Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20130522 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22 2013 Commissioner, Jay Maytin called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Nora Berko, Sallie Golden, Patrick Sagal and Jane Hills and Willis Pember. Jamie McLeod and Ann Mullins were absent. Staff present: Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Sara Adams, Senior Planner Justin Barker, planner MOTION: Nora moved to approve the minutes of 4/10/13 second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried. Willis disclosed that he has worked with Allen Richman and Neil Karbank but is not involved with this agenda item 604 W. Main 233 W. Hallam — Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Partial Demolition, Floor Area Bonus, Residential Design Standards Variances and Setback Variances, Public Hearing Affidavit of Posting — Exhibit I Sara said the project is located on the corner of Hallam and Second Streets. The applicant is requesting relocation of the historic resource. Staff is recommending continuance to restudy the size of the new residence. We are ok with the proposed relocation of the resource and the partial demolition of the non-historic resource. The relocation puts the house back in its original location. They need a side yard setback variance of 3 feet and staff supports that because they are doing a restoration of the historic house. Staff is concerned about the mass of the new residence and the fact that the entrance is off Second Street. Nothing is attached to the historic resource which is great. The new development is in an L shape and overshadows the preservation of the historic home. They are requesting the 500 square foot bonus. Staff is recommending two dormers be added to the side elevation and restudy the window proportion on the historic home. The proposed new home does not meet the design guidelines. Staff feels the FAR bonus is 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22, 2013 not earned at this point but there is plenty they can do to get there. They need two residential design standards for the historic home basically because it doesn't have a front porch. We wouldn't want them to put a porch on just to meet the design standards. We are in favor of those variances. Mitch Hass, Haas Planning Don Ruggels, DHR Architecture Mitch said the house will move to the original site and be restored as a standalone structure. We appreciate how well focused staff's memo was as it helps with what we are addressing. The lot is over 9,000 square feet. Our attempt is to put all of the new development within a new structure rather than adding onto the historic resource. This property sits next to two other historic houses that are almost identical. We refer these houses to the three sisters. We will pick up the house and move it to its original location as a standalone building. The amount of work that will go into this restoration is extensive and we feel warrants the FAR bonus. We are fine with working with staff and making the recommended changes. Our goal is to provide an outstanding preservation effort for this house that the city can be proud of. The bulk and mass on the new structure the house is in the R6 zone and it will be taller than the historic house. This house will also have more square footage. The separation between the buildings is 7 feet between the three of them. The new house is 21 feet away from the historic structure. What you would see is three historic structures next to each other and a 21 foot separation and then the addition. Don said this town has a tremendous maturity due to historic preservation and it is an honor to work here on a house in the West End. Mr. Kumin, the owner has a great sensitivity of historic preservation and the charge is to do whatever we can to honor the three sister buildings. We will work with this to create a proper sequence of the three buildings. They have a family of three children and an extended family that travels with them quite frequently. We have certain requirement that are needed. On the existing geometry of the three sisters have a basic roof form with a gable. We took that form and reversed it and used a hip dormer. The rhythm of the trees is ,really important in the design. There are two fir trees on the corner. The gable end is slightly wider and higher than the historic houses. Because the trees are very vertical we wanted the windows to also be vertical. The L shape opens its arms and embraces the three sisters. We have met with the arborist and the existing trees will be protected. We will work with the 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22 2013 committee on all the details as we want the building to resonate as a building of its own time. We also looked at a porch but the trellis idea is like the trees with a filtering light. We can also look at a porch if the board feels that is important. This is on a corner site and we wanted to relieve parking on Hallam and have the entrance on Second Street. With the entrance on Second Street it creates less pressure with sidewalks and parking. Nora asked about the chimneys. Don said there is a mechanical room below the garage which reflects one chimney. Nora said her concern is that the size of the addition is about 28% bigger than the historic resource. Is there a way to quiet down the size. I feel the historic resource is getting lost and it is behind trees. Don said he is glad to take one chimney off if that would be preferable to the committee. We are always looking for balance and symmetry. One balances out the other. Patrick said because of the trellises the site would be opened up more if the garage was attached to the structure then the east side would have two non- covered areas. Opening it up more to the south would be preferable. Don said we originally had it attached but according to the residential design standards on secondary mass you would have to have some kind of connector Sara said there are different ways to design secondary mass to meet the residential design standards that does not require a linking element or a trellis like this. There are lots of ways to do it. Mitch said guideline 11.3 doesn't necessarily apply to all properties. Here we want the relationship with the other two sister houses that are not on the same site. The houses are 7 to 8 feet apart. We hear loud and clear that we have to address the overall mass and scale. There is 21 feet separation east to west and 20 plus feet separation north to south. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22, 2013 Jane said it appears that the applicant is willing to accommodate and work with staff's wishes in order to be able to accomplish the goals. The historic resource is our most important part of the application. Commissioner, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. Jane Wells: I am the middle historic house of the three sisters. I am concerned about the relationship of the three sisters. The 7 feet separation stated by staff is based on the Sanborn information. We have come to the conclusion about what the historic distance was. The relationship of the three is based as being identical but actually I measured the space between the first and seconds and it is 8.4 feet. I also have concern about the two heritage pine trees that have to be removed and the massiveness of the proposed structure. Peter Fornell: I commend the developer for restoring the historic asset. If you don't have ten feet between the buildings you will have to have a one hour fire wall along the east elevation of the building. Alex Hill, 214 W. Bleeker— I own one of the sisters. I like the design. My observation is that the scale diminishes the quality of the three historic buildings. Sara said she received a letter from Philip and Susan West— Exhibit II — They are pleased that the historic structure is being restored. The concern is the size of the new house and they are opposed to the 500 square foot bonus. A very large home in that location will detract from the character of our block and the neighborhood. Nora pointed out that our charge is to protect the size and scale of the neighborhood and we don't have a lot of opportunity to that anymore and here is a place we could. Jane said she would like to see this continued and I'm excited to see the next phase. We have a great opportunity to restore the asset. Tree mitigation with the City of Aspen is a continued issue. Willis commented that the guidelines are derived from Victorian typology and 19th century. I am a little concerned about the inconsistency in the presentation with regard of talking of its time. The west elevation has 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22 2013 brought a lot of commentary with the long bar and relentless ridgeline. Maybe look at a more fractured volume. I see Williamsburg here and 18' century architecture. It looks a little too neoclassical. We don't want to replicate architecture and we don't want Williamsburg. Sallie suggested studying the distances between the houses to whatever is correct. Also check on the firewall statement by Peter Fornell. You need to look at mass and scale. I appreciate the separation between the garage and the house. Commissioner, Jay Maytin closed the public comment section of the agenda item. Jay asked the applicant to provide the accurate measurement between all three sisters. The mass and scale of the garage and new house needs some work. Pulling the house back so that the site line is correct is important and also moving the second floor mass from the same corner, the northwest corner of the property. The representation of the light wells and dormers are appropriate. I am ok with the residential design standards for the porches. We also need to know if the large pine trees are going to be removed and we need something from the Parks department with regard to the trees. The main reason for continuation to me is the trellis. I also have an issue with the large skylight and light pollution. Don said he is open to addressing what each commissioner brought up. I will work on the mass and we will look at the skylight more closely. I am not sure what the board likes, the trellis or porch? Jay said we need a definitive statement whether you want the trellis or the porch. Patrick said in this case the trellis is considered mass. Willis said he doesn't feel light pollution is in our purview and the skylight doesn't bother him. Jay said the skylight is fenestration for final review. MOTION: Jay moved to continue 233 W. Hallam until June 26th, second by Patrick. All in favor, motion carried. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22 2013 604 W. Main — Historic Landmark Lot Split, Demolition of Sheds, setback Variances, Public Hearing Debbie stated that the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I Alan Richman, represented the client Neil Karbank, owner Amy said 604 W. Main is a 9,000 square foot lot and there are multiple buildings on the lot. There is a Victorian house, carriage house and some sheds that were built in the 1950's and a newer shed. The applicant is proposing a lot split with almost all of the development rights turning to TDR's and sold elsewhere to historic sites. By dividing the property through the lot split it allows a better allocation of the floor area establishing the right to build a single family house. We are splitting the lot but there won't actually be any development on the site. There will be a 6,000 square foot lot on the corner that contains the historic house and carriage house. The 3,000 square foot lot that is internal on the site will contain a cabin from the 1950's and shed. There should be discussion about setbacks and retaining the cabins now instead of demolishing them. The sheds to be demolished: A long shed and taller gabled shed on the alley and a small shed that isn't historic. There is also a car port that will be demolished at some point. Staff is excited about moving the development off the site particularly on Main Street. Alan Richman said this is a no development to this property. We have vested right until next year for the previous project but the market isn't here for that kind of project and it isn't the best solution. We want to preserve the structures at their scale. We feel this is a good preservation project. Amy said city council makes the final decision on the lot split and TDR's. They still will have some rights down the road for a 500 square foot FAR bonus and they will have 25 square feet left for development. Commissioner, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was closed. Patrick said he agrees with staff. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22, 2013 Amy said the edits proposed effect conditions 1 and 2. New language. The applicant has represented that if approved by city council unused development rights will from time to time as warranted by the TDR market be converted into TDR's and sold. Amy said the idea is that these can be done one at a time. Neil said that is the approach I did on 612 and the mayor and John Worcester signed off on it. Amy said the second sentence in condition 42 should be changed to say "HPC approves the demolition of the cabin and sheds and these buildings may remain in place until the time the applicant requests the issuance of TDR certificates for the floor area contained in these structures. More recent small shed crosses the property line and must be removed or relocated before the plat is filed" Alan said the cabin has a tenant for ten years and we would like him to be able to keep his office. Jay said there is no discussion on the changes. MOTION: Nora made the motion to approve resolution #17 as amended by Amy. Motion second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried. Motion carried 6-0. Marolt Parcel- Minor Development for Restoration/Reconstruction of the Derrick Debbie said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed Exhibit I. Amy said the Derrick is in poor condition and falling over. The City of Aspen owns the property and there are a few activities on the site including the Marolt affordable housing project. Museum, community garden. There is a pedestrian path and interpretive signs that were installed a few years along the path to the river. There are ruins from the lixiviation plant, some foundation and a derrick. The derrick was a tripod structure that carried a cable and was involved in powering the plant. It has fallen over and the 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22, 2013 wood is deteriorated. The proposal is to build a replica of the structure. Graeme Means has taken measurements of it and they would like to be as accurate as they can about describing the history of it. We normally don't reconstruct but this is a museum and people expect that kind of effort to resurrect whatever we can to tell the history of town. Staff recommends approval and we would like to work with them in the field to determine where the derrick should go. Brian Flynn, Larry Frederick, Carl Bergman, Graeme Means presented Brian presented a slide show of the site. There are 22 acres. In 1989 — 1992 the restoration of the mining museum occurred. In 1990 the site was designated. In 1994 we developed a preservation and management plan. In 2004 the Bergman trail was developed. Brian said we would work with the monitor on the material selection and whatever else is needed. We have installed way finding signs. Tours started in 1989 and in 2012 we hosted over a thousand visitors. Carl Bergman said he is with the museum and his job is to tell people about our history and have them something that they will never forget. Graeme said the derrick is about 26 feet tall. The derrick supplied mechanical power for the plant. We would also work with the HPC on signage for the site. Commissioner, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment section of the agenda item was closed. Nora said it is amazing what is on that site. Some of the trees need to be cleared out from the foundation walls. Brian said after the Derrek is completed we would like to do another archeological study as well as work with a mason to see how to secure everything. Sallie said she has been to the site and it is amazing. Anything we can do to help to make it a better spot would be advisable. Patrick volunteered to be the monitor. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22, 2013 MOTION: Jay moved to approve resolution #18 second by Nora. All in favor, motion carried. 114 Neale Ave. — Final Major Development— Public Hearing Steev Wilson—Forum Phi architecture Debbie said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed. Justin said this is part of an historic lot split done in 1998. The house was moved up the hill and it is an historic miners cottage and has a non-historic contemporary addition added on right now. At conceptual HPC approved to remodel and expand that rear addition and to add a garage and a subgrade living space. HPC also approved a front yard setback as well as a 400 square foot bonus. As far as the landscape the west side isn't changing except for a small picket fence in the front and a stone paver walkway that goes around the house to the back. On the east side a driveway is being added. The city forester has no issues with the removal of the trees for the driveway. A sidewalk is proposed along the north but staff recommends not putting in a sidewalk or proposing something more subdued. This area is not part of the city sidewalk master plan. The new fence along the east will be 6 feet tall. On the street facing side the residential design guidelines only allow it to be 42 inches high so they will have to drop the height. That issue also exists on the front. Possibly the IPE fence could be moved back so it isn't flush with the house. Staff recommends approval with conditions to carry over the FAR bonus from conceptual as well as removing the proposed sidewalk or replacing it and to be reviewed by staff and monitor. Lower the height of the east fence and locate the driveway gate completely behind the front fagade. Steev said we can comply with the 42 inches on the fence. A window was changed to a door on the back and we added some windows in the bedroom to get some light. The white picket fence is our addition. The driveway will be pervious. We are using an IPE wood screen fence and a standing seam metal roof. Sallie said when you turn right on King Street you always end up in the middle of the street and it gets dangerous. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22, 2013 Justin said they could use something such as crushed gravel that would identify the pathway. Steev said maybe we can use the same pervious system as the driveway and work with the monitor. Patrick also recommended that something occur on King Street for a sidewalk and that the fence be lowered to 42 inches. Steev said there will be lights under the steps going out on the deck. The front entry will have a sconce and there will be sconces on the garage. Coming down the driveway there will be a series of linear elements, LED lights that will illuminate the driveway. Commissioner, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment section of the agenda item was closed. Jay identified the issues: Fence height Gate height and location Sidewalk on King St. Picket fence around the historic resource Nora and Sallie said all the issues have been addressed. Sallie said we should give direction about the sidewalk. Willis said the applicant has lowered the fences where indicated to 42 inches. Jay commended the applicant on a great project. The sidewalk along King Street can be reviewed by staff and monitor. MOTION: Jay moved to approve resolution #19 with a change to condition #3 that the sidewalk be reviewed by staff and monitor. The sidewalk should stay one way or another. Keep #4. Strike #5. #6 on the gate the height should be 42 inches or lower. Motion second by Willis. All in favor, motion carried. 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 22, 2013 WORK SESSION Selection of HPC 2012 awards MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Patrick. All in favor, motion carried. ;Mvleetin adjourned at 7:00 m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 11