The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.drac.19960411l ~~ ~ i ~ AGENDA DESIGN REVIEW APPEALS COMMITTEE April 11, 1996 Regular Meeting Basement, City Hall 4:00 I. Roll Call II. Comments (Committee members, Staff and public) III. New Business ~ 4:05 A. 307 W. Francis 4:45 IV. Adjourn REMINDER: THIS COMMITTEE MEETS THE SECOND THURSDAY OF EVERY °' MONTH (IF NEEDED) AT 4 P.M. MEMORANDUM TO: Design Review Appeals Committee FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer DATE: April 11, 1996 RE: 307 W. Francis, Eberstein- Appeal from Design Standards SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct a single stall garage, partially below grade, facing the street. Waiver of Ordinance #30 standards, as described below is requested. In addition, the applicant must request a number of variances from the Board of Adjustments. A setback variance is needed due to the driveway slab being within the frontyard setback. An FAR bonus is needed because the only way to receive the 250 sq.ft. garage exemption is if the access is taken from the alley. (Under the old rules, the project was 4' below maximum FAR. Given the changes in FAR calculation as instituted by Ordinance #30, the project gained some FAR due the elimination of the old "volume" calculation, but loses FAR because the new volume calculation finds that there are windows in the "no window zone' causing the associated interior space to be counted at 2:1. An FAR bonus must cover this deficit and also the square footage that will be charged to the garage.) Thirdly, the Board of Adjustments would be asked to vary the maximum grade allowed for driveways, which is 12%. The Engineering Department must be petitioned on this matter and may not approve the variance. PROJECT REVIEW PROCESS AND STAFF EVALUATION The Committee may grant an exception to the design standards for any of the following criteria: a) yield greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan; b) more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or c) be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. a) yield greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan; Staff response: The proposal is not indirect conflict with the AACP, nor does it further any of its goals. b) more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or Staff response: Ordinance #30, as well as other areas of the code, clearly discourage having garage access from a street as opposed to an alley. c) be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. Staff response: The only practical difficulty to placing the garage on the alley are building improvements made by the property owner. A fenced in patio at the rear of the property could be altered to accomodate a parking space. Staff recommends DRAC deny the variance request finding that none of the variance criteria are met. Date: 1/15/96 To: Design Review Appeals Committee, City of Aspen Owner: Pati & Brian Eberstein Address: 307 West Francis Street Legal: Lots F &. C~, Block 42, City and Townsite of Aspen OVERVIEW The Owners' of this existing house need a single car garage. Because of the constraints created by the existing footprint there appears to be only one realistic location for this addition: under the existing bedroom on the Francis Street side of the house with a ramped driveway accessing from Francis Street. The existing footprint, height, site coverage, setback and massing will not be affected by the proposed addition. It should be noted that the recent addition to this house was used as an example of good design at the Design Symposium that lead to Ordinance 30. VARIANCE ISSUES 1. F.A.R.: A 250 sf F'.A.R. exclusion is allowed for garages. The F.A.R. of this proposed below grade garage calculates out to be 89 sf and thus is "O.K." The F.A.R. of the existing house was under the allowable maximum as calculated at the time the last addition was built in 1994. Thus F.A.R. appears not to be an issue in this application. (The proposed garage could have been built under the zoning that existed previous to the adoption of Ordinance 30.) 2. Drivew~ below natural grade in front setback: A below grade garage is the only feasible solution on this site thus a below grade driveway is required. A hardship variance is needed to bypass this stipulation. By taking advantage of a natural drop in existing grades along Francis Street, the depth of the proposed driveway below ajoining grade can be markedly reduced. The driveway will be perpendicular to the front lot line thus meeting that requirement of Ordinance 30 for garages below grade. 3. Garage to be recessed behind front facade minimum 10 ft._ A natural change of grade exists on Francis Street that helps reduce the steepness of the proposed garage access driveway. The garage needs to be located ort the left side of the Francis Street elevation of the house under an existing bedroom in order to take advantage of this beneficial change in grade and the ol`her site constraints. A hardship variance is required to bypass the 10 ft. setback requirement. I Development Application Eberstein House 307 West Francis Street 1/16/96 page: 1 ~~ ~ i (g 0 ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ o.~~ ~~ W zW r~ ~~ . ~ ~ g ~ ~'~~ ~# ~ aW g a ~~ ~ ~~ ~W ~NNS - --~ I I ----j r--- ~---- I I I ~~~I ~~~~ ----~ i i i ----~ ~~~ S ---~ a_ :__J ----1 I I I I I !~ ~~ B ~~ -~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ L---------- -----------~ 1332LL5 QNC'N 3~ W 3 133L15 QLI£'N ~~ r--- I Z a a3 N~ Z 6 ~~ w N I I ~--- I I I i ~- i i L___ v V ~ ~ ,. R J p~ 4 m ! 3 } N ~ ~~ ; ~ o~ ~~~ ~ ~ z g N ~ a a~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ W r o ~ ` }~ ~W ~m P f L ,~ 1- J ~ -~, ~ ~ l J ~ ~ c~~ ~~ ~'~~ ~ I ~ ~ L ~x ~ j ~ I iL~~ ~ ~1~ ~~~ - ~ I ~~ ~,, ~__ ~ ,,, I B ~~ i rm r .~ _ I ~~ ~ .w J S~ a~ v