Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit G.DRAFT HPC Minutes.20201028 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 28 2020 Chairperson Greenwood opened the meeting at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Jeffrey Halferty, Scott Kendrick, Kara Thompson, Roger Moyer, Gretchen Greenwood. Commissioners not in attendance: Sherri Sanzone Staff present: Amy Simon, Interim Planning Director/Historic Preservation Officer Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Jim True, City Attorney Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk NEW BUSINESS: 211 W. Hopkins Avenue– AspenModern Historic Designation Conceptual Major Development Review including Relocation, Variations. Sara Adams of BendonAdams and John Rowland of Rowland+Broughton Architecture. Ms. Adams stated that AspenModern has a 90 day turn around, meaning this project will be moving pretty fast. Ms. Adams stated that there have been multiple demolition permits pulled on this property until AspenModern was adopted. Ms. Adams stated that they will only be asking for what is needed and what will work for the resource. Ms. Adams said that they are requesting for AspenModern is Landmark Designation, FAR Bonus, Deck Bonus, Waiver for Tree mitigation along the alley. Ms. Adams said that their request for Restoration with a demolition of the non-historic addition. Ms. Adams stated that the HP conceptual design with a temporary relocation for a basement, she explained that the Pan Abode will be placed back into its original location. Ms. Adams said the only variation that is needed is in the rear yard for living space. Ms. Adams stated that the location of the project along Hopkins is among other historic designated properties. Ms. Adams said that the Pan Abode is a rustic style of architecture, essentially a log kit with overlapping corners with a tongue and groove construction. Ms. Adams stated that this was a quick and affordable construction and is indicative of Aspen of post-World War II as a ski resort and destination. She further explained that the Pan Abode was built in 1956 and is the best example of a Pan Abode in Aspen with an extremely high level of integrity. Ms. Adams stated that she scored the historic resource with a perfect score and Ms. Simon scored it one point less due to the lack of a recessed entry. Ms. Adams stated that there will be a restoration effort on the Pan Abode. She explained that the restoration will be restoring the rear façade, removing the paint, removal of added shutters, repair and replace logs, improving the foundation through the adding of a basement, and finally the replacing of the roof in kind. Ms. Adams said that there are a lot of conceptual challenges on this property. She explained that it is a 6000sf lot with two large sprues trees that frame the resource. Ms. Adams said that the goal of this project is to keep the new construction detached while restoring the Pan Abode to its original footprint while maintaining 10 feet of separation between the two buildings. Ms. Adams stated that the Pan Abode is set back 15 feet from the front property line and the required setback is 10 feet but due to the spruce trees, the Pan Abode can not shift forward. Ms. Adams pointed out that the shape of the new building resembles the Pan Abode as a simple rectangle. She stated that the access for the new building is from the alley mimicking the symmetrical entrance of the historic resource or a sidewalk off Hopkins. Ms. Adams stated that they are required to have 10 feet of living space in the back and asking for a variance of 2 feet. Ms. Adams stated that they tried to balance the three main elements of HP REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 28 2020 conceptual design form, fenestration, and materials. Ms. Adams referenced the shallow roof of the designated Search and Rescue Pan Abode on Main Street for the new addition’s roof form. Ms. Adams said the width of the new addition will be the same as the historic resource. She explained, to break up the long façade of the new building one roofline of the new addition will have a more traditional gable while relating to the historic landmarks around the neighborhood and having contemporary glazing. The second roofline will have a Pan Abode form with a more of a direct relationship with the historic resource. Ms. Adams stated that the material that will be used on the new addition will be wood and there will be more detail at the final review. She said that Ms. Simon raised concern in the staff memo that this could come across too similar. Ms. Adams pointed out the overlapping corners on the new addition and stated that the owners wanted to bring some small references from the rescuers to the new addition. Ms. Adams stated that there will be a full basement under the Pan Abode, she said they have worked with the Parks Department in respect to the Spruce trees. Ms. Adams showed a rendering of each floor plan of the new addition. She explained that on the second and third floors of the new addition there will be decks carved out and are along the alley and not visible from Hopkins St and there will be no visible impact on the Pan Abode. Ms. Adams reiterated the community and property benefits. Mr. Rowland stated that it was very critical to his team was that the new architecture needed to be distinguished yet quiet, and the form needed to be pure and honest. Ms. Thompson asked if the applicant would be paying