Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNOA_Draft_305-7 S MillPage 1 of 5 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 26.415.070.B). 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 façade. 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 façade, exceeding code compliance. There are also two L-shaped ducts that will provide ventilation and make up air to Page 2 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 façades 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 3 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 façade. The entirety of the ductwork for the equipment is not compliant with the required 15 feet setback from a street facing façade. 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, or accessibility 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.B 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 4 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 façades 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. And, 2) Building Permit will be issued as this project is deemed compliant with City of Aspen Building and Energy Codes. Page 5 of 5 APPROVED BY: __________________________ _____________________ Phillip Supino Date Community Development Director Attachments: Exhibit A – Review Criteria and Staff Findings (not recorded) Exhibit B – Application (not recorded)