MEETING DATE: Thursday, January 10, 2019 MEETING TIME: 5:30 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City Council Chambers, 448 East First Street, Salida, CO

Transcription

1 Page 1 of 25 AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEETING DATE: Thursday, January 10, 2019 MEETING TIME: 5:30 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City Council Chambers, 448 East First Street, Salida, CO I. CALL TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES December 19, 2018 III. UNSCHEDULED CITIZENS IV. AMENDMENT(S) TO AGENDA V. REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS: 1. Major Certificate of Approval Morgan Jones, 133 E. Sackett Avenue The applicant is requesting Major Certificate of Approval to construct an oversized carport on the west side of the duplex structure and install shed roofs above each side entry at 133 E Sackett Avenue. a. Staff Review of Application b. Applicant s Presentation c. Commission Discussion d. Commission Recommendation e. Decision by Staff VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: VII. NEW BUSINESS: Discuss Major Certificate of Approval process VIII. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: IX. ADJOURN **An alternate can only vote on, or make a motion on an agenda item if they are designated as a voting member at the beginning of an agenda item. If there is a vacant seat or a conflict of interest, the Chairman shall designate the alternate that will vote on the matter. If a Voting member shows up late to a meeting, he cannot vote on the agenda item if the alternate has been designated.

2 Salida Historic Preservation Commission Historic Preservation Commission packet Page 2 of 25 DRAFT MEETING DATE: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 MEETING TIME: 5:30 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: City Council Chambers, 448 East First Street, Suite 190, Salida, CO Present: Krebs, Harris, Tomkiewicz, Zeman, Klein, Van Nimwegen, Jefferson, Almquist Absent: Regan, Hunnicutt I. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Krebs at 5:30 pm. II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: October 11, 2018 Harris made a motion to approve the minutes as written. seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion carried. Zeman III. UNSCHEDULED CITIZENS: None IV. AMENDMENT(S) TO AGENDA: None V. REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS: 1. Major Certificate of Approval Manhattan Hotel, 228 North F Street The applicant is requesting Major Certificate of Approval to construct an addition attached to the existing historic Manhattan Hotel. The request also includes removal and replacement of existing windows on the second story of the F Street façade and removal of windows on the north side of the structure and installation of doors in the existing openings. A. Staff Review of Application Jefferson gave an overview of the proposal and stated that staff supports the application with three (3) conditions of approval. B. Applicant s Presentation Steve Riden, applicant s representative explained the changes the applicant agreed to after the November work session. He stated that the applicant agreed to install fabric awnings on the ground floor but would rather have metal awnings on the upper floors because of maintenance. Riden stated that he doesn t agree with the metal kickplate not being compatible. Harris asked if he understood that the kickplate wasn t on the doors but under the storefront windows and he said yes. C. Commission Discussion: Krebs opened the Commission discussion. Harris asked about the proposed awnings and Riden stated that the owner is fine with a material awning on the ground floor but prefers the metal awnings on the second floor. He explained that that the owner does not want to have to install the retractable awnings. Harris asked if the proposed brick was a thin brick veneer and Riden said no that the brick will be a regular size brick. Harris thanked Riden for a great detailed packet. Klein explained that he is concerned with the visibility of the existing ductwork and asked if it will be moved to the interior. He stated that the application materials do not show the exterior ductwork and was hoping that it would be moved to the interior. Riden explained that the ducting on the south wall will be moved to the interior with the construction of the addition and the hood vent for the kitchen on Meeting Minutes

3 Salida Historic Preservation Commission Historic Preservation Commission packet Page 3 of 25 DRAFT the north wall will be enclosed with the proposed metal siding. Klein stated that it would be a huge improvement to move all of the ductwork to the interior. Klein specified that the most important façades of this structure are the F Street façade and the riverside façade. Klein referenced the application materials and explained that it is stated that the applicant is trying to treat the addition as a separate building and not as an appendage to the existing structure. He explained that he sees things in the application as appendages like the proposed balconies on the River side of the structure and feels that they are inappropriate. Klein stated that replacing the existing windows with doors and adding decks is an appendage which will take away from the Historic Structure. He said that if he were a voting member tonight he would vote against removing the windows and installing doors in the existing openings and adding the balconies. Riden explained that the Secretary of Interior Standards allows for additions or balconies to be added as long as if removed in the future the existing historic structure is unharmed. He further explained that the balconies will not be attached to the structure so that it will not damage it. Klein stated that he thinks that the proposed metal on the addition is too contemporary and doesn t compliment the historic structure. He recommended using stucco instead of the metal. Klein asked if the applicant intends on using the same brick as the historic building and Riden said no they will be using the brick that was used on the restaurant. Tomkiewicz commended the applicant for listening to the Commission s recommendations at the November work session. He explained that his only issue is the use of the metal siding as it looks too contemporary. Zeman said that she agrees with everybody that the updated application is much better. Zeman stated that she likes the reference on the corner of the addition with the round window that relates to the existing historic structure. She explained that her biggest concern is the proposed balconies on the river side of the building because the Commission is here to preserve the historic structures. Zeman said that she is very opposed to the balconies and removing the windows and inserting doors in those existing openings because it detracts from the historic structure. Zeman agreed with Klein regarding the ductwork and would like to see it rerouted to the interior of the structure. Zeman said that she agrees with everything that Commissioner Klein brought up earlier. Krebs stated that he has a real problem with the proposed balconies on the river side and is concerned how they will be held up without attaching to the existing structure. He said that he feels that the balconies are not appropriate to that side of the building. Krebs indicated that he doesn t have a problem with changing out the windows and installing doors but doesn t want to see balconies. He doesn t believe that the balconies will be used much and Riden disagreed and said that it is not unusual to see balconies like these on similar historic structures. Krebs agreed with staff on the metal kickplates and explained that the kickplate should be compatible with the existing structure. He is fine with the metal hyphen and the metal that separates the addition on the south elevation but does not agree with the use of the metal in all other areas of the addition. Riden stated that they can reduce the amount of metal to just the hyphen and the metal on the south Meeting Minutes

4 Salida Historic Preservation Commission Historic Preservation Commission packet Page 4 of 25 DRAFT elevation. Krebs said that he also has concerns with the glass wall on the west elevation of the addition. Riden stated that the window wall is intended to open completely and is designed around the function of the space. Krebs explained that he is pleased with most everything that has been presented with this application but will not support the installation of the balconies on the north wall and the use of all of the proposed metal. Harris stated that he does not have a problem with the river side elevation and the proposed balconies because the entire first floor has been covered with the restaurant and that side of the building has been altered several times in the past. He explained that the Secretary of Interior standards for rehabilitation allow for additions like the balconies because if removed in the future the existing historic structure will not be harmed. Harris believes that the balconies will be used a lot especially during the summer festivals. Harris explained that uses change within historic buildings and the Commission is not tasked with telling people what they can or cannot do. He stated that when uses change there needs to be some allowances for alterations as long as the integrity of the historic building remains. Klein disagrees with Harris and stated he doesn t like the notion that you can justify another aberration to the building based on something that is already an aberration to the building. Klein stated that it is not right to say that just because we have already let this façade morph on the bottom we should allow it to happen again and we have to stop the bleeding on this thing. Klein said that if there is an approval vote he hopes that they will include the removal of all of the ductwork on the building. Harris asked if the ductwork is existing because the Commission does not have the authority to require an applicant to remove something that is existing. Klein stated that the ductwork was never approved by the Commission. Zeman stated that when the Commission approved the restaurant expansion in 2017 the ductwork was not shown in the application materials and was not approved. Zeman asked about the spa deck on the west elevation and wondered if that could be an option for people instead of the proposed balconies on the north elevation. Klein stated that he sees why they would want to have the decks but in this case there just is no reason to have them, not even economically. Klein said that the applicant does not need the balconies to sell the rooms because he owns the hotel next to this property and he has no problem renting his rooms without decks. Riden stated that the applicant wants the balconies along the river and Klein said that he may not be on the river but he is across the street from Riverside Park and still rents rooms without balconies. Klein stated that the statement that having the balconies will make it or break it economically doesn t hold water and they are not critical to the function of the business. D. Commission Recommendation: Krebs made a motion to approve the exterior alterations as proposed with the three recommended conditions: 1. That the applicant use a stone or tile material that is compatible with the Meeting Minutes

5 Salida Historic Preservation Commission Historic Preservation Commission packet Page 5 of 25 DRAFT existing historic structure for the proposed kickplates. 2. That the applicant applies for a building permit as required by the Chaffee County Building Department prior to starting construction. 3. Upon completion of the project the applicant contact staff for inspection of the approved work prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. And added the following conditions: 4. The only use of the proposed metal material shall be the two vertical areas where addition connects to the existing building and at the hotel entrance on the south elevation. 5. Remove five balconies on the River side of building as they are inappropriate additions to a historic structure. 6. Relocate all ductwork from the exterior of the building to an interior chase. Harris seconded the motion. Zeman opposed and the motion carried 3 to 1. E. Decision by Staff: Staff will review the recommendations of the HPC with the Administrator who will make the final determination. VI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None VII. NEW BUSINESS: Jefferson stated that she is going to try to schedule a work session with the Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in January to discuss returning the Commission as a decision making board. VIII. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None IX. ADJOURN: 7:10 PM Meeting Minutes

6 Page 6 of 25 MEETING DATE: January 10, 2019 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM TITLE: AGENDA SECTION: 133 E. Sackett Avenue- Major Certificate of Approval Application Public Hearing REQUEST: The request is to receive Major Certificate of Approval to construct an oversized carport on the west side of the duplex structure at 133 E. Sackett Avenue and install shed roofs above each side entry. APPLICANT: The applicant is Morgan Jones, Double M Trust, 1785 E. Interstate 30, Garland, TX The representative for the applicant is Deke Spillyards of Colorado Architectural Drafting. LOCATION: The legal description for the property is available at City Hall. The Historic name of the property is DeWeese Terrace. PROCESS: A major Certificate of Approval (CA) shall be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission and ruled upon by the Administrator or his or her designee at a regular or special meeting to be conducted within twenty (20) days from the date the application was determined complete. Written notice of the date, time and location of the meeting shall be mailed by regular mail or personally delivered to the applicant not less than five (5) days prior to the meeting. The unexcused absence of the applicant from the meeting shall cause the Administrator or his or her designee to deny the application or, at the Administrator or his or her designee s option, continue the matter to a later meeting date of its choosing. OBSERVATIONS: 1. The subject property is located within the Central Business (C-2) District and the Downtown Historic District. 2. The property is considered contributing to the downtown historic district. According to the Architectural Inventory for this property, This building is associated with the development of multi-family terrace housing in Salida s downtown during the early twentieth century. The well preserved building displays popular architectural elements of the late Victorian period, including a decorative cornice, a projecting porch with columns, segmental arched windows, corbelled chimneys, and round windows. 3. The applicant is requesting approval to construct an oversized two-car carport on the west side of the duplex structure and install metal shed roofs above the side entry of each unit. Public Hearing, Agenda Item 1, Pg. 1

7 Page 7 of The applicant has included photographs, elevations, and a site plan describing the proposed carport and shed roofs. The materials include rough sawn timbers, pre-engineered trusses, rusted corrugated metal siding on the gable ends and a metal roof to match the metal on the duplex. The carport will match the carport that was approved in December 2017 and will be slightly shorter with an overall height of 13 9 ¼. 5. The oversized carport will setback 43 from the front property line but will be visible from Sackett Avenue. The shed roofs should not be highly visible from Sackett Avenue. West side of duplex where carport will be constructed REVIEW STANDARDS: 1. Conformance with Certificate of Approval Review Standards for a contributing building (Section (a)) using the Design Guidelines in the review: A. Architectural Character. Whether and/or to what extent the proposed work will preserve, protect, change, diminish, disguise, obscure, detract from or destroy the appearance or structural integrity of the historic features, design, materials, character or value of the structure or site. The proposed carport will be located at the west side of the existing duplex structure. The materials will complement the work that was done to the duplex in 2012 and match the existing carport that was approved in The proposed shed roofs will match the existing corrugated metal on the addition of the duplex and will not be highly visible. West side of duplex showing the proposed carport Public Hearing, Agenda Item 1, Pg. 2

8 Page 8 of 25 B. Original Materials. Whether original designs, materials, finishes and construction techniques that characterize the historic value and appearance of a structure or site can be retained, restored or repaired as opposed to replaced, and whether replacement designs, materials or finishes can match and/or accurately replicate the originals. According to the Downtown Design Guidelines, Part 4 Additions and New Buildings, Section B Materials: Building materials of new structures and additions to existing structures should contribute to the visual continuity of the district. They should appear similar to those seen traditionally to establish a sense of visual continuity. The proposed materials for the carport include rough sawn timbers, pre-engineered trusses, rusted corrugated metal siding on the gable ends which match the existing corrugated metal on the duplex. The roof will be a metal roof to match the existing roof of the duplex which will contribute to the visual continuity of the property. The carport will be similar to the carport that was approved in 2017 The proposed materials for the shed roofs are corrugated metal to match the existing metal of the addition. C. Minimum Change. Whether and/or to what extent the proposed work will require more than a minimal change to the historic appearance, materials or integrity of the structure or site. The proposed work will not change the historic appearance of the primary structure. D. New Construction. New additions, exterior alterations and related work shall not destroy or detract from the existing historic structure and materials to the maximum extent feasible, and such new work or alterations shall be differentiated from, but compatible with, the existing size, scale and exterior architectural features of the structure or site so as to protect its historic identity and integrity. According to Salida Design Guidelines, Part 4, Additions and New Buildings, The materials, window sizes and alignment of trim elements on the addition should be compatible to those of the existing structure if it is a contributing structure and to the district if it is non-contributing. Exterior materials of both the shed roofs and the carport will be compatible with the existing duplex. E. Historic Appearance. Work that will protect or return the original historic appearance of a structure or site, especially where documented by photographs, historic research or other credible evidence, shall be encouraged and favored. According to Salida Design Guidelines, Part 4, Additions and New Buildings, New construction should be designed in such a way that it does not over power or detract from historic buildings. It should be compatible. Public Hearing, Agenda Item 1, Pg. 3

9 Page 9 of 25 The proposed work includes building a carport on the west side of the duplex and will be visible from Sackett Avenue. The overall height of the carport is 13 9 ¼. The materials are compatible with the current building and previously approved carport and will not overpower the existing two-story structure. The proposed shed roof over each entry will barely be visible from Sackett Avenue. F. Work Necessary. Whether the proposed work is required or necessary to comply with a building, fire or other health/safety code. The proposed work will comply with all existing building, fire and other health/safety codes. RECOMMENDED FINDINGS: 1. That the application is in compliance with the review standards for contributing structures in the historic district because the new construction should not detract from the historic integrity of the primary structure and site. 2. The new construction will be differentiated from but compatible with the existing historic structure. 3. The work is not necessary to comply with any building, fire or life safety code. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the observations and review standards outlined above, staff recommends Approval of the application for the construction of an oversized carport on the west side of the duplex structure at 133 E. Sackett Ave and the installation of a shed roof above each side entry with the following conditions: 1. That the applicant applies for a building permit as required by the Chaffee County Building Department prior to starting construction. 2. Upon completion of the project, the applicant contact staff for inspection of the approved work prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the recommended findings be made and the recommended action be taken. Attachment: Application Site plan Architectural Inventory Form for 133 East Sackett Avenue Public Hearing, Agenda Item 1, Pg. 4

