Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20150225 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 Chairperson, Willis Pember called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were John Whipple, Bob Blaich, Jim DeFrancia and Patrick Sagal. Absent were Nora Berko, Sallie Golden and Gretchen Greenwood. Staff present: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Preservation Planner Cindy Klob, Records Manager MOTION: Jim moved to approve the minutes of February 1 Ith second by Bob. All in favor, motion carried. Commissioner Comments Patrick said the purpose and intent of the h-istoric preservation commission is to ensure~the preservation of Aspen's character as an historic mining town, early ski resort and cultural center and retain the historic architectural and cultural resource attractions that support tourism and economic welfare of the community. Recognize and protect and promote the retention and continued utility of the historic buildings and districts.. Promote awareness and appreciation of Aspen's unique heritage. Encourage sustainable reuse of historic structures and encourage voluntary efforts to increase public information, interaction and access to historic building interiors. Disclosure of Conflict of Interest Debbie said the second agenda item is a negotiation for AspenModern which involves a property that is in the family of one of the HPC members. The family will be appearing. Our ethical rules allow for that application to come before you with the HPC member present. Each member needs to be free from bias on both sides in connection with judging of the application and to judge by the criteria of the code. If none of you indicate that your relationship with the applicant or applicant's family is such that you can't be fair and impartial you would say so. y r,a ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 Willis asked the members if they feel they can review the application without conflict and in an unbiased way. All members replied they could review the application and be fair. Jim disclosed that he has a business relationship with CCY in Basalt but that in no way impairs his ability to judge the 229 W. Smuggler or 211 E. Hallam. Willis disclosed that he knows Howie and Nora socially but can be unbiased and fair. Willis also said he teaches students from UCD with Harry Teague and he has a long standing relationship with Harry but can be unbiased and impartial in reviewing his work. John said he know the Mallory's son Lyndon and he can be fair and impartial. John also said he worked on a project with bluegreen, Valerie Yaw and there is no monetary incentive that could persuade him. Patrick said he only knows Nora from the HPC board and will look at the project from the guidelines. 229 W. Smuggler / 426 N. Second — Final Major Development, Public Hearing Debbie reviewed the public notice affidavits that were provided and it appears that notice has been appropriately given. Affidavit of Notice Exhibit C New elevations Exhibit D Amy said staff is very happy with the progression of this project and recommends.approval with conditions. 1. Condition has revised setbacks 2. When the building is excavated for the new basement there are certain insurances that should be provided. 3. There is a stone foundation on the Victorian house on the site and it is pained. The applicant will use the stone as a veneer for their new foundation. The discussion is whether they can get the paint off the stone's surface. Staff is recommending that it be stripped or flipped. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 Staff and monitor will work with the contractor to determine a reasonable solution during construction. 4. Images in the memo show the railing around the porch deck not to be original. Staff would like the plans proposed to be revised to replicate the original design of the railing on the porch deck. 5. The steps leading up to the front porch are not original. We are recommending that the re-design show the full width of the stair. 6. Staff is asking that a hand rail not be installed on the stairs to the front porch because that is a change in look of the front porch. 7. There is an unusual pattern in the gable end where there. are striped fish scale clapboards. We would like the applicant to retain that original design that is show in the older photographs. 8. Window replacement— The applicant wants to replace all the windows and that is not in keeping with the HPC guidelines that ask fist for an effort-to improve their efficiencies and reduce air infiltration and replace glazing and putty. Staff will inspect each window with the architect and contractor during construction process and review and approve a treatment approach for each window with the project monitor. There may be some that are not original and not repairable. 9. We need to know what the flashing will be. Is it painted or galvanized. We also need to see gutters and down spouts. 10. We need a new drawing of the chimney as it is drawn larger than it is. 1 l.On the new additions that are directly on the Victorian; side addition on the e4st and a dormer on the back. The applicant showed them sided with wood but roofed with metal. Staff would like-the wood . shingles so that they don't stick out so much from the historic architecture. 12. There is a large opening, a door that is proposed on the back of the Victorian. It is in an area that has already been disturbed and there will be a hole left when the non-historic duplex unit is taken off but the opening is to be enlarged for a new door and we need discussion about what that would be. 13.The historic house and the detached house would have a trellis connecting them in the back yard with a retractable awning. We would like to see that deleted as it takes away from the detached layout of the project that was'approved at conceptual. 14.This is a request for a sample of the zinc material. This material has not be used on a project in Aspen before as a siding and roofing. HPC needs to be comfortable with the possible reflectivity of it. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 15.A detailed landscape plan includes work in the city right-of-way. Anything that is un-necessary in the ROW should be removed. No private pathway lighting should be in the right-of-way. Minimize the pathways themselves. Be careful with perennial plantings so that they do not mess with the roots of the cottonwoods. They also do not want a lot of water going into that area. This can be worked out with the applicant and the Parks Department. 16.The landscape plan shows a stone curb that follows the property line. We feel the Victorian landscape was much more informal. We suggest that be removed from the plan. 17.Along with the architectural restudy of the front steps of the front porch the landscape plan may need some adjustment. 18.There is path lighting in front of the Victorian and in general HPC has not wanted that in front of a Victorian because it is the kind of lighting that wasn't there originally. We prefer the porch light to provide adequate lighting. Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning John Schenk, CCY architects Valerie Yaw, bluegreen John said he feels they have nicely adjusted the drawings for approval. The house was built in 1888. The new owner desires to invigorate the historic house. The Victorian is staying in its same spot. The site plan is quite porous and you can see through to the alley. We will be fixing baseboards, corner boards and windows. We will roof the immediate addition with shingles. We are showing a handrail on one side of the widened steps. We believe code requires a handrail. We want to keep what historic windows are there but they are in bad shape and we will work with staff and monitor to make whatever needs to be done happen. The trellis between the garage and new unit A has been removed. The material MB zinc is a natural product and weathers nicely and doesn't become shiny. We are using a solid version and a perforated version (sample). The addition of the dormer roof has been changed to shingles so it matches the addition to the east. We have kept the large glass opening on the south side of the Victorian and we feel it is in a location that is not seen from the street. The opening gives you the opportunity to see into the historic building as it currently exists. On the materials we are using weathered zinc (sample). The material of the large glass opening is attached outwardly to the clapboard siding and we are not 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 proposing the sun shade. We will look at removing stain from the outside stone but that might be difficult. Valerie Yaw showed the site plan drawings. This property sits opposite to. Triangle Park. Landscape is art and it is an important piece to our fabric. There is a strong presence of the cottonwoods. The northeast corner has extraordinary views. When you are on the front porch you feel like Triangle Park is part of your experience. Planted joints and pavers will be incorporated. The curb is from public to private. Perennials come back every year. A significant portion of the property will remain in sod. The path to the front porch-will be a simple path made of natural stone historically. The expanded risers are a much better solution. Keeping the views open is part of our fabric. A low green mass would balance the objective of preserving the resource. In the front we have proposed a modest garden, shrub and perennials and low grasses to the street. The Dowler's have two dogs as we studied the option of the curb because it would allow them to keep the dogs contained and provide a visual view without doing a 42 inch fence. There is a history of a fence on the property. A low curb would be a welcoming threshold to keep this park like environment. The breakfast nook is on the east side of the property. You come out to an elevated landing walk down three risers to a planted joint stone patio. Stone is an enduring material and is both old and new and if we can reuse the material on-site that is a possibility. New construction: The landscape path is simple and straight forward. We will simplify the right-of-way. The experience of moving to the interior courtyard is through a small slip off the new construction. There is a low wall and you move through that. The courtyard is pavers with planted joints and includes a couch, coffee table and a fire feature. There is a concrete apron the meets the garage and extends to the east to the trash and recycling. We have reduced the lighting in the right-of-way that Amy suggested. We ,would like to keep one ballard at the property line for a single light along the length of the path. That area is very dark. Overall we have eliminated 5 light features from the project. John said condition #3 regarding the stone we would like to work with staff. We are not sure whether we can strip it or not. #4 is the porch railing. Amy said we are asking them to replicate the historic railing. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 John said we are ok with #4 condition. John said #5 we are conforming to. John said regarding #6 the Bldg. Dept. will require a handrail etc. We can work with staff on condition #7, #8, #9. John said the chimney diagram has been corrected in the packet. Condition #12 is the opening to the rear and it is less visible than other parts of the house. With the opening the house would have a much more livability front to back connection and we would prefer to keep the same size opening both in detail and in form. Willis said we can discuss #12. John said #13 and#14 are complied with. Valerie said on #15 we struck all the right-of-way lighting but kept a path light at the front door. Amy said #15 can say work with the forester on acceptable perennials in the right-of-way. Valerie asked that #16 be removed because they would like the curb to be approved. #18 needs modified. Willis commented that a dog fence doesn't require anything that is visible but is an alternative to doing a 42 inch high fence. John said they feel the curb is a public to private delineation. The curb would be a stone product. Valerie said when we strip the paint off the sandstone and cannot be reinstalled that would be a great material to use. A stone natural product could also be used. John said using the stone foundation from the house would work well. John Whipple said presently there are no street curbs on Smuggler. Jim said he agrees with the comments made except for the path lighting. He has no problem with that lighting as it can get dark in that area. Bob said he lives in a similar house and if he didn't have path lighting it would be a liability issue. The West End is dark and all the Victorians in 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 the area have path lighting. Who monitors awnings and lighting five years down the road? Amy said if it was a previous approval the city would do some kind of enforcement. Debbie said the Building Dept. has specific regulations and HPC cannot over ride them. John Whipple said since this is a curb less street this is a nice feature and a good delineation. -I am in favor of all the conditions. On condition #12 the opening is a good way to express the interior to the exterior and it is in an appropriate location in the back of the house. Patrick said the reduced glazing is OK. The historic Victorian goes from street to grass to building and putting a curb in there will change it significantly from how it has been historically. I am not in favor of 24 inch light sticks. The unified roof and siding of the addition creates the appearance of greater mass. It needs to be broken up either with different colors or materials. Willis said since we don't need to elevate so much to reduce risers at the porch to make it one riser height six or 7 inches would be preferable as 12 inches is impactful. Willis said the only disagreements between the board are the path light, curb and continuous roof and siding. Straw poll: Path lighting approved. Possibly do in ground flush lights. Straw poll: Curb, one riser approved. Straw poll: Roof and siding approved as is. Amy clarified all the conditions which were agreeable by the board. MOTION: Jim moved to approve resolution #9 with the conditions delineated by staff, second by Willis. Willis said on condition #10 the historic photo should be used as a reference that show the steps without a cap to be approved by staff and monitor. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 Clarification: Valerie said on the perennials it would be good if the board had a comment on perennials vs Kentucky blue grass as the appropriate right-of-way solution. Debbie said the condition is up to the forester because of the roots of the trees. John Whipple said he is for the perennials if a watering system can be worked out. Jim agreed. Willis said we are approving the landscape plan as part of the vote. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Bob, yes; John, yes; Patrick, no; Willis, yes. Motion carried 4-1. Jim will be the monitor. 211 E. Hallam —AspenModern Negotiation for Voluntary Designation, Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation and Variances, Public Hearing Debbie said the notice of affidavit is in order and the applicant can proceed, Exhibit I. Exhibit II, new elevations Amy said the review is for an AspenModern negotiation for historic designation of 211 E. Hallam and a major redevelopment. There was a subdivision on the 12,000 square foot lot and it was divided in half. The 6,000 square foot lot is under HPC purview and has a studio on the lot. Nothing has ever been done to say that the studio has historic significance. If it was proposed to be demolished HPC would review that but it hasn't been a contributing resource and so the applicant is voluntarily offering designation under AspenModern. The first discussion is whether the studio should be AspenModern designation worthy. This property has an interesting history. Mr. Berko put Aspen on the map in 1949. With AspenModern negotiation the applicant can ask council for things that are needed for the success of the project. After conceptual it will go to council and then back to HPC for final review. At council they will discuss waiver of the building permit fees, waiver of 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 impact fees. There are a number of large trees on the property. All can be removed except the one in the south east corner back along the alley. The applicant will be applying for a tree permit removal for that tree. As a recommendation HPC should not be discussing the tree as that decision is involving the Parks Dept. and Council. The applicant will be presenting without the tree. If they do not get approval to remove the tree they will come back for conceptual. This is a 6,000 square foot lot with the studio structure on the alley. The applicant has the right to do a duplex and that is their plan. They are proposing to have them touch but they have the option to make them two detached structure and still conform with zoning. By choosing a duplex program that allows 360 more floor area than a single family home. It also allows one additional garage stall of 250 sq.ft. to be exempt from the floor area. The applicant is also asking for the 500 square foot bonus. The project as proposed has 1,110 square feet more gross floor area then is allowed as a standard. At the work session HPC seemed to embrace the idea that the studio could be lifted up, rotated and put on the front of the site. If this is done we'are losing a substantial amount of original material and it would be a character change. The family lived in the house and the studio was an accessory unit. The building would be picked up, turned, making it a street facing building and demolishing some of the existing materials. Staff can get behind this but it clearly has to be justifiable. The biggest issues is how the old and new connect. Amy did a power point on different connectors throughout town. There are a number of guidelines that have not been met with this project. Staff suggested totally detaching the units from each other. Staff said there is a problem with the two story volume added directly to the studio. Staff recommends continuation to re-design the addition to either create a connector or,somehow separate the two pieces. Staff does not feel the FAR bonus is warranted. There are also setback variances being requested. The RDS's require a secondary mass and the applicant is requesting a variance as we feel that should not be granted until there is some improvement with the connector. The applicant has a new front door into the studio that is too far back from the street for the RDS's and we feel that should be restudied. Applicant: Nora Berko Harry Teague 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 Philip Jeffries Mirte Malory Howie Malory Stan Clauson Nora said she grew up in this property and her father, Ferenc Berco had the studio built in 1964 by Ted Mylarz. The structure had to be beautiful, simple and affordable. Those are the same values that lead us on our journey. The studio was a gathering place for participants in the design conference, music festival and institute. They came here to talk and get photographed and all the images were developed and printed here. We have engaged in the AspenModern by choice. When the lot split was done I chose the studio because it was unprotected. The studio would be a great example of AspenModern and giving our family the opportunity for multi- generational living. It would be a Senior center for us and a home for our children. I have seen this neighborhood empty out into second homes. We want to keep life in the West End year round. We have lived on the property for almost 60 years. We have several thresholds in conflict with the HPC guidelines and we recognize that. One is livability. Livability and marketability are two different measures. Our standards align with the Aspen Community Plan and with the housing we want to create a place for two families to live year round and be active participants in the community. We want to reuse the existing structure, build green and generate energy. Regarding transportation we want to be able to walk, bike and have access to RFTA. We also want the town to have a healthy mix of ages. We are attached to the studio and hope to see it celebrated on Hallam St. as an AspenModern. Mirte said Ferenc Berko's photographs and his life career as a photographer were international. It was the dedication to form, line and shape that lead him to be recognized as one of the pioneers of black and white photography. His work is collected in major museums and at international exhibitions: Architecture has always been a part of his vision and photography. It has been my honor to keep the collection alive. We have maintained a dark room in the studio today. The studio is different than other projects that HPC has seen because it has a public interface. Howie said they had family discussions about what is the right thing to do with the property. We came up with two straight forward objectives. First the creation of a multi-generation primary residence duplex which would 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 consist of the renovated studio and a new duplex residence connected to the studio in the rear, the senior housing. The second objective was to landmark the studio and keep the Berko archive here in Aspen. We are here to talk about the livability of the project not the marketability. The studio and the two units should have an abundant access to natural daylight. We don't want to live in shadows. We want to have above grade living. We also want to have affordable construction with basic non-custom materials in the Bauhaus style that are energy efficient. We want to take advantage of the lots natural southern exposure. The senior center would have minimal level changes. We believe this is a proper and successful AspenModern project. Philip Jeffries said the project lines up nicely with the Victorian. The bay window has always faced the interior of the site. We tried to come up with a scenario that balances the preservation and livability. The spirit of the studio ,is driven by its form and that form needs space around it. The inside of the studio comes to life with the display of light. We need to keep light coming into the studio from both sides. The further we moved the studio forward the more breathing room it had. Philip went over some of the designs they worked on. One unit is in the studio and the other duplex behind. Harry said the studio is key to the history of Aspen which needs preserved and celebrated in an appropriate way. The family is also key. The guidelines were created for a different era and a different style of architecture. The resource would move to the front of the property and spin 180 degrees and what that does is make the resource visible so that it is seen. There is public activity associated with this building. The entrance and the way it addresses the street is very important. We want to create an addition to the studio that creates an entrance from the street. We would build a new foundation out of cinder block and would have exactly the same appearance as it has now. On the back side we would have a slight modification of extending the porch for a deck and changing fenestration in the kitchen with the addition of a little window. You basically look right,throw this building and making a glass enclosure connector in the center would-prevent you from seeing through the building. We are creating a new entrance from a non-functional part of the building. The building in the back is a two story structure. Regarding the parking two are connected to the senior housing (duplex) in back and the other on the side. 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION . MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 On the secondary building the master bedroom is on the second floor. It is our intent to create a setback of forms and we gradually increase the program and mass as you step further back. The south elevation is on the alley and we are providing a space for two cars attached to the senior housing and there is a back entrance from the alley side. There is also a single car garage that serves the studio on the alley. The front door of the senior housing faces the street. There is an upper element over the front door. There are two front doors for the duplex from the street. The mass of the building is on the west side and it is opened up to the south east so that gardens, vegetables can be grown in this area. We are utilizing the building collage concept with a dark element over a light element in color. Harry said they have done several projects not by connector additions. The new architecture was attached directly to the old buildings. Mirte said we hope that you will look at this project in the spirit of Modernism and not Victorianism. We have also talked with Ted Mularz, the original architect for the studio and he is in support of this project. Our neighbors are also in support of our project. Willis said this is an exciting project for our community. It is clear that the studio is a living archive with its own front door and the senior housing is a separate residence. Mirte said the studio is a separate family residence for our siblings. Bob asked about the traffic to the archive. Mirte said it depends on what is happening with publications. Requests weekly. It is not a heavy traffic area but I work there daily. Willis said with the archive facing the street one would think you would have more exposure and more traffic. Patrick said in trying not to have the two story over the historic resource taking the bedroom and putting it on the east side and moving the garage up and putting the double garage west so you have a U. That way you would have a view through the building all the way back to the alley. 12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 Harry said they explored numerous options. Eventually you are going to r have a two story structure behind the resource and that would block the view to Aspen Mountain. Moving this to one side and having a two story element to one side fit the idea of the collage. 'Mirte said moving it over would impact the studio twice and our goal is to have as little impact as possible. That would also require a driveway. John said the structure is intertwined with the use of it and the public amenity of being able to visit. Are there any kind of guarantees down the road that this will be maintained as the archive and public amenity? Mirte said the indication is that we want to keep it here. .There is a large amount of material that needs preserved. It is our intent to preserve the archive and keep it here as much as possible. Jim complimented the applicant on their thoroughness and evaluation of alternatives. It is an asset for our community. I agree with continuance and studying the separation and clarifying the setbacks. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. Bill Stirling said all of the AspenModern presentations have been unique. With the structure being moved Aspenites will see this structure. Bringing it forward makes a lot of sense. By shifting it over to the left they have eliminated the bustle look. Mixed uses have been going on in the West End. If you designate it, it stays there. Scott Ride said he and his partner bought the original Berko home. We are looking forward to restoring the Victorian. This will be a unique property with the Victorian and AspenModern studio right beside it. What makes Aspen great is that we embrace many styles. We applaud what is trying to be accomplished here and we are working together. Shortly we will be in front of the HPC. Phyllis Bronson, said the building is aesthetically beautiful. It captures the simplicity of Ferenc Berko's photography. Having a multi-generational project and seeing lights on in the West End permanently is compelling. 13 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 David Hyman said this is a beautiful presentation. The project will be such an amenity to the community as it draws the 40, 50, 60's into the present day. I have heard no negative comments and it preserves the old studio and enhances it with the view to the mountain. I am total support and hope the HPC passes it. Exhibit III - Amy said e-mails or letters were sent to the HPC from Ted Mularz, Aspen Institute, David Floria, Aspen Community Church, Linda Bump, Jess Bates.and Phil Hodgson. Chairperson, Willis Pember closed the public hearing. Applicant rebuttal: Stan said the required site coverage is 50% and this meets that requirement at 44%. ,In the packet there were extensive alternatives that have been discussed. Staff did not provide a resolution because additional study is being recommended. If the HPC feels there is enough presented staff could prepare a resolution based on the application presented. Willis identified the issues: Designation of an AspenlVModern resource Re-siting of the historic resource Setback variances RDS's — secondary mass Willis agreed with everything that the public commented on. Itis clear that the massing has to go to one side or the other. What we are asked to review is a one dimensional requirement, a one-story ten foot connector to separate the old from the new. The project is beautifully done and it is good architecture but it doesn't meet the narrow guideline for a connector. I can get behind everything else but the connector. Patrick also said he has concerns with the connector. Bob said the concern is the connector entry. I have no problem with the design. The family wants to keep the usage on this property. How you solve the access is the issue. With the double entry they both face the street and they both have different functions and the solution is acceptable. 14 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 25, 2015 Jim said he agrees with staff to restudy the connector and clarify the setbacks. The basic design is good. John said he understands the uses of the West End and hopes that they continue in the future. He also understand staff's position and the family's needs. This is a tremendous resource and possibly we can re-interpret the guideline for AspenModern architecture. The project is well thought out. MOTION: Jim moved to continue 211 E. Hallam to March 25th; second by Patrick. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; John, no; Patrick, yes; Bob, no; Willis, yes. Motion carried 3-2. Jim said the design is terrific and the continuation is to allow staff to study the separation connector issue and clarify the setbacks. Amy said staff is not suggestion the project start over and they are not suggesting it has to be a one story ten foot long connector. It could be just a little more in alignment as to how it is connected. We are open to some flexability and it is not identical to every other case. MOTION: Willis moved to adjourn; second by Jim. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8.30 m. Kathleen Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 15