Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20070627 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 27. 2007 508 E. Cooper Ave. Cooper Street Pier ~Extension of Conceptual.................................. 2 411 E. Hopkins ~ Caribou Alley - Minor Development .................................................... 2 214 E. Bleeker - Conceptual..............................................................................................3 980 Gibson - Conceptual....................................................................................................5 420 E. Cooper - rehabilitation of the Red Onion interior................................................... 6 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 27. 2007 Chairperson Jeffrey Halferty called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.rn. Commissioners in attendance: Alison Agley, Brian McNellis, Sarah Broughton and Michael Hoffman. Staff present: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Jim True, Special Counsel Disclosure: Alison will recuse herself on 980 Gibson Ave. Jeffrey informed the HPC that he uses the same sub-contractor that 420 E. Cooper uses but it will not sway his vote and he did not work on this project. MOTION: Michael moved to continue the public hearing on 110 E. Bleeker to August 8,2007; second by Sarah. All infavor, motion carried. 508 E. Cooper Ave. Cooper Street Pier -Extension of Conceptual MOTION: Sarah moved to approve resolution #29 for the extension of conceptual for six months for 508 E. Cooper; second by Alison. Roll call vote: Brian, yes; Alison, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes; Jeffrey, yes. 411 E. Hopkins - Caribou Alley - Minor Development Amy said the board looked at replacing the existing canopy in January and it was continued in order for the applicant to try and reduce the pitch and replicate what exists with better materials. The applicant has been working with Jerry Cavil ere from Hanson Construction. The canopy will be up year round and it is not operable. It is also more transparent than what we have now so it may light up the space in the Caribou alley and give you the feeling that it is an outdoor space. Staff finds that the standards are met. HPC also has the ability to waive some of the cash-in-lieu but staff is recommending that it not be waived. If doors are going to be on the alley staff and monitor should see a basic design. Billy Stoltz, owner said we do not have a design for the doors. During Dec. through March the doors would be up. We are looking at a more solid structure door. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 27.2007 Jerry Cavilere clarified that the canopy is translucent not transparent. The exact pitch will need to be engineered. Jeffrey inquired about the drainage etc. Jerry said the skylight will have internal drains and the shedding of the snow will go onto the adjacent flat roofs. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Sarah said a 3xl2 roof is an improvement and she is willing to go forward. MOTION: Sarah moved to approve Resolution #26 for 411 E. Hopkins as stated in staff's memo; second by Michael. Discussion: Jeffrey said the cash-in-lieu seem onerous because they have been there awhile. It is very open to the public. Just because we are closing it doesn't mean it is not a public space. Michael said his concern with the reduction in the amount of cash-in-lieu is that this has been an issue from the past. We should not unilaterally be in the business of reducing fees. Sara pointed out that no more than half of the fee can be waived. Brian said he is willing to waive a portion. The issue is what would be the appropriate amount. Billy said his intention is to get this going and approved. It is not a big Issue. Michael commended the applicant for being gracious about the cash-in-lieu. Roll call vote: Brian, yes; Alison, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes; Jeffrey, no. Motion carried 4-1. 214 E. Bleeker - Conceptual Dave Rybak, architect; Kristeen Church, owner. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 27. 2007 Amy informed the HPC that this is conceptual for the new house on the Brumder Lot Split. This is a 6,000 square foot parcel with a swimming pool on it and it is designated a landmark. There are no variances required and at the previous meeting there were a number of suggestions made about how to deal with inflection and how the massing related to the Victorian. On this entire block this will be the first new house, everything else is a Victorian era landmark. At the last meeting the item got continued to look at some issues: How fare should the building be set back on the lot and the front porch alignment with surrounding buildings. The applicant has done what HPC asked and the inflection is all directed to the west. Dave has made adjustment to the front porch and it is wider on the site and creates a nice relationship to the porches on the Victorians nearby. The building has been pulled back and staff recommends approval of the project. Dave Rybak informed the board that the front porch will align with the porch on the 214 E. Bleeker property and close to the property at 232 Bleeker. The primary gable is set back behind the front porch and the second mass which is the inflection aligns with the front fayade of the home at 214 E. Bleeker. The massing is generally the same. Michael commented that the roof over the front door doesn't feel to be consistent with the neighborhood. It seems somewhat "suburban". Amy clarified that Michael's concern isn't the roof, it is that it is open. Sarah also agreed that closing the gable on the front should be looked at. Dave has addressed our concerns and it complies with our guidelines. The alley view is sympathetic to the historic resource and breaking up the mass works well. Sarah thanked the applicant for supplying the street elevations. Brian said breaking up the mass addresses our guidelines. The streetscape was his concern. In terms of the gable on the front he can go either way. Alison said all our concerns have been addressed. The open gable that Michael mentioned does stand out. Maybe a study could occur as to what should happen. A solid gable might be too much. Jeffrey said he feels that the applicants design process has flushed out our concerns and he can approve the project as is. The design complies with Chapter II of our guidelines. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 27.2007 Dave Rybak addressed the porch. The gable was added not just to signify the entry but a solution to help with the massing of the building. To have the porch come all the way across uninterrupted would make it look like it was tacked on. By adding a cross gable to the porch it ties the two porches together. The house at 232 E. Bleeker has a similar gable and it appears tacked on because it is not in the same plane. The gable is the solution and whether it is closed or open we can restudy for final. MOTION: Michael moved to approve Resolution #27 for 214 E. Bleeker with an additional condition that at final the fenestration or finished treatment of the gable will be evaluated; second by Sarah. Roll call vote: Brian, yes; Alison, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes; Jeffrey, yes. 980 Gibson - Conceptual Alison stepped down. Sara said at the last meeting 980 Gibson was continued to get clarification on the setback variances that are required for this property and to address the request to restudy the light well that is abutting against the historic resource. The light well has been reduced in size and has been pulled away from the fayade of the historic cabin. Regarding the setback variances HPC needs to grant a ten foot west side yard setback and a nine foot north rear yard setback. Overall staff recommends approval of this project. Scott Bartleet said the only other change would be the upper level link in which we will provide some more glazing to give it a more transparent feeling. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Sarah pointed out that the project has greatly improved. Regarding the porch maybe a restudy could occur because it is highly detailed and the historic resource is very simple. Michael said the improvements in the light well make it easier to interpret what is going on at the site. The setbacks on this site are very unique and there are no negative impacts. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 27.2007 Jeffrey also said the changes have helped the project. The balcony is interesting but is almost in conflict with the historic resource because it is directly adjacent to it. A restudy for final would be recommended. MOTION: Sarah moved to approve Resolution #28 for 980 Gibson Ave. as stated in staff's memo, second by Michael. Roll call vote: Brian,yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes; Jeffrey, yes. Motion carried 4-0. 420 E. Cooper - rehabilitation of the Red Onion interior Alison was seated. Sara explained that the applicant entered into an agreement with the City of Aspen to gain exemption from the interior moratoriurn. Certain elements of the interior will be preserved. Part of the review process to gain exemption from the moratorium is that they come before HPC and explain what it is they propose to do to preserve the specific elements that staff has identified and get a recommendation from HPC that will be made to Chris Bendon, the community development director who will make the ruling as to whether it meetsJhe criteria of the moratorium. Ifit does they are exempt. If there is a conflict it would then go to Steve Barwick, City Manager to settle any disputes. Bill Poss, architect Connie Woods, architect that deals specifically with restaurants. Andy Hecht and Ron Garfield, owners Bill pointed out that Hanson Construction will be handling the renovation. The plan is to renovate the Red Onion and bring it back to its glory. The floor will be taken apart piece by piece. There is a sign in the floor "Latta" that will be retained. Mr. Latta built the building. We are proposing to replace certain areas with the old tiles. The Red Onion was a great jazz and entertainment place in the early 60's. The Red Onion went across three buildings. There was the bar, the restaurant and the gourmet. The stage was where the back bar is currently. We are asking to restore the openings and open it up so we have a lot oflight. We have a demolition permit and we would like to get the bar opened by XMAS holidays. The idea is to keep the tile in the bar area and wood floors throughout the rest. Architects are looking at awnings that do not attach to the building. The intent is to have outdoor seating. The bar will be restored and a few mirrors that were identified by staff. We also would like to get all of the sports memorabilia back and bring the heritage back in the bar. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 27. 2007 Sara identified the issues that HPC should have a discussion on: l. The three booths in place which are not original but they are part of the Post War Ski heritage interior. 2. The size of the openings in the walls behind the booths. 3. The philosophy behind the historic tile floor, whether or not it is appropriate to find matching tile to replace the tile that has been pulled off or should there be new and old tile. HPC also needs to discuss the border around the tiles. Bill said there is a company that can make more border tiles if needed. Jeffrey asked staffifHPC has the purview to review interiors. Sara explained that in order to get an exemption from the moratorium a building permit agreement was drawn up and in that agreement HPC will have an advisory role regarding the application and may make recommendations to the Community Development Department. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Michael inquired about the openings in the wall. Bill said two exist and the plan will work better if the openings exist. They would like to evaluate what dimension they need in order to get the character needed. Bill said he went to New York and looked at a lot of old restaurants that have a lot of life. The reason they have life is that you can see the waiters coming and going. Michael said the proposal for the tile floor and the holes in the wall sounds reasonable. Regarding the booths he is ambivalent. Possibly one could be preserved to represent what happened in the 1950's. Alison indicated she feels the same with the booths. The Red Onion should be taken back to its original state and not confuse the time periods. Regarding the openings the more light that goes through the restaurant the better but they were not there in the beginning. The tile is interesting, should we put a border back on or leave it alone. Brian said in terms of the booths he agrees that we should not confuse time periods. He would support removing the booths for the sake of vitality in the bar area. We have an obligation to help make the success of the Red Onion. The holes in the wall being opened up will help lighten that space. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 27.2007 The tile should be salvaged as much as possible and reused. It is important to preserve the integrity of the design and if that means adding in some tile that matches properly to reinforce the original design I would lean toward that recommendation. Sarah concurred about the booths that they should not be retained. The party wall is an evolution of what this restaurant has been and it should be detailed appropriately. Regarding the tile, as best we can it should be restored and take the tile on site to patch and concentrate it in an area and keep the original pattern. Jeffrey said this will be a very interesting project. Jeffrey doesn't necessarily agree that we should be reviewing this because we have nothing in our guidelines. The research that staff and the applicant provided us is excellent. The details are all very logical. Regarding the tile maybe it should remain as is and let the new tile come in around it. It should be the applicant's choice. The booths do not work with the interior. The openings in the wall were added on. The preservation of the bar is important and it has similar details to the Hotel Jerome. Jim True pointed out that even though this is a recommendation a resolution form would be appropriate. MOTION: Michael moved to make the following recommendations to the applicant and the Community Development Director as it relates to the Red Onion building permit agreement, resolution #30: 1. The booths not be retained. 2. The party wall- No objection to removing the material in the holes and to use the holes as a design feature for the restaurant. 3. Tiles: Preserve as much of the existing tile as possible and to consolidate the salvaged tile in a particular section of th~ floor where it will be appreciated by patrons. The balance of the floor to be covered with tile of a similar pattern and type. Motion second by Sarah. For clarification we will keep the tile and the pattern. Sara said the question is what will the tile filler be. Do you want the tile to dictate where the historic bar was. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 27. 2007 Bill said he would take the tile down the center and he will try to make a statement as to what the old part is. Sarah said the pattern and borders are important. The intent is to keep as much as you can. Bill said he would like the flexibility to make the openings a little larger to get the see-through look. The opening would only be around 30 inches. Sara said staff could make a judgment call in the field. Amended motion: Michael amended his motion regarding the openings. Particular attention should be paid to the excavation of the openings. After the investigation of the size of the opening the applicant will mock up what they would like to see and work with staff on the opening size that is acceptable with staff and with the intent to preserve the shot gun feeling of the existing space. Motion and amended motion second by Sarah. Roll call vote: Brian, yes; Alison, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes; Jeffrey, yes. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Michael moved to adjourn; second by Jeffrey. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. ~ ~~~-~f Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 9