Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20130213 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13, 2013 Chairperson, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Willis Pember, Jay Maytin, Jamie McLeod, Sallie Golden and Patrick Sagal. Nora Berko and Jane Hills were absent. Staff present: Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk MOTION: Jay moved to approve the minutes of January 9t" and 23rd second by Ann. All in favor, motion carried. Willis will recuse himself on 110 W. Main Street 110 W. Main Street, Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual Commercial Design, Demolition, Public Amenity— Cont'd Public Hearing Amy said staff feels that the revisions do not address the concern in a meaningful way and the main concerns are the free market units that face Bleeker Street. This is an unusual property because it stretches from Main Street to Bleeker Street and encompasses an old alley and has multiple layers of zoning and part of it is in the historic district. All along our concerns are the four units and their relationship to the neighborhood. The applicant has provided more accurate information about the size of the neighboring buildings which is helpful. They have also increased the public amenity space with outdoor dining which doesn't exist now and they have revised the head in parking along Garmisch Street. The height, footprint and massing of these buildings is not sympathetic to the adjacent structures. We still think more work is needed. There are a few minor issues that need to be worked out that would affect the massing of the project. The affordable housing units proposed are undersized and that would change their shape. One of them doesn't have proper access from the street and that might change the site plan and the Fire Department has concerns about fire fighting between the buildings. We feel these issues should be resolved at the HPC level. Amy said we need to know that the affordable housing units are an acceptable dimension. The fair housing issue is that the units need to be approached from a public street and not through the alley. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13, 2013 Stan Clauson, Clauson and Associates Kim Weil, Poss & Associates Michael Brown, Applicant Stan did a power point on the revisions made to the project. The lodge increased from 53 to 54 units. The average lodge unit size is 292 square feet. The amount of affordable housing has been increased 1456 square feet to 1829 square feet and all the units are conforming to the affordable housing guidelines. We reduced the height of the free market units to 32 feet which is difficult to do with a three story element. The code is not clear that it prohibits access from the alley and I am not sure this is an issue for the HPC. Regarding the fire fighting area between the units that is something that can be easily addressed through materials. All of these things will be addressed through the Building Department at the appropriate time. The sewer main line will have to be relocated for the underground parking. The other key change is the increase in the public amenity space. A third of the block is parallel parking with the loss of spaces and if that is what the Engineering Department prefers this would be our plan. We would remove a section of the fence which allows visible access for outside dining and access to the public amenity space. By doing this we increased the public amenity space by 400 square feet which brings it back up to 15%. The trash facility off the alley will have a trash compaction. We are requesting a reduction of 5 linear feet. The code is clear if a trash compaction is used it can be the basis for a reduction in the overall size. The free market units have been reduced to 32 feet which is a significant reduction for a three story building and the desire to still allow for ceiling heights for a three story. This is a small moderately priced lodge. Stan went over the different heights of buildings within the neighborhood. At 30 feet we are consistent with the overall heights of the area. Under the small lodge character there is a section 5.9 which talks about the 45% angle. The front fagade is 23 feet high, 28 feet on the hotel facility and 32 on the free market. The 32 feet is set back 145 feet. Along Bleeker the 32 foot element is setback 10.5 feet. In summary we have 54 lodging units. Andy Wisnosky said the project is bordering the transition of town. We want to keep the context in relationship to the other buildings around. Andy did a power point on the context of the project with other buildings in that area of town. We are relating to the other buildings on the street with mass and scale and a more modern mass. It is our contention that we are not emulating Victorian architecture. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13, 2013 Jay said you can drive a car through the alley. Jamie inquired about the reduction in the trash area. Stan said the land use code says you can request a reduction in the size of the trash area if you have a trash compactor. Kim Weil said the trash area is 15 x 10. Amy commented that the reduction in the trash area has not been approved by the Environmental Health Department. They are asking them to meet the minimum size. As far as the affordable housing the units are smaller about 100 square feet than the minimum required. Units cannot be accessed from the alley. Debbie said the state also has requirements and standards for accessibility which are referenced in our building code. We are not certain the Building Department would accept an access from this alley. Kim said one unit has an elevator. Ann said it is difficult when we have so many contradictions to move forward. Jay said the applicant has detailed drawings. Amy said the comment from the housing authority is that the referral agency has not signed off. The planning office is concerned about the free market units. Patrick said he also feels the issues should be resolved at HPC. Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public hearing. Julie Ann Steele 121 Bleeker Street. We are an 1888 house and we are 31 feet tall. Our setback is much greater than the units that they are selling on Bleeker. We are being surrounded by townhomes and blocking our view of Aspen Mountain and Smuggler. We are being swallowed up by this three story building. I realize they have to sell the townhouses to make this 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13, 2013 project viable but it will devalue our property. We have been here since 1985 and this is our third house in Aspen. Chairperson, Ann Mullins closed the public comment section of the agenda item. Ann said the primary issue is the potential change in mass and form of the project depending how the sewer, trash and affordable housing are resolved. Are we comfortable here knowing that it might shift around. Patrick said the height issue is trying to keep the hotel and free market units compatible and similar. The fact is that the commercial and residential are separate. I would find it more in keeping if the free market units were compatible with the neighborhood. Jay asked if we could give an approval with the condition that any site plan changes trigger the restudy of the entire project. Debbie said with the reading of the code it talks about conceptual that is binding on location and form of all the envelopes of all the structures including height scale massing and proportions. If there is a chance any of those might change in one respect it is a question whether you have sufficient information to agree with the locations proposed and second if you approve it as is and the applicant has to change it the applicant can come back and have it changed but HPC can't change it. If the applicant can't do what he asked for he would have to come back for a different approval. We have had a situation where there was an approval of something that was contrary to the building code by another department that has created significant problems and I would advise you not to approve residence on an alley until you have an answer because it could create problems for the City in the future. Jamie said we have five issues that are of a concern and I would suggest we move forward and continue this until we get comments from the other departments. The mass and scale of the free market on the back the transitional one if it did relate to the neighborhood a little bit more like stepping down it might be a little more amendable to HPC. Ann said she would like to see the mass broken up a little or brought down on the free market units. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13, 2013 MOTION: Ann moved to continue 110 W. Main until March 13th; second by Patrick. Jay thanked the applicant for bringing the roof down on the residential. Jay pointed out that we are preserving the streetscape on the Main Street side. The idea of the cafe is great. On the parking I think it is strange having two different kinds of parking on one street. I feel the project is great and wish there weren't so many unanswered questions. Sallie said this looks like it will be continued and we need the answers resolved at the next meeting. On the Bleeker Street side there is too much mass and it should be stepped back a little. The parking plan is a good resolution. Motion carried 4-1. Jay voted no. 208 E. Main Street, Conceptual Major Development, Demolition, Special Review and Variances — Public hearing Debbie said the photograph and addresses are not attached to the public notice. Michael Giordano, owner said he did the publication and will bring them in tomorrow for the record. The board agreed to continue without the addresses and photographs. Exhibit I - affidavit of public notice Exhibit II — 5 new elevations Amy said 208 E. Main Street is a 3,000 square foot lot that was part of an historic lot split. It is a landmarked building in the historic district and there is a Victorian miner's cottage on the front of the property with a small addition in the back and a shed on the alley. The proposal is to demolish a portion of the non-historic addition at the back of the property, excavate a basement and lift the shed and place it on the new basement and build a new residential unit at the back of the site. There just is not a lot of room to work with on this lot. The applicant has the right to a 1,500 square foot residential unit and that is what they are trying to achieve. The design guidelines say that an addition to a gabled roof building should not be a flat roof and that is 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13 2013 what is on the table. In this particular situation staff can get behind the flat roof because it does a lot to limit the profile of the new construction popping up above the historic building. It will have some presence on the alley. At this point a gabled roof would not benefit anything but the flat roof does conflict with the guidelines. The new construction does not have the separation from the historic resource. The guidelines call for a connector to separate new from old and that isn't happening. The new and old are basically touching each other both the historic house and shed. Staff is concerned that they are crowded. The applicant is requesting to pick up the shed and put it back down in the approximate location. Staff has no concerns with that. The setback variances along the west side of the property there is already an encroachment by the existing construction and that will be made worse by the two story element. The new elevation has a jog which reducers the setback somewhat but HPC still is being asked to grant a portion of it allowing the new project to come very close to the lot line which shares the adjacent Victorian home. Regarding the utility and trash the normal length is 15 feet parallel to the alley. In this case it has been rotated. The Environmental Health Dept. is OK with the plan here. You are asking to grant an exception but it has the endorsement of the Health Dept. The applicant is requesting not to pay the cash in lieu. There is no room for parking. Staff is recommending continuance. There is a deck proposed on top of the addition which has an enclosed staircase. Staff is concerned about the relationship of the stair to the historic house. The minimum setback is five feet. HPC has the power to waive the entire setback but then you create another set of problems. Amy said more than half the property is occupied by one story historic resources. This is a mixed use zone district and incentives are important and I would recommend HPC waive the fee. Sarah Upton represented the applicant. It is essentially a zero lot line condition. Sarah talked about the proposed stair. Possibly we could do a stair enclosure with a high percentage of a glass enclosure. Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public comment section of the agenda item. Exhibit III — letter from Jake Vickery read by Della Pegolotti Fire protection and maintenance issues exist and the lot split was approved by HPC. Jake owns the structure next door and is opposed to the variance. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13, 2013 Mary Hayes lives at 209 E. Bleeker and her concern is the trash. Amy said this will be an improvement and they are being asked to build a wild proof container surrounding the trash bins etc. Chairperson, Ann Mullins closed the public comment section of the agenda item. Ann identified the issues: Side yard variance west side Separation of the shed to the historic building Flat roof Enclosed stair case and deck Utility and trash which has been approved by the Environmental Health Dept. Parking variance and fee waiver. Jay said he supports the cash-in-lieu on the parking and you wouldn't be able to see a connector. I do not support the roof deck enclosure but support the side yard setback. The property is extremely constrictive and I feel this is a good solution and it accentuates the historic house in the front and saves the little cool shed in the back. Patrick said he appreciates saving the historic resource. Possibly the shed could be moved off site and move the addition back so that there could be a connector. The two story needs restudied. Sallie said she agrees with everything Jay mentioned. Sallie said she is in favor of incentives and supports the cash-in -lieu waiver. Willis said he is in favor of the on-site relocation of the shed. Regarding the separation it seems a little crowded in the back. There will be a lot of issues to resolve with the separation and what the Fire Department requires. Jamie said the new addition is a two story addition all the way around which is somewhat of a concern. Typically the addition is somewhat subordinate. I would not increase the variance on the west side and keep the three feet. Ann said she feels there is too much crammed on this lot. The cabin is jammed into the house and I don't feel you need a connector. The cabin 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13 2013 needs some more breathing room. The flat roof is fine. I am in favor of waiving the cash-in-lieu. Overall it is too large on the site. Amy said you could sacrifice the shed and create the breathing room. There is an issue when you are on the lot line how the spaces are going to be maintained. Motion: Patrick moved to continue 110 W. Main Street to March 20th per staff's recommendation. Restudy of the staircase, deck, west wall two story aspect and the stepping down into the historic resource. Restudy the massing in its relationship to the shed. Restudy the west side yard setback. Motion second by Jamie. Jay asked the board if they are willing to have the applicant demolish the shed. Willis said it is a great little shed. Michael said they embraced the shed and we didn't' cantilever over the shed. The connector to the shed is basically a doorway. Vote: Jamie, yes; Willis, yes; Patrick, yes; Ann, yes; Sallie, yes; Jay, no. Motion carried 5-1. 204 S. Galena, Substantial Amendment to Major Development— Public Hearing Justin Barker, planner Exhibit I— elevations Justin said this project received final approval in December which allowed for the demolition of the existing building and replacing it with a new commercial building that will occupy the entire lot and a portion of the second story. The original proposal did not propose an increase in the net leasable. Over the past few months there have been more specific tenants that have stepped forward and so the program has increased in size. It is adding about 5,000 square feet of retail space in the basement as well as 1,700 square feet addition to the restaurant on the second floor which will be achieved by moving the west wall of the restaurant toward Galena Street and also adding some restrooms to the restaurant. The only exterior changes are on the second story of the restaurant. There is an elevator overrun. The firewall is not necessary. One of the conditions from final is that there 8 - ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13, 2013 should not be any mechanical placed on top of the second floor mass and to keep that roof top clean. Some of the mechanical will be in the basement but the rest has to go on the roof to serve the restaurant. Due to building codes there is a limited space where it can go on the roof. Staff recommends approval with condition. All the conditions from final will be carried over with two additional conditions added. They would have to apply and receive growth management allotments for the increase of the net leasable space that is being added as well as eliminating the fire wall on the east property line. Conditions: Lighting plan. Amend the plans to include an airlock entry for each tenant space. Provide a plan for all rooftop mechanical and screening for review and approval by staff and monitor. No mechanical or vents placed on the top of the second floor mass. The applicant has represented that the requirement to provide 10% of the lot area dedicated to public amenity will be satisfied by an upper floor restaurant deck. If the restaurant use is removed, compliance with the Public Amenity requirements in effect at that time will be required. Replacement of the 7 on-site parking spaces shall be by cash-in-lieu payment. The applicant has represented that the project is below the Courthouse View Plane as it crosses the property. Verify net leasable commercial and non-unit calculations with the City Zoning Officer prior to building permit application. Prior to building permit application apply for and receive growth management allocations for proposed net leasable increase. Eliminate the firewall depicted in this application along the east property line. Charles Cunniffe said the below grade space is being requested because we want to be prepared if we need it. On the upper floor of the restaurant we have been working with a Dutch designer which is requesting the additional 1,700 square feet. The equipment is consolidated to the back corner and not visible from the street. Mechanical equipment is allowed to be five feet above. It would be in the south east corner of the building and contained and painted to match the color of the stone. We have also eliminated the fire wall. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13 2013 Ann asked about the airlocks and how they would be accommodated. Charles said with the airlocks you won't see anything inside the shop with a five foot wide door. With the airlocks the entrance is set back ten feet from the street fagade. We would like a dispensation from that requirement. Charles pointed out that airlocks are required for stores over 3,000 square feet. Amy said the airlocks are being required on all new buildings in town. This is slightly different with the small tenant spaces. You could reword it so that it can be discussed if there is another mechanical option that serves the same function. Energy efficiency is an important issue. It was added because we were constantly seeing buildings retrofitting for airlocks because they needed the cold air blocked out. Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public comments. There were no public comments. The public comment section of the agenda item was closed. Willis commented that the corral is innocuous and a minor issue and the air lock issue should be restudied. Jay said he supports the project and restudying the airlocks. If we can accomplish the energy goal with something more advanced we should look into that. Jamie said the Building Department should make the determination on the air locks not the HPC. Charles said the Building Department would not require the airlocks. Debbie said the issue is who determines whether or not what they come up with is comparable for an airlock system. It is not an issue that HPC should be deciding. Change condition #2 - Prior to final design submission amend the floor plans to include an airlock entry or comparable measure for heat loss prevention acceptable to the Building Department. MOTION: Jay moved to approve 204 S. Galena Street as represented and strike #3 condition and change condition #2 - Prior to final design submission amend the floor plans to include an airlock entry or comparable 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 13, 2013 measure for heat loss prevention acceptable to the Building Department. Motion second by Ann. All in favor, motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Jamie moved to adjourn second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 11