HomeMy WebLinkAbout205 W Main DRC Summary205 West Main Street
Design Review Committee (DRC)
Meeting Summary
Date: 08/08/2022
Present:
Applicant Team City of Aspen
(SC) Stan Clauson, Lead
(BB) Brian Beasley
(JG) Josh Gaube
(MB) Michael Brown
(AS) Amy Simon, Head of Planning
(BF) Blake Fitch, Parking
(BN) Bob Narracci, Zoning
(CC) Cindy Christenson, APCHA/Pitkin County
(HG) Hailey Guglielmo, Engineering
(KR) Kevin Rayes, Planning
(NFL) Natalie Feinberg Lopez, Planning, HPC
Absent:
Harris Berlinsky
Lynn Rumbaugh, Transportation
MEETING SUMMARY
All gathered via a virtual Teams meeting on 08/08/2022. A DRC Review Meeting is a pre-hearing
process that allows the various departments in the City of Aspen to hear directly from the
applicant team, and ask questions previous to comment submittals required for a Major
Development Review in front of the Historic Preservation Commission. The applicant team
began the meeting with a brief description of the project and allowed for questions and
comments afterwards. The project consists of a historic landmarked resource located at 205 W
Main, Aspen CO, a historic corner lot. The team proposes to add two new buildings after
relocating the historic structure on the lot. A total of nine, 100% affordable housing units is
proposed. Detail regarding the design of the site and the individual units was discussed. The site
is short 2 parking spots, to be reviewed for either an HPC exemption or to be mitigated via fee
in lieu. The project has proposed multiple units that are above 50% below grade, which
qualifies the project for review by pre-moratorium code requirements. The architectural details
were described, with emphasis placed on lighting, ample storage, decks, etc.
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS
KR – comments
1. Please clarify parking
• SC response – The preference for the applicant team is to have HPC parking waiver, with
an alternative of cash in lieu.
2. Review of APCHA amenities and regulations.
BF – Parking comments and questions
1. each unit to qualify for one guest parking permit.
2. elimination of a head-in parking spot and change it to parallel parking.
• SC response – The location is ideal for walking and access to public transit.
BN – Zoning comments and questions:
1. A need of calculations for cash in lieu to be presented to council.
2. Plan sheet 102 site plan has no built-in featured.
3. The project will need to review side yard setbacks, there will be no exemption.
4. The roof over the garbage will need to be out of the setback.
5. Sheet A103 will be marked for comment submittal regarding net-livable.
6. There are two basements, each needs a separate column in the table for calculations.
7. Deck area will need to be divided and shown for each unit
8. Sheet A105 Roof Plan – please show height over topography
9. The code states no BBQ is to be between the street and the structure, something must
come between the two. HPC can be asked for a waiver.
CC – APCHA comments and questions:
1. 4 bedrooms are more than 50% below grade – yes
2. All units have washer/dryer hookups? – yes
3. All units are to be owned by different employers?
• SC response – No specific buyers in mind at this time.
4. Net-livable area look appropriate, how many baths?
• BB response – 3 bedrooms has 2 full baths, 2 bedrooms have one full bath, some have
an additional half bath.
5. 22 bedrooms and 7 parking spots is not ideal.
HG – Engineering comments and questions:
1. Please provide a storm water plan and utility plan at conceptual. Note the transformer
will need to be “clear to the sky” with no coverings by roof overhangs.
2. Review power needs for period of construction, two construction sites on the same
transformer may be too much for the total transformer capacity.
3. JG response – conversations initiated with utilities
4. Water and sanitation off Main Street appear to be okay.
5. Sidewalk will be required on 1st St.
6. Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA Report) not in the packet, but needed. Please
review transportation needs of bicycles and pedestrians.
• BB response – the plan is in the works
7. Street parking should be for the public