Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19760413RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Reqular Meeti n.q Hi stori cal Preservation Committee April 13~ 1976 Meeting was called to order by Chairman Lary Groen at 1:15 p.m. with members Norm Burns, Mona Frost, and Florence Glidden. Also present was John Stanford from the Planning Department and Clayton Meyring from the Building Department. Approval of Minutes Burns made a motion to approve the minutes of March 30, 1976 with the following corrections: Page 1, paragraph three, line 18, architect should be "architecture"; page l, paragraph three, line thirty, after along Main Street add "through Historic Zoning"; page 1, paragraph four, line eight, add "look" after Main Street; page 3, fifth paragraph, line one, the word "new" should be before antique. The motion was seconded by Glidden. All in favor, motion carried. Groen mentioned there was a request from Birkwood Associates to be put on the agenda. Burns made a motion to put Birkwood Associates on the agenda; seconded by Glidden. All in favor, motion carried. New Business Stanford mentioned the planning office had made a report at the City Council meeting on the progress of the Main Street Historic District. Stanford passed a memo out which identified a schedule with the proceeding of the Designation process. By the middle of May, Stanford hopes to have the completion of the historic inventory and development of the specific proposal for historic designation of Main Street. After the completion of the historic inventory, it will be presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission followed by a joint resolution which will set a date for the public hearing together with the Planning and Zoning Commission. The joint public hearing would be held by the end of June, with a joint report to Council and Council setting the date for their public hearing around July 15. Hopefully taking action by the middle of August. Procedures for Pre-Application Stanford explained the procedures that must be taken for pre-application approval. Any building designated "historic" or being built in the historic district, before the BuildSng Inspector can issue a building permi~ the applicant must come before the HPC for approval of anything that represents a change to the exterior of the structure, or any demolition or moving of structures within the historic district. At the pre-application stage, 3 copies of drawings must be submitted of what is being proposed to the Building Inspector. At the pre-application meeting, if the change is minor to the exterior, final approval can be given at that stage. However, anything that is more substantial requires a public hearing, because the Historic District is of public interest. After the public hearing, the HPC can give the final approval. Aspen Historical Society "Carria9e House" This is a request for an addition of a "carriage house" behind the Stallard and is an expansion of the existing museum. Stanford showed drawings of the Carriage House being proposed. Mr. Morse explained the building will be used for fire equipment, antique clothing, and the humidified area in the basement will be for the '!Aspen Times," also a research area. For edification on the plan, George Vicenzi has requested the carriage house move south ten feet and west five feet to insure a better view for Mr. Vicenzi. Stanford mentioned the Planning Office had no recommendations, except for the HPC to set a public hearing for the first meeting in May, which is May 11. This wout:d allow for a 15 day publication notice. Motion Frost made a motion to approve the pre-application approval for the Aspen Historical Society for a Carriage House, with a public hearing set for May 11, 1976. The motion was seconded by Glidden. All in favor, motion carried. -1- Aspen Historical Preservation April 13, 1976 La Cocina Final Review Motion Birkwood Assoc. Tom Mix Final Review Motion Demolition of two houses on Hopkins behind Bullocks pre-application There has not been a publication notice for the final approval of La Cocina. Therefore, the HPC can give tentative final approval, pending the formalities of the public hearing which the Planning Department is also requesting to be set on May 11, 1976. Nick Lebby presented the plans for the restaurant. Lebby mentioned the siding for the restaurant will be stucco because of the fire code. Frost moved to give tentative final review, pending the May 11, 1976 public hearing; seconded by Burns. All in favor, motion carried. Stanford explained that when tile pre-application approval for the Tom Mix Building was granted by the Con~ission, everyone thought that it was also granted for final approval. Itowever, the motion stated it was only for pre-application approval and a public hearing wasn't set for final approval. Hauter asked the Board to look at the application again to maybe consider the proposal as minor, thus being able to grant final approval at this hearing. Stanford mentioned it will only be an addition to the building and actually won't be affecting the exterior of the building itself. Burns moved to make a motion to re-consider the platform planter extension to Tom Mix Building; seconded by Frost. All in favor, motion carried. Burns moved that due to the minor nature of the Tom Mix Building extension, pre-application and final approval be granted not requiring a public hearing of the plans as presented; seconded by Frost. All in favor, motion carried. Stanford explained the area that is being talked about. The location is across Hopkins Street and one of the houses is the house closest to Bullocks which is a small wooden structur and a brick framed structure to the east of Bullocks. Peter Van Domelen was present to represent the applicant. The request is for the two structures to be demolished or removed. The wood house is in a state of deterioration and possibly cannot be removed because it may fall apart. However, if anyone is interested in re-locating the structure, they may do so. There are no plans, at present, for the use of the premises and would not be necessary that a building permit be requested for the removal and demolition. The eventual plans is to work with the HPC to put a commercial structure in that area. The con~ercial structure would be of the same character of the neighborhood. The present buildings do not conform with the existing buildin9 code or fire code in this district. Also the use as residential structures is not in harmony with the commercial core zoning of the buildings. Van Domelen mentioned the purchaser is acquiring lot D which has the wood framed house on it; lot E has the brick framed house; and F is a vacant lot. Frost mentioned her sister owned one of tile buildings; and would like to talk to her sister before she takes any action. Frost mentioned the Historical Society would like to receive the building because they are working on the old buildings up Independence pass and the material from the old buildings would be perfect for that project. Stanford stated the planning department's recommendation. They would like to have conditional permission be granted for demolition of both structures; with the following conditions: 1) the planning department would like to have a preliminary conference with the people that will be designing the new structure. The reason is because it is adjacent to the most historic block, being the block City Hall is on. The Planning Department would like the building that replaces the two structures be sythentic with the fact it is across from the most historically authentic blocks in downtown Aspen. -2- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Regular Meeting Historical Preservation Committee April 13, 1976 Motion Aspen Grove (Wienerstube) Pre-application Motion The Planning Department prefers the building to be of a contemporary architecture that is in scale and sympathy as far as materials and scale and height with the older buildings. 2) The planning department would request the purchaser to maintain and protect any vegetation from sight for example the tree in front of the brick house, since that is an historical element in downtown Aspen. Glidden moved to grant pre-application approval for demoli- tion of the framed building and the brick building if the materials and bricks are used or given in an historic event; and to schedule a public hearing for May 11, 1976. The motion was seconded by Burns. All in favor, motion carried. Molny explained that this is a pre-application review to remodel the first floor level of the Wienerstube, also called Aspen Grove, and to add a second floor to the building. Molny went through the drawings that he had of the Wiener- stube building with the members. Molny explained the second floor of the building will be built with triangular shaped buildings. Molny did not have drawings of the second floor and said if they are given pre-application approval they would have drawings for the public hearing. Burns made a motion to set a public hearing and review of the project on May 11, 1976; and to have the preliminary review postponed until the next meeting. The motion was seconded by Frost. Groen asked that the City Attorney clarify if the above stated motion is a legal procedure. Ail in favor of the motion. Motion carried. Burns made a motion to adjourn at 3:05 p.m. Libby M. ~lym, 'D&p~y City Clerk