Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20130626 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2013 Commissioner, Willis Pember called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Nora Berko, Jane Hills and Patrick Sagal. Jay Maytin was seated at 5:10 and Sallie Golden was seated at 5:30 p.m. MOTION: Patrick moved to approve the minutes of May 22"d, second by Jane. All in favor, motion carried 4-0. Disclosure: Willis said he worked with Neil on other projects but is not involved with 430 W. Main and will remain seated for the agenda item. 233 W. Hallam — Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Partial Demolition, Floor Area Bonus, Residential Design Standards Variances and Setback Variances, cont'd public hearing Mitch Haas, Haas Planning Melissa Mabe-Sabanosh, DHR architecture Amy said this is a 9,700 square foot lot in the west end that has a Victorian house on it that is heavily remodeled and moved from its original location. The proposal is to strip the building back to its core and move it to where it used to be and it will be restored back to its original state. There will be no additions made to the historic house. The remaining square footage will be for a detached second unit and that unit runs along the side street and wraps around the alley with a two car garage and covered spaces. The revisions for tonight were sent to you yesterday. We are happy with the direction of the amendments that were made in breaking up the building so that it relates more to the historic structure. There is a light well proposed on the Victorian that is large and it should be moved back or broken into smaller ones. One concern is the door that faces the side street that has a lot of prominence and a much wider sidewalk coming into an entry forayer and we want to make sure that we have floor plans that show that both the Victorian and new house face Hallam which is required by the design guidelines. For final we would also like to see the buildings be free standing. The proposed two car garage had a gabled roof and now has a mansard roof which is being used to hide mechanical equipment but it is not a typical roof form in the West End and competes with the uniqueness of the Victorian house. We are suggesting HPC award a sideyard setback reduction so the house can go back where it used to be. We are also suggesting waiving some residential 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2013 design standards. A letter of credit for $30,000 is needed because the house is going to be picked up and moved. This is a suggested resolution for tonight and you also have the option to continue. They are also asking for a 500 square foot bonus. Mitch Haas, Haas planning Melissa Mabe-Sabanosh, DHR architects Mitch said from the beginning it was our intent to hear concerns and respond. We want everyone to be proud of the project at the end of the day. We are confident that we can address all the issues before final. We are fine restudying everything. We have worked to break down the mass and scale of the building and to break up the ridge heights. We removed skylights and taken out a lot of the pergola and made a traditional front porch. We don't feel the building competes with the historic building. There is also no covered roof over the entry walkway. New elevations Exhibit I Melissa said the entry moved to Hallam Street. What used to be the entry is a sunny corridor that feeds to a courtyard on Second Street. The height of the roof form was lowered 2.5 feet and the center form was lowered another 2 feet. Nora asked what the height is now. Melissa said the ridge height is 30 feet 7 1/2 inches. Amy said the applicant received Sara's memo last week and then met with me Friday morning and then you received the revisions yesterday. Staff recommends approval with conditions. Commissioner Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was closed. Jay said this commission has had issues with going to final without conceptual being completed. Restudying roof forms has created issues in the past. Patrick said page A3.1 shows the two options. The gabled roof is more historic and there is also a chimney. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2013 Melissa said the chimney is there to hide venting etc. and it is not a fireplace. Willis said this is a big improvement over the last meeting. Willis said he is concerned about guideline 11.10. The entrance off Hallam is going in the right direction. The concern is granting an approval with conditions that we don't know what are going to look like at the end. Conceptual is mass and scale and we should not be surprised if things come back looking different as long as they are in the overall geometry that describes mass and scale. Jay asked if the chimney by code has to be that high over the ridge line. Willis said it depends what it is exhausting through it. Jay said he feels the chimney on the garage is too high. The front entrance now feels more like the front entrance. The west fagade is massive and the gable in the middle makes it huge and massive. Maybe a flat roof would be better. Another concern is the trellises around the east side of the garage and the window over the front door seems quite large and mimicking in comparison to the Victorian. Because of guideline 11.10 possibly set the new building back on the front lot line to make it more submissive to the historic house. Patrick also agreed that setting it back would separate it and make it submissive. Nora said there is some movement toward a resolution. There is a wonderful opportunity with this corner lot. I am not comfortable passing something with 9 conditions. Mass and scale is still an issue. It is much larger than the historic resource. I do not see the addition being submissive to the historic resource. It overwhelms the property. A 30 foot high building next to a 19 foot high building is a concern. There is a lot of program in the new house. Jane said she spent an hour on that street this morning and there has been a lot of changes on that street and the applicant has heard our concerns. The applicant also has to achieve their goals as well and they are ready to make the changes that we feel are appropriate. The design guidelines are confusing to an applicant. I feel it is of the appropriate scale on a 9,000 square foot lot and the chimney will not be obvious. The lot has a lot of trees and I support staff's recommendations. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2013 Sallie said if we made everyone who had a one story house only be limited on their empty lot to have one story it would be impossible in certain situations. I do feel it needs some more work in keeping the proportions. The design is too busy and there is too much ornamentation with the windows and trellis. I don't understand the trellis and the gable roof. Those are simple Victorian houses next to it. The separation of the garage is good. Patrick said his concern is with the massing along Second Street. Willis pointed out that the building has to be similar in scale with the historic building no subservient. It is similar. The guidelines are weighted toward formal resemblance. It doesn't mean they can't be abstract. The three sisters all have a truncated central core. Everyone is on the same page with the trellis, it just needs to be minimized. Jay pointed out that the project has requested a 500 square foot bonus. I can't grant conceptual and a bonus when there are so many things to be answered to what the project is going to look like. Patrick said his concern is the massing along Second Street and possibly it could be pulled back and the roof line lowered on Hallam. Jane asked the board if they really think the new construction is trying to mimic the historic house with mass and scale (11.10 guideline). Jay said from the Hallam Street side it is mimicking the building next to it. When people drive by it will be difficult to distinguish the old from new. Willis said the design is not distracting enough. The guidelines are asking you to be abstract. Melissa commented that guideline 11.9 specifically says that I have to do a similar size and shape. The windows, material, roofing and stone are the things that will bring the house into our time. The materials are what help differentiate. The scale and mass is right for this neighborhood. I can get rid of the pergola between the garage and house. We have given you concessions on everything you have asked for. The light well can surely be separated and moved. The house is placed where it was historically. We also want the West End to be the best. Certainly we are on the same page and we can work together. I will work with Amy at length to make sure the 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION - - - - - - - - - MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2013 fenestration and details that you are taking about are exactly what you would like to see. We want the rhythm of the house to be in accidence with the rest of the neighborhood. Mitch pointed out that the historic house is 25 feet high and the addition is 30 feet. This is a 9,700 square foot lot. The point that nobody is remembering is that there is 7 or 8 feet from the first sister to the second sister and seven feet to the final sister and then over 20 feet until you see the new structure. The reason we didn't think we wanted to push the house off the front setback line is because of the 20 feet. We also took the height of the front portion and lowered it and eliminated the chimney. No one is going to confuse what is historic and what is not especially when we get to the fenestration etc. This corner is not going to get developed with a 1,000 square foot house. I feel we have come the distance and we support Amy's recommendation. The historic house will be totally restored. MOTION: Patrick moved to approve resolution #22 with staff's recommendation and taking out the word gable on the roof options for the garage #5. #10 approve the 500 square foot bonus. Change #4 to say remove the link. Motion second by Sallie. Willis made a friendly amendment to #5. Provide roof options. Willis retracted the amendment. Sallie said she thought one of the guidelines was to keep the houses in alignment to keep the vitality and historic pattern of the West End. Amy said if they pushed the house back they would need a residential design standard variance which creates another problem. VOTE: Patrick, yes; Jay, no; Nora, no; Jane, yes; Willis, no. Sallie, yes. Motion does not carry 3 — 3. Sallie said Jay and Nora have mass and scale issues. Michelle said we can do a lot with materials so that the houses doesn't mimic the other historic houses. Michelle said the schedule of the board is completely full and we feel we can handle getting this project approved. Jay said he feels it will take at least two more meetings on this project. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2013 MOTION: Jay moved to continue 233 W. Hallam to July 24th second by Nora. VOTE: Jane, no; Sallie, no; Nora, yes; Jay, yes; Willis, yes, Patrick, yes. Motion carried 4-2. Jane said there are many projects approved conceptually with several conditions. I feel the applicant can solve the problems. 430 W. Main — Historic landmark lot split and variances, public hearing Debbie said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I Alan Richman Planning Services and Karbank 430 LLC Amy said this is a corner lot and the property contains a 1 t/2 Victorian house and a huge tree on the lot. There were also work sessions in the past on this house with additions and none ever came to be. Neil Karbank has purchased the property and would like to do a lot split and almost all the development rights sold away as TDR's. In this case there is a 4,000 square foot lot on the corner that will have the heritage tree and all the development rights except for 177 square feet will be converted to TDR's to be sold to other historic homes. The interior lot is a 5,000 square foot lot with a Victorian house and all but 18 square feet will be sold as two TDR's. There is a request for a bonus on the interior lot. There is no project proposed. The bonus would be awarded to cover part of the existing building and 500 square feet would be converted to TDR's and sold. Staff is in supportive of this application especially on Main Street and preserving the openness. The new lot line would create for a need of a two foot setback reduction from the west side of the historic house to the lot line. On the Victorian house someone enclosed the front porch and then it was re-opened. There is a balustrade railing that was not there originally. If the Building Dept. would allow them to remove the railing and not have too much of a drop off we suggest as a restoration effort for the bonus that the railing go away. Alan said there was an approved lot split around 6 years ago. We basically kept the configuration of the two lots the same, a 5,000 square foot and a 4,000 square foot lot. The reason it is 4,000 square feet is because of the heritage tree. We are trying to create room on the lot to preserve the evergreen tree. This would preserve the white Victorian structure as you see 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2013 it and this is a great thing for Main Street. The setback is more of a technical variance. By creating the 4,000 square foot lot the lot line comes right up to the edge of the building and so we need two feet of additional setback. The FAR bonus is important and it basically helps make this a worthwhile preservation effort for the Karbank family. We thought sending all the TDR's off this property represents an exceptional preservation proposal. The shingles on the roof are weathered and really not in good shape and they need to be maintained and we committed to do that. If the HPC would like us to remove the railing that is fine with us. We have no issue with any of the conditions that staff has recommended and we hope that HPC will support this. Patrick inquired about extinguishing the 177 square feet. Alan said there isn't a mechanism in the code for a partial TDR. TDR's are 250 square feet each. Amy said the 177 square feet would still have HPC review and the tree would not be allowed to move and you.can't build too close to it. Jay asked about the value of TDR's. Amy said they sell from $175,000. to $205,000. We have had 6 or 7 of them sell. Commissioner, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was closed. MOTION: Patrick moved to approve resolution #22 with one edit to condition #I which states that they can sell one TDR at a time; motion second by Willis. Nora asked about the language change. Alan said it means that they are able to create TDR's one at a time as opposed to taking all of them down at one time and having the inventory that is unsold. Once the TDR is created it is created. It can be reverse. It is a very unpredictable market. We are trying to think of ways to the city council to have more uses for the TDR's. It is a great program but it needs more places that TDR's can be used. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 26. 2013 Neil said council took away some potential uses of TDR's in the commercial core. Amy said they are only able to use them in the City of Aspen and single family or duplex owners one each. Willis said they can't go to lodges or multi-families. Nora asked about the FAR bonus being transferred because I thought the FAR bonus was for restoration of an historic resource. Amy said there are six or seven justifications for granting a bonus and normally it is justified by someone restoring something but they are certainly retaining notable landscape features by not developing on the property. Jay said basically they are preserving an empty and that is why I am comfortable with it. Willis agreed that they are preserving the site. Willis noted on page 8 that the applicant is not required to comply with all of the elements to be eligible to receive the bonus. Jay thanked the applicants and commented that he would like to see more preservation like this. The TDR program is making this possible and it is a win win situation. Nora also said it is being used very visibly on the property. One can also use the picnic table. Patrick asked about a fence. Amy said she usually reviews fences on HPC's behalf unless it is a problem. Nora asked if the property would be fenced. Neil said he talked about it but he is not sure. In the winter the bushes are dormant but now they are leafed out and there isn't a need for a fence. Willis said the motion includes taking the baluster off the porch. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2013 Roll call vote: Patrick, yes; Willis, yes; Jay, yes; Nora, yes, Jane, yes; Sallie, yes. Motion carried 6-0. Election of officers Debbie announced that this election is for the balance of the term. HPC is required to have them in January. Jay nominated himself as chair. Nora nominated Jane as chair. Jay is chair. Willis nominated himself as vice-chair. Nora nominated Jane as vice-chair. Tie vote: Willis and Jane are vice-chairs. MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Patrick. All in favor, motion carried. 557 Walnut—work session — no minutes Debbie said this is a work session and there can be no approvals and the applicant cannot rely on anything that is said by the commission as a whole or by any individual commissioner. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 9