HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.drac.008-97-- .RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW APPEAL COMMITTEE
APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 26.58.040(E), INFLECTION,
OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE
FOR A PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY HOME
LOCATED ON WEST SMUGGLER STREET (LOT TWO, OXLEY LOT SPLIT),
ASPEN, COLORADO
Resolution No.00 ,Series of 1997
WHEREAS, the applicant, Aspen GK LLC, represented by Charlie M. Kaplan of
Peter Gluck and Partners, has.requested approval of a proposed design for asingle-family
residence on the property located on the south side of West Smuggler Street (Lot Two,
Oxley Lot Split); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.58.020(B) of the Aspen Municipal Code,
Community Development Department staff reviewed the applicant's application for
compliance with the Residential Design Standards of Section 26.58.040 of the Aspen
Municipal Code and found the submitted development application to be inconsistent with
the Standard 26.58.040(E), Inflection, of the Aspen Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.58.020(B)(1) of the Aspen Municipal Code provides
that if an application is found by staff to be inconsistent with any item of the Residential
Design Guidelines, the applicant may either amend the application or appeal staff s
findings to the Design Review Appeal Board pursuant to Chapter 26.22, Design Review
Appeal Board; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.58.020(B)(1) of the Aspen Municipal Code,
the applicant submitted a request for a variance from Standard 26.58.040(E) of the Aspen
Municipal Code to the Design Review Appeal Board; and
WHEREAS all applications for appeal from the Residential Design Standards of
Section 26.58.040 must meet one of the following statements in order for the Design
Review Appeal Committee or other decision making administrative body to grant an
exception, namely the proposal must:
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, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing, which was legally noticed, was held at a regular
meeting of the Design Review Appeal Board on August 14, 1997, at which the Board
considered the applicant's proposal and associated variance request and found that the
project, as proposed, more effectively addresses the issue or problem the given standard
responds to; and
WHEREAS, a Design Review Appeal Boazd motion proclaiming that a vaziance
from the inflection standazd of Section 26.58.040(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code shall
"•-°' be granted, finding that the project as proposed more effectively addresses the issue or
problem the given standazd responds to was passed by a vote of 4 - 1.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the proposed design of asingle-family residence on Lot Two of the Oxley Lot Split,
Aspen, Colorado, is granted a variance from the inflection standazd of Section
26.58.040(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code by the Design Review Appeal Board as the
project, as proposed, was found to more effectively address the issue or problem the
given standard responds to, thereby satisfying variance criterion "b."
APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE at its regular meeting on the 14th day of
August, 1997.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
A sistant City Attorney,
David Hoefer
DESIGN REVIEW APPEAL COMMITTEE
ATTEST:
~/
eputy City Jerk,
Jackie Lothian