Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20210526 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 26 2021 Chairperson Thompson opened the meeting at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Kara Thompson, Scott Kendrick, Roger Moyer, Jeff Halferty, Jodi Surfas, Peter Fornell, Sheri Sanzone. Commissioners not in attendance: n/a Staff present: Amy Simon, Planning Director Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Natalie Feinberg Lopez, Historic Preservation Officer Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Fornell moved to approve the March 12th minutes. Mr. Kendrick seconded. Roll Call: Mr. Kendrick; Yes, Mr. Moyer; Yes, Mr. Halferty; Yes, Mr. Fornell; Yes, Ms. Surface; Yes Ms. Thompson; Yes. 6-0, motion passes. Ms. Sanzone joined the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Thompson stated that there was a discussion about meeting in person and an HPC Work Session. Ms. Simon stated that on June 1st all City of Aspen employees will be back in the office. She added there has been a discussion happening about bringing the boards back together in person. The staff liaisons will be reaching out to each board chair to discuss options and requirements. Ms. Simon said as far as a work session staff will put together a list of topics and maybe plan a retreat. Ms. Sanzone said she watched the HPC awards at the last council meeting. She said that the Mayor did an excellent job describing each project and that Councilwoman Mullins was very surprised and honored by her award. Ms. Simon said that staff is aiming for the August 10th council meeting to present the awards in person. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT: None. PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Yoon stated that the most current project monitoring list was attached to the agenda. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon introduced Natalie Feinberg Lopez, as the city’s new Historic Preservation Officer. Ms. Lopez said that she is thrilled to join the city team. OLD BUSINESS: 121 W. Bleeker Street - Conceptual Major Development. Derek Skalko with 1st Friday Design representing the owner. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 26 2021 Mr. Skalko said that they would like to focus on the refinement of the project and property. He reminded the board that the majority of the mass is the addition on the back and is non-historic. Mr. Skalko showed a historic photo of the structure and said that the plan is to bring the resource back to its pure form. He showed a rendering of the proposed plan where the new addition massing is pushed to the alley creating a clean space of 12 feet with a connecting element between the resource and the addition. Mr. Skalko said that the outside staircase that was proposed has been taken out of the plans and the massing of the additions has been reduced by 6 feet on the west side. He added that the grill that was proposed has been removed as well. Mr. Skalko said that on the east side they have decided to forgo the open-aired court-well and went with a simple skylight. The skylight will sit 13 feet 7 inches from the resource. He added that there will be a 5-foot fence along the alley, so the public will not be able to read this element. Mr. Skalko said that the area that was proposed for the outside staircase will now be shifted and used to create a wraparound porch for the master bedroom. He stated that now that the outside staircase and the open-aired court-well have been removed, they are asking for a smaller variance. Mr. Skalko said that there has been concern about the outside patio, which bumps up to the resource. He explained that the patio will sit 2 to 3 inches above grade and there will be a fence so no public view of this patio. Ms. Thompson asked if the shed roof mass that has shifted will hang over the skylights more so than the last iteration. Mr. Skalko said that is correct. Mr. Halferty asked what the distance is between the resource and the two-story addition. Mr. Skalko said 12 feet. Mr. Fornell asked the applicant to explain the patio detail further. Mr. Skalko said that the east and west patio will be utilized as a part of the kitchen and dining experience with an open-air concept. He explained that the patio will be stone only 2 to 3 inches above grade, for all intents and purposes they are grade-level conditions. Mr. Skalko said that there were conversations about pulling the patio away from the resource wall, he said that doing this one is creating a precarious detail for waterproofing failure. Mr. Fornell asked if the fence will be kept or recreated. Mr. Skalko said there have been many iterations of the fence through the decades and at certain points, there was no fence. He said that they intend to have a fence with wood construction referencing a historic photo. Mr. Fornell asked if the staff has an opinion on the fence. Ms. Yoon stated that this is a detail that they will cover in the final review as it relates to the landscape plan. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Yoon reviewed the history and the list of approvals that are being requested for this project. She stated that staff supports the removal of the non-historic addition and the restoration that goes along with the removal. Ms. Yoon said that the applicant is seeking a full basement and will pick up the resource and place it back in the original space. She said that the connecting element is wider than normal, however, and staff is in support of this in this case. The resource is taller than the addition and there is a loss of historic integrity due to the addition that is there now. Ms. Yoon said that the applicant has reduced the massing of the addition as it is viewed from Bleeker Street. She said that the side yard setback request has been removed since the applicant is no longer seeking the outside staircase. Ms. Yoon stated that staff would like HPC to discuss the paved patio condition. She explained that typically the resource needs to REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 26 2021 meet grade and not a paved material like the patios. Ms. Yoon said that staff supports the mass reduction on the second floor of the addition and that the addition is now more in line with the resource. She said that the height variation is no longer being requested since the large lightwell is not being pursued. The skylight that is now being proposed for natural light for the subgrade living area is a bit larger than typically seen, staff would like to see a slight reduction. Ms. Yoon said that there is a rear yard setback variation being asked for. She explained that the deck on top of the garage is considered a livable space. She added that the mechanical equipment will also need a setback variation. Mr. Fornell asked staff’s opinion on connecting elements. Ms. Yoon stated that the purpose of the connecting element is to distance the new development from the historic resource and to reduce the physical impact that it may undergo during construction. Mr. Kendrick stated that the ideal situation would be that there is no connecting element. He said that it is unique in the city building code that there is an option for a connecting element. Mr. Fornell said that his concern is that some individuals get them, and some don’t. He added that he wants to be fair to all applicants. Ms. Thompson stated that it is written into the code and HPC does not get to diced one way or another. Mr. Halferty said just take a look at this project where the applicant wants to take off an addition that is smashed up against a historic resource and this is why a connector is needed and works. Ms. Sanzone stated that she supports the proposed patios and that the applicant is doing a great job restoring and being sensitive to the resource. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Thompson stated that the removal of the staircase and reduction of the massing is a great improvement. She said there is concern about the overhang above the skylight. Mr. Moyer asked Ms. Thompson why she’s concerned about the overhang. Ms. Thompson said it is just a concern in elevation and the consistency of the plane along the resource and alley side. She explained that before it gave the illusion of a longer connecting element with more space between the addition and resource. Mr. Moyer asked Ms. Thompson why she thinks it was changed. Ms. Thompson stated that she does not have the old plans in front of her but to her best guess, the master suite was re-laid out. Mr. Fornell asked if the skylight would be used as egress. Mr. Skalko said no. Mr. Fornell asked if there were no bedrooms in the basement then. Mr. Skalko stated there is no need for egress from that room and that there are bedrooms in the basement, and they all have egress. Mr. Fornell asked if the egress is at grade and if you push up or have a railing. Mr. Kendrick said it’s on grade. Mr. Halferty said as far as massing, the connecting element is larger than typically seen. He added that the shed form that is on top of the link makes the link seem bigger. Mr. Halferty said that he agrees with Ms. Thompson’s statement about the overhang. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 26 2021 Mr. Kendrick asked if the height is below the resource then the applicant does not need to maintain that 10-foot distance. Ms. Yoon said that is correct. Mr. Kendrick said that this fits into the guidelines. He said he appreciates that the addition is below the resource. Mr. Kendrick said that he agrees with fellow board members that there are areas that could be cleaned up a bit. Ms. Thompson stated that she does not have a problem with the width of the linking element, and it was a lot cleaner when the shed roof element lined up with the linking elements. Mr. Moyer stated that he agrees with the staff’s comments and is ready to approve. Ms. Sanzone said she agrees with staff on the massing and that there are a lot of details being shown that will be discussed at the final. She added that she does not mind the width of the linking element. She reiterated her support for the patios. Ms. Thompson said that she agrees with Ms. Sanzone about the patios. She added that she is ok with the skylight as proposed and supports approval. Ms. Surfas stated that she is in support of the project. Mr. Fornell said that the applicant did a great job addressing the concerns from HPC. He raised concerns about the setback variations being granted. Ms. Thompson said that the setback conversation was extensively discussed at the first meeting. She explained that the garage variance is for a railing on top of the garage and adding mechanical equipment under the garage. She added that this will not change the footprint. She further added that there is mechanical equipment shown in the side yard and this will grant them to sit on grade. Ms. Thompson said that she is good to approve the project and asked the applicant to consider the massing above the linking element. Mr. Fornell moved to approve Resolution #10, Series of 2021; Mr. Kendrick seconded. Ms. Sanzone asked why the square footage was changed from 250 to 205. Mr. Halferty said that they did not need all 250. Ms. Sanzone asked if the applicant needed more could they come and request and be granted that. Mr. Kendrick stated no that would change the mass and scale. Ms. Sanzone said that she wants to make sure the applicant is aware of the 45-sf difference. Roll Call: Mr. Kendrick; Yes, Mr. Moyer; Yes, Mr. Halferty; Yes, Mr. Fornell; Yes, Ms. Surface; Yes Ms. Thompson; Yes, Ms. Sanzone; Yes. 7-0, motion passes. NEW BUSINESS: Report on Colorado Preservation, Inc. conference. Ms. Yoon stated that the city was awarded a scholarship for some of the HPC members to attend the virtual CPI Conference. She said that this conference is about preservation and focuses on Colorado. Each commissioner discussed the seminars they attended and their experience. Mr. Halferty motioned to adjourn; Mr. Moyer Seconded Roll Call: Mr. Kendrick; Yes, Mr. Moyer; Yes, Mr. Halferty; Yes, Mr. Fornell; Yes, Ms. Surface; Yes Ms. Thompson; Yes, Ms. Sanzone; Yes. 7-0, motion passes. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 26 2021 _________________________ Wes Graham, Deputy Clerk