HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19750703 Study Session City Council/H~ .............. July 3, 1975
Meeting was opened by Mayor Standley at 5:15 p.m. with Councilmembers George Perry, Michael Behrendt and
Nina Johnston plus HPC members Bob Marsh, Terry End, Florence Glidden, Norman Burns, Lary Green and Jerry
Michael. Also present were City Attorney Stuller and City Manager Mahoney.
i i Mayor Standley noted this was a joint meeting to discuss with the HPC their role as a cormmittee for the City
i ! of Aspen. He noted that several people had spoken to him about the treatment given them by the HPC and that
t i maybe they should go over Article Nine of the Z~ing Code. Be questioned whether they weren't usurping
-- Council's perogatives in judging buildings. He asked that the City Attorney interpret the scope of the HPC.
Ms. Stuller noted that the HPC had jurisdiction over the Historic District in terms of exterior work done
and that it was strictly design criteria (Sec. 24-9.11). The Mayor was Particularly concerned over the
Winter Shop redesign application. Councilwoman Pederson arrives. It had been recommended by the HPC that
they extend the wood siding all the way to the alley, they had come to Council for an encroachment (which
Council had granted) and now they find out that the Building Inspector denied the permit because of a Violati¢
of the Building Code if the wood siding were to be put up. He felt that the HPC should not he making any
stipulations if they are illegal and it should have been caught before it went to Council since their time
was wasted. Lary Green noted that the HPC had only given preliminary approval and the application would have
?had to go thrQugh for final before resabmittal to the Building Inspector's Office. He explained that the
?~mmittee had fe!t that the building would look better along the side and it fit in better with their criteria.
Standley's point was that there evidentally was a breakdown in the system and that they should make it easier
for the applicant. It was mentioned that the Building Inspector should have caught the error previous to
its going to Council and Jerry Michael noted that all HPC applications are routed through the Building Inspect
first before it is scheduled on their agenda. Standley asked how they evaluate a building with Green noting
that the building should not look incongruous with adjacent buildings and Marsh adding that they were interest
in any building in the historical district. Michael asked if Council felt that they had been overstepping
their bounds with Councilman Behrendt denying this. Green mentioned that they have had problems with some
buildings in town such as the Mill Street Station, which had been allowed a permit for exterior work without
the HPC's approval, but that these things happened and they had accepted it. Standley asked what their
recourse was in cases such as this with the City Attorney noting that it was up to the Building Inspector or
they could take the case to Municipal Court. Councilwoman Johnston questioned if they could put on their
routing slip that approval is given subject to the Building Inspector's comments? Green asked how Council
felt about the Winter Shop? He noted that the HPC felt that they should try to retain the brick on the
building and would they like to see it remain? He noted that the applicant does have the right to change
the character of the building. Members ~qUesti0ned how much right the HPC had to ask that an applicant change
his design with the City Attorney explaining the difference between autonomous and arbitrary. She noted that
they do have criteria, passed by Resolution, that they have to go by. Stanford said that they ~ela~e to
criteria through scale, size and nuauber of stories of a building. He felt that some buildings were out of
scale here and that this criteria has helped develop new buildings. They also review materials for
compatibility with the surrounding materials. Standley asked how he felt about the Winter Shop with Stanford
noting that the applicants had the opportunity to make it more harmonious with the neighborhood. Standley
wondered if the thrust had been to Victorianize the city With Stanford pointing out that on the contrary,
they had given approval to several building with good contemporary design, one such example is the Alpine
Jewelers store which although completely modern fits in with the older buildings because of its red brick
and the fact that the windows are the same shape as those around the area. Mahoney noted that he had been
i I under the impression that the BPC was simply an advisory board but that he had found out, when he had come
in about the Wheeler basement window, that they were more of a decision-making group. Glidden said that they
had had a study session with architects invited and only one, Ted Mularz, even bothered to come and give them
their feelings. Stanford said that he usually had a pre-application meeting with the architect to determine
what the intent of the change was and what the design would be. Standley asked how they looked at temporary
structures and City Attorney Stuller noted that the building code doesn't "see" temporary structures - they
aren't considered - and that applicants have to go through a preliminary and final review. Standley was
specifically speaking of the IDCA tent which didn't have a permit and yet the Pavillion for the Arts had been
turned down by the HPC before they even had a hearing. Standley felt that what they were talking about was
consistency in their methods. He also brought Up the problem over the Arts Festival's painting of the
construction boards. It was determined by the City Attorney that the construction boards, although technical~
out in the street, were private property and thus the City didn't have any jurisdiction over them. Standley
questioned how the HPC had gotten involved in something that was out of their jurisdiction. Green explained
that two of the construction areas were in the historic district and Burns felt that they had also been reacti
to the Ordinance against billboards. Green said that he, as a personal thing, had called owners to verify
if they had given their permission and two of the owners hadn't.
Tom Wells, who had come before the HPC for both the IDCA and Arts Festival, noted that there had been a mix
up over the temporary structure of the kiosk but that he had felt "condescended to" by the HPC. Standley
noted that they had to develop something in the building code to deal with temporary structures and Burns
felt that a time limit on these structures should also be included. Standley also felt that they should make
it easier for the applicants who have to go through all the zoning and building code red tape by making within
City Hall interaction better. He felt that it was hard to determine who's making the laws, otherwise.
Members adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
Susan B. Smith, Deputy City Clerk