Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20120808 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2012 Vice-chair, Jay Maytin called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Willis Pember, Patrick Sagal, Jamie McLeod and Sallie Golden. Ann Mullins and Nora Berko were absent. Staff present: Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk MOTION: Jay moved to approve the minutes of July 25, 2012 second by Jamie. All in favor, motion carried. 204 S. Galena Street— Conceptual Major Development and Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Demolition, Public Hearing continued from July 25th Amy said this is a continued hearing for conceptual design approval and demolition. It is a total replacement of the building. At the last hearing HPC asked for three things in order to complete their review process: 1. Restudy meeting the design guideline that asks for a 30 foot module along the Hopkins side of the property in order to relate to town site lots. 2. Reduce the variety of cornice treatments that face the street facades. 3. Some additional context information particularly on the Hopkins Street side. Elevation — Exhibit I Elevation of July 25th with drawn in dimensions of the bay- Exhibit II Staff is recommending approval with a few conditions as outlined in the resolution. Charles addressed the 30 foot modules. We feel that the 30 foot modules do not relate to any buildings around. The storefront goes all the way back to the door on the left so you will get a storefront that goes all the way across into where the doorway is on the 30 foot element at the end. The height of the building is only 22 feet and we feel the 23 foot bay has a better proportion. Trying to force a 30 foot bay under a 22 foot high building creates a horizontal emphasis which we feel isn't something you are looking for. The 30 foot module is reflected in the façade but it doesn't change the floor plan. We would like some consideration from the HPC to vary the 30 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2012 foot requirement. The rendering in the packet is for the 30 foot module but that is not what we would like. Vice-chair, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was closed. Jay said there are three issues: 30 foot modules on Hopkins St. The cornice Hopkins Street facade Charles said they have provided the streetscape diagram and a diagram of the cornice. Charles pointed out that there are no entries to the stores on Hopkins. The entrances are on Galena. The restaurant entry is on Hopkins. Patrick said he feels the roofline of the restaurant doesn't meet the guidelines. It is not in character with the rest of the blocks in the surrounding area. There are no other rooflines that protrude out. Patrick said he is ok with either module depth. Jamie said the depth of the overhang on the restaurant is part of mass and scale which will be discussed at the next meeting. I am in favor of the elevation that was presented at the last meeting. The night image that was presented at the last meeting, the middle retail space on Galena was accented a little differently with the lighter colors which were represented well. I am also in favor of the 46 module on the Hopkins side ( the non 30 foot bays). Jay thanked the applicant for the restudy. With the 30 foot modules we end up with something squatty and I am not in favor of them. The cornice simplification works well. On the roof line of the restaurant we aren't trying to replicate history and everything fits in the character of the whole core. As a recommendation the applicant should study the most energy efficient shading for the restaurant and overhang because the sun is so intense here. Willis said the roof is stepped back far enough from the property edge and I don't see any impact with the surrounding neighborhood. The strength of the scheme is the flat roof over the one story expression down below. The 30 foot module makes sense on Hopkins because that is the short side. The cornice as presented tonight is acceptable. This is a great concept and a great project of a one story retail building. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2012 Sallie said the restaurant roof should not be changed and it looks very new and respectful to the neighborhood. The Galena Street façade is appropriate. Charles said the roof is all wood and the wood roof would give you the sense of enclosure. MOTION: Jamie moved to approve resolution #18, 2012 for 204 S. Galena with the following conditions: Approval of demolition; approval of the 46 foot bay width on Hopkins (north elevation from July 25th with dimensions of the bays, Exhibit II) . Reduction of the cornices as presented and to review the restaurant roof for final. No new net leasable space and one year approval for conceptual development. Jay second the motion. Patrick said the 25th elevation is dated July 19th and the bay widths are different than proposed today. Jamie said the stair well was proposed at 21 feet and now it is proposed at 23, the second one was 48 and now it is 46 feet. Amy said the only change is that diagram 3.4 in your packet is not approved and the July 25th version is approved, Exhibit II. Jamie said we are looking at a plan elevation and the dimensions are off a little bit because the dimensions in the plan are referencing a wall not an exterior material setback. AMENDED MOTION: The stair well is 23 feet to the exterior materials on the Hopkins Street side, the middle portion is 46 feet to the exterior materials and the west side is 21 feet. Jay amended his second. Roll call vote: Patrick, yes; Jamie, yes; Sallie, yes; Willis, yes; Jay, yes. 435 W. Main St. — Substantial amendment to Major Development Approval, Public Hearing Deborah Quinn said the posting and noticing is in order, Exhibit I. Amy said this is a half block, 27,000 square foot site that contains cabins from the 30's and 40's and it is a designated landmark. HPC came to an 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2012 agreement to allow three of the historic cabins that are on the back of the site to be relocated elsewhere. The 1990's non-historic cabins will also be removed and demolished. In their place we have the sanctuary building and a social hall on the more eastern end of the site. At the next meeting the concept is to take away the social hall and replace it with a parsonage. This is a one step substantial amendment. This is new construction and there are a lot of elements that relate to the neighborhood. The fascia on the gable ends facing Main Street have been slimmed down or totally eliminated and staff feels that is an important way that ties the building to the Victorians in the area and that should be retained. The skylight along the ridge of the sanctuary building is meeting the guidelines and it will illuminate the building in a way that might be different which might be a concern to the board. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. Arthur Chabon, architect for the project. There are basically three types of changes for the development of the project. One set is technical developments such as mechanical vents. Then there are massing and planning changes with the elimination of the social hall. There are also changes related to client preferences as more people go interested in the project and donors got involved. We had to respond to the community in our design changes. Changes to the site plan. The social hall, connector piece and lobby are being eliminated. In its place the front area will have an open loggia with a terrace above and glass railing and also an entrance to the pre-school. Not all of the rake board has been eliminated. Arthur said there were technical changes to the project. In the approved drawings we had a masonry chimney that was centered on the main gable facing Main Street. We now have a stone chimney on the east west access. That had to do with getting closer to the fire place in the lobby. On the west elevation a vent was added to vent the elevator shaft. There are also small plumping vents. On the east elevation we had windows at the base of the tower element and we were proposing a masonry arch or long vertical cuts in the masonry wall. Behind the wall would be the mechanical intake for the building. The wall is an aesthetic issue which is open for discussion. We also added a vent for attic space. Plan changes: 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2012 Skylights were added to get daylight into the sanctuary. The skylights are not visible as they are blocked by the dormer. We also got rid of a window in the coat room that wasn't needed. A larger shed dormer was added on the rear. We have also dropped the eave height down about two feet. The loggia gives a covered entrance for the pre-school. Originally you entered through the connector piece in the center of the block so now you enter the building from Fourth Street. Patrick said the changes are functional and how do they affect the flow of traffic and parking changing the entrance from Main to Fourth Street. Amy clarified that there has always been a Main Street entrance and they are required to have one. Arthur said the Main Street entrance is secular and for events that would take place in the lobby such as art exhibits. Patrick inquired about the fire exits. Arthur said primarily the secondary means for egress in the lobby is the Main Street entrance. We only need two but there is a third one that takes you through the administrative area and through the loggia. There are exits from the pre-school to the exterior. There has always been an alley drop off. Patrick asked about the fascia change. Arthur said we only eliminated the rake board on the little dormers. Patrick also inquired about the skylights. Arthur said we will get the benefit of day lighting with the sky lights. They aren't as efficient as an 18 inch thick roof. They will be fixed and will follow the slope of the roof. The skylights sit on the ridge. Jamie asked about the width of the cupola. Arthur said it has gotten about 32 inches bigger and is around 2x6. Willis asked about the parking spaces. Arthur said they have the same amount but just spread them out a little bit. Jay asked about the lighting. Arthur said the lighting hasn't changed and we have the same fixtures. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2012 Amy said staff did not recommend that they delete the sky lights. Jay asked if any mechanical will be seen on top of the building. Arthur said not on top of the building. We also need to locate a transformer. Vice-chair, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. Steve Goldenberg said he lives next door and has been working with the applicant very amenably and we are all ready to go. Tom Drake said he represents the property of Robert and Leslie Dahler, 447 W. Bleeker. Tom said he greatly supports the Jewish Community in this town and I know some donors for this project and I would love to see it come together and it has been entirely too long in the making. They asked me about the transportation and parking. Their concern is that the side streets will be crowded with cars etc. due to the specific events that will be held. Are there any thoughts on that? Amy said that was resolved with City Council and the program is actually decreasing to what they actually have approval for. They do have 9 on-site parking spaces and multiple obligations to tell people about commuter options. That review was held with Planning & Zoning and City Council and HPC cannot re-visit it. Tom said he will visit with the owners and tell them the situation has been resolved by City Council. Vice-chair, Jay Maytin closed the public comments. Jay said his big concern is the light pollution and that is the sky lights. Main Street is dark and that is the way we like to keep it. There are a lot of things that happen in the sanctuary in the evening. The skylights on the north side of the gable that face Main Street will emit light. I'm basically OK with the changes but not the skylight. Patrick said since the skylights are not opening to increase the benefits of them on the inside use an accordion cover underneath the skylight when it starts getting dark to keep the light out. Amy said that would be difficult to enforce. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2012 Willis said we should not be designing the operations of their building. There is a lighting code and it doesn't talk about Main Street specifically. Up lighting and down lighting apply in the lighting code. Jay said the guidelines are to retard this kind of light pollution especially on Main Street. Willis said this is a civic building and the presence of skylights in the evening is perfectly appropriate. Having skylights on both sides of the ridge would allow you to actually see through and penetrate the building and reduce the visual mass and scale of it. The energy savings by bringing in daylight and reducing artificial light is a sustainable thing. It is an appropriate gesture to Main Street to see light at night. Jay said the way they look is fine. What is coming through is a concern especially on the Main Street side. If you used the south façade which can collect more light then you could accomplish the goal of bringing in natural light into the building without polluting the dark street of Main Street at night. Willis said it is an appropriate gesture on Main Street to see light at special events. Jay also said the cupola will give off light. My concern is light shooting up in the sky. Sallie said the ridge skylights help clarify more of what this building is and give it the life that you are talking to. Maybe the sky lights should be narrowed up all the way across the ridge. The sky lights give it more of an industrial look. I don't think the lights are going to be on at night that much. Willis pointed out that the lighting will go through the process and be approved by staff and monitor. Jamie said adding the skylights makes this feel more like a civic building in an historic residential neighborhood than without. I don't see this confused as a house. Jay said one of the reasons Ann and I brought this back is because the public is involved and this is a residential neighborhood and if we would have 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2012 approved these changes people would have said this isn't what was approved. Jamie said the back of the project looks more like a back of a house rather before it looked like the front and back were the same. The alley reads much different than the front and before it tied in better. Patrick said maybe the skylights could be put on the south side due to the light pollution. Amy said HPC needs to focus on a guideline. Jay said we should address guideline 14.8. Allan Richmand said there aren't 15 unresolved matters it is a checklist for staff so that nothing is missed. Sallie said she had no problem with the cupola and no problem with the wood chimney if it is a vent. Willis said the changes are well done and he appreciates all the renderings. Arthur said we have every intention of putting a black out shade on the skylight. The chimney is a gas fire place and you rarely will see vapor. On the roof we will have a concealed filter. There will not be a huge mushroom up there. Deborah said you can consider Arthur's representation that a black out shade will be installed on the skylight. MOTION: Willis moved to approve resolution #19 for 435 W. Main with the following conditions: Eliminate condition #1. 2-16 are past approvals. Black out shades for the skylights. Motion second by Sallie. All in favor, motion carried 5-0. Roll call vote: Patrick, yes; Jamie, yes; Jay, yes; Willis, yes; Sallie, yes. MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Willis. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk. 8