Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sr.555 Walnut St.0079-2005 .. " City of Aspen Community Development Dept. CASE NUMBER 0079.2005.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBER 2737-07-3-00-022 PROJECT ADDRESS 555 WALNUT ST PLANNER CHRIS BENDON CASE DESCRIPTION REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES - FOX CROSSING REPRESENTATIVE STAN CLAUSON & ASSOC 9252323 DATE OF FINAL ACTION 10/13/200 CLOSED BY Denise Driscoll MEMORANDUM TO: Stan Clauson, Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. Charles Cunniffe, Charles Cunniffe Architects Chris Bendon, Community Development Director Fox Crossing Subdivision Residential Design Standards Variances September 30, 2005 FROM: RE: DATE: SUMMARY: The applicant, Fox Crossing Partners, LLC, is developing the residential lots within the Fox Crossing Subdivision and has applied for administrative variances from the City's Residential Design Standards (RDS) on individual lots within the subdivision. Approved Variations: Staff finds the following requests meet the criteria for administrative variance. The variances provide for an appropriate pattern of development given the context of the neighborhood: Lot 10, Building 0 - Light well Lot 10, Building P - Light well Lot 8, Building C - Two light wells Denied Variations: Lot 2, Building G, appears to require a variance from the Garage setback standard - 26.41O.040.C.2. Staff does not believe this request meets the criteria for administrative variance - the design is not an appropriate pattern of development given the context of the neighborhood and the purpose of the standard. Staff suggests the Applicant either redesign to meet the standard or seek a variance from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Building H on this lot is accessed from an alleyway and need only demonstrate compliance with provision C.l of the section. The Applicant has represented site plans for the most of the lots in the subdivision. Some of the lots have not been designed yet and staff cannot confirm compliance with the RDS at this time on those lots. None of the proposed buildings are represented in elevation and staff cannot confirm compliance with certain provisions of the RDS without reviewing the elevations. The Applicant believes no further variances will be needed, at least for the lots for which site plans have been prepared, and it is appropriate that the remaining elements of the RDS be reviewed for compliance at the time of building permit submittal. This further review may result in the need for further variances or redesign. mmunity Development Director: APPROVED . Dategl1JO,rJCj SEP :1 0 2005 COMMUNITY DEVELOPI.lCNT LJlH~CTOO CITY OF ASPEN Chris Bendon, AICP ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Application dated 9.15.05 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS ,..... Fox Crossing Subdivision ~ ,., 15 September 2005 .... 'M< Applicant: F ox Crossing Partners, LLC ... "" ... Location: Portions of an Area bounded by Lone Pine Road, Gibson Street, and Spruce Street Aspen, Colorado ... ... ... ... - - A statement of overall design criteria, conformance with the residential design standards, and requests for administrative variances in several specific instances. ... - ... ... ... ... Prepared by: Stan Clauson Associates, Inc. 200 E. Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 970-925-2323 - ... - ... - In conjunction with: Charles Cunniffe Architects ... - - - - Overview of Project Issues The Fox Crossing Subdivision includes several streets that were orthogonally platted as part of the late 19th Century Williams Addition. These include Walnut Street, Race Street, and Race Alley. It also includes public ways that reflect the curvilinear development ofthe late 20th Century, such as Lone Pine Road and Gibson Street. Moreover, the creation of the subdivision involved two creative approaches to platting: one was the creation of Fox Park Meadow, a publicly accessible park area that represents an extension of an unopened section of originally platted Walnut Street, and the other a private drive extending Walnut Street to into the subdivision partially following the original Midland Railroad Turn-around Right-of-Way. Finally, an additional private drive entry to Lone Pine Road was required by the Fire Marshall during the approval process. Taken together, these various design elements pose something of a challenge in approaching the City of Aspen Residential Design Standards. These Standards are applicable on a City-wide basis, and include minor residential and private roadways as well as public ways. In providing a rational site design for each of the residences within the subdivision, we have attempted to utilize the following hierarchy and criteria: .,.... I. Limit administrative variance requests for each individual lot to not more than three of the individual requirements as stated