Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20140226 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2014 Chairperson, Jay Maytin, called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were Willis Pember, John Whipple, Jim DeFrancia and Patrick Sagal. Absent were, Sallie Golden and Nora Berko. Staff present: Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Sara Adams, Planner Travis Elliot, Intern MOTION: Jay moved to approve the minutes of February 12, 2014; second by John. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Patrick said he would like to make a motion to reconsider because he would like to change his vote on the Rubey Park issue at the last meeting. Debbie said at the next meeting after you have taken action anyone who voted with the majority can move to reconsider. It is only a motion to reconsider. There is no discussion of the merits of the application. If the motion passes then we will have to reschedule another public hearing. It is not fair to the applicant to have any discussion about the merits of the decision that was made. Willis second the motion. Patrick said it was said to me by the applicant that I was the only one who brought up the historic character of Aspen as part of the analysis for the design and architecture and after the meeting I looked at the purpose and intent of historic preservation, section 206.415.010 and found that I had great questions. Debbie said based upon Patrick's thoughts he feels he should have voted differently. Jay said he doesn't support bringing the applicant back to change one vote out of a unanimous decision. It wouldn't sway my vote and I am 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2014 comfortable with how the meeting went. It can be noted that Patrick is not in favor of the Rubey Park project. Jim echoed Jay's comments and the decision was thoughtfully undertaken after adequate discussion and I wouldn't change my consideration. Willis said he wasn't at the meeting so he will not make a comment. Patrick said if it was reconsidered everyone would be able to change their vote. John said seeing that the vote was 4-0 I would not reconsider. Vote on the motion: Jim, no; Jay, no; John, no. Patrick, yes. Motion failed 3-1. Willis asked about the color of the Gap referencing a letter in the paper. The letter writer was critical of the color of the stone. Willis said it looks fine. Patrick said the color is not the character of Aspen and out of the palate and it doesn't meet the guidelines. It was not perceived to me as a glass building with brick trim rather than a brick building with glass. Jim said he likes the building. John said he was surprised at first and has already watched it get toned down by the suit and mag chloride and that finish will not remain. I like the building and it makes a statement and we shouldn't make decisions until it is fully done. Jay said he likes the way the textures talk to the Brand building and the fact that it is one story is amazing. They did a good job on the building. Patrick handed out the purpose and intent from the guidelines - Exhibit I 420 E. Main — Minor Development— Public Hearing John Kelleher said he is representing the owners of the US Bank building. There is a round conference room on the second floor and we would like to 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2014 cut holes through the exterior wall in order to get some daylight into the conference room. Amy said 420 E. Main is in the historic district. There are no other historic buildings on this particular block face. It was built in 1954 and designed by Sam Claudill and is shown on the Aspen modern website. It has a lot of his characteristics with brick as the main material and the curved shape appears in a lot of his other buildings. The owner would like to put five windows on the upper floor. The building is not designated and not considered historic at this point. The street facing window design will replicate the character and finish of the other openings on the building. Staff recommends approval. Amy said most of our guidelines deal with a building that has a retail presence on the ground floor and this building doesn't have that. There is a drive through and it is a little unique having punched openings on the upper floor and nothing on the ground floor. Staff recommends approval. Jim said he feels the windows would be an enhancement to the building. Lightening up the building is appropriate. Patrick asked that the windows be the same color and shape. John Kelleher said that is their intent. Jay said the building would talk to the street a little more with windows. MOTION: Jay moved to approve Resolution #6, second by Patrick. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Willis, yes; John, yes; Patrick, yes; Jay, yes. Motion carried 5-0. Jay mentioned that he forgot to formally open the public hearing. There was the opportunity for the public to speak. No one was in the audience. 1000 E. Cooper Debbie Quinn said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed. Travis Elliott, Intern: This is a landmark and has an alley unit at the back of the lot. The alley unit is not historic. The applicant would like to do some 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2014 minor exterior renovation. It is a rental unit without prior approval. It is a retrofitted garage that has turned into a rental unit. To remain as a rental unit on this lot it would have to be registered as an ADU and deed restricted with the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority. To become an ADU you have to meet the review criteria which goes through an administrative review. In this case we were unable to meet one of those criteria which is providing a separate and on-site parking space specifically to serve the unit which has prompted the HPC review. In addition we would like to go forward with the minor review for the exterior renovations and to bring the space up to code and make it safer to live in. That would include replacing one exterior window, an exterior door and window glazing with insulated glazing and matching all existing finishes and installing a gutter and down spout along the alley side of the building. Due to the restrictions of the lot itself staff is recommending approval of the parking variance to let it become deed restricted and a registered ADU and to allow it to be a rental unit. All exterior renovations meet HPC design guidelines for non-historic buildings. We are also recommending that the minor amendment be approved. Patrick asked what date the garage was built originally and the date it became an abandoned unit. Amy said there is very little building permit history for this structure. This is not a major development review. In terms of HPC review we are only talking about windows and door changes. HPC is being asked to address the housing criteria because it doesn't make sense for them to go to HPC and P&Z. We don't have a change in use or anything like that. We are just addressing making the unit legal and safe. Debbie said there is a separate process for designation of the unit to an ADU if the parking waiver is given. Leo Carmichael, represented the owner. This is an abandoned ADU and they are in the process to get it all cleaned up. It has a kitchen and bath and it needs life safety issues. Patrick asked if anything on the outside has been evaluated for code. Leo said we have a roofing permit and there was water being diverted to the back of the building and there is a gutter and heat tape to get the water away 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2014 from the building. There is a slab footing. There doesn't seem to be any damage to the footers. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. Basil Smilious said he lives in the Sunrise Condos. Next to the applicant property 1006 is an abandoned unit that got a six foot right-of-way in 1991, a revocable six foot right-of-way. That is in the alley six feet. The applicant's property is in the alley 2 to 21/2 feet. I would like to see the alley restored to its 20 foot public right-of-way so all these cars can pull out properly. Right now the public right-of-way is twelve feet. The applicant has to do a renovation on the north wall and I would like to see that north wall moved to the property line and the public right-of-way restored. Geraldine Haymen said she lives across the alley in the same building. There is so little space there. I don't see where the parking for this unit could be unless it is on the grass. Mrs. Smilious said her concern with the alley situation is the water coming down into the alley and forming ice buildup. Sue Lum said she lives to the right and that shed has always rented and there won't be any more parking problems then there are now and it wouldn't be a terrible burden. Chairperson, Jay Maytin closed the public hearing. Issues: Parking requirement Parking waiver request Travis said it isn't exactly clear as to how much it encroaches into the right- of-way. This owner would have to get an encroachment license after this approval. Amy said there are little buildings like this all over town that were built before the present code. If a property comes in for a major development we try to correct the encroachments. All the development would happen within their property lines. Until the point when someone asks for that substantial project the city typically tries to allow for an encroachment to continue to 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26. 2014 the extent that it doesn't cause a life safety situation. If you approve this they will get a building permit and will have to get engineering approval for an encroachment license. They will not be able to drain their snow and ice into the alley and will have to contain it on their own property. It does seem to be encroaching two to three feet into the alley. Leo said the square footage is about 490 square feet and the minimum is 300 square feet. Leo said there is an egress window and egress door. We would change the single glass to an insulated glass. John said in my opinion the alley encroachments are off the table. I understand the memo clearly. There are minor window adjustments in trying to get an abandoned unit up to code. Amy pointed out that encroachment licenses are revocable at any time. Patrick asked if the square footage could be eliminated to 350 which would pull it back and have a space for parking so that they wouldn't need a variance and would bring them out of the alley so that they wouldn't have a two foot encroachment. Jay said he feels if you live in town you don't need a car. I am OK with waiving the parking because of the improvements to the building and drainage and with the changes it will improve the livability of the building. MOTION: Jim moved to approve Resolution #7 granting the requested parking variance and approving the minor development review. Motion second by John. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Willis, yes; John, yes Jay, yes; Patrick, no. Motion carried 4-1. 507 Gillespie - Substantial Amendment to Major Development— Public Hearing Debbie Quinn said the applicant didn't bring their affidavit. Debbie asked Mr. Rowland if he posted the notice that is required by our code provisions at least 15 days prior to the hearing. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2014 John said he posted and the posting is still up and a photograph has been taken. Debbie also asked if notice was provided to property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. John said he did the mailing and will submit the affidavit within 24 hours to the clerk's office. Debbie said based on the discussion about the notice the board can proceed. Sara Adams said this is a vacant lot and there is an historic resource on the adjacent lot. In 2007 the vacant lot received approval for a single family home and an ADU. In 2013 John Rowland and Sarah Broughton did a substantial amendment to the 2007 approval that included changing roof forms and windows but the concept of a single family home and an ADU remained in effect. They are back before you for another substantial amendment to do some further tweaks. They provided comparisons so the board can see where the changes are. We are supportive of all the changes and they meet the design guidelines. They are proposing a built in grill in the setback which would require a setback variance. We are not supportive of that proposal and we feel the criteria for granting a variance are not met. The garage doors would have to meet the residential design standards. John Rowland, owner of the lot. John said we had the chance to rent the historic resource next door to our vacant lot. Since then we had the opportunity to understand the lot better. The primary differences is that we wanted a cleaner more defined architectural volume that is represented in the house next door. The eaves are simpler. The side elevations are simpler. The more significant change is on the gable that was facing the interior of the courtyard. The eave detail was 2 1/2 feet and we desire it to be around four inches. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. John Rowland said we have moved the gas grill so we will no longer need a variance. Issues: Residential design standard on garage doors. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 26, 2014 MOTION: Patrick moved to approve Resolution #8 as staff as recommended. Motion second by Jim. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Willis, yes; John, yes; Patrick, yes; Jay, yes. Motion carried 5-0. Jay will be the project monitor. Work Session — 28 Smuggler Grove Debbie Quinn said this is a work session and there can be no approval and the applicant cannot rely on anything that is said by the commission. This is informational only for the applicant. The commissioners are doing this as an impression as to what their thoughts are. John Rowland acknowledged that this is not recorded and is in no way binding. MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Jim. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:15 Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 8