Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19970326ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 Chairman Jake Vickery called the meeting to order at 5:05 with Suzannah Reid, Mark Onorofski, Melanie Roschko, Susan Dodington, Mary Hirsch, Roger Moyer and Gilbert Sanchez present. Jeffrey Halferty was excused. 333 W. MAIN STREET - MINOR NOTE: 333 W. Main has five exhibits. Amy stated that this the Herron Condominiums on Main Street and the proposal is to make window and door changes on a condominium unit, #3. On the alley side they would like to change a slider window to two larger fixed windows and on the east side of the building they want to switch the location of a door and window and make the window larger. Staff' s only concern on the alley side is that possibly a more vertical proportion be suggested. Chris Shipp presented the proposal for the applicant. The views from the back of the building are good up toward Shadow Mountain and the lower views are just toward the alley. The proposal is for two trapezoidal windows and the reason they are not taller is to obscure the view of the alley. The existing outside pulley system will be taken out. Moving the door will allow a gas log fireplace in its place. Chris also stated that he did a photo of what Staff is recommending (four windows) but his intent is to obscure the alley with minimal glass. Committee member comments. Suzannah stated the trapezoidal windows goes with the building. Gilbert stated that horizontal windows relates to the existing horizontal popup area. Roger stated that he had no problem with the proposal as drawn. Susan said double hung windows look better from Third St. and tie everything together. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26, 1997 Chris said he thought about double hung windows but it opens up the view on the alley. Mark stated either way is fine. MOTION: Roger moved to approve the minor development application for 333 W. Main Unit/¢ as proposed; second by Mary. All in favor, motion carried 7-0. Gilbert did not vote. 403 S. GALENA - MINOR DEVELOPMENT Gilbert stepped down. Charles Cunniffe presented for the applicant. NOTE: 403 S. Galena has six exhibits. Amy stated not long along HPC looked at a remodel for the store front windows and the proposal now is to add bay windows on two locations on the north elevations. Charles stated that this proposal is for an image center for River Valley Ranch Aspen. He stated that you cannot see in the windows due to the light. The glare from the flat glass acts like a mirror. If you walk by a curved piece of glass due to the refraction of the light you get a clearer view inside. The proposal is a bay window with flat glass sides and a piece of curved glass on front. An all curved window might be too contemporary. The top of the window goes up against the bottom of the deck overhang so the deck forms the roof of the window. Suzannah asked if the windows would be metal? Charles stated clad window to match the existing. Mark asked for clarifications of how the window will be hung with the square ends and rounded window? 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26, 1997 Charles stated that the frame will be tied into the existing window sash and basically it will be a box frame that projects out. Members concluded that the straight sides and curved front were a compromise in the design. MOTION: Roger moved to approve the minor development at 403 S. Galena, application for the River Valley Ranch Aspen information center recommending that the applicant use a square side and curved bay window as presented in exhibit/¢6; second by Melanie. All in favor, motion carried. 1008 E. HOPKINS - LANDMARK, CONCEPTUAL Gilbert seated but did not vote due to a full board of 7 members. NOTE: 1008 E. Hopkins has three exhibits. Assistant City Attorney, David Hoefer stated that the affidavit of notice reflects adequate posting and HPC has jurisdiction to proceed. Amy stated that landmark designation requires that two standards be met. Staff stated that architectural importance has been met. It is a typical Aspen miners cottage and has had few alterations. Standard E, community character has also been met. The cottage is a modest scale, style and character of the late 19th century. The site is narrower and longer than most in the neighborhood; however, there is an 18 foot sewer line easement that runs down the west side. The applicant cannot build on that easement and they are trying to get a driveway access permit across it. The applicant wishes to share the driveway with the property owner to the west so there would be no parking on the street and no garage doors on the street. Staff also stated they are in favor of moving the house forward. There is a connecting link between the cottage and addition and HPC encourages that in projects. The materials for the proposed addition are appropriate; however, the mass overwhelms the historic resource. It is essentially four times the size of the original structure. A few bonuses are being requested. A side yard setback variance is being requested as the proposal is to set the addition on the lot line so there would be no side yard setback variance there, however because of the sewer line easement it would not impact the neighbor. They also need a combined side 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 yard setback easement waiver for the same reason. They are also requesting the square footage bonus that is available to landmarks which is 500 sq. ft. Staff is recommending against the bonus because the massing is not compatible with the original building. Staff is also recommending tabling. Chairman Jake Vickery opened the public hearing. Dave Rybeck, Bill Poss & Associates represented the owner. Dave stated about 32% of the existing structure will be removed. There will be a connector and a two story addition to the back of the site. Within the historic cabin there will be a two bedroom guest suite. There will also be a two car garage. They are required to have two parking spaces and the applicant chose to put them in the garage so there is no on-site parking. They do not want to impact what yard exists. The adjacent sewer easement will be landscaped. Suzannah stated that she would have a problem approving a variance for the side yard. She is also concerned about the house being lower than the street. Amy stated part of the bonus is attributed to the garage and she feels that does not deserve a square footage bonus from the HPC. They are not required to build a two car garage. Dave stated with the narrow lot and trying to separate the two buildings they can only meet 28% of the open space requirement and they are 7% short. They are going to the Bof A for a variance. Gilbert asked about the South elevation and breaking down of the front facade. Dave stated the entire front gable will be separated from the shed roof about a foot to break it up. Charles Vresilovic, adjacent neighbor to the east stated they take great pride in keeping the yard cleaned and flowers planted. They have seen the neighborhood change and have put up with three years of non-stop construction on that street. Construction workers park illegally. Five feet between the building is too close. Eventually improvements will be made to 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 the property they live in presently. They are willing to give them what the law allows, 3,279 sq. ft. A house the size that is presented is too large for that lot. 28% open space is not enough. It is essentially too close to the street. They have eliminated any appearance of a yard in the front. There are four local men that live in the present house and they will be displaced. John O'Donohue, adjacent neighbor at 1010 E. Hopkins stated that five feet is too close. His western windows upstairs will face the wall of the addition instead of his present view of Aspen Mtn. and Shadow Mtn. If they are digging five feet there could be structural damage. A monster onto a tiny lot is inappropriate. Brian Gonzalles neighbor requested that they mitigate construction impacts as the neighborhood has had severe construction impacts. Mary stated that the applicant is proposing to move the building forward two feet in front of the complex to the left. She also stated that she is sympathetic to the neighbors. Dave stated during the history of the town lot lines moved and set backs have changed. Five feet is part of the allowable setbacks. Susan suggested that the historic part of the building should be moved to the west. Melanie inquired about the adjacent parcels. Dave stated that the duplex is on its own lot and the three condos are on one lot. Melanie stated that the adjacent house is too close to its property line and the dimensions are about 45 feet by 100 feet. That parcel could be torn down and developed. Roger stated that the fenestration on the south side is too vertical. He feels the bonus is justified due to the connector and the fact that there is a garage, rather than having cars out on the street. He also stated that he would request a restudy of the resource and its placement a little more to the west to address 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 the concerns of the neighbors. Overall due to the slope of the lot it is a good solution. MOTION: Roger moved that HPC supports' landmark designation finding that standard B (architectural character) and E (community character) are met. The partial demolition and on-site relocation are supported. The Public Hearing and Conceptual are continued to April 9th, 1997, with the following conditions: 1) Restudy is made of the south side and therefore no variance at this time is given regarding ordinance 30 until the study is complete. 2) A study is made of the placement of the historic resource in regards' to the setbacks' east and west; therefore HPC is not granting a five yard west sideyard setback or 13foot combined side yard setback variance until the restudy is done. 3) The entire project is subject to the applicant avoiding development in the area of the sewer line extension, fishing and trail easement and stream bank. In addition the applicant must obtain an Board of Adjustment variance. 4) Also stated that a letter be drafted to BofA asking for a variance in order that we may save an historic resource and place it within the confines of the property to allow the applicant to build an addition and that the design is compatible with the neighborhood; second by Susan. Motion carried 7-0. Roger stated direction is given to move the building as far to the west as possible and still work with the excellent landscaping plan. Jake stated that the intent of the zoning code was to get ten feet between the buildings and if there were overriding issues to reduce that they could be presented. Dave Rybeck stated they might be able to provide 10 feet at the historic house but the actual setback might be less where the addition is sitting. Mary stated that the addition doesn't impact the neighbors it is the historic house that does. Roger stated that the board is concerned about the historic house and its impacts. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 Melanie stated that the ultimate benefit to the resource is to move it as you don't know what is happening next door. Amy stated she is also concerned about the house being lower than the street and she feels awarding 125 sq. ft. for the applicant to build a two car garage really has nothing to do with preservation and is not in keeping with the bonuses that were awarded in the past. They are already getting 375 sq. ft. free for a garage. Mary stated that she understood the FAR situation but in looking at the entire project she has no problem with granting the FAR. Suzannah stated that generally she could support the bonus primarily due to the lot size. Roger stated that he would favor the FAR bonus. Jake stated he would support the bonus pending the restudy recommendations. Susan stated she could not make the FAR determination. Melanie stated she would support the bonus. Mark stated that in this particular case he would support the bonus. Gilbert stated that the site is unfriendly right now for the little building and the FAR bonus would enhance the project. 414 N. FIRST - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING Assistant City Attorney David Hoefer stated that for the record he reviewed the proof of notice and it is legally correct and HPC has jurisdiction to proceed. In addition two letters have been entered into the records. NOTE: 414 N. First has eleven exhibits. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 Chairman Jake Vickery opened the public hearing. Amy stated that the site visit inside the house made it very clear the exact condition of the building and the changes that have taken place over time. Staff is recommending approval of the project including a rear yard setback variance of 4'6" to allow an addition to the historic garage. A 500 sq. ft. FAR bonus. Five other areas need addressed: Landscape plan, relocation plan, and proof that the garage can withstand the physical impacts of relocation. Referral comments are needed from the Parks Department if trees are to be removed and more information is needed about how the structural improvements will be handled. The house has changed from a 1 1/2 story bungalow to a 2 story building. The existing building has very little architectural integrity from the point of view that it does not represent the original building. Windows and different architectural elements of the building don't relate to each other; the building has a confused character. Staff feels the landmark status is related to the people that lived in the building rather than the building itself. The project can be looked at with more flexibility. From the street the house will remain as is. Michael Ememann, architect for the project stated that they analyzed the history of the house to find out how the house became what it is today and to try and determine the historical value it might have. The house was built in 1887 and completed in 1888 for a man named T.G. Leister who was the first cashier for the Bank of Aspen. He lived in the house until after the appeal of the Sherman silver purchase act which occurred in Nov. 1893. It was then acquired by D.R.C. Brown in 1909. Brown was the founder of the first bank in Aspen. Under the Brown ownership the house became a summer house and it had 12 bedrooms at the time the Paepcke's acquired it in 1951. The second story was added and the roof pushed up. There were screened in sleeping porches on the easterly side. The total property was comprised of 21 acres including the land which is now ACES and the Given Institute both of which were given by Mrs. Paepcke. Herbert Bayer and Fritz Benedict, architects made further modifications such as the small porches on the easterly side and a series of changes on the inside. HPC worked closely with the architects in determining what was historic due to the changes. The garage or carriage house has had minimal changes. The house has always had the presence of an estate. The massive west elevation of the house represents the public image of the house. Another element was to keep the low wall and entry trellis and the Bayer (German detail) of the kitchen. The 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 carriage house and garage will be kept as it exists. The west elevation and primary roof will be kept. Presently all the trees have been kept. Dan Kiley has been retained as the landscape architect. The garage is quite small and they would like to widen it slightly and need a variance. He also stated that he wanted to remove the structure for a short period of time while they place a new foundation under it and move it back within the property lines. Melanie asked if the lap pool and workout space was all inside? Michael stated that it was inside and totally underground and has trees all around it. Flowers and lower vegetation will be placed over the pool. Amy stated that the drawings are the current proposal and the model is slightly different. Michael stated that the street side will be retained but they would prefer the little gable if the HPC approves it. The roofing materials would be a product called astro zinc metal. Susan stated on the model the glass pyramid is still remaining and HPC recommended that it be removed. Michael stated that the glass pyramid will be removed. Michael stated that there are quite a few materials on the house as it exists and they would like to remove the stucco and replace it with wood siding but retain the banding. Amy stated Steve Whipple received a notice and asked if a screening wall of trees could be placed on the alley side for privacy. Michael stated that the row of trees will remain and a wall will be constructed to match the existing wall on the west side. COMMISSIO~R COMMENTS Gilbert stated that the transitions of materials have been handled skillfully. Regarding the gable that faces the street he would prefer to see the shed retained in the interest of historic preservation. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 Mark agreed with Gilberts comments and his concern is the structural engineers report on handling the temporary relocation of the garage. Michael stated that the site has not been determined. Susan stated she agrees with the comments that have been made and would prefer that the shed roof retained. Suzannah stated that she liked the idea that no more openings would occur on the west side. She has mixed feelings on the gable. The gable is more attractive but the shed is more true to the building. Roger supports moving the carriage house to the west and he would like to see documentation on how the trees will be preserved. Mary stated that she is also concerned about the report on the trees. Michael stated that he is working closely with the Parks Department. Amy stated as a condition of final she would like a report from the Parks Department. Jake stated that the research done was commendable and the project itself was well presented to the Board. Chairman Jake Vickery closed the public hearing. MOTION: Mark moved that HPC grant conceptual approval, partial demolition approval, off-site relocation approval, waiver from Ord. ~30 standards related to "street oriented entrance, garages and volume, "grant a rear yard setback variance of4feet 6 inches for an addition to the garage and grant a 500 sq. fi. FAR bonus with the following conditions: 1. The garage must be demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-sitting, g structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation prior to application for a building perm Jr. 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 2. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the engineering department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if required) of the garage, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation; The bond shall be in the amount of S30, 000. $. A landscape plan, which is currently in development, must be reviewed and approved by HPC prior to submission for a building permit. The applicant shall address privacy concerns of the neighboring properties by making every efJbrt to retain a landscaping screen along the south property line. 4. Prior to final approval, the application shall be referred to the Engineering Department, Parks Department, Water Department, and other referral bodies as needed to identify any issues which may delay issuance of a buildingpermit. 5. For final review, a demolition plan shall be submitted indicating which areas of the existing building will be retained with structural improvements, which areas are to be reconstructed, and which areas of the existing building will be completely removed. 6. In addition that the hipped shed roof on the west facade be maintained; second by Melanie. Discussion of motion. Roger stated that he would recommend that #6 condition be removed as HPC is designing. Amended motion. Mark rescinded/¢6, second by Melanie. All in favor, motion and amended motion. Motion carried 7-0. Michael asked about removing the stucco. Roger stated that materials and removal of materials should be dealt with at final. 17 QUEEN STREET - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING Jake stepped down. 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 MOTION: Roger opened the public hearing and continued the public hearing on 17 Queen Street and Conceptual review to a date certain April 9, 1997; second by Susan. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Roger moved to adjourn; second by Susan. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAR. 26~ 1997 333 W. MAIN STREET - MINOR .................................................................................. 1 403 S. GALENA - MINOR DEVELOPMENT ................................................................... 2 1008 E. HOPKINS - LANDMARK, CONCEPTUAL ........................................................... 3 414 N. FIRST - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING ........................................................ 7 17 QUEEN STREET - CONCEPTUAL -PUBLIC HEARING ............................................. 11 13