Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19910408 HISTORIC P~ESERVATION COMMI'~-r~E Minutes of April 8, 1991 Special Meeting Meadows Rehearsal Facility Meeting called to order by chairman Bill Poss, with Glenn Rappaport, Don Erdman, Jake Vickery and Georgeann Waggaman present. Heidi Houston: There seems to be a far less impact in relationship to the seating on the west side. I have visual concerns about the mound. Ron Austin: I represent a group called the Friends of the Lawn. The people of this group are neighbors in the community. My impression looking at the staking on the east is that our group clearly prefers the west side of the tent for the rehearsal facility. On the east side the new structure would be dominant and changes the whole experience of entering the property and being around the music tent. In addition on the west it might effect King's office but it doesn't effect any of the neighborhood. You can stand under the staking on the west and you don't see the houses of the neighbors where on the east it clearly impacts all the neighbors. Herb Kline: I agree with Ron and got interpretation from the Planning and City Attorney that if the west site is chosen the applicant would not have to go back through the process. It seems very obvious that it should go on the west side to best serve the community. I would also ask that the poles be kept up until the process is completed. Perry Harvey: I have a March 15th memo that talks about the final plan and the final siting decision are the prerogative of the Planning Commission and City Council and conceptual approval of the rehearsal facility on the east takes precedent. We are in the middle of a complicated landuse process that has gone through several steps. I don't want this entire process compromised because of the neighbors. Mary Martin: When the City designated the east side did they specifically draw the site as to where the rehearsal facility should go? We are grieving that it is placed on the lawn. George Vicenzi: If it was on the west side and lowered the historic openness would not be effected. Harry Teague: We will add outside seating no matter which side of the tent the facility is on. The total area for lawn seating would increase 50%. We received clear direction from the Planning Staff, P&Z and City Council that the facility should go on the east. It has the least impact on the site on the east side. This building has to be site specific including the trees etc. Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of April 8, 1991 Bill: We have an application before us with the proposal of the rehearsal facility to be placed on the east side of the tent. We should deal with the east site at this point and then do recommendations to council regarding the west site. Don: We need to deal with the tent and how the new structure will relate to the existing historic resource, the tent. The lawn is not historic. After reviewing the model and plans a few minor adjustments could occur to the site. I would recommend lowering the building by four or five feet as it would decrease the impact along the sky line and when looking at the tent from the parking lot would make the plates at the top of the building less conflicting with the tent structure. By lowering it a small amount we could move the whole structure using the center of the tent axis and move it a given number to the north to produce a more successful relationship and open up the views from the parking lot to the historic resource. I would like to see a lowering of the building and a reduction in the diameter of the berm and swinging it around to the north a certain number of feet. Georgeann: We have three elements here: The location on the east, the lawn and the location on the west. My first impulse was to put it on the west but found that there was less impact on the east than I had expected. I see that we have major impacts with traffic patterns on the west so I am leaning more toward the eastern location. I concur that the building should be lower and the berm softened. I also agree with the movement of it to make it nestle into the service part of the facility more than it does now to allow the views. Glenn: Regarding the service access I am in favor of the consolidation. One issue is how will the building resolve itself as far as the echoes that are created or not created with what goes on in the tent. Jake: I concur with the other Board members particular the rotation of the building as far north as is practical. In support of the existing historical tent the building does need lowered. If that can't be done then there needs to be a restudy of the actual roof. Bill: If the rehearsal hall and mound could be lowered it would give a better relationship and it would be perceived better from ground level of the person walking to the site to get the appreciation of the design of the folds and roof shape of the rehearsal hall and how it relates to the tent. I also agree on the shifting of the building to the north and reducing the height. I favor the east side in this particular design because 2 Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of April 8, 1991 of how the new rehearsal hall truly to the other buildings on the site. alone on the site. relates to the tent and not The other buildings stand Mary Martin: The prevailing winds carry the music to the east and you can hear it better sitting on the east side. I want to remind the Board of that and it is cooler on the east due to the sunset on the west. Harry: Decreasing the radius is fine but we will have a problem lowering the building due to the acoustics that we want to maintain and also the possibility of water seeping through the ground the deeper you dig down. We will still attempt to lower it. Jake: The primary access is between Paepcke and the parking lot. Georgeann: Two things need to be investigated: One is, if in fact the prevailing winds do keep the music from sounding as well on this side as opposed to the other and the other issues is that we have one building with a decorative roof which is the historic tent and historically all the other buildings have quiet roofs and is this counter productive to that philosophy to have quite such a decorative roof on the rehearsal hall which is a subservient building to the tent. Harry: The purpose of berming the entire seating area is to dramatically improve the acoustics. Ron Austin: The Board feels they do not have the legal right to consider the west side as it is not being presented today. Don: We are only addressing one siting which is the east side of the tent that is before us. Ron Austin: The audience is in favor of the west and they are taking that from their historical perspective. Public: Letters from the public enter into the records in support of the west side of the tent for the rehearsal hall facility. The trees that were planted on the east were done by Walter Paepcke. To be able to transplant those trees would be a big challenge due to the huge root structure. It is easier to transplant sage bushes. The cluster of the buildings is agreeable. We all want to see the entire Meadows plan succeed. The access roads should be modified. Jake: In general with the context of the historic resource it would be my finding that the size, height and location of the Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of April 8, 1991 design as presented is competitive and in-compatible with the existing historic resources. Relative to the purposed easterly site the level of compatibility maybe increased to an acceptable level with the following conditions: 1) That the structure be located as far north as possible to preserve as much lawn seating as possible and the views along the access of town and also the visual prominence of the tent from various locations around town and views of the surrounding mountains from existing seating areas. 2) Restudy the roof configuration and overall building height to reduce the height (18 ft. above the level of entry to the tent). 3) Restudy the berming concept to reduce its footprint and to allow for further rotation of the building to the north. 4) Use of any other mitigation such as landscaping to reduce the impact of the structure. Georgeann: Jake's comments are very valid. We could make a motion to either table or approve conceptual on the eastern side with various specific requirements. We could also make another motion for P&Z and City Council to restudy the location on the west side to take into consideration all the public input. Glenn: There are good arguments about either side. Jake: We need to focus on architectural and visual criteria. MOTION: Don made the motion that the conceptual development application for the rehearsal facility portion of the Aspen Meadows be approved as proposed with the following conditions. The conditions would have to be met for Final. 1) Re-site the rehearsal facility to possible with a much closer adjacency the existing tent. the northeast as far as to the east west axis of 2) Significantly lower the heiqht of the mound and the height of the structure shall be reduced'at least 4 feet. 3) Better define the surface treatment of both the land form and the structure considering in detail how the break between the field and the berm would be accomplished and finishing up the berm. 4) Restudy hard surface paving area between the rehearsal hall and the tent to maximize the amount of informal seating available Historic Preservation Committee Minutes of April 8, 1991 during performances. 5) Provide representation of all materials, to be made at Final application. 6) Final landscape plan indicating all significant and proposed vegetation, surface treatments and lighting shall be required. 7) Provide detailed drawing of tent and music area parking lot treatment and bus drop-off area. Glenn Rappaport second the motion. Ail in favor, motion carries. Discussion Glenn: I also would be in favor of looking at a of the end of the mound on the north east side in the slope of the mound work for seating etc. "chopping off" order to make Don: It is implied. Don: Clarification regarding #1 the tent itself has a north and south and east and west and the east entrance-exit is on that axis and the idea is to come as close to that as possible. Bill: I would entertain a motion that we refer the minutes etc. to P&Z and City Council and that they may wish to consider the west side. MOTION: Georgeann made the motion that the HPC recommend to City Council and P&Z that they may wish to reconsider relocating the rehearsal hall to the west site of the tent in light of the strong public response received at HPC public hearings; second by Don. All in favor, motion carries. MOTION: Glenn made the motion to adjourn; favor, motion carries. Meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m. second by Don. Ail in Kathy Strickland, Deputy City Clerk 5