The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.19881122AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE November 22, 1988 - Tuesday 2:30 P.M. to 4:30 P.M. FIRST FLOOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS City Hall REGULAR MEETING 2:30 I. Roll Call II. Approval of Minutes - November 8, 1988 III. Committee Member & Staff Comments IV. Public Comment V. NEW BUSINESS A. Minor Development: 334 W. Hallam skylight addition to carriage house VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Historic Preservation Incentives VII. COMMUNICATIONS A. Monitoring Projects B. Sub-committee report - public relation C. Change in December Meeting Dates D. Heritage Celebration Committee E. Preservation Law Update F. Preservation Briefs HAPPY THANKSGIVING CONGRATULATIONS TO JOE KRABACHER ON HIS WEDDING VA MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Minor Development: 334 W. Hallam, Skylight addition to Carriage House Date: November 22, 1988 APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to add one roof skylight window to the carriage house, south elevation (Hallam Street side). It is a fixed Velux skylight, flat, with dimensions of 22" x 56", rough opening. The purpose is to add more light into the central portion of the carriage house. STAFF'S COMMENTS: In staff's and HPC's attempts to retain a "carriage house" feel to this reconstruction, inappropriate additions have been discouraged. However, as this is a "reconstruction", with very little original material remaining in the carriage house, the argument can be made that a modern skylight may be appropriate. The Development Guidelines state (page 51-52): "Avoid inappropriate features such as new sklylights unless their appearance is concealed from principal views. They should avoid being placed on any portion of the roof that faces the street. Skylights should be mounted flush with the roof to avoid altering the lines of the roof. Bubble- shaped skylights are not appropriate." Response: Staff finds that the application is not in keeping with the Guidelines as the skylight will be visible from the principal view of the property. The skylight does face the street and will be visible from Hallam. One alternative may be to install the skylight on the roof's north elevation, however, the application may find this application unnecessary due to interior floor design. The carriage house, in staff's opinion, has received multiple detail additions, which has altered its original visual status as a secondary support structure to the main house. Staff feels by the addition of a skylight, visible from the main street, the sense of the historic use of the carriage house would be further dimished. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC deny the application for the addition of the skylight to the carriage house where proposed, possibly offering an alternative placement suggestion. - 605 EAST MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TEL: (303) 925-4755 . . ...._ : _a... king Dept. 130 Hauth Salena Street Aspens'Colorado 81611 1 1 r.n' n . . '1 i-4.Â·.7 1 ' ..1 M I 1 1 su. b stantial Amar'-i f..3 inen c of D fe vel op ment O i ... , prle - (Sec. 7-603A) Roof Skylight -1 of this letter is to request c review by The L! !C. Flann:ng Direcuor for the addition of a roof skylight window a i '2Â· riown o rÂ·-: Â·iÂ·:(Â·-1 e :2 'l-'. -l'*. 4:-:. c hed <Â·-4 [:' pt r- h elÂ·: rÂ·? V -' i, Ill Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· i''l-Â·-Â·:2:). 3 I believe this request is in ordor with the standards outlined in 3: c: 7-603 A. If vou require additional clarification, please don't helitate to call. !. r-'t i-2 e !-- 63 1 V ill Poss and Associates LÂ»-16,11 7Â£04- -4 Project Manaci !3 11) --- --- --- /...AL - + ----- ---- - -- -11 C 2 1 E- - - - - -- -- - - C A., 1 Â£2< - -- -- -- --- - --- - - -* t gl[765 -1-1Ed@HT .'441-61-1 13*1Â·Sfiti(6 - -- -- -- L- 'I . f t N r--1 FIXFED VER-UX ; ' 1 1:-i 1---I--------4 t-- / 1 S'44 Ubwl- 1 ulf-VIA--*-I~ t f-- ; 1 i 2 -1 1- 1 Â·11 1 1 Ir . , ~. I - I Â»11=41 r I /- / - 6 - \ 0 02 1 -7\ M / - 9 -22.-3*-34-34 -.2 3- >7' 4-14 1 *Pe I*val, T Â». 1 21'- 1 74 0 t. 1 V 3 L r 1 -- --- lif-1 '2 f _~ f--_----_-- __ -- 729 /D; 7 - .JUTZ-7--_ -29 - ./SW - -- L- - 920 9) 0 1\(/1 - r E. A 1 07 9_.A/eA, ---- -- - - 9 - 1 Al i ./1/. /1 1 .-I lA- -- - - --- 1 , - - - _SOUTH -- --- -- -i , /1-. r-h AII TICU AP REDr Â»(l-46â‚¬, EN--- efaER < sâ€žS NO/. gi (12 - 534 W. HAL-1-Aw\ . f o ... 4 11-1- e 11 3 f/- 2 1 f#--7 nix .: t- v\ C ZÂ». I. I\ -/ Â»67/0 4. 1 . , /9 j#,17 . F \ KeÂ© x \I - Val'UK 14 \ i // 1 > 2.1 : i ./1 SHY (-(64+T. - Lj,-71 1 . 4 - N 2 :2/ / 7.94 P , M / ,1 *1 4 , 9/ /4 f :'.t :ill - '! - 1 641, 21;57 - '4, 1 ; - t t 1 /1 11 /.44(~,/ , 1 1. tildhw. - . 1* 0 . 4 ~ : /1 Ej\MI Pir: r-------91\\ 1 809., '1 I Ofe# 2 1 104 1/4-8 -- 1 r4.-ALN. -]-1 1 - -1.-- 1 1. '11 11 \ 1 8------ -4 LT ri L D- 3 Zi &72' LJ !/2 d- - c i-W,>r \ 7 -1 11 9-1-1 . li 11 I 0 11 .r 1 .11 Wil' 1 i , 1-0 1 11 4 i . 1; i 1 11 1 4 1 11 \41 2-1 / ' 1711 - r. 1. 1-1 1 ' 1.Xl -1 :3#p- Tar 1 /9, 67.R. 940 7 - 4 ~ ..1 1/1 4 - \! 1% PrtilleN (y- Acm _Â«Ll 8 H-7 . y -i- 4- TY -'I . 7 -t--4- ./ I Mu. gl (14Â§ . 2/ 1- 1- 1 2- 4- ,14!16* 842 OVE.12$ * . 7 y 1 4- 12--11 RISP IMDUL. --9.- - i 1 . 0/ i 09 '1 4 $ A 1 , 11 -1- 41 ...2 X VA : 1-7 03 - 5 41 1 .... 1- i SECTION _~~ 4 /14/ M 1 A. ,~ g j / A, 97,9 t A- , 4"= p.ov- l 1 Â· C U -X=-/ . h \ .- ~ 4/ 1 'Tr 79= r -11 9 < 0 1/ -- /1. MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Review of Preservation Incentives Date: November 22, 1988 SUMMARY: Much discussion has been given lately to the revamping of the historic preservation incentives and some "disincentives" which are provided by code. This memo will serve to prepare the HPC for potential discussion at the Joint Worksession scheduled for December 5, and begin the dialogue between yourselves and staff for proposing amendments and additions to the code. Staff has researched preservation ordinances in many communities nationwide, and in particular preservation incentives in the cities of Boulder, Telluride and Manitou Springs, Colorado; Park City, Utah; Stowe, Vermont; and Pasadena, California. Aspen has more collective preservation incentives than most Of these communities combined! Staff has also contacted the State Preservation Planner, Chris Pfaff, for ideas and suggestions, and is researching additional communities through the assistance of Preservation Action in Washington, D.C. INCENTIVES CURRENTLY ALLOWED: Ordinance 42, adopted by Council in 1987, sought to provide historic property owners with a variety of incentives to promote the preservation of historic resources. Paragraph One of the Ordinance reads as follows: Positive incentives should be made available to historic landmarks which are consistent with the purposes of the zone districts and with existing land use patterns, and which meet the goals and objectives of the Historic Preservation Plan Element, including (a) to encourage productive and economically attractive uses of historic properties; (b) to discourage demolition of significant historic properties; (C) to encourage faithful restoration or significant properties and compatible alterations and additions; and (d) to enhance the contribution of Aspen's historic resources to the resort amenity of the community. Ordinance 42 basically provided the following: 1. Designation Grant: A one-time $2,000 grant for residential properties, rated a 4 or 5 (or higher) is available upon application for a maximum of ten per year. Four designation grants have thus far been awarded. No "renovation" stipulation is required at this time (see Alternatives section, page 3 of this memo). The incentive was to encourage voluntary designation of historic resources, somewhat in lieu of larger "district" overlays. Individual Landmark Designation is required for Exemption from GMQS, Special Review, Conditional Uses, etc. 2. Variations: If found to be compatible in character, HPC may grant variations for landmarks for side, front and rear yard setbacks, minimum distance between buildings, and FAR by up to 500 sq. ft. with provisions 3. Conditional Uses: Available to landmarks for residential uses in all zone districts: Bed and Breakfast, Boardinghouse, two detached single family dwellings or duplex, subject to compatibility issues. Other conditional uses currently exist in the code for the "Office" zone district, which is the Main Street Historic Overlay District. 4. Parking Reduction by Special Review: Available for landmarks, review is required by P&Z, application fees and cash-in-lieu applies. 5. Garage FAR exclusion: Garages and carports up to 400 sq. ft. per landmark dwelling unit may be excluded from overall FAR calculations, with provisions. Important to note: Now that the ordinances have been integrated (codified) into the newly revised Land Use Code, effective May, 1988, other issues pertain. Where just last year the landmark Elli's project was approved and constructed with no impact mitigation and city exactions waived, the pendulum has swung the other way. The revised Land Use Code incorporated the 60% affordable housing threshold requirement on projects, making smaller scaled and economically feasible renovation projects extremely difficult due to design and/or cash-in-lieu considerations. With no relief in city exactions, historic property owners are finding it difficult to creatively adapt their structures to meet modern needs, preserving the historic integrity. The newly P&Z approved RESOLUTION 11, passed November 1, 1988, additionally strengthens the city's position in requiring affordable housing. Reso 11 requires a one-to-one replacement of affordable housing upon demolition, plus deed restricting affordable housing units within new construction, OR limit the allowable FAR to 75%. How this resolution affects preservation issues is as yet somewhat unclear, primarily in multi-use projects. Staff will update the HPC continually on this issue. With few incentive tools to creatively incorporate into preservation projects, a worst case scenario may be that 2 renovation costs are SO exorbitant that property owners, financially unable to renovate, Will allow the resource to deteriorate and decay to the point of structural failure, health and safety hazards and inevitable demolition. On the other hand, by taking a proactive approach and adopting a policy of preservation incentive granting, Aspen Will see a halt in needless demolitions, a stronger sense of community heritage, and the protection of existing historic resources for decades to come. ALTERNATIVES: The obvious place to begin looking at preservation incentives is in the financial considerations of proposed projects. Not only is proper renovation costly (it can be argued MORE costly than new construction, which staff does not entirely support), the added fees required by the City can double the cost of the project. Those costs are passed through to renters, and subsequently passed down to the consumer through the higher costs of goods and services. As this vicious cycle spirals upwards, sometimes at the expense of the historic resource, the community suffers. Therefore, HPC should consider the following incentives and make their recommendations to Council through Staff for incorporation. 1. Waiving City Exactions: The 1987 Elli's project served as the catalyst in the elimination of waiving exactions and impact mitigation for historic structures. As it currently exists, no waiver provision is available for preservation projects, which must carry the same burden of development fees as new construction. Staff strongly feels this is not in the best interest of the community, and is inappropriate for preservation considerations. It is a sure way to eliminate good preservation projects. The community has spoken and Council is listening. Historic preservation IS critical to the community. The HPC is in a position now to draft recommended changes to these provisions. A sliding scale for such waiver may be appropriate for a number of reasons. First, it encourages and, in its own right, is an incentive for smaller scale projects. Secondly, historic preservation developers remain responsible for density and other impacts, yet on a much softer, more realistic scale. The proposed Elisha House project serves as a good example. By converting the Elisha to office use, and not providing any deed-restricted affordable housing on (or off) site, the cash-in-lieu estimates exceed $93,000. Add this to the park dedication fees, cash-in-lieu for parking reduction and special review fees, open space cash-in-lieu (if applicable in the particular zone district), and all other associated costs of the project. Some negotiated city exaction and 3 fees waiver should definitely be considered. 2. Purchased Development Rights (PDR's): A new approach, and definitely pioneering in spirit, Purchased Development Rights are simply a buy-out of proposed, or speculative, development. Used mostly in open space or agricultural situations, PDR's may be THE ideal situation to insure the retaining of historic resources, on site. Briefly, the property remains in private ownership, an appraisal is made of the "development rights", with a monetary figure attached. The "developable rights" are actually purchased from the owner, and a deed restriction is placed on the property. The goal is to keep the historic resource as original in scale, location and nature as possible. The funding source is the main question, with a possible alternative being a 1/4 penny sales tax, with the City as the conduit, funded through a non-profit, such as the newly forming Aspen Historic Trust. Pre- planning and community education and support would be critical. This proposal Will require significant study. Staff has not found another community with a PDR *ovision in place for historic preservation. Aspen may be a first! 3. Designation Grants: Increase the monetary amount, i.e. $3,000 for residences, $5,000 for commercial. Allow ANY historic resource to apply; do not limit to just 4's and 5's, residential. Require the funds be used for exterior renovation, or at the minimum a large percentage for exterior, a smaller percentage for interior related to bringing the property up to code. 4. Landmark Plaques: For all designated structures, an engraved bronze plague for exterior display would be presented to any designated property. This is utilized in Boulder and other communities nationwide. Aspen currently presents landmark plaques to honored preservation award winners during National Historic Preservation Week, a somewhat different focus. 5. Use Tax Credit: Waiver of all use tax for renovation materials, interior and exterior. A reciprocal arrangement would be required valley wide, or possibly Pitkin County only, on the sharing of use tax. This is utilized in El Paso County. Staff has not researched the monetary consideration associated with waiving of use tax fees at this time. This may be extremely political with the variety of governments involved, however, it could be significant enough to warrant a feasibility study. 4 6. Waiver of Building Permit Fees: One additional possibility for historic structures, utilized in many communities. 7. Review projects using UCBC criteria: The UCBC (Uniform Code for Building Conservation) has been ordered by Bob Gish in the Building Department for review in its application with historic preservation projects. The UCBC, a new document (1987) is being adopted in communities across the country as an extra tool for building departments, and its adoption in Aspen is strongly recommended by staff. 8. Facade Easements and Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credits: Encourage the use of these two classic, nationally recognized preservation incentives. Property owner education is critical. The HPC should commit to more fully understanding these tools, and recommend their application in specific projects. 9. Low Interest Revolving Loan Fund: The City of Pasadena has recently passed legislation for the development of a "Historic Treasures Fund". This fund consists of the city's portion of all historic structure property tax, granted for renovation and restoration projects, with a cap of $5,000 for residential, $10,000 for commercial. This is a new provision for Pasadena, and only one landmark has taken advantage of the program to date. Low-interest renovation loans are common throughout the country, and their application should not be discounted in Aspen. There are many examples of "property owners on a budget" in our city who could benefit from ANY help in reducing renovation costs. The Aspen Historic Trust may be the ideal funding mechanism for a revolving loan fund, however, in the interim a cooperative effort with the local banks might be worth considering. Your ideas/thoughts: RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends that the HPC take a strong position on the incentives program, and commit to working on creative solutions. A resolution may be in order, clearly stating your position and proposing amendments and/or additions to the code. Direction to staff from the Committee should be made in the form of a well designed motion. memo.hpc.incentives 5 DRAFT LETTER TO HISTORIC PROPERTY OWNERS co-drafted by Charlie Knight and staff NOTE: This letter is in draft form to obtain HPC's comments and suggestions. The goal for the letter is to educate and inform historic property owners in a communicative way. It has been approximately two years since any mass mailing has gone to historic property owners. This will reach all individuals of designated landmarks, or property owners within the two districts. This letter does not reach non-designated historic property owners. Discussion should be given to the drafting of that letter, with the benefits for designation listed. Dear Historic Property Owner: The Aspen Historic Preservation Committee has been examining ways to effectively reach our community, and assist historic property owners. It has been over a year since we have contacted each of you directly, asking for your comments. We would like to take this opportunity to share with you new changes that have taken place in the past year. The Historic Preservation Committee has developed and published the new "Historic District and Historic Landmark Development Guidelines", an invaluable tool to property owners, Realtors, developers, architects, etc. The Guidelines are to be used in areas Of renovation, expansion, new construction, structure maintenance, exterior site improvements, historic research and more. Guidelines are commonly developed in historic communities as a way to assist and clarify development activities and compatibility issues. While the Victorian style of the mining era is predominant, a great many other architectural contributions have been made over the years and are considered a significant element of Aspen's evolution as a city. The Guidelines address issues in all these areas and are used in reviewing development proposals. The 90 page indexed document is available for purchase in the Planning Office (3rd floor, City Hall) for only $10.00. A copy of the entire Land Use Code is available for purchase in the Planning office. The city has been successful in obtaining as staff Roxanne Eflin, our first historic preservation planner dedicated solely to the task of developing Aspen's historic preservation program. Roxanne serves as staff to the HPC. Her role as preservation planner provides the community with a resource for consultation. Roxanne will also be serving part time as staff in county preservation concerns as well, particularly in the historic community of Redstone. She may be reached at 920-5090. 1987 saw the adoption of two important preservation ordinances. Both of these ordinances have now been integrated or "codified" into the newly revised Land Use Code, effective May 25, 1988. ordinance 11, Series of 1987, the Preservation Ordinance, outlines the entire program, addressing development and demolition/relocations standards as well as application requirements. Historic Property owners should be aware of the requirements specified in the code for review of development. "Development" is defined in the code as "the carrying out of any building activity, the making of any material change in the use or appearance of any structure or land, or the subdividing of land into two or more parcels". The other adopted ordinance, Ordinance 42, Series of 1987, also referred to as the Preservation Incentives Ordinance, addresses a variety of positive zoning considerations and permissible variations the HPC may grant if applicable, to encourage and foster historic preservation in the community and discourage the demolition of significant historic properties. Ordinance 42 also incorporated the "Landmark Designation Grant" program, allowing a $2,000 city grant to residential property owners who landmark designate their historic resource. The Historic Preservation Committee, with staff's cooperation, is currently examining the entire preservation incentives program and Will proposing 2 additional incentives for adoption by Council. It has come to the attention of the Historic Preservation Committee and the Planning Office that often times work will begin without prior approval. Should you have a question if the work you are about to begin requires review, please do not hesitate to contact Roxanne in the Planning office at 920-5090. Our sole task is to preserve the historic character of our community, which takes cooperation on everyone's part. In nearly every case, planning staff will review your application, and determine if it should be brought before the Historic Preservation Committee for review. Development proposals are categorized as follows: Minor, a one step process Significant, two steps with a public hearing Exempt (from HPC review), requiring approval from staff Insubstantial Amendment to a previously approved development application, also a staff signoff. Demolition, partial demolition or removal/relocation is considered Significant Development. Development which is NOT subject to the provisions of review and approval include any interior remodeling of a structure, repainting of the exterior of an already painted structure and choice of color of any exterior architectural feature. Such development shall not require the review by the Planning Director or HPC, and shall proceed directly to building permit review, when a building permit is required for the development. It is important to note that the Planning office must review any other development activity, including repair of existing architectural features, replacement of architectural features when found necessary for the preservation of the structure. Similar remodeling activities which create no change to the exterior appearance of the structure and have no impact on its character may be considered 3 Exempt from HPC Review and signed off by the Planning Director. Specific applications packets are available in the Planning Office. Please contact Planning Staff at any time. Sincerely, draft.hpc.letter 4 MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Change in December Meeting dates for the HPC Date: November 22, 1988 (Happy Thanksgiving!) PLEASE NOTE THE CHANGE IN MEETING DATES, AS VOTED ON AT THE NOVEMBER 8 HPC MEETING: December 6 and December 20! Our regular meetings for December were scheduled for the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays, the 13th and the 27th. In looking ahead and anticipating attendance and case load, the 27th (being the week between Christmas and New Years) presented logistical problems. Therefore, the change should accommodate both the HPC and public well. A public notice was prepared for the Aspen Times. PLEASE REMEMBER TO NOTIFY EITHER KATHY STRICKLAND OR ROXANNE IF YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO ATTEND ANY MEETING. THIS APPLIES TO ALTERNATES AS WELL. THANKS! MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Heritage Celebration Committee Date: November 22, 1988 Attached is a copy of the press release and list of committee members for this newly formed group. I thought you would be interested in knowing what will be forthcoming in the way of press and promotion focusing on Aspen's heritage. The HPC's primary focus will be on National Historic Preservation Week, May 14-20, 1989. Please be formulating any ideas you have to further our efforts in community awareness, heritage education and preservation issues in general. We will again present the Annual Preservation Awards, with nominations due in by April 1, 1989 (should give you plenty of time to come up with some ideas!), and hold the Preservation Forum again. The Hotel Jerome and the Wheeler Opera House, both celebrating their centennials, will be coordinating efforts with us during that week. A variety of other events are being formulated - it should be very worthwhile and fun! THE HERITAGE CELEBRATION COMMITTEE 1989 Celebrating Aspen's Heritage City Staff and Liason: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Planner Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office City Hall - 130 S. Galena, 81611 920-5090 Historic Preservation Committee Bill Poss, Chairman Bill Poss and Associates, Architects 605 E. Main, 81611 925-4755 Aspen Historical Society Ramona Markalunas, Board Member Accent Properties 624 W. North, 81611 925-7071 Wheeler Opera House Bob Murray, Director 320 E. Hyman, 81611 920-2268 Hotel Jerome Beth Mitchell, Marketing & PR Director 330 E. Main, 81611 920-1000 Aspen Music Festival Debra Ayers, Publicity and PR Director P. 0. Box AA, 81612 925-3254 Aspen Times Bill Dunaway, Editor 310 E. Main, 81611 925-3414 Aspen Resort Association Michael Forbes, Director of Special Events 303 E. Main, 81611 925-1940 hcc.members I. Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 130 south galena street aspen, colorado 81611 PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact Roxanne Eflin, Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office 920-5090 THE HERITAGE CELEBRATION COMMITTEE IS FORMED 1989 is already shaping up to be a year of heritage celebrations! Aspen's two distinctive histories will be celebrated next year as many landmarks enter their second century, and many organizations kick off new decades! To assist in networking, communication and promotion, the Heritage Celebration Committee has been formed. The idea of the City's Historic Preservation Planner, Roxanne Eflin, the Committee consists of one member of each of the organizations and groups involved in promoting their heritage in 1989. "I discovered quickly the need for such a committee once I began overhearing the variety of promotional plans being formulated with little communication between groups. The common theme among them all is "Heritage", hence, the Heritage Celebration Committee!" stated Eflin. This year alone saw the looth anniversary of the famed National Register (Midland Railroad) Maroon Creek Bridge , and it was 100 years ago this month when Aspen voters approved a bond issue to build a new courthouse! Aspen's history is alive and well, as evidenced in its historic architecture and community interest in preserving its unique heritage! "Aspen' s heritage will be receiving a great amount of attention in 1989, and in the years to come" stated Eflin. "Both the Wheeler Opera House and the Hotel Jerome will be celebrating their centennials this coming year and many other local landmarks will be having 100th birthdays. Aspen's ski history will also be featured. The ARA has announced their Winterskol theme: "Aspen' s Spirited Heritage". Highlands has turned 30, and even Snowmass will be celebrating their 21st birthday in 1989!" The Aspen Music Festival, now 40 years an Aspen tradition, Will be extremely involved in the heritage celebration as well. A multi-media production is being coordinated now featuring Aspen's histories of mining and culture. National Historic Preservation Week in May will feature many events, including the presentation of the Annual Preservation Awards and Preservation Forum. t Members of the Heritage Celebration Committee are: Roxanne Eflin, Preservation Planner, Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office Michael Forbes, ARA, Director of Special Events Bill Poss, Chairman, Historic Preservation Committee Ramona Markalunas, Board, Aspen Historical Society Bob Murray, Director, Wheeler Opera House Beth Mitchell, Marketing Director, Hotel Jerome Debra Ayers, Publicity Director, Aspen Music Festival Bill Dunaway, Editor, Aspen Times Other organizations celebrating significant birthdays and their heritage are invited to volunteer one board member to participate in the Committee. Those interested should contact Roxanne Eflin in the Planning Office at 920-5090. ### hcc.press.rel ; MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: "Preservation Law Update" attached Date: November 22, 1988 Attached are two copies of the current "Preservation Law Update", each dealing with issues which we have been discussed briefly in the past. The first discusses issues of a demolition moratorium pending designation, which was upheld in Minnesota (a case in Minneapolis). This should be of interest to you in relation to the elementary school "debates" and other properties particularly in the West End. Remember those "Proposed Historic Districts" we have had on the map for eight years? The other Update discusses protection for Significant Interiors, a provision we do not have in our ordinance, though Boulder does. One significant interior in staff's opinion is the Elisha Carriage House - a remarkable museum quality original interior which will probably soon make way for a dry-walled office space. The sign of the times? Maybe. However, Aspen does still contain a few excellent interiors which we may wish to protect through designation and possibly incentives? Food for thought. NATIONAL CENTER lfÂ©]R P}RESE]RVATION LAJV 1283 2OTH STREET, N.W. 0 SUITE 501 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20086 â€¢ (202) 828-9811 PHESIDENT ExEGE:TIvE DIRECTOR TERSH BOASBERG. ESQ. STEPHEN N. DENNIS, ESQ. PRESERVATION LAW UPDATE 1988-40 October 27, 1988 Legal Strategies for Protecting Significant Interiors A recent questionnaire from the National Center for Preservation Law to local historic preservation commissions has revealed that legal protections for significant interior spaces are increasing. The questionnaire was sent to 465 local commissions, and 139 commissions returned the questionnaire form. The questionnaire asked commissions about local interior landmark designations and. about interior preservation easements. At least twenty-two preservation commissions (15% of those responding) believe they now have the authority to regulate significant interiors (Pasadena, Cal.; Santa Clara, Cal.; Boulder, Colo.; Coral Gables; Miami; Orlando; Dalton; Chicago; Indianapolis; Amana Colonies, Iowa; Boston; Rochester, N.Y.; Asheville, N.C.; Greenville, N.C.; Wilson, N.C.; Portland, Ore.; Philadelphia; El Paso; Forth Worth; Roanoke, Va.; Pierce County, Wash.; and Seattle). (Because some commissions known to have this power have not responded to the questionnaire, the actual number of commissions with the power is somewhat greater. No responses were received from Detroit and New York, for instance.) In some states, ambiguous legislation has been interpreted by commissions as giving them power to regulate interiors. only eleven of these twenty-two commissions have designated or are regulating interiors. (Pasadena, Coral Gables, Miami, Indianapolis, Boston, Rochester, Asheville, Wilson, Philadelphia, Portland and Seattle). Seattle reported that it has designated 35 interiors. Other cities, though, seem to be regulating fewer interiors (Pasadena (1), Miami (3), Indianapolis (3), Rochester (1), Asheville (20), Wilson (1) and Portland (2). In Philadelphia, the official interpretation of the city's preservation ordinance has always been that a landmark designation protects the entire building, so that a separate landmark designation of a significant interior space is not required. The Chicago commission, though, can only protect interior spaces in structures which have already been designated as landmarks. In many cities, separate interior landmark designations seem the rule. NATIONAL CENTER FOR PREMERVATION LAW Seventeen local preservation commissions responded that they can "designate interior landmarks located in buildings to which the public does not have ordinary access" (Pasadena, Cal.; Santa Clara, Cal.; Boulder, Colo.; Orlando, Fla.; Chicago; Indianapolis; Amana Colonies, Iowa; Boston; Rochester, N.Y.; Asheville, N.C.; Greenville, N.C.; Wilson, N.C.; Portland, Ore.; El Paso; Ft. Worth; Pierce Co., Wash.; and Seattle). Only four commissions indicated that they have designated residential interiors (Pasadena, Cal; Indianapolis; Asheville, N.C.; and Seattle). In Boston, Asheville, N.C., and Seattle, religious interiors have been designated. Miami noted that it is in the process of designating a religious interior. (Seattle has now designated nine religious interiors.) Commissions in twenty-one states believe that state enabling legislation for local preservation commissions would need to be amended to permit the designation of interior landmarks (Arkansas, Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia.) Some cities, of course, have independent home rule or charter authority. Many commissions (57% or 79 of those responding) would like "copies of model interior landmark designation forms. " Thirteen commissions stated that interiors in their communities have already been protected through interior easements. The number of interior spaces so protected varies widely from community to community. (Prescott, Arizona (?) ; Guilford, Conn. (1); Ft. Wayne (2); Baltimore (23); Salisbury, Md. (4-8); Boston (24?); Rochester, N.Y.; Raleigh (9); Wilson, N.C. (1); Philadelphia (1); Bristol, R.I. (4); Charleston (5) ; and Loudoun County, Virginia (?)). Responding commissions are not aware of any interior preservation easements which are held by national organizations, though five statewide preservation organizations and six local preservation organizations are thought by commissions to hold such easements. Overall, the questionnaire responses suggest that commissions are increasingly interested in approaches to the protection of significant interior spaces and that commissions need more information about approaches now being used across the country. (A subscription to the "Preservation Law Updates" series for 1988 is available for $55.00. Please send inquiries to the National Center at the address listed at the top of this "Update. ") NATIONAL CENTER FO -1 PRESEJRVATION LA~V 1233 2 OTH STREET, N.W. 0 SUITE 501 0 WASHINGTON, D,C. 20038 â€¢ (202) 828-9811 PRESIDENT ExEctÂ·-trvE DIRECTOH TERSH BOASBERO, ESQ. STEPHEN N. DENNIS. ESQ. PRESERVATION LATV UPDATE 1988-37 September 15, 1988 Minnesota Court Upholds Moratorium Pending Designation A problem which is frequently encountered by local historic preservation -commissions and supporting preservation organizations is how to cope with a threat to a property not yet designated. In many larger cities, the process of identifying properties eligible for designation and documenting their significance prior to designation can be extremely time-consuming. Though these cities are likely to expect staffs for preservation commissions to keep an eye on all properties within a commission's potential jurisdiction which could be eligible for designation, not every eligible property can be documented and designated at once. Problems arise when properties clearly eligible for designation are suddenly threatened by owners unaware of their historic significance or unwilling to wait for city staff to proceed with designation. Though a growing number of local historic preservation ordinances do provide for interim protections pending final designation (see "IJpdate" 1987-22), many ordinances do not contain such an explicit provision. May a city delay action on a requested building permit or demolition permit in order to give a preservation commission time to develop the case for designation and take action to designate and thus protect a property whose owner wishes to alter or demolish it? A recent Minnesota trial court decision provides strong support on this point. Hiltunen v. City of Minneapolis (No. 88- 1017, Hennepin County District Court, decided August 1, 1988) upheld an informal moratorium on the issuance of a demolition permit. The owners in Hiltunen wanted to demolish two 24-unit apartment buildings, and the trial court upheld the city's delay in issuing demolition permits: The only remaining issue before the Court in this case is whether or not the City can deny a demolition permit on heritage preservation grounds prior to the actual historic designation of the property. ... The Court finds that the i.*t . r-- Â¥ N.AT IONALâ‚¬'ENTE R FOR PH EA E H V.tT ION LAW City's action was not arbitrary or based on unlawful grounds. The Court agrees with respondent that Almquist v. Town of Marshan, 245 N.W.2d 819 (Minn. 1976), stands for tl proposition that a municipality can validly enact moratorium ordinance (but is not required to formally enact one) to preserve the status quo of a particular area while a zoning study is being conducted. The City acted reasonably when it delayed the decision on whether or not to issue petitioner a demolition permit. The City has the express and inherent authority through its Heritage Preservation Commission to deny a demolition permit until the required studies are completed. The court's decision in Hiltunen is quite brief, but the issues argued before the court are made clearer by two briefs submitted by the City of Minneapolis. The first of these was submitted on January 29, 1988, and the second was submitted on February 12, 1988. The court did not specifically adopt either brief, but referred to the city's arguments in its opinion. Because these two Hiltunen briefs address an issue which has not arisen in a previous case, they could be particularly useful to other historic preservation commissions which find themselves faced by the same problem. The National Center will provide a set of papers from the Hiltunen case including the court's opinion, the city's two briefs and a brief for the property owner for $5.00, which will include postage and handling. Minnesota is a "Dillon Rule" state, in which the powers o municipalities are strictly construed; the general rule is that ~ cities in a Dullon Rule state may not exercise a power not expressly permitted by state enabling legislation. Nonetheless, the City of Minneapolis argued that language in Merriam v. Moody's Executors, 25 Iowa 163 (1868), would support the city's exercise of "those [powers] necessarily implied or necessarily incident to the powers expressly granted": It should thus be clear that the City in invoking its police power with respect to zoning has the express power to create such ordinances and such implied power as is necessary to effectuate the goals of providing for the public health, safety and welfare. It is further well settled that historic preservation is a proper area for exercise of the police power. The city argued that it should be allowed to "declare an informal moratorium" during which a careful study of the merits of threatened buildings could be carried out: It is undisputed by the Petitioners that the City has the authority to designate buildings for historic preservation pursuant to Chapter 34. That Ordinance on its face requires the Heritage Preservation Commission to prepare studi which catalog buildings or districts to be considered f ..' NATIONAL CENTE R FOR PR EME H V.ATIO> L.4 W heritage preservation, which recommendations are ultimately forwarded to the Minneapolis City Council for action. It would be totally inconsistent for the City to on the one hand require that these studies go forward with respect to the structures which are the subject of this lawsuit and then completely undermine the requirements of this Ordinance by allowing the subject properties to be demolished while the administrative processes are in progress. In effect what the City has done is to declare an informal moratorium with respect to the Petitioner's property until the administrative processes have been completed. The city argued that the Almcruist case would not require it to enact a formal moratorium to accomplish the desired goal of giving time for a thoughtful assessment of the historic significance of threatened properties: [Almquist] and cases subsequently cited thereunder in no way requires a municipality to resort to a moratorium in every case to prevent some development from going forward while a particular issue is being studied. To do SO would be ludicrous and would require a municipality to pass perhaps hundreds of motarorium ordinances a year, every time it considered a zoning change or a text amendment to a zoning code which could conceivably affect any rights a particular property owner would have thereunder. In its Reply Memorandum, the city addressed again the property owners's efforts to argue that Almquist should be read more strictly: Almquist clearly stands for the proposition that a municipality can validly enact a moratorium ordinance to preserve the status quo of a partciular area while a zoning study is being conducted. There is absolutely no requirement under Almquist or [any other case of which defendants are aware that] a direct moratorium ordinance [be] enacted, before a municipality can exercise its normal legislative and administraive authority either express or implied; Almquist merely sanctioned a process not otherwise allowed by statute at that time. ... It is clear from Almquist that our court recognizes that the administarative and legislative processes of a municipality take time, and that indeed it is proper and appropriate for a municipality to reasonably defer or delay action on a particular request while the overall effect of such action in a given zoning area is studied. (A subscription to the "Preservation Law Updates" series for 1988 is available for $55.00. Please send inquiries to the National Center at the address listed at the top of this "Update.") MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee From: Roxanne Eflin, Planning Office Re: Preservation Briefs 16, 17, and 18 Date: November 22, 1988 Attached are -just the front pages of the three brand new Preservation Briefs to spark your curiosity. PB #16 addresses "The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors"; PB #17 addresses "Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character"; and PB #18 addresses "Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings". Preservation Briefs are all published by the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service and the Planning Office has a complete set of them if any of you are interested in delving more deeply into a particular topic. Please use the resources we have in the Planning Office! Thanks. . + PRESERVATION BRIEFS 14* 0;r-CV 5 44 The Use of Substitute Materials 111 r " 4 on Historic Building Exteriors . i.4'.1.-"". . 6*10{2eteâ€¢. Sharon C. Park, AIA .~ --t 1 . U.S. Department of the interior, National Park Service Preservation Assistance Division, Technical Preservation Services . The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehainhtation require that ''deteriorated architectural features be repaired rather than I ~ replaced. 1., hornÂ·er possible. In the event that replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being ~ replaced in composition. desitn, color, texture, and other visual properties.'' Substitute materials should be used orthÂ· on a . limited LÂ·ast: and litily when they will match the appearance and general properties of the historic material and will not damage | 1 the historic res<,irce. 1 1 Introduction the accurate visual duplication of historic materials, : and last a reasonable time. Growing evidence in- i When deteriorated, damaged, or lost features of a dicates that with proper planning, careful specified- 3 historic building need repair or replacement, it is 1most always best to use historic materials. In tions and supervision, substitute materials can be used successfully in the process of restoring the mited circumstances substitute materials that imitate visual appearance of historic resources. nistoric materials may be used if the appearance and This Brief provides general guidance on the use of properties of the historic materials can be matched substitute materials On the exteriors of historic closely and no damage to the remaining historic fabric will result. buildings. While substitute materials are frequently used on interiors, these applications are not subject to ~ Great care must be taken if substitute materials are weathering and moisture penetration, and will not be used on the exteriors of historic buildings. Ultra-violet discussed in this Brief. Given the general nature of light, moisture penetration behind joints, and stresses this publication, specifications for substitute materials caused by changing temperatures can greatly impair the performance of substitute materials over time.. are not provided. The guidance provided should not be used in place of consultations with qualified pro- Only after consideration of all options, in consultation fessionals. This Brief includes a discussion of ivhen to with qualified professionals, experienced fabricators use substitute materials, cautions regarding their ex- ) and contractors, and development of carefully written specifications should this work be undertaken. pected performance, and descriptions of several The practice of using substitute materials in substitute materials, their advantages and disad- architecture is not new, yet it continues to pose prac- vantages. This review of materials is by no means comprehensive, and attitudes and findings will tical problems and to raise philosophical questions. change as technology develops. On the practical level the inappropriate choice or im- proper installation of substitute materials can cause a Historical Use of Substitute Materials radical change in a building's appearance and can cause extensive physical damage over time. On the The tradition of using cheaper and more common more philosophical level, the wholesale use of materials in imitation of more expensive and less substitute materials can raise questions concerning available materials is a long one. George Washington, the integrity of historic buildings largely comprised of for example, used wood painted with sand- new materials. In both cases the integrity of the inipregnated paint at Mount Vernon to iniitate cut historic resource can be destroyed. ashlar stone. This technique along with scoring stucco Some preservationists advocate that substitlite into block patterns was fairly common in colonial iaterials should be avoided in all but the most America to imitate stone (see illus. 1, 2) iited cases. The fact is, however, that substitute Molded or cast niasonrv substitutes, Such as dry- terials are being used more frequently than ever in tamp cast stone and poured concrete, became popular preservation pr@ects, and in manv cases with in place of quarried stone during tile 19th century. positive results. Ther can be cost-effective, can permit These masonry units were tabricated locally, avoiding L / BRIEFS M~5154.4-9-1~~B ..rchitectural Character: " *.R/V Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to 1/#,Liatz&/6--fi13/:alit<j.*45Â£96*Twizaom/LIS, 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" embody two important goals: 1) the preservation of historic materials and, 2) the preservation of a building's distinguishing character. Every old building is unique, with its own identity and its own distinctive character. Character refers to all those visual aspects and phvsical 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 architect identify those features or elements that give significance of an historic building and the district in ' e building its visual character and that should be taken which it is located. account in order to preserve them to the max- If the various materials, features and spaces that give m extent possible. a building its visual character are not recognized and ...ere 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 considered 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 tb at 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 identify those materials, features understanding of any property may require documen- and spaces that contribute to the visual character of a tary research about its style, construction, function, its building. This approach involves first examining the furnishings or contents; knowledge about the original building from afar to understand its overall setting and builder, owners, and later occupants; and knowledge architectural context; then moving up very 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 character. events or persons and it is those tangible elements both on the exterior and interior that should be preserved. Step 1: Identify the Overall Visual Aspects herefore, the approach taken in this Brief is limited entifying those visual and tangible aspects of the Identifying the overall visual character of a building is ric building. While this may aid in the planning notliing 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 ,~-~PRESERVATION BRIEFS 1=RiÂ¥<.fut.,â€ž1-2 WalltÂ»fLA.1.~~9. Rehabilitating Interiors %92*28-11311,2.d/~~///~/////~~Ef/~/ in Historic Buildings Identifying and Preserving Character-defining Rzmmi./...../...le'l Elements H. Ward Jandl U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Preservation Assistance Division Technical Preservation Services A floor plan, the arrangement of spaces, and features and applied finishes may be individually or collectively important in defining the historic character of the building and the purpose for which it was constructed. Thus, their identification, reten- tion, protection, and repair should be given prime consideration in every preservation project. Caution should be exercised in developing plans that would radically change character-defining spaces or that would obscure, damage or destroy interior features or finishes. While the exterior of a building may be its most contribute to its historic character and in planning for prominent visible aspect, or its "public face," its in- the preservation of those elements in the process of or can be even more important in conveying the rehabilitation. The guidance applies to all building ding's history and development over time. types and styles, from 18th century churches to 20th tabilitation within the context of the Secretary of century office buildings. The Brief does not attempt the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation calls for the to provide specific advice on preservation techniques preservation of exterior and interior portions or and treatments, given the vast range of buildings, but features of the building that are significant to its rather suggests general preservation approaches to historic, architectural and cultural values. guide construction work. Interior components worthy of preservation may in- Identifying and Evaluating the Importance clude the building's plan (sequence of spaces and cir- of Interior Elements Prior to Rehabilitation culation patterns), the building's spaces (rooms and volumes), individual architectural features, and the Before determining what uses might be appropriate various finishes and materials that make up the and before drawing up plans, a thorough professional walls, floors, and ceilings. A theater auditorium or assessment should be undertaken to identify those sequences of rooms such as double parlors or a lobby tangible architectural components that, prior to leading to a stairway that ascends to a mezzanine rehabilitation, convey the building's sense of time may comprise a building's most important spaces. In- and place-that is, its "historic character." Such an dividual rooms may contain notable features such as assessment, accomplished by walking through and plaster cornices, millwork, parquet wood floors, and taking account of each element that makes up the in- hardware. Paints, wall coverings, and finishing terior, can help ensure that a truly compatible use for techniques such as graining, may provide color, tex- the building, one that requires minimal alteration to ture, and patterns which add to a building's unique the building, is selected. character. Virtually all rehabilitations of historic buildings in- Researching The Building's History volve some degree of interior alteration, even if the A review of the building's history will reveal why buildings are to be used for their original purpose. and when the building achieved significance or how Interior rehabilitation proposals may range from it contributes to the significance of the district. This preservation of existing features and spaces to total information helps to evaluate whether a particular reconfigurations. In some cases, depending on the rehabilitation treatment will be appropriate to the building, restoration may be warranted to preserve building and whether it will preserve those tangible torie character adequately; in other cases, extensive components of the building that convey its rations may be perfectly acceptable. significance for association with specific events or -his Preservation Brief has been developed to assist persons along with its architectural importance. In building owners and architects in identifying and this regard, National Register files may prove useful evaluating those elements of a building's interior that in explaining why and for what period of time the 4 Now.bi, ilAMM , N 4 1, 1- . 4 . ..5 'U- 7 --lipl- b 101#/M 24 Fall BM<694*# u,i F7i 9,9 aji t 0 . .. Skiing through the Years in Society's 109th Colorado annual meeting D 1(1.IVE THE ADVENTURES of the many ranchers, ittes, concludes on May 9 with a program by Pro- highlights Colorado 11\- doctors. midwives, and mailmen of the mid- to fessor Duane A. Smith entitled -On the Road to the i â€¢ 1 â€¢ I.tte-1>;Sos who donned "Norwegian snowshoes" (early Silvery San Juans: Silverton and Durango." skis) to negotiate the wintry CI'loradc> Rockies. On Lectures are 52.50 each for members, $3.50 for sKi nistory December 5, Duane Vandenbusche, professor of his- nonmembers, and will be held at 7:00 p. m. at the tory at Western State College, will entertain and Colorado History Museum. 13th and Broadway, wtth 'r HE 109th annual meeting of the Colorado 1 Historical S<klety will take participants back to inforni us with his slide-illustrated lecture, "Skiing one exception. The December 5 annual meeting through the Years in Colorado." Vandenbusche, author program is free to the public and begins at 6:00 p.m. the early davs of skiing in Colorado. The meeting, of numerous books and articles on Colorado and Please call (303)866+4686 now for reservations and scheduled from 6:00 to 8: 30 p. m. on Monday. western history, has been a prcdessor of history at further information. No one will be denied admission [)ecember 5. 1988, will be held at the Colorado Western State College since 1962 and a cross-country due to inability to pay. History Museum, 13th and Broadway in Denver. The festive opening of a speed exhibit on the skiing coach since 1975. He will schuss through C,ilorado's ski history to show us the evolution of 6111~ history of Colorado's ski industry also lS scheduled skiing from essentiai transportation to sport. Vanden for that night. Members and their guests should busche will introduce us to Al Jollnson, great "snow- Â· - -77---~~*A~#4~. not miss this opportunity to be the first to see Ski shoer" of the 1880s, who carried mail through the ~-IlilIlII,i~&~-~~~~~~ ~ Trocks: A Century of Skiing in Colorado, s?on. steep and rugged mountain area of the Devil's Punch sored in part by the Adolph Cmrs Coinpany. Bowls. over Schofield Pass, and into Gothic. He will Western State College professor Duane Van- denbusche will present a colorful slide-illustrated delight us with stories ot early tour races, including the race held in Crested Butte in 1886, where 1,000 lecture. "Skiing through the Years m Colorado.- One of Colorado's most noted historians. Vanden- people came to watch and cheer for Charlie Baney and p. t# .F 'W P his fellow Gunnison Country Skiers. 1- --- - 4 1.0% 1 , ' busche will cover topics ranging from the moun- Vandenbusche's program is part of the Colorado .â€ž: ' '-- *- ~~ - '*1 il tains to earw winter transportation M Colorado and Historical Society's 109th annual meeting, and also ,-1/10'9 from ski races in mining camps to the climate that opens the exciting new exhibit at the Colorado Elis 4%2~11/ ti,~8 encouraged development of the industry. The lec- ture wiil complement the exhibit. which is the first of its kind ever mounted in Colorado. Technology, p.m. in Boettcher Auditorium at the Colorado History - -44*.4 ski safety, the famed Tenth Mountain Division, 1-- - _t#/<CZ + ..'- //Â£.f..- M racing, fashion, and style are ail components of this Museum. is free of charge and will be followed by a reception and an opportunity to preview the exhibit exhibit The annual meeting will also include the elec on skiing in Colorado, sponsored in part by the Adolph EJ,SL3-0,MA-IS111"*TWq"~~i L.-1-AN tion of the Society's board of directors, a report Coors Company. Mark your calendars now to make ~ n ~ j-~M A-- tracks to see this presentation and exhibition at the from Society chairman Bruce Rockwell, and the *Â·ante,JI~,gi,1,1,"9- presentation of several awards, including the museum. Fil*11 - â€¢ ' , betralÂ£Â¤-~IP*15#19#LJ~JI This lecture is the second of the 1988-89 lecture '142", 1., 1, Bancroft History Award. the Stephen H. Hart series On the Beaten Path: Colorado's Historic High- &~pr â€¢ ,.. Preservation Awards, and the American Associa- woys and Hyways. The next lecture, to be held on ~ I tion of State and Lx)cal History Awards. January 10, 1988, will be a slide-illustrated lecture ~ The reception following the meeting will be - 4 1 presented by the Volunteers of the Colorado His- presented by Walter R. Borneman entitled Transcon . 4 torical Society. tinentai Railroad Schemes and Dreams: Colorado's ~ ~ U Marshall l>ass and Georgetown 1.oop.* On February $ . . 5 The annual meeting is free and members are 14, Professor David R. Hill will present "On the Go: A ji ' ; invited to bring their guests and friends. The History of Transportation in Denver." Janet Luompte e - . -- : evening promises to be a highlight of the year at 2 the Colorado History Museum. Plan now to attend; will delight her audience on March 14 with "Professor ,' -:.r~~ __ 1 - her. ~ you will not want to miss the 109th annual meeting Goldrick and the Merry Stagecoach from Denver to L~ i of the Society. Santa Fe." On April 11. Professor Richard G. Beidle- man shares an unpublished diary with us in -Over Cochetopa Pass to Calamity: The Gunnison Expedi_ A m -be, of th, Colorado Mountain Sk, Club repam a pair of Cariadian m,rshoes â€¢ ith a tr,tr of -Noruu,an snowshoes" tion.- The lecture series, generously sponsored by a standing .p besidÂ£ him in this umtage photrgrat>h takeM wound grant from the Colorado Endowment for the Human- World War I. 1 Of