Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20081008ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 Contents Lift I -Conceptual Review -Public Hearing .................................. 204 N. Monarch -final review cont'd from 9/10/08 ....................... Popcorn Wagon ................................................................................ 720 E. Hyman Ave. -Aspen Athletic Club -Minor Development And Landmark Designation ............................................................. ............................... 1 ............................... 7 ............................. 11 ............................. 11 ............................. 11 18 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 Chairperson, Michael Hoffman called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. Commissioners in attendance: Ann Mullins, Brian McNellis, Sarah Broughton and Nora Berko. Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk MOTION: Brian moved to approve the minutes of August 13`h with one amendment and the minutes of August 27`h; second by Michael. All in favor, motion carried. Lift I -Conceptual Review -Public Hearing Exhibits I -Letter from the Ski Company II -Proposed resolution III -Lodge pool house IV -Letter from Mary Janss -requesting that the native grass is preserved. V -Alison Agley -email about preserving the chewing fescue grass. Possibly the pool house could be moved forward toward the poma lift a little so that it is more of an active building. Sara pointed out that this is the fourth hearing and at the last meeting HPC was looking at a site plan that included a poma lift and activating the historic Lift I corridor and making it an active ski back area. HPC requested more information; contextual rendering, elevations, and information that put the relocation of the steak house into context with the surrounding development. They have provided that information and overall we are recommending approval of conceptual review and relocation of the designated steak house and relocation of the skier's lodge and pool house. Staff feels the addition of the poma lift does not detract from the lift one apparatus. It is a great idea to activate that corridor. In terms of the historic steak house relocation the applicant provided illustrations showing the effect of the height and mass of the Lift I lodge which is where the Holland house used to be. There would be a 30 foot increase in height if the steak house stays in its original location. The increase in height would definitely be significant and the steak house would lose its prominence if there was a huge ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 building hovering over it. Staff recommends approval of the relocation of the steak house which meets criteria 4. The addition to the steak house would be similar to what was approved in 2006. It is a circulation corridor and it meets the guidelines in terms of height, mass and scale. We were wondering about elevator access to the second floor and the applicant can elaborate on that because right now it is just a stairway corridor. Skier's lodge and pool house. Staff is in support of the proposed relocation of the skier's lodge which is listed on Ord. #48. They are not proposing any additions to the lodge. Moving it down and making it into a museum is appropriate. The proposed location in terms of the setback works well. There is plenty of public space around it. The relationship of the pool house to the chalet lodge is also appropriate. It is being kept in the same configuration. The proposed elevator roof penetration is minimal and you can barely notice it. It does not adversely affect the integrity and we are in support of everything they are proposing for the lodge. The Ski Club building is being brought back to its 1950's size. Regarding the Deep Powder cabins the Ski Co. is willing to accept the cabins if they get approval from the Forest Service and can acquire all the approvals that are needed. They do want to incorporate them into their program of useful buildings. If they are slated for demolition or a major addition they are offering the City the right of first refusal. They will not accept the cabins if they are historically designated. If the cabins go to the county we do not have jurisdiction over designation. Staff feels the site plan is appropriate without added additional buildings. HPC has the authority to make recommendations on the entire master plan. Stephen Holly, Poss Architecture & Planning Stephen thanked staff for the hard work that they put into the process. Staff has aided us in every step of the way and we really appreciate it. Stephen addressed staff's recommendations: The platter towers do not detract from the historic lift one apparatus. The stream line pathways and simplified landscape is a positive addition. There will be a more specific landscape plan for final review. An elevation was provided to show the increase in height of the Lift I lodge if the steak house is left in its original location. The steak house would get assumed by the building. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 The addition to the steak house is just a stair core that connects the two levels. Previously we had an elevator and when HP C gave conceptual approval there was a condition that the elevator be removed. The pool house will be moved down in the same relationship that is there now. At this time no addition is proposed to the chalet lodge. There is an elevator required by code in the museum. The lift structure will be returned to its 1950 size. At final we will have photos of what the back side looks like. The Deep Powder cabins and out buildings will be stabilized. The boat tow is the property of the city and we would like to work with staff on how to restore it and whether it should go inside the museum. There has been a lot of citizen input with regards to the design. At Planning & Zoning we received a unanimous vote of approval. We would like HPC to make a statement and support this master plan to revitalize this area in context with its historic nature. Michael said his concern is the relationship of the buildings to each other. Sara said the erosion around where the steak house is, is part of the reasons why we feel it can be relocated. The buildings won't be concentrated and there is plenty of open space. By moving the steak house down you will have a stronger relationship as opposed to having a huge back drop of an enormous new lodge building. They plan on moving it 80 feet down and it will retain its relationship to the street. Nora asked what will bring us to the museum. Stephen said the first level of the steak house will be some kind of local eating establishment with reasonable pricing. Nora asked if there is a way to interact the lodge area with the museum. Georgia Hanson said they have a lot of planning going on and nothing has been decided yet. Bob Daniels went over some of the proposed resolution changes. The changes are cleanup and not fundamental issues. #4 add circulation and stair structure. #5 skier chalet lodge and pool house. #8 provided in the representations. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 #9 have the letter from David Bellack be referenced. Some kind of language that says the relocation of the deep powder cabins be incorporated into the Aspen Skiing Co. program is approved as represented in the attached letter from the Aspen Skiing Company. # 11 and # 12 add pool house instead of ancillary. # 14 Because of the complexity we would request a two year window relative to the final development plan which is consistent with the prior application. We also need a reference to the negotiations to ordinance #48. Jim True said we can add an acknowledge to the resolution indicating that this is considered part of the negotiation period under ordinance #48 and that the parties have reached a conclusion that is consistent with ordinance #48. Sara said you can also add a statement that H PC supports the entire master plan. Brian inquired about the $30,000. Sara said it is a way to have a property owner have responsibility. Brian asked if the figure should be renegotiated. Amy said it is somewhat of an attention getter. If we make it more of a significant amount it makes more of a burden on the property owner. Bob Daniel said in the resolution that deals with the bond you could change may to will be negotiated. Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. Andrew Kole, task force representative. Andrew pointed out that over 2000 man hours went into this proposal. Nothing here was done quickly. One of the key efforts to make the steak house work was by moving the building down you can enhance the financial possibilities. You now have something that can, appeal to locals and people staying up there. It is a better setting for people to get to. Alan Harvey, task force representative. This plan is an opportunity to add new vigor to the neighborhood and honor the history. The neighborhood has changed in the last three years. There are buildings that are gone. The skier chalet lodge is to be moved and be a museum and I would hope that the developers work with the Historical Society to create a vital space. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 MaryAnn Meyer, task force member. We spent countless days and countless hours working on this. The final analysis is that we have an incredible campus of historic buildings and it provides 12 months a year lights on situation. David Bellock, attorney for the Aspen Skiing Company: This is something we are trying to do for the community. We haven't done the engineering to see if can all work to make it a functional lift shack but we have committed to try. We would give notice to the City if they cannot be accommodated. Two ideas are a lift shack or a picnic warming shelter is another idea. Sara said this is a problem we are facing in Aspen as to where the small outhouses go. Amy suggested adding an advisory level to work with the Ski Co to complete the buildings in a minor restoration. Some of the walls are missing. Cliff Weiss said there is a large deck off the north side of the skier chalet restaurant. We tried to adjust the position between the lodge and the restaurant with the lift in between so that there was some of the old chalet style intact. It is somewhat a residential neighborhood but we wanted to have some vitality spread out. There will also be a lot of foot traffic coming from Dean Street. There is also a foot path taking you up South Aspen Street. John Sarpa said the group still has a lot of work to do but the plan presented tonight is exciting and the 27 people involved approved this plan. Ann said now that the site isn't being disturbed by the underground parking garage the existing landscape should be protected and retained along with the retention of as much of the native grass as possible. Bob said in order to get the lift corridor down and accommodate return skiing and grooming etc. there will be no vegetation between the skier chalet steak house and the fence line. Along the north side of the Dolinsek property the trees will be retained. Michael went over all the conditions: 1-8 are acceptable. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 #9 condition amended. Ann added a condition that some kind of interpretive signage go on the Deep Powder cabins. Amy suggested adding that staff will have an advisory roll with the Ski Company about the repair and rehabilitation of the cabins. The board agreed. # 12 amended. Add pool house and change may to will be revisited. # 14 amended. Two year period to submit a development plan. # 15 amended. Work with parks to retain and restore native grasses where appropriate. The area in and around the bottom terminus of Lift one, the poma and the ski back corridor. # 16 The conceptual approval set forth herein and the lift one COWOP master plan are considered the appropriate culmination of negotiations commenced pursuant to ordinance 48 regarding the property located at 233 Gilbert Street, Skier Chalet lodge. # 17 The HPC recommends to city council that it approves the lift one COWOP master plan and approval of negotiations to Ord. 48 regarding the property at 233 Gilbert Street. Amy suggested that a condition be added regarding the historic buildings indicating a phasing plan. # 18 The applicant will present a phasing plan at final review regarding the historic buildings. Brian asked if the board was concerned about losing potential funding in the future from the federal government for upkeep of preservation. Amy said the steak house is not on the national register and moving the building will eliminate it being on the register. We are compromising its historic integrity in a certain sense and we all struggled with that but came to the point that we were leaving it in its best situation. Bob said we clearly have the obligation to designate the skier's chalet lodge after its relocation.. Do we have the same obligation with the steak house after it is moved? It probably should be designated. Chris Bendon said our approach to the ordinance in the master plan is to undesignated the land that the steak house sits on now and the new parcel that is created for the steak house to sit on will be designated historic. The 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 historic designation moves with the steak house. That was the intent of the ordinance. Jim True recommended a statement be added to the resolution that both buildings will be designated. # 19 Historic designations will be pursued by the applicant for the skier chalet steak house and the skier chalet lodge. MOTION: Brian moved to approve resolution #23, 2008 subject to the changes and conditions stated above by the commission this evening; second by Ann. Roll call vote: Brian, yes; Ann,yes; Nora, yes; Michael,yes. Motion carried 4-0. 204 N. Monarch -final review cont'd from 9/10/08 Sarah was seated. Public notice -Exhibit I Sara said during the approvals for conceptual HPC had a few conditions of approval: 1. One was to study the front porch. 2. Push the development back from the west lot line to be in line with the adjacent Blue Vic. 3. Restudy the depth of the eaves on the entire house to be .more proportionate with the historic context. Staff found that the applicant has satisfied conditions 2 and 3. The issue of the front porch has not changed since conceptual. It would be helpful if HPC gave specific recommendations on the front porch. Overall staff is concerned about a few issues with the final proposal. The front porch proportions and also the combination of the proposed materials. Issues to discuss tonight: Landscape. There are trees proposed in the alleyway which is not open. Staff recommends the Parks Dept. work with the monitor and applicant to come up with a solution. Staff feels no trees should be planted in the alleyway to preserve the open feel. Another aspect should be the trees that are proposed between the Blue Vic and the new house. The proposed line of 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 trees doesn't reflect the traditional landscape that you would have seen. Rose bushes or lilacs are more in characteristic of this time period. Front porch: Staff feels the elements of the front porch are still dis- proportionate specifically with the porch of the Blue Vic. We think that the short sandstone bases and metal columns and the combination of materials and weight doesn't have any relationship to either Victorian on either side of the new building. We are recommending that the applicant continue to restudy the front porch. The guideline sited is 11.9. Staff is also concerned about the slanted chimney cap. It is an interesting element but is distracting in the historic context and it is not appropriate for the historic site. Also the proposed light fixtures are very contemporary and they should be simplified to meet guideline 14.6. Materials: The materials: Staff is concerned about the combination