The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19940209I V.'' 41 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE February 9, 1994 REGULAR MEETING 3 13 / 'e-- 6-, -7~. / SECOND FLOOR MEETING ROOM CITY HALL 5:00 I. Roll Call and approval of Dec.3, 1993 and January 12th minutes. II. Committee and Staff Comments 5:10 A. HPC recommendation on code amendment requested by Harry Teague, Architects B. Stained glass windows on St. Mary's church 1(9 'Ar - 0 0 râ€¢ 0 ki r 0 30 4 t- /-)Â£) i/),O 4 5 \ (%:26Â£.t (jz,4-,Lot III. ~Alblic Comments g \ 131-Â£Â¢-- f)~7'~7 tu_t.Lk Â· IV.~ OLD BUSINESS -h. r A. None Vit NEW BUSINESS 5:25 A. 300 W. Main Street, McDonald- Minor development GÂ»u 8.4/c_ 5:45 B. City Hall- Worksession- 6:15 1 c. 706 W. Main Street, Krabacher- Worksession - 6.. 6:45 VI. A. Project Monitoring B. Neighborhood Character Guidelines- ongoing C. Red Brick update- ongoing D. Amendment to Guidelines (rooftop equipment) E. Demolition policy F. Upcoming Meetings 6:55 VII. Election of new chair and vice-chair 7:10 VIII.Adjourn Â£ 1 f HPC PROJECT MONITORING HPC Member Name Proiect/Committee Add Conceptual date to all projects when approved Bill Poss CCLC & PPRG 413 E. Hyman County Courthouse Highway Entrance Design Committee Character Committee-AACP 601 W. Hallam (app. liaison) HP Element-Community Plan Aspen Historic Trust-Board Member 214 W. Bleeker St. Mary's Church 533 E. Main Donnelley Erdman The Meadows (Chair-Sub Comm) 442 W. Bleeker (Pioneer Park) Collins Block/Alley Wheeler-Stallard House 624 E. Hopkins 304 E. Hopkins 234 W. Francis Leslie Holst Holden/Marolt Museum (alt.) In-Town School Sites Committee Aspen Historic Trust-Chairman 824 E. Cooper 210 S. Mill 303 E. .Main Alt 312 S. Galena - MD (Planet Hollywood) City Shop - 1080 Power Plant Road Joe Krabacher 801 E. Hyman AHS Ski Museum Aspen Historic Trust-Vice Chairman 612 W. Main 309 E. Hopkins (Lily Reid) 617 W. Main 312 S. Galena - MD (Planet Hollywood) Jake Vickery The Meadows (alternate) In-Town School Sites Committee 205 S. Mill Larry Yaw 716 W. Francis 442 W. Bleeker (Pioneer-alt.) 204 S. Galena (Sportstalker) City Hall 627 W. Main (residential-Jim Kempner) 232 E. Hallam ACES City Shop 1080 Power Plant Road 2 Alr.'V S 13 Roger Moyer CCLC Liaison 334 W. Hallam Aspen Historical Society 409 E. Hopkins 303 E. Main 311 W. North Farfalla lights outside 210 Lake Avenue (alternate) Karen Day Rubey Transit Center 334 W. Hallam (alternate) Cottage Infill Program 134 E. Bleeker 435 W. Main Swiss Chalet 311 W. North 304 E. Hopkins 121 S. Galena Martha Madsen 620 W. Hallam (alternate) 100 Park Ave. (alternate) 214 W. Bleeker (alternate) 132 W. Main 520 E. Cooper Unit 406 Linda Smisek 134 E. Bleeker 210 Lake Avenue 305 Mill St. 702 W. Main - Stape - Conceptual Development approved Sept 8, 1993 TE CO MEMORANDUM TO: Diane Moore Leslie Lamont FROM: Jim Curtis Kraut Consulting Team Joede Schoeberlin Harry Teague Architects DATE: January 19, 1994 RE: Requested Municipal Code Amendment To facilitate a better architectural design for the Kraut project, we would like to request a Municipal Code Amendment to Section 3-101(A)(2) of the Code. This section allows Architectural Projections to extend 12" into the yard setback. We request this be amended to permit an 18" projection consistent with the 18" projection permitted for building eaves under Section 3-101(A)(1). We feel this amendment is basically a clean-up and clarification of the Code and does not change any policies of the Code. We feel this amendment would benefit all projects for the following reasons: 1. Currently in the Code, there is no definition of what is a building eave and what is an architectural projection. At least in the Kraut example, we feel they are one and the same. The Kraut's architectural eave provides snow and dripline protection to the windows. Having both projections extend 18" would eliminate any definition debates. 2. Allowing slightly more flexibility (6") in architectural projections is felt to be consistent with the "Neighborhood Character Guidelines" of the HPC and the "Design Quality and Historic Preservation Action Plan" of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Both plans encourage buildings with a pedestrian friendly scale. Again, with the Kraut example, the architectural eave is intended to break i the scale of the building and make it more pedestrian friendly to the street. 3. The 18" projection into the setback is significantly less than other setback projections currently permitted by the Code. Balconies may project into the ' setback 4 feet. Regarding Kraut, the obvious question is why not simply move the buildings back 6". We've looked at doing this, but because of some of the key building dimensions, and the dimensions between the buildings and the parking structure, simply moving the buildings back 6" is not an easy task. More importantly, we feel the Code amendment is beneficial to all projects for the reasons stated. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Please feel free to call on any questions. 2 I.J MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 300 W. Main Street, McDonald- Minor Development DATE: February 9, 1994 SUMMARY: Due to the particular location of this house, the owners would like to construct a fence which would block out some of the pollution and dust from Main Street. The fence that the McDonald's are requesting is four feet high and made of wood and will sit on top of an existing retaining wall. An encroachment license must be issued by the City. All four structures on this block of Main Street, including the log cabin, are Aspen Landmarks. APPLICANT: Scott and Caroline McDonald, owners. LOCATION: 300 W. Main Street, Lots Q, R and S, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen. REVIEW PROCESS AND STAFF EVALUATION: All development in an "H, " Historic Overlay District must meet all four Development Review Standards found in Section 7-601 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H, " Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark.... Response: The type of stockade fence that is proposed is generally allowed to the rear of a parcel, but fences in front of historic structures should be more open in character. HPC has indicated that they are willing to make an exception to this principle in order to offer the homeowners some protection from pollution. The materials proposed for this fence are meant to be in character with the log cabin, however, given the location of the new fence it will have a much greater visual connection to the Smith Elisha house and carriage house than it will to the log cabin. It is important that the new fence not detract from the character of the Smith Elisha house, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Therefore, staff finds that the fence should not be "rustic" but should be made of sawn wood pickets. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The fence will be only 4 feet above the grade of the sidewalk, a height which is in character with other fences along Main Street. Because this will be a stockade fence, every effort should be made to soften it along the west side with vegetation. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Response: This house is difficult to see from Main Street, because of several large trees in the yard. A fence in this location will further block views of the addition, but will not affect the visibility of the main house or any other historic resource. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The fence does not directly affect the architectural integrity of any historic resource. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any Of the following alternatives: 1) Approve the Minor Development application as submitted. 2) Approve the Minor Development application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (specific recommendations should be offered) 4) Deny Minor Development approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC approve the Minor Development application on the condition that the fence be constructed of pickets rather than rough logs. Al'I:AC:EMENT 1 IAND ISE APPIICATICN FEâ„¢ . 