HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20070711
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 11. 2007
405 Gillespie - 707 N. Third ..............................................................................................3
ASPEN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER - recommendation ....................................... 4
435 W. Main - variance......................................................................................................5
500 W. Francis - Minor Development ............................................................................... 6
208 E. Hallam - Frost Barn FAR bonus .............................................................................7
1
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 11.2007
Chairperson Jeffrey Halferty called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.rn.
Commissioners in attendance: Brian McNellis, Sarah Broughton and
Michael Hoffman. Alison Agley was excused.
Staff present:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Jim True, Special Counsel
Disclosure:
MOTION: Brian moved to approve the minutes of May 9th as amended by
Michael and the minutes of May 23rd; second by Sarah. All in favor, motion
carried.
Staff comments:
Amy summarized Ordinance #30. Any property that becomes 30 years of
age, in whole or part you cannot make exterior alterations. You cannot
apply for a building permit or landuse review until you have gone through a
screening to determine if there is an historic resource on the site. The screen
starts with Chris Bendon and he will apply the landmark criteria. Ifhe
determines that there is nothing there eligible we will inform council and
HPC and you have seven days to object otherwise we will give the property
owner a letter that is good for five years that says we are not talking about
this. If there is something worth evaluating we will initiate a landmark
application. Amy said we think there are about 120 total properties that are
potentially significant but there is no list that has any status. Properties will
be dealt with case by case.
HPC commissioners were disturbed because they were not brought into the
loop. They did not know how to react when people asked them about the
ordinance. They are against the process as to how it came into place. The
board also felt that it should not have been brought in as an emergency
ordinance.
Sarah commented that at our last work session it was brought up by Rachel
Richards about updating the list and informing the homeowners of their
potential landmark status. That seemed like a proactive approach and what
we have created is an alarmist situation. .
2
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 11. 2007
Michael said the ordinance pushes back the time period at which something
can be considered historic from 40 years to 30 years. It doesn't
automatically create new historic structures. It creates a process to identify
those properties.
Brian commented that he also is concerned about the process and will
review the ordinance.
Jeffrey and Michael said in 1999 that whole symposium was about creating
a more proactive symbolic relationship between the public and the private
sector when it came to property rights. We just took a few steps back. We
need to revise our guidelines incredibly to help with this process.
405 Gillespie -707 N. Third
Amy said staff is not in agreement regarding the material selection for the
roof. Carol Craig has a Victorian in the West End and right now it has a
wood shingle roof on it. It has been remodeled and there are odd roof
junctures and it is leaking. Staff said they would be willing to sign off on
wood shingles or asphalt shingles but she would prefer metal.
Carol Craig said her house has been leaking for five years and every year
she got it re-shingled and she is fed up as it started leaking again. On the
ranch at Woody Creek she has a metal roof and they don't have to worry
about the pro-panel. Carol presented two types of metal roofs that would be
acceptable to her. The color would be dark.
Jeffrey inquired about the process that the roofer used. Carol said the roof
put a rubber under liner on but it still leaks in one particular place.
Sara said it seems to be in a joint in a comer.
Carol said she took many pictures of the leak and the leak is in one of the
valleys. She would also like to put more insulation in the roof at the same
time.
Brian said the wooden shingles are a great character to the house and he
would hate to loose them. Brian said he is sympathetic to the problem
because he has dealt with it in the past. The pro-panel could compound the
problem the way it is installed with rivets.
3
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 11. 2007
Jeffrey said there are numerous Victorian's that have rooflines and valleys
that do not leak. Since it is happening in the same location it sounds like
there is a detail that is being missed.
Amy pointed out that there is a flat roof in the house and it is almost like
there is a little swimming pool up there.
Jeffrey and Sarah offered to meet with the contractor and owner on site to
see if they can meet the owner's objective and still keep the historic
character of the roof. Carol said the contractor was Shane Stevenson
construction.
ASPEN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER - recommendation
Amy said there are three cabins that are to be relocated. In the approval the
condition was that three cabins be relocated pending the approval of a
specific site. In the packet are lists of property owners. who are interested in
the cabins. In general the Parks Dept. is not thrilled to continue to be the
focus of landing various historic buildings. If at all possible the three cabins
should be kept together but that might not happen. What are the areas that
HPC wants us to concentrate on: Should they be designated if a private
property owner takes them? Can they be hooked together, and can they be
out of the City.
Lennie Oates said they have been working on the cabin issues and would
like some feedback. If all three cabins were to be required to be on the same
property that would complicate the task unless you were willing to look at
the link idea or the Aspen Camp School for the deaf who might be interested
in the cabins. If they were designated it would be the cabin only not the
entire property.
Sarah suggested looking at the area behind the Red Brick and possibly they
could be turned into an art studio.
Jeffrey suggested that they have public visibility and a plaque with the
history of the cabin on it. They could be used as a shelter for the golf
course.
4
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 11. 2007
Michael's feeling is that they be visible, preserved and maintained. A
commitment from the land owner to preserve them for some period of time
should be drawn up. If they are out of the City maybe a deed restriction
could be attached.
Sarah said it would be best if they could be used and not be a gardening
shed.
