Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20150211ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 Chairperson, Willis Pember called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were Patrick Sagal, John Whipple, Jim DeFrancia, Sallie Golden, Bob Blaich and Gretchen Greenwood. Nora Berko was absent. Staff present: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk MOTION: Willis moved to approve the minutes of January 28, 2015; second by Gretchen. All in favor, motion carried. Bob will recuse himself on 530 W. Hallam Sallie will recuse herself at 232 E. Bleeker John will recuse himself at 530 W. Bleeker Limitations on variations to the land use code requirements Chris Bendon, Community Development Director presented The code amendment is regarding variations that an applicant can receive through the city process regarding height and floor area and level of affordable housing mitigation that is required. We feel it is important to exempt properties that are requesting designation from this set of limitations especially the Aspen Modern program. To push that to a public vote might damage the program. We would also like to reassign the duties of the Board of Adjustment that rarely meets. They review decisions on hardship variances and we would like to reassign those duties to the Planning & Zoning and the Historic Preservation Commissions. This would be more of a process cleanup. Sallie said the variance process was put in place for a reason to give people a fair hearing on being able to ask an appeal to the code. To make the variance onerous through costs, time frame you are not giving a fair avenue to get a variance. We voted for the City Council to put our trust in them. I would not support the ballot question that is proposed for May and would prefer to leave the code as is. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 Jim said every piece of property is unique. Variances become critical to the public interest and the proper use especially historic preservation and the character of the community and any restriction on the ability to grant variances is fatal to the program. We elected council to make those decisions not the public vote. John said to amend the code for the current elected officials vs leaving it as is is self correcting. John said he is in favor of not changing the code. Patrick pointed out that the comments came from developers. Jim said we are on this board as citizens and to presume a bias because of ones professional application is preposterous. Sallie said we were not appointed to this board because of what our professions are. It was because of our experience in the area of historic preservation. Sallie said she is not a developer. Patrick said he did historic preservation as an archeologist. John said the interviews were very fair and went by the process of the law. Chris said his commentary will be from the members that were placed on this board. John said we are all here because we care about this town. Willis said he generally agrees in the direction that staff is going in. HPC should probably be exempt from the code amendment. I would not recommend pushing variances into a public vote. The code amendment is the right venue. Bob said if we had something that had to go to a vote at the time he was on Planning & Zoning nothing would get done. Bob said he would support Chris’s position. 110 E. Bleeker Street – Conceptual Major Development, Demolition and Variances, Continue public hearing to March 11th Debbie said the notice for 110 E. Bleeker is in order. Exhibit I 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 MOTION: Willis moved to continue 110 E. Bleeker to March 11th; second by Bob. All in favor, motion carried. 202 N. Monarch Street Subdivision, Final Major Development, Public Hearing Debbie said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I. Amy said this is an infill project behind the Jerome professional building and behind the Blue Vic facing Bleeker Street. The property is landmarked because it was once part of the lot where the Blue Vic is located so there is HPC purview over it. This lot is zoned mixed use and the applicant could have chosen to do a more commercial style development with almost twice the size of the FAR than what we are seeing. The proposal is for a duplex and it is very contemporary in character and staff supports it because it is a good transition between the flat roof commercial structure running down Mill Street and the scale and massing of the residential properties in the West End. The applicant will have vested rights for three years. Joseph Spears, S2 architects Bill Guth, applicant Monique Spears, landscape architect Joseph said they have not adjusted the plans that much. We have created a thinner link and we have stepped down in scale so the front elevation is two or three feet below the height limit which is 25 feet. The height of the Mill Street building is 32 feet. We have a driveway between our unit and the Blue Vic. The streetscape design will have planted trees and we will link that into the Blue Vic sidewalk. The materials are a dark brick with a contrasting wood. The small scale duplex will be in the front and the larger one in the back. We will use light colored wood and grey brick for the main level. The window system will be a clad window system with wood on the inside and concrete paving surfaces to match the sidewalk. Monique said we will have a quiet and suble sidewalk. We will have a nice buffer between the Blue Vic with grass and perennials in front. The stairs provide access to the front and the garage. The fence is a slotted wood. Along the walkway there is recessed hooded lighting. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 Joseph said the windows will be metal clad. There is a 25 foot grade change. Gretchen said this is a beautiful project and the mass and scale is a perfect transition between the west and what is happening with Mill Street. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Willis summarized the issues: Materials Fenestration Exterior lighting Landscape plan Willis reiterated that this is a great project but the materials are a little maintenance intensive. A lot of wood causes routine finishing. It is a sensitively designed project. The material samples are different than the rendering which has a lot of variations. Joseph said we were thinking of mixing and matching the materials. Gretchen said the rendering shows the texture. The wood fence will change colors over the years. Patrick said the wood will be natural and not treated. I would suggest picking a wood from the same environment as we have here. Sallie said she supports the project. She would support whatever brick they pick because it shows the texture and the applicant knows what they are doing. Jim said they have done a good job with the project. Bob said he studied the project and it is a very difficult site and this is an exciting project and a commendable project for the site. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 MOTION: Willis moved to approve resolution #6; second by John. All in favor, motion carried 7-0. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Bob, yes; Sallile, yes; John, yes; Gretchen, yes; Patrick, yes; Willis, yes. 232 E . Bleeker – Final Major Development, Public Hearing Sallie recused herself. Debbie said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed, Exhibit I Exhibit II new elevations Amy said this project is an addition to a Victorian house that is done in a contemporary style and is on a corner lot. Staff had concerns with the contemporary shape; however, HPC didn’t. The addition is low in height and doesn’t tower over the Victorian. Staff wants to emphasise the need to connect to the Victorian. The Victorian house is very simple in its material palate. It is painted wood with a wood shingle roof and a little bit of brick on the chimney. We would like that to reflect onto the addition and see a simple addition. Our recommendation was a restudy of the materials and fenesetration. The windows have been simplified. For the most part the addition is a wood siding but there is a ceramic tile proposed that is meant to have some connection to board concrete and staff doesn’t support that because we feel it is too much of a rough material in this particular context. Our recommendation is to simplify. The new drawing also indicates that the skylight has moved close to the house and we hope that it has a low profile and looks more like a lightwell in appearance. The applicant has mentioned a metal fence or wood fence. Staff doesn’t have a problem having a fence around the property but we would lean toward wood as the material. Staff recommends continuation. Willis said the three siding materials are wood, ceramic tile and concrete panels. Amy said it is not only the materials it is also the rain screening which we feel should be simplified. We would love to see them move through the process if the board is comfortable. Kim Raymond, architect 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 We now only have two materials, wood siding on the Victorian. The siding on the majority of the addition will be white wood 4 inch butt jointed so that it looks a little different. The link will be a linear tile matt smoothe finish (basalt tile) and this will also be for the elements in the back. The windows are more in proportion with the double hung in the Victorian. The stair element is white wood behind the louvers which are stained grey to let light in. The modern unit in the back does not compete with the Victorian because it is set so far back. The city removed the two cottonwoods in the front but they will be putting them back. They skylight now looks like a window well and it will have plantings around it. From the street elevation you won’t see the skylight. Stan Clauson from Stan Clauson & Associates Stan said they were brought on board to look at the landscaping. The skylight has been moved adjacent to the building. Around the building no tall shrubs have been introduced. There are dward irus, fescue, black eyed susans and cat mint and there are some dogwoods adjacent to the outdoor patio area. The fence is an optional element. The intent to was to have a low transparent fence similar to the one on the adjacent property next door which happens to be a wrought iron fence. If HPC thinks the wrought iron is not an appropriate material across the street there is a wood transparent fence. The fence decision could be made by staff and the monitors. The paving material will be concrete z block pavers. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Willis identified the issues: Can the board go forward with the changes submitted Corner fence to be approved by staff and monitor during construction Ceramic tile Glass handrail Lighting Fenestration Willis said this feels like a mid block development and doesn’t reflect the corner condition. The material reduction and material choices are good. Willis said he would prefer the basalt stone with little texture. Possibly add more joints. The fence being addressed with staff and monitor is OK. The preference would be a iron glass railing that is transparent on the resource. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 John said he is in favor of the project and the rain screen luvered architectural feature on the outside of the windows. Gretchen said the materials are as good as they can be for the project. The skylight on the east side is a mistake and I wouldn’t support it. That is an historical resoration and the skylight goes against the restoration of Victorians. Shrubbery is never going to cover it up. In the winter you will see it. Patrick said he agrees with Gretchen on the skylight. No fence would be a better direction. Amy said the basalt stone is a better choice than the formed concrete stone. Staff feels the rain screen adds a complication to the building. John said the project is very close and hopefully we can come to a resolution tonight. Bob said he doesn’t have a problem with the skylight. The skylight makes for a more livable space. It is not a detriment to the overall plan. The basalt stone is a good solution with the matt finish. Jim said he would endorce moving forward with the project. The skylight is OK and the basalt stone is a good improvement. The new addition is done in a fashion that does not overwhelm the historic house. The basalt is a ceramic tile. Kim said if we can use the real stone we will do that in the same kind of smoothe mat finish. Willis said staff and monitor can work with the applicant on the stone. MOTION: Willis moved to approve resolution #8 with the following conditions: Fence to be approved by staff and monitor during construction; Approve the basalt ceramic tile that was presented with the option for real basalt stone to be decided by staff and monitor. Glass guardrail to be low iron. The skylight and screening are approved. Standard conditions will be included in the resolution. Motion second by Jim. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 Roll call vote: Jim; yes; Bob, yes; John, yes; Gretchen, no; Patrick, no; Willis, yes; Motion carried 4-2. 530 W. Hallam Street – Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation, Historic Landmark Lot Split and Variances, Public Hearing cont’d from Jan. 28th, 2015 Bob recused himself John recused himself Amy said this is a 9,000 square foot corner lot in the West End with a Victorian building on it that has additions on two sides of it. The lot will be split approximately in half. The Victorian will remain on the corner on a slightly smaller lot and the interior lot will have a new home built on it. The historic lot split has been helpful as it takes pressure off the building and puts the square footage into a separate structure. There were a few things that caused continuance; the status of trees; restudy the massing in the front of the new house and restudy the connector. Staff recommends approval. Two trees can now be removed, one in front and one on the side. The trees are not in good health and are crowding the other trees. Staff is recommending approval with the 500 square foot bonus. The house is going to be stripped back to its original form. There are also a few setback variances, two below grade and they are one foot shy of the combined side yard requirement on the new house. RDS variances are also needed. The linking element on the new house is a little wider than the requirement but staff feels this is acceptable because of the tree issues and it will not be visible. The Victorian will be picked up and a basement built underneath. The garage meets the setbacks. Kim Raymond, architect Kim said the stairs are on the interior now and the windows are simplified to lessen the glass. The Victorian will be moved forward on the lot to be more in line with the other historic cabins at the other end of the block. The Victorian house will be eleven feet back. When the tree is removed it will open up the view to the new house. We took a little more square footage out of the Victorian and moved it over to the other building in order to make the adjustment to the stairs. The front of the Victorian will be taken back to its original state. The stair tower on the Victorian has been revised. We took square footage out of the Victorian and moved it over to the other building to make the adjustment to the stairs. The Victorian will be brought back to 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 its original state. We will replicate everything on the photograph as close as we can. The link is longer and there are no windows on the stairwell that face the street. We also simplified the fenestration on the new addition and there is a very simple gable shape. The front gable of the new house is shorter than the gable on the Victorian. Willis inquired about the materials. Kim said the link will be a different material and not wood. I like a similar color palate on the Victorian and new home. There will not be a contrasting color. There will be wood shingles on the Victorian and asphalt shingles on the addition to the Victorian. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Willis summarized the issues: Mass and Scale FAR bonus Setback variances 5 foot rear setback 1 foot variance for the combined Willis commented that the project is much improved and thanked the applicant for addressing the stair and making the FAR smaller. The packet did include neighborhood photos and that is good. One concern is the fenestration. In the presentation you claimed that the double hung windows matched the resource in size on the west elevation and they really don’t. The proportions are all different. The living room windows are the smallest and awkward. I would recommend studying the west elevation of the addition to the Victorian. I also support the variances. There needs to be more considerate composition. Gretchen said the addition should look well composed just like the historic resource. I still feel the massing on the addition is very large in respect to the Victorian. The stair is good between the two buildings. Part of the detailing of the Victorian is the beautiy of the fascia, the thinness of it. That should be represented in the drawings so you understand the scale. Regarding the new structure possibly eliminate the gable on the front due to the amount of glass. When that glass is lit up at night it will be quite bright. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2015 My comments do not need to hold up the process. Patrick said he appreciates the changes especially the pitched and gabled roofs giving a continuity if historic character to the neighborhood. The stairs without the windows are appropriate. The two story mass on the west wall of the addition should be broken up so that it isn’t so massive. Kim said she can address the roof line and pull it back around 6 inches. Gretchen said the applicant is working with our suggestions. Jim said the project has improved especially the stair element. The tree issue is resolved with the Forester and I am in favor of the variances, bonus, mass and scale of the project. I also agree that the west wall needs restudied. MOTION: Willis moved to approve Resolution #8 with the condition that the offset plain of the west wall of the new addition be addressed. That area is the master bath. Motion second by Jim. All in favor, motion carried 4-0. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Willis, yes; Gretchen, yes; Patrick, yes. MOTION: Willis moved to adjourn; second by Jim. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Kathleen Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 10