1) Project Name KhonA' - I AE 1,0 6 CA,13 1 yo 2) Project I.ocation 10 9 A) 8- 18 #(ocr 44 & 2.5 ( 300 LOâ‚¬ST U A-i;V 5-2) (irxiicate street actiress, lot & block ntiniier, legal amcription whâ€¢Â¢e appropriate) 3) * Present Zoning 40 Ad Â· use - 207- 4) Iat Size 4,000 5) Applicantes Name, Nliress & Bme # 920 t$ A CAâ‚¬o| 10/e 11 cJhc,Ral j 10 9 19 . SM d St *90 60 92\611 6) Representative's Name, Address & Ehcne # 7) Typd of Aplication (please check all that aiply): Ocnditicral Use _ el SPA Concephial Historic Dev. Special Review Final SEA Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline Conceptual POD / Minor Historic Dev. .1 Stream 14argin Â· Â· - Final ED Historic Demolition Mxmtain yiew Plane Subdivisicn __ Historic Designaticn OcnchniniumizationÂ· _ TexvMap Amerxlment . - aÂ«36 Allotment Iat Spli~Lot line QUE E~ption Adjustment 8) Description of Flcisting Uses Â· (rnmber and type of existing structures; agIroximate sq. ft.; Immber of bedmas ; any previous aIprovals granted to the prcperty). gond - 0 30 â‚¬15ta(klan-r l,00Â·~ Clâ‚¬ect- Best - 1\ousl ACT cilit- 9) Description of Develegnerrt Applicatian 4 ' Se,il- gloclfade 4.nce a lonc~ k.forA sn ape,09 2' &'44 Cedar or 6Â·Ke Wood wil-h point-ed /of - Fld- flab al luea H.er ed woo D to m cAA ec,6 in 10) Hav9 you attached the following? 4 Response to Attadinient 2, Minimim Slihnission Ocntents Response to Attadmerrt 3, Specific Submission Contents Re~cnse to Attad=mt 4, Review Starxianis for Your 14plication lilli i Aspen Historical Preservation Committee Aspen Planning Office, Aime Amidon From: Scott and Caroline McDonald Date: January 27, 1994 Re: Historical Landmark: The Log Cabin, 300 West Main St. Block 44, Q,R,and S Request of a minor development, a 4 foot historical looking split natural wood 2" stockade fence with pointed tops. This fence would be located on the Main street retaining wall. The stockade fence would be compatible with the natural logs of The Historical Log Cabin. The owner, residents of this property feel the need to protect their family from the massive amounts of dust and P.M. 10 kicked up by the cars and buses and the Bus Stop located along their property. The proximity of The Log Cabin being located at the bottom of the Main St. Hill and stuck at the Original historical grade unable to fill as the Elisha property,up the hill from The Log Cabin recently did. The dust generated by Main Street settles at the lowest spot on the Main St. Hill, The Log Cabin site. Sincerely, ~ Ful c (3 - - 5 J 04301.~Lf Scott and Caroline McDonald 303- 91â‚¬ -931-43 UUK.521.1- W Nt ~J-- - PRO,76520 4' Câ‚¬/nal on wall 1-615 9 . -3 2/ efacle N 904 , 20' below 5/de,Wat< -4-- - '21--f= ----4 11 . /DDUBLE UNES. QUTIJAIE ADDIT/ON \1 .4 . COUG. 064 j/ _/DliP\PSTEA115' WIDE K 6.S' LUNra 1 _CEK,K_ A * - 21' /1 99#~~ -AN(7706/ =r:-7~-, 1 -I Â· hi 1 ~ Â· 4 LINE OFFSET- SAMe A â‚¬ SHED OFFI ' ~/UIT ROOF / \ .[,MPROVEMENT EURVEN . /0/770'*'1 - j . 19 1 9 ' . 11 Â· 227'Wa/6 WA// 919 ' JEUNE-01Â£91 ' , I - , , 1 42.5 16' : ' , /1, 245 e 'Â· 4 1: 3,4' ' 7'.2'Â·~ ! GRARAGE 54 i'-t fl 4 , 41, 42.5' - 11 , --Q- 6,/0- 4- El i L_Ji 0 Â· 4%,1 33.6' - ALLEY ! v 9 m d c ;11 6 Â© LJOPeÂ°#,91Â°4 6 5â€¢(62%4< , 1 i- 4 1 11 i . 4'5, -ENCROALmjEMI 35.2 2/,9' 18. 22 4' ~ 5' ~ . 2/0.F l v'Al A s - PU\NT/4 5 2172/8 ?AD STREET Cilif?a - 300 W MAIN ADD/r/WV 1-4 4 SITE PLAN + ROOF S- . *am - 5' PLPMT/NS STRIP CD<--F/RE AMDR/417 5/Of WAI. K 1 0 . lie . ' I' . L:'44.- I . ..1, $ - Â· --=.- .14 44. . -Â«;-Plu,{:.4'S .. 4. a .... 1. , . Â· -,Â·,-iÂ·= ' Vâ€¢Â·"hit I.- - 4,4 1: 4 - $ MWAX. I 'f JEr . $ - 2 41 --I 4 - I L -21 ., aplf> #' r)....... ..' ..:4490 ./0,_7 .., r., b..Â»Ar..... % a 0, 155.71 1 â‚¬ M O 54. i; 44 4 1-- 24.1 ./.1, P .Â¥*; 11. 1 J. iÂ· 4 Unt 4 '331"115ht,ip=Al-Â·-â€¢ ti 2 -1.71 la .k . '44. ..Act -p . g m g 0 - i .1 I ' 19 *11 ,;elj ,p :i i 1 ' 1 -;Â· 1 , '4 F 9 1,4. W ,2: ': ., 1+V . - J I .. '11-vi#: 1 *.4 0 '.di . hfU~ litili:li : ' 4*, 04 -. 'J/91 4 :, i 7 11:+ 4%%49 ;121/ 9 4.61 Â·5 - i. : Â· 11â€¢h '*.90 '1 1 .*11 r 1 1+ Â· ~4 , 11- 1 P: y-81 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 130 S. Galena, City Hall- Worksession DATE: February 9, 1994 SUMMARY: The City of Aspen would like to create a basement in City Hall as part of the Master Plan for renovation of this building. The basement would accomodate a new meeting room for Council and offices for City staff members. To meet safety codes, a stairway exit is to be constructed on either the east or south side of the building. In addition, the City is contemplating creating window wells on either side to improve the quality of this below grade space. Cris Caruso, City Engineer, is seeking HPC's opinion on the appropriateness of these window wells and staircase as well as input on location and design concerns. STAFF EVALUATION: This building is highly visible on all four sides. Staff finds that a well designed stairway, made of colored concrete or brick would not be incompatible with the east side of the building, although it would remove land from the park. A stair on the south side would require moving the existing sidewalk closer to the street. There are several examples in town of historic buildings with exterior stairways to a basement- the Elks Building, the Independence Building, and the Wheeler Opera House. In all of these cases, the stairway lies along the sidewalk. Historically, basements were placed in most large commercial or public buildings and window wells were used to bring in light. The Wheeler Opera house has window wells which once lit the barber shop in its basement. The Pitkin County Courthouse has basement level windows which helped to light the jail when it was located there. Light wells must have a guard rail around them if they are more than 36" deep, or in some cases the Aspen/Pitkin Building Department has allowed a flat, decorative grate to be used to cover the opening. HPC should consider the overall visual impacts of the window wells, safety rails and staircase, as well as the changes in pedestrian circulation that would be caused by these new elements. NOTE: The Colorado State Historical Society holds a covenant on Armory Hall, which gives them the right to review exterior and interior changes to the building. After HPC's formal review of the project, the Board's decision will be forwarded to the Society as a recommendation. 1 :j< -*60 MEMORANDUM To: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer Historic Preservation Committee From: Cristopher Caruso, City Engineer Date: February 3, 1994 RE: City Hall Basement Renovation The following is a foundation for review of the City Hall Basement Renovation in accordance with the City Hall Master Plan. I look forward to discussing this project on February 9th. A master plan was developed and adopted in April 1992 to schedule future improvements to City Hall. The plan calls for a 1994 renovation to include the basement as usable space. This space is to be utilized for more functional council chambers or offices, meeting rooms, and storage. Raul Gawrys Architects Inc. has been retained to design the new space. Programming is under way and several interior layouts are currently being reviewed by staff and council. A specific design matter to be addressed is the need for natural light in the basement. The feasibility of constructing window wells and a below-grade exitway as required by code along the south and/or east walls requires discussion. We have evaluated the window wells and exitways of the Wheeler Opera House and Elk's Building and would like to consider placing similar ones at City Hall. We are also interested in restoring windows to the openings that have been infilled with brick along the south wall. This restoration would enhance the historic nature and natural light conditions of the building. As an update, we are working to have the roof renovated this spring. Bids came in 80% over budget and we are investigating measures to make the project affordable. We will keep you informed on progress. Thank You r <L\7 .Â£jil'.'-- <--G~ ..xm 'res.8.5........ illisilillilililimillillill::Ilinilliziligibvil/Prif'Zil.'Jfillillil /'ll'/3/.4.litue .../dimiv'll'll'll ISAq,ilmit- - J - I.- F...32.m- 0,1 7~ i =*~ fip ./4,.--- . i /4 Â· <132.kar- Â· r . , 1 ...A .09Â» ' . WMeeâ€¢ERÂ· 6,491 WAYL W.Pe, 08 84*T- WALL 1,&61 -, - hA-- P ~11 - 94*441.â€¢A 4 th --- 1 .- h _ - 2743: 1 13 AM- - ~ . --15 - - -1/L\Al/<7* 1 0 -- 1 \ 1 , Â¥ Alwi 'L-- -J 'C r~- . Â»21 2 - r fil,%4 400111 WALL W,4084-ER 65 OT-H WAGE Mr '%.I, - -,- 1/ir k =/Aff~rtfl - .63.F + L V.r. & #. - '4467*< .. W*** sount WAN M .2.1 %44 1 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 706 W. Main Street, Krabacher- Worksession DATE: February 9, 1994 Joe Krabacher, owner of 706 W. Main Street, and David Panico, architect, have requested a worksession to discuss options for expanding this house. The building is an Aspen Landmark. Their designs are in a very conceptual stage, so none were provided for HPC to review before the meeting.