HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19901128HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
Minute of November 28, 1990
MOTION: Don made the motion to appoint Georgeann Waggaman as
chairman of this meeting in the absence of the regular chairman
and our two vice-chairpersons; second by Les. All in favor of
motion, motion carries.
Meeting was called to order by Georgeann Waggaman with Don
Erdman, Les Holst, Glenn Rappaport, Jake Vickery and Roger Moyer
present. Joe Krabacher, Charles Cunniffe and Bill Poss were
absent.
COMMITTEE AND STAFF COMMENTS
Roxanne: The CLG grant was adopted at the Council meeting.
204 S. GAT~NA - SPORTSTALKER - FINAL DEVELOPMENT AND VESTED RIGHTS
Public hearing opened.
Roxanne: The applicant met with the sub-committee and the
conditions required were as follows:
Restudy the details of the 2nd and 3rd floor, in
particular the center portion of the west elevation.
Restudy the cornice.
Restudy awnings for window specificity.
The applicant has presented, two options and we find that we are
confused as to whether or not in fact, it met the requirement of
conceptual from the sub-committee point of view. We recommend
tabling.
Sven Alstrom, architect: We have some discrepancies from the
sub-committee as to what was determined.
Sven: We received conceptual approval from the sub-committee on
Oct. 2nd with conditions. We also made final development
application on the 19th stating what we thought were those
conditions. The condition of the sub-committee included the
following:
1. Addition of solid transom panels above the store
front windows to visually raise their head height to
emphasize their importance and reinforce the detail of
the upper story windows.
2. The second and third floor windows be similar in
size so as to not draw your eye up to the third floor
detail and let the street level windows remain primary.
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of November 28, 1990
3. The mid-block recess be further studied and that is what
we are presenting now (glazing).
Sven: The other item they did not make a finding on is the open
specific vs. continuous awning. The awnings are the primary
unresolved issue and Welton's and my finding is buildings like
this with continuous store fronts, which this has, may not look
best with open specific awnings. The open specific awnings
appear scattered about the facade and are too small and do not
provide a clear definition between the street level retail and
the residential. The continuous canopy we feel appropriate as
covered sidewalks are on a number of Aspen buildings including
the Bank of Aspen, Collins Block and Mesa Store. Continuous
canopy is a solution that protects the pedestrian and separates
the street level from residential.
Jake: We had talked about the window spacing being different and
if we are getting into the issue of what the sub-committee talked
about I need to see the previous drawings.
Roxanne: The HPC granted conceptual
the condition that the sub-committee
issues that were in this memo.
development approval with
meet to clarify the three
Georgeann: The cornice will be more in keeping with details of a
strong cornice. We need to discuss glazing, awnings and main
notch.
Roxanne: The discussion is how this building is perceived.
Jake: There are too many horizontal lines.
Glenn: I have never been concerned about this building being too
vertical as it is only 36 feet tall compared to the buildings
around it. I would be in favor of reducing the amount of
horizontal lines that are gQing on and try and let the two small
building shapes on the western facade read more vertically. The
discussion of dropping the top line of the awning down grew out
of trying to thin the line above the awning and turn them into
awnings rather than "building".
Jake: We had talked about the awnings being too low and they
were trying to use the awnings that they already had which are
metal and hard. Welton said he would restudy the awnings. We
had also discussed the cylinder over the entry. There also was
discussion as to whether the principle form should be the two
lower floors with the third sitting on top or be a lower base
with the two floors.
2
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of November 28, 199U
Georgeann: Jake is saying to take off the line at the bottom of
the second story windows.
Sven: The line will not be another color and will diminish a
little and that should be considered.
Glenn: Having the detailing relatively two dimensional in the
breakup of the masses; which could mean removing the line as
well.
Les: My problem is that if it is not removed and in the future
someone buys the building and sees the line they will paint it.
