HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.205 S Mill St.HPC002-99.. PN: 2737-073-38004 Case HPC002-99 205 South Mill, #109, HPC Minor ., £ 1 80% H 9- 6 1 7
.. PARCEL ID:~2737-073-38004 DATE RCVD: ]2/22/99 #COPIES:|1 CASE NO|HPC002-99 * CASE NAME:|205 South Mill #109 Minor HPC Review PLNR:~Amy Guthrie PROJ ADDR:1205 South Mill, #109 CASE TYP:~HPC Minor STEPS~ OWN/APP: Campo De Fion ADR: 205 South Mill, #109 C/S/Z: ~ Aspen, CO 81611 PHN:~948-6407 ~ REP:~Elizabeth H. Plotke-Giordani ADR: PO Box 2616 C/S/Z:IAspen, CO 81612 PHN~948-6407 FEES DUE:~125 (hpc) FEES RCVD1125 STAT: E- REFERRALS~ REF:- BYj DUE:~ MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED DATE OF FINAL AC-~mil s //0 / 1 7 -j CITY COUNCIL: REMARKS| PZ: BOA: CLOSED:|&/4/7~ BY: IS 134*tE:-c -731%*C: #0-'C; d~0-6v.4€f 1 4- tb PLAT SUBMITD: ~ PLAT (BK,PG):| ADMIN: Ck/943 L/«
. .. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sarah Oates, Planning Technician RE: 205 South Mill, minor review (1 6 DATE: March 10, 1999 SUMMARY: The applicant, Campo De Fiori, is taking over the space formerly occupied by Aspen Sewing Service and proposes a minor alteration to the exterior of the store. The subject building is not historic but is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. APPLICANT: Campo De Fiori, represented by Elizabeth H. Plotke-Giordani. LOCATION: 205 South Mill. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Response: The applicant requests HPC approval to make an exterior change to the storefront. The proposed change is to replace the existing windows with sliders that match the rest of the Campo De Fiori's exterior.
2 . Staff has no issue with the change in the windows. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The change proposed will not have a significant impact on the neighborhood because the shop does not have a direct relationship to the street. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal will not affect the historic significance of any building. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposed development does not affect the architectural character or integrity of any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: • Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. • Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. • Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) • Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve new windows for 205 S. Mill Street."
. I Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated March 10, 1999 B. Application j:\planning\aspen\hpc\cases\minor\campo.doc
.. APPLICANT: Campo di Fiori LOCATION: 205S.Mill Street ACTION: Minor Review All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. Standard 1: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Standard 2: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Standard 3: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Standard 4: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof.
02/22/99 11:47 FAX 970 925 6995 11&1¥ PROPERTIES 12101 .. IVI & ~W~ PE«_>PERTIES SurrE 30 IA 205 SOWTII MILL STREET ASPEN. Col£>RADO 81611 AREA CODE 970 A.wr'HONY J- MA22- FRANK .1 WOODS. III TELE,HoNE 925-8032 FAA 926-6996 February 22,1999 Via Facsimile No. 920-5439 Ms Amy Guthrie Historical Preservation Committee Re: 1-Matti. Inc. fC<unpo de Floril Dear Ms. Guthrie: Mill Street Plaza Associates, LLC, as owners of the Mill Street Plaza Building, hereby approves the proposed change of windows to sliding windows in the new srace which I-Maiti, Inc. (Campo) has leased (the same windows which are presently contained in Campo's premises). Very truly yours, @14*u_,91#64 Debbie P. Roberts For MILL STREET PLAZA ASSOCIATES, LLC dr
.. ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name f ffrilh <Istbconk j-inc I ded - Caa/th de Fion 2. Project location 0766 .F rn m % E. 11: / 09 ) Le+ b - I - *168- 91 , C.i 19 and -61) osik 0+ Arce/1 (indicate street addr4ss, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning 4. Lot size 5. Agplicant's name, address and phone number ~/7* OP 776)09 366 3.milly; 109, Afpen; Co Fl(oil j * 910 -94-2 4>46--1 6. Representative's name address, and phone numberF"babpfl-· LI Flotte -60/Janj J € 0 - 6 et aG \U, A h Re.*j , C o 1( 1 $ 1,1 , 947 - (940-7 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD J Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD Relocation HPC Subdivision TexUMap Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot Split/Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) PNWA+4,1- (lA £¥((t)/4, fte,ika.016£41 : li}·f t.,00\Ud likf- h .ai pcinOU out bof 1,#AL€ 6+990*.1.- 41/- vilor¢ 4,0(1 4-tr)*_ 0./4-0. -11* 448 u i,w ow 471- t. i /¥,V holl. Tle 8 ld al titinq i ~ #%4¢,19, ld¢ i,auld 1 Uct h) ad d »s I idelo thip t.bl li mal,th €Y 1(Anci_ I\2 1 +evhan k lo Ad (ALLJ . 0 9. Description of development application l* (Aist/12 1 i (C€ 41 ap %4 ce ,€V is-FIA¢f (,Ufldc/Wa l,01·th WifICI4O 97\» Match -fke N i 4 -Af U OJ) Af K [A<A UNI- 1 ~ Have you completed and attached the following? Attachment 1 - Land use application form 7-- Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form Response to Attachment 3 Response to Attachment 4 llllllll
6'~86*A - 942~ 4-07 4 l.,7 4 d- M .A 001(-7 rolue\O~pull al\- ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION CM G 1- 1 7 A- MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 44-=~10 14- Application Package Contents 130--C»* »423 Following is an application for minor development review at HPC. Included in this package are: l 1. Attachment 1- Application form 2. Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form 3. Attachment 3- Description of general requirements for a complete development application 4. Attachment 4- Description of specific requirements for a complete development application to HPC 5. Attachment 5- Applicable review standards on which HPC will base its decision 6. Attachment 6- General summary of the HPC review process 7. Attachment 7- Definition of minor development To submit a complete application, fill out Attachments 1 and 2. include all items listed on Attachments 3 and 4, and provide any other information necessary to clarify the project. A pre-application conference is strongly recommended so that the appropriate review process and submission requirements can be discussed. In addition, other reviews. such as those before the Planning and Zoning Commission, which may be required by the Aspen Municipal Code can be identified at this time. A consultation with the Zoning Officer and Building Department is also recommended early in the application process. TWO COPIES OF ALL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS IN A FORMAT NO LARGER THAN 11"X17" ARE REQUIRED. FOR GRAPHICS WHICH ARE LARGER THAN 11"X17," SUBMIT TWELVE SETS OF PRINTS. lt« 1; ka pho *84 64347' 1 /(cuhAL . -AR (A Vato./
0 0 KE ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: Address: Zone district: Lot size: Existing FAR: \ Allowable FAR: 1. Proposed FAR: Existing net leasable (commerciabf/ Proposed net leasable (commercial): \ Existing % of site coverage: =,#* \, Proposed % of site coverageR ~\ Existing % of open spacg:/ N h Proposed % of open space: Existing maximum,*ight: Principal bldg: Accesorv bldg: Proposed max:~teight: Principal blda: Accessorv bldg: Proposed % df demolition: Existing number of bedrooms: Proposed number of bedrooms: Existing on-site parking spaces: On-site parking spaces required: Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed: Front: Front: Front: Rear: Rear: Rear: Combined Combined Combined FronUrear: FronUrear: Front/rear: Side: Side: Side: Side: Side: Side: Combined Combined Combined Sides: Sides: Sides: Existing nonconformities or encroachments: Variations requested: (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft., site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts)
.. ATTACHMENT 3 GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS All development applications must include the following information: 1. The applicant's name, address, and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name. address, and telephone Dit. number of any representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 2. The street address and legal description of the parcel on which the development is proposed to occur. 0 ¥- 3. A disclosure of ownership of the parcel on which the development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the development review. 4. An 8 1/2" x'If' vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. D.k,
.. ATTACHMENT 4 SPECIFIC SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW All applications for minor development review must include the following information: 1. If determined appropMate by the Community Development Director, a site plan or survey showing property boundaries and predominant existing site characteristics. ~~6 2. An accurate reoresentation of all major building materials, such as samples and photograpns, to be used for the proposed development. 0. E- ,#ee ..&0€ (37 F'ho h:Er 3. A scale drawigg of the proposed development in relation to any existing structure. 131 01 - ~ O 1]r ref }Cic,/1~ w,Ad 44· 4. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how -he proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application, including a statement of the effect of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure (if applicable) and character of the neighborhood.
.. ATTACHMENT 5 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDARDS No approval for any develooment in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met: 1. The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale, and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to a Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to 500 sq.ft. or the allowed site coverage by up to 5%, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.040.090 (B)(2). 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development; and 3. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels; and 4. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. "HISTORIC DISTRICT AND HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGN GUIDELINES" HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY THE CITY AND ARE AVAILABLE AS A FURTHER EXPLANATION OF THE INTENT OF HPC AND GENERAL PRINCIPALS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION. ALL APPLICANTS SHOULD CONSULT THIS RESOURCE, COPIES OF WHICH ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
.. ATTACHMENT 6 GENERAL SUMMARY OF ONE STEP HPC APPLICATION PROCESS 1. The following are the types of development applications which are processed in one step by the HPC: • Minor development review • Partial demolition • On-site or temporary relocation 2. Development review procedure summary. The one step HPC review procedure is as follows: • Attend a pre-application conference. The purpose of this one-on-one meeting with the historic preservation planner is to determine the review process into which your development proposal fits and to identify the materials staff will need to review your application. • Submit development application. Based on your pre-application conference, respond to the appropriate portions of the application package and submit the requested number of copies, and fee if applicable, to the Community Development Department. • Determination of completeness. Within five working days of the date of your submission, the application package will be reviewed by Staff to determine if all required information has been included. You will be notified in writing when additional materials are necessary. • Review of development application. Once the application is determined to be complete, the item will be scheduled on the soonest HPC agenda available. The submission due date is a minimum of nine days prior to the HPC meeting date to allow for staff review and memo preparation. It is the planner's task to review the application with respect to it's compliance with land use regulations and to write a memo to the Historic Preservation Commission. In the memo, the planner will recommend approval. approval with conditions, tabling, or denial of the application. The memo is normally available at the end of the week prior to the HPC meeting. The planner will call the applicant or representative when the memo is ready and can also provide the expected agenda time for the item. 3. At the meeting, staff will make a brief presentation of the case and then the Chair will ask the applicant or representative to make a presentation or to
.. clarify any aspects of the project. HPC members will comment on the proposal and then vote on an action. 4. Receipt of building permit. Once the approval of HPC has been received, a building permit application may be submitted. At this time the proposal will be reviewed for compliance with the Uniform Building Code and zoning regulations. Fees for water, sewer, park dedication fees, and employee housing will be collected if due. Any document, such as a plat, deed restriction, or other agreement which is required to be filed, must be recorded before the building permit will be issued. 5. HPC assigns a member of the Commission to be the "project monitor" for each project. The monitor (and Staff) may periodically visit the site as work is under construction. If any aspects of the project change after the HPC approval, the applicant, Staff, and the project monitor will attempt to address them without returning to HPC.
.. ATTACHMENT 7 DEFINITION OF MINOR DEVELOPMENT Minor development shall be defined as follows: • Remodeling of a structure where alterations are made to no more than one element of the structure, including but not limited to a roof. window. door, skylight, ornamentai trim. siding, kickplate, dormer, porch, staircase, and balcony; • Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase in floor area of the structure is two hundred fifty (250) square feet or less; or • Erection or remodeling of combinations of, or multiples of no more than three (3) of the following features: awnings, canopies, signs, fences, and other similar attachments; or windows, doors, skylights, and dormers. Erection of more that three (3) of the above listed features may be defined as minor if there is a finding that the cumulative impact on such development is minor in its effect on the character of the existing structures. • Erection of street furniture. signs, benches, public art, or similar development which is to be placed throughout the Commercial Core or Main Street Historic Districts. The community development director may determine that the development is to be reviewed as a significant development, pursuant to Section 26.72.010(F). Public hearing requirements will not apply.
. . 94 239 HPC Minor Development Review: Questions and comments: Attachment 1: 3. Present zoning .. Lot size 10. May I refer to last HI?C records? Attachment 2: • Setbacks • Existing non-conformities and encroachments • Variations requested Attachment 3: 3. Is lease addendum o.k,7 i. l.-204-, -~1 (/rA 4. May we pull from last HPC hearing drawings? Attachment 4: 4. We would like to pull out the existing fixed window and door and replace it with sliding windows. When we remodeled our space 4 years ago we did the same thing (see photos). We were given approval at the time, and have received very positive response from the locals on the remodel.
.. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 205 SOUTH MILL STREET, CAMPO DI FIORI, ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 1999 WHEREAS, the applicant, Campo di Fiori, represented by Elizabeth Plotke-Giordani, has requested minor development approval to install sliding windows at the property located at 205 S. Mill Street. The property is located within the Commercial Core Historic District; and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.72.010(D) ofthe Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, narnely: 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and WHEREAS, Sarah Oates, in her staff report dated March 10, 1999, recommended approval without conditions, and
.. WHEREAS, at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on March 10, 1999, the Commission considered and approved the application without conditions by a vote of 7 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That minor development approval for Campo di Fiori, at 205 S. Mill Street, Aspen, Colorado, be approved as shown on March 10, 1999, without conditions. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of March, 1999. Approved as to Form: City Attorney HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Chairman ATTEST: Chief Deputy Clerk
• 'Y[ 41 . MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sarah Oates, Planning Technician-S-Q RE: 205 South Mill, minor review DATE: March 10, 1999 SUMMARY: The applicant, Campo De Fiori, is taking over the space formerly occupied by Aspen Sewing Service and proposes a minor alteration to the exterior of the store. The subject building is not historic but is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. APPLICANT: Campo De Fiori, represented by Elizabeth H. Plotke-Giordani. LOCATION: 205 South Mill. PROJECT SUMMARY AND REVIEW PROCESS: All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Response: The applicant requests HPC approval to make an exterior change to the storefront. The proposed change is to replace the existing windows with sliders that match the rest of the Campo De Fiori's exterior.
Staff has no issue with the change in the windows. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The change proposed will not have a significant impact on the neighborhood because the shop does not have a direct relationship to the street. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal will not affect the historic significance of any building. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposed development does not affect the architectural character or integrity of any historic structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: • Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. • Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. • Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) • Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve new windows for 205 S. Mill Street."
Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated March 10, 1999 B. Application j:\planning\aspen\hpc\cases\minor\campo.doc
' mAilt .0'A Campo de Flori 1-t'/1- KITO,-4 (lip/4 00*lam l - 40 U h *13 --- f--91 '.t'. 'U..,. - 1 Obrria" C gl-"- 1 - 21 0 - : ~Dil"'.i:li,EW'/'/ El : . -1,-P & 021<1'/4,4,713 L ='- 1 -tp.' -.."'-' . ......0.... 19= 0= A • a™ M M j W. r. 2 **/1- 1 V CTI- 1 4/i/- 1 ..E, 1 14- ----9 - W•~ ~ IN,LI'lli'll-/--n'll"Al-~,4 ..1 C=:1 1-1-1.U-'ll.-I-n-I.1...... .. 1 ./1./ =. 1 FLOOR PLAN 1 --"# 1 Al.0 9 4/9/5,9