Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20221109 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9TH, 2022 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission at 4:36pm. Commissioners in attendance: Jeffrey Halferty, Roger Moyer, Jodi Surfas, Barb Pitchford and Kara Thompson. Staff present: Amy Simon, Planning Director Ben Anderson, Deputy Director, Community Development Haley Hart, Long Range Planner Sophie Varga, Zoning Enforcement Officer Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk Risa Rushmore, Administrative Assistant MINUTES: Ms. Thompson moved to approve the minutes from 10/12/22. Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 5-0, motion passes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mr. David Scruggs asked that HPC consider requesting the applicant for 205 W. Main to install “story poles” on site and provide three dimensional models of the project. Ms. Johnson asked the Board to disregard Mr. Scruggs’ comments as those comments need to be made in the presence of the applicant so they can hear and respond to them. Ms. Thompson responded to Mr. Scruggs saying that they cannot take any action and let him know that it was requested of the applicant at the last meeting to provide a 3-dimensional representation of the project. She invited him to attend the next meeting and make his comments because the applicant does need to be present. COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS: Mr. Moyer commented that it was important for HPC to be presented with 3D models. These should show not only the mass and scale of the project itself but of each side of it as well. He asked that staff request applicants to provide these types of models. He thought story poles were helpful and encouraged staff to also ask applicants to provide them. Ms. Simon clarified that the Land Use Code lays out submission requirements and it references visual representations of the project but is not prescriptive to how the applicant chooses to represent the project. A Code amendment would need to be made to change this. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: None. PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Simon mentioned that she needed to talk with Mr. Halferty and Mr. Moyer about a few projects. STAFF COMMENTS: None. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9TH, 2022 CALL UP REPORTS: None. SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Ms. Johnson said that she reviewed public notice, and that notice was provided per the code for both agenda items. She then confirmed with the applicant that public notice posting was done on the property at least 15 days prior to today’s hearing. Ms. Greenwood confirmed that she posted on the property on October 18th. NEW BUSINESS: 132 W. Hopkins – Final Major Development, PUBLIC HEARING Applicant Presentation: Gretchen Greenwood – Gretchen Greenwood Architects Ms. Greenwood stated that nothing had changed since the conceptual approval in March. There will be an addition on the back and the historic Victorian will be restored. She said she had completed the conditions on the resolution and is ready to go to the building department once final approval is granted. She went on to describe what needs to be done to the historic resource and showed the existing and proposed elevations. As part of her overall preservation and restoration plan, she detailed the proposed replacement of historic windows, trim, and doors as well as restoration of columns, siding, and trim detailing. Next, she went over in detail the construction sequencing with an emphasis on the movement of the house to allow for excavation. She then went over the roof plan and penetrations. She also detailed the proposed use of a wall hung air conditioning unit to be located on the new addition. She went over the materials proposed for the front walkway and went over the exterior lighting plan. She mentioned that proposed material examples are included in the packet but would be a simple design and she described some of them. Ms. Thompson asked about the proposed drywell an asked if a micropile wall around it would be necessary. Ms. Greenwood said she had discussed it with the contractor, and he said it would not be needed. Ms. Surfas mentioned that she did not see any information about the preservation plan or lighting in the packet that they received. Ms. Greenwood said that she did not include them in the packet. Ms. Surfas then brought up a note included in the packet from the Engineering Department requesting a sidewalk agreement to create a curb sidewalk around the cottonwood tree to be included at final review. She said she did not see that agreement in the packet. Ms. Greenwood said she would work with engineering on that. Ms. Simon clarified that the agreement was still being looked into but is outside HPC’s purview and would be handled by Parks and Engineering. Mr. Halferty asked what the distance between the historic resource and the new addition. Ms. Greenwood said 8” on one side and 9’ 2” on the other. Mr. Halferty then asked about the lightwell, and Ms. Greenwood said it would have a grate on it. Mr. Halferty asked if there were any wall penetrations proposed for the historic resource to which Ms. Greenwood said no. Mr. Halferty asked if the proposed wall hung AC unit would encroach into the setback to which Ms. Greenwood said it would hang about 16” into the setback. Mr. Halferty finished by asking if Ms. Greenwood had had any discussions with Parks or Engineering about the sidewalk agreement. Ms. Greenwood said she had not. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9TH, 2022 Staff Presentation: Amy Simon – Planning Director Ms. Simon started by going over the site plan for the project and noted that there were no significant changes from the conceptual approval. She then went over a bit of the history of the house and reminded the members of the setback variances they granted at conceptual. She showed a historical picture of the house and went on to describe the conditions in the resolution noting that staff is recommending approval. Mr. Halferty asked about the AC unit and if HPC needed to address the setback issues. Ms. Simon said the ability to grant setbacks ended at conceptual review, so the applicant will need to meet the setback requirements and that Zoning will determine where the unit will need to be located. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. BOARD DISCUSSION: Ms. Thompson agreed that Ms. Greenwood did a good job of keeping the plans consistent from what was presented and approved at conceptual through to final review. She thought that all the conditions that Ms. Simon presented were valid and was in favor of approval with all the conditions noted in the resolution. Mr. Moyer agreed with staff that it should be approved with the conditions. Ms. Surfas said that as long as all the conditions are met it is acceptable to approve with conditions. Ms. Pitchford agreed with Mr. Moyer and Ms. Surfas and asked if the additional information would be sent to the board or just staff. Ms. Thompson said it would be provided to staff and whoever the monitor ends up being for the project. Mr. Halferty did not like a piecemeal approach as it adds to staff and monitor responsibilities to handle what usually is presented at final review but noted that Ms. Greenwood did a thorough job with the civil and structural details. He was in agreement with staff’s conditions. MOTION: Ms. Thompson motioned to approve the next resolution in the series with the conditions presented by staff. Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 5-0: All in favor, motion passes. Mr. Moyer and Ms. Pitchford were assigned as monitors for the project (132 W. Hopkins). Ms. Thompson was assigned to be monitor on the 520 E. Cooper project from the last meeting. OTHER BUSINESS: Outdoor Lighting Standards – Code Update Presentation and Discussion Staff Presentation – Ben Anderson – Deputy Director – Community Development Mr. Anderson introduced Ms. Hart and Ms. Varga and mentioned that they are working with himself and their consultant team on updated the City’s outdoor lighting code. He then went over staff’s Lighting Code Update presentation. This included issues with the current code and why they are proposing an update as well as some of the framework they are looking at in updating the code. There was discussion and Q&A between HPC commissioners and Mr. Anderson. Mr. Anderson finished his presentation by asking a few questions of the HPC commissioners to gain some ideas to move forward with. These REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9TH, 2022 questions focused on what outdoor lighting should be like or what outcomes it should achieve. Also, in the commissioner’s own experience living and working in town, if they had any concerns related to outdoor lighting that should be considered. There was some back-and-forth discussion of ideas and concerns. There was then some discussion between the members and staff regarding their meeting formats and whether they should be in-person or virtual. Ms. Johnson mentioned that the only real direction she has received from City Council is that the switching between both formats may be causing some confusion amongst citizens. Ms. Thompson suggested that the discussion be had with the whole board. ADJOURN: Ms. Thompson motioned to adjourn the regular meeting. Mr. Moyer seconded. All in favor; motion passes. ____________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk