Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20180822 1 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 22, 2018 Commissioners in attendance: Jeffrey Halferty, Scott Kendrick, Nora Berko, Roger Moyer. Absent were Gretchen Greenwood, Willis Pember, Richard Lai, Bob Blaich and Sheri Sanzone. Staff present: Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Ben Anderson, Planner Trish Aragon, City Engineer Brian Long, Open Space and Trails Supervisor APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Moyer motioned to approve, Ms. Berko seconded. All in favor, motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Berko asked what is going on with Poppie’s at 834 W. Hallam. Ms. Simon said we expect them to proceed with their affordable housing project once permits are issued. DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICT: None. PROJECT MONITORING: St. Mary’s front porch Amy Simon Ms. Simon said the building didn’t have a stoop previously and HPC did approve a modification of the porch. The applicant would like to keep the existing metal shingles instead of changing it to a wood shingle. Ms. Simon didn’t want the project monitoring team to make the decision since it’s a departure from what has been proposed so the full board needs to give input. Staff are recommending against leaving the metal shingles in place. Ms. Simon feels that the wood is important to add to the porch. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Marina Skiles of Charles Cunniffe Architects and Father John Hilton Ms. Skiles said the reason for requesting change is twofold. First, we felt that keeping the metal shingles would keep things more harmonious with the building. She showed a picture that was taken earlier in the day, which reflected the relationship between the existing church and canopy. Father Hilton said this is also for fire safety reasons and the church is owned by the arch diocese of Denver and they have asked to keep this metal, so it is important to follow their requests. Ms. Skiles said if there was a fire on the front porch, we would be putting people’s lives in danger. PUBLIC COMMENT: John Kelleher - member of the parish for 45 years. He said he is in favor of the shingles and not in favor of the wood shingles. The existing aluminum shingles are great. Likes them far and away better as far as maintenance is concerned and he doesn’t like the fire hazard of the wood. Ms. Berko mentioned HPC approving wood shingles and asked why, at the time, that was ok. Ms. Skiles said it was ok until the insurance situation became a new development. Mr. Kelleher did some research 2 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 22, 2018 on shingles and the unification of the porch to the rest of the structure is not something we previously considered. Mr. Moyer pointed out that the church was redone in the 50’s when they put the metal shingles on. From a historic standpoint, the metal shingles are historic. Mr. Halferty said that on a humanistic scale, the church is part of the fabric of Main Street and we’ve gone through a lot of staff and monitors on this project. Since it is a historic building across the street from a lot of new construction, he tends to side with staff’s recommendation. Mr. Moyer said if the church were to put on a new roof, our requirements would be that it stay original. Ms. Simon asked if it is time to reroof, if it could potentially be wood and said it’s raising some structural questions and the shingles would have to be fire treated. She said she is not sure if the diocese is aware of that. Mr. Moyer said for insurance reasons, they will drop this because fire retardants only last about a year in this environment. Ms. Skiles said the porch is not sprinkled and Ms. Simon asked if we could extend that out there and Ms. Skiles said everything is buttoned up at this point and it isn’t reasonable. She continued to say the church was originally built with wood shingles and the snow was being retained instead of falling off and that is why they put on the metal shingles on for a slippery surface. The building, as is, barely meets structural code, which means it won’t retain snow. Snow clips wouldn’t work on the roof structurally either because the building just can’t handle it, but there is a snow guard up there right now. Ms. Simon mentioned that the sidewalk has also been moved away from the building to avoid snow coming at people. Mr. Kelleher mentioned that he went into the new county building and looking out from Cindy Houben’s office, the roof on St. Mary’s looks amazing and said it wouldn’t look good if it were brown. Mr. Kendrick said he isn’t against the metal material. Ms. Berko said she believes there is a character to the resource that we need to respect which is why we approved wood in the first place. Mr. Moyer mentioned that the porch was never there originally and isn’t a historical part of the church. He has an issue in the modern world of safety and said he is ok with metal. We’re not really changing anything. He mentioned they also had this dilemma with Mrs. Paepcke’s house and how it’s perceived. He said a class A shingle wouldn’t look so appropriate and he’s in agreement with the metal. It’s in the city right of way and due to safety, he is in support of the change. Ms. Berko said HPC’s purview is to keep what is historic, but she can’t argue with Mr. Moyer’s point. MOTION: Mr. Kendrick motioned to amend the existing approval for wood, Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Kendrick, yes; Ms. Berko, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes. 4-0, motion carried. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon said she will be leaving shortly for her high school senior and said Ben Anderson will handle the presentation regarding way finding. CERTIFICATES OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None. 3 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 22, 2018 PUBLIC NOTICE: Ms. Bryan said she has it and it’s good. CALL UPS: None. STAFF PRESENTATION: Ben Anderson, Trish Aragon & Brian Long Mr. Anderson said this is the very first presentation on this idea and they are going to be presenting to a lot of different groups moving forward. Ms. Aragon said it’s confusing for visitors when they are here to get around and find things and this is based on feedback received from a 2016 survey. Council suggested we need a better way to direct people in town and that is how this idea was born. Mr. Long said we have a fantastic trail system, but unless you actively use it and live here, it’s hard for people to find and figure out. The project is aimed at the tourists and visitors to town; particularly in the core. It will be aesthetically pleasing to place in the downtown landscape, the Gondola Plaza, John Denver sanctuary etc. Ms. Aragon agreed that it’s a walkable and bikeable town, but only if you know where you’re going. DESIGN PRESENTATION: Ross Burdekin, KK Closuit & Stephanie Wills of RSM Design Mr. Burdekin said he and Ms. Wills work in Boulder together, but the company originates from California. He said they are creating a strategy behind a design program and are looking at palates and for a certain direction. To start, they are defining and understanding who Aspen is. Our goals are to create directions to key landmarks and city amenities with a focus on pedestrian and bike directional while highlighting community assets. This isn’t just about navigating to businesses around town; we want to provide safety within this and it would be a critical element. As a secondary element, we want to elevate the brand of Aspen and there is a subtle way that we can do that. This would not be a clashing of element, but a coming together. Carmel is a good reference because you get a nice blend of outdoor activity with cultural elements similar to Aspen. This is a very outdoor driven population. A final reference would be to Jackson, Wyoming, which is also a very similar type of town. The idea here would be to create a clear and easily understandable system. We will work hard to make it authentic and want the signs to be relevant and apply to the history and the future of the city, which will combine the history with current day and stand the test of time while creating a cohesive system. Mr. Burdekin said they want to divide areas up into districts, such as the downtown core area, periphery mountain green area, neighborhood in purple and then everything else, which they showed in color code on screen. He then presented various ideas for parks, trails, crosswalks, sidewalks, etc. Mr. Anderson said we want to know how the system might work. 1. Destinations – identifying some major destination points. 2. Getting to places are that are most essential, such as, the Hopkins street corridor, the Hallam street corridor, the pedestrian mall and key tourists destinations, such as, the gondola plaza, Rio Grande park, the Aspen Institute, parks and trails. Mr. Halferty said Ruby park and the Rio Grande parking garage might be added to this list. He also doesn’t think we should litter up the west end with kiosks. 4 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 22, 2018 Ms. Berko agree with Mr. Halferty. It sounds very much like it should be on an app and not on a sign. This would be great for an app instead of hundreds of signs around town. Mr. Kendrick said it’s overwhelming the number of signs we already have in town so adding signs isn’t the answer. Mr. Halferty said that safety and health and wellness of pedestrians is important, but he doesn’t think it should be too urban. A lot of those people still pull out the old maps and that’s the old romantic in me. It’s very logical what you’re doing, so keep this simple and don’t clutter. He likes the app idea without any signage or clutter. Personally, he is concerned with how it reflects to our history. Your purview needs to address this day and not how we did it 50 years ago, but still tie in the history. It’s a fine line for him. Mr. Burdekin said the issue is moving people from one destination to another. It’s about moving people, not identifying spaces. We don’t need another layer of that, we’re just recommending tying everything together here. We want to create one comprehensive system for signs and a style that ties everything together. The app is a great system for certain people, but not everyone wants to use that. We want people to engage in the environment and find their way. It’s ok to wander and explore and get lost. Mr. Moyer said you have to consider why people come here. He thinks they’re on the right track. Don’t leave out other places people come to visit, such as, houses, cemeteries, mines, etc. Right now, all of our signs are all different and submit to messy vitality. We need some serious thought about that and the history of the community. There are specific design elements of the signs. Mr. Halferty commented that the current signage for cycling is great. It has effectively been done perfectly. There are different types of signs and graphics on the street and it’s a simple way to make us more transit and bike friendly. Mr. Moyer asked them if they do apps and Mr. Burdekin said yes, we do, but it’s not currently a part of this scope. It certainly could be addressed at some point. When we decide on a type of sign, it will tie into the app so it’s recognizable. Ms. Wills said they find that a lot of people don’t download apps anymore and if you’ve got google, why do you need an app? How do we tie these together when we can’t see a huge component of this being used? People don’t want QR codes anymore. It was a tool and it’s slowly phasing out. Mr. Moyer asked if the crosswalk brandings work and Mr. Burdekin said they do several things, like, slow down traffic. While you’re standing and waiting, you’re looking up and engaging in the environment. Mr. Moyer asked if there are any negative comments regarding polluting to landscape. Mr. Burdekin said it depends on the environment. We design the graphic to blend it so it feels like part of the place, so we don’t get any complaints if it’s done right. Mr. Moyer motioned to adjourn, Mr. Kendrick seconded. All in favor, motion carried. ________________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk