Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19880913HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE MINUTES City Council Chambers 1st Floor City Hall September 13, 1988 2:30 p.m. Meeting was called to order by chairman Bill Poss with Georgeann Waggaman, Nick Pasquarella, Zoe Compton, Charles Cunniffe, Charlie Knight, Augie Reno and Joe Krabacher present. MOTION: Nick made the motion to approve the minutes of August 23, 25, 1988. Second by Augie Reno. All approved. Motion carries. COMMITTEE MEMBER AND STAFF COMMENTS Charlie Knight: Being gone for two months, the way the press perceived and after reading minutes on the Berko situation I feel HPC got a no-win situation specifically. From what I have been reading HPC has not been left in good standing with the community. Georgeann: I left my vote show how I felt. Bill: I'm trying to get a joint meeting with the City Council, P&Z and HPC and discuss the matter and bring everyone up to date on why the decisions were made and the concerns of zoning issues etc. There has to be a joint effort among us. Charlie: I think this is a very controversial issue and the Board did what they felt best. The pressure is coming from other elements in the structure other than the needs of HPC which would say leave the building but that is not a reality. Madeline: Don't you feel a little of the controversy from the people in the town who don't feel like they represented. is coming have been Bill: One of the things I have learned we have to be more articulate when we give our voting to demonstrate the hours that we spent analyzing this before we came to the Board. We were given packets and I looked at it four or five hours. I still stand behind my voting. Roxanne: Alan is available to speak to the Board on any specific issues today. Bill: We would like to get Alan's input on what the options are from the HPC and how it fits into an all encompassing review process with the P&Z and Council's views. Roxanne: A letter from Bob Murray on the Berko decision is included in your packet. I will be attending the National Trust HPC.MINUTES.SEPTEMBER.13.1988 for Historic Preservation annual conference in Cincinnati. There is a "rehab for profit" seminar in Denver coming up Oct. 17th. Bill: Possibly we could at some point have a seminar here in Aspen. Roxanne: I'm working on that for the first week in November. Roxanne: I have received a letter regarding the sidewalks in the west end. This is on 334 W. Hallam. The Eng. Dept. approved the encroachment with the condition that they put in a five foot wide sidewalk along Third. There is an historic irrigation ditch along Third. HPC needs to be looking at this and get a dialogue going with the Eng. Dept. so that they aren't requiring sidewalks that may not fit with our historic guidelines or the west end. Georgeann: We don't want this sidewalk there. Gideon: We would like to be added to the agenda to look at revised plans. Bill: I would entertain a motion to conduct old business and review the 309 E. Hopkins project, The Berko building. MO?ION: Nick: I so move. Augie second. Ail approved. Motion carries. 309 E. HOPKINS-REVISED CONCEPTUAL Charles stepped down. Kevin MacLeod: We have taken the comments from the last two meetings and combined them. We lowered the height another foot. We aligned the main face of the building with the Mill St. Plaza and tried to create a more vertical element there and brought the bay out which would have a store front window similar to the size of the ones on Mill St. We stepped back the third level so it is 2 ft. lower than our original design. We will be using brick and similar material to the adjacent buildings. We will probably use glazed block or tile for kick plates. Zoe: What is the railing. Kevin: A metal grid railing. Richard Klein: In terms of perception of height you won't really perceive a three story building. There is a glass element on the pitched roof. We tried to taper the building back to reduce height concept. 2 HPC.MINUTES.SEPTEMBER.13.1988 Gideon: The direction I thought from the majority of the Board was to try to get the first two floors to tie in with the surrounding and the upper level could be a little more creative and different. That is what this attempt has done. Kevin: We aligned the top band which carries through with the bottom band of the fascia. Bill: For the record I want to state I was contacted by the applicant over the weekend. Roxanne: In reviewing the guideline in a lot of areas it fits pretty well. They have restudied height, massing and facade. Also the store front is different as well. The setbacks appear good because they relate to both the adjacent buildings. Massing has stepped back. We talked about the store fronts needing to be traditional and transparent. They are traditional in form yet they are modern in materials so that does meet what the guidelines are trying to accomplish. It has recessed entrances. This new building may in fact help bring that rhythm of fenestration and the pillars and all through it. Zoe: I assume the elevator doors face the street. Kevin: They are metal and will be painted or treated to make them appear similar. Richard: They are set back 2 1/2 ft. in. Charlie: Is the open space cash-in-lieu. Gideon: In the new code you can pay. Charlie: How much further does the front window bay stand out past the A1 Phillips bldg. Kevin: It is flush with the A1 Phillips, they are in the same plane. Charlie: Eventually a retailer will want to put an awning over his front doors to keep snow and ice off of it. Richard: We would rather not see awnings. Zoe: They will want it. Charlie: The tenant will want it for signage. Charlie: Is there not another way to have a transparent look on the third floor, does the elevator have to open to the street. 3 HPC.MINUTES.SEPTEMBER.13.1988 Kevin: If that is a concern we could restudy it and not have the door open to the street. Zoe: That would be a good idea. Richard: One of the reasons they are like that is when enter the elevator lobby you are presented with the elevator you don't have to go hunting for it. Georgeann: Did you go edge to edge on the property. you and Kevin: It is edge to edge in the back. Joe: I like how the building picks up the rhythm of the two buildings that are adjacent; the fact that it is stepped back more; a much better design. Bill: This building is an attempt to get compatibility between the two buildings. They did a good job studying the massing to allow it to give some interest and vitality in a more vertical look. This building has to go through GMP and the Berko is not relocated until this building is approved. Gideon: Are you saying it is final approval from you and the final approval from P&Z. Bill: I was assuming you wouldn't come for your final till after you have GMP so that would be taken care of. Gideon: Lets say in a month or so we are able to get final approval from you. Once we have satisfied you and it is a final design and you have given off the approval is that the condition or is it the condition of the P&Z as well. Georgeann: We don't want you to relocate the building until you are actually going to be able to build this building. You might get approval from us but if it stops on down the road we don't want to find this building moved. Bill: That was our understanding, the building doesn't get moved until everything is ready to go; the site is ready to accept it; not until this building is a definite go. Charlie: Is it important to the committee members that the first two stories carry on the same street plane. It seems rather large and that it will shadow the street; possibly stair step back a little on the second level. Richard: We had discussed the need to stop the horizontalness and the form the building is taken it really achieves that. 4 HPC.MINUTES.SEPTEMBER.13.1988 Bill: They were trying to do a three story building and what we were trying to do when we asked them to study the massing was to break it up so that it could be conceived as a one story with another story on top of it. That is what ties it together. Georgeann: I do think the verticality is a nice mix with the horizontal feeling which is what I asked for last week. Bill: How does everybody feel about the height, massing and facade. Charlie: I think the massing is overwhelming. It will be the most prominent feature building on the block and although the smallest building it will have the most presence in the block and I think particularly the brick balcony on the third floor add to that quite a bit. Bill: Do you think this one massing will affect the buildings on the other side of the street. Charlie: I feel we have already addressed the other side of the street when we got rid of the Berko bldg. Georgeann: few feet. Do you want to ask them to push the top floor back a Zoe: There is something about the top floor that throws everything out of scale or proportion. The wide band and store front doors are very good. Maybe the railing should be a solid band. Kevin: You feel if it is pulled back more. Zoe: What would happen if the doors were like a dark wood and very contemporary and something done with the top floor, maybe it is too symmetrical. Kevin: No matter how far you pull it back you are always going to see a third level. Zoe: The top floor doesn't belong with the first two. Kevin: As you walk down the street this will appear as a two story building. Zoe: I definitely don't like the elevator facing the street. Kevin: We can work with that. 5 HPC.MINUTES.SEPTEMBER.13.1988 Georgeann: I like the railing in the middle of the upper level as it creates a finished detail. I'm not unhappy with the third floor but agree the elevator doors should move around in the other direction. Two things that are hurting the people presenting this are: one, the way they have the glass, is it clear or what as it won't read that strongly. Kevin: Clear glass. Georgeann: I would almost guess that this prospective is taken further back then just across the street. I think you would see less of that top floor then you do in this sketch. Zoe: To me the building is the first two floors and the third doesn't belong. I think it could be rearranged a little bit better. Since we are moving this little building what is across the street is very important. This side of the street should some how relate to the other side of the street. Charlie: With Gordons we asked that it be very transparent so you could still see the mountain and there was light down on the street. This building is massed with more masonry almost the balance of equal masonry as there is to glass on the first two floors. It is "heavy". I don't know how you move the second floor back and still keep the verticality you are looking for. Zoe: The first two floors kind of have the flavor of a contemporary Mesa store which is attractive. Kevin: floor. Do you think we should change the materials on the third Zoe: Possibly that would work. Gideon: The Gordon mass was three times as big as this and much closer to the street. Zoe: On the top floor the fascia or the trim over the skylight and the band, if that were removed and the building less obtrusive and didn't blend with the first two floors would that distract from the building itself or would that kind of make it fade away a little better. The top floor is a focal point and it shouldn't be. Kevin: Possibly the top should be brick all the way up and the skylight moved back some. Zoe: Something like that so it doesn't become predominant in terms of the building. 