Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20140122 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22, 2014 Chairperson, Jay Maytin, called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were Sallie Golden, Willis Pember, Nora Berko and Patrick Sagal. Absent were Jim DeFrancia, John Whipple and Jane Hills. Staff present: Jim True, City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk MOTION: Willis moved to approve the minutes of January 8, 2014; second by Nora. All in favor, motion carried. 947 E. Cooper—Minor, Continued Public Hearing Amy said in the 90's there was just a Victorian house sitting in the middle of this 10,000 square foot lot and a barn in the back. The Victorian was restored. The property is an RO unit that was built in 1998 and is totally new construction. The entire project was under HPC review. HPC has reviewed some modifications to some of the buildings on the site. In 2000 there were some deck railing changes. Apparently the owner at that time did some other work without permits. They enclosed part of the garage space as living space and changed some of the windows. We are talking about an enforcement problem and some work that they are applying for. There are windows along the alley on the upper floor which were replaced by a previous owner with a large undivided piece of glass on both sides. They have also replaced the doors with taller French doors and one fixed window. There is only one guideline that is relevant here which is use building components that are similar in size and shape to the historic property. HPC looks at the character of the historic building. The windows are very large and could possibly be mitigated through some panes of glass or some kind of division. As is, they don't meet the design guidelines. We are recommending that something be done. There might be a mullion or trim that can be installed that breaks down the scale and makes them more compatible with the historic resource. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22. 2014 Amy said they would like to install a window on the north elevation and on the east elevation salvage the windows. Staff feels the north window should be more vertical. Patrick brought up shutters on the sides to change the perspective of the windows which would make them look thinner. Amy said staff is concerned about the size of the glass. Matt and Kate Holstein, owners Exhibit I— drawing, time line sheet and letters Matt said the windows were installed between 2005 and 2007. The owner who did the windows sold the house to the Fullers whom we bought the house from. At that time the city discovered that the garage was converted to livable space and nothing was said about the windows. We received money from the Fullers and have agreed to fix the garage which is almost finished. This house is employee housing. When put in the building permit and decided to add a couple windows for the master bedroom and that is when Amy discovered that some of the windows never went through HPC approval. The Housing Office was not aware of the window changes either. Kate said they would like not to see any changes to the windows. The City is in the line of title. We feel who is in control should also take on some level of responsibility. Matt said we are asking that you approve the existing windows and we can work with you on the design of the new window. Kate said the homeowners are favorable with keeping the windows that were there. All five members are favorable. Willis said the request is for windows on the east and north side. Kate said by salvaging the windows on the east and only do one window on the north we can save money. Staff only objects to the north window. Sallie asked if funds were available from the City to help with the cost of changing out the windows. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22, 2014 Amy said it would be the Housing Authority money. Jim said the issue about responsibility is a separate issue than what HPC needs to consider. HPC needs to review the windows under their criteria. We have been in conversations with the Holstein's and we are trying to keep some of the issues separate. Nora asked if the new northern window could be vertical rather than horizontal so it would be more consistent with what is there. Matt said we would rather work with you on breaking up the horizontal window to fit the guidelines. Willis said the original mutton windows did not go in anywhere even though HPC approved them. The divided lights were deleted. Sallie said she is opposed to applying mullions to the windows. Matt explained that the owner got a permit for some of the remodel but not all of it. Jay asked the attorney if there is a mechanism to pass onto to the next owner that the changes need to go back to the original plan. Matt said that would make it difficult to sell the house with all those costs. Jim said theoretically you could do that. It would be a factor that would be included in the sale price. You are actually asking for something that could be indefinite and has some unknown repercussions to the owner and to the city as to whether it could be done and it would be difficult to track. I am not sure it should be recommended. We are trying to sort out what was done on the house without a permit. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Bobby Burkley— I live in the neighborhood. The windows would not disturb what is there in the neighborhood. I would urge you to look at the magnitude of the violation. The home is tucked away on the alley. You 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22, 2014 need to see the compatibility issue. I would urge you to allow the Holstein's to go forward. Let the windows that exist be as is. Cindy Christensen—Housing Authority— When the person sold the house to the Fullers we didn't realize that it had an HPC overlay. I hope that you have some understanding with the Holsteins. The Housing Authority never knew about the windows. Jay Maytin closed the public hearing. Jay identified the issues: windows on the north and east side of the house. Possibly_enforcement of the illegal windows. Patrick agreed with Jim True that we should stick to the guidelines. I agree with staff to divide the windows into smaller areas of glass to be similar with the complex. The two enormous windows do not fit with the complex. The mullions could be approved by staff and monitor. Willis said there is not a lot of consistency in the complex. It looks like each home is individual. I am OK with the non-conformance of the windows and would probably leave them alone. The master bedroom proposed window is inappropriate and alien. Nora said we are all sympathetic to the situation. Within the building we can still ask for some consistency. The north facing window would fit better if it was compatible with that side of the house. From the guidelines it is our charge to find some sort of solution for these huge windows. Sallie said the windows that are there should be kept. I am opposed to applying any mullions which would just cheapen the house. The new master window should blend more with the house. Jay said he is OK with the window changes downstairs and the garage door. For APCHA to let this go through two sales without that being fixed is a concern. Something needs to be done with the windows. All the other homes have big windows broken up into smaller sections so that they look less massive. Amy said they will have to legalize the windows through a Building Permit. 4 - - - - ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22 2014 Sallie said because of the architectural integrity of this house anything fixed on the window could be uglier than what is there now. Jay said he had a hard time figuring out the windows. Nora asked about the proposed north window. Willis said his only concern is the north windows. Maybe staff and monitor can address the north window. Sallie agreed. Kate said we are open to suggestions on the north window. We are not architects. Jay said all the APCHA properties should be identified that have an historic overlay on them. MOTION: Willis moved to approve resolution #4 for 947 E. Cooper approving the French doors installed on the south deck; approve the already installed upper south and west windows; applicant to submit revisions to the proposed ground floor north windows to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor and moving the three windows from north to east is approved as shown in the drawing. Motion second by Sallie. Roll call vote: Sallie, yes; Nora, yes; Willis, yes; Patrick, yes; Jay, yes. Motion carried 5-0. 135 E. Cooper—Minor, Development— Public Hearing Dylan Johns, Zone4architects Mitch Haas, Haas Planning Amy said this is a landmark property and on the National Register. There is an 1888 Victorian on the site and an out building along the alley that is about the same vintage. In 2003 the house was allowed to be picked up and moved slightly closer to the corner and there was an addition made to the west side with a one-story link between the new and old and some construction to the out building and garage on the alley. The application is to increase the size of the connector because it is causing circulation problems with the living spaces. Staff finds that changing the connector to a two story connector does not meet the guidelines. When this was approved 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22, 2014 by HPC they allowed the new and old to be closer together than the ten foot distance that is required. By turning this into a two story element and a much larger connecting element it is really taking away from the success of the project and not complying with the guidelines. They are at the max for FAR and might have to alter the attic. The proposal diminishes the distinction between new and old and it covers up four historic windows in the large section of the west facing wall of the Victorian house. A skylight is also being requested on the historic carriage house on the alley. The skylight would be on the west facing slope and it would not be very visible. Our recommendation has always been to use traditional windows to bring in natural light in instead of incompatible skylights placed on a roof of an historic building. Staff is recommending denial of the project. Dylan Johns, Zone 4 architects Mitch Haas, Haas Planning Mitch said the historic house sits on the corner and the addition done in 2003 is to the side of the house, on the west side. The connecting element is 7 feet instead of 10 feet. In 2003 the house got an award for the preservation efforts. The biggest problem with the house is the function and flow of the house. You have two two-story houses with a one-story connecting element. If you are upstairs in the master bedroom of the new addition you have to go down the stairs and across the house and back up the stairs to get to the other bedrooms. The house is often used as a rental house by the owner. The owner has tried different ways to make this work so it can function well so that the form will follow the function. In 2012 there was a work session and it was discussed making the linking element a two-story glass box. It is hard to tell if the existing link is historic or added on. The proposal now is similar to what was presented at the work session. The linking element provides a hallway to get from one side of the house to the other. The guidelines encourage owners to rehabilitate their historic homes and to coincide with historic preservation. At the same time the guidelines are not intended to result in dysfunctional homes where the livability of the home gets compromised and the form doesn't follow the function. The guidelines seek to balance the concerns with providing a product at the end of the day that someone can be happy with and live with and provides incentives as a way to get there. Guideline 10.7 talks about linking elements and it says one-story elements are preferred but it doesn't say a one-story is required. I would say the existing connector is not proportional. It is small and makes it confusing as to what is old and new on this building. The proposed 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22 2014 connector sits below the eave lines and made to be fully transparent. We feel guideline 10.3 and 10.4 are met. The length of the connector will still be 7 feet and it has been pulled forward to have some space in front of the stairway and open up the floor plan. We could pull the front curtain wall back three feet and in doing so preserve another window on the ground floor. The accessory dwelling unit is lived in and it is dark inside and the windows on the outbuilding are small. The skylight would be a better solution than proposing punching in new windows in the side of the building. If windows are preferable we could do that. On the west fagade it is blistering and we could put a window there because it needs repaired. Dylan Johns said they met with the zoning officer to determine the floor area calculations. Jay said destroying historic fabrics is a concern of this board. This project as proposed would remove 4 original windows and a considerable amount of a wall. Jay asked how you justify removing the historic fabric. Mitch said part of it is the lack of visibility. There is no other way to do the connector. The function of the house is not there. Willis asked why it is dysfunctional. Is it because the master bedroom occupants have to go down stairs to visit the regular bedrooms. Mitch said there is no flow to get to the living space. None of the stairs can stack and there are three sets of stairs in this house and they don't stack with one another. It is the intent to stack everything in one central corridor. The central stair will give us the ability to eliminate two sets of stairs. The dysfunction is mainly the lower level. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Jay identified the issues. Jay said the house has been built there for 11 years and it has been functioning. The flow should not enter as part of the decision. We need as a board to focus on our guidelines. The two-story linking element is an issue and the destruction of the historic fabric. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22, 2014 Sallie said everyone was opposed to the skylight in the cabin at the work session. The connector is a nice design and it is transparent but it is not applicable to our charge as a commission and it doesn't fit the guidelines. Nora said she is opposed to the skylight and the applicant needs to figure out a way not to destroy three windows and the wall of the Victorian. This building is on the National Register and won an HPC award. The wall of the house should not be disrupted and I echo staff's concerns in her memo. Willis agreed with Nora that the existing fabric needs to be unaltered and the connector should be transparent. The roof should be glass. Patrick said he agrees with staff's memo that guideline 10.3, 10.7, 10.81 10.99 10.10, 10.11 and 10.14 are not met and the skylight is not appropriate. We are happy to do something as long as the historic fabric is not destroyed. Staff noted that there are other options such as interior remodels to address the concerns of the layout of the living space. Jay said it is not appropriate to destroy any more historic fabric. From what I understand you can't do this project without destroying three historic windows and part of the historic house. I would be interested to see if there is a solution that the applicant can come up with to solve their flow problems and not touch the house. If there was ten feet between the house and addition you could have probably fit the glass box in there without touching the historic fabric. The linking element has some positive things to it. Sallie said the siding should be repaired on the shed. Mitch said hopefully we can continue this and look at other options and if I can get success convincing my client that she should leave the stairs where they are and work with the connecting link. We would probably come back with a window rather than a skylight. Nora also suggested an internal remodel so that you are not touching the historic resource. Dylan Johns said the eave line is rather low. Mitch said an obvious solution would be a smaller link. Could we keep walls and windows inside a linking element with some kind of condition or 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22, 2014 agreement that those are still under HPC purview. They would still be retrievable. Willis said if your preserve the interior surfaces and the windows and made it more transparent so that you could see in and see the historic fabric that would work for me. Nora asked what Willis suggestion would do to the integrity of the historic resource and the integrity of the board. Amy said HPC traditionally does not review interiors and it would be difficult to monitor the inside of a building. Sallie said we would be setting a precedent. I have seen a lot of houses like this. I like the idea of taking away the connector and putting in a glass connector but making it one-story. It doesn't solve getting from the master bedroom to the other bedrooms. Sallie said HPC has a problem with people being able to walk across their connector or putting a hot tub on top of their connector. MOTION: Jays moved to continue 135 E. Cooper to April 9t', second by Sallie. All in favor, motion carried. Patrick said he would rather they come back with a new proposal. MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Sallie. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Work Session — Main Street cross walk lighting No- minutes Kv Xe e Kathleen J. trickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 9