Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20100526ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 26, 2010 Chairperson, Michael Hoffman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Jason Lasser, Ann Mullins, Nora Berko, Jay Maytin, Jamie McLeod, Sarah Broughton and Brian McNellis. Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel Amy Guthrie, Preservation Officer Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Commissioner member comments: Amy brought up that the University of Colorado has put in an application to demolish the Given's Institute. It is zoned R-6 residential. Sara said it is on Ordinance #48 and they are willing to go through the process. Because it is a state entity they don't have to go through our local processes but they are willing to do that. Jim True, Special counsel said HPC could discuss with council what opportunities there are for negotiation. Jason said in theory this could become a single family home. Sarah requested a meeting to discuss prodigal and have a site visit. Jay asked if there are any other buildings in the city that this could happen too. Jim said the D-19 building is owned by Stanford University but recently sold. 216 W. Hyman -Substantial Amendment to Major Development Approval Ann Mullins recused herself because she owns the property in discussion. Amy said 216 W. Hyman is known as the pink house next to the City ice rink. A few years ago alterations were approved on the primary building on the site but they have not been constructed yet. The proposal tonight is to build a free standing out building structure on the back of the property. It is ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 26, 2010 not a large structure, less than 600 square feet and a story and '/z. It is centered in the back of the lot and placed to avoid removal of existing trees on the site. In reviewing the application there are no variances required and it is a detached building so that there are no impacts to the historic structure. Initially the steepness of the roof seemed out of character and in reviewing it a little more and visiting with the architect we developed a different perspective of this structure. It was designated some time ago and it doesn't particularly read as a Victorian. It was the home of Darcy Brown who was the head of the Ski Company in a very important period of time. The house absorbed the character of the time, almost a chalet with a Bavarian detailing. Staff is recommending approval without any changes. Derek Skalko, architect - 1 Friday Collaborative Derek said opposite the pink house is the Aspen Ice Garden. It is an eclectic area in town. Ann's property is the most forested lot in that area which played a lot in why we did what we did. There is 5 '/~ feet of grade from the front of the lot to the back of the lot. Essentially with the mass being higher 6 %2 feet they will read very close to the same height. There is 28 feet separation between the two structures. I am pretty confident you will not see this building from any capacity. Derek walked through the images with a power point and model. It is a very eclectic lot and essentially Ann's is the smallest structure in the area. The end property is about 24 feet high and then Ann's property which is about 14 '/2 feet. There is a grade variation on the site and numerous trees on the site. The front of the house has aspens and cottonwood trees. All the trees in the back are evergreens. The house most impacted is across the alley. The lower floor is 9 feet clear and another 9 feet to the head height. What 9 feet gives us in the loft is about 5 '/z feet height of area where you will have at least about 6 '/z feet of space that is kind of usable. We are asking for no special conditions and no variances which is very unusual. We are requesting a 5 foot rear yard variance which is under the designation of an out building in the residential design guidelines. There are no plumbing or utilities. A studio is in the lower level and a loft above. It is a simple request. We are staying 6 '/2 feet below the height limit at the peak of the ridge and we are under construction for phase one. Derek gave examples of caretaker units or out buildings throughout Aspen. Examples where out buildings didn't always adhere to the main building. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 26, 2010 Proof of notice -Exhibit I Derek said the care taker unit is definitely subservient to the main house. Jay asked if the fence will be removed. Ann said there will be a gate and she will keep as much fence as possible. Derek said he thinks a six foot section will need to be removed. Sarah asked what drove the pitch of the roof. Derek said the structure itself is an amalgamation of different areaa so it has no real style, nothing pure. Some of the details are chalet in style. In the back of the property being that it is an every green site the outhouse pitch fits in. Right next you have a 26 foot flat structure. This design feels right and is appropriate in scale and mass. The steeper it is the less you see it from the front. Ann Mullins said secondary buildings are mostly different throughout town. The pines have strict pyramidal shapes. It had to be tall enough to walk across. At the top of the loft you will see Aspen Mountain. The pitch is 4 x 12. Derek said they looked at flat roof shed structures etc. The pitch with a different form on the out building makes the two buildings read as two different entities. Jason asked about the placement of the building and why it wasn't set to one side or at 90 degrees to enjoy more lawn? Derek said the site chosen was because of the Parks Department which indicated that under the stone patio are tree root systems so we had to go in between the two drip lines. We are at the five foot setback. Brian asked if any trees would need to be removed. Derek said one crab apple needs removed on the back alley. Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 26, 2010 Jim True, Special counsel indicated that he reviewed the notices provided. Affidavit of public notice Exhibit II Nora thanked the applicant for presenting a project with no variances requested. MOTION: Jay made the motion to approve Reso. # 6 as written. The approval meets the guidelines as stated in staff's memo; second by Jamie. All in favor, motion carried. 7-D Michael pointed out that you can see a little peak of the roof form by the ice garden and there is no other visual impact. Materials: Anne said the siding of existing house is pink and white. Herbert Bayer, architect chose a colored palate. The horizontal clapboard siding and the trim will be white to tie into the existing house. The upper portion will be vertical and the lower horizontal siding. Ann said she feels the standing seam roof is appropriate. Sarah said it is appropriate to keep the roof the same as the metal existing roof, standing seam metal. Jason pointed that that there is no kitchen or plumbing. Ann said it is a studio for work space. There will be a library and a desk and lots of light. Jay said there is zero opposition and no variances are being requested. MOTION: Brian moved to adjourn; second by Sarah. All in favor, motion carried. Sarah monitor. Meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.