HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19881108HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE
MINUTES
City Council Chambers
1st Floor City Hall
November 8, 1988 2:30 p.m.
Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Nick
Pasquarella, Chris Darakis and Georgeann Waggaman present. Zoe
Compton, Charlie Knight, Charles Cunniffe, Donnelley Erdman and
Joe Krabacher were excused.
MOTION: Bill made the motion to approve the minutes of Oct. 25,
1988. Second by Georgeann. All approved. Motion carries.
COMMITTEE MEMBER AND STAFF COMMENTS
Roxanne: There is a new document out called the U.C.B.C. which
is the uniform code for building conservation which compliments
the U.B.C. I will be working with the Building Dept. on this
particularly in the area of the minimum maintenance requirements
for buildings to see if we can adopt something.
Roxanne: Jan. 6th is a seminar in Denver sponsored by the
National Trust, Colo. Historical Society and Colo. Preservation
Inc. It is a workshop that will brief everyone on the new state
wide preservation tax incentive bill that is going to be
presented to the floor. There are only three other states in the
country that have a state wide incentive, a rehabilitation tax
incentive. Colorado may be the fourth; 25% tax credits for
rehab.
Bill: That would only go against the Colo. State Income Tax.
Bill: What is the status on the incentive program.
Roxanne: I have been working with Alan Richman and we are
looking at the entire landuse code for revision including
incentives. Gideon Kaufman and Joe Wells are interested in
writing some language for an incentive to amend the code that
might happen prior to the adoption of the change ordinance. I
might be specifically looking at employee housing and City
exactions.
Bill: Has the hearing on the Berko Bldg. been suspended.
Roxanne: It has been tabled indefinitely, basically they have
withdrawn their GMP application. Jack King owner of the
Berko/Lily Reed has put the house back on the market. They
still have to go through GMP and go through final before the
house can be moved.
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
424 E. HYtqAN
Roxanne: The applicant is requesting to replace her 6 yr. old
awning. The new awning would be one color, charcoal gray. The
awning is a very visible element right in the middle of the mall
and will include the business name on it. We find that the
general application is within keeping of the guidelines and a
very positive addition to the otherwise simple non-historic store
front. We can address any questions regarding an encroachment
license to the Zoning Officer, Bill Drueding. The awning does
encroach but six years ago they didn't have encroachment
licenses. The process was not in place to do so but for any kind
of replacement or new awning that is being put up an encroachment
license is required. In the past HPC has required a letter of
agreement from the building owner to basically make sure that
all the awnings are consistent on the building. Another
business located in the building, Takah Sushi has an awning that
is not like Sandy's. It is bright blue with white piping and a
round barrel shape. Sandy's awning exceeds the width of the
store front approximately one foot on each side. The
replacement awning should match the width of the store front and
it is not similar in design to Takah Sushi's awning. My
recommendation is that HPC grant the development approval subject
to the conditions stated in the memo: 1) To show proof of an
encroachment license or apply for one. 2) That the awning be
slightly redesigned to compliment with Takah Sushi's. 3) That
the awning meet the Development guidelines with regard to
matching the width of the opening. 4) That Sandy meet with Bill
Drueding regarding signage because she is adding in "jewelry" on
her sign. 5) I have also recommended that the applicant submit
to the Planning Office prior to a permit being granted a letter
of agreement from the building owner requiring awning conformity.
Sandy Francis, owner: I have no problem with any of the
recommendations except that I was going to ask the council to
waive the application for the encroachment license for several
reasons: a) We did this six years ago and it has been up six
years and it has enhanced the front of the building, b) It is
expense to apply for a license also. I can certainly get a
letter from George Vicenzi, owner of the building and he has
already seen the material selected. The old awning was light
gray with a maroon valance and the new awning is a charcoal gray
and will blend in better. The valance will disappear. The new
awning will enhance the store. The awning goes exactly to the
edge of the store front and doesn't encroach on either side. Six
years ago we had to comply with the exact width of the store
front.
Roxanne: Your drawings show it extended beyond.
2
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
Sandy: My drawing is wrong and it goes exactly to the store
front line so I don't think that is applicable. Takah Sushi's
awning has a rod iron umbrella shape awning the same kind of
structure that I do. Takah Sushi's entrance is very confined and
they really couldn't have done anything else as their doorway is
recessed. They couldn't have complied with my awning design
which I am sure they were asked to do. My awning went up first.
The frame is a rod iron frame very similar to mine. If I make my
awning smaller it will look strange and that would mean preparing
a new rod iron frame and it would be funny to have a barrel
shaped awning over the entrance. I am asking that that
recommendation be taken out. Takah Sushi's awning is not due to
be replaced as it is in good shape and I looked at it today.
Casey Coffman, owner of Takah Sushi's and I are good friends and
when she is ready to replace her awning we can bring material
samples that are similar and maybe she can pick a color that
would be closer to mine or at least in the same color tones.
Nick: Regards to us having to say anything about encroachment
licenses I wouldn't even want to recommending that you don't get
an encroachment because that would setting a precedence. It is
completely out of our hands.
Sandy: I spoke to Elyse in the Eng. Dept. and she said she
would recommend to you that the encroachment license application
be waived and grandfathered in.
Roxanne: That is done by Council. I spoke to Elyse about that
and Bill and I are not comfortable in beginning to waive
encroachment licenses. There is a $300. fee involved and I
mentioned to Elyse that possibly the Eng. Dept. might want to
waive the fee and that was just my recommendation.
Bill Drueding: The Zoning Dept. got together with the Eng.
Dept. regarding encroachments over city property and we decided
not to go around telling people they are encroaching and have to
come in for a license. As awnings etc. need replaced we notify
them that an encroachment license is needed and that is a written
policy procedure. Council can waive the fee but not this Board
or Engineering.
Georgeann: I think the applicant has gone to a lot of effort in
trying to answer the questions and solve them. I don't want to
see a bright blue awning on the mall and I think gray is a good
solution. I have not been disturbed in the past by the blue
awning on Takah Sushi's around the corner. This isn't a building
that is going to have a bunch of different awnings as there are
no other places for awnings so this might be one of the places
that is not as critical as in other locations. I would be
inclined to go along with approving the charcoal gray awning.
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
Chris: I walked over there today and walking from east to west
the Takah Sushi awning isn't that prevalent, you almost have to
get buy and turn around and look back for the two to come
together. I don't think it would be that noticeable.
Bill Drueding: As the awning is now I think it is too low and
could not go back in the same space. The distance should be 8
feet and another 1/2 ft. for the valance.
Sandy: That is one of the reasons we eliminated the valance and
I can do that.
Chris: I looked at it and don't know if it can it be moved up
with the windows above.
Sandy: I forgot about that and possibly there is four inches
there. Possibly that is why the awning is down lower.
Bill Drueding: We enforce the 8 ft. because at one time the
city equipment went by and got caught on an awning because it
was put up too low. The City is concerned about their liability
and you have skiers and ski's also.
Sandy: It has to be 8ft. from ground level.
Bill Drueding: The metal piece. 8 ft. minimum.
Sandy: I'll make sure that happens.
Bill: Since this is an existing frame and it had been reviewed
by the HPC before I would be willing to waive the condition on
the approval to be consistent with Takah Sushi's awning. I do
agree that we want to get compatibility on existing buildings.
Bill: We need to get a clear motion and I would like to keep
conditions 1, 3, 4 and five of the recommendation in Staff's memo
dated November 8, 1988 and delete recommendation 2.
MO?ION: Bill: I will entertain a motion to grant minor
development approval for the application for 424 E. Hyman Avenue
subject to the following conditions as re-numbered 1, 2, 3, 4 as
outlined in the memo from the Planning staff dated Nov. 8, 1988
at this time.
Nick: I so move.
Georgeann: I second the motion. Ail favored. Motion carries.
4
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
Nick: The memos that Staff has been putting out since her
arrival has made it a whole lot easier for me to be on this
Board. I can read the recommendations and see what the direction
is being given.
6~5 W. MAIN ST.
Roxanne: This situation is unique. Some of you were here back
in Dec. of 1986 when this project know as the Wesson Dental
Building came before HPC and received final approval for this
particular project. They received GMP allotment in 1987, this
was the only project for the office GMP allotment in that
particular zone district. Dr. Wesson is not going to carry
through with this and Mac Cunningham and Stan Mathis have an
option on the ground. In going back through this file I found
that nobody liked this building that was approved. Stan and Mac
are amending the entire facade and not changing the FAR, not
changing the footprint. We have a situation where a building has
received final approval from HPC and when it was approved it was
before ordinance #11 was passed which required an 18 month time
frame in which to pull a building permit. In other words they
have approval for this design for the next three years under
their GMP approval. The 18 month time frame "evaporated" when
ordinance #11 became codified. This could be build within the
next three years or we could amend the final to something similar
or what they are presenting today. We could also say that this
is an entirely new building. They are going to be amending the
floor plan inside from a huge two bedroom apartment and divide it
inside and make more closely affordable one bedroom apartments up
above.
Mac: The basement has an employee housing unit and we want to
go to P&Z with an amendment to use the entire basement.
Roxanne: There is going to be a process and some time involved
in getting their GMP allotment amended. They are under a time
frame and are seeking as much information from HPC as possible
and some direction as to where to go with this and I am seeking
information from the Board also. As I see this we are looking at
a whole new building, we can either amend the final which I don't
think really suffices for the public. I think the public needs
to be involved again in this process. I see this as significant
development because of the major exterior changes that are going
on. I would like to see a conceptual and a final process with a
public hearing involved. It will not delay them in their overall
because they have to go through this other process. I wanted to
bring to HPC the full picture.
Mac: I put this property under contract a week ago today and
Wesson has the right to build this. The City in its "present"
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
looking at Main St. and the facades and the general character of
the street and with Roxanne's professional input is not at all
going to be happy with this. Wesson recognizes this but on the
other hand he has the right to build it and he said to me if you
can get the changes in the character that you want, great
otherwise I am going to sell it to somebody else and they are
going to build it. The reason is he designed a building that HPC
told him to build and he wanted to do originally a victorian
building and the past HPC board came back and said they didn't
want a pseudo victorian. If we are making progress I hope to
persuade him to give us additional time. This is an unusual
situation. Stan and I feel these plans are grossly
inappropriate for Main Street. We are not changing the foot
print at all but we did move the building forward 15 ft. at
Roxanne's request. Apparently they were originally asked to
pull it back 15 ft. and not have it line up with the other
buildings on Main St. The landscaping on the footprint is a
reflection of what was previously approved. I happen to agree
with Roxanne and Stan and I can talk with you about it but we
just literally copied it off the other and you will see that the
ditch was moved. It is the classic problem with so many
regulations in Aspen now that the trees can't be moved so then
you have to move the sidewalk and when you move the sidewalk it
is over the ditch. Those are just minor comments. Our main
objective is to do a building that has the character of the
other Main St. buildings. Frankly I am not interested in doing
the original plans.
Stan Mathis: We have revised the plans and have taken the
access to the building off Main St. and put it off 5th Street.
The footprint is modified somewhat.
Bill: You are trying to get feedback from us to see if your
plans are worth pursuing. Give us a brief overview of your
design.
Stan Mathis: The concept is pitched roofs, ten and 12 pitch.
By the site plan I am suggesting some flat roofs and that is an
attempt to keep the roofs low. Shake or asphalt shingles,
painted lap siding down to a band just below the double hung
windows. Below that we are looking at a sandstone or a material
that looks like that to give us a nice base. We have aerial
wells at each end of the building. We will try to put a guard
rail around the wells. I have reduced the size of the decks in
the rear for parking.
Roxanne: I understand the logistics for need to enter off of
5th and even from the rear and the important orientation to Main
Street. This is a pre-application to enter into a casual
dialogue to offer Stan and Mac feedback. I am not convinced that
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
we are there yet on the facade. The side orientation is nice.
Other than the irrigation ditch I feel this plan is drastically
better than what was originally approved. I am interested in
working with them to come up with something compatible as this is
a very sensitive site and the wonderful Shaw house is next door.
Nick: What is going to be in the building.
Stan Mathis: On the second floor there will be two condominium
units one bedroom each and on the first floor there will be 2400
sq. feet of space for office which would include 1,000 sq. ft.
for my office. In the basement, lower level there will be the
two bedroom employee housing units.
Nick: In seeing the direction they are going I am very
comfortable with the plan.
Mac: We have tried to incorporate a lot of Roxanne's technical
background into the plan and we want to work together.
Georgeann: You say you have an option on the property until
Dec. 1st, does that mean you have to have all the approvals, if
so that is not realistic.
Mac: We just need to have a time frame and direction from the
HPC.
Georgeann: So we need to give you
can close your deal with Wesson
comfortable.
a positive direction so you
or else he won't feel
Stan: We can't get public notice and be on an agenda until Dec.
6th or 13th and what we would like to do is come back in two
weeks and address any comment we hear today.
Georgeann: I feel encouraged by what you have here and I am
definitely in your favor but I think technically it should go to
a public hearing. I am comfortable with both entrances but I
think the entrance on the front needs to be more beefed up. I am
concerned about the pits because you are not that far from the
sidewalk and the street. I would like to see more study on the
design. I'm in favor of saving the cotton woods. If you move
the irrigation ditch back and put the sidewalk on top of the
roots of the cottonwood trees, I'm concerned that it might be a
real shock to the cottonwoods. So I would like more study on
that.
Mac: The sidewalk on the 5th St. side is on the property line
nOW.
7
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
Georgeann: The 5th Street side looks fine and works well.
Roxanne: The irrigation ditches are very rectangular throughout
town and they should remain that way.
Georgeann: I'm not sure I agree with you that the ditches
should absolutely have to remain rectangular however, I am
convinced that they have to be kept where the cottonwoods are
used to them so the cottonwoods can't be harmed.
Stan: We were going to hold off on the sidewalk issue until
there is an improvement district there. All the cottonwoods are
on the outside of the property line except two and only one would
be impacted.
Chris: I agree with Georgeann on the entrance way as far as
bringing it out a little bit more. On the stone work I am
wondering if the stonework would detract from the building since
the other victorians around it don't have it.
Roxanne: The more substantial victorians had stone work around
them but I am not convinced the height of the foundation would be
in keeping but we don't want a replication either and that is
something to think about. When we looked at 200 E. Main was that
too much of a solid horizontal base and did it need to be more
delicate. Those are fine details we can get into.
Bill: I like the approach and the Board wants to help you move
forward. The process will have to be outlined by Staff and in
concept we are all in favor of what you have presented here. I
tend to agree with Georgeann about the irrigation ditch and
sidewalks and saving the cottonwoods and that will have to be
studied. I also agree with your approach of probably waiting
until an improvement district is put in place before doing the
sidewalk. I agree with Chris that stone may not be appropriate
on this building and I think you should look at other buildings
around.
Mac: The building next door to the Hickory House has sandstone
banding.
Bill: But they didn't come that high usually only to the floor
elevation. It should look like a large scale residence that has
been adapted into an office/residence mixed use. This is a pre-
application and we are only giving you comments and anything we
say here might change when we get a full set of drawings to
review.
8
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
COMMUNICATIONS
Roxanne: Due to the XMAS holiday possibly we could move our
meetings to the 6th and the 20th. All approved of the change.
Bill: We are trying to put out literature that will be
informative to people about historic preservation and how it is
handled in town, what designation is and what the process is.
We are trying to get better public relations and let the public
know what we are doing. The Mayor also recommended that a
pamphlet would be a good idea.
Roxanne: I need an monitor for the Elisha house.
Georgeann: Is there going to be a lot of construction details
that might be good for Chris since that is his line of work.
Chris: I will monitor the Elisha house.
Roxanne: Welton Anderson is the architect for the Elisha
project at 320 W. Main. The main house will be repaired and
restored in bits and pieces and the carriage house will sit. The
owner is Alan Sheda from California and president of Vista
California Historical Society. He has a real sense of
preservation. Welton has requested an exemption from HPC which
he could in fact get with all this work because all of the work
is restoration and repair and staff does have the ability to sign
off on all of the work. I wasn't comfortable in doing that
because there is a lot of work to be done. I feel the monitor
should go out to the project with the plan and look at
everything that is involved. It is including an entirely new
roof and a massive amount of detail.
Georgeann: I looked at it and it seems that every piece of wood
needs something done to it.
Roxanne: It has not been maintained very well at all. Their
goal is to turn it into offices with a dwelling unit that will be
for Alan Sheda and his family. They are also coming before us
for designation and it is eligible for listing on the National
Register and Alan does want to pursue that.
Georgeann: We need to be aware that they did cut down every
tree and bush around the Elisha house but that makes sense with
the kind of renovation they have to do. They are talking about
taking the lower level and raising it up to the carriage house
level and putting a retaining wall along the property line with
the McDonalds. They are considering putting up a gazebo also.
We now have to be aware of the neighbors considerations, the
9
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
McDonald's. We need to show the McDonald's that HPC works in
both ways for people.
Bill: If Staff requests from Welton a master plan you will be
able to address issues like Georgeann said. The project should
be monitored whether it is exempt from our review or not. We
have to try and preserve what is there.
Roxanne: Bill and I attended the CCLC meeting and I was
surprised to find out they were almost ready to take an ordinance
to Council for streetscape guidelines for the commercial core
district and I had several concerns. Maybe there is some wording
that we can recommend that they incorporate in the ordinance that
ties them into us in some method.
Kathy: A copy of the guidelines and ordinance will be presented
to HPC before going to Council to resolve issues. Possibly we
could have a joint mtg.
Georgeann: The McDonald's at 300 W. Main called me regarding a
small brick fireplace that is in the existing building. One of
the pieces of equipment hit the top of the fireplace and they
asked if they could be allowed to remove that brick fireplace.
Roxanne was concerned about keeping it because it added character
and interest. In the old building there is also an aluminum
colored stove pipe which is going to be removed. Roxanne, did
they ever indicate where their new smoke stack was going to be.
Roxanne: No.
Georgeann: To some extend this is a case where an applicant
did not give us all the information, lets presume good will and
never even thought about it. They have a smoke stack in the
livingroom of their new building and an iron stove which turns
out to be about two feet away from the little brick fireplace,
chimney. The fireplace to the brick chimney is sealed up and it
is not used and was for the old stove in the old building. One,
they should have come before us with the smoke stack and we could
have dealt with it then, they didn't and they have already bought
it and they intend to put in a plain smoke stack, paint it black
which is architecturally in keeping with a log cabin as built in
the 1940's that is there. I felt that the two smoke stacks side
by side was inappropriate. I felt that the brick fireplace even
though it had a certain charm did not add or detract from the
architectural integrity of the old building. The primary
fireplace is the stone one which is out in front which is the
significant fireplace. Roxanne had mention they could have
brought the smoke stack from the new stove over and put it up the
other chimney but they would have to go through the old wood
walls and up into the old chimney and the chimney at that point
10
HPC.MINUTES.November 8, 1988
would probably crumble etc. etc. and I felt that a better
solution and a quieter solution would be to remove that brick
chimney down to the roof level and let the black smokestack be on
the new addition. That is what they are going to do.
Bill: Georgeann, do you feel comfortable with your decision.
Georgeann: I felt this was a very clear cut decision. I took a
tour and I feel they are doing things appropriately. I was
concerned about one thing: the old building has a window and
the new building comes right up to the window which we had not
addressed before. I asked Caroline how this was going to be
handled and what they have done is build the new wall right up to
it and when they get to the point that they have extra pieces of
wood from the back corners etc. they will fill in with the
appropriate material over where the window is. The window will
always be there and will be easily findable which is our
requirement under putting a new addition onto an old building.
They are going to cover it up with similar material and it will
be a very quiet connection.
Nick: I'll give you a thorough monitoring report at the next
mtg.
Bill: I have to report on 222 E. Hallam and the foundations are
going in. I am pleased with the size of the foundation, it is a
lot smaller than I thought the drawings represented and they are
protecting the tree. I think there is some dirt around the
roots of it but it is probably dormant now. The dirt should
really be pulled back from the root system. I have not been by
715 W. Smuggler and they are starting to frame as of last week.
Adjourned 4:30
Kathy Strickland
Deputy City Clerk
11