Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20250827 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 27TH, 2025 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission at 4:30pm. Commissioners in attendance: Roger Moyer, Jodi Surfas, Barb Pitchford, Duncan Clauss, and Kara Thompson. Absent were and Dakota Severe and Kim Raymond. Staff present: Gillian White – Principal Preservation Planner Daniel Folke – Planning Director Luisa Berne - Assistant City Attorney Mike Sear – Deputy City Clerk MINUTES: Mr. Moyer moved to approve the draft minutes from 6/11/25 & 6/25/25. Ms. Pitchford seconded. Roll Call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Mr. Clauss, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 4-0, motion passes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None COMMISSSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS: Ms. Pitchford commented on her perspective of the City’s Historic Preservation process and outcomes. She mentioned that she had recently been on a trip up the northern California coast and was very impressed with the quality of preservation of the numerous historic properties she saw. She questioned why these small towns with limited resources could do such a great job at preservation while the City of Aspen could not seem to be able to do the same. She noted the California Mills Act of 1972 as a reason. It gives tax incentives to owners of historic properties for preservation efforts. She noted that she had been on HPC for four years and while she has learned a lot and enjoyed the process, she felt that the results of the process are disappointing at best. She felt that the HPC does save a historic window or walkway here and there, but nothing of significance. She referenced the recent Crystal Palace and Armory Hall projects as examples. She felt the deterioration of Aspen’s historic resources over the past few decades was due to a lack of will on the City’s part. Mr. Moyer echoed Ms. Pitchford’s comments and felt it was not HPC’s job to allow applicants to take out walls and create larger openings. He said that he had often thought of walking away from HPC. He also commented on his concern with the “whitening” of Aspen and felt that they could demand that any new addition be a different color than the historic resource. There was further discussion about the California Mills Act and how it could be replicated in Colorado and Aspen. There was also discussion regarding HPC’s role in the preservation process, including interpreting the guidelines and approving or denying projects. Ms. Surfas asked about the current status of the Boomerang building. Ms. White said that owners had met all the conditions of the demolition by neglect agreement but still are required to submit bi-annual conditions assessments. Ms. Berne added that there had been no applications to develop the property and that the City could not force a private owner to develop their property. Mr. Moyer asked why not. Ms. Berne further explained the legal reasoning. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 27TH, 2025 Ms. White noted that if the HPC wanted to look at revising the Historic Preservation Guidelines, they could open them up for changes. There was a discussion about the best way to go about submitting commissioner’s thought and suggestions. There was then a discussion about how the HPC could better play a role in educating the community about historic preservation to increase the public’s level of interest and investment in Aspen’s historic properties. Mr. Folke gave an update on staffing and hiring for the historic preservation program and the Community Development Department overall as well as efforts being taken to identify ways to speed up the application processes. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: None PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. White noted that there were several insubstantial amendments that had occurred since the last update. She went on to detail each request and whether they were approved or denied. There was discussion on a few of the updates. There was also discussion about giving staff better direction on what level or threshold amendments needed to meet to be brought to the monitor and which can just be approved by staff. STAFF COMMENTS: CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: Ms. White noted that there were several Certificates of No Negative Effect that had been approved since the last update. She went on to detail each request and listed the included approval conditions if applicable. CALL UP REPORTS: Ms. White noted that the 305 S. Mill St. project will be brought to City Council as a notice of call up on Sept. 9th. She also detailed the 130 S. Galena Armory project, which was approved by City Council on second reading on Aug. 12th. She then listed the Historic Preservation conditions of approval that were included. She also showed a rendering of the final approved design as well as the original design renderings and highlighted the great work and collaboration between the HPC, the monitors and the design team to get to the finished and approved design. Ms. White also gave an update on some research she had done and her conversations with a brick specialist about the use of limewash on historic brick. She then went over a few other topics including scheduling training with the NAPC, the creation of an alternative to the current violation program and the potential of scheduling a joint work session with City Council. There was some discussion of each of these. ADJOURN: Ms. Thompson moved to adjourn the regular meeting. Ms. Pitchford seconded. All in favor, motion passes. ____________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 27TH, 2025