HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20070926
"
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
Septenlber~907
5:00 P~~
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISIT: NOON-
~~~
I. Roll call
II. Approval of nlinutes - Septenlber 12th.
III. Public COnlnlents
IV. Comnlission member comments
V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
VI. Project Monitoring
VII. Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be #36 )
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. 135 W. Hopkins Ave. - Major Development, Final,C (TYl'fJ J c f J 'dh
Variances, Public Hearing cont'd from Sept. 12tb (20 nlin.)
B. 408 E. Cooper Ave. - Aspen Sports - Minor Development,
Public Hearing continued from Sept. 12tb (40 nlin.) J(~,C j,t
IX. NEW BUSINESS
A. NONE
X. WORKSESSIONS
A. Referral comnlent - Proposed Anlendments to Ordinance
#30, Identification of Potential Historic Resources (30 min.)
B. Annual HPC Awards Selection (20 min.)
IX. ADJOURN 7:00 p.m.
Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH)
Staff presentation
Applicant presentation
Board questions and clarifications
Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing)
Board comments
Applicant rebuttal (comments)
Motion
No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting
of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a
quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue
the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring
vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes
of the members of the commission then present and voting.
PROJECT MONITORING
Jeffrey Halferty
555/557 Walnut
701 W. Main
640 N. Third
314 E. Hyman, Motherlode
930 Matchless
205 S. Galena~ Brand deck
134 W. Hopkins
212 W. Hopkins
920 W. Hallam
114 Neale Ave.
Mike Hoffman
308/310 Park
640 N. Third
Jewish Community Center
202 N. Monarch
320 W. Hallam Ave.
426 E. Main (Main and Galena)
507 Gillespie
Sarah Broughton
811/819 E. Hopkins
110 E. Bleeker
530,532,534 E. Hopkins (Connor Cabins)
100 East Bleeker
Doerr Hosier Center @ Meadows
406 E. Hopkins (Isis)
304 E. Hopkins (Elevation Restaurant)
B rian McNellis
629 Smuggler
Hotel Jerome
Jewish Community Center
Doerr Hosier Center @ Meadows
233 W. Main (Innsbruck)
Alison Agley
529 W. Francis
214 East Bleeker Street (historic house)
205 S. Mill Street (Bruno's Deck)
710 N. Third
Boomerang
501 W. Main Street (Christiana)
214 East Bleeker (new house)
520 E. Durant (Ajax Bldg)
'''~''~.''_."'''-"_'_''..__A__. "'~",..;."~"_"___""
CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS THA T HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL REVIEW:
508 E. Cooper (Cooper St. Pier Redevelopment)~ (July 12, 2006) extended 6 months
~Q,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
RE:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner~
135 West Hopkins, Major Development Review (Final) and Variances ~ Public
Hearing
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
September 26, 2007
SUMMARY: On September 12, 2007, HPC continued Final Review of the project with the
direction that the applicant restudy the west fayade of the new house to reduce its perceived
scale. The proposed slate roof material was also discussed during the meeting.
The applicant submitted changes to the west fayade of the new house and introduced new roof
forms and massing to the new house. The material palette of the new house was restudied with
horizontal wood siding proposed for the west elevation and a standing seam metal roof.
Staff recommends that HPC continue the application for further restudy.
APPLICANT: John Key, represented by Gretchen Greenwood of Gretchen Greenwood and
Associates, Inc.
PARCEL ID: 2735~124~59~112.
ADDRESS: 135 W. Hopkins Avenue, Lot A and the west 22 Y, feet of Lot B, Block 60, City and
Townsite of Aspen, Colorado.
ZONING: R~6, Residential
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL)
The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Final level, is asfollows. Staff reviews
the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the
design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to
the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to
continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the
recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the
evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve
I
with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny.
Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual
Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual
Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the
envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application
including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of
the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan
unless agreed to by the applicant.
Front Porch:
The proposed front porch meets the Residential Design Standards. Staff finds that the scale and
proportion of the front porch are consistent with the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines
11.2 and 11.4. Staff is concerned with the proposed front door detailing and pair of solid doors
and recommends that staff and monitor approve a more appropriate front door for the new house.
11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by
using a front porch.
. The front porch should be functional, in that it is used as a means of access to the entry.
. A new porch should be in similar size and shape to those seen traditionally.
. In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street;
nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that
orients to the street.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
. The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure.
. The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch.
Roof Forms:
The applicant proposes new roof forms for the new house (See Exhibit B for Conceptual
approvals and Exhibit C for Sept. 12th final review submittal). The overall roof line of the new
home is reduced by I foot, which results from these changes. Gable ends were added to the west,
north and south elevations of the new house. The roof height is reduced from what was
presented at Final Review; however, Staff is concerned with the complexity of roof forms for the
new house. Staff understands that the applicant is trying to reduce the perceived scale of the new
house by breaking up the roof forms, but finds that the number of gable forms, many of which
are not complete, proposed in this application is not the best solution for this project. The intent
statement of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Chapter II: New Buildings on
Landmarked Properties emphasizes that" simplicity and modesty in design are encouraged."
Staff recommends that the applicant simplify the roof forms similar to what was approved at
Conceptual Review (Exhibit B).
2
Staff recommends that HPC discuss the narrow, projecting utility shed proposed for the
southwest elevation, adjacent to the proposed front porch of the new house. The application
indicates that it will be used for utility poles. This "shed" is not appropriate for the front fayade
of the new house and adds more complexity to the west elevation along with a steep roofline that
is out of character with the house. Staff recommends that the applicant omit this new addition to
the design and return the previous approval (Exhibit B)where the sloped roof was pulled back
behind the front porch and front fayade of the house. Relevant Design Guidelines are:
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the
parcel.
. Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic
buildings on the original site.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
. The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure.
. The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch.
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those ofthe historic property.
. They should not overwhelm the original in scale.
11.6 Use roofforms that are similar to those seen traditionally on the block.
. Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roofforms
. Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context
. On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the
context.
. Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street
are discouraged.. These include geodesic domes and A-frames.
11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
o This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. Highly complex and ornately
detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on
historic sites.
Materials: The applicant proposes a standing seam metal roof for the new home, which is
consistent with Design Guideline 11.8.
The applicant has omitted the stone veneer originally proposed for the west elevation and
replaced it with 1.5 foot wide horizontal wood siding. The horizontal siding attempts to define
the first story of the new house and reduce the perceived proportion of the two story residence in
relation to the historic home. Staff finds that the wide proportion of the siding is out of scale
with the historic home (which has 4" wide horizontal siding), and is unsuccessful in reducing the
perceived scale of the new house. Staff does not recommend that the applicant replicate the
siding dimensions of the historic home; but rather find a solution that is consistent with
Guidelines 11.8 and 11.9.
3
11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale.
D Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are
encouraged.
D Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged.
11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic
property.
D These include windows, doors and porches.
D Overall, details should be modest in character.
Staff recommends that the applicant address the railing for the second floor deck that is currently
the wide wood siding, and look into replacing it with a transparent railing, similar to what was
proposed during the September 12'h meeting.
DECISION MAKING OPTIONS:
The HPC may:
· approve the application,
· approve the application with conditions,
· disapprove the application, or
· continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the HPC continue the application for restudy
of the west elevation of the new house and to simplifY the roofforms.
Exhibits:
A. Relevant Design Guidelines
B. Approved Conceptual plans, August 9, 2006
C. Final Review drawings, September 12, 2007
D. Staff Report from September 12,2007
E. HPC Resolution 22, Series of 2006
F. Application
4
"Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for 135 West Hopkins Avenue, Final Review"
11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by
using a front porch.
. The front porch should be functional, in that it is used as a means of access to the entry.
. A new porch should be in similar size and shape to those seen traditionally.
. In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street;
nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that
orients to the street.
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the
parcel.
. Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic
buildings on the original site.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
. The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure.
. The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch.
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property.
. They should not overwhelm the original in scale.
11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally on the block.
. Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms
. Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context
. On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the
context.
. Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street
are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames.
11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic
property.
D These include windows, doors and porches.
D Overall, details should be modest in character.
11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
D This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings.
D Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history
are especially discouraged on historic sites.
5
~'\l b
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM:
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE:
408 E. Cooper Avenue, Aspen Sports- Minor Review and Commercial Design
Review, PUBLIC HEARING
DATE:
September 26, 2007 (Continued from May 23, 2007)
SUMMARY: Aspen Sports has operated in their current location for 50 years. In 1968, the
local architecture firm Caudill and Associates redesigned and added onto the one story shop,
creating the masonry fayade and arches that exist today. A few years later, an upper story was
constructed over a portion ofthe building.
Aspen Sports proposes to replace materials and features on the front fayade of the store, and to
add new signage, lighting, and awnings. The building is located in the Commercial Core
Historic District, but has not been designated a landmark. Staff has identified it as a potential
historic resource.
HPC reviewed a proposed remodel of this building on August 30, 2006 and continued the
application for restudy. The applicant provided three options for review on May 23, 2007, at
which time the discussion was continued again with direction from the board to create upper
floor windows in compliance with the design guidelines, and to employee materials that are
consistent with the historic district. Minutes from the previous meetings are attached.
Staff has not supported this project through the previous reviews as none of the proposals
have adequately met the design guidelines. We recommend that HPC deny this Minor
Development application.
APPLICANT: Barnett- Fyrwald Holdings, represented by Joe Larken. The architect is Todd
Architecture.
PARCEL ID: 2737-182-16-009.
ADDRESS: 408 E. Cooper Avenue, Lot PT L and M, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen,
Pitkin County, Colorado.
ZONING: CC, Commercial Core.
MINOR DEVELOPMENT
The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal
materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design
I
guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the
HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue,
approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The
HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the
hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation
Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue
the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or
deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and
the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision
shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet
of the subject property in accordance with the procedures setforth in Chapter 26.316.
Staff Response: The proposed remodel does not amount to the City's definition of "demolition"
based on calculations provided by the architect. It does amount to a Minor Development
Review, and also requires compliance with the Commercial Design Review standards. During
previous HPC discussions of this project the Commercial Core was affected by a moratorium that
prevented any expansion of FAR. The moratorium has since ended.
The project involves a redesign of the front of the building, including removing the existing
arches, replacing entry doors and installing new storefront windows at the west bay. On the
second floor, based on HPC input at the last meeting, the applicant now proposes to infill an
existing deck and create windows that are flush with the masonry fayade.
Staff finds that the work on the upper floor is generally consistent with the design guidelines in
that the deep recess created by the deck is removed and replaced by traditional windows. The
band of windows could perhaps be restudied as punched openings, with masonry separating each
unit rather than the proposed cast stone.
Staffs objection continues to be the alteration to the ground floor. The guidelines call for entry
doors to be recessed, but not the entire display window. This is an existing condition of the
subject building, however the masonry arch mitigates the situation by reinforcing the fayade line
at the sidewalk edge. Staff finds that it is inappropriate and out of compliance with the
guidelines to expose the storefront windows in the way that this application proposes. The
relevant guidelines are:
13.8 Maintain the alignment of facades at the sidewalk's edge.
D Place as much of the facade of the building at the property line as possible.
D Locating an entire building front behind the established storefront line is inappropriate.
D Where a portion of a building must be set back from the sidewalk, use landscape elements to
define the sidewalk edge.
13.12 Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core facades.
D Rectangular forms should be vertically oriented.
D The facade should appear as predominantly flat, with any decorative elements and projecting
or setback "articulations" appearing to be subordinate to the dominant form.
2
13.15 Contemporary interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged.
o A contemporary design that draws upon the fundamental similarities among historic buildings
without copying them is preferred. This will allow them to be seen as products of their own
time and yet be compatible with their historic neighbors.
o The literal imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
o In essence, infill should be a balance of new and old in design.
13.18 Maintain the repetition of similar shapes and details along the block.
o Upper story windows should have a vertical emphasis. In general, they should be twice as tall
as they are wide.
o Headers and sills of windows on new buildings should maintain the traditional placement
relative to cornices and belt courses.
13.19 Maintain the pattern created by recessed entry ways that are repeated along a block.
o Set the door back from the front facade approximately 4 feet. This is an adequate amount to
establish a distinct threshold for pedestrians.
o Where entries are recessed, the building line at the sidewalk edge should be maintained by the
upper floor( s).
o Use transoms over doorways to maintain the full vertical height of the storefront.
COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW
An application for Commercial Design Review may be approved, approved with conditions, or
denied based on conformance with the following criteria:
I. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial
Design Standards or any deviation from the Standards provides a more-appealing pattern
of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the
purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from
the Standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested Design Elements, is not
required but may be used to justify a deviation from the Standards.
2. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the
proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial
Design Standards, to the greatest extent practical. Amendments to the fayade of the
building may be required to comply with this section.
3. For properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or located within a
Historic District, the proposed development has received Conceptual Development Plan
approval from the Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.415. This
criterion shall not apply if the development activity does not require review by the
Historic Preservation Commission.
Staff Response: The Commercial Design Standards are attached to this memo as "Exhibit A."
This proposal represents a replacement of existing materials, not an alteration to the footprint or
massing of the building, therefore most of the Commercial Design Standards are not relevant.
Staff does not find that the proposal creates any conflicts with the Standards. To the extent that
current features may not entirely comply with the Standards, they may remain in place.
3
DECISION MAKING OPTIONS:
The HPC may:
. approve the application,
. approve the application with conditions,
. disapprove the application, or
. continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC deny Minor Development approval for the
proposed fayade changes finding that they do not meet the design guidelines.
All motions must be made in the affirmative, therefore staff has prepared a resolution approving the
project. The recommendation is to make a motion to approve, but then to vote against passage of
the motion.
Exhibits:
Resolution #_, Series of2007
A. Commercial Design Standards
B. Minutes of August 30, 2006 and May 23,2007
C. Application
4
Exhibit A: Commercial Design Standards.
The following design standards shall apply to commercial, lodging, and mixed-use development:
A. Building Relationship to Primary Street.
A street wall is comprised of buildings facing principal streets and public pedestrian spaces.
Consistent street walls provide a sense of a coherent district and frame an outdoor room.
Interruptions in this enclosure can lessen the quality of a commercial street. Comer buildings are
especially important, in that they are more visible and their scale and proportion affects the street
walls of two streets. Well-designed and located pedestrian open spaces can positively affect the
quality of the district, while remnant or leftover spaces can detract from the downtown. A
building's relationship to the street is entirely important to the quality of the downtown
pedestrian environment. Split-level retail and large vertical separations from the sidewalk can
disrupt the coherence of a retail district. The following standards shall apply:
I. Building facades shall be parallel to the adjoining primary streets. Minor elements of the
building fayade may be developed at irregular angles.
2. Building facades along primary streets shall be setback no more than the average setback
of the adjoining buildings and no less than the minimum requirement of the particular
zone district. Exempt from this provision are building setbacks accommodating On-Site
Pedestrian Amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030.
3. Building facades along primary streets shall maintain a consistent setback on the first and
second story.
4. Commercial buildings shall be developed with the first floor at, or within two (2) feet
above, the level of the adjoining sidewalk, or right-of-way if no sidewalk exists. "Split-
level" retail frontage is prohibited.
5. Commercial buildings incorporating a setback from a primary street shall not incorporate
a substantial grade change between the building fayade and the public right-of-way.
"Moats" surrounding buildings are prohibited.
B. Pedestrian Amenity Space.
Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting, and vital
downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere.
Pedestrian amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-
of-way or private property within commercial areas.
On parcels required to provide pedestrian amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030 - Pedestrian
Amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the
method or combination of methods of providing the Pedestrian Amenity shall be at the option of
the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable,
according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards:
5
...':
I. The dimensions of any proposed on-site pedestrian amenity sufficiently allow for a
variety of uses and activities to occur considering any expected tenant and future potential
tenants and uses.
2. The pedestrian amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this
characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade
trees, solar access, view orientation, and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent
rights-of-way are encouraged.
3. The pedestrian amenity, and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent
structures, rights-of-way, and uses, contributes to an inviting pedestrian environment.
4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls,
sidewalks, or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian
environment.
5. Any variation to the Design arid Operational Standards for Pedestrian Amenity, Section
26.575.030(F) promote the purpose of the pedestrian amenity requirements.
6. The Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as
applicable, may reduce the pedestrian amenity requirement by any amount, such that no
more than half the requirement is waived, as an incentive for well-designed projects
having a positive contribution to the pedestrian environment. The resulting requirement
may not be less than 10%. On-site provision shall not be required for a reduction in the
requirement. A mix of uses within the proposed building that enliven the surrounding
pedestrian environment may be considered.
C. Street-Level Building Elements.
The "storefront," or street-level portion of a commercial building is perhaps the single most
important element of a commercial district building. Effective storefront design can make an
entire district inviting and pedestrian friendly. Unappealing storefront design can become a
detriment to the vitality of a commercial district. In order to be an effective facility for the sale
of goods and services, the storefront has traditionally been used as a tool to present those goods
and services to the passing pedestrian (potential customer). Because of this function, the
storefront has traditionally been as transparent as possible to allow maximum visibility to the
interior. The following standards shall apply:
I. Unarticulated, blank walls are prohibited. Fenestration, or an alternate means of fayade
articulation, is required on all exterior walls.
2. Retail buildings shall incorporate, at a minimum, a 60% fenestration ratio on exterior
street-level walls facing primary streets. (For example: each street-level wall of a retail
building that faces a primary street must be comprised of at least 60% fenestration
penetrations and no more than 40% solid materials.) This provision may be reduced or
waived for lodging properties with no, or limited, street-level retail, office buildings with
no retail component, and for Service/CommerciallIndustrial buildings.
3. Building entrances shall be well-defined and apparent.
4. Building entrances shall be designed to accommodate an internal airlock such that
temporary seasonal airlocks on the exterior of the building are unnecessary.
5. Non-traditional storefronts, such as along an alleyway, are encouraged.
6
D. Parking.
Parking is a necessary component of a successful commercial district. The manner in which
parking is physically accommodated has a larger impact upon the quality of the district that the
amount of parking. Surface parking separating storefronts from the street creates a cluttered,
inhospitable pedestrian environment. A downtown retail district shaped by buildings, well-
designed storefronts, and a continuous street wall is highly preferred over a district shaped by
parking lots. Well-placed and well-designed access points to parking garages can allow
convenient parking without disrupting the retail district. The following standards shall apply:
I. Parking shall only be accessed from alleyways, unless such access is unavailable or an
unreasonable design solution in which case access from a primary street shall be designed
in a manner that minimizes disruption of the pedestrian environment.
2. Surface parking shall not be located between the Street right-of-way and the building
fayade.
3. Above grade parking garages in commercial districts shall incorporate ground-floor
commercial uses and be designed in a manner compatible with surrounding buildings and
uses.
4. Above grade parking garages shall not reveal internal ramping on the exterior fayade of
the building.
E. Utility, Delivery, and Trash Service Provision.
When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building
can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one building can
detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are
important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply:
I. A utility, trash, and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley meeting
the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060 Utility/Trash/Recycle Service
Areas, unless otherwise established according to said section.
2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley.
Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall
be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site
conditions, such as a historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments
shall be properly licensed.
3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility
shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged.
4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the
roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the Street as practical.
5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within
the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed
behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a
7
public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for
future ventilation and ducting needs.
Suggested Design Elements. The following guidelines are building practices suggested by the
City, but are not mandatory. In many circumstances, compliance with these practices may not
produce the most-desired development and project designers should use their best judgment.
A. Sifmaf!e:
Signage should be integrated with the building to the extent possible. Integrated signage
areas already meeting the City's requirements for size, etc. may minimize new tenant
signage compliance issues. Common tenant listing areas also serves a public wayfinding
function, especially for office uses. Signs should not block design details of the building
on which they are placed. Compliance with the City's sign code is mandatory.
B. Dis/Jlav windows:
Display windows provide pedestrian interest and can contribute to the success of the retail
space. Providing windows that reveal inside activity of the store can provide this pedestrian
interest.
C. Lirzhtinf!:
Well-lit (meaning quality, not quantity) display windows along the first floor create
pedestrian interest after business hours. Dynamic lighting methods designed to catch
attention can cheapen the quality of the downtown retail environment. Illuminating certain
important building elements can provide an interesting effect. Significant light trespass
should be avoided. Illuminating the entire building should be avoided. Compliance with the
City's Outdoor Lighting code, Section 26.575.050, is mandatory.
D. Orif!inal Townsite Articulation:
Buildings spanning more than one Original Townsite Lot should incorporate fayade
expressions coincidental with these original parcel boundaries to reinforce historic scale.
This may be inappropriate in some circumstances, such as on large corner lots.
E. Architectural Features:
Parapet walls should be used to shield mechanical equipment from pedestrian views. Aligning
cornices and other architectural features with adjacent buildings can relate new buildings to
their historical surroundings. Awnings and canopies can be used to provide architectural
interest and shield windows and entryways from the elements.i
8