Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19950913ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPT. 13, 1995 Heeting was called to order by chairman Donnelley Erdman with Jake Vickery, Roger Moyer, Melanie Roschko, Jeff McMenimen, Linda Smisek, Les Holst and Martha Madsen. Excused were Susan Dodington and Sven Alstrom. MOTION: Linda moved to approve the minutes of August 9th second by Roger. Ail in favor, motion carries. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Amy: The Marolt house where Bob Gish lived has all original windows and they are very pretty. They have five small lights over one large light and they are all single pane windows. They want to do something with them. I went over with the Parks Dept. and suggested they get storm windows to match the windows and the seemed OK with that or if the HPC would entertain keeping the windows on the front and a few around the side and then they can go with a matching replacement for the rest. With City Hall we are doing a sash replacement kit. Linda: I would say keep all of the windows. Donnelley: A storm window solution would work. Amy: It has hooks on the outside where it originally had storm windows. Les: Regarding the windows possibly they could use Craig's shop. ENTRANCE TO ASPEN Amy: We need to move forward with a statement that we can give CDOT about impacts of each alternative and where we see improvements. Les: At the last CDOT meeting I spoke with members and they were disappointed with our statement. We have to be very specific with the impacts of certain alternatives one by one on the historic properties. These two seem to have the least impacts and we need to get very specific or they will totally disregard us again. Stan Clauson, Community Development Department Head: They may be disappointed if they want to take that attitude but on the other hand I thought the HPC gave a very premiere unequivocal response on the context that impacts would otherwise be a difficult time loss. There was no way to make it entirely clear from Ralph's response what the impact of maintaining the highway on the S curve and certain designs that would allow you to use the S curves without ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 impacting the buildings. That was not clear in the ElS. The impact on the Berger house is not clear. The HPC needs the design data available to complete an effective analysis. Donnelley: We should discuss one area at a time to see if the Board is in agreement on principle with such things as invasion of the Marolt open space. Alternative H involves an invasion but a minimal one and it doesn't cut it in half. Helanie: What is missing or I can't see it is a plan view of the Maroon Creek Road. Stan: The alignment is not definitive it is simply illustrative. It shows Maroon Creek Road realigned coming into a point approximately opposite the golf course entrance skirting the existing tennis club subdivision. Linda: Will the roads have bike paths adjacent to them? Stan: Definitely a bike path but there was no attempt to design a pedestrian path. The NAC is working on that design. Linda: I would like to see bike paths all the way down to Glenwood. Roger: Is alternative H the least impacting to historic resources. Is alternative H if combined with a light rail what are the historic implications. Concerns I have are the rail itself and the implications to Hain Street and with the light rail there are wires overhead and what is the historical implication of that aspect. Also how does that fit in with FEET FIRST. Stan: An overhead cable would be involved and could be done in a minimally obtrusive manner. The designers came up with Hain Street a 34 foot platform width that would carry the two lightrail tracks in the center of Hain Street and there would be a center poll with the wires. Donnelley: Under the present configuration there are two obvious problems and one is that you would not be able to have the rail situation elevated by the street elevation because we have to make left and right hand turns off that single lane. Anyone wishing to turn left or right of either lane would have to leer themselves into the light rail area before making that turn and we would have a big traffic jam on Hain St. Why were buses discarded as they are so much more flexible. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 Stan: They felt that rail offered a long range possibility. Buses would have an impact in the final analysis. Ruby Park is almost at maximum capacity right now and would need to be expanded to provide of additional buses. The buses were thought to be noisy and polluting. Polluting at this elevation is about 20% less efficient than at sea level. At the present time it is not possible to purchase buses. The basic concept is one that would provide fast and comfortable transportation between the airport and Ruby Park and possibly between Brush Creek Road and Ruby Park which is the extension that the county commissioners are asking us to consider. They felt H was more desirable. As for the location of the center with the respect of Hain street you have three options for the location of the rail: Center, to the outside or skewed it to one side or the other side. Looking at the entire impacts they felt that the center was the least impacting. Melanie: Where would the snow go? Stan: Presently it is plowed to the center and at night it is moved. Under this configuration the snow would be plowed into the curb lane and would involve the posting of signs. Les: With the trolly it is special and with the buses there is nothing special. It is easier to get them into this than a bus. Cross walks being raised works. Donnelley: Can we determine that a central rail oriented system would have the least impact on historic resources on Hain Street? Roger: Are we supposed to come up with a recommendation this evening? Stan: The City has requested a 90 day extension with a possibility of that extension only being 75 days. Amy: We are not completely under the gun. Roger: On the historical perspective I am neither for or against light rail. I do not see at this time the light rail being historically significant to what went on in Aspen during the mining days at this time. Possibly H is the least impacting so far. Regarding light rail I had dinner with a friend who is president of the Barkley bank in Tokyo and they funded three light rail systems. Two in Germany which are disasters as they are not used. The one in England which runs from London to the coast is not working also 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 and I asked for information why these light rails are not working. Hy concern is that we do not step into something that will not work and cost a fortune. Jake: Did you look at a transition from high speed vehicles into slower vehicles. Stan: No. This charet was held for two days and they did not solve all the problem but in general they envisioned one single rider lane and where the parking is indicated it could be a bike path. The Ped Plan says since Main Street is so unfriendly bicycles and pedestrian corridors should be shifted to the streets on either side of Hain Street. The designers were given four innermodel sites to evaluate: Marolt, Moore, Buttermilk and the airport. Given the ultimate buildout needed on parking from CDOT we will probably need three of the four sites. They recommended Moore, Buttermilk and the Airport. They felt that the scenic and visual values of the Harolt were such that it was not appropriate. Jake: Weren't they supposed to be cut and cover? Stan: Even with that you need a lot of space. Stan: G had the center alignment of light rail but it had all the vehicles going on the $ curves and the light rail going on a direct line. The difference between G and H is that you have a split couplet with the outbound direction taking the S curves including the light rail and the inbound direction plugging the small area just before you drop into the flood plane. This shows the Berger cottage as not being impacted but it is not entirely clear until we do detailed engineering studies. We felt G like H minimized the impacts on historic resources. Donnelley: We will have to meet on this again. Roger: Our last motion to CDOT stated to leave things the way they are. Does the Board feel we should stay with that or bend to do something else. Amy: The motion was that the HPC was against all of the options that they presented but you were not against the idea of having some sort of transit corridor even coming onto the Holden Harolt but as they presented it, it was unacceptable. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 Donnelley: We should probably do a modification from the last position so that we have continuity but I do not want to make it tonight. Roger: Is H a viable possibility with some conditions? Straw Poll: Yes. Roger: Is a light rail corridor something that we would entertain at this point given the information that we have? Straw Poll: No. Donnelley: We need more information on light rail and H has a lot of good features that we could stand behind. Jake: Our job on this committee starts at cemetery lane intersection and comes into town and we need to review the impacts on Hain Street. We need to address some of the pedestrian plan that is going on and incorporate it. On the intermodel link at Harolt that would create a linear linkage where people would be dumped off in town and then could create circulation on a pedestrian, bicycle, trolly plan and would reestablish the importance and viability of Hain Street. Donnelley: If you take it to an extreme Main Street will become a secondary street almost. It really becomes a single lane which might be difficult for commercial and construction traffic but it becomes a very slow pedestrian oriented situation automatically. Les: Ail of the issues at this meeting we are talking about has been addressed in the transportation plan. We are looking at 40,000 cars a day coming in which is the projection from CDOT in five to seven years with no light rail and is that historically relevant. We haven't talked about traffic management and we need a long worksession to discuss the issues. Jeff: Can we give Stan some information that we would like to get from him concerning light rail for instance historic precedence in the west. Donnelley: Les has information and Roger has information that he is trying to get and we need to look at it all. Stan: The trolly also integrates with this proposal. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 205 S. MILL, CAMPO DE FIORI - MINOR Amy: They are asking for an small expansion which is basically the walkway right now similar to what was done at Cache Cache a few years ago and they will have sliding french doors and an open feeling. It is not visible from the street and still preserves the open space and I am recommending approval. Donnelley: I agree with Staff and it is not visible from the street. Melanie: I know for that building the restrooms are back in the corner and up the stairs and does building this through the walkway cause a problem for people who are trying to go through that space. You have a patio and Cache Cache has a patio. How do they then access. Elizabeth Gordini, owner: One panel will stay back and you will be able to access the stairway. Melanie: Then you would have to go down through the courtyard. Elizabeth: Yes. MOTION: Les moved to approve the minor development application for 205 S. Mill Campo de Fiori; second by Roger. Ail in favor, motion carries. 228 S. MILL - SABBATINI BUILDING - MINOR Amy: Dexter is asking to replace all of the windows on the second floor of the building and all of them are original. The wood is very dry and deteriorating. A few of the windows have broken glass. Under standard #1 we have several options which involve stripping, sanding the windows and they could be reglazed. They could add an interior storm window and could use the sash replacement kit or they could totally replace the windows to match. I walked the commercial core and there are other buildings that have the original windows, Aspen Block etc. I feel the original windows add to the character of the building. My recommendation is that the two windows on the front facade and the western one be repaired and restored adding a storm window if necessary. The rest down the alley could be replaced with a sash kit or totally replaced. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 Dexter Williams, owner: I agree with Amy that the windows on the front could be restored. The others are in very bad shape. CLARIFICATIONS Les: Ii makes sense that we are restoring the ones that are most visible. It is a wonderful block. Dexter: I would like to reglaze or double pane the glass. Amy: None seem to have the original glass. Les: Are we keeping the same dimensions. I went to the Rocky Hountain Solar business and if you go to the narrowest pane available you are really not picking up much and loosing a lot of strength. You could do that we with monitor. Amy: You might be better off an interior storm window. MOTION: Roger moved to approve the restoration of the two windows on the west facade and the western most window on the south facade at 228 S. Hill Street. If an interior storm window is to be used the product information should be provided to staff before ordering. Hore information about existing the rail dimension and those of the proposed replacement window must be provided for review by Staff and monitor before ordering; second by Les. Ail in favor, motion carries. Amy: I just need to work with Dexter on the details of the windows to make sure the dimensions are correct. 132 W. MAIN - SETBACK VARIANCE AND MINOR Chairman Donnelley Erdman opened the public hearing. Donnelley: We had a site visit at NOON today. Amy: They are requesting a setback variance to accommodate a lightwell to the west of the front entrance way. We looked at that today and everyone is in favor of the lightwell. They also want to install a metal spiral staircase between the old building and the new building. The discussion was that the Board would prefer to ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 see a normal staircase with railing details to match those of the adjacent building. Donnelley: At the site visit we seemed to agree that a concrete stair similar in design to the one that drops from the alley would be the best solution and there was additional concern about the extent and maintenance of landscaping which if we are to grant these changes which have some impact on the street that the landscaping is a very big issue here because it will tend to screen if it is properly maintained. Brian Busch, contractor: Everyone is in agreement to get rid of the flower beds and make it all grass. If you want to continue the evergreen on the far west side to where the window well starts we would be happy to do that also. Donnelley: We need comments on the landscaping from the commissioners because if you produce this stair that runs down perpendicular to the street you will have a slot in there between the stair and the restaurant. That slot should have some form of formal landscaping rather than being all bricked as it would help screen the activities between the two buildings. Melanie: My concern about the flower beds is that it would be great if they were kept up but in the condition they are now presently there is no point in having them and it would be better to have the green lawn. Brian Busch: We have been after the new lessee since spring to get flowers in there and he hasn't been motivated to plant flowers. Melanie: They haven't done the street beds either and there are holes outside that are quite dangerous. Brian busch: The holes are from your city sign people. They pulled the sign out where one hole was and took the bus sign out and left the hole there. Melanie: I would suggest that you have those repaired because if someone has an accident you will be responsible also besides the city. It would be nice to see the planters in the front have something in them. In the space in the back I would recommend some large shrubs. Donnelley: As a group today we felt a straight shot stair was appropriate but part of the approval should be that a drawing which ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 now shows that will be done not only in terms of built form for the staircase and rail but also the landscaping. Jeff: If you are using landscape materials to screen that evergreens tend to make your eye go toward what you are trying to screen more than just making it go away. Other kinds of shrubs work better. Brian Busch: I would ask the HPC as I am trying to get the stairway in before winter. Donnelley: I can't speak for the entire commission but I do not feel we have a problem with starting the work but we do have to have guarantees about the screening and a plan will be required and it is best that it is prepared by someone who is competent to indicate what type of plant materials will be used. Chairman Donnelley Erdman closed the public hearing. Les: I do not get giving the variance as I do not see where this is a better historical project because of it. That is what the variance is for to get better history. What are we getting historically for our variance. Brian Busch: We are making the inside much more appealing to the user. Les: That is not historical. Amy: Previously we approved two lightwells one on each side that were out of the setback. Now at least we have eliminated one and have gone down to one next to the door and it is a setback variance and will not impact any other property. It is to be covered with a grate and screened and we are getting an approved landscape plan. Helanie: The landscape plan will improve the property but the staircase has no impact on us. That is because the owner can't rent the space. We are allowing him to have access so he can rent his space and that is not really our problem. Donnelley: We are trying to find a solution that has the least impact on the resource and also becomes a positive visual element. Helanie: If it is done properly it will look better than what is there now with that rail. The buildings would look less connected with the staircase rather than the rail going across. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 Les: It is like they are not maintaining the flowers so why should they maintain the landscaping. There are no guarantees. Brian Busch: Ail I can do is put in the leases to maintain the flower beds etc. Hyself and Lily both talked to the owners of the restaurant and they did some. Donnelley: Is it within our purview to make permanent landscaping a part of the approval. Amy: Kathy said there is an ordinance on the books about weeds and maintaining them. MOTION: Roger moved to approve a front yard variance of 3' for the completion of a new lightwell on the west side of the entry stairs and to approve the installation of a new cement stairway at 132 W. Hain. The east lightwell which was previously approved s not to be constructed. The west lightwell shall be covered with a grate and screened with plantings with the following two conditions: 1) A plan showing the location and dimensions of the new stairway be submitted. 2) That a complete landscaping plan be submitted for approval by staff and monitor; second by Helanie. DISCUSSION Brian Busch: Can I make a request, for us to end up with a clean three feet inside I have a six inch retaining wall of cement that will have to be in place so that leaves us 2 1/2 feet of the actual inside. I am trying to make a garden area in that window well and I was hoping we might get four feet so I could have 3 1/2 inside. Donnelley: When we paced it off today it was about four feet to the outside. Roger: I remember discussing that issue and have no problem. Brian Busch: The wall will be about six feet. Jeff: Have you calculated what size of footing you will need. Brian Busch: I have not been to an engineer with that yet. 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 Jeff: I would guess with a wall that size 1 1/2 feet on each side of the wall for your footing. Brian Busch: The other one by the stairway is only eight inches thick or ten at the most and it is 15 feet high. Jeff: You should discuss that with a structural engineer. Donnelley: They will have to go through the building department. We need to define the exterior limits of the construction. A}4ENDED MOTION: Roger amended his motion to indicate the dimensions to be four feet to the outside of construction; second by Melanie. Vote on motion and amended motion; carries 5 - 2. Les and Martha opposed. Martha is the monitor. 533 E. MAIN - ST. MARY'S Amy: The front corner two doors they need to get light into that space so they are proposing to glaze the two upper panels on the door. We had discussed using the doors as shutters that would open out and then having glazing behind that on the inside. The other would like to put a screen door on the back door alley side for the kitchen. They don't have to put it there but Environmental Health has suggested that they do that. Finally they need some mechanical equipment. They have a mushroom vent out from the west side of the wall. My recommendation was to retain doors 50 & 51 and do the shutter operation. I don't feel so strongly and would approve glazing the panels and it is probably a more simple solution. The screen door if it could be put on the inside or not do it at all. These are the only three original doors in the building and we are talking about altering all three of them. Maybe somehow one should be intact. I am not sure we have all the mechanical information. The neck down is being constructed so they have met that condition. Martha: It is a concrete pad. Deana 01sen: It is a concrete area but on each side there is a grassy strip. Donnelley: We reviewed this at NOON today and there are several problems with changing the doors to out swinging so we have to evaluate what is gained by doing that v.s. what is sacrificed by allowing the top two raised panels on each door leaf to be 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 converted to glass. I would assume that the doors could be worked on in a way that the wood panels can be stored. Reversibility is one of our criteria. Changing the doors to out swinging doors requires a thorough study on the interior of how it would work. We have two options one is to allow the glazing of the upper most panels in each leaf and the other is to not allow any changes other than changing the swing of the doors and then the applicant can determine how it would work on the interior. We have three issues that one and the door to the kitchen in which they are applying for a screen and then the work on the south facing alley wall which requires modification of existing openings and a new opening for an exhaust. There would be a modified opening, a bathroom vent which would be cut in six inches square. Deana Olsen: The vent would be 12 inches but there is a 6 inch vent on the side of the building that the engineer needs as an exhaust from private bathrooms and we have a brick vent detail for that. Donnelley: Lets deal with the most evasive, the doors. Helanie: Today at the site visit did I hear something about the upper part is just painted over and there was actually glass underneath them. Deana Olson: Yes. Helanie: So the panels are glass. Deana Olsen: They are in the landing and years ago that used to be the main entrance and you walked in and up. Helanie: Are you proposing to take the paint off? Deana Olsen: No, that would not give us enough light. Helanie: Would there be a way to pull the doors from the inside like you do a window to close it. Deana Olsen: You would have to puncture the glass to get a mechanism to pull them in. I am afraid people would throw the doors open trying to get light in and then you would be able to see everything in the classroom. Linda: I think it is more historically correct to leave the door swing the way they are and to save the panels. 12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 Roger: In light that these are three original doors I would like a condition that the doors be removed and that the bottom panels be restored with the proper restoration material to be approved by staff and that all he edges be cleaned and painted. Ideally I would like the doors stripped and do a restoration job. They would need sanded, primed and properly sealed. Deana Olsen: The front doors need weather stripped so they will be removed. Roger: We need a maintenance book and this is one of the reasons why as they just stuck a coat of paint on the doors which is more destructive as water gets in behind the paint. Donnelley: In terms of restoring these historic leaves we can have a restoration schedule. Straw Poll on door 50 & 51. Donnelley: Ail agreed. Donnelley: Street door ~49 in the drawing is the back door on the alley side and generally the screen is placed close to a door behind it. The intermediate rail with the lock in it should correspond with a similar rail in the panelled doors behind. Deana Olsen: They wanted the screen just in case they need it. Linda: From a health standard it is good to have the screens. Donnelley: In addition there will be a brick vent which will be very small. The new air intake is replacing an exhaust and will be less obtrusive. Deana Olsen: There are actually two air intakes and we are taking them off and only having one. I wanted your recommendation on painting it? Roger: Yes you can paint the vent out. Hartha: I have heard the discussion about this glass and is everyone in approval of this as to me it is a drastic alternation. Les: What are you venting? 13 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 Deana Olsen: The hood over the stove and venting the oven. We are talking about 1200 CFM or draw on this so it will be a big motor. I am also trying to get a smaller vent. Jeff: This is a stylistic opinion and I do not like utilitarian fixtures painted over and I would prefer to see the aluminum or tin. Donnelley: Generally on rooftops we want everything painted out and now we are on a vertical surface and there are different ways to deal with it. MOTION: Roger moved that HPC approve the minor development application for 533 E. Hain with the following conditions: 1) Doors #50 and #51 shall be retained. Panels as drawn shall be removed and replaced with panes of glass and the panel shall be kept in storage. 2) The screen door in the kitchen shall be installed to match as close as possible the existing door and to show as much as possible the existing door. This will be monitored by staff and monitor. 3) That the mechanical be located as drawn showing the removal and that any mechanical structures that protrude out of the building be minimized and if possible be a flat grill and to be dealt with staff and monitor. 4) That the three original doors 50 51 and kitchen door be removed and conditioned as best as possible although we ask that they be stripped and refinished although this might be a financial problem so we ask that at least the necessary repairs be made to the bottom and the edges and that any filler material be approved by Staff. second by Helanie. Ail in favor, motion carries. ASPEN MEADOWS TRUSTEE TOWNHOMES - AMENDMENT TO FINAL Amy: We also did a site visit on this today and walked around the buildings. On the west L there will no longer be a chimney element and it will all be glazing. The existing staircases on the front of the unit certainly contribute to the character of the units are going to be retained now. I am recommending approval as these 14 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 revisions seem to retain more of the original character and fabric of the buildings. I have attached a one page memo of how the materials will be treated and this was approved previously and I just wanted it noted that this still stands. Donnelley: What about tamper proof trash receptacles for each unit as it is mentioned that they may be in the garage. It is a highly visible element. David Brown, architect: One of the reasons we did not address it was because it was not on the approved plans. It would be easy to extend one of the garages over a six or seven foot wide area for trash containers and recycling facilities. Donnelley: There are four garage units and would each one have an additional extension. David Brown: I was thinking of one in the center of the project. There are four garage elements each having two to three garages for the units and we could take a center one and widen it six or seven feet. Roger: Could in the motion it state that a trash/recycling facility be installed to meet with approval of staff and monitor. Donnelley: If these units are going to be free market are they people associated with the institute and will it be restrictive. Gideon Kaufman, attorney: They will be trustees and we have to sell them to make this happen. Roger: Will there be rental pools? Gideon: Yes but there will be restrictions. Donnelley: If there is a lot of year round use that generates a different kind of trash situation there than people who are just coming in for institute functions. Gideon: The goal is to sell them all without a broker and with restrictions. Helanie: I have a landscape question. Are you planning on removing any vegetation? 15 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 David Brown: We plan to retain as much as is there and enhance it. Melanie: I am concerned with the little courtyards. Will you have CC and R's that will prevent the removal of existing landscaping. Gideon: There are CC&R's for the condominiumization and those will be general common elements. Donnelley: Future maintenance will not be handled by the institute. Gideon: It will be handled by the homeowners association. We intend to have certain restrictions in there because it is our campus. Helanie: I was concerned that individual homeowners might remove vegetation but it seems you will have control over that. Gideon: The homeowners together can do something. Helanie: Is there anything historic in regards to the landscaping that we should be concerned about. They could conceivable come in collectively and tear out everything. Gideon: The city has regulations on tree removals. Donnelley: The amendment involves less changes to the existing structure than were approved. Our main concern is that the historic aspects either across the river or from the parking is not changed substantially from what is approved. I have concern about the trash and recyclable. Gideon: Just so the record is clear this change is conditioned on the Institute actually closing and purchasing the units. We seek your approval but it will not take effect until we own it. Donnelley: Our approval is conditioned upon ownership change. MOTION: Roger moved that HPC supports the revisions as submitted and all representation regarding preservation of existing materials attached shall be adhered to with the following two conditions: 1) That the trash and recycling facility to be installed be approved by Staff and Honitor. 16 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 2) A landscaping plan be submitted and approved by Staff and Honitor with the understanding that approval is conditional depending upon the change of ownership from Savannah to the Institute; second by Les. DISCUSSION Gideon: Right now there are garages to go in and there are changes that are going to be made and I thought there was a concern about changing the landscaping but I do not know if there are any particular plans for actual landscaping that is going to take place. David Brown: Two things came up on the site visit and one was the entry. The original plan by Bayer had no covered car port. Later on the car port cover was added. The roof you see today was not the one that was contemplated by Bayer. There is a small floating car port roof plan that was part of the original approval. It was my suggestion to remove that floating small car port so that a garden at the entry could be created. One concern was the garden at the entry and the other concern was the landscaping off the deck. Part of the proposal of the patio is to have separate steps going down three or four feet lower to the back yard so the yard can more easily be accessed and used. There would be one or two threes that need moved or modified and we need a few more trees and shrubs. They want to see some consistency. Donnelley: The original landscaping that Herbert and Fritz envisioned was to use indigenous plant materials and if we do not try and reinforce that I can see a rather strange situation occurring. I would like to see something to give some structure to this area that will be obviously up to the owners discretion as to how it will be landscaped. A structure out toward the public area which would be Aspen and choke cherry or whatever so that there is continuity. Jeff: The planting plan could have a set list of materials that we could approve. Gideon: If you are saying indigenous materials I do not have a problem. I do have a problem if we start getting into what the landscaping ought to be. Helanie: I am concerned that unit 1 might have dirt and unit 2 weeks and unit 3 might have flowers. 17 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 Jeff: The landscaping plan should state limits of disturbance and then you set guidelines with the materials that can be used. You could use them how you wish but they have to pick and choose from the approved plant materials and that are consistent with the landscaping that is going on there now. Gideon: I don't have a problem with that as long as we are not dictating. Donnelley: How about an amendment to the motion which is more specific to indigenous materials such as Jeff has suggested. AMENDED MOTION: Roger amended the motion to the landscaping plan that the intent of the original design be followed as close as possible with the use of indigenous materials. Jeff: If you add limits of disturbance it would help us as people might build terraces in the future. Donnelley: What was previously approved indicates trees throughout the area that is being made as a covered parking situation. Now we have approved some generic planting of trees and that should be included. The landscape plan includes the entire site. VOTE: Ail in favor of motion and amended motion. 523 W. FRANCIS - DIKEOU - DISCUSSION Amy: The house has lost all of its original detail and has additions on it. It has an enclosed area on the front like an air lock entry and Peter Kunst is an interior designer but he is also doing the architecture of it. They want to take advantage of the way we are not exempting porches from FAR and add a porch to the house. He would also like to drag the porch across the new addition and it is very ornate. That part is disturbing to me. Clearly the porch is not original. He wants to remove the porch now and continue to work with HPC to show the replacement. Donnelley: To remove the shed portion. Amy: I feel putting a porch back on is great. Roger: Put the historical porch back on or a renovated porch as close as possible. Then the extension part would be a new modern addition to that which shows the separation. 18 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 Amy: I feel it is ok to remove the proposed piece and we will review the rest at a later date. He just needs to know if he can continue to study the porch concept. Donnelley: The direction should be two different character of the porch and possibly a break in the porch so that you do not just change the detailing in a straight line. Les: The transition is a critical area. MOTION: Donnelley moved to adjourn; second by Les. All in favor, motion carries. Heeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 19 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 13, 1995 ENTRANCE TO ASPEN 1 205 S. MILL, CAMPO DE FIORI - MINOR ............................ 5 228 S. MILL - SABBATINI BUILDING - MINOR .................. 6 132 W. MAIN - SETBACK VARIANCE AND MINOR ................. 7 533 E. MAIN - ST. NLRt~Y'S 10 ASPEN MEADOWS TRUSTEE TOWNHOMES - AMENDMENT TO FINAL ...... 13 523 W. FRANCIS - DIKEOU - DISCUSSION ...................... 16 20