Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.20161026ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 1 Chairperson,Willis Pember called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were John Whipple, Jeffrey Halferty and Gretchen Greenwood. Absent were Michael Brown, Nora Berko, Jim DeFrancia and Bob Blaich. Staff present: Andrea Bryan Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner Justin Barker, Senior Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk MOTION: Willis moved to approve the minutes of Sept. 28th as amended, motion second by Jeffrey. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Willis made the motion to approve the minutes of October 12 th, second by Gretchen. All in favor, motion carried. Jim True introduced our new Assistant City Attorney, Andrea Bryan 533 W. Hallam Street, Conceptual Major Development, Demolition, Relocation and Variations, Public Hearing to be continued from August 24th to November 9th MOTION: Gretchen moved to continue 533 W. Hallam Street to Nov 9th, second by Jeffrey. All in favor, motion carried. 310 and 330 E. Main Street – Planned Development Detailed Review, Final Major Development, Final Commercial Design Review, Public Hearing Jim True said the public notices are in order – Exhibit I New elevation which was e-mailed – Exhibit II Justin said HPC reviewed this project In Dec. 2014 and the project received a unanimous vote. In 2015 the project was revised and there were some changes made to the Aspen times building as well as the new addition in terms of their sizes. That included removing a fourth floor addition proposed for the Hotel Jerome as well as increasing the length of the Aspen Times building to be preserved and reducing the overall size of the new addition. HPC reviewed those changes in April of this year and was ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 2 supportive of the changes. HPC felt the applicant had good preservation methods. Council also approved the application 4-0. Justin said there are a number of dimensions that are different than what council had approved. It is not the result of the project changing it is the result of the calculation method that is applied to the project. The lodge unit size and lodge net livable are all increasing. This is due to the circulation for the lock off units that are going in the addition. The entire floor of each of the units could be rented out and when it is rented out as an entire unit that circulation counts as net livable. The commercial net leasable is only increasing by 10 square feet due to minor program changes mainly in the proposed Aspen Times renovation. The applicant is also requesting to phase part of the project based off the interior changes to the existing hotel. These include moving the fitness room to the basement and converting that space into a lodge room. Renovation the existing spa in the basement of the hotel and expanding existing rooms on the third and fourth floor on the northeast corner of the building. These have no impacts on the other aspects of the design and staff is comfortable with the phasing of the project. Justin said from conceptual there were three design conditions that were placed by HPC and those included studying the fourth floor addition which is no longer part of the proposal. Study the relationship between the new lodge structure and the restored Aspen Times building. Those were addressed at the April meeting and the Aspen Times building is shown to be longer. There was concern that the new addition would be overshadowing the Aspen Times building and that some of the balconies didn’t relate to it because they were protruding balconies. Those balconies have been incorporated into the mass of the building and the building is set further back from the street frontage of the Aspen Times building. Staff feels that has been addressed. The third condition is related to the sign. There are a couple new additions on the east wall of the Aspen Times building. Right now it is covered up with a non-historic addition. The applicant is proposing to restore the entire wall to its original shape. The wall has been significantly compromised. A small door will be located under an historic window and the second one is for a bi-fold option. When closed it would appear as part of the siding. Due to the preservation of the historic structure staff is comfortable with the new openings because there has been significant compromising. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 3 Justin said staff is recommending that the storefront be simpler and the pattern should be what historically existed. Regarding the signage on the front it showed up around the 50’s with the large cutout letters and the date below it. Staff said it is up to the commission if they desire to keep the signage. Staff is OK with the lighting plan but there is one fixture that is rather large and should be restudied. Any light fixtures that go on the Aspen Times building need to be approved by staff and monitor. Justin said regarding the Hotel Jerome they are proposing to change the courtyard gallery space on the northeast corner of the courtyard. What exists is a string of double doors going across the front of the gallery space. The proposal is to maintain the flanked doors on either side and replace the center section with a series of large sliding glass doors. This is somewhat out of character but it isn’t an historic portion of the building. This was an addition that was constructed in the late 80’s. It