Don: There is a valid reason for having a wide board that is
possibly three times as large as the average clapboard down at
the bottom line of the awnings especially if the awnings are
going as we recommend them which is to minimize them and have
them opening specific. ]it produces something that ties together
all the events, the circular and square ones over the windows;
however, I am not sure Glenn is saying maintain the small detail
below the second story windows as well.
Glenn: I wanted some flexibility in the design. I agree with
Don that the wide board ties together the intent of the awnings.
Jake: There are too many horizontal lines and something has to
go. My eye is seeing the lower band that goes to the top of the
windows and a narrow band then another band and another even
higher band. The horizontality needs simplified to be a clear
intent. The top floor has more prominence visually to me than
the lower floor because it is chopped up. I would think you
would want to see large, medium, small but instead you see large,
small, medium floor levels.
Roxanne: What about the banding along the awning?
Georgeann: Don and Glenn have spoken in favor of the banding
along the awning.
Glenn: The first floor should read a little bit more prominent
height wise to work better as a downtown building.
Sven: That is Welton's argument for the continuous canopy.
makes the first floor read more distinctive and taller.
It
Georgeann: We need to discuss window specific vs. canopy
awnings.
3
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of November 28, 1990
Jake: I prefer window specific awnings and they are more
consistent historically with the buildings in the neighborhood.
They allow the forms and walls to express their rhythm.
Don: The two barrel awnings especially the one in the corner
which is the most visible ale out of scale on the drawings. I am
in favor of window specific awnings.
Les: I agree.
Roger: Historically barrel awnings were never used and call
great attention to themselves. Awnings in the 1870's do run the
entire length of the building even though they are broken up. I
don't have a problem going the entire length of the building but
have a problem with the barrel awnings. It seems that we are
designing a building and the model is out of scale and perhaps
they should come back with a model to scale. We are still not
there in simplicity.
Sven: We were never requested to make a model with window
specific awnings.
Glenn: There are discrepancies in the model. The corner barrel
awning in the model is 1/2 the size that shows on the drawings.
Georgeann: They brought in the old model and we have never
requested a model on an awning. We are professionals and should
be able to visualize. ·
Sven: The awnings are not all the same size.
Roxanne: A model is to provide HPC what it is that you are
presenting and want approval for. If you bring a model to final
it is important that you be accurate and awnings are a critical
issue on this building.
Glenn: I want to know if I am criticizing the model or the
drawings?
Sven: Lets stick with the drawings.
Georgeann: We want a restudy of the horizontal line; restudy of
the awning to keep it simple.
Glenn: I would like to hear some clear intent from the applicant
of what they want this building to be.
Sven: What the committee has been uncomfortable with from day
one is this is a maximum FAR building with employee housing
4
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of November 28, 1990
taking the entire second floor. We had to have recesses on the
third floor for FAR reasons. We tried to follow the guidelines
and establish a rhythm to the facade, pull the corners back etc.
Roxanne: We need to discuss the fenestration and bring that
issues to a close.
Don: We have discussed this nine times and this building is not
a dignified structure for downtown. The central bay window was a
big issue.
Georgeann: We cannot do vested rights until final.
treatment seems too light and too glassy (high tech)
building on the west elevation.
The wood
for this
Sven: We have some contradiction as Bill Poss liked the high
tech.
Georgeann: I don't think high tech is appropriate on this
building because we are trying to say simplify.
Georgeann: I would recommend a motion to table and be specific
in the motion.
Sven: Another issue is whether that center recess is wood or not
on the west elevation.
Georgeann: I would prefer diagram C that breaks the windows up
further and that is the consensus of the Board.
Sven: The glass on the sides of the corners has been removed
which was originally mirrored glass.
Les: This building is a major transfer into the Elks and Brand
builsing and it has to work~
Georgeann: To give him direction without designing it we
recommend that the awnings be window specific; eliminate second
floor ceil line; restudy the west mid block recess; major
materials shall be submitted. Cross section of the wide board
line at the top of the first story windows (more detail).
Roxanne: I think it is appropriate for the community to see an
accurate color rendering of this building.
MOTION: Georgeann made the motion to table final development and
vested rights public hearing of the Sportstalker, 204 S. Galena
with the following conditions: Restudy awnings, awnings shall be
window specific, eliminate second floor ceil line, restudy west
5
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of November 28, 1990
elevation mid-block recess, major material samples be submitted,
color rendering, restudy cross section of the top of the first
story wide board line need more detail; second by Les. All in
favor of motion, motion carries.
HOLDEN-MAROLT RANCHING AND MINING MUSEUM
CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT - PUBLIC HEARING
Public Hearing opened.
Roxanne: I am very pleased that the Historical Society is
working with Graeme Means, architect and Heidi Hoffman, architect
on developing a whole master plan for the entire museum site.
For conceptual approval we will only be discussing their 1.9 acre
site that they have a long term lease for with the City. They
will be focusing on the preservation, restoration of the two main
structures, the sampling works building which is basically called
the barn and the salt shed. There will be displays throughout
the area. I have worked with Graeme and it is very important
that the sub-committee project monitors which are Charles and
Roger, work very closely with us on fine tuning the details for
the final development approval. We are recommending approval of
conceptual with conditions:
1) Preservation activity shall adhere to the secretary
of Interior standards.
2) The sub-committee meet on site with the applicants to
review all the details of preservation, restoration and
reconstruction. The report will be included in the final
development memo.
3) The cupola shall be designed as a reconstruction based
upon accurate historic research. A restudy of the cupola
windows is recommended.
4) Ail landscape, deck, ditch, fence, etc. details shall be
submitted in the final review.
5) Exact major building materials be submitted as required
in final development application.
Graeme: This is conceptual and we need your approval to go to
P&Z. There are numerous issues at the P&Z level that might need
too change in terms of the access etc. The sit plan is a little
loose at this point and needs to be due to possible changes. We
feel the prime artifact of this museum is the barn structure. We
want to restore it as best we can and have it stand as a
dignified structure. To do that we came up with "pods" of
6
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of November 28, 1990
exhibits around it that would consist of natural grass or grain
so that from the trail there would be a foreground of natural
vegetation in front of the barn rather than having an open yard
full of cluttered equipment.
Heidi: I read in our report that we had identified the
irrigation ditches, we have not because it might dictate a
different layout. We want to see them but possibly not the way
they are now.
Roger: Where is parking?
Graeme: Part of the lease states that there will be no parking
and we look upon that as an advantage in terms of being able to
preserve the site or reconstruct the site.
Roger: If you do this project will the path have to be plowed in
winter?
Graeme: We are not committed to being opened in the winter.
Roger: I am on the nordic council and we have lost a sizable
portion of the trail due to the project, even though it was
considered, unless we have a major snow. The trail is paved and
has to be a fire lane and you have to take off your ski's and
walk.
Graeme: Those are a few issues that need to be hammered out at
P&Z.
Les: It is a great project and I was wondering if old windows,
wood etc. have been stored for future use?
Graeme: A1 Bloomquist said there are materials stored on Fritz
Benedict's property but I have not seen it.
Roxanne: We need to discuss the cupola and also there is a need
for some second story display area in the sampling building in
getting light into it.
Graeme: We have some reasons for wanting to put the cupola back
on, one is historic preservation the other is that we have a
large building with a high roof and very little light in it. If
we can get light into it, it will be a better building. We look
on the cupola as a means to bring light in and get ventilation.
Roxanne: My idea is a transom that operates with ropes and allow
light and ventilation so that it doesn't look like a window but
looks like an opening. 0
7
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of November 28, 1990
Georgeann: Two windows with space between them looks more like
what people would have done. The windows could be smaller.
Don: Can they be fixed windows?
Graeme: No, as we need ventilation.
Roger: If windows are put in they have a good defense after
looking at the old photos.
Georgeann: At conceptual l~vel we can say that we are in favor
of the cupola and are interested in what the solutions are for
windows and handle it as delicately as you can.
