Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20180328 1 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 28, 2018 Chairperson Greenwood called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Gretchen Greenwood, Jeffrey Halferty, Willis Pember, Scott Kendrick, Bob Blaich, Roger Moyer, Sheri Sanzone. Absent were Nora Berko and Richard Lai. Staff present: Linda Manning, City Clerk Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION: Mr. Halferty motioned to approve the February 14th minutes, Mr. Moyer seconded. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Mr. Halferty motioned to approve February 28th, Mr. Blaich seconded. All in favor, motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Greenwood mentioned a new board member who joined the HPC board, Sheri Sanzone. Ms. Greenwood welcomed her. Ms. Sanzone said she is a landscape architect and owner of Blue Green and she is very excited to be on the board. Mr. Pember mentioned that the Pritzker Prize was just announced and the first Indian architect was recognized; B.V. Doshi, who is based in India. Mr. Pember had the good fortune, while in graduate school, to study with him for a month in India and it was a fantastic experience. He is now 90 years old, so it is a lifetime achievement award basically. He is still able to travel and be there in person to accept the award. One thing that was noted was his work in affordable housing. Mr. Pember also mentioned that he had a coffee with Sara Yoon since she invited everyone to come aboard and chat with her so he would highly recommend it if anyone has time to do that. He enjoyed his time with her very much. DISCLOSURES OF CONFLICT: Mr. Halferty said he lives within 300 feet of 500 W Main so he will be recusing himself. PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Yoon said Mr. Lai is out of town so Mr. Kendrick will be taking over for him as project monitor. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Yoon said Ms. Simon will be back on Monday. She also had an update on an HPC project. She said they just finished and launched the HP benefits survey. She sent out an email to everyone with the link so she asked that they make sure to fill it out. She also said to feel free to share the link with other interested parties. The survey will be open for around three weeks and they are sending it out as a community outreach. Ms. Garrow said the feedback will be used in the code amendment process and there will be a site visit with Council on April 10th to look at various projects and to please let them know if anyone is interested in attending. CERTIFICATES OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None. PUBLIC NOTICE: Ms. Bryan has the appropriate notices. CALL UPS: None. 2 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 28, 2018 PRESENTATION: 135 E Cooper Ave Sarah Yoon Ms. Yoon said this is an Aspen landmark listed on both the Aspen Inventory and National Register. This has been in front of HPC a number of times and the most recent approval was in 2015 regarding the connector. Vesting expires in July 16th this year. The returning applicant has designed an alternate solution for the connecting element for HPC to review. The review is for a substantial amendment of the previous approval and will be subject to old guidelines. There is a one-story connecting element with an exterior path. Under the old design guidelines, a two-story on a corner lot is still appropriate in this case. This project also has unused floor area 70 sq. ft. that can be used towards the proposal. The approval of the connecting element was two-story element, which encompassed a set of stairs. There was a condition of approval from HPC where the connector had to tuck under the eaves of historic structure with approval of staff and monitor. The proposal tonight is two-story connecting element, but it eliminates the stairs and interior so it allows for a more simple element. The function still creates the desired distance between the historic resource and the addition. The proposal does call for the removal of a historic window in upper floor with relocation to the north side, which would require some removal of historic fabric. The proposal also includes changes to the yard and a Blue Stone paving material would be the replacement, which is not native. There are two unaccounted for spruce trees were planted close to the historic resource and staff would like them to be removed. Staff recommends approval with conditions: 1 The historic window on the west elevation is to be removed but they do not approve relocation or the new openings being introduced into that façade. 2 The new patio and walkway are to be red brick pavers or sandstone or along those lines and the applicant should provide a design for review by staff and monitor. 3 The requirement of submission for the building permit by July 2018 to comply with the 2015 code. 4 A commitment to remove the two rogue spruces Mr. Kendrick asked about the removal of the spruce trees and whether any mitigation fee would be associated. Ms. Yoon said since they were not accounted for, she does not believe there would be mitigation. Ms. Garrow said she is not sure they are of the size that would trigger mitigation so she is unsure if they have that information to be able to answer that tonight. She suggested that HPC could include it in the resolution. Ms. Greenwood asked what mitigation fees they are speaking of. Mr. Halferty said it’s for tree removal. Ms. Greenwood said tree removal is not typically in HPC review. Mr. Eigleberger said they spoke about this previously and both trees seem to be smaller than the requirement for removal. APPLICANT: Christof Eigelberger – representing Christy Ferer Mr. Eigelberger said this project is located on the corner of E cooper and Aspen. It is a historic Victorian located on Aspen side with the new addition heading down E cooper to the west. The sq. ft. added is 55 feet to only the 2nd story of the building. 2016 as granted was moved forward in addition to adding the 2nd story. This design accommodates the existing connector to be rebuilt to accommodate the story above. 1st story connector will be demoed, but rebuilt using the same foundation, same height and same width. The 2nd story connector will be narrowed. A small portion of the roof will have a little metal roof then go in to the structure allowing it to go underneath the eave. The entire connector will be glass and we went through several rounds of this with Ms. Simon and in the end went with glass 3 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 28, 2018 skylights. The whole thing will be a dark painted steel. The front façade facing cooper is a continuous façade of gazing. The other portion of the submittal was to address the exterior staircase going down to the basement area that they want to eliminate. He said they would like to eliminate it to clean up the entire façade and the backyard. Mr. Moyer asked if the current trim on the connector is white and Mr. Eigleberger said it is and the dark steel is a condition of the 2016 approval. We are proposing to keep all the trim work and exposed elements as in the 2016 approval. Mr. Moyer said if it is painted dark, it will it draw attention to it. Mr. Pember said they had a long conversation about that when they approved the dark metal and feel it will be more recessive than the white trim. White is more advancing in spatial relations. Mr. Blaich said they thought it better defined the separation too. Mr. Eigleberger said the transparency of the connector allows the new addition to be its own building. Ms. Ferer asked about the window that was approved for the cottage and wants to make sure it is retained. Mr. Pember said that was the last application. Ms. Greenwood clarified that the application is in for the link and all the other approvals stand as is. Ms. Ferer asked about the color of the stone because Ms. Simon had suggested it stay red. Ms. Yoon said as written, they are recommending a red brick paver or stands tone that stays in character of what is traditionally found here. Blue stone is not native or used here in this area. Mr. Ferer said the blue stone is closer to the new addition and it is there now and we are adding to it. Ms. Greenwood said they can discuss that as staff. Ms. Sanzone asked about sheet A302 and the photos of the rear area and if they current. Mr. Eigleberger said it is and shows the staircase and railing. We are trying to eliminate the railing and stars that protrude. Mr. Pember asked if the scope includes interior work. He said it is refreshing to not see a stair. Mr. Eigleberger said the idea is to go back and eliminate one of the interior staircases and use the primary stair within the newer portion to connect back to the Victorian. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Ms. Greenwood suggested they talk about the issues and recommendations from staff. The historic window is approved to be removed. Regarding the new patio and walkways, they are still trying to determine the type of material to be used. Ms. Greenwood said she does not see there is enough information to see what is going where so this is a little difficult to discuss. The requirement for the building permit to be submitted by July 16th. Commit to the removal of the two spruce trees. Design of the new connector and the materials that have already been set by previous approvals. Mr. Pember said staff and monitor should take care of the paving. Ms. Sanzone said she is curious why staff is recommending that. Ms. Garrow said it goes back to guideline 1.9 on paving where it talks about using paving materials that are similar to that of the building style. Blue paving was not typically used so we are recommending a softer pallet of brick or sandstone, which is more typical. Ms. Sanzone brought up the photographs of what is there today and said it is a mix of different colors of sandstone so staff’s recommendation today may help tie that together. Ms. Greenwood what is being recommended is it is a staff and monitor decision and suggested that this might be a good one for Ms. Sanzone to monitor. Ms. Greenwood also explained that at times, they allow those decisions to be made by staff and monitor to allow the application to move on. Ms. Sanzone said she is in favor of the overall design. 4 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 28, 2018 Mr. Moyer said he is in favor of staff’s recommendation. Mr. Halferty said he is in favor of the project and asked if the gate is proposed to be wood. Mr. Eigleberger said it is and that there is an existing fence there and the property is required to have two parking spots. Mr. Blaich said he is in favor of the project and Mr. Kendrick said he is good with it. Mr. Pember said he likes everything in the resolution except the window is approved to be removed but not relocated. He asked if HPC is comfortable with this. Mr. Eigleberger said if it is shifted over, it begins to squish the other window. Ms. Greenwood said she feels this is a huge improvement since she has been present for every single hearing on this project. The simplicity is perfect for a two-story addition. She is ok with staff and monitor. She clarified that they are all in agreement on the recommendation from staff. Mr. Pember suggested they add to the resolution a line specifically saying to demo the stair around the hot tub as presented. MOTION: Mr. Pember moved to approve Resolution #2 with addition of #6 demolition of landscape stairs and interior courtyard as submitted in the application. He also clarified that this has nothing to do with the paver issue. Seconded by Mr. Moyer. Roll call vote: Mr. Pember, yes; Mr. Blaich, yes; Ms. Sanzone, yes; Mr. Kendrick, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes. 7-0 motion carried. Mr. Halferty recused himself. Ms. Bryan mentioned regarding the notice, that she has a copy of the publication and the applicant checked the box that the notice had been mailed, but attached a photo of the posting. She said she doesn’t know if they needed to mail for this and needs some clarification. Ms. Yoon said it should be both. If they provide the mailing the next business day they can go ahead with the hearing. We just need proof of mailing by the next business day. PRESENTATION: 500 W Main Street Sarah Yoon Ms. Yoon said this building is also known as the Mesa store and consists of two 3,000 square foot lots. The historic resource is mostly situated on the corner lot S with an adjacent lot R used for parking. The previous application was withdrawn with a revised scope for interior and remodel. HPC will need to review the following items: the request for the front set back variation to rebuild the roof overhang, reconstruction of two missing historic brick chimneys and proposed window and door openings along the west elevation. The outdoor living features will not be included in this review application and will be addressed separately through a certificate of no negative effect process. Ms. Yoon showed historic photographs of the old Mesa store. The applicant is proposing to rebuild the existing roof overhang and return back to a pitched configuration, while the stairs and railing will remain the same. This will require a front yard variation. On the west elevation, the applicant is proposing to restore two chimneys, which will be used for mechanical flues and restore window #11. They will also introduce three new openings and a ground level door. On the overhang, there is a proposed new down spout. There are located electric and gas meters under the exterior stair, but need the attachment clarified. There is a new location for trash area and transformer. Staff recommends HPC approval with conditions: 1. Approval of the 0 front yard setback to rebuild the overhanging roof. 5 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 28, 2018 2. Provision of exact location and historical documentation for window 11 and provide cut sheets. 3. Confirm meter and other equipment and situation under stairs, prefer detachment to the extent possible. 4. Confirm meter and other equipment and situation under stairs, prefer detachment to the extent possible. 5. Review historic documentation for reconstruction of the chimneys. 6. Submit site work for cert of no neg process. 7. Previous approvals will be vacated. Ms. Garrow said she thinks because this is minor it only needs to be posted. We will confirm but thinks the posting is sufficient to proceed for tonight. Applicant John Rowland and Kurt Peterson both of Rowland & Broughton Mr. Rowland showed a slide of the existing condition. There is an overhang in the set back and any changes need approval of HPC. Historically, there are 4 chimneys and they are proposing to bring back three. The fourth would serve zero use for the project. There are no historic drawings of it and they plan to match what is there in the field and will work on that with staff and monitor. They will be restoring the windows to their historic glory and the framing is already there. There are lots of changes to the west façade with windows and doors. Mr. Peterson said the only two windows that don’t fit into a previous opening are two lower floor windows. Mr. Rowland said there is not a lot of light on the ground level so they are trying to capture as much light as they can. Mr. Peterson said they are moving the back door to the side of the building for the accessible entrance and parking will be along the back alley with a walkway to the accessible entrance. There is discussion around the mechanical meters below the exterior stairs. Ideally, they would like to not put any more mechanical equipment on the wall and prefer it to be under the stairs. Mr. Peterson said they are not looking to remove any of the historic siding with the placement of the meters. Ms. Greenwood asked if the front yard is the setback they are asking for and Mr. Rowland answered yes and said the covered roof is right on the property line. Ms. Greenwood asked if it applies to the front overhang. Mr. Peterson said they are not demoing, but deconstructing to see what is or not historic. Ms. Greenwood asked how they plan to control water and Mr. Rowland said through a gutter and downspouts. Right now, there is a false façade and a regime of cricketing that eventually gets the water to a downspout in the corner. Mr. Moyer asked if they have fully finished the demo inside and discovered the original framing. Mr. Rowland said it is in surprisingly good shape, but the rafters are charred from a stovepipe in the roof that had caught fire so it looks like modern architecture right now. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Mr. Pember said that looking at the framing of the historic porch, there is asymmetry going on with the columns, but he noticed it is cleaned up in what is proposed and asked why they haven’t looked at some of these details regarding the asymmetry. Mr. Rowland said they are not currently like that today. Mr. Pember asked, if it isn’t like that today, why wouldn’t they try to replicate the column rhythm. Mr. 6 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 28, 2018 Rowland said it never occurred to him because that is as much information as they have and they didn’t feel like that was enough so they are keeping the columns and the stairs as is and ripping off the header to add the new roof. Mr. Pember asked about the new windows on the west façade and how the calculations were done because they almost look squarish. Mr. Rowland said it is borrowed from the rear. There are some old photos that show the original location. Ms. Greenwood said she isn’t clear about the existing slope of the roof over the stairs and asked if it is a continuation of the upper roof. Mr. Rowland said it is currently almost flat and the proposal is to hinge it. Ms. Greenwood asked what brand the windows are and Mr. Rowland said Colby. They have the best historical window out there. Ms. Greenwood said she has no problem with approving staff’s recommendation. Mr. Moyer asked about attaching utilities to the building and asked if they have to be attached or can they stand alone. Mr. Rowland said that because of the lap siding, it will never going to touch. Mr. Peterson said they would have to build a Unistrut frame to attach it to. Mr. Blaich said the recommendation reads that it should be detached from the building to the extent possible. Ms. Greenwood noted that everyone is in agreement to approve Resolution #3. MOTION: Mr. Blaich moved to approve, seconded by Mr. Moyer. Roll call vote: Mr. Blaich, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Mr. Kendrick, yes; Mr. Pember, yes; Ms. Sanzone, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes. 6-0 motion carried. MOTION: Mr. Pember motioned to adjourn at 5:50 p.m., seconded by Mr. Kendrick. All in favor, motion carried. _________________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk