Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20000412ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, APRIL 12, 2000 Chairperson, Suzannah Reid, called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Members in attendance were Mary Hirsch, Susan Dodington, Gilbert Sanchez, Lisa Markalunas, Jeffrey Halferty and Rally Dupps. Christie Kienast, Heidi Friedland and Melanie Roschko were excused. Staff in attendance was Historic Preservation Officer, Amy Guthrie; Chief Deputy Clerk, Kathy Strickland and City Planner, Nick Lelack. MOTION: Mary moved to approve the minutes of February 23rd and March 22, 2000; second by Susan. All in favor, motion carried. Lisa recused herself on the Aspen Grove Cemetery Amy recused herself on 920 W. Hallam Street WESTSTAR BANK- MILL & MAIN Amy informed the HPC that she typically reviews sign permits herself and Sara Oates reviews the lettering. This is a non-historic building in an Historic District. The proposal is to have cut out letters attached to the second floor of the building and staff cannot find examples in town where we typically have signs at that level or lighted. It has a build-board effect and the letters are to be lit up from behind. Stan Clausen presented for the applicant. The sign meets all the zoning requirements regarding size and lighting type. It is a metallic reverse pan channel letter which means the letter is just a hallow box. Within the hallow box they are proposing to have lighting that casts a soft glow on the wall and the letters themselves read as voids in the glow. The building has vertical piers dividing the window bays which terminate at the top of the fenestration and there is no place to do the WestStar bank sign except in the top area below the cornice line. The sign is 10.5 feet and will not extend more than two bays. Forest green is the logo color for the sign. Staff' s concern is the compatibility of the sign in the historic district. Gilbert inquired about available surface area in the front of the building for the sign rather than the Mill Street side. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF~ APRIL 12~ 2000 Start relayed that the kont area retains a sign that says Mill and Main building. Comments: The majority of the board members felt that the lighting as proposed was inappropriate in the historic district. Gilbert and other members felt that the build-board type sign should be located on the Main Street side of the building. Some members felt that the sign should be smaller. Other concerns were the prominence and size of the sign facing the Hotel Jerome. MOTION: Rally moved that the lighting proposal be restudied and possibly a different elevation could be explored. A color sample should be presented at the next meeting with the proper documentation; second by Susan. Motion carried 6-0. Yes vote: Rally, Gilbert, Mary, Susan, Suzannah, Lisa. 834 W. HALLAM ST. - EXTENSION OF CONCEPUTAL Amy relayed that conceptual was granted for an addition in 1995 and the code requires that you come back in a year for final or ask HPC for an extension. HPC has granted four extensions in the past and HPC is being requested to grant a fifth one tonight. With the pending adoption of the new guidelines staff is concerned with having a project extended out over that period of time with new standards and new members on the board. Michael Hull was sworn in. The reason for the delay is due to financial constraints. The partner, Earl Jones was bought out. Michael said he is very hopeful in getting something done this year. Amy relayed that the next step would be final review and at that time the board can ask for any kind of redesign or air their concerns. Members were sympathetic to the applicant's situation and supported the extension but relayed to the applicant that when he comes in for final the application would be looked at more aggressively with the new regulations. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF~ APRIL 12~ 2000 MOTION: Mary moved to grant a one year extension to the applicant with the proviso that when they do come in for final that the board will scrutinize the project aggressively; second by Rally. Yes vote: Rally, Gilbert, Suzannah, Mary, Susan, Lisa 920 W. HALLAM - Lot A - FINAL - PH Nick Lelack, planner relayed that the applicant addressed the concerns of the board, which was the addition of four feet to the south on the front elevation; the expanded closet on the west and east elevation, and the third issue was the complexity of the iron fence. The fourth issue was a concern of a window. In response to the concerns the architect eliminated the four feet in the front. The closet has been scaled down and incorporated in a shed roof. The fence has disappeared. The windows on the south and west elevations have also been redesigned. The scalloped shingles in the gabled roofs have been replaced with square shingles that match the roof. A shiplap design has been incorporated for most of the structure. Ron Robertson was sworn in. He relayed that the board had good points from the last meeting and they were addressed in the design. They feel they have captured the spirit of the little cottages. On the floor plan a wood burning stove was added and the vent replicates an historic one. The material is horizontal wood siding one by six. Also a one by twelve board and batten will be used and it will be painted. The siding is all wood and the roof is a cedar shingle. The vents are all wooden and the windows are clad. The grounding elements are wooden lattice. The public hearing was opened and closed. Comments: Suzannah requested that a landscape plan be submitted to staff. The changes to the north side of the house are favorable. Look at lowering the stovepipe on the south, as it is too prominent. Susan felt that the closet should be pulled in on drawing A2. In general all members felt that the project was good and the sizes of the house are compatible. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, APRIL 12, 2000 Rally said this project is how you do a project "the text book way". MOTION: Mary moved to approve the final significant development plan for 920 144. Hallam Street Lot.4 with the standard conditions outlined in the draft resolutions for historic preservation projects'..4 lan&cape plan nee& submitted and approved by the entire board. Motion second by Gilbert. Yes vote: Rally, Gilbert, Suzannah, Mary, Susan, Lisa. 920 W. HALLAM ST. - LOT B Nick Lelack presented that lot B is not as prominent as Lot A. At the last meeting the only concern was the window on the south elevation. The size of that window has been reduced. Clarifications: Ron said relative to the natural grade the ridge heights of both buildings are very close. The chair opened and closed the public hearing. The massing of the building was well received by the majority of the HPC members. Lisa had some concern of the material choice chosen on the garage. The garage materials should be very simple. MOTION: Mary moved to approval the final significant development for 920 144 Hallam Street Lot B with the standard conditions outlined in the draft resolutions for historic preservation projects' and with the condition that the lan&cape plan be submitted to the full board; motion second by Gilbert. Motion carried 5-1. Yes vote: Rally, Gilbert, Suzannah, Mary, Susan No vote: Lisa 110 W. MAIN STREET -HOTEL ASPEN - CONCEPTUAL - PH Sworn in were: Alfred Beadelston Augie Reno 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF~ APRIL 12~ 2000 Herb Klein Tim Semrau Amy relayed that the building is not historic but half of it is in the historic district. Through the last two meetings staff has expressed concerns about the third floor and the response has been directed to a flat roof to minimize the height. Ideas given to the applicant from the board were to break the addition into pieces. Staff cannot find that the proposal contributes or is appropriate or in scale with the historic district. Augie stated at the last meeting the majority of the HPC asked us to look at lowering the third floor roof. Some of the belvederes (a structure designed to command a view) were a concern. The sizes of the doors and transoms were also a concern. The two larger gables were reduced from 135.3 inches and now are 133.6 inches. That is a one foot nine inch difference which has been achieved by lowering the plate heights and changing the roof pitch from a six twelve to a five twelve. The plate height for the main body of the building is 7'9". The doors were eight feet and now are seven feet. The transoms were two feet six inches and now they are 18 inches. Augie said the height was 32.7 feet off the ground level to the ridge. The code allows us to go to 30 feet. The third floor has been brought down considerably. The belvederes break up the horizontality of the building. Herb Klein relayed that the recommended revisions were accomplished. He also relayed that staff has not supported the project. Tim Semrau said from his calculations it is 5 feet over the height limit at the mid point. Suzannah relayed as long as the representation is clear regarding the height that is what the board will base its decision on. Augie said the main ridge is higher than the ends. The building is three floors. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF~ APRIL 12~ 2000 Gilbert felt that breaking the ridge line would work but the only place you get a sense of that is if you are standing directly in the center and the existing building blocks that. A thought would be to "carve" away the other locations rather than the center location. Augie addressed the question and that particular area is an area that is a corridor and could be carved but the rest of the spaces are rooms. It could be done but it is not desirable from a hotel standard on an upper floor. If they went to a flat roof they could only go to a one and ½ to twelve pitch, which puts the parapet up to 30 inches. The chair opened the public hearing. Tim Semrau relayed that his measurement on the elevation was 31' or 32 feet. Augie said the ridge of the main body is at 32.7 ½. The two architectural gables are at 33.6 feet. The plate height is at 26 feet. Tim said he understands that they do not want to use the pool area but the height for the neighborhood is not appropriate. Views are greatly impacted. The scale and mass of the building is inappropriate. Rally said he is sympathetic to Aspen loosing the non $500 a night type of lodging. The project as submitted is larger than the surrounding residential character. Even some of the office buildings have maintained the residential scale, (the old Asia bldg.). This building will dwarf its neighbors. The third story component is monolithic even though the applicant has tried to break it up. Rally also has a concern about the alley view when people look up and only see stairs and corridors. There are a lot of buildings in Aspen that do not contribute to the experience of Main Street and this conceptual design does not add to that experience. Gilbert said the problem is bulk and mass and he was hopeful that some of the changes from the previous meeting would help solve the issues but they have not. Taking away the piece in the middle will not help the bulk. The 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF~ APRIL 12~ 2000 flat roof is probably the only way to resolve the issues of bulk and mass. The impact of that building to the pedestrian on Main Street is not real terrific at this time. A large part of the building is blocked by the existing building on the street. As you step away from the building the bulk and mass becomes more prevalent. There is nothing else on Main Street that goes uninterrupted and has that kind of ridgeline. Gilbert agreed with staff' s opinion that the project is not an enhancement to Main Street. The pedestrian view as you walk along Garmisch is an uninterrupted bulk with a massive wall and that does have an impact to the neighbors that do live on the other side. Mary interjected that the HPC is the only Board that looks at this project in terms of the Historic District and Historic preservation. The HPC board cares about historic preservation and that is why the members serve on the board. This project does nothing to enhance or contribute to the historic district or the experience that the tourist or those that live in this area expect. This is not an urban environment. P&Z may let you go over the height limit but they are not "charged" with caring about the historic district or historic preservation. The low number of parking space is not a major concern because a lot of the tourist comes in on planes and buses. There are too many minuses in this project to support it. Susan dittoed the other HPC members. She also reminded the board that the project does not meet the standards. One or two units would be more acceptable rather than seven units. The site has additional space that can be used for the expansion. She cannot support the proposal. Lisa felt that the height sits far enough back as is not a great concern and the belvederes add interest to the facade. When additional units are built on the Bleeker Street comer the historic impacts will be greater than what is proposed here on Main Street. The West End should have historic review in the future. Suzannah felt that the applicant has reduced the height and she is in the minority and could accept the proposal in its location. She feels Main Street is a good place for these kinds of things to happen and the board will probably be dealing with more of them in the future of Aspen if we are going to keep inexpensive hotel room etc. in Aspen. The east and west elevations are a concern and she prefers the simplest roof shapes without the belvederes. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF~ APRIL 12~ 2000 Suzannah also relayed that she has a concern with the flat roof but would go along with the majority of the board. Augie requested tabling one more time to talk to the ownership to see if they can live with a flat roof or not. If the flat roof is accomplished it will still be over the 25 foot minimum height requirement but would also lower the total height substantially. Gilbert said the issue of mass and bulk is only evident in the roofline because you do not see the lower part of the building from the street. The ridge is the issue. It is important to do something to avoid a continuous relentless ridge. You do not necessarily have to do a flat roof everywhere but if you could find strategic places where you do open it up so people can see the breaks in the mass along the roof, that would make a successful building. Gilbert felt that the overall height of the building is acceptable. Rally said he would like to see a scheme come back that isn't so monolithic. He also understands that we need the beds and he is not sure taking the courtyard away is the solution. The roof needs broken up but he is not advocating a flat roof either. Mary and Susan dittoed Gilbert. Everything needs scaled down. Amy stated her position regarding tabling. Many times at a certain point the board gets beaten down out of frustration and approve something that conceptually was not right in the first place. She feels the proposal does not meet the standards. MOTION: Gilbert moved to continue 110 W. Main Street until May 24th with the condition that the applicant restudy the bulk and mass issue of the roof as discussed at this meeting; second by Rally. Motion carried 6-0. Yes vote: Rally, Gilbert, Suzannah, Mary, Susan, Lisa Gilbert understands Amy's position but he also feels there could be a resolution on the design one more go around. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF~ APRIL 12~ 2000 ASPEN GROVE CEMETERY FENCE William Perry Ruth Brown Perry Jim Markaluns Amy relayed that the application is for a fence permit. It is for a new gateway into the Aspen Grove Cemetery which is on the Historic Inventory. Staff' s concern is when an original feature is missing we take one of two approaches: If there is documentation how it originally looked we reconstruct from those documents. If there is no documentation we aim for a very simplified element which would not be confused as an historic piece. In reviewing the gate it is certainly attractive but staff is concerned about the size and ornate character of the gate. The gate has already been built but is not installed. Jim Markalunas relayed that he is the sexton for the cemetery, which was founded around 1890. The Association has had problems with the existing gate primarily with the positioning of the driveways next to entrance. To prevent vandalism and encroachments into the cemetery the barbed fencing was repaired. The association gave the City of Aspen an easement for a water tank and the condition was that the city would install a fence appropriate for the association and neighborhood. A ranch style fencing was built. At that time a gate was also constructed. The gate has had damage due to snow plowing for the parking lot area. The gate was relocated and an arched gate constructed a year ago but not installed yet. The association did not know that they needed a permit for the replacement of the gate. The arched gate was not intended to replicate or duplicate the historic archway since it was a wooded structure and made of some type of lattice work. Most cemeteries have an archway or gateway because it is symbolic to the transition from this life into the next. Linda Wommack from the National Association for cemetery preservation wrote a letter in support of the arched gate. The material selected wrought iron and marble are do not compete with the natural vegetation. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF~ APRIL 12~ 2000 William Perry said he is an artist and black smith in Carbondale and was bom in Aspen in 1951. His roots go back to 1880 in Aspen. He has done work in the cemetery and has relatives buried there. Several other cemetery arches have been done in Colorado. William presented a diagram of the arch. The boundary of the cemetery is the loop area. Board members were in favor of the arched gate and supported it. It is a natural evolution for the cemetery. It serves practical functions as well as symbolic. Members also felt that a plaque should be attached to the fence indicating the history of the cemetery. They also felt that a connecting piece should be installed. MOTION: Gilbert moved to approve the proposed gate at the Aspen Grove Cemetery with the condition that HPC review and approve the informative plaque to be attached; second by Rally. Motion carried 5-0. Yes vote: Rally, Gilbert, Suzannah, Mary, Susan MOTION: Gilbert moved to adjourn; second by Rally. All in favor, motion carried 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF~ APRIL 12~ 2000 WESTSTAR BANK - MILL & MAIN ................................................................................................. 1 834 W. HALLAM ST. - EXTENSION OF CONCEPUTAL ................................................................ 2 920 W. HALLAM - LOT A - FINAL - PH ........................................................................................... 3 920 W. HALLAM ST. - LOT B ............................................................................................................ 4 110 W. MAIN STREET -HOTEL ASPEN - CONCEPTUAL - PH .................................................... 4 11