Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20180124ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 24, 2018 Chairperson Greenwood called the meeting to order at 4:32 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Gretchen Greenwood, Jeffery Halferty, Nora Berko, Roger Moyer, Willis Pember, Scott Kendrick and Richard Lai. Absent was Bob Blaich. Staff present: James R. True, City Attorney Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Moyer moved to approve, Mr. Pember seconded. All in favor, motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Mr. Moyer gave Ms. Simon a handout and has to do with mineral wool as opposed to fiberglass. He said when it gets wet, it doesn’t shrink and self-destruct, it’s like a wool sweater and keeps working. In the historic world with old houses, this material allows them to breath. This handout talks about why to use it and the benefits. He said sometimes the old goodies still work better than the new products and is organic. Ms. Berko thanked Ms. Simon for organizing the church visit. She said it was really fun and very impressive. DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICT: None. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon will be sending around emails about the conference in Denver. She said so far that Mr. Lai, Mr. Halferty and Ms. Berko are planning to attend and asked if anyone else would like to go and to let her know by tomorrow morning. In terms of carpooling, Ms. Simon is going down Wednesday morning and coming back Friday around 3:00 p.m. if anyone wants to ride along. Monday night is a work session with City Council about HPC benefits and she has emailed the memo to everyone and hopes everyone is satisfied with how it is being presented to Council. Mr. Halferty joined the meeting. Ms. Simon said they can’t have more than three board members show up to the work session so it is not considered a meeting. Mr. True said that three people are considered a meeting so he said no more than two people can attend or if they want to have more members attend, they can notice it as a public meeting. Ms. Simon said she doesn’t want to do that so Ms. Greenwood and Mr. Halferty will attend and the others can watch on the webcast. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: Ms. Simon did issue one for the Mesa store property. Roland and Broughton are moving into this building and they decided not to build the addition that HPC approved. They are still doing the preservation work that they promised and are doing an interior remodel, but not the addition. It’s very expensive and they have decided that the existing building can accommodate their staff. The log cabin on Main Street has withdrawn their application and will come back with a minor review with face lift type of improvements. Ms. Berko asked about the Boomerang. Ms. Simon said their only option at this point to pursue is to pick up the building permit that’s been under review for some time. They have eight weeks until their rights to build are gone so it remains to be seen if they will take action. They owe 800,000 in permit fees just to pick it up. She mentioned that she and Mr. Kanipe have been in the building numerous times and the building has remained sound. PUBLIC NOTICE: None. CALL UPS: None. MOTION: Mr. Moyer motioned to continue 533 W. Hallam to March 14th, Ms. Berko seconded. All in favor, motion carried. PROJECT MONITORING: 420 E. Hyman Ave. Amy Simon Ms. Simon stated that this is a project that involves demolition and replacement of the building on the Hyman mall where CB Paws and Zocolito are located. It came through the review process several years ago and it could not be built under the current code because it was grandfathered under the previous moratorium regulations. The main floor is commercial and the second floor is a mix of commercial and affordable housing as well as a free market apartment on the top. It exceeds the size of the uses that are allowed downtown now. It is currently in for building permit and they ran into a problem with the zoning review. They have gone through a series of adjustments and some were interior or so modest that Ms. Simon and Mr. Pember, who is project monitor, approved together. As a way to shed some square footage, they are asking to more deeply recess the street facing door than what was originally approved by HPC. There are two street facing doors on the ground level on Hyman, which are both approved to be recessed three feet. One of them is a secondary access and the upper level of the building is now asking to be approximately nine feet back. They have sited guidelines in the packet which are applicable and the guidelines do ask for recessed entries, but something more in the 3-4-foot range is what the pattern typically is downtown. They feel this will create a darkened space and is not typical so they are not recommending approval. Brian Weiss of Charles Cunniffe Mr. Weiss handed out a site plan to the board showing adjacent buildings and not every recessed entry on Hyman is shown, but the ones most similar to what they are proposing. Due to permit review issues, we are proposing to recess further. One door will access the basement and one will access the second floor. Some entry ways on that street are recessed significantly more and some not so much, but with what they are proposing, he feels there is a context on the street and doesn’t think it would be an outlier or that much different in terms of the surroundings. He feels this is feasible and hopes that HPC accepts it. Mr. Kendrick asked how wide the entry way is. Mr. Weiss said it is 4 ft. 10 finish to finish. It widens a bit once you get past it and is on the side of the street with the sun. Mr. Kendrick said the only example given that really relates is that of Escobar. Ms. Simon said it’s possible that not everyone has the south elevation in their packet. Ms. Greenwood said she needs to see a better drawing. Ms. Berko said she doesn’t understand why the public has to absorb this dark space. Mr. Weiss said the 40 square feet would get distributed among all uses. Brian this solution solves multiple issues, one of which was a square footage issue and one was an egress issue. No extra doors can enter into it so we are proposing to separate the stairs and the doors in the basement can be open whichever way we want. In tandem, it solves a square footage issue and makes Jim Pomeroy more approving of the basement space and the stair being commercial. Now it’s open for the basement and there are no questions. This helps in terms of FAR calculations. Ms. Berko noted that the separation of stairs could happen at the approved space and then you would have to find your 40 ft. somewhere else. Mr. Weiss said if HPC did not approve this and the door would need to remain where it is currently approved, he would need to revisit this with Denis and he imagines that the vestibule that would be resulting, would become a non-unit space and be distributed amongst the rest of the building. That’s what he believes, but hasn’t confirmed that yet. Mr. Halferty asked if the store front nook display is driving the depth of the two doors and Mr. Weiss said yes, in a way it is. Mr. Pember asked what the basement use is. Mr. Weiss said it’s commercial, the second floor is affordable housing and the third floor is free market residential. Ms. Greenwood asked what the door material was and how it related to the other doors of the front façade. Mr. Weiss said it is in line with them and is steel framed. Part of that reason is that the alley side has to be fire rated. Ms. Greenwood asked what the relationship is to the door to the commercial space and the window and the door to get to the stairwell. She asked if it was all the same design concept. Mr. Weiss said yes, it was all the same material type and concept. She can’t get a good reading on it from the elevations at all and doesn’t have a clue what he is asking to take away from a design standpoint. Mr. Halferty mentioned a section line drawn through and asked if Mr. Weiss has a new proposed section. Mr. Weiss said they just did an overlay onto the permit drawings. Mr. Halferty asked if Mr. Weiss understands why it’s confusing to the board because of the shadows and rendering lines due to sketching over the approved plan. It’s a little bit difficult and confusing. Mr. Weiss said he understands. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Ms. Greenwood said the board probably put some time into the façade and it’s really important to the public and there is a certain rhythm to the façade and design as well as openings and doors. What they are proposing makes a puncture in the building which creates a positive/negative space, which seems odd with the size of the building. She thinks they should stick to the original approvals where consideration was given to the cadence of windows and doors. Ms. Berko said she supports staff’s recommendations and echoes Ms. Greenwood’s comments. She said from the drawings, it feels like an alley entrance, not a main public entrance and since it’s a brand new building, she wants to stick to what is required. Mr. Halferty also feels the proposal is difficult to understand. He conceptually understands it, but how it’s presented doesn’t make a lot of sense. Regarding the examples that were handed out, he feels that some are successful and some are daunting and dark. He said that the Escobar entrance and the Paragon entrance are confusing spaces and it’s hard to understand their access. It’s a challenging issue regarding egress and building code, but feels that it has not been researched or presented well. He said it’s a very important façade due to its location. Mr. Lai said the presentation had him really confused and he thinks he should have invested a little more time in the presentation and concurs with the majority of the board. The inference here would be at odds with the fairly uniform façade treatment facing the mall and would like some reconsideration. Mr. Moyer concurs to stay with the original approval and not change anything. Mr. Kendrick agreed that this is too far of a departure from the original approval. He doesn’t think it is something that would work and doesn’t feel that most of the examples are relatable except Escobar, which is too dark and too deep. He doesn’t want to see more dark. Mr. Pember said he was remembering the renderings now of the original approval and said it had a nice façade and nice contribution to the malls. He said he is afraid the solution will come back worse than this proposal. The addition of a second door in that vestibule creates a lot of complications and doesn’t seem like something Denis or Jim Pomeroy will easily dismiss. This creates a more private entrance by pushing it back further, is the way he reads it. The struggle is getting two doors in there, not so much the FAR. Ms. Berko said the concern is with the visual impact on the mall. Ms. Simon said they always try to avoid problem solving, but she wondered if the board be interested in a door that is not solid with some sort of architectural metal work that still qualifies the space as unenclosed, but could be up in the plane that they were expecting. It might create the definition. The problem is that they cannot fully enclose and heat this space where the new recess is shown and this could be a compromise. It would be where the door was approved, but instead of it being a full metal door, it would be a grate of some kind. She’s not positive this would solve the issue, but it’s an option. Ms. Greenwood said it’s not a terrible solution. Mr. Weiss agreed and said they need to have the two doors separating the stairs. He said he would need to speak with Denis in terms of exiting and how he would feel about this type of solution. Ms. Greenwood asked what the door was. Mr. Weiss said it was a glass door with a metal store front system that is 10 ft. tall. Ms. Greenwood said they need to see more detail of this and the monitor needs to show us. Ms. Simon agreed and asked if they would be open to herself and Mr. Pember looking at a different grate type of door with an openness. Ms. Greenwood said absolutely and thinks it’s a very good solution. Mr. Kendrick said his concern is that it won’t be solving anything in terms of keeping weather out so it will most likely be blocked open the whole time. Ms. Greenwood agreed. Mr. Halferty recommended that in the new rendering, that he show an east or west side elevation so that it depicts the door is propped open or closed. Ms. Greenwood asked for a show of hands for who wants to stick with the original approvals. Ms. Simon said that they will not approve this change and that Mr. Weiss can come back to her and Mr. Pember with another idea. Mr. Moyer moved to adjourn, Mr. Kendrick seconded at 5:25 p.m. ____________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk