Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19940126ainutes of ~&nu&~ 26, 2994 312 $. GALENA - PLANET HOLLYWOOD - AWNINGS PAWNEE AND LUCY DESQUE - 523 W. FRANCIS · 220 W. MAIN - EUROPEAN FLOWER MARKET - CD 107 JUAN STREET - WORKSESSION 205 S. MILL STREET - FINAL DEVELOPMENT 520 E. DURANT - AJAX MOUNTAIN BUILDING - AWNINGS 1994 GOALS HPC 1 1 5 7 10 11 13 HXBTORIC PRESERVATXON CO~O(~TTEE Minutes of ~&nu&z~' 26, 1994 Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Joe Krabacher, Jake Vickery, Roger Moyer, Martha Madsen and Linda Smisek present. Excused were Donnelley Erdman, Les Holst and Karen Day. MOTION: Roger made the motion to approve the minutes of Dec. 8, 1993; second by Martha. All in favor, motion carries. COHMZSBZONER ~ 8TI%FF COH~ENT8 Amy: We will be receiving $1,000 from the Stromberg income tax credit and that money needs to be used in any way for preservation. Joe: Possibly used for the Historic Trust. Amy: Les suggested that the funds be used for furniture. the Pioneer Park Joe: I would like to listen to the tapes from the character guidelines. Roger: When I was at Planet Hollywood the air came right through which reminds me we need to do the guidelines on painting and maintenance. We need to work on those guidelines so that in the future we don't loose the historic integrity. Rod Dyer, architect for Planet Hollywood: Some of the problems in the back of the building are the problems of the kitchen which draws the air out. Amy: In next years grant I have requested funding for maintenance guidelines. 3~2 8. GALENA - PT.~,NET NOLL~Zt;OOD - AtrNZNG8 Rod Dyer: The lights at the entrance were the lights prior to Planet Hollywood. They were taken down and cleaned and the globes will be placed back on. I am requesting the approval of the awnings from pink to green. The pink are a maintenance problem. MOTION: Roger made the motion to approve the request of Planet Hollywood to change the awnings from pink to green with pink lettering; second by Martha. All in favor, motion carries. The green is the color that was originally presented, a kelly green. Roger: Ebbe put those lights up prior to Planet Hollywood. Historic Preservation Committee l~inutes of Janu&ry 26, 1994 P~WNEB liND LUCY DESQUE - 523 W. FRANCIS Jake stepped down. Pany, son of owner: My mother purchased the house a year ago and we live in Denver. It is a supporting historic structure which I believe is the lowest on the scale. It was built in 1893. We are attempting to add a garage to the house and one additional bedroom. The problem is the site coverage is over about 40% by 100 to 250 square feet at the most. Different people have calculated different amounts. If we were unable to do this we would be forced to add a garage and eliminate one of the two existing bedrooms. If one of the two is eliminated then there is the need to add two bedrooms and in doing so one of them would be up toward the house which is the more historic portion of the house and we believe that would not be as compatible as getting a variance for 100 square feet putting in a garage an a one bedroom above the garage. We would like feedback and a memo of support that might help us obtain a variance which would protect the integrity of the house. It is real important to add the garage as my mother.wants to bring her mother out here and she cannot walk very well and is in a wheel chair and without the garage it would be very difficult to get her in and out of the house. This house was the Dayton house and Dave Stapleton was born there. Bill: It is a three bedroom, two bath on a smaller lot of 6,000 square feet is hard to get the smaller victorians to meet the sight coverage if you add on. They would go over approximately 250 square feet which is a one car garage with a one bedroom above bringing it up to a four bedroom house with a one car garage. So that puts it over the site coverage. Pany: In the back there has been several renovations over time and most of these are of a later date and we would like to put the garage and bedroom in the back of the property which is better historically. Amy: They have two options: Either go to the Board of Adjustments and ask for a site coverage variance and that is the end of their problem. Or they can pursue historic landmark designation and if they get that they can build this garage and put an ADU above it which can serve as their other bedroom and we can give them the site coverage variance. We can give site coverage variances only if it is a landmark and it is not right now. It would have to be an ADU. Bill: Because the house is so small they do not want the ADU as they need the fourth bedroom. Historic Preservation Co,~ittee Minutes of January 25, 1994 Pany: We never wanted to do the ADU. There is a lot of FAR left on this property. Amy: As the program stands right now they would not have to rent it and technically it could serve as their other bedroom as long as there was an outside entrance. It would still serve their purposes. I am concerned about the Board of Adjustment approving this and they look for hardship and maybe they do not consider an additional bedroom a hardship. They may be coming back to us for landmark. Joe: So I understand our roles with historic landmarks we can vary side and rear yard setback requirements. Because the ADU creates the need for a site coverage variation is that something we grant or P&Z grants when they approve the ADU? Amy: It is part of the cottage infill program. HPC can give a site coverage variance of 5% because of affordable housing. Because the unit is above the garage it is considered affordable housing. I do not feel the BOA will be their way out. If it got past historic landmark would we be in favor of giving them the site coverage variance to do their unit. Jake: As a general comment people buy these older houses of 1200 square feet and try to do additions. It has an historic facade to the street. Bill: Their first option is to create the addition to the back and they want to keep the front as is and then go to BOA and this keeps the options open. They meet the side yard setback already. They would like to keep the option open of not having to build the ADU because they can build out to the maximum FAR. Jake: Even at the coverage they are at, they are still 1,000 from maximum. Joe: Is the HPC preliminary in favor of granting a site coverage variance if they are landmarked. Pany: Our first option would be to go to BOA and if that doesn't work then go to landmark. If that doesn't work then demolish it and start something new. Bill: The hardship would be that with regards to the historic structure that is on the inventory it would be more compatible to add onto the back which would create the need for the site coverage variance and it is a hardship that they have an historic structure. We don't want them to add on that it imposes the nature of the Historio Preservation Co~l~ittee ~inutes of ~anua~ 26~ ~994 smaller structure. That is where the HPC comes in and gives support that it is a hardship that it is an historic structure and the HPC would prefer to see the addition onto the back and that creates the site coverage problem. HPC is in support of seeing the addition to the back as to opposing onto the historic structure. Joe: My feeling is I would be in favor of what you are proposing if the property was landmarked. That is the idea of HPC. Amy: They are already doing an addition and we didn't get to review it because they were on the inventory. Bill: I don't think it would be onerous to them to go for landmark status. They just don't want to go through the ADU. Roger: They mentioned tearing down the house but they cannot. They can remove the non-historic elements. Amy: Portions could be torn down but not without an approval. I am willing to work with them so that they don't have to have an ADU and I would much prefer to see the small addition on the back rather than removing portions of the existing structure. Jake: There are two huge pine trees on the site. Roger: In my option it does not have to be a landmark. It would be great if they did so. Bill: They could be landmarked and we would approve the addition upward and would not have to do the ADU. Martha: I am in favor of a recommendation of a memo to BOA. Amy: In general the Planning Dept. is not in favor of just giving away a site coverage variance. Joe: We should be consistent with the code and that would include designation. Roger: The Planning Dept. is not in favor because they want to see the parcel landmarked. We need to remain consistent. Pany: If we are landmarked your committee only has the ability to grant a variance for an ADU. Amy: In general the committee supports the concept and we will do the memo to Board of adjustment. Historic Preservation Committee Hinutes of Janu&ry 26, 1994 MOTION: Bill made the motion to direct Staff to do a memo in support of the addition to the back of the house; second by Martha. Ail in favor, motion carries. 220 W. M~IN - EUROPEAN FLOWER M~RKET - CD Glenn Rappaport, architect: Jake brought up the issue of snow shedding on the side yard and I thought it might be better working with a flat roof. Other concerns were to make it a little more friendly to the streets and the owner of the flower market needs as much glass as possible even though it is not a typical green house. They wanted to have the glass to the front. The upstairs looks like residential and commercial. On the front facade the lintel will have a long flower box above it which makes it more friendly and will soften it up. Bill: Glenn: same. Are you proposing masonry? At present yes and on the side the intent is to keep it the Roger: The east and west wall are existing with new openings on the first floor and you are adding a second floor. Amy: I like the new facade even though it is more commercial rather than residential but I am not sure that is inappropriate. Glenn has really responded to the pedestrian enhancement. Glenn: I doubt if the building next door will ever do any improvements as they are maxed out on their FAR. Amy: What is the opinion on the brick facade as opposed to clapboard. GLenn: Maybe this massing would work in wood. This building is fighting for its identity and the brick solidifies it. Linda: I am having trouble with the size of the four windows up above as they seem to be as big as the door entryway. Glen: They are big but they have two functions: 1) They need as much light in the green house area. The other function is that it allows the offices above to have windows that over look the green house. The building is on Main Street and there is a lot of noise and dust. If the windows are large it will feel like they are outside. I like the idea in this project of the mixed uses and when you go upstairs you can smell the aroma of the green house. H~sto~c Prese~v&2~on Comm~22ee N~nutes of ~&nu~L~' 26~ L994 Jake: I feel this is interesting compatible. The oversize windows add a playful aspect. Joe: We always struggle with the infill projects and I like this. Main Street is very eclectic and we do have a number of flat top buildings on Main Street. I would like to see if it could be treated with wood. With respect to the cornice I do not know if there are a lot of statements like that around town, possibly look at that. As far as carrying the first floor treatment all the way across I am not sure that is appropriate. The three quarter design looks good to me. I don't see a problem with the windows and all in all I like the treatments Glenn has proposed. Roger: This is an interesting/compatible structure. The large windows are fun and playful and sometimes that is what we strive to help people do. I would highly favor the brick for two reasons: 1) When Aspen was first built there were a lot of wooden structures and as Aspen prospered they were torn down or burnt down and more solid brick structures were built that form the core of the landmark part of town. Main Street was dilapidated and fell apart and when the ski lodges were built they were cheaply built and I never felt that they were permanent. I would like to see this as a trend on Main Street with infill that shows Main Street as a more permanent nature. Martha: I like most of the that section of Main Street. presented. ideas and that it is different along I like the lower floor broken up as Bill: I feel this is a good approach, a square shape and leave the architect to pick the materials. I personally feel masonry is out of character for Main Street and is more prone to the core area. Glenn: I can look at the facade in brick and wood. Jake: I agree with Bill that the brick is more associated with the core but I am not saying it wouldn't work. Joe: On the south elevation the first floor cornice comes across three quarters of the way and on the west elevation you show it wrapping around. For clarification does it wrap around? Glenn: The drawings are inconsistent and it does wrap around. Bill: Chairman opened the public hearing, no comments from the public. Chairman closed the public hearing. R~storlo Preservation Co~mittss Minutes of January 26, 1994 MOTION: Joe made the motion that HPC approve the conceptual approval of 220 W. Main Street subject to the following conditions; that there be a restudy of the materials used for the facade; second by Jake. AMENDED MOTIONs Joe amended the motion that the HPC urge P&Z to grant the special review approval in light of the contribution that the property makes to the historic district. Also more importantly is that they are putting in a 690 square foot employee housing unit; second by Jake. Ail in favor or motion and amended motion. Glenn: We are going to P&Z and will request the .75 to i increase. If the HPC can support that I would appreciate it. I hear that the Board likes the building etc. and you would like to see it draw up in wood also. 107 JUAN STREET - WORKBE88ION Dave Tollin, Housing Authority representative: The idea is to maintain the historic house but moving it on the site toward the property line basically keeping it in the same configuration. We will be constructing five new deed restricted affordable housing units, basically single family homes and duplexes. We will be rehabilitating the existing structure and using it as an ADU unit. We have retained the firm Gibson & Reno and Colorado Construction and it is at the design level. Amy: My biggest concern was the height of the buildings especially the one in front. It needs to be brought down and aligned with the historic house at the street level. Dave: Regarding the existing miners house we have the option of doing a three bedroom unit by adding a loft space at the rear. That is attractive to keep it a family oriented site but is not something that makes or breaks the project. There is not a basement proposed. Amy: I am not in support of the loft on the miners cottage. It has a big impact on the character of the house. Jake: What is the intention for all the site walls dividing up the property? Dave: Those are fences as opposed to walls. We want to keep the feeling as open as possible. We have discussed incorporating them into the landuse approval but not actually constructing them and leaving them at the option of the homeowners. The idea is to create a space for a pet or area for a child to play. Historic Prese~v&tion Committee ~inutes of ~&nu&~ 26, i994 Joe: Why is the foundation of the historic house so much lower than the townhouse. Dave: In order to get the required parking we have to basically do subterranean parking and that is done with twelve spaces two per unit which brings the foundations up. As it is we have cut into the back of the hill between six and eight feet with a retaining wall in an effort to maintain some type of usable yard space. We have tried to keep the units as low as we could as well as keep the parking. Alan Richman: All of the units meet the 25 foot height limitation of the AH zone district. Joe: Was there an analysis as to why or why not do a basement underneath the historic house? Dave: We have not done anything yet and the site space is so tight that we didn't think it was real usable space in terms of bedrooms. We could go a little higher. Joe: You have a choice to either bring the other buildings down or the historic house up. Jake: I also like that decision as an option to putting on the addition on the back. If you raise the historical building and put a couple bedrooms underneath the historical building they could orient and put the windows toward the street. I think a walkout basement could work. Amy: You are changing the character of the building when you are putting a doorway in. I would have to see that. Jake: This project was discussed with Nore Winter and used as an example for our new guidelines. Roger: If the historic house is left as is where is the laundry and heating? Dave: We have not gotten to that level yet. Roger: Suppose you had a partial basement for the laundry and heating system, would there be enough space on the rear of the house to have a small connecting breezeway and behind that another tower configuration that would work with what you have on the new structure to put another bedroom and bath in. Dave: I took a guess that you wanted to keep things below the H~etor~c Preee~v&~on Committee M~nutee of ~anu&r~ 26, ~994 ridge line and possibly something different would work. Roger: You could have a connector between the new and structure. historic Dave: I can look at that and we would have to see if we have the space. Roger: Regarding the corner unit next to the historic structure could you reduce that immense wall and possibly lower the tower and get rid of the cumbersome stairway in the front. That is very visual. It needs softened. Also the garage door could be a single rather than double to lessen the impact. Linda: How do you access the parking spaces? Dave: Basically it is a double loaded with six spaces and you go through a double wide driveway with twelve spaces around the edges and storage and an enclosed trash area. I never thought that we might not need the double driveway. Jake: I will summarize our meeting with Nore Winter: What works is that it is broken down and not one big building. The units are residential in scale and the roof slopes down. You have the tall vertical windows. The stepdownhonors the historical house. The use of porches and lower single scales was appreciated. One thing that was discussed was an inverted plan where the living level on the back units would be elevated so that on the back side, south side you would be exiting at grade instead of down in a big hole. The'inverted plan is an interesting concept. The way the bays face each other is awkward. Possibly the towers could be glazed and put the stairs in back against the hill on the rear. That way you are working with the grade a little better. Covered walkways and things like that are good because it is dark. The relationship of the project to the street is important. Joe: From an historic perspective the elements that I would like to see restudied would be the tower element on the front townhouse unit, the stairway coming up to that unit and the treatment. Dave: We thought of using a brick facing on the stair that stepped out a little to help break it up. Joe: That will help and the tower element is so tall. I agree with Amy's comment about having the walkout on one side that the historic building becomes something different and I am not sure that is appropriate. I feel the historic house should be raised a little. I would like to see this as a pure preservation project and not do the shed addition on the back of the historic house. Historic Preservation Conlttse Ninutes of Janu&r~ 26, 1994 I am not sure what the connector idea would look like. Alan Richman: We also have a parking lot on one side. Roger: The overall concept of a village type feeling is good. I feel the fences should be softened possibly with vegetation. Regarding the historic structure everyone is opposed to adding to it and keep it as is. David: My gut feeling i to make this a two bedroom unit. Roger: The concept of the porches is great and the idea of inverted interior was interested. The massing on the corner front unit needs lowered. Martha: I like the stepping down area by the historical building. I agree with most of the co~ments and feel the single car entrance would be less intrusive visually. Linda: My only comment is the unit on the left, it is over powering, too high and the entire things needs brought down. Possibly the garage could go down and in. Bill: I would much rather see an historic restoration of the historic building rather than adding on. I don't have a problem with the height to the buildings on the rear of the project because they seem to step up the hill and the model is quite successful in showing that. I find the bays on the east side to be somewhat foreign to the shapes that you are using. You were quite successful in keeping the shapes primitive and if you use a simple shed that extended across the whole building it would give you a more horizontal line and break down the scale. You would also gain some covered porches. Amy: If you redo study the height I think the roofs should be a little more steeper and possibly some of the massing incorporated into that so that we don't end up with taller structures yet. Bill: I also feel a steeper shape would be more compatible with the town. If you had to work with the height line you could break the roof on the back and come down. Historically buildings had 12 x 12 pitches. Dave: The roofs now are 8 by 12. Bill: Sometimes with the wider shapes you can get something in the middle that can allow you to steepen it and shallow the back. Dave: We have the ability to ask for an additional five feet but "--' H~stor~c Preservation Committee ~,,_, ~nukes o£ ~&nuary 26~ ~994 we have not done that due to concerns of the neighbors. ~05 ~. ~ILL STREET - FINAL DEVELOPMENT Larry Yaw, architect: The changes from conceptual were opening the area up and creating a cross block circulation so that you can enter the internal courtyard from two different areas. The other change is creating more verticality and we have carried the idea of the chanford corner across. The slate above was brought down to tie the two together. Amy: This is a good project and it is important along that street as there is not enough vitality there. I thought maybe the way the stairs were chopped off that maybe they should be cut back on an angle. Larry Yaw: With response to the awnings we think they will be the same and tie into the others. Maybe we need to use a different color. We can use the existing stairs and with the opening it is much better. Jake: What about the revisions of the windows. Larry: The glass in the windows will line up with the glass in the rest of the building and there will be no exterior lighting. Amy: We approved an awning for Chanin's and it was the same color of green so I would suggest using the same color. MOTION: Joe made the motion to approve the final development application for 205 S. Mill Street finding that it meets the applicable development review standards; second by Roger. Ail in favor, motion carries. 520 E. DURANT - AJAX MOUNTAIN BUILDING - AWNINGS Amy: We have had a problem with illegal signage on this building and I am trying to get them into compliance. Pizza Hut, Ross Andrews and Ajax Ski Shop. We need to decide if it is appropriate to have all of the awnings blue and gold when the HPC approved the Polo shop. Pizza Hut does not fit that. Ross Andrews has writing on the face of the awning and Ajax Ski awning needs to come into compliance with the sign code. I feel because the HPC said the awnings should be consistent years ago, we should keep to that. The problem is that all of these people put awnings up. Roger: Why did they put the awnings up illegally? Amy: Ross Andrews did his because it was getting near the Hietoric Preservation Committee Minutes of Januar~ 26, 1994 christmas season and the rest I believe the owner of the building did not make it clear to them. Amy: Pizza hut is blue with white lettering. Peaches is blue with silver lettering and no ones awning was approved except the Polo shop. Roger: They should all conform to the Polo size, shape and lettering. Ross Andrews: The landlords position told us we didn't need city approval. When I talked to the city I found out differently. Specifically with my awning the lettering conforms to the signage rules and mine is the only awning with lettering. My awning is different from the others because its placement is close to a sidewalk and if I were to put it on the valance it would be a foot lower so visually on the valance you could not see it. That is one reason I ask that you let me keep it on the top and the name will not fit on the valance unless it is tiny letters. For me it is an issue of having a sign or not. I also replaced that old plastic awning and wooden sign that was Mama Mafias that was not in conformance. Roger: Are there any other entrances like yours? Ross: No there are none others that are exactly the same. There is a T-shirt shop on the other corner but there are no stairs that come down to it. Roger: You are the only one on a diagonal corner. Ross: Also I have no other lettering in the window to clutter it up. Roger: You are saying you are so close to the sidewalk that you couldn't see it. Ross: I talked with Bill Drueding the other day and my sign is conforming and I just need approval of the lettering on top by the HPC. Bill: We don't have a problem with Ross's but we need to be consistent. Joe: Ross has a unique situation allowed on that part of the awning. to apply for this stipulation. and the lettering should be I would not want everyone to Roger: Ail awnings should conform to the color, size and lettering Historic Preservation C~mm~ttee Ninutes o£ ~anu&ry 26~ ~994 as originally approved on the Polo Shop. Ross Andrews awning because of it distinct difference is allowed as is and all other awnings should have their printing on the valance or facia. MOTION= Joe made the motion that HPC approve the awnings on the Ajax Mountain Bldg. with the following conditions: 1) consistent in color, awning and lettering with what was approved at the Polo Shop. 2) Lettering appear on the valance with the exception of the Ross Andrews shop. 3) That the logos comply with the sign code regulations. Any existing awnings not in compliance should be replaced; second by Linda. Ail in favor, motion carries. 1994 ~OALS HPC Amy: We have taken care of the AACP goals and one important thing next year is how we deal with demolition. We have the support of the City Attorney that we will review partial demolition and full demolition. We need to decide what we will defend and how we will address people coming in who want to tear down part of the non- historic building in order for us to review partial demolition. Bill: I feel it depends on the magnitude of the demolition because what gets rebuilt can affect the historic portions. Roger: So we are really looking at mass and scale. Joe: I feel if they are proposing any demolition of the historic portion it would not be considered minor. Amy: Some other goals are the maintenance guides, neighborhood character guidelines. Other issues are bonuses that we can give like the FAR bonus. Does that bonus have to be 500 square feet and could not it be 200 or some other figure that is compatible. Joe: I don't think we have granted that on any projects since I have been on the Board. Amy: Also in the past we have not wanted to deny anyone their due FAR and felt that it was not our role. I just wonder in some cases we should be taking a stand on the character issue and I use the stapleton project as my example. They were allowed to do what they had the right to do. There could have been plenty of arguments that it was not in the character of Main Street. Roger: There were two issues there: What od you want to happen on all of Main Street and you need a goal or plan for all of Main Street. That philosophy was not around and still isn't around when stapleton came up. 13 H~stor~c Prsserv&t~on Co~ttee Ninutss of ~&nuaz~ ~6~ :1994 Amy: Your goals always go to City Council. Joe: Back to the FAR issue, I feel we should be offering that more than we have. Bill: A code amendment we need to look at would be a sight coverage variances up to 300 or 500 square feet if we find that it saves a structure and you get your landmark designation. Joe: Another one, I feel HPC should have the power to grant height variances and front yard setback variances. You find a number of people not wanting to put porches on. Bill: Even if it is five more feet. Joe: You will never see buildings like the Wheeler Stallard house due to the height problems. I push incentives but there are not a lot of them. Amy: Possibly we can do an educational session with contractors etc. on procedures for restorations. HOTION~ Joe made the motion to adjourn; favor, motion carries. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. second by Roger. A1 in Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk