Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20140108 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 Chairperson, Jay Maytin, called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were Willis Pember, Nora Berko, Jane Hills, John Whipple, Jim DeFrancia and Patrick Sagal. Sallie Golden was absent. Staff present: Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk MOTION: Jay moved to approve the minutes of Dec. 11, 2013; second by Jim. All in favor, motion carried. Disclosure: Jay said his company might potentially be doing business with the owners of 414 E. Hyman but he will not be involved and has no financial conflict. 414 E. Hyman, Minor, Public Hearing Debbie said the posting is in order and the applicant can proceed. Joseph Sphears, architect Bill Guth, owner Amy said this building is in the downtown historic district although it is not considered an historic resource itself. It is a simple wooden stucco building and two stories tall. There aren't a lot of historic structures on this side of the block so there isn't a strong historic context next to this. The applicant would like to start a new restaurant with some exterior remodels. They would like to make changes to the entry and the windows at the front of the building. There is an alley that goes between this building and the building where Zocalito is. The property between is owned by the owner of the building we are talking about but the tenants on the other building have the right to walk down this alley to get into their building. There are diagrams for tables and chairs for the use of that area. We feel HPC should not approve anything for that space and the tenants and owners need to get together and preserve the easement as it was meant to be. HPC doesn't need to be involved in movable objects that might occur in the space. The applicant would like to have opening windows to allow the restaurant seating to be open to the outdoors. This has been accepted in other locations and is appropriate. Our only concern is that there is a counter on Hyman 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 Ave. dividing the window space in half. Staff has suggested that maybe the counter doesn't belong on Hyman. The counter might also be over the property line. Amy said there is a private agreement between the two properties that allows certain things to happen and some things not to happen in the alley space. We think HPC should not become committed to any fixed improvement in this space and allow us to work it out through the building process. Debbie said there is a restricted covenant for keeping ten feet of space on the easterly portion of the alley. Certain improvements and access are permitted. The two parties should do something themselves that satisfies them both and the Building Department. Joseph Sphears said he thinks there is around 12 feet between the buildings. We want to create some feeling from inside the restaurant to the outside onto the mall. We would like to also open up the side alley and make it more interesting with a folding corner. There is a planter on the back part of the alleyway. For clarification the counter would not extend beyond the property line. The awnings were revised to be three feet from the building. The material would be galvanized steel and teak wood. We are also proposing to move the front door toward the west. There is a structural column so we cannot put the door in the center. We are also adding a window to the west side of the front door which would start 14 inches off the ground and go up to the top of the ceiling. New elevations — Exhibit II Bill said they prefer option zero and the bi-fold accordion style windows on top in order to engage the malls and to be pedestrian friendly. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Jay said the counter is an issue and the splitting of the south facing fagade. Amy said they would need a mall lease in order to put chairs in front of the counter. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 Jim said that block could use more energy and this project adds vitality to the street. John said the corner makes a statement and a presence for the new restaurant. Nora said there will still be seating on the alley side in any situation. Jay re-opened the public hearing again. Steve Fante, owner of CB paws. My objection to the plan is because they are putting tables on the eastern side and they will block access to our store. It is a problem that we need to work out. Jay closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Debbie said there may be building code issues with the furniture etc. in the alley. John said it seems like everything is removable in the alley. Bill said the idea is to preserve access. Jay said by approving the plan we are not approving the tables and chairs. Amy said the approval would be conditional upon the applicant assuring that legal access through lot N 420 E. Hyman remains. The Building Department has concerns about any combustible materials too close to the Zocalito side. HPC is not approving the design in the elevation. The owners and Building Dept. can determine what is acceptable. MOTION: Jay moved to approve resolution #I for 414 E. Hyman as proposed, plan O; second by Jim. Amy added the condition that nonpermanent improvements are permissible to the extent that they comply with the building covenant and Building Department regulations. Jay amended his motion and Jim amended his second to add Amy's statement. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 Amy said there is a wooden trellis awning around the side of the building that is also approved. Roll call vote: Jim, yes, Jane, yes, Nora, no; Willis, yes; John, yes; Jay, yes. Motion passed 5-1. Patrick was seated at 5:30 p.m. 420 E. Cooper— Final— Public Hearing Debbie said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I Amy said this parcel has been a poster shop for some time and everything will be demolished except the front facade and a stepped back three story building will be built. We are talking about final details such as materials and lighting etc. At conceptual it was discussed that the front facade was not historic and the applicant is holding onto it in this project. Should the facade come down during construction staff is suggesting that HPC review a new facade if it falls down or is taken down during construction. This facade doesn't comply with the guidelines. There is discussion about the treatment of the upper facade. Staff feels the vertical piers might not be in keeping with the emphasis of horizontal elements of the building. They might emphasize the height of the building. There is also discussion about an airlock. On the front facade there is no door and you walk down an open air hallway before you get to the doors. Staff recommends that a door be right on the front facade of the building. The door would create an airlock. The mechanical will not be visible from the street. Staff recommends continuance because it doesn't meet the standards, as it doesn't have an airlock and the concern with the horizontal detailing on the upper floor. Stan Clauson, presented. This project was approved conceptually with a net livable space of 2,276 square feet. The overall building is under the allowable floor area. The site has constraints and is narrow so the basement was eliminated. There has been deterioration of the structure. It is a cinder block construction. The replacement of the entire building is necessary. The design meets the guidelines and the code. The building is set back from 4 - ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 the front fagade. We are fine with the condition if the front fagade can't be maintained we will work with the HPC on the appropriate front fagade. The new mechanical is much less obtrusive and is discretely placed behind the elevator overrun. Kim Weil from Poss and Associates said the mechanical that exists was over built for a restaurant that was never built and the large piece will be removed and a smaller one erected. Stan addressed the entry vestibule. The entry gives access to the commercial area and the residential stairs. We are happy to add the door if you feel it is important. Having it open has greater access to the commercial area and residential area. We would accept the judgment of the HPC in this regard. The second level is stepped back 12 feet from the front fagade and the third level is set back 33 feet. Kim said the building is less than 22 feet wide and it is a narrow site. We are trying to bring some brick and detail into the building to give it a little bit of interest. It is wedged in between two larger buildings. The town is not without horizontal bands. The Brand building is an example. Stan presented a sketch up with the horizontal look. Stan said the lighting plan can be approved by staff and monitor prior to a building permit. Kim said on the outside there are lights by each door which is a requirement. They would be shielded down lights. We can keep the white paint but we aren't sure what is behind it. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was closed. Jay identified the issues: The airlock and vertical element. Kim said the upper level is brick and a sandstone material. Nora said she likes the horizontality of the new design. Willis said he likes the original design. A building of this size between two other buildings has to fight for its life. It warrants having more detail. The 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 lack of an airlock doesn't bother me. The commercial use would be served better without the airlock. John said he prefers the original design and the more detailed piece behind. John said he is 50150 on the air lock. Patrick agreed with John's statement. A little vertical height does bring the building out a little. I'm also 50/50 on the airlock. There might be a buildup of snow in the winter without the airlock. Kim said there will be snow melt in that area. Jay said he is flexible on the vertical elements. On the airlock I would like to see no door but have a technical solution such as a curtain. If we don't have an airlock we need some kind of air environmental solution. Jay thanked the applicant for addressing the mechanical. Kim said there is an air curtain at City Market. Patrick said the building should conform to the color palate of the downtown. Nora said it seems like the horizontal element makes the Red Onion building stand out and gives it more prominence. Kim said the vertical elements accent the height of the window bays. We cannot do the size of window that the Red Onion has. MOTION: Jim moved to approve Resolution #2, 2014 for 420 E. Cooper. Strike #5 and replace it with the requirement that samples of the exterior materials need to be reviewed by staff and monitor. The air lock is the responsibility of the monitor and it can be flexible with no front door. Motion second by Jay. Roll call vote: John, yes; Willis, yes; Nora, yes; Jane, yes; Jim, yes; Patrick, yes; Jays, yes. John and Jay are the project monitors. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 Election of chair and vice-chair. Motion: Jim nominated Jay as chairperson, second by John. Motion: Jay nominated Willis as vice-chair second by Jim. All in favor, motion carried. 602 E. Hyman — Final Major Development— Public Hearing Jim recused himself. Debbie said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed. Amy said this property was a voluntary designation that involves maintaining most of the existing building and the construction of an addition on the alley. Part of the design involves Ellie Brickham, who was the first woman architect in Aspen and she influenced the color scheme. Amy said there is a non-historic deck on the south west corner at the front of the building that the applicant plans to modify. There was concern because we don't want it to read like it was original construction and you didn't want any railings to be overbearing. The applicant has restudied this to set it off so that it has its own modern element and has less impact. The railing will be glass and the stair has been moved around so that it isn't at the front of the building. The roof plan is very consolidated and has no significant visual impact. Landscape plan has several open court yards. They will also be re-working the sidewalk. Staff finds that the outdoor courtyards are nicely designed and more interesting than what they are now. They are proposing to take away the wrought iron railing. Staff finds that appropriate. The lighting is minimal and appropriate to the style of the building. Some of the windows are a concern. The west side window should not be larger. Everything that is a window should not be converted to a door. We need to make sure features that are historic are not changed. Dylan Johns, architect presented. Dylan thanked the HPC for playing an active part in getting the design where it is. The roof plan is unchanged. The bump out size has been reduced. We modified the south west deck and reduced the size 8 square feet. The planters on the wood deck are part of the storm water system. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 The deck is removable and it is part of the storm water mechanism for the building. Dylan said the steps will be removed to comply with ADA access. There is lighting on the rooftop and step lighting. We would also like to do an integrated handrail light to give the space surface lighting to guide yourself at night. Dylan said the concrete masonry would be painted white and we would do white stucco and the wood elements would be painted black and white. On the addition it would be a clear cedar and we would also use a laminated product in a gray color. Dylan said this project is right next to the core. The ground floor has a multitude of windows and doors and we don't feel this variation brings character to the architecture. We want to find the best ratio in the windows and bring them up to code. The owners have concerns to the functionality of the ground floor. To enhance a pedestrian feeling we propose to change the door back to a window. The door didn't exist in the 1975 photographs. There isn't a lot of wall space left in the building. It would be a great value to turn some space back into wall space. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Issues: Amy said the sides of the building did not have a lot of openings and the glass was focused on the front. The concern is changing the openings on the historic building. Jane said she feels the building will be fantastic. We don't know what the use of the space is going to be and our job is to do what is in the best interest of the building and I agree with staff about the window changes. Nora said she agrees with Jane and Amy about no window changes. Willis said where the five openings are there is a lot of inner play and a lot of ad hoc things occurred over time particularly the north side and part of the character is to able to plug things in and out. I would agree with Amy's comments except for the ground level five bays at the edge of the courtyard. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 It is an active outdoor space now. Amy said the upper level is fixed but Willis is saying those windows would be operable. John said he agrees with Willis and having the doors interchangeable to get access to the courtyard is valuable. Patrick said he agrees with Willis and John. Jay said he agrees with Willis, John and Patrick. Jay said making five doors in those bays is appropriate. Changing the size of the windows in the historic part of the building is not recommended. Amy said she has no issue having the doors turn into a window because the opening is already there. Getting rid of a non-historic opening is good. Nora said on the west wall guideline 3.2 and 3.3 are clear that the historic building should stay like it was. MOTION: Jay moved to approve resolution #3. #l,staff and monitor to review and approve elevations which represent the discussion tonight about which openings would be modified and which ones would not. Jay said the change to the five doors is allowed and upper casement windows are allowed. No new openings on the front most part of the building. They are allowed to change a pair of doors that open onto the east courtyard to a fixed window and they are allowed to close in an existing courtyard facing window. Motion second by Jane. Jay also included in his motion to not approve the handrail around the hot tub. Jane second the amendment. Patrick asked about the fence height. Amy said six feet is the maximum height allowed anywhere. Dylan said the fence can be 36 inches and it can be reviewed by staff and monitor. Jay made the third amendment to the motion that staff and monitor approve the fence height of no higher than 36 inches or whatever the commercial core code says. Jane second the amendment. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 2014 Roll call vote: Patrick, yes; John, yes, Willis, yes; Nora, yes, Jane, yes; Jay, yes. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Patrick. All in favor motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Work Session - aspenmod.com Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 10