Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19810915RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES FOR SEPTEMBER 15, 1981 The Historic preservation Committee held its regular meeting on Tuesday, September 15,1981, in the Aspen City Council Chambers. Members present were: Chairman Bill Clark, Terry End, Richard Cicero, Larry Groen, and Nick Pasquella standing in for Mona Frost. Members not present were: Steve Marcus and Georgeann Waggman. Colette Penne of the Planning Department was also present. Bill Clark called the meeting to order, roll was called. The minutes were approved by Terry, seconded by Larry. Public Hearing - Final design review of Takah Sushi facade and awning- Paul Larkin. Paul Larkin: We have had several alterations in the design to we have had to put off the hearing until now. The awning that had been used for the other restaurants did not meet the building codes. The variance was approved. Two letters were presented from the Fud§eworks and the Country Flower stating that they had no objection to the awning. The application that Paul Larkin presented to the Committee was discussed, the Public Hearing was closed. Nick made the motion to accept this latest proposal, Terry seconds, all in favor. Public_Hearing- Final consideration of demolition of the Parson's Residence (Poor Pauls) amd conceptual approval for a new commercial structure (pending GMP allotment). Jere Michaels, J. R. McCarthy, and Jack Miller were the people present who represented the project. J. R. Miller presented the fact that it was their belief that that sight had more potential with the new structure. The old building, to him, was of questionable historic nature, and has a lot of serious problems. They would like to present a building that is more urban in character, that would pick up the feeling of Galena street, pick up the sizes and proportions and bring it around the corner,bring that whole block in relation to the downtown area. The building is on the list of notable structures, but no letter has yet been sent to the owners. It is not before the committee as a historic structure yet, but does come under the moratorium. The committee today is to give conceptual consideration to a GMP proposal but also to give opinion on what you think about demolition of that building. The moratorium is explained to J. R. and the others by Colette. It is a matter of the City attorney writing a resolutaion asking that that residence be exempted fro the moratorium. They can put in their GMP application based on the fact that you have conceptual approval which is the requirement. The house will have to be exempted from the moratorium unless they want to wait till the end of November. J.R.: we were told by Colette that even in that catagory ( the building being a notable structure) the building RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS page2 100 Leaves the building had only six of the eighteen points neccessary to place it in that catagory. The building has some structural problems, it is unsound and some of the brick is already faltering on the west side. We have a proposal that we think is a better use to that entire property and the building that we presented before had conceptual approval, that building swallowed the old one, like the Floradora. We are here to answer any questions that the HPC would like to ask. Larry: We denied demolition of this building in the past on the theory that we would like to see it preserved and it was considered notable. Bill: This was some time ago and we are dealing with past actions and the progress of Municipal actions is extremely slow. The longer those structures sit unused like that little building the less likely they are to be able to be rehabitable. I do not feel that that building is a total loss, t have a drawing here showing that building being incorperated into a larger structure. This board approved that presentation. The council established this board to protect the structures that we feel are important in this community. I think we could wipe out that structure and probably open ourselves to some kind of critcism from former applicants who were not allowed to go ahead with their projects because we denied demolition. Nick: tt is a two and a half, three brick construction the would be very hard to move, the wood portion of it is a shambles, it will be very hard to preserve in any way. I would be sumpathetic to the person that said, well we had a nice building here at one time,it is useless, it is now time to take that building away and go towards a new concept. I move that we move Poor Paul~s and forget it as a notable structure. Terry: I would have to take someone elses professional opinion as to what you can do about that building now that it has been sitting ther a couple of years. I would rather see it incorperated into a building. Richard: This new building meets all the guidlines. I have beenpolling people I know and the general concensus is" oh really they are tearing down another building" most people that came up to me did not want to see that building go. I realize what state that building is in. I am just passing along what I heard from the people on the street. I like this( the new) building. Colette: I think that there are tradeoffs, that is an important part of downtown, I think %ha% their design solution for it is a£good one. What we have now is a little victorian that is in bad shape surrounded by a mudhole and that should be a consideration to some extent. It has sat there unused and no one has had a plan to fix it up. I advocate letting it go. This was in the notable catagory because it was one of the first miners cottages made of brick. It would be too hard to build around that building. Larry: We are becoming an extremely contemporary area on the premise that this is better. Jere: This building is low in profile. The Floradora and Explore Bookstore buildings do not look anything like the original buildings that were there. Perhaps it would be good to have this new building in the midst of the old, it would make the old look more intersting. The building cannot be moved, so ~at is not a possibility. I feel that J.R. came up with a more handsome structure, one that is more viable in the commercial area, thatn doing the wrap around. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Bill Clark: I think we should deal with the point today, do we think this building should remain a notable structure, pass that on to the Council and let them decide. The public Hearing is closed. Larry makes the motion to grant conceptual approval of this building as presented but it would be pointed out to the Council that there is a structure there which has been classified notable under the Historic designation and that the Committee would be opposed to the demolition of that structure should the GMP allotment for this year not include the right to build this building. Terry seconds, all in favor excepting Richard. Motion carried. The review for changes in approved plans for Dr. Wesson at 605 W. Main was tabled and will be on the next agenda. The resolution on the Skiers Chalet park area was approved in the motion made by Nick and seconded by Richard. All in favor. The Resolution recommending the designation of structures at: 200 E Bleeker, 20]-207 S. Galena and 330 E. Main passed on a motion made by Terry, seconded by Richard,all in favor. The Courthouse Resolution to designate it as a state historic structure was passed on the motion made by Larry snd seconded by Richard. All in favor. The next meeting is scheduled for September 29th. Meeting adjorned.