in the Residential Design Standards; 2. Provide an appropriate design and pattern of development considering the context and internal nature of the Fox Crossing Subdivision; 3. Principally address the major existing public streets-Walnut Street, Race Street, Race Alley, Gibson Avenue, and Lone Pine Road-with building orientation; 4. Treat Fox Meadow Park as a street frontage-that is, a visual extension of platted but unopened--Walnut Street for purposes of setback and building orientation; and 5. Treat the new curvilinear extension of Walnut Street and its fire lane entrance onto Lone Pine Road as an interior alley, with the lowest priority with respect to Design Standard requirements. - - - - ... With these basic criteria in mind, we are providing below responses to the Residential Design Standards. These are identified in this summary grouped by each individual property, then subsequently review along with the corresponding code provisions in the section following. - ... ... Lot # Unit Variances Required Discussion ... ... - Lot 13 A None The residence has been aligned to Lone Pine Road, which is its primary public street per Criterion #3. There are no window wells facing onto Lone Pine Road. There is garage placement forward of the far;ade wall facing the fire lane, but this is consistent with an alley orientation. - ... ... - - ... Lot # Unit Variances Required Discussion ~ Lot 13 B None This residence does not have frontage on any public street. It has, however, been moved forward to maintain a build-to line relative to the fire lane and hammerhead ofthe Walnut Avenue extension. J Lot 12 R None This residence has been aligned to address Lone Pine Road. There are no window wells facing Lone Pine Road. A window well is required along the Walnut Avenue extension, but should not require a variance per Criterion #5. . .. ,.. \ Lot 11 Q None This residence has been oriented , toward Lone Pine Road, with a secondary alignment paralleling the property line facing Gibson Street. ,. ., Lot 10 0 Light Well This residence has been aligned orthogonally with Walnut Avenue, per Criterion 3. There is a small extension of the Walnut Avenue right-of-way to the west of the existing pavement. Facing this extension is a far;ade wall with a needed light well. This light well may be construed as requiring V an administrative variance. "" .. "" .., Lot 10 P Light Well This residence has been aligned to ) address Walnut Avenue and also provides an alignment appropriately parallel to Gibson Avenue. There is a needed light well along the Gibson Avenue frontage. However, it is screened from the street by the existing topography, which provides a significant elevation difference between the house far;ade and the Gibson Avenue sidewalk. ., '"', ~ .., Lot 9 M None This residence orients toward the Park per Criterion #4. Entry is taken from the Walnut Avenue Extension. '" ..., - Lot 9 N None This residence orients toward the Park, per Criterion #4. A light well is needed on the far;ade facing the Walnut Avenue Extension. However, per Criterion #5, this should not be considered as requiring an administrative variance. Due to the irregular lot and its constraints there is very little room to place light wells which are necessary for light and egress, so the light well was placed on the alley side rather than toward the park. ... . ... . ... Lot 8 C Light Wells (2) the building orientation is toward the Park per Criterion #4. It was needed, however, to place two light wells on the Park fayade of this residence. These light wells will be well-screened from the Park and associated pathway, and an administrative variance is requested to permit their placement along this far;ade. . ... . ... Lot 7 L Not designed There is an existing residence at this location. No design is provided for development on this lot at the present time. . ... . ... Lot # Unit Variances Required Discussion Lot 6 K None This residence orients toward the Park, with rear yard setbacks addressing Race Alley. As an historic residence being restored, this residence has had its site plan approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. .. Lot 5 J None This residence orients toward the Park, with rear yard setbacks addressing Race Alley. As an historic residence being restored, this residence has had its site plan approved by the Historic Preservation Commission. ,...,. .- '.. Lots 3, 4 D, I Not designed residential designs prepared at this time. Lot 2 H, G C~~ the Race Street frontage. These lots have not yet had ,.. These residences will orient toward ,.... - - Lot 1 E, F Not designed designs prepared at this time. This lot has not had residential - - ... L,~? - - - - - ... - ... - ... - ... - - - - - - . - - - Land Use Code Standards-Residential Design Standards . Applicable sections of the City of Aspen Land Use Code have been addressed below. - 26.410.020 Procedures for Review. 11\ _I A Determination of Applicability. The Community Development Director at a pre- application conference shall make a determination as to whether the proposed project is exempt from the requirements of this chapter. If it is determined that the design review standards shall apply to the proposed project, the applicant shall receive an application form for Residential Design Standards review, which shall include a copy of the administrative checklist referenced at Section 26.410.030. 11\ ... 11\ .... Response: The entire Fox Crossing project is outside of the Aspen Injill Area and is therefore exempt from requirements relating to Secondary Mass, Non-orthogonal Windows, and Inflection. 11\ .. 11\ -- ., '- Lots 3 and 8 have no streetfrontage per Section 26.410.010 (B) (4) and should be exempt from requirements relating to Building Orientation and Building Elements. ... II .. B. Determination of Consistency. Upon receipt of an application for Residential Design Standards review, the Community Development Director shall determine if the development plan is consistent with the Residential Design Standards set forth at Section 26.410.040. II ... .. .. C. Appeal of Adverse Determination. If an application is found to be inconsistent with any item of the Residential Design Standards, the applicant may either amend the application or seek a variance as set forth below. II ... D. Variances. Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Historic Preservation Commission, if the project is subject to the requirements of Section 26.415. An applicant who desires to consolidate other requisite land use reviews by the Historic Preservation Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Planning and Zoning Commission may elect to have the variance application decided by the board or commission reviewing the other land use application. An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate, and the deciding board shall find that the variance, if granted, would: .. .. .. lOIi .. .. .. 1. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, ... .. ... II ... II 11\ 2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Response: The Fox Crossing project presents some unusual site conditions beclUlse of the relationship of the lots to existing public ways as wells as interior alleys and fire lanes. Five criteria for consistent applicability of the Residential Design Standards have been proposed and are presented in the Overview of Project Issues section of this document " ~,I 26.410.030 Administrative checklist. The Director of Community Development shall create a checklist for use by applicants and community development staff in identifying the approvals and reviews necessary for issuance of a development order for an application that is consistent with the Residential Design Standards. 1'.".'1 "~ ,,".~~ ... 26.410.040 Residential design standards. A. SITE DESIGN. The intent of these design standards is to encourage residential buildings that address the street in a manner which creates a consistent "far;ade line" and defines the public and semi-public realms. In addition, where fences or dense landscaping exist, or are proposed, it is intended that they be used to define the boundaries of private property without eliminating the visibility of the house and front yard from the street. - - - - 1. Building orientation The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street facing facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. - - - - One element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front corner of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. - - Response: Existing public ways have been identified in the Fox Crossing Residential Design Criteria and building facades have been aligned with existing public ways. It was not possible in all cases to align the front or entry fafade with an existing public WIQ', but all facades facing public ways have been appropriately aligned. - - - - 2. Build-to lines. On parcels or lots ofless than 15,000 square feet, at least 60% of the front far;ade shall be within 5 feet of the minimum front yard setback line. On corner sites, at least 60% of both street facades of the building shall be within 5 feet of the minimum setback lines. Porches may be used meet the 60% standard. - ... - Response: Build-to lines have been observed in relation to all public ways and to the Fox Crossing Park area. ... - - - - . ~ 3. Fences. Fences, hedgerows, and planter boxes shall not be more than forty-two inches (42") high, measured from natural grade, in all areas forward of the front facade of the house. Man-made berms are prohibited in the front yard set back. .: Response: Specific lanc/scape plans for the various residences have not been developed at this time. Requirements of this section have been noted for future design activities. . '"'I B. BUILDING FORM. The intent of the following building form standards is to respect the scale of Aspen's historical homes by creating new homes, which are more similar in their massing, by promoting the development of accessory units off of the city alleys, and by preserving solar access. ... .. I. Secondary Mass. All new structures shall locate at least ten (10) percent of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building, or linked to it by a subordinate connecting element. Accessory buildings such as garages, sheds, and accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate uses for the secondary mass. A subordinate linking element for the purposes of secondary mass shall be defined as an element not less than six (6) feet in width and ten (10) feet in length with a plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. "" ... .. ... 11III ... Response: Since the Fox Crossing Subdivision is outside of the Aspen lnfill Area, the project is exempt from the requirements for Secondary Mass. .. ... C. PARKING, GARAGES, AND CARPORTS. The intent of the following parking, garages, and carport standards is to minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic by placing parking, garages, and carports on alleys, or to minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist. 1. For all residential that have access from an alley or private road, the following standards shall apply: .. .. .. .. .. . .. ,?~Al' \\ . ... a. Parking, garages, and carports shall be accessed from an alley or private road. .. b. lfthe garage doors are visible from a public street or alley, then they shall be single-stall doors, or double-stall doors designed to appear like single-stall doors. ... .. c. If the garage doors are not visible from a public street or alley, the garage doors may be either single stall or normal double stall garage doors. ... .. Response: Garages and driveways have access from alleys and private roads rather than public streets, wherever these are available. ... .. ... .. .. I". 2. For all residential uses that have access only from a public street, the following standards shall be met: hkl.,. 6. a. On the street facing facade(s), the~th of the living area on the first floor shall be at least five (5) feet greater than the width of the garage or carport. ,. Ilia b. The front facade of the garage or the frontmost supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the frontmost wall of the house. ,~ - c. On lots of at least fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in size, the garage or carport maybe forward of the front facade of the house only if the garage doors or carport entry are perpendicular to the street (side-loaded). - - d. When the floor of a garage or carport is above or below the street level, the driveway cut within the front yard setback shall not exceed two (2) feet in depth, measured from natural grade. - ,- - e. The vehicular entrance width of a garage or carport shall not be greater than twenty- four (24)feet. - ... f The garage doors shall be single-stall doors, unless the garage doors are not visible from any public street or aIley, in which case the garage doors may be either single-stall doors or normal double stall doors. - - - Response: These requirements of the Residential Design Standards are consistently met by the proposed designs. - - - D. BUILDING ELEMENTS. The intent of the following building elements standards is to ensure that each residential building has street-facing architectural details and elements which provide human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience, and reinforce local building traditions. 1. Street oriented entrance and principal window. All single-family homes, town, houses, and duplexes shall have a street-oriented entrance and a street facing principal window. In the case of townhouses and accessory units facing courtyards or gardens, entries and principal windows should face those features. On corner lots, entries and principal windows should face whichever street has a greater block length. Multiple unit residential buildings shall have at least one street oriented entrance for every four (4) units, and front units must have a street-facing principal window. This standard shall be satisfied ifall of the following conditions are met: - - - ... ... ... - - - a. The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten feet (10'0") back from the frontmost wall of the building. Entry doors shall not be taIler than eight feet. ... ... - - - . - . - b. A covered entry porch offtfty (50) or more square feet, with a minimum depth of six feet (6'), shall be part of the front facade. Entry porches and canopies shall not be more than one story in height. . .' c. A street-facing principal window requires that a significant window or group of windows face street. . - Response: These standards have been consistently met in the proposed designs. .. - 2. First story element. All residential buildings shall have a fIrst-story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty (20) percent of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first-story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first-story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch, or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element, however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front far;ade shall not be precluded. "" ... '" ... .. ... .. Response: These standords have been consistently met in the proposed designs. ... 3. Windows. a. Street facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve feet (12) above the finished first floor. For interior staircases, this measurement will be made from the first landing if one exists. A transom window above the main entry is exempt from this standard. All street facing areas with an exterior expression of plate height greater than ten (10) feet shall be counted as two (2) square feet for each one (1) square foot of floor area. Exterior expression shall be defined as facade penetrations between nine (9) and twelve (12) feet above the level of finished floor. " ... '" .. III .. 11II .. b. No more than one non-orthogonal window shall be allowed on each facade of the building. A single non-orthogonal window in a gable end may be divided with mullions and still be considered one non-orthogonal window. III ... .. Response: The criteria in Paragraph 3.a above have been consistently met The requirements of Paragraph 3.b above are not applicable, as the project is out side of the Aspen Infill Area. ... .. ... .. ... . ... . - 4. Lightwells. All areaways, lightwells and/or stairwells on the street facing facade(s) ofa building shall be entirely recessed behind the frontmost wall of the building. Response: In several instances-specifically Lot 10, Residences 0 and p, and Lot 8, Residence C-lightwells have been needed to be placed in front of the identified front fafade of the residences. The need for administrative variances as well as mitigating circumstances for these occurrences are discussed in the Overview of Project Issues section of this document. E. CONTEXT. The intent of the following standards is to reinforce the unique character of Aspen and the region by drawing upon Aspen's vernacular architecture and neighborhood characteristics in designing new structures. 1. Materials. The following standards must be met: ,~ a. The quality of the exterior materials and details and their application shall be consistent on all sides of the building. I ~.. ,... b. Materials shall be used in ways that are true to their characteristics. For instance stucco, which is a light or non-bearing material, shall not be used below a heavy material, such as stone. - - c. HigWy reflective surfaces shall not be used as exterior materials. - - Response: The proposed designs are compatible with these residential design standards. - - 2. Inflection. The following standard must be met for parcels which are 6,000 square feet or over: - ... - a. Ifa one (1) story building exists directly adjacent to the subject site, then the new construction must step down to one story in height along their common lot line. If there are one story buildings on both sides of the subject site, the applicant may choose the side towards which to inflect. - - - Response: This standard is not applicable since the project is outside of the defined Aspen Infill Area. - - - - - - - - INFILL AREA MAPS THE INFILL AREA: The geographical area of Aspen east of Castle Creek and south of the Roaring Fork River, "mountain to rivers." COMMERCIAL CORE Same boundaries as current Commercial Core. PERIPHERY COMMERCIAL Includes areas currently zoned Office, NC, and C1 '"' '" ~ II' _1 ~~\';: ":.... ..\:~)~ \ .'. . )".- -,aJ tl"b ';\ .:~- , , '. '... ..... w "( / ... -, lOll -, '"' ... '"' ... '"' ... '"' ... '"' - . ... . .. . .. . ... '"' - - - - - '"' Section Four, Page 1 - . .. . i 1~ , ~. -_._._._._~-_.~ '" 3: ." "0 ~:." 0 rrI 0 1> 'I~.. 15 x j1? _._._~._._.~ --'-', ~ . ! r----, i ----... '---"1 . ~ I 0 . . , r---u,- I I--~._-_.- 00 I II, G '! r i 'I ~ 'I i - i ! ! ~b \! " --, 'gr'I'IHI, ~r! I I I aC) '1: t')Ul '1" ~ C) i iii' ~-1 'I !:!l I t')-1 , ~.J>.. '------ 'L~J Iii :~.J i'-::.., . \ i m : , \ i &r' 'I ~~ \ L. i ~ \ : i I . , -n \ \ --_._~ 1'" I'" ~ .. .. r1 Ir, r-", ) )>21J1 G-r G:=C) -1)>(\ - 7\ C)3:Ul zUl FOX CROSSING ~ Ii l'l~ 0 ~ z 5~ ~ )> >- 0 ~ z p E ~ " --l. >- I\) :e~ ~~ ESTATES OF FOX CROSSING ASPEN. COLORADO r , ~ . ~ .. r 0\ ~~~ ;1N\d;1N ~~--=~, \ ~---~ , -I --=~ ~~ I C Z .... m ;0 n ;0 m m ^ n o z D D 3: Z C 3: PARKINiS> }<Or S~ ~ ~uc PARKING ~ LOT SJ': i>~ ~)- I CHARLES CUNNlFFE ARCHITECTS WW\'V.cunniffe.com blU Wi l1I'M'oN AVE.' ASl'IN,CO I1MI' fEll: ~,G'lL>_3~'lll . fAX: ~;O"'1(l...45S1 1\lll11'NE CKOVf lW.Slf 102' illA\IIO.\T ~tolGS,(O lICI-l17' nll:~'lllm-O>'Jll' tM:91lt'~Kn . ,. I C Z -I m ~ (\ ~ m m 7\ (\ C) z G C) 3: z c 3: , (iJ(iJ ~.