6 HPC.MINUTES.SEPTEMBER.13.1988 Bill: top. What if we had a condition that allows you to restudy the Gideon: What about saying looking at alternatives to material and setback that would minimize the third floor. Bill: Look at alternatives to material and setback that would minimize the impact of the third floor mass. Roxanne: Restudy material and setback to minimize predominance of the third floor. Nick: From across the street you aren't going to see much of that third floor. Georgeann: I do think the two buildings lining up at that point is good and I think minimizing it a little does make sense to study. I could see leaving those two side elements in massing where they are so you get the alignment and it might be worth studying pulling back that skylight as it might lighten it up a little. I'd prefer some kind of finished detailing on the top of the brick. Augie: On the Mill St. Station bldg. does the brick return on the west wall. Nick: Yes. Charlie: What is the material on the west elevation. Kevin: The banding on the front will be carried through on the west elevation. Zoe: Is it all brick. Kevin: Yes. Charlie: Will there be windows to break it up on the third floor facing west. Kevin: You can't do them unless they are five ft. away and they would have to be wired and protected. Bill: If there is no further discussion I would entertain a motion for clarifications from the conceptual approval. MOTION: Augie made the motion that we approve designs presented in preliminary design with the following conditions to study the north facing elevator doors so we aren't just looking at a pair of steel doors. Nick second. 7 HPC.MINUTES.SEPTEMBER.13.1988 Roxanne: The Board had also talked about a restudy of materials in the setback to minimize the predominance of the third floor. Bill: How many people on the Board feel strongly about that and do we want to amend the motion. Augie: I don't think it is necessary and the building is setback and the pedestrian walking along this side of Mill St. will not have the third floor come into view that much. It will come into view from across the street but by the time you are across the street your view to the mountain and the sun is going to be such that it won't matter how tall that building is at that particular point. Bill: Ail in favor of the motion: Augie, Nick, Joe voted yes. Georgeann, Charlie, Bill Zoe voted no. Motion dies. MOTION: Charlie made the motion that we ask the applicant to bring back review and study of the third floor with the detail addressing the elevator doors as well as considering a variation of the setback to the street of the third floor. No second. Motion dies. Roxanne: To restudy material and setback to minimize the impact or predominance of the third floor. Bill: Could we get a motion that includes the conceptual approval as presented today with the restudy of the elevator doors and the wording. MOTION: Zoe made the motion that this building receive conceptual approval and that the third floor have further study and to restudy materials and setback to minimize the impact of the third floor and that the elevator doors be restudied, relocated so that they are not visible from the street. Zoe: Roxanne will you reread my motion. Roxanne: That HPC move to approve revised conceptual approval as presented in the meeting today based on the restudy of materials in the setback to minimize the predominance of the third floor and to restudy the elevator doors on the third floor. Charlie second. All approved except Georgeann. Motion carries. CI~ANGES TO ASPEN INVENTORY OF EISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES Charles was reseated. HPC.MINUTES.SEPTEMBER.13.1988 Bill: I'll open the public hearing. No one present from the public. I'll close the public hearing. Roxanne: In our guidelines at least once every 5 years we are to hold a public hearing to solicit comments to upgrade the inventory. The memo in your packet includes the Marolt barns and the Marolt house to be added to the inventory and the five structures that I have listed here have been demolished and need to be removed from the inventory. Charlie: Are there any more structures that should be considered such as in the Meadows property (Institute). Roxanne: Other members have brought up the Barnett residence at 513 E. Bleeker as possibly needing a re-evaluation. Roxanne: The Institute is already on. MOTION: Nick made the motion that we place the Holden/Marolt barns and the Lixiviation Ruins rated 5 on the inventory. Also the Marolt house rate 4 on the inventory. To remove the five demolished buildings from the record as listed. Georgeann second. All approved. Motion carries. MOTION: Joe made the motion to retain Bill Poss as and Georgeann as vice-president. Nick second. All Motion carries. president approved. Adjourned 4:05 9