Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20090325ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 25, 2009 707 N. Third St. - Amendment to Major Development ...................................................... 1 411 Pearl Court -Ordinance #48 Negotiations .................................................................. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 25, 2009 Chairperson, Michael Hoffman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Brian McNellis, Sarah Broughton, Ann Mullins and Jay Maytin. Nora Berko was excused. Staff present: Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Toni Kronberg said the HPC commission approved the fire house and the thrift store. Toni wanted to know who is on the project monitoring list. Sara said Jay and Sarah are the project monitors. 707 N. Third St. - Amendment to Major Development Exhibit I -affidavit of publication Sarah chaired the meeting. Architects for the project - Al Beyer and Scott Slogan Sara said Carol Craig is the owner and previously the house was approved to move forward toward Third Street. There is an addition on the back and restoration is occurring. The project is underway and moving along nicely. They were not approved for any on-site parking. There was off-site parking that Carol had and she was choosing to hopefully maintain that. The proposal is for a substantial amendment for a garage. It will be a single car garage, one story located in the back of the property. It will be accessed off the street because there is no alley. The garage is attached to the one story addition because there is no space on the property for a detached garage. Overall the scale and height and materials are appropriate and meet the design guidelines. Staff s concern is the material of the garage doors. Frosted glass was proposed for the doors which doesn't meet our guideline especially if the garage is street facing. The architect has said they have reworked the materials. For the driveway there are two tracks of brick pavers proposed which have a minimal impact on the landscaping. Staff is recommending approval of the amendment. Exhibit II- photograph of the garage doors. Al Beyer said on the back side they got rid of the garage door facing south and replaced it with a couple of windows and a door. On the front side instead of doing the full frosted glass garage door we went with a traditional painted wood type of door with one row of windows of light across the top. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 25, 2009 Sarah asked the architect if he feels the new garage door design is appropriate with the entire design scheme. Al said we liked the sense of less garage and more carport. Since the frosted glass didn't work with the guidelines we would have to go to clear glass and we didn't want people looking inside. The neighbor's were a little concerned about the glass etc. at night. Ann asked how the pavers are being handled. Al said there is sand and there are two courses of brick across the lawn from the garage. Sarah ask~l about siding material. Al said it is cedar beveled siding painted white. Al said the little shed on the site that was not historic has been demolished. Ann asked if this is a case of the contractor removing a shed which is a change in plan. Sara explained that it wasn't part of the development and is not historic. The shed was not part of any approval or alternation. Sarah opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Jim Curits, neighbor. They are doing a great job and everything is running smoothly and Carol is glad to get back into her house. Exhibit III - E-mail from Claude Saulter 620 N. Third in favor of the project. Sarah asked about the parking in front and if they are getting rid of the street parking that exists in front of the house. Sara said it sounds like the Eng. Dept. wants the on-street parking removed. In the final approval HPC has conditions that it should be returned to sod if Engineering requires that the parking spaces be removed. Al said they would like to keep the head in parking on the street and they will work it out with Engineering. Al said they are not in favor of the curb and gutter and would like a recommendation from the HPC. Sarah closed the public hearing. Michael said a detached garage would be preferable but it doesn't work on this site. The design fully meets the concerns of staff in guideline 8.4, 10.11, ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 25, 2009 14.17 and 14.19. It should be noted that the existing shed has been removed. Ann said all the guidelines have been met. The original proposal is much better where it looks like an extension of the house. The frosted glass is a related material and the siding is a little different which works well. The two garage doors and stacked windows are much better. Jay said he is in agreement with staff. Brian said he is also in agreement with staff. Sarah said the design is a good solution. Sarah agreed with Ann that the original design is much better. If we agree with the new proposal there should be no windows in the garage door and possibly they go to the east side to get light in. Brian agreed with Ann and Sarah. Michael and Jay said you can't hide the fact that it is a garage. Al Beyer said if the glass door is better for everyone they can handle that. MOTION: Ann moved to approve resolution #9 as stated and that the design returns to the original design. North garage door be built as shown in the drawings dated 12/02/2008. South garage door be built as presented tonight. A recommendation to Engineering that the on-street parking be retained. Dies for lack of a second. Michael said he strongly feels that curb and gutter is no appropriate in the West End. MOTION.• Brian moved to approve the substantial amendment for 707 N. Third St. in accordance with the draft resolution and with the condition that the north garage door comply with the drawings dated Dec. 2"d 2008 and that the rear garage area comply with Exhibit III. HPC recommends to the Engineering Dept. that curb and gutter on this particular property and throughout the West End is not appropriate and in this particular instance it should remain as is per our final approval which is taking it back to sod. HPC does not recommend curb and gutter for this particular property. Motion second by Ann. Roll call: Brian, yes; Ann, yes; Jay, no; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes; Motion carried 4-1. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 25, 2009 411 Pearl Court -Ordinance #48 Negotiations Sara pointed out that the owner, Jim Curtis isn't interested in negotiating for landmark designation. The property was built in 1963, a typical pan abode that hasn't had many additions. It was built for a doctor that lived in New Mexico. The manufactured log was indicative of what the American West was and that is one of the ways they gained popularity. Staff determined that there are about 10 manufactured logs homes or pan abodes left in Aspen. The majority have large additions. Two of the pan abodes out often are designated landmarks and the remaining 8 are unprotected. Jim has done a few minor alterations; window replacement and garage doors. Overall the form has been unaltered. Regarding context, directly to the east is also another pan abode on 615 N. Third and Peal Court. The integrity assessment scored 79 out of 100 and the threshold is 75 for Post War properties. Jim Curtis said he purchased the house in January of 1997. I understand and appreciate how historic preservation takes place. Relative to me this house is my only retirement asset. I need to keep as much flexibility as possible. I am fairly knowledgeable of the incentives. My lot is only 5,000 square feet and I do not think it would fit for a lot split. It would be incompatible with the neighborhood. I submitting for a building permit and it is my intent to keep the building permit alive for a year without doing any work and I will wait to see what happens with the resolution of ordinance #48 under the task force. The building permit is to encapsulate the house with a skin sufficiently enough to get the house off ordinance #48. Sarah asked what is original on the house. Jim said he thinks everything is original. Sara said staff feels this is an important building in Aspen. Michael asked the HPC if they think this house is worthy of preservation and should council negotiate with Jim? Ann said clearly from the assessment score of 79 this house is worthy of preservation. Ann said the task force is looking at incentives that can be applied to structures on ordinance #48 and on lots under 6,000 square feet. I am not convinced being on ordinance #48 is an economic hardship. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 25, 2009 Jay said this scored 79 and is a good example of a pan abode. Jay recommended that Council work with Jim. Brian said the only incentive would be a lot split and given the nature of this neighborhood fabric it would be more detrimental. In this particular situation it is not justified in this location. It is not particularly a visible house and the street is very narrow and reads more like an alleyway. Brian said he would not support negotiations. Sarah said the rustic style and the assessment score gets us over our threshold. Sarah agreed with Brian that Pearl Street is more like an alleyway. There might be incentives that are acceptable to Jim. Sara pointed out that council can't make the owner designate the property. If Jim doesn't want to negotiate the property will not be designate. Sarah said she supports designation of the property as it fits within the rustic style and given the integrity score this is a property worth looking at. Jay said we need to look at the structure itself and let Council do the negotiations. Michael said his personal feeling is if City Council has the option to designate then we should get a full analysis at the time so we can consider whether we are interested in pursuing designation. Sara said even if the owner doesn't want to designate. Ann said we are here to identify historic designations and not consider what might happen or might not happen, maybe a lot split and maybe not a lot split. By bringing all those other issues into play we are not sending a clear message to City Council. If the assessment score is adequate and we feel this is an important historic resource we should just send that message on. With Ordinance #48 we need to be isolating the resource from everything else around it. Brian said it is difficult to separate the issues when the incentive is tied to the historic character. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 25.2009 Jay pointed out that we have a score and it is defined and I feel it is worth making the applicant go to Council and we should ask council to make the attempt to negotiate something. Sarah said we are getting better clarity. We are not talking about the scale and the what i£ We are talking about this building in its current state and how it relates to our adopted material. MOTION: Jay moved to recommend City Council negotiate designation for 411 Pearl Court. 411 Pearl Court is a good example of a rustic style pan abode as defined in our adopted context paper and given the integrity score of 79, it surpasses the minimum threshold; motion second by Ann. Motion carried 5-0. Jim Curtis said he would volunteer and give input for assessments for pan abodes. Sarah said after Council has made their recommendation we could meet with Jim and go through the pan abode with the assessment score and all of could assess the property. 28 Smuggler Grove Road work session - no minutes Sara read the policies written by Jim True for a work session. MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. / ~ /, Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 6