Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.hpc.025-2020RESOLUTION #25, SERIES OF 2020 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION GRANTING ASPENMODERN HISTORIC DESIGNATION, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW INCLUDING RELOCATION, AND VARIATIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 211 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, LOTS F AND G, BLOCK 53, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PARCEL ID: 2735-124-63-003 WHEREAS, the applicant, Matt Joblon, 205 S. Detroit Street , Suite 400, Denver, CO 80206, with the consent of property owner Vaughan Capital Partners, LP has requested HPC approval for AspenModem Historic Designation, Conceptual Major Development, Relocation and Variations for the property located at 211 W. Hopkins Avenue, Lots F and G, Block 53, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, the AspenModern designation process is described at Section 26.415.025 and Section 26.415.030 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, for approval of Setback Variations, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.C, Setback Variations; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on October 28, 2020, considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and continued the proposal for restudy. On November 18, 2020, the commission found the revised application to be consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of 5 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: I IIIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIII II I III IIIII IIIII IIIII IIII IIIII IIII RECEPTION#: 672888, R: $23.00, D: $0.00 DOC CODE: RESOLUTION P9 1 of 3, 01/26/2021 at 02:18:26 PM Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO HPC Resolution #25, Series of 2020 Pagel of 3 Section 1: Approvals 1. HPC hereby recommends Council approval of historic designation for 211 W. Hopkins Avenue and approval of the proposed redevelopment, Option 4 for the design of the new structure on the alley as presented at the November 181h meeting, under the terms of AspenModern negotiation for designation as follows: • Granting of tree removal permits and waiver of all tree mitigation fees generated by the approved development. • Expedited building permit review consistent with the Building Department's adopted procedure. • A floor area bonus of 135 square feet of enclosed space and 19 square feet to be used for larger outdoor decks. • A rear yard setback reduction of 2', allowing the new residential unit to be 8' from the rear lot line on all floors. 2. As part of the approval to relocate the house on the site, the applicant will be required to provide a financial security of $30,000 until the house is set on the new foundation. The financial security is to be provided with the building permit application, along with a detailed description of the house relocation approach. 3. As part of building permit review, the applicant shall address the following referral comments to the satisfaction of the respective Departments. Parks: The new water line is to be installed under where the front walk is now located to minimize impacts to the spruce and aspen in the front yard. A site visit with the Forester is needed prior to this installation so he can direct the best route for the tree roots. A tree permit must be issued for all removals. This permit will call out specifics for the dripline excavation for the trees at the front of the property. No trees in the right-of-way on West Hopkins are approved to be removed. The impact of the project on the driplines of neighbor's trees will need to be considered. Some neighboring trees might need to be removed. The applicant will be required to provide the Forester with a letter from the trees' owners saying they accept the impacts and risks to their trees. The applicant may need to treat impacted trees with growth regulating hormones and trunk injections for bark beetle protection. En2ineerin2• The proposed drywell must be 10' from the neighboring property. A Geotech or structural engineer must supply a stamped letter stating the drywell within 10' of the proposed structure and existing cabin foundation will have no adverse effects. At building permit the project may be required to detach the existing sidewalk and install a new sidewalk with a 5' landscape buffer between the curb and sidewalk. The neighboring property to the west has a current building permit and may detach their portion of the sidewalk depending on existing tree constraints. If this happens the sidewalk at 211 W shall also be detached. HPC Resolution #25, Series of 2020 Page 2 of 3 At building permit the project will need to determine the water service line size and configuration for the two buildings. Currently two service lines are proposed per sheet L300. The water service line on the east runs under the dripline of the large spruce tree. The excavation that close to the tree trunk will most likely kill the tree. This needs further vetting. Foundation drywells are proposed in close proximity to the east spruce tree. Excavation cannot take place within the dripline of the tree. It needs to be shown excavation can take place to accommodate the foundation drywells without adversely affecting the tree. 4. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 3: Existine Lititation This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 18th day of November, 2020. Ap rove as to Form: Kathanne Jo Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk Appro .ed as to Cent nt: Gretghen enwood, CI it HPC Resolution #25, Series of 2020 Page 3 of 3