The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20010822ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION August 22, 2001 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS SITE VISITS -NOON - 5:00 I. Roll call II. Approval of minutes -July 11,2001 and July 25,2001 (distributed in boxes) III. Public Comments IV. Commission member comments=end-pâ€¢efe#*~6*:it,_- -1 V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) VI. Project Monitoring VII. OLD BUSINESS A. 233 Main Street, Innsbruck Inn - Conceptual Review, (Continue to Sept. 26th VIII. NEW BUSINESS 5:10 A. 312 S. Galena Street, Prada -Minor Development Reso. #38, 2001 IX. WORKSESSION 5:20 A. 434 E. Main St. 5:35 B. 64Integrity Assessment Forms" for Postwar Architecture 7:00 X. ADJOURN ROJECT MONITORING Suzannah Reid 414 N. First- POLE 312 S. Galena * and Main 330 Lake Avenue 620 W. Bleeker Historical Society 328 Park Ave. - Lane 515 Gillespie Jeffrey Halferty 414 N. First- POLE 920 W. Hallam- Guthrie 312 S. Galena 620 W. Bleeker - Historical Society 213 W. Bleeker 200 E. Bleeker 328 Park Ave. - Lane Lisa Markalunas 939 E. Cooper- Langley 200 E. Bleeker 419 E. Hyman - Paragon 302 E. Hopkins 110 W. Main 104 S. Galena - St. Mary's Church 620 W. Bleeker Gilbert Sanchez 312 S. Galena 333 W. Bleeker Street 501 W. Main Christiania Lodge 330 Lake Ave. 609 W. Bleeker- Ernie Frywald 200 E. Bleeker Rally Dupps 419 E. Hyman - Paragon 501 W. Main Street - Christiania Lodge 129 W. Francis 435 W. Main 104 S. Galena St. Mary's Church 302 E. Hopkins 610 W. Smuggler elanie Roschko_ Teresa Melville 513 W. Bleeker 515 Gillespie Neil Hirst CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: HPC Legal Procedures (Submit affidavit of notice for PH -conceptual) Swear In Staff presentation Applicant presentation oard Questions and Clarifications I opened and closed Board Comments Applicant Comments Motion ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 12 Christiania Lodge 501 W. Main St. -Conceptual March 28, 2001 13 213 W. Bleeker Findings of Fact - 14 513 W. Smuggler - Final - April 11, 2001 15 328 Park Ave. Final - April 11,2001 16 419 E. Hyman Ave. - Minor, Landmark - April 11, 2001 17 401 E. Cooper - Minor - Feb. 28, 2001 18 301 E. Hopkins -April 25, 2001 19 302 E. Hopkins - Final Utility/trash PH - May 9, 2001 20 428 E. Hyman Ave. -Conceptual Review PH-May 9,2001 21 935 E. Cooper Ave. -Conceptual Review PH-May 9, 2001 22. 610 W. Smuggler - Conceptual Review PH - May 9, 2001 23. 101 E. Hallam -Conceptual Review -PH - May 23, 2001 24. 640 N. Third - Conceptual Historic Lot Split May 23, 2001 25. 515 Gillespie St. -Landmark Conceptual, Lot Split June 12, 2001 26. 935 E. Cooper Ave. -Final Review -PH- June 13, 2001 27. 501 E. Hyman -Landmark Designation June 13,2001 28. 214 E. Hopkins - Minor Development -June 13,2001 29. 629 W. Smuggler - Conceptual review - Partial Demolition June 27, 30. 110 W. Main Street -Hotel Aspen Final Review July 11, 2001 31. 28 E. Hyman-Final Review July 11, 2001 32. 610 W. Smuggler - Final July 25,2001 33. 513 W. Bleeker -Minor Development July 25,2001 34. 515 Gillespie -Final August 8,2001 35. 620 W. Bleeker - August 8,2001 36. 629 W. Smuggler-Conceptual-August 8,2001 37. Wagner Park August 8, 2001 38. 312 S. Galena St. Prada -Minor Development August 22, 2001 6 MEMORANDUM 0 TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Chris Bendon, Senior Planner ah RE: Innsbruck Inn - Public Hearing (Continued from 7.25.01) Conceptual Development Exemption from Partial Demolition DATE: August 22,2001 The applicant has requested and staff is recommending the public hearing be continued to September 26, 2001, to allow for further redesign ofthe project. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to continue the Innsbruck Inn review for Conceptual Development and Exemption from Partial Demolition to September 26, 2001." 0 0 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning DirectoUA% FROM: James Lindt, Planning Technician <Sl~ RE: 312 South Galena Street - Minor Review, Public Hearing DATE: August 22, 2001 SUMMARY: This property contains the historic Andre's Building that is currently undergoing an interior remodel. The site is landmark designated and located within the Main Street Historic District. The applicant requests HPC approval to attach a seventeen (17) foot tall temporary barricade on the front facade of the building while the interior construction is completed. The barricade would include a sign with approximately 10" lettering that would say "Prada". 