Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20130710 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 10 2013 Chairperson, Jay Maytin called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Sallie Golden, Patrick Sagal and Jane Hill Nora Berko and Willis Pember were excused. s' Staff present: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk MOTION: Jane moved to approve the minutes of June 12", and June 2 to second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried. 6 Topic related to 430 W. Main — lot split and TDR's Amy said the applicant came in and asked for subdivision and they were going to transfer most of the development rights away llinotheo form of TDR's. I have always been under the impression once that is done that it is a done deal but in further discussion with staff and the attorne office what is really happening is that people are being given permissions sell TDR's but they are not required to. It isn't until the moment the to execute a certificate or record a deed restriction that it is done. We anted HPC to understand that there is always the possibility that someone would come back to council and ask to amend their approval. An example would be that they would sell 5 instead of 8 TDR's. The only clarification is wh someone gets a FAR bonus. On 430 W. Main a 500 square foot bonus asn granted out of recognition that the lot would be preserved forever. As this project goes to city council we added language and ensures that the are n getting that reward without selling the TDR's. y of Debbie said we also made sure that in the minutes there was that discussion that the sterile lot was the basis for the bonus. The applicant is fine with decision. There is the possibility that they wouldn't request all the TDR's the from that vacant lot and if they don't then they wouldn't get an TDR's the developed lot and won't get the bonus. y on 125 W. Main Street—Historic Landmark Lot Split and Variances Public Hearing ' Debbie said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can r Exhibit I. proceed. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 10 2013 Amy said this is a 6,000 square foot lot and is landmarked and has a Victorian home on it. It doesn't have very many alterations and is fairly authentic. The applicant is requesting a lot split with two 3,000 square foot lots. There is no specific development requested at this time. In this case because of the width of the historic house and where it sits they can't just draw a straight line from front to back. There will be a jog. The new lot line is held three feet away from the Victorian house. The required side yard setback is actually five feet and if they provided that it would be creating a minimal usable vacant lot. Three feet is the minimum for building code. You are being asked to approve the lot split and award the variance. This will also go onto city council. Assuming the lot stays a residential use with this subdivision the allowed FAR basically covers the Victorian with very little future expansion. If they turned the house into a mixed use they would have some square footage to ad on if they wanted to. If someone builds a house on the vacant lot they would take an FAR penalty and it would be about a 1,900 square foot house. If they developed it as mixed use they would be allowed up to 3,000 square feet. Staff supports the lot split and the setback variance. The setback variance is only for the lot with the Victorian house. Cynthia Milling represented the owners. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. Jeffrey Halferty representing David Melton Mr. Melton is the adjacent neighbor. All in all he supports the lot split. The lot split concept is fantastic because it minimizes the large additions onto historic resources. It also helps the board manage the mass and scale. Mr. Melton supports the lot split with a few conditions. Mr. Melton doesn't want to get pigeon holed due to the variance. HPC should analyze the existing allowable FAR ratio for both lots. The massing should be minimal a one story link with some potential FAR added to the back of the historic resource and making sure the variances do not have any negative effect on the lot. Also he would like to make sure the demolition by neglect standard is prevented on the historic resource. There is a current ice damming issue on the west side of the historic resource. This should be addressed in the resolution. Gutters and heat tap should be installed in order to prevent damage to the historic house and any potential liability to the users of his property. The parking on both sides of the lot should be addressed. The 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2013 vested rights should also be addressed. Mr. Melton also wants to make sure that someone doesn't come in after buying the lot and asks for variances based on hardships on the west side. Somehow in the resolution language we need to protect his basic rights. The applicant understands the zone district he lives in and the FAR. Photograph Exhibit II Chairperson, Jay Maytin closed the public hearing. Amy said we need to look closer at the side porch. The sidewalk and the porch steps and platform are OK in the setback because they are less than 30 inches off the ground. The fact that the porch is covered means you need to grant a variance specific to that porch or require the covering to be removed. Amy also said all properties are required to remove their ice and snow from their properties. This property went through an enforcement of demolition by neglect and we required some repairs to the front porch and deterioration issues. We should talk about some conditions when it goes to council. We need to make sure the house is OK and that the ice issue is taken care of Jay identified the issues: East side yard setback variance Covered porch variance Lot split Patrick asked if there was a sidewalk that runs along the side of the house up to the porch. Amy said yes. The covered porch is for the doorway. Possibly the cover could be reduced in size. On the 1,920 square feet is that the maximum or could they come in for a hardship and get more. Amy said the 1,920 square feet is the maximum allowed and it doesn't mean you always get it. On the vacant lot in an historic lot split you can't give them setback variances unless they have a hardship such as a large tree. You don't have the same ability because it is an empty lot and they shouldn't need a variance. Hopefully whoever buys this can live with a skinny lot. Patrick said we need to do something about the ice buildup. Jane asked about the parking requirement for mixed use. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 10 2013 Amy said it is a certain number of spaces per 1,000 square feet. Every residential unit has to have one or two spaces. You aren't being asked to grant any parking variances right now. I believe there is room for two spaces behind the Victorian. Jay said his only concern is that it looks like there is 30 feet to the east property line minus the five on either side which brings it to 20 feet for a building envelope in the center. The concern is that the new developer comes in and says they have three feet and I want three feet. I don't see a reason to grant a variance to the east lot. I do like the five foot setback on the west side. Cynthia Milling said she is representing an elderly owner and the children are starting to take over the estate. They want to take care of their asset. If they sell part of the lot they will put that money back into the Aspen asset. I I am sure the family doesn't know anything about the ice buildup and I will inform them. MOTION: Jay moved to approve Resolution #23 as written; second by Patrick. The cover comes off the porch. Jane said the estate needs to be educated as to what the process is and the responsibility that they have with the asset. Amy suggested adding an additional sentence to condition #2. Remove the roof covering on the east porch of the Victorian allowing the stoop to remain. #4 solve the identified ice damage on the west to be approved by staff and monitor. Jay amended his motion, second by Patrick. All in favor, motion carried 4- 0. Vote: Patrick, yes; Sallie, yes; Jane, yes; Jay, yes. 517 E. Hyman Ave. —Minor Development and Partial Demolition, Public Hearing, Cont'd to August 14th MOTION: Jay moved to continue the public hearing on 517 E. Hyman until August 14th, second by Patrick. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC P=RESERVATION COMMISSION - - - - - MINUTES OF JULY 10, 2013 Debbie Quinn said we will defer the public notice until that date. 314 W. Main Street—work session — no minutes Debbie advised the applicant that during the work session there are no minutes and this is not a formal meeting and no formal action can be taken. It is merely the opinion of each of the commissioners and it is not binding in anyway. Derek Skalko; architect Robert Levy, owner Derek said he and his client are aware and understand what the work session is all about. MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Patrick. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. 1 Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 5