HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20081112ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
November 12, 2008
.5:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISITS: on your own
I. Roll call
II. Approval of minutes - .September 24th and Oct. 8th 2008
minutes.
III. Public Comments
IV. Commission member comments
V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
VI. Project Monitoring:
Red Onion (20 min.)
VII. Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be #29)
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
A. None
IX. NEW BUSINESS
A. 1000 N Third St., Aspen Institute - Paepcke Auditorium -
Final (40 min.)
B. 1000 N Third St., Aspen Institute -Greenwald Pavilion -
Final (30 min.)
X. WORK SESSION
A. 1006 East Cooper (30 min)
XI. Adjourn 7:10 p.m.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
P1
RE: 1000 N. Third Street, Paepcke Auditorium-:Major Development (Final)- Public
Hearing
DATE: November 12, 2008
SUMMARY: Paepcke Auditorium was constructed, in 1961 and was designed by Herbert Bayer,
with the participation of Fritz. Benedict.. It is :virtually unaltered, inside .and out. The Aspen
Institute proposes a remodel of the building. to achieve the goals of improving mechanical
systems, energy efficiency and functionality, in addition to providing accessibility and expanding
seating capacity in the auditorium. HPC held a worksession and site visit on this topic in
February 2008, and granted Conceptual approval on May 28, 2008. A .follow-up worksession
took place on July 23,.2008. Minutes are. attached.
In 1991, .the Meadows area completed an .SPA (Specially Planned Area). review which
established the rights. to expand structures and activities on the campus. Paepcke Auditorium
was not given specific approval to expand within that plan, but the Institute will be asking to
allocate other unused area from earlier projects towards this roughly ,,600 square foot expansion
of the Paepcke building. Since the HPC review, the application has been to P&Z and Council
for_an amendment to_the _SPA_approval; Traffic-and-infrastructure impacts havebeen_discussed
in those meetings.
The SPA document clearly acknowledges the need for HPC .involvement in development at this
campus, stating that the board's review and approval is required and that there is to be "minimal
disturbance of significant examples of Herbert Bayer/Fritz Benedict architecture."
f~.
Staff recommends the greatest level of preservation possible be achieved in this project. We
recommend that existing materials be preserved to the greatest extent possible, and that .new
improvements to lighting, exterior railings, and landscape be very consistent with Bayer's other
selections for the campus. Conditions for Final are proposed in this memo.
APPLICANT: The Aspen Institute, represented by Jim Curtis, Planner and Farewell, Mills
Gatsch, Architects.
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-29-809.
1
P3
MAJORbEVELOPMENT (FINAL
The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Final level, is as follows. Staff reviews
the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the
design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to
the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to
continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the
recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the
evidence. presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve
with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny.
Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual
Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual
Development Plan shall be binding .upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the
envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application
including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of
the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan
unless agreed to by the applicant.
Staff Response: Final review deals with details' such as the .landscape plan, lighting,
fenestration, selection of new materials;'and feci}nical issues surrounding the preservation
of existing materials. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." Only
those guidelines which staff finds the project does not meet, or where discussion is needed, are
included in the_memo.
The Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies was created in 1947 by Walter Paepcke and formed
the foundation for the Aspen Renaissance period after World War II. The Meadows campus is
very significant as the center of activities related to Paepcke's "Aspen Idea." Paepcke brought
Herbert Bayer to Aspen in 1946 to serve as the design consultant for the Institute, a role in which
he served until 1976. Bayer, with assistance from Fritz Benedict, was offered the chance to
design a planned environment, where the goal was total visual integration.
The key features of the property are the campus plan and the relationship between the
architecture and landscape. A number of original Bayer features remain (some with alterations),
but others including the Music Tent and original lodge units have been demolished. New
structures have been designed in a manner that is sympathetic to the Bauhaus aesthetic. It is very
important that careful stewardship of the property be maintained.
Herbert Bayer's work is heavily documented and 'staff has attached an excerpt about his life, and
particularly his contributions in Aspen. The article',emphasizes his ground breaking influence in
the worlds of graphics, typeface, sculpture, environmental design, and more. The book "from
Bauhaus to aspen; herbert Bayer and modernist design. in america" notes the fact that his
involvement in architectural design began in Aspen, out of necessity and opportunity. The book
3
P4
explains how the structures at the Institute are integrated with the natural environment,
diminutive in scale, and built of understated materials. "The Paepcke Memorial Building echoes
the sculptural configuration of the Seminar Building, with a faceted exterior of planar geometric
elements." Part of the beauty of Bayer's work at the Institute is the way in which he used
common cinderblock to create such unique building forms, with wall surfaces full of texture and
movement.
The existing Paepcke Auditorium is approximately 17,805 square feet, contains a 346 seat
auditorium, a public gallery, library, and administrative offices. The applicant is proposing to amend
the SPA in order to increase. seating capacity in the ,:building from 346 to 406 seats by adding
approximately 614. square feet of new space: The. renovation will include upgrades to the energy
envelope of the building, improvements to the HVAC, electrical, and plumbing systems. Bringing the
building into ADA compliance for access to the restrooms, lobby, backstage, administrative offices,
and for seating in the auditorium are also proposed.
At the Conceptual level, staff objected to the removal of sections of the faceted walls of the
auditorium. We continue to believe that Herbert Bayer's unique work has incomparable. significance
in Aspen. Many of his buildings have been demolished or altered. This structure has high visibility
and high level of architectural. integrity.
Relative to the Final design issues, staff recommends that HPC discuss window and door replacement,
the details of the new construction, the proposed geothermal pond, exterior light fixtures and exterior
handrails.
While interior review is not under HPC's purview, we hope that the project will carefully retain the
original design to the greatest extent possible.
Windows and Doors
HPC heard a presentation from the Institute's mechanical engineer on July-23rd. It was represented
that the existing windows are highly inefficient from ari;energy perspective. The proposal is to replace
all the windows, and units will apparently be purchased from the original window manufacturer. Staff
'recommends that consideration be given for retaining windows such as the "slot windows" in the
Auditorium. It is staff's understanding that these are not currently operable. The applicant may seek
to make the open now. We believe there would be value in retaining the original fixed units and
perhaps adding a layer of glass on the interior to improve their insulating value. The guidelines
promote preservation of original windows as the first priority.
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
^ Features important to the character of a .window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions,
sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows.
^ Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit.
^ Preserve the original glass, when feasible.
3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a historic
window.
^ Install a storm. window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the
original window to be seen from the public way.
^ If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the
original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub-
, frames or panning around the perimeter: ~.,.
~:.
Iri some cases, the application states that the new windows will "approximate the function and profile
of the .existing," and other notes state that the new and old windows will "match." Detailed
information comparing the windows will be required as a condition of approval. The guidelines use
the term "match." The operability of the windows should be replicated as well (i.e. a slider should be
replaced with a slider; a fixed window should remain fixed.) Windows that are currently fixed should
generally be replaced with the same. The drawings aze not entirely cleaz as to whether changes of this
type are proposed. Staff and monitor (an HPC member or members assigned to observe the project
through construction and review on-going refinements) will need to verify that all window dimensions,
coloring, reflectivity of the glass, etc. are all being cazefully replicated.
3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
^ If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-hung, or at a
m;n;mum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass
panes.
^ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades.
3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original.
^ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades.
However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components
will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish.
3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the
original window.
^ A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps back
to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually
only .measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual
window from the surrounding plane of the wall.
__
The proposal is to retain the original front doors and skylight, which is appreciated. North and South
doors out of the administrative wing and lobby are being enlarged, or altered in configuration (i.e.
double leaf doors replaced by a single door with sidelights:) While this is driven by Building Code,
there are some exceptions for historic buildings and the options need to be discussed with staff and
monitor.
New Construction
The applicant has made additional amendments to the overhead doors in the new additions, in order to
improve their proportions relative to the historic glazing. Staff has some concern about the overall
ability to distinguish the additions as alterations to the building, and not Bayer's original work. Some
subtle differentiation would be appropriate.
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
^ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining
visually compatible with these earlier features.
^ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a
differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be
considered to help define a change from old to new construction.
P5
5
P6
The application includes three possible locations for a geothermal pond. Option 1, in the
foreground of the Auditorium and Koch Seminar, would be the most visually intrusive. Option
2, towards the north property. line, is not :feasible due to underground utility lines. Option 3,
tucked behind a bank on the soutk~ side of the building, seems to have the most merit. Additional
details will require review as the design is taken further.
Exterior Light Fixtures
It appears that exterior lighting on the building is currently quite limited. There are some
landscape lights on the path to the entry and some soffit lighting. No details about new site
lighting are included. The applicant intends to retain soffit lights and to add some simple new
wall mounted fixtures.
Staff recommends that information be provided as to any original fixtures on the Bayer buildings,
so that treatment of this building is .consistent. Part of Bayer's charge in the design of the
Institute campus was total visual integration. We feel that small details are quite important in
preserving the historic character of the campus.
Exterior Railings
Similar to the light fixtures, a variety of new railing designs have been implemented over time.
Paepcke Auditorium has 4 different exterior railing styles. It is staff's understanding that the
applicant 'is still evaluating the rail design that they feel is most appropriate for this building and
they will provide HPC with photographs of other examples on the campus at the meeting.
The HPC may:
• approve the application,
,_-approve the application with conditions, ._._ ._ __ _---- _---_-_ ___ ___--___- _..-__ --- ___ _. _ .--
• disapprove the application, or
• continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the following conditions for Final approval
1. Detailed information comparing the windows will be required. to verify that all window
dimensions, operation, coloring, reflectivity of the glass, etc. are carefully replicated.
2. Staff and monitor must review and ,approve any alterations to the size or configuration of
existing exterior doors, and all options for preservation of original design must be discussed
with the Building Department.
3. Subtle differentiation in the materials or detailing of the new construction must be
proposed, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor.
4. Option 3 for the geothermal pond is supporked. Additional details will require review by
staff and monitor as the design is taken further.
6
P7
5. Original light fixtures and exterior railings on the campus must inform selections for
Paepcke Auditorium, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor.
6. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved
drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the
information is available.
7. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being
reviewed and. approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board.
8. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute asite-specific development plan
vested for a period of three (3} years from the date of issuance of a development order.
However, any failure to abide by any. of 'the terms and conditions attendant to this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of .the development
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested. property rights and shall. render the
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
9. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary
to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be
published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the
City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific
development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice
shall be substantially in the following form:
10. Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development
plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years,
pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado
____Revised-:.Statutes,-pertaining o...the_following: descrbed_property:__1000 N. Third, Paepcke
Auditorium. ' ~''
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews
and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or
the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this
approval.
The approval .granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial
review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin
to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required
under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the
Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter.
Exhibits: '
Resolution #_, Series of 2008
A. Relevant HPC Design Guidelines
B. Application
C. Westword excerpt.
7
P8
"Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for Paepcke Auditorium, Final"
1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a
rehabilitation project.
^ This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding
along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the
"private" spaces beyond.
^ Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering
walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree.
^ Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style.
Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles.
1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic
structures.
^ The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod,
and not covered with paving, for example.
l.ll Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and
shrubs.
^ Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of
damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department.
^ If a tree must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a
large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project.
1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs.
^ Retaining historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways is encouraged.
1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context
of the-site. -------- ------- ------- ------------
__
^ Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact
of mature growth.
^ Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent.
^ Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials.
1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are
inappropriate.
^ Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than
the mature canopy size.
^ Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or
block views to the building.
^ It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the .yard.
1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting.
^ Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on
walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes.
2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating
or otherwise reinforcing the material.
^ Avoid the removal of damaged materials that can be repaired.
8
P9
3.4
3.5
3.7
^ ~ Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins
may be considered for wood repair and special.masonry repair components also may be used.
2.7 Match the .original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials
on primary surfaces.
^ If the original material is wood clapboard, for example, then the replacement material must
be wood as well. It should match the original in size, the amount of exposed lap and finish.
^ Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only
those should be replaced, not the entire wall.
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
^ Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions,
sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows.
Repair frames and -sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit.
Preserve the original glass, when feasible.
Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-hung, or
at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of
glass panes.
Matching the original design is particularly important on key chazacter-defining facades.
In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original.
Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades.
However, a substitute material may be considered if .the appeazance of the window
components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish.
Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the
original window.
^ A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the. window's casing, the sash steps
back to the plane of -the glazing (glass) in several increments. 'These increments, which
ndividually_onl_y__measure in eighths- or-quarters of inches, aze-important- details. They
--- -----
distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall.
3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a historic
window.
^ Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the
original window to be seen from the public way.
^ If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior,' match the sash design and material of the
original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub-
frames or panning around the perimeter.
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
^ Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the
door, door frame, screen door,. threshold, glass panes, paneling, hazdwaze, detailing, transoms
and flanking sidelights. '
^ Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances.
^ If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that
the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic
position.
^ If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must
remain operable.
9
P10
4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening.
^ Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height.
4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic
appearance.
^ For additional information see Chapter 14: General Guidelines "On-Going Maintenance of
Historic Properties".
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained. , .~
^ Anew addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the
primary building is inappropriate.
^ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is
inappropriate.
^ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style
should be avoided.
^ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
^ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining
visually compatible with these earlier features.
^ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or
a differentiation between historic, and more .current styles are all techniques that may be
considered to help define a change from old to new construction.
10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure
historically important architectural features.
^ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be
avoided.
10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic
materials oI_~ne prlmdry uUllUlug.
--------------------
^ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials.
14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that
used traditionally.
^ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be
approved by the HPC.
^ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence.
14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting.
^ Unshielded,. high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be
permitted.
^ Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures.
^ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by
controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night.
^ Do not wash an entire building facade in light.
^ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of
buildings.
^ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area.
14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building.
~,
10
P11
^ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct
light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade,
or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged.
^ Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the
property or into public rights-of--way.
14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street.
^ When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with
commercial and multifamily developments.
^ .This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks.
^ Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists.
14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way.
^ Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create
a negative visual impact.
^ Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof .must be grouped together to minimize their visual
impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible
with those of the building itself.
^ Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges.
^ A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does
not create a negative visual impact.
^ Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or
alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller
satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant
building facades or highly visible roof planes.
^ Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their
appearance by blending with their backgrounds.
11
P12
Excerpt from Denver's Westword, Arts and Entertainment newspaper,
Herbert Bayer Collection
The Denver Art Museum finally finds a permanent home for Herbert Bayer's works.
By Michael Pa~lia
Published: July 5, 2007
"Bayer was born in 1900 in Austria and showed an early propensity for art; however, his plans to
attend the Academy in Vienna were short-circuited by his father's premature death and his
conscription into the Austrian army near the end of World War I. After the war, Bayer got a job
as an architect's apprentice -first in Linz, and then in Darmstadt, Germany, in 1920. It was at
this time that he first became aware of modernism, and a year after moving to Darmstadt, he
headed to Weimar to enroll in the Bauhaus, Germany's preeminent design school.
At the Bauhaus, Bayer quickly moved from student to teacher, and in 1925, he was asked to head
up the school's graphics department, which by this time was located in Dessau. Bayer's graphic
design - in particular, his cover for the Bauhaus magazine -led to international recognition.
The cover combines the doctrinaire constructivism of the Bauhaus style with the then-cutting-
edge surrealist sensibility. The dialogue between rationality and irrationality is a key dialectic of
modernism, and its effects are evident throughout the rest of Bayer's oeuvre. It was also during
his time at the Bauhaus that Bayer designed his "universal type," a simple sans serif with no
capital letters.
From early on, the Bauhaus struggled against reactionary forces that wanted to shut it down,
meaning that financial support from the government was not forthcoming. As a result, the school
sought out private clients, and Bayer's graphics department was very successful in that effort.
In 1928, no doubt encouraged by his success with commercial art, Bayer left academia and
moved to Berlin to pursue a career in advertising. As could be expected, he became highly
successful at it; more important, his graphic designs revolutionized the field and were
internationally recognized for their daring innovations -especially his early use of
photomontage. Because of the latter, he can be compared to the likes of Man Ray and Alexandr
Rodchenko as one of the greatest photographers of the period.
As students of art history know, Germany was a great place to be a vanguard artist in the 1920s,
but by the mid-1930s, it was one of worst. The Nazis embarked on an official campaign to snuff
12
P13
out modern art, and several Bayers were confiscated from museums and later included in the
Nazis' notorious Entartete Kunst exhibition of so-called degenerate art.
With the handwriting on the wall, Bayer came to the United States in 1937, but he was asked to
go back and retrieve Bauhaus-related artifacts for a show at the Museum of Modern Art. Literally
risking his life to do so, Bayer returned to Germany to carry out the task; he returned to New
York in 1938 with $20 in his pocket and the history of the Bauhaus in his luggage. But poverty
was a passing issue, and he soon skyrocketed to the top ranks of Madison Avenue's advertising
world.
In 1945, Bayer met industrialist Walter. Paepcke, and the rest, as they say, is history. Paepcke
invited Bayer to spend time at his winter home in Aspen and then convinced him to move to the
former mining town. Bayer had free rein while living there, working as a planner and designer,
overseeing the restoration of Victorian buildings such as the Wheeler Opera House and designing
new buildings like the complexes he did for the Aspen Institute and Aspen Meadows.
At the same time, Bayer acted as an art consultant for. Paepcke's Container Corporation of
America and, later, Atlantic Richfield. He produced sculptures, tapestries, murals and
environmental installations for these companies, including some of the earliest modernist
earthworks ever done, a huge influence on later artists. And, as if all of that weren't enough for
one person to accomplish, Bayer also produced a large volume of paintings and prints and
continued his work in the field of photomontage. W~Ow.
Bayer stayed in Aspen until the 1970s, when health issues forced him to leave the high altitude.
He retired to California."
9
13
P14
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) FOR
PAEPCKE AUDITORIUM, LOCATED AT 1000 N. THIRD ST., ASPEN INSTITUTE,
ASPEN MEADOWS, LOT 1B, CITY AND TOWNSITE ASPEN.
RESOLUTION NO. _, SERIES OF 2008
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-29-809
WHEREAS, the applicant, The Aspen Institute; represented by Jim Curtis, Planner, has
requested Major Development (Final) for alterations to Paepcke Auditorium, located at 1000 N.
Third St., Aspen Institute, Aspen Meadows, Lot 1 B, City and Townsite Aspen; and '
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordarice with the procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, for Major Development Review, the HPC must. review the application, a staff
analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance
with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2
and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve,
disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information
necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHEREAS,_Amy-Guthrie,.in_her__staff_xeport dated No_v_ember_12, 2008,_performed an analysis_
of the application based on the standards, found that the. review standards and the "City of Aspen
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines ~ had been met and recommended approval with
conditions; and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on November 12, 2008, the Historic Preservation
Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the review
standards and "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and approved the
application with conditions by a vote of _ to _
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC hereby grants Major Development (Final)
approval for Paepcke Auditorium, located at 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute, Aspen Meadows,
Lot 1 B, City and Townsite Aspen, with the following conditions:
1. Detailed information comparing the windows will be required to verify that all window
dimensions, operation, coloring, reflectivity of the glass, etc. are carefully replicated.
2. Staff and monitor must review and approve any alterations to the size or configuration of
existing~exterior doors, and all options for preservation of original design must be discussed
with the Building Department.
:~~
P15
3. Subtle differentiation in the materials or detailing of the new construction. must be
proposed, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor.
4. Option 3 for the geothermal pond is supported. Additional details will require review by
staff and monitor as the design is taken further.
5. Original light fixtures and exterior railings on the campus must inform selections for
Paepcke Auditorium, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor:
6. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved
drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the
information is available.
7. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being
reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board.
8. The development :approvals granted herein. shall: constitute asite-specific development plan
vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order.
However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
9. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary
to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be
published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the
City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific
development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice
shall_be_substantially_in the following form: ______ _ ____ __ ____ _ _ - _ _
10. Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development
plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years,
pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City .of Aspen and Title. 24, .Article 68, Colorado
Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 1000 N. Third, Paepcke
Auditorium. `
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews
and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or
the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with. this
approval. .
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial
review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin
to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required
under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the
Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter.
P16
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 12th day of November,
2008.
Approved as to Form:
Jim True, Assistant City Attorney
Approved as to content:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Michael Hoffman, Chair
ATTEST:
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
P17
~T 2 ~ ~~~~
ATTACHMENT 2~-LAND USE APPLICATION
APPLICANT: ~`~~~ ~~ ~~~~~
PROJECT:
~ 1 _ i
Name: , ~ ~ '
Address:
Phone'#:
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
vt
D
i
^ Conditional Use ^ Conceptual PUD
d .
e
c
^ ~ Conceptual Histor
Final HistoricDevelopment
^ Special Review, ^ ment)
,Final PUD (& PUD Amen
^
Design Review Appeal
^ Conce tual SPA
p ^ Minor Historic Devt.
^ GMQS Allotment ^ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ^ Historic Demolition
^ GMQS Exemption ^ Subdivision ^ Historic Designation
^ ESA'- 8040 Greenline, Stream ^ Subdivision Exemption (includes ^ .Small Lodge Conversion/
i
Margin, Hallam_Lake_Bluff, _ _ condominiumization on
_ Expans
Mountain View Plane
s ^
Other:
^ Lot Split ^ e
Temporary U
f-l Lot Line Adjustment ^ Text/Map Amendment
Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $
^ Pre-Application Conference Summary
[`~'~ chment #1, Signed Fee Agreement
sponse to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form
Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards.
All plans that are larger than 8.5" g 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written
text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application.
Name: ~ ~" w ~ ~ ~/V ~ ~L~~ W ~ ~V
Location: ~ ~~
(Indicate street address, lot & bloc number, legal descriptio where appropriate)
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 7, ~ ~
P18
ATTACHMENT3
DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
~ ._ t ~~
Project:
Applicant:
Location:
Zone District:
Lot Size:
.Lot Area:
~ ~fT'Y
(for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area maybe reduced for areas
within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the
definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable: Existing: ~" Proposed:. 1/~
Number of residential units: Existing: / Proposed:
Number of bedrooms: Existing: ~ Proposed: G'1
Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ `fin
DIMENSIONS: ~
r
Floor Area: Existing: ~' Allowable: oposed:
P
Principal bldg. height:
Existing:
~ Allowable:
i Proposed: s
~
Access. bldg. height: Existing: ~' Allowable: -~' Proposed: ~
On-Site parking: Existing: ~' Required.• r Proposed: ~
Site-covera e:
g
g __.._
Existin
-_ -- q
r"--Re wired: ----- --- ~' -Pro osed:.
P __
Open Space: Existing: ~ Required: ~ Proposed:.
Front Setback: Existing: '' Required.• / Proposed:.
Rear Setback: Existing: ~' Required: ~' Proposed:.
Combined F/R: Existing: ~ Required.• ~' Proposed:.
Side Setback: Existing: -f Required: i' Proposed.•.
Side Setback: Existing: Required: ~ Proposed:,
Combined Sides: Existing: ~ Required: ~ ~ Proposed:,
Distance Between Existing ~ Required: '~ Propos
Buildings
Existing non-conformities or encroachments
Variations requested:
~ 1~I Il -
11`_----
____
,+
i "
MEMORANDUM
TO: Amy Guthrie,
FROM: Jim Curtis,
DATE: October 28, 2008
Aspen Community Deve. Office
Owner Representative
The Aspen Institute
~~ „
~.>,~ ,
°Me .~ -.. ~ ~jltFd!
~~ , ,a uti
_ ,~
RE: Paepcke Auditorium Renovation & Additions
SPA Amendment Application, Dated Apri12, 2008
Historic Preservation Commission Major Deve./Final HPC Application
Aspen Institute Property
1000 N. Third Street
Lot 1-B, Aspen Meadows Subdivision
Parcel #2735-121-29-809
This Major Deve./Final HPC Application is outlined as follows:
A. Design Development Drawings
B. Windows, Doors & Overhead Doors Details
C. Exterior Lighting
D. Patio Railings.
E. Other Materials
F. Geothermal Pond
G. Appendix Information (Submitted Under Separate Cover)
1. Land Use Application Form
2. Dimensional Requirement Form
3. Signed Fee Agreement
4. Owner Consent & Authorization Letter
5. Disclosure of Ownership Title Commitment
A. DESIGN DEVELOPMENT DRAWINGS
Enclosed are the requested most current Design Development drawings for the
project. Minor but positive r~nements have been made to the plans to reflect comments
from the May 28`h and July 23rd HPC meetings, a site inspection with the Parks
Department and technical building code comments from City Staff. The most meaningful
refinements are listed below:
1. The geothermal pond has been relocated to the SW of the building and
away from the entrance of the building based on the HPC concerns.
GuthriePaepckeAudRen 10288
1 of 4
~- !
2. The windows & doors renovation has been addressed in detail as described
below.
3. The overhead doors have been narrowed slightly based on adjustments to
the rear walls of the auditorium, and as a way to more proportionally relate
the new overhead doors to the existing slot windows.
4. The mechanical areaway at the SW rear of the building has been
reconfigured to better protect the near-by pine tree as requested by the
Parks Department.
B. WINDOWS, DOORS & OVERHEAD DOORS DETAILS
Samples of windows and doors materials will be provided at the meeting.
Main Entry Doors (East Elevation): Both outer and inner doors will remain.
New weatherstripping will be provided.
2. Administrative Wing (East, South, and West Elevations): The existing
aluminum window system, including the fixed panels, will be removed and
replaced with an aluminum system approximating the function and profile
of the existing. The construction will incorporate windows provided by the
original window manufacturer, and will incorporate a horizontal sliding
glass panel, a fixed glass panel, and a fixed. insulated aluminum panel
below. The system will be thermally broken to reduce energy loss. Finish
will be mill finish aluminum to approximate the existing finish.
3. Library (East and North West Elevations): Existing single hung aluminum
windows and fixed panels will be removed and replaced in the same fashion
as the Administrative Wing. Operation, profiles, and finish will
approximate the existing. Please note that the Library windows are believed
to have been replaced since construction of the building.
4. Foyer Doors (North and South Elevations): Existing aluminum framed
doors and frames will be replaced with an aluminum system approximating
the existing. The existing doors are undersized for egress and accessibility
and are single glazed. New doors will be sized appropriately and will be
thermally efficient.
5 Auditorium Slot Windows (North, West, and South Elevations): Existing
aluminum windows will be removed and replaced with new aluminum
GuthriePaepckeAudRen 10288 2 of 4
widows with insulated glass. Frame profiles for the new windows will
match existing.
6. Overhead Folding Doors: The horizontal mullion pattern remains dominant
and aligns with original (replaced) horizontal mullions. The door will
receive an aluminum curtain wall glazing system with finish to match all
other aluminum windows and doors.
7. New Stage Egress Doors (North and South Elevations): New doors to be
hollow metal and to be painted to match the surrounding wall surface so as
to draw as little attention as possible to the new openings.
8. Backstage Doors (West Elevation): The existing double wood doors, which
are in bad shape, will be replaced with new hollow metal doors to be
painted to match the surrounding wall surface. Metal doors for the
backstage service area are more functional and durable than wood doors.
C. EXTERIOR LIGHTING
Existing downlights located in the soffit of the administrative wing will be
replaced with new energy efficient fixtures in the same locations, using the same aperture
size. Existing wall sconces will be replaced with new fixtures (lighting details located on
drawings), and new doors will receive the same fixtures.
New patio ramp and stair lighting will be provided by a concealed fixture located
within the new railing system that will provide a wash of even light over these elements.
D. PATIO RAILINGS
New patio ramp and stair railings are proposed to be a stainless steel post and
cable system with a concealed light fixture in the handrail. A cut sheet is located on the
drawings. The Institute is open to discussing matching the existing white tube railing with
white woven in-fill pattern at the patio if that is preferred by HPC. The issue with
matching the existing railing is how exterior step lighting is handled.
E. OTHER MATERIALS
1. Concrete Masonry Units (CMU): New CMU will match the existing to the
extent practical. The exterior of the building will be completely repainted
(color to match existing).
2. Roofing: New roofing to be white TPO over the auditorium and upper flat
administrative wing areas, and a fluid applied white membrane will be utilized
on sloped administrative wing areas.
GuthriePaepckeAudRen10288 3 of 4
F. GEOTHERMAL POND
As communicated prior, the Institute is proposing to heat and cool the renovated
Paepcke Building using a Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP) Pond, i.e. a Geothermal
Pond as shown on the enclosed Site Plan. The recently constructed Doerr-Hosier
Building at the Aspen Institute is heated and cooled by a GSHP System which is
projected to reduce the gas and electric use of heating and cooling the building by
approximately 40%. The Doerr-Hosier Building has been awarded a LEED "Gold"
Certification which is believed to the 1St Gold Certified building in the valley. It is hoped
the renovated Paepcke Building would achieve approximately the same 40% savings.
Additionally, the pond has been sized to hopefully tie-in the Koch Seminar Building at a
future date.
The proposed pond has been relocated to an upper bench SW of the building
based on concerns raised by the HPC about locating the pond at the entrance of the
Paepcke and Koch buildings. This is Preferred Option #3 shown on the Pond Locations
drawing enclosed. The new pond location will have minimal visibility or impact on the
Paepcke and Koch landscapes and the Institute feels it is a much better location. The
pond is located on an upper bench of native grasses and was field inspected and
conceptually agreed to by the Parks Department on September lOtl'. The Institute will
continue to work with the Parks Department to refine the design details and construction
management plan for the pond.
If the GSHP Pond proves technically infeasible or too costly, the Institute will
cool the building using a fluid cooler mechanical system as shown on the Site Plan and
heat the building using high efficiency boilers. However, based on the technical and cost
estimating work that has occurred on the GSHP system and pond since the July 23rd HPC
meeting, the system and pond appear to be feasible and cost effective. The proposed
location for the fluid cooler equipment, if used, is behind a cluster of aspen and
cottonwood trees behind the Paepcke Building and this location was field inspected and
conceptually agreed to by the Parks Department on September 10th based on submittal of
a construction management plan to protect the cluster of aspen and cottonwood trees
hiding the equipment.
GuthriePaepckeAudRen10288 4 of 4
~$ P,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner
RE: Greenwald Pavilion Worksession
DATE: November 12, 2008
During a recent survey of the property, the applicant discovered asewage/water easement
running through. the area conceptually approved by HPC for the new Greenwald Pavilion. Since
this discovery, the applicant has been working on a proposed new location for the tent that does
not disrupt the easements. The current proposal included in your packet relocates it closer to the
top of slope and out of the easement area. Walkways and fire access had to be rerouted on the
campus to accommodate the new location. Anew terrace is also proposed. Staff received this
information without adequate time to get referral agency comments on the new location and
impact of the fire access to the landscape.
The applicant was scheduled for Final review at HPC on November 12, 2008. HPC is asked to
determine whether the proposed changes are substantial enough to warrant a new Conceptual
review or if the applicant can proceed to Final review. The applicant is seeking feedback on the
proposed location and impact during the worksesson.
L
1