0 APPLICANT: Arcades Associates LTD, owner. LOCATION: 312 S. Galena St., Lots A-D, Block 95, City and Townsite ofAspen. ZONING: The property is zoned "CC, Commercial Core" and is a designated historic landmark. MINOR DEVELOPMENT No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.B.4) are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) 0 square feet, or exceed the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, the 1 Historic Preservation Commission may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(21 for detached accessory dwelling units. Response: The proposed changes would not affect the design, scale, and massing of the building. However, the temporary facade would hide the architectural characteristics of the front facade for three months. Staff feels that there are other option such as papering the windows from the interior. b. The proposed development rellects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: Staff does not feel that proposed temporary changes are compatible with the character of the neighborhood in which all the storefronts contain visible windows. Staff is concerned that the barricade will become a bulletin board for fliers and graffiti. The barricade also gives the perception of a decrepit, boarded up store that might be found in a larger metropolitan area. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal would not affect the permanent significance of the building because it is only a temporary facade, but staff is concerned that it would temporarily be an eyesore in the Historic District and may set a precedence for other interior remodels in the downtown area. Staff also has concerns about whether the Historic Preservation Officer and HPC Project Monitor's will be able to determine if anything is being changed on the exterior with the building. d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: Staff feels that the proposed barricade would detract from the architectural character of the historic structure while it is in place. Staff is also concerned with the fact that the applicant is proposing to attach the temporary facade to the face of the building with the possibility that the adhesive could damage the facade of the building. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the application as submitted. 2 â€¢ Approve the application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) â€¢ Deny approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends that the HPC deny the request to construct and attach the temporary facade to the building as proposed. Exhibits: A. Resolution B. Application. 3 r i 1/1 *A 4 41( 1/1, 1 D rf- A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 312 S. GALENA STREET, LOTS A-D, BLOCK 95, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-182-24-009 RESOLUTION NO~, SERIES OF 2001 WHEREAS, the applicants, Prada, represented by Hansen Construction, have requested minor development approval for the property located at 312 S. Galena Street, Lots A-D, Block 95, City and Townsite of Aspen. The property is listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures," and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and WHEREAS, James Lindt, in his staff report dated August 22, 2001, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended denial of the project; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on August 22, 2001, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and approved the application with conditions by a vote of_ to _. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That minor development for 312 S. Galena St., Lots A-D, Block 95, City and Townsite of Aspen, be approved. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 22nd day of August, 2001. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 05/11/01 FRI 11:23 FAX 415 441 0112 BRAND ALLEN ARCHITECTS . r f .1 1 1 48 4 01003 C>(Miloir DRE S.- al ... 0000 0 0 00000 f Â¢ 1885 0 f=31 101 110 11 ~ 01 J 0 1 IL-11 U 1 0- 1 11 M 11 0 1 0 1 El 11 // 1 - 03 6 1 1 1 1 4-17 11 1- * 1 â‚¬ 'PRADA p 1 Â¥ i r 1 4& T - MILA. 1 1 1 1 11 1 1.21 /\1 1 1 11> 1 1 1\ /1 === 0 fl(604-ASPEN ~ }34:104(ADE â‚¬0Et/AtiON 7~110}r r- - .1 AUS 1 2 1 AS'DJ / Mi KiN COMM.JÂ¢m DEVELOPMEN-1 CONSTRUCTION July 30, 2001 Mr. James Lindt Zoning Officer City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Andre's Building 312 South Galena Dear James: I am writing you to address why I feel the temporary barricade we are proposing to erect in front of the Andre's Building complies with the HPC's Development Review Standards. 1. The proposed temporary barricade is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with the historic Andre's Building and with the historic structures on adjacent parcels. The barricade is only temporary, will be in place for less than three months and will serve to protect the public from the visual and noise impacts resulting from the approved remodel work, thereby enhancing the neighborhood. 2. The proposed temporary barricade is consistent with the character of the neighborhood because construction barricades are an expected and natural element of building renovation. If an historic neighborhood wants to preserve its character then buildings have to be renovated occasionally, otherwise they will fall down. When you renovate a building the prudent owner will typically erect barricades to protect the public and limit unauthorized access. You see them in every city, historic structure or not. 3. The proposed temporary barricade enhances the historic significance and architectural character of the Andre's Building by screening from view what takes place during the renovation. When the queen mother is getting ready for the ball, she certainly doesn't want the pubiic to see her foundation (or her piastic surgeon). Also, anything that hides a messy construction site should help enhance a neighborhood. The proposed barricade is very temporary and should be viewed as a positive thing, put in place to preserve the peace and sanity of the community. S*terely~ 8 Jer* Cavaleri H0sen Construction, Inc. P 970.920.1558 F 970.920.3038 | P.O. Box 10493 Aspen( CO 81612 city of aspen, james lindt 7-30-01 P 970.920.1558 F 970.920.3038|RO. Box 10493 Aspen,CO 81612 RECEIVED JUN 2 2 2001 ASPEN / PITKIN 0 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ifr CONSTRUCTION - June 22, 2001 Mrs. Amy Guthrie Historic Preservation Officer City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Andre's Building 312 South Galena Dear Amy, Attached is a drawing of the temporary barricade that Prada would like to erect in front of the Andre's building. I understand that you discussed this barricade at your staff meeting earlier this ~ week and that there were some concerns expressed. I will try to address those concerns below. 1. Prada and Hansen Construction would like to assure the city that we would not use this barricade as a screen to make any unauthorized alterations to the historic Andre's building. 2. We will provide photographic documentation of the before and after conditions of the building so that no unauthorized work is done while the fagade is under wraps. 3. We will provide the city free access to make whatever inspections you feel are necessary. 4. We will make sure that the barricade is not used as a bulletin board or billboard. If any one tries to post notices or advertisements on the fagade we will remove them immediately. Similarly, if anyone paints graffiti or otherwise vandalizes the barricade, we will have it repaired immediately. Please let me know what further steps we need to take in order to get your approval to erect this temporary construction barricade. I have confirmed with the building department that we will not need a building permit and James in zoning says that your department is the only approval we need. Sincerely/1 ~ 1 perm Cavaleri VH*sen Construction, Inc. P 970.920.1558 F 970.920.3038 ~ P.O. Box 10493 Aspen, CO 81612 city of aspen, amy guthrie 6-22-01.doc ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name PRADA 51-oRE- /AND RES SU/LO//4G- 2. Project location (51 2. SOUTh 4-ALE-,4 A (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning 4. Lot size 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number 14 ANS E-Af re,4 5-nâ‚¬UCJ-1 c'rÂ·/ a Emp># CAVALEAA 9 20- I S 5% 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number SAME- 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD ~~ Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot SpliULot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) 9. Description of development application TE/v\202/9-A' 84-4/1 6,4-PE AT- FRANT- ELE VA-1-104 10. Have you completed and attached the following? 1- Attachment 1- Land use application form 1- Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form ,*A- Response to Attachment 3 ,y$â€¢r Response to Attachment 4 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: HANSEN coNS-nu,crt ced 'FCA PAADA Address: ANDREb, BoIL.0/46- ~ 317 SOUTH GrALErÂ·t A Zone district: Lot size: Existing FAR: Allowable FAR: Proposed FAR: Existing net leasable (commercial): Proposed net leasable (commercial): Existing % of site coverage: Proposed % of site coverage: Existing % of open space: Proposed % of open space: Existing maximum height: Principal bldg: Accesory bldg: Proposed max. height: Principal bldg: Accessory bldg: Proposed % of demolition: Existing number of bedrooms: Proposed number of bedrooms: Existing on-site parking spaces: On-site parking spaces required: Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed: Front: Front: Front: Rear: Rear: Rear: Combined Combined Combined FronUrear: Front/rear: Front/rear: Side: Side: Side: Side: Side: Side: Combined Combined Combined Sides: Sides: Sides: Existing nonconformities or encroachments: Variations requested: Tmt,Â°02:,405/ 13ARAICADE A-7-,FRAVT- SLEU/+TteN (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft., site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts)