Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19990728ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, JULY 28, 1999 Chairperson Suzannah Reid called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Members in attendance were Mary Hirsch, Lisa Markalunas, Roger Moyer, Heidi Friedland, Jeffrey Halferty, Susan Dodington, Christie Kienast and Maureen Poschman. Staff in attendance were Assistant City Attorney, David Hoefer; Historic Preservation Officer, Amy Guthrie and Chief Deputy City Clerk, Kathleen Strickland, MOTION: Heidi moved to approve the minutes of June 23, 1999; second by Susan. All in favor, motion carried. 400 W. SMUGGLER- MINOR DEVELOPMENT Christie recused herself. Lisa was seated. Amy reiterated the approvals from the last meeting. All dormers had to be the same style either all gable or all shed. If they were going to go with gable there should be one on the south and two on the north and that the peak of the dormers should be below the ridge line. Sworn in were Steve Weaver, contractor and Ernie Delto, architect for the project. Ernie relayed that on the gable solution the existing shed dormer was removed and replaced with a larger gable solution. All of the windows have been reduced to a pair of 28 inch wide units. The dormers begin below the ridge which was a request at the last meeting. Neither proposal will require a variance. Roger asked the applicant which solution they preferred and Ernie replied from an aesthetic solution he would prefer the gable solution. The gables on the north are a different size than on the south. The middle dormer on the south is existing and they are taking the roof off to lower the point where all the dormers join. You cannot see all four dormers from any one point. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, JULY 28, 1999 Comments Susan felt that the shed dormers were less massive from the east elevation. Heidi preferred the softening of the two different gables. Lisa had no strong opinion on either but felt that the two gable dormers on the south side were somewhat crowded. Maureen preferred the shed dormer. Roger relayed that the shed design is simpler and cleaner in design. Jeffrey said on the south elevation the gable gets too busy and he would prefer the shed design but on the one on the south side seems quite elongated. Mary preferred the shed as it will give the owners the room that they need and it is less imposing. Suzannah voted for the shed also. MOTION: Jeffrey moved to approve the shed dormer alternation on 400 ~ Smuggler as presented at the July 28, 1999 meeting Exhibit I sheet 1 and 2. No other changes to any of the buildings on the site can be made without further HPC approvals and that no other detailing can be added or removed from the building beyond what has been discussed on Exhibit I presented at the July 28, 1999 meeting; second by Roger. Yes vote: Roger, Jeffrey, Suzannah, Mary, Susan, Heidi, Lisa 500 W. MAIN ST. - MESA STORE Amy Guthrie, Preservation Officer relayed that the proposal will effect the Mesa Store which is an historic landmark and in the Main Street Historic District. The application is to add a few windows for office spaces on the second floor of the building on the west side. This is another issue that the board has been faced with where a new window style has been placed on the 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, JULY 28, 1999 building and the board can either decide to go with that window style or try to revert to what would have existed on the building historically. Double hung traditionally proportioned windows have all been replaced. The style on the building now is a fixed piece of glass blanked by two double hungs which is a more horizontal window and very different from the historic pattern. The owner and architect researched the history of the building and there are cuts in the clapboards on the west side and it is hard to determine what that wall looked like. The proposal is modified and the central Window has been removed. They are still proposing double hungs and haVe not gone with the tall narrow window because they need desk space to use that office. Sworn in was Bob Rankin. Susan asked if there were any other incidents in town that were done before where you put an historic window back into an historic building? Amy explained that on the Mullin house all of the double hung windows were in place and when they wanted to add a new window the board had them match that style to be compatible with the building. The board needs to be consistent with the architecture of the building. In thi~ case every window but a few have been replaced. Bob Rankin said the building was originally built for a grocery store. Suzannah stated that staff's finding is there isn't enough information to start replacing historic windows in historic locations. Amy replied if the owner wanted to change all the window back to the original historic places that would be commendable but in this particular case only an office is involved. MOTION: Roger moved to approve the addition of the two window units as show on Exhibit 2t dated July 12, ]999 to the west side of the Mesa Store building. No other work can be done on the outside of the building or property without HPC approval. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, JULY 28, 1999 No other materials can be added or deleted from the building except what has been show on the drawings as submitted tonight. Motion second by Mary. All in favor, motion carried. 7-0. Yes vote: Roger, Jeffrey, Suzannah, Mary, Susan, Heidi, Maureen For clarification clad wooden windows will be used. 121 NORTH FIFTH STREET - CONCEPTUAL, PARTIAL- DEMOLITION, ON-SITE RELOCATION, VARIANCES, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW-PH David Hoefer informed the board that proof of notice has been provided to the Clerk's office and HPC has jurisdiction to proceed. Sworn in were Mary Holly and Ernie Frywald. Jeffrey disclosed that he went to a benefit dinner at the Holly's for Dennis Murray and the project was mentioned but in no way will it influence his decision. Amy relayed because of the lot split they are limited to 2, 339 square feet on this lot and it is 4,500 square feet in size. Staff is recommending approval of the project. There were a few concerns regarding the site plan that indicates a flagstone terrace in front of the historic house which is not the way the landscape would have been treated originally. Staff is recommending that it be removed and have a stone or concrete path to the front door. There needs to be confirmation of the location of the door that faced West Bleeker Street and is proposed to be put back in. Any windows in the building that are historic need co be retained and where they have been previously replaced Staff and monitor need to see that the replacement windows match the double hungs that would have been there. On the west side of the new addition which is not a public faqade the double htmg windows are actually larger than the historic windows and Staff feels that the entire design should be compatible with the historic house even if it is not visible. Variances are necessary to make the additions compatible. The house will be lifted slightly eastward on the site and it needs to be 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, JULY 28, 1999 confirmed whether or not the floor level will be higher than it is and also what the new foundation will look like. The drawings note a new rubble foundation which historically where there was stone used it was a coursed cut stone foundation. The rubble stone foundations that we have seen seem awkward. Clarification needs to be made concerning the foundation. Possibly a concrete or a lattice cover would be a simpler solution. The house is proposed to be separated from the existing floor structure when it is lifted up which is what is done typically and staff is requesting an explanation regarding the method. A relocation plan, demolition plan and bond need to be submitted before they can proceed. Also a preservation plan needs submitted on how existing materials will be restored. Lighting fixtures need to submitted and there can be no deviation from the plans that have been approved. Amy also reminded the board that the applicant is proposing to tear down the two story apartment building at the back of the site. The guest house was built for added income around 1954. Mary addressed Staff's concerns. Mary Holly addressed the flagstone and under the spruce tree which is facing north there is nothing but dirt and there isn't much that typically will grow. She will get with a landscape architect to see what will typically grow in that area and what is appropriate. When the building is lifted microlambs will be attached as there will be damage to the bottom of the building and that area will be masked by adding a veneer and a foundation material that would be historic. Mary is opposed to adding exposed concrete at the base. She is working with Bill Bailey, (house mover) regarding remedies and the approximate rise is around nine inches. A material will be chosen that is compatible with the historic structure. There is a new floor plan so the windows on the west side of the new addition will no longer have to be egress window and can be reduced in size. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, JULY 28, 1999 Jeffrey explained with the new basement being constructed and the rising of the historic house you will ultimately see from the outside foundation and it is that relationship regarding materials that needs determined. Do you clad it, concrete it or screen it. The relationship to the grade should stay consistent. Chairperson Suzannah Reid opened and closed the public hearing. The board felt the development was in the best interest of the historic house. It would be commendable if the clapboards could be saved. The board felt that the presentations in the worksessions were very thorough and made it much easier for the Board to understand what was being presented. Worksession are not beneficial if the board does not have things to look at. It is a successful one story addition attached to an historic resource. Roger suggested a complete landscape plan showing lightwell treatment and walkways. Suzannah said her main concern is the connection to the ground. A suggestion would be brick or copper flashing that is browned out. MOTION: Roger moved to approve conceptual development, partial demolition, on-site relocation, variances, and "Residential Design Review" approval to be granted with the following conditions at 121 N. Fifth Street: 1. Eliminate the flagstone terrace in front of the house and instead indicate a stone or concrete path to the front door. 2. The character and location of the front door along YE. Bleeker Street will need to be confirmed to the extent possible by framing evidence and photographs. 3. All existing historic windows in the house must be retained. [Vhere the historic windows have previously been removed, new replacement windows must match what existed originally. 4. Complete landscape plan with walkways identified for final. 5. The HPC grants the following variances: a 7' combined front and rear yard setback variance, a 2. 3' west sideyard setback variance, a 3' west sideyard setback variance for lightwells, a 1' east sideyard setback variance, and a 3.3' combined sideyard setback variance, finding that 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, JULY 28, 1999 the variances are needed to place the bulk of the new construction as far back from the historic house as possible, and to accommodate the width of the existing structure, and are compatible with the historic landmark and the neighborhood. 6. Clarify whether the relationship of the floor level to grade will change when the house is relocated. 7. HPC must discuss the new foundation treatment, which is proposed to be stone rubble. Staff recommends concrete, with or without a lattice covering, be used instead. 8. Provide more information as to the implications of removing the house from the existingfloor structure. In the past this has resulted in the loss of historic siding along the bottom portion of the structure and other similar negative impacts. 9. Provide a relocation plan, detailing how the house will be securely stored during relocation, and a letter of credit in the amount of $30, 000 with submittal for building permit. lO.Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly what areas of the historic house are to be removed as part of the renovation. 11.Submit a preservation plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating how the existing materials, which are to be retained, will be restored. The requirement is to retain/repair all original materials and replicate only those that are determined by HPC staff and monitor to be beyond salvage. 12.No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor. 13.HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fvctures. 14. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 15. The preservation plan described above, as well as the language of certain conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 16. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OFt JULY 28~ 1999 submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 17. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. 18. Identify lightwells and vents and no new cuts or accoutrements to be added to the historic resource. 302 E. HOPKINS PH continued - WORKSESSION MOTION: Roger moved to continue the public hearing on 302 E. Hopkins until August J ?h,' second by Maureen. All in favor, motion carried. les vote: Maureen, Roger, Heidi, Suzannah Lisa. MOTION: Roger moved to adjourn; second by Mary. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF, JULY 28, 1999 400 W. SMUGGLER - MINOR DEVELOPMENT .......... : ...................................... : ................................ 1 500 W. MAIN ST. - MESA STORE ........................................................................................................... 2 121 NORTH FIFTH STREET - CONCEPTUAL, PARTIAL-DEMOLITION, ON-SITE RELOCATION, VAR/ANCES, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW-PH .............................................. 4 302 E. HOPKINS PH CONTINUED - WORKSESSION ......................................................................... 8 9