Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19981014ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 Chairperson Suzannah Reid called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Present were Roger Moyer, Mary Hirsch, Jeffrey Halferty, Susan Dodington, Gilbert Sanchez, Heidi Friedland, Lisa Markalunas and Christie Kienast. Maureen MacDonald was excused. Gilbert disclosed that he will be stepping down for 735 W. Bleeker. 514 N. THIRD ST. - PUBLIC HEARING, VARIANCES City attorney, David Hoefer received the affidavit of notice. Sworn in were Gray Ringsby, Beattie Block and Martin Block. Amy Guthrie informed the board that the shed was built without the proper permits and approvals. Staff received a complaint. Because it is an historic landmark HPC has the ability to grant setback variances. There is no basement and limited storage. The house was historically built and pushed to the east side of the lot and HPC would not want anything built in the foreground of the house facing the street. From a preservation point of view the shed is probably built in the best possible location; however, it impacts the neighbors. Staff is recommending approval of the variance but only with the condition that the roof line of the shed be changed so that no snow at all would shed toward the neighbor. That could be done by making it a gabled roof or possibly a shed roof that points toward their own yard. Gray stated that the shed was built around ten years ago and the owners did not know that they needed a building permit and the carpenter went ahead and built the shed. There is an impact on the neighbor because it is built so close to the fence. The water draining from the roof goes onto their property and their bushes. Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing. Martin Block said the shed was built six years ago. It is the snow load that drops off the shed onto the adjacent property and has destroyed the bushes. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 Beattie Block stated that she has replaced the bushes three times. A gutter would be out of the question because it too would be on their property. There was a requirement six years ago for a building permit. Martin Block said he didn't have a problem with the shed but the roof should be dropped down so that the roof comes below the fence and the snow builds up on their own property. The snow should not come over the fence. The shed should be moved back so that it drains on the other side of the fence. Suzannah Reid closed the public hearing. The board discussed among themselves different design options that could accommodate the neighbors concerns. Suzannah relayed that the board needed to make a decision on the variances and whether the shed should stay or not at this meeting and the applicant would then need to submit a new design. Mary suggested that the applicant work with the neighbor regarding the new design of the shed. MOTION: Roger moved to table the application on 514 N. Third Street until October 28, 1998for the purpose of redesigning and reducing the size of the shed; second by Mary. All in favor, motion carried 7-0. VOTE: Roger, yes; Gilbert, yes; Suzannah, yes; Mary, yes; Susan, yes; Heidi, yes; Jeffhey, yes; 735 W. BLEEKER - CONCEPTUAL, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, PUBLIC HEARING, VARIANCES ON-SITE RELOCATION Suzannah opened and closed the continued public hearing from Sept. 23, 1998. Gilbert stepped down. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 Amy Guthrie relayed that at the last meeting all the issues were resolved except the design of the addition to the historic house. It had a flat shallow roof pitch. A model and new plans have been provided. Sworn in were Charles Cunniffe, Rich Pavcek and Drew Dolan. Charles stated that there was a doubled peaked roof which came just behind the ridge of the original house. They have worked trying to get the peak pulled away from the historic house. A flat section has been incorporated which moved the addition back and slopes it away so that it doesn't impinge on the historic structure. Susan stated that the height is two feet higher than the plans presented at the last meeting. Her choice was the suburban roof line. Attorney, David Hoefer informed the board that only the six regular members will vote. The new members cannot vote since they were not involved in the previous meetings regarding the specific project. Jeffrey relayed that the architecture is a better resolution in its relationship to the historic house. It takes a lot more mass away from the historic resource. He also stated that there are complex roof designs when dealing with the snow and drainage issues. Charles stated that the drainage will be internalized and it will make the historic structure look better. MOTION: Mary moved to grant conceptual approval for 735 W. Bleeker which includes partial demolition, on-site relocation, variances and residential design standards with the following conditions: (~ Contact the Parks Department as soon as possible to begin discussion what their requirements with regard to tree relocation or removal will be. ¢) A west sideyard setback variance of 6 '8 ", a rear yard setback variance of S ' and a combined front and rear setback variance of S ' are appropriate assuming that HPC fJnds that the above issues have been sufficiently addressed. ¢) Recommend landmark designation finding that the property meets criteria B, D, and E. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 ~ Address the UBC issue with the proposed lightwell and stairwell on the east side of the old house. ~ At bui/dingpermit submittal, demonstrate that the structure is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting by submitting a structural report by a licensed engineer or ap/an drawn by the house mover demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation and the protection methods that wi//be used for the relocation. ~ At bui/dingpermit submittal, post a bond or letter of credit in the amount of S30, 000 to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if' required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. Approval of exhibit one which was presented at this meeting. West elevation roofline be restudied as the new proposal swallows the roof line and turns it into a/ongerp/ane. Motion second by Suzannah. Motion carried 5-1. VOTE: Roger, yes; Suzannah, yes; Heidi, yes; Mary, yes; defikey, yes; SHsan, no. 112 S. MILL ST. - Minor Sworn in were Barbara Long, architect and Cindy Griem, owner of Griem Fine Jewels. Amy Guthrie, planner stated that the applicant wants to change the single entrance door to a double and install an awning and apply slate on the retaining walls. Light fixtures are proposed for the outside of the building and colored concrete on the floor of the courtyard. Staff has no concerns with the entry door or lighting. Regarding awnings, they must retract. In the past all awnings on a building were to be the same. Fox photo's awning is red and the proposal is for a green color awning and HPC would have to make an exception. Barbara Long stated that they never approached Fox photo regarding the awning situation. The owners have approved the more softer colors on the building. The proposal is to apply the slate to the existing cement block under the flashing. The floor would be painted a soft terra-cotta color. The railings would all be painted slate gray. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 Jeffrey stated that he had concerns with adhering slate to the cement block. There is not only dripping concerns but that masonry has the ability like a sponge to absorb moisture. It causes the tile to remove itself. In order for it to work a furring would have to be installed and then a clip system that would hold the slate. He asked the applicant to check with the Building Dept. regarding the handrail and code issues. The board felt that the proposal was an improvement to the building and that the applicant should work out the awning situation with Fox photo in order for it to meet the code requirements. Gilbert stated that he did not feel that the awnings on this particular building had to match. He also stated that he has not seen a successful application of slate to cement block. His concern is if the slate fails what control does HPC have over the maintenance of buildings. Roger also had concerns about adhering the slate to the block. He recommended that the owner get a minimum of a ten year warranty on the procedure. The problem is that the existing wall is not back sealed which means the earth is against the wall but there is no water membrane behind it. The white residue on the existing wall is the release of lime in the mortar because the water is coming through. Other board members did not have a problem with the two colors of awnings on the building. Cindy Griem stated that another material similar to the slate is available in the same colors but more costly and she will look into it. Mary's concern is approving something that the board has been told doesn't work. MOTION: Gilbert moved to approve the new entry doors, colored concrete, and light fixtures for 112 S. Mill St. with the condition that information about the location of the new concrete and light fixtures be provided and approved by Staff and monitor. The proposed awning must be restudied so that it is collapsible or retractable. Documentation regarding the 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 installation and five year warranty of the slate shall be approved by staff and monitor. Motion second by defJhey. All in favor, motion carried 7-0. Roger and Gilbert are the monitors. 920 E. HYMAN AVE. - Partial Demolition Mary stepped down. Christie seated. Amy Guthrie, planner relayed that the property is on the historic inventory and not a designated landmark. The application was submitted three weeks ago and is a partial demolition review. Subsequently a code amendment has been adopted that changes the application to require a two step process with a public hearing but this project was submitted prior to the adoption of code amendment. Roger recommended a worksession. Attorney David Hoefer stated that it is the applicants choice to go forward or not. Amy stated that the proposal is to put a second story on the miners cottage built before 1893 and to have the front porch turn into a deck. Variances are needed which HPC cannot grant because it is not landmarked. It is over the FAR and height limitations. It possibly exceeds the 50% threshold for demolition. Staff feels the partial demolition does not meet the demolition standards and recommends denial. Sworn in was Roger Kerr, architect for the project. Roger Kerr feels the proposed plan keeps the new construction behind the ridge which is what HPC recommends. Two bedrooms are proposed for the upper floor and on the main floor is a kitchen and garage. There is a bedroom and family room in the basement and the FAR is 1800 square feet. The allowable is 2400 square feet. The existing FAR is 1600. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 Roger stated for the applicant and new members his viewpoints. HPC is not in favor of demolishing any part of an historic structure if at all possible. If an addition is added to an historic resource there are three things that are looked at: connection, link or porch so that the new addition does not overwhelm the historic structure. The new addition is never taller than and the new addition instead of being one large mass if possible should be broken up into smaller masses. This is difficult on this project because the lot is long and narrow. HPC would recommend landmark designation. HPC prefers not to deal with variances unless it is absolutely necessary. HPC would recommend restoring the street front of the historic resource. Roger Kerr stated that he addressed the above issues brought up. Page 14 of Exhibit II is the new design. Several members had concerns about the structural load proposed to be attached to the existing roof of the historic cottage. Amy stated that the lot is 3,000 square feet and there are constraints because you can't do two detached dwellings and you can't do a lot split. There are no other choices except to make it a single family house. Several members needed other elevations of the proposal plan C in order to make a decision. Lisa stated that the addition is too overwhelming to the historic structure, it doesn't take on enough prominence in the design of the structure. She had no concern with the demolition on the rear side of the house. Christie felt that the original structure needs to be intact. Roger Kerr stated he would like some resolution regarding the design. He doesn't feel there are a lot of options. The proposal is for 1800 square feet and they are allowed 2400 square feet. At some point a reasonable approach has to be considered. The applicant wants to do nice job on the restoration. The new addition has a basement but not the historic house. MOTION: Roger moved to deny the application for partial demolition of 920 E. Hyman Avenue finding that the development review standards' have 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 not been met as outlined in the memo dated October 14, 1998; second by Susan. Motion carried 6-1. Roger, yes; Susan, yes; Suzannah, yes; Gilbert, yes; defJhey, yes; Christie, yes; Heidi, no. Motion carried 6-1. Gilbert relayed that he feels the new plans are workable. Heidi agreed. Amy stated that the demolition standards will not change under the new code. 520 WALNUT STREET - amendment to final Amy stated that the miners cottage on this property is the owners office and completely detached from that she is building a new home. The changes are mostly materials and locations of windows. Gretchen Greenwood, owner informed the board that she had been in the office for over a year and she decided that the entry needed to be lowered to more of a one story addition with a gable on the end. It was too tall next to the historic resource. The owner wanted the new building not to have any relationship to the historic cottage in terms of the windows. The windows are Hope windows which are very narrow. Gilbert said there were a lot of double hung windows in the approved scheme and a lot of them have changed. He likes the notion that the building is contrasting. Gretchen relayed that she wanted to use modem materials in the modem building and maintain simplicity. The entry roof is corrugated metal. Lisa and Christie are the monitors. MOTION: defJhey moved to approve the changes as presented; second by Heidi. All in favor, motion carried 7-0. Roger, Suzannah, Gilbert, Susan, defJhey, Heidi and Lisa voted yes. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 320 W. MAIN - TREE REMOVAL Amy stated that the Parks Department will not issue a tree removal permit. The tree will only be allowed to be pruned. Roger informed the owner that information on maintenance for Victorian homes is available. Caroline MacDonald, owner stated that they are moving into the Elisha House and making it their home. They are working on the inside first. The paint has been purchased to repaint the house. She would like to see a deciduous tree instead of the spruce tree. They have to rearrange the heat tape four or five times during the winter to get the snow to melt off. It is seeping and leaking into the walls of the bedroom upstairs. It is also a liability issue. She would rather have a deciduous tree in order for the sun to get through and melt off the roof. Amy said she has to agree that she would not want a tree that is causing the building to deteriorate and the house should be visible. Susan agreed with Amy's comments and she said the house is the second most beautiful house in town. Gilbert said there are ways to prune a tree to get the sun through. There are other areas besides the west that have the same deterioration and there maybe ways to solve the problem. Christie also felt that the tree should be removed in order to protect the house. The tree is not that old and it is not that beautiful. The trees are too close to the house. There should be some regulation that pine trees can't be planted within 30 feet of the house. Caroline said she would prefer cottonwoods and her concern is that the spruce might damage the existing two cottonwood trees. Jeffrey brought up the aspect of the Sardy house and the blue spruce in front of it. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 Lisa relayed that there are a lot of technical possibilities to reducing the snow buildup that could be explored. She does not feel the tree is causing enough impact to cutting it down. There was no recommendation made to the Parks Department regarding the tree. 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 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 14, 1998 514 N. THIRD ST. - PUBLIC HEARING, VARIANCES ..................................................................... 1 735 W. BLEEKER - CONCEPTUAL, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, ..................................................... 2 PUBLIC HEARING, VARIANCES ON-SITE RELOCATION ........................................................... 2 112 S. MILL ST. - MINOR .................................................................................................................... 4 920 E. HYMAN AVE. - PARTIAL DEMOLITION ............................................................................. 6 520 WALNUT STREET - AMENDMENT TO FINAL ........................................................................ 8 320 W. MAIN - TREE REMOVAL ....................................................................................................... 9 11