HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20100312ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MARCH 10, 2010
5:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISITS: None
1. Roll call
I. Approval of minutes -FEBRUARY 24, 2010
II. Public Comments
III. Commission member comments
IV. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
V. Project Monitoring:
VI. Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be #4)
VII. OLD BUSINESS
A. NONE
VIH. NEW BUSINESS -PUBLIC HEARING
A. 630 e. Hyman, Crandall Building, Final Review -Continue
to March 24~n
IX. WORK SESSIONS
A. 735 W. Bleeker Street (30 min.)
B. Design Guidelines -building alterations and new
construction (lhr.)
X. OTHER
A.
XI. 7:00 p.m. Adjourn
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)
Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed
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.
P1
735 West Bleeker
HPC Work Session Project Summary
This project hopes to place the existing Victorian, located at 735 W. Bleeker,
over a new basement and reconfigure additions to the East and South. The
structure currently rests on a combo of rocks, timbers, dirt, and concrete. The
existing additions essentially wrap the eastern and southern facades and roofs of
the historic elements. The original exterior walls have been mostly removed
over time. The existing structures contain f1,303sf.
To the North of the house are 3 large spruce trees. We have met with Chris
Foreman, Aspen Forester, and he would like the trees to be preserved so we are
making the assumption they will stay. This precludes moving the house to the
North to any large degree. An existing landscape easement prohibits any added
development to the west of the existing structure. It is historically beneficial to
maintain the original location as well so we are starting with thought that the
best solution will keep the historic home in its original location.
To the south of the house is the structure approved in 1998 which is under
separate ownership and includes a residence and an ADU. It includes 11,703 sf
FAR. Access is available through the alley to 735 Bleeker via an easement
across this part of the lot but has not been used. Gaining access would require
removal of a cottonwood tree in this area. Originally platted parking spaces on
735 Bleeker have not been used and parking currently occurs on Bleeker Street.
Part of the reconfigure of existing non-historic additions, to the east and south of
the historic resource, are a few moves to express the original structure better
and to restore walls in their original locations. Because of tight site constraints,
we are unable to completely free the original form from later additions and still
maintain a viable residence. Total FAR of the proposed scheme is t1,600sf but
this could be more if a greater portion of subgrade walls are exposed. Currently
1,567 sf FAR remain available so a bonus of up to 500 sf is requested as part of
the application. The exterior improvements include exposing the NE corner and
eastern Gable of the Victorian, and opening up the enclosed entry porch. We also
propose shrinking the eastern encroachment into side yard setback. This will
provide better spacing from the next property east.
The remodel includes a small bedroom addition to the east and rear of the
project on the second story. It is very small in scale so the original structure is
not dwarfed by the new pieces. And it looks really cool! This element is
delineated from the historical resource by fenestration and material changes. It
provides and intermediate scale between the historic resource and the next door
2-story structure.
The project may require Residential Design Standard variations based upon
interpretation. The existing rear yard set back variance is requested to remain.
The existing Eastern Side yard setback would need to be altered to allow for a
roof encroachment and narrow storage wall,
The project shows an exemplary balance of historic rehabilitation and beneficial
design improvements.
P2
al
nth Street
x rn r , -. o
5
i! E ^ > '
g
K a~
o g~ 1
~
3i nn
~~
_
i
~ ~
~
~L._.~ o''
~ ~
va no
o
~?~
% O
v
n ~
3 u
~
~~
O '~
^qo
~ ~
o
~
~ °-
~
~a
~
~ p O x p
~ ~P
°
~
~, ,
O
6
n p
9n
3
y
a o
~ _ ~ o
~ ~ ~
~ m W=
o=
' g
v'
z m K .. n
w T ~ ~ O
I lu
a l
~ N
~
3
a O
y
3
v
0
E
N
Q
n
>< e A
o n o 0
z $ o
O !" ~ € ~ ~
l ~ ~ i
o Su z a rn
~ x u ; N
8
o ~ ~
2 n a ° £
O y
n o ~
b ~ ~ 2
w
g ~ ~
3
~ 6
3
A
a
a I
I
N
I
f
I
I
----~
_I
'7th BtrECC
~°;~~~~~~~~
g ~~ D
R w Arn
n ~" ~ag
~P~
~ o~ W _Ti
i
~ N ~ ~ V
"' rn~ Q
O YEq~YT
~&~$~
4'n$oa ~
~
§~
' ~
mD ~
:R ~
a ? ° (D
n
n7t 3 N
i O~ ~"~
~ ~ O 9
~ 3
^
R~S5 B~R R~~a3y
t~ ~f~8R3
~qx~~~ fD
:~ N
,o
om ~.