of materials because they really don't relate to the historic resource. Stan Clauson, Clauson Associates, Inc. Landscape plan. Stan said alternations have been made after reading the resolution. Wood rose and common lilac along the border between the historic resource and the proposed residence. We would like to place some bristle cone pine in that area for screening. That could be best done with staff and monitor on-site. Historically there was very little plantings and mostly trees. We have photographs to that respect. Alleyway: The subdivision improvement calls for a new sidewalk on Bleeker and a sidewalk agreement along Monarch to allow for the installation of a sidewalk whenever the City deems this appropriate. The restoration of a curb cut and installation of a typical tree planting at the throat of the alley. The trees we propose in the alley are not specifically addressed in the subdivision agreement but not prohibited. It seems to be a reasonable way to use the space. Jeffrey Halferty, architect: The front porch can be massaged and we can work with staff and monitor. We looked at the column posts and stone and we can simplify a lot of things to meet the goals of the HPC. We were trying to create a product of its own time. We didn't want a turned post because we didn't want it to be Victorian. The new materials are represented in the mockup. Red stone 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 mahogany with cedar shake and zinc elements. We would prefer a clad window due to maintenance and we can match the style and shape but we can discuss that with the clients. The chimney cap was just an embellishment and a protective element. We can do away with it and work with staff and monitor. The lighting fixture is something that we can simplify and make a less modern fixture and not replicate an historic feature. We prefer to use a natural wood and we feel barn wood is not appropriate. The simplest way would be to do a painted clapboard detail but that doesn't set it as a product of its own time. The wood siding is a large element of this house. We satisfied HPC goals with the mass and scale. We have pushed back the depths of the eaves which helps. We are trying to make the material palate comply with the guidelines for infill. Tim Semrau: Photograph -Exhibit II Tim said the owner of the Blue Vic and us would like a little screening between the houses. On the materials the stone is the same as around the Jerome. We very much believe in the HPC guidelines and making the house as part of its time. Our materials help differentiate it from the historic resources. On condition #3 we would like it changed and we are willing to look at other window options. We would like the removal of condition #5 and have that be a discussion with the Parks Department as to how they would like to treat that. Clarifications and questions: Sarah said part of the porch element came back and hit the house. The sketch that Tim handed out only addresses the post and there is no change to the massing. Everything here we are seeing is what we are being asked to approve. Tim said except the fascia detail on the 3-d drawing is inaccurate. Jeffrey said the metal cladding can be discussed and we could go to a wood fabric. Tim said the final material of the post can match the final material on the siding. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 Sarah asked what kind of material the siding is. Tim said mahogany. The size and height are correct. The spacing between the board is like a rain screen on the entire house. Chairperson Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Sarah commented on the porch and the tapered columns are a nice addition and work well on the house. The new fascia detail is more complimentary and in keeping with the guidelines. Ann said the revisions of the porch are fine and the materials are appropriate. Texturally they are different and a nice solution. The windows are fine. Amore contemporary- light should be researched. Sarah said the material palate is fine and having the rain screen is OK. I am in favor of the metal clad windows. The mahogany is beautiful and with a little stain will work well. The palate has a lot of the same thing but that could be OK. The most important thing is the mass and scale and we have reached that. The details need to be kept fine and keep the rusty look out of it. Brian said he has no problem with what is being proposed. The photos presented showing how the mahogany siding works are very helpful. It is something that can work. If the siding is mahogany I would said eliminate the spacing in between or go with a painted siding that allows the spacing to occur. The windows are fine. Tim said the gap in the siding gives a shadow line and we can certainly work with staff on the size of that gap. I've done it a couple of times. On the porch return the neighbor to the north has the same return and secondly it is in line with the windows. The side of the porch dies into the wall. We could certainly go to cedar shingles rather than shakes. Jeffrey said they can simplify the chimney cap. Brian stated that the landscaping in the alley is beneficial to the applicants and the people next door. The houses are relatively close together. 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 The alley is gone and has basically lost its use and it might as well be planted as long as they are traditional plant materials. Sarah concurred with Brian and Ann. Stan said the city could open the alley at anytime. Stan said they will work with the Parks department and ask Mr. Hodgson to get involved and hopefully he will participate. Sarah said it needs to be thought out as to what it will look like in 30 years. Ann said the applicant has worked hard to make this work and the conditions can be worked out with staff and monitor. Michael went over the conditions: 1. Front porch is approved as presented tonight. 2. The palate is approved with further review in terms of refinement of the detailing and the choice of final roof material. (detail of rain screen) (detail of posts). 3. Eliminate 4. Chimney cap eliminated and to be restudied and reviewed by staff and monitor. 5. Landscaping in alley to be approved by staff, monitor and the Parks Department. MOTION.' Sarah moved to approve resolution #24 for Lift I as amended; second by Ann. All in favor, motion carried 4-0. Monitor -Ann and Brian Popcorn Wagon MOTION: Sarah opened the public nearing and moved to continue the Popcorn Wagon until 10/22/2008; second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried. 720 E. Hyman Ave. -Aspen Athletic Club -Minor Development And Landmark Designation ll ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 Jason Lasser, planner said this is a voluntary designation. Designation has three criteria, (a)the event pattern or trend related to local histories (b) people who .contributed and in this case it was Robin Molny (c) physical design and whether it contributes. We are looking at the exterior. The second component is minor review. Keep the existing planters which are in the right-of--way guideline 1.16. There is no encroachment license. Engineering doesn't have a problem with that if they are not modified or changed at all. They are OK with the conifer trees being removed from the planters but they are not OK with redoing anything structural on the walls of the planters. Guideline 2.9 covering original building materials. Right now they are painted and we are recommending removal of the paint. Guideline 3.3 keeping ratio to the windows. They are adding a new floor on the interior side, the courtyard space. Right now it is a two story volume. They are proposing to put a floor in there so the perception is that you look through the exterior glazing and that floor line will interrupt the vertical glazing that is butt jointed along the facade. There will also be a glass railing. I am not sure HPC has purview over the inside but it is something that you will perceive from the exterior, guideline 3.3. Guideline 3.5, 3.7 talk about the windows. They are proposing to replace the plywood hoppers that are in two locations. There are two glue lamb beans across that create a horizontal structure and in between that is the glazing. Above that is a line of hopper windows that fold out to provide ventilation. They are proposing to replace those with glazing in the same location and they are not changing the proportions or the framing detail. Staff supports the change. Guideline 4.1 talks about preserving the doors. On the ground floor there are sliding doors. You can open the doors and it looks like a transparent space. The proposal is that the doors be fixed and staff is recommending that they keep the existing aluminum clad sliding doors. 14.6 and 14.7 relates to the lighting. We haven't seen any lighting and that should be discussed. Staff recommends approval of designation and the minor review with conditions. Condition: Keeep existing doors on the ground floor. Remove the conifers. If the planters are replaced Parks has a planting recommendation. 12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 Remove the beige paint to reveal the existing wood. If planters are modified or removed that will have to be put within the lot line. Amy pointed out that there are pictures that the planters are original. Robin Molny studied at Taliesen. The integration of the inside to the outside would have been important. You can see through the building and how the flooring on the inside comes out. These planters are important and are part of modern historic landscape in which we do not have many examples of in town. Staff feels they should stay. Rich Kailen, architect with Charles Cunniffe. We would continue the plants on Hyman and plant aspen trees around Original to. keep the pedestrian link. That would require us to redevelop the planters. The basement continues out to the lot line and the planters have done water damage to the basement. We would we rebuild them to what they were before. Our client loves the building and has already done some repairs to bring out the character of the wood. He also has put copper flashing on the glue lamb beans. Either way the planters need to be torn apart and reworked. The planters are as high as they are because there is a basement under them. We would also pull off the pavers and determine the water damage. Jason said there are solar shades proposed and we need to see how they are going to be attached to the building. Rich said the shades would match the color of the existing windows. They would cantilever off the middle of the structural beams. Ann said from the exterior you will see a line across the building. Rich said all the windows would be retained. Nora said you will no longer see the atrium. Rich said what we are proposing with the shades is reversible. Rich said he doesn't feel the doors are historic but we could recreate them. We want to keep the quality of the building as is. We are proposing to 13 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 replace simple store front window in a medium bronze color insulated glazing panel that wouldn't change the profile of the exterior. Michael said the building is very inefficient. Amy said in the future plans they might be putting residential up above on the third floor and they could receive growth management exemptions for the new residential units. If they have net leasable they could have some relief on some mitigation requirements. It is a nice gesture for the owner to offer. Sarah asked when the building was built. Jason said the drawings indicate 1976. Rich said the public access will be on Original and the existing access will be Coates Reid and Waldron's dedicated entrance. Michael said it is hard to perceive how the interior remodel will be perceived from the outside. Brian asked about the new design of the planters. Rich said they would be retained at the 2 x61eve1 and brought to the lot line. Amy said she feels more discussion should occur with Engineering in order to come to a middle ground and allow repairs and water proofing. If they need to get an encroachment license that is OK. Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Brian said we are discussing: Landscaping, planters, window shading and designation. The board supported designation of the building. Michael went over the conditions. Existing ground floor exterior sliding doors: Brian said sliding glass doors rather than fixed glass would be his preference. Sarah agreed. 14 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 Jason said how the doors are hung is important. If the glazing gets thicker it might go beyond. Rich said the slider would be insulated and the profile would not change. Ann said the planters are an integral part of the project and creating a directed entrance needs to stay the same. Rich said a ramp needs to be created on the Original side. Sarah said this building was designed as a two story atrium and the whole use of it is changing. Michael said he is in favor of retaining the existing planters. Brian said the main concern is that we maintain the main character that was crafted which is along Hyman. Nora said the experience from the outside and the inside is critical in this building. Brian said if the architect does this properly they can do a Wrightian type architecture of bringing the inside to the outside and see the internal functions on both sides of the wall. Jason the walls are reversible. They are not taking out the glue lambs etc. Michael said the atrium creates a lack of vitality in the building. Rich said we can make the floor plate as thin as possible. Michael said the way that the light plays on the interior atrium is an important part of the design of the structure. It is not clear to me that this new design is going to be perceived in the same way as the existing structure is. Ann said the interior walls are very transparent. Lennie Oats said we have acceded to the transparency on the inside and that is as far as we are willing to go. 15 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 Sarah said we have to make buildings more efficient. Jason said staff and monitor can look at the details of the floor as it tapers. Sarah said the proposal hits many of our guidelines, 1.9,1.13, 1.16,2.1, 2.6, 2.7. MOTION: Sarah moved to approve resolution #25 for 720 E. Hyman Ave., Aspen Athletic Club for a minor development and landmark designation with the following conditions: 1. The applicant will replace the ground floor exterior sliding doors and maintain their existing configuration and operation. 2. That the applicant will retain the existing planters primarily on the Hyman side but will look at the planter configuration on Original Street and work with the new accessible needs and try to maintain as much of the original landscape as possible. 3. The applicant will remove the Coniferous trees in conjunction with Parks and Engineering. 4. The beige paint will be removed. S. The applicant will apply for aright-of-way permit for all the landscaping items as stated in staff's memo. 6. The applicant will work with parks to choose the appropriate tree species from the Arbor Guide and those plantings will be appropriately and carefully considered in size as they grow. 7. The new awning windows are approved. 8. The breeze-alay as proposed are approved but final design will be approved by staff and monitor. 9. Historic Designation is approved. Motion second by Ann Ann made two amendments: Amendment take out (new) in #6 and add restored planters. Amendment: #4 -The applicant will need to comply and apply for all landscaping standards etc. Sarah second the amendment. Brian, yes; Sarah, yes; Ann, yes; Nora, yes; Michael no. Motion carried 401. 16 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 8, 2008 MOTION: Brian moved to adjourn; second by Nora. All in favor, motion carried. Meetin adjourned at 8:00 p.m. ~,~ _.., L. ~G~ y ~~~ ~. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk 17