HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.234 W Hallam St.A063-99
~,
1""""\
,:',::;:,;~:\ .:'? i:~;;::>'\ :> ,'., '.,," :i:.'\ :\:;;';':.,1,;:, ,",''';:",'.':,\;..., ,.,.. ,'~"\",,:,.,;. ::,:i, i'i.. '_'
.~',;~.'~,';.~.~".6~+b~;:;.1;2;j;i;;'';J;;::\';:~(';2i;, 1 . ;C.;?} ,,':i," ",
;""""".'""".,',,,',.: ;::)':1$~t~\~~~;~I.fi~~/;~',._;:J.."
,;.~,::' \:",,:>":" "> ':'.,::''',;'\:::;',':::;:::;~;':;~.i':> i I" \'\:, :.i',
", "',' :1;'-. ~ ': ,)\;,"'i!;;W\~~,,;;,',:::~,;,::,'!'.~,;'\\'::i,'Di,;,"
;1:'~~,~~,;,4,
'",','
'.;:;::\;;.;:':,i:f^~;:;
',"
:',;':i',
': '. {''.' ~\,'
",~.,." ".
;~;,;\ ~:",:.-
-"'.
-":,:'1':;'
';:",'
/
.... .,wo. ...... .~.'
'i"::";:i;:i~fi'~~~I!!..WJ;:i?;!N~~~~!':'
ui':'~~""E"""""" ", >:"
'1 .,~ "
," ,\
.~. ,- -. " .
i: !\,\~ ,;.' "\. >.',1:;: .:':-i:";.., ",;:"" :,"':' .~ '..' ";
,-.\"
", .' ",,':'t;~~~;'i:;':~i
:lti~(~~i'!~!;:/\,J;~';;:';;)\i~:'i'
",~:,;/,,; i-,;'> i'~\,~A:r:~\:: ..
:,;,:;;\ '\;~~~..~i;:~;,\~,'
'"'. .,
:",.,
:i\~;r:\{:\}~:\\?;:'~\.i::.{,,:,': \ \::i~:'::':':: . :,' ":.,',"
. " 'I' "'.",
"', " .,.~..
,:',~1'?'-:":
'.:~:"i:;:::i
;,~Wt1:
:,\:",;,'",!"
,.,:!1:!\:~:\11\i~'::;(\11i~\!
,",'.,
ii:. ,:~/r::;:.,iV;;;':' \\1.::;;'. .,t~,dL
".\!; ,':'~;,,'.;','}:.\iJ;':~' ,:<:\:;
~;, . 'i' ',: i ~'
\:,:,~~!"., ,:.r;~,:,:',j..., '..::l"~:: ,,\ -: r ,.
.." ",. < .." ."""::.:""
,;}~~,~;r,;i~~;~14 ' " ','
":'::;':" ' '., . .' \ :::;~:' ,~';~~ ',~\,.'~.:,:'::~I -;. ',( ", ,',".':: '.:\:"., ,0"
,(':;'.h', ""!" \"... " _.0.. "':"'~\I_'" ';Y,\,'.,,~,:.:::;' ","'" '':::.''''.'' ','. ,\.'.
,..~:,:;, ;, ;::,:',;;c:,i:d~:;:~!t~:)S})":L'! ""i.! "" ,:~c:"t!
.....'..:'\
:'..:'~
;..<'.::;
i',i':.,i,'. ";'.
'.':":
"".
.:,<"
;,.
"':':"1':',:
:';
<,", ",:,."",
.' :,,:!',;:"': " ':~::::>,)\J/'
"...h '~";.'''i''; (.. :,i'
',:.':'i!.S' '"
.... ::,"',"
:"i~' '....
:"j'"
::"',;i'",,
/
,i'
~:;::':':':'Ei~~
.::.:.:.:':::.,
,~" ,
.":'i:.;;,:,<"': ;}'"''
....::....::~lw.::.: .:::_::..;,:..::....
,':',:.'
"':"i:<."
- ~mWQ
9
O~~ ~ ~. ~.-
.r-:
.
~
ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
December 7,1999
West End Partnership
520 E. Cooper, ste 205
Aspen CO 81611
Re: A063-99234 vv. Hallam DRAC
Previous balance
Balance due
Amount
$280.00
$280.00
130 South Galena Street. Aspen, Colorado 81611 . (970) 920-5090
.
1"""'\
~
,. ...- ...
DEVELOPMENT ORDER
of the
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
AOb3-'r1
This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to
Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010,
"Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order
shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date ofthe
,Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant.to Section 26.304.075,
or unless an' exemption from expiration, extension or reinstatement is
granted or a revocation is issued by the City Council pursuant to Section
26.308.010.
This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the
site specific development plan as described below.
West End Partnership, 520 East Cooper Avenue, ste. 205, Aspen, CO 81611;925-7806
Property Owner's :Name, Mailing Address and telephone number
234 West Hallam Street Lots K, L, M, Aspen, CO 81611
Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property
Design Review Appeals Committee
Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan
DRAC Resolution 99-5, August 12, 1999
Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions)
October 22, 1999
Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of appro va I.)
October 13,2002
Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration
and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen
Municipal Code.)
Issued this 22nd day of October, 1999, by the City of Aspen Community
Deve pment Director.
. a-~
Woods, Community Development Director
G,Planning.Aspen.fonns,DevOrder
,-,
r'\
PUBLIC NOTICE
Of
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development
plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the
City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the
following described property: 234 West Hallam Street of the City and Townsite of
Aspen, by Resolution No.5, Series 19990fthe Design Review Appeals Committee.
For further information contact Julie Ann Woods, at the AspenJPitkin Community
Development Dept., 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 920-5090.
s/Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk, City of Aspen
Publish in The Aspen Times on October 22, 1999.
/0 toe p u.kJlj'shd i6
~'
,
~,
DESIGN REVIEW Al>PEALS COMMISSION - Mimm
UKAfT
AUllust 5. 1999
Roger Moyer, Vice-Chairperson, called the Design Review Appeals Commission
meeting to order at 5 :05 p.m. with members Roger Moyer, Bob Blaich and Mary
Hirsch. Tim Mooney arrived at 5: 15 p.m. Steve Buettow was excused; Jeffrey
Halferty was absent. Staff members present were Chris Bendon, Community
Development; David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City.
Clerk.
COMMISSIONER. STAFF and PUBLIC COMMENTS
Roger Moyer asked about the home being built at Park & Cooper (second from the
right) with a 2Y:z story addition with huge window openings. The commission
noted this was another example of the rules not working; the variance was denied
on this building and the results were still bad.
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Steve Buettow recused himself.
DRAfT
MINUTES - June 3. 1999
MOTION: Bob Blaich moved to approve the June 3,1999 minutes.
Mary Hirsch second. APPROVED 3-0.
REVIEW 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
PUBLIC HEAR1NG:
WESTEND PARTNERSHIP. 234 WEST HALLAM - WINDOW
STANDARD & ONE STORY ELEMENT
Sworn In: Jim Colombo, applicant. The Affidavit of Notice was presented at
the public hearing and David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, stated the notice
met the jurisdictional requirements for the commission to proceed. He noted
there were four members present and asked if the applicant wanted to continue this
hearing. Colombo replied that it was a difficult position and stated that he waited
two months to make this presentation. Bob Blaich noted there was only one
member missing, since Steve had a conflict.
Chris Bendon commented that the house was currently under construction and if
the windows were not approved tonight, these windows would have to be
modified. Colombo distributed new drawings and provided a model.
1
~
~
~,
DESIGN REVIEW. )PEALS COMMISSION - Minutes
August 5. 1999
Bendon stated that there were 2 variance requests CDWindow standard, relating to
windows between 9 and 12 feet. There was a penalty associated with itwould be
counted twice towards floor area. There were two houses on the lot and this was
the East House. There was a series of windows that exceeded the 9 feet.
Roger Moyer asked for clarification on the drawings.
ORA 1FT
Colombo intent of the ordinance was clearly to define the window separation
between a lower level and an upper level. He said so there was not a hllge mass; it
continued to step-back. He said there was a distinct separation of the massing of
the windows on the first and second level and 3-dimensional separation by the
'balcony. .
Colombo distributed 2 additional drawings
@ One story element, requiring at least 20% of the front fa<;ade to be One story.
,
Bendon said that the porch structure was a second floor element. Staff
,
recommends denial of the one story element request waiver. Colombo said that
the element exceed 20% it was 32%. He said they subtly stepped back the mass.
He felt that they architecturally exceeded the element.
Colombo illustrated with photo storyboard of the surrounding neighbdrhood
noting all the 2 story facades. He felt this house fulfilled the spirit ofthe
ordinance.
Bob Blaich noted the references with 1880 vintage houses do not corripare to other
houses. Blaich asked if it was a spec project. Colombo answered it was spec and
asked what bearing it had for the review. Colombo said the house was Neo-
Victorian.
Tim Mooney said that for this design to become in compliance, the part of the
deck that runs behind the copula, could be brought deck around so th~t it comes
into the roof element, then it would be in compliance.
Roger asked which was correct, the drawing or model with the eleva~ion and with
the porch ceiling at 8' or the porch ceiling at 10'. Colombo replied that the
transom windows were at 9'.
No public comments.
2
All~ust 5. 1999
Hirsch said they were to decide upon two variance requests, everything shown was
acceptable because of"B" and the one story element was better looking.
Mooney said that he didn't find a problem with the windows and that would make
the house more livable. He said that if they wanted to comply with the ordinance,
it could be re-designed. ORA r"'r
Blaich said the point in construction today is assuming the variances will be
granted and to build to this point was an arrogant position. He said that Colombo
should have come in long before this but to build and then come in for appeals.
Blaich said that this was a manner of principal to sell the commission; he stated
that he was not in favor of approval based upon that position.
Colombo stated that
Moyer said what if this was an historic element, this is a story and 1/3 or 1/4 and
HPC would say that this is too grand, it could be dropped down and made to
human scale. He said the entry was not to human scale at 12'. Colombo replied
that it was 10'. Moyer said this would look like a restaurant at night (a huge wall
of light) and that was not the intent of the ordinance. The intent was a friendly
residential feel when you are walking down the street. Moyer said that he would
say no on this unless it was 8' high. Moyer said if it were dropped, then okay. He
agreed with Blaich's comments but that even 3 months ago it was framed as it is
now.
The commission took the model apart and placed the cap lower. They all agreed
that the 2nd floor deck could be waived but the second story should be lowered.
Blaich said it was the spirit that was in comments Roger figure out a way to make
the entrance a little less imposing. Hoefer noted that technically there was no
approval and the project could be red-tagged.
Colombo stated that he should have the right to respond to the comments. He said
that the idea oflowering to human scale was acceptable. He said the comment of
the windows being over-bearing was something that he couldn't see. He said that
they were in scale of neighborhood and the community. He said that the intent of
the ordinance was not just to limit 9' as the highest point a window could be
because is says thresholds. He said these are technically thresholds. Colombo
3
~
DRAFT "
AU2ust 5. 1999
~,
DESIGN REVIEW'PEALS COMMISSION - Minutes
said this board exists for the spirit of compliance and interpretation with common
sense and judgement. He said the board exists for instances like this.
Colombo stated that he was willing to make entry level and agree with staffthat in
compliance windows. He said the board had the right to approve these windows.
Mooney requested positive feedback from the commission for conditions so
applicant does not have to come back. Bendon suggested a condition that Jim get
a change order to the building permit before he does it. He said there *as concern
about the structural aspects.
Blaich asked if the house in the present condition could have been it reid-tagged;
why wasn't it re-tagged. Bendon replied that because he was in for review there
was no red-tag issued.
MOTION: Tim Mooney moved to grant a variance for the Westend
partnership, 234 West Hallam, for the windows as represented in the
application included in conditions 1,2,3 & 4; a change order and a
building permit be issued to re-design the front window design to be in
compliance meeting the recommended the cantilevered bay of front
fa~ade to 12" -18" as acceptable. Mary Hirsch second. Moyer, no;
Blaich, no; Hirsch, yes; Mooney, yes. DENIED 2-2.
'''=j
Hirsch asked who would be watching over the project to say this is the intent.
Bendon said that he would be the monitor. Mooney stated that he was making the
motion in the spirit of compromise; he said the motion was a better alternative.
Moyer said the applicant had to come in with real plans and HPC got into trouble
by trying to help out someone. Moyer said just follow the plans. Mooney agreed
that the applicant was behind the spirit issue and attitude for application and
approval process should change. Hirsch said she loved to go by the spirit of the
law but was sympathetic to the time of 60 days out and shew felt that they had to
be reasonable. Hoefer commented that the waiting period for building permits in
Laguna Beach was 21/2 years; so we are pretty quick here. Blaich said that he
gambled to get it through and ifhe doesn't win, then he gets to wait. Hendon
stated for the record that this case came in about 2 weeks ago, the 60 days was
maybe when Jim was thinking about coming in. Colombo responded that he was
ready to submit 60 days ago and Sara Thomas said that there was not a full board.
Hoefer noted that the 60 days was not an issue one way or the other. Moyer stated
4
- "
-"
.1"""\
DESIGN REVIEW APPEALS COMMISSION - MinW
DRAFT
AUl:ust 5.1999
that there wasn't a board member that wouldn't meet even next Thursday to help
facilitate your project.
MOTION: Tim Mooney moved to grant a variance for the Westend
partnership, East House, located at 234 West Hallam, for the waiver of
the one story element story to create a more functional space and
complies with the design standards. Mary Hirsch second. Blaich, no;
Moyer, no; Hirsch, no; Mooney, yes. DENIED 3-1.
to come into human element to 8'6".
Tim said there was a solution to re-design and eliminate then flat deck space to
comply with the roof or one-story element. Moyer and Blaich wanted to see
drawings. Blaich said that he understood why Tim wanted to do, but it made the
house less livable. Blaich said that he agreed with what Roger proposed, to see
drawings. Hirsch said that she wanted to withdraw the motion. Mooney said that
if they denied both motions then he could come back in with new drawings.
Hoefer said then the meeting could be continued to a date certain.
MOTION: Tim Mooney moved to continue the public hearing for the
Westend Partnership, East House loca'ted 234 West Hallam to Noon on
Thursday, August 12,1999. Mary Hirsch second. APPROVED 4-0.
Lothian asked Jim Colombo if the drawings could be provided prior to the
meeting for staff and the board to review. Colombo replied that he would have the
drawings in on Tuesday and the model adjusted for the meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
,Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
5
,-,
DESIGN REVIEW Ar PEALS COMMISSION - Minu0
August 12. 1999
",-.,.
"
Roger Moyer, Vice-Chairperson, called the Special Design Review Appeals
, Commission meeting to order at Noon in City Council Chambers with members
Roger Moyer, Bob Blaich, Tim Mooney and Mary Hirsch present. Steve Buettow
and Jeffrey Halferty were excused. Staff members present were Chris Bendon,
Community Development; David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Jackie Lothian,
Deputy City Clerk.
REVIEW 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
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Steve Buettow was excused.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
WESTEND PARTNERSHIP. 234 WEST HALLAM - WINDOW
STANDARD & ONE STORY ELEMENT
Sworn-in at the prior meeting (08/05/99): Jim Colombo, applicant. The
Affidavit of Notice was presented at the public hearing on August 5, 1999.
Chris Bendon stated that this was a continued public hearing for appeals from the
windows standard and one story element for 234 West Hallam, the East
Residence. At the prior meeting the committee requested amendments to the plan
for <D entry canopy and @ horizontal element above the first story windows, the
cantilevered-out. It was now 12 inches and provided some relief from that front
fayade. The Staff recommendation remained the same with amended conditions
specific to the window variance represented in the drawings dated August 10,
1999. The applicant was required to seek a change order to the building permit.
Bendon said if the committee members chose to approve the one story element,
then condition #1 would have to be amended to include that standard.
Jim Colombo said that they had taken lead that majority of the board had asked for
cantilevered the element above the decks 12". He said that they felt that it did
accommodated what the interest was in separation and any further expansion in
that area would become a structural problem as well a shade problem with an
inhospitable condition. It would have too much over-hang from the roofline from
1
.
~,.. ~"
,.-"
DESIGN REVIEW A.. L'EALS COMMISSION - Min~
August 12. 1999
the inside looking out. Colombo said it would cause shading with the southern
exposure. A patina-copper element was added at 8-foot 6-inches as the board
suggested and seemed to work just fine. It distinctively shows the first floor
element and there was a distinct separation with the addition of the cantilevered
element. Colombo noted the area was heavily treed.
Mary Hirsch noted the changes were the door with the copper-entry lowered
would and made window treatment friendlier with the cantilever. Colombo said
there was a 6-foot wall not shown that fills in area separating the 2 homes.
Tim Mooney stated that it was certainly an improvement and was now in
compliance. Bob Blaich said it was a real improvement on the window but he said
that there was still a problem with the 2 story. Hirsch said the window was an
improvement and balcony was a directive for the step-back from the front door.,
Moyer said that he was comfortable with a motion and the balcony over the front
door created more of a life. He said that with the cantilever it broke up the front.
MOTION: Mary Hirsch moved to approve the waiver of window
standard, condition #1. for the East Residence located at 324 West
Hallam, as demonstrated in the drawings dated August 10 and the staff
report, meeting Standard B. Tim Mooney second. Roll call vote:
Blaich, no; Mooney, yes; Hirsch, yes; Moyer, yes. APPROVED 3-1
MOTION: Mary Hirsch moved to approve the request to waive the one
story element for the East Residence located at 324 West Hallam as
demonstrated in the August 10th drawings, finding the design just as an
effective method. Tim Mooney second. Blaich, no; Mooney, yes;
Hirsch, yes; Moyer, yes. APPROVED 3-1.
Mooney said he wondered if the back of the canopy was going to be solid or was it
just the height of the canopy that was the re-design. Colombo replied that there
would probably be bric-a-brac filled-in. Colombo thanked the board for the
second meeting and the recommendations.
Meeting adjourned at 12:30 p.m.
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
2
,-...
.~
'0/<)
.1 Z'?t I,.ft1i ~tbwt ~
!~4i~ f\t, 1Ji ~oo/;ti u.1 ~I:
1M) e~l e.M~, tftL
l~ol (901 .
:: ~
':1
~:!:--~:n:-, ~~. ~~ ~~0~ir
li~. ,~~
:.1 wW:rs ~~
;ii
,.
Vw. ~~I 'b'~~.
"
:;;
ii'
0(Mtw.ev.~
p~ 'JCth41\CQ.S .o~.
\(\i\v\J.<iJJ;; ~~.
:li ~ O~ bbJ~ z:j;/~
'\!~.
,i ....... q I' i i, L '. \
" , A.f~a~t ~nv... DU\\t-\
",1 ~1~
:"!i"'-~
:'i
i!1
I
ilr~.
I~
,
1)1' luV
,;'
::i~
iil~' t~ ~ ~ ku~k.
ill ~~ll'l! I; ~ ~"" "'4\;<.
w\witMJs . IN)./. r (1.../ '
, \.. ~ ~O\Jl, ~ or,r \Wr~' . {)
.,::!' r
::!
Ui
!!,
Iii
ii _
mw ~ ru~fA~ Oyk b l<;Svl-~ f-,. t(.uk\\;__
i~'J co~~k\tv' b~ cl.ec,b Iv (b" ,-( N
!r~~~. ~ h ~ f'1. I# tki~ - li
i:
'.
-.,
,t"""\,
1\
i:
I' lW\. 'O~ ~~t
! r.z t;T-.J -*' t:-
'I ::tf-I bW ~fvl~. 4
ii: J\t ft\j\\~ cc<p o\IftJrpeJ ~ + W~k.. J} I~J UooJ ,_
:ii
1',1
ii'i
1\1
ii:
:(il
'ii
.II'
1i!
d%iuA .
'} H
r - Iff
::)
ii:
,:I
,
ii! Jra~~ o~ 1-u~rdty,
~ IlL IliCM iVlI€J ~fU':"l:>.
~. i~~= -t~~b~~~~1 db-to
i:i
,1M. ch~~Orffj Iht _ tJIA If.,~1 !WJ~f.
I! 111l. . I
!~!I ~/
,', \I 1 ~ r ~~ItM1.qv 7
ii.IM 11 lV'1\4~ o~
lli~fi Ittr~~
'i, <oy/l. J( Wl~'
,1'1
lil:J /NIv<- b
..... III -1 3-1 ~d,
r-,
I"""
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Design Review Appeals Committee
THRU:
Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
THRU:
Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director
Christopher Bendon, Planner~VV7
234 West Hallam Street Appeal -- Public Heariug (Continued from Aug. 5th)
Window Standard
One Story Element Standard
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
August 12, 1999 Noon
SUMMARY:
The applicant, the Westend Partnership represented by Jim Colombo, has applied for an
appeal of the Residential Design Standard relating to windows within 9 and 12 feet
above finished floor levels and for the One Story Element requirement for the "east
residence" located at 234 West Hallam Street. The property is currently being developed
with two single-family residences.
On August 5, 1999, the Design Review Appeal Committee (DRAC) denied a motion to
approve the window variance and denied a motion to approve the one-story element
variance. The DRAC then requested specific amendments to be demonstrated with
drawings and continued the hearing until noon August 12, 1999.
The applicant has provided details for a entry canopy to be placed on the front fal(ade,
above the entryway. The bottom of this canopy approximates the top of the first floor
windows. The applicant has also provided aetails for a 12 inch cantilever overhang
above the first floor windows.
Staffs recommendation remains the same. The appurtenance above the entryway does
not qualify as a first floor element and staff does not believe it represents a more
effective method of addressing the standard. The cantilever above the windows does
help mitigate the effect of the larger windows by providing relief on the front fal(ade.
The conditions have been slightly amended to require the approval of a building permit
change order and referencing the plans submitted to the Planning Office on August 10,
1999. If the DRAC wishes to approve both variance requests, condition #1 should be
amended to state the two standards.
Staff recommends DRAC grant a variance for the window standard, with
conditions, and deny the request to waive the one story element requirement for the
"east house" at 234 West Hallam Street.
I
1""'\
1""'\
APPLICANT:
Westend Partnership. Represented by Colombo International, Inc.
LOCATION:
234 West Hallam Street.
ZONING:
Medium Density Residential (R-6).
The application is subject to the previous Residential Design Standards, as it was
submitted prior to the effective date of the revised standards - Ordinance 20.
WINDOWS:
The applicant's proposed development is subject to aFAR penalty with the following
Residential Design Standard:
All areas with an exterior expression of a plate height greater than 10 feet shall
be counted as 2 square feet for each 1 square foot of floor area. Exterior
expressions shall be defined as facade penetration between 9 and 12 feet above
floor level and circular, semi-circular, or non-orthogonal fenestration between 9
and 15 feet above floor level.
In response to the review criteria for a DRAC variance, Staff makes the following
findings:
aj in greater compliance with the goals of the AACP; or,
Staff Finding:
The proposed variance is not in greater compliance with the goals of the Community
Plan. The AACP specifically rejects two-story window expanses in both the current and
proposed versions of the document.
bj a more effective method of addressing standard in question; or,
Staff Finding:
The standard specifically says no windows in this area unless the house size is reduced
by the Floor Area penalty. However, the windows do not span through to the second
floor and do provide interest to the fayade and differentiation from the closely adjacent
west house. In addition, the cantilevered deck provides relief and differentiation in the
front fayade. Staff supports the waiver.
2
,-,.,.
1'1""\.
c) clearly necessary for reasons offairness related to unusual site
specific constraints.
Staff Finding:
There are no site specific constraints for this property which necessitate larger windows.
The site is relatively flat and developable.
ONE-STORY ELEMENT:
The applicant's proposed development is not in compliance with the following
Residential Design Standard:
One-Story Element. All residential buildings must have a one-story street facing
element the width of which comprises at least twenty (20) percent of the buildings
overall width.
In response to the review criteria for a DRAC variance, Staff makes the following
findings:
a) in greater compliance with the goals of the AACP; or,
Staff Finding:
The proposed variance is not in greater compliance with the goals of the Community
Plan. The one-story element criteria was to encourage pedestrian scaled facades and.to
break-up the, overall massing of buildings.
b) a more effective method of addressing standard in question; or,
Staff Finding:
The applicant has not provided a more effective method for this standard. The addition
of a canopy does not ret1ect the spirit of the standard which requires the provision of an
actual first floor element. The second t100r deck, however, is very similar in its method
of addressing the standard and provides relief to the fayade while still acting as the porch
covering. This being said, staff does not believe this is a more effective method than the
standard.
c) clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site
specific constraints.
StaffPinding:
There are no site specific constraints for this property which make difficult the provision
of a one story element. The site is relatively t1at and developable. In fact, the applicant
has demonstrated the ability to provide the one-story element on-site prior to the un-
approved modifications.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends DRAC grant a variance for the window, as represented in the
application drawing submitted to the Community Development Department on August
10, 1999, with conditions, and deny the request to waive the one story element
requirement for the "east house" at 234 West Hallam Street.
I. This window variance shall be limited to the development proposed on the "east
house" as represented in the application drawing submitted to the Community
Development Department on August 10, 1999. All other aspects of the
"Residential Design Standards," as amended, shall apply.
3
,r-..
~
2. The applicant shall apply, and receive approval, for a change order to the building
permit reflecting the built and proposed amendments to the original building
permit.
3. The applicant shall record this Design Review Appeal Committee Resolution with
the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder located in the Courthouse Plaza Building.
There is a per page recordation fee. In the alternative, the applicant may pay this
fee to the City Clerk who will record the Resolution.
4. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during
public meetings with the Design Review Appeal Committee shall be adhered to
and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other
conditions.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to grant a waiver of the Residential Design Standard for windows within nine
and twelve feet above the finished t100r levels according to the application drawings
submitted to the Community Development Department on August 10, 1999, and with the
conditions recommended in the staff memorandum dated August 12, 1999, forthe "east
house" at 234 West Hallam Street."
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A - Application 4v<e.w:I~-k-,
4
\")
)
!
:J:.
""
""
~
0-
,....
z
~l
.."'~
:2 ~,';;:
~f'3
'L;l.f
-.d
;Jr
-~ t::
:n ~':t:
<( -,
..~.
--
:<
o
()
-
-'
=>
....,
L L9 LS'OOVllOlOJ
N3dSV
S3JN30I~gm:~M 'l$J ~SV3
WV'TIVH"A\. v€Z
r"'
t""'""'
~
.~
j
.o-;oot
',~~
_. .
!l
i~
.
... 0-,5
is 9N:>M3J1't'W
~! , lVlte\.l't'NllOH91H.9S:
3!i ","=..l.~====-~..l.~~..:IlU.r=o.r._..l.=tIaz.'==u.~;:,~":,=w=.'===.r.,"=,,.:.~...r=.--==~
~~H! : I
~~, "I I '
!I.-to to )I:)Y8J3S 301$0-- ------;--------'-
n il ~=-==- i
! "'i ~~~- ~~~~= Ji I ' I
! , I
I ,
i I I
i !
! I...",..,........, or--!"'.-...-
J,.. I
i ~'
. :!!l
'\!if
! I
! I
! '
I !
i I
. '--- --~-- I
i il I --- --- -
ill I - il
;~--+----- ------ ---
""I,~n ,"""," .
. .:,,;kl\ ll,~"',:",~;.\l~VJ'fo"'ii'I";'"
"," _I:~, '",'
. ','11 .It!;:. ,'0"
. ..- , .~
;'" \0 ~"....-'"
"1 ~' I I '
I _ _ .... ,.
...N1..,,~~ IV.......
1VJ.N:J.lVNllOHOIH.9S:
'"
~
'"
;1;
II
Ii
I
,
!
,
,
__________1..__
llOY8US ....'
I
~
<(
........-::.. ........-:...........- .r....-=.................-::..
>
133lUS ONOO3S'N
y
~
'.
~
~ U ~!l
~ !': ~ U
~! ~ n
t~d i-
I)
.
,
"
.
b
b
J
w
~
" .
..............
...............
..............
m
~
....N.....
'" . ....
........ ....
'" .. ....
::):C12::::)
....(I). .....
"l:: :: .. ':::.
~.. . ....
... .. .....
.............
.. ..
f"""'.
f"""'.
~-
\3tj--'--
r"'
("
;-
,:,
~
"
5'
e
w
"
..
-"
~"@
"'~o
~~~
N~
01
.~
,
,
, ~
<>: I "- ~08~
~ 13' .~ ~<;;~
~_~ . ~,~ H ~ 0' 5 !e
3 , ~ <1_- _ _ 0 " ' ~;> - " J ~
8 ~<::l,'O ____"OJ ""'~ ~w o.
u::g~I~ ~---------- ~ CI
Q' ------- '
"-', -, -
,9-;;1
,
,
,
A:1
'0/
%
~
~
<w
w~
~.
-0
"0
%0
2%
5.
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
~
o
o
@ffi
S~
~o
~,~
%,
-<
'"
"'-'i
I "Ohi
'"
,
~
r
,
I : "'....-i-
11/ I ,.....
J II zu'
I II 0 tF. /....\
I I \--- ~,,/ \
I 1\ ...."l'!'I'-- \
I I \............../1'........ J
: I \ I 1\......../
I 'i......_i ..)./
M
3:;lN~Jldd\fS'V~
.
:
'S:: f',.
o
8
"
~~:;(
~ii>O
.~ ~ ~~
_et.:J
9
8
~
"~
~
~
~
ffi
g
,,'
.v~ t t ..~t
"
,ZIlO'S
,,'
.6-,;
I'
~i
"
,,1;-';1
nll-,S
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
A:'\
~
o
~
.
""
2"
d~
:I:~3:
~<iO
Nl;j~
'T::<3:
,,1-,
"O-,L
..UL !i-,6
o
2
,
~
.
""
2"
~~'~
5:-'0
N~~
.><
"lhi
"g-,S
"v-,I::
~
~
"
"
"
~
"
o
o
o "
lli!:t:!!;I
~UO
O~"
Ua..!:2-
i5
i.
ZO
07
~~
~
~
'"
,2/16.,g
,V-,S
"O-,L.
S:>
~
,
,
,
,
I
,
I
I
I
!
[
!
,
!
I
,
I
,
I
,
!
I
[
I
,
"
..-
"-
~
-w
f"""
f"""
~w __
~-
<
~,
,......,
.
,,9-.,l
~
~
@~~
.. ~.
'"
@
,
~
.....--.-.-
--~-@
::1:.... 9
til~. 8 ~
~@9it 00 J
*;Z~ 2
"'1;;;"""
~~~~
'" <
e ~ ~[;]
~~lID
"'~
"o~-,s
"i-,9
"a'~ ~-m
w
~
;;\
q
z
'f
o
~6
,,0:
~~
"
()
~
z
~
+~-I
,ZI~ o~-,zI
"l.,~
.ht'
.9-,9
.'Z",t ~
N
.YIOI"a
i2
~o
z~~:
5~~~
~C:.
;
!
to
~
@]DO
~ ~n~
3~
~f:..
-@----
;
~
.9-.01
"
'"
,m-z
"v-,v
I
I
I
.~~ h9~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
~
.9-,9
"en ~~',v
,cns.,e
.t-,v
",,-,6
,,<:IL h9t
.GI L t~.S' L
,
,
,
I
i
,
,
,
I
I
,
,
i
I
!
.'
;".
"-
~
W
...J
II
(/)
"
"
,
'"
"'
"
r".
r""
4>------
t"",
t""
:
-'-'-'-ii'-------'-
~
~
~
"v-,g
"ULS',SL
"c:n ~',L
~
~
~ J
9 "
N !l
""'''
.0.0' ~
" , d
'" ,
~
"
,i:!\.",2
S
!
::;: 001<","
~
~
I;;
g
u
@
----.-'2
:l: d!o~
!.,! z~...
~ ~q
~~!:!.
~
~ ~
"
~
d
~
~
""
~
"
< 0
~= g I
<~~
"'~~
(!l....lJJ ....
~b~ Ig
iij~~1
"ON'
llOlJl:Il
@
(i)
.
z
~
~
g
.lI-,;
,,0-,;::::
"Z1~ 0 ~
"UlG-,S
,vI >>-,01
,,2/. L.-,~2
"LL-,SI ,,0-,[
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
$
"V-.t
"hL
.2ft S-,6
..ZlL 6",9
~
to
o
z
'"
~
9
'"
'r
'"
~
'"
So>
,
,
,
,
,
i
I
i
,
,
,
,
!
,
,
1
i
i
.'
;,.
"-
.:J
-.J
C)
U)
- -- --- ---~
'r
'"
N
~
9
'"
r
r
f"""".
,
r-"
\;'-'
,
~,
'. ';>
't' ;\'
'.
:.
~,
~~
H
~~
~,
~ o,~p'"
"-
i1:
;"
i1.~
'"
"t\~
~,~.,) J
,'~'t:..~ !
!,'h. :
. ~ .
";l1~ '
i:
:' .,
J( ,\"
i::
"" ~-
\'
,~,
\\. ....
1 ~'\
~ .~
'<- "
" c7'f"/
.0-;6
.1
"
)1
~\ \:t,
XI)'
'"
'>
X-It"
'd's.
~" ~
~Ii..
\
. \
I \
t
I
I
r'
:z.
~
~
~
"
,
1:--'-:::'1
\
" o~. se'--
. dl
;;:.
~
""'ft,;
~'
~~
,
~,
"
->";/
-
.
f>
~'
'.,
~
,....,
r
r"
\'
" -.
p
...
,
,
.
,
, ff io
I "
, ' ...
r ~
j
~
'""
.'
..
,
-4.~_i .
~ =-..--.-
. '. Ii~':i?
I
I
!
..
,~
" '
~:t
~~'
-ill.
'-"",
\..1.>1. IL
ti Sdi~'
J ~>
- _._.~t~ 01
<t ~
~ ,\1
~ ilI~
"F .
t
'OR,,'
" .',.... ','It/
'. ' "
J
f
~:t ,
,.
J.,.
~ 'f
.;-\..
~~
.,;
:x'
~~
I "Ilil '.
i 1 t 'j
, '
. .
< . ---:-"l ~':o;i - .~-
-h.., j ~."
:--... .,---_..'..~.-
~1?1~,z: .
.
.
('
,\
"
. .
,.
r-. I I [
. \'
, #..~.u..j""""""""';l
, ,
, I
"
, " I; i
.. " ,
" r I
".
. [,
I
I..i I
I .
I
.1
I' I. I ~
/. I
I
.,.
,
.,
'" ,
I' .II.
r-. . . .,
,........ ... .
,
r"'
!u
~i
~I
~I
~,
\- "''',--!' .
"r _ ,
:.l~ - ""',
~bt .; ~
,
(",
.
,-;':;,--..
;1""''''1 I:
'-..
/
.l
~I , ,'A' ~
" ~i
-"" ~
'<' '~'~) ~ J!.:
~ ~;: ~t~
i li~ '<:z ~
'~ ~
p:,
:J
U:=
i-
fo;-
...J
7:~ 10--
!! ~
. ,
-;,-;-r- r---..'-'----
I, '". t. 1. ,,";1'/
5'~ .
.
fJ
-
~
r
~
('
r"
"
~;
"
t-}
7~ '
Ed
.'3~
f
.1.: "
..: ,.'
.. :~
1- f~
\"'
qO;Sz.-
~
It
r~V' t."
'<- ~'l .t.
'\,
'~.
l
"
~
.L n
~ "
"'- .'
.:1 ~
\-'
d=...
J 1
~" ~
! I
r----......- -------.....-
'0
!~ -! ~
"'1 ~ ...t .t;;~1
tl' >;
~. ~! ~t
'" ~~ I
<l1
r \:,,'!
" '" 7;' .')
~ ~' ~\i
\ \ .--. -.
\
i
I
.L
~
~
n
.
..--'.-..: '''--1'''-'' -.... ...- '-""'"
II ..
,.... m.,"
.r--j
:1 .,~. '1'
:1_':'" I
j,
. .
)'1'
I
I'
, '
....'
"Ir' .1..,..,.......,...1
. ." . I'"
I . . I .
; ". i " I.. ':'
:.- 'Ji J~; I'
" ' I
.,. '. I
,,"'. r:.
,
;
I
i
I
I
,
! I
: !
~l-~LJ-~,":-
~~ n.
,I,,-
f
.
?
<-
....
~
r
("'.
f'
I""""
,
r
II--
I!
I!
"
"
JLc..,-......
-'I-I
"
"
"
"
"
I!
"
I
I
"
"
"
" 1
"
H ~
"
"
I!
"
I!
I L_
L____ _
:r:-l~::::
I J ::::
" '"
"
"
'I
II
l~
"
':::--i)'::-~':'::':':':'::_:':'-
II
"
II
"
q
"
"
"
I!
II
II
I,
"
I
I~
I
"
II
II
I!
"
"
I!
II
II
"
"
"
"
'L
N
<::
'"
::"1-1_" c: c:c: "c:::c:: ::_- _::_ _ ___
11--
"
II
II
"
"
"
"
II
"
"
':'-d
"
II
II
--r:J-.r~
II
"
"
II
II
II
"
I
I
II
II
II
"
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
i'~~-: _
.~~
. r~
l~
;0
:~:
";!!;'.
'.1;'.
19
I
I
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
I'
':
:'
IL
.:
II
"
II
"
:'
I
"
"
"
"
I
"
"
\i 2l/S
"
.1
II /";-
~~-=--=--=-_---:..:-:~~_-__/ I'
Zl/S
,I
15
'.
"
"
"
"
",
II
II
II
II
.1
II
"
II
II
II
-po
". \l
I II
) II
II
;J
C'/ 1,;/'
""
"
~"
------ L:: _== ~/
"
~~,')
t-
i5
'-., ~
o
[
j
i
"
,
'"
-.i.
"
vI
~:
ATTACHMENT 1
LAND USE APPLICATION FORM
1. Project na~e \ ClI... L..&J........-,
2, Project location I- "'"
0.,- I{ L I.oC , 0 t=" A..J
(indicate street address, lot nd block number or metes and bounds description)
<iOCO ,;J.
..
~
~
~f;::';1""~nf'~~
r~ """'" ','V".='" q *- 'JJ
JUL ] 9 1999
,!,~>,)''''.:.i\j r~~ 1"\',';
3.
g-~
5.
<:-
7. Type of application (check all that apply):
.....-'-
Conditional Use
Special Review
8040 Greenline
Stream Margin
Subdivision
GMQS allotment
View Plane
Lot Split/Lot Line
Adjustment
Conceptual SPA
Final ~PA
Conceptual PUD
Final PUD
Text/Map Amend.
GMQS exemption
CondominiumizationA
o
Conceptual HPC
Final HPC
Minor HPC
Relocation HPC
Historic Landmark
Demo/Partial Demo
Design Review
Appeal Committee
8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures,
approximate sq. fl., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the
property) ~\Mlf. EA-Mi\\..-1' -ee>&~- .
"?\Q!:)o ~, ~ - ~A-I"'''''''M>
'-,
9. Description of development application
6~NA<\~ t'J...o 'f2EVt~ - ~Q.\.Io€J T ~L
-f'"~ r"4'11 0\-/
10. Have you completed and attached the following?
'?' Attachment 1- Land use application form
Response to Attachment 2 '
?' Response to Attachment 3
,
July 13, 1999
CityW Aspen
Community Development
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
To Whom it May Concern:
~
West End Partnership
520 E. Cooper Ave/ Ste/ 205
Aspen, Colorado 81611
,,-..,
This is a writen authorization for Colombo International, Inc. to represent West End
Pa4rtnership , L.L.C. for all issues concerning 234 lIam Street in Aspen, CO
mbo
Partner- West End Partnership.LLC'
r<20LOMBO
f\
TEL: 970 925-7806
INTERNATiONAL, INC.
520 E. COOPER ASPEN, CO 81611
234 West Hallam
DRAC Variance Request
FAX: 970 925.3972
Design R~view Appeal Committee
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena
. Aspen, CO 81621
-'-
RE: response to attachemt #3 item #6
Dear DRAC members,
-
The property located at 234 E. Hallam respectfully request a variance from the
Ordinance 20 Residential Standards. Specifically this request is for s variance from
the glazing standard which prohibits windows to occur between 9'0' and 12'0. of what
may typically be a second level. -
:",;
The premise for this standard is to eliminate spans where a second level would
typically exist above finished first floor. The goal of this standard is to prevent the
visual perception of expansive first floor volume which would not be typical of the
desired neighborhood architecture.
The proposed window exemption occurs from the first floor level rising in a second"
set of small windows which spans from 9'0" to 11 '0" from first floor level. The distinct
and intervening element in this case is the street facing balcony which separates and
amply designates the first and second level of the structure which convincingly brings
this structure into full compliance with the invent of the design standard.
The typically higher ceiling of the Victorian style home is maintained in this design
and the intent of the ordnance is fulfilled.
Therefore it is our respectful request that this board approve the variance for
window height at the first level as described in the aforementioned.
rLOLOMBO (\
TEL: 970 925-7806
INTERNATIONAL, INC.
520 E. COOPER ASPEN, CO 81611
234 West Hallam
DRAC Variance Request
FAX: 970 925-3972
Design Review Appeal Committee
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81621
RE: response to attachemt #4 item A & B
Dear DRAC members,
..
'flIre property located at 234 E. Hallam respectfully request a variance from the
Ordinance 20 Residential Standards. Specifically this request is for s variance from
the glazing standard which prohibits windows to occur between 9'0" and 12'0" of what
may typically be a second level
Standards for review bY DRAC
~
Standard A:
"yield greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan"
Standard B: "more effectively address the issue or proble a given standard or
provision responds to:"
The premise for both of these standard is to eliminate spans where a second level
would typically exist above finished first floor. The goal of this standard is to prevent
the visual perception of expansive first floor volume which would not be typical of the
desired neighborhood architecture.
The proposed window exemption occurs from the first floor level rising in a second
set of small windows which spans from 9'0" to 11 '0" from first floor level. The distinct
and intervening element in this case is the street facing balcony Which separates and
amply designates the first and second level of the structure which convincingly brings
this structure into full compliance with the invent of the design standard,
The typically higher ceiling of the Victorian style home is maintained in this design
and the intent of the ordnance is fulfilled.
Therefore it is our respectful request that this board approve the variance for
window height at the first level as described in the aforementioned,
----~- "
...-....-:::::-~. ""'-~--
:::~-- " .
~ ", 'C,, '
. ;-""" .
,-,
;-.....
/' .'
..............
-'-"~- ::
\.:.
o
00 0
ClO D
c::J
/""'\ Pit S""OPf1~~ IS
i_~_- ~~
i.- {Co-;,
u1 NtP~$ ";-::-.>:.~
../-\.....~----'....../ ~
' , ~.,.....,
~","O PI (~O J,,::::-.....~
<"., ~", 0'" -l--C\ .'PIO"
-~..!!:?O':""o G C~~__._ ~"?_ "
I --:... l --LI"I ~O
/ 0 E "'~ 'mt'lel"f /~
)t .5 ~ -'b/ Cot, ~..
/fo^,'<' (ill ~~v'\'''.",,,
~I.I .-''''''It.. 0\
-1~ ~,,! I~./ ,,0
.-----"' ~~ '~~,..
. ^ ...----) O( "'".
......:->:- -t:Usa ~..\ .
- V ".llit. '/~ ~\
r.. '-'I
~( ~
9\,' I':
. ~i /.."
""'. ..,
:.;;,; It"
~/ .:l
'-':--.....
.0:: PI~'~e,,::
~
~
:5
0,
'" ,c'
~)Kc
,C'
i",.',
Ik,., --"c"
. .,,~, .,~;
~'"'<~
,j ';"'..,"
j '"""'0.-..
I
/'
/
/
~
/
,,~
,
\
/-'\.'v'
\
\
,
/
"-.
\.
\
Ii
. I
/ .
( .
,
:
z
.....
q,
\.
, ~
; C"-,""
,/ '\ \:,,.~
/ .rT"-.j ~"t
/ j/ I !''C
{--~, I ~~
,/"-,- II, f
. n1 l ,-..._
/:. ,< I,;f "J //)....-
"y J,p ... '/ /
/ .7.....
jst~~~ \
/ I ~/
r, I I
I ,\ ~.'1
rq~"it
i ,/ ll}, ,; J
I ; t~f(;"r:/~O~;J;1
~~/ /i . ,<:"",c
~\""",/.." /' ('
~~",," /' ~
i ~. 9......0..,... q~
'.: ,":/
\..: "':>,"
I
(
~
, 6'
-", . ....
... . Ii_'
Cs '" ~~
~;; -
'.
',.-
'.
;,"
,
~
"
, ~.
"" .:.,,~
, "
,J
r"\
\/'"'\
/
;
.J
\\v
C)
\\\,
\,-(
~ '- 1S.,,,,,,s;
~ s~
,
.;- t;
: -Ii
.
ol' Iii
IS ~c
.. 's '1~
.;-
j .. 'S'lS
~
, 1$ 19
"
IS ~I
IS ~~
Q
~
I::
,
IS I~
'~\ '''-._,
H:\ .~)..:
"'. ',~
V). '>"_..J
....,
...,
>
~
.
.
,
.
(
.
(.:;C';~'W"IIIi>;./
,~
"
::.
I;"
"
~
.''::
/ 1""'1 CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIPr--,
,~iCk~n county Title, Inc., a duly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the
State of Colorado hereby certifies that WEST E~~ PARTNERSHIP, LLC is the
owner in fee simple of the following described property:
I'"
, ,-
LOTS K, L AND 1'1,
BLOCK 4.9,
CITY AND TOWNSITE
OF ASPEN
COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
,Subject to encumbrances, easements, restrictions and rights of way of record.
This certificate is not to be construed to be a guarantee of title and
is furnished for informational purposes only.
BY:
rI'ITLE, INC.
signature
CERTIFIED
1.9.98 @ 8:30 a.m.
~
,
-~
, "
.
...
...,
'.
/
,-.,
f\
~
Attachment'
Project Information
.
1. 234 W. Hallam
Asoen, Colorado
'-' Westend P.artnership
520 E. Cooper Suite 205 . ,
Aspen, Colorado 81611
925-7806
'.
Applicant's Representative: . ~
Jim Colombo
2. 234 W. Hallam
. Lots K, L & M, Block 49
, City & Township of Aspen -
3. Parcel Ownership: ~
Westend Partnership
See- '
, .
-~
- . ." ..,~.
4. , , See Vicinity Map-. "
> ""-...C-,"'" ,-'.
5. See Written Description
...,.,
l