~
O ~3~~
'~o-
,
~.T \/ ~ P3
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: Update to Design Guidelines- Chapters 8 and 9
DATE: March 1Q 20]0
SUMMARY: HPC's current design guidelines were adopted in 2000. Amendments were
initiated in 2004, but not completed. The primary purpose of the 2004 amendments was to
ensure that the guidelines were able to address both Victorian era and Postwaz historic resources.
In order to move the project forward to adoption, HPC has been in the process of re-visiting the
work and, for this meeting, is asked to review Chapters 8 and 9. The chapters at hand deal with
Secondary Structures and Building Relocation.
Attached are the 2004 amended versions of these chapters, with hand-written mazk-ups
indicating what is changed from the 2000 guidelines that are in effect. We have not noted all
simple changes, such as the relocation of a sentence within a paragraph, a changed guideline
number, etc.
Staff asks that HPC verify that the content is appropriate, or indicate what should be re-written.
Illustrations can be added or removed. The board should consider whether there are any
additional guidelines that aze needed given experience in using the document.
Overall, staff believes the proposed edits aze effective. HPC should discuss and verify its
policies on these two topics, which can be challenging. Preservation of outbuildings is
sometimes difficult to achieve or may take secondary importance to concerns over the size,
character and placement of proposed additions. However, some mountain communities, such as
Crested Butte and Telluride, consider preserving these modest buildings to be critical to their
town's character. Building relocation is typically frowned upon in historic preservation, but has
been a solution that arguably achieved better preservation in many cases in Aspen, given
development pressure.
HPC should read the guidelines to ensure that they are useful for a variety of building types
(residential, commercial, and civic buildings) styles, and eras.
P4
Secondnry Stnlctures
Chapter 8
Secondary Structures
Poi~~y:
When a secondary structure is determined to be historically significant, it
should be preserved. This may include keeping the structure in its present
condition, rehabilitating it or adapting it to a new use so that the building
continues to serve a function.
This chapter addresses the treatment of secondary
structures. These guidelines apply in addition to
the guidelines for treatment of doors, windows,
dormers, materials, additions and other features
presented in the other chapters.
• NOTE: Outbuildings often encroach into
alleys or at least into the setback, and the
owner should be aware of variances or
encroachment licenses that may be required .
to rehabilitate these buildings.
.....:~...•...........I........
\\\\ US~ ~ V Q/d'Q
Background u ~ /U^~~a'~t /
Accessory structures include garages, carriage
houses and sheds. In the 19th centur these
structureswereimportantelementso residential
sites. Because secondary structures h Ip interpret
how an entire site was used histo tally. their
Primary materials
Many of the materials used traditionally in
secondary structures are those employed in the
construction of primary buildings. Simple board
and batten siding or clapboards were typical.
Treatment of siding is addressed in the preceding
chapter and applies to secondary structures as
well. In preserving or rehabilitating secondary
structures, it is important that the character-
defining materials be preserved.
Roof forms and materials
Traditionally most secondary structures had
gabled or shed roofs. Roofing materials included
metal, wood, asphalt and composition shingles.
Property owners are encouraged to use traditional
roof forms and materials if undertaking more
extensive projects, such as converting a secondary
structure to a new use. However, because
accessory structures are often subordinate [o the
main house, greater flexibility in the treatment of
accessory structures may be considered.
preservation is strop ]y encouraged.` Adaptive reuse of secondary structures
WOE, \ ~ The reuse of any secondary structure should be
a y (~~ planned realistically so thaC its character is not
Key Features ofHist~r~, v'~6-~ lost. Maintaining the overall mass and scale is
p p titularly important and therefore, raising the
Secondary Structures ~t ~'~1~~~~ oof-line of a structure to create a "pop-top" is
Most secondary structures were simple in discouraged since it will alter the height of the
character, reflecting their more utilitarian roof's ridgeline, and the structure will appear
functions. Many were basic rectangular solids, much larger than it would have historically.
with simple finishes and they typically had no
ornamentation and few windows.
add ~
City ofAspea Hismdc prnservatlon Guidelines c'r ?, pa8e 89
LnO~
P5
s
Commercial ~ , ~ Residential
1
t
1
1
1
1
I
i
i
i
i
~ i
i
E. COOPER . , AV,
Md L14~
_ n j`r ry, EYJn
ti
a
M
ip~
II~tt
96 ,~ f
a"
i
^ •
G
tP
~n I
fL
N
1
i
I•
.
t N
¢.
f¢.
Fs
!~ r
ar ~ ¢
'. Y £
t.l~
• • • • • ~ • •
• v a• •`d o •
•
• - - -
~ a
'J •J' 3 b ) • ~•
1 i~~
~ ~ W. Main Street
I C `
a. 'r
i 1 a
• • ~
r G ~ v 'v r•~
~. ae
• ~
N J
l
t`'7L J
r
'~
*
a
~
*
_ r~
Z a
o'
U
A
ive rroi °~ ne q
,
The historic maps above illustrate [he large number ofsecondary structures used in 6o[h commercial and residential settings. ` The map
on the left provides a detail of the blocks at E. CwperAvenue and S. Hunter, which includes several commercial structures, whose primary
facades align along the street. In [he rear, setbacks varied andsecondarystructures were sometimes built along the all eyedge. The map detail
on the right illustrates a residential context Here, secondary structures are even more numerous. and are also located along rear property
lines.
*The map on the left is from 1893 and the nne on the right is from 1904.
`
a $a ~ ~
r~ I o
, ~ ~
~ a.:
•• J
rN• .vr
.
~ c v {
id 0
.
J. '
T''
M e
f t
.
• •~• L i/ ;
• C ~n x~s)'
. ~ ;,, '1 E
~ ~ °i
C
~
~ .~
~ 4 i M sl
F' u
Peb~ 90 p~ ~ Clty afAspen liistarlt Preservstlon Gutdellnes
T ;
P6
Secondary Structures
Secondary Structures
8.1 If an existing secondary structure is
historically significant, then it must be preserved.
• When treatingahistoricsecondarybui]ding,
respect itscharacter-definingfeatures.These
include i[s primary and roof materials, roof
form, windows, doors and architectural
details.
• If a secondary structure is not historically
significant, then its preservation is optional.
8.2 If an existing secondary structure is beyond
repair, then replacing it is encouraged.
~• The replacementshouldbecompatiblewith
~~ ~~ 1 ~ the overall character of the historic primary
~M ~~"~f' structure, while accommodating new uses.
prolns~''~°" t~ ~nm~- loQi vt~eXS~-f
8.3 Avoidatt chinganeworhistoricgarage r
carport to the primary structure. ~ 3~
• Traditionally, a garage was sited as a
separate structure at the rear of the lot; this
pattern should be maintained. Any proposal
to attach an accessory structure is reviewed
on a case-by-case basis.
8.4 A garage door should be compatible with
the character of the historic structure.
• A wood-clad hinged door is preferred on a
historic structure.~If the existing doors are
hinged, they can be adapted with an
automatic opener., ~ u~ ' W~ ~~
v
• If an overhead door is us , t e materials
should matchthatofthesecondarystructure.
8.5 Avoid moving a historic secondary
structure from its original location.
• A secondary structure may only be
repositioned on its original site if it is
~~~ determined to be the best or~st feasible
way to preserve the building's historic
integrity. See Chapter 9: Building Relocation
and Foundations.
City of Aspen Hlatorlc preservnt/nn Guidelines I~.~r'~ .page 9]
.~ I
J
While most secondary structures are modes[ in character, some
exhibit more refined details. Tbe_se features should be preserned.
~ ~~~
~1 eti'
e
8.6 Avoid adding detailing or features to a
secondary structure that are conjectural and not
in keeping with its original character as a
utilitarian structure.
• Most secondary structures are basic
rectangular solids, with simple finishes and
no ornamentation.
8.7 Additions to a secondary structure should
be subordinate in size and height, and in
character with the materials and detailing of the
historic building. ,
~ i
Page:92 _ c'~'e~ '.~~YafJLsped`.HisrorlcP[e38rvatlon Gutr7elirtes.
P7
A historic outbuilding adapted (or use as an architect's office.
P8
Building Relocation
Chapter 9
Building Relocation & Foundations
Porgy:
Moving a historic structure is discouraged; however, in some instances
this may be the only viable option, and it may be considered in limited
circumstances to preserve the structure's integrity.
This chapter presents guidelines for relocating
historic structures and for the reconstnrction of
building foundations. They applyto primary and
secondary structures.
Background
A part of a historic building's integrity is derived
from its placement on its site and therefore, its
original position is important. Preserving the
original foundation is always encouraged.
Generally, removing a structure from the parcel
with which it is historically recorded will
compromise its integrity. However, there maybe
cases when relocation will not substantially affect
the integrity of a property and its rehabilitation
can be assured as a result.
Early city maps suggest that some structures were
shifted on their sites, and even relocated within a
block to make room for more buildings. Therefore,
some precedent exists. Today, however, such
relocation must be considered very carefully and
on a case-by-case basis.
In some cases, it may be possible to reposition a
structure on its original site if doing so will
accommodate other compatible improvements
that will assure preservation. For example, if a
house straddles two parcels, shifting it to one side
may accommodate construction of a new,
detached structure. Doing so may better preserve
the scale of the original structure, as opposed to
erecting a large addition.
Proposals to relocate a building within its site boundaries will be
considered on a case-by-case basis. ~ ~ ~! _ ~--~
A related concern is the character of the building's
foundation. Traditionally, most buildings in
Aspen had simple foundation designs. Many had
a wooden sill that was clad with siding. A few of
the grander structures had stone foundations.
These features should be preserved. However,
even when a building is preserved in place, it is
often necessary to rebuild the foundation. When
doing so, it is important to convey the character
of the original foundation.
At times, it may be necessary to "mothball" a
building in order to keep it safe until it can be
improved. Wood panels should be mounted on
the exterior of the building to protect existing
openings and particularly historic glass. Special
care should be taken to keep from damaging door
and window frames and sashes in the process of
covering the openings.
Ci(y~{fAspen HlsroHc PresCrualturt.GPttle~iies a~* .';` - P Be
a 93
r .. C.Y~1
P9
Preserving Building Locations
and Foundations
9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be
C\
~v, ~ ~~ :onsidered on a case-by-case basis.
In general, relocation has less of an impact
~} on individual landmark structures than
;~/~Q)~ ``-' those in a historic district. Howe~he
~,
/ specific history and style of a given building,
\ ~~andthecharacteristicsofthesite,maycreate
asituationwhererelocationisnotdesirable,
even on a parcel that is not located in a_
historic district.
• It must be demonstrated that relocation is
the best preservation alternative.
• Rehabilitation of a historic building must
occur as a first phase of any improvements.
• A relocated building must be carefully
rehabilitated to retain original architectural
details and materials.
• Before a building is moved, a plan must be
in place to secure the structure and provide
1 it ~ ~~ anew foundation, utilities, and to restore
~
~~~b~jQ the house.
`
Q
/ In general, moving a building to an entirely
.t~
~/t (~ 07' ~ different site or neighborhood is not
~~~~ l/~ O~ ~ approved.
S~ ~ s~f ,1 ` ~O.Q
V a 9.2 Moving an existing building that
i
t
i
di
t
f
hi
t
oZ't~ ~
V'(~ r
c
or
c
s
a
s
contributes to the character o
should be avoided.
,
°~G~
~N and the
ildin
f
b
h
f
g
a
u
icance o
e signi
,
~, j„I ~~~• T
l 1 ~ /X t/i~ character of its setting will be considered.
.~t/L
,, ~,, 1 J t ~
W" `~ In general, relocatingacontributingbuilding
i
it
th
i
/
~ O N an
y
t
v
in a district requires greater sens
~~s~t/'V moving an individually-listed structure
fl
f
it re
ects
because the relative positioning o
patterns of development, includ ing spacing
of side yards and fiont setbacks, that relate
to other historic structures in the area.
page 94 Ic``~,r ~, ' - G14y or Aspen Historic Preservation Guidelines
P10
BuildMg Relocation
9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the
HPC, a structure must remain within the
boundazies of its historic parcel.
• If a historic building straddles two lots, then
it may be shifted to sit entirely on one of the
lots. Both lots shall remain landmarked
properties.
9.9 Site the structure in a position similar to its
historic orientation.
• It should face the same direction and have a
relatively similar setback.
• It may not, for example,. be moved to the
rear of the parcel to accommodate a new
building in front of it.
9.5 Anew foundation should appear similar
in design and materials to the historic
foundation.
• On modest structures, a simple foundation
is appropriate. Constructing a stone
foundation on a modest miner's cottage
where there is no evidence that one existed
~~ ~ histo. ricallyis iscourage ecauseitwould
be out of character.
• Where a stone foundation was used
historically, and is to be replaced, the
replacement should be similar in the cut of
the stone and design of the mortar joints.
One should try to salvage and re-use the
Vl~'"l -7 stone from the original foundation.
Locate the structure approximately at its historic elevation above
9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the grade. Li Ring it too far up from ground level, such as in this
structure at its approximate historic elevation example, is inappropriate.
above grade.
• Raising the building slightly above its
original elevation maybe acceptable when ~QyvJ
accommodating a new basement. However,
lifting it substantially above the ground level
is inappropriate. For most structures, the t~~J
maximum change in elevation that would ~
be acceptable is 18 inches.
• Changing the historic elevation is
discouraged, unless it can be demonstrated
that it enhances the resource.
~'
City of Aspen Hls[orJc Presecvatlon GuideJtnas c't*, ~. - ': 'page95
a
Areplacemenf foundation should 6esimilar loan original foundation
such as this one.
P11
~ ~~ ~
.Qi : ~
O
9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light
into below-grade living space.
• In general, a lightwell may not project out
th
f
f
i
b
ildi
ll f/'.(~i
l
~~
per
~_~t
rom a street
ac
ng
u
ng wa
p
Residential Design Standards.
• The size ofa lightwell should be minimized.
• A lightwell that is used as a walkout space
may be used only in limited situations and
will be considered on a case-by-case basis
• Lightwells shall have grates, and not railings y~Qj
around them to minimize t
heir visibility. ~t,,Upv~
~ ,
J
t
(lS~/` ~ ~` 1o'uJ
9.8 All relocations of designated structures ~-P
5~~
shallbeperformedbycontractorswhospecialize
in the moving of historic buildings, or can ~
~~ll~
document adequate experience in successfully
h b
ildi
l
u
ngs.
re
ocating suc
f
h
d
l
b
d i
Th
(/1
ic met
o
o
ogy to
e use
n
•
e speci
roved
relocatin
the structure must be a -
g
pp / ( Q,
by the HPC. i
~ l ~t P
• Aletterofcredittoensurethesaferelocation
of the structure will also be required.
page 98 4'~~ ~ City of Aspen lils[oric 3'reserJatlon Guidelines
Protect historic e~indows and other features while a building is
bring relocatrd.
~ ~,t~