Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19771122RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves A regular meeting of the Historical Preservation Committee was held at 1:00 on November 22, 1977 in the Council Chambers of City Hall. Thcse members present were Lary Groen, Norm Burns, Jerry Michaels, Terry End, and Gaard Moses. 'Also present is John Stanford of the Planning Office. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OLD BUSINESS ASPEN GROVE BUILDING Gaard Moses discussed the minutes of the previous meeting, and the Resolution for Sign Code changes. He asked for clarification from Stanford on the reco~ended change of size in signs in the Main Street Historic District. Stanford explained that we are just asking for the Council to agree to change it. Exactly what change will be made will be addressed later. Moses also stated that plexiglass signs should be outlawed in the sign code, which they are not presently. There have been shop owners express a desire to use this type of sign. Stanford stated that we would have a chance to look at this at a later date, when we go into more detail on the changes to the Code. Ms. End moved to approve the minutes as presented, seconded by Michaels. All in favor, motion carried. Resolution from the HPC on the recommended changes to the Sign Code will probably be addressed at Council on November 28, 1977. Stanford had nothing to report on the Boat Tow, he did relate to the members the subject that came up at the last Council meeting, where Steve Knowlton and the Vail Ski Museum requested to use the Boat Tow, which was turned down by Council. The Birkwood Associates are here today for the public hearing and Growth Management ~an scoring of their proposed project on Cooper Street, above the existing Pinocchio's, ~inerstube building. David Hauter is present as the architect to answer any further questions the members may have. The two areas of major concern which have been shown by the HPC were, how the fenestration in the brickwork above the entry doors on the west facade, the window arrange- ment above Pinocchios at the new second floor and how the arch on that window was to be handled. The members felt the brick over the entry dorrs should not look like a false window, and they have eliminated the fenestration at the head of the door, making this a recessed panel that excenuates the vertical effect. The window on the second story, east facade has been eliminated. The masonary arch has been raised to the height of the windows adjacent to it. The plane that the arch sits in is recessed 4" from the outermost surface of the brick. The metal facia is going to be handled by having a bronze anodozied trim on top and a bronze anodozied trim below with a clean metal facia that runs continiously from east and west points all the way around the garden. The sample of that material was presented by the applicant. Hauter went over the colors to be used in the metal. Upstairs signage was discussed, and Hauter explained that in terms of individual shops their signs would be on their display windows applied to the glass in an approved fashion. At the street level there will be a building directory in the garden and another floor Historic Preservation Committee November 22, 1977 Regular Meeting PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL plan rendering to show people exactly where the stores are. The subject of signage was discussed by the members. Their concern is that shops back off the street do not put over the sidewalk signs out in front. This could end up in a similar situation as the Country Flower area, or Berkley Aspen. The same colors will be used as previously presented, and the brick will match the existing. Hauter presented a sample of the brick to the members. Trash storage in the rear of the building was discussed. There will be a recessed trash area on the second floor, and the trash pickup will be in- creased to daily to aleviate any problem. The planters on the sidewalk in front of this building were dis- cussed, as they narrow down the usable part of the sidewalk. Woods would like to see them moved, as there is nothing attractive planted in them and they just obstruct the sidewalk. The members also would like to see them moved. The paving in the front of the building was discussed, and if the mall goes into that area they would probably use the same paving as the mall to make it all contigious. They do not anticipate putting down a brick sidewalk in front of that building. Moses stated that the lights should be a proper color. Steven Marcus put in mercury vapor lights in this Aspen Plaza Building and they are the wrong color. Stanford made some recommendations for conditions under which this application may be approved. 1) Any future expansion of the building be under the existing building 2) Any addition of glass areas on the second floor deck come before HPC and P & Z if necessary for view plane, awnings come before HPC. and 3) if the mall does not go in, and any paving is done, it be done with HPC approval. Woods stated that the only condition he does not agree with is the first. He feels that with the GMP and HPC review should be sufficient to restrict any unwanted development. Stanford stated that this is making a final architectural statement. Michaels stated he disagreed with Stanford on this condition. Stanford explained that they are trying to protect the garden area and any overshadowing of that area. Groen suggested stating "that any future additions to the building res- pect the existing garden," but Stanford does not feel this is restrictive enough. Woods stated to the members that they are as concerned as the HPC for achieving an excellent design and a great deal of hard work and con- cern for that area has been taken into consideration in developing this area. Groen opened the public hearing. There were no public comments, and the public hearing was closed. Groen asked for a motion on this project. Michaels moved that the project be approved with the following conditions: 1) that any future expansion of the building not encroach into the existing garden area 2) any future development on the second floor with regard to glassed in areas and awnings come before HPC and if necessary P & Z for approval 3) any future plans for paving the front area come before HPC for approval. Groen called for discussion. Burns suggested adding to this motion: All signs on the second floor shops be confined to a ~ign on the ~indow. Also t~at all exterior lighting be of an incandescent nature. This generated some discussion from the members. They did not generally agree on the sign restriction. After much discussion, it was decided to request that the applicant come back, after they see exactly what the plan for signs would be, with a detailed plan for signs on that building. Moses, in response to the lighting, stated that all exterior lighting should be of an incandescent RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Historic Preservation Committee Regular Meeting November 22, 1977 nature, below 3400 degree KLVN. Therefore two more conditions were made to the motion made by Michaels. Burns seconded this motion, all in favor, motion carried with approval given on the five conditions. The members adjourned to give this project their GMP ratings. The members went over individually their score for this project under the G~ guidelines. Ms. End gave gen- erally all 3's; Burns gave all 3's with a 2 on archi- tectural detail because of the balcony rails; Groen gave 3's on everything; Moses gave 3's on everything except the architectural; Michaels gave 3's on every- thing. The average score from the HPC on the Aspen Grove Building was 14.4. The maximum points that can be alloted to each project is 15. Stanford reviewed the planning office scores and what their concerns were. The meeting adjourned at 2:25. Ellen Atkins~ Deputy City Clerk