Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19840424RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Historic Preservation Committee Regular Meeting April 24, 1984 Chambers Present were Terry End, Nick Pasquaretla, Gretchen Greenwood, Zoe Compton, Colette Penne, excused were Georgeann Waggaman, Mona Frost, and Richard Cicero. The minutes were moved for approval with the correct of adding the words, does not, on page 3, Nick Pasquarella made the motion, Gretchen Greenwood seconded, all in favor, motion carried. Stan Mathis came to give a report on the r~-~ration/reconstruction of the Glidden residence at 232 E. Hallam the new owner being Vigoda. 232 E. Hallam Glidden House Stan Mathis stated that when they started this project, it was going to be a new exterior siding,windows, trim exactly like the old structure, how ever after the sheet rock off of the inside walls, they discovered several things, one, all the interior walls, are what you call flat frame, that means instead a 2 by 4 the 4" direction being perpendicular to the plate line, flat, so the walls are on a 2" divide instead of a 4" divide; There are two bearing walls in the interior of this house, one is up stairs, and one is down stairs. The 2 by 4 wall that is flat frame has a tendency to bend, because you are not bearing things in the way the two-by-four is meant to be working; And on each side of this flat frame wall was a layer 1 by 10 pine boards, which was kind of a sheeting underneath, that makes it impossible to do any new wiring without taking off those boards, and if you take off the boards though and the structure interity of the building is really impaired. In addition to all this, when the siding is off, and the 1 by 10 boards where taken off the inside they found that about 1/3 of each side of the long side of the building were starting to kick out; This house is what called platform frame, they build the walls to a certain point, then they put the floor joist on, then they build another wall on top of it, and that works fine when the roof comes all the way over, but in this case, there was a little 2 by 4 root business that joined the 2 by 6 mansard slope side roofs, and a pony wall on south of the second floor, so what happens is a hinge action and over a period of years, and this house is about 100 years old, these wall are starting to kick out, and there are some photos to show this; Stan Mathis said if they had left the structure the way it was, and had insulated this whole roof, then they would of start to maintain more snow level on the roof, and this roof was never ~signed for a heavy snow level, and would buckle. Showing the committee what they have done to reconstruction the house, and repair the damage to the house they found as they tried to restore it. They would of liked to save the whole structure, but the house was unsafe, and that is why it became a reconstruction instead of a remodel. He also show the members a rim joist that was dry rot, one of the worst and one of the best. The foundation the old one is a double Y, the exterior bricks are not in very good shape, and one reason they are not in good shape, someone either the Gliddens or someone before them, put inside the brick foundation wall set up some 1 by 10 boards from the ground level to the bottom of the floor, and filled it with saw dust for installation, the saw dust whipped the moisture out of the ground, and over a period of years, of the freeze thaw conditions turn this to dust. Also the wiring in the house was dangerous. The mill work is being built in Carbondale, the exact same knee braces, same trim, same windows, same siding new, they have salvaged brick rack around the roof, it was broken and gone in many places, it can not be reproduced so it might just be the the major part of the house in front, in the same color scheme. Gretchen Greenwood said that a part of restoration is to restore the house to the way it orginally looked. Nick Pasquarella said the members should look at the reconstruction vs restoration, if you drive by and see what has been done, reconstructing the frame work, putting the building back so whole again, and it for the benefit of historical preservation in this community,Stan Mathis has made this building physically whole, in its restored arrangement, he has made the building firm and safe and strong structurely. Stan Mathis said that the wood fence is not going up again, but there will be a new fence made of iron, picket style, cased iron, with detailing. Colette Penne stated that when HPC looked at in the most detail was the addition, what HPC heard was that the old part of the house was going to be restored,all the elements were going to be the same, and HPC did not look at that many details, looking back at the presentation HPC should of looked closely at ~e older of the house more than they did at the time. HPC took this house that was an excellent quality, and took it at face value, and at the time the members went and looked at the house, when the roof was falling, and HPC said at that time , that perhaps Stan Mathis did the right thing, but HPC is asking why the choices were made, to have a better understanding for later references and knowledge. Colette Penne said that after talking to the regional director of the nation trust in Grand Junction for historic preservation, and told him some of the information that Stan had remarked on, like the bay window had no structural support, they only had 1 by 6's in them, and where not going to hold up, and some of the other problems that the members had seen, and the decision if you can restore an old house and retain almost all of its materials then that is preferably to reconstruction. Colette Penne said the statement she would like to make to the community, that not every victorian in town is in this bad of shape, and this has to be the solution, this house should be reconstructed, and in this case to reconstructed was the only way to go. That HPC should be allow to have a budget, and in cases like this , when a architect finds more problems with the house he is planning to redo, then have a budget, that would allow a second opinion on the best way to go about it. Stan Mathis said what happen if HPC had an architect on hand, and they had a different opinion than the other architect that was doing the project, if the structure failed, the libel party being who,he would not want to put his license up for a thing such as this. Gretchen Greenwood said she feels this is a lost, that this building has been taken away, she felt it could be resoted to the way it use to look,but that there will be something missing from it, and that being the old materials and the restoration as it is being done; There should be alternative methods of construction for restoration vs tearing a building down and starting over. Nick Pasquarella said for the record he would like Stan Mathis to state what he did the work and it went on far behond what HPC exspected, that he did go ahead and do what he felt had to be done, without advising this board of the problems and decisions he was making, and that he was in error for at least not comming and telling this board, that when he gets through all thats RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves HPC April 24, 1984 cont. P.3 you are going to see there is just a minimal frame, no more, no less,beacuse he can not do any thing more with the building beacuse of where it is at. HPC should have the decision of what can and can not be done with the building, and if HPC still wants the building with just two-by-fours. Stan Mathis said , okay. Charles Hopkins, from the public, stated that he felt that a contractor would want to explore the condition before he commitment himself even a ball park figure of what it would cost to renovate this house, and he feels its strange that the house had to be made into a skeleton before they discovered these things. Somewhere in the planning stage, crawling in the crawl space would of been done, and these things would of been discovered, and he stated he was suprised at the late date the struture damaged occurred. ~olette Penne said that after this has happen that perhaps HPC should be educated and a certain group of architects in town that can be called upon to help advise this board on certain decision, even a tax consultant on tax advantages, lawyers in terms preservation activities. Patty Hopkins said she feels the owner has a responibility and HPC should be presented with construction plans,architectal plans; Stan Mathis did state that Mrs Vigoda does have another architect in Denver working with them, Harley Reinhart. Heather Hopkins,said she would like to see a precaution, that something like this does not happen again; Colette Penne said that Aspen does have one of the better ordinances, in the state; The problems with this house, no one anticipated the amount of demolishion this house was going to under go, and so there was noone monitoring, HPC did have a site visit, and perhaps someone from the building department should check on this places especially the excellent historical designated ones, every few days, and any thing that is major, will have to reviewed. Gretchen Greenwood restated how unfortunate this happen to the community and that a house like this was lost, and that something like this will not happen again. Terry End said this has been a learning experince for HPC and Stan M&this, and there might be a better inspection on the other excellent and good historical houses; Gretchen Greenwood said that this house still has to go through reconstruction, and the community and HPC does want to be very involved with it and the orginal state as to how it was; And for the record Stan Mathis said that would be no problem, and that he will keep in touch with this committee, and have them review major steps. Colette Penne had a discussion with Patty about asking for funds from City Council or the mayor for funding, to have a specialist in historic presevation, when ever a remodel is apply for, be call in, or bill the owner who is applying for the restoration; The idea that the owner, since we do not have abudget, and there is no application fee either, and most processing that the City or the County go through do have large application fees. Maybe when some one purchased one of the structures that is of the top two categories, which since HPC does not have a budget, then maybe the owner, when someone purchase of these houses, they would understand they are going to have to do major restoration rather than reconstruction, that there will be a fee on a consultant architect or a varification of the structure if HPC could get these structures evalated that could be in HPC files, and when someone buys a structure that information would be invaluable,It would tell an objective opinion of the condition of the structure and what it would take to bring it up to code,or to restore it. Maybe since this type of information will be dated , that they would have to pay for an undate on the information. Stan Mathis said that the front and the apparent side of the house now, will h~ve to raise and lower the elevation by about eight inches, for drainage across the side, the east side of the house. Patty Hopkins asked about the landscaping, and would there be the lost of any more cotton woods? Then the gardens will be lost, on the east side of the house. Stan Mathis said he was not sure when every one had seen the gardens,because they are not in the greatest condition, but the gardens are going to go back in, a full landscaping plan, And they have applied to cut down one more Cotton wood, the one furthest back on the lot. Patty Hopkins said like the Lilly of the Valley can not be replaced or the myrtle garden. Discussion continued, Zoe Compton stated that this body has to consider also the needs of the applicate, if not these old houses would there, and one of the main things is to maintain the b~auty of Aspen, by keeping these old houses and keeping a part of Aspen historical, and if people put there money into these old houses, and they find they need more space, and if HPC does not look at there needs, then they most likely will become rental units, and not kept up as well. Gideon Kaufman, said he would like to set the record straight, that she had the property zoned from commerical to residential; That property was zoned commerical by mistake, a lot split has been tabled by there request, the house is the one that is designate historic, it is not the land, and the issue before HPC is how to deal with the situation in the future, not to try and go back and u~do something that was done; Stan M~this will come back to HPC as this project goes along, and }{PC will review the photo's of the Glidden house, and return them to Stan. Stan Mathis said that the owners of 633 W. Main do not like the color on the house and wish to change it, showing the members the color samples of nocturne M3640, and Minute Man Blue D4036, Stan stated that the whole color of the house is going to change. This is the corner house, the 627 W, Main will stay the same as before when painted. Pink as a color was turned down down by HPC before. The trim will be changing. Colette Penne said that Joyce H~tton is out of town, but that she should of been notified that this was to be taken off the agenda before today when Colette had to call to find out why Joyce Hatton, was not attending this meeting. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Awnings Levi's Lickety Split Ice Cream HPC CONT. 4/24/84 P.5 New Business: Consideration for awnings for Levi's Lickety Split Ice Cream ~. in the Ski Service Building across from R. Peas. James Le Virus. Showing the members the samples of awnings,this will be a summer time awnings, the lease runs from May 15, to November 25 of this year, The request is for ice cream cones on his awnings on the side of it, the awning is similar to the one in Glenwood Springs, As far as the signage, the cones are consider part of the sign; The store front is 18 feet wide, Zoe Compton said she felt there should be a site visit, and take the sample of colors for the awnings, and decided when the members can see the color of the building, and what will blend; James Le Vitus said his first choice will be a dark color with a multi color ribbon around it, but he said he would be flexible with his choice of colors, his main objection is to let people know that he has home made ice cream, and is across from the park. Th~ members felt that the ice cream cones on an awning were to much, Colette Penne said she has no problem with the blue awning that James has a sample of, with a trim color of orange and yellow, but a raised cone, no. Gre~hen Greenwood said that an applique is not in keeping with, the signs of Aspen. James Le Vitus said that another thing he wanted to mention, that the bottom part of the awning is not flat material, it will again be on the puffy side, and the cones on the awnings will be a good way to advertise. If James can not have the cones he said he would have "Home Made Ice Cream" across the awning, which the members agreed would look much better than the cones, The signage will have to be worked out with Bill Drueding The meeting was continued at the site of the future Levi's Lickety Split Ice Cream Shop,, After reviewing the planned awning, the members voted for approval of a blue awning with scallop trim of yellow and orange,.all in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned.