Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19930908H~stor~c Preservation Co~ittee Xinutes oE September 8, 2993 702 W. MAIN - CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT - CONT'D PH 312 S. GALENA - MINOR DEVELOPMENT - PLANET HOLLYWOOD 835 W. MAIN - LANDMARK DESIGNATION - PUBLIC HEARING DISCUSSION 107 JUAN STREET AUSTIN PROPERTY. 2 6 12 21 HZSTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Minutes of September 8, 1993 Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Joe Krabacher, Donnelley Erdman, Les Holst, Jake Vickery, Roger Moyer, Karen Day, Martha Madsen and Linda Smisek present. MOTION~ Les made the motion to approve the minutes of July 28, 1993, second by Roger. All in favor, motion carries. COMMITTEE ~ ST~FF COMMENTS Amy: Please site visit 334 W. Hallam as they are coming in for a worksesison. Les: Numerous contractors are not aware of the materials we have for repairing old wood, so if anyone talks to somebody please give them the materials. PUBLIC COMMENT Michael Hull, owner of Poppies Biestro, 834 W. Hallam: We are looking at putting an employee housing unit on the back of the restaurant. The model shows the proposed addition. Jake: I am doing the architectural work on this building and we will be coming in on the Sept. 22 nd. agenda. Mike: It is 950 square feet to qualify as a three or four category housing unit. Karen: Is it one unit? Mike: One unit two bedroom. Don: This is an added-on second story addition to the rear. Roger: The back roof is 2 1/2 feet higher than the front. Mike: There is a lot of landscaping and I would like to know how you feel about that amount of volume. Roger: Maybe the roof height should be lower on the east/west gable. Les: Our guidelines state that any addition should not take dominance over the historic building and should not detract from it. I am concerned about additional height over the historic building as it may take dominance over the historic building which is our primary concern. The design is ok but it is too large in the back. Don: There are atlernatives with the north cross gable and it could be chanfered back and have a partial flat roof on top. The Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of September 8, 1993 pitch of the roof that is parallel with the house, that gable if you change the pitch too much it may call your attention to it which we don't want. Better to leave it the same pitch. Bill: I have a comment to the differences in height. You can balance the prominance of one part of a structure to another by using materials or fenestration of the windows. PUBLIC COMMENT Wayne Stryker: The old Glidden house above the post office, the owners desire to have something less expensive than the design approved. The last approach had a carriage house on the back of the house echoing the existing historic structure. Would you consider reducing this to a more flat roof blending in with the existing contemporary addition rather than echoing the mansard. Is that something too .drastic? Don: It is more than an insignificant change and you may have to go through the process again. Roger: Would it be a one story continuation of the garage? Wayne: Yes, but we would desire to have the roof a couple feet higher than the garage only to get south light into that space. Amy: Probably one of the things the committee liked about this addition is that it reflected the original house and they would be sorry to see that go, Karen: My feeling would be if it garage and somehow related to the house it would tie it together. could be kept higher than the large window on the original Amy: Our design guidelines state that flat roofs are not appropriate and you should review those guidelines. Roger: PosSibly you could work it out with the monitor and submit drawings. 702 W. M~IN - CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT - CONTWD PH Chairman Bill Poss opened the public hearing. Joe Krabacher stepped down. Amy: This is a proposal for a new office building in the Main Street historic district and also involves the demolition of a building that has been determined non-contributing to the district. The applicant has submitted a third rendition of the proposal here Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of September 8, 1993 tonight. Dick Fallin, architect: We tried to increase the south sun on the Krabacher side. We changed the drawings on the windows to double hung with one vertical mullion. We took the column off the back. On the rear on the north elevation shows what the dormers are doing. Along the west elevation we have modified the window arrangement. We were trying to protect the privacy. Materials will stay the same and we have eliminated the metal roofing. CLARIFICATIONS: Karen: What is the position of the mullions? Dick Fallin: Two fifths from the top on the east and south. On the west elevation we tried to have the mullion horizontal. Don: Are the cross gables blind? Dick: Yes. On the porch you will see a little relief on the small gables. Linda: Is the dormer on the east elevation missing? Dick: It is there but missing on the model. Bill: Are the dormers on the rear for headroom or decorative and do you want those as the architect. Karen: We talked about increasing the setback to the west, does this model reflect that setback? Dick: It does not but I do think there is 15 feet between the buildings. Amy: Where is the front door? Joe Krabacher, adjacent neighbor: I would reiterate the comment that I made at the worksesison. I think the concern is the height ahd massing and the committee should understand that they are setting a precedent for this block because on the cbrner you have the Christian Science building, apartment building and I am realistically considering what I am doing with my property. Karen: How do you feel about the setback between your building? Joe: It is what is allowed and is the minimum setback. If I was going to live there as a residence I would want more of a setback, but frankly at this point I am probably not going to live there. H~storlc Preserv&t~on Co~mi22ee M~nutes of September 8~ L99~ Chairman Bill Poss closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Karen: I feel there is room on the corner to move the larger building over and would hope that it would not effect your growth management application. Don: Dealing with the blind dormers I could see removing them since they do not let light in. I also agree that we should persue that the setbacks be reversed which would give Joe Krabacher's lot 18 more inches of incrased yard space between the two structures. Martha: I like the window changes to a certain extent but wasn't opposed to the first design except for the number of windows. I am uncomfortable with the mass. I would be in favor of moving the setback if that would give relief to the landmark. I feel the landmark is in critical danger of this project. I am not comfortable as a result of that. Les: My feeling is that the massing on the front is inappropriate for the neighborhood and sets a dagnerous precedent and I wish there could have been a way that it was structured further back or staggered. It is inappropriate having this kind of massing on the sidewalk. It is not compatible with the historic block. Jake: I will not vote on this project as it has been pointed out to me that I cannot sit on two boards and so until I figure that out I will not vote. At the worksession the issue that Joe raised was brought up which was what we are doing here is setting up a precedent for these basically two blocks. There are several well preserved little buildings in those two blocks and we are determining here the fate of those two blocks. On the one hand someone decided this should be office zone which puts pressure on these lots. I don't know if they decided Main Street would be noisy or what. That is adapative reuse. I do not know if their intention was to sacrifice these blocks for growth so that other areas in town could be left more preserved. I do not know what their thinking was when they decided to do this. In a situation when they maximumize the parcel they really do have to go to a higher level of design because they are in an historical overlay zone. It is a more demanding zone than office zone. You either take a stand and defend the little houses or you don't. If you take a stand on the little.house then this proposed design does not work, it is an over load. My only concern which was raised before is relative to the rear portion and it should be secondary and simple. I still would like to see something more playful. Something else should be done to the windows. H~storlc Preservation Committee Roger: I would be in favor of changing the setback and if the dormers on the back are not going to be used for light to enhance the interior space then they should be taken off. Also when you come in again we would like to see a strong landscaping plan. The windows on the south and east need restudied. Bill: I feel the project has responded to comments from the worksession. The committee likes to hear from the architects and if you do not like the dormers we would like to hear that. I feel those dormers add business to them. I also feel the guidelines should be changed if we want to change Main Street and I do not feel we can expect an applicant to bear the grunt of our committee's indecision on the guidelines. Amy: It is not identified as a contribution structure in the district and you need to determine according to the code certain findings that have to be made including that demolition is necessary to the redevelopment and it meets the condition that it is not identified on the inventory. MOTION: Don made the motion that the HPC grant conceptual development to the proposed office building at 702 W. Main St. with the following conditions: 1) That the blind dormers on the northern portion of the building be either restud~ or removed to simplify the architectural scheme. 2) As an additional ~ecommendation we recommend to the Board of Adjustment that demolition of the non contribution structure on the side be allowed to fasciliate redevelopment of the site. Also that the Board of Adjustment grant a reversing of the side yard setbacks that the easterly side yard be reduced five feet and the west side yard increased 6.66 feet. The variance be granted for the use in the office zone is appropriate. Variance for the reversal of the side yard setback is appropriate. Second by Roger. Don amended the mo~ion to restudy of the rather than east; second amended by Roger. Don amended the motion to add findings: entrance facing south Findings: Historic Preservation committee Minutes of September 8, 1993 1. That the structure is not identified in the inventory of historic sites and structures. 2. structure is no contributing to the historic district. 3. Structure does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district and its demolition does not impact the character of the historic district and demolition is necessary for the redevelopment of the parcel which I already mentioned before. 4 Proposed redevelopment is included in this application by HPC. Motion second by Roger. Ail in favor, motion carries 6-0. 312 S. GALENA - MINOR DEVELOPMENT - PLANET HOLLYWOOD Joe seated. Amy: The applicants is requesting approval for exterior elements windows, doors, signs lighting and awning. There is not a significant impact on the exterior of the building. Rod Dyer, architect: The changes are to the front entry and the front display windows. Addition of awnings and blocking out of existing windows on the north wall which is the alley and one window on the east wall. The addition of lighting also. The existing storefront was built in 1978 and 1979. In 1978 I presented a photo when it was the Eagles Club. The storefront display windows are not historic elements. Changing the door will work better for the client. We want to change the entryway doors and the transom above the doors with aluminum glass storefront. This would be strictly infill and no change to the actual structure. Also we want to change the single pane store front window to two fixed glass insulating tempered units. We won't need them for ventilation because we are adding a considerable amount of lighting and airconditioning. We wish to install three awnings. The stripes on the awning would be 12 inches wide. There are approximately the same number of windows already bricked over on the building. We would like the bricked windows flush and will match the existing color. We also want to move one entry door at the east end of the north facade which is presently an service entry door. We plan to repaint the building the same colors. We wish to replace some of the roof top mechanical equipment because what is there is not adequate. The structure of the elevator will not come above the existing roof line. The applicant wishes to do logo signs painted on wood, one on the alley facade close to the streetscale and one above the transome at the entry way. We wish to light them from the front not behind. 