Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20060308 -.,. ..~.,,-,.._".-_.._..,~,.._.." -_."."~--~_._,-~._.~--~~-"'_.... ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERV A nON COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2006 308 E. HOPKINS AVE. - CONCEPUT AL, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, DEMOLITION, PEDESTRIAN AMENITY SPACE AND VIEW PLAN REVIEW....... I 332 W. MAIN - CONCEPTUAL - DEMOLITION - VARIANCES............................... 4 330 E. MAIN - MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - CONCEPTUAL - Public Hearing continued from Feb. 22nd ....................................................................................................4 220 E. MAIN ST. - MINOR DEVELOPMENT - PUBLIC HEARING........................... 6 WORK SESSION - LIFT 1/SKIER'S CHALET ...............................................................7 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2006 Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.rn. Commissioners in attendance: Sarah Broughton, Alison Agley and Derek Skalko. Jason Lasser was seated at 5: 12 p.rn. Michael Hoffman was excused. Staff present: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Planner Jackie Lothian, Deputy Clerk MOTION: Derek moved to approve the minutes of Feb. 8th as amended and Feb. nnd; second by Alison. All infavor, motion carried. 308 E. HOPKINS AVE. - CONCEPUT AL, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, DEMOLITION, PEDESTRIAN AMENITY SPACE AND VIEW PLAN REVIEW Affidavit of posting - Exhibit I Charles Cunniffe, architect Amy said there is a structure on the site and the proposal is to demolish and replace it. The building used to be on the historic inventory and two years ago it was de-listed. HPC needs to verify that the demolition standards have been met. In terms of conceptual review staff feels there is a conflict with the guidelines in terms of the placement of the entry. There are three entry points on the ground level, two go to residential units and one into the ground level restaurant. They are all setback from the street. Guidelines 13.3, and 13.19 suggest that the entry should be right at the sidewalk or slightly recessed no more than 4 feet which is what you have when you have a typical Victorian store front. The open balconies that face the street still are in conflict with guideline 13.12 which requires flat facades. The proposal is not consistent with downtown. Three-story buildings per guideline 13.10 are to be considered on a case by case basis. Regarding the commercial design review guidelines, staff finds that two guidelines A3 and C3 are not in compliance. A3 requires a flat fayade on the first and second levels. C3 requires entries to be well defined and apparent. The applicant is requesting that the cash in lieu be waived for the open space (Pedestrian Amenity Space). At this time Staff is not recommending in favor of the cash in lieu waiver because the community needs it for other improvements in the downtown. The last matter to deal with is the view plane. There is a view plane that originates from the Hotel Jerome toward Aspen Mountain and as I ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2006 it crosses this property it hits at the second floor level. It allows for a two- story building but does not allow for a third floor. There are two ways to deal with that; either HPC grants an exemption finding that there is negligible impact to the view plane or it can through a PUD process. Staff recommends continuance because there are HPC design view issues and view plane issues. Charles said there are three entry points. The entry to the units upstairs is through the courtyard rather than on the street. We would like the condition waived that the two entrances have to be at sidewalk level. One of the driving forces in the proposal is the outdoor dining courtyard. The door furthest to the west can be pulled forward to comply with the guideline. We want to work with what is happening on that street, the vitality and have the restaurant continue that vitality. Regarding the balconies, we can further reduce their size and have them a protective balcony rather than a linear balcony across the front. Jeffrey inquired about the view plan study. Charles said they do intercept the view plane. In favor of what we are trying to do, if you look at the buildings on either side there is some significant construction on either side. The white Victorian at some point will have a two or three story addition. It would effectively take out our view plane issue because it is forward of us. Derek inquired if studies were done to take down the height. Charles said they could take off 2 or three feet. They were trying to create a nice height above the kitchen, the parking and the employee housing which is above the second floor. Amy said for clarification there is a guideline that encourages first floors to have gracious height. Charles said they could have the first floor high and then step the building over the parking in the back to reduce the height. Alison asked Charles to address the entrance to the restaurant on the street fayade. Charles said in the summer people will sit in the patio then sit at the windows. We can pull the western doorway forward to have a more historic context. We wanted it stepped back because the Victorian next door, the Genra Bistro building steps back. Chariperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2006 Rob Ittner, owner of Range restaurant. Rob said we welcome another vibrant restaurant on the street. Rob said he hopes the architect is conscious of the views in designing their wall on the west because their restaurant on the second floor is set back. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. Board comments. Derek said his concern is the overall massing and his concern is the 3rd story. We need to come to a balance. The current height is 42 feet. The patio will add vibrancy to the street. Derek recommended a restudy of the massing context. Jason said the western fayade needs to be restudied to add sensitivity to the block. The design would be better ifit was a two story building with a third story loft. The south fayade also needs restudied to comply with guideline 13 .12. It should be broken down to have more of a horizontal effect. The guidelines state that the entry should be on the street fayade and that should be accommodated. There probably won't be dining in the winter. Regarding the dining space, at the last meeting the deck above didn't have a cover over it. We are trying to reduce the amount of balconies. Alison also said she feels the entry should be looked at on the street fayade and how that would work. The main entrance should be within four feet of the street. She said Jason had a good point about walking through the patio in the summer and during winter it isn't used. On the western fayade the balcony not being glass and being brick would be better. The eastern balcony needs restudied. Maybe it isn't necessary. Regarding the view plane, this is difficult because it is the first building on the block. Story poles would help. Alison is also in favor of continuance to look at the story poles and restudy the balconies. Sarah also concurred with the story poles. The view plane is a tough thing for us to be judging projects by, but it is what we have and we need to respect that. Maybe some articulations would lessen the blow of the view plane. This is the first box going up but we need to judge it for today and not tomorrow. If you can bring all the issues into play that were discussed, it will serve this building well. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2006 Jeffrey concurred with the board. The small scale intimacy of this restaurant row has nicely been maintained. It is difficult to come in with a large design that is allowable by scale. The architecture should compliment at least on the front the Victorian scale. It is a difficult design challenge. On the entry it should be as close to present to the street as possible. The overall mass and scale is much too grand. Lowering the top floor by three feet isn't going to help it. We have historic view planes for a reason and they are site specific. Some undulation could compliment the view plan predicament and would help the mass and scale. Jeffrey said he supports the commercial use and the story poles. The balconies are very aggressive. Jeffrey pointed out that he understands that the scale of the town is continually changing but our purview at the same time is to maintain the intimacy. This is a difficult transition. The board feels there will be a favorable outlook. Derek said the view plane is important but he could be favorable with some designs that infringe on the view plane if they are respectful to what is going on around it. Sarah said she cannot support waiving the cash in lieu. Charles said they will reduce the horizontal line of the balconies to more of a projected balcony and try to break down the massing that way. MOTION: Sarah moved to continue the public hearing and conceptual development of 308 E. Hopkins until April 19th; second by Derek. All in favor, motion carried 5-0. Roll call vote: Jason, yes; Alison, yes; Derek, yes; Sarah, yes; Jeffrey, yes. 332 W. MAIN - CONCEPTUAL - DEMOLITION - VARIANCES Sarah recused herself. Motion: Derek moved to continue the public hearing and conceptual development for 332 W. Main until May 1 (jh; second by Alison, All in favor, motion carried 4-0. 330 E. MAIN - MAJOR DEVELOPMENT - CONCEPTUAL - Public Hearing continued from Feb. 220d 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2006 Amy said the Hotel Jerome was continued from the last meeting for restudy of the new presidential suite on top of the 1990's addition. The discussion was about simplifying the roof form. Exhibit I - new drawings Bill Poss, architect said they redesigned the pent house. They lowered and simplified the pent house. The ceiling height is ten feet and we would like to pop up behind the eave over the living room. We are holding it back about 5 feet from the courtyard side. The penthouse is 15 feet back from the parapet. Richard Decampo, architect presented 3D photographs. Alison asked what material would be used on the roof parapet. Bill said metal and glass, contemporary but quiet. Chariperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing section of the meeting was closed. Derek said this project has only gotten better and he is in full support of the proj ect. Alison said the 3D's are very helpful in determining where you will or won't see the addition. Jason said his only concern was the element on the top floor. Jeffrey said this is a better solution for the undulating roofforms and the design is sensitive to the historic resource. The design is compliant with our rooftop guidelines. Bill said the top floor element was raised up to be part of the annex. It originally would have been done 15 years ago. MOTION: Derek moved to approve Resolution #5 for 330 E. Main Street, conceptual development as proposed; second by Alison. Roll call vote: Alison, yes; Derek, yes; Jeffrey, yes. Jason abstained. Amy clarified that the approval includes the drawings that were shown at the last meeting relating to the roof of the project i.e. entry, fitness roorn. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2006 220 E. MAIN ST. - MINOR DEVELOPMENT - PUBLIC HEARING. Amy stated that the Cortina Lodge is in the Main Street historic district. It is not designated but it was brought up in 2000 as a potential building of interest because it is a small lodge. Part of it is a rustic style made of log. It also has some chalet style influences. The Hotel Jerome is the owner and the building is used for their affordable housing. The proposal is to upgrade the building; repair materials, improve internal circulation and improve the livability of the structure for their employees. It was built in 1950, called the Aspen Court. It was built in two pieces. The Wiley family purchased the building in the early 50's and they changed the name to Cortina because they wanted a European theme. An addition was done in 1963. Some of the guidelines are mandatory because they are in the historic district and some are advisory because they are historic preservation oriented but the building at this point is not land marked. Staff finds that the project meets all of the mandatory guidelines. Light fixtures can be addressed later on. It would be preferable if windows and doors were not moved around. To the extent possible we recommend that the applicant think about how that can be avoided. Perhaps if a door or window has to be abandoned it could be drywalled. There is currently no front door on the building which we think was an original feature and we would like to see that come back. Bill Poss said a lot of the rooms that exist do not meet the housing guidelines. We want to clean up the interior design of the rooms and get studios on the first level and dorm suites up above that four people will share with a common area which includes a laundry and meeting roorn. We will save as many windows as we can. Several of the doors are being remodeled into windows. We will work with staff on the windows/doors. Richard DeCampo, architect said there are 15 studio units now all of which are sub-standard to the employee housing guidelines. The pre-existing commitment is 20 employees for this unit and we are trying to figure out how to get 20 employees housing and that is how the dormitory concept came about. The shell ofthe building will remain. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the meeting was closed. Board Comments: 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 2006 Alison commended the applicant for keeping the building in its current size and scale. It will be another improvement to the Main Street historic corridor. Derek relayed that he has no issues with the proposal. Jason said as far as living conditions they are not adequate. In reality the lodge is dilapidated and in bad shape. If you are trying to make it look like an old motel the doors should be kept. Jason is opposed to having 5 more people in there even though you are trying to comply with the guidelines. Jeffrey said the application is supportive of our guidelines. Keeping the existing doors and windows is a good suggestion by staff. The motel is a very important history of Aspen. Bill said they will look at keeping the doors. A lot of the lodges have dorm rooms. We have a mix of studio and dorm room which allows them to keep their staff under their own management. MOTION: Alison moved to approve Resolution #6, 2006 with conditions as stated in the resolution. On condition #2 staff and monitor will review the dorm/window situation. Motion second by Derek. Roll call vote: Alison, yes; Derek, yes; Jeffrey, yes; Jason, yes. All infavor, motion carried. WORK SESSION - LIFT lISKIER'S CHALET MOTION: Jeffrey moved to adjourn; second by Alison. All infavor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 7