is out of the language for that era and staff is recommending that the same pattern be maintained but with the ability to update those doors to more energy efficient ones. The applicant is also proposing a number of awnings within the courtyard. One is over the gallery space and there are also a couple proposed on top of the openings for the rooms on the ground floor level. Staff feels the awnings do not fall within the language of the development. Staff is recommending that the awnings be removed or do something that is more permanent. Willis asked about additional signage. Justin said there was some painted signage that appeared on the east wall that is currently covered. Justin identified the issues: Dimensional changes; increase in the net livable lodge unit sizes; phasing of the interior portion of the Hotel Jerome; overall design, fenestration, landscaping, lighting; New doors on the Aspen Times; Signage and lighting on the Aspen Times building, courtyard gallery doors, courtyard awnings; Overall staff recommends approval with conditions. Sarah Broughton, principle of RowlandBroughton architecture and urban design. We performed the remodel that happened in 2013 and this building is near and dear to our hearts. We understand the importance of historic preservation. Regarding the addition, the balconies are within the footprint within the mass of the building as opposed to being extended. You walk through the gallery to get to the annex and ballrooms. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 4 Sarah said we are happy to bring the Aspen Times storefront back to the historic photo and restore the windows and cut out lettering. The windows along the east façade will be preserved if we find them or replaced in the historic openings. There will be a double door under the historic window. One of our goals is to bring life back into the Aspen Times building and it will be a multifunctional space. We are trying to get as many windows as possible for the space and bring in natural light along the east façade. With staff we came up with the idea of a door that would allow for an opening when functions occur and when there isn’t a function it is closed. After further looking into the bi-fold door it was pushing the glass door 18 inches deep into the space so we have changed that proposal to a barn door that is made of the same material as the siding. Sarah said the gallery space currently has French doors and we are proposing the French doors flanking two sets of sliding doors. The space acts as a transitional space and operations and ownership is really wanting to have more of an indoor outdoor connection that can invigorate the outdoor seating and provide seating within the gallery. There is the hope to open that wall up more. We will detail the doors as close to the existing French doors as possible so that they do not appear modern. Sarah said with the Aspen Times building we will be preserving the siding and we will keep color on the building. Any windows that would be restored will be wood. There will be a corrugated metal roof and the signage will be preserved. Sarah said the design intent of the addition is to be a background building. It is meant not to compete with the two historic structures. The building recedes into the background and responds to the relationship of the courtyard and to not compete with the Hotel Jerome or Aspen Times. The building has a strong base and above has wood siding and some wood slats that speak to this building being a garden building. It is a combination of wood and painted wood, black metal on some of the windows and also blue metal windows that match the hotel and some painted trim. Sarah said they would respectfully like to keep the fabric awning on the gallery and on the annex. Overtime the Hotel Jerome has had fabric awnings since 1911. The awning is to provide much needed shade for people to sit outside. The awning can roll back for half the year and it is on ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 5 a non-historic portion of the building. We ask that we are allowed to have the fabric awning on the gallery and off the guest rooms that open up to the pool. Sarah said we are collaborating with Design Workshop on the landscape plan. The idea is that it will be very simple and complementary to the historic resources. The front lawn area is being retained with the current location of the walkthrough. The pool will be beyond outside the seating area. The materials are a combination of sandstone in a buff color and brick pavers. We are also going to rebuild the sidewalk and working extensively with Engineering on the specifications of a concrete material. Sarah said the material of the addition could be stained cedar or a wainscot as another material that wouldn’t require such maintenance. We will also propose a different light fixture that can be removed with staff and monitor approval. Questions and clarifications: Willis inquired about the east side door on the Aspen Times Building. Sarah said it will be a barn door that would be tucked under the fascia. If the window on the east wall is original we will restore it. John asked about the hardware on the barn door. Sarah said the door hardware will be concealed and have it not be a featured hardware. Gretchen asked about the sliding doors on the gallery and the size of the awning. Sarah said there are flanking French doors and the 2 awnings would go the full width of the wall. They would come out 8 feet. Jeffrey asked about the Aspen Times east elevation and if there is an awning. Sarah said with the barn door the awning would go away. The glass doors will be flush with the wall behind the barn doors. Willis asked about the landscape lighting. Sarah said the lighting is minimal more like step lighting. It will be low and appropriate. On the doors we are proposing sconces which will be approved by staff and monitor. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 6 Willis commented that it is exciting to see the Aspen Times building restored and brought to its original luster. The thing I struggle the most is with the concept of the garden folly. The scale of the addition is like a big box and the finishes don’t talk to the original brick fabric of the Jerome or the painted wood siding of the Aspen Times. It is like a third element in the mix in terms of its character, detailing and materiality. Jeffrey said the dimensional changes are confirming to our code. The added circulation and the phasing with the interior is necessary. The new doors on the Aspen Times (Exhibit II) is a better solution with the shadow line and it is an excellent addition to add natural light from the east side. The storefront window pattern on the Aspen Times is in conformance with our guidelines. The signage on the Aspen Times is in the proper cont ext and it will only help compliment the restoration. Staff and monitor can review the lighting. On the courtyard gallery doors at first I was apprehensive but it is an 80’s addition and getting a little shade is appropriate. The awnings are OK. On the materials to the new pavilion even though it is new architecture there is a small disconnect even though the colors are in keeping. It goes from an historic clapboard to brick. This can be reviewed by staff and monitor. The restoration efforts are well done. The applicant’s proposal meets out guidelines and the proposal was well articulated by staff and the applicant. I can support the project with a few modifications. On the landscape plan the materials work. John said the awnings are retractable and I can support the dimensional changes, phasing and the overall design. The wood and materiality of the addition are appropriate. The color might be off a little. I’m glad there is not more brick and the wood breaks things up. I was against the awnings but am in favor of indoor outdoor dining. I could also see heaters being used. The historic photos regarding the awnings swayed me and I can approve the awnings. It is a dead space that is underutilized. I am also excited to see the Aspen Times building coming back to life. Gretchen also said she likes the barn door on the Aspen times. I am also in favor of the storefront pattern, signage and the lighting has already been addressed. Regarding the courtyard gallery doors making that space useful is important than maintaining doors that open out. I’m on the fence regarding the awnings because they are typically on street fronts but I could approve them because that area needs to be useful for the Hotel Jerome. My big problem is that the addition behind the Aspen Times doesn’t seem to belong ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 7 with the Hotel Jerome. If feels overly heavy with the detailing and the eye brows around the windows. I feel the wood is the wrong material for a building that should have a relationship with the Hotel Jerome. The building feels like it is out of place. The detailing is not as refined as what we see on the Hotel Jerome. The applicant needs to rethink the materials and details of the building. The corner balcony is beneficial to the building but it doesn’t feel like it belongs on this parcel. I don’t feel the project is quite ready for an approval. Maybe the detailing and materials should be re-thought. I would like to see a stronger visual relationship of the materials with the Hotel Jerome. Willis said the building is too big to be a folly. I could see a stripped down minimalist brick box with penetrations. It would speak of its own time and not be confused with the Hotel Jerome. It is overly detailed. Guideline 10.6 Consider these three aspects of a new building; form; materials and fenestration. A project must relate strongly to the historic district in at least two of these elements. Departing from one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. Willis said regarding the other issues the dimensional requirements are a math problem and can be solved. The phasing is OK and landscape and lighting is fine. The landscape plan is well thoughtout. I feel we also talked about the eastside graphics on the Aspen Times building. Sarah said she remembers talking about the painted sign on the east elevation but doesn’t remember talking about a spandrel. It is difficult to tell whether the sign is applied or how it is done. We have scoured the archives. Gretchen said the spandrel has been on the building for some time. Willis said he supports staff’s recommendation to simplify the Main Street fenestration over what it is now with a simple clear story on top and the larger glass at the storefront. Staff and monitor can handle the light fixtures. John said he like the materials and they follow the current guidelines. They aren’t replicating something and not building something Victorian. It has some sympathetic imagery to the crown molding at the top and there is some dialogue but the building is a product of its own time. What they have done fits the guidelines. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 8 Jeffrey said seeing the rendering and it is in a public space inside the courtyard. It will be somewhat visible from Main Street but is set back. It is not trying to replicate the 80’s. The detailing is something that staff and monitor could handle. John said what they have designed is what they want and it fits our current guidelines. Gretchen said the building is not as good as it could be on an important site in terms of the materials and detailing. Jeffrey said he is OK with a wood building. Gretchen said from a massing standpoint the large building relates to the Hotel Jerome. The fenestration and detailing does not continue the theme. Jeffrey said the applicant has done a nice job blending the materials. If the commission feels the detailing is too much and there are too many materials that is something that can be simplified. They have been respective of the scale and mass. The cornice line has been copied from the Hotel Jerome. John said he is in support of the application as proposed. Gretchen said the addition to the Hotel Jerome is very quiet and it paid respect to the building. Willis said what is being proposed is very busy. Whether you like wood or not the design needs to be quieter. John said he would advise the applicant to not come back with more of the brick. Gretchen said the planters is not a language that is spoken on the block. Gretchen suggested adding some brick and simplifying the detailing. Willis said select a material palate that is compatible with the Hotel Jerome. You can decide whether it is brick or not or brick and sandstone. There are no wood clapboards or wood rain screen or planters. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 9 Amy said it doesn’t seem that the board is going to come to a unified decision and we could continue to November 9th. Sarah said we looked long and hard at this project to find the appropriate material for an addition that is in between two historic r esources. One is masonry and one is wood. It is our belief as urban designs and architects that this building from a materiality standpoint did not want to have a masonry presence. It wants to have wood that responds more to the Aspen Times. We didn’t want the Aspen Times building to be on its own island in a sea of masonry. We feel very strongly that the material should be wood. I’m happy to look at the color of that and look at the detailing. In terms of detailing we thought it important to respond to the context and to the cornice lines that are on both buildings, two corner boards and two lentils. The things that you see are common vocabularies through this compound. Humbly that is our opinion that wood is the appropriate material. If there are concerns about the detailing we can work with staff and monitor. We have read the guidelines and we believe in them. Amy said if this project is going to be continued this option proposed and a restudy should come back so that the board that is here can evaluate it. It seems like it is a two two vote. John said he would encourage the applicant to follow the guidelines and encourage you not to make a sea of brick. MOTION: Willis made the motion to continue the application to November 9th second by Gretchen. Roll call vote: Willis, yes; Gretchen, yes, Jeffrey, yes, John, no. Passed 3-1. 422 and 434 E. Cooper Ave. – Final Major Development, Final Commercial Design Review, Substantial Amendment, Growth Management, Public Hearing Jim said the proof of publication has been provided. –Exhibit I Amy said a year ago conceptual approval was granted for the redevelopment of 434 E. Cooper (Bidwell bldg.). HPC looked at scale and massing, Wheeler view plane, trash, parking and public amenity. The project was ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 10 approved by a 3-2 vote. There were conditions to be addressed at final. The board asked that the project be re-designed so that there was a 45 degree chambered at the corner of the building instead of rounded corner. The recommended that there should be some kind of hierarchy or differentiation between the facades facing Cooper and Hyman and that there be a storefront on Cooper. Another condition was to provide a more detailed Transportation impact analysis for this review. The board did address that parking and public amenity would be addressed entirely through cash -in- lieu. The applicant has acquired the neighboring property, the Red Onion which is a 9,000 square foot lot that includes the Red Onion restau rant and some office space and the building that is adjacent to the Bidwell building. When the applicant purchased the property they inherited an approval to turn the building next door into a three story building with new free market units. Under the current code you are not allowed free markets and the height would not be approved. Instead of building it the applicant met with city council and negotiated an arrangement that will be addressed tonight which is a redesign of the poster shop and bringing it into this corner pro ject as a circulation space for this building. There will be a retail shop but most of it will be an elevator to service the adjacent building. Council put a few conditions on the vested rights extension. Council would prefer that the free market be gone and they wanted the height reduced. The applicant has proposed cash- in –lieu which HPC had accepted but now they would like to do some improvements along Galena Street to improve the street scape. Staff does not support that because we have a full remodel of the pedestrian mall coming in the future. Another issue is the trash area and previously you saw a 300 square foot area but now it is 200 square feet which is OK but the applicant needs to change the doorway and add an overhead door in order to meet the Environmental Health requirements. The public amenity issue needs to be resolved. Amy said at the last meeting HPC requested that the corner be a 45 degree chamfered corner. The applicant does not prefer that, they would prefer the rounded corner. There is only one building in downtown that has a rounded corner and that is the Elks building. It has the rounded corner because there is a rounded dome. Staff finds that the rounded corner is out of character and we would prefer HPC stick to the 45 degree chamfered. HPC has asked for a one story expression at the entry and this has come up with the numerous buildings that you have been reviewing. We think that has not been achieved here partly because the corner element is two stories of a material that is different than the rest of the building. It reads as a different ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 11 element and does not carry the stone course in the middle of it and it reads that it does not have a two story expression. Staff is recommending a restudy. HPC also asked for study of the hierarchy in a couple of manners. The board asked for the Cooper Ave. and Galena Street facades to be differentiated from each other. Willis referred to it as bilateral symmetry, like a butterfly, both wings are identical and that is not what you find downtown. An example would be one side would have more glazing and the other side more of a solid wall. At the previous meeting the corner had a void in it with a lofted space as you walked into the building. It is a two story in portions of the building. That has been expanded in this proposal. There is limited amount of second floor and more area that is open for two floors. Staff feels if there isn’t a venue for the entire second floor we could have seen a drop in height. We also feel it draws life away from the façade by pulling the floors on the upper story back. The second floor should come up to the windows and create a void in the middle or do something else. Amy said the next issue of concern is the use of stone and a steel window system. Most of the buildings downtown were built from 1885 to 1993. They are primarily brick buildings, the Brand bldg., Wheeler and Cohenhaven bldg. We do not support introducing more stone buildings. We feel those three that exist are the pinnacle of important development in Aspen. Aside from those 3 brick buildings at the time of the si lver crash most of the town had wood buildings. We are also concerned about the amount of glazing and the cornice is perforated with greenery. As far as the windows, steel might be appropriate but the three historic windows have wood windows. There is a certain modesty that is not historically reflected in this building. Another issue is that the upper floor windows are slightly recessed and not in the same plane as the ground floor windows and in front of them there are planter boxes that are not characteristic downtown. On the rooftop, the railing almost comes to the parapet wall and we feel there is too much visibility of the railing and activity that might take place on the roof top and it could be pulled back slightly. Amy said touching on the poster shop building next door, council said the remodel of that building should be no more than two stories and 28 feet tall except for elements that had to do with circulation. There are actually three floors and there are elements that exceed 28 feet that are not just about circulation, mechanical equipment and vestibule lobby space. Restudy is needed there. We are also concerned that the materials for the poster shop project now mimic what is happening on the corner and they don’t address ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 12 the Red Onion historic structure. The exterior lighting has sconces on every corner which need restudied. Lastly, the applicant is required to address affordable housing. There are 14 employees generated. The applicant is choosing to provide affordable housing credits which represent units that are built elsewhere in town. In the memo we suggest that is not the only appropriate solution. Some housing could be accommodated in the corner building. After conversations with the attorney’s office they are meeting the growth management requirements and we would recommend HPC accept the credits after the architectural issues are resolved. Amy reiterated that the poster shop would have retail on the first floor half way back and then two or three stories of stair cases and an elevator to access the adjacent building. Mark Hunt, owner Dwayne Romero, represented the ownership Chris Bendon, bendonadams Chris said the existing building has been through numerous approvals. Council determined that the building was not historic. The conceptual approval had three retail spaces on Galena St. The Red Onion building is an addition to the project. Because the access was through the front the project became compromised regarding the commercial space. The pent house was 5,000 square feet. We went to council and they asked us to work with HPC and the approvals expire May 15, 2017. Council gave direction to incorporate the Red Onion poster building into the 434 E. Cooper building. Part of the rationale is that each building has their own trash and vertical circulation and elevators etc. The idea would be to have one set of trash and vertical circulation and elevators. We would then extend the commercial footprint of the 434 building so that there is more vitality on Galena and Cooper streets. On the plans today there is a full basement, four tenants accessed primarily off Galena Street. There is also an entry off Cooper Street and an entry off the Red Onion poster building. At conceptual it was brought up to have a greater differentiation in hierarchy between the ground floor and the upper floor. The bottom floor windows have more of a residential feel. Overall the memo from staff says the building needs to be more traditional. We can fix the trash door. We can revise the TIA. We can also have the lighting reviewed by staff and monitor. Mark Hunt said the building sits on a prominent corner, a high end luxury corner. Mark said they were given clear direction early on from Planning with a list of things they wanted for this corner. One was that it had to be ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 13 two stories, no residential, and architecture was to reflect the architecture of today and not to replicate or copy any of the buildings from the past. We went back and looked at historic assets and pulled out historic pieces. We focused on three elements, stone, steel and glass and doing those th ings very well. We did not try and replicate. Buildings were designed a lot different in the past. Residential is no longer allowed downtown. We softened the building by the curved corner. When you go from a three bay to a four bay it gets closer to the punched openings. A lot of the corner building grids are closer to 20 than thirty feet wide. We took the simple elements and added the curve. It is very difficult on this building to build a two story building, make it proud and hold the corner and try to fit the design criteria that is involved. There is a three foot grade change on this site. Looking down the mall it is a 25 foot high building and by the time you get to the alley it is 28 feet. With our requirements for our store fronts we end up with an 8 foot floor height which is not generous on the second floor. If we went down two feet we would have a six foot ceiling which doesn’t meet code. The iron planter boxes were to soften the building up but we could get rid of them. One of the things that has been missed in the new buildings in town is texture. I’m a big fan of texture and shadows and using light and adding depth to some of the buildings that we are building. I feel this building fits in and is not competing with the Wheeler or the Ute City Banque. We feel the design celebrates the facades. Dwayne Romero said we have a time clock on the Red Onion annex building. The previous design is in the view plan and now the building will serve as a circulation device for the broader proposed project. Ganging up and consolidating circulation is a plus and the alley utilization is a win. We are trying to get guidance to move forward. MOTION: John made the motion to extend the meeting 30 minutes; second by Jeffrey. All in favor, motion carried. Mark showed a new elevation of the Red Onion annex side. The height was lowered to 28 feet and allows for the stair corridor and elevator shaft to access the roof top deck. There is a vegetated screen in the front. The building will not compete with the Red Onion or the 434 building. John said the alley is livening up which is commendable. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 14 Tom Youder, Kemo Sabe I am a tenant in the building for 24 years and over the past 4 years I have gotten to know and admire Mark and his team. He is very accommodating. Diana Shore said she works for Kemo Sabe and has been to several meetings and she likes the changes and the corner works well. It is a difficult corner. Willis said it is a one material with a two story expressing on the front which is a scale issue and that needs addressed. The one story entry technically is achieved but there is still a very large volume. The front being at a 45 degree or round is not a huge issue. It is really the question of the scale. The masonry would have come across the second floor and that is a missed opportunity to explore. You need a retail expression but maybe there could be more wall on Cooper to break the structural grid. That is what is creating the lack of hierarchy between Cooper and Galena Street. Regarding the cornice and flower boxes those are all details. Chris said we want a good pedestrian experience and a proper retail expression on both streets. Are you looking for one street to have a little more solid effect. Gretchen said Willis is talking about the relentless monotony of the building. It comes across as a very large building on a corner that doesn’t have that kind of scale. You have somewhat a break down in scale with the windows. It is the monotony that it is the same on two sides. There is no breakdown of the cornice or roof. If you look at the older buildings downtown they treat the sides differently. It competes with the specimen buildings in Aspen such as the Brand building. The front entry with the two story element which we are trying to get away from creates visual mass even though it is two stories. Gretchen said she agrees with staff about the sandstone as it makes the building look too important. We need something that is pedestrian friendly and has a scale breakdown that doesn’t repeat itself or compete with the important buildings in town. Willis pointed out that the neighboring Red Onion annex is cleverly incorporated with this building. Gretchen said the symmetry is too grand for the Bidwell building. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 15 Jeffrey said he would agree with some of the comments but the applicant has done an excellent job breaking up the pattern and using the rhythms and conforming to our commercial design standards. Maybe change the rhythm of the fenestration. The building is modest in scale. The perspective is at eye level and seems large but it is small scale. The element of the two story entry piece is prominent and we saw that on the Boogies structure and maybe there can be some simplification to change that. I know what it is like to be in retail and you want as much glass as you can and to just put wall on the building might not be appropriate. We have commercial design standards that talk about storefront glazing. There is strong architecture on this building and they have kept under the height limits and are respective of the grade change. John said the hierarchy is very confusing because both street facades are important and this corner deserves prominence. A 25 foot tall building is not a big building. I don’t feel the community would feel that the height is too tall. I like the rhythm and it is not monotonous. I like the way the building wraps around the alley. The sandstone would be one negative I have toward this project. The curve is appropriate. Maybe if the stone was a different color it might be less mimicking of our prominent buildings. I would like to see this building move ahead. Willis pointed out that Cooper is a pedestrian mall and Galena is a street and you can drive down it. They both are important but they behave very differently. Gretchen said maybe use a different brick with some sandstone detailing. Chris said maybe it is a combination of sandstone but use it as a base course, more detailing and use smooth stone or brick. Gretchen said that would improve the building and you would have the ability to have different facades on each street. The upper railing also need to be set back from the front façade of the building significantly. Visual activity on the roof detracts from our core buildings. Chris said we are under a certain code and will respect those codes. There are a variety of opinions about roof top activity. There is also an attractiveness of seeing life and activity on top. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 16 John said subjectively he likes the roof top activity. Willis said the detailing issues such as planter boxes and cornice can be handled by a subsequent final review. The big issue is the materiality and the lack of difference between Cooper Ave. and Galena Street and the double scale entry. Mark said the vertical expression to the cornice is trying to read through. The examples that Amy put in the packet, the shortest building was 35 feet tall in a town that has a strong verticality. It hard to do verticality in a 25 foot tall building. If we are going to change the materials and fill the top with brick it will be worse. You will have your store front then there will be a horizontal line that brings the height down. If the committee wants to get away from verticality and away from the stone I would strongly recommend that you allow us at least on portions of this building make it a one story building which is what we asked to do two years ago. Those changes would make the building read as horizontal. Are you open to having a one story element on this building? We have designed a building that is shorter than the one that is standing there today and its being read as it is huge. Willis said there are subtle ways that store fronts turn the corner. They have a horizontal expression. I wouldn’t advocate a one story building. Gretchen agreed that a one story would not be appropriate. Maybe do something that is more traditional in shape. The Independence Building and the Elks Building have strong horizontal bands. John pointed out that there are only four people here tonight. Both frontages on this building are prominent. The comparable building would be the Elks building because it is on the same orientation and pays homage on the Galena Street side. Jeffrey said we don’t design but we need to give proper direction. We talked about the corner 45 vs round, bilateral symmetry, annex building, glass and steel, cornice detailing, planter boxes and use of the alley. The representations of the facades respond to the height and entry. We need to make sure the building has proper context. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 26, 2016 17 Amy pointed out that we don’t want any of the historic buildings copied. Our issue is that there are too many things going on that depart from the patterns downtown and we would like to see certain elements strengthened. Amy discussed the issues: The chamfered corner was discussed and the board is a little more open in possibly wrapping the material around the upper level. The first floor have a different character than what is above it. The hierarchy and having something different on the two sides whether it be rhythm o r how the columns are expressed needs reviewed. The stone the way it is expressed is a concern. Upper floor windows with railings need looked at. MOTION: Jeffrey moved to continue the 422 and 434 E. Cooper Ave. to November 30th, 2016, NOON, a special meeting; second by Gretchen. All in favor, motion carried 4-0. MOTION: Jeffrey moved to adjourn; second by Willis. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk