Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20181010 1 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2018 Commissioners in attendance: Gretchen Greenwood, Scott Kendrick, Bob Blaich, Roger Moyer, Richard Lai. Absent were Nora Berko, Willis Pember, Jeffrey Halferty and Sheri Sanzone. Staff present: Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Ben Anderson, Planner Kevin Dunnett, Parks Planning & Construction Supervisor Chairperson Greenwood opened the meeting at 4:34 p.m. Ms. Simon noted that Ms. Berko is out, and Ms. Sanzone has a conflict, but she is expecting Mr. Pember and Mr. Halferty. Mr. Blaich made a correction on the meeting minutes for September 26th and said he did not appreciate the western saloon approach. MOTION: Mr. Moyer moved to approve the minutes for September 12th and September 26th, Mr. Blaich seconded. All in favor, motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Mr. Moyer would like to see us more proactive about the urban forest, parking and housing. He feels that the board is getting slammed in these areas and need more clarification and better understanding on these issues. Regarding housing, this is something we cannot keep doing since we are always giving and not maintaining. We need a better understanding of what is happening. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT: None. PROJECT MONITORING: None. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon said she sent everyone an email yesterday with meeting dates for the rest of the year. She said to take note of the especially important work session with city council and HPC on November 13th. Ms. Greenwood asked if they can review the benefits before that meeting in preparation and Ms. Simon said she does want them to have a clear idea of what they are proposing to council beforehand. She suggested maybe having a lunch meeting beforehand. She also mentioned the great Mall Fest 42 and said there was a really great turn out and speakers in attendance. She appreciates the recognition from the APA and thanked Mr. Lai for his part in that. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None. CALL UPS: None. OLD BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: Lift One Lodge Subdivision Ben Anderson, Kevin Dunnett & Amy Simon 2 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2018 Mr. Anderson noted that public comment from Hilton Goldreich has been entered into the record and summarized for the board as well as handed out copies. He said this application came to HPC back in July. After city council gave direction to the property owners in the area and after SE group determined that the lift could be moved, the property owners went back to the drawing board in response. The conversation this evening, is now in the review process and heading to city council and the voters of Aspen. The Gorsuch Haus has existing approvals, and this is a major amendment to the existing approvals. We are collectively calling this the Lift One Corridor. The Aspen Ski Co and the historical society have been very involved in this and the review schedule is ambitious. Presentations started last week with P&Z and APCHA so we are starting our review with HPC now and it is likely to continue to the 24thof October. We will go to Open Space on October 18th and this will be evaluated on October 22nd with council. When we introduced this months ago, several of you showed up to look at the lay of the land and we have another site visit planned on Monday to stake out the property and evaluate the height of the buildings. Stan Clausen and Scott Glass are here representing the applicants for Lift One. We are going to try to narrow the project for discussion tonight as we are trying to get a recommendation on specific aspects. Aspen street has been realigned and narrowed and the skier chalet has been relocated to Willoughby Park, which was initially proposed as dorm style affordable housing. There will a sub grade parking garage, but the entrance has changed, and the access is now proposed off of Dean Street. There will be a widened ski corridor, a relocated lift station and lift corridor, relocated skier chalet and steakhouse, a relocation of the historic lift, inclusion of ASC skier service and patrol and a redesign of Willoughby Park. There is a change to the lot configuration as well. Two lots are owned by the City of Aspen and two are owned by the Lift One Lodge. The city property has been redrawn and it is important that the Dolensic property gets horseshoed. Two of the Dolensic brothers were involved in the building of the original lift and the property has been sold to the city. The Dolensic gardens will get incorporated into the larger site design. The entire project couldn’t happen without this family. There has been an agreement for the family to allow some ski operation. In the existing approvals, HPC had purview of Lift One park because of the historic towers and Willoughby park and the area of the original lot 2 containing the steakhouse. HPC commented on these things in the existing approval. We are asking you to please consider what is going on now in lot 3. The purview has shifted with the lot configuration. Planning and zoning is looking at several issues such as, scale and massing, employee housing, reconfiguration of underground parking and making recommendations on approval docs. Mr. Dunnett is the planning design and construction manager for parks and open space and has been involved with this project since early April. He said there are impacts to open space parcels and the entire corridor. The Dolensic parcel is under his current purview and is a very large piece of property. Mr. Brown has pointed out that it’s more space than Wagner park, so it is an amazing opportunity to really highlight and create vitality of seamless continuity. Mr. Dunnett said that Josephine Dolensic is 97 and very involved in the process. He added that a lot has changed since we were here in July. He continued to walk through the plan on screen. Dean street would now be a one way. There are dramatic cross slopes and we are working with engineering to make this an urban frontage to the project. 3 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2018 Ms. Simon mentioned that a diagram is included in the packet and she went over it on screen with the board. They will be moving the skier’s lodge downhill to become a ski museum. It will be moving a bit further downhill than what was seen in the proposal. She said that HPC needs to understand there are some additional impacts to the steakhouse building and said the one-story dining room is being removed and there will be a patio in the front. A relocation is already approved, but she is not sure to what extent the impacts were vetted, but we want to make sure we get it right this time. There is a retaining wall, which changes the character of the structure. They want to look at what options are available to bring up the grade. The skier’s chalet lodge was built in 1960 and is a classic chalet. There is a difference in how the grade meets the building. When you come up to the lodge, it’s sitting on a concrete foundation and the ground level just dives straight into the hill. The new setting is as respectful as possible to the new appearance. We need to put a preservation lens on this project. The height of the base level is a concern. It appears that reaching back to the 2011 approval, the balconies were not drawn properly so we are concerned about that. Everything is tight regarding the grade relationships and we are unsure what adjustments are possible. The retaining wall is a concern on the steakhouse because we’d like to see more grass wherever possible. We’d like HPC to focus on the lift, what you think in general, discuss the preservation treatments for the lift regarding lead paint, repairs, etc. and hear your opinions on the relocations. There are conservation issues with the lodge buildings so staff is recommending continuation to October 24th. Mr. Moyer asked who has ridden Lift 1 A and then asked if anyone from the city expressed concern about the historic structure being moved and Mr. Anderson said it was a constraint by the SE Group, so alternatives have been proposed. Different configurations have been examined and they considered the existing location. As they looked at the project at large, it required a relocation. Mr. Moyer then asked why no no one from the city asked them not to move it and Ms. Simon said there have been many discussions about this and it proved to be a tough decision. She advised him that HPC will get left out of the conversation if we flat out say no as a board. Ms. Greenwood asked if there is any information available which describes the relationship of the new area and if they have the detail of how the building meets the grade. Ms. Simon said Mr. Dunnett will be the best to answer those questions. Mr. Dunnett said he and Mr. Glass had a discussion earlier in the day on this subject and the idea is to mitigate the height issue. Mr. Glass said they will present on those issues tonight. Mr. Lai asked how extensive it is and where the parking will be located and what the proposals are for underground parking. Mr. Anderson said he will let the applicants speak to this, but there are 163 spaces, which are all subgrade. There are several layers of parking, which will require significant excavation. The parking requirements have been reduced to encourage less automobile use in the core and the project is responding to meeting the minimum requirements. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Scott Glass of Guerin Glass Architects, Stan Clauson of Stan Clauson Associates and Michael Brown. Mr. Clauson said this is a highly cooperative project. This is a unique opportunity to celebrate Aspen’s history and future. Largely, the lift 1 lodge and changes were driven by SE group and various alternatives they came up with. When city council opted with this design, in addition to the requirements of the ski co, it necessitated a significant change of the design and footprint. There is a 60-foot-wide ski corridor. The historic elements are now brought together by the corridor and 4 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2018 accessibility will be enhanced. The garage will provide 50 public spaces as part of the original agreement and also due to the outdoor spaces being lost on the street. The garage entry has moved down to Dean street. We feel this is a much better arrangement and engineering agrees as it is no longer necessary for the cars to go up the steep slope of Aspen street. Mr. Brown spoke about the benefits to the community and said it has been a long process with different stakeholders. This is an incredible opportunity for the community to develop a second portal onto the mountain. We want to revitalize the neighborhood with restaurants and lodging to showcase and interact with ski history. There will be new equipment, a telemix lift, better access and passenger foot traffic, which allows for summer and winter usage. There will be reduced congestion around the gondola. The loading factor at lift 1, will be about 3%. The goal here is to get the load factor on to the mountain at 20%. Now it’s a very walkable solution and there will be amazing summer opportunities for the parks and gardens. It will be a return to the roots of the building with a vibrant bar and restaurant located adjacent to the telemix base. Mr. Glass showed a contemporary view on screen. He said the most exciting part of the project is opening up the side of the mountain and having the historical assets. He showed floor plans on screen and talked through it for the board. Ms. Greenwood said it would be helpful to visually see these relationships between all of the buildings and the lift. PUBLIC COMMENT: Marissa Laskey Ms. Laskey said she has been in Aspen since the late 1960’s and knows the area really well. She lives at South Point and is the most affected by the building with the parking garage. This is food for thought and for you to consider the impact to us. She said she applauds the major players for working so well together. She asked Mr. Glass to show the overlay of the old proposal and the new and she addressed the parking and the sidewalk proposed in front of South Point. She said this will remove the trees and remove the dumpster. It’s a conundrum. She would like to see the sidewalks on the other side of the street and said that moving this building to almost curbside and adding another 3 feet, makes this a very large and tall lift. Most residents feel as though they are on garden level. They’d like to see the lodge moved back to the originally proposed area. We’d like to see more of a plaza area in front of the building so people can queue up to the historic building as a gathering place. The other piece is the parking and traffic as the residences still need to park, but they are losing some of the original parking they would have with the lodge. There is constant looping from lift 1 around Dean Street, including trucks and service vehicles that need to get in and out. She’s also concerned that they’ve lost all of the employee housing and said something within the lodge would have been helpful. David Corgen / planning and development for Aspen Ski Co. Mr. Corgen said this has been a very collaborative process so far and we support the preservation of the historic lift. We also support the preservation of the steakhouse and skier chalet building. A potential occupant and necessary occupant. We have about 2500 square feet of program that will have to be incorporated into this portal. The patrol and ticketing function has migrated into the skier chalet building. For us, our space is located at the Dean Street entry. For us, at a Dean Street elevation, it’s critical to have west side exit and we anticipate a circulation pattern. Ms. Greenwood asked him if there will be ticketing available from the outside and Mr. Corgen said no, it will be indoors. With electronic 5 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2018 ticketing, it necessitates an inside ticketing experience. The westside accessibility really is essential to the functionality for us. It is very important and we would not support moving the building back to the south, but are sorry to the residents of South Point. Public comment closed. Mr. Brown said they appreciate South Points interest in the project and that Ms. Laskey has been at all of the hearings. They are supportive fundamentally of the lift moving down. With respect to the parking spaces, he is not sure why she references losing spaces as there will be more than what was previously. We can’t be held responsible for the entire neighborhood and the lower lift location in town, lends itself to less cars anyway. People won’t be driving to that location. Dave Corgen articulated the necessity to pull the building to Dean Street and I can appreciate their views are impacted, but this is something that is important to the milling and the ski yard. The street has nice width to it and we’ve tried to be very respectful of South Point. Mr. Clauson said one thing that has been done with engineering is to allow a substantial portion of the landscaping and South Point has a considerable amount of landscaping in the city right of way. The dumpster is also in the right of way and we are mindful that we want to retain all of the landscaping. The dumpster is an issue and we do recognize that. Ms. Greenwood asked him if they have a solution for the dumpster and Mr. Clauson said no. The city would like it removed, but he doesn’t currently have a solution. He can understand why they don’t want to move it closer to the building and said it’s not a historic preservation issue, but an engineering issue. I think we are clearly trying to be respectful of their issues and look forward to working with them. Ms. Simon said that as far as HPC’s purview goes, it ends at the property line. She said not to think of how the whole project comes together. The street and sidewalk are not your purview. You may have thoughts about the parking garage, but we want you to stick to the HPC aspects. This is a conceptual HPC review and is not a binding approval. We have reserved time on October 24th for another meeting, so we want to make sure everything is fully explained before you make a decision. This is a site plan review that you are conducting right now so we need to make sure you are satisfied at a conceptual level. There is no need to rush before you’ve gotten all of the info needed. Ms. Greenwood summed up what the board needs to focus on. She said she doesn’t feel like employee housing belongs there. She said to think of whether this could move forward in terms of site planning and she likes this site plan. She thinks it’s really beautiful, but has a lot of questions regarding details. She doesn’t have a level of comfort with the detail and feels they are getting lost in the size of this project. She is generally in favor of this project and she could move forward to a final as long as there was another process to approve the restoration. She’s really confused about the process of the rest of the project and says it’s a big black hole to her. She feels the stairs should remain where they are, and she has a problem with some of the stone detail and realignment of the stairs. She could move forward on the overall concept of the lift, just not the details and said this process is a little different than what they are used to. Mr. Moyer concurs with staff to move this to the 24th. He said it’s a fabulous project with no objections. Moving it to Oct 24th will give us a chance to address the rest of the issues. Mr. Blaich said that Mr. Moyer has covered most of it. As far as the design standards, he feels that staff needs more information. The project meets the standards in general but agrees that there are loose 6 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2018 ends and details needed. We need to come to next meeting with very clear details. I think it’s a great project and it’s come a long way. He kept the old iterations and looked back at them in comparison to the current proposed project and likes this version very much and likes how everyone is working together. Mr. Kendrick said the devil’s in the details. He wonders how things will look with the façade and the stairs. He concurs with the rest of the board and commented about discussion on how the lift is going to be preserved and moved so he would like to see more detail on that and it being handled appropriately. Mr. Lai said he was the prodigal son of Aspen here about 50 years ago and rode Lift 1A and at that time they were given a canvas blanket because it’s was so cold riding the lift up. He is happy there is this cooperative attempt to revitalize that part of Aspen mountain and he likes to see this site revitalized. He’s happy with most of the decisions made especially about keeping the bull wheel in the front. He applauds the idea of having the steakhouse there. At one time, the steakhouse served the best low- priced burgers in Aspen, so he hopes we might persuade city council to keep the prices low. He likes the idea of having a museum taking a prominent role to introduce people to Aspen and to entice them to visit the museum. He always thought about having a 10th mountain monument located in this area as well. He likes the idea of having the towers, so we can see them as we did in the old days in sequence. The one worry for him, is congestion and he’s not sure what the solution is. He believes that area needs to be studied and they need to put that extra 2% in to see what they can do. He doesn’t like the idea of moving the museum away from everything else, but we will have to do what is best to avoid congestion. It deserves a little more effort to see what can be done. He is in favor of continuance. Ms. Greenwood said she feels those stairs really need restudy. The detail, the applicants need to bring back in two weeks. Mr. Clauson said they appreciate the feedback and can do better than 2%. Mr. Brown noted that the gantry is viewed as an asset and will not be moved. Mr. Moyer asked if there is housing in any of the buildings and Ms. Simon mentioned the cash in lieu. Mr. Brown said this project generates a number of FTE’s. Ideally, they would like their own project somewhere in the city, but in the event they don’t have a project and not enough credits, they’d like the cash in lieu option. MOTION: Mr. Moyer motioned to continue to October 24th, Mr. Lai seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Mr. Kendrick motioned to adjourn, Ms. Greenwood seconded. ________________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk 7 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 10, 2018