the parking fee for the historic resource since there will be no parking for that structure. Ms. Adams stated that there currently is no parking for the Pan Abode and that they are able to keep that condition. She said that they are required for two parking spaces for the new addition which has been met. Ms. Thompson stated that there was a note about a 3-foot setback on the side of the structure. Ms. Adams stated that was a carryover, that there was a lightwell that was proposed, and ultimately it was taken out. Ms. Thompson asked if the proposed railing up to code. Mr. Rowland stated that the railing is up to code. Ms. Thompson asked if the walkway that is under the trees has been reviewed by the Parks Dept. Ms. Adams stated that yes, the Parks Dept. has reviewed all walkways and have met on-site with them multiple times. Mr. Moyer asked how will the paint be removed. Ms. Adams stated that they will be doing a few spot tests on the section of wood that will be taken down. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon stated that there is great enthusiasm for this project and that HPC has talked for over twenty years about preserving post-war area historic properties and that it is properties like this that we are dedicated to the preservation for our community. Ms. Simon said that this is the first designation that has come in since the reductions of benefits for a property. Ms. Simon stated that the benefits that are being requested are entirely fair since this application is starting out not as far along as previous discussions. Ms. Simon stated that there is less floor area bonus available, mitigation for affordable housing which the applicant is doing. Ms. Simon said that this is a negotiation and HPC will be making recommendations to City Council and then Council will be the ones deciding if the designation and requested benefits are appropriate. Ms. Simon further explained after Council's review then the project will return to HPC for final review. Ms. Simon stated that staff recommended a continuation and some of the REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 28 2020 issues that raised concern have been resolved in the previous restudy. She said that the Engineering Department has requested a larger easement for the transformer and that is why the building placement had to be adjusted. She further explained that there have been conversations with the Electric Department to see if any of the clearances can be supplied by the ally rather than the property. Ms. Simon stated that the Parks Dept. has agreed to the removal of the trees in the alley and that a few of the trees have grown so close they have cut off access. Ms. Simon stated that the idea of AspenModern is everyone working together to achieve a common goal. Ms. Simon said that staff suggested a restudy on a fence on the westside of the Pan Abode, the fence is 6-feet tall and would block views from Hopkins, and that it looks like it has been removed from the site plan. Ms. Simon said that this would be an easy issue to discuss at the final. Ms. Simon stated that there were concerns raised about the compatibility with the new structure and the Pan Abode. She further explained that it is the shallow pitch gable end behind the Pan Abode is what is causing concern with relationship and scale. Ms. Simon said that the material is matching so well that it is reading as an attached structure to the historic building and would like to see the material restudied for the best fit for the site. Ms. Simon stated that staff supports all the benefits that have been requested, tree mitigation waivers, and the applicant has asked for an expedited permit review process which is an easy way to reduce cost and move things along faster. She stated that the applicant has asked for some floor area bonus for closed space and deck space. Ms. Simon stated that the final condition would be financial reinsurance for relocation to be posted. Ms. Greenwood asked what aspect of the roof needed to be restudied. Ms. Simon stated that they cited three guidelines in chapter 11 which are the guidelines for new buildings on a historic lot. She further explained that chapter 11 talks about form, fenestration, materials picked, scale relationship, and form relationship to the historic resource. Ms. Simon stated that the street-facing gable end on the new building and a pretty shallow roof but is pretty broad and imposing on the Pan Abode. PUBLIC COMMENT: David Scruggs neighbor. Mr. Scruggs stated that he is very pleased that the Pan Abode is going to be preserved. Mr. Scruggs said that he has spoken with the applicant's team and finds them to be very fourth right and transparent. Mr. Scruggs stated that he supports the project. COMMISSIONER COMMENT: Ms. Adams stated that the fence Ms. Simon referenced is still in the plan. Ms. Adams said that they are still finessing the plan and where the best location for it. Ms. Greenwood asked if it is the plan to take the fence at 6-feet on the east and westside. Ms. Adams stated that is not the plan. She explained that on the west side there is a fence which code allows a 6-foot fence. Ms. Adams said that there is fencing in between the Pan Abode and the new structure to create a cornhole area. She further said that they will be looking at other ideas to define the yards and can discuss more at the final review. Ms. Greenwood stated that this is a beautiful project. Ms. Greenwood said that it is like a modern Pan Abode look and an excellent addition. She said that her first thoughts were that the massing is a bit overwhelming, however, after further review from different angles this project is appropriate and well done. Ms. Greenwood stated that she does not agree with staff on the restudy for the roof. She explained having the same width and style of the roof pulls the two together. Ms. Greenwood stated that she would be in favor of moving this forward except for the fence. She said that the fence cuts of the property to the community to see the past architecture REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 28 2020 with a modern complement. Ms. Greenwood said that she would be in favor of something that would not obliterate the historic sides and shields the beautiful yards. Ms. Thompson stated that restoration is phenomenal. She further stated that she is in support of all the floor area bonus, variations, and everything that Ms. Adams has listed. Ms. Thompson said that she agrees with Ms. Greenwood about the fence and would be nice to see a bit more of the resource from the street. Ms. Thompson stated that she agrees with staff that the front plane of the roof is beautiful and elegant. Ms. Thompson explained that the shed roof takes away from the rest of the proportion of the structure. She further explained that this style makes sense on the historic resource, however, when the scaling up to two stories it seems out of place. Mr. Halferty stated he appreciates the volunteering for designation. Mr. Halferty said he also has an issue with the scale of the addition and agrees with staff. He said he appreciates that the new addition is detached but the scale still feels large. Mr. Halferty stated that he agrees with HPC about the fence, and should be restudied for scale and transparency. Mr. Halferty said he agrees with Ms. Thompson about the shed form that it might not be the most appropriate form. He stated that overall this is a great project and thanked all the City departments that worked on this project. Mr. Halferty stated he would support a continuance on this project to flush out any concerns on the new construction. Mr. Moyer stated that he agrees with staff about the awkwardness of the roof form. He said that he agrees with fellow commissioners about the restudy of the fence. Mr. Moyer said that it was great to hear support from the neighbor and overall this is a great project. Mr. Kendrick stated that this is a project that he struggles with. He explained that overall this is a great project and likes the preservation aspects and agrees with all the asks. Mr. Kendrick said that he agrees with the concern about the fence. He stated that the roof form of the north elevation of the main mass feels too big. Ms. Greenwood stated that she agrees with Mr. Kendrick about the north elevation and that a breakdown of scale does not happen, unlike the south elevation. Mr. Kendrick stated that he would like to see the north elevation restudied. He said that he would like to see the project move forward with a few restudies. Ms. Greenwood stated that the 3:12 roof pitch is what pulls the whole project together and would not want to see the roof pitch change. She said that she was surprised that the alley neighbors did not want to comment on the south elevation’s fenestration. Ms. Greenwood said that this is not too different from the swiss chalets that are seen throughout the town and that the shallow 3:12 pitch is what makes this project so successful. Ms. Greenwood reiterated that she would like to see the project move forward. Mr. Kendrick stated that he disagrees with Ms. Greenwood about the alley elevation that there is a lot of options to break the elevation. He explained that there is a lot more interest from the southside with the wrap-around deck, rooftop deck, all the different windows, and the garage doors. Ms. Greenwood stated that the Pan Abode is a pretty simple rectangle and the architects are successful in mimicking that and there is a strong relationship between the two. Ms. Greenwood said the new addition does dominate the resource, but it complements the resource in form. Ms. Thompson said that the typical 3:12 overhang in town is much deeper. She explained working with the façade depth could help break it apart. Ms. Greenwood asked what is the proposed overhang on the new addition and the current overhang of the Pan Abode. Mr. Rowland stated that the existing eve is 16 inches and the modern eve will be 4 inches. REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 28 2020 Ms. Greenwood stated that the applicant could bring the overhangs of the new addition out a bit more to break up the flat wall. Mr. Moyer said when you have a vertical wall with no overhang it makes the building seems more imposing. Ms. Adams asked with the tight turn around the board is wanting a restudy on the depth of the overhang rather than the 3:12 pitch. Ms. Greenwood stated that the roof pitch and overhang are very strong with the Pan Abode and the new addition should reflect that. Ms. Thompson moved to continue 211 W. Hopkins Avenue to November 18th. Mr. Halferty seconded. Ms. Simon reviewed the topic of conditions that will be reviewed at the November 18th meeting. ROLL CALL: Mr. Halferty, Yes; Mr. Kendrick, Yes; Mr. Moyer, Yes; Ms. Sanzone, Yes; Ms. Greenwood, Yes. All in favor, Motion carried 5-0. ADJOURN: All in favor, Motion carried 5-0. _________________________ Wes Graham, Deputy Clerk