Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20101013 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 13, 2010 Chairperson, Sarah Broughton called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Ann Mullins, Nora Berko, Jason Lasser and Jamie McLeod. Jay Maytin and Brian McNellis were excused. Staff present: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk MOTION: Jason moved to approve the minutes of Sept. 15`" second by Nora. All in favor, motion carried. Sarah will step down from 630 E. Hyman — Rowland Broughton are the architects on the project. Nora will recuse herself on We -cycle as she is related to the applicant. 630 E. Hyman — Crandall building Amy said this building was designated last year. The discussion was that the exterior courtyard would be made into interior space, not lit and made into an art gallery. The applicant said the south facing round window would be part of the art gallery. As the project has developed Greg and his team need to make that space a tenant space and it would not have public access. Staff is looking for a recommendation to city council. Greg Hills, owner and developer of the property. When we approached HPC that space was to be sold space and not common space and I think Jay wanted the space open because of the architect Tom Benton and the round window he designed so we agreed to make that space. We talked about Benton's art work but there are other areas in the building that have his art. When the art museum was approved, when you look through the window the view will disappear. Affordability of the spaces is an issue. Tenants came back and said they couldn't afford the price so we are trying to get creative and the long and short of it we worked with Sandy's, the barber and the pediatrician who will be on the lower level. The only way I can give them their price is to sell the space. Greg said they have lost the intent due to the view being gone and the space needs sold in order to help subsidize the costs. Ann asked about the exterior. Greg said it would stay the same. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 13, 2010 Jamie said the art area was also to be a common space, open to the public. Greg said the main point is that you could see out the windows and with the art museum the view will be blocked. Justine from Sandy's office supply said they are excited about the building and the courtyard down stairs will be an integral part of our business with a coffee cart etc. Greg has been great through the entire process. Amy pointed out that there will still be a corridor and court yard space; there is not a loss of space through this project. Greg said the main point was that the public could look outside the window. It wasn't that the building needed the extra space it was the Tom Benton view. Jamie said it was the view and the public amenity of the space being open. Jason said he worked near that building for 6 years but we lost the sequence when the stairs were removed. It was a cool feature but lost when the stair case was moved. Ann opened the public hearing. Bill Wiener said he has concerns about this. The courtyard was exterior space and it was turned into interior space which is a loss. When you did that you lost the natural light. This window still brings the feel of the light coming in and the reason the building is historic. It is a small percentage of the building probably less than 5 %. Possibly negotiate fees or raise the rents a little to compromise. You don't make historic decisions based on someone's economic return. Ann closed the public hearing. Comments: Jamie said the stairs were changed and the tenant was going to do a show of art work in the open space i.e. public space. The affordability is not an HPC decision and should be left for city council discussion. I feel it is taking away the public space and I am worried about that transition. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 13, 2010 Nora asked how "public" would that space have been. If we no longer have the view as it was I feel everything is somewhat turned upside down. Jason said he feels we should have had some kind of light from above, solar tubes etc. but the space is being closed and it is unfortunate. It is unfair to put us in a displacement of tenant's issues. Some kind of solar tubes would have helped that space. It is interior now and light was a huge issue. Ann also agreed that we can't speak to the economics. The sequence is gone and with the art museum going in the view is gone. The exterior needs to stay the same as we approved it with no shades on the window. Jamie said it was exterior space and now it is interior space. It was public space that now is becoming tenant space. Greg said he originally did it for the view and the gallery was not to be in that space but more in the atrium area. The building isn't big enough for all this common space and now we are losing the view with the art museum and it's height of 47 feet. It has all changed. Having energy in the lower courtyard will actually have more light. I agree it would have been nice to have the light tubes but we couldn't figure it out. I do value your opinion and I would like a recommendation. Jason encouraged the applicant to take a look at the middle school and the light tubes are bent on that building. Greg said he would look into it. Nora said what we approved has nothing to do with the building across the street. If we can get more light in there and keep the exterior the way it is supposed to be I would support it. Jamie said solar tubes and more light is something they don't want to discuss tonight and we have already gone through that discussion. Jason mentioned that solar tubes that turn are at the middle school. Motion: Ann recommended that city council approve the commercial FAR change. The reason for keeping the window accessible was for the view and now the view is gone. Motion second by Nora. Vote: Nora, yes; Ann, yes; Jamie; no; Jason, no. Motion failed 2 -2. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 13, 2010 Jamie said the loss of public space in the building is the issue. Greg said the public space was for the view not the common space. Nora said she voted for it the first time because of the view and now the view is lost. 220 E. Main, Cortina Lodge Landmark Designation Public notice exhibit I Amy explained that the Cortina Lodge has been owned by the Hotel Jerome since the 80's for their employee housing. When the Hotel Jerome came in asking for an expansion and upgrades to the main building one condition approved by city council was that the Cortina Lodge would submit for historic designation. The property is under construction for a much needed remodel. There is deferred maintenance that has occurred over the years. The building was built in 1950 as two side by side one story machine cut log buildings. It is a kit log building similar to a pan -a -bode building. The lodge operated as that size and is set up in a motor court configuration where you can pull up to the door. In 1965 the Wiley family owned the property and they hired Rob Roy who is a modernist and a second floor was added to the one building and an extension to the front. Other than that the building has not been changed. It was renamed in the 50's and possibly coincided with the Cortina, Italy hosting the winter Olympics and the concept was that the town of Aspen was trying to establish itself and wanted to be on the map. The designation criteria are met and we spent some time on the integrity scoring. One of the buildings is missing its roof and a good part of a wall toward the back. Everything that is being done is meant to replicate the original condition. The massing reads as it has for 40 years. A lot of the features down to the light fixtures are original. Staff recommends designation. Julie Maple with Poss architects: The applicant is happy to get this moving forward. Jason said at the site insulating the roof was discussed. Will that occur on the inside and the eaves remain thin? Julie said there will be a 2 x 6 frame and the eaves will not be as thin as the original ones. It will be a truss system. The ceiling will have a slight pitch with insulation. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 13, 2010 Ann asked how you can get an integrity scoring when there is nothing left. Julie said the entire building on the 230 building was listing and turning to the side and Jason and Amy came out to discuss and resolved taking the walls out as we were changing a lot of the windows to meet the floor plan criteria. Amy said HPC could come to the conclusion that the building is gone but staff said what is happening is a replication of the wall sections that will match the original and the replication of the walls was absolutely necessary. The building is in authentic condition and it is in a significant remodel right now but the material and evidence of its appearance is all there. Nora pointed out that this is an example of a motor court and the only example of a chalet motor court left. Jason said the Gretchen Greenwood project on Hopkins was pretty much pulled apart. They took what it was and made it look very similar. We took the monitor first on this project and the building was unsafe and wasn't built properly. Julie said expediting was done because the employees have been moved out of the building and we are trying to get them back in under a very short construction period. Amy pointed out that HPC reviewed the remodel that is under way but we didn't apply designation standards because it was not designated. The applicant isn't asking for any bonuses or setbacks. Chairperson, Sarah Broughton opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public portion of the agenda item was closed. Amy said all the applicant was required to do was apply for designation. They could be opposed to it. Jamie said she is all for designations. The more designations we have the better. Ann said if this is landmarked to protect it as it is being reconstructed to what was there originally it is a good thing to do. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 13, 2010 Jason said the single story building is almost perfect. It is getting interior changes but the exterior is the same. Anytime we get a voluntary designation I am in support of it. Nora said she is delighted with the voluntary landmark. MOTION: Jason moved to approve the landmark designation for the property at 220 -230 East Main second by Jamie. All in favor, motion carried 5 -0. Work session — We -cycle proposal and Aspen modern ordinance and scoring proposal — no minutes MOTION: Jamie moved to adjourn; second by Jason. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. CAL- d/LC= '���✓2�- I- /C. ., �Z G�' at J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 6