Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20070710 Snecial Meetinl! Asnen City Council Julv 10. 2007 ,'JII!"'-"". Mayor Ireland called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. with Councilmembers DeVilbiss, Johnson, Romero and Skadron present. Mayor Ireland noted the Council waived 24 hour notice of the special meeting .....~ ~ ORDINANCE #30. SERIES OF 2007 - Land Use Code Amendment Historic Preservation Amy Guthrie, community development department, reminded Council the historic preservation program started in the 1970's and is one of the oldest in the state. Aspen has been recognized for setting the bar on how the historic character of Aspen should be treated. Ms. Guthrie noted there have been discussions for years that aspects other than the Victorian heritage should be recognized. Ms. Guthrie said there is no minimum age for historic properties; there is a prohibition against the city initiating historic designation over the property owner's objections unless a property is at least 40 years old. ,. Ms. Guthrie said staff has been directed to be aware of the additional resources in town that should be considered for designation. Staff has done research and surveys of additional properties during the last 20 years. Staff s assessment is that about 20% of the properties in Aspen have been landmarked and protected. About 15% of the properties staff has looked at over the last 20 years have been demolished. Ms. Guthrie said one issue is at what age properties become significant. The nation uses 50 years as a perspective to judge what may have historic merit. Aspen uses 40 years and this ordinances proposes to reduce that figure to 30 years. Ms. Guthrie said research suggests the average age of buildings being demolished is between 30 and 40 years. Ms. Guthrie said the institutes that have given Aspen its heritage, skiing, culture, were still developing within the 30 year time period. Ms. Guthrie noted Aspen receives recognition for the type of benefits for historic properties. On residential sites there is an FAR bonus, lot splits, transferable development rights, variances. Commercial properties can receive growth management exemptions, they can be land for TDRs, there are tax credit programs at the state and federal levels. Ms. Guthrie said this is proposed as an emergency ordinance as there is an urgency to make sure to protect some properties while Council is discussing regulations, the city does not want to trigger loses of these properties to make sure the community's priorities are being met. Ms. Guthrie said the Whereas statements address the nature of the emergency. The ordinance proposes the threshold at which the city can initiate a designation is reduced from 40 years to 30 years. This clarifies how to determine how old a property is, which is based on building permit records. The community development department will maintain a data based on the age of each property, which staff commits to completing by November 2007. Ms. Guthrie said there are about 2400 properties in Aspen. Staff hopes the date of construction information will be available on line. Ms. Guthrie noted currently only the HPC or Council can initiate a landmark designation; this adds the community development director to that permission. I Snecial Meetinl! Asnen City Council Julv 10. 2007 Ms. Guthrie said this ordinance adds a demolition review prO<,ess triggered exclusively by the age ofthe building. There will be a prohibition against exterior alterations, applications for building permits or land use applications for any property that reaches 30 years. The community development director will screen a property to determine ifthere is a potential historic resource present. The community development director will use the existing landmark criteria to make that determination. There are timeframes in which the community development director is to respond so that the process is predictable for a property owner. Once the community development director makes a determination he feels there is no historic significance, HPC and Council will be informed and given a chance to rebut that or initiate a landmark application. If the community development director thinks there is potential significance, he was the right to initiate a landmark. Ms. Guthrie pointed out there are appeals with thresholds, dates and time frames. There is also discussion about what the property owner can and cannot do during that time period. Ms. Guthrie told Council the land use code already has protection against demolition for properties that are or may be under consideration for landmarking. This language is difficult so this ordinance proposes to replace it with the process described above. Ms. Guthrie said the language clarifies this ordinance does not apply to any active land use applications, existing development orders or projects in the building permit review process. Ms. Guthrie said approximately 20% of the 20th century resources have been landmarked, 65% do not have landmark protection and 15% have been demolished. Ms. Guthrie told Council post WWII properties have to meet quite a few criteria having to do with association of Aspen's history as well as a high level of architectural integrity. Ms. Guthrie told Council a property owner can ask staff if this ordinance applies to their property at any time. The answer provided by staff will be good for 5 years. Chris Bendon, community development director, told Council the historic preservation staff has a responsibility to advise Council and HPC when a building that may be a historic resource is threatened. Staff also has the responsibility to respond to questions from property owners questions about redevelopment. It puts staff in a difficult position when they are contacted about potential redevelopment on a property that is potentially historic. Ms. Guthrie reiterated this ordinance designates no structures. The ordinance could begin an evaluation process that could lead to designation hearings. Mayor Ireland said he hopes in the future there is a list available so that property owners can look to see the status oftheir property. Councilman Johnson said list pre-judge structures, and every structure should be treated equally. Councilman Johnson said it is not appropriate for staff or Council to judge structures. There should be review criteria and if a property owner does not want to demolish their structure, nothing has to be initiated. Mayor Ireland said there should be a list; Council should identify what it is they want preserved and property owners ought to know if they are on the list or not. Mayor Ireland said the nature of history changes and property owners ought to confront every 5 years that a property is no longer historic or that it should be preserved. 2 Special Meetinl! Aspen City Conncil Julv 10, 2007 - Councilman DeVilbiss said the best that can be done is to continuously audit the properties. A list would give a false sense of security as things change constantly. Councilman DeVilbiss said what he wants outlined is what happens to a property owner when they come in and apply for a demolition permit, what is the process. Bendon said staff would like to get away from possible historic designation being a surprise to property owners. Bendon said he wants a data base so that people can look up when their structure was constructed, has it been considered for designation and if so, when was that decision made. Bendon said if a property owner applies and their property is not historic and does not have any potential historic resource value, one may proceed with demolition or land use application. Bendon pointed out the ordinance requires staff respond to a property owner's request within 14 days. If that is not met, then the property is not historic. Councilman Johnson said he is concerned that 14 days will not be enough time for 2 staff people. ....- Bendon pointed out the designation criteria are strict. For Council to designate a property, they must make findings regarding the structure, whether it is associated with an important person in history, whether or not the building was associated with an event, whether an important local architect was associated with the project or whether the building represents a notable piece of a particular type of architecture important to Aspen's local heritage. Councilman Romero said with those as criteria, it seems once a property is determined not to be historic, it should not keep coming back. ,. Councilman Skadron asked what has been demolished and what was culturally relevant about those structures. Ms. Guthrie told Council the post WWII buildings staff has studied have fallen into category of building types or architectural styles and the community has lost a little of everything. Councilman Skadron asked if staff feels the community is losing too much too fast. Ms. Guthrie said the concern is that a majority of properties that are potentially significant are not protected. Bendon said staff feels the dialogue about a building's significance is important to have without the threat of demolition hanging over. Councilman Skadron asked who this ordinance might most negatively impact. Ms. Guthrie said it has not been demonstrated to staff that being historically designated is a negative. Staff has asked appraisers and the assessor's office and they have not stated this is a negative. There are benefits in the land use code for historically designated structures, like increased density or lot splits. Councilman Skadron asked why the emergency nature is necessary. Bendon said this is a Council decision. Staff recognizes post WWII development is important in the evolution of Aspen as a ski area and these structures reflect that heritage. Bendon said staff understands the real estate market in Aspen may be different than in other places, where a house is purchased, demolished and replaced. Demolitions tend to happen at an earlier age of the property. Bendon said there is immediacy for addressing whether a property should be preserved or not. Bendon noted this is a decision Council has to be comfortable with in terms of the rationale and the need for an emergency ordinance. 3 Special Meetinl! Aspen City Council July 10. 2007 Councilman Skadron asked if separate criteria for post WWII should be established. Ms. Guthrie told Council if a building has not already been landmarked and it is a Victorian era building and still standing, the city will landmark it. The post war has cultural and architectural associations criteria and these have to be demonstrated thoroughly and the building has to be unaltered. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. Alex Merriam said with only a two week period to make a determination on whether one's house is historic or not, the staff will determine "it might" and put the owners in a 6 month moratorium while making that determination. Mayor Ireland pointed out interior remodels are not subject to this ordinance. Ms. Guthrie agreed the ordinance should be clarified so that a building permit for interior remodels is not part of the process. Merriam said he attended a tour of possible historic houses and was appalled at the subjectiveness of the criteria. Merriam said it is difficult to make criteria when one is discussing newer structures. Jon Busch said he supports the ordinance as the community as lost buildings like the Bidwell and Paepcke house. Busch said the Paepcke house was allowed to be demolished because of its many renovations. Busch said it should have been saved because of the importance of the people associated with the property. Junee Kirk asked if there is an appeal process. Ms. Guthrie noted one can appeal to Council ifthe community development director determines there is potential eligibility for historic designation. One can also appeal the landmark designation. Ms. Guthrie said designation does not mean one cannot alter or remodel one's property. An FAR bonus is awarded for a good historic remodel. The discussion is the way to distribute the FARon the property and the historic design guidelines are used as well as lot splits and TDRs. Ms. Kirk asked what incentives there are for historic designation. Ms. Guthrie said the current incentives are FAR bonus, transferable development rights, setback variances, extra density. Jeannette Darnauer, representing the Aspen Chamber Resort Association public affairs committee, requested Council not adopt this ordinance to allow the Chamber time to survey their members and give Council feedback. Mitch Haas stated he is a fan of the historic preservation program and the HPC works to make projects better than they started. Haas said he feels like the two week turn around for an answer from the community development director may be too quick and put on too much pressure. Haas said 30 years is too early; 40 years is a better length of time. Haas said the standards are too subjective. There is too much burden of proof on a property owner. Haas said the HPC design guidelines do not address a building built in 1975 and they do not have the tools to address buildings that new. Haas said the city runs the risk of diminishing the integrity of the entire historic preservation program and the value of being in the program. Haas said he feels this preservation runs counter to the canary initiative. Craig Ward said he likes the suggestion of having a list of buildings for potential inclusion. With good criteria, staff should be able to look at a building and say yes or no 4 Special Meetinl! Aspen City Council July 10. 2007 or maybe. The property owners of "maybes" can take their request through a quick determination. Ed Foran said this process is too subjective. Aspen has many visiting dignitaries and any building they visit could be made historic. These are not post World War II houses but post Vietnam War houses. The houses are functionally obsolete. Council should be encouraging the upgrading of these houses to make them as energy efficient as possible. Foran said if this ordinance is passed, demolition permits for houses less than 30 years old will double. Tim Cottrell asked if a structure is not on the historic register and regardless ofthe condition of the structure, ifit 100 years old it is automatically historic. Ms. Guthrie said there is a process to look at the character ofthe structure. Victorian properties can be altered and still meet the criteria for designation. Ellie Wienstein asked how this will affect condominiums and will individual units be able to do improvements. Ginny Dyche, Aspen Valley Hospital, asked if the ordinance will apply to public institutions. Mayor Ireland said public institutions are not exempt from this ordinance. Rob Gile said this is taking away a property right makes that property less valuable because the owner cannot do what they want to do with the property. Gile asked if the city will compensate that difference. Can the value versus historically designated and not historic can be calculated. Ms. Guthrie said this is one reason the incentive package for historic designation was created, to offset any fiscal impacts. Anne Murchison asked if this ordinance would apply to interior remodeling. Mayor Ireland stated the ordinance will be clarified that it is not a prohibition against interior remodel. Les Holst said the reason this ordinance is before Council is that Aspen is losing community. Holst told Council he did a survey of visitors and people said they liked the small lodges and historic character. Holst stated this ordinance is going the right direction. Holst said historic buildings maintain a lot of value. Mike Maple told Council his house would fall under this designation. Maple said the way architecture will be evaluated is of concern. Maple said some ordinances like this will cause loss of community because people will leave because more rules are being applied to people's property. Maple said the definition of 30 years as historic is mind boggling; 40 years is hardly historic. Maple urged Council to look at a time period of more than 30 years. This throws people's property into limbo. Maple questioned the emergency nature of the ordinance. Tom Isaac said he does not see the need for an emergency ordinance; there are questions that have not been answered, like will this affect duplexes. Isaac said change is good and makes the community healthy. Isaac stated he does not see an emergency and Council should take their time. Scott Davidson said adopting an ordinance aimed at structures of the post Vietnam era will affect many locals who have had their houses for a long time. Davidson said this is a community issue and the community should be able to have time to come to Council and discuss it. Adopting an ordinance in one day is not the way to handle business. 