HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.hpc.018-2009RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL),
VIEWPLANE REVIEW, AND COMMERICAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 434 EAST COOPER STREET, LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK
89, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO.
RESOLUTION NO. 18, SERIES OF 2009
PARCEL ID: 2737-182-16-001
WHEREAS, the applicant, Bidwell Investment Corporation, represented by Mitch Haas of Haas
Land Planning, LLC; Klein, Cote & Edwards, P.C., and Rowland + Broughton Architecture and
Urban Design requested that Aspen City Council reconsider the subdivision application for the
property located at 434 East Cooper Avenue, Lots Q, R and S, Block 89, City and Townsite of
Aspen, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, Aspen City Council approved reconsideration of the application for subdivision for
the subject property and remanded Commercial Design Standard Review, Historic Preservation
Major Development Conceptual Review and Viewplane Exemption Review back to the Historic
Preservation Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director determined that the application is governed
under the Aspen Land Use Code in effect in March 2006; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(B)(1) of the Municipal Code, the Community
Development Director has approved a combined review to enable HPC review of the applicant's
viewplane and commercial design review requests with major development (conceptual) finding
that such combination will eliminate or reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense
and clarity; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application,
a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's
conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section
26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC
may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain
additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
RECEPTION#: 563656, 10/1512009 at
10:45:06 AM, HPC Resolution No. 18, Series of 2009
1 OF 3, R $16.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION 434 East Cooper Street
Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, GO Page 1 of 3
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(B)(1) of the Municipal Code, the Community
Development Director has approved a combined review to enable HPC review of the applicant's
viewplane and commercial design review requests with major development (conceptual) finding
that such combination will eliminate or reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense
and clarity; and
WHEREAS, for View Plane Review the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report
and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with Municipal
Code Section 26.435.050, Mountain View Plane Review. The HPC may approve, disapprove,
approve with 'conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny. The HPC hereby finds that impact on the viewplane is
minimal; and
WHEREAS, for approval of Commercial Design Review, HPC must review the application, a
staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.412 of
the Municipal Code, that the project conforms to the following criteria:
]. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial
Design Standards or any deviation from the Standards provides amore-appealing pattern
of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the
purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from
the Standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested Design Elements, is not
required but may be used to justify a deviation from the Standards.
2. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the
proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial
Design Standards, to the greatest extent practical. Amendments to the fapade of the
building may be required to comply with this section.
3. For properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or located within a
Historic District, the proposed development has received Conceptual Development Plan
approval from the Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.415. This
criterion shall not apply if the development activity does not require review by the
Historic Preservation Commission; and
WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report dated July 22, 2009 and August 12, 2009,
performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards
and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines have been met, and
recommended approval; and
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on July 22, 2009 continued to August 12, 2009,
the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application was
consistent with the applicable review standards and "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines," found a minimal impact on the Wheeler Opera House viewplane, and approved the
application by a vote of four to zero (4 - 0.)
HPC Resolution No. 18, Series of 2009
434 East Cooper Street
Page 2 of 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby approves Major Development (Conceptual), View Plane Review, and
Commercial Design Review for the property located at 434 East Cooper Avenue, Lot Q, R & S,
Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, as proposed and illustrated in Exhibit A, with
the following conditions;
1. The applicant will continue to study the storefront fenestration heights to better relate to
the historic context and the impact of raising the storefront height on the overall height of
the building for discussion and approval during Final Review.
2. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one
(1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an
application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the
Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole
discretion and for good cause shown, grant aone-time extension of the expiration date for
a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written
request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular eting o the 12~" y pf August,
2009.
Approved as to Form:
~- -
im True, Special Counsel
ATTEST:
~~A~
~ Kath~kland, Chief Deputy Clerk
Hoffman, HPC Chair
HPC Resolution No. 18, Series of 2009
434 East Cooper Street
Page 3 of 3