6 Historic Preservation Committee H~nu2es of 8ep2ember 8, ~993 CLARIFICATIONS Les: Is the mechanical on the roof to scale? Rod: Yes. Les: Is there any reason you could not use wood jams in the front? Rod: From a maintenance point we do not want to use wood. Don: Explain the lighting of the signs. Rod: Underneath the awning we would have a small off the alley side also. spot light and Don: On the drawings the lighting is mislabeled. Roger: You are recommending the windows be stored, where? Rod: There is windows there. alley side. Jake: on site or a large attic site and we can store the historic We would only be removing the four windows on the Is there any options for leaving them in place. Rod: Not to get insulation. Jake: Why are you sealing them up? Rod: For usage of the interior space. John McCann: We have a substantial lighting package inside. Rod: We have a back bar also and the windows are set to the inside. John McCann: Half of the original windows are already bricked. Roger: Since the windows are in the alley do they in fact have to be taken out and are there other alternatives. There is another window that was put in in the 70's. Maybe one of the historic windows could be placed in the newer windows spot. Do you feel a pink and green awning is conducive to the character of Aspen. Rod: I do not feel it detracts and the building next door has a two tone awning and there are other two tone awnings in Aspen. These particular colors are part of their trade mark. 7 Historic Preservation Commi2tee Hinutes of September 8~ ~993 Roger: With weather considerations do you intend to paint the building this fall? Rod: We decided not to change the colors so that we could paint it this winter. Roger: You are dealing with a very important landmark, do you intend to use paint or a protective coating? Rod: That I cannot answer. John McCann: Epoxy paint. Roger: That is totally inappropriate. We are not so concerned with the color but with the protection of the existing structure. The material on the existing building is paint. We would ask that any problems in the masonry be repaired and there are very specific guidelines to that. Once that is done it can be coated. Standard paints we would object to. We would ask that a protective coating be done which would last for seven years. This also protects your investment. John McCann: We would not have a specific preference over the type of paint. The contractor would be happy not to use epoxy paint. Newstrom-Davis will be the general contractor on the interior. I understand that he is familiar with the requirements of working in the city. Roger: You basically have two weeks of adequate weather and anything after that is not advised. All exterior work should be put off until spring as it is a too of an important building. Bill: The applicant should contact Staff regarding the morter and brick work. John McCann: The awning colors are our trademark colors. Karen: What other historic buildings in town have changed out to aluminum windows and doors? Jake: Esprit but some of the others have cast iron with wood framed infill. Mary: I was on the Board when Esprit was approved and we wanted wooden framing and they stated they wouldn't come if they couldn't have metal. They also wanted the windows way to the ground. Roger: Whereas the Independence Building windows were kept and reconstituted. But this building does not have original windows H~stor~c Preserva2~on Committee ~inu2es of September 8, ~993 on the front except up high. Karen: Once the windows are out or bricked up do future tenants ever go back to the original or is it too expensive? Bill: On the hardware store some of them were replaced and also on the Lily Reid building. You want the windows to remain as a product of time. Karen: The dining space will be gone. Jake: I feel there are options regarding the windows if the Board feels they should be saved. Would this building qualify on the national register? Amy: Possibly under architectural significance. Karen: Are their details as to what the front door will look like? Rod: Standard aluminum store front door, close to the drawing. COMMITEE MEMBER COMMENTS Les: You are sticking to the basic historic building. On the roof historically all changed need to remain to scale and check with the monitor. I do not think the trade mark awning is appropriate in the historic district. I also do not feel the aluminum is appropriate even though it is easier to do. This is a wonderful building and there is a lot of wood up above. The wood is more appropriate. I would like to see the windows stay in the alley and frame and drywall behind them so you will not loose your interior space. If windows are stored etc. they seem to wonder. Linda: As an historic building I see the bottom half this new modern element not in keeping with the historic building. I do not feel the metal is appropriate and would rather see wood. The windows and door are not in keeping with the the historic feeling, too big and too modern. The awning is a harsh treatment to the facade. Karen: I would like to ask if a restudy of the windows is done that you maintain the bifold existing of the window that exists. Opened to the street is a very friendly atmosphere. The details as they are presented right now do not meet all four of our guidelines which they are required to do. I would recommend tabling for a restudy. Donnelley: Ail four development review standards need to be met. We cannot repeat errors in the past and if the windows have to be Historic Preservation Committee Hinutes of September 8, ~993 closed I would recommend leaving them in place and insulating in behind them. We do not need to follow the precedent of the past on this building. Aspen is in a continual state of change. The awning is not appropriate and I would not accept any two tone awning when you place a third color on for the sign. Steel or wood for the door and storefront is appropriate. Roger: I would ask that any roof systems be scaled down in height if ppossible. The stripe awning are totally unacceptable, although the color scheme is not. Regarding the store front windows aluminum is out. In 1978 the windows were redone and fixed and then taken out. In regards to the windows in the alleys I feel they should stay. Possibly you could do something on the interior to show they indeed were windows. I would ask that a condition be made that materials etc. be seriously looked at by Staff. Also no outside work done after September. Jake: I would like to see research done on this building as to what it used to look like. If we can move the architecture in the direction of restoration I might be willing to give up a few issues. Amy: Regarding Jake's statement concerning the Secretary of Interior's standards we might put a condition that any exterior work should be reversible. Joe: I concur and this is a large vertical building and with the large windows on the first floor and large opening you have made the first floor squattie and it is not consistent with the historic building. Possibly a center mullion to give it a veartical feel. Aluminum is not consistent with the historic structure. Also I am not sure if all the roof top materials are shown on the plan. We have had numerous problems in the past with roof top equipment. Windows on the north should be preserved and am against replacing those with bricked in. If they go they will never be replaced. On the display window it is an existing window and I am not sure of that solution. Roger: If this was tabled does it prevent you from doing work inside? Rod: To some extent. The existing windows are sigle pane double hung wood framed windows. They are not in good shape or weather proofed. Bill: I concur with the statements and feel this is a good landmark structure. This is an opportunity to restore this building. I might be able to forgo the awnings if the storefront is restored with wood and single pane glass on the Galena Street l0 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of September 8, X993 facade. The windows on the alley or north facade I would like to see them retained and work with monitor and Staff. It would be the owners obligation to store the windows not the tenant. Also windows should be photographed and put in files. Rod: The text book storefront has a recessed center flaged by large display windows and kick plates. I have seen pictures of this building and it originally had a central entrance and stoop that sticks out into the sidewalk area. I have been told by Engineering that that is not acceptable to them. My thought is that the large windows do meet the guidelines, not necessarily the aluminum frame but the size of them. As far as retaining the windows on the alley I feel it is possible to do it. The tenant will have to relay to me whether they are willing to go to the additional expense of retaining those windows. In their present location it would be inpossible but they might be able to move them to the outside. We also have to provide for this building an elevator. Roger: If the owner asked for national historic designation, there are a lot of incentives for that. Suppose they restore the building as close as possible to the central entrance and that entrance is recessed which is what was done in that erra, would that not work? Rod: Not interior wise. John McCann: I would have to check on the lease regarding putting the building back to its original state. I do not anticipate a problem with the roof top mechanicals. The alley is narrow and you cannot see anything. We can address the windows but half of them have been bricked up. Leaving some of the windows to me is not attractive and would encourage the Board to look at that. I am willing to store the windows. We are proposing an aluminum clad dark bronze and possibly we could change the degree of color. When you clad in copper or bronze it is a softer look. We have music inside the restaurant. Bill: I feel the committee meant that the larger glass is fine, but it is how you trim out the window. Wood detailing would be more sympathetic. John McCann: Painting the building to me is maintenance and could that not be done now so we can get it protected while the rest of this si being sorted out and allowing our interior removation to proceed? Bill: As long as the proper materials and pointing and done correctly. Historic Preservation Committee Hinutes of September 8, ~993 MOTION: Les made the motion that the minor development for 312 S. Galena Street be approved with the following conditions: a) b) c) d) e) f) e) f) No historic windows be removed unless agreed to by Staffand monitor. Ail attemps be made to save the historic windows. No aluminum be used on the building for stops or additional construction. All stops to be wood with attention to historic detailing. Awning to be restudied and approved by monitor and Staff. Ail roof top additions to comply with plans as submitted, Any variables to be submitted to Staff and monitor. HPC would like to suggest that the owner looks at bringing the building as close to its historical state as possible. Ail materials being used are approved by Staff and monitor and if exterior work is to be done and the weather changes that it be wrapped. Front door be restudied to be wood. second by Roger. Ail in favor of the motion, motion carries. Discussion: Donnelley: Painted steel has also been used on historic buildings. Roger: I would encourage you to add wood and or steel. Les: I didn't add it because that is giving them another hassle and I do not like steel. Donnelley: Wood doors that have high frequency use present significant design problems and it will be a different expression than what the architects have presented to us at this time. The thin detailing of an aluminum store door is quite different in appearance from wood. Roger: Independence Building doors are cast with wood. Joe and Les monitors. 835 W. MAIN - LANDMAREK DESIGNATION - PUBLIC HEARING Amy: This is an application to consider landmark designation of 835 W. Main Street also known as the Berger parcel which was just officially annexed into the city as of July 1993. I found that the parcel meets 5 of the 6 historic standards and is only required to 12 H~stor~c Preservation Committee H~nu2es of September 8, ~993 meet one. Because this is associated with Fritz Benedict who is an important local architect exhibits interesting design styles which we do not have many examples of. It also contributes to neighborhood and community character. Scott Harper, representing Mr. Berger the applicant: This building was built in 1947 is a prime example of the beginning of the renaissance era the beginning of Aspen due to the ski industry and related cultural aspects which exist today. It was designed by Fritz Benedicte and one of his very first designs in Aspen. It was one of the designs after he studied with Frank Lloyd Wright for five years that exhibits a number of Wright infulences in the design aspects of the building. It is significent also because we are loosing other buildings from that era. It was one of the most important architaects of that era and his buildings are disappearing and we need to try and preserve the few that are left. The buildilng is the western most structure within the city limits on Main Street in Aspen. It was built with local materials and lenado logs and sandstone from the frying pan river valley. With the exception of the fact that there has been a small addition to the house which is a music room done in 1964 and was done precisely in the same design and style of the original structure. The building exists today as when it was built in 1947. Mr. Berger has no intention of changing the structure at all. Mr. Berger has owned this since 1969. Mr. Berger: The corner windows are mitered windows which means the glass meets glass at a 45 degree angle. The interior ceiling is called lapstreak ceiling which means the board overlap in the way ship building was done and is unusual. The fireplace has cantilever which projects over the logs and has recessed lighting which is a Wrightian feature. CLARIFICATIONS (NONE) Chairman Bill Poss opened the public hearing. Scott Harper presented the affidavit of mailing. Amy: We are here to discuss whether this parcel meets landmark designation criteria. But you all are aware that there are impacts to the entrance to Aspen discussion. When the city addresses the four lane or rail into Aspen they are required to go through an environmental impact study partly because there are air quality issues. Possibly this will not effect the Berger property but we do not know where the line will occur. We need to consider that there are several (8) resources involved if there is a realignment of the highway. If we find that there is historical significance in this structure there is every reason that the environmental 13 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of September 8, 1993 impact statement should address how it would effect that property. That does not mean it will stop the initiative it just means that it needs addressed because it is part of our community. Fred Pierce, Aspen Villas representative, attorney: It is the immediately adjacent project to the north of Bergers. I am here to oppose our oposition to this designation which evolved around the five or six criteria that are set forth in the application. The question is, is this truly an effort to take a piece of historicaly signifcant property and designate it or is it an attempt to put a road block in front of a vote that said the straight shot to Aspen is where the transportation corridor should be in terms for four laning and the Berger parcel was identified as one of the buildings that would probably have to be moved if they put the four lane in along the shot that the voters approved. I want you to recall that vote and it wasn't the first and it probablyi will not be the last but it was to the entrance of Aspen and I remember it well. When you designate a piece of property that clearly is in the way of that vote or alignment that you are saying to the voters we don't care what you think, we think we have an important consideration here irrespective of that. If you look at the criateria to designate I would like to point out a few things. I have heard that this is not eligible to be on the national register because it is not old enough. Therefore, you are looking for other kind of significances to make it fit in with the criteria. The only thing that I have heard is that it is designed by Fritz Benedict and he trained under Frank Lloyd Wright. I pose the question that that is of historical significance? Is this a significant structure that represents all of his work and is he a significant architecte for that purpose. Historical importance is the first criteria and Staff states that that is not met. Architectural criterial in the memo states that the structure represents architectural style that is unique, distinct or traditional Aspen character. In the memo I reviewed I do not see any discussion that states that it is unique, distinct and do not see what makes it traditional Aspen character. Is the infulence of Frank Lloyd Wright unique or distinct in this area or is it a traditional Aspen character? My interpretation is the victorian/mining era. I am not convinced that this building is anything within these particular criteria. The structure and distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type or specimen. Basically it is a log cabin and is it significant. Have you had an experte that has told you it is? Is Staff's opinion sufficient to make this kind of finding. The second or third criteria is that the structure is a significant work of an architect's individual work that has infulenced the character of Aspen. Number one you are asked to find that Fritz Benedict is an individual whose work has influenced the character of Aspen, I do not know fi that is true or not. Is this structure 14 H~sto~ic Preserv&tion Committee M~nu~es of September 8~ L993 a significant work of his? You have heard that it is one of the first. Does that make it significant, maybe it makes it insignificant, I have not seen testimony to that. The next item was neighborhood character and the way it is worded in the code is that it is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation is important for maintaining that neighborhood character. The neighborhood out there is the Villas of Aspen, the Aspen Villas, the Bavarian Inn and the three houses on west Main Street and a very large new modern home just to the south of those three houses. That to me is not a neighborhood character that is significant historically, or in terms of this partaicular building. I suggest that Staff's comments regarding several houses do not apply in that area. I am not sure that is a finding that you have the ability to make here tonight. With respecft to community character the criteria says that the structure is critical for the preservation of the Aspen communitiy because its relations in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures of historical significance. You are being told that this is the first of many, potential future ski renaissance historical structures, I do not see it. That particular statement does not provide you with the basis to make that finding. There is nothing unique or special or significant about this. A letter from Kim Johnson states that designation will not impact the alignment of the highway. Upon direct discussion wtih the Dept of Transportation they state clearely otherwise and significantly delay the attempts to put the alignment there. The letter regarding annexation states that the Bergers "desire to obtain the right of franchise and not impede or prevent or therwise interfere with the proposal of the State HWY 82 in the City of Aspen and that the city "accepts and relies on the representation from Mr. Berger that the annexation is not being sought to influence the proposal of the highway 82. I would suggest that you include in your resolution language to the effect of: This historic designation is not intended to impede in any manor the straight shot approach to Aspen for a 4 lane highway as approved by the voters and if it is necessary to move the Berger house to accomodate the straight shot such move is consistent with this approval and should allowed without any additional review." Dottie Murray: I live at 814 W. Bleeker, formerly Aspen Villas. We are a condo complex of 26 homeowners and my husband is on the board. I am the spokesman of the people and Fred is the legal representative. I wish to repeat and reinforce those statements that Fred has already said. We are not here to battle the highway issue. The first issue is whether this home should be historically designated. I have a general contractor that builds homes in the style of Frank Lloyd Wright for 20 years and don't expect any of them to be given landmark status being Minnesotta or here. In 1990 we were active in the entrance of Aspen and were informed that a ~5 H~stor~c Preservation Committee N~nutes of September 8, L993 few homes would have to be removed or relocated and the Berger home was mentioned. This is one more roadblock to the process, we do not know what we are going to get as a highway. We should keep our options open and this is one more stumbling block to the means to our end. Therefore I am violently opposed to the designation of this property. Jeffery Evans: In 1990 there were 42% of the people who chose the S curve as the preferred alignment. If those people had a problem the proper recourse is to take their case to the voters and not try to use the HPC as a way of creating a political problem. If you approve this request I would suggest that you are in fact being used for a larger political battle that has nothing to do with historic designation. I called Fritz and he didn't know anything about this meeting. These people want to preserve Fritz's work but never called him about it. I explained the situation and he asked if the house could be moved if the highway was to come through. I asked Fritz if this building had any significance to you and does it mean anything special to you personally. He said he would think about it but it didn't raise any sapecial recollection. I wanted him to know that his name was being used in a larger political battle over the highway and that if he was interested the mtg. was today. He never called me back to state his comment and obviously he has no strong interest in it. Your time and effort is being manipulated. Jerry Felds, 111 S. Seventh: I think that this has become a political football. The question that comes before this group is this an historical designated unit. I know Bruce's house and I am a sculpture artist by profession and I know I have not gone to sculpturers if they thought this was a premium piece of my work. The important thing is that this is a house that was built in 1947 that represents the part of the beautiful growth of Aspen. I have never sat in on the historical meeting before and I am terribly impressed with the way all of you are so concerned with details that what you have done going over the last building and worrying about each detail is remarkable. The Berger house is a beautiful example of Fritz Benedict work and one of Aspen's national treasures and it should be preserved. It is an important part of Aspen. Bruce Berger: I have seen Fritz during the summer and everytime he asks me what the status of the house is. He does have interest. As far as Wrightian architecture there are only two others in town that have studied under him, Charlie Patterson, Robin Molney. A list of buildings that belonged to his tradition one way or another are Frsitz's Bank of Aspen, Meadows, Boomerang Lodge, the Hearth Stone house. This was architecture that was practiced in Aspen. The issue of the highway I would like to remind you of the His2oric Preservation Committee Minutes of Septen~er 8, X993 transportation meeting held at the Institute for two days in August which was conviened by Jeff Tynas and said put all the cards on the table and discuss everything when it comes to transprotation. One of the cards is that we are talking about an historic house and we cannot pretend that it is anything other than what it is. The idea to sweep it under the table because it is inconvenient for a transportation route, I think to pretend something that does exist, does not. This should be decided on its merits. Mary Martin: I was on HPC after a log building was allowed to be turn down and then the lot was split. HPC does improve along the way. I believe in saving historic building and do not believe this is historic. Fritz Benedict has had enough patrons supporting his work by the Meadows and Herbert Bayer. Fritz built Snowmass. He has a lot to honor in this city. Whether you voted for the straight shot or not it won. If government doesn't respect the vote of the people then there is something wrong with governemnt. That straight shot maybe changed a dozen times. I wouldn't want a train by my house either, I would ask to have it moved. I am all for designation. Move it to the Marolt property. If you do allow this to be preserved you might come up with a class action suite unless you put this one article that he mentioned: that if in the event the highway or the alignment of a train or whatever comes this man can deed restrict his house to never be changed. Bill Martin: Our house was 1890 historical I can't understand why. of historica designation. and to clasify this house as It does not fit into the class Scott Harper, attorney: The majority of people here speak in opposition and unfortunately did not follow the 1 1/2 year long progression of annexation petition. It took that long because it became a political issue and should not haves been a political issue. Clearly this property has five or the six criteria met for historical designation and only one has to be met. The unique character of the neighborhood is disappearing because of comdominium projects and this property is one of the few left that does preserve it unique character. This is not the appropriate form to address political issues of the 4-lane which may or may not happen in my life time. I have had direct discussions with CDOT also. There was no indication that a local historic designation will impete a four lane if the State so chooses to do so. Lets look at whether this building meets the criteria of designation or not here tonight. Dottie Murray: We had reps at all those annexation meetings and letters have been entered here today to Amy. There are quotes from Mayor Bennett promising us this very thing would not happen. I thought it had to be 50 yrs. old. I see the Martin's home as Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of September 8, 1993 historic but Marvin is currently making a corner window also and puttin git in every third thing that is built. If Fritz work are so significant why was the water fall house tourn down. Am I missing the point here? Bill: That was not protected by designation and was not in the city and in the county. Mary: Why did Mr. Berger have to move into the city when Amy's precdecesor was trying to designate houses in the county? Scott Harper: Mr. Berger has never tryied to hide the fact that he was trying to get desgnation. We filed the petition for designation at the same time we filed for annexation. Francis Uhler, Aspen Villas 814 W. Bleeker: I was in touch with an out of state architect in this matter and was told that one of the original homes of Wright called the Loren Pope house was moved two years ago because a highway had to go through and that that was a definate possibility. If you are seeking to make the relationship of designation with Mr. Wright you are grabbing at straws. Bruce Berger: Brenden Gill has written a biography of Wright and pointed out certain figtures immediately when he came into the house. Chairman Bill Poss closed the public hearing. Bill Poss entered a letter into the records from Harry Farb who owns property at 814 W. Bleeker. He states his opposition. Amy: County has a preservation program and have identified certain areas. The water fall was determined eligible for the register because of Fritz Benedicts importance to this town. With a living architect it is difficult to judge. This is an early stage of Fritz career. HPC has the authority to make the decision even if it isn't 50 years old. We do not know what the outcome of the highway will be. I fwe don't address home we will start to loose it all. COMMITTEE COMMENTS Les: I made two calls to Legal Council and even a national designated site will not stop a federal mandated road. The City Attorneys office said this in no way will effect the highway coming in here. This building is historic designation. Over the last several years we have had worksession$ on how to preserve or ecclectic mix here in Aspen. This is all the transition materials 18 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of September 8, 1993 also. I am here for preservation of historic structures. meets the criterial of B,CA,D,F. This Donnelley: I have know this house long before it became an issue. I am better briefed in architectural history and am incensed that it is an political issue. I mentioned to Bruce several years ago that this was extraordinary house. I am an architect and have done work in architectural history and should be saved. It is obviously a political issue and I am incensed that there are so many people here totally uneducated in terms of what is or what is not historic. Jeff Evans: That is a pretentious remark. Donnelley: I have not heard anything but prejudicial comment. It is our mandate to determine what is historically important or not on the basis of the criteria presented. Standard B has been met long ago and it is an archaitectural style that is unique and distinct to Aspen. The importance of the small building must be saved. Karen: I agree with everything that has been said and we are not here to encourage or impede highways. We are here to protect buildings that we 'feel are historically significant. I feel it meets category D. This is one of Fritz's first buildings in Aspen. It represents the beginnings of the new Aspen that came into being after WWII. I would recommend designation of the this house. Roger: In part of being a proactive board in the last two years we have discussions about buildings that have been constructed since 1910 and what to do with them. We have lost many. Our job is to preserve as much as we can of the uniqueness of Aspen. That would be like the house of Mr. Bergers. At some point we will be dealing with the Swiss Chalet on Aspen. It is in fact historic. In five years the Berger house will be 50 years old. We need to look at bldg. that will be historic in the future. History does not stop. It is our mandate to designate this house. Joe: We have been discussion the two eras in Aspen's history the mining era 1910 and a separate era the Ski industry era which started after WW 2. The Log Cabin was built in the 40's and it has a landmark designation. It is unique because it is a log cabin on Main Street. Looking at the standards I think it meets standard B because it is of traditional Aspen character. Small in scale and built from local materials. It could stand on that alone. It also meets E and F. It is important to maintain our smaller buildings. HPC recommended at its last meeting designation of a rock. Mary: I am all for preservation and no one has a quam about 19 Historic Preservation Committee N~nutes of Bep~ember 8~ ~993 preserving that house, the only thing that came out was the fact that it should have a clause in it to make it easier if the hwy or train comes through that your hands have written this off and making your job easier. Martha: I feel we have a responsibility of course to recognize properties that we feel are significent and I agree even though it isnot 50 years old that it is emerging into the era that we should be recognizing as historic. I also think we as a committee are looking at neighborhoods and doing an historic overlay of those neighborhoods and this is the kind of neighborhood that we need to look at with the large trees and space. I do not feel as strongly architecturally as others but it does represent a era that we need to look at and preserve. Jake: I do not know too many log cabins that got to colide with Frank LLoyd Wright. I feel it is a small scale and the architecture is interesting. We extend our infulence in other areas and the way to do that is landmarking houses to look a redevelopment of sites and demolitions. Linda: Early Aspen is seen as mining and skiing which are large areas that we are looking at. The skiing area maybe needs more emphasis and this is one of those houses that should be part of that. We need to give more concern to that and people will look back at that era. Nothing stops a federal highway, I lost my family home to a highway when I was growing up and you always have the right to move it. We need to keep the highway issued tempered. Bill: I feel there is enough reason to find that this structure meets B, D, and F. and we are charged with preserving structures. The structure can be moved and we have done so to others. Fred: When the water fall house was deemed to be eligible but the state it was not becasue it was a Benedict house it was because of the uniqueness of the waterfall. Amy: That is not what the letter states. Joe: Your firm represented the people that tore it down. Jeff Evans: Regarding B, uniqueness every single home in town would satisfy that criteria. See what become historic and category B, I get the sense that everything should be historic. Don: This building can stand on its own without Fritz Benedict. Jeff Evans: This is a political issue and possibly will slow down the process to the entrance of Aspen. 2O Historic Preservation Commitkee Minutes of September $, X993 Fred: I still feel you should include the paragraph in your motion to take the political issue out. Amy: Including that in the motion we are stating that it is a political ' issue. ~OTION: Les made the motion that HPC recommend to City Council designation of 835 W. Main, know as the Berger Annexation, City of Aspen finding that it meets criteria B,C,D, E, and F; second by Roger. Joe: Adopt a resolution recommending landmark designation for 835 W. Main Berger Annexation finding that it meets one or more of the criteria B, C,D,E.and F. AMy: The site and structure are designated. Fred: I feel you should designate the site only,. Bill: We leave it open to the benefit of the applicatn to be able to move the structure on the site by giving incentives such as setbacks, parking etc. Fred: If you designate the site you will find that when the HWY come in the city will be waving its red flags saying I'm sorry it is an historic site. We cannot move the site. AMENDED MOTION: HPC recommends approval of landmark designation of 835 W. Main Berger Annexation, City of Aspen finding that it meets one or more of the criteria B,C,D,E, and F; second by Roger. All in favor, motion carries. Mary Martin: You cannot dsignate annexation. Amy: That is the address that is used as metes and bounds. DISCUSSION 107 JUAN STREET AUSTIN PROPERTY Amy: We had a site visit and this house is on the inventory and is a miners cottage. We are looking at doing an affordable housing project. Dave Tolen: We are trying to identify programs to present for conceptual. Considering the historical resource on site we recommended two programs C & D. This is GMQS exempt as it is 100 percent affordable housing. It is a six step process. The project incorporates underground parking. One scheme would be studio one bedroom and the other is family oriented. Zl Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of September 8, 1993 Joe: I like C better than D as it is a little tall. Amy: The building is being shifted to the right because there is another residential structure at the bend of the road. I like the courtyard configuration which is represented in C. Karen: Which is needed the most in employee housing, three bedrooms or studio. Tom Baker: We need both. Ail of the needs can be met on the site. Karen: I feel to make the historic residence dominent would be to do the one bedroom/ studio which would be D. Les: I like the smaller scale. Units along the street front would be smaller. Donnelley: Both schemes would work. definate program come out. I would like to have a Roger: Will the historic residence have a basement? Dave: Potentially. Roger: I would have the entrance to the underground parking moved further up to the east. The front of the project is Juan street and why have the underground parking th dominent item. The historic house will be moved. Dave: You mean move the entrance as far away as possible. Roger: In D.C. the entrance is only one car wide and they had a light to control it. That will work with either plan. Jake: Possibly intergrade a porch. Martha: I am for the less square footage and like the spaciouness around the historic structure photo D. Jake: Regarding the program I feel there is a need for family housing. When you have family housing that involves kids and issues of safety and where they play. You need to adequately provide for their needs. I like C because the height is lower and the historic building is more visual. I also like the articulation of D fragmented and broken down. Maybe you could do something creative with the bank. Bill: The smaller structures are more compatible. Historic Preservation Committee M~nutes of September 8, 1993 Roger: What about a porch on the historic structure. Don: We had talked about that and it is appropriate. Don: What incentives will there be for the design team to make it economically viable to do a good job. Dave: There is a preference for the three bedroom option. Roger: Most people have a bike and car and there should be sufficient storage. At west hopkins that is a major storage problem. Possibly provide for a path etc. to the Koch Park. Les: Probably why we like C over due is due to scale and massing. MOTIONs Jake made the motion to adjourn; second by Les. Ail in favor, motion carries. Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland Chief Deputy Clerk 23