HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20121114 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2012
Chairperson, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Commissioners in attendance: Jay Maytin,Willis Pember, Jane Hills and
Sallie Golden. Jamie McLeod, Nora Berko and Patrick Sagal were absent.
Staff present:
Jim True, City Attorney
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Sara Adams, Senior Planner
Motion: Jane moved to approve the minutes of October 10th and 24th;
second by Willis. Motion carried 4-0.
Jay was seated at 5:30 p.m.
Disclosure —223 E. Hallam. Jane disclosed that Nora's son in law works for
her.
Jim True said Nora's son in law works for Jane Hills firm and has no
investment in the property at 223 E. Hallam. That property is owned by
Nora and her Sister and Jeffrey has no financial interest in the property.
Under our ethics rules this is not a conflict.
420 E. Hyman — City Council Remand, Conceptual Major Development
and Conceptual Commercial Design Review
Jim True said the affidavit of posting was in order and the applicant can
proceed. Exhibit I
Sara said council decided to call up this conceptual approval. Council had
concerns with condition #5 regarding a full review of mass and scale with
materials shall occur at final HPC review. There are problems with leaving
mass and scale to final because there are other reviews that need to happen
before it gets back to the board for final. Hopefully we can come to an
agreement on mass and scale so that they can go to growth management and
subdivision knowing what size the box is going to be. The height has been
lowered to 38 feet and there is a 15 foot setback for the third floor. The
packet information reflects the height change and setback that were
conditions. HPC concern was how the materials affect mass and scale
because they are proposing largely a glass building and how does the glass
1
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2012
work with mass and scale. The applicant has brought samples of materials
for tonight's meeting even though this is conceptual and we usually don't
talk about materials. Staff has concern about the alley elevation. Guideline
6.24 talks about rear facades stepping down toward the alley. There is a car
port that you can drive under on the first floor and the second and third floor
is straight up. We were a little concerned that that guideline has not been
met. The decision tonight would be final.
Brian West, Cunniffe architects
Brian said they got rid of the separation wall because the adjacent building
already has one.
Charles Cunniffe, Cunniffe architects
Charles said they have provided imagery of the back of the building. One of
the reasons the mass is where it is on this building is because it is a 1 to 1
replacement requirement and we have to provide far more affordable
housing on this particular site which pushes the building out to the back on
the third floor instead of being setback. The affordable housing part is 50 %
of the residential portion of the building. We would carry the solid banding
around the building. The ground floor has been setback 30 feet due to the
trash and parking. The mechanical on the third floor is setback from the
mall side. The second floor has a cut out in the corner and there is a
walkway that accesses the units which steps back the second floor the width
of the walkway. We would prefer to have a roof over the walkway to cover
it but the consensus at the time was to not have that roof. It could be a glass
canopy roof in order to protect it from the rain. The property to the east is
three stories on the alley.
Brian West said the bronze colored banding coincides with the front of the
building so there is continuity from front to back.
Charles said we wanted to have the building transparent so that you can see
through it. We wanted to keep the building simple and elegant. It is a
building of today. The bronze tinted glazing could tie into the spandrels and
it would be a non-reflective glass with just a tint.
Charles and Brian did a power point on the different elevations of the
building.
Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public hearing.
2
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2012
Sara said the elks lodge sent a letter asking that the view plane of Aspen
Mountain be protected, Exhibit II . Sara said the building is not in the
adopted view plane.
Chairperson, Ann Mullins closed the public comment portion of the agenda
item.
Jane said the city is upgrading the transformers in the core and how would
that be an issue with your building and the utilities?
Charles said they met with the city on parking and trash and they said our
proposal is acceptable.
Willis asked about the soffit and cornice. Charles said the soffit is wood and
the cornice would be metal.
Ann and Jane agreed that there doesn't need to be another step back in the
alley.
Jane said for safety issues some kind of canopy over the walkway would be
acceptable.
Willis said he appreciates the renderings and the attempt to address the
reflectiveness of the materials. The wood on the back of the balcony and
second floor are appropriate and a good contrast. The mass and scale in the
alley is OK. On the cornice as a suggestion make sure it doesn't look like
stone and restudy the mullions on the third floor for final.
Sallie said she has no problem with the height. Sallie said she likes the
walkway without a canopy or glass canopy.
MOTION: Ann moved to approve resolution #28 which approves mass and
scale, and omitting condition #5; second by Willis. All in favor, motion
carried 4-0.
222 E. Hallam — Minor review and partial demolition
Jay was seated.
Affidavit of posting— Exhibit I
3
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2012
Jim said one of the owner's son in law works for Jane Hills. Under our code
that is not a conflict that would require recusal.
Jane said she would like to stay for the meeting.
Sara said this is for minor development and partial demolition of 223 E.
Hallam. The property is located on a 12,000 square foot lot and there are a
few structures on it now. There is a two story 1893 Victorian that has two
residential units in it. There is a one story residence that was built in the
1960's and an out building along the alley that was used for storage. The
subject of tonight's minor development and partial demolition is the two
story Victorian. There is a non-historic addition that was added in 1967 and
that is being requested to be removed. In the future the applicant is
interested in pursuing a subdivision and the newly created property line
would go right through the addition. To be pro active they are requesting
demolition approval. The minor development portion of the application is to
restore the wall and how they restore the wall once they tear off the 1967
addition. Staff is supportive of the project with conditions. Staff also finds
that the demolition criteria are met. The addition does not have historic
significance to the property. This will be a good restoration effort. The only
condition is for the foundation that needs to occur once they take the
addition off. We would like them to use sandstone to match the existing
rather than concrete block.
Derek Skalko, architect
Derek said the property at 223 E. Hallam is a 12,000 square foot parcel
essentially right across from the Red Brick. We are not touching anything
on the property except the 1967 east side addition to the Victorian itself. We
have two owning families of this property and simply we are basically
easing the way into a subdivision process so we don't have any contentions
down the road. Essentially there would be two 6,000 square foot lots. There
is a bump out on the house and we would like to restore it back to its original
condition between 1957 and 1967. The foundation is intact and when the
extension comes off there is a sandstone base that is existing.
Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public hearing. There were no public
comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was closed.
4
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 14, 2012
Sara clarified that HPC will be able to give a recommendation to city council
over the two lots.
MOTION: Jay moved to approve resolution #29 second by Ann. All in
favor, motion carried.
Jay and Sallie will be the monitors.
MOTION: Ann moved to adjourn; second by Jay. All in favor, motion
carried.
Meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
a
Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk
5