Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20110427 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 27, 2011 Vice- chair, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Jason Lasser, Jay Maytin, Brian McNellis and Willis Pember. Excused was Sarah Broughton, Nora Berko and Jamie McLeod Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk 132 W. MAIN STREET Minor Review and Setback Variances — Public Hearing (30 min.) Amy relayed that porches have been enclosed and changed. There is a full basement. There is a full basement. They are doing a remodel to section off an office in the front corner. They are doing a remodel to section off an office in the front corner and that office cannot use the existing accessible ramp that is at the back of the building. There is not a continuous pathway from the ramp to the office of the new pathway from the ramp to the office of the new space. There is a requirement from the building department to provide accessibility and the proposal is along the front facade and it lands on a non - historic porch that is now the main entry to the building. The good thing about it is that it will provide accessibility to the core of the building. It is not quite as discrete as some solutions. We want to respect the law but try not to damage historic features or add something that is obtrusive. We tried to look at other options but each one of them had their own set of issues or didn't offer accessing the basement in the future. Staff is recommending approval and the building department indicated that this is the minimum they would accept. This is sitting in the front yard setback so there is a variance needed. Jay Ray Barlow, architect Jay said he helped Matt Foley put this together. The site is tight and this is a very simple solution and it is a straight run ramp and lands on the existing porch on the left hand side. There is a slight kick at the toe of the ramp so a wheel chair has a flat landing five feet long. I had to bend the ramp so not to get into the hand rails of the other ramp. All the trees but one will be maintained. Heavy railings were not used and we tried to minimize the look. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 27, 2011 Matt said Related Snowmass purchased the building in 2007 with suite A and B. A &B previously had an internal access but we have a new tenant for suite A. The building department determined that ADA access was necessary. When everything was leased as one we had accessibility up the back ramp and into the bathroom but now that it is landlocked from accessibility. Willis asked if there was another location. Jay Ray said that is the challenge we couldn't get from the back side to the suite. In all honesty it should have been done like this to begin with. Ann asked what triggered the ADA issue. Matt said the one tenant went in for a building permit to close of the interior from A to B and the new tenant wants privacy and sound insulation and dry wall over the locked door. You can't access the unit from another tenants space to satisfy the requirements of the ADA. Jay asked if they studied the back and changing the other space. Jay Ray said the central corridor is double loaded so if someone tried to come in through the interior corridor you would come through the interior of someone else's office. Matt said a third tenant occupies the back of the building. Jay said he sees solutions that would be more work but they might be the right solutions. You would have to change the leases. Matt said that would require creating an interior corridor of some sort. Willis asked what the rise of the ramp is. Matt said 22 to 24 inches. Brian asked if you needed an intermittent landing? Matt said you only need that if you go 30 inches. Willis inquired about the handrail design. Jay Barlow said you need an intermediate hand guard rail. It is a function of IBC. I have tried to keep it simple. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 27, 2011 Ann asked about coming up the east side of the lot. Jay Barlow said there isn't enough linear run and there is also a light well. We are also up to the property line on that side. The length of the ramp is the bare minimum. Willis clarified that there are three suites and two ramps with this proposal. What if there is a fourth suite in the future? What if there is a fourth suite in the future? Jay Barlow said he would anticipate that all the suites would enter from the middle. Jay Barlow said he would anticipate that all the suites would enter from the middle, the corridor in suite C. Vice -chair Ann Mullins opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Jason said he understand the concerns. You could shorten the bridge of the railing. You have an iron railing in the front and a wood railing off the porch and this is adding another kind of material. Willis said for three suites, having two ramps is excessive. The corridor in suite C could possibly be utilized. You could look for ways to reassign circulation. Jay Barlow pointed out that the corridor is part of the leased premises. Willis said he is curious about the material changes up the ramp. Jay Barlow said it is somewhat of a constructability because right now there is a brick sidewalk and we were trying to make the ramp feel less long. Willis said he would prefer the entire thing to be brick and the handrail tie into the landscape. Jay said he will not support this. Applicants say we have restrictions and this is how it has to look. I am not supporting confusing this building. This was triggered by development inside the building. Re- designing the inside might need to occur and would be a better solution. This is Main Street and a prominent piece downtown. We are losing them left and right. A recommendation would be to restudy the corridor through the building to accomplish having ADA access through all three suites. I would urge the commission to try and protect what we have left on Main Street. Brian said he is concerned about this to the detriment of the historic resource but more to the detriment of the landscape. With the elevated ramp I am 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 27, 2011 worried about what would happen to the area underneath. You won't be able to maintain sod underneath. I am also struggling with the railing. Maybe there is something that would tie into the architecture a little better. Jay Barlow said if you try to match the railing it will be stronger and the proposal is minimal. I was reluctant to put anything in front that would hide the main facade. The existing railing is 2 x 2 pickets. Brian said maybe you could redesign and pull in the picket fence in the front. If this is approved two conditions should be included: If the suites are every converted back to one suit the front ramp would be taken away. If there is any detriment to the trees or loss of trees in the installation of this it would be mitigated for. Ann said the entrance should be from the front of the building but there are many options. The location is right and it is unfortunate that it has to cut across the front. Studying the color that blends will make it disappear somewhat. In the landscaping maybe you can put shrubs in front to break it up. I am in support but you should look at the landscaping and color. Willis agreed that screening the railing with a hedge and possibly remove the picket fence in front is a suggestion. MOTION: Brian moved to approve 132 W. Main Street, ramp applicant pursuant to the draft approval with the added condition that if it suites that are now bifurcating the building go back to one continuous office space the ramp will be removed. If any trees are disturbed or threatened during the construction they will be mitigated for. The landscape plan to screen the proposed ramp will be approved by staff and monitor. Motion second by Willis. Ann said there are ground covers that will work. The ramp in the front needs to stay as the front entrance. Jay Barlow said in the motion you might have some federal issue about removing the ramp. Sara pointed out that once you have an ADA entrance you cannot go backward. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 27, 2011 Jay pointed out that there are so many changes it would be responsible of this committee to continue the application and look at a revised plan. Jason concurred that the application should be continued. Brian withdrew the statement of removing the ramp. Jason asked if the board wanted to add removal of the fence in the motion. Ann said that can be left up to staff and monitor. Brian said he is not offended by the fence. Brian removed the condition of the tree mitigation. Amy clarified the motion that there will be a landscape plan to screen the ramp which will be approved by staff and monitor. The motion also included the approval of a setback variance. Roll call vote: Brian, yes; Jay, no; Willis, yes; Jason, no; Ann, yes; Motion carried 3 -2 Motion: Ann moved to adjourn; second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried. Brian and Ann are the monitors. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Kathleen . trickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 5