Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19980527ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 Meeting was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by chairperson Suzannah Reid. Present were Roger Moyer, Gilbert Sanchez, Susan Dodington, Melanie Roschko, Heidi Friedland and Jeffrey Halferty. Mary Hirsch was excused. Suzannah Reid relayed to Staff that No Problem Joe's property is deteriorating. 303 E. MAIN - Doorway at back of the porch Jeffrey stepped down. Suzannah stated she did a site visit to the property to review the doorway at the back of the porch that the owners were requested to reinstall. Stephen Kanipe, building inspector relayed what the nature of the door would have to be in terms of being handicapped accessible. They need to have an automatic opener/closer on the door which would involve a push plate on the outside and inside to operate the door. In order to have the detail show the wall would be visible through the window on the side of the porch. Suzannah stated the reasonable solution would be to allow them to not do the doorway but to finish out the inside with siding on the back of the porch wall and on the Bacchus door side so it will look like finished space and to change out the Bacchus door to a wooden door. This area is one of the few areas that is original to the house. Roger inquired about the other issues such as the planter designs. Staff stated they would draft a resolution for the next meeting regarding the outstanding issues and recommended HPC just address the issue about the doorway. The monitor needs to sit down and address the outstanding issues and then a letter will be drafted to the applicant. MOTION: Gilbert moved to allow the existing opening at the back porch to continue to exist based on the following conditions: ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 0 That the interior of the porch befinished with wood siding to match the existing Jn order for Jt to look ]Jke an exterior space. 2) That the Bacchus door be replaced with a door to be approved by the monitors. 3) That the trim around the opening be restored to a condition to be reviewed and approved by monitor. Motion second by Melanie. All in favor, motion carried 6-0. DEPP PRESENTATION - No minutes 107 S. MILL - ELLI'S BUILDING- ZONA Sven Alstrom was sworn in. Mitch Haas, planner relayed that the proposal is to swap the locations of the door with one of the store front windows to utilize the interior space. The new doorway would have transom windows above it that would match the existing windows above the storefront windows. Sven Alstrom, architect for the project explained that all the awnings on the building will be replaced eventually and they are requesting the first one. Melanie did a site visit and relayed that the two windows are set back further from the center post and the door and existing window are at the front. She asked if both could be set the same. Sven stated since both were being moved he could set them both all at the same plane. He also relayed that the owners want charcoal gray or black awnings. The awnings will all be the same on the building but all will not have signage. MOTION: Melanie moved to approve the proposed changes to 107 S. Mill St. EIIi's building, Zona stare front with the following conditions: 0 Set new windows and door at the same plane as adjacent existing windows and the final alignment must be approved by staff and monitor. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 2) The window trim, mullions and transom windows shall match those of the existing windows. 3) The color and material of the proposed awning(s) shall be reviewed and approved by the assigned HPC monitor and Community Development staff 4) All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings all be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision-making body having the authority to do so. Motion second by Heidi. All in favor, motion carried 7- O. 214 E. BLEEKER - HISTORIC LOT SPLIT - PH Affidavit of posting presented - Exhibit I Sworn in were Gretchen Greenwood, architect Joan Lang, neighbor Ramona Markalunas Franz Berko Bill Light Mitch Haas, planner stated that the gross square footage is 11,963 square feet and the request is to divide one parcel of 5,963 square feet and another parcel of 6,000 square feet. The smaller parcel contains the historic structure. The 1,913 square feet of floor area would be allotted to the lot with the historic house with the potential of the 500 square foot bonus if granted at final development review by HPC. The larger parcel would have a base floor area of 2,344 square feet. There is an existing pool on the larger lot. Gretchen gave an overview of the project for the benefit of the neighbors present. The lot has a Victorian house on it and the owners have chosen to subdivide the lot. The historic lot split was adopted so that you can create two lots with two small houses on one parcel. The allowable size that you can build on the two parcels together is the size of a duplex. The idea is to preserve the Victorian house and prevent the concept of a large addition or duplex onto it. Without the lot split they could quadruple the size. With the lot split the FAR go to the vacant lot in order to preserve the small Victorian house which is presently 1,800 square feet. The new house would be deed restricted to 2400 square foot house which is consistent with the Victorians in 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 the neighborhood. The ordinance allows small houses to be in scale with each other. The Victorian would be limited to a 1900 square foot house. They have an approval to move the out building to the new lot. Bill Light, neighbor endorsed the proposal after clarifications were made. Ramona inquired about the FAR for the historic house. Mitch stated that the allowable is 1913 square feet with the potential for the 500 square foot bonus at final development. The board relayed that the proposal meets the goals on what lot splits are all about, restricting the masses. MOTION: Roger moved to forward to City Council a recommendation to approve the historic landmark lot split for 214 E. Bleeker Street with the following conditions: 1. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development and Engineering Departments' and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall: a. Meet the requirements' of Section 26.88.040(D)(2)(a) of the Aspen Municipal Code; b. Contain a plat note stating that development of the new/easterly lot (Lot A) created by the lot split shall be required to mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100. 050(A)(2)(c) of the Municipal Code; c. Contain a plat note stating that the lots' contained therein shah be prohibited from applying for further subdivision and any development of the lots' will comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application. d. The two lots' created by this lot split shah have a total allowable base FAR, on both lots' combined, equal to 4,257 square feet of floor area prior to consideration of potentially applicable lot area reductions (i. e., slopes, access easements', etc.). The applicant shall verify with the City Zoning Officer the total allowable FAR on each lot, taking into account any and aH applicable lot area reductions. The 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 property shall be subdivided into one parcel (the westerly parcel, Lot B) of 5,963 square feet and a second parcel (the easterly parcel, Lot A) of 6, 000 square feet. Provided it is found by the Zoning Officer that no lot area reductions are required, the maximum allowable FAR on the westerly parcel (Lot B) wouM be 1,913 square feet of floor area (plus the potential for a 500 square foot floor area bonus if granted by the HPC), and 2, 344 square feet of floor area on the easterly parcel (Lot A). The information verified by the City Zoning Officer shall be included on the plat, as a plat note. e. Contain a plat note stating that any setback nonconformity's created by the new lot line shall be eliminated upon redevelopment or further development, as may be applicable, of either of the two lots'. 2. As a minimum, the subdivision exemption agreement shah include the elements' outlined in Section 26.88.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code, and shall meet the recording and timing requirements' described in Section 26. 88. 030(A) (2) (e). 3. Prior to issuance ora Certificate of Occupancy on either lot, the applicant shall sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter construction agreement andpay the applicable recording fees. 4. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public hearings shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a decision-making body having the authority to do so. Motion second by Heidi. All in favor, motion carried 7-0. 234 W. FRANCIS - CONCEPTUAL & FINAL - PH - (table Julie Ann Woods, planner stated that her research indicated that the age of the garage is 1956. The actual request conceptual and final review, partial demolition of the non-historic structure which is the garage and the variances from the rear yard, side yard and combined side-yard setbacks. Scott Lindeau, Studio B represented the owner. He relayed to the board that the garage is an assemblage of added on structures. What is there now was built in 1970. The proposal is to re-build the garage and moving it two feet closer to the main house in order to get the vehicle in the garage. Exhibit I - letter of support from Tobin's Exhibit II - letter of support from Allen' s 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 Gilbert relayed his concern of no garage elevations in the packet and the applicant is requesting a final approval. Scott relayed that the only thing changed is the connector from the Dec. 10, 1997 meeting. Susan asked about lifting the existing garage up and pouring a new floor. Scott said if that were done it would change the dimensions of the footers. Julie Ann explained that the east elevation is different than what was presented in December. Suzannah stated that the stair is not drawn on any elevation and the dormers have changed. The majority of the board felt there was not enough elevations presented to make a determination. Chairperson Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing. Sworn in were Joan Lang, who worked for Herbert Bayer. Scott Lindea, architect Ramona Markalunas, public Joan Lang stated she worked for the Bayer's from 1951 to 1954. She worked in the breezeway that was attached to the garage. There was a garage in 1951. Ramona Markalunas stated that the 1904 Sanborn map shows the breezeway but not the garage. The Bayer's bought the property in 1946 and built a garage and the Anderson's bought the property in 1953 from the Bayers and they remodeled the garage into the caretaker unit that it is today. The 1946 date is well within the 50 years that it would take to make it historic. The historic garage is now an historic caretaker unit that was converted by R.O. Anderson. Julie Anderson the daughter of R.O. is married to Morgan Smith who is Jim Hopkins Smith's son. R.O. Anderson was very instrumental in funding and getting the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies started. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 Governor Davis Wade lived in the house and the title to the property was carried in his wife's name. He also ran one of the six newspapers that were published in the 1880's and 1890's the Union Era. He was oriented in having women vote and was a populist. This building became a landmark in 1982 and it met the architectural qualifications. To demolish a shed without a complete plan is not doing what the preservation commission is established to do. Chairperson Suzannah Reid closed the public hearing. Roger relayed that there may have been something there but it has been changed so much over the years i.e. a similar parallel to the Paepcke house. The real historic portion of the structure is the original house. He stated that he went through his records and painted the house in the 1970's when the remodel was done. He stated that he is comfortable allowing the demolition because an error was made by the City in that there was not a complete set of drawings submitted. Gilbert relayed his gratitude to Ramona in identifying individuals who have lived in the historic structure. He also asked what other elements of the garage/guest quarters she felt provided contribution to Aspen. Ramona stated that the garage was turned into the caretaker unit and the caretaker still lives in Aspen. Most of the larger homes in Aspen had caretaker units. Jeffrey site visited with the contractor Gary Wheeler and he relayed to the board that Gary is doing his very best to keep all the historic conditions such as the windows and siding and the siding is being stored in a dry place. He stated that he looked at the rafters and existing framing and you could see the break to the attached breezeways etc. The garage has 30 year old construction techniques. The hangers are all of the 70's and 60's. There may have been something there but it has been significantly altered. Jeffrey relayed that he could vote for demolition. Scott stated they are virtually building the garage. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 MOTION: Roger moved to approve the demolition of the non-historic garage at 234 W. Francis with the following conditions: 1) A full set of drawings be submitted for the June 10th meeting which reflect the drawings that were submitted today. Plans to include a lan&cape plan. 2) Fariances will be considered at the June 10th meeting; also final material selections will be reviewed. MOTION: Roger also moved to continue conceptual and final and the public hearing until the June 10, 1998 meeting Motion second by Jefjhey. All in favor, motion carried. Motion carried 5-2. Melanie stated that she felt the design of the garage needed to be restudied since it is not historic. Roger stated at final the fence needs to be discussed. 101-105 E. HALLAM - PARTIAL DEMOLITION Sworn in were Augie Reno and Alan Busch. Mitch Haas, planner stated that a memo was not provided as drawings were not presented in time for review by a planner for the packet. A new set of drawings were submitted for the HPC review and possibly the board can give the applicant some direction. The applicant has noticed property owners within the 300 foot radius. One of the major issues were the light wells at the last meeting. The majority of the board was opposed to the lightwell on the north elevation, the street side and that light well has been eliminated. The other light wells remain where they were and are required for egress of the basement. Augie stated they were given approval to connect the shed to the house. The majority of the roof line was brought back from the last meeting to what it exists as of today. Two dormers were eliminated. They down scaled the dormers on the western elevation. One light well on the north side was eliminated. It was suggested at the last meeting to put the light wells on the east side of the building but you would not get light down into that space. The recess of the center door on the west side is at the 1 1/2 foot dimension and is primarily because the 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 existing wall is recessed and they area bringing it out and a kitchen will be put in. A request is being made for a variance of the no window zone. Susan suggested eliminating one of the lightwells on the west elevation. She also inquired about what materials would be saved from the shed. Augie relayed that the brick would be saved. Augie stated the west elevation is set back 30 feet from the street and the light wells will not be that visible. Mitch stated that the original house had a hipped roof. They would need a Design Review variance from ordinance 30 for the lightwells and windows. Augie mentioned that the existing house basically has the windows in a similar form as the building exists today. The triangulated and semi-round window exist today. Alan stated that they are staying within a total of nine feet of windows and it is the same location as the existing windows. Gilbert indicated that throughout the elevations the windows are consistent excep for the south elevation. Augie indicated that the space is the only area visible to Aspen Mountain and they wanted to take advantage of that view. It is also the alley side. Commissioner Comments Roger's concern is the distraction on the west side of the fenestration above the historic resource. He requested a restudy of the window shapes of that facade. The mass and scale is commendable. He stated if you want to show differentiation between the historic and later additions then you would not put columns by the entry that match the ones on the front west elevation. The columns on the north should be totally different. He also stated that he could accept the light wells due to the distance of 25 to 30 feet from the curb if they are done in a flat grill shape and vegetation could be done in front of them. The placement of the double hung windows on the 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 north elevation needs restudied, possibly bring them closer together and also more to the proportion of the windows on the west side. The strange window shapes in the peak on the south elevation is a little confusing with the historic house. He feels too much space is taken up in the dormers with the strange shaped window (this references Ord. #30.) The mass and scale have been addressed successfully. Mitch clarified that on the east the door is being moved over into an area where there was a filled in window. On the west elevation there are three new windows which are not on the historic resource. Gilbert relayed that the mass and scale are acceptable. In general he likes the proposal. The exceptions are the amount of upper level glazed windows. The scheme for the west elevation and the south elevation regarding Ord. #30 volume standard could be waived if the upper windows were restudied. He also said the windows are visible from across the street. The columns should not be the same as the historic columns on the north elevation. Susan stated that her concern is the west elevation. Too much is going on. Regarding the light wells one should be moved to the storage side. The recessed area on the west is appropriate. His major concern is the second floor elevation on the west side. Melanie stated that her concern is the upper west elevation. She also feels the glazing needs restudied. The alley side of the house is acceptable. She would prefer to see the light wells on the east side of the house but since they are so far from the street, (approximately 30 feet) she feels there may be a way to incorporate them and do plantings around the light wells. Heidi relayed that the proposal is much improved over what was presented at the last meeting. She is far more comfortable with the roof lines presented this evening. She also concurs with the west elevation concerns of the other board members. It feels too dominant and it is distracting from the historic element. In general the windows need restudied. On the north making the upper windows smaller and closer together is a good suggestion. In that way they would be subordinate to the lower historic story. No problem with the light wells. She recommends that a memo be prepared from staff before making a final vote. 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 Jeffrey feels this proposal is a great improvement as the massing has been addressed. The west has been improved but he large dormer needs restudied because of its inflection on the historic resource. The light wells are OK depending on the final detailing. The consistency in the material change from the historic brick to the new brick and then back to the historic brick helps with the clarity of what is defining new and what is old. On the north elevation the proportions work better. The proposal is on its way to being a good project. Suzannah agreed with everything said but her concern is the north elevation windows. They should be moved closer together. She is also concerned about the way the eave detail is being handled and the portion of the roof that is wrapping around the front side and also the way the new peaked roof is being cut off by the horizontal line. Something a more elegant should be incorporated, possibly allowing the fascia edge to come through. The west elevation dormers need simplification. Light wells are acceptable and they will be presented by landscape work. No problem with the garage dormer. Alan Busch asked that the motion include the approval of the light wells in order for them to get started. Suzannah relayed that her concern is cutting up approvals in pieces and it has been a problem in the past and keeping track of what was approved. Augie requested a summary. MOTION: Roger moved to approve partial demolition to 101-105 E. Hallam with the following conditions: 1) Restudy the windows on the north elevation. 2) Restudy the delineation of the historic and new remodel on the west side i.e. columns and doorway. 3) Restudy the upper fenestration on the west elevation. 4) Restudy the upper fenestration on the south elevation. Motion second by Melanie. Discussion: 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 Roger explained that the HPC is allowing them to proceed with their engineering and permit to demo and lift the house up. Suzannah and other member relayed their concern about the one step process partially being approved. Gilbert relayed that the associated issues are exceptions to the volume standard and variance issues for the light wells. It would be difficult to approve a volume standard because of the disparity of what is acceptable and what is not. Other member indicated they could not approve the project without the revisions. AMENDED MOTION: Roger moved to continue 101-105 E. Hallam, partial demolition to a date certain, June lOth with the following conditions: 1) Restudy the windows on the north elevation. 2) Restudy the delineation of the historic and new remodel on the west side i.e. columns and doorway. 3) Restudy the upper fenestration on the west elevation. 4) Restudy the upper fenestration on the south elevation. Motion second by Melanie. All in favor, motion carried 7-0. SUNDECK REFERRAL No minutes MOTION: Roger moved to adjourn; second by Heidi. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p. m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 13 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF May 27, 1998 303 E. MAIN - DOORWAY AT BACK OF THE PORCH .................................................................. 1 DEPP PRESENTATION - NO MINUTES ........................................................................................... 2 107 S. MILL - ELLI'S BUILDING - ZONA ........................................................................................ 2 214 E. BLEEKER - HISTORIC LOT SPLIT - PH ............................................................................... 3 234 W. FRANCIS - CONCEPTUAL & FINAL - PH - (TABLE .......................................................... 5 101-105 E. HALLAM - PARTIAL DEMOLITION (CONTINUED FROM MAY 13) ........................ 8 SUNDECK REFERRAL - NO MINUTES .......................................................................................... 12 14