HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19801125Historic Preservation Committee
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
November 25, 1980
100 Leaves
The Historic Preservation Committee held a regular meeting on Tuesday, November
25, 1980 in the Aspen City Council Chambers. Members present were Jon Seigle,
Gaard Moses, Mona Frost, Richard Cicero, Georgeann Waggaman, Terry End and
William Clark. Sunny Vann, Planning Staff representative, was also present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mona Frost said the minutes of October 28, 1980
read "Mona Clark" instead of Mona Frost. On the
minutes of October 14, 1980 the word "alleviate"
was mispelled like "eleviate." On page two of
those same minutes, they read "memberTs'' when
they should have read "members'" because there was
more than one. Also, "seperate" was mispelled when
it should be "separate." Also on the third page
of the October 1~, 1980, Mona said she was confused
as to some wording. The minutes read "He said there
was an overall opinion that it looked like the
Floradora and the people from the Floradora said
there was no way anyone would like that because there
were already too many big buildings on Main Street."
Mona said there was no one present at the meeting
who was representative of the Floradora so they
could not have said that. The secretary for the
meeting explained that it was to be read as Welton
Anderson saying that the people from the Floradora
had said that.
Mona also pointed out that on the minutes of Novembe~
3, 1980, it read "...to keep the building from
falling in based on some legal excavation that took
place a few weeks ago." They should have said "...
illegal excavation..." Richard Cicero made a motion
to approve the minutes as corrected. Terry End
seocnded the motion. Ail in favor, motion carried.
OLD BUSINESS
Inventory of Historic
Sites and Structures
Since the representatives of Prospector Lodge and
Arthur's Chinese Restaurant were not yet present,
the Committee agreed to go ahead with this present-
ation.
Vera Kirkpatrick and John Stanford said they were
here to present the results of the survey they
conducted for the City of Aspen on all of the
historic structures within the city limits. John
showed a map of the City on which all historic
structures were displayed. He said there is a total
of 293 historic structures but he said the number
would vary a little bit as they do the last of their
findings. Sume structures will fall out and there
may be one or two put back into a category. He
said the total number of structures have been
divided into one of three categories: notable
significance, excellent significnance and exceptiona~
significance.
There are 233 structures in the first category, 32
structures in the second category and 28 structures
in the highest category. Most of the structures
that are in the higher category are in what is now
known as the historic district in Aspen.
Vera said she wanted to review again the various
purposes of the inventory. Primarily it is just
a record of historic sites and structures, keeping
in mind that a lot of these notable, excellent and
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
and exceptional things in the categories are sites.
Although everyone tends to think of these as
structures, there are a lot of sites that are also
very siginficant. She said they documented any
site or structure that existed before 1940. They
have, however, sovered some areas that are younger
in years~ such as the Aspen Institute because of
its role that it played in the development of Aspen.
Also, the ski lodge areas.
Vera said they did a photographic documentation and
followed it up with determining the ownership to
arrive at the historical significance of the
structures. That meant going back and not just
determining the original owner but all of the
various owners. She said that because of the variou:
phases in the history of Aspen there are some
significant owners in varying years, particularly
in the 1940~s and 1950's. She said the figure was
llke John said at about 293 plus or minus, but this
did not include all of the various enclosures such
as cemetarles, which would bring it to well over
340 sites and structures within Aspen City limits.
Vera said some of the sites and structures she wante~
to speak about are other than the standard commercial
buildings and residences. For example, the Durant
Mine and various other buildings that are still
standing, the Maroon Creek Bridge, the Midland
Right-of-Ways, the Rio Grande Right-of-Way, the
Koch Lumber Buildings, which are no longer on their
original site, The Moon Saw Mill, which is just
a little outside of the city limits, Triangle Park,
which was known in the 1890's as the public square
and other than Hallum Lake, it's the only park
as we know it today, present in Aspen. Also
Lift One, the Bull Wheel at Willoughby Park, Tower
#1 and #2, the former electric power plants which
are now the Visual Arts Center and the city shop,
the remaining foundation of the Aspen Brewery, which
is just a little bit outside of the limits, the
original irrigation ditches, which need further
documentation as it was critical in the early
development of Aspen and has once again been pretty
critical in maintaining the trees in Aspen. Also,
various street scenes which will speak to mainly
define the visual character of Aspen.
This is all part of the photographic documentation.
Vera said the second purpose of the inventory is to
be helpful in the planning process to evaluate
proposals. Thirdly, the inventory has given an
idea as to which structures and sites are eligible
for National Register designation. Those which
would be eligible would be in the exceptional
category. She said a copy of the forms which are
submitted to the state would be given to the
Historical Society and a copy will be available in
the Planning Office. Hopefully, this inventory
will be ongoing and more information will be added
to each individual structure and maybe the categorie~
will change from notable on up.
Jon Seigle asked if this would be in the form of
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
a published document. John Stanford said there
would be report that will basically describe the
information that resulted of the survey. He said
it would be more of a file. Sunny Vann said the
Planning Office would have it as a reference copy
for reviewing applications for proposing structures.
He said it would be beneficial in the Main Street
analysis.
Gaard Moses asked if they took into consideration
any buildings that are no longer standing. John
said no. Moses then asked if they are well preserved
in the archives, and John said they were if there
are photographs of the buildings. Gaard then asked
where the Aspen Brewery used to be. John said it
was of Red Mountain Road.
Jon Seigle said that he was sure that the Committee
and everyone else would get some use out of this
and it is a very helpful inventory.
William Clark asked Stanford who makes the move to
register the building with the National Register.
John said that the owner does. Bill then asked
what benefits the owner gets by having the building
registered and Stanford said that if it'~s a non-'
residential building, there are certain tax benefits.
Clark asked what limitations would be imposed by beint
recorded as a national landmark and Stanford said
there would be no limitations, just prestige. He
also said the building could not be torn down until
an environmental impact study is done to determine
whether the building should be torn down.
Mona Frost said this was strictly a personal thing,
but she was unhappy when they changed Center Street
to Garmisch Street because Garmiseh had become
Aspen~s sister city. She would still like to see
Garmisch Street changed back to Center Street and put
Garmisch somewhere else. Center Street had been
so named since the town was founded and it is the
dividing line between West Aspen and East Aspen.
Jon Seigle said he thought the committee should make
a resolution to change the name back to Center Street
Mona made a motion that the Historic Preservation
Committee send a resolution to Council to change
Garmi~ch Street back to Center Street as it was
historically designated and move Garmisch to some
new street in Aspen. Terry End seconded the motion.
Georgeann said ~f the name was changed, it might
be of help to tourists today to help them get around,
since Center Street would divide East and West Aspen.
Sunny said he would draft the resolution and bring
it back to the HPC for them to look at. Ail in
favor of the motion; motion carried.
PROJECT REVIEW
Arthur's Chinese Restaurant
Public Hearing and Final Welton said the HPC had requested to see a more
Approval three dimensional depiction of what the revised
Arthur's was going to be. He said at the last
meeting he presented the entire history over the
past three years. Welton showed his new plans which
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
received preliminary approval at the last meeting.
Richard Cicero said he has a problem with a gravel
roof such as was done on the antique store on the
corner of Main. Welton said they haven't painted
that yet. Richard then said the HPC would have to
make it conditional that they paint the roof. He
asked if there was any way to do it in metal or
asphalt or something. He thinks it would be in more
context with the building. Georgeann said she
thought standing seam would catch attention even
more than gravel.
Jon Seigle asked what the proposal was for color on
the building. Welton said, as he has discussed in
the past, they would like to leave Arthur's the same
three colors, basically, which would be maroon red,
cream color and yellow. Jon said that would only
work if they hide that link really well.
Jon Seigle then opened the meeting up to the public.
Norm Burns said that now thatthe ARI Building has
been moved, there is a hole in the lot the building
used to be on. He wondered if there was always
going to be a hole there or what.
Jon said they had made representations to the
committee that the hole was going to be filled in
and sodded over. Sunny said they would also be cominl
through a conditional use process for expansion of
the restaurant and the Planning Office said they
were also going to address that adjacent lot.
Mona said David Moss had told her they had had to
sell that lot because of the delay in building.
Therefore, she believed the committee would have to
find out from the new owner what he plans to do.
jon said it seems to him that the lot would not be
under the HPC~s jurisdiction now beeause there is a
new owner.
Sunny asked David Moss if the lot is now under
separate ownership. David said the land is now
teehanically owned by Hans Cantrup and he has no
lease on it. Jon asked who owns the land under
Arthur's and David said it is divided right down
the middle. The property is still legally under
June Cantrup's name, that property where the present
Arthur's is, and the property where the ARI Building
is now located is under Hans Cantrup's ownership but
Moss has a lease on that property for 50 years.
Jon then asked who owns the property where the ARI
was formally located and Moss said Hans Cantrup
owns it and there is no lease on the property.
Seigle then said he believes that one of the applicant
in this case would have to be Hans Cantrup. He
said the applicants were neuturing the committee's
ability to deal with the whole project. Welton
said that between now and the P & Z hearing that
could be ironed out so theme are no further delays.
Sunny had a suggestion as to how they have handled
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
other development applications in the community.
He said that if the applicant does not own the
property but it is a joint application on behalf
of the proposed developer and the underlying property
owner, in this case the proposed expansion of
Arthur's is under two ownerships, theoretically
this should be an application that is co-signed by
the owner of the other parcel, which is Hans Cantrup.
There should be also a condition in this application
as to improvements on the other property for approval
of the project.
Bill Clark wanted to know why the committee would
have any jurisdiction on the other lot. Sunny said
it was because it is one parcel of land and there
is no property line. If Hans owns portion of the
land under half of the restaurant and he also owns
the other part of the land, it is not two parcels
in the eye of the city. Clark asked if that pertains
since David Moss is the leasor.
Jon said that all he cared about was to deal with
this for the final time. He said if the owner could
agree to make improvements on the adjoining lot by
spring, everything would be fine. However, he didn't
think that agreement would be possible because the
owner of that lot is not present.
Norm Burns said the hole and the six foot high fence
should be looked at today because it was created by
actions the HPC had done before, by allowing the
ARIBuildlng to be moved.
Jon agreed 100% but he said there was a question in
his mind as to what could be done today because
they guy who owns that piece of property is not
present.
Sunny said they could do this: if the committee
approves of the design, they could approve it as
a final submission contingent upon whatever condition~
they want to put on it with the additional stipulatior
that prior to issuance of the building permit the
applicant must demonstrate an ability to solve
this problem since it is part of the original over-
all concept that the committee is reviewmng. This
puts the responsibility on the applicant to demon-
strate the ability to solve the problem to the
committee's satisfaction.
Richard Cicero said if the minutes were looked at
from the meeting where they approved moving the
ARI Building, there was a condition that the hole
would be filled and sodded over or landscaped.
Bill Clark wanted to make a suggestion, if it's not
already done. He suggested that the conditions on
an approval be written on the face of the plans
that are stamped by the committee. Sunny said they
are not written on the plans but they are incorpor-
ated in the material that goes with them. Bill Clark
said those materials could be lost and Welton Andersor
said he thinks Clayton Meyring gets upset when he has
to go back and research on conditions.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
Prospector Lodge
COMMITTEE COMMENTS
The public hearing was closed at this time.
Sunny said he would recommend approval subject to
Welton and the applicant being able to demonstrate
to the satisfaction of the committee an ability to
resolve the problem on the adjacent lot. However,
they should not stamp it until this ability is shown.
Jon also wanted to add that he thought they should
make it conditional upon approval of the colors.
Jon also said that all the committee needs is a
letter from Hans saying he agrees that if the lot
is left vacant they will fill the hole in or lan~ -
scape the property or whatever. Therefore, the
committee delegated Jon to receive this letter and
stamp the plans.
Richard made a motion to approve the design with the
changes noted on the face of the plans and conditiona[
upon filling in the now vacant ARI Building lot and
sodding it over. Sunny wanted to add that they
approve it contingent on the fact that it was sub-
mitted as a three lot solution and it is to be filled
in and sodded; also, they must demonstrate that it's
still a three lot solution and if that's going to
change then they must come back and explain the
changes. Also added to the motion was the condition
that the lot be filled in by June 1, 1981.
Georgeann Waggaman seconded the motion. Ail in favor~
motion carried.
Sunny reminded the committee this had been approved
on condition that some modifications be made on the
stair tower and they come back and show the HPC
their solutions.
Dave Gibson said they were before the HPC for prelim-
inary approval on August 4, 1980 and again on Sept.
23, 198Q for final approval. There were a couple
of concerns voiced by members: 1) They specifically
wanted some changes in the stair tower 2) Another
concern Gibson has addressed although it was not
specifically asked for was the large willow tree was
moved.
Gibson presented the same drawings the committee
looked at before with a small overlay to indicate
the changes that were made.
Jon said Gibson did a nice job on the changes.
Georgeann made a motion to approve the revision on
the Prospector Lodge. Mona Frost seconded the
motion. Ail in favor, motion carried.
Richard Cicero asked if the Wheeler Commission would
let the HPC look at their plans. Sunny said he
isn't even sure where the Wheeler Commssion is at
this point. He is not familiar with the status of
the project. Richard said he would like to know
what is going on because it is in the historic
district. Sunny said he would check on the status
of it and report back to the committee.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
Mona Frost asked what happened to the painting of
the sign by Gaard Moses on the Brand Building.
Sunny remembered that he had said it would be there
by this time. Gaard said there is a budget discre-
pency.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 PM.
Robin R. Berry
Depnty City Clerk