Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20030528 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2003 311 S. FIRST - CONCEPTUAL - 432 W. FRANCIS ST .......................................................................... 2 MEADOWS~TRUSTEE TOWNHOMES UNIT 2 - MINOR DEVELOPMENT CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ...................................................................................................................................... 2 320 W. I-IALLAM - CONCEPTUAL .......................................................................................................... 5 470 N. SPRING - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING ....................................................................... 6 28 SMUGGLER GROVE ............................................................................................................................ 9 WORK SESSION - NO MINUTES .................................. ~ ......................................................................... 9 [0 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28~ 2003 Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty called the meeting to order at $:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Derek Skalko, Michael Hoffman and Nei11 Hirst. Excused were Teresa Melville and Valerie Alexander. Staff present: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Planner Intern, Katie Ertmer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Disclosure: Michael will recuse himself on 470 N. Spring St. Monitoring: 635 W. Bleeker- David Hoefer said the state law states that you cannot restrict the use of solar panels without good cause. If there is a reasonable way to accommodate the panels that do not affect the historic resource significantly, you need to accommodate them. Daran Rienks, contractor said the 2 solar panels will do all of the domestic hot water. Neill and Derek had no objection because you do not see the skylights from Sixth and Bleeker. It is out of the primary view. Michael said they do not .impact the historic structure. Rienks said they also want to do an extension for a gas fireplace through the historic roof. Jeffrey asked if the vent could go inside the joists and go out the original old chimney. Reinks said he would look into that solution. The contractor informed the HPC that the front door got stolen. They are having pricing done to replace the door. David said research should be done to see if the door can be replicated and Daran should check to see if he can find a salvaged door and then come back to the HPC with his findings. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2003 Guido's Katie said the new owners came in to eliminate three windows to put a lounge in. Derek said they could frost the glazing or do something else rather than removing the windows. The HPC opposed the removal of the windows. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued for L'Auberge & Innsbruck - paint and hide air conditioners. 311 S. FIRST - CONCEPTUAL - 432 W. FRANCIS ST MOTION: Michael moved to continue the public hearing and conceptual development on 311 $. First Street and 432 W. Francis St. to June 11, 2003: second by Jeffrey. All in ,favor. motion carried. MEADOWS/TRUSTEE TOWNHOMES UNIT 2 - MINOR DEVELOPMENT CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING Sworn in: Victoria Smith, Ellie Brickem, Bill Lukes Amy said the alterations include 1. Adding one new window in the front faqade. 2. Eliminating the original staircase to the upper floor. 3. Moving the original entry door forward and remodeling the entry area where meters are located. 4. Relocating the non-i~toric windows on the north, south and rear. Staffis sympathetic to the safety issues and on other town homes the staircase has been removed. These buildings were not designated until the mid 90's and before that HPC had some kind of informal review over certain alterations and in general a lot has happened without our intense discussions that we have about historic structures on what we would allow and not allow to happen. We need to determine if removing the stair compromises the original architecture. The area under the carport where the meters are located has already been remodeled in the past and they are proposing to bring that forward slightly. There is no historic material there. Moving the door up so that it is in the same plan is appropriate to do. The only issue is whether the door is original and if it is does HPC have a 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28~ 2003 problem with them replacing it with something else. Alterations to the non- historic windows are appropriate. The addition of one window on the front facade is consistent with what is happening on some of the other units and doesn't alter an original feature. Bill said he cannot determine if the door is original or not. Three of the un,ts were remodeled and all have the same front door and hardware, Victoria's unit being one of them. When the units became single-family homes the doors were changed. By bringing the door out to where the storage wall will be the door will be in a different location but in the original relationship to the back of the carport where it was originally built. The storage wall will be the exact same material and color as the existing. Having a viable front door is important. The door could be a solid door or a door with appropriate glass and white frame detailing. Victoria said the doors that are exactly like hers are on the units that were done 1 ½ years ago, where they expanded patios into sunrooms. Ellie Brickem said she worked for Herbert Bayer in the early and middle 50's. Ellie said Herbert never did anything horizontally. She did not work on the town homes. On the Meadow lodges the staircase was at the outside end and Herbert said the staircase needed moved in to hide it. Victoria said when you come up the stairs they go directly into her bedroom. People do not find the front door. The solution would be to get rid of the stairs and allow for more landscaping. This town home is located closest to the Meadows delivery and there are trucks and people around that area coming in and out. This is the most vulnerable unit security wise. Michael asked if we didn't permit the removal of the staircase, what other · possible solutions are there? Bill said some sort of gate arrangement might work. This is a fundamental issue for the owner so we have not looked into alternative solutions. Victoria said putting a gate there would conflict with the front door and mix people up who are trying to find the front door. Bill said if the stair went in any other direction there would be alternatives. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28~ 2003 Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened and closed the public hearing. Comments: Michael said he agreed with staff regarding the front door. Michael said his sense is, bit by bit we are giving away the fagade. Victoria said there are only two facades left, the rest have been altered. Neill said he has theoretical and procedural concerns. He is very passtonate about not altering original designs and this poses a dilemma for us. This was designated in 1995 but actually a "too late" designation. There were a lot of free reign changes that occurred on the units before designation but now they are designated and reviewed under a different criteria. This unit is the most visible unit and less change should occur. Derek said Neill made some good points but when looking at historic projects one of the things he struggles with is the fact that this was a property that was designated too late because of all the changes. There is a concern because Herbert Bayer's name is associated with the project. Just because his'name is associated with the project doesn't mean it should be all together, all everlasting. This project has alteration over alteration and he would be hard pressed not to approve the window alterations. Most of the windows were horizontal windows. The modern interpretation of the door is a good solution. He understands the concern for privacy and security but feels there could be another solution for the stairs and would recommend continuation of the project for further analysis. He is in favor of the windows and door changes. Jeffrey said it is very difficult to judge this based on prior allowances and what has happened and some of the things that weren't preserved prior to designation. We are trying to preserve a small portion of the resource. The usage has changed and that is a natural evolution. He said he is in support of analyzing this closer and recommended continuation. The staircase is an original element and a major part of that fa¢ade. The recessed nature of the door is part of the design. Having extra light would be a benefit to the interior but the window is an original punched opening. The rear facade changes are ok. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2003 Victoria responded that Bayer's original eastern exterior, the carport exterior was flush. He did not design a recessed door, it was completely flush and she brought his original plans to Amy. The windows that are being removed that are horizontal are not original. On the original plan Bayer did not put windows on the north or south walls except for bath and ventilation. The windows that she is changing are not original windows. The other balconies were changed after designation. Michael relayed that he basically supports staff's recommendation on the window and front door. Amy relayed to the owner that the City has adopted new guidelines and the sensitivity level has risen regarding designated projects. MOTION: Michael moved to continue the minor development and public hearing on the Meadows/Trustee Townhomes Unit to June 11, 2003: second by Neill. Motion carried 4-0. Yes vote: Derek, Neill, Michael. Jeffrey 320 W. HALLAM - CONCEPTUAL Derek recused himself. Sworn in: Judy Haas Amy relayed that the only concern from the last meeting was the height of the addition to the Pan Abode. The architecture shows a slightly steeper roof pitch and the explanation was given that it relates more to the context around the property. A study has been done to drop the height 1-I/8 inch that will be accomplished by flattening the roof pitch and lowering the plate height by a foot. Setback variances are being requested to help push the addition to the back of the property and create an important separation. There is also the request to waive one parking space. Judy presented elevations showing the different roof pitch from an 11 / 12 to 'a 10/12. The 10/12 reduces the ridge height. Other additions in Aspen have a much higher plate and ridge heights. Judy said the roof of the Pan Abode is not changing. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28~ 2003 Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened and closed the public hearing. Comments: Jeffrey commented on the link and suggested that it tuck so that it doesn't look like one continuous roof. A shadow line break would make it look more like a connector. Judy said she had no problem with that suggestion. Jeffrey also mentioned that Pan Abodes did not have a lot of light and ventilation and he would approve the skylight. Neill said he has a concern with the skylight on the Pan Abode. Amy said she did not comment on the skylights or the window changes on the north elevation because they will be addressed at final. Conceptual is about bulk and the building envelope. Neill said a condition should be added that states skylights and window plaCements to the original structure will be withheld until the final approval. Also, Jeffrey's recommendation about lowering the connecting element below the eave line of the existing Pan Abode, the link should tuck under so ~t doesn't look like one connnuous roof. Create a shadow line break. MOTION: Michael moved to approve Resolution #13, 2003 with ~rwo additional conditions; 4. Skylights and window placements to the original structure will be withheld until the final approval. 5.Lowering the connecting element below the eave line of the existing Pan Abode. The link should tuck under so it doesn't look like one continuous roof. Create a shadow line break. Motion second by NeiIl. All in favor, motion carried 3-0. Yes vote: Neill, Michael. Jeffrey 470 N. SPRING - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING Michael recused himself. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2003 Staffrelayed that he applicant did not have their notice of posting. David Hoefer said the affidavit must be presented to the City Clerk's office by noon tomorrow. Amy said the house was relocated and the lot is very small and does not allow for a lot of expansion. Some property exchanges are going to occur so we are working on the project with the assumption that those changes will occur. That would be a condition of approval. The additional property to be acquired will allow for the two car garage with some living area above it. It does propose numerous setback variances. Staff'S recommendation is to restudy a few aspects of the design of the garage to help it meet our guidelines and some residential design standards and to soften the impacts of the variances to the greatest extent possible. Specific proposed changes: The garage ground floor be slid back as far as possible to give some relief to the eastern side of the Victorian which is the side that the public sees most. Discuss sliding the connector piece back on the property so that you have some sense of space between the two buildings. On the north elevation the neighbor has concerns. They want no penetrations on that side of the building. Staffhas concerns that the wall is totally blank. In order to justify all the variances particularly the 500 square foot floor area bonus that is being asked we think there needs to be a clearer plan for the ~estoration. The window on the east fafade could be a double hung which would be a good improvement. The skylight on the front roof interferes with the historical character of that faqade and that could be filled in. There is a parking area toward the front of the house that should be abandoned and re-vegetated. The overall project is a good one and the design and architecture is sympathetic to the historic house. Sworn in: David Warner, Dennis and Andrea Young David Warner said we want to be sympathetic to the neighbor on the north. We were reluctant to have a totally blank wall on the north so we left a row of small windows and eliminated the skylights. David presented a video to the HPC. The building pushes into the hill pretty quickly. We agree with most of the recommendation but would rather 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2003 not push the house back. We want to preserve the portion of the hipped roof that we feel is historic. It can be pushed back but that means we encroach on the north face of that roof. The window concern can be researched. The skylight on the south Can be eliminated. Questions & clarifications: Derek inquired about the overhang of the garage. David said it is a t~ee foot overhang. Amy said she was suggesting that the garage scoot back and that the upper level remain the same. David said they could push the entire addition back but that would increase the variances on the back side. You would need to move everything to the east. Neill asked Amy what her conceptual issues were witti this project. Amy said we need to address the window issues because the FAR bonus is granted at conceptual. What the merits are for the bonus need to be determined now. We need to look at reducing the variances because the garage is coming out slightly ahead of the historic house, t° push everything back to the extent possible and to look at pushing the connector piece back. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened and closed the public hearing. Neill said if we are giving such a substantial bonus the building needs to return to a pristine state as much as possible. Jeffrey said the window below the dormer has been altered and the barn style door down the back of the wall could be made into a more appropriate style. Derek said he likes the direction the project is going in. He is OK with the skylights on the new construction. Regarding the overhang over the garage he has no concerns with that. Jeffrey said the presentation was excellent. He also agrees with staff's recommendations. FAR bonuses are based on exemplary projects and David is aware of the rigorousness of it. A restoration plan needs formalized. He also agreed with staff that the garage doors should be flush and the porch element does jut out further which needs some 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2003 reconsideration. The doors and window configuration should be considered in awarding the FAR bonus. The language is simpler and the ridge height is OK. The connector element we usually have wider but as long as it doesn't exceed the height it seems to work. With small modifications Jeffrey could approve conceptual. David Warner said they will change some of the features that do not fit. They will come up with a plan for the south elevation. They will look at the window on the west elevation again to make sure it is not historic. On the east elevation they are looking forward to changing some of the windows there to be more in scale of what might have been there originally. Hopefully we can somehow make the dormer work because they do not want to loose the function of that room. Jeffrey said some members do not want the dormer but others would accept the dormer when it provides light and ventilation. Derek said he is open to a dormer concept if it is done well but he feels the majority of the board might not agree with him. Amy said the dormer is very clumsy. The guidelines do not prohibit dormers; they give guidance as to the appropriate way to add them on. Jeffrey said in the past we have approved dormers especially is it prohibits doing an additional addition. The scale and wall value, the windows vs. wall mass is an aesthetic issue that needs addressed. MOTION: Neill moved to continue the public hearing and conceptual development of 470 N. Spring until June 25th, second by Derek. Motion carried 3-0. Yes vote: Neill, Jeffrey, Derek 28 SMUGGLER GROVE - Work Session - no minutes MOTION: Jeffrey moved to adjourn; second by Neill. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 9