5 Special Meetinl! Aspen City Council July 10. 2007 Georgeanne Waggaman told Council she was on HPC when the first structure was designated. The community was alarmed at that action. Ms. Waggaman said there are issues to be addressed before this ordinance is adopted, like condominiums and institutional buildings and how will they be dealt with. Ms. Waggaman said creating a data base will take 5 years and without that, everyone will feel trepidation until that is completed. There should be criteria and an appeal process. Ms. Waggaman stated the city should work out the details before enacting an emergency ordinance. Andrew Kole said Council should identify what the emergency is. Kole noted candidates ran for office stating they wanted community input and do things fairly. Jim DeFrancia said this ordinance does not designate any structure as historic but gives the city an opportunity to review any property 30 years or older to see if it should be considered for historic designation. DeFrancia said it is important that a property owner has an opportunity for early determination of designation will impact their property. DeFrancia questioned the nature of the emergency; however, stated he supports the basis of the ordinance. Marcia Cook begged Council to reconsider this ordinance. Ms. Cook said her house is energy inefficient. Ms. Cook stated it is not fair for people to not know where they stand. Tim Semrau stated it is a big deal to freeze every building in town built before 1977, which is what this ordinance is doing. Semrau asked ifthere is one building of significance that is at risk, has recently been demolished that is driving the emergency nature. Semrau asked Council to delay this and get proper public input and to work out all the issues. Chris Leverich asked Council not to adopt this ordinance. The more regulations that are put on property owners, the more problematic it is for people who live here and who have been here for a long time. John Kelly told Council his house is functionally obsolete and it needs to be remodeled so it is all on one floor. Kelly said he has already spent money in reliance that their building is not historic. Kelly stated he does not see the emergency and feels this is a perversion of the emergency process. Kelly noted that staff should have compiled a list 5 years ago when the then historic preservation ordinance was modified. Kelly said property owners were to be notified. Kelly said a lot of work went into the previous ordinance by staff and the public and it is being overthrown in a 24 hour period. Georgia Hanson said the canary initiative and historic preservation of these buildings needs to be put together and set how they fit. Jack Wilke said his impression is this ordinance takes away some of his property rights. Michael Behrendt said having HPC look at one's property is a fearful process. Behrendt requested the time period for a property that is deemed non-historic be extended from 5 to 10 or 15 years. Behrendt said the incentives are not enough. Behrendt said the city should find out what historic designation does to the value of one's property. Toni Kronberg thanked stafffor bringing this important ordinance forward. Walt Madden said he favors this ordinance and it should be expanded to every structure in Aspen. Bert Myrin agreed this should be expanded to the entire town so that everyone knows what to expect. 6 Special Meetinl! Aspen City Council July 10. 2007 Mayor Ireland closed the public comment. Mayor Ireland said points for Council to consider is whether 30 years is the right amount of time; is that an emergency; clarification this does not apply to interior remodeling; getting a rapid decision from staff; whether to list or not the properties under consideration; reliance on previous statements one's property is not historic; should there be a period after which one is told they are not historic during which this is not subject to reconsideration; consideration of energy efficiency; a review of how well this is working in 6 months or a year. Councilman Skadron questioned the city's ability to manage this process. Councilman Skadron asked how this ordinance might conflict with the AACP and the canary initiative. Councilman Skadron stated he has concerns about the underlying subject nature of the process. Councilman Romero said his issue is whether this is an emergency or not. Councilman Romero suggested the staff review be changed to 30 days rather than 14 days to give adequate time. Councilman Romero said he would like to see the historic preservation section of the code amended to define post WWII and or not to include the post Vietnam period. Councilman Romero said he would like the time out extended beyond 5 years to 10 years. Councilman Romero agreed with 6 months or a year review. Councilman Romero reiterated there is a lack of proof this is an emergency. Councilman DeVilbiss stated he favors a 14 day review as long as there is enough staff to insure it is fair and thorough. Councilman DeVilbiss pointed out this ordinance does not designate any structures; it just insures review before a building can be demolished. Council agreed this ordinance does not affect interior remodels and it is not intended to. Mayor Ireland asked staff is there is significant danger to structures they believe should be protected if Council fails to act. Ms. Guthrie said yes, structures that are eligible and have no designation are threatened everyday. At least 15 structures have been lost in the last 5 years. Councilman Johnson asked the definition of an emergency ordinance. John Worcester, city attorney, stated it is Council's job to determine if an emergency exists. The City Charter allows Council to enact an emergency ordinance if they find an emergency to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. Councilman Johnson stated he feels an emergency exists and that the existing code encourages demolition. Councilman Johnson said the threat of demolition is the emergency. Councilman Skadron asked the impact of not declaring this an emergency. Bendon outlined the code amendment process, which takes up to 8 months including another month for the ordinance to go into effect, during which time there is no protection for these structures. Councilman Romero noted there have been 15 demolitions since 2000, or 2 per year. There are 65 structures on the list which may be considered for designation. Councilman Romero stated he has difficulty finding an emergency condition in this circumstance. 7 Snecial Meetinl! Asnen City Council Julv 10. 2007 ~ Councilman Romero stated he favors historic preservation and wants a code that the community has ownership in and can live by. Councilman Romero said citizens should be able to count on consistency from Council. Councilman Romero stated there is no emergency. Councilman Skadron said he agrees with Councilman Romero about process. Councilman Skadron stated he would have preferred more time to weigh all aspects of this; however, Council has this situation and has to deal with it so it is an emergency. Councilman DeVilbiss, Councilman Johnson and Mayor Ireland agreed there is an emergency. Mayor Ireland said the next issue is the age of a structure, which staff recommends be 30 years. Councilman DeVilbiss said he feels 30 years is appropriate. Councilman DeVilbiss reiterated this ordinance does not designate any structure as historic but garners review of a 30 years old structure. Councilman Romero said he agreed with the factual criteria presented that structures being demolished are in the 30 year window. Councilman Johnson agreed with 30 years. Councilman Johnson stated he could go with all structures being reviewed, regardless of age. Councilman Skadron said he agrees with 30 years on recommendation of the staff. , Mayor Ireland noted another issue is whether there should be a list or not. Councilman Johnson said he does not want a list; every property owner should be treated the same. Creating a list seems to be asking the staff to pre-judge what structures might fit the criteria and make a list. Councilman Johnson said there may be two systems; one is a list which creates certainty. A demolition review procedure is at odds with the notion of a list. Councilman Johnson stated history does not stop and there should be a continuous examination of structures and demolition review is the best method by which to achieve that. Bendon said what he thinks is important for the community is to have a data base, a place where property owners can look to see how old a property is; is it over 30 years; has the property owner asked stafffor a determination regarding possible historic designation. Bendon noted the issue for Council is whether there should be a category for properties that staff feels need a second look. Councilman Johnson said he feels demolition review is simpler than a list. Mayor Ireland stated he would prefer a list as it goes to the need for a property owner to have certainty. Mayor Ireland said one should start with history and create criteria. Having a list of properties the city thinks are historic starts a discussion of what history means, what is consistent. Property owners should be able to find out what their property is as well as what the city's program is all about. Mayor Ireland proposed after creating a list, property owners can come in and obj ect to inclusion on that list. Mayor Ireland said the list would say a property is either historic, one that the city is considering as historic or one that does not have historic value at this time. ~. ..... Ms. Guthrie reiterated a list does not exist yet. Ms. Guthrie said she feels like a list says the city is done and this should be an on-going process. Mayor Ireland proposed the list be of 3 components; properties that are designated, properties that are pending, and 8 Snecial Meetinl! Asnen City Council July 10. 2007 ,#""- ..... properties that are not possible. Ms. Guthrie said if the city is going to establish a list, it will need to be very comprehensive. Ms. Guthrie noted things changes, events happen. If the process is evolved naturally based on when people want to take action with their property, the process will be more thoughtful. Mayor Ireland said he does not want citizens to feel the historic process is being used as a growth tool. Councilman Johnson said he felt the purpose of a demolition review was to have a different process than that ofthe past. Councilman Johnson said what has been done with post WWII properties has not been great because of the fear of upsetting the property owners. Councilman Johnson said there has not been the political will to designate WWII properties. Councilman Johnson said he feels continuing the list will be no progress at all. Mayor Ireland stated there has never been a public list of structures that should be considered; this issue only comes up when one wants to demolish their structure. Mayor Ireland said he could live with a proposed demolition review rather than a list. Mayor Ireland stated he feels a list would give more certainty. " Councilman Romero noted staff has suggested a data base without determination. The historic officer has a working list with some qualitative criteria. Councilman Romero asked if staff would construct the data base which would include a stafflevel review of the 2000 properties in Aspen to give a starting point. Bendon said this is about the details of the operation. The ordinance contains the ability for a property owner to "call the question", submit a simple application as to whether their structure is potentially historic and get an answer. Bendon said there is a staff responsibility to have a publicly accessible data base. This is a core information expectation of the planning department; however, this cannot be done before November 1 st Property owners will receive a letter stating their property is not eligible for designation, if that is found to be the case. There will be an expiration to that letter. Bendon said staff s charge will be to review properties and to minimize the list so there is no "in between" properties. These are properties that the age is not known; there is not data available or the property is 30 years or older and there have been no inquiries about that property. Mayor Ireland said he can support the way in which the ordinance is written and to move toward a more comprehensive data base to be developed by staff. Councilman Johnson said his goal is to make sure that no structure 30 years old or older is demolished without historic review. Mayor Ireland said the next issue is how long can property owners rely on the determination that their property is not historic. The proposal is 5 years after one receives a letter from community development department. Councilman Johnson said this provision would only kick in which one applies for demolition. Councilman Romero stated he would like the letter be good for 10 years; architecture and trends evolve more slowly so 10 years would be fair. Councilman Skadron and Councilman DeVilbiss and Mayor Ireland said they would favor 5 years. P"'" Mayor Ireland said Council agreed there should be a reconciliation between this ordinance and the canary initiative. Councilman Johnson stated he does not buy the ..... 9 Snecial Meetinl! Asnen City Council Julv 10. 2007 ...." argument that projects built in the 1960's or built speedily are not energy efficiency nor that it can be made more efficient. Mayor Ireland stated people are allowed to modify historically designated structures for reasons and this may fall into the canary initiative. Mayor Ireland suggested making the time for staff determination on a historic review request longer than 14 days so staff does not have to rush to a judgment. Bendon agreed 30 days would be a better amount of review time. Bendon noted a quick response is a worthwhile goal. Council agreed to 30 days. Councilman Skadron said he feels the community development department should be given every opportunity to make this work. Mayor Ireland asked about people who already have letters and what their reliance is. John Worcester, city attorney, suggested if those property owners want to know if their prior letters are still good, to come in and ask for a determination. Mayor Ireland said this ordinance should not invalidate something the city has already agreed and the letter should be valid for 5 years from date of issuance. Council agreed to get more information from staff, how many letters, what they state. Council agreed they would like a 6 to 12 month review of how this ordinance is working. Mayor Ireland suggested the review be scheduled after the data base is complete. Council asked how much or how little exterior renovation would be allowed under this ordinance. Ms. Guthrie told Council the existing code states no exterior alteration other than basic maintenance is allowed. Worcester pointed out this ordinance contains a new violation for property owners removing or defacing the exterior of a structure. Bendon suggested Council add a section to the ordinance that interior remodels or work limited to the interior are exempt from this ordinance. Bendon suggested Council not put staff in the position of trying to weigh the two public goals of historic preservation and the canary initiative. Bendon stated a property either has merits historically or it does not. Bendon suggested Council might look at special grants historic properties can apply for to upgrade their energy efficiency. Bendon said if a property owner has a letter stating they are not historic, they may rely on it for 5 years like any other determination. Bendon said if people have called in, received a response on the phone, relied on that response and spent money, staff should consider that in the determination if a review should be initiated. Councilman Johnson moved to adopt Ordinance #30, Series of 2007, as amended; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. Councilman Romero said the functional purpose of public buildings and the benefit to the community, like the hospital, should be a part of the determination of whether a building should be historic or not. Councilman Romero said the city should take leadership on the green renovation techniques for its buildings. Mayor Ireland reiterated Council gave direction for consideration of the canary initiative to reconcile with this ordinance. This might include incentives or help with energy efficiency levels. Roll call vote; Councilmembers DeVilbiss, yes; Skadron, yes; Romero, no; Johnson, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. "-'. 10 Snecial Meetinl! Asnen City Council Julv 10. 2007 Councilman Johnson moved to adjourn at 8:10 p.m; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. All in favor, motion carried. 11