Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19871208 HISTORIC PRESERVATION CO[91ITTEE Minutes Regular Meeting Old City Council Chambers, City Hall December 8, 1987 2:30 p.m. Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Georgeann Waggaman, Nick Pasquarella, Patricia O'Bryan and Augie Reno present. Excused were Charlie Knight, Charles Cunniffe and Zoe Compton. COMMITTEE MEMBER CO[~qENTS Steve: It has been tough to set deadline dates for HPC because there are a lot of last minute things. If we intend to get proper and adequate information to the Committee we will have to initiate deadlines. The scheduling is an administrative matter. Bill: Doesn't the code call for ten days before? Steve: It doesn't say when the applicants have to have things submitted. There has been a tendency for applicants to come at the beginning of the meeting and ask to be put on the agenda and I have often been troubled by that and it can compromise the reviewing ability. Patricia: We have had time for people. Georgeann: It doesn't seem fair when other people have to have their information in ahead of time. Augie: I don't have a problem with it as long as we have the time. Bill: In the area of the zoning code it does state that the Planning Director shall determine if an application is complete within ten days so that tells you Steve that you have to receive it ten days before it can be put on our agenda. Steve: We have never taken ten days to certify that it is complete. I would prefer to establish a definite time schedule as it would allow for greater consistency. Bill: It puts a burden on the architect when a submission has to be submitted three weeks before you even submit to the HPC and you are still working on it. It almost puts in a month delay on your project. You have to have your drawings done a month before you go to HPC, you are sitting there a month waiting to be acted on. Georgeann: In a lot of make most of the submittal would that be possible. cases don't they allow the person to but bring a few things in at the end, HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 Steve: That is what we have been doing but it has gotten out of hand. Bill: If we decide to utilize the schedule you should do a mailing to all the architects and place an ad in the paper letting them know that this is your schedule. Steve: We can do that. Steve: Last night at the City Council meeting they passed a motion that said prior to CO the applicant should mitigate growth impacts i.e. employee housing. That was passed and last night City Council reconsidered that motion and did indeed rescind that motion and the understanding is to take no further action. Bill: Paul Taddune spoke very well for me as chairman and for the Committee saying that we had acted properly. At the time they made their initial submission designation was in the very front of everyone's mind. In order to retain the charm of Elli's we had acted in good faith and that is what we were trying to do. Council came away feeling that HPC had acted properly. MONITORING PROJECTS Nick: I'm watching the atrium building and have of people on the street and the comments that I sign. They don't like the sign. talked to a lot got were on the Augie: I'm not sure what was approved on the Hamilton House. Bill: Maybe staff could research the minutes. Steve: On Monday night there will be another appeal to City Council of the HPC evaluation. This is for the Marv Reynolds house now owned by the Amatos and it is in between Mona Frost's house and Luke Short's house (Begotta house). Charles Cunniffe is involved and they are making a strong argument and are hoping to win. At this point I will recommend to Council to affirm HPC's evaluation. Also the HPC guidelines will be discussed. Georgeann: I have comments on the Stallard House but I will wait until the end of the meeting. ASPEN FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT OFFICE Bob Walker, architect: I have gone through your concerns point by point. HPC was concerned that the building encroached on the park both visually and physically so we moved the building back, cut the overhang back from 4'1" to 2'6" and we moved the entire front wall back 1'9" so now we conform completely down to the HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 square foot with the 1982 requirements. Ail our square footage is correct. We have the park at the size the 1982 SPA overlay wanted and the original overhang (1982 concept) came out 5'1/2'. In the transcript Steve noted it would be nice if we could keep the overhang as close to the original. We are about nine inches farther than the original concept so basically we are where the original one was and we have gained by moving the entire building back a little bit. Another concern was the height of the parapet and we feel from a design point that this height should be the same. We would like to keep the parapet height the same. We don't want to go with brick or stone on the building due to the cost and it is a small building. We would like to stay with the 8 x 8 grid and in that way we graphically have the same thing going on in the new building and the thrift shop building. Trying to use an integral color is difficult because we do not have much of a range and there is just a handful of block here and they don't like to do color unless we have a larger run of block. We are suggesting that we go with a painted block in a color that HPC would approve that would be close to terra cotta or the brick color. We could use a split face block as a base underneath the windows but the fire fighters didn't like that. We would suggest the facade stay as is and use a color either a stain or paint on the blocks. We would like to suggest that we use sheet metal or wood painted in dark colors that would be complimentary to the block and that would occur on the fascia and all the window trim. My only problem with the painted color is that it is setting up a third facade in these three buildings and if HPC can live with that we can to. Steve: Moving back the facade to increase the open space is an improvement and reducing the size of the overhang gives a sense of more open space. It had been suggested by Bob that at the final review some samples of what the block, paint or stain would look like should be presented to the HPC. Bob: I assumed that. Patricia: Is this the correct footage now as it stands? Bob: Yes. We took the entire building and moved it back and we decreased the overhang size and we moved the facade back. The major problem was the color contrast. Nick: I wasn't present when the committee opposed using the same facade and colors that the Thrift Building has. How much opposition was there from the Committee? HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 Georgeann: People felt using the same color made it look cold and they felt that it wasn't logical to have the gray match the Thrift Shop when the building actually goes to the Fire Depart- ment. I'm not unhappy having a small building in there that is a separate building. It gets a few of the things down to that small scale in Aspen where otherwise you become monolithic. I'm pleased with the whole approach. I like the parapet at that height. I like the color and I am pleased with the way you were able to move it back significantly without harming yourself. Bill: I'd prefer that Thrift Shop as long as economic headache. the building be all one to match the it doesn't cause the Fire Department an Georgeann: I like the maroon that Bob has on the front of the eye brow and the posts are a warm color. What about using those colors and leaving the gray stone. Nick: The Thrift Shop is a public building and if anything happened to the building most likely I feel it will revert to the Fire Department as another part of a public building. When we start breaking it up into three different fixtures we might end up with something very wierd and I don't see anything wrong with the gray brick building. Augie: We thought that the new center building should somehow relate to the old building so that you knew that you were going to the Fire Department. We are not to have jurisdiction over color here but the existing building that you have basically has an inexpensive material and the only other material to deal with is color there. Bob: You do have jurisdiction over color here because that is what we are dealing with. Steve: Only if you are the one to bring it up. Georgeann: You could do it in the gray block and if it doesn't look right you could stain or paint it. Bob: I'd, we'd willing to do that. Patricia: How would the color weather? Bob: It would have to be sealed and it is like paint which weathers and it would have to be kept up. Patricia: I would vote for something other than gray. 4 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 Peter Wirth, Fire Chief: This model was presented to the Aspen Fire Protection District and has been seen by at least 100 people. There was not one comment made other than favorable about the colors. The intent was to blend the middle building so that it didn't look like three separate buildings there. With the trees out front the profile of the gray block is minimum. If you paint or stain it you will be looking at three different colors. The Fire District was in favor of the gray block. I don't know how long the Fire Department will be there and I can see the Thrift Shop moving their expansion into that building. Bill: I was one of the ones to look at a color associated with the Fire Barn. After seeing it now and knowing the complications that we can't get integral color it would become a maintenance problem and I think it could go either way gray or the mauve. Since it is new I feel it will look better if it does associate with the Thrift Shop. The identity problem is a matter of theirs and I would side with the architect. I would change my vote now. Steve: This is a follow-up of the conceptual and if you would like you could deal with the issue at the final. Bob: I only asked to come here to get this straightened out so that I would have an idea of what was going on. Bill: Do we need a motion? Steve: I don't believe you do. Bob: We are struck with the materials we are using the building is up if it looks like it is going to be gray I think we would be willing to color it. and after a problem PRE-APPLICATION-DESIGNATION IN USE 300 W. MAIN LOG CABIN Bill: We have a pre-application conference designation, enlargement and change in use of 300 log cabin which sits next to the Elisha House. which is the W. Main Street Scott McDonald, owner: The reason we want historical designa- tion is primarily to get the variances needed for the building requested. Putting on an additional 2800 sq. feet two story and it would be between the existing log house and the Elisha's house and the visual impact for that location is essentially nil from Main St. You would see it from Second Street and we would need variances and set backs. The ideas was to minimize any real change to the lot such as tearing down trees to build buildings. The log house is worth refurbishing but it is crude. The new structure would be our living area and would be the kitchen for HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 the proposed restaurant. As far as tearing down the structure we would like to keep the structure and I grew up in town and we left in 74 and came back and we want to make this our home. We have to look at this economically. We could build a duplex but we prefer to keep the structure. There is plenty of parking. Nick: If I read it properly you don't intend to touch the building, it is not going to be raised, it will not be moved and it will not be shifted and the log building will sit where it is and you intend to work around it on two sides. Caroline McDonald: It would be a log addition. Patricia: Would the log addition be two stories? Scott: Two stories. Steve: I encouraged the McDonalds to come to HPC. The first question to HPC is are you interested in historic landmark designation of this structure. The inventory states that it was built in 1944 so it is just over 40 years old. It is not a real old structure. It was not evaluated back in January but the inventory did note that it should get points in a couple of areas. It does have a distinctive style of architecture and it is a note worthy example of a style that is rare and it is identified with Main Street and it is an important contribution to Main St. Bill: Who did that? Steve: John Stanford and~? Kirkpatrick. Our code is a little more specific as to how we define historic significance. In their actual application for designation they should try and document a little bit better of what is the architectural importance of this structure as a rustic style log cabin. Is the craftsmanship unusual or especially good. Is it an important contributing component to the neighborhood character. The second question is to find out whether this structure can rehabilitated without being destroyed. Can it successfully be converted into a restaurant. Are the foundations, the roof and other aspects of the structure capable for the work to be done. It would be a shame to find out after designation that essentially this building can't be saved. The third question is how does the HPC feel toward the concept of the attachment that they are propos- ing. They are trying to say that they do not really affect the Second Street which is the front of the house elevation and I think that is important and they are trying to keep the same line on Main Street. As a rule for historic preservation you are trying to make the connection somewhat distinct so that it retains the integrity of the original. Furthermore there is a 6 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 need for encroachments and set backs which is up to the Board of Adjustment. One possibility rather than encroach into the side yard they might try to get a little more square footage by coming forward towards Main Street. The Elisha house (carriage house) is right on the property so they will be close. They have discussed about using logs. There are some large spruce trees on the property and they intend to save them. I feel this is very important for the character of the property. Demolition and building one duplex is possible but this Committee w~d rather not see that happen. Designation requires the P&Z and City Council to take action. Restaurant is a conditional use in the zone district so that would be subject to P&Z review. At that time parking would be one of the key issues. The change in use from residential to restaurant and to add two dwelling units one deed restricted and one free market would be done via the GMP exemption through historic designation. There is change in use and the creation of an additional dwelling unit. There are two aspects of that. Bill: Any comments from the Committee? Georgeann: I've been watching this house for the ten years that I have been on HPC and this is the one house that I would happily fight for. I don't want to see it demolished in any way period. I'm very pleased with what they are suggesting here and the modestness in the way it is pulled back. I think the interior of this log space is so attractive, the design of it, the scale of it that I would be pleased with some kind of public addition in there so that more people can enjoy it. I'm in favor of designa- tion but I do not like Steve's idea of pulling the building forward. Steve: Could you clarify that? Georgeann: That space is very important and I would rather see it notched back a little and add more planting. Scott: There is one large spruce. Georgeann: Keeping this building is real important to the fabric of Main Street. It is a unique style in Aspen. Nick: Looking at that lot from Main Street, it is unusual for me to see the side of the house on the main street but if is what it is going to be that's fine. The trees and landscaping fill that in nicely. The idea of moving the new structure back a ways to give a little definition as Georgeann suggested softens it. I feel you have something you really can work with. 7 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 Steve: They are going to have to get a variance from the Board of Adjustment for the site where they are and that will be difficult as we all know. It is a tough board and to build a new structure and to say we have a hardship will take some support from this Committee and even then it is not at all guaranteed. Maybe there are some other possibilities that they should consider so that they might not need to go before the board. They will probably have to go before the board for the alley side. Do you think this house should not be moved? Is that something that should be considered by the McDonalds? Patricia: You mean toward Second Street to give them more space to work around. Nick: I'm opposed to that. Georgeann: That opens up a can of worms If we are asking people to keep things possible asking them to move .... and I'm also opposed. restored as close as Nick: If they present their case right they might get the variance. A variance is something you have to work for. Patricia: I'm not in favor of demolishing the house. I also wouldn't be in favor of moving it forward toward Main Street. It is an interesting concept. Are you going to run the restaurant also? Scott: Yes. Patricia: I wouldn't be against moving it on the lot personally and I wouldn't vote against it if it came up. I am also in favor of keeping all the trees. Augie: I'm in favor with everybody of keeping the house where it is. I wouldn't want it to be moved due to potential problems that would come up. One thing that bothers me is anytime someone designs an addition to a historic building that is a tough job to do and it particularly tough when you want to go two stories when the building is only one story because then it kind of dwarfs what you are trying to call attention to. Scott: I've thought about that and the way the second story would be, it would appear as a one story dwelling with dormers. Augie: My other comment relating something to be said for being able is approaching it. If there was a would loose some of that. to that: I think there is to see the coach house as one structure right up to it we HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 Caroline McDonald: Actually you don't see the coach house coming up Main Street due to the trees. Scott: The wall of the coach house is up 3 1/2 to 4 feet and then it is another two stories so it is close to 30 to 40 feet above. So it wouldn't be dwarfed. Caroline: That is the only place we could do an addition because our front space and side space we want to keep open on Second and Main. We have to live somewhere. Augie: The other comment is on parking. I would be saying no parking on this particular parcel because where parking would ruin the whole feeling. in favor of I could see Scott: That is true but it would use space that is used now currently. It so that you could do parallel parking. the same amount of street is just adding a few feet Steve: I would suggest that you talk to the Engineering Department about the parking aspect of it. The on site parking requirement might only be six spaces which possibly could be accommodated in the alley and they wouldn't have to touch Second Street. Georgeann: You can park on Second Street right now. Steve: There is parallel parking. Bill: What we have to make clear to Scott as an applicant is that if the house is designated we must see the plan as it develops later on and some of the comments that we have encount- ered in the past application is that we would like to see this building keep its own identity so there should be some separation between the new and the old. The plan that I see here has more zoning complications where I think we have to be respective of the house next door and the carriage house. If you have a house almost build up next to the carriage house what happens, are we imposing a use or negating potential use of the carriage house for the Elijah house. As you look at historic photographs one of the nice things is that there is open space between the struct- ures. We are having problems with these houses downtown now. Steve: They should go through conceptual review before approa- ching Board of Adjustment. Bill: I find the carriage house to be very unique historically also and should be preserved and to build a house right next to it encroaches on its own identity. We have several structures here that we have to be careful of and retain each ones identity. 9 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 You Scott have to be sympathetic of that. Scott: I don't want to build that close to it due to the wall. There would have to be a separation approximately between four and five feet of our property line. The other aspect of it is if a new dwelling was put up it could go up anywhere on the property and that could mask the building. Caroline: We thought it would be a trade off leaving all the front for open space to be able to get the variance for the property lines in the back. Georgeann: Since this is so significant from Main Street and the north side of the building is not as significant and it doesn't have as much impact for as many people. How would people feel if the building were moved in that direction. Scott: There is only about 15 feet of dimension there to work with. It would be very unusual to have a building 15 x 30 and it would be beyond the limits of use. It would be all right for a shop or something. Patricia: Design the building in an L shape. Bill: Is there any action required here Steve. Steve: Only that notes be made on the Commissions concerns. Scott: You would like a model at conceptual. Steve: It would give you a sense of what the effect is on the carriage house. Scott: I would prefer a model. Steve: Making application for designation would be your first step. Board of Adjustment will be concerned with your variances. P&Z will be concerned with the designation and the conditional use of the restaurant use. Bill: We do need to see drawings and a model. Steve: For conceptual we do need to see scaled elevations. For designation we do not. There is a possibility that we can give designation and conceptual at the same time. SPECIAL PROJECTS Steve: Council wanted HPC to look at some of the changes that 10 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 should occur to the guidelines prior to the next council meeting Dec. 14, 1987. 1. Improve preservation. guidelines. the introductory statement about why we believe in I changed the one section on the function of the 2. Delete the time HPC meets in the guidelines. 3. On page 35 we have the discussion on how to address Main Street when you have diverse types of architecture. We should encourage compatibility. I added: In all new commercial construction, compatibility to adjacent building types should be considered. 4. On page 36 in regards to open space in the commercial core for new construction. I simply added another concept for evaluating open space. In some cases a courtyard or corner open space may be considered desirable if it has an active function or gives desired relief for the purpose of allowing a historic landmark to stand out more prominently. 5. On page 79 define replication. We have three definitions in our glossary replication, reconstruction and restoration. Renovation/rehabilitation are two other terms that are used and they aren't as specific. We should all understand what we mean by those three terms. Replication is defined as the process of reproducing by new construction the form and detail of an existing or previously existing building, structure or object, or part thereof, on a site where no such building, structure or object had existed. The idea of a new construction of a struct- ure that had never existed there. Reconstruction is defined as the act or process of reproducing by new construction the exact form and detail of a vanished building as it appeared at a specific time. We might want to say a total reconstruction is an entirely new structure made to look exactly like a structure that had existed on that site. Patricia: Replication would be like victoria square. Augie: I don't agree with that. Bill: I don't agree either. Augie: If you have a building that is there and it comes down and you replicate it and it goes back to be that is replication it is not reconstruction. If you are reconstructing something, if a building is there and it is falling down and you are 11 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 reconstructing leaving some of that building there that is reconstruction. Patricia: Like Elli's. Augie: A total reconstruction wouldn't exist, it would be replication. Steve: Do you think replication should be on the same site? Augie: I would think so. Bill: I would agree that it does exist on the same site. Bill: Replication is taking the exact detail and scale and rebuilding it. The interiors of the Wheeler Opera House were replicated. There is a fine line between reconstruction and replication. Patricia: They are synonymous. Georgeann: Maybe you would want to say that we don't encourage reconstruction unless it is a very important building. Bill: The Dept. of Interior only deals with rehabilitation. They define it as the process of returning a property to its state of utility through repair or alteration. They also try to stay away from replicate because they try and save all features. Steve: In our definition of restoration I'm adding one feature and that is repair. The act or process of accurately repairing and recovering the form and details of a property and its setting as it appeared at a particular period of time by means of the removal of later work, repair of the original building component or by the replacement of missing earlier work. That definition is general enough to not only be buildings by also sites. The idea is to use all the old components as you can. Bill: We are trying to get a definition between rehabilitation, reconstruction, renovation and replicate. In your guidelines you have a similarity between renovation and rehabilitation. They are almost the same. We have to define reconstruction. Nick: The Civil War created the reconstruction of it was accepted. The South somewhat is still where doesn't look like it did before the Civil War. the South and it is but it Bill: Reconstruction is just the mere fact of reconstructing something. If you want to do it authentically you would repl- 12 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 icate it. Replication is part of reconstruction but building it exactly as it was. Steve: Reconstruction can be either accurate or not accurate. Accurate reconstruction is replication. Bill: Lets say the Sardy house burnt down. You would then have to reconstruct it. At that point you have a choice of replicat- ing what was there if there was enough documentation. If not you would reconstruct it in an architecture that was as close to the period without being authentic. You would be imitating that era. Georgeann: Maybe replication becomes a perfect reconstruction. Steve: The other aspect of replication is that you could be taking a structure from Georgetown and replicating it exactly in Aspen. Bill: It could be on a new site or anywhere. Patricia: Maybe we should say replications are exact duplica- tions. Steve: Another point is that there is a certain schizophrenia in identify historic architectural elements, all this trouble of telling people how it was and then asking them to consider them in new design but make it a sensitive contemporary design don't make it like in other words a replication. We are not going that step in saying we want you to build like they did in 1890. It seems that the Committee decided we discouraged it and the guidelines are identifying those characteristics but they are putting that challenge to the architect to design a contemporary structure with it. Bill: Having worked with the guidelines and worked with the Committee and shot down trying to adhere to these guidelines. There is a fine line when we ask them to follow certain guide- lines and not imitate. I can see the dilemma in using guidelines and then a committee taking the guidelines and using them against you. Bill: I think we want to say we are offering the guidelines as a history of Aspen and you are encouraged to use them and reinterpret them for compatibility. Steve: The problem with the guidelines is that they get very specific and then it says design it contemporary, do it as your wish but think about these things. 13 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 Bill: It is so easy to imitate the guidelines but you don't want to because the guidelines are right there. Augie: Telluride shows you every little thing that they want you to use. Georgeann: How about this: There is a certain schizophrenia in using historic architectural elements; however, encouraging consideration of the most important historic elements in a design it is generally appropriate to create a sensitive contemporary design. MONITORING PROJECTS Georgeann: One of the problems with the Stallard house is trying to keep something that looks authentic. Two trying to deal with some of the areas that are severely deteriorated. Three dealing with some of the areas that are severely deteriora- ting and because of their orientation will continue to deterior- ate and need a lot of maintenance. Most of the interior of the house you look through lace curtains. A lot of the outside of the house you are not near the house. As you walk up to the front door there is one window right on the left and you are very close to that and it is on the east wall so it is not badly deteriorated and there are the windows underneath the porch and all the way a long the eastern side that are underneath the porch. These are the only windows that on the outside you actually walk next to and on the inside the ones in the first reception room don't have curtains over them. We talked about restoring those windows, the only windows close enough for you actually to touch and feel and they are the least badly deter- iorated. The windows on the front facing to the south, the parlor windows and above the parlor windows replicating them. I feel confident from talking to the Pella people that they do have a window that will replicate well. The little muntins on the Stallard House are 1 1/8" and the ones that pella has are 1 1/4". They could put those on the front of the house, new windows but in wood with wood surroundings so it would still be a natural material and that is not that big of an area for maintenance. They were willing to do those and paint them. Because they used the new pella windows as opposed to the old windows which would be restored they can put in a much more in an inobtrusive storm window as opposed to the broader ones. They need the storm window for light control as well as heat control. The southern sun comes in a bakes those rooms. We also looked at the western wall which gets the most exposure and gets the least observation at any close range. On those we considered using the same pella window as on the front but in this case cladding them in aluminum in the same color so that they were last longer and need less maintenance also those windows are the most awkward because you 14 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 would have to build a scaffold up to the second floor and then build another scaffold out three more feet to get up to the attic window. In the back where they are going to put in a few new windows they would also put the pella in and use the snap in storm windows. That seemed to be a reasonable compromise and how does that sound to the Commission. If it doesn't sound now is the time to tell me. Augie: What would be the aluminum color? Georgeann: Moss green and white. Ail the frames on the inside would be left wood and painted. It was suggested that the Commission look at the Sardy House windows and see how they relate to each other. Steve: The windows that would be restored are the ones east facing underneath the porch and the south facing. Georgeann: Also the one just as you walk up the stairs that is not under the porch. We treated things in three ranges: 1. If it is a foot away close enough to touch those need to be rest- ored. If it is five, six or seven feet away but fairly signif- icant those can be replaced but with wood that needs to be painted and if they are far away and you don't look at them those could be the aluminum clad. Patricia: What about the cost? one design. Wouldn't it be easier to get Georgeann: It wouldn't be any cheaper. Steve: Did you see the drawings of the 1 1/4" muntin compared to the 1 1/8". I would like to see that. Georgeann: I've asked for two things, elevations that show what is going to be restored and what is going to be replaced and what is going to be rebuilt. They are also going to give us shop drawings that show the window details. Maybe we also should ask Charles for a comparable cross section of the existing window. Steve: I think that is important. Bill: What are the preservation notes on replacing wood windows in historic buildings say? Steve: They emphasize all the techniques that can be employed to restore windows. Windows are a very important component to the historic character. If you can't save them get as close a replication as possible. There presentation was that they could get exactly the same. 15 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 Georgeann: We are holding onto some of the windows so that they are not destroyed. Steve: Is the muntin difference going to be noticeable, I think it might be. Bill: I feel this is one of the last great buildings in town that should be restored. Augie: I agree. Bill: I'm siding with Charlie Knight in if you allow them to change some things now they are going to come back and rechange them. I know their goal is to build that as a restored victorian house and I think it should be restored even without the insul- ated glass and storm windows. It is not a house that you live in so they can insulate and cut their heat back. Augie: We rebuilt the Red Onion and it was very costly. Bill: That is a great example to be able to look at a real old victorian and it should be restored like the old victorian. They should be point the brick and save what is there. Augie: It would probably be better to have a carpenter do the windows rather than pella. Pella is dealing with standard piece. Georgeann: We are talking about more money to do that. Steve: The only question that would deviate approval given at the last meeting would be otherwise you are just refining it. at all from the the muntin size Georgeann: If you all think that you will get that much of a different look in that 1/8" of an inch then that is critical. Steve: If they build the museum carriage house then that western garden area would be more of an entrance. Georgeann: I will bring that point up to Fran. Society doesn't have enough money. The Historical Bill: I think we should go for the restoration and maybe the City will get behind and contribute monies. Georgeann: Maybe the City will get behind if financially but only if they restore it perfectly. 16 HPC Minutes December 8, 1987 Bill: They are about to go our for funding for the museum. Maybe they should get funding for the restoration of the house at the same time. It is easy to raise a lot of money than it is to raise a small amount twice. Steve: There are two options to meet their prior condition. One would be to get pella to manufacture the findows exactly as they had been. Pella or someone else because that was what the approval was for; to allow them to use clad windows recommending wood windows but accepting clad windows. Georgeann: It would be aluminum clad. Steve: The motion says metal clad windows are not acceptable. Augie: I knew that pella doesn't make vinyl windows. personally like metal. I Georgann: Which one looks more historic in a window? I will tell Fran that HPC was not in favor and it sounds like they do not want to recommend funding from City Council unless it is an actual restoration. Information Item Georgeann: It will be about $2500 to print 200 of the guide- lines. Adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Kathy Strickland Deputy City Clerk 17