Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20140827 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 Vice-chair, Willis Pember, called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were John Whipple, Patrick Sagal, Jim DeFrancia, Nora Berko and Sallie Golden. Jay Maytin was absent. Staff present: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk MOTION: John moved to approve the minutes of July 23, 2014 and August 6, 2014; second by Jim. Patrick amended the August 6t' minutes page 24. All in favor, motion carried. Disclosure: Nora will recuse herself on the work session of 223 E. Hallam as she is part owner. Willis will recuse himself on 549 Race Alley. He has been in contact with the new owner. 135 E. Cooper Ave. — Minor Development, continued public hearing Amy said this is a large Victorian listed on the National Register of Historic Places and is on the corner site of Cooper and Aspen Street. In 2003 the owner proposed a renovation of the house which has the Victorian preserved on the corner and a similar mass next to it. The two pieces are linked together with a one story hallway. There has always been a concern of the minimal passageway between the two major living areas. The public hearing was continued to tonight. There have been a few different designs to try and turn this one story connector into a two story stair case that would link the house together so you could walk more freely between both levels of the house. In January HPC denied the project finding that the guidelines have not been met and it deteriorated the success of the project when you had a nice breathing space between the structures. There are a few proposal tonight but staff is not able to find that they are successfully meeting the guidelines. The linking element guideline shows that it should be as minimal as possible. Trying to incorporate a stair into this part of the project is 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF-AUGUST 27, 2014 really creating an object between the two masses that is bigger than what we think is successful in the context of the guidelines. This link is on top of the Victorian in a few concepts and staff cannot support the application. The compromise suggested is that the one story connector has a deck on it and from the new house you can actually walk out onto this deck but you cannot go into the Victorian because there is an historic window. Possibly the window could be turned into a door to get to the second floor levels of the house. Beyond that there is interior remodeling that could occur. There is also a request for a skylight in the historic out building in the alley. A skylight is an out of character way to add light into the building. Staff has suggested a window that could be approved by staff and monitor. Staff recommends that the proposal in your packet be denied but you would allow them to convert this one historic window into the door on the Victorian and that you would allow a window on the outbuilding to be approved by staff and monitor. Dillon Johns and Mitch Haas represented the owner Christy Ferer. Mitch said this project has been back and forth and we are trying to find a workable solution. The property is on the Corner of Cooper and Aspen Street. There is an out building that is occupied and used as an ADU and a garage. When the addition was made there was no room to go back with a linking element which is normally the case. There are two bedrooms and a stair in the historic house and a set of stairs in the addition that gets you to the master bedroom. We are trying to resolve that you don't have to go down the stairs and across the link and up the stairs to get from the one side to the other. Over time this has been an ongoing function. At the last meeting we heard that if we could find a way to solve the problem and disturb less of the historic fabric then we could bring it back to the HPC. We have tried to make it easier to tell where the old ends and the new begins. We have come up with three options. #I Dillon said on the ground floor we would leave the existing connector and the stairs and on the upper level where the existing window is we would make a connection from the addition to the historic resource but stack the connector over the existing connector. The two story connector would be all glass. One window would need to be removed. Mitch said because of the roof line you can't pop a door through the window as suggested because the window goes up under the eave and if you put a 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27 2014 door in you would have to cut into the roof to make the door a normal height. #2 Dillon said the existing corridor would stay and the stairs are to the south of the corridor. We have shifted the upper connector over so that it lands in between two existing windows. We would be preserving all the main features of the house and only penetrating the siding wall area in between them. With this design the roof connection becomes more clean and you don't destroy the historic windows. #3 Dillon said in this scenario we are eliminating the existing corridor and taking a new corridor and new stair and pushing it into the house. We are still leaving a gap between the new envelope and the historic house. We could move the historic window to keep it on the site. On the upper level the corridor would stack on top of the ground level connection. Dillon said the property owner is willing to further screen the connector with trees etc. On the carriage house the kitchen is dark and we are flexible as to the size and location of the window instead of a skylight. Mitch said the ADU is occupied year round as an ADU and it is dark. The siding is somewhat damaged in the area where the window would go. Nora inquired about the increase of site coverage. Would the two story connector impact the light going into the cabin. Mitch said he didn't think the connector would impact the cabin because it is glass. There might be a little more light coming to the cabin. Vice-chair, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Willis identified the issues: Connector Window on the outbuilding on the alley instead of a skylight. Willis said the applicant has done a good job in explaining the difficulty in simply using an outdoor connector above the existing connector and its relationship to the roof option #1. Option #3 is a good synthesis between option #1 and #2. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 Amy said this is a two story addition to a two story house. Guideline 10.7 said if you are designing an addition that is taller than the historic building set it back and use a connector. A one story connector is preferred and it should be ten feet long. This guideline has some relevance but this situation is somewhat different. There are other guidelines that talk about removing as little historic material as possible. Mitch said the link is about 7 feet east to west. Willis said the applicant has done a good job of interacting with the historic resource. Nora asked how far forward of the historic house is the connector moving. Dillon said he believes the connector/stair is moving forward five feet. The net change of the connector would be about the same. The question is do we leave what is originally built or do we puu it back. Willis said he is comfortable with #3 and there is vegetation and things grown that obscure the connector and site lines to it. Jim said he is also comfortable with option #3. Sallie said she agrees with staff and is not in favor of deviating from the guidelines with a two story connector between the buildings. Nora said she feels the floor plan is an internal question. This building is on the National Register and is a historically landmarked house and how do you honor these listings when you are changing it significantly and bulking up the site. The site is getting really heavy. Our charge is stewardship of the historic house and this design seems counter to the integrity that I am charged with. John said when he looks at this project the existing linking element really blends the two together where the glass delineates between the two buildings. The two buildings look similar and hopefully one could be painted differently. John said he could support option #3. Patrick said he agrees with staff that the project should be denied. You could put the bedrooms on the same side. The design destroys the character 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27. 2014 and separation of the two houses. Even though it is glass it creates one house where it should be two houses. The skylight in back should not be approved but the window in the ADU could be approved. John asked if the connector could step down two or three steps to make the doorway as staff has suggested. Dillon said we are already dealing with a level change from one side to the other of approximately two steps as the addition is set slightly higher. Patrick mentioned the attic and its use and possibly the next owner would open up the attic. Amy said community development is taking this seriously that this property is maxed out on FAR and the idea of freeing some up for the project you are looking at is questionable. They would have to turn the attic back to storage instead of leaving it the way it is now. Mitch said the attic space is legal right now. We would only have to get rid of the space if we added the stairs. Dillon said if we were to get approval for the connector we would have to reconfigure the space no matter what. In order to convert the attic space we would have to have a drop down ladder access. Willis said the glass separates the two building and architecturally the design is appropriate. They have met the intent of the guidelines. It says a one story is preferred but it doesn't say never have two stories. Sallie said she has seen architecture that doesn't meet the guidelines in the past. The applicant should figure out a way to do what staff has recommended. MOTION: Willis made the motion to approve resolution #24 for 135 E. Cooper Ave. with the connector option #3 as presented by the applicant. Elimination of the skylight proposal on the out building and a window to be replaced in the vertical wall that is approved by staff and monitor. Staff and monitor to review the glass sample; motion second by Jim. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST-27, 2014 Patrick said he would like to see two bedrooms on the same side. Staff recommends altering the interior. Mitch said there isn't enough room for two bedrooms on the same side. We have explored interior and exterior. There isn't an interior re-working that will solve this. This was originally approved as a one story connector because HPC wouldn't approve two stories. The guidelines also say the new should not mimic the old. We are still trying to find a reasonable balance between a private property owner's rights and the historic preservation interests of the city. A one story connector " is not a hard and fast rule, it is a guideline. Nora said she appreciates the glass connector. Her issue is the bulk of the additional glass as it is quite massive. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Sallie, no; Nora, no; Willis, yes; John, yes; Patrick, no. Tied vote 3-3, no action. MOTION: John made the motion to continue the application until November 19°2014. John made the motion to approve resolution #25 for the window fon the ADU because they need light and it is not detrimental to the project. Motion second by Willis. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Sallie, no, Nora, yes. Willis, yes, John, yes, Patrick, no. Motion carried 4-2. John said the applicant has the right to exercise their development rights with a continuation and for us to flat out deny this closes the conversation. We are here to have open conversations. 549 Race Alley and Lot 4 and Lot 5 for Fox Crossing Subdivision - Final Major Development, Setback Variance, Public Hearing Willis recused himself. Jim chaired the meeting. Debbie said the notice has been properly provided and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27 2014 Amy said HPC granted a conceptual approval for the renovation of the Victorian house at Fox Crossing that sits on Lot 5. This building was abandoned in the 30's or 40's. It is one of the most pristine examples of a miner's cottage left in and town and it is in terrible condition. HPC approved an expansion to the building which involves picking the Victorian up and temporarily setting it on the north, Lot 4. The basement will be excavated and the Victorian brought back and the expansion finished. We want to make sure as this project goes to permit that it is very clear what will be preserved and what will not be. That will probably be figured out in the field. Our starting point is to preserve everything as possible. We will need a detailed preservation plan. All of the screen doors etc. are there for this building. We typically expect windows to be preserved. Around the base of the house to cover the joists there is some vertical wood. Staff recommends that the wood be reconstructed. The applicant has presented board formed concrete to replicate the texture of the wood foundation but in this case since the house is pristine we want to maintain its character and we are suggesting that the wood character be maintained. The applicant has also asked to use a composite shingle and we are suggesting wood or asphalt shingles. On the floor plans it indicates that the doors on the Victorian are not operable. One of the original doors needs to be operable so that you can walk through. It needs to be a primary entrance to the building. Some of the windows need to be more unified and that can be done with staff and monitor. Staff has no problem with the lighting chosen for the new construction. On the miner's cottage there is an interesting fixture that has the qualities of an old jelly jar but probably doesn't meet the lighting code because it is a clear lens and you see the bulb. HPC has the authority to accept or modify the light. With the landscape plan staff has identified a number of concerns. On the Victorian you walk up a couple of steps and it is 18 inches to 2 feet above grade. That is being maintained in the project but it appears that the grade on the entire site is being raised as much as two feet so the finished floor level of the Victorian will be four feet above where it is now. Staff needs clarification about this because there are retaining walls proposed around the site that don't exist now. This Victorian was set out in a meadow, rural and modest and informal character of the landscape. The landscape plan needs reviewed by staff and monitor if they intend to use retaining walls. The exact plants are not pointed out in the landscape plan and we need to know what is being planted so that it isn't too close to the historic structure. Our primary concern is the front and around the Victorian house and no so much what happens around the addition. There is a setback variance request for the addition. HPC already gave a setback variance at conceptual. This 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 neighborhood has bigger side yards than the West End even though the zoning is the same. You need ten feet minimum on each side. HPC accepted five feet on one side and ten on the other. The applicant would now like to encroach into the ten foot side yard with an 18 inch overhang that would protect a pathway leading to their alternate front door for the house. Staff doesn't feel this meets the preservation effort. Amy said the line shack on the Victorian property will go to lot 4 and the line shack on lot 6 will stay where it is. The performance guarantee should be $30,000 like it is for all historic buildings. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. Oscar Carlson, Charles Cunniffe presented Charles said the preservation evaluation was done in 2008 and will be revised with Staff and monitor etc. Charles said because the wood or base of the house is sitting in the ground we thought that a board formed concrete that was colored and looked just like the wood would be more sensible. There is very limited visibility of the base and we felt it is a good solution. We are fine with wood shingles as recommended by staff. The front door is operable. We are happy to work with staff and monitor on the new windows of the addition and we do feel the windows should be contemporary in nature. The historic sconce as is could be frosted. Part of the beauty of the sconce is seeing the beauty of how the interior works. They are under the historic porch roofs. The house is down in a hole and in a hollow and Race Alley is considerably higher and we are trying to connect the garage to the house addition. If we can raise it 2 feet that would give the house more presence when you walk by. On the landscape plan we would do a very low wall with a gate and you would get the sense of the house being in a landscape setting. Raising the house would give its presence on the street. Charles also said he is withdrawing the variance request. Jim said staff is recommending approval with nine conditions. Board formed concrete Amy said there will be a concrete base and staff is suggesting that they apply wood to the foundation so that it looks like it does now. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 John suggested a green treated pressed wood. Jim opened the public hearing. U Erspamer said he is a neighbor and serves on the Planning & Zoning Commission. U said he supports fascia or something at the base of the historic house. I would support the encroachment request also. Angie Griffith was a good friend and I represented the estate that sold the property originally to Camilla Auger and then it was sold to Harris. Angie lived on the property until she died. She married Griffith the sheriff who built the line shacks in the 60's. She was very emotionally tied to the building. It is hard to put this building together and make it functional and yet still look historic. Sconce Sallie said she likes the jelly jar design with a frosted glass. Sallie said she wants to be considerate of the code and the style of the house. Alteration to the natural grade Patrick suggested staff and monitor approve the two foot grade change. Jim said the landscape plan will be approved by staff and monitor. Their relocation plan will be approved with the security of$30,000 which is customary. The vesting period is in the resolution. Patrick said he agreed with John that the base of the historic house should be green treated or chemically treated wood that matches the house. Staff and monitor can review the sample. Jim said the condition would be treated wood with the condition that staff and monitor approve the color and character of the wood. MOTION: Nora moved to approve Resolution #24 with the changes as discussed at this meeting. Motion second by John. All in favor motion carried. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 223 E. Hallam —work session — no minutes Nora recused herself as she is one of the applicants. Debbie said the work session is non-binding and cannot be relied upon in any in connection with the proceeding of the Historic Preservation Commission. It is to acquire information and direction for the applicant. MOTION: Willis moved to adjourn the meeting; second by Patrick. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 10