The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19890328â‚¬ AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE March 28, 1989 - Tuesday 2:30 P.M. to 4:30 P.M. FIRST FLOOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS City Hall 2:30 I. Roll Call and approval of March 14, 1989 minutes II. Committee Member & Staff Comments III. Public Comment IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Conceptual Development, public hearing, 201 W. Francis St. Carriage House renovation B. Conceptual Development, 204 S. Mill, Aspen Hardware Stalker Building C. Pre-application, 204 S. Galena St., The Sport V. OLD BUSINESS-NONE VI. COMMUNICATIONS A. Staff Report: Code Amendments B. Project Monitoring Reports C. Special Committee Reports: Public Relations Aspen Historic Trust Heritage Celebration Committee REMINDER: Aspen Hardware Store Walk-through, NOON, Tuesday, March 28, 1989 meet on site. Council/HPC Joint worksession - VERY IMPORTANT - Wednesday. March 29, 1989 5:00 p.m., Council Chambers 0 4 12 \Â¢ d v n 6-Â·L, 4 -1. 216 LOCU 124 ~ Ld SOA) AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE March 28, 1989 - Tuesday 2:30 P.M. to 4:30 P.M. FIRST FLOOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS City Hall 2:30 I. Roll Call and approval of March 14, 1989 minutes II. Committee Member & Staff Comments III. Public Comment IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Conceptual Development, public hearing, 201 W. Francis St. Carriage House renovation B. Conceptual Development, 204 S. Mill, Aspen Hardware C. Pre-application, 204 S. Galena St., The Sport Stalker Building V. OLD BUSINESS-NONE VI. COMMUNICATIONS A. Staff Report: Code Amendments B. Project Monitoring Reports C. Special Committee Reports: Public Relations Aspen Historic Trust Heritage Celebration Committee REMINDER: Aspen Hardware Store Walk-through, NOON, Tuesday, March 28, 1989 meet on site. Council/HPC Joint worksession - VERY IMPORTANT - Wednesday. March 29, 1989 5:00 p.m., Council Chambers 1% A MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Conceptual Development: 201 W. Francis, Carriage House Renovation, Public Hearing Date: March 28, 1989 LOCATION: 201 W. Francis, Lots F, G, H, and I, Block 49, City and Townsite of Aspen ZONING: R-6, Designated Landmark RATING: "Excellent", Designated Landmark APPLICANT: George A. Vicenzi HPC MONITOR: not yet assigned APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Conceptual Development approval for the adaptive use renovation of the frame carriage house, which includes partial demolition of the attached "cow shed" to the west elevation, construct a new gabled entry at the west elevation, and make changes in window and door openings. The applicant also intends to repoint and repair the attached brick carriage house, currently serving as a garage. A rear yard setback variation is requested of the HPC. PRIOR HPC CONSIDERATION: On March 14, 1989, the applicant met with the HPC in a pre-application to begin a dialogue with the Committee on proper renovation techniques. A few Committee members attended the walk-through held on March 17: The --1 applicant has submitted revised plans based upon Committee member comments at the pre-application meeting and walk-through. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The Development Review Standards are located in Section 7- 601(D)(1) of the Land Use Code. Staff's comments follow. Standard 1. The proposed development is compatible in character with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels with then subject site is in an H, Historic Overlay district or is adjacent to a Historic Landmark. For historic Landmarks were proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area, HPC shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. Response: Secretary of the Interior Standard #1 states: "Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a property which requires minimal alteration of the structure." The applicant has demonstrated his desire to do so, however, staff has concerns on the number of changes taking place, removal of original materials and the addition of the gabled roof dormer. 1) Four (4) flat roof skylights are proposed. Staff finds this excessive and recommends the HPC approve no more than two. 2) The south (alley) elevation is the primary facade on this carriage house. The changes proposed include new overlap siding, sliding glass doors to replace the upper hayloft doors, new lower level garage doors, a triangle gable peak window, and the addition of the west elevation entry. 3) The west elevation is also receiving a number of alterations. The demolition of the small attached cow shed is proposed, replaced with a small gabled entry with the following dimensions: Height: 17' to ridge Width: 17' Length: 9' The entry is recessed in appreximately 2' from either end. The overall FAR increase for the parcel will be approximately 25'. This entry contains the interior stairway, central doorway with small pedimented porch covering, two double hung windows on either side of the door, a triangle gable peak window, flat roof skylight and gabled dormer with casement window. Staff recommends the complete elimination of the dormer and gable peak window and smaller cottage-type windows. 3. The east elevation contains two flat roof g - 2 skylights, which staff recommends be eliminated, and a new lower level entrance door. A small bathroom window is also proposed which staff finds acceptable. 4. The north elevation, visible from Francis St., will retain its lower level barn door and upper window openings. The new entrance addition contains two small divided cottage- type windows, which appear compatible, and another entrance way to the west. A single double hung window is proposed on the lower level to the west of the barn doors. Another triangle gable peak window is proposed. The proposed roof dormer is extremely visible from this elevation. The total number of changes proposed on all four elevations is significant. The HPC should consider the impact these changes will make to the overall character ef the carriage house, at the same time working with the applicant to find an acceptable middle ground. Certainly the structure needs repair. The applicant wishes to make alterations that are sensitive to the property's historic nature. Staff, however, is concerned that this project may become one more "carriage house reconstruction", which continues to perpetuate the loss of historic integrity of outbuildings in the West End. Standard 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development Response: The West End neighborhood is seeing more and more adaptive use projects involving secondary historic structures (carriage houses). As this committee has reviewed in the past, the critical goal to keep in mind is not allow the character of the original carriage house to be diminished or destroyed. This is often an extremely difficult task to do. Staff finds this proposal attempts to maintain as much original integrity of the structure as possible, however, our concerns remain that what we will end up with is a "new" structure, that barely retains the historic fabric and character. Also, since this structure has received serious deferred maintenance over the years, we are faced with nearly replacing the entire structure. The question remains: does the adaptive use force design issues that are not respectful of the historic carriage house? 3 Staff recommends that the HPC make a condition of approval be that the attached brick carriage house will receive maintenance and repointing as a preventative to its future reconstruction. Standard 3. The proposed development enhances er does not detract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: Staff finds this standard could be argued either way. On the one hand, the marvelous historic character this carriage house has in combination with all the structures on the parcel should be retained as is, with active maintenance. As previously stated in a staff memo before, the Bowles-Cooley House (as it is known with historic authenticity) is one of the most photographed residences in the West End. Its property's importance as a cultural resource in Aspen is undisputed. On the other hand, adaptive projects for housing (deed restricted or otherwise) may assist in meeting the community's overall goals. Staff and the HPC have attempted to find ways to guide carriage house development without destroying the historic character. Staff's concerns lie in the addition of a roof dormer, which alters the original roof form and integrity of the structure, and the handling of the window and door openings. While it is difficult to address these issues as they related to "cultural value", staff recommends the HPC consider this standard in its general applicability to this very significant West End residence. Standard 4. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: Clearly, this development does diminish the historic architectural integrity of the structure. Original elements will be removed, additions made, etc. that permanently alter this carriage house. The HPC should strongly consider if the proposed changes are better than the existing conditions might be with an active stabilization and maintenance plan. Staff recommends that the replacement materials exactly match the existing, including wood roofing shingles. 4 ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 1. Approve the proposal as submitted 2. Approve the proposal with the conditions as recommended by staff and discussed in this meeting 3. Table action to a date certain to allow the applicant further time to study the proposal, incorporating the comments and guidance from the HPC in a revised proposal. 4. Deny conceptual development approval finding that the application does not meet the development review standards. A denial would constitute public hearing re-noticing. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC grant conceptual development approval for the carriage house renovation at 201 W. Francis St., subject to the following conditions to be met at Final Development approval: 1. The treatment of the three large south elevation openings be further studied for compatibility 2. The repair rather than replacement of significant percentages of exterior siding be accomplished 3. The two east elevation skylights be eliminated/kc,4,c,12 4. The roof dormer be eliminate N k. aae.U-el 5. UPhe-triangle_gable--peakzzÂ¥:indows=be=el-iminateda=-uie an>e~424 / Au 6. The west elexation main floor entry double hung windows be sinÂ¥-11'42,)#'possibly divided into two-over-two. 7. The roofing material be wood shingle / f '71 2. t/A (- /' 0, 0 Â© 1 4 1-'~- 8. The Final Development application include a complete description of the partial demolition activity to be performed and the sequence 9. The repointing of the attached brick carriage house be accomplished at the time the frame carriage house is being renovated. The deferred maintenance of this structure is equally of concern to staff. ~21/ .'1~a> ge?r// YG ,Â·41 3--i f--bor< memo.hpc.201wf.2 & ff J~ 'fÂ» 4-0 L Q 0/ 29=1 1/LÂ·Pu<~ 57 5 w.r< C, 02 4 1.4 944K[Lfl:fral- VICENZI & COMPANY March 3, 1989 Historic Preservation Committee Aspen, CO Dear HPC Members: I have decided to tackle the arduous and delicate task of rehabilitating the wooden carriage house presently located behind my house at 201 W. Francis. After consulting with various engineers, architects and contractors, I reached the conclusion that it would be much easier and less expensive to demolish the existing dilapidated structure. However, the resulting structure would be just another "new looking" victorian and would be too much of a contrast with the adjacent brick garage and main house, which I have previously renovated in a manner preserving most of the original victorian flavor. Consequently, in the spirit of preservation, I would like to pursue a plan which would preserve as much of the original structure as is economically and structurally possible. This approach is only feasible for me as long as the presently useless building can, after renovation, be used as a garage/ work area on the ground level and a studio guest apartment upstairs. In order to accomplish this goal some minor changes will have to be made to the original structure to provide more natural lighting and upstairs access. I feel that my proposal as presented herein complies with all of your review standards involving Historic Landmarks for the following reasons: 1) Since my proposed rehabilitation basically retains the victorian design and scale of the original carriage house, which has been compatible with the adjacent brick garage and main house for the past 96 years, it will continue to be compatible after my remodel is completed. However, in order to retain the historical and compatible massing of all the structures on the parcel, the carriage house should remain exactly where it is. Since the "cowshed" isn' t tall enough even with a new dormer roof to allow for an interior stairway to access the upper lever, is dilapidated, is not a victorian structure, is not critical in the overall scheme of buildings and is on the least visible side, I concluded that demolishing it was the most logical alternative in order to build a large enough entrace area to accommodate the needed access to the second floor. Consequently, I feel that a variation on the dimensional requirements with regard to rear yard setbacks, minimum distance between buildings and additions to non-conforming uses be granted. P.O. BOX 2238 ASPEN COLORADO 81612 303/925-1196 Historic Preservation Committee March 3, 1989 Page 2 2) As proposed, the remodeled carriage house would be consistent with the character of the neighborhood which is contemporary on the south and west sides and a mix of contemporary and remodeled victorian on the north and east sides. , 3) My proposed plan will only enhance the other historic structures on the parcel because the carriage house in its present dilapidated state only detracts from the adjacent structures and eventually (in the near future) will collapse in a heavy snow year. After renovation it will help preserve the cultural historical value of the brick garage and house because it will retain the victorian out- building style and scale which has always complimented the other structures on the parcel. 4) Under my proposal, the architectural integrity of the structure will remain intact for the following reasons: a. Over 60% of the original structure will be retained including 90% of the siding on the north side, 90% of the structural members and 80% of the original soffits and fascia. b. The carriage house will remain on the original "footprint" and retain 90% of the same basic victorian architectural form. c. The new elements for the most part are victorian in nature, ' thus are consistent with the intent of the Historic Landmark Development Guidelines. Also, most new elements are on the least visible south and west elevations. d. Those new elements are minor and placed in such a manner that the end result is a carriage house that becomes usefull and remains as an "outbuilding" that does not compete architecturally with the main house. In sum, I would like to be able to renovate the "falling down" carriage house preserving as much of the original architecture and materials as reasonably possible and ending up with a usefull building that will blend with and enhance the other existing victorian buildings. Cordially, jl .- 'fl L, ,- M.K 1 George A. Vicenzi )1 4 ' ''llal -=9.. ./ 12,;ir'ikLillill A fla- J . .b 0 1 1- 44 40 - f f#'&..,<05"NI/4 + & <Me I ~Nip jv --I- ? 71i xylÂ©fti - , ~|?'hh 1 7. . I 4 %3 9&- 4.4 1-(Al<LU ~Â·2 bi""1Â£4 liell' - =29 la t . 5- -22 11 '2. 3 1 -. .. 4 .erÂ· f 1 l'-7>>.9-2 h.2.14 W'. ; 21111+ k. 1 1, 04 , 4 , . 4-4: . M Â£"Â« .....rm./Im- li 4 â€¢â€¢ -t- 7/0#/Iri /1 497~70, ~*)!i:,4#'itilffl~iDâ„¢ V m.a P po' Uill.liq....7.MA*'ILi:l,â€¢imp' D Â¥923.-fts 4, U'ki;ij:1169<1 .11:.R!4 Al,WEA#Mwi'14'kimwir El./low Â¢2; i Â¥-7, \ a.'WIN/"Nil - 1 t> 4 iiI- :4~~* r14-730 k 41, -46 14 .4 \ r Â·.,32.- 1 I 16Â¥. 1 1. kit , 1-44 . I X\ f A// 0/1~ Ill - - 1 117 -4 LIli 1 1 3 4 8 -O, 3\ - /// ,XC<3- \44 Â® Kbe N" Cl M? 80 A<10 J . , , 41 OLD (19.tek @ 04 MET k. (~00$ (3{lowlâ‚¬ 0 SLY C[6 Wr S (bfak-rRIP Â® MEw METAL QWF (Drow w Â© OLD Eh ECT A r If 11 ' 14 1 Sd.ALE Yf =1 u ncr t I r,/ (A M V N 8 r 11) d> ib C . (3) A G \-0 41, Cl- k ? Bok 4 0 - G Kile tia 4. Roo,2 le\Kou>\.3 (i) lut Lt&4Â·r l\31~A.BTRITA . , ' 42- / 7 1 Â· 1- f Z 11 .1 OD Ute OLD 7-2-1Â¢7 14: posireLE Châ‚¬.1 1 ~ NOTE: U.)0 ob \FAIXA C..5 00< -i ~ 11 J 4- 1 Au Ng \O utiews + booRS 1 1 sc A LE .1/9 U= 1 : ,-1 VVEST ELEV. (AMEN )) 0- \A- - 4-4 -L JA F. 67 5 V - 0 - Sta -- .-1 220 2 14Â°~ BEE i - 1/7//ill:!1114111 mmum Â«99 1.--1 \_r:2 - // /1/// . ta i Â£ MALE Y,I :11 5641 H ELE V. ~AMEN betÂ© $ Eti q- Iâ€¢40 04 BKI<k (DU)000 51.tht,16 &.Al $ 6<Â»Ri G KEW CLA? 80*0 4~ QtÂ©â‚¬ 8) EUSTIWG METAL R.001: CORow 16 Â© REW .Er K Roof EBROW)13 (DUSâ‚¬ 10%'rt NG FASÂ¢*A -tbit,4 9*FltÂ¢ Â®U)005 loptteow Ar-11(ts LA''Cleftâ€¢Mif oÂ¢ kle Setoi / MEw U.Ke GoARD 40 w,bE d> 54 ULKT (b kÂ« 19:*M) 417 I,f-f-rÂ¥-Â· 1,Â·.4.h F a ir-v.C ..It r)44 0/ 1 Ht- i,i t.â€¢e,4 W...., 4 t~,-Ai,<. 11 @ C //1 - - i / 11 -3 1 L s r.=11- L 4 Â®Â»D, *A-1 11.-li 0 E.evt,~16 WRItt . ~Â·4 - ' 74,0, R *,Â· er/*1 - 1 0 0, 6 M gr 6< ADO F (8~ou, w) ~Ar\ENDEDj No Al H E LE\< ~ e DeckrKG 5) MEw 4' CLOBOARO 0 0,Â· O ru:r M. 8*4 le KO-,3 Â© ke,0 nu AL WOOK LBROWIN) g) OLO t.,4/ 00*RO 4< / At.w U 62 %0 *4 4 . (Polt> FARIA 4304-tri (5&2112 Woog CKIEMI,â€¢IC 04 All- ME.w Vullou,% 410012% 19. Â¥ 11 1 LUE F .121 G 321 i i ! ..4,7 1 11, 1 1 1, 1 1 ill. . 1 K . '0, a '00 A 4 1 9 42341, i & D:.'-- P . 1 1 I \11 2 6 1 ' 1 . 1 0 0 I / % ' ..1 ; I . D ... , 1 242'CK & 10056 -4 1 ir I â„¢ 1 0 . 1. 1 4 I ID U : 0.2 , 970 1 1 ! f '' LU| i! \ 13 0 . 1? 4 : 1 4 ~ocal.4 0 1 - . I , .-4 ! Â¢.1 21..' . :Y 1 9 1 t -t- C.Â£11-AQ OCOU , 1 t 'L "61 T E>LOCK 4.9 1, 1 - 4 1 Al ' I . 7. 1 4- 0 4> 0 27.20Â· . ..~. 1 34 ~ 1 Ai Â· 9, ' 8G 4 1 436 0 - d 4 4 St-460 20\CK GAQUSE - ! 411 -- 1 Â¢ 'I ,/ 3 8 -ASS.... , 20 05 27 20 _.- 0 -1-/t,--;,Â·CA-'W 35 20 :Â· W CC, CD' 5:7513'3Â·In" w LO CO â‚¬11-1.- QU. ZI. BE)Â· A 0- 1* Retbalk 6 LV-4 2 DE E thle.?42 1 -bi / C.L.S.ft U V 1 , .... 1 , 16321% 1%51=i ?ag., 1 ... A 0 4.11 . b 1.:I '' i A. "â€¢ : '11.11 - . ~Â·,0r Â· / h. *L - 4 10 IiI 'ji,4: , - 1.- ' I I :. : 4 -2. igit*I ~' . 1 - MIFIBLi. A'lilt. -92 liu .. - r--1 Contemporary French i B~/,A [Cladl Sliding Glass Doors J~ . . . OR IMPOSING CONTEMPORARY FRENCH DOORS Very contemporary with its Clad finish and Slimshades... traditionally sensible choice for either a new home or a remodeled one or as a "French" with substantial panel dimensions and removable wood metal-door replacement. Pella's standard glazing or the Climate Control muntin bars... Pella's Contemporary French Sliding Glass Door has a System within the door's panels give it a significant edge in controlling distinctive appearance and some unique features. It's a stylish and climate efficiently and at a minimum cost. - 1/~ / 1 -M- W 4 1 14 19- 7 1 '4- . 1 . 1 . 1- , . 1 -1-=/ - 3 1. 1. .....1: "1 - iI - 1 1 1 . 1 1 E - --- Il / 999 -: ~['~ZE 1 4 F "" i 1441 f - CO -111 5 # 0 EtÂ¢ 1, 0 -/1 4--- LJ Ill V.:1< 1 Fify .O r U. =C CO 1 E i 0 l=ft -. - 7# 9 3 E m Z 2 The clad door frame, aluminum sill, weatherstripping, screen and ~ GLAZING is the versatile and energy-efficient Pella double glaz- hardware, including the security footbolt and adjustable rollers in siid- ing system. All glass is tempered double-strength; exterior glazing ing panel and screen, are identical to those in Pella Clad Standard can be clear or Sunblock bronze glass. Sliding Glass Doors. In addition, however, the Contemporary French Door incorporates some distinctive features of its own: For maximum energy savings, Pella's Climate Control System is available. Total-unit U value with the closed Type E Slimshade is * LOW-MAINTENANCE EXTERIOR of wider rails and stiles is .26, R value 3.85 - equal to or better than equivalent "low-e" films. finished aluminum, mechanically bonded to laminated-wood Heatlock glass has similar heat-reflecting characteristics: U and door panels. Panel joints are lapped and sealed. R value performance equals or exceeds that of triple glazing. As an alternative to Slimshades, removable wood muntins can fit Â® DOOR PANELS are 1Â¥4" (44 mm) thick, glued and doweled at between glass panes for an authentic "French" look. all ioints. Width of stiles and top rail is 55/32" (131 mm), bottom rail is 99/16" (243 mm) wide for strength, insulation value and (~ WEATHERSTRIPPING - and performance - is identical to that distinctive "French" appearance. Panels have core of warp- of the standard door: With static air pressure of 1.56 psf (equiva- resistant laminated wood blocks, interior surfaces are quality lent 25 mph), maximum a\r infiltration is 0.10 cfm per ftz of overall veneers, ready for finishing. frame dimension - with 50 mph (6.24 psf) water resistance. PELLA WINDOWS AND DOORS 41 Pella Contemporary French Door: erlor of type XO, regular muntins. And at exterlor-type XO with Pella Sllmshades. 42- JOIJ@Pre IUOJ; 0*049-JOOG LIOU . . 9..+W. ./ 7-9 5 0Â·11 9, i' c-- 4 4:3â‚¬:f .5 1, T *6,4 --~i.Bâ‚¬*w '7 0 ':.-I"Ir'9~~Â·~I :..... ... . .....Itt I &.Â·r, .; - f -- F.:t:~.;r -14.4 4-5.-Â· p .:.- .; .C f.'F ,-i:>f.' ' I '~:~~f' 4 - c. 9-,~ 2 ~ tÂ·.0 :"Â·)'Â· 4 ' Il ' . ..<%*{Â·:FÂ·A <- @iltif ~ A, .': Â·-i 1.0. .A .1 ~~ : k>E:Â·.4 -;~ 1;~ A 0*** kh#Â·~ - A A Oft Â·,lus; ..0 f, , ;b#,41* 9 .42.ri,42* ENÂ·f':.: I 41 1,2- - D-r- 1 I , 61Â£11?6'.A :1 1, 5,9... ' hai' 9 ' '*. 0&4 -1 --=. 1 -2,2- 1 . ...., I. A ./...8 4 1%13.2 2 kkth 4 1 TY :.= * SE..54 4 IL:L -1.-UD * :Â·r t.arrn 144 0 -7 .-,3 Ab DI" IWN.4 . 10141 m.4.. :%2.. t...7 Â£ ' 3. a.. 4-* , .r . i 76. 43, -5-Er 2 -R '~1 ~Iti?f- 0 -,7 3'~I- _ A r ' 7 'Â·ap#..b.~.t ;f, 11]lk- ' 40. 4,10 . . f. 4 i .~raÂ·.M; 1'1' 2/y*Mt#Ettivifie '115=3 :: -f*417 --6 3- 0Â¥Â·-Â·39,Â·--0.4. lt- 1 - , '4 &.Â·.' pÂ· 1 ' h'.Â° 0 li PA4 9 . - '.. . Â· u. * L &. 251,44 ID.:.f -- i Â·2~â€ž I . c ..L An ka Fa I =fla . 'limmel=- .. . .:.. 4494.4 C # F r. 12Â£;3 -t i kli I i.-Â· l di,AE_1.-- 17>~Â·t j ~~ '~ - G:Â·. -Â·2'i ~fiW*-â‚¬**94 - ~ '. tt2 - I hi#*5'' 141~ 2, Ir k < .4344*99%{426-Â·t :fr . Z C 623 - ' 4.14 ".41Â·A 2 1%.13Â· - 1 --- 1 Â·z#lul ./.~ , 7%. --Lk ...-Â·;Â·'I,}AÂ· PE9 3 1 : -7.1,#;:;:.4~~.-d-"Â· *+ '*-9... 9{ 7 .7.y...1,-, ~fl.flbt; 9..1 1:.:.~:.:~: ~1â„¢4Â· - 2. . - -331.it; 3/9 Â·i.i. f-$-8,~ -- ... .... .0 4 .-..... I 7/*. 1 3 *. 3 A , i Y . CE MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Conceptual Development - 204 S. Mill St., Aspen Hardware (The Collins Block), Public Hearing Date: March 28, 1989 LOCATION: 204 S. Mill St., the N. 80' of Lots A, B, and C, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO, excepting that portion of said Lot C conveyed by Quit Claim Deed...; and a parcel described by metes and bounds (see attached Exhibit "A") . ZONING: CC, Commercial Core; CC Historic District; Designated landmark RATING: "Excellent", Designated Landmark, and listed on National Register of Historic Places APPLICANT: Harley Baldwin APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Conceptual Development approval to renovate the historic Collins Block storefront and upper facade, construct / a 2,000 sq. ft. third floor to the building to be used as free- market penthouse apartments, and construct a one-story in-fill structure in the open lot behind the principal structure (facing Hopkins St.). A major excavation is planned for the parcel for structural and storage purposes. NOTE: It should be noted that the applicant has amended the original submittal which indicated a plaza/courtyard development in the vacant lot facing Hopkins St. The plans now indicate a one story infill structure of traditional Victorian era storefront design. In pre-application discussions, the applicant has proposed the non-contiguous alley lot to become the site for affordable housing units. This application does not address that issue at this time. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Zoning Officer, Bill Drueding, has stated his concerns about the applicant's FAR calculations, and will be requiring a meeting with the applicants to review in detail their plans. Bill's final determination on existing conditions FAR vs. new, and open space impacts will be required for the P&Z review and approval. SITE, AREA AND BULK CHARACTERISTICS: Please see applicant's calculations attached PRIOR HPC CONSIDERATION: The applicant presented the project in a pre-application with the HPC on February 14, 1989. Committee member comments at that meeting were not opposed to the idea of a third floor addition, provided that it was "not visible" from principal street view. Staff contended in that meeting that any addition would be visible, and the historic integrity of the Collins Block would be gravely diminished. The day following that meeting, staff received comments from three Committee members that they also believed the third floor concept was incompatible to the district and in particular, the landmark structure. OTHER REQUIRED COMMISSION REVIEWS: P&Z approval is required for the project based upon the enlargement; an application for GMQS Exemption was submitted on March 23 by the applicant, however the P&Z review date has not yet been set. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: The Development Review Standards are located in Section 7- 601(D) (1) of the Land Use Code. Staff has also utilized the Historic District and Historic Landmark Development Guidelines, the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation and National Park Service Preservation Briefs. Applicable Secretary of the Interior Standards 1. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a property which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or site and its environment, or to use the property for its originally intended purpose. Staff's response: The applicant is attempting to utilize the structure to its maximum economic benefit, which is understandable. In doing so, a two-unit 2,000 sq. ft. penthouse (third floor/rooftop) addition is proposed to the landmark, which we find requires much more than "minimal" alteration to achieve this goal. In addition, a one-story infill structure is proposed for the vacant lot currently storing hardware store merchandise. We find that this "addition" will require minimal alteration to the Collins Block structure and meets this standard. 9. Contemporary design for alterations and additions to existing properties shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historical, architectural or cultural materials, and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the property, neighborhood or environment. Staff's response: 1) Collins Block: The applicant's proposal 2 meets a portion of this criteria in that the storefront restoration activity proposed Will repair and replace deteriorating elements. It also appears that the contemporary design for the third floor will not destroy significant historic elements of the structure. However, staff finds that the third floor addition is incompatible with the established character of the property and neighborhood. Staff maintains that the historic * character of the two-story Collins Block will be diminished dramatically with the addition, which is visible from many prime %1 locations throughout the Commercial Core. We feel the proposal 1 is insensitive to the historic structure's character. 2) Infill: The proposal incorporates very traditional "Victorian" storefront design in an elaborate fashion for this one-story structure. While the structure basically stands alone, and might not be considered an "addition" to the Collins Block, staff finds this Secretary Standard is applicable due to the nature of the parcel and the development. The new structure is intricately associated with the historic landmark. Staff recommends that the applicant restudy the facade to incorporate compatibly-scaled features while not replicating historic detail. Note: The 1904 Sanborn Insurance Map (attached) indicates a small detached one story structure occupied this vacant lot at some time. Please also notice the relative consistency in sidewalk alignment of structures along this block of Hopkins. 4.0 10. Whenever possible, new additions or alterations to structures shall be done is such a manner that if such 4, additions or alterations were to be removed in the future, Nu' the essential form and integrity of the structure would be unimpaired. 4 Staff's response: It can be argued that ANY addition or alteration may be reversible, and that in this case, the third floor will be constructed in such a manner that the original facade elements of the Collins Block remain protected. Staff finds the applicant's "reversible" argument difficult to support due to the 2,000 sq. ft. size and cost of the addition. Standards for Development Review Land Use Code Section 7-601(D)(1) Standard 1. The proposed development is compatible in character with the designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an H, Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to a Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front, yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend 3 into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area, HPC shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark, that would be development in accord with dimensional requirements Response: 1) Collins block: The applicant's proposal to restore the storefront and upper facade is highly commended. The Collins Block has received deferred maintenance for some time, and restoration efforts are highly applauded. Greater detail on the restoration activity Will be required for final review. The sidewalk covering (a more recent alteration) is proposed to remain. Staff is not opposed to the removal of this non- original sidewalk covering, to expose the original storefront elements of the Collins Block. We do find that the addition of a third floor will alter the character Of this historic structure. In particular, the design does not enhance the neo- classical elements of the Collins Block, and while attempting to be invisible, doesn't meet that goal. The two-story, lower scale of this structure does not allow for a third floor addition, in our opinion. Staff refers to the National Park Service Preservation Brief #14 to support these comments: "The historic character, to a large extent, is embodied in the physical aspects of the historic building itself - its shape, its materials, its features, its craftsmanship, its window arrangements, its colors, its setting, its interiors. "The appropriate size for a new addition varies from building to building. For example, in the case of relatively low buildings (small scale commercial structures) it is difficult, if not impossible, to minimize the impact of adding an entire new floor even if the new addition is set back from the place of the facade. Alteration of the historic proportions and profile will likely change the building's character. One the other hand, a rooftop addition to an eight story building in a historic district of other tall buildings might not affect the historic character simply because the new work would not be visible from major streets. 4 Staff recommends that the applicant consider transferring the density of the third floor proposal to the infill structure, possibly stepping back the massing to the southern (rear) portion of the lot to maintain the historic one- story street edge storefront. Standard 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development Response: Staff finds that while other taller buildings exist near the Collins Block, the third floor proposal is inconsistent with the established historic character of other two-story commercial structures in the Commercial Core. Staff does find the infill structure's storefront appropriate in storefront scale, however recommends its theatrical, heavily ornamented appearance be reduced with the use of a combination of principal facade materials, not just rusticated sandstone ala the Cowenhoven Block, and by incorporating a more simplified parapet and window treatment. Standard 3. The proposed development enhances or does not 3,G detract from the cultural value of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: Staff finds the third floor addition clearly detracts from the cultural value of this National Register structure and the district. The classic architectural elements, scale and form deserve restorative treatment without the competition of a third floor. The cultural value of the Collins Block to Aspen's Commercial District is undisputed and staff recommends that every attempt be made to maintain it in its current form without significant character-damaging alteration. The Planning Office feels positively about the role the infill structure Will play in the district and in this block of Hopkins St. The block has little continuity in setbacks. The sculpture garden provides this block with ample "open space", in our opinion. There is no strong, defined relationship of structure alignment to the street edge of this block. The 1904 Sanborn Map indicates a more consistent street edge alignment, which supports the idea, siting and massing of the 5 4** 2-Ad Â·,54 :i proposed infill structure. Standard 4. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: Staff finds that the third floor addition does detract from the architectural integrity of the Collins Block. A new wrap cornice is proposed for the east elevation which staff finds does not meet the guidelines or Secretary Standards: "Alterations that have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier appearance shall be discouraged". Also, we find that the heavily ornamented design of the proposed infill structure competes with the Collins Block. The conceptual materials are rusticated sandstone, painted wood kickplates and windows, fixed transoms and small divided sidelights surrounding the two storefront windows. The centered entryway is recessed. An 8" projection appears as a broken horizontal band above the storefront windows, with brackets. Staff recommends that the applicant further study the infill storefront for compatibility in relation to other one story storefronts in the district. It is unclear from this application the extent of the excavation proposed for the parcel for purposes of structural repair and storage. The HPC should obtain conceptual information with regard to this activity at this meeting. Staff is recommending a full engineering report and detailed information on the excavation and shoring up (or replacement) of the foundation. Staff applauds the applicant's desire to tackle yet another significant renovation project, and feels that a good design solution is possible given the nature of the parcel. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider the following alternatives: 1. Approve the proposal as submitted 2. Approve the proposal with the conditions as recommended by staff and discussed in this meeting. 3. Table action to a date certain to allow the applicant further time to study the proposal, incorporating the comments and guidance from the HPC in a revised proposal. 6 4. Deny conceptual development approval finding that the application does not meet the development review standards. A denial would constitute public hearing re-noticing. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC deny conceptual development approval for the third floor addition to the Collins Block and grant conceptual approval for the infill structure with the following conditions for Final Approval: 1. Detailed description of all repair and restoration activities to the Collins Block 2. Restudy of infill storefront materials and architectural elements 3. Exact material representation 4. Structural information from licensed engineer, and detailed information on excavation and structural activities to be accomplished on the Collins Block 5. Detailed submission of the affordable housing development on the non-contiguous lot off the alley memo.hpc.204sm.2 7 ./ EXHIBIT LA" to Court Order Thâ€¢ North 80 feet of Lots A, B and C, Block 88, City and Townsite o: aspen (exc=pting that portion of maid Lot C conveyed by Quit Claim Deed recordâ€¢d in Book 287 at Page 425 of Pitkin County Records) And a Parcil described as: Bâ€¢ginning at Corner No. 1 which is the Southeast corner of Lot D in Block 88 of the City and Townsitâ€¢ of Aspen, and the Southwest Corner of Lot E in Bald Block thence runn-ing along the South Boundary of Lot D in a Westerly direction a distance of 24 feet to Corner No. 2, thence runnlng in an Easterly direction parallel to the South Boundary of said Lots D and E a distance of 41 feet to Corner No. 4, thence running in a Southerly direction parallel to the East boundary of said Lot E a distance of 20 feet to Corner No. 5, thence running in a Westerly dlrection along the South Boundary of said Lot E a distance of 17 feet to Corner No. 1, the place of beginning; and The South Twenty (20) feet of the East Thirteen (13) Yeet of Lot lettered "E" in Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen; and The South Twenty (20) feet of the East Twenty Five (25) feet of Lot lettered "D" in Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen. CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO ARVIWPO1 m United States Department of the Interior C =r- I -14 NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 'jw ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGIONAL OFFICE .-.'I- . 12795 w'. Alameda Parkway -. P.O. Box 23287 Denver, Colorado 80225-0287 14 RtfLI Rt/IR TO H30 (RMR-PR) WAR 2 4 1989 11 M5. Roxanne Eflln NA#&87HBRId-Planning Office 130 South Galens Street As pen, Co lorado 81611 Dear Ms. Eflin: Thank you for your request for technical assi5tance concernlng the propoaed rooftop addition and adjaoent infill oonstruction for the Collins Block, located in the Aspen Commercial Core Hi:,toric District. We, in the National Park Service, want to take every opportunity to explain the Secretary of the Interior' 5 "Standard3 for Rehabilitation" and the policies and guidelinâ‚¬3 that accompany them, 80 that more Individuals, planning and design review commissions, local governments, etc., can more conslntently interpret and apply them when conaidering the rehabilitation of historic properties. As you kno w, the National Park Service applies the Secretary' s "Standards" on a daily and continual baais, and there is a considerable amount of written guidance to ald in their application and interpretation. After reviewing the pending proposal for the rooftop addition and adjacent infill construction for the Collins Block, and discussing the proposal with !* . Jay Yanz and Ms. Christine Pfaff of the Colorado Historical Society, we have determined that the proposal does not meet the Secretary' s " Standards." The pro pooed rooftop addition and adjacent 1nfill construction would charise the historic character of the Neo-Classical Collins Block. The rooftop addition, with 1ts massive form and hipped roof, together wlth the rooftop garden consisting of large trees and shrubbery, would be highly visible from several vantage points within the Commercial Core Historic District and would introduce a strong new architectural element to this two-story buildlng. The historic character of the Collins Block is defined, in part, by its flat roof and cornice, which produces a strong profile against the sky. The rooftop addition and plantings would dramatically alter this profile. The pro po s al to add a "sandstone cornice" to increase the height of the existing parapet to "conceal" the new addition, would also alter the building' s historic form and would not be acceptable under the Secretary's "Standards.'1 Because of the scale and massing of the Collins Block, and the low-scale buildings surrounding the buildlng, any rooftop addition or garden would be highly problematic. The adjacent infill construction is also problematic as an addition to an historic building. The addition's curved parapet, decorative cornice, large flagpole, and arched windows and entrance, introduces "historicizedn forms which have no relationship with the rectangular forms on the Collins Block. New additions to historic buildings should be compatible with the size, scale, and proportions of the hiatoric buildlng without either imitating a hiatoric style or period of architecture, or duplicating the exact detailing of an hlstorio building. I have indicated to Ms. Pfaff that the National Park Service would be pleaaed to 8551st the Colorado Hlstoric Society in its efforts to increase the understanding of the Secretary of the Interior' s "Standards for Rehabilitationn among Certified Local Governnenta wlthln the State cf Colorado, of which Aspen 13 one. Pleaae call M.3. Bonnie J. Haloa, A.I.A., of this office or me at (303) 969-2875 lf we can be of further assistance in this matter. Sincerely, iÂ» J. Keith Everett, A,I.A. 1\~ Chief, Architecture Unit U Branch of National Preservation Programs Divia:Lon of Cultural Resouroeo CCi Ms. Christine ?faff, Colorado State Historic Preservation Office, Denver, Colorado 9 4- 24.*2-.; 2.40:' 21/ 5 1 frily: 994; *1 1% 1 19 Ff LJ - 2 e ii 42-5Â£02 24Â·041 2 6 :A ~~~J JTI 4 61.- ce /.115,Â·034 1 -A: 93 1-1 2 + \ 4 >47 -72.-3SÂ·,0,Â« 433 4. 9 ~ 2*-< 9 L k N oLD) *1,1 <1: 4 Z -, %â€ž.A 1.26 F- 1 ~ Ll Â£ 421Â£ F G. H. u--7\A n --1 - 112 yant -- 4 t Â¢ 33i [77 Li * fmttl~ 1/ *1 Xi 46.-2-91 (Â» 4 4 -1 e . _.3971 7-71 f>ti. P 1 c. e o i vÂ¢ N /KN 71.1 41 17-9 ix 1 20. x 87 - * /kf - & 4 :ablft-U] Ir / O , -0 CD 9 1/ . U 171 00 11 y- 4 I :1 ' 473Â£ . - 0 7 1 44 0 0 R. 6. R ~- .lilli I 11 4 K ; 1-7.-44<%2/*@*Es /1 ~&3Â»n;4-9/ r-:ll /? 21 -*Â·Â·:. 9 41,~*t~429'i>hf ~44* 01*474Â¢~ - - -4 L ..' $1-5 15NQ.0-/- 17 - 7, 1 +Al'*,1. , rTHFT- 2 242%131:A 1 1 . OLD . 4.//.'1*,2. 5.ca. Â·4 01.,2/,r#,9.7 -T- , X :51.2212 2#.|| ~ Up. j *44â‚¬(4% Asar. ~--4~~- 1% E >4 1 1.1 9-97#0 4 /1 â€¢Â· i 51MRWZ:*Â¢Â£45>46 / 0Â«0 .Li2 ~A';i\ -L_i~ z :0* 0 42*SMEE \ 400. 402 -= 404 406 408 490-=412 4/4 4/6 4/8 420 922 424 426 428 430 432 434 H.WEBBER 8'0< 11 P =~" =* =4= =-= IlÂ¢%6tkrÂ· fL- hA~ =- ==-- 11 40! 408 4,05 qU?a 409 411 415 4/5 4/7 4/9 48/ 483= 7 79 433 435 501 503 75%*t~ 7-7 Z zeÂ· * :. 03 S 6727 ~ . ..1/37' * 1 cL ;i â€¢-fÂ·51~91*.9 L.al 1 & . n=: 1/ / O 1 1,/ F--4 - - E,-. $ @+A Z â€¢eD#k~'Arly /0..1 i I f:-0jk#*%6142 0 1'5~1 0. Â£ Mo . 1 Pit#4*41*931. 0 k Vac.. 'r- 249'6~,4/3259':,222 /:pi LAJÂ·:e-9.4*fhd~4.1/124:.6 $ 4 %34- - i g **91,49~ & & 42,â€ž4/ * *,3 1.ON" 88 SA. 2. M ~. p. n,41 /'?~ rn-r'rT . Ill 8. 4 /1 vac m=:1'U_ 21 -c~ ,_-4,04*~- / 11 to e -Ji~#43131:/3< 45& b 0 284&S 2} /coR.M (~3~ E ~ 3~ 1 Z 11:6-ri~~~~~1ILLF # R 0'Â°. 1,- .0/ AOÂ«-lf---9--2,91 L.k.,2. 11 0 164't} 1% - 1: 0-LIAÂ·~rApt:4â€¢24- 1 % ed St**E - A. / 5 - . 6,1 . 17*t:. L. 6--1 t I :w*Â©O 2/3,.Al,-&1â€¢IiÂ· 10 5 132-16-RÂ» liM frâ€¢j-t.;'d 4-e _- . 1.' 1 6- 1 1 f*'.Â»he-,4984 2.76 i 1 *kt. N Ob 3 1 C j-9 4,- i' . , A 1-1 4 727/-f- 4 73 4 1 33 3, . 1:4 .% 1 Â¢1~1*14Â»42".9.gg It f. Â· 1: Arlt@->0 32 -t'sti lit> tkgottÂ¢ & 12.. 1262 e - 4 14 2 4 11% - 3 4- 2â‚¬10%2 %*618â€¢11 Zi o EN:42%4 g= 470 / " o /0. 0â€¢'0 21,6 2.a;,&IAT,k#mkf '*'41 3 75' 02 1)54*\M 1*4+ ty'l '400 402 404 406 408 4/0 44 414 4/6 4/8 400 422--404-42864-2i 433 43â‚¬ 434 500 50. 4 11 .OH. .OH. Scale of Feet. = _ 50 100 150 = Atky.'-,ef -- = - - ... Z~/ N 6' W. r),pr (92* Furrts~crage, fc . 'y. COLLINS BLOC 1 AREA AND BULK CHARACTERISTICS SITE AREA: 80 x 90 = 7200 SF I. Existing Building A Existing first floor: commercial n:.- rchandisina space: 5671 sf B. Existing 1.jnroo f ed commerc 13] merchand]'3ing space: 1 3805, f (~(2~~ 10qce._ a/Ukj C Existing mezzanine area: 576,51 - 6'Ldi'GQ_ D. Existing storage loft: 252sf- ia_ 03/ack.Â£4 ,?41~ 0 E. Existing second floor residential space: 4495sf - ,Â«f uÂ»-4 ke<.2 F. Total interior commercial and residential space: 10,9943,f - /Â«cfcÂ£ câ‚¬,cÂ«... ~Â«Af._ 6. Existing height (to parapet) 30 dd- l tieÂ« H. Existing FAR: 1.53 1 L Relevant code restrictions (cc, significant historic) Sec.5-209 A. Setbacks: no requirement B. Height 40' maximum, not to exceed 4 stories above gracie C. External FAR: 1.5:1 on up to 2.0 by special review 111. Proposed work A Elimination of existing commercial storage and office spareÂ· 828Sf - U 1 - YON k. 2074 204 CL /4 alia AcÂ¢ A B. Construction of! story on unroofed commercial lot: 1380sfflf--,Ge k 4% 4Â£22 C. Construction of third level residential space: 2000sf- 3 6 >A- A 0â‚¬4Â» /54 et D. Total area of building upon completion of proposed work: 13,546 sf - ,& fi_ kbu c-flu-24_- E. Height of building following proposed work: 36'10 (to roof peak) F. External FAR following proposed work: 1,88 - . 3 7 di,tu, dbwdl_ CJ~t-ek uid AeR- 424 ttic...frc{ - E3 March 17, 1989 Roxanne Eflin City of Aspen Plannina Deoartment 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Roxanne: We intend to do the "Hardware Store" scheme until such Doint in time that it anpears unfeasible. Regards. Hdrley Baldwin HB:jb ; t L. ' - The Brand Building 205 S. Galena Street Aspen Colorado 81611 303 925 2209 COLLINS BLOCK 2. Proposed development: Description of Proposed Development The greater porti on of the pr-oposed develop ment will take place within the conf ines 1. The existing building: of the existing structure. In the performance of The Collins Block wiss constructed in this renovation the applicant intends to 1892, irnmediately prior to the crash of the assiduously preserve and to restore the existing Silver Boom in Aspen. I t hias served as a street facades in all their elements. rooming house and a corn mercial building Deteriorating or hazardous conditions housing frorn Ume to time a mortuary, a whi ch present 1 g exi :3 1. \''fi 11 be remedi ed, so far hardware store, arid other retail establishnients, as possible in a manner identical with the The architecture of the building is original details. transitional in nature, corribining classic revival In addition, the applicant proposes to details with Victorian shop windows and continue such details along the upper east frontier sands lone rustication. facede of the block as it. is unlikely, given The classic orders and banding give the modern building restrictions, that an adjacent. facades a strong horizontal ernphasts which is three story str-uclure will ever be built. enhanced by the sidewalk: logqi a which was A lopv garden story structure is propoed added in the 1950s. The building suffers for the roof of the building. This level will somewhat frorn o weak vertical terrnination due contain kitchen and living areas for the units on to the lock of a strong parapet cap or cornice the seconij floor and will take advantage of the such as is typical of similar buildings in the views offered by the roof level. The concept is Aspen core; some of which are surmounted similar to the roof garden structures of the in addition by a decorative pediment or similar Brand Building, the Bowman, and several other device. properties in town. The east side of the block was designed This addition is designed to be and constructed as if to abut ion adjacent unobtrusive frorn the street and eniploys building and hence does not exhibit the detailing materials subdued in colorand conforming in of the street facades. nature to those now to be found on the Collins Block and the W h eeler Opera House building across the street. To further conceal the roof level Decorative iron work bal conies will be structure from the street view and to installed overlooking the yard. strengthen t.he vertical termination of the The paving for the court will be of a facades, it is proposed to add a continuous herringbone brick pattern with margins of course of sondstone cornice to the pat-apet cop. exposed aggregate concrete. It has tieen determined that the proposed The above contemplated renovations and structure will be well below the Main Street addition ore intended to comply with the Mountain View Plane. published guidelines of the Secretary of the The third area of developrnent will be Interior both in regard to restoration endin the surrounding the existing cominet-cial LIOrd. stated permissibility of new construction Here it is proposed lo replace the It is the intention of the developer to existing commercial space with several srriall create 8 setting distinct frorn the street shops in an attractive and it-itit-note place. These thoroughfore vY'hich preserves and enhances the shops ariel fronts will be designed to a street qualities of the Collins Block, level scale and will incorporate elements of the It should be noted that the "Little Place" adjacent building in their- design. Among the proposal described is one of two proposals elements willbe the continuation of the heavy which are being e><plo red by the applicant. The sondstone base course around the courlyard alternative scheme under study would house 8 beneath the shop fronts and windows. large hardware store in the commercial yard on We believe that this area presents on the east side of the building. This structure opportunity to create an irnaginative and diverse would be one slot-g in height with a full pedestrian space which the Aspen plon seeks to basement. Its s treet faced e would be tre a ted as promote and which Hopkins Street will benefit 8 nineteenth century 'storefront" in a manner frot-ri. compatible architecturally with the adjacent The shop fronts will tie pointed wood in Collins block. We believe that a muted Victorian tones wit.h awnitigs and hardware/general st.ore, serving the cornmercial fixtures typical of the period. New roofs of dork core and domestic and gener-01 construction grog steel with raised seems will be installed. need s , would be appropriate 1.0 1 he Hopkins Above the roofs the upper facede of the Street address. We find, however, that building w i 11 be restored ond completed wi th the eriot-1-nous "cash in lieu " exactions by the c ity for continuation of the barids and dentil co t-nice. open space, emplogee generation, and parking preclude this as en option. The applicant is one of a number of Aspen propert g owners who have demonstrated a commitment to the Aspen heritage, breathing new life into decaging buildings with style and in a manner consistent with the highest aspirat ions of the builders of the Silver- 6 nom. 0.-- , - C --- 4 , l - r. - ,. 2. 141\k f/4 - 4 N- - - } i. -' '4Â£- i i: 'r .' 9 1 1 - 7---- Ur- Â£/1 , /37'ce< h-= 29- kÂ»=====c~Â£=20- 2 #3-=.- -2/-/Gue=UPZF./-:/-- 3 F=I -. \ 5, .:>:S. - 1 Â¤7-3.732=17 421 - Â·N \*- - . - -- - _ f ~rÂ»o .7 3 9 1 - , -h -- 'r-, -- -4-2.22~ \ .---h----- -1 - ~-'~Z--~-- L 3-L_[ . r ====p p=Â·,~ ga ~-=z==priulz. + 1 Lein--,f . '~0-3--1 /.e=32 4-~2.2-Il>% :C-:-L- r--t:-- -IL- 21 - , A- - I- '-> 1 /, .ri > 17 1 11 D S :â‚¬f 9 *F 7~~rrt' 1:1 [!:-2--; 0---,1-- . - il-- .-214 --' 5 1/4 1 Uyif -1 -fl, 4 k, 71 4 - -1.L eEL C._.--===tes==zED====r E=Z==L----------- F~ 0 62 2 41 â‚¬ - 0 -1 9 - -r' t;7 u 1 - 7 : Â·-4 6- -1 L - -1 63 57 - - 1 -4, 6 -- Ty - 1â€¢ -- - - T -7 91 Hor ei U -wi u [ Er 4 +4 tff - 24 - ...1 1.i ,i . L....,1 I. i . i, il r--1 4 \,3 1--11 - 1-1 U .1.1 - U U Â·U .14 -- U ----W -U L.. L.L -. U U , & 9 7 009 - - 0-Â«3 _03~E-Â«--[1 1. CZE = --1 ---LJ --ir---i-~12-7-3z-%-IMMP -2 71 .- 3 3*Flibe IL)7196 =Llp-fz-p___s' - -- 9 1 -- 7 _1__-_ z_-1- 7,2'liffAI.- -1,1 1 =_ J--4-9.9 - Â«fÂ¢-- 3 -_I A--r_f ~ fi --2 i _FEE,-1 -E~ -7 -- , 1. - - --1. - -2_Ir L.2--2 .IA" .1 *- tif Â·'i{-Â· t,j#00 +-. -- L-,4=- * - - lulÂ»-1--2 - 93 - -iU- ~ p*-_ ~ 1 1-- 1 ~! 1 --t ~69 :.j E --- - ----~.fL~ b T~~--- T. ' 1- - 11 1 I -3-ja-EN-1- MIER 1 iE~ r-3-- -;1 0-1-Â·r- '12.R~ 12-r-t.EL-31- - - r==t----T.L___+UT--L-T -- ILI' r-t- ~ i 1 1 1 1 , ; 1 2- Â· : L__J L<*9 0 t- 1- t>t 5 -- ID-zu-0u ~ClurN WF<+A--2-0-L L V A-710~1 ht'r'~Â· -9 ,- 0 1 9 ph#dr# 4917 1â€¢~l=A Lb_-. - 44, -â€¢ C L.lt}yt ,132.10/6â€žfL 1 ~>Lk -Ln--- I ;1&66 r- Â·~ ; 49"17, 1 ... ' ,/ 22.2 7 =- . liLLi 1-1 ! f 8 1 -1 LIre- 1 L Irt-T t-I -1-1-1 '-. i 1 Lam-3 6 Wid.EJ - I 09. Ill I U 1 1 1 tj ..fulj .3 . .-- .d fill: 20' =- _ , L=-6 -I 1- -9 4 r- 1 .Enfr 1: ~ 4.,~.ll,li 1 1. E- -1 1- 1 Â£ El-': Jui 14 1196-,- ~.i ' ' ~~- - | ~ .Erfi->Â·~ r - .. ter-1 ===USAU 1 342.4 33=1-f]K-tÂ·# 2~ - ICIJL â€ž3 - 1Â»-ACI - - 71.1-/ TIU 17-1- 1 .Â«J t PL- - -/ l-2- -- 19 3-1 - 11_ 1 1 I 1 1 41 0,1-1 Ll =-=-- i-i: 1-i-i-[1-1 1-L J 1 -=- 91 1 '.1 4 7 4== A--- '-' * - 2.-- 4 073 P j /Â¥7 11 -1, - 11 .b.-4 ip F [1-1(0- 4 3 al-Iki~.1 1- 1 0 0-7 g - 4 h.fl -1 -1, /7 - -11 9-_ 1 1 I - f 1... ij <1, . li 19 ; 4 , - L--- , \1 ..,1 1 1 'L_!'- 1-1-,i-_-U-- L U U..U L.1 ~U'L..~ U. a -u 1-1 - 21- 4 41 4 U .-U -1. - U U ..U U U -U U U LL ~ i,1 1-1 U U U U LL Li LL . Â·Â· . r=-1 3 n V M --- 1 1 E Â· a u I .a- *ZE~ 1. Ftj r Imt 1! 6 f~ 41 lili Ill 4 . 1 . 1 irÂ·_7 Z~rm .11 " 'L. r ~' f E-â‚¬ 1 tjaildnEatilnaq[!BUL!-inaefae!!in---2 :L El}t- 1 i 0 1, T ' , i' 1 - I ~i~Â¥ -,rr--. _ k=4 .-1- r-4-- .1-777-1-----. -- 11 - ur ~_ L_______~_--+-1-- - f 6 , , h '-=i 1 1 7 1 b 1 1 1 6 i ,.M4UNJLJ<. 3- .illl .. t'qtaj.kW' AlÂ©91 'Wk- : --, 11 1 - 1-433411 1 1 --50-1 6 -Ea- 4-'F-j li=821 . I jp=Â·CW I i 1 0 1211 1 ~ ; 10 11 1 Â£ 04-- : 3 r.p&-HI 11 ~ 4_2.094 * Â£ HA+Â·" p - ii 4_ 1 il_man%8Â©-Chi-FEE]2 20&2 &461= -J-10 011* 00+EÂ¢4-ifE-* ~câ‚¬I_ltu#*1 2- - 1 5 2-0 LÂ«~ -r 1-4 - 1 U 46 1 - -+ : 1 -- l- h r r\-4\ - 11 I Ef/, .3 - e , ..c- f 0 g 1-,3 -.. - . r.1 -- 1 1 ! 1 4 4 - - 0714-1 64/,H 5 UPP.Â¥ (F'&.101 .0, --------~ 1 -- : 1 - ~Irl 0 ~ Ill: ! C --J. - A - Â£ 1-1 i 1 1 12. I 0 -~ =: ~~~UNJ--Q' F---1 LI 1 11.14' -44 rl le'; r .-1 1*9~ - Â»Â·Ekifitirm- 1 4 1 1 1 6060 i r.1 5 27 & o C. 4 C j 1 0 r.-81--1 W h â€¢ r #4 1 L- A . 7 -lk , 50-1-- 1 1- 1 r r 41 1 i ! 71 = 9 Z r. n. 1 13 - 1 44 , rv/-1- â€¢ L ---0.-__0-- 1~~~~_~-~ 6 -]bl 4 * tr 4 E. 0 -El 0 Â· UTO[Li 6 0'-O. M\It-1- ~*4#*Cl- &Â£_- 1.- 102~:I 1 I i] i JES*Et[ 11 AA ~~_r--ALL-~ 1--1 1 1 1112, E LE-JU L -. I.>N --11 "f ....1, rrL--1- -1 ~ Fan, r i~ iIB-* 1 ~ ' ~ ~ ~ r-1 ~ let =-1- --UU :iNt, ' Â£~-ljr-Â·'-T--f~~ ~_-i.~1 36 -~ 1 ~ , ., . --' 1 *91 1 .1 -ffal L45 -u 20- nu 1 u .1~ 2 3 f 52131 1 -----14 tikEb' 4,-k-= 1-.- .- â€¢0-21/~T#-7=97 1 I p . - 4-35il--9- f--355-21[ - -1... -3- 4-- ff~736.0 1~9!, i, Il L.-] 110-3+21r 1 CLELLD L 91 1 r 4, TJTF*------ 0,6.94 0 34Â«A~- -~- 24{4Â«1 -7- - '1 Â·~ill-i ~Â·Â·**mr r ~ OP6~,1-1.. tr / 4 TALW-= 1 firt // , \ rÂ·Un-* *4/ , d unri.1-~ -~1---L J Â· 11 t V'-T-7 41,111;~ 011.2 -14[ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~'~ ~~~~~>~~--~~~~1~~ ~~22~-~ Lj~- ~~j~ ~--- -- '~ i-Â»121[ Filt-t<.ril -11!: LEI' ' i 0 2-71 d ... =3.- L=, ' =0 ./.Al-1 - rE--E r -1 0 4-1 141Â»Â«I 1 i--r2-7 ------ L LI d 1--1 y F<:f.. ':2.2 0 li L , - 1 - - 4.--4U-- ~ prr_-1 9 dll 1 1 1 ELE - ~~ - 1--44Â· 4 , 4 4/ 1 i ~~ l - itt 2 1 0 ~-'1_ 6-19Fzr~7~-421 ~ r---| O,-- 41 -cu 6 47 , E=ZIZEÂ» -luNd --TÂ»Il-- --- -- - ...LL 6.1 0.-7 - Â£3\ . 1 2 A 13 E --- 6 - > - i +7 23 + C c. < - f e. . e -t 7 _, E- V E- 6- /3 1! 9 11 1 t- 3 11 1, lili 14-14-4- 1- il i L ,+ 'It -9 , 1 1. 1 1 r--- T - rs K -'.'- - 1 241 1 ' 6*Â£'011' r--- - .-d[-T-[ 1,7 66Â» 6 - -- - 1 --07_t_~LM.T..~_r-11.1,4 -! '71 : 4 cq - -- ir 4 - 17 ;*1.9, --- -:1 .'I-'d-~ T 1 '' ' -_a r , 1 ~rh' 1 -Nolpt# 11 1 --h / f. 2 . I- 043 31Â«411; 2 -_ ]Wt||Qi, 1 1 - .-I -Â· .1 t. v~ I\ 1 11 1 - -1 .6.- .4 1 1 .- ..... - b ~< 1 turÂ»-p .I -I.---:Ir-I_-/-7.7-. 71 - .3 ' NU â‚¬,1 1 1 -Â£0--7 &_u -1-1- -+-"- 49}3-Fl/%--214=172=-3 --- + 1 1-'IWI -- ~ /' J ' ---- *ilt-iii_ 1-LfiÂ·Â·rz. fl~' 22 , (ij~fic Ld- 1 lili -4 12- 1 41 -1 '41 1 ~22 049 =a 0.1 1 1 ; 1 1 - -C> O l- - s -4 5 32 -'04 a & r-- 17 6 H -, V + ... TE. C. MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Pre-application: 204 S. Galena St., the Sports Stalker Building Date: March 28, 1989 PROJECT SUMMARY: The owner of the (non-historic) Sports Stalker building wishes to construct a second floor containing at least five deed-restricted affordable housing units, and a free-market unit for himself. The architect and planning consultant wish to begin a dialogue with the HPC in this pre-application on the best design solution for this site, which includes off-street parking. PROBLEM DISCUSSION: At appears that upper floor additions are becoming increasingly desirable in the Commercial Core. The HPC should review this proposal closely in its potential impact to adjacent landmarks: the Elks Building, the Brand and City Hall. The committee should consider whether a second floor is appropriate, and if so, what the most compatible design solution would be. The Guidelines indicate an appropriate design solution may be to carry the existing exterior lines of the building straight up, as opposed to setting it back. However, as we have seen, setbacks have benefits as well, such as in massing reduction, etc. The architect has examined both approaches, and contends that stepping the mass back from the first floor and "hiding" it within a roof only accentuated the horizontal character of the building in what is essentially a vertical neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC offer assistance to the applicant to help determine what, if any, approach might be the most appropriate for the district and this structure. A full Conceptual Development application is expected to be submitted to the Planning Office within the next few weeks. memo.hpc.204sg J V. d . - C Welton Anderson & Associates - Architects MAR 21 21 March 1989 !; 27 v ; 4 Roxanne Elfin .0 / .... J..1 -LS,1 -4.- Plannina Office Dear Roxanne, Attached Dlease find orints for the Drooosed second floor addition to the Sports Stalker Building (formerly Bullocks) at the corner of Galena and Hookins for preapplication review. As we discussed in our meeting of 17 March 1989, several approaches were tried to minimize the visual impact of the new second floor. Stepping it back from the first floor and hiding it within a roof only accentuated the horizontal character of the building in what is essentially a vertical neighborhood. Strict adherence to Chapter V (Commercial Buildings-New Construction) of the City of Aspents Historic Landmark Development Guidelines has resulted in a much more compatable solution. Adding a rectangular solid second floor with regularly spaced vertical windows over the existing first floor storefront fits the Guidelines but more importantly fits in with the Elk's, Wheeler Block, and Brand Building's massing much more apDropriately than the one story 1950's box there now. Materials will be wood which is historically appropriate and offers some relief from the brick which has been dominating new construction. Your consideration is appreciated. Sincerely, C. Welton Anderson, Architect Planning / Architecture / Interior Design Box 9946 / Aspen ,Colorado 81612/(303) 925- 4576 MAR 2 1 1.4/2 -,LIC. ....1, Â¥3 7 1/-==------*--re--2=------=. 11 1 Â£_1_1.fi --Ll_- 51 -4 En V Flfl-L--[f~----[i -1 r E --7, ' 4 il i ; 1 *.I--- 1 - j _.111 .~~---~-21-1-1-~2--Â·-=1 L__-1 LI.I_UZZLILLI==.=i_I.-22 ..z~. :.=. _. ..-- , 1 i 11 1 j L L / 1 .21 - ( 6/. z,-/ j A h itÂ·\ j 1 1 1 Et*'6 84 .CO ' ' -0 1 1 1 Pit I i * .-' N 27(,1 I I Â»02-G; ECEV Â£ fl MAR 21 . 1 ! 1: 1_'i ;iii 11 t !1 1 li : 11 -1.1 1 E--1 1 1 1 \Al E 6-1- itÂ· l i ') ir 5 18-r, 3 Â· 5 Â»27 6-0102 24 C -tton Inder/- r 4 1 ' 9 ..~ 1 9, 4 '..Stt, VZ -*St 4. CITY OF ASPEN ,~ 3-8 Y-8 7 -.:â€žz UdIEMO FROM ROXANNE EFLIN Historic Preservation Specialist f uÂ« cÂ»td WIL Â«4 *At 42 %*L k 4- 24- p Â«toÂ«- FJ- b A- I _~- 21- /Â«/p~T/- to (IL w A fi,p- au -bio- ,AQ,O.- afkt of_~ -filk~ A-440 ~- â€ž 6 r t HPC FIELD STUDY Significant 1988 Projects February 21, 1989 Listed in order of site visit Please use Checklist for reviewing each project Back of Checklist may be used for comments 1. 516 E. Hyman (formerly "Mouse House") One story commercial infill, with approved second story Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? 2. 411 E. Hopkins (sculpture garden) Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? 3. 134 W. Hopkins (Wyckoff/Carley relocation project) Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? 4. 212 W. Hopkins (2 story "L" addition to cottage) Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? 5. 300 W. Main (The Log Cabin - addition) Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? 6. 320 W. Main - The Smith-Elisha House renovation Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? 7. 715 W. Smuggler - two story addition with tower to cottage Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? Field study, continued 8. 513 W. Bleeker - multiple additions and garage to Queen Anne Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? 9. 334 W. Hallam - Carriage House reconstruction Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? 10. 222 E. Hallam - demolition and new construction Good points Bad points How could this project have been improved? Notes, thoughts, comments to assist in future project review: hpc.field.study : h 1 7 PRE SERVATION amm,DZ~ 1/ BRIEFS 4 759 #I-4 4 Ge -f~WnEW- Architectural Character: milplifiEXEgifirlisaimill:El#11'13/1/6//:<;GE<;HE' Identifying the Visual Aspects of .4,/ta:530630 gbf #t,-1 Historic Buildings as an Aid to . ...4 /Ali'VE Preserving Their Character Lee H. Nelson, FAIA U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Preservation Assistance Division The Secretary of the Interior's "Standards for Historic Preservation Projects" embodv two important goals: 1) the preservation of historic materials and, 2) the preservation of a building's distinguishing character. Everv old building is unique, with its own identity and its own distinctive character. Character refers to all those visual aspects and physica] features that comprise the appearance of every historic building. Character-defining elements include the overall shape of the building, its materials, craftsmanship, decorative details, interior spaces and features, as well as the various aspects of its site and environment. The purpose of this Brief is to help the owner or the substitute for developing an understanding about the chitect identify those features or elements that give significance of an historic building and the district in ie building its visual character and that should be taken which it is located. ~- ito account in order to preserve them to the max- If the various materials, features and spaces that give imum extent possible. a building its visual character are not recognized and There are different ways of understanding old preserved, then essential aspects of its character may be buildings. They can be seen as examples of specific damaged in the process of change. building types, which are usually related to a building's A building's character can be irreversibly damaged or function, such as schools, courthouses or churches. changed in many ways, for example, by inappropriate Buildings can be studied as examples of using specific repointing of the brickwork, by removal of a distinctive materials such as concrete, wood, steel, or limestone. side porch, by changes to the window sash, by They can also be cotisidered as examples of an changes to the setting around the building, by changes historical period, which is often related to a specific ar- to the major room arrangements, by the introduction of chitectural style, such as Gothic Revival farmhouses, an atrium, by painting previously unpainted wood- one-story bungalows, or Art Deco apartment buildings. work, etc. There are many other facets of an historic building besides its functional type, its materials or construction A Three-Step Process to Identify A or style that contribute to its historic qualities or Building's Visual Character significance. Some of these qualities are feelings con- veyed by the sense of time and place or in buildings This Brief outlines a three-step approach that can be associated with events or people. A complete used by anyone to identity those materials, features understanding of any property may require documen- and spaces that contribute to the visual character of a tan, research about its style, construction, function, its building. This approach involves first examining the furnishings or contents; knowledge about the original building from Mar to understand its overall setting and builder, owners, and later occupants; and knowledge architectural context; then moving up verv close to ap- about the evolutionary history of the building. Even preciate its materials and the craftsmanship and surface though buildings may be of historic, rather than ar- finishes evident in these materials; and then going into chitectural significance, it is their tangible elements that and through the building to perceive those spaces, embody its significance for association with specific rooms and details that comprise its interior visual events or persons and it is those tangible elements both character. *Ln the exterior and interior that should be preserved. Step 1: Identify the Overall Visual Aspects ~ Therefore, the approach taken in this Brief is limited Vl~to identifying those visual and tangible aspects of the Identifying the overall visual character of a building is . - historic building. While this may aid in the planning nothing more than looking at its distinguishing physical process for carrying out any ongoing or new use or aspects without focusing on its details. The major con- restoration of the building, this approach is not a tributors to a building's overall character are embodied I I in the general aspects of its settizig; the shape of the In part, this is because so miich of the exterior can be building; its rc)of and roof features, such as chimneys or seen at one time and it is possible to grasp its essential cupolas; the various proiections on the building, such as character rather quickly. To understand the interior porches or bav windows; the recesses or voids in a character, it is necessary to move through the spaces building, such as open galleries, arcades, or recessed one at a time. While it is not difticuit to perceive the balconies; the openings for windows and doonvavs; and character of one individual room, it becomes more dif- iâ€ž,imir--= finalk' the various exterior mciterials that contribute to ficult to deal with spaces that are interconnected and the building's character. Step one involves looking at interrelated. Sometimes, as in office buildings, it is the the building from a distance to understand the restibules or lobbies or corridors that are important to character of its site and setting, and it involves walking the interior character of the building. \Vith other groups around the building where that is possible. Some of buildings the visual qualities of the interior are buildings will have one or more sides tliat are niore related to the plan of the building, as in a church with important than the others because they are more highly its axial plan creating a narrow tunnel-like space nhich visible. T]iis does not mean that the rear of the obviouslv has a different cliaracter than an open space building is of no value whatever but it simply means like a sports pavilion. Thus the shape of the space mar that it is less important to the overall character. On the be an essential part of its character. With some other hand, the rear may have an interesting back buildings it is possible to perceive that there is a visual porch or offer a private garden space or some other linkage in a sequence of spaces, as iii a hotel, from the aspect that niay contribute to the visual character. Such .lobby to the grand staircase to the ballroom. Closing off a genera] approach to looking at the building and site the openings between those spaces would change the will provide a better understandine of its overall character from visually linked spaces to a series of Cl character without having to resort to an intinitely long closed spaces. For example, in a house that has a front checklist of its possible features and details. Regardless and back parlor linked with an open archway, the two of whether a building is complicated or relatively plain, rooms are perceived together, and this visual relation- it is these broad categories that contribute to an ship is part of the character of the building. To close understanding of the overall character rather than the off the open archway would change the character of specifics of architectural features such as moldings and such a residence. their profiles. Tlie importance of interior features and finishes to Step 2: Identify the Visual Character at Close Range the character of the building should not be overlooked. In relativelv simple rooms, the priman visual aspects Step two involves looking at the building at close range may be in features such as fireplace niantels, lighting or arm's length, where it is possible to see all the sur- fixtures or wooden floors. In some rooms, the absolute face qualities of-the materials, such as theirÂ· color aiid plainness is the character-defining aspect of the interior. *,.4 texture, or surface evidence of craftsmanship or age. In So-called secondan, spaces also mav be important in some instances, the visual character is the result of the their own wav, from the standpoint of history or U juxtaposition of materials that are contrastingly different because of the familv activities that occurred iii those in their color and texture. The surface qualities of the rooms. Such secondary spaces, while perhaps materials may be important because they impart the historically significant, are not usually perceived as im- very sense of craftsmanship and age that distinguishes portant to tlie visual character of the building. Thus we historic buildings from other buildings. Furthermore, do not take them into account in the visual many of these close uR qualities can be easily damaged understanding of the building. or obscured bv work that affects those surfaces. Ex- amples of this could dnclude painting previously un- Conclusion painted masonry, rotary disk sanding of smooth wood siding to remove paint, abrasive cleaning of tooled Using this three-step approach, it is possible to conduct stonework, or repointing reddish mortar joints with a walk through and identifv all those elements and gray portland cement. features that help define the visual character of the There is an almost infinite varietv of surface building. In most cases, there are a number of aspects materials, textures and finishes that are part of a about the exterior and interior that are important to the Dunaing's character which are fragile and easily lost. character of an historic building. The visual emphasis of Step 3: Identify the Visual Character of the Interior this brief will make it possible to ascertain those things that should be preserved because their loss or alteration Spaces, Features and Finishes would diminish or destroy aspects ot the historic Perceiving the character of interior spaces can be character whether on the outside, or on the inside of somewhat more difficult than dealing with the exterior, the building. , For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington. D.C. 20402 to Â· 1 1 .. k.* Ex \ e.-L -917Â£12â€¢*2~E - 1- 1 *"f- FU@~'~ 2%*Nk *Vir . ' h 1232 ~ ELLI __.. /4-~. #Nal"mar'' tot:~~~%:lz~~=9~ Overall Visual Character: Shape &343 m 312-.Ame,Egiall; ' RE :Â·.:. 4,mm. Yer,11] tusihil clti-acter< cal~, [:211]chIi,f~nict!Stratte~(19'lore.!or ex_ te. c â€¢*!iM*8!41Â¢93 .imp,ie, lias a distinctnÂ·e lic,rizonta] bi)\-like s}inpe ri'itil tlie it.3NS*ag middle portion oi the box projecting up an extra htonÂ·. This - ~-- building has other visual aspict> that help denne it> overall Overall Visual Character: Shape character, including the pattern of vertical band.s ok win- dows, the decorative horizontal bands which beparate the It should not be assunied that onkÂ· large or unusual base of the building from the upper doors, the dark brown buildings have a shape that is distinctive or identifiable. The color of the brick, the large arched entrancewar, and the front wall of this niodest commercial buildine has a .simple castle-like tower behind the buildin{ three-part shape that is the controlling aspea of its overall 0 visual character. 11 consists of a krge center bar with a two storv opening that conibines tlicÂ·.torefront and the windows above. The upward proiecting parapet and the decorative stonework also relate to and emphasize its shape. The ilanA- ing narrow bars entrame the side windows and the small iron balconies, and the nlain entrance doorwav into the store. Any changes to tile center portion of this three-part I-- I ' i 1 1 ape, cotija drasticalh' affect the visual character of this 9 . gr . ./ buil'ding. Photo bv Enie:ene A. Bevitt ME-&-).&â€¢E~U -*g -'*//v=/< //81159*.a#.*Ir.- , .g=,a= :-11 --5 - - -Ill# 1 l -./'ti;â€¢>Â·: 0 1 . 22 ., -2â‚¬ 7 - - . b. - -2 fi#WA tf. &-/EEM.<,;p'/*a3,7/*piR. .. -T, Â¥ 1 -r r - *-#.. .: /--/&-Il-- 1- a-'o ** ./92...=$"/* Ty I . --4.2..I Overall Visual Character: Openings * --.- - x2c - 4Â·' :1424 trreallnx,11 \Vindow and door openings can be important to the overall - ~ le F. t. 6 li ill -:. 1 6-2..1** visual character of historic buildings. This view shows onh I-4 -â€¢ -Â·Â·-- - , -1- u-,1 :p..62:-4..,44-d~ 14=*4a part of a much larger building, but the windows clearly help . i,ic-â€¢P-ritÂ·:iÂ·,Inrili define its character, partly because of their shape and WBA/Filt.'--3#RMr#/ix 4. . Fryr--(Ii'/1/.rt/& rhythm: the upper floor windows are grouped in a 4,3,4,1,4 -.-i-- . -.. I... =r..Â·rl.., rhi thni, and the lower floor windows are arranted in a 6-0#qkÂ»-~ .. â€žUce*A*00 1/ 2 1-- regular 1,1,1,. rhvthrn. The individual windows are tall, 1 - AL# J.'. -/ .' /2 narrow and arched, and thev are accented bv the different 0- - %/0. colored arched heads, which are connected where there are multiple windows so that the color contrast is a part Of its Overall Visual Character: Openings character. If additional windows were inserted in the gap ot The opertin,g illustrated here dominates the visual character the upper floors, the :haracter would be much changed, as of this building because of its size, shape, location, materials, it n ould li the wmciov.Â· heads were painted to maten th, and craftsmanship. Because of its relation to the generous color of the brick walls. Photo biÂ· Susan I. Dvnes staircase, this opening places a strong emphasis on the prin- cipal entry to the building. Enclosing this arcade-like entrv with glass, for example, would materially and visually chante the character of tile building. Photo bv Lee H. Nelson. co 0 A + . e, f v - ft ef a , f. 4 V f. 1 > f ki,2 ..44'.2, .4Â¥ty'- I p... I A - r MV.:f I:e ...1â€¢10Â·'~13-'.4.-- 3 Â· 74*5#Ebt#,PA-2 1 ., . - -, - '..t~*40*9 U,; U . . 5 4. - -*ZEÂ«-23 -1----. .- -- - r . .. - 4 -,FAM"g/J3#*5%. _ i. jlit-, U */ W 3? :.2 - 3 .3 .2311 â‚¬ .4. 12.7. 7. ....r â€ži 44 1 - -- . R 11Â· --- d. . UE. f I'/ .. f 532=~ - -1=- 22292 f-fluff-*=23--UA '2 . 77 ; , , 3 .771.Â¥fyic, 3 .1=9=-- .-1.ZED:ru....0â‚¬32111 1 24.91 A .L . - -LL-' . .7- , - -1 .4 + . Â»â€¢_11-2 L.-4 11. . t-,0 1 .4401.-d". 1 1 .1- * --' -trÂ· Â¥70'ir* -~4.04-, , -- ...9- , - ' Â·'C'' ': ~ -~ 1 '-9 A- f 4 I Â¥,/ 4 3~' fr 06 Â· A- - I ., 1 _r- 9 1 ' , 11*j ---/ -1 :Ii , 1, 43' â€ž. I. 4 11 1 ...1,10.,Â¥99- Z It .. 4 4 Overall Visual Character: Roof and Related Features I .. - Â·f tâ‚¬ e -1 1 I.L. This building has a number of character-defining aspects -4Â·L '- r'I- - Â¥ --- *le - 01'llf' 9 .. . A which include the windows and the decorative stonework, but certaink the root and its related features are visuallv im- --b - .La portant to its overall visual character. The roof is not on}v , 1 354 .d .; ~ ~t.7'=r: hichiv visible, it has eiaborate stone dormers, ana it also has 4 -. decorative metalwork and slatework. The red and black ,#mai slates of differing sizes and shapes are laid in patterns that Overall Visual Character: Projections extend around the roof of this large and freestanding 'building. Any changes to this patterned slatework, or to the A projecting porch or balcony can be renÂ· important to the other roe)-ing details would damage the visual character of overall visual character of almost any building and to the the building. Photo by Laurie R. Hammel district in which it is located. Despite t}ie size of this building (3 1.2 stories), and its distinctive rooiline profile, and despite the importance of the very large window open- ings, the lacy wrap-around iron balconv is singularly inipor- - tant to the visual character of this building. It would Jlng - -1'Fier'MI'*2324 1 serioushÂ· affect the character to remove tile balconv, to .'..:Â·i Â· 3 6 6 . : Iort= 2: E --- =7, enclose it, or to rephice it with a balconv Zacking tht same -,2 - 1.. I degree of detail of the original material. Photo br Baird Mi. - - Smith - 1 Overall Visual Character: Roof and Related Features On this building, the most important visual aspects of its character are the roof and its related features such as the dormers and chimners. The rOOi iS important to the visual character because its steepness makes it highly visible, and its prominence is reinforced by the patterned timvork, the 4\ dorniers and the two chimnevs. Changes to the roof or Its leatures, huch ab renioval or alteratic)ns to the dormers, te,r e\.unple, would certainly ch;inge the character of this < build::Â·,4. rhls does not discount the iniportance of its other aspea. such. as the porch, the windows, the brickwork, or its se:tint; but the root is dearkÂ· crucial to understanding the over.41 visual character oi this building as seen from a distance. Photo bzÂ· Lee 11. \el:on 4 ' P.Â· 170 4 1-2 4. , 3/ . 7'iii f, . 453 - +6 .2- . 4. 2% 54 1-r Â· 7 31 ' & . | .* 3 4 '-a - '- 5:4eeÂ· - 2.-.-,Â», l Clk:.t=. 21: f 23&* r.%.", id,- zi - . r , -Â·. ./4, .Â· 7 r . - Y+ - I "Fli - . .~ - p + t.. 4 Â¥ 1 -- 0 X 4. . - *.. % 9- IT 1*. . - I Â·. 4 9-25- - -:Alk + .- ~-rI?,1.2 .' + Z le-7 I I - 1-1.- . . 11. 6 - - = Overall Visual Character: Projections Manv buildings have projecting features such as porches, 11- bav windows, or overhanging roofs, that help define their overall visual character. This projecting porch because of its '. 7 - - 2. .39,51_=---.r k size and shape, and because it copies the pitch .ind niaterial of the main roof, is an important contributor to the visual ~ : character of this simple farmhouse. The removal or alteration ' of this porch would drastically alter the character of this building. If the porch were enclosed with wood or glass, or if gingerbread brackets were added to the porch columns, if - - ~-- the tin root was replaced with asphalt, or if the porch railing f was opened to admit a center stairwav, the overall visual ; Â· character could be seriouslv damaged. Although this project- ing porch is an i-mportant feature, almost any other change - - . to this house, such as changes to the window pattern, or changes to the main roof, or changes to the setting, would Overall Visual Character: Projections also change its visual character. Photo by Hugh C. Miller Since these are row houses, any evaluation of their visual exterior character i: necessarily limited to the front and rear walls; and while there are a nuniber of things competing tor - attention in the trent. it is the hall round prolecting bavs 1. ' f with their conical roots that contribute most prominentiv to - the visual character. Ilieir removal would be a devastating - : Â·'tua. loss to tlie overall character, but even if preserved, the character could be easilv damaged by changes to their color Â· . 1 .AWÂ¥,9; -- (as seen in the left bav which has been painted a dark Â·-- , , U m : 41 ' fi . ..thÂ·.46 Â· -; ; PÂ« :4,nu-1Â¢4 Â· color), or changes to their windows, or chances to their tile - , roots. Though these houses have other fine features that u ~ contribute to tht~ visual character and are worthv ok preser- vation, these half-round bavs demonstrate the importance of â€¢: 4 ,Â· I . .54 L . projecting features on an alreadv rich and complex facade. Â£ F 0. Because of the repetitive nature of these proiecting bays on -- Â·4 - 0 adjacent row houses, along with the buildings' size, scale, openings, and materials, tiler also contribute to the overall 4=, ./. J.t. visual character of the streetscape in the historic district. Any evaluation of the visual character of such a building should Overall Visual Character: Trim take into account the context of this building within the If one were to analvze the overall shape or form of this district. i noto bv Lee H. Nelson - building, it would be seen that it is a gable-rooked house with dormers and a wraparound porch. It is similar to many other houses of the period. It is the wooden trim on the eaves and around the porch that gives this building its own identify and its special visual character. Although such wooden trim is vulnerable to the elements, and must be kept painted to prevent deterioration; the loss of this trim would seriously damage the overall visual character of this building, and its loss would obliterate much of the close-up visual character so dependent upon craftsmanship for the moldings, can'ings, and the see-through jigsaw work. Photo br Hugh C. Miller D -- a. - ..'..%-, W.f-I ..Â·>-I- I... 37,4'~'5~Â» 2~"- W #0 I . 834 'fit- it p It r I il + r 4 * . 4 1 , . ..111/1 *ar=22,.2-i,4,=tut kof'j,Â·4 ''. _ - 4,11 1 â€¢liAk;21-414:<Â·~N'In, I Â·~i-cliig~;Pab ktmi<ti' * .-*17 1 --1 9.1-ra,0171[un'lilli A' - * ; 1 All r.-*,7,7"-r.----1- .AA n':rÂ»il<14 Te:JiliTE.U+Jf-1,1-nÂ»-fi'-0,wom., 6.~-1 -6 2-i *b. 1Â·:'-Â·.ap--Flj4111~~~~<111 ....'-I.'Â£1=rut %..1,13 -- . I~: - - p.:I:' 0-. -il + U ---- Overall Visual Character: Setting RE---rif.L~ -Li,ZiwaL-'1:IMA1.L--1 11.13 In the process of identifying the overall visual character, the aspect ot setting should not be overlooked. Obviouslv, the setting of urban roK houses differs from that ot a mansion with a designed landscape. However, there are nianv in- --* .- .. stances where the relationship between the building and its , 1 - -7.1 - ,- place on the streetscape, or its place in the rural environ- - ment, in other words its setting, mav be an important con- tributor to its overall character. In this instance, the corner tower and the arched entnnvav are important contributors to the visual character of the t'17 building itself, but there is also a relationship between tile building .ind the two converein# streets that is also an im- U L portant aspect of this historic building. The curb, sidewalk, fence, and the vard interrelate with each other to establish a setting that is essential to the overall visual character of the historic propertv. Removing these elements or replacing them wÂ·ith a dfirewar or parking court would destrov an Â· Â·Â· important visual aspect. Photo bv Lee H. Nelson --, Overall Visual Character: Setting Among the various visual aspects relating to the setting of 4 i an historic property are such site features as gardens, walks, ' Â· fences, etc. This can include their design and materials. There is a dramatic difference in the visual character be- . tween these two fence constructions-one utilizing found r Â· materials with no particular regard to their uniformitv of size or placement. and the other being a product of the machine i 1111111111111'j .lilli - - -- age utilizing cast iron components assembled into a pattern of precision and recularitv. If the corral fence were to be repaired or replaced with lumbenÂ·ard materials its character would be dramatically compromised. The rhythm and I , regularitv of the cast iron ience is so important to its visual .ip' 1 *1 - - damage or vandalism, if some of the fence top spikes were character that its character could be altered 'or accidental " ~ broken off tlius interrupting the rhvthrn or pattern. Photos bv Lee h. N elson - --i - -r r Overall Visual Character: Setting Even architecturallv niodest buildings frequentlv will have a bettint that contributes to their overall character. In this very lirt.an district. set-backs are the exception, so that the sniall trorit vard i: something of a luxurv, and it is important to :!w over.11! character because of its design and materials, . ill,h 111.111.it' t!1,1 Iwn tence ,}c,nil the sider1Â·a]k, tlie eun'ed H .Ilk le.,ii:!1,2 to the porch, and the various plantines. In a Al,trict v. mÂ·re :,arkilli hpace. arc 111 'Creat demand, such tront vard, .irc wimetinliÂ·Â·Â· Converted to ott-Â·treet parking, hut !!1 :Ill. 111.t.ince, tliat would e..entialkÂ· destro\Â· its .etting .!:1,1 wh,11|.i di.1.':allv Chante the vi,ual character of this Â·. :,Â·.Â·cv Knoto [1Â·.Â· 1 ec H. Ickon '.r 7 . -1-71"! uu.r a,:..~~r.vlam~ vol'tri Il'/////,/,////1&&:irir/:~;, ~9 2:~ir :< 1. J-4 1.-4 . *4- t ~'~~~~ r ElilF'WJ*$I rily'--1, .7.... 1...11 0; - .UA i.w - < 9. 9-7219$:Milts,2 I- Arm's Length Visual Character: Materials At arm's length, the visual character is most often deter- mined by the surface qualities of the materials and crafts- manship; and while these aspects are often inextricably ~6114l,â€¢. - ~ ,~ a ... related, the original choice of materials often plays the dorni- 4....1 ./.Â·.,Â·- ... Â· â€¢ nant role in establishing the close-range character because of tit 1'3â€¢Â£Â·M>'./ Â· 71 - Â· the color, texture, or shape of the materials. ~**iet*irt:f>1 .'tiA~;1 ..... -=*... In this instance, the varietv and arrangement of the }, 1 Zeâ‚¬...'.*. 'y.':.... ..1 . -Â· Â· ..' - 4. Â·Â·"I. -~ ' A'71212194:7#AL- 1 . materials is important in defining the visual character, start- ing with the large pieces of broken stone which form the projecting base for the building walls, then clianging to a Blopi~5421:,9 .. ~ .Â·-: râ€¢: ~Â· ; r. =fl-; 1.1 Pt/,/4WlÂ¥-.Â·JI. e'l ..1 - . -- i wall of roughly rectangular stones which vary in size, color, ets*4 ..'... and texture, all with accentuated, projecting beads of niortar, then there is a rather precise and narrow band of cut and dressed stones with minimal mortar joints, and finallr, the -1-- . : , ..... 1 , main building walls are composed of bricks, rather uniform in color, with fairly generous mortalÂ· joints. It is the jux- 46AW;eÂ«iN.tÂ£4 taposition and variety of these materials (and of course, the , f. 3-*~,2 & :;' ' -Â· -IMAÂ·p'-,b*FE-24*LAGh-1 craftsmanship) that is very important to the visual character. I ..Illi- Changing the raised niortar joints, for example, would rastically alter the character at arm's length. Photo by Lee Arm's Length Visual Character: Craft Details I. Nelson The arm's length visual character of this building is a com- bination of the materials and the craft details. Most of the exterior walls of this building consist of earlv 20th centun' Ii-9*19~ lÂ£~p~z*6574*2i,1-ililiIDE, Roman brick, precisely made, unusually long bricks, in vary- ing shades of yellow-brown, with a noticeable surface spot- ting of dark iron pyrites. While this brick is an important . 1 contributor to the visual character, the related craft details are perhaps more important, and they consist of: unusually precise coursing of the bricks, almost as though they were 2 -- h .MI.J-12. JA/lial:*de/,hill laid up using a sun,evor's level; a row of recessed bricks every ninth course, creating a shadow pattern on the wall; deeply recessed mortar joints, creating a secondary pattern 0- A r prz- .-re.r-, .1-14 Â·e â€¢4 1*il~%~ of shadows; and a toothed effect where the bricks overlap !B -2:.12Â»2-10.-.--.~.~.i. 46Â«m= each other at the corner of the building. The cumulative ef- - feet of this artisanrv is important to the arm's length visual character, and it is evident that it would be difficult to match 5//"./......- #-- '1~ -: I EATA-*-11"lil 1-1Â£* 9, 37"~.-Â·Â·--ltÂ·,--Â·rol~ if it were damaged, and the effect could be easily damaged . through insensitive treatments such as painting the I.,4-61Â·Â«. #14Â·-AL- ~!9*14-_-3 brickwork or bv careless repointing. Photo bv Lee H. Nelson '16.--:2Â· *43\544-120<.El. Arm's Length Visual Character: Craft Details There are many instances where craft details dominate the arm's length visual character. As seen here, the craft details are especiallv noticeable because the stones are al] of a uniform co]or, and the>' are all squared off, but their sur- ~ faces Ivere K orked with differing tools and techniques to create a great variety of textures, resulting in a tour-de-force of craft details. This texture is very important at close range. It was a deliberately contrived surface that is an important contributor to the visual character of this building. Photo by Lee H. Nelson h . - w. pfrk&32*441*3*LA=m*.206-- 2 4- 4 4 -*6 e . , Nt - 117~ rel; -1 f, 9 Re= t:'My:~ LiENITE:14 mt Â»In 1 -/-/'0*844.- E. V..,0 91-4* 4049 ,:fM~~ Ann's Length Visual Character: Craft Details While hand-spht clapboardâ‚¬ are distinctive visual elements --------- - in their own war, niachine-sawn and p.-,inted wood siding A: ,Cs Length Visual Character: Craft Details is equally importint to the overall visual character in most other instances. At arni's length, however, the machine On some buildings, there are subtle aspects of visual sawn siding mar not be so distinctive; but there might be character that cannot be perceived from a distance. This is ither details tiiat add visual character to the wooden especi.:lly true of certain craft detail> that can be seen onk building, such as the dez..ils of wooden trini and low'tred at close range. On this building, it is easilv understood that shutte!5 around the windows (as seen here), or simile: sur- the narrow. unpainted, and weathered clapboards are an face te .!ures on other buildings, such as the saw niarks on important aspect of its overall visual character; but at close wall sitingles, the joints in loaded glass, decorative tinwork range there are a nurnber of subtle but very important craft on a rain conductor box. the rough surface of pebble-dash details that contribute to the handm.ide qualitv of this stuccowork, or the pebblv surface of exposed aggregate building, and which clearlv differentiate it from a building - concrete. Such surfaces can on}v be seen at arm's length with machine sawn clapboards. Tlie c..itpboards seen here and thev add to the visual character of a historic building. were split bv hand and the bottom ed:ics were not dressed ' Photo by Hugh C. Miller so tiiat the boards vary in width and thickn, :s, and t}ius they give a verv uneven shadow pattern. ItÂ· ause ther were split from oak that is unpainted, there ..re occasional wavv ravs in the wood that stand acainst the crain. Also >**< F Â·Â·~Â·--:.*By:Ain/t##te>.:t >Â·in~~3.-3 O L noticeable is the fact that the boards are of relativelv short r Â· . >11 - 4 4.-40 t- 1 Â¥1=13...... leneths, and that ther have feather-eaced ends that overlap . 1 . each other, a detail that is venÂ· different from butted ioints. The occasional large nail heads and the differential silver- gray weathering add to the random qualitv of the clap- boards. All of these qualities contribute to the arm's length , 1,4. / ..7&Â·r - ..t I L , PÂ»' rk-54--*Â·?13366' 4 visual character. Photor by Lee H. Nelson --- i-,==rw04.. p Bil. 1 -1 :24 1 Â· 1 .kia,f-.2=2';a~ - 1 ~-1 . 196*=i-=2=9%2====~ 22. Interior Visual Character: Individually Important Space: In assessing the interior visual character of any historic building, it is necessan' to ask whether there are spaces that are iniportarit to the character of this particular building, whether the buildine is architecturallv rich or niodest, or even if it is a simple or utilitarian structure. The character of the individuallv important space which is illustrated here is a combination oi its size, the twin eun-- ing staircases, the niassive columns and curving vaulted ceilings, in addition to the qualitv of the materials in the floor and iii the stairs. If the ceiling were to be lowered to provide space tor heatine ducts, or if the stairwars were to be enclos, c tor coae reasons, the shape and character of this space \\Tould be daniaqed, eE en u t}iere Lias no perma- ~ nent physical damage. Such changes Can easily destroy the visual character of an individuallv important interior space. Thus, it is important that the visual aspects of a building's interior character be recocnized before planning an\' changes or alterations. Photo bv National Portrait Callerv 8 1--/A Interior T'isual Character: Related Spaces Manv buildings have interior spaces that are visuallv or ...,4., physicallv related so that. as you move through them, they i*.i: 2 4. .:,1,â‚¬.:-44... '.7'.Â¥ :*?.3.2#- t.:-29.,.4,4,1~~i.Â® ,../ea*4# i. are perceived not as separate spaces, but as a sequence of related spaces that are important in defining the interior .,2-f~*:i- 4,93.-~vt..ff-- 9 -&**9441Â·90.1*. f&*13/4-/~'&-,I.:,::U 16~.7 . r ,.,14'I)4$6.=AEâ€ž:S character of the building. The example which is illustrated .. te..844: t:.ey:34 .:21#*464~~.S*d~ here consists of three spaces that are visuallv linked to each 1.:1 + Â· Â· 7*419~~gi 84 #Ae,+91.2, - 1 other. f Tlie first of these spaces is the vestibule which is of a - i '17 1 1 -4 generous size and unusual in its own right, but more im- portant, it visuallv relates to the second space which is the , --4--5-- main stairhall. 1, The hallwav is the circulation arterv for the building, and t.....Â» r â€ž,6, ... leads both horizontalkÂ· and vertically to other rooms and -1-. . i. .. .,~â€žZ~----- + - .- - 7-7.- ~:.-72. . spaces, but especiallv to the open and inviting stairwav. i . +-,0--<11,- ..=...-6 1---1.-4/41/4-- --4 The stairwav is the third part of this sequence of related . spaces, and it provides continuing access to the upper Roors. These related spaces are verv important in defining the iIi- . - terior character ot this building. Almost any change to these . 11- spaces, such as installing doors between the vestibule and 20 the hallwav, or enclosing the stair would serioush' impact <. I.,A.-4 P I their character and the war that character is perceived. Top ' photo by Met Chamowitz, others by John Tennant , % 1 ...14.-"/'. 1 .f ."11:- //- .A . 4 9, 1, r. I .4. 4.6-~ lit.9â‚¬.4..j III . 1 ~49â‚¬49.... -r 2' 1 , ; M t . , â€¢Â· Â· ./.. 71 I.,râ€¢%.=qâ„¢":(e 2 t ;, '';:b-'- ' IL j -i:t-;3i,rl:Jr-*. , 3,4~ r 1 *tf**W ~ f - . Â»S-bet--1 a , 15#At-/Â·4 g . ..88 :Â·2> 4-Â· - . ' UL - 1 ... .5.- - 'Â·T:2- 1- \1 4 x F **Ne*Â¥23Â»:f.'.7.4 8 4 - 27*Â¥321:- - f *62...At-':.-Z.E:.2'tud. M , Â®e-FÂ« i 1 --1.-2. -1 ..~lfÂ«~Â· ~. k '.. ..1 . ./.14 /3..35,4 :.*E I . I 'â€¢.4Â·*.4 1,4.â€¢p . 19 22/24'.&234: d*r.,5,/itri Interior Visual Character: Interior Features - ,AU.%'22*31 Interior features are three-dimensional building elements or .â€ž 1 1 architectural details that are an integral part of the building - --1 lt-' -.* . 2/I# as opposed to furniture. Interior features are often impor- =21 -4 1 A ~ * 9.1,56..2.9 tant in defining the character of an individual room or 11 V- t k space. In some instances, an interior feature, like a large 1*6*2t gAÂ·v. , and ornamental open stairwar mar dominate the visual Â· character of an entire building. In other instances, a modest Ii./* iron stairwav (like the one illustrated here) mav be an im- portant interior feature, and its preservation would be - ' - ~ Sucii features can also include the obrÂ·ious things like crucial to preserving the interior character of the building, 1. 4- fireplace mantles, plaster ceiling medallions, or panelling, but thev also extend to features like hardware, lighting fix- tures, bank te]Iers cages, decorative elevator doors, etc. Photo by David \1. Look | 9 45... ':.04 ..t , fFFE~.,f'.7 : 12.,0......69.33.9....41,1 ht.1'i]'36243 er:#5:.:~ ~ ~;.- rÂ°Â·fi<~~9*041MV,-Â·Â· - 1 - US*LYP ?*419Â·9 49591 : ...214..4.- . . 439% 1 - â‚¬5 I .1 I 4. -I. . Silapp/26 1 fli . - r Â· r -1 f ,4,71 4,â€¢- - 1 64Â£/WA 224*-2 .. @939 20 - R -- 1. .2 .-- 1 =+Ed +Efla 5*4* . 4%*z REE - Art@e .. - f/5.L~~=I.=.---E+34/feE+E+E+I+EEZ FS,&< z --.,4 â‚¬,7, O=:.-st:'tzc2Â¢â‚¬541<'C. 22 . f: .--------.f--- - Interior Visual Character: Interior Features Modern heating or cooling devices usualh' add little to the interior character of a building; but historicallv, radiators, for instance, mar have contributed to the interior character _91. N Â· . bv virtue ot their size or shape, or because ot their speciallv designed bases, piping, and decorative grill age or .f.Â· T"&5 9. , enclosures. Sometimes thev were painted with several col- ors to highlight their integral, cast-in details. In more recent . , - times, it has been common to overpaint and conceal such .-6.- 4 ' 48 distinctive aspects of earlier heating and plumbing devices, .F so that we seldom have the opportunity to realize how ,Â¥1. important thev can be in defining the character of interior .3 rooms and spaces. For that reason, it is important to iden- tify their character-defining potential, and consider their -- preservation, retention, or restoration. Photo by David W. - , Look -== r 4-r 92...1 1 - .. 72 12 , r< D. -IMI. L Fragility of A Building's Visual Character -5 -tÂ£* . 4 Some aspects of a building's visual character are fragile and are easilv lost. This is true of brickwork, for example, . which can be irreversiblv damaged with inappropriate Â· cleaning techniques or bv insensitive repointing practices. * .I *7 I At least two factors are important contributors to the visual character of brickwork, namely the brick itself and the Â¥ -/.I craftsmanship. Between these, there are manv more aspects worth noting, such as color range of bricks, size and shape Interior Visual Character: Surface Materials and Finishes variations, texture, bonding patterns, together with the When identifying the visual character of historic interior many variable qualities of the mortar joints, such as color, spaces one should not overlook the importance of those width of joint and tooling. These qualities could be easily materials and finishes that comprise the surfaces of walls, damaged by painting the brick, by raking out the joint with floors and ceilings. The surfaces may have evidence of power tools, or repointing with a joint that is too wide. As either hand-craft or machine-made products that are impor- seen here during the process of repointing, the visual tant contributors to the visual character, including patterned character of this front wall is being dramatically changed or inlaid designs in the wood flooring, decorative painting from a wall where the bricks predominate, to a wall that is practices such 26 stenciling, imitation marble or wood grain, visually dominated by the mortar joints. Photo by Lee H. wallpapering, tinwork, tile floors, etc, Nelson The example illustrated here involves a combination of real marble at the base of the column, imitation marble pat- terns on the plaster surface of the column (a practice called scadiola), and a tile floor surface that uses small mosaic tiles arranged to form geometric designs in several different colors. While such decorative materials and finishes ma> be ~ important in defining the interior visual character of this particular building, it should be remembered that in much more modest buildings, the plainness of surface materials and finishes may be an essential aspect of their historic character. Photo bv Lee H. Nelson 10 11lm IL . 1.,#'TI!1!111!1! L !1 . . A Preservation Briefs 17 The Architectural Character Checklist/Questionnaire Lee H. Nelson, FAIA National Park Service This checklist can be takeIl to the building and used to identifv those aspects that give the building and setting its essential visual qualities and character. This checklist consists of a series ot questions that are designed to help in identifying those things that contribute to a building's character. The use of this checklist imÂ·okÂ·es the three-step process of looking for: 1) the overall viqual aspects, 2) the visual character at clo>e range, and 3) the visual character of interior spaces, features and finishes. Because this is a process to identify nrchitecturni character, it does not address those intangible qualities that give a property or building or its contents ltS historic significance, instead this checklist is organized on the assumption that historic significance is embodied in those tangible aspects that include the building's setting, its form and fabric. Step One 1. Shape 4. Projections What is there about the form or shape of the building that Are there parts of the building that are character-defining gives the building its identitv? Is the shape distinctive in because they project from the walls of the building like relation to the neighboring buildings? Is it simphÂ· a lowÂ·, porches, cornices, bay windows, or balconies? Are tliere squat box, or is it a tall, narrow building with a corner turrets, or widelv overhanging eaves. projecting pedinients tower? Is the shape highly consistent with its neighbors? Is or chimnevs? the shape so complicated because of wings, or ells, or dif- Notes on the Projections: ferences in height, that its complexity is important to its character? Conversely, is the shape so simple or plain that adding a feature like a porch would change tliat character? Does the shape convey its historic function as in smoke stacks or silos? 5. Trim and Secondary Features Notes on the Shape or Form of the Building: Does the trim around the uÂ·indows or doors contribute to the character of the building? is there other trim on the walls or around the projections that, because ot its decora- tion or color or patterning contributes to the character of the building? Are there secondary features such as shutters, 2. Roof and Roof Features decorative gables, railings. or exterior wall panels? Does the roof share or its steep (or shallow) slope con- Notes on the Trim and SecondanÂ· Features: tribute to the building's character? Does the fact that the roof is highly visible (or not visible at all) contribute to the architectural identity of the building? Are certain roof features important to the profile of the building against the sky or its backgro~nd, such as cupolas, multiple chimneys, 6. Niaterials dormers, cresting, or weathervanes? Are the roofing Do the materials or combination of materials contribute to materials or their colors or their patterns (such as patterned the overall character of the building as seen from a distance states) more notTceable than the shape or slope ot the roof? , because of their color or patternine, such as broken faced Notes on the Roof and Roof Features: stone. scalloped wall shingling, rounded rock foundation walls, boards and battens, or textured stucco? c Notes on the Materials: 3. Openings Is there a rhythm or pattern to the arrangement of win- dows or other openings in the walls; like the rhythm of 7. Setting windows in a factory building, or a three-part window in the front bay of a house; or is there a noticeable relation- What are the aspects of the setting that are important to ship between the width ot the window openings and the the visual character? For example, is the alignment of wall space between the window openings? Are there buildings along a city street and their relationship to the distinctive openings, like a large arched entrancewav, or sidewalk the essential aspect oi Its Setting? Or, converselv, decorative window lintels that accentuate the importance of is the essential character dependent upon the tree plantings the window openings, or unusually shaped windows. or and out buildings which surround the tarmhouse? Is the patterned window sash, like small panes of glass in the front vard important to the setting of the modest house? Is windows or doors. that are important to the character? Is the specific site important to the setting such as being on a the plainness or the window openings such that addine hilltor, along a river. or. is the building placed on the site shutters or gingerbread trim KÂ·ould radicallv chance its in such a wav to enhance its setting? Is there a special rela- character? Is there a hierarchv of facades that make the tionship to the adioinin< streets and other buildings? Is tront windows more important than the side windows? there a view? ls there tencing, planting, terracing, \Vhat about those walls where the absence oi windows walkwavs or any other landscape aspects that contribute to establishes its own character? the setting? Notes on the Openings: Notes on the Setting: 11 MEMORANDUM To: Aspen City Council From: Bill Poss, Chairman, Aspen Historic Preservation Committee Re: Chairman's Report Date: March 29, 1989 On behalf of the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee, I am proud to report the progress we have made in historic preservation during the past year. In light of the recent issues that have received great attention from the community and the media, we felt a Chairman's Report would be an appropriate forum to bring you current on our extensive work program. Broken into distinct focuses, you will find two attachments. The first, Technical Report, briefly analyzes development review (case load) and summarizes the amount of time volunteered by the Committee. The second, Special Projects, addresses the multitude o f proj ects, sub-committee and sta f f work currently underway to meet our goals. Guidance for these projects is taken from the Historic Preservation Element of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1986. Three very active new programs indicate the enthusiastic and proactive role the HPC is playing in Aspen: the non-profit Aspen Historic Trust, the Heritage Celebration Committee and the Public Relations Committee. These programs, along with the enhanced Proj ect Monitor system, incorporate preservation into the community on a much higher level than in the past, and serve to educate as well. ------ ------ The combined Aspen HPC represents 19 years of continued commitment and dedication in the pursuit of protecting and preserving Aspen's heritage. We are sensitive and responsive to the community's needs. We look forward to a continued dialogue with Council, and seek guidance from you as well. We encourage you to take an active part in the historic preservation process and continue to arrange communicative worksessions with the Committee. chairmans.report HPC CHAIRMAN'S REPORT - MARCH 29. 1989 Technical Report Summary: The figures below represent an overview of the past 15 months, from January 1, 1988 to today, of the Aspen Historic Preservation Committee. Further details associated with each sub-section may be obtained from Planning Staff. Summary of Meetings: Regular Meetings: 30 Special Meetings: 2 On site Reviews: 4 Worksessions: 5 Sub-Committees: 7 - Aspen Historic Trust 5 - Public Relations 2 - Heritage Celebration Committee Total 49 Summary of Time: Regular Meetings: 75 hours Special Meetings: 5 hours On site Reviews: 5 hours Worksessions: 9 hours Sub-Committees: 14 hours - Aspen Historic Trust 7 hours - Public Relations 4 hours - Heritage Celebration Committee Total 119 hours Average Hours volunteered per month per member: 25 Average Total Hours per year, combined HPC: 2,700 (figures do not include Staff time) Summary of Projects Reviewed: Minor Development: 19 Significant Development: 15 Landmark Designation: 7 Demolition approval: 2 Staff signoffs: 24 Total (1-1-88 to 3-28-89) 67 Average Staff time dedicated to HPC project review and research: 80 hours/month Report prepared by Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner chair.report.technical HPC CHAIRMAN'S REPORT - MARCH 29, 1989 Special Proiects SummarY: The Historic Preservation Element of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, adopted by Council in 1986, has served to guide staff and the HPC in developing the city's preservation program. We are proud of the accomplishments made to date, . representing approximately 95% of the short- and long-range goals identified in the HP Element. We look forward to mapping our new course for the coming decade, to take the program into the year 2000. Certified Local Government Program: Aspen is one of a few (7) select communities in Colorado to have the honor of "CLG" status, since 1986. This Federal program has aided State Historic Preservation Offices with funding for local level preservation programs in all 50 states since the early '80's. Colorado's "pass through" allocation Of approximately $49,000 annually is competed for by these seven CLG communities. Last year, staff successfully applied for and received the largest amount of CLG funds ever allocated to one city: $16,500. The funding contract includes a "Performance and Payment Schedule" which is negotiated between staff and the State Preservation Planner. With each year's pass-through funding, the State receives the mandate from the Federal level on the special products and studies required, which determines funding priority. Continued education and training is required for all HPC's under a CLG program; staff is currently coordinating state-wide preservation conference to be held in Aspen July 20-23, 1989. Special Committees: Aspen Historic Trust: The newly formed non-profit organization has been created to bridge the gap between the Aspen Historical Society and the HPC, to proactively seek conservation easements and instigate a Purchased Development Rights (incentive) program. The 10-member Board of Directors has been chosen, consisting of three HPC members, three Historical Society Board members, and four citizens at-large. The Trust was formalized after the results of last year's Feasibility Study clearly indicated the need for such a tax-exempt non-profit preservation organization. Heritage Celebration Committee: Developed to network and provide a tool for communication, the HCC consists of 10 members representing Aspen area organizations, business and individuals involved with marketing the heritage of their historic buildings. National J Historic Preservation Week (May 14-20) activities are . being planned with the assistance of the HCC, which includes the HPC 2nd Annual Preservation Honor Awards, Preservation Forum (to be held in the Ballroom of the Hotel Jerome) , and the "Architreasures" photo contest in the Aspen Times. Public Relations Committee: Chairman Bill Poss, Vice- Chair Georgeann Waggaman and citizen Leslie Holst are assisting staff in developing a community-awareness campaign involving an informational brochure, print and radio " advertisements" (similar in institutional focus to the current Aspen Clean Air Campaign), engraved plaques for annual preservation awards, and other tools to reach the community. The approximate budget for this campaign is $3,000. Staff is currently preparing an itemized budget for City Manager and Council approval. Additional Programs: Preservation Incentives: The HPC and staff have worked - for months on developing revised code language to address the critical issue of preservation incentives. Staff has prepared a 35 page Issue Paper on the subject of incentives, which incorporates the Aspen Historic Trust into the process. Code Revisions: Since Ordinance 11, Series of 1987 was passed, and subsequently codified in the Revised Land Use Code, problems have occurred from time to time, requiring revised language. The HPC approved Staff's re-write of the Demolition, Partial Demolition and Relocation standards, and the important new Minimum Maintenance provision. The recent "Conflict of Interest" issue resulted in the significant revision of the HPC By-Laws and Article 4 of the Land Code as well. The HPC is recommending that P&Z initiate the ordinance to formerly adopt these revised By-Laws into the Land Use Code. Project Monitoring: Each Minor and Significant Development project is assigned a "monitor", whose task it is to regularly observe progress and serve as liason between property owner and staff, offering pro bono technical assistance where possible. Time is allotted during each regular meeting for monitoring reports. The monitoring system is proving to be an excellent resource. National Register Nominations: Adding to the number of National Register properties is a primary goal of the CLG program. We have been successful in the official 2 listing of the Smith-Elisha House, and are currently working on two additional nominations: The Castle Creek and Hunter Creek Hydro-Electric Plants and the Holden-Marolt site. Five additional eligible sites are targeted for listing on the Register within the next two years. Local Landmark Designations: Seven (7) new landmarks were added to the designation list last year. Staff anticipates the additional of at least three (3) more this summer. Historic Districts study: Staff's significant study of the existing historic districts and the three proposed districts was completed last summer. Recommendations to formalize the West End Districts and mandatory landmark designation of all remaining historic resources outside district jurisdiction was made, which the HPC generally supports. The Committee agrees that any further eradication of Aspen's historic built environment must be stopped. Technical Assistance: 1) Staff and Chairman Bill Poss offered their assistance in last fall's Wheeler Opera House maintenance and repair program. 2) The Aspen Resort Association requested design assistance from the HPC for their Mall kiosk, which they received. 3) Staff has served continuously as liason to the Aspen Historical Society in their attempts to obtain the Holden-Marolt Barns Site for a historical park/museum. The HPC formally endorsed the project last summer and continues to be actively available to the Society. One HPC member has volunteered architectural assistance to the Wheeler-Stallard House renovation and window replacement program. Staff assists the Historical Society with special events. Staff attends conferences, worksessions, and seminars on historic preservation continually, and updates the Committee on important issues. Copies of National Trust Technical Briefs are often included in meeting packets. Guest speakers have been brought in as well. 3