HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo.135 W Francis.20210623_AS Comment
Page 1 of 8
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
Memorandum
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner
THROUGH: Amy Simon, Planning Director
MEETING DATE: June 23, 2021
RE: 135 W. Francis Street – Conceptual Major Development, Relocation,
Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus, PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICANT /OWNER:
Francis Street Holdings LLC
REPRESENTATIVE:
Kim Raymond Architecture +
Interiors
LOCATION:
Street Address:
135 W. Francis Street
Legal Description:
Lot A and the West One-Half of
Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite
of Aspen, Colorado
Parcel Identification Number:
PID# 2735-124-21-001
CURRENT ZONING & USE
R-6 (Moderate-Density
Residential); Duplex, may not be
legally established
PROPOSED ZONING & USE:
Single family home
SUMMARY:
The applicant requests approval for Conceptual Major
Development to demolish the existing non-historic addition,
relocate the historic resource onto a new basement foundation and
construct a new addition to the rear of the property. Setback
variations and a floor area bonus of 250 s.f. are requested for this
proposal. As a historically designated landmark, this project is
exempt from Residential Design Standards Review (RDS).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff supports the restoration efforts but recommends continuation
to restudy building placement and the design of the new addition
to better comply with the Design Guidelines.
Site Locator Map – 135 W. Francis Street
135
Page 2 of 8
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
BACKGROUND:
135 W. Francis Street is a 4,500 s.f. corner lot in the R-6 zone
district that contains a Victorian era miner’s cabin. This
property was designated historic via Ordinance No.77-1981.
Shortly after its designation, the current addition was
approved and completed in 1984. Building permit files
indicate changes occurred to the south elevation of the
historic resource around 1969, but more significant changes
were made during the 1980s remodel and expansion.
Exterior alterations occurred over time, however, according
to the 1904 Sanborn map (Figure 2), the home appears to
occupy the original location on the site. Currently there is one
other historic property to the east that aligns in terms of front yard setback with this property along West
Francis Street.
REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals:
• Major Development (Section 26.415.070.D) to demolish the non-historic addition from the 1980s
and construct a new addition to the rear of the property.
• Relocation (Section 26.415.090) to move the historic resource forward and to the east. It will sit on
a new basement foundation.
• Setback Variation (Section 26.415.110.C) for the new addition towards the rear of the property,
above and below grade.
• Floor Area Bonus (Section 26.415.110.F) the applicant is allowed to request up to 250 s.f. for this
sized lot but must meet all relevant criteria for the bonus including exceptional preservation
outcome.
The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is the final review authority, however, this project is subject
to Call-up Notice by City Council.
Figure 1 – 135 W. Francis, 2021
Figure 2 – Sanborn Map, 1904 Figure 3 – 135 W. Francis, July 1963
Source: Aspen Historical Society
Page 3 of 8
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
PROJECT SUMMARY:
The applicant proposes to remove an impactful addition directly attached to the historic resource and to
restore the south façade of the resource using historic photographs and documents. Since the project is a
corner lot, three of the four elevations are clearly exposed and visible to the public which makes design
compatibility especially important. The historic home is to be moved forward and to the east and placed
on top of a new basement foundation. A two-story addition is proposed to the rear of the property and
connected to the historic resource utilizing a reconstruction of an earlier one-story addition and a 3’ long
contemporary linking element. The applicant requests setback variations and a 250 s.f. floor area bonus.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Staff supports the plan to use existing historic documentation and physical evidence to restore the historic
resource, but recommends restudy of the relocation to move the historic resource, and restudy of the
design of the new addition. The plan for relocation means that the historic home will no longer be in its
original location and out of alignment with the adjacent historic properties.
The location of the proposed new addition is supported but the overall form of the new addition mostly
consists of the flat roof top deck and small gable roof. Additionally, the two-story addition does not read as
a subordinate massing when perceived from the front (north) or west side elevation (facing North 1st Street),
and staff is also concerned about the reconstruction of the one-story massing behind the resource because
it is unclear if the integrity of the historic material is still there.
The applicant requests setback variations for the proposed addition and a 250 s.f. floor area bonus for
restoration efforts. Staff finds that the criteria for a floor area bonus are not met and recommends restudy.
Parking provisions on the site also need to be clarified. The written application indicates two parking spaces
will be provided, however, the drawings only show one space. In order to address all of the comments,
staff recommends continuation.
Staff recommends HPC further discuss the following topics in more detail.
1. Site Planning & Relocation & Parking: Two large cottonwood trees a spruce tree and a grass lined
ditch are located in the public-right-of-way that abuts the property. These features will need to be
preserved and maintained and staff recommends the applicant coordinate with the Parks and
Engineering Departments to address their comments related to proposed impacts in the tree drip lines.
Parks has suggested that the excavation may need to be restudied to protect the right-of-way trees
and trees on the neighbor’s property.
The site itself contains mature lilac shrubs. Design Guideline 1.27 requires the preservation and
maintenance of significant landscape features on the property.
The preliminary stormwater mitigation plan calls for a water quality vault in the northern corner of the
lot and drain basins along the perimeter of the property. Both the Engineering Department and the
Parks Department have comments related to the location of the vault that need to be addressed.
Relocation of the vault may be necessary. See Exhibit B for more details. Design Guidelines 1.2 and
1.8 refer to the importance of creating positive drainage on the site to protect the historic resource from
future damage. All stormwater and drainage features must have minimal visual impact, especially in
the foreground of the historic resource.
Staff recommends the applicant provide additional response to the excavation concerns.
Commented [AS1]: Looking at the 211 W. Hopkins
project, we agreed that if demolition and change in use
weren’t triggered, they could maintain their parking deficit,
so they technically don’t need two spaces. The application
does indicate 40% demo though. Please confirm how much
they are demolishing. If it is 40% or more, then need two
parking spaces.
Page 4 of 8
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
The applicant proposes to move the historic resource 4’-7” forward on the site, which will result in the
structure being out of alignment with a historic structure two doors to the east. The relocation criteria
states that the act must not diminish relationships with other significant properties that are adjacent to
the landmark. Although staff understands the intent of the move forward, staff recommends restudy of
the historic condition of the two resources on this block and potentially a restudy of the new addition to
maintain the resource in its historic context (Design Guideline 1.1 & 9.2). The proposal is also to move
the resource 2’ eastward. This results in the new addition being proud of the historic resource on the
side street, where it could instead be slipped towards the east. It appears that the extent of proposed
basement excavation beyond the footprint of the above grade home needs to be restudied. There are
tree issues and best outcomes for historic preservation that need to be reconsidered.
This property does not appear to have any code compliant parking spaces on the property at this time.
In the written application, the applicant indicates two parking spaces exist and two will be provided on-
site. The drawings show a single parking space in the garage. According to the code, single-family
residences must provide for two parking spaces (Code Section 26.515.040). If the applicant can
provide additional information demonstrating that the project will not trigger the 40% demo threshold,
it is possible for the applicant to retain the existing non-conformity related to parking. More information
is needed regarding this topic.
2. Historic Landmark – Restoration & Reconstruction: A preservation plan will be necessary to call
out the existing conditions and the proposed restoration of the historic resource. Staff supports the
applicant’s proposal to restore important architectural features such as the chimney and the secondary
porch with the supporting historic documents as a guide for the restoration. The existing non-historic
addition constructed in the 80s will be removed and the areas covered by non-historic material will be
restored in accordance to the design guidelines.
When reviewing the Sanborn map, it appears that the home is in its original location but the one-story
addition along the rear of the home is no longer there. It is difficult to know if the historic one-story
addition was completely removed or if the one-story addition was incorporated into the construction of
1984 addition. The applicant proposes to reconstruct this historic addition (11’-7” long by 14’-4” wide)
and utilize it as the connecting element for the project. While staff would typically support the
reconstruction of a significant historic features if clear documentation exists, the reconstruction of this
addition would be inappropriate if there is no historic material integrity left. A full reconstruction of this
historic addition would result in a lot of guess work related to details and may create confusion on what
parts of the home are historic and what parts are reconstructed. The reconstructed addition contributes
to the decision of moving the actual historic resource from its original location. Often, relocation is
approved because it helps mitigate negative impacts to the historic resource but in this case, it would
put the historic home more forward of its surrounding historic context.
While Staff supports the removal of the detrimental non-historic addition and the restoration of historic
architectural features, staff needs more information about the material integrity of the one-story addition
to decide if reconstruction is appropriate.
Page 5 of 8
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
Figure 4 – Proposed West Elevation
3. New Addition – Form, Materials and Fenestration: The proposed new addition is a two-story tall
structure with a minimal building footprint. The applicant proposes modern windows, wood siding and
a building form that uses both flat and gable roof features. The Design Guidelines seek compatibility
by having the new design relate to the historic resource using form, fenestration and materials. The
new addition departs from fenestration with modern non-orthogonal windows but relates to materials
by using wood siding. The form of the addition is complex because a flat roof deck consumes the
majority of the area. Staff finds that the form and height of the new addition does not support a strong
connection to the historic home and recommends restudy. As a corner lot, there are more stringent
expectations of design compatibility that is not yet achieved. There is a glass skylight proposed in the
patio between the historic home and the new addition. Staff recommends the glazing be reduced by
pulling the feature away from the historic resource. (See arrow below.)
Figure 5 – Proposed Roof Plan
Staff finds the location of the new addition to have some appropriate characteristics but recommends
restudy of the new addition regarding form and height to better relate to the historic resource.
4. Setback Variations & Floor Area Bonus: Setback variations and floor area bonuses are benefits
available to historic properties granted by the HPC. They are site-specific approvals that are tied to a
design reviewed for compatibility and appropriateness.
Setback Variations: The applicant requests a reduction of the 10’ rear yard setback requirement for the
proposed addition, above and below grade. The proposed design shows the subgrade level within the
rear yard setback by approximately 4’-10”. The proposed one-car garage addition has livable space
that extends into the rear setback by the same amount. A setback reduction of 5’-2” for the rear yard
setback, above and below grade, would be needed for this design. The applicant also requests
Page 6 of 8
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
lightwells to be larger than what is required by code. This would also require side yard setbacks to be
granted but the drawings show compliant lightwells at the minimum dimension of 3’ x 3’, so the
applicant’s intent is not clear. The applicant will need to clarify if they would like to request setback
variations related to the lightwells. Additional side yard setback and combined yard setback reductions
would be necessary for this request. Staff finds the request to reduce the rear yard setback is
appropriate because it distances the new addition away from the historic resource, but more
clarification is needed due to conflicting information in the application related to the dimensions of the
light wells. See Exhibit A.3 for detailed staff findings.
Floor Area Bonus: The applicant has pointed out different areas for restoration of the historic resource
that include the restoration of a secondary porch seen in historic photos and the removal of an impactful
non-historic addition. According to the code, a 4,500 s.f. lot is eligible for a maximum of a 250 s.f.
bonus. Staff finds the request for the full bonus has not meet because staff recommended restudy of
the new addition and the plans for moving the historic structure. In addition, the restoration work needs
to be well researched. There may not be enough information available to reconstruct the missing
secondary porch, original chimney, etc. Staff also recommends additional research of the front porch
railing and approach to the front porch. The current condition, entering the porch from the side, is
unusual. The applicant has requested a 250 square foot bonus although the proposed design only
requires a 140 square foot bonus. It is not acceptable to request surplus bonus and bank it for future
use. See Exhibit A.4 for criteria and detailed staff findings.
Staff supports the request for a rear yard setback reduction because it helps mitigate impacts away
from the historic resource, but the request for setbacks pertaining to the lightwells need to be clarified.
The criteria for the floor area bonus are not met because staff recommends the restudy regarding the
design of the new addition.
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
The application was referred out to other City departments who have requirements that will significantly
affect the permit review. Please see Exhibit B for full comments.
Engineering Department:
1. Major Development within the Urban Runoff Management Plan is triggered. The proposed water
quality vault must be at least 10’ from the property corners. Infiltration vaults follow the same
guidelines as a drywell. Variances may be requested by Engineering.
2. Confirm that the transformer capacity is sufficient for new the proposal. Work with City Electric to
determine capacity.
3. Verify if the structure will have a fire suppression system and call out water service line size.
4. Engineering and Parks must examine excavation for the proposed water quality vault. No
excavation is allowed within the right-of-way or tree drip lines of large trees.
5. Provide stabilization information for the proposed relocation of the historic resource at building
permit.
Zoning Department:
1. Provide and verify net lot area calculations using the zoning summary sheet.
2. Review site plan comments regarding existing and proposed.
3. Confirm floor area calculations on sheets A.1.05-A 1.07.
Page 7 of 8
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
4. Provide height over topography sheet.
5. Provide demolition calculations.
6. See comments on elevation sheets A.3.01-A.3.04.
Parks Department:
1. Location of stormwater storage needs to be moved to east side of the front yard or outside the
dripline of the trees on the west side of the house.
2. Move the egress window on the southwest corner of the house to the back of the house out of the
dripline of the tree.
3. Adjust the stormwater drain to remain outside the dripline of trees.
4. Air spade 15’ from the edge of the cottonwood tree trunks. Clean cut roots back to soil and cover
exposed soil with burlap.
5. Submit for tree removal permits.
6. Show 6’ tree protection fencing around all remaining trees on the site.
7. Obtain a letter of permission from neighbors on the east to work within the driplines of their trees.
Building Department:
1. Fire sprinklers are required because the fire area exceeds 5,000 s.f. Exterior walls and projects will
not need to be fire-rated because they are more than three feet from the property line.
2. Snow stops will be required at all roof pitches that shed onto walking and driving paths and into
emergency escape and rescue opening window wells.
3. If edge of the spa is within 18” of the edge of roof deck, the guard around the spa is to be extended
an additional 18”.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends HPC continue this application with the following direction:
1.) Restudy the new addition to be more subordinate in scale to the historic resource and restudy the
form of the addition to be in compliance with Design Guideline 10.6 & 10.11.
2.) Restudy the connecting element and the concept of reconstructing the rear portion of the historic
resource.
3.) Restudy the proposed relocation of the historic resource, the basement excavation, lightwells and
the stormwater plan to address concerns with the integrity of the building location, relationship to
the nearby historic resource, tree preservation concerns and placement of the new addition.
4.) Reduce the skylight located in the patio directly behind the historic resource.
5.) Provide clarification on demolition calculations to ensure that 40% demolition is not triggered. If
demolition is triggered, the applicant will need to provide for 2 code compliant parking spaces on-
site.
6.) Provide responses after communicating with the relevant City Departments regarding the
preliminary stormwater and drainage plans for the site and clarify the anticipated visual impacts for
the plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution #____, Series of 2021
Exhibit A.1 – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria / Staff Findings
Page 8 of 8
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
Exhibit A.2 – Relocation Review Criteria / Staff Findings
Exhibit A.3 – Setback Variations Review Criteria / Staff Findings
Exhibit A.4 – Floor Area Bonus / Staff Findings
Exhibit B – Referral Comments
Exhibit C – Application