10 Page 10 of 25

11 Page 11 of 25

12 Page 12 of 25

13 Page 13 of 25

14 Page 14 of 25

15 Page 15 of 25

16 Page 16 of 25

17 Page 17 of 25 To: City of Salida (Salida Historical Commission) Date: December 4, 2018 Re: Certificate of Appropriateness for Addition to site and Building (Park Place), 133 E. Sackett Street, New Carport at side of Unit A as well as for Unit A & B addition of shed roofs at side entrances (each unit), Prepared by: Deke Spillyards, Colorado Architectural Drafting dba Deke Designs PO Box 411 Salida,Co colorado.drafting@gmail.com Prepared for: Morgan Jones, Owner (Double M Trust) 1785 E. 130 Garland, TX Dear Members of the Commission: The following narrative and images are to provide a description of the proposed addition/change to the 133 E. Sackett Avenue. This document was prepared to present to the Salida Historical Preservation Commission. Scope of work: The scope of this project consists of the addition of a over-sized 2 car carport at the west side of the above mentioned address. The footprint of the new carport will be 23.5 feet by 35 feet, side setback to the west of unit A of the existing residential structure & 18 inches from adjacent property to the west. The existing rear façade and front/side façade (Image #1 and 2) will remain. The proposed rear elevation from the alley will look like (Image #3) with the addition of above mentioned carport. The view from the west (adjacent property) will look like (Image #4), though the lower six (6) feet of structure will be obstructed by an existing six (6) foot tall fence. The new carport will be constructed of rough sawn timbers, preengineered trusses; rusted corrugated metal siding at the gable ends to match the existing metal on site and the roof will be a metal roof to match the existing structures. This new carport will be constructed similar to the existing carport which was approved this past year. Colorado Architectural Drafting DBA Deke Designs Inc.

18 Page 18 of 25 Image #1) Photo of existing residence from rear of property, November 20, 2018 Image #2) (above) shows West elevation as of November 20, 2018 The existing residential structure will remain and a carport will be added feet from side of existing building unit A per the images below and attached documents. Colorado Architectural Drafting DBA Deke Designs Inc.

19 Page 19 of 25 Image #3 (above) depicts the proposed rear elevation with the added carport. Photo #4: (above) depicts the proposed side elevation with the added carport. Second scope of work: The scope of this portion of project consists of the addition of shed roofs to cover the side entry of both units of the above mentioned address. The new shed roofs will cover the side entry of each unit from existing deck above to outer edge of existing structure. The new shed roofs will be constructed of rough sawn rafters and beam and will have a corrugated metal roof that will be similar to the existing metal siding on the structure. The new roofs will have a very mild slope and shouldn t be too visible from any public street. Image #5 shows the existing side entry for Unit A (Unit B is identical), Image #6 shows the proposed addition of the the shed roof at the side entrance. See associated documents and drawings for additional information. Colorado Architectural Drafting DBA Deke Designs Inc.

20 Page 20 of 25 Second part of H.P.C Submittal; the addition of shed roofs to the side of each residence, unit A and unit B Image #5: West elevation Unit A as of November 20, 2018, Unit B is mirror image Photo #6: (above) depicts the proposed shed roof addition at side entrance Additional documents: We have attached the following documents: 1) preliminary site plan and proposed plans, for Carport and Shed roofs 2) proposed elevations with keynotes Thank you for your time and thoughtfulness in considering the application. We look forward to hearing from you with your comments. Deke Spillyards, Colorado Architectural Drafting dba Deke Designs Colorado Architectural Drafting DBA Deke Designs Inc.

21 Page 21 of 25 N 51 54'19" W 74.96' N 51 54'19" W ' S 38 05'39" W ' N 38 08'42" E ' N 38 03'22" E N 38 09'14" E ' N 51 55'36" W 74.86' 99.82'

22 Page 22 of 25

23 Page 23 of 25

24 Page 24 of 25

25 Page 25 of 25