Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19790424RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Historical Preservation Con~ittee, Regular Meeting, City Council Chambers, April 24, 1979 The Historical Preservation Committee held a regular meeting on April 24, 1979, in the City Council Chambers at 1:00 PM. The members present were Gaard Moses, Lary Groen, Norm Burns, and Mona Frost. Staff representative was Jim Reents. WESSON BUILDING: Wesson brought along his architect, Dennis Meininger, from California. Wesson stated that what essentially he was trying to do is to accommodate the needs of his neighbor, Mike Gody who will arrive later on in this meeting. He stated that they have some controversies over setbacks and height. What he is trying to achieve is to keep the building low and spread out. In doing this, Gody can still keep his view on Independence Pass. Wesson stated that he will leave some unexcavated space upon the half floor below grade. The purpose of doing this is to try to anticipate what will happen with zoning and employee housing. Wesson stated that he would like to establish employee housing in his building. Moses asked Wesson what the floor area ratio is there. Wesson stated that it was .75. Wesson stated that he could put 6 cars across the back, which would leave him between 43x23 and 43x73 square feet to build. He would like to have as much footage that he can on the upper floor for rental purposes. He stated that he would occupy most of it but he would like to have a little bit to rent. Wesson stated that he would like to compromise with the neighbors next doo~ , then he would gain the rental space by lowering the building. Wesson stated that Gody would like him to set the building back 14 feet instead of the 10 feet that the zoning allows him. He would then come 10 feet from the property line which would be contiguous with the porch of the Shaw House. Gody would like Wesson to set the proposed building back to keep the Shaw House prominent on the block. Wesson stated that it would hurt him somewhat. Groen stated that his initial reaction that it does not come anywhere near trying to be sympathetic with~ the residential scale of the buildings on Main Street. From that standpoint, he would have a great deal of difficulty going along with this type of approach. Groen stated that it is almost wall to wall type of building and parking which seems very much out of keeping for what they were trying to do when Main Street was designated historic. He could appreciate that the building is low but he felt that it was a minimum agrument. Groen stated that he would rather see the building higher at the rear with some other type of scale to get into the more sympathetic scale with the rest of the buildings. As far as the other house, he could not address the idea that they would like ta maintain their view. Groen stated that in any building if another building is constructed, views are going to be obstructed somewhat. That would be something that the committee could not discuss. Groen stated that the proposed building had a block look. Meininger stated that a dental office needed 2200 square feet for the first level, and this design is made especially for a dental office which is rectangular. A rectangle is the most efficient use for a dental office. Groen stated that the intent and the idea of zoning on Main Street, which is zoned historic, was to preserve the residential look of the area. Additional uses were allowed in historic structures to encourage the preservation. He felt that it was not their duty to consider what is necessary to accommodate a certain type of business. The business has to accommodate itself to what the area is zoned for. Moses felt that the two things were not incompatible. Moses stated that he agreed with Groen in that the architectural consistency should be strived for. But not necessarily for one victorian after another. Burns stated that at the last meeting, all this was said and was stated in the minutes. Burns felt that no attempt was made to bring a residential feel to the building. Groen stated that they have a double problem in which Wesson has two sides of the building that are very prominent. This consists of the Main Street and the 5th Street sides. Groen stated that he would like to push the building back from the corner. Wesson asked the committee if they would recommend a gable type roof. Burns stated that it would help with the follow through of the Main Street residential character. He would like to see them go higher with the building. Burns stated that he would like to see a door on the front of the building. Reents stated that the floor ratio is .75-1 within the O-Office zone. However, there is a bonus for the commercial employee housing and conditional so that they could go up to 1-1 floor area ratio. Groen stated that in town most of the buildings do not have shingles that go all the way to the ground. Right now it is too premature to talk about the type of shingles to place on the building. Groen stated that he would like the corner opened up in some way. Wesson stated that he would not be losing any trees. Groen stated that when they put up the building, he would like them to make some provision for watering the trees. Groen asked Wesson if the first level is partially below grade or all the way. Wesson stated that it was partially below grade. Groen asked Reents if there was a problem with covering the parking space with the second floor. Reents stated that there was a problem with the overhang. In the City of Aspen Code, both the area under the overhang and the overhang would effect the FAR ratings. Groen asked Wesson where he will locate the trash storage. Wesson stated that he would have it on a small deck on the rear of the building. Frost asked if the trash pick-up could be handled without difficulty. Wesson stated that it would be in trash cans instead of dumpsters. Groen stated that it would look better if Wesson would pull the building up and in. If that infringes on a neighbors viewplane, then Wesson would have to deal with them. Groen stated that someone will not be totally happy with what ever happens. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Historical Preservation Co~u~ittee, Regular Meeting, April 24, 1979, City Council Chambers, Page 2 Mike Gody stated that he had a few things to say to the committee. He stated that he would like to preserve the view of Independence Pass which over looks the Boomerang Lodge. On the the setback, he would like to see the building set back further than proposed. The reason for this so that when you are coming down the street, you could visually see the house rather than the tiny roof line that would stick out. Groen stated that the property was vacant when Gody bought the house. Groen explained to Gody that he should have expected that eventually something would be placed there. Groen stated that the function of the committee is to consider the compatibility with adjacent structures and to review designs of structures. Groen explained to Gody that what the committee would like to see is a smaller structure on the property so that the floor area ratio would be reduced. The com~ittee would like to see the structure built higher and more in scale and sympathy with the buildings on Main Street. Preserving the views of Gody's house would have to be between Wesson and Gody. Gody stated that the height and setbacks meant alot to him. The height could block his visual aspects out the window. Gody stated that if the proposed building is built too high, they would never see the sun. Burns stated that there is five feet between his house and the next. Burns stated that they have 28 feet between the proposed buildings and their house. Groen stated that they could not deal with that at this point because they are not dealing with the final structure that would be on the property. Groen stated that they have ruled out the proposed structure and that they would like to see something different. Reents stated that he felt that the proposed building is monolithic. The scale is inappropriate. The building does not seem to have followed the guidelines that were set for the Historic District. Norm Burns made a motion to adjourn. motion approved. Groen seconded. Ail in favor, Meetin/~d~hTne~d ,~ .... ~'~ ~ pem eal uty City %lerk