Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.19760525RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Regular Meeting Historical Preservation Committee May 25, 1976 Meeting was called to order by Chairman Lary Groen at 1:15 p.m. with members Norm Burns, Mona Frost, Terry End and Jerry Michael present. Also present was John Stanford of the Planning Department. Approval of Minutes Burns made a motion to approve the minutes of May 11, 1976 with the following corrections: page 1, twelfth paragraph, fifth line, delete "5'~ after the word south and add "10"; page 3, second paragraph, line two, add "site" after "building". Frost made a second to the motion. All in favor, motion carried. Old Business P&Z Public Hearing Mesa Store Bakery and Floradora Stanford explained the Resolution that HPC has adopted recommending adoption of the Mesa Store Bakery and the Floradora to be historically designated; has been referred to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Planning and Zoning has set a public hearing for June 1, at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. There has to be a quorum of the HPC members present at this public hearing. The recommen- dation for approval will be recommended to Council. Council will then set a public hearing which will be the latter part of June or beginning of July. New Business Proposed Amendments to HPC Review Guide- lines Stanford feels the Commission has not been as thorough as it could be in the districts where there is residential buildings. When the criteria was being developed, attention was given to the major commercial structures. The criteria reflected design constraint directions that are oriented towards making new construction compatible with the commercial structures. The criteria doesn't specifically address what happens when a new building is built adjacent to the residential structures. Stanford would like to see the low-keyed character maintained in the residential areas and the proposed Main Stree Historic District. Thus, Stanford came up with the following amendment to the guidelines: New construction shall respect existing rhythms of solids and void along a street as established by building facades separated by open spaces. Stanford would like to see the design be sympa- thetic to the character and environment that is set by the residential structures. Stanford also brought another point he would like to see cleared. That is in reference to the work that HPC and the Planning Office have done on new developments since the adoption of the historic district. Stanford suggested a field trip to see what work has been developed under the review of the RPC criteria. Stanford explained the buildings that have been constructed have taken the victor- ian motiff; but do not promote the historic character of Aspen because they are not authentic victorian architecture. Stanford would like to see a contemporary facade that has some elements that are compatible with the victorian look. Stanford suggested the following amendment: Architecture in the Historic District that reflects contemporary design but that is visually compatible with the scale and visual impression of nearby Historic structures shall be encourage~ rather than new construction that imitates or copies authentic historic architecture. As far as changes on an existing historic structure, Stanford suggested the following amendment: Exterior renovations to designated historic buildings shall maintain the original architectural appearance. In other -1- Historical Preservation Committee May 25, 1976 Main Street Historic District HPC Review of H- District Proposal Pre-application Review - Schaffer Building words, Burns explained that the rennovation of the existing victorian would be one thing and the addition should be another. Groen mentioned that from a businessman's stand- point, the hardest thing to reproduce as far as a victorian building is the scale of the building. Tom Wells was asked by the Commission to present his opinion Wells has had experience in architectural review in other cities and feels that in order to do a real reproduction of a victorian building is economically out of the question. Wells suggested that HPC become an architectural review committee that can decide whether a building is sensitive to Aspen or not (such as a new building) but reserve the old buildings. Wells feels new architecture can be sympa- thetic to the scale, materials and feeling of Aspen; and that the HPC should be able to have the power to say the old victorians can be preserved but new victorians are not allowed. Wells suggested to have the phrase "to avoid the capricious use of victorian detail" added in the criteria. Groen asked Wells if he would like to be an alternate member for the HPC. Wells said that he would. Stanford mentioned he would schedule for the June 8 meeting, a walking tour of the Historic District. Stanford said he will be bringing in a series of maps which will identify the direction that will be taken on the historic district. That is to identify areas that have more significant historic character than others. So far on all the victorian structures, except one or two, the planning department has received documentation on the historic structures dating from 1911 back, and the middle period from 1911 to 1940 to present. Stanford explained the proposal which is by Steve Marcus for a new building on the corner of Hunter and Hopkins. The applicant submitted two concepts on the building, the difference in plan is the form of the building. Jack Lawler, architect of the building, was present to explain two different concepts of the building. The basic concept of the first plan was to orient the facade of the building toward the corner. In orther words 45° between Hunter and Hopkins street with important space by that orientation to the corner itself. Also the site west of the corner is opened up more because of the 45° angle of the building and it opens up the corner of the rear. Lawler continued to explain the first concept of the building. It was predominately brick with some arches and imitation victorian detail; but at the scale Lawler wanted to achieve. One-half story would be the main level and one-half story would be below the main level. Lawler did present this proposal to Stanford to see what Stanford had in mind for the corner. Stanford wasn't convinced of putting the facade at a 45° angle. Stanford suggested to orient the building toward a residential scale rather than the scale of City Hall. Lawler then explained the second concept. Lawler felt because of the scale of the buildings in the area, i.e. the Church, City Hall, Professional Building etc. the building should be more oriented to a larger scale rather than the scale of the residents. Therefore, the building had the same layout but decreased the appearance size of it by giving a stronger horizontal element and breaking up the upper level facade with a victorian residential RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Regular Meeting Historical Preservation Committee May 25, 1976 scale details. Also the building had a sloped roof motiff which keyes to not only the adjoining houses across the street, but the sloped roof which is on City Hall and a number of other buildings in the area. The plan gives more of a one-story effect on the immediate street elevations. There will be a story-and-a-half scale which will, Lawler felt, tie in with the victorian houses because it will tend to accent the height of the victorian buildings and then by sloping back will minimize the impact of the upper level. The lower level is oriented to the court yard. Groen asked what the plannning department's position was. Stanford read a memo with the planning department's suggestions. The planning department is recommending denial of the proposal because the final design lacks sufficient compatibility or harmony of the neighboring historic structures. Also the massing of the building is not in harmony with the victorian residential structures. The lower patio of the building eliminates the linear open space along the streets that separates the adjacent existing structures from the street. It would be a severe change in character to have the sunken patio immediately off the sidewalk. The character of the streets created by one-story brick and ~lapboard facades with individual access at grade and separated by open space. T hes e characteristics of the existing historic structures are not reflected in the proposed structure. Also the design of the proposed building expresses a contemporary character that does not relate to adjacent roof shapes, set-backs, location of open spaces, or landscaping. In other words, Stanford feels the proposed building does nothing to promote the existance and would probably increase the pressures to eventually turn the existing residential structures to demolish them. It would increase pressures to have them removed and put in another commercial structure. The planning department is looking for a building in that area to actually enhance and tend to stabalize the existence of the historic structures adjacent to the property. Lawler asked how the HPC weigh the importance of the residential historic residential elements as opposed to City Hall, the Church and the larger buildings that are also neighbors. Groen replied that what Stanford is encouraging the HPC to consider is the rhythm of space and voids and mass as they relate in the downtown area. The resident's structures are related to City Hall as a relief from the mass and the scale. The HPC would like to encourage the retention of some of the buildings to maintain variation and would prefer not to see the entire downtown area eventually become like downtown Los Angeles with street to street and sidewalk to sidewalk masses of masonary. Groen explained to Lawler that the HPC would like to see some- thing that didn't have as much mass as the proposed building has in relation to the houses. Groen felt the excavated area, a lower court yard, creates a dimens~iol that is not typical except in one area of downtown Aspe~ which is Mountain Sports. Burns suggested blocking out the lower level. Groen thought that was an interesting idea because it changes the apparent mass and scale of the building. -3- Historical Preservation Committee May 25, 1976 Allen Schaffer was present. One of the guildelines that Schaffer went~by was the Durant Mall. What the architects have done is: 1) try to make a building that is attractive for a merchant or the man who is going to put a store in the building where people will be generated to come into the shops~ 2) there are 3 lots of 9,000 feet which means they could have a buildout of 18,000 feet. However, they are building 13,500 feet so there is not the bulk and mass there, so the space that could be used economically is being cut down; 3) if the building was built at grade level, and took that space that is down below and made a three-story building out of it, the mass and bulk would suffer more than it does now. Therefore, the purpose of the open plaza is to create a park atmosphere, or a leisurely-feel for the front of the building; thus keeping the scope of the building down rather than increas- ing it. Stanford suggested taking the open space and breaking it up into three or four smaller, more intimate spaces. Stanford's feeling on the open plaza is it is too grand of a space. If the open spaces were smaller it would be more in keeping of the scale and keeping the open space extending from the front yard of the house next door. Groen asked if a restaurant was a proposed use in the building. Schaffer replied that it was, but if something better came along they would take that use. Groen asked if the restaurant could use part of the patio level for dining outside. Schaffer replied the restaurant has their own paito above because that is where the restaurant will be placed. Schaffer defended the open plaza because he feels people like setbacks rather than have the lot line buildings. Schaffer questioned how to accommodate three very different type buildings with the Lodge on one side, the professional building on another and victorians on yet another side. Stanford mentioned the proposal is in line with the Lodge and the professional building; however, not with the victorian houses and that is what HPC is concerned with. Schaffer responded he is making the building attractive for entrepreneurs and merchants who will be in there to attract people. Schaffer feels the element of visuality is important so shoppers will be able to see the shops. Stanford resnonded that a benefit in Aspen is the saying "bigger is not be t te r.'~ Part of the experience is being able to go into small scale shops. Hecht was present to ask the commission to explain more thoroughlywhat it is they would like to see on the corner. So far Hecht understands they wouldn't like to see a reproduction of victorian houses. The concern is to preserve the victorian character of the street. The policy of the HPC is to deny any application to tear any existing houses. The houses across the street are designated "historic". Lawler questioned the Committee if they could picture in their minds a building 2½ stories that will ever be acceptable. Burns suggested taking part of the open plaza and separating it thus creating two smaller elements. Burns liked the idea of a low section on the front and having it higher in the middle. However, it might break the scale by having an indentation between part of the building. Stanford mentioned if the building was located in a more commercial area, there probably wouldn't be as much concern. Stanford feels there should be consideratign given to the house next door and the new building that is designed next door should foster being a good neighborhood. Schaffer asked about the vacant lot next door and if some- one can build there. Frost mentioned the property has been sold and they have been before HPC to ~ild. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Regular Meeting Historical Preservation Committee May 25, 1976 Stanford suggested to Lawler to go up to the setback on the back part of the lot. Stanford suggested to develop preliminary sketches. Lawler questioned if the courts did become two or three smaller courts, what would be the reaction of the basic idea of going up half a level and down half a level, rather than go in at street level. There has to be a certain amount of square footage to make it economically feasible; thus if it is taken out in the ground the building would have to go higher or underground. Michael didn't like the courts because he felt they would become snow, dirt and paper catchers. Groen felt it is hard for the HPC to come to a consensus or to give guidelines except they can follow the guidelines which have been developed for historic structures. Schaffer felt to utilize the bulk that the zoning allows, and yet keep the lines to appear like the victorians it is almost an impossible task. Groen suggested they do the preliminary drawings that were suggested, present them at the June 8 meeting to be reviewed and the HPC would comment on them at that time. Stanford asked if there would be any problem going down a full level. The reason is because it would bring the second level down to street level. Groen asked if there was any further discussion. It was decided to have a study session on June 1 at 4:00 p.m. to discuss the sketches at that time. Groen asked the Committee members if they had any further comments. Michael felt the patio is not an element that fits into the central core, and there are shops in the town that have an interior access that are doing well, and doesn't care to approve another patio. Groen mentioned the reason he questioned if the area was going to be used for outdoor dining is because when the area is not used during the winter the tables when not in use or the chairs will be stored there and piled up. Also the businesses in the lower level could display merchandise in that area. Stanford suggested the patio to be completely internalized such as the Patio Building. Groen asked if the trees and/ or sculptures could be put in the patio space. Stanford replied they could. Burns moved to adjourn at 3:00 p.m.; seconded by Michael. L~D~y M./K~lyf~,'De~ty City Clerk -5-