Georgeann: Regarding the two feet off the shed roof I presume
you are referring to the extension of the roof itself.
Graeme: The overhang is under structure and needs help and
structurally is not up to standards. There are two ways to deal
with it. One is to cut off approximately those two feet of roof
and that might allow the truss work to remain as is and the truss
work is a very prominent visual element. If we don't cut that
off we think the other solution would be to beef up the trusses.
Beefing up the trusses would be more of an imposition on the
building cutting those two feet off and furthermore I believe
those two feet were added on at a later date. This is also
complicated by the fact that we haven't engineered the solutions.
Graeme: Roxanne had some notes about the loading dock and it is
structurally unsound. It is beyond restoration to serve as it
once did. If there were going to be people on it we would have
to put rails on it which compromise it. We propose to do minimal
work to do just to support ~xhibits which will be put on it and
we have a lower deck which could serve a number of purposes.
Roxanne: My concern was the size of it in compatibility to the
barn structure.
Glenn: The new deck would be close to grade level.
Graeme: When the handicapped business gets dealt with we might
see some things going on.
Roger: Would the new deck be connected?
Graeme: Yes, real close.
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of November 28, 1990
Georgeann: We are all in favor of conceptual development and
recommend that the changes be as minimal as you can and textures
be rich and interesting as they are now.
Germaine Dietch: I live across Castle Creek from the barn. I
would like to ask a question about the sheltered outdoor exhibits
on the east side.
Heidi: That is existing and not and additional.
Roxanne: The lease with the City Council states specifically
that there will be no further structures on the parcel.
Glenn: About the deck and how the new lower deck interfaces with
the upper deck I would like to support the idea of a small
platform on the existing deck that had its own structure so that
you could leave as much of the existing stuff there visually as
you could.
MOTION: Les made the motion that HPC grant conceptual
development approval for the Holdon-Marolt Museum Site subject to
the following conditions:
1. Preservation activity shall adhere to the Secretary
of Interior's Standards.
2. Sub-committee consisting of the three project
monitors and Staff, shall meet on-site with the
applicant to review all details of preservation,
restoration and reconstruction prior to the submission
of a Final Development plan. The sub-committee's
findings shall be incorporated within the Final
Development application for full HPC review.
3. The cupola shall be designed as a reconstruction,
based upon accurate historic research. The windows
need restudied.
4. Ail landscape, deck, ditch, fence, etc. details
shall be submitted in the Final Development
application.
5. Exact major building materials (roof, windows,
railings, etc.) shall be submitted, as possible, as
required in the Final Development application.
Roger second. Ail in favor of motion, motion carries.
9
Historic Preservation Committee
Minutes of November 28, 1990
LITTLE ANNIE'S - 517 E. HYMAN AVE.
Roxanne: The applicant is requesting HPC
relocation of the entry door to increase
entrance way to allow for better egress.
approval for the
the width of the
MOTION: Les made the motion that
approval for 517 E. Hyman; second
motion, motion carries.
HPC grant Minor Development
by Roger. Ail in favor of
PRESENTATION ON HARDING GLASS
Ken Johnston presented the Board with a new material for windows
that will be available. Windows have a thermal break inside.
New paints have been developed that are compatible with aluminum.
Paint is baked on the aluminum.
COMMUNICATIONS
County Court House Wheelchair
Roxanne: The court house is proposing a temporary ramp up the
west elevation which is the second most visible side of this
building. I feel the county should purchase a lift as opposed to
the ramp. °
Don: By the time the ramp is finished it would cost about the
same. I would prefer a lift.
Roger: Where would the lift be situated. I would recommend the
North elevation and have an interior lift.
Glenn: Consensus of the Board is no ramp and east or north
elevation outside only.
MOTION: Glenn made the motion to adjourn; second by Jake. Ail
in favor of motion, motion carries.
Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Kathy Strickland, Deputy City Clerk
10