Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19990922ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, SEPTEMBER 22, 1999 Chairperson Suzannah Reid called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Members in attendance were Lisa Markalunas, Roger Moyer, Heidi Friedland, Jeffrey Halferty, Christie Kienast. Staff in attendance were Assistant City Attorney, David Hoefer; Historic Preservation Officer, Amy Guthrie and Chief Deputy City Clerk, Kathleen Strickland. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Roger informed the board that he talked to the owners of the guest house that was General Martin's regarding the historic siding shingles. Roger informed the owners to not take the shingles off and the owner removed the shingles. Amy did a site inspection and the owner is required to come in and get a repmr permit. Amy requested that board members leave a message with her regarding whether or not they are going to the site visits. 616 W. MAIN STREET - MINOR DEVELOPMENT Bill, Heather and Darlene Manclark were sworn in. Amy relayed that the property is an historic landmark and it is a 3,000 square foot lot. Both of the buildings on the lot were moved from the Christmas Tree lot which is now the 7m and Main project. The carriage house has been remodeled into an ADU and the house is basically in its original form. The Manclark's are new owners and they would like to address maintenance concerns. The areas of concern are the roof over the kitchen. They would like to increase the slope of the roof and add a skylight. They would also like to replace two existing windows which are historic and have been turned sideways. One is in the kitchen and one in the livingroom area. A few clapboards are proposed to be replaced before the house gets painted. Regarding the carriage house they would like to add a door out the north side of the building to get an approved egress out of the loft. The building department has requested further information regarding the draining; is it ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, SEPTEMBER 22, 1999 going to the back of the property or toward Mountain Rescue. Staff has no problem with the skylight but it would seem awkward to do considering the difficulty with the roof. Staff is recommending that the diningroom window be restored to its original position on the east side of the building. On the kitchen window staff is recommending replacing it but that the new window be the same basic proportions of the historic window that exists. Staff has concerns about the egress that is being proposed. The cut is to occur through the eave line of the house and Staff feels that is not appropriate. Staff has no problem with replacing the clapboards that have holes cut into them for blown in insulation. Bill Manclark relayed that on the non-historic part of the roofs there is a 12 to 15 degree slope going up to the flat roof and the proposal is to carry that slope up to the steep gable areas of the east west gable and the north south gable that drain onto the flat roof. The drainage causes damage to the interior of the house. The snow and rain would drain onto the roof and progress to the back of the roof area in the gutters and down into the ground back toward the carriage house. The roof replacement will be metal. The kitchen is ten feet wide and twelve feet long. With the horizontal window upper cabinets cannot be placed on either side of the sink. The proposal is to replace the window with a three or four foot high single hung window and plane. The window is not visible from the street. The owners are trying to make the house move livable and provide more storage above. Some of the wall boards need replaced where insulation was blown into them. They need replaced to make it air tight. Bill would also like to build a storage cabinet on the back of the non- historical portion of the house. When the boiler was installed it was not done correctly and there is only 11 ½ inches between the boiler and floor joists and according to the instructions there needs to be 23 ½ inches and there is no enough room. The owner was going to move the broiler and reservoir outside to a storage area. The shed would have the same features as the Victorian and a sloping roof. The broiler cannot be turned on until it is moved. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, SEPTEMBER 22, 1999 CLARIFICATIONS Roger inquired if the storage shed would be on a slab. A concrete slab will be poured. The applicant said he is going to take off the historic siding that is approved himself. Roger suggested an architect design the egress on the ADU do to the involvement. His recollection is that on the east and west side of the house there were two vertical windows, directly across from each other for a cross breeze. Both of those double hung windows were removed and laid horizontally. The windows could be removed and cleaned and made operable and put back vertically. Roger also suggested that the project needs to be monitored very carefully. In general the board had no problem with the removal of the clapboards and staff and monitor will mark the boards that need replaced. Members felt that a design could be done regarding the egress in the ADU and fire escape issues. Regarding the roof situation, snow has always been a problem on the north side of the house and a metal roof would make it easier for the snow sliding. The dining room window and kitchen window should be turned vertically to its original form. The board had no problem with the request for the storage shed. The felt the roof should be explored further and also an egress on the east side of the carriage house. The board was not in favor of cutting the historic eave of the north side. Jeffrey informed the board that an egress needs five square feet of glass to qualify. Suzannah said she feels there is some opportunities on the carriage house to find a.place for an egress in one of the existing openings. Changing the slope of the roof has implications to the house, particularly the wall of the kitchen and the loss of the eave line. The detail of the shed in its relationship to the house needs to be drawn up and presented to staff and monitor. Bill Manclark said he has plans submitted to the Building Dept. for a permit for the shed which can be reviewed by staff and monitor. Amy informed the owner that they should be aware of setback requirements for the shed. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, SEPTEMBER 22, 1999 MOTION: Roger made the motion to grant Minor Development approval at 616 W. Main for a storage shed to be approved by Staff and monitor. MOTION: Roger moved ro tabling the request for a new roof and skylight until a full proposal with plans can be submitted. MOTION: Roger moved to approve restoration of the dining and kitchen room windows to their original vertical position. MOTION: Roger moved to approve removal of siding to be specifically designated by staff and monitor and replaced by siding from the rear of the house and filling of holes from the insulation. Any vents that are to be added to be approved by Staff and monitor. ADU UNIT MOTION: Roger moved to table until a design can be submitted for egress that has the least impact on the historic resource Motions second by Christie. Yes vote: Roger, Suzannah, Heidi. Christie, Lisa, Jeffrey For clarification, Amy informed the applicant when the windows are turned vertically they are to go exactly into the framed opening that exist not to the left or right of the opening. 302 E. HOPKINS AVE. - CONCEPTUAL, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, ON-SITE RELOCATION, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING FROM AUG. 25, 1999 Amy recommended approval of the revised drawings dated 9-22-99. With the elimination of the third floor the architecture is compatible. Staff has only one remaining concern regarding an existing lightwell that is shown to be expanded and why the stairs to the basement have not been recessed further back. That was one of the conditions of approval from the last meeting that the stair to the basement start as far back on the shed as possible. It has been pushed back two feet but staff is recommending something more significant. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OFt SEPTEMBER 22~ 1999 For final review the architect needs to identify any kind of rooftop equipment that is anticipated to be placed on the new commercial building and where that will be relocated. Sworn in were Jake Vickery, John Davis, Roger Kuhn. Jake stated that the third floor has been eliminated and they have tried to minimize the landing in the interior courtyard and pull the stair back. The overhead door has been added to the trash area. Windows have been removed and changed in the south elevation. Rooftop mechanical will be identified at final. There.is a little platform before you go down into the lightwell. In order to get the egress and light into the lower bedroom the lightwell had to be extended. The same treatment that exists is proposed for the lightwell. The overhead garage door has been installed over the trash area at the request of the neighbors. The lightwell in the basement plan will extend four feet to the south. Roger asked what the height of the parapet was on the new structure. Jake said 2 ½ feet and if mechanical equipment needed to be on the roof it would be sereened. Jake explained that the stairway cannot be changed due to the door and if it was changed it would reduce the glass area. You go down the stairs to access the apartment but also the lower level of the new building. In terms of trade-off the preference is to keep the plans as drawn as they are more functional. Heidi commended the applicant for incorporating the recommendations from the HPC. Heidi recused herself. Jeffrey suggested a restudy to possibly pull a few Stairs back which was recommended at the previous meeting. John Davis said they need the second door which access the space in case the area is used as a powder room and they want to utilize the square footage and make it functional. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, SEPTEMBER 22, 1999 Jake said the maximum rise is being used, 7 inches. Roger inquired about the power source and David said they do not even know what amount they need and if they need a new transformer they will have to house it within. Jake said at final he will confirm the capacity of the transformer on the other side of Bill Seguin's building and if there is a capacity to tie into it. Suzannah suggested that issue be addressed with the mechanical at final. Jake relayed that the second floor over hangs the first floor on the west elevation. The proposal is to keep the design that way in case the second floor turns into a studio apartment that area would be functional for a dining area. Jake stated that the second floor will either be commercial or residential. Chairperson Suzannah Reid opened the public hearing. Roget Kuhn relayed that his concerns are the same as the publics in previous meetings. Chairperson Suzannah Reid closed the public hearing. Amy stated that when the motion is done a recommendation should be made to the Planning & Zoning regarding the reduction of the trash area. Commissioner comments. Restudy stair pushed back to the east. Recommendation to P&Z for reduced trash. Elimination of parking supported by HPC. With the reduction of trash and parking it helps the project be more compatible with the historic resource. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, SEPTEMBER 22, 1999 Some members felt that standard #2 has not been met. It is not consistent with the character of the neighborhood. The houses in the neighborhoods were all small and the proposal does not enhance the historic structure. Details of the lightwell should be presented at final. Suzannah felt that the north stair overhanging the wall is problamatic. The dimension of the stair landing should be met or exceeded. That dimension is 3.6 feet, Jake responded to Suzannah stating that a column will exist on the north west comer of the new building holding up the area above the stair. MOTION: Jeffrey moved to grant conceptual development, partial demolition and on- site relocation for the project located at 302 E. Hopkins Ave. for the project as presented on September 22, 1999 with the following conditions: i. Further explanation from the architect as to why the existing lightwell is proposed to be enlarged and why the stairs to the basement cannot be recessed further from the street than the 2' that ts presented in these plans. 2. For final review, the architect is required to identify the location for any ,further rooftop mechanical equipment and verify that the equipment can be adequately screened from the pedestrian view. 3. Stair restudy that it be 3.6from face of the new building. 4. Recommendation to P&Z regarding the reduced trash and parking issue. 5. Finding that t~e standards have been met. Roger second the motion. Yes vote: Roger, Suzannah, Lisa. Jeffrey. No vote: Christie Passes 4-1. 104 S. GALENA ST. - worksession - no minuts & MAIN STREET AH - worksession - no minutes 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 22, 1999 616 W. MAIN STREET - Mi[NOR DEVELOPMENT ........................................................ 302 E. HOPKINS AVE. - CONCEPTUAL, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, ON-SITE RELOCATION, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING FROM AUG. 25. 1999 .................................. - .......................... - .......................... - .................................. 4