Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19780314RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS A regular meeting of the Historical Preservation Committee was held at 1:00 on Tuesday, March 14, 1978 in the Council Chambers of City Hall. Those members present were Lary Groen, Norm Burns, Terry End, Mona Frost, Jon Siegle, Gaard Moses, and Planning Office representative John Stanford. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the last meeting were reviewed and approved by the members. PROJECT REVIEW LA TORTUE The Tom Thumb is being reviewed today for ~'' Growth Management ~Plah~pOintl.a!loc~tiOn.' The applicants, represented by Copeland, Hagman, and Yaw architects, have made presentations to the HPC on two other occasions, and today they are presenting a model of the proposed building. Bill Lukes again expalined the application to the members and reviewed the model. Since the application has been reviewed at length by the members before, he asked for any questions they may have at this point. The proposed trim color was presented as railway exp- ress green; the brick colors were presented in block form showing the different shades of red/pink. From a distance the varriations will blend in very well. There will not be any heavily tinted mortar. There are awnings on the interior court areas, but Yaw stated that these would be removed and the area opened up more. The lighting inside is very subtle with the minimum necessary for safety and most of the light coming from the shops themselves. The air conditioner will be in a 2% ft. encasement on the roof, but will not show above the parapet. Snowmelting was discussed, and the roof solar collectors. There are no signs shown on the model, but Lukes reviewed the proposed placement with the members. On the North side of the old building would be one site, on the court side adjacent to the entrance or somewhere around the Hyman street entrance would be another. Reduced planting could probably make the court area larger than it is now. Yaw reviewed what he felt were the good points of the project. ~his project is being reviewed for HPC approval and GMP point allocation. The planning office has sub- mitted to the members a memo on the expansion of this building. The planning office is recommending denial of this application 1) because the proposed expansion while visually similar to the existing building is not compatible with the objectives and general character of the historic district 2) the agreement to remove the experior display of merchandise is not enforcable by the City 3) that any expansion of this property should be done in the context of a Master Plan for the entire property. The HPC had previously discussed with Hicks the possib- ility of having an agreement in which they would agree not to place merchandise outside the building and use the proposed expansion area for that purpose. Groen felt this would be setting a precedent for expansion of other spaces that are not noted for their comp- atability to the historic district. He strongly urged denial by the committee. Siegle, however, disagreed and feels this is a HUTCH dimenious problem. The economics of what the HPC is asking as a whole from this applicant is un- realistic. The applicant has no control over the placement of the Chuck Wagon (which HPC has asked be removed) nor can they promise to improve the other properties in that area that are somewhat below standard. This was discussed at length by the members. Hicks explained to the members that at this time the Hydes, who own that property are seperated, and it ~is not ]znown which will end up owning that property after the settlement. Groen, in view of this, pointed out that one consideration the HPC must have is that it would be unrealistic to expect the new owner, if the property is sold, to abide by any agreement that Hicks and the HPC may make at this time. It was also pointed out that since the lease for the building is for a year at a time, if the building is ever sold and the Hydes took over the property the HPC would have no control over their putting the merchandise back outside. At the last meeting, however, Hicks had stated that they had negotiated a five year lease with the Hydes. Groen opened the public hearing. The owner of the General Store, Jerry Long, is present and stated that he felt, as a business owner on Durant Street, that this area is not as promoted as, say the mall area, by the City, and therefore is "underdeveloped". There have not been many improvements in that area in quite a while. Any improvement would better that what exists in that area now. Groen closed the public hearing. Siegle feels that even though the HPC is not able to put a covenant on this project, Hick~ has given his word they will abide by the wishes of the HPC. If they do not, this will certainly hamper their ever coming back to the HPC for any type of approval of any further expansion. Groen entertained a motion to deny the application, but there was no motion to this effect. Siegle moved to approve the application with the stipulation that they cease their outdoor merchandising. Burns seconded this motion. Burns further amended this motion to include that the outside be landscaped and sodded and that the expansion definitely house the merchandise, that the colors would match the existing and that only under extreme duress would this com- mittee review further expansion on this property. The members voted, with all in favor, except Groen who voted against. This application is for a 500 ft. additon to the Hutch on Hopkins Street. This could not be s~en from the street. After the last meeting the members held an on-site- inspection of theproperty. There will not be any windows on the west side of the building. The height of the expansion is 28ft, which includes the parapet. The members reviewed the plans with Gayle Bryant who is representing the applicant. Groen discussed the plans and application with the members. He feels that this addition is just "tacking on" space, and is not compatible with the remainder of the building. Siegle agrees with this philosophy, and feels that just because the addition does not have any visual impact there is no reason not to make the addition compatible with the existing building. Groen suggested tabling this project for the time being, they can still go through with the GMP process, but the HPC would like to see some improvements in the plans. If the HPC denied this application at this point the applicant could not re-apply for another year. The HPC is not completley dissatisfied with the application but is not comfortable enough to give it approval at this time. ..,,=;o.~,,.u.,.,..,.; ~o.,,~;,,,,~. R E C O R D O F P R O C E E D I N G S Historic Preservation Committee Regular Meeting March 14, 1978 Public Hearing GROWTH MANAGEMENT POINTS Tom Thumb GMP Points - LaTortue GMP Points Hutch GMP Points Burns further discussed the drawings and plans with the members stating that there were some items on the drawings that may not be approved by the building department, such as the toilet area size and that these could possibly change the character of the addition. He would like to see elevation drawings showing the addition and the existing structure. Ms. Frost moved to table this application until final drawings in a design more compatible with the building could be submitted by the applicant. This generated discussion both with the members and other applicants because the project can continue through the CMP review process without final drawings, when other applicants have spent a great deal of time and money to develop an application that is complete and explicit. The question was raised as to whether a building application must receive HPC approval, not just review, before it can be forwarded on to the P & Z for their GMP review. Stanford left the meeting to obtain the Growth Management Ordinance. Groen opened the public hearing. There were no comments from the public and the hearing was closed. Groen entertained a motion to table action on the applicant by the Hutch contingent upon submission of complete drawings of a more compatible nature showing more detail of the overall project and elevations. Ms. Frost so moved, seconded by Burns. All in favor, motion carried. The Tom Thumb building was reviewed first for the allocation of Gb~ points. Siegle withdrew from the scoring, stating that he represents one of the tenants of that building. Stanford added that if~_a member must withdraw from scoring on one project they must also refrain from scoring on any of the proposed projects because of possible conflict of interest. Groen 11.3; Frost 14.5; Burns 13.9; End 13.5; Moses 13.9. Overall HPC score 13.4 Groen 4; Frost 9; Burns 6.7; End 7.7; Moses 6.5. Overall HPC score 6.7 Groen 4; Frost 8.5; Burns 7; End 9.8; Moses 4. Overall HPC score 6.6 ANOTHER GALLERY Preliminary Dave Streetman is present to represent an application by Another Gallery for the addition of a show window. Footage of the finger mall is 14ft. This app- lication also includes an application by the Deli who would like to have a rail similar to the wrought iron fence in front of Mine Company. They feel this would make it seem less like a alley. They are also going to panel the outside of the Deli to match what is in front of the Aspen Steak Company. The proposed windows would cut out 20" of the 14ft. wide alley. The only light would be in the ceiling of the window. The Planning Office asked if the owners of the Deli are aware of the application and what it entails for them. Streetman stated that they were, and their signatures do appear on the plans. The windows on the front of the building are dark brown and the Preliminary/ Final approval added windows would be the same. The walls are stucco. Groen feels the windows look "tacked on" and there is no support under them, and that they do not make an architectural statement. The window extends 7' up from grade. Stanford stated that Streetman is asking for final as well as preliminary approval at this time, and he does not feel that an addition of this nature would require a public hearing. The fence proposed will be wrought iron to match the Mine Company, the awning will be yellow, but there will not be any posts supporting the awning, which will be a bonnet shape. The lighting will be in- candescent placed in the ceiling of the cases. The cases will not be mirrored in any way. There will be "Aspenique Jewelers" printed on the canopy instead of a hanging sign which is there now. This application does not require a building permit. Groen would like to address the awning and cases only at this point, instead of including the fence for the Deli. Burns moved to give preliminary and final approval on the addition of the two cases, based on the following conditions: That awning caps be put on the cases and that the farthest north case be centered on the two windows, and that the awning be approved over the doorway. Moses seconded, with all in favor. Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 3:55. Ellen L. Atkins, Deputy City Clerk