Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19890614Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of June 14, 1989 FINAL DEVELOPMENT MOUNTAIN RESCUE - 630 W. MAIN ELKS BUILDING - LANDMARK DESIGNATION 210 S. GALEN 200 E. MAIN STREET - AMENDMENT TO FINAL DEVELOPMENT VARIATION . GUIDOS SWISS INN - MINOR DEVELOPMENT 612 W. MAIN ST. CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING FAR 1 2 2 3 4 HISTORI6 PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES City Council Chambers 1st Floor City Hall June 14, 1989 - 5:00 p.m. Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Georgeann Waggaman, Nick Pasquarella, Joe Krabacher and Charles Cunniffe present. Charlie Knight, Don Erdman, Zoe Compton and Chris Darakis were excused. MOTION: Charles made the motion to approve the minutes of May 24, 1989. Nick second, all approved. COMMITTEE MEMBER AND STAFF COMMENTS Charles: If a project is controversial, possibly those who were absent should listen to the tape and read the minutes if they are voting on the issue at the next meeting. This would help continuity. MOTION: Joe made the motion to add Guido's Swiss Inn, minor development to the agenda. Georgeann second. All approved. FINAL DEVELOPMENT MOUNTAIN RESCUE - 630 W. MAIN Graeme Means: The eaves have a 1 x 8 fascia which seems to be in scale. The siding shows the same as the logs on the front of about 5 1/4 inches so the siding on the addition will relate to the original logs. If the building is within 5 to 10 feet of the property line windows need protection. Roxanne: You aren't changing the size of the opening just the glass to make it fire rated. Graeme Means, architect: We might change the opening an inch to make the glass fit. Roxanne: windows. What about egress. They aren't making you have egress Graeme: Not on those two facades. Bill: At conceptual the Board voted to allow the tower but I find it not in keeping 'with the rest of the neighborhood. A gable end window would have been a better selection. Georgeann: I had no problem with the tower. MOTION: Georgeann made the motion that HPC grant final development approval for the Mountain Rescue building at 630 W. Main Street, to be as presented with the corrections and changes in the eaves as were shown tonight and subject to whatever requirements they need for the wire glass windows as long as in Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of June 14, 1989 the original buildings the minimum. Minor changes to be All approved. changes are made to the absolute signed off by Staff. Nick second. ELKS BUILDING - ~ANDMARK DESIGNATION 210 S. GAT~NA MOTION: Georgeann made the motion to recommend designation of the Elks Building. Charles second. All approved. Nick: We are going to upgrade the building internally and I have been lobbying for 7 years to get the building designated and the next step will be to get the building on the National Register. Roxanne: There will be a change to the exterior as they want to put on an elevator similar to what the Wheeler Opera House has. Georgeann: We might want to discuss the issue of elevators and how we deal with them in a worksession. Nick abstained from voting. 200 E. MAIN STREET - AMENDMENT TO FINAL DEVELOPMENT FAR VARIATION Roxanne: The issue is whether this is an appropriate action for this Board to take as far as granting a variation with the specific finding that ft is more compatible to the historic resource. The historic resource is the adjacent structure. Bill: I find it to be incompatible because we didn't want the windows to be that exposed and they chose the employee housing. The design could have been done differently. Charles: A smaller window would be more compatible from the Board's point of view. Holly Proctor: We are requesting a variation for 155 sq. feet floor area. We only counted the stair wells once and they should have been counted twice which would take us over FAR 58 sq. ft. To avoid taking a chunk out of the building we are asking for a variation so we can keep the building as it is. We feel the building as it stands now does allow for a smooth transition that works well for the neighborhood. The light wells and basement walls above grade would be the balance. Bill: What could you offer to the Board that makes it more compatible historically to allow for this variation. 2 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of June 14, 1989 Holly: The first and second levels I can't say without doing studies and taking out 60 sq. ft. Bill: To grant a variation for ease of going through the process is not in our purview unless we can prove that it is compatible historically. To grant variations for additional floor area above what the zoning code says for a new building I am finding hard to justify. Georgeann: On the second element where you want to keep the basement where it is, bgcause the basement lines up nicely with the basement of Gracy's, perhaps we could say the smaller they are the more they are in keeping with the historic elements of the whole area. We just can't arbitrarily grant this because you have worked with us and we like the design. Donald Fleisher: The building should not be lowered due to the residential use downstairs. The other issue is the alignment of the windows. Charles: We deal with this problem all the time and it could be resolved by cutting off a few inches of the building somewhere. Change the dimension on the last ten feet of the building. We have already exempted the building from GMP. It would be stretching our bounds for us to permit more than the amount of square feet that we are allowed to permit because there is an architectural error here. MOTION: Nick made the motion to deny the request proposed as it is out of our bounds. Charles second. Yes vote: Nick, Charles, Bill, Joe. No vote: Georgeann. Bill: Since this is a new building they could step the building back to conform to grad~ so that they don't have to count that floor area. Joe: In general it would be more compatible if it were smaller. Bill Drueding, Zoning Officer: If you have a new building you should design it within the code. GUIDOS SWISS INN - MINOR DEVELOPMENT Bill Poss stepped down. Roxanne: The applicant proposes to remove the grass and place concrete in the rear area behind the restaurant to beautify the dining area. The area will be fenced and planters will be 3 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of June 14, 1989 installed. The area is on the south side of the building facing Rubey Park. Guido Meyer, owner: The fence is around four feet tall and two sides of the fence are already there. We want to put a patio in and make use of it. Georgeann: What about lighting. Guide: There will be low lights to light the plants. MOTION: Charles made the motion to approve the minor development for Guido's Swiss Inn. Nick second. Ail approved. 612 W. MAIN ST. CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING Bill opened the public hearing. Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner presented the over- view of the project as attached in records (memo June 14, 1989). Roxanne: This is an asphalt clad cottage with no foundation. They want to put a new foundation in and relocate the cottage on their 6,000 sq. ft. parcel which is two lots. They intend to excavate an entire basement, add an addition on and raise the structure approximately 30 inches and screen the foundation with lattice. Staff finds that raising the structure is not appropriate and breaks the rhythm of the block. The partial demolition is for the two small attachments to the rear to be removed. One appears to be an original porch that was enclosed. Roxanne: The secretary of interior standards state that with partial demolition that all changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of the building and that changes may have acquired significance in their own right. It is important for the HPC to consider if these two attachments have acquired significance. The new addition we find to be appropriate in scale and materials. The east elevation needs to be restudied. Every original opening is being changed. We find that the east elevation completely changes from its original character. We are requiring that the original siding under the asphalt be rehydrated and painted with only patching in of new clapboard where extreme deterioration has taken place. All original windows should be retained and preserved. Porch and chimney element shall be preserved. Original landscaping shall be retained. Roofing material shall be wood shingles stained dark. We are recommending approval with conditions as stated on page 5 of memo dated June 14, 1989. The applicant also proposes to install decorative cut shingles in the 4 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of June 14, 1989 gable face. We recommend approval only if it is found to be historically accurate. APPLICANT RESPONSE Rod Dyer, architect: The porch was added on at a later date. Both shed structures are about to collapse and are incompatible with the floor plan. We are representing a height increase of about 2'6" over what we have presently. We want to raise the building in order to add a basement under the house and the owner wants the increased square footage and we are within the FAR. In order to do this we must provide light and egress out of the basement if at some time it is used for habitable space. The owner has lots 0 & P of Block 24. The present location of the house is on the western line of lot P. The owner would like to move the house in order to add on a sitting/family room with a deck. The wood deck would be screened by compatible shrubbery. They intend to remodel the kitchen/dining area and put a fireplace in the livingroom. There would be modifications to the bath area. We would like to add a bay window to give room for a large dining table. At the kitchen we would like to add a greenhouse type window to provide more light into the kitchen. We will have guard rails on the porch. The addition would be done in the same type of siding. We would like to do the roof in an thick asphalt shingle because the applicant already had one historic building burn t~ the ground. We would like to utilize decorative shingles on the gable ends. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Nick: I feel comfortable with everything except raising the building. Charles: block in developed. I am concerned about the building being shifted on the relationship to the other buildings as they get Georgeann: Perhaps the building shifts a little too far to the left. I don't like it being quite as tight with the building to the left. I am uncomfortable with the building being raised. Roxanne: it. Possibly not raising the building but just shifting Joe: I don't think it is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood to raise the building up and I don't like the railings on the inside of the porch. As far as moving it over I don't have a strong preference. I also have no problem with the asphalt roofing. 5 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of June 14, 1989 Georgeann: I would like the front of the building to remain and stay in the plane as it is and only raised no more than a foot. I am opposed to the railing and to the concrete walk. Nick was excused. Bill: As far as relocation I am in favor of it because the rhythm has just shifted from one side of the lot to the other and the historical rhythm of the street is retained. As far as raising the structure it' should be retained within the historic nature of the street because most of the structures were at street level. I would be willing to raise it no more than a foot. I am in favor of the partial demolition. I have a problem with extending the roof continually back on the new addition. Keep the same gable and drop it a foot. Roxanne: On the east elevation every existing opening has been changed and I feel it needs more study. I am not sure if the bay window is appropriate on this structure. Bill: On the west elevation the applicant should try to work with the existing windows if possible. Charles: We should have the applicant restudy the roofing materials and bring in samples. MOTION: Bill made the motion that HPC recommend and grant conceptual development approval for the proposal at 612 W. Main St. subject to the following conditions to be met at final development which are represented on page 5 and 6 of Staff's memo dated June 14, 1989. In addition item #9 That the structure shall not be raised more.than 6 to 12 inches to order to correct any drainage problems. Item #10 Elimination of the railings completely. Item #11 'Restudy of the east and west elevations particularly fenestration. Item #12 Restudy making the addition more distinguishable from original. A break in the roof alignment and wall plane to distinguish between historic and new. Item #13 Concrete walk be eliminated and applicant to come up with a more historical material. Item #14 Restudy roofing materials. Charles second. All approved. Motion carries. COMMUNICATIONS Committee changed July l~th meeting. Meeting to begin at 3:00. CLG grant will be $12,000 next year. Committee scheduled worksession at 4:00 for the next meeting June 28, 1989. 6 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of June 14, 1989 Roxanne: We need to take about the re-evaluation process also. We also need to look at the inventory. Meeting adjourned 7:00 p.m. Kathy Strickland, Deputy'City Clerk' 7