Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.hpc.201801171 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 2018 Chairperson Greenwood called the meeting to order at 4:33 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Gretchen Greenwood, Jeffery Halferty, Willis Pember, Nora Berko, Roger Moyer, Richard Lai, Scott Kendrick. Absent was Bob Blaich. Staff present: James R. True, City Attorney Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Berko said that she is going to have to leave early. Mr. Pember commented that WPA got best of Houzz for 2017 awarded by Houzz magazine. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT: None. PROJECT MONITORING: None. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon said she is sorry for occupying so much of the board’s time this month. She thanked them for the special meeting tonight and she will see everyone next week for the regular meeting as well. She is horribly remiss in forgetting to offer HPC members a chance to go to the state historic preservation conference, which is two weeks away. She said that staff goes every year to Denver and they usually have board members attend. They offer a variety of lectures and tours so please let her know and she can cover registration and hotel. She mentioned that Ms. Greenwood and Ms. Berko have been in the past and they do offer AIA credit sessions, etc. Mr. Lai said he would like to go, but has accommodations. Ms. Berko asked for the dates and Ms. Simon said it is Wednesday the 31st through Saturday and you can go for one day or multiple days. Mr. Pember asked if there was a limit to commission members going and Ms. Simon said she would see how many people are interested and she would speak to Ms. Garrow about how many people they can manage. Ms. Greenwood stated for the record that Mr. Halferty entered the meeting. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None. CALL UPS: None. OLD BUSINESS: None. NEW BUSINESS: Aspen Pedestrian Mall Project APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Mike Albert of Design Workshop, Darla Callaway of Design Workshop and Tina Bishop 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 2018 Mr. Albert stated that the purpose of the meeting this evening is to present a few alternatives for the way forward. The alternatives have been shaped by inventory, analysis and public outreach. They will allow for dialogue and questions from board members after presenting three design alternatives focused on above grade improvements. They want to take the best attributes of each plan and put them together into one. At the end, they will share the public engagement outcomes. As of today, they are in the second of five phases; the conceptual plan. They would like feedback on the Ki Davis fountain, the crab apple trees, the south Mill improvements and on the strengthening and new connection to Durant. The project goals are to maintain historic integrity and character of the mall while upgrading the infrastructure, improve storm water, replace utilities, retain the mall as an urban park, increase the mall’s accessibility and engage public and business owners so the mall can be the best benefit in the future to everyone. The results from the public surveys have guided the concepts we are presenting tonight. A lot of people think the fire pit and the Ki Davis fountain should be rethought along with the Sister Cities plaza. They asked if the mall’s design should retain the color, texture, pattern and paving maintained and people strongly agreed. People also requested adding furniture and additional water features as well as at grade plantings. Ms. Callaway said the infrastructure doesn’t meet current standards for storm water. She continued to explain the current issues and what they plan to do regarding the infrastructure. She explained that it is a real mixed bag regarding utilities when they were looked at underground. She talked at length about moving the utilities to different areas, such as, up against the storefronts or into the alleyways and replacing the bricks on the mall. Mike Albert took over presenting each alternative to the board and explained the historic character of the mall and the idea behind the 1976 construction. He mentioned that the prospectus was conducted in accordance with nationally recognized standards for culturally recognized landscapes. The mall was designed as a distinctive grid with four linear spaces. All alternatives remove the concrete retaining walls and barrier at the southwest corner of Cooper near Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory. Alternative 1 – Stay the Course– most closely aligns to what is there on the mall today. This is mostly in the reestablishment of the trees along south Mill Street. At the corner of Hyman and north Mill, they are proposing the least impactful crosswalk. The crabapples are to be removed, boxed and salvaged and then brought back. The outdoor dining would stay underneath the trees like it is today. Along Hyman, things will appear like they are today, except the location of outdoor dining, which contemplates some dining in the middle and along the sides. The water level in the Ki Davis fountain will be brought up to the edge. There will be peripheral bike racks added. Along Cooper and Sister Cities, there would be an improvement to the playground of a nature inspired theme. There would be a removal of the fire pit that is located near Ralph Lauren as well. Alternative 2 – Community Activate – maintaining a similar strategy to what is there today, but invites people to linger longer. This would have a concrete intersection that signals to vehicles to slow down. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 2018 The node and dancing fountain will be maintained and the crabapples would be boxed, removed and brought back. They would concentrate all outdoor dining to the middle and would make clear north and south crossings. Some people say they can’t walk around the Ki Davis fountain, so this contemplates moving the curb line to the east a few feet to be able to walk on all sides of the fountain since Galena is a one way. They would also implement a seating bench on the backside of the fountain. The playground at Cooper and Sister Cities would be an imagination playground and the existing restrooms are maintained. They would remove the fire pit, but would install a low water table (18-24 inches high) and provide a sense of white noise. They would also add some seasonal plantings and bike racks. Alternative 3 – Capturing Potential - The south Mill space is the area that has changed the most over time so most of the improvements are concentrated there. The Dancing fountain would be repaired. The outdoor dining would be detached from the building, but they would maintain the center aisle. The main difference would be replacing all crabapples with a non-fruit bearing crab apple tree to steer away the bears. The Ki Davis would be rebuilt similar to option 1 and they would raise the water level. At Cooper and Sister Cities plaza, there is a desire for additional restroom space so they want to achieve a stronger connection to the park. This creates a new opening to the mall and they would add a new water feature; a misting fog. On both sides would be the playground, games court and a pavilion for adults. The restrooms would be located to the far south end. Along the middle, the path would remain open. This would be a flexible playground where kids can create their own adventure. Mr. Albert said they have reached out and had a lot of community engagement, which includes: CCLC, City Council work sessions, online surveys, stakeholder meetings, etc. He showed survey results on the screen. Mr. Moyer asked about ADA and if they will have a surface that moves through the existing bricks for people in wheelchairs and women in high heels etc. Ms. Callaway said they would be looking for an in- kind replacement of the brick and addressed in the jointing and durability of the brick. Mr. Moyer asked about the seating being placed in the center and whether that would be too much messy vitality. Ms. Callaway said they have received a lot of mixed feedback about this subject and dining in the center received the least favorability from the public. Mr. Halferty asked about the budget and if there is an exorbitant cost involved in relocating the bathroom that Mr. Pember designed. Mr. Thompson said that they do not have a range at this time until they choose a specific direction to move in and there will be many meetings on this. There are many ways to finance this and they need to weigh all options. Ms. Callaway said this will be a multiyear project so they need to make decisions as a community as to how to move forward and what times of year the work will be done, etc. Mr. Halferty said he really likes the last alternative as far as the Durant connection and asked if they could you potentially do this in the other schemes as well. Mr. Albert said yes. Mr. Woods reminded everyone that they aren’t just picking one alternative, they want to combine the best parts of all plans according to what people like. Mr. Pember asked them to explain the perception of Wagner Park and it not being what people want. He said it is shocking to him. Mr. Woods explained that the original mall design had no intentional 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 2018 connection to Wagner Park and he noted that Mr. Pember widened that connection and the new team wants to embrace Wagner more since it has grown exponentially as a town square area. Mr. Pember said that HPC values honing in on the details and the process of discovery. He said they are adamantly opposed to “historic-ish”. Ms. Bishop said they have a 68-page site analysis book. She says they did look at all original drawings and although they were DD level drawings, the mall was actually built to those drawings. They did site measurements and found that the cross sections were built exactly as drawn. The drawings were from April 1976 and show the original building and the original playground, which is all in the packet. At the time the mall was built, Wagner Park was more of a green open space and wasn’t what it has evolved into today. Please be comforted by the fact that we did very detailed and thorough historical research. Mr. Pember said he would have liked to have seen the analysis in the packet. Mr. Thompson said it was presented to HPC last fall, but they would be happy to give that to him again to see. Mr. Pember said the City Council minutes should have been included in the packet also. He asked for a summary of what City Council had to say. Ms. Callaway said they are going to synthesize all comments they’ve heard from all boards and will bring back to present to HPC as a preferred conceptual design. Mr. Albert said there are a couple of areas that do not have consensus yet, but the minutes can be provided if that’s what is needed. Mr. Pember asked if they can describe the groups who are steak holders and decision makers. Mr. Albert said there is a core team and the City of Aspen partners. The steak holders came from our team going door to door on the mall getting people involved. The steak holder meetings consist of 25-30 individuals. We don’t want to stop there, we are also getting high traffic online with 70-80 participants more coming in. Mr. Pember asked if the Ski Co is involved or if ACRA is involved. Mr. Albert said yes, Mr. Klanderud has been to every meeting. Mr. Pember asked about Ruggerfest, Jazzfest & Food & Wine and if those big players are involved and Ms. Callaway said those players are coming to stakeholder meetings and they can get a list so Mr. Pember can see for himself. He asked about the clock tower being nuked and Mr. Albert said the clock tower stays in option 1 and 2, but would be removed in option 3. Ms. Greenwood said that she feels in certain areas of the mall, the space is doing too much and is too crowded. She likes the historical element being retained, but the pattern of use on Mill Street could be better designed to take congestion off of that corner. The Wheeler corner and the fountain are very busy and she feels the playground and restrooms are congested so she likes option 3. She thinks the dining should stay the same and not be in the center as it is visually disruptive. She doesn’t feel that congestion is solved in options 1 and 2. Ms. Bishop reminded everyone that ideas from each option are interchangeable. Mr. Lai agrees with keeping the dining to the sides and he likes the idea of separating the bathrooms. He applauds the staff and consultants in the way they approach the design and the process. Community involvement is a strong element and he feels fortunate to be here originally 50-60 years ago and by happenstance to be here now to see it redone. As an architect and planner, he looks at the trees and plants on the mall as something that can be done easily to have labels on the trees and plants, etc. to 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 2018 provide an educational aspect. He said he is an old dog with a bone regarding the fire pit. He understands the concerns as wasteful and the police complaints, but to him; being here in Aspen, he feels they should consider having a firepit that is wood only or controlled more. People like to gather around a warm fire. There is something welcoming about it. There are also long thoroughfares throughout the mall to give numerical scores to where activities are to decide and see a pattern come up, whether linear or nodal and decide where to add more activity. Consider the independence node, it could use some type of activity and decrease the activity along Mill. Overall, he is super impressed with what has been done. Mr. Kendrick likes the idea of opening up access to Wagner Park, but is concerned with the cost of moving the bathrooms, but does think it’s helpful. Regarding alternative 3, he feels there needs to be a clear delineation between the street and the mall. He would like to see a different material or pattern and doesn’t like the painted crosswalk. In terms of the Ki Davis fountain, he asked about the historical details. Ms. Bishop said the fountain came before the sculpture and is considered an original contributing feature to the mall. He is not sure how much he wants to see it changed and he doesn’t like the mid-way mall seating. He asked if any of the designs are going to be more impactful for businesses than the others and Ms. Callaway said that all options have equal impact. Ms. Simon clarified that this is the second update on the mall and the next step is to go to council. This is an important moment to identify likes and dislikes regarding historic preservation. On February 28th, they will check in and move to a conceptual review hearing. Ms. Simon was at the City Council work session and she said it was hectic. There was a lot of dislike expressed for the Ki Davis fountain and the use of energy on the fire pit. Mr. Woods said that City Council liked option 3 for the most part. The one common theme heard is that Mill street is the least loved the way that it is. Ms. Simon said the other thing she wanted to remind everyone about is that the mall was designated a historic landmark last April. There has been a lot of investigation into the replacement of the bricks and this seems like the time to say your comfort level with the bricks. She also said that they need to understand the physical impacts moving the dining would have on altering the surface of the mall. She said she hopes that everyone understands all implications and uses this time to comment before the opportunity is lost. Ms. Greenwood said that she hopes the attention to detail to the bricks is important. Mr. Thompson mentioned they are running out of brick so if we were to replace them, we would need to have a huge stock pile. Ms. Greenwood thinks they need a new solution for this and disagrees with replacing the brick. Mr. Lai mentioned that it’s two different things to see the brick on the ground and looking at a sample. He suggests having a sample area to see the new brick on the ground and look at different specimens. Mr. Kendrick asked if they have looked at ways to integrate the original brick into the new design. Ms. Callaway said they know there is not enough brick supply to be able to use what is there today and those bricks do not meet ADA standards. She said they aren’t there in the process to that level of detail yet. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 2018 Ms. Greenwood said again that they need to rethink their thinking and come up with ways to incorporate the old brick so the impact and historic aspect maintains itself because that is not happening in the proposed designs. Mr. Pember mentioned the public polling demographics. He was thinking of the older generation and their thoughts about the City of Aspen serving those who live here and the tourists being the groups to accommodate. He didn’t think the people who live down valley and work in Aspen should have such a weighted opinion because those people aren’t spending time in downtown Aspen on a nightly basis. He feels that the surveys are heavily skewed and this stuck out to him. The mall has a completely different character in the evening. It’s not insignificant and it’s a huge part of life here in Aspen. You have to be careful what lens you are looking at this problem through and it is all predicated on the users. Pay attention to the flip side of existence here; it is important. Ms. Berko exited the meeting. Mr. Albert made one important clarification. The survey question asked people to click anything that applied to them. He said 111 people took the online survey and 78 of those people live in Aspen. They set up the survey for this exact criticism. He feels that they did get a good idea of how each person feels. The community benefits by people living down valley. The business people would love to make people linger longer and make the mall the vital place that we want it to be. Regarding the restrooms, there is a mentality that it stays in place or that it stays in place until it’s life is deemed over or it is determined that now is the right time. It’s a financial investment and what is practical, etc. We would love to hear that if it is the right spot 50 years from now, terrific. Mr. Pember continued to talk about the attributes of the restroom building and said it is not just a bathroom. He went on to say the trees need to be thinned out because they attract bears and it doesn’t seem to pop on the radar of any of these surveys. He said no one seems to care. Mr. Woods said that is not true. He said he heard loud and clear from the public that people like the flavor of a park in the community. Mr. Pember said that is not his choice, but he is not going to win any arguments against popular opinion. He suggested picking up the Ki Davis fountain and moving it for better flow. He also feels that the Durant connection is weak and said if they fix that, they will do a great service to the way the mall works. He is astonished at how they got from the RFP to the situation here today. He doesn’t feel that there was a very broad group of disciplines invited to look at this RFP and no architects and very little emphasis on design and he finds this regrettable. He feels there should have been a design RFP. Ms. Greenwood agrees that there was no design follow through with an architect involved in the community as part of the solution. Mr. Rice said that when he and Mr. Woods were writing the RFP, they wanted to keep it simple regarding infrastructure, etc. He said when they went out and started presenting it to the public, it’s what people were asking for. The design aspects came from listening to the public. Mr. True exited the meeting. Mr. Lai said he agrees with Mr. Pember on virtually everything. The discussion reminded him of a couple of practical things as well. What he is missing on the mall besides a bathroom are water fountains. 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 2018 Ms. Greenwood said she doesn’t think those are very sanitary and he needs a water bottle for the water taps. He said he misses the old ambiance of times when Aspen was more accessible to younger people when you could hear students practicing around the opera house. He said he had a professor at Princeton who always insisted that every project had a night lighting diagram. This is something he would urge the design group to really study and have a consultant on. Mr. Moyer said that the overall concept is quite good in his opinion. The idea of this “messy vitality” needs to be looked at very seriously and be reconsidered. He thanked everyone and said they have done a good job. Mr. Pember suggested to the design team that they develop more narratives about the life in the mall because people understand narratives and stories to help sell their product. Ms. Bishop mentioned that she has a couple of items to clarify. She mentioned that the Ki Davis fountain has a name and it is called “Interplay” and the second thing is that at the Wagner node, someone said the pavement was never built, but yes it was. It is in aerial photographs from 1980 so she just wanted to point that out. Ms. Callaway said they want the right approach and direction from Council regarding artwork on the mall and wants the art to be determined by its own committee because it’s a big discussion. MOTION: Mr. Moyer moved to adjourn, Mr. Pember seconded at 6:48 p.m. ___________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk