HomeMy WebLinkAbout305-7 S Mill Notice of ApprovalRECEPTION#: 695903, R: $33.00, D: $0.00
DOC CODE: APPROVAL
Pg 1 of 5, 07/06/2023 at 11:66:01 AM
Ingrid K. Grueter, Pitkin County, CO
NOTICE OF APPROVAL
ALLOWING FOR THE REDESIGN AND INSTALLATION OF ROOFTOP
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE MOUNTAIN VIEW
PLANE REVIEW, AND REVIEW FOR A HISTORIC PRESERVATION CERTIFICATE
OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 305-7 S MILL
STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT H AND LOT I, BLOCK 82, CITY AND
TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO.
Parcel ID No. 2737-182-20-003
APPLICANT: 305-7 Mill Street LLC
REPRESENTATIVE: Mike Kraemer; Kraemer Land Planning
SUBJECT & SITE OF AMENDMENT:
The application proposes the redesign and installation of rooftop mechanical equipment related
to kitchen ventilations systems at 305-7 S Mill St., as well as some minor fenestration changes to
the exterior, on a building located in the Commercial Core Historic District and subject to
requirements for properties located in the foreground of a Mountain View Plane. The Applicant is
requesting administrative approval for ESA Mountain View Plane Review (Section 26.435.050.E.1
and 2), Commercial Design Review (Section 26.412.010), and a Historic Preservation Certificate
of No Negative Effect, (Section 26.415.0703).
SUMMARY:
The property at 305-7 S Mill St was originally built in 1960. Approval was granted in 2002 to allow
a 150 square foot expansion of the commercial space. This property has provided a permanent
location for the original Popcorn Wagon since 1986, as well as its modern replacement since
2008. Minor renovations have been approved historically, including finishes and fenestration
changes in 2012, and a partial demolition in 2016. Temporary Use approvals have been granted
annually since 2014 for the trellis structure to be enclosed with temporary materials during the
winter months.
This property is a single -story commercial space that will be home to the Wild Fig restaurant
following the proposed renovations. The changes to the kitchen require updated mechanical
equipment to be installed on the roof. To comply with building code requirements for ventilation,
the equipment must be installed on the roof within the Wheeler Opera House Mountain View
Plane. Installing the equipment elsewhere would place unnecessary and undue cost and burden
on the applicant.
Most of the equipment will be shielded by the existing parapet wall. Exposure to the view plane
will be limited to a short section on the north fagade. The equipment includes a roof top unit (RTU)
that has already been approved, kitchen exhaust fan (KEF) and make-up air unit (MAU). All
proposed mechanical equipment is setback 20 feet from any street facing fagade, exceeding code
compliance. There are also two L-shaped ducts that will provide ventilation and make up air to
Page 1 of 5
the kitchen and will be within the required roof top setback. The applicant will work with City staff
to determine the most appropriate method of screening the equipment, as necessary.
The applicant is also proposing minor changes to fenestration. These renovations are proposed
to the north elevation, as well as the east and north fagades in the courtyard. The changes are
minor and will not have a diminishing effect on the building's character. The changes that are
beyond a like for like replacement are within a courtyard or screened by the existing trellis. These
changes require an administrative Commercial Design Review.
The applicant's proposal to upgrade the buildings' ventilation system has three challenges: 1) the
building and attached features infringe the Wheeler Opera House View Plane; 2) the locations of
some of the required equipment do not meet the 20 feet setback requirement, and 3) the intensity
of development of the property prevents any practical relocation of the equipment to alternative
locations on the property.
STAFF EVALUATION:
Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2017, created significant changes to Mountain View Plane Review.
Important to this proposal, development in the foreground of a view plane became much more
restrictive under this ordinance. Additionally, non -conforming rooftop mechanical equipment is
required to come into conformity with Land Use Code section 26.575.020. The combination of
these two factors creates a difficult set of restrictions and review criteria for properties that are in
the foreground of a view plane and have limited rooftop or other locations for necessary
mechanical equipment. Three reviews are required for this proposal.
1) Land Use Code Section 26.435.050.E ESA Mountain View Plane — Administrative Review
The Community Development Director may approve "attached building feature(s)" that do not
meet the criteria for an exemption if one of the following criteria can be met:
The infringement to the view plane is erected to the minimum height necessary;
and complies with Section 26.575.020 (height and setbacks for rooftop features),
Section 26.710 (zone district requirements), and Sections 26.412 or 26.415
(Commercial Design Review or Historic Preservation).
Or
The infringement cannot be seen with the naked eye from the reference point as
demonstrated by a visual resources analysis.
Staff discussion: The proposed work at 305-7 S Mill St requires consideration of both options
for compliance. The attached visual exhibits illustrate how the view plane interacts with the
building and attached features. The proposed mechanical layout places most of the equipment
towards the southern side of the roof, significantly reducing the visible infringement. While the
ductwork will be visible from the view plane origin, it is only minimally visible where it is not
shielded by the parapet wall. Most of the proposed to the mechanical equipment will not be visible
from the view plane origin.
Staff finds that the proposed improvements meet both the letter and intent of the criteria required
of this review. First, the visible infringement is reduced. This is ultimately the goal of the view
plane requirements when applied to existing development. Secondly, most of the changes, are
Page 2 of 5
not visible from the view plane origin — as they are blocked by the parapet wall on the north side
of the building.
The first criterion requires compliance with the Measurements and Calculations section of the
Land Use Code and Commercial Design Review and/or Historic Preservation. The next two
reviews describe compliance with these requirements.
2) Land Use Code Section 26.575.020.F.4; and K Measurements and Calculations, Allowed
Projections into Setback, and Exceptions for Building Code Compliance.
Staff discussion: The RTU (roof top unit), MUA (make-up air unit), and KEF (kitchen exhaust
fan) are all setback at least 20 feet from each street facing fagade. The entirety of the ductwork
for the equipment is not compliant with the required 15 feet setback from a street facing fagade.
The ducting encroaches into the roof top setback but are required to be placed within a kitchen
exhaust hood directly above the cooking surfaces in the kitchen below.
On the setback issue, the only practical location on the property for the installation of this
equipment is on top of the roof within the setback. The Mechanical Engineer explored routing the
ducting on the interior of the structure, and it is not possible. The applicant's design team and city
staff spent extensive time exploring potential alternatives and none were found feasible —
regardless of cost. The Chief Building Official and Staff from City of Aspen Environmental Health
have evaluated the proposed improvements, have confirmed that they are the minimal required
to meet necessary code requirements — and that there are no other possible locations for
installation.
The Community Development Director is approving this projection into the setback, against
requirements of the Measurements and Calculations section of the code — using 26.575.020.K—
"to accommodate improvements required to achieve compliance with building, fire, oraccessibility
codes in or on existing buildings when no other practical solution exists."
4) Land Use Code Section 26.415.070.B: Development involving designated historic property or
property within a historic district — Certificate of No Negative Effect
The subject property is not landmark designated but is located in the Commercial Core Historic
District. The scope of work qualifies for a Certificate of No Negative Effect according to Section
26.415.070.E of the Aspen Municipal Code in that the scope results in 1) Mechanical equipment
or accessory features that have no impact on the character -defining features of the building or
structure, and 2) alterations to a noncontributing building within a historic district that have no
adverse effect on its historic or architectural character. Similarly, Administrative approval for
compliance with Commercial Design Review is appropriate according to Section 26.412.090.A.3.
Based on a review of the applicable Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards,
and Guidelines, staff finds that the proposal as submitted complies with the design guidelines.
Staff Discussion: Mechanical equipment is an eligible work item to be considered under a
Certificate of No Negative Effect. The review criteria most applicable to the proposed work is the
following: "The proposed work will not diminish, eliminate, or adversely affect the significant
historic and or architectural character of the subject property or Historic District in which it is
located."
Page 3 of 5
While the proposed improvements do not eliminate the visual impacts of this equipment, the
redesign consolidates the equipment into a more organized and less haphazard roof plan — and
from Staff's view reduces the negative visual impacts of the equipment. A condition of approval
will require that the equipment be painted a uniform gray color, similar to existing conditions (or
screened). Additionally, safety tie offs and an access ladder, for utilization by maintenance and
repair personnel, are also approved as they are necessary for conformance with code.
Acknowledging that the proposed changes to fenestration are all consistent with the current
architectural character of the structure, staff has determined that this will not diminish the
property's contribution to the district's historic character.
3) Land Use Code Section 26.412.090.A.3 Commercial Design Review — Amendments —
Administrative review
The Community Development Director may approve a Commercial Design Review if it is
determined that the proposed work has no adverse effect on the physical appearance or character
defining features of a development. An application for administrative review may be approved if it
meets the following requirements:
It is deemed that the activity is an eligible work item and meets the Commercial,
Lodging, and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines.
And
Any modifications to the proposed work requested by the Community Development
Director are agreed to by the owner/applicant.
The subject property is in Aspen's Commercial Core Historic District and is therefore subject to
review for its change in design regarding the fenestration. The proposed changes include some
window alterations along the north elevation on Hyman Ave, as well as the east and north fagades
in the courtyard. All changed beyond like for like replacement are minor and will be within a
courtyard or screened by the existing trellis.
Staff Discussion: All changes to fenestration will not negatively impact the building's current
aesthetic character. Per the requirements of this insubstantial amendment, these minor changes
are consistent with review criteria.
Please refer to Exhibit A, Review Criteria and Staff findings for more specific discussion of the
reviews.
DECISION:
The Community Development Director approves the proposed improvements to the
rooftop mechanical equipment at 305-307 S Mill St., subject to the following conditions:
1) The new equipment shall be painted a uniform, matte, dark gray color (similar to existing
conditions), unless prevented by building code or equipment specifications.
am
2) Building Permit will be issued as this project is deemed compliant with City of Aspen
Building and Energy Codes.
Page 4 of 5
l i 6 Z5
BEi t Supi Date
Communi evelo ment Director
Attachments:
Exhibit A — Review Criteria and Staff Findings (not recorded)
Exhibit B — Application (not recorded)
Page 5 of 5