HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19980128ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
January 28, 1998
Chair-person Suzannah Reid called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with
Melanie Roschko, Susan Dodington, Gilbert Sanchez, Roger Moyer, Heidi
Friedland, Mary Hirsch and Jeffrey Halferty present.
Heidi was seated at 5:10
Jeffrey was seated at 5:15
Amy Guthrie presented the HPC with a sign permit for 132 W. Main, the
McClusky building. The sign is bronze with a sandstone base and is quite
large.
The Board wanted a clarification if their would be more signs attached. Other
members wanted to do a site visit. Staff will bring back the information.
TIPPLE INN
Gary Jackobs did a presentation on the Tipple Inn. He would like the Inn to
become a museum. February 11 at 1:00 p.m. site visit.
930 KING STREET - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING
Chair-person Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing, no comments.
MOTION: Mary moved to continue the public hearing and conceptual
approval for 930 King Street until February 11, 1998; second by Melanie.
All in favor, motion carried.
114 NEALE AVE. - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING
Chair-person Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing, no comments.
MOTION: Mary moved to continue the public hearing and conceptual
approval for 114 Neale Ave. until February 11, 1998; second by Heidi. All
in favor, motion carried.
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
January 28, 1998
232 E. HALLAM ST. - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING
Assistant City Attorney, David Hoefer reviewed the affidavit (Exhibit I) and
HPC has jurisdiction to proceed.
Harry Teague, Matthew Scholl and Scott Lindeau were sworn in.
Exhibit II (two 11 x 17 drawings)
Amy Guthrie, planner relayed the concern of compatibility standards i.e.
window vs. wall surface of the addition and material selection. The
beautifully designed addition is somewhat competitive with the historic
structure even though it is heavily vegetated. They are also proposing to
demolish an 1980's addition to the house and Staff has no objection. Ord.
#30 volume standard has not been met on the window of the addition.
Chair-person Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing.
Matthew Scholl, architect for the project stated that the window was
remodeled and is in compliance. The tower element has been lowered. The
vertical element of the house has been connected with a transparent element.
Scott Lindeau relayed to the HPC that he is in favor of this type of addition.
If you were to do an addition similar to the main house you would loose the
clarity of the original structure. It is secondary in scope and size.
Chair-person Suzannah Reid closed the public hearing.
The Board felt that the majority of the issues were addressed and they were in
favor of the project and proposed demolition. The window mass was reduced
and the new composition reflects off the historic house so it is a good
comparison of blend and contrast. The existing landscape is sufficient. The
board was in favor of the setback variance on the east side yard which allows
the addition to site in the same location as the existing structure. The variance
would be seven feet. Lowering the eave height works well with the design
and a better relationship with the existing building. The east elevation is
pulled together quite well. Some members had concerns with the proportions
of the south elevation in that it is too horizontal and too busy. Staff has
2
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
January 28, 1998
concerns with the dramatic departure from the historic house. The
representation of the old materials is very well done. Visually the tower will
be recessed from the glass.
MOTION: Heidi moved to approve the conceptual development, setback
variance and partial demolition based on the new plans as submitted
(Exhibit II) for 232 E. Hallam. Restudy the proportions of the south
elevation. Motion was second by Roger. All in favor, motion carried 7-0.
234 W. FRANCIS ST. AMENDMENTS
Scott Lindeau, architect
Arthur Yuenger, architect
Amy Guthrie relayed that half of the proposals are alternations to things that
were already approved and half of the proposals are new revisions. On the
carriage house the proposal is to remove the roof and replace it with a gabled
roof porch. Staff is opposed to the change as the original building had
nothing on the front of it. The court yard elevation faces the house and the
proposal is to remove the flat roof trellis that his not historic and replacing it
with a gabled roof and staff is opposed to that change. The shed roof dormer
on the back of the carriage house has been approved and instead they want a
closet addition and move over a set of windows.
On the historic house a kitchen already has been approved and they are
asking in addition to make the windows more vertical. On the courtyard
elevation they want to take the porch off and put on a gabled porch and staff
has concerns with the removal of the transom window in order to accomplish
that. A skylight is proposed on the street side and staff recommends against
it. On the street side there is an enclosed area that links the house to the
garage and they are asking to open it up into a breezeway again to add light.
Another change is on the windows of the garage.
The chair reiterated that there are three buildings on the site.
3
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
January 28, 1998
Scott indicated that the proposed gabled porticos were designed to shed snow
away from the doors. A skylight is proposed in the kitchen.
Commissioners concerns:
Carriage House - Portico on the street side should be very simple and have a
flat roof or taking off. Gabled roof too formal for the structure. The change
to the closet is appropriate. Gabled portico takes the building into a different
realm. The portico should not mimic what is on the historic house.
Some of the HPC members felt that the 14 issues were not minor amendments
and the entire application should have been presented all together instead of
three different segments/meetings.
Roger relayed to the Board that snow load issues needs to be addressed and
the board should have a worksession.
The majority of the board recommended a restudy of all the gable ends to be
flat. Removal of the trellis is appropriate.
Garage:
Vertical windows are acceptable.
House:
Retain transom window.
Geometry of dormer restudied.
Skylight on courtyard OK
Restudy portico
No skylight on west but OK on east.
Skylight in kitchen OK
Oppose skylights on historic structure
Scott indicated that he would like to rebuild the porticos that are existing with
a slight slope so that the snow falls off.
MOTION: Heidi made the motion to approve the amendments' to 234 W.
Francis St. with the following conditions: 2,3,4, 7,9,10,13 and 14 of the Jan.
21, 1998 memo.
Rejected 8, 11 and 12 of the Jan. 28th memo and to restudy 1,5 and 6 of the
January 28th, 1998 memo. Conditions of Jan. 28, 1998: see attached.
4
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
January 28, 1998
All conditions of the Oct. 8th, 1997 and the Dec. lOth, 1997 minor
development approvals' must be met.
Oct. 8, 1997 conditions:
MOTION: Gilbert moved to approve the proposal for the minor
development, partial demolition of 234 W. Francis St. with the condition that
the applicant look at revising the rear stair dormer so that the wall aligns
with the building wall below and that more research be done on the slope of
the original roof on the rear addition of the house to be approved by staff
and monitor, second by Roger.
kOTE: Passed 4 - 3. Yes vote: Gilbert, Roger, Mark, Suzannah. No vote:
Mary, Melanie, Heidi.
Dec. lO, 1997 conditions:
MOTION: Roger moved to approve the temporary on-site relocation of 234
W. Francis St. and lightwells with the following conditions:
0 A letter of credit, escrow agreement, or bond in the amount of $30, 000 is
to be provided prior to building permit to ensure the safe relocation of the
building back onto the new foundation.
2) The required lightwells are to be on the east side of the house as
presented by the applicant.
3) The applicant will salvage if possible all the foundation stone or re-create
as existing.
4) No exterior materials' on any part of the historic structure may be removed
without the prior approval of HPC, excepting those areas that were approved
for remodeling on October 8, 1997.
5) All windows be covered for protection during construction.
6) Any changes or additions to the windows to come before Staff and monitor.
7) All conditions of Oct. 8, 1997 minor development approval must be met.
Motion second by Susan.
Amended motion: Roger move to amend his motion to include that a
detailed description of how the house will be moved and determining the
final location be submitted as condition ~8, second by Susan.
The motion of January 28, 1998 was second by Roger. All in favor of the
dan. 28th, 1998 motion and conditions of the Oct. 8, 1997 and Dec. 10, 1997
meetings, motion carried.
5
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
January 28, 1998
Continuation of Jan. 28th minutes.
For clarification no changes to the historic house except one window
which was previously approved.
Motion: Suzannah moved to adjourn; second by Mary. All in favor, motion
carried.
Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
6
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF
January 28, 1998
TIPPLE INN ........................................................................................................................................... 1
930 KING STREET - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING ............................................................. 1
114 NEALE AVE. - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING ................................................................ 1
232 E. HALLAM ST. - CONCEPTUAL - PUBLIC HEARING .......................................................... 2
234 W. FRANCIS ST. AMENDMENTS ............................................................................................... 3
7