Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19950510HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 332 W. MAIN - IGLEHART ............ 316 E. HOPKINS - CD-FD-PH ........ SHOWCASE PROPERTIES - MINOR DEVELOPMENT 123 W. FRANCIS .......... 939 E. COOPER - WORKSESSION ....... 1 2 5 6 8 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 Meeting was called to order by 1st Vice-chairman Les Holst with Donnelley Erdman, Jake Vickery, Roger Moyer, Linda Smisek, Martha Madsen, Susan Dodington, Melanie Roschko, Sven Alstrom and Jeff McMenimen present. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER COM~ENTS Roger: I am the monitor on Juna Street and the post are totally out of scale with the victorian scale of the building. The window trim and fascia is victorian and quite small. The posts are bigger than four by four and distract from the historic structure. My recommendation would be that we ask that the post be more of a victorian character, possibly reduced in size or made round. The porch was added on. We took the historic windows and removed the glass and routed out the frame and inserted a thermae-pane. In order to hold the window in we used modern adhesives. Between the wood frame and the glass there is a thin metal strip to help hold this together. The windows could be painted and so could the metal strip. Les: Someone called me and said electricians were working on the Marolt property and running huge pieces of black conduit up the front of the building and it looks terrible and they are destroying old fixtures on the inside. Amy: That building is owned by the city. Amy: City Hall material is being recommended as a sandstone veneer as opposed to the colored concrete. IGLEF~%RT Amy: On the Iglehart project we required a $30,000 bond and Jim has appealed to have it lowered because he is a local trying to do a job himself and the $30,000 is a real hardship to him. He is willing to give the city $10,000 in cash. I can support that. Les: Did he say what it costs for a $30,000 bond. Sven: I could approve reducing the bond if it stated that the $10,000 could also be used to reimburse the city attorney if we had to seek litigation. Amy: There is a little problem of consistency. Martha: Every circumstance is different. Donnelley: This is unique in that you have an owner/contractor being the same person and I feel the responsibility is a lot easier to direct. Amy: I assume the house mover has his own insurance. This is the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 owners responsibility to ensure that the work is completed in the manner that was approved by HPC. Les: I wish I had information on what it costs to have a bond. Amy: The applicant cannot get his bldg. permit without the bond. Jake stepped down and Jeff was seated to vote. MOTION: Roger moved to accept the $10,000 cash while we are looking into the city providing the service if people want it; second by Martha. Les: I would like to see the hardship demonstrated. AMENDED MOTION: Roger amended the motion to add the hardship; second by Martha. Ail in favor of motion motion, motion carries. cost of the and amended Donnelley: Les is trying to find out if he researched it well. Jake: My office is trying to do an analysis on how much premium do you pay to try and deal with an historical structure vs being able to build it brand new and it actually turns out to be somewhere between $25. and $50. a square foot for the historical structure. 316 E. HOPKINS - CD-FD-PH Amy: The applicants have presented the revised plan at this meeting. The restaurant that was up on the deck is now below the deck along with a storage area. They have eliminated the canopy that was over top of the bar area. They have altered the railing design somewhat so it is now interspersed clapboards and railing and have shown plantings and hanging lights that they plan on having on top. There is a separate staircase for code. The stage area has been slightly relocated and is now back toward the kitchen. Because they have moved the bathroom down to the first level two of their existing six parking spaces no longer function. They also have to have an area for a trash enclosure. They are requesting a waiver of those two parking spaces. The code requires two spaces for every thousand sqft. of net leasable so they would have no parking for their lot. The other four spaces are not available to them. I had listed three conditions of approval and one of which is a 1/4 drawing of all the elevations. We are missing the west and south L's. The historic house is clapboards with asphalt shingles and the existing new construction is board and batten and the deck is clapboards. I didn't know if it was important to have a discussion about the first level being board 2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 and batten. Chairman Donnelley Erdman opened the public hearing. Paul Levine, owner: At the worksession it was recommended to put a few curves and turns in and it was also mentioned to put in openings in the deck so that people from below could see what was going on. We have made the dividers into planters and we will have plants and flowers coming out of them. We have proposed japanese style paper lanterns or something of that nature. Melanie: Would you explain the placement of the planters. Steve Levitt, owner: They would be on the inside of the balcony. Melanie: They are not shown on the plan view and look like they are of significant size and would need support underneath. Steve: There will be drainage into the common four drains. Donnelley: The bar and food service area will more specific lighting. Steve: It will only be open in the evening. drywell which has probably require Donnelley: We might need to see an architectural plan for lighting. Also will there be a covering for the food service area? Paul: I talked with the Environmental Health Dept. and the sandwich station which is a steel structure has a lid and they said that was sufficient. It will all be very simple and easy care area. Martha: Is the staging area for a band. Steve: We are interested in doing acoustic music and having the music students come and play for lunch etc. Martha: I was concerned about the noise ordinance. Jake: Yes there is one. Paul: We will probably do classical music and there is a decibel meter which can determine the correct level so we do not raise the level. Paul: We have not put a lot of thought about the lighting over the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 food service area but it would probably be similar to a reading lamp or halogen lamp over the station. It would be specific lighting not general lighting over that specific site just for the person who is working over the station. It would be like a bar area with lights underneath to light what is going on. Linda: You are not allowing for a wet summer and the possibility of tenting the area? Steve: We are not allowed and if we tented it, it would be net leasable. Sven: I like the elevations that are presented and it communicates well and my only concern would be the lighting and what the west side would look like. You would need safety lighting on the stairs either in the treads or the sidewalls. Donnelley: That is required by code. Sven: I hope it is done in a low key fashion and not detract from the lanterns. Jake: Regarding Amy's comment about board and batten vs the horizontal clapboard do you have a concern about that? Steve: On the front of the building with the purple asphalt wavy shingles we might be able to do that along the walkway. Jake: At the end of the roof does it turn to board and batten? Amy: Yes and that is where the kitchen is right now. The existing cooler has board and batten around it also. Susan: What is the access to the back for the guests? Steve: It will be two fold. One way out only through the kitchen area and you would come through the restaurant and up the stairs. We could also have security at the back. They are not going around the restaurant. Jeff: Regarding the painting of the additions I would recommend that you paint it so that it is consistent with the existing. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Jake: There is a lot of equipment in the alley and anything that is cared about improves the alley and the applicant has incorporated some of our thoughts. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 Melanie: I have a problem giving up parking spaces in that general area. Les: I have no problem with the materials going from vertical to horizontal and have no problem with the parking. Amy: We will need the other two drawings before a building permit is issued. Jeff: Regarding the planter boxes I would suggest that you go with simple planter boxes and when you talk about trees you are talking about a roof garden and the drainage system is much more complicated and expensive than you think. You are talking about light weight soils and a heavy structure and it will not be worth the costs down the line. MOTION: Roger moved to grant conceptual and final approval for 316 E. Hopkins Lot 0 Block 80 with a waiver of the two parking spaces required for the restaurant and with the following conditions: A) Provide a set of drawings at 1/4 inch scale of all elevations. B) Provide drawings and written information that identifies all building materials and finishes and drainage and planter details preferably boxes and vegetation. C) Before a building permit is issued these conditions will be fulfilled for approval by Staff and Monitor. second by Les. Les: Should we mention painting out all vents? Roger: I said provide all building materials and finishes and that includes vents. VOTE: Ail in favor, motion carries. Monitors are Linda and Jeff and Les. 332 W. MAIN - SHOWCASE PROPERTIES - MINOR DEVELOPMENT Amy: This is one of our landmark structures in the Main Street Historic District and the proposal before you is to construct a handicapped accessible ramp on the west side of the building. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 Originally the proposal was to place the ramp on the front side of the building which I felt was not necessarily for preservation reasons the best solution. I worked with Michael Gassman, architect and the building dept. to locate it on the west side. We have the ramp and it is a one twelve slope that meets the ADA requirements. I recommend that you approve it with the revision that the applicant shows how the ramp connects to the parking area, how someone would access it from the street. Michael Gassman, new drawings so which is grave. architect: The ramp has changed direction in the that it connects to the existing parking surface Donnelley: The ramps seems to comply with all the regulations and its surface is wood. Jake: My feeling is that wood absorbs moisture in the winter and gets slippery and it appears that a portion of the roof drains down on the ramp. Michael: There is a gutter. The wheel chair was invented by Benjamin Franklin in the U.S. so the wheel chair was around at least 100 years plus before the historic resource of Aspen was created. I feel they were a common thing and we were trying to make the building more authentic. MOTION: Les moved to approve the minor development for a wood ramp for 332 W. Main including a gutter; second by Roger. Ail in favor, motion carries. Donnelley: For clarification this motion is to approve the wood ramp and a gutter etc. for keeping the water off the ramp. Jake: I would incorporate something relating to a nonskid surface over the wood. Les: They could work that out with the monitor. 123 W. FRANCIS Greg Pickrell: I am contracting with Jake Vickery on a few projects. Jake: This is a project that I am the developer and it is on the May 24th agenda. This project proposes a code amendment. Martha: That is the Quam house. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 Greg: We propose to take the existing house which is house that is now on two lots and relocate the house. a few out buildings on the site also. a single There are Jake: There is an addition on the south side and that will be removed. Roger: The historic house itself is very small. Sven: It is a miners cottage on two lots. Jake: Technically it is one lot of 10,500 feet and allow you to build on an historic landmark two houses by right. We are proposing to remove part of the historical structure which is the rear and also a piece of the corner. Greg: The proposition is to make two separate lots or condominimumize and relocate the existing house which at present is in the center. The second lot could then be developed. The idea is to create two smaller scale houses which we feel will fit into the neighborhood rather than one miners house with some large appendages. Sven: The hunch back type on a small miners cottage. Greg: We want to keep a scaled down neighborhood. We will keep two sheds and creating parking for the new structure. One of the sheds would be parking for that unit which would enhance the alley. Donnelley: Are you looking for side yard variances? Greg: We want to put ten feet on the the west side. The idea is to get as buildings as possible. east side and five feet on much space between the two Amy: This is a ten thousand sqft. lot and Jake and Company are proposing a lot split and normally you have to have two six thousand sqft. lots and his code amendment would allow a non- conforming size as the receiving parcel for an historic landmark and therefore less FAR would be allocated to the historic landmarks and the large addition to the back of the miners cottage could not occur. I feel this could be a positive thing for our historic landmarks. Jake: The code amendment would allow the ownership of these historical properties to be on smaller lots and individual lots rather than part of a condominium. To do a condominium you need to do a plat and condo decks etc. and if you want something changes HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 you need to ask the other party and to me is not feasible with only two owners. Creating little lots with heavy FAR restrictions was a good idea. I am trying to shove as much development rights over to the big lot. Jake: I am calling the historical house 123 W. Francis and the new house 129 W. Francis. Roger: So there were at one time two houses. Jake: I feel the partial demolition will not hurt the character of the historic house from the street. The first phase would be to move the structure and we may just live in it as is for awhile. The second phase is to determine what the second house would look like. I am trying to leave flexibility for the purchases and once it is landmarked they have to come through HPC as it is part of the historical property so HPC would have review of what would happen. Susan: When you build your little addition why couldn't you keep the historic portion and work with it. Basically take the roof off. Jake: I can look at that. Martha: You are talking about a lot split and selling one half. How does the code amendment read? Jake: The code would permit the construction of two single family residents and such lots can be split provided that the aggregate FAR of the two resulting lots be limited to the allowable duplex FAR of the parent lot. Only landmark properties could be doing this. An example would have been Jo Problem Joe's lot and they could have taken that miners house and put it on a 3,000 sqft. lot by itself and that would make it more accessible for a local to own and the new development could happen independent of it. Thus the integrity of the miners cottage is kept. Donnelley did a straw poll and the entire board approved of the concept. Melanie: I am concerned about what is built on the vacant lot. Jake: I am going to try and draw up plans that are acceptable to HPC and if people want to change that they would have to return to the board. 939 E. COOPER - WORKSESSION HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 Darnell Langley: I am concerned about the final of the stone for the historic house. This was a miners cottage not an expensive house and I took pictures to demonstrate that. I would like to keep it the way it is. Donnelley: Are you talking about building the stone or veneering the stone. Darnell: Veneering. Donnelley: When you veneer with stone it looks non-structural. One of the pictures demonstrates a stone foundation and you can really tell the difference. It is difficult for a mason to make a veneer look like a random stone. Darnell: I am not trying to make it look like a high end victorian. I want the old rustic flair and I feel that is what is achieved with the random pattern vs the cut. Linda: You are right but not in a veneer. appropriate at that time. Veneer was not Sven: She needs to look at a non-veneer foundation. could explore a concrete footing with a stone wall. Maybe you Roger: You could have three feet of stone wall showing or two feet. Donnelley: If you do that you would have to have a smaller mortar joint. Amy: I have a letter on the barn stating that it does not meet the structural loads and relocating it would be dangerous. He is recommending that the entire structure be demolished and that the materials left should be used for architectural purposes only and they are willing to work with an HPC monitor. Les: There is nothing that can't be saved and you need to find someone that knows how to do it. Sven: You could do x bracing inside and move it that way. In your letter it states that the existing structure cannot be lifted and I believe that but ask them about the x-bracing. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MAY 10, 1995 MOTION: Roger moved to adjourn; second by Les. motion carries. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Ail in favor,