Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19950111HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE JANUARy 11, 199', 525 E. COOPER AVENUE STREETSIGNS 610 W. HALLAM RESOLUTION 95-1 - MINOR DEVELOPMENT .... 1 1 3 6 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE JANUARY 11, 1995 Meeting was called to order by vice-chairman Donnelley Erdman with Les Holst, Jake Vickery, Roger Moyer, Martha Madsen and Tom Williams present. Excused were Joe Krabacher and Linda Smisek. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Amy: Asia constructed a bridge between the buildings and we are making them tear it out. They also got a change order through the Bldg. Dept. without going through HPC to move the handicapped access ramp. Appearance wise it is less obvious but I am not sure it is as good an access as proposed previously. Donnelley: Ail mechanical equipment should be required to be painted to match the background. Jake: There is some responsibility of the owners with regard to the alley and adjacent property owners. Amy: There have been complaints. Martha and I can review the railing. MOTION: Roger made Nov. 23th, and Dec. carries. the motion to approve 14, 1994; second by Tom. the minutes Nov. 9th, Ail in favor, motion 525 E. COOPER AVENUE - MINOR DEVELOPMENT Amy: This is the Aspen Grove building and there are a number of awnings already on the building. It will be a new awning on the side where the doorway is and will match existing in color dimension, material and all aspects. I recommended approval as submitted and I had asked the applicant to provide a sample of the lettering. Susan Drazan, manager: It will go around the corner and be similar in design. Les: Is there a slope on the awning. Susan Drazan: It slopes down a little due to the doorway. MOTION: Roger made the motion that HPC grant approval of minor development at 525 E. Cooper as submitted; second by Tom. Ail in favor, motion carries. STREETSIGNS Amy: The CCLC deals with the malls and has expanded to do some additional projects and the streetsigns have been approved by Council. They are also working on delivery times during the day. A graphic artist did the design and they need your input. With the street signs we might want something a little detailed. We need HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE JANUARY 11, 199', comments from the HPC to take back to CCLC. Martha: I like the sample that is in front of the Brand Bldg. a very plain sign and it is not overstated or understated. Donnelley: The poles will be the existing street light poles. Les: If they have to install more poles please indicate that they are too close to the curb and should be moved back. Jake: I feel we need a sample of the lettering and color. Donnelley: The sign is busier than the graphics. We need to reflect back on Aspen's history. I personally feel anything the city does now should be of its time. Amy: This is an historic district because of its victorian roots and we could emphasize that. Kathy: The color and reflective lettering would correspond. Tom: If it were designed in a contemporary way the aspen leaf would work. Les: I feel somewhere in the design it has to adapt for the tourist and I do not mind some of the victorian. Tom: I agree somewhat but feel this particular design is too complicated. Donnelley: What if the horizontal members framing the sign looked as if it had some relationship to the pole. The pole is fluted. Possibly a concave groove and a ball finial on the end. It would then identify with the street furniture that exists. Roger: Possibly incorporate the aspen leaf in a bracket form. Donnelley: Doing something simple but captures the nature of the pole that it is on. Roger: I feel it is ok to go with some victorian flavor. I feel it doesn't have to be a clean graphic design. Donnelley: He doesn't state how the horizontal bars, top and bottom are treated. Roger: pole. Amy: I feel the horizontal bars should be the same flavor as the Maybe some of the design on the pole could be incorporated. Maybe we could ask for a few more drawings. We all agree HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE JA/qUARY 11, 199', this is a little too ornate. 610 W. HALLAM Keith Howie Poss & Assoc.: The FAR has increased by 10 sqft. In terms of materials the only change that we have had is shingles and some fenestration. The court yard, roof and horizontal siding is still the same. The window system is a clad system. We feel this will minimumize the maintenance on it but still lends itself to an historic precedence. The concerns from before were the front entrance and making it deeper for historic reasons. We have looked at that and we have tried to make it deeper and push it back. There is a four foot depression as you come in so you will get a shadow line and will see the entrance when you come in and will still give the homeowner a closet as you come in the front door. The only other concern was the size of the chimney and in our drawings we attempted to reduce the size. Amy: I recommended approving it and we do need to set a value for the bond and the applicants need to submit the structural engineers report and the bond and a relocation plan as to where you are going to put the house. A site plan as to how it will be stored. All that needs to be in at the time or before you submit a building permit. I have one question about the windows on the house. The existing windows have all been replaced and is that true of the front picture window in the bay. Jim Iglehart, owner: It has been replaced. Donnelley: There are four development review standards which seem to have been met or can be met. #4 was original materials much be preserved. Roger: Does the historical house sit on a stone foundation or is it on the ground and what amount are you budgeting on the bond. Keith Howie: There is stone and we intend to reuse it. Jim Iglehart: The insurance company says $10,000. Jake: How many square feet is it. Keith Howie: A little less than 1000 sqft. Amy: The bond is supposed to be what it costs to replace the building and also you can't replace the building if it were lost. No Problem Joe's bond was set at $40,000 and is about a similar size. ~ISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Donnelley: I would suggest $30,000. Les: I would suggest $50. a square Donnelley: This project is very clarifications. foot. well defined JANUARY 11 1995 so I need no Jake: I had a question on the differentiation from old and new. Keith Howie: We have kept the front piece the same as it is and have changed the gable to what was originally there. We will open the porch up. We have raised the roof up two feet and we felt that we had to do that so that we could make the other roofs smaller and less obvious. We wanted the original house to stand out. Jake: In terms of the neighborhood study this is probably one of the best designs. Final is focused on details and material that differentiate the old and new. When you walk up to the house it should be distinct and you could readily tell the difference between the old and new. It looks to be that a lot of the siding is consistent and you can't tell between the old and new. Donnelley: Since you are using clapboard one way to distinguish old and new is differentiating the amount of siding exposed to weather. Change that cadence. There is a differentiation in the window treatment that is pronounced in your elevations. Amy: I would not want to see a big assortment of materials here. It is essentially obvious enough. Donnelley: The horizontal clapboard siding of years ago is of a different dimension than what we have today. Jim Iglehart: The fish scale shingles in the peak of the roof were existing when I bought the house so I assume they were original. Amy: The bay window is original except for the glass. In terms of repair or replace we are only taking about fish scale shingles and a decorative window. There are no old clapboards left. Les: Are the clad windows vinyl or metal? Keith Howie: Pella vinyl clad and we will choose a color for them once the color scheme of the house is decided. Jim Iglehart: There is a significant amount of work to be done on the house and the only thing left will be the front portion of the siding. I put the siding on in 1983. Roger: My thought was re-trim and reside the historical portion 4 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CO~ITTEE JANUARY 11 1995 the small part with a narrower trim and less spacing in the siding would have possibly been used historically to show the differentiation. Would that be a hardship to the project if that were done. Jim Iglehart: I feel it is in the eyes of the beholder and I would hope coming from this meeting that I things. I would like to see integrity do not get a mish-mash of and on the corner boards it was replaced in 1980 and the dimension are similar to what I will use. Donnelley: There is a variety of ways to trim windows and I wonder if adding more variety will matter. Martha: What about the treatment of the areas below ground. Keith: It steps down. Amy: On the foundation as it exists right now you can see it above grade and are you using a stone base. Keith: The site slopes away as it goes back and a lot of victorian houses the trim board will come over and lap to the stone. We will have a banding board and stone behind that. Amy: Will the clapboard come down over the foundation or are you going to show three feet or whatever the dimension will be. Keith: The stone will be the foundation. Bill Poss: On 131 E. Hallam we carried the clapboard down and we went by and looked at it and it somewhat throws off the proportion and made it longer and thinner and narrower and on this one the team decided to leave the proportions accurate on the foundation so that when someone walk by you will see that it has been lifted up. Keith: From a maintenance standpoint we also wanted something a little more durable than siding. Jake: On the W L the little windows look like a brick casing. Keith: There is no banding board around the little windows but between the door and window their is a banding board. Jake: That is one way to differentiate by the use of window trim. MOTION: Ro~er made the motion that the HPC approve the final developmen~ for 610 W. Hallam as submitted with the condition that the applicant submit a structural engineers report, bond of $30,000 5 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE JANUARY 11, 199', and a relocation plan as required at conceptual approval before submitting for a building permit; second by Tom. Les: I feel the monitor should see the brick chimney. Howie: We have an engineer that will look at the project and evaluate it and work with the movers. Donnelley: Would you like the motion to be amended that the size of brick or any replacement be consistent with the original and also the mortar comply with federal guidelines. AMENDED MOTION: That the chimney be approved by Staff and Monitor to most property fit the historic structure. Also as a note all variances were approved at conceptual; second by Tom. All in favor of motion and amended motion, motion carries. RESOLUTION 95-1 Amy: I did not include in the motion that you had tabled the Colorado midland right-of-way, 325 Second Street and the Meadows. MOTION: Roger made the motion to approve the resolution as submitted 95-1 and noting that three items have been tabled until further discussion and those three items are: Colorado Midland Right-of-way; The Aspen Meadows; and 325 Second Street; second by Tom. All in favor, motion carries. Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. MOTION: Donnelley made the motion to adjourn; second by Tom. in favor, motion carries. All Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk