The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20241023AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 23, 2024 4:30 PM, City Council Chambers - 3rd Floor 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 I.ROLL CALL II.MINUTES III.PUBLIC COMMENTS IV.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS V.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI.PROJECT MONITORING VII.STAFF COMMENTS VIII.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED IX.CALL UP REPORTS X.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS XI.SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT XII.OLD BUSINESS XIII.NEW BUSINESS XIV.ACTION ITEM XIV.A Consideration of Chair’s proposed letter to City Council RE: the Armory Building project located at 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, CO. XV.ADJOURN XVI.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER HPC to Aspen City Council re Armory.docx 1 1 TYPICAL PROCEEDING FORMAT FOR ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS (1 Hour, 15 Minutes for each Major Agenda Item) 1. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest (at beginning of agenda) 2. Presentation of proof of legal notice (at beginning of agenda) 3. Applicant presentation (10 minutes for minor development; 20 minutes for major development) 4. Board questions and clarifications of applicant (5 minutes) 5. Staff presentation (5 minutes for minor development; 10 minutes for major development) 6. Board questions and clarifications of staff (5 minutes) 7. Public comments (5 minutes total, or 3 minutes/ person or as determined by the Chair) 8. Close public comment portion of hearing 9. Applicant rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) 10. Staff rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) End of fact finding. Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed. 11. Deliberation by the commission and findings based on criteria commences. No further input from applicant or staff unless invited by the Chair. Staff may ask to be recognized if there is a factual error to be corrected. If the item is to be continued, the Chair may provide a summary of areas to be restudied at their discretion, but the applicant is not to re-start discussion of the case or the board’s direction. (20 minutes) 12. Motion. Prior to vote the chair will allow for call for clarification for the proposed resolution. Please note that staff and/or the applicant must vacate the dais during the opposite presentation and board question and clarification session. Both staff and applicant team will vacate the dais during HPC deliberation unless invited by the chair to return. Updated: March 7, 2024 2 2 Members of HPC Please recall that the City Attorney opined on 8/7/2024 and I assume again in a Secret/ Executive Meeting on 10/9/2024 the following concerning the Historic "west addition" of 206 W Main: a. There was no misrepresentation. (incorrect - as the applicant in written applications and oral presentations said the "west addition" was Non -Historic) b. The "Issue was not raised" (incorrect- the Issue was raised by staff and the Chair in May 2024 over 6 months ago -see 1M6 Willets Map &1895 McClure Photo of 205 W main) c. The "applicant has taken steps fulfilling the approval". (Incorrect -administrative approval is still ongoing and no permits have been issued and the historloo "west addition" still stands) d. The HPO "does not have the right to revoke". Oncorrect- the revocation of permission to demolish is justified by the applicant"s misrepresentation, even If unintentional) e, The "applicant has the right to move forward: as is". (incorrect, the HPC was mislead and relied on the applicant's misrepresentation in approving the request to demolish the historic "west addition". The demolition of any of the Historic resource Is contrary to the HP mission and duty Of preservation) f. Estoppel and reliance (legal concepts) I do not, apply as It was the HPC that relied on the representation of theapplicant that the addition was NOT historic, The 1-896 Willetsmap &1895 McClure Photo of 206 W Main, clearly show the existence of the historic "west addition". PLEASE DISCLOSE AN O MAKE PUBLIC THE ADVICE RECEIVED IN THE SECRET MEETING/EXECUTIVE SESSION -PLEASE WAIVE ATTORNEY /CLENT PRIVILEGE Secret Meetings about the public's business are disliked and disapproved. The demolition of part of an Historic property is the Public's business and contrary to the Public Policy of Preservation of Historic resources. A.The H-PCby a simple majority vote (51 Mmay, waive attorney/client privilege. B. The privilege belongs to. the client (HPC) meaning you have the authority to waive. it. C. HPc and the City attorney both serve the citizens of Aspen. The citizens have a right to know the advice given by the City Attorney and relied on by the HPC concerning preservation of historic resources, PLEASE PRESERVE ALL OF HISTORIC 205 W MAIN INCLUDING THV'WEST ADDITION" Respectfully submitted David Scrugg's 212 W Hopkins Aspen City Council City Hall 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 October __th, 2024 Dear Aspen City Council, The City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission is excited to see the project for the Armory Building moving forward as it is a critical resource in our downtown that has been vacant for too long. However, we would like to convey our concern and disagreement with the proposed review pathway for the development of the Armory Building that includes the HPC as a recommending body only. The proposed path presented by the City Manager is to follow the Public Project process as outlined in the Land Use Code.1 While we understand this process exists to expedite public projects, we strongly disagree with its use on this project. The Armory Building is an important historic resource in our historic district. The intent of our commission is to “promote the public health, safety and welfare through the protection, enhancement and preservation of those properties, areas and sites, which represent the distinctive elements of Aspen's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history.”2 The proposed development of this project as a new public space by the City of Aspen has the potential to be the embodiment of this intent. It is illogical for this project to be considered without the Commission’s significant review and input. We believe that the best way to achieve this is to follow the Planned Development pathway outlined in the Land Use Code3. This allows for an initial review with the HPC, then review with Council, and then final review again with the HPC. This is the most appropriate path for such a significant project, especially considering its location. We will not comment on a planning application that has not yet been submitted for review. However, we would expect any project taken on by the City of Aspen would respect its own policies and follow the City of Aspen Historic Design Guidelines. The reference images presented to you as part of your application packet several weeks ago clearly do not respect this goal, making the importance of this application process change even more important. The City has an opportunity to create an exemplary project on a critical Historic Resource in our Historic District. We request the City Council give direction to the City Manager's office to follow the standard procedures outlined in the Land Use Code for this development application. The HPC would also welcome a worksession with the City Council to discuss this project and process further. Sincerely, The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission 1 City of Aspen Land Use Code 26.500.040 2 City of Aspen Land Use Code 26.415.010 3 City of Aspen Land Use Code 26.445.040 3