Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20250212 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 12TH, 2025 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission at 4:30pm. Commissioners in attendance: Roger Moyer, Barb Pitchford, Jodi Surfas, Dakota Severe, Kim Raymond and Kara Thompson. Absent was Riley Warwick. Staff present: Gillian White – Principal Preservation Planner Stuart Hayden – Planner - Historic Preservation Luisa Berne, Assistant City Attorney Mike Sear – Deputy City Clerk MINUTES: Mr. Moyer moved to approve the 12/11/25 minutes. Ms. Pitchford seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Severe, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 5-0, motion passes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None COMMISSSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS: None DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Ms. Raymond noted that she would be conflicted on the agenda item at 627 W Main St. PROJECT MONITORING: Mr. Hayden displayed the project monitoring assignments list that included the project statuses. He noted that there are five projects that would eventually need reassigning. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. White noted that Ms. Surfas was recently reappointed and that a new member was also appointed and would be going through training soon before joining a meeting. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None CALL UP REPORTS: None SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Ms. Berne confirmed that public notice was completed in compliance with the Code as needed for agenda item. Ms. Raymond left the meeting for the agenda item. NEW BUSINESS: 627 W Main St. - Minor Development and Variations Review - Public Hearing Applicant Presentation: Mr. Marcus Hanlon – Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors Mr. Hanlon began his presentation by stating that the request is for a stair remodel in the home, and that they would not be touching anything on the historic resource. He said that they would be removing an existing entryway into a bedroom and adding a new enclosed stairway and also a dormer to create headroom for the stairway. He noted they are also looking to add a new window where the existing entryway was and possibly removing an existing window. There would also be an enlargement of the REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 12TH, 2025 deck on the second floor. He noted that staff had made a recommended condition of approval to push the new deck back behind the existing setback and they agreed to that. He then detailed the minor roof work proposed to demolish a first floor shed roof to create the proposed dormer and noted that all new siding and trim would match the existing. Mr. Hanlon then displayed a few pictures of the existing home and pointed out where this work would be occurring. He followed this by displaying the site plans and renderings detailing the proposed work. Next, he went over the details of the proposed materials and noted that there would be a zero for zero livable floor area change. Ms. Surfas asked about the window that Mr. Hanlon said would possibly be removed. Mr. Hanlon noted that he used the word “possibly” because he was not 100% sure it would need to be removed. He pointed out the window on the site plans. Staff Presentation: Stuart Hayden – Planner - Historic Preservation Mr. Hayden began his presentation by noting that staff is generally very supportive of the application and commended the applicant for sticking within the guidelines and keeping to small iterative changes as opposed to the demolition of an existing addition and a large-scale new building. He noted staff’s original concern of the new portion of the second-floor deck encroaching into the setback but said that with the applicant agreeing to setting it back it is no longer a concern. Mr. Hayden noted that in the 2008 approval of the addition, the deck was allowed to project into the setback and no variances were required at the time. He was not sure why, but since it was part of the approval staff is not looking into this and letting what currently exists stay. He finished by stating that staff is recommending approval with the condition that the deck be set back from the setback. Ms. Thompson said that she had looked at Title 26 and believed that they would need to establish a variation for the deck to be above the garage within the five-foot setback, because in her interpretation it needed to be a ten-foot setback. Mr. Hayden responded that his understanding was that since they were not altering the existing deck, and a standard five-foot setback was allowed in the mixed-use zone district, that no variation was required. Public Comment: None Board Discussion: Ms. Thompson opened discussion by saying that she felt this was a very appropriate project, minimally invasive to the addition at the rear of the property and that the changes would not be very visible from Main St. She agreed with staff’s interpretations of the guidelines. Ms. Severe felt that, while a minor detail, she would like all four windows to be kept. She said that other than that, she was supportive of the project. Ms. Thompson felt that the window removal could be left up to the applicant as it was not very visible from Main St. Ms. Pitchford’s only concern was the existing deck extending the 1’ 2” into the rear setback, but felt that had been explained and dealt with, so she was in support of the project. Mr. Moyer concurred with staff and Ms. Surfas had no comments. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 12TH, 2025 MOTION: Ms. Thompson moved to approve the next Resolution in the series as written. Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Severe, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 5-0, motion passes. ADJOURN: Ms. Thompson moved to adjourn the regular meeting. Mr. Pitchford seconded. All in favor, motion passes. ____________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk