Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.201708231 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 Chairperson Halferty called the meeting to order at 4:34 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Jeffrey Halferty, Gretchen Greenwood, Willis Pember, Nora Berko, Bob Blaich, Roger Moyer, Scott Kendrick. Absent was Richard Lai. Staff present: Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 9th: Mr. Blaich moved to approve, Mr. Kendrick seconded. Mr. Pember mentioned that one of his comments on the bottom of page 7 in the last sentence, ended awkwardly. He asked to just leave it with he was “a little nervous.” Ms. Greenwood seconded. Mr. Blaich moved that they approve with the amendment, Mr. Kendrick seconded. All in favor, motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Public comment closed. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Mr. Pember attended the AIA annual design awards in downtown Denver this week. They invited every architect in the state to come to the same place. There was one architect from Virginia to review all submittals and it was quite extraordinary. One of the comments made, was that the western slope, was the most active and aggressive in pursuing awards out of any other district. There were only 2 or 3 Denver architects present and the western chapter overwhelmed the proceedings. His office got an award, Studio B, Joseph Spears and a few others. On a state level, the western slope ranked very highly on quality, interest and design. Ms. Simon mentioned that Charles Cunniffe’s office won some awards as well. Congratulations were received from the board. Mr. Halferty commended the staff and monitors. He has looked at everything currently under construction and everything seems well organized and clean. The signage is appropriate and the historic resources are well protected. It says a lot from staff, monitors and the building department about the great job that is going on. He said he has been on his bike a lot and doing the west end shuffle. DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICT: Ms. Berko is recusing herself for 211 E. Hallam St. PROJECT MONITORING: 211. E Hallam Ms. Berko stepped out. This building is under construction converting the Berko studio into a duplex and we are here to talk about a window on the rear façade of the historic resource facing the alley. Ms. Greenwood is the monitor. A new window on this façade was already approved through HPC and we are here to discuss the repositioning of it. Ms. Simon has concern because repositioning, will place the 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 new window against the old window without giving identity and breathing room so we’ve given this to the board for discussion of appropriateness. Applicant Presentation: Philp Jeffreys and Mirte Mallory Ms. Mallory said that the front façade is coming to fruition and the Berko Studio has been completely restored and will be untouched in terms of modifications to windows. The windows will be replaced with new non-single paned windows. The rear is seen from the alley and the rear façade has very little public view. The octagonal window is in the upper corner with no direct light onto anyone’s faces and no ventilation. This area with the window is becoming a kitchen and the new window was introduced with a very deliberate design. The purpose seemed appropriate, but once it was built, it had several unintended consequences as the design didn’t work as well in real life. Mr. Jeffreys mentioned that there are no floating windows and are on the periphery of the siding, but by creating this floating element; an awkward visual has been made. From an angle, the siding looks unaligned and the inside is not a whole lot better. The main issue with the inside, is that the band of wall is directly eye level and looks very heavy. We are proposing to take the window up 6 inches to the base of the historic windowsill and we would anchor the window, which would eliminate and make the façade come back to its original design. This works from an aesthetic standpoint and in theory, and we would love to move forward with this adjustment. Mr. Halferty mentioned the description of the diagonal and asked for help understanding how, by moving the window up 6 inches, does it change the notion of the diagonal. Mr. Jeffreys said there are penetrations in the siding, historically and both are pulled to the extremity of the building. If you look at this façade, it doesn’t connect visually. They were going to add a cedar trim to replicate the historic window trim so the final product would have a trim from the historic window and a trim around the non-historic window as well out of a cedar material as well. Mr. Halferty confirmed that these were the same windows HPC approved previously and Ms. Simon answered yes and said this is the only new opening on the building. Mr. Blaich said it’s disturbing to have the sight visually unaligned and asked what the horizontal is and Mr. Jeffreys explained that it’s a beam and said the header would just go away. Ms. Greenwood confirmed that the sill would stay in the same place and the window would just get taller. Mr. Pember clarified if they are proposing to use the exact same window that is onsite and just move it all the way up and Ms. Mallory said no, it would be a new window and it would be six inches taller. Mr. Moyer mentioned the historic window and asked Ms. Simon if it would be allowed to be an operable window and she said they didn’t talk about that previously when the window was approved. Mr. Jeffreys pointed out to Mr. Moyer that they thought they had a good solution originally and wholeheartedly. Mr. Moyer noted that this is a major wall on the building and putting a window in is kind of weird, but on the east end of that building, there is no opening and is hardly visible so he asked if 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 they could put the window there instead. Ms. Simon said the fact that there is nothing but siding on those side walls, she thinks you would see it. Ms. Mallory said this window is already installed so the fenestration has already occurred in the rear façade of this wall. Mr. Jeffreys said you do actually get a fair amount of view from the side of this building. You do have to work harder to see the back of the studio and we did a lot more than just add this window to make this photo studio livable. The back was the only place we were willing to compromise. Ms. Greenwood said she has looked at this on paper, but she would rather go to the site from now on. She said it looks fantastic and is really going to be an asset to our program. When she saw the window, it looked completely wrong from inside and out. She re-looked at the drawings and noted that it doesn’t work from the outside or the inside as it doesn’t have the language of the windows. She became in favor of the proposal just from going to the site and seeing it in person and thinks it’s a better solution for the building, as well as making the proportions larger. They’ve done an excellent job and it’s really going to be a statement for the AspenModern program. It’s uncomfortable to be on the inside and be in that space and they won’t have to redo any siding. They need guidance on how it should be trimmed out. She said she is in favor of it and they will see that the siding plays games on you and it’s one of those odd optical illusions. Mr. Blaich said he has looked inside out and feels it’s an improvement as well. He thinks the change helps a lot with usability and livability. Things happen and we are all learning and overall, he agrees with Ms. Greenwood. Mr. Moyer said he also agrees with Ms. Greenwood. Mr. Pember said he would tend to not copy the historic trim to distinguish a level of detail between the two. He said they could put it flush with the historic window. Ms. Greenwood liked that idea too. Mr. Pember said they should find a detail to separate the two treatments. Ms. Mallory said it’s a completely new frame and glass. Ms. Greenwood asked if it is it possible to be one solid piece of awning versus broken up into two and Mr. Jeffreys said Colby is not excited about doing the wide awnings. Mr. Halferty said he feels the project is looking great and they rarely have a historic window or a postmodern window next to a new window so that part was troubling for him. He and Mr. Pember agree that it does warrant different case detailing. It’s a shame they can’t just take the existing window and bring it up for cost sake, but this is the most sensitive approach due to the siding issues. Mr. Jeffreys said that this window is an 8-week order item and we can come back with a couple of trim options and then review those Ms. Greenwood. Because of the timing for us, we can’t reuse that window so we need to order a new window. We can come back for the detail of the trim or whatever HPC wants, we just need to get to that point. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 MOTION: Mr. Blaich motioned to approve as stated, with Ms. Simon and Ms. Greenwood working on trim details, Mr. Kendrick seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Blaich, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Kendrick, yes; Mr. Pember, yes. 6-0 all in favor, motion carried. Ms. Berko re-entered the meeting. PROJECT MONITORING: 540 E Main St. Amy Simon Ms. Simon mentioned that Mr. Halferty is the project monitor and this is for the affordable housing behind the new police station being built on Main St. This is currently in for permit review and there is one last minute changes to the project. There has been a request to instead of using a metal clad window, they would like to use a vinyl window. This building is set back from Main St., but there are still some design guidelines that need to be discussed and we have a sample of the window for everyone to see. Applicant Presentation: Jack Wheeler, Capital Asset Manager for the City of Aspen Mr. Wheeler mentioned that this was an oversight on their part when they did the specs, they originally came from Burlingame, but they have upgraded the windows since then. This window will save energy and money for the building overall. Ms. Greenwood asked what the original color was and Ms. Simon said it was a painted grey. Ms. Simon said this is to be a vinyl Pella window and there will be some material changes with cost being one of the issues. Decks were meant to be painted steel and are now going to be wood. Mr. Moyer asked for clarification on the desks as to whether they are painted or stained. Ms. Simon said the deck structure will now be painted a heavy timber. Ms. Greenwood asked about the railings and if they are wood or steel and Mr. Wheeler said they are all painted steel. He said the building will look just like the rendering in front of them and he doesn’t think they’ve changed the architectural feel of the building. Mr. Kendrick asked if there is a difference in durability and Mr. Wheeler said it depends on who you ask and that both are very durable. Aluminum would last longer, but vinyl would hold its color longer. Mr. Moyer asked about durability at altitude and Mr. Wheeler said the altitude isn’t as much of a factor as the sun exposure and they both perform well and meet the current energy codes. Mr. Halferty asked if the rest of the police station fenestration is metal clad and Ms. Simon said yes. Mr. Halferty asked where the approved metal starts and the vinyl begins and Mr. Wheeler said there is sidewalk and greenspace between them. Ms. Greenwood asked if white is the only color option and Mr. Wheeler said it had more to do with the color palate of the building. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 Ms. Berko asked what the other material changes are to the building. Ms. Simon said there were some windows facing west and they were designed to be blind windows and have been restudied. The deck structure is now wood and the railing style may have changed somewhat as well. Mr. Pember asked what the colorfast rating is for vinyl windows and Mr. Wheeler said he is not sure, but that might be his only concern with fiberglass going from white to yellow. Overall, he thinks white is probably a good approach and had good luck with the Burlingame windows with no change and this is a better window. Mr. Halferty summarized by saying that the window is going from a metal clad to a proposed vinyl and color is to be determined by staff and monitor. Ms. Greenwood said that she has no issues or problems with it. Mr. Kendrick said he has no problem and feels that it is aesthetically fine and will not be losing any energy. Mr. Moyer said he is ok with it. Mr. Halferty said that staff and monitor should look at the color again now that we’ve had a change of materials as well as a mock up. Mr. Wheeler said he has ordered one. Ms. Greenwood moved to approve with recommendations as a mock up and looking at almond as an alternative color, Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Ms. Berko, yes; Mr. Pember, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Kendrick, yes; Mr. Blaich, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes. 7-0 all in favor, motion carried. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon said 217 S. Galena has been pulled from the agenda. This is regarding painting an already painted Victorian so we need to be more serious about this. There are six coats of paint on it already so we need to figure out the condition of the building first and they will go ahead and paint the woodwork. Kemosabe will be moving into this space. Ms. Simon mentioned that they just hired another preservation planner. Her name is Sarah Yun and she grew up in Denver. She has a master’s in architecture from Columbia. She is working at the Getty currently and is coming to us mid-October. This will be her first job in local government and it will be a big help being more responsive with all HPC requests. CERTIFICATES OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: Ms. Simon has issued one for the 629 W. Smuggler, the old Marolt house that Derek Skalko did years ago. They are redoing the driveway and walkway, which takes them to the side of the house. This is mostly a right of way issue with Engineering mostly, but she looked at and said it was ok. PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Simon mentioned that Mr. Halferty is the project monitor for 980 Gibson Avenue, which is a project that was reviewed a year ago that had two historic resources hooked together and is now a lot split. HPC approved a project to restore one of the miners cottages and build a 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 detached house. As they have prepared to move the historic house from where it’s currently sitting onto it’s new foundation, they got some push back from Bill Bailey about the logistics. The house needs to be spun around because it was placed backwards on the lot so they will be using a crane to lift it. It’s something that has been done once before and is not the typical technique. The Building Dept. is all over it and will be happening on Friday. CALL UPS: None. PUBLIC NOTICE: Ms. Simon left the notice for 406 S Mill St. upstairs so she will make sure to get this to Ms. Bryan before noon the next day. New Business: 406 S Mill St. Amy Simon This is request for exterior changes to the former location of McDonalds. This is a non-designated building in the historic district. This was built 1956 by the Ski Co. and used to be the Aspen Country Store until the property was sold to McDonalds in 1983. It now has a new owner and is being turned into O2 Yoga Studio. There is a significant interior remodel underway and Ms. Simon has already done a certificate of no negative effect for the windows and roof replacement. The request tonight is to paint the brick. The stucco on the upper floor is to be replaced with a painted metal siding. We have no particular concerns about that issue, but is somewhat disappointing to lose some of the natural characteristics and material that comes with the wood on the building, however, from the ground, you won’t tell the difference. We recommend that HPC allow this change to happen. We do have an objection to painting the natural brick and we do not want to encourage people to paint masonry downtown. We think it diminishes the character of the architecture. There are a number of painted buildings downtown, which are historic and non-historic and don’t think that should continue. We do have a concern that this is terribly important decision because we have adopted new commercial design guidelines. You’re finding tonight, might have implications for additional buildings later on, which are not necessarily under HPC’s purview. Applicant Presentation: Bill Pollock & Jeff McCollum of Zone 4 Architects; Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning, LLC; Britney Van Domelen, Owner. O2 will have a spa on lower level, retail on the entry level and yoga/Pilates studio on the upper level. We feel this is going to be a completely opposite energy. We are going from the heaviness of burgers to the lightness of being. Maybe having classes in Wagner paired with the retail outside, it will bring a vitality to that corner that has been missing. To change that and move that, we would like to make everything on the exterior light including painting the brick. Changing the wood and stucco to metal, it will still be seen as wood and harken back to wood. We would love to step out of the McDonalds aura and bring this into a new realm and give a new personality for the building. There are a lot of buildings downtown, speckled with white buildings. James Perse, Aether, Tesla are just a few, so this is not something completely unique. We will not be painting, but just doing a white wash so the texture and the character of the brick will still come through. We will white wash the brick on the first level and everything wood 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 will go to white, with the gray metal caps at the end of them, also going to white. On the upper level, the stucco will all go to metal and the windows will be white and metal clad. Mitch Haas It is Important to recognize and keep in mind that the building is not historic and is not on the list for being potentially historic so we are not talking about painting historic bricks. He pointed out the Red Onion and that it’s painted red brick and there are two buildings on either side painted white. These are painted solid white and this isn’t what we want to do, but again, would be a white wash. Going forward, if someone comes in and wants to paint the brick on a historic structure, I will be in here along with everyone else arguing against that, but this isn’t historic. With regard to the actual guidelines, I read them and it states somewhere that paint color is variable and not subject to review. Nowhere does it say to not paint brick. If this was recently adopted, we feel there is a fairness issue here and we can’t just start this now for no reason. The existing alley façade doesn’t have any visual entrance at all so there is a reason the homeless tend to gather in here because it’s so dark and not noticed. We need to lighten up this alley and allow this to pop and deliver some light into it. By white washing, it helps to create that pop to create visual interest. It’s not do or die, but it is felt like this property needs a clean and fresh start. Britney Van Domelen I completely understand you have to draw the line with paint, but please don’t start the precedent with a local business. If you let Tesla do it and not O2, that isn’t cohesive, in her opinion, for local businesses so maybe not start it with someone whose been here for 15 years. Ms. Berko asked what type of metal it will be and Mr. Pollock said it’s a representation of the siding. There is not a lot of area where this is going to be and it is basically a lap siding, but since it’s a metal, it’s going to be very tight without a huge shadow line. Mr. Kendrick asked what is happening to the second-floor brick. Mr. Pollock said it is proposed to be white also. Mr. Moyer asked if they have done any white wash testing on the brick and Mr. Pollock said no. Mr. Moyer said they are allowed to do that because it’s glazed brick and has a protective outer coating. Mr. Pollock said that on the interior side of the stair well is where the testing will take place. Mr. Kendrick pointed out that this isn’t a freestanding building, but connected so he asked what the plan is for the transition and Mr. Pollock said they will repeat one of the columns that’s on the side. The identical column right behind it against the brick and the paint would stop in a straight line behind the column. Ms. Simon wanted to point out a couple of code issues and said this isn’t a topic that has been in front of HPC before. Work in the historic district that is exempt and we have always taken the position with an already painted building, that they can continue that work. This is partially why this is in front of you 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 tonight, because once the building is painted; two weeks later, they would be able to paint it with four coats of black paint if they wanted. Once the coating is applied, the board no longer has control. Ms. Greenwood confirmed the code says that once any surface is painted, you can repaint it. That’s where the decision comes from. Ms. Greenwood thinks it’s very odd. Mr. Moyer said there is a huge difference between paint, wash and stain. A stain or wash is insignificant because you can still basically wash it off. Once you paint, you have to put something underneath to make it bond. He said he would never paint masonry, so the wash, to Mr. Moyer is pretty insignificant. Ms. Berko asked Ms. Simon to reread the code. Ms. Simon pointed out that it is on page 42 of the packet and read back the code. Mr. Kendrick asked Mr. Moyer for clarification on the brick being sealed. Mr. Moyer said that when the brick is fired, it creates a hard-outer surface and it’s sealed. So, if you were to white wash on the outside, it’s not penetrating. If it’s hard, it’s easy to take off. Acrylic white wash is what they would use and it’s basically a coat of stain. It would be ok and create the look that they want. Mr. Kendrick asked how hard it would be to do a mock up. Mr. Haas said it wouldn’t be hard at all. Mr. Pember asked if the interior will be white as well and Mr. Pollock said yes. Mr. Pember asked about the ceiling structure and Mr. Pollock said there are purlins that go in twos and they would have metal caps that are painted white metal. The concrete that you walk on, would stay the same and the stairs will remain the same. Mr. Halferty mentioned the memo (context 2.14, bullet point 3) and asked if that is referring to brick in its natural state and Ms. Simon said yes, that putting any coating on it downplays the naturalness and the characteristics. Mr. Halferty asked if they have samples of the metal and Ms. Simon said that it could be a staff and monitor item if HPC approves it. Mr. McCollum noted that the metal is in a 6in horizontal pattern. Mr. Moyer said that as much as possible he wants to agree with staff, but the wash does not lose the integrity of the brick and asked if they could agree to that. Ms. Simon said it puts us in a position down the road between painting and white wash. Once coating is added, that’s the path we’re on. Mr. Haas said they would be comfortable with adding a condition to require a review with HPC if they want to change the paint moving forward. Mr. Pember said he doesn’t remember any talk about painting brick in any prior reviews. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Public comment closed. Mr. Blaich said he is torn on this one, but is in agreement with Ms. Simon and staff on the intention. The way the rules are written are not clear enough. He said he knows the purpose of this business going in is 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 positive and think it’s refreshing from an aesthetic point of view. He thinks it would be a positive thing to create a different image that doesn’t relate it to a corporate image. We do need improvement in this area and to lighten it up and be more friendly. He is on the fence, but feels this has to be the test case. Ms. Berko said she concurs with staff recommendation. The metal will lighten up the whole building and accomplish the look they want and she likes the play of the brick and metal together. If she thinks of it as all white, it’s an intrusion on the block. Guidelines are guidelines and her interpretation of the guidelines is not the same as the applicant on this one and the guidelines must be respected. The metal and more glass would lighten it up and the transition to white would be disturbing to her. It would be a shock to not have it marry with the rest of the block. Mr. Kendrick agrees with staff as well, but also has concern with the partial building being painted. He doesn’t think it relates well to the rest of the building. Ms. Greenwood said she doesn’t agree with staff on this. It’s obviously just getting some paint and fixing it up and it will eventually be completely redeveloped anyway. She cannot go along with guidelines that won’t let the business project what they want to do. She thinks the guidelines are holding an unrealistic longevity for our mall. This is the antithesis of what a new business needs to be successful. Empathy with the fact that this is the first one to come along and it needs paint the most and needs to be uplifted and brought into the 21st century. This board should support changing this building. None of the new buildings that come in to us are white; they are all brick and natural stones. They are all that same kind of genre. I don’t see that anything is getting away from us in terms of the mall. It meets the guidelines. There are very few buildings that are going to ask for paint and this is a local business and it needs to change. We’re here to add good honest discretion and help people get through the process and help enhance the town. She said she would change the metal and go more toward a wood as she is not crazy about the metal. Overall, this building goes along with the language of the commercial core and needs a fresh coat of paint. Mr. Moyer agreed that the building could be torn down tomorrow and asked why they are even talking about this. Ms. Greenwood agreed and said things do happen. This meets our guidelines and helps a local business and revitalizes the corner. Mr. Moyer agrees with Ms. Greenwood. It’s a wash. Mr. Pember said this is a hodgepodge of things and was not built in one continuous sequence. If someone would buy this, they would just tear it down. Mr. Blaich said they can’t make a decision on what someone might do since it’s just conjecture. Ms. Greenwood said that there is no integrity to this block. It was built for function and is in dire need of redevelopment. 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 23, 2017 Mr. Halferty thinks this is a great project. It’s tough. He continued to give a summary of the project and discussion. He said there are a lot of moving parts here and he is not steadfast in one direction or the other. He said the applicant argument is strong and he feels they meet most guidelines. 2.14 is the only guideline he feels they may not meet so it’s a challenge for him as well. He’s ok with the other improvements, however. Ms. Greenwood feels the project meets all of the guidelines 100%. Mr. Pember asked if this is HOA compliant and asked if the HOA has seen the plans and Mr. Pollock answered yes. MOTION: Mr. Blaich motioned to approves resolution #19 and also recommended the white wash of the brick as well as a condition to review any future requests for paint, Ms. Greenwood seconded. Staff and monitor will report back on the mock up to confirm white wash. Roll call vote: Mr. Halferty, yes; Mr. Pember, no; Ms. Berko, no; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Blaich, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes; Mr. Kendrick, yes. 5-2, motion carried. Mr. Blaich motioned to adjourn at 6:56 p.m., Mr. Pember seconded. _____________________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk