Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19980422ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 Chairperson Suzannah Reid called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with Roger Moyer, Gilbert Sanchez, Mary Hirsch, Heidi Friedland and Jeffrey Halferty present. Excused were Melanie Roschko and Susan Dodington. MOTION: Mary moved to approve the March 25, 1998 minutes; second by Gilbert. All in favor, motion carried. 706 W. MAIN ST. CONCEPTUAL - PARTIAL DEMOLITION - RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS (PH) Suzannah stated that she was noticed on this property as a neighbor but it will not effect her voting decision. Assistant City Attorney, David Hoefer relayed that it was not necessary for Suzannah to step down. Sworn in were Susan Furr, architect, Melinda Goldrich, owner. Two exhibits were entered into the records; the memo and affidavit of posting. Amy Guthrie, planner indicated to the HPC that the property is a designated historic landmark and it is also located in the Main Street historic district. The application involves the following: 1) Make an alteration to partially enclose the front porch. 2) To extend the porch so that it wraps around the side of the building. 3) To make a garage and bedroom addition at the rear of the building which includes a request for setbacks variances. 4) To do an at grade patio on the east side of the property. The core of the house is still present but it has been doubled in size toward the rear of the property. The front porch had changes over time. The front porch is not the original porch and actually the building had no porch originally and by 1904 it had a porch that extended across the full width of the front of the building. Amy addressed the recommended conditions: ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 1) Enclosing the front porch with glass is not appropriate as it changes the character of the porch. She is also not in support of wrapping the porch as it is not an authentic characteristic of the building. These items should be deleted. 2) If a larger porch is desired a porch similar to the drawing on the Sanborne 1904 map should be used. 3) The aluminum siding and shutters are not original features and staff would support the applicant removing them. 4) There is a proposed deck on the east side of the house and staff feels it is appropriate but recommends that it not come all the way to the front of the house so that the front porch and side deck do not unite into one element. They should be distinct. The door to access the porch is on the front side of the building and it is staff' s recommendation that they look at single doors rather than French doors to be consistent with the architecture. 5) The new addition has windows which need restudied to bring them back to a vertical proportion. 6) Staff supports the west side yard setback variance of two feet and a rear yard setback of ten feet. The variances are needed in order that the new addition have some offset otherwise the west wall would be very long. 7) On the rear yard, the office zone district requires a 15 foot rear yard setback so that the office could have ample parking but this is a residential use so the proposed distance which is five feet from the alley is appropriate. That is allowed directly across the alley which is the R-6 zone. Chair, Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing. Susan Furr, architect stated their biggest concern is enclosing the porch. They are willing to alter the porch as suggested by staff. To do without the entry vestibule would compromise the use of the house. The house is small and there is not a way to create an entry inside of the house without taking out a big portion of the livingroom. The factor is Main Street with the dust and soot. The intention is to keep the scale of the original house and it is still 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 under 2,000 square feet. The vested approval was for a commercial building looming on Main Street and requesting the enclosed entry is a good compromise. Melinda brought up the fact when she bought the house it came with vested rights with much more extreme use of the landscaping. She is scaling down the project. The house is next door to a busy restaurant and busy street with RFTA buses coming by and a line of news paper racks in front. Right now there is no closet or anything you are in the middle of the livingroom and she is trying to make an intermediate use because there is no other entrance to the house. You can never leave the front door open due to the dust and noise. Susan Furr passed out photographs in support of the front enclosure. She also said she could do a six foot porch and continue it across the front and then take the center of the porch and enclose it with glass in some way or possibly set back the enclosure so that the porch reads across the front. Regarding the garage the door needs to be a few feet wider in order to make the turning radius. Susan Furr agreed with Gilbert on the east elevation that she could make the windows longer with a vertical mullion. Roger relayed if the porch was replaced like the Sanbome map he would look at a portion of the porch glassed in; however, panels are not appropriate, possibly a simple railing with glass behind the railing. Gilbert relayed that he is in favor of the shed porch and concurs with staff except for the front porch enclosure. He feels something could be accomplished to accommodate the applicant. He is sympathetic to a functional entry. The Board in general favored Staff' s recommendations. In general they favored a vestibule but need to see the plans before signing off. This is a modest addition to an historic house. The massing is appropriate. Heidi commended the applicant for doing a modest addition and keeping it true to its original nature. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 Jeffrey relayed that the French door concept was acceptable as long as it had Victorian details such as being solid with glass in the top of the doors. Roger suggested that the porch be as transparent as possible so that it appears to be an open Victorian porch with possibly glass behind it. Chair, Suzannah Reid closed the public hearing. MOTION: Roger moved to approve conceptual development for 706 W. Main and partial demolition with the following conditions: O Restudy thefrontporch and vestibule. Building aporch that wraps around the east side of the building is also not appropriate since this is not authentic to the original appearance of the house. 2) Ifa larger front porch is desired by the applicant, remove the existing porch, which is not historic, and building a porch that extends across the front of the house, as evidenced in the 1904 Sanborne map. The porch would need to be built to the dimensions shown on that map. The posts' should be relatively simple in character and be of an appropriate scale, to show that they are not original to the house but are sympathetic to its' detailing. Prior to reconstruction of this element, a search should also be made by the applicant of the Aspen Historical Society's photo archives to see if any pictures of the original house can be found. 3) .4 deck on the east side of the house is acceptable as long as there is no roof over the deck and the deck extends no further towards' Main Street than the double hung window on the East side of the original house, so that the front porch and side deck are independent elements'..4 door as proposed on the south side of the building to access the east deck is also acceptable, although a single door rather than French doors is more appropriate architecturally. The proposed flagstone path may be built along the east side of the house. 4) Study making the windows on the new addition more vertical in character than some of those shown, to be compatible with the original house rather than the newer addition. 5) Grant a west sideyard setback variance of 2 feet and a rear yard setback variance of 10 feet. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 21, 1998 Motion second by Mary. All in favor, motion carried 6-0. 701 W. MAIN - CONCEPTUAL & FINAL, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS - PH - Sworn in were Martin Mata, architect and Mark Pearson, owner of the property. Amy Guthrie, planner relayed to the HPC that the applicant received variances from the Board of Adjustment instead of HPC as this board cannot give variances because this is not an historic site but it is in the Main Street Historic District. Those variances were granted. The proposal is to demolish an existing mechanical room at the back of the house and demolish an existing car-port area that accesses off the side of the street. They also want to add a small basement area, a new living space and a car port. They also need partial demolition and staff finds that the demolition meets the Residential Design Standards. The only condition requested is that once the parking comes off the alley that the existing curb cut driveway area should be reverted to landscape area. They are slightly over the FAR and they will deal with that by reducing the size of the car port roof and drawings are submitted for the record on the car port. Mark stated that they had planned on turning the existing car port area back into a landscape area with flower beds, grass and a 30 inch brick wall that would go to the 6th street entrance into the mud room. In the model they show the rear carport as a one car carport accessed off the alley. The proposal before you is 1,050 FAR above grade smaller than what was approved with the commercial building and 8 feet shorter. Chairperson Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing. No comments, public hearing closed. The Board was favorable with the proposal. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 MOTION: Mary moved to grant conceptual and final review, partial demotion and the Residential Design Standards to 702 W. Main St. with a condition that the existing driveway cutoff to 6th Street be returned to grass or brick as proposed; second by Heidi. All in favor, motion carried 303 E. MAIN ST. Resolution of permit issues Jeffrey stepped down. Roget Kuhn stated that he feels that the architecture is done appropriately on the building and that they are trying to comply with HPC's requests. Nicklaus Kuhn stated if you look at the entire project they have come a long way. In 1992 the first plans were submitted and since then they have drastically changed for the better. Nicklaus stated that he desire the HPC and himself to work out the problems. Sworn in were: Nicklaus Kuhn Roget Kuhn Charles Fagan Jeffrey Halferty Amy stated that there were 14 issues in the letter and several were resolved since the last meeting. 1) Forgo the issue of the side entry door 3) The tower has been resolved 6) Converted window into a double hung with a sash over the top. 7) Window issue on the tower 10) The shed door was widened to meet ADA requirements. What is left is: 1) The appearance of the porch that runs along the side of the building on Monarch Street. 2) The back entryway to Bacchus and Matsuhisa 3) The front porch 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 4) The mechanical equipment on the roof. The canopy entry into the tower has already been built to look like it did on the plans. Staff finds it acceptable and they added the trim work that was necessary and added the brackets. The mechanical equipment on the shed has a cabinet built around it and that is acceptable. Amy reiterated the remaining issues: 1) side porch on Monarch Street 2) back entry 3) front porch 4) roof top mechanical equipment 5) lights, signs and paint on the building. Mary asked if the painting of the brick was brought up and indicated that it was brought up at the last meeting. Nicklaus addressed the side porch and stated that he is going to do it exactly as the plans. Bead board exist and they will expose the original beam because it is not plum. The old posts are not plum. They beams will go to the inside so that they kind of disappear. They will also put molding around the windows and a new molding on top. Suzannah stated that they need a drawing that represents those changes. Nicklaus said there are no changes and he will do what was submitted. He said there are two decorative posts that are not flush to the wall and they cannot be righted and he will attach wood to the front of the column so that it looks the same. You are still preserving the original posts but have a face on the new one. None of the existing materials will be changed. Suzannah stated at least for the porch issues we need to see a drawing. Amy said at the last meeting the back entry door has to be installed so that it is an enclosed vestibule. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 Roget showed a design of a door with half light which the board agreed on. The door will match what is on the shed. Amy relayed that the front porch proposal is to take the brick column down to 42 inches and replace it with a wood column and to replace the railing, (a design was presented). Amy stated that the next issue is the roof top equipment for Bacchus and Matsuhisa. Roger recommended that the roof top equipment be painted black and then after it is painted HPC review if any accouterments have to be built on the roof. The flashing and valley should also be painted black so that when you walk down the street visually it seems to disappear. He also stated that he doesn't like a lot of things built on a roof which in the long term can cause detriment to the structure. Mary also stated that she is concerned about more weight on the roof. The board determined that after the roof top equipment is painted they will do a site visit to determine if anything else is needed. Amy relayed that the next issue is exterior lighting and she has not seen any cut sheets related to lighting. Charles Fagan stated that he conversed with the lighting guy and he is to contact him sometime this week. Amy stated that the signs are up to date. Amy stated that the last issue is paint. Paint on all wood surfaces and now paint on the foundation was brought up at the last meeting. Nicklaus stated that he is starting the painting. The old and new addition will all be painted the same as what was originally there. Amy inquired about painting the foundation. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 The board said painting the foundation will be helpful aesthetically to the building as it was originally painted. Amy summarized what was said. · On the west side porch facing Monarch St. it will be revised so that it appears exactly as it did in the plan submitted, exhibit I. The one detail is how they will deal with the column. · The back entry will have a door installed that matches the door on the shed. They will provide a drawing of what that looks like from the back of the building. · The front porch submitted has been approved. · On the roof top area all the roof top equipment and flashing will be painted black and then HPC will take a look at it for further additions. · Still waiting for cut sheets from the tenants about their exterior lighting. · Signs are in order. All wood surfaces and the stone foundation on the historical building are to be painted. Questions and clarifications: Roget requested to do a drawing on the side entry since they already have the door picked out and run it by the monitors and Amy for approval. The monitors agreed to review the plan. Roget requested the same thing on the column detail. The monitors agreed to review the plan. MOTION: Heidi moved to approve the outstanding resolutions as presented tonight and that the back door and column detail will be worked out with Staff and monitors; second by Gilbert. All in favor, motion carried. 435 W. MAIN - L'AUBERGE Roger, monitor for the project relayed that the reduction of units is better for the entire project. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 Chris Bendon, planner presented. The proposal is to reduce three units on the interior of the site. Due to the handicapped access issue they needed to reduce the number of units. The project was split into two phases and the second phase is for the remaining seven units. If the allotments are reduced they would need to verify in writing that they are vacating those lots. The changes save two pine trees. Roger inquired about the street parking and the board discussed moving the interior driveway to get the cars off the street. MOTION: deffbey moved to approve the amendment to 435 W. Main with the following condition: That the culdsac turn around be moved to the south 1 1/2feet to restudy the parking layout in order to get the cars off the street. To be approved by Staff and monitor; second by Mary..411 in favor, motion carried. 514 NORTH ST. - FINAL (continued from April 8, 1998) Karen Ringsby, owner of the project sworn in. Amy Guthrie relayed at conceptual two areas were recommended for restudy. Gray Ringsby make the revisions and Staffs feels they are acceptable with one condition that the mullions in the dormer windows on the east side be removed. Karen Ringsby stated she voluntarily had her house designated and she believes in the concept. She feels the addition is appropriate. Roger commented on the mullions and he feels they are appropriate to leave as it is not visible. Mary relayed that Gray was a little upset at the last meeting but every time revisions are made it is for the betterment of the project and the board feels the project is very successful. MOTION: Roger moved to approve the significant development application for 514 N. Third Street with the following conditions: 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 0 Engineering Department approval is needed for the pavers within the City right-of-way. 2) HPC has granted a site coverage variance as needed for the addition. 3) HPC has waived the volume standard/FAR penalty for the "pre- Ordinance ~30" windows in the carriage house to prevent an FAR penalty from being applied retroactively. HPC also grants' a variance from the volume standard for the windows proposed in the new addition, as described above. 4) HPC has granted partial demolition approval. 5) The materials' chosen will be as represented in the final review application. 6) The applicant must obtain the necessary tree removal permits from the City Parks' Department. Motion second by Gilbert. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Roger moved to adjourn; second by Gilbert. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p. m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF April 22, 1998 706 W. MAIN ST. CONCEPTUAL - PARTIAL DEMOLITION - RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS (PH) ..................................................................................................... 1 702 W. MAIN - CONCEPTUAL & FINAL, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS - PH .................................................................................................... 5 303 E. MAIN ST. RESOLUTION OF PERMIT ISSUES ...................................................... 6 435 W. MAIN - L'AUBERGE ....................................................................................... 9 514 NORTH ST. - FINAL (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 8, 1998) ......................................... 10 12