Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19900214Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of February 14, 1990 RESOLUTION-HPC GOALS . 204 S. MILL-LANE PARCEL-PUBLIC HEARING RESOLUTION SUPPORTING HOUSE BILL 1033 PRE-APPLICATION-INDEPENDENCE BUILDING 1 1 3 3 6 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE Minutes of February 14, 1990 Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Georgeann Waggaman, Charles Cunniffe and Glenn Rappaport present. Absent were Joe Krabacher, Don Erdman and Leslie Holst. MOTION: Charles made the motion to approve the minutes of January 24, 1990. Second by Glenn. All Approved. Motion carries. PUBLIC HF2~RING-~-ESTED RIGHTS RESOI/3TION-624 E. HOPKINS Charles stepped down. MOTION: Glenn made the motion to approve the Vested Rights resolution for 624 E. Hopkins as presented by Staff. Georgeann second. All approved. RESOLUTION-HPC GOAT~ Roxanne: I condensed all the issues we have talked about and appropriated them into the Goals; stated our goals and objectives. This resolution provides a foundation. Charles reseated. MOTION: Georgeann made the motion to approved reso 90-2. Charles second. All approved. 204 S. MILL-LANE PARCEL-PUBLIC HEARING Public Hearing opened. Roxanne: Harley Baldwin needs to provide affordable housing on site because of the FAR expansion of the project. In order to do that realestate transactions occurred so that there could be a lot line adjustment so that the Lane parcel (the alley parcel) was contiguous to the property. The parcel now connects with the Collins project. The whole purpose of the Lane parcel is to provide two affordable housing units on site with parking underneath. Staff finds that further study is necessary. They are proposing a concrete block building with some brick banding on the north elevation. The north elevation in this particular case is bland due to the Laurel Donnelley parcel (Alpine Bank) not being developed yet. Possibly further study on materials and articulation. I am concerned about a rectangular block building being visible from Hopkins Street. The south elevation fenestration is not compatible. With regard to the demolition of the existing structure we did not put an exemption in the code, it says any structure shall go through all the requirements for a demolition which is very extensive. In this case I feel it is burdensome. The Planning office will be working on a code Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of February 14, 1990 revision. We need information from the applicant at the next submission as to why they feel they should be exempt. Joe Wells: We have a project underway on the Collins Block which include the renovation of the historic structure as well as a portion of the infill building beside it. That was approved through a Planning Director's exemption from GMQS for no increase in FAR for an historic landmark. We are trying to complete the loft bedroom on the third level of the Collins Block, complete the infill structure and establish continuity between the two lots. We will tear down the existing structure and do a mechanical and storage on the lower level, two parking spaces on the alley level, trash service area, and two, two bedroom affordable housing units up above that. We are seeking to increase the FAR of the structure roughly 3800 sq. ft. and the net leasable about 2,000 sq. ft. with an additional 1500 sq. ft. of affordable housing. The lot line adjustment goes to City Council and hopefully we can resolve HPC's conceptual issues and move onto Council. We have a primary structure with no alley frontage and no opportunity to have off-street parking and no opportunity to address the trash storage requirements. Wayne Paulson, architect: The back wall is on the property line which presently faces the park. The alley side was concern and how to make it compatible. Today we are just throwing out ideas for the space requirement of the building. We used the general massing of adjacent buildings and the window are the same general character of the Collins Block. We used a soldier course parapet along the south elevation (brick). The entire south elevation is brick. On the north elevations I was instructed to use concrete block. The building will be as simple as possible. Glenn: There will be a building where the art park is on Hopkins. I like the idea of a back wall being as blank as possible so if there is some art going on it could be utilized. The garage doors are appropriate. Charles: Collins anybody. Possibly the appearance could blend in more with the Block. The north and east elevations do not impact I would like to see a little more brick. Georgeann: I like the blank north wall and see the concrete block painted a dark rich color which will neutralize it. The openings for the trash and cars are appropriate. The brick on the alley side enriches that area. I have some concern with the rhythm of the windows. Bill: With regards to standard one I find that the rectangular massing is compatible and with the height being lower the massing 2 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of February 14, 1990 stays subordinate. I questions whether the materials need to be the same as the adjacent building. Possible the use of stucco veneer over the north face to get a better back drop to the Art Park. This is a great opportunity to have a whimsical building that is compatible and change the windows. Harley Baldwin, owner: If the contract next door does not go through I am happy to give them the opportunity to change the wall to reflect the Art Park, possibly changing it every two years. Glenn: This has tremendous design possibilities and I would encourage this building to be different. Charles: To reflect what Glenn is talking about the two sets of windows that are on either side of the stair window could be put together. That would make more window area in one place. Georgeann: We are asking them to study an upgrade of the north, east and west wall materials. We are asking to study the fenestration of the south wall. MOTION: Charles made the motion to grant conceptual development approval of 204 S. Mill, Lane Parcel with the following conditions which shall be met at Final Development Review: a) Exact materials representation, brick or a brick form of concrete block. b) Restudy of all elevations. c) Restudy of south elevation fenestration and ground floor doors. d) Information to the Planning office as to why the structure proposed for demolition should be exempt from the criteria for approval. Georgeann second. All approved. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING HOUSE BILL 1033 Georgeann made the motion to approve the resolution supporting house bill 1033. Charles second. All approved. PRE-APPLICATION-INDEPENDENCE BUILDING Roxanne: Ail of the committees comments are non-binding. The proposal is only the store front level. My concern is the building as a whole. My goal is to have both owners communicating so that all the changes are compatible with each other. Michael Ernemann, architect for the project has researched photographs of the building and intends to do an actual restoration of the recessed entrance that is on the Cooper Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of February 14, 1990 Street side and remove the brick facing on the kickplate and replace it with panelled wood. My concern is what they want to do on the Galena Street Elevation. That is where the recessed lobby is. The applicant would like to put in an additional store front on the west elevation and a storefront window near the corner. That elevation needs to be looked at as a whole. If the lobby were to be more compatible as a store front the building might be eligible for the National Register. Georgeann: It is a little difficult to tell owner A he can't put in a storefront unless owner B improves their lobby. Roxanne: They also want to remove the lights that are attached to the building and add an retractable awning. Michael Ernemann, architect: The contract is to buy Crossroads including the basement. They have not contracted to buy the lobby entrance or the upper two levels of the building. My sense of why it was designed that way is that Cooper Street was the southern most edge of commercial activity in Aspen and Durant Street was the route of the Colo. Midland railway. There was no reason to develop the westerly facade of that building. The commercial development was on Cooper Street. Within the last ten years commercial development has taken place on Durant Street. We propose to add one storefront which is proportionally the same size as all the other storefronts in the building. Detail that so that it is not a replication. Charles: Broken awnings are more appropriate. Georgeann: I have no problem with restoring the bays, and wooden front door. I am not sure the windows on Galena Street should be changed. Adding the storefront might make the building more confusing. Charles: It is a fabulous building and to make it look more authentic would be appropriate. Glenn: Setting up a framework like the second layer being the strong unifying force and the front layer whether it is awnings or signs etc. should be very different. That seems to be the direction you are going. Michael: In the guidelines it states that new construction should exhibit more modern detail appropriate to the buildings period. It is not the intent of the guidelines for modern construction to mimic an historic building. 4 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of February 14, 1990 Georgeann: Three different elements just is not appropriate. Possibly we need replication because we can't have three elements. Charles: What about doing a modern interpretation of what was there before. Michael: That is where we are headed now. Charles: similar enough but if they stop and look at it they would know it was not original. Bill: I am encouraged by the restoration of the store fronts on the Cooper Street side and am in favor of the awnings being more individual. A 1990 rendition would be appropriate for the character of the new storefront. A new storefront that is compatible with the existing. I am not in favor of doing it by itself without having some commitment as to what happens to the hotel or allowing you to do a replication there. Georgeann: Possibly taking the two windows and turning them into doors. Michael: I concur with Glenn's statement. The hotel intent is to have the facade read and have something behind it. Georgeann: If you contact the hotel owners possibly they will be willing to work with you. MOTION: Georgeann made the Charles second. Ail approved. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 motion to adjourn the meeting. Kathy Strickland, Deputy City Clerk 5