435 W. Main - variance
Affidavit of posting - Exhibit I
Amy said at the final review for the Jewish Center there was the expectation
of a setback request on the west end of the site related to the playground due
to the slope and the drop in grade from west/east. They tried very hard to
have the building all in one level for accessibility, safety etc. You cannot
have something that lowers or raises grade within the setback more than 30
inches. IfHPC did not grant the variance it would limit the use of the
playground. In terms of the review standards staff feel the variance should
be granted because the whole idea of the project was to be respectful of the
height and the grade conditions of the cabins and that has been respected.
Suzanne Richmond, landscape architect Design Workshop. The area is
basically five feet from the property along the length of the playground.
With the variance the playground can remain on one level. The variance
goes from 30 to 48 inches along Fourth Street. Also, in order to preserve the
spruce tree we n~ed to keep the grade higher.
Michael asked what the purpose of the regulation was. Amy said it is to
eliminate activity in the perimeter of the property.
Chairperson Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing.
Cheryl Goldenberg ask for clarification. Suzanne explained that there will
be a wall and a fence along the sidewalk and it will be on the inside of the
fence and shrubs. The fence design has not been determined.
Dan McCartney, neighbor asked if the very old lilac bushes will be taken
out. Susanne said the lilac bushes under the spruce tree will stay and the
ones along the alley will be removed and placed on the site at a later date.
5
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 11.2007
The public hearing portion ofthe agenda item was closed.
Brian pointed out that a section drawing would have been helpful.
Michael said the change in grade are based on the preservation of the
historic cabins and because of that constraint this variance is necessary and
thereby mitigates an adverse impact that would otherwise exist to the
historic structure.
MOTION: Michael moved to approve Resolution # 31 approving the setback
variance on the west side of 435 W. Main Street, second by Sarah. Roll call
vote: Brian, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes; Jeffrey, yes. Motion carried r
500 W. Francis - Minor Development
Sara explained that the applicant wants to replace all of the windows that are
on the carriage house. Staff recommended that double hung windows be the
replacement window. HPC should discuss the window on the second story
above the door on the east elevation. We have not been able to find any
photographs of what was there historically. Staffrecommends approval with
conditions:
I. The windows be replaced as double hung windows.
2. Second story window be replaced with a style approved by HPC.
3. The windows on the north can remain the same style.
Trevor Everett represented the owner. It is our intent to replace the windows
on the carriage house. The window in the upper east elevation has a couple
of challenges. The window is right at the top of a set of stairs and a child
could fall through it. We need to make it a tempered glass and we are
proposing a mullion down the middle merely to add strength. We could
make it an awning style or double hung and just make the top operable.
Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no
public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed.
MOTION: Sarah moved to approve Resolution #32 for 500 W. Francis with
the following changes:
#2 condition states that the second story window will be placed as exhibited
tonight, as a double hung.
Motion second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried 4-0.
6
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 11. 2007
208 E. Hallam - Frost Barn FAR bonus
Exhibit I - affidavit
Sara said this request for 120 square foot bonus is a little different than your
normal request because the barn has already been rehabbed. The property
will voluntarily forfeit the remaining 380 square feet of the FAR bonus if the
120 square foot bonus is granted and that will be contingent on the
establishment of buy TDR certificates. The bonus is needed to convert the
garage into living space. There is 1,147 square feet of un-built FAR
remaining on the property. Staff finds that this request meets the criteria for
a bonus. By granting the 120 sq. ft. the applicant is able to establish one
more TDR. If the bonus is granted they forfeit 380 square feet of the
remaining bonus and they sever the five TDR's then there will be 17 square
feet of un-built FAR on the property. Basically the way you see the barn is
the way it will remain and staff feels this is a great preservation effort.
Mitch Haas, planning consultant
The applicant has a couple options. They could convert the garage to living
space and have 1,140 square feet of FAR build out left on the property and
the potential to ask for the 500 square foot bonus.
They could convert the garage and ask for 4 TDR's without the bonus. Once
you sever the TDR's the end result would be another 147 square feet ofF AR
left plus the potential of 500 square foot bonus.
Mitch said to leave nothing left on the property we need a small bonus to
make the math work so that we can sever 5 TDR's and leave only 17 square
feet. The concept is very basic. The approval would be conditional on
council approving the TDR's and the owner severing them.
Sarah said it seems like he is using the 120 ofthe bonus for the building and
packaging the leftover square footage of allowable FAR into TDR's.
Brian said the crux of the matter is there is a discrepancy between 147
square feet and an additional 1,000 square feet that could be built
somewhere else.
7
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 11. 2007
Sarah said she understands the reason for the bonus but we are giving you
square footage for not doing anything. I somewhat feel this is contrary to
what the program is for.
Michael said there are a few assumptions here, he has a right to build up to
the maximum FAR which is wrong.
Sarah said you should build to the right you have by code. This barn is not
the historic barn and that should be taken into account.
Michael said he supports the application but not the assumptions.
Mitch said this is simply that we move the square footage or not.
Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no
public comments and the public hearing was closed.
Michael said this is about preserving the balance of the lot and he can
support the small bonus. The HPC also needs to make a finding.
Jeffrey said we have an adaptive reuse of this barn and there is a greater
appreciation of this building.
Sarah said we are not talking about this historic structure we are voting on
that we are not building or adding onto this structure. Sarah said the
variance request meets criteria B, G, H for granting the FAR bonus and that
we appreciate the owner's willingness to transfer the development right
away from this property.
MOTION: Michael moved to approve Resolution #33, second by Sarah. All
in favor, motion carried.
MOTION: Michael moved to adjourn; second by Sarah. All infavor,
motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.rn.
,.
8