Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Land Use Case.100 E Francis St.0025.2010.ASLU
I° THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0025.2010.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBER 2735 124 19 851 PROJECTS ADDRESS 100 E. FRANCIS ST PLANNER SARA ADAMS CASE DESCRIPTION ORD #48 REVIEWS REPRESENTATIVE GIVEN INSTITUTE DATE OF FINAL ACTION 8.11.11 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 8.11.11 2 73 S • 12 4- • + cl • t 00 2__C • 20 (0 • c..--L1 r- ii1i . i 1§ •i E3 1 File Edit Record ttavigate Form Reports Format Tab Help ;■ i , OL A z cigar Ai g v Fees Fee Summary !Main � Actions Attachments Routing History Valuation 1 Arch/Eng I I,r i,_�, r is Parcels Permit `Aspen Land Use Permit - Addres 1 00 E FRANCIS •ST - Apt/Suite City ASPEN State CO Zip 81611 Permit Information • n Master permit ••• I Routing queue . Applied CI 1 Project ••• I Status Approved CI Description ORDINANCE 48 REVIEW Issued Final NM Cill i Submitted SARA ADAMS Clock = Days 01 Expires 15/20/2011 I Submitted via I • Owner _ Last name GIVEN INSTITUTE ••• First name Phone Address Applicant R Owner is applicant? ❑ Contractor is applicant? Last name GIVEN INSTITUTE ••• First name "` Phone �. _ • _ ,,',;:,, ,, . • _ .r � Cust # 28814 ••• Address Lender Last name ••• First name Phone ( ) - Address .. _ — , AspenGold5 (server) angelas Edit 1 of 1 .;i DRt t c (-Q., — Regular Meeting Aspen Citv Council November 8.2010 2. Councilman Johnson said the high school football team beat Carbondale and will be in the play offs, a home game this Saturday at 1 PM. Councilman Johnson encouraged everyone to go out and cheer. 3. Councilman Romero said the lodging tax, question 2A, passed and this will enable a more comprehensive marking program on behalf of Aspen's lodges, retail and restaurant businesses. 4. Councilman Skadron said the city and ARC hosted the fall face off hockey tournament with over 90 hockey games. Councilman Skadron said these were well attended and a great benefit to the community, especially during the off season. These games introduce Aspen to people who may not otherwise come to Aspen. Councilman Skadron complimented the ARC and city staff. 5. Councilman Skadron said Aspen Film is starting their screening process for filmfest and it is a chance for community members to get involved in viewing films and rating them. 6. Mayor Ireland noted 1776, the play, is at the Wheeler. Everyone should get out and see it. 7. Mayor Ireland congratulated the winners from the November election, including Rob Ittner, county commissioner, and Gail Schwartz, state senator. 8. Mayor Ireland said the girls' hockey team played a great game and lost in the last few minutes. GIVEN INSTITUTE S a 00240. 2421© ?IA I G ;le ve,a(acAJ pva�<l �ts ktieg John Worcester, city attorney, told Council the city is in negotiations with the University of Colorado on the Given Institute. Worcester said as part of this, Council should deny the rezoning ordinance and the Ordinance #48 negotiations should be continued. Bart Johnson, representing SC Acquisitions, told Council they are under contract to purchase the Given property from CU. The proposal is to preserve the Given either as a non -profit that the city would be involved in the mechanics of or after a year, the building would be preserved as either a duplex or single family residence. Mitch Haas, representing SC Acquisitions, told Council the goal of this plan is to preserve the Given building on its own lot and create 3 residential lots around it. The Given building and site will be landmark designated. This plan will go through a full Ordinance #48 review and full public process, starting with a joint HPC and P &Z review before public hearings at City Council. Haas said the proposal is to subdivision the property into lots that are compatible with the surrounding R -6 zone district. Haas said there is enough land that could be subdivided into 14 Tots and the applicants are only proposing 4 lots. 4 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 8.2010 Johnson said once there is an approval and the applicants can close the deal with CU, the city will then have a one -year lease on the Given building for $1 /year plus maintenance expenses, during which there will be an option to purchase, assignable to non - profits. If the city does not exercise that option, the land owner can convert the building to a single family or duplex residence subject to historic preservation. Johnson said the goal is to preserve both the building and the uses with the fallback of preserving the building even if non - profit uses turn out to not be feasible. Johnson said the purchase price if the city exercises the option is $3.75 million plus recouping development fees that have been paid by the applicant. Mayor Ireland asked about denying the rezoning and then the applicant applying for a demolition permit. Johnson said that is up to CU, not his client and in exchange for the denial of the rezoning, CU has agreed not to exercise its rights on that permit until the Ordinance #48 negotiation is complete. Johnson said this is the beginning of a process. Amy Guthrie, community development department, told Council the schedule is a joint HPC and P &Z meeting early January with first reading in front of Council the end of January and public hearings in February. The proposed closing date is March. Mayor Ireland asked how this compares to what could be done if CU demolished the building and came in with a development application. Chris Bendon, community development, said 14 lots would be difficult considering the infrastructure and access that would have to be part of any development. Bendon said this plan is in line with expectations for the property. Mayor Ireland said this property is about 2.2 acres and this proposal would have 1/2 acre /unit. Bendon said the R -6 zone district has 6,000 or 9,000 square foot lots, in general; these lots will be larger than other typical west end lots. This will be a less dense development than is the west end. Ms. Guthrie told Council the Given building is one of the most important unaltered modernist structures in town and represents the Aspen Idea of mind, body and spirit. The building is actively used today as a meeting place. It is significant as both architectural preservation and community uses. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. Mayor Ireland moved to deny Ordinance #22, Series of 2010; seconded by Councilman Skadron. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Skadron, yes; Romero, yes; Torre, yes; Johnson, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. Ordinance #48 Negotiations Worcester told Council he is authorized to state that CU consents to extending the Ordinance #48 negotiations to January 11, 2011. Mayor Ireland asked if extending these negotiations prejudiced the city from having HPC and P &Z review. Worcester said CU understands that will be part of the process. Mayor Ireland asked why the negotiations are not extended through the projected closing date. Worcester said CU is concemed about the property being off the market for so long. 5 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 8, 2010 Mayor Ireland moved to extend Ordinance #48 negotiations through January 2011; seconded by Councilman Johnson. Councilman Romero asked about the maintenance costs to the city during their potential lease period and if that is a hard and fast position. Johnson said it is a fast position. Johnson said his information from staff is that the city may or may not try and operate the building during that one year or just mothball the property. The owner will let the city do that as long as the city pays the costs whatever the operation. Scott Miller, asset manager, told Council it would cost about $20 to $30,000 to mothball the property. Councilman Johnson said the one year time to fmd a buyer seems short and asked if there is the ability to extend. Johnson said until the applicants know what will happen on this lot, non - profit or single family, they are on hold. The use will change how the other lots are marketed. This one year is an important time frame. Councilman Romero asked what size structures could be built on the 3 lots. Bendon said these lots will be developed according to the R -6 zoning with no special considerations or variances. These parcels could hold 4500 to 5000 square feet of FAR. Bendon said there is a 15' setback requirement from the Hallam Lake bluff and the applicants have agreed to observe that setback. Johnson noted converting the Given to a single family or duplex residence would cost as much as starting from scratch. Johnson said there will have to be some restriction on uses, like eliminating large tents and outdoor functions, to take into account the proximity of the single family residences. Ms. Guthrie pointed out the site plans shows the property divided into 4 parts, roughly 1 /2 acre each. Councilman Skadron said it is important for him that this remain a viable entity and attractive to the users rather than being smooshed by 4 large structures. All in favor, motion carried. Council directed staff to enter into negotiations to bring this proposal through the process. Councilman Torre said he would like to see the Given parcel have more room around it to allow for nonprofit uses accessibility and breathing area and to preserve the historic asset. Council thanked CU and the applicants for bring the proposal forward. 10. Councilman Skadron reported on a recent CAST meeting where the Avon public works directed reported on using effluent waste water to capture and provide heat for public buildings. Councilman Skadron said the director of Mtrip analyzed the summer 2010, which ended strong for tourism visits. Councilman Skadron said what are big for tourists are special events, road bike events and travel with dogs. Councilman Skadron said the lodging tax in Breckenridge was approved to increase from 2.4% to 3.4% and they have a budget line item to incorporate VRBO (vacation rentals by owners) and the tax paid on those. 11. Mayor Ireland said he went to Denver for a press conference announcing that Aspen will be one of the towns for the Quiznos Pro Bike Tour. Mayor Ireland said the tour participants will spend a night in Aspen. Mayor Ireland said he hopes there is a charity event in Aspen so people 6 In Aspen, Demolition Looms fop- Modernist Building by Harry Weese I N.rs I Architectu... Page 1 of 1 In Aspen, Demolition Looms for Modernist Building by Harry Weese August 25, 2010 By Davld Hill A little -known building in Aspen, Colorado, designed by the late Chicago architect Harry Weese —whose most celebrated work is the Washington, D.C., Metro system —is threatened with demolition. Built in 1972, Weese's Given Institute is a small concrete -block conference center owned by the University of Colorado School of Medicine. The 12,000- square -foot structure sits on a 2.25 -acre lot in Aspen's pricey West End residential neighborhood. For years, the medical school has used the institute for summer conferences and retreats, but faced with ongoing budget cuts, it now plans to close the Given and sell the property. School officials are negotiating with a potential buyer, who has offered $15 million for the property— provided Weese's building is torn down. The city of Aspen hopes to save the building. Amy Guthrie, Aspen's historic .nurteay Given in,mlite preservation officer, says the Given is part of the town's rich cultural history. This Built in 1972, the 12,000 - square - fool Given Institute is isn't just some random, nice modernist building that appeared here," she says. it owned by the University of Colorado School of really is directly tied to the community's history as a cultural and intellectual center." Medicine. Voters May Decide Aspen voters may have the chance to decide in November whether the city should spend tax dollars to buy the Given. But that could be a hard sell in the current economy, says Ziska Childs, a production designer and preservationist who started a "Help Save the Given Institute" Facebook page. 1 don't think there's any chance of it passing," Childs says. She points out that because of the Given's relatively isolated location and limited use, many Aspenites don't even know it exists —which has made it difficult to rally support for saving the building. City council members have already rejected one plan that would have asked voters to allow the city to match the $15 million offer to buy the Given. A new proposal could still end up on the November ballot, however. Weese in the Spotlight The dispute over the Given comes at a time of renewed interest in Weese, who died in 1998. A recent article in Chicago magazine chronicled the architect's thriving career in the 1960s and 1970s and his alcohol - fueled decline. And architectural historian Robert Bruegmann has written the forthcoming book The Architecture of Harty Weese. the first critical study of the architect's work. Born in Evanston, Illinois, in 1915, Weese studied city planning under Eliel Saarinen at the Cranbrook Academy of Art in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. After working for a year in Skidmore, Owings & Merrill's Chicago office, Weese opened his own practice in 1947. Although considered a modernist, Weese rejected the minimalist style of Chicago's preeminent post -war architect, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, preferring a more eclectic, expressionistic approach. In addition to the Washington Metro, Weese designed the brutalist Arena Stage, also in Washington, D.C., and the Time -Life Building in Chicago. The Given's Project Bruegmann says Weese first visited Aspen shortly after World War II ended. In 1968, he and his wife, Kitty, bought a house in the ski town. Weese became friends with Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke, who had helped transformed Aspen into a thriving cultural center by founding the Aspen Institute and the Aspen Music Festival and School. (They hired Bauhaus architect Herbert Bayer to design the institute's buildings.) Elizabeth Paepcke commissioned Weese to design the Given Institute, which was built on property that she donated to the University of Colorado School of Medicine. Bruegmann calls the Given one of Weese's most important works, and it is one of 31 projects by Weese featured in his new book about the architect. "It's a quirky building that shows the whimsical side of Harry," Bruegmann says. "To tear it down would be an act of cultural vandalism." http: / /archrecord .construction.com /news /daily /archives /2010/08/ 100825weese_given_instit... 6/23/2011 The Given Institute, Harry Wee -'' Architect, Aspen, Co GREG WATT` - 'HOTOGRAP... Page 1 of 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY GALLERIES I ABOUT I CONTACT I The Given Institute: Exterior ZC0D8633.jpg 6of52 The Given Institute, Harry Weese, Architect, Aspen, Co Copyright Greg Was Photography « Download image ta. all images , GREG warts PHOTOGRAPHY i contact 1 gnwatts @sopris. net * 970 309 0127 powered by Photosheiter http: / /gnwatts.photoshelter.com /gallery- image/ The - Given - Institute - Exterior /G0000ngcA2... 3/17/2011 ZC0D9260.jpg 1 GREG WATT' PHOTOGRAPHY Page 1 of 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY GALLERIES 1 ABOUT I CONTACT The Given Institute: Interior ZC0D9260.jpg 3of26 , a il Copy Glass ri Grey Watts Photography Download image ,rte , "t.; �y ^, 4 -y- Y hg^ 4 a `tw, . y � a +k ,s:� s9 x .; 4.,k 4 L ;2k i • —'s B " e t all images ;S GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY I contact I gnwatts@sopris.net " 970 309 0127 Dowered by Phowsneher http: / /gnwatts.photoshelter.com /gallery- image/ The - Given - Institute - Interior /G0000RXXIiN... 3/16/201 ZCOD9240.jpg G WAT PHOTOG Page 1 of 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY GALLERIES 1 ABOUT I CONTACT I ZCOD9244.ipg The Given Institute: Interior .. 12of26 " Copyright GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY » Download image ww , m M 3 ; f3 , I X F ? ` b `;,t f 1 ■ b E all images : e GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY 1 contact 1 gnwatts @sopris.net ' 970 309 0127 powered by Photo,,neiter http: / /gnwatts.photoshelter. com / gallery- 1111 - Given - Institute - Interior /G0000RXX1iN ... 3/16/2011 ZC0D9251.jpg 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPH Page 1 of 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY GALLERIES 1 ABOUT I CONTACT 1 The Given Institute: Interior ZCOD9251.jpg 19 of 26 Door to spiral stair from meeting room. Copyright Greg Watts Photography Download image • q t Y 4:* ' ', � ' � I all images ;c` GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY 1 contact 1 gnwatts c©sopris.net ' 970 309 0127 powered by PhotoSneher http: // gnwatts .photoshelter.com /gallery- image/ The - Given - Institute - Interior /G0000RXXIiN... 3/16/2011 The Given Institute, Harry WeedArchitect 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOG0PHY Page 1 of 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY GALLERIES I ABOUT I CONTACT I The Given Institute, Aspen, Co ZC0D8722.jpg 6of21 The Given Institute, Harry Weese, Architect Copyright Greg Watts Photography s Download image > w .1 1111 sY ar images (ti GREG WATT 5 PHOTOGRAPHY contact 1 gnwatts@sopris.net `970.309.0927 powered by Photo i`r http : / /gnwatts.photoshelter.com/gal lery- image/ The - Given - Institute - Aspen- Co /G0000EvN... 3/16/2011 The Given Institute, Harry Weems , .. Architect, Aspen, Co 1 GREG WATT" °HOTOGRAP... Page 1 of 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY GALLERIES 1 ABOUT 1 CONTACT 1 The Given Institute: Exterior . r..� r. ZC0D8666 jpg • • ., x •F4,- 46 of 52 f . a. a� w+r4F^. ft ' . . . t The Given Institute, Harry Weese, Architect, h 71ri' Aspen, Co Copyright Greg Watts Photography ! j Download image A ,1 % an +mages GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY 1 contact l gnwatts @sopris. net ' 970 309 0127 Powered by PhotOSheiter http: / /gnwatts.photoshelter. com/gallery- image/ The - Given - Institute - Exterior /G0000ngcA2... 3/16/201 1 The Given Institute, Harry Wee Architect, Aspen, Co 1 GREG WATT' ''HOTOGRAP... Page 1 of 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY GALLERIES 1 ABOUT I CONTACT 1 The Given Institute: Exterior i �� ZCOD9105.jpg t " • 19of52 1 The Given Institute, Harry Weese, Architect, • 11. Aspen, Co I �t Copyright Greg Watts Photography 44. Download image im all images : <1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY 1 contact 1 gnwatts ©sopris. net ' 970 309 0127 powered by PhotoSnekw 3/16/2011 http: / /gnwatts.photoshelter.com /gallery- image/ The - Given - Institute - Exterior /G0000ngcA2... The Given Institute, Harry Wet Architect, Aspen, Co 1 GREG WATQHOTOGRAP... Page 1 of 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY GALLERIES 1 ABOUT 1 CONTACT 1 The Given Institute: Exterior ZCOD8682.jpg v 5of52 The Given Institute, Harry Weese, Archttect, Aspen, Co � 1 - m Copyright Grey Watts Photography » Download image a =pw e S >aY rA nro w riMV Y�.r �° AF yy " kitAlr f .0 " e all images GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY I contact l gnwatts @sopris.net * 970 309 0127 powered by PhotoShelter http: / /gnwatts.photoshelter.com /gallery- image/ The - Given - Institute- Exterior /G0000ngcA2... 3/16/2011 The Given Institute, Harry Weec.° Architect, Aspen, Co 1 GREG WATT' ' Page 1 of 1 GREG WATTS PHOTOGRAPHY GALLERIES I ABOUT I CONTACT I The Given institute: Exterior ZC0D8638.jpg 11 of 52 The Given Institute, Harry Weese, Architect, Aspen, Co Copyright Greg Watts Photography >, Download image .. ms; fG N �a t 1 all tmaaes;t_, nann WaTis pi-ic RMHY; contact 1 9nwatts @sopr is net 970 309 0127 a01Yerel by Paoto`i1kUe http:// gnwatts .photoshelter.com /gallery- image/ The - Given - Institute - Exterior /G0000ngcA2... 3/17/2011 , v se! r r r'r f v 4 • , ,- w. .Z 4 . f U - Harry Weese (right) in front ' '..4,, of the eccentric Barrington residence he designed as a weekend retreat for his family ` 4 • ji '4 . r. • .t. REcpNST `.'k RUCTING . S y t • Illriill jiill .1 1 4 f � f I a ■1e At his peak in the sixties and seventies , . ' . Harry Weese was arguably Chicago's ' preeminent architect, a visionary whose ideas helped revive the city's fraying downtown and whose projects won . �. . • worldwide acclaim. But his final years ' - - _ were marked by a sad, booze - saturated decline, and in time his reputation faded. 4,--- Now aforthcoming examination of . his architecture could restore him to the place of honor he deserves:, by Robert Sharoff --,- - 3 k 68 - CHICAGOMgG.COM JULY 2010 �j • t 7'W - - _'•= S ite • - 3111 11k.: _ • - ' �. • .., — ..<.. . ' $ y �y { fSL{y { ,; �� _ , • 1,.1. 4 , : .n. -^•"" L N 1 jsj - "no t a.... .aaaaa++ra '. i L f 1 .ate 1 ° . k 111 f =.� i .. [ .. . 1 - ; - 1 :. , ft . � f � ?' r t' ! dif , I . ! .• . 0 . . ..,.. .,'" ' . . ' i i ,: . .rC { J 'I I .: r t • 1_ ch -- /9 . ; figal Weese, late in life, at his office Oyond specific buildings, Weese wielded influence with visionary planning schemes for transforming downtown Chicago. These ` ultimately included the creation of Printers _ Row, the city's first loft district, as well as the tom, redevelopment of the downtown riverfront as a residential and recreational area. "He talked more about the physical fabric of Chicago and what had to be done with it than any other architect of the period by a A Ai,' + huge margin;' says the architectural histori- A an Robert Bruegmann. "And this was during the very worst years —the late sixties through I : .-- , 4 i 0 the early eighties —when it looked like cen- tral Chicago could go under the same way Detroit and St. Louis did. One of the reasons ' ; that didn't happen is Harry Weese." Bruegmann is the author of The Archi- _ tecture of Harry Weese, a new critical study that Norton will publish in September. The book is the first about a man who once ii y commanded international attention but is now rarely mentioned. Part of this, of course, relates to the eternal tides of taste and fashion. The postwar generation of ar- chitects, of which Weese was a leading member, went severely out of style in the ,. eighties and nineties. WO YEARS BEFORE HER FATHER, THE VISIONARY ARCHI- But part also relates to the King Lear -like r_ tect Harty Weese, died in 1998, Marcia Weese made a last grandeur of Weese's fall. Over the last stormy = lonely trip to visit him. After a spectacular alcohol - fueled decade of his life, he went from a man at the crackup in the 1980s, Harry Weese had been committed to pinnacle of his profession to a raging, di- ; N .i< a dreary downstate veterans' hospital, where he spent his fi- sheveled figure who could often be found F c nal years drifting in and out of consciousness. "It was fall;' wandering the city's streets. "It's something Marcia recalls, "and I found this gigantic sycamore leaf— you say wasn't a part of Harry Weese;' says probably 15 inches across. My dad loved trees, so I brought Ben Weese, an architect and Harry's adored it down with me' Her father by then had become a spectral younger brother. "You have to separate your - figure, confined to bed and increasingly unresponsive after self from it." a series of strokes. "I know he recognized me," she says, "but "I don't think he ever wanted to quit he didn't — probably couldn't— speak. So I laid the leaf on his chest." drinking, says Shirley Weese Young, his It was an oddly peaceful ending to a relationship that had both nurtured and wound- second - oldest daughter. "He liked being bad - ed her over the years. No encounter with Harry Weese was without drama, and the dos- ly behaved. He was a rebel." er you were to the bonfire of his outsize personality, the more likely you were to be singed. Throughout his long life, Weese's obsession never varied. As his wife, Kitty, recalled, HEY DIDN'T GET ALONG." WITH "It was architecture all the way." He often seemed close to flying off the tracks, both emo- those brief words Ben Weese tionally and intellectually, and eventually he did. But before that happened, Harry r ' describes Harry's stormy rela- Weese had one of the wildest rides in the history of Chicago architecture. Over the course tionship with his father, Harry of his career, he designed almost a thousand buildings. These range from single - family Sr. The father grew up on an houses, churches, schools, and small -town community buildings to Washington, D.C's 80 -acre farm in Indiana and enormous —and mind - boggling —Metro public transportation system, which opened in was the first in his family to go to college. 1976. In his obituary of Weese, the New York Times architecture critic Herbert Muschamp In 1903, right out of Northwestern Univer- ranked the Metro as "among the greatest public works projects of [the 20th] century" sity, he joined Harris Bank and never left, L o The vaulted spaces where stations intersect, Muschamp wrote, "induce an almost reli- eventually rising to the position of compa- Ar gious sense of awe." ny treasurer before he retired in 1941. 2 In Chicago, Weese's many commissions include the Time & Life Building, the Latin Harry Sr. married late —to the much s School, and the Metropolitan Correctional Center, as well as such groundbreaking restora- younger Marjorie Mohr, daughter of a steel • lion projects as the Auditorium Theatre, the Field Museum, and Orchestra Hall. company executive —and had five children, At his peak in the 1960s and 1970s, Weese represented Chicago's most sustained and of whom Harry Jr., born in 1915, was the successful alternative to what was then the overwhelming dominance of Mies van der Ro- eldest. (Ben, born in 1929, was the youngest.) he and the International style. "When I joined Harry's office [in 1961], it was like giving By the time the Depression hit, the fam- up the Church of England and becoming a Christian Scientist,' says Jack Hartray, who ily was living two blocks from the lake in had previously worked as a designer at Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, then and now the Kenilworth, in a spacious house with "a foremost proponent of Miesian modernism in the city "Harry was a [modernist] archi- basement where we shoveled coal and an at- tect who was doing very interesting buildings, but they weren't like anyone else's'' tic where we kept all of our indigent rela- 70 CHICAGOMAG.COM JULY 2010 a tives," recalls Ben. He adds, "My fathec a made and his exposure to the general inNtletual ferment —both cultural and political. domineering type. .. - I remember huge ar- The friends included the future architects I. M. Pei and Eero Saarinen, as well as J. Ir- guments between him and Harry about pol- win Miller, scion of the family that owned the Cummins Engine itics. My father was such a Republican that Indiana, and a man who would become one of most i p ompanp in Columbus, he turned [all of his children] into Demo- the intellectual ferment, "he got in with a Communist cello recalls Bent "and my father crats. He ended up being a John Bircher." As got wind of that, and they had a horrible a staunch Methodist, he also forbade all knockdown -dr ou argument. I remember the vividness of this Y ag t getout of my -house fight." drinking and smoking. "He didn't party Stylistically, Weese began to come into his own during a long bicycle tour through Z well," says Ben. (Three of his five children northern Europe in the summer of 1937. "[It's] what opened his eyes to the fact that mod - would ultimately become alcoholics.) ernism is an actual living thing. He saw Scandinavian and Nordic society living that o In contrast to his father, Harry was "prof- dream, says Robert Bruegmann. ligate from the beginning," Ben says. "He For most of his life, Weese recorded his ideas, observations, and appointments in four - N o was hyperactive, ADD, whatever they call it by- six-inch notebooks, which he generally kept in his shirt pocket and that eventually today. He was liable to do loony things that came to number more than 100. (The Weese family has donated them to the Art Insti- required spankings and other forms of disci- tute of Chicago's Ryerson Library.) The flyleaf of the first one is dated "Paris 6/3T,' and the ,T pline.... But my father saw precocity in my notebook includes dozens of sketches of the people, buildings, and monuments he en- brother.... He was the family genius." countered during that critical summer. Next to one h From an early age, H asty sketch, dated August 1st he arry also displayed wrote in an excited scribble, "This is the life!" LL f a fascination with nature, a quality that Interspersed with these sketches are stray facts and details ( "[Swedish workers are] would come to play a leading role in his 95% unionized in the trades "), reminders and comments ( "Debussy `Iberia' Potent! "), ad- .1 architecture. He kept bees and at one dresses of friends, and various lists, including one headed "To be seen in New York point taught a crow to speak and perch on Thanksgiving 1937" The latter begins with the Museum of Modern Art and ends with his shoulder. "Slums" and "Greenwich Village?' i For all his discipline, Harry Sr. often in- After college, Weese — through his friendship with Eero Saarinen —was offered a fel- dulged his eldest son's artistic nature —at lowship in urban planning at the Cranbrook Academy of Art for the 1938 -39 academic ' least to a point. "My grandfather was a prag- year. It turned out to be one of the most pivotal years of his life. "I think Cranbrook shaped y matist, very left- brain," says Marcia Weese, his entire career," says Kate Weese, his youngest daughter. "It was a magical time, and he who is now an interior designer in Colorado. reminisced about it with great feeling and awe that it all came together." "When my father told him he wanted to be There is something undeniably paradisiacal about Cranbrook, the 315 -acre estate of an artist, he said, `No —you will not be an the newspaper publisher George Booth located in what is now the Detroit suburb of artist because you will be miserable and Bloomfield Hills. In the 1920s, Booth recruited the Finnish architect Eliel Saarinen = poor. You will be an architect. "" (Eero's father) to design and administer an arts academy for the estate. The S After graduating from New 'flier High grounds ul School in the early 1930s, Harry spent four years at MIT and one at Yale before '_ emerging with an architecture degree in 1938. Aside from meeting and studying X - under Alvar Aalto, the visionary Finnish Clockwise from far left: architect who would become one of his �- Weese with his first sailboat, m ost important inspirations, Harry '' " r b on Bangs Lake in Weese Wauconda, J rarely mentioned the education he re- Illinois, circa 1 cera mics prof Weese *`� working on a ceramics ceived at those institutions. Far more im ect at the Cranbrook Acad portant, evidently, were the friends he emy of Art, where he spent a s pivotal year; Weese studying s ' plans at his drafting board; : -' p Weese with the modernist I master Ludwig Mies van der A Rohe (right); an aerial view of r , 4/ / the Cranbrook arts academy (bottom right corner) pt — - -,, iii F 11 a '. ' i .A111 r yt ■ 'Sa;,} � ... ( I \ ? I 1 • i __ - `rvy acs"' Rk a p,_ I _ I _ . _ -... ti ■ V ci ' a j - J ,Y . ,. 4. ,r,':;- ' timately included studios, housing, a lib , a museum, and the faculty boasted such Zfiey married in early 1945 when the t `' eminent artists as the sculptors Carl Mines and Marshall Fredericks, the metalsmith Har- navy destroyer on which Harry was sta- ___ ry Bertoia, the weaver Marianne Strengell, the potter Maija Grotell, and the painter Zoltan tioned stopped in New York "We got a li- Sepeshy. Many —like Eliel Saarinen himself —were northern European immigrants on the cense from city hall and went down to the run from the continent's ever - darkening political climate. Gradually the school came to ship," said Kitty. "The ship was tied up at be known as the Scandinavian Bauhaus. the Brooklyn Bridge. There's a chapel in . The faculty was more than matched by the roster of students. In addition to Harry the bridge, and that's where we got mar- and Eero, the list included the furniture designers Florence Knoll and Charles and Ray ried. Then we went across the street and Eames; the urban planner Edmund Bacon, future father of the actor Kevin; the archi- had a cup of coffe quality was charac tect Ralph Rapson; the sculptor Lilian Swann, who eventually married Eero Saarinen; and the designer Benjamin Baldwin. All went on to acclaim, and all became Harry's life- teristic of both Kitty and Harry. Neither was long friends. especially sentimental. "It was kind of a mar - Cranbrook was "a luxurious and beautiful place;' Baldwin wrote in a memoir he pub- riage of convenience;' says Ben Weese. "Kit - lished toward the end of his life. "Each of us had his own studio, and we were not on any ty had a certain suave way about her... . She kind of schedule. We had no responsibilities whatever as far as the school was concerned. had connections. She always had money:' If we wanted advice or criticism from Saarinen—or Pappy; as he was called by the stu- And Harry needed all of those things. dents —we could ask for it, and he would give it. Otherwise, we didn't have to see him at Kitty, for her part, was nearly 30, living at all if we didn't want to:' home, and eager to break out of her upper - Judging from the photo he submitted with his application, in those days Harry class cocoon. "I didn't want my life to be the Weese was a slim, handsome young man with dark, wavy hair and an engaging, almost Junior League; she told me. elfin, grin. By all accounts, he was a popular student. All during the war, Harry had continued One of his closest friends that year was Baldwin, a wealthy young Southerner —his to write in his notebooks. "He was writing family had founded the city of Birmingham, Alabama —who had recently graduated from about the things he wanted to do when he Princeton with a degree in architecture. Baldwin would go on to have a distinguished ca- got out," said Kitty. One was to come back to and reer as a designer of interiors, furniture, and gardens. In 1939, however, he was in love Chicago, elel Daniel an architecture ham's mo , Plan of with Harry Weese. After Harry's death, the Weese family donated a cache of Baldwin's letters to the Cran- Chicago. Another was to open a design store brook archives. All are from the latter half of 1939, when the students had scattered to their featuring the kind of innovative modernist respective homes —Weese to Chicago and Baldwin to Kintray, his family's country estate out - furnishings that he and his Cranbrook friends side Montgomery. The letters —none of which have heretofore been published — chronicle were designing. Baldwin's intense infatuation. On November 5th, he wrote: "Dear Harry, I've thought about "All these dreams and schemes;' said Kit - you so much & missed you so desperately.... Thank you for being what you are—which ty. "Most came true" is everything." On December 17th: "My dear Harry, You have saved my life again and I'm N T H E LATE FORTIES AND FIFTIES, so happy just to know you exist and that I breathe the same air you do. Your letter made ' me so happy. .:' there was no more exciting place In a lifetime of fairly well- documented heterosexual promiscuity, there is little to sug- for an architect than Chicago. The modern that had invented ism gest that Weese was gay or bisexual. Still, his response to these letters is curious. The next city the late century was rein- year, he invited Baldwin to relocate to Chicago and become his professional partner —the in th e l late 1 it 1 a ent generation, asei - only one he would ever have. He also married Baldwin's younger sister Kate. and the results would rivet the world for the EVERAL YEARS BEFORE SHE DIED IN 2005, KITTY, AS SHE WAS KNOWN, next three decades. I aka talked to me numerous times, ostensibly to probe her husband's creative The major names in architecture then processes. The interviews usually devolved into remembrances of her own were mainly steel - and -glass modernists, bap privileged —if troubled— childhood. such as Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, who had The second youngest of five children, Kitty was born in 1917 and grew up immigrated to the United States in the late in an imposing Italianate mansion several blocks from the state capitol build- 193Os to become the head of architecture at ing in Montgomery. Her father, Morris Baldwin, was heir to a banking and real- estate for- the Illinois Institute of Technology. "Chicago tune. Her mother, Kate, was descended from several generations of lawyers with promi- was Mies's city; says Jack Hartray, Weese's nent government connections. "It was a very close family;' Kitty remembered. "Lots and lots of cousins, aunts, and uncles. Lots of big dinners." Her brother Ben, who was four years older, was "by far my closest friend;' she said. "He was always teaching me things and was totally responsible for my interest in art." 1 Less happy were Kitty's memories of her father. "My father was an alcoholic;' she said. "He never drank at home. But he would go on these binges and be gone for days. My stormy t st Over the lass i mother would have to go around to the different hotels to find him" In and out of what decade of his t life, Weese we now call rehab, he died the year she turned 14. After studying child psychology under Sigmund Freud's daughter Anna at Kings Col- went from a man at the lege London, Kitty —by then a willowy, dark - haired beauty —became a psychologist for Al- pinnacle of his profession e to abama's welfare department By her own account, she did not really get to know Harry until the fledgling partner- a rag in ,disheveled figure ship of Weese & Baldwin broke up when both Harry and Ben joined the navy in 1942. g "Ben called me and asked if I would like to drive up to Illinois and help him move," she who could often be found i said. "So I did. I stayed a few days at Harry's house and fell in love with him and his fam wandering the city's streets. ily. After that, I saw him whenever I could." j 72 CHICAGOMAG.COM JULY 2010 Ea a °ell t: ., ' in ��, \ � ',::,, [1::: r� � 1 / r _.`" -/ -"../.: - s a s :i. former colleague. "He had his school going and was turning out large numbers of architects who were devoted to what he was doing. That was the orthodox architecture of the time. It i I 1 1 I 1 11 was what everybody did:' I II II I I 1 I Weese initially fell in step by securing a job with Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, the most I 1 I I 1 11 I I1,1.77. prominent avatar of Mies's minimalistic `less is more" style. He left after only a year to found I I I I I I1 I I his own firm. It was the last time he ever worked for anyone other than himself. �i i Mies's severe, rectilinear minimalism would play little part in Weese's work. In fact he dis 'e ;Il � 1 I I I I I I II I I • liked it "He was always nudging the IIT guys and trying to embarrass them;' recalls his broth • er Ben. "He warted to carve out his own middle ground:' I I I i I I I I I I 1 1 I • His influences would always be eclectic —Aalto and the Saarinens, certainly, but also ear- 1 I I I II ®,. W l of bounds. At the beginning of a project, says Chi architects such as Louis Sullivan and Daniel Burnham. Nothing, however, was out _ 1 1 1 1 I 1 u u I ' ., ` Y s Hartray, "we never had the slightest idea what - ' ! a a building was going to look like" r III I I In 1947, Weese— together with Kitty and a new friend, Jody Kingrey —founded Baldwin ; I I I II I I a : o Kingrey, the city's first modernist design emporium. The store was located in the old Michi- I 1 1 I I I gan Square B uilding at the southwest corner of Michigan Avenue and Ohio Street. (Thir �-e; i 1 1 1 1 1 i i j ty years later, the building —and its famed Art Deco lobby, the Diana Court —would be razed i 1 I l I I for what is arguably Weese's worst building, the Marriott Hotel.) The store carried furnish 1 I1 1 I � j I � � • 3 ings by eminent Cranbrookians, such as Eero Saarinen, Harry Bertoia, and Charles and Ray 1 Eames, and by Harry's old MIT professor Alvar Aalto. According to Kitty, it was profitable from the day it opened. s Many years after she sold the business in 1957, Kitty was asked why she had traded psy a chology f or retailing. "My husband didn't believe in psychology" she told the Chicago Trio ; • . { une in 2004. Rather, she added, he wanted her to do something that involved design. "I'm . o from the South, and we did what our husbands told us." F , ; ,, EESE'S FIRST OFFICE FOR HIS ARCHITECTURE FIRM WAS THE BACKROOM ' ? of Baldwin Kingrey Later, he moved several doors north to 612 North Michi- T , , .f- gar' Avenue, where the firm occupied a 750- square -foot space on the fifth floor. By the early 195Os, the firm had seven or eight associates and was starting to } make a name for itself — though not in Chicago. "[The early work] all came from Cranbrook;' says Ben Weese, who started working for Harry as a mod- = el builder in the late 1940s. `As soon as Eero got busy, he kept giving jobs to Harry" - " This work included two of the firm's three largest projects in the fifties —the master plans _ and subsequent buildings for Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, and a variety of build- ings in Columbus, Indiana, a town of about 40,000 residents that, improbably, became one Clockwise from top left: Weese's seminal i First Baptist Church, now a National His - fees for ly in of the great modernist showcases. Starting in the early fifties, Miller tom Landmark; with Kitty n front of the Time & Life ilding; Kitty Columbus created a foundation that agreed to pay the design new public Bu ings in exchange for being able to handpick the architects. The result is that Columbus, which Time & -i Life Bu lding; Weese's masterpiece, Washington, masterpi sterpi W is located about an hour south of Indianapolis, features churches by Eliel and Eero Saari- D his Metropolitan Correctional Center; nen, a library by I. M. Pei, schools by Richard Meier and Edward Larrabee Barnes, and a hos- pital by Robert A. M. Stern, among other glories. i daughters Shirley (left) and Marcia The architect with the biggest imprint, however, is Harry (continued on page 86) JULY 2010 CHICAGOMAG.COM 73 _ —. 0 HARRY-IN-USE acollege major cultural institution on the East (continued from page 73) Weese, Over the Coast. "The two of them would take week - n ie t t o the Millers' son Irwin• more end trips to New York to see plays, and they neat two de Weese would d apparently had an extended affair;' says than a doze buildings for Columbus, in- ann "That [Pattern] seems to have eluding schools, banks, a country club, and Bruegn' the creation many believe rivals the Wash- followed him throughout his career.' mainly by trying to ignore it. re ington Metro as his masterpiece: the First Ki co Shirley r Baptist Church. Crowning a hilltop outside "My mother was very tight lipped, " of town, the church has echoes of both a Weese Young says. "Very see no evil, hear no medieval abbey and the Midwestern barns evil, speak no evil!' Sing in the late 1944s, the Weeses hard and farm buildings Weese had admired for tent the late eldest She was Shan d most of his life. In 2000, it was designated a four syndrome and Sheila, w or ' "` " h National Historic Landmark institutionalized daughters were ' emerged as an advo- very early. The other three ugh m / Y� er 1 In the what s, would now g Marcia, and Kate. Sheila was gradu- 11u ji cate for what we would now call sustainable Shirley, history in a way development and as a cultural provocateur. ally written out ' h t f was not that un- the G-las Ar in se asked him and also wrote for nu- made regular visits merous publications. Over and over again, tact with her, but Kitty he stressed the importance of low -rise hous- until Sheila's death, in the late 1990s. "It was should be no higher traumatic for Kitt);' says Ben. ins a v n buildings The family lived in several different down - than a can grow"), individual owner- town apartments before settling for good in ship, and solid public amenities such as S and playgrounds. "The best the late sixties m an Old Town row house e- N • parks, squares, signed by Weese. Far more important, how - �/ individual dwelling is a house on the ever, was the family's weekend residence in n E: • ound!' he said. "And the best husbandry is ever, Called the weekend Studio and ch for c h a m p a g strums of cedar planks, it was one of Weeses in h ouses owned by their occupants!' Sidewalk Cafe Seat ing He seemed to genuinely dislike the sub- Ohio urb - "Nh artists set up their easels in Park most eccentric houses. A two- s t 601 N. State • Stre et: space was flanked by asyiTirrr Forest;' he said in a speech in 1960 —and that resembled giant cat ears and were con - 312.266 76 7 suspension bridge• rchampa scathingly described the postwar Unite by an interior suspe s States as "an overaged infant, unmindful of nected favored a comfortable house: a large luxuriating in unsafe ` chair, enclosed impending doom, kitchen with a rocking CHICAGO litter d arks, parades ZO on s, de ter o Day, a storage space for everything!' Kitty " .� � littered parks, defunct zoos, deteriorating gvro�te Y� ay - later. "He saw a weekend play- bankrupt railroads ... a Levit- well-sited if TRIBUNE monuments, a which house, imaginative if not private, town culture in which the church and not copious. We struggled through 30 3Q ,e STORE �j similar instructor] Arthur Murray often play 1 1 J rounds and, in the end ... I gave in!' similar roles." Weese added numerous whimsical this time, his identification with roues, including nautical -looking ' ; # -1 + Your one-stop Chicago During gladde leading bedrooms, r ' Daniel Burnham deepened. to the upstairs � � �' -1,. for eS everything "He aspired to t as Burn h buildings Tribun t N Michigan . gar Ave, Chicago uildings as big and important says Robert Bruegmann, the author so that the children could leave and enter a M i 435 N Michigan Ae Chicago ham,' gay will, without tracking up the downstairs i and historian. "They both believed that the "The way we interacted as a family; says �, i 1 city was in grave danger and wanted to see Marcia, "was by traveling and by going out to { 4 it remade for another generation" Barrington on the weekends. It was ten acres 1 10 !:, of wooded hillside with a lake and a little i ' • • i s sailboat Dad would get his chain saw out • "MAN'S DESIRE, WEESE ONCE NOTED, „ [a] difficult and elusive matter.' He was and just sort of be in the country" recalls { „ about urban development, but he As a father, Weese was "sparkly!' sp Shirley, who today lives on the North Side own just as easily have been referencing his with her husband, the gallery owner Donald i own p life. Young, and is active in civic affairs. "It was a 1 i / "Harry like the ladies;' says his broth- Win, she � little hard not to be charmed by ''' er Ben and uplifting and �. ears of their marriage, ac- says. ` He was maddening I th e early Y ... He had a real buck - the - trend with the idea of establishing a menage a ,,:>. - ' � ' cording to one friend, Harry approached Kit very y funfny ... attitude He ha d a real alot of things. He rlfriend. "He wanted liked to incite riots" r � ' ° ' trois with a current g Marcia describes him as "a benevolent 'y 1 I r the three of them to live together; says the 1 friend. Kitty nixed the idea F F 1 king. Around the dinner table, it was always Over the years, there would be numerous about architecture or art or culture. We ■ other women, some of whom were clients. In rarely had discussions. It was more he held 1 o u I 1 days, one conquest was the head of court and we were his captive audience." 1 total purchase when y the early Yg present this coupon! 1. .=... fir" Mgt" eMach_°AN. cou0m b-2rno�a-, 86 CHICAGOMAG.COM JULY 2010 li ! ... "` sank of the North Branch of Center, Chicago — ' River, across from the Apparel tedings: and 1 announced plans for Wolf Point Lan an elaborate residential development con - sisting of nearly 1,000 new apartments and townhouses, plus an expansive marina. Though the area has rapidly grown in the past decade, Weese's project ultimately stalled. In the end, the only parts that came to fruition were the conversion of an old . .., . • cold storage warehouse into condomin and the construction of four exquisite row with its own boat dock —that houses— each wa doom the riverbank to the seem to caste water line just south of Kinzi e Street HARTRAY LEFT THE FIRM IN 1976, FOLLOWED by Ben the next year. "We both got to the point where we were heading Harry of on the way to the petty cash drawer, and it just wasra worth all amore;' says Hartray. "We all left in Harry's man- M discord with Har agemen says Ben. "Harry d in _ •, was glad to see go. I was a thorn in his side." ed 65 in me W�ewas getting older —he turn o, t like it "He was feeling a 1950 —and plat ower!' says his ec e more cynical" n t h Maecse. "Hebeanm l e htie, a Q D OS•? In the late seventies and early eighties, sharp recession curtailed new construes economy recovered, BY the time the world had undergone a signifi Are you a chronic sinus su with asal drip chitecture •on.�rhegodsofmoder�m A y r e s s u re, post s cant transformatio world c ongestion, facial p were passing away, and Weese mourned e l I? Mies over us. [Le and reduced sense of sin them: "No totoem often, no Aa1 antibiotics Corbusier] almost forgotten, he wrote. Architectural tastes had moved on to e late or be inspired by; Have you tried sinus surgery- medication without success? postmodernism, which favored ote. return to and allergy traditionalism as well as the freedom to mix powerful new styles. ``The Younger a nd match historical �' and notion You may be a candidate for a p p eople turned away from the grand al m edication. oinyles. "The younger treatment with anti fungal thysRobert gowasg gt ann "They 41 N o r provide says sgn was thought that quality of was overreaching" The arbitrary q Northwestern Nasal +tai Br With this exciting the new work —the sense that desigcould it to be—"really an evaluation for treatment be anything you wanted annsays. to people like Harry; Bruegm new therapy. Weese began an oddlittle rear - guard •� �� the post- • paign that involved snip We rive at C a" � � 2 modernists ak. every opportunity. to ,� the � of last, and perhaps alas!' he carom a rh Man. He lives a di of Chicago the Cow conglomerates occup suit, o jets, tonal u sually a suburb, 676 North Saint Clair, Suite 1575, ent or another city, (Discount parking vouchers available) o f e v e r y f o u r , , He has panache, the average powerful instinct for the bottom John T. McMahan, .tom Panae average a ge But does has F ACS • Daniel G. Carothers, MD, FACS line, but does he have taste? John T. McMahan, MD, ley? Its a long haul from the Medieis and 1 `� along the way came such dillies as the prepos idou Center and pompoas Albany terous Pomp to Palladio, we are muPPen• NASAL +SINUS I Mall. Compared Chita- NORTHWESTERN `'� ,e His bite noire was Helmut Jahn, Expert solutions Exceptional care Expert solutions for: Nasal & sinus problems • Allergies • Asthma • Snoring 11 88 CH(CAGOMAG.COM JULY 2010 Al] three daughters stress his intense Asa boss, Weese was idealism. "He would and schemes," says talk about his dreams By aYs Marcia "He "He didn't like laissez faire at best E vE optimist. He would tell a about how an ike to fire anybody," r ls Har- FANG GOT BIGGER tray "We had an interior d Metro —to RAFTER THE was going to change the world one city that he [tried designer on staff projects, the budgets the egos. time. • • There was o at a t h a ' to fire] three or four times, but the time the in sense of an change the almost childlike Just never left" first phase of the anything Even as W Al 1976, Weese's firm was one of the opened e to do it." g Possible and I'm going er, ewe's business Chicago, with about in drinlang was starting to b �v�, howev would 25i, as ocdos There A ngeles. In Barrington told an issue. "He eventually be additional lunches and dinners," "there were constant me once that he started drinking be Washington D.C., M and offices in says ause it loosened him up Weese was schemes d for dom was the house not full of Shirley. e very salt more relax as incr s A when he P and made him a se of mglYP ah with People: around . dom a the land of c ommonplace to have tans People" says Shirley. nnp°r- Chicago. "I'm visionary schemes for downtown Ray Eames commonplace Well, maybe. But lack of bravado d time that never man ten years ahead r a end, says Kate, who is now for the week- really seem comes; Berke] painter in does not 1968, hefdozen ed wryly. Charles Berkeley, California More likely have been Weeses Problem. de on Esquire published a feature One says Kate, t the o is sixties of Harry's H arps explanation For men the Problems of half a ut Aalto, now hunched from was Alvar g generation, ` it ideas de ors and invited Weese to outline his age and working That's the was they lived:' thi f their and walking with a cane. `type sat down to The normal way they improving Chicago. P this wonderful lunch— pattern was to adjourn to . v s e fee d raisin Lake Shore Among other black bean toe lunch at Riccardo's —a le Drive seven fee g sherry that we ate with s P with acting hangout for � t the level of Buckingham spoons" pbea Japanese artists and wr'ters—imbibe three or four Fou and creating de a new t Ovate w him Marcia recalls. Afterward, "we H inis, and wander back to the office. district underneath Hront to his re car, and he and my viaducts. resulting an father embraced." rental y vaairy�k o many of his [best] id eas on the Or d More ideas would follow: building � w are were tears a hi yent drove away; and saw No one was do's, says over face," down my aYs Hat tr ay. land in miles offshore on an i she s ays. Y father's situation. one exactly in the dark about the n Lake Michigan; ov Imew my father Wabash Avenue for a g er when I came home alcoholic a world's fair to retail arcade; creating an • • • says Shirley, "He used to send Mayor Daley a sketch of fro college in 1968" Columbian rival Burnham 1893 THE COMMISSIONS 1968," houses, KEPT COMING —MORE more churches, more schools and d O an addition IN T HE • • • something Chicago should be doing every t the more schools Library, MID - 19605, THE FEDERAL two 0 Veese or s°" S t of an office building for IBM, and a colla meet decided to move GOVERN- Weese also , says Hartray. lion with the addition to born- the nation's ahead on a project for moved into on the Pe architect Dan Kiley since capital that had been percola • preservation the forefront of Institutes Sou the vation movement through v the enfant terrible—the l d a Garden' "He was the New Deal —a state -of -the- art percolating bed a groundbreaking a elevated architect "He a]_ way system to rival those in ar sub reeking & the e w Projects ways in the news Paris, London, a nd a campaign to save the ws doing clever buildings," Moscow. The dimensions were Burnham- system In the Loop's elevated says the architect John Vinci. '" esque, to say the 1 urnham- regarded 1970s, the el was widely He got a lot of work," tutted by 86 ' 100 miles of track as an outmoded Victorian Non were not internally ground. Seventeen many them under- there was talk of replacing Placing 4 The firm never had k O a all. architects submitted with a subway line o any organized &i pro posals. The commission went to Street was is response under Franklin thought he novld control everything." yHe spent more than a Weese. Poise was unequivocal: Weese basically had year researching it The el Eiffel Tower. Replacing thou full immersion modes of de- the pro without ever touching unthinkable. mersion and limited des per, traveling around Pen s o a tion —and boat- the world to i Weese also decided to become a "When he he never and stopped sketching. various systems. Finally, eances in terms of his family's develop- Present his ideas. "We Y the time came be Brue rm] yes fi- was doing a house," reds Jack `We had our first nan o• "He was a to � 1 enY "he would fly a h have dinner tation on July 6, 1966," says Stan Allen, p a ramble businessman," t client, and then, on the way ba start Skidmore alumnus who joined Allen, a prone m o f w at he d was hugely risk the i t, and then, e n , o n th way bat tubers in 1964 and became the point Weese's firm there. was a gambling mentality re than one Metro. "The person for the much of what ck did Pecially in " ed him occasion Weese hand- The weekend before that his own real-estate deals— lime an airsickness bag covered I were out in B Harry and [his actions] more scribbles. "Eve with three days drawing He sat there for t han bordered on the reckless" tray says, an airsickness bid be there," Har- wing "He wanted plan, would d be s signage, the station design, plan. vaults, the ern every eve plan elevation, details of the section, the were 19 drawings the plan. Three demonstsation;'says Ben Weese. „ Jett into a es' We would take the bag and Cabinetwork wm� m all, done in M He wasted sheets of working the i into 20 er and ink Not a single went the Mark_ more than you can believe:' drawl floor. He ogle drawing went ease's approach ultimately office rig$, drew it and it was finished" profound imps on In Y had a tine w as chaotic, with people The highlight was a for Cl1 rk the dings, ally coming and going con- subterranean stations with ofjaw g vault scape hinters Row was a bleak that began and ended mg and a hierarchy ed with soarin Cafe he decided land - usw co n a n d s a "Those ceilings molded from n place when hod crumbling industrial buildings more successes with Those of concrete. cast - in -place �drd to turn it into a Chicago Doug began him," Some saw Piranesi, version of New York's who w at the firm says Brunelleschi, still others L' Daniel renovated S u p de t e time, he sixties and seventies, rm in the Enfant D a number of the buildings C Doug T ad his sketches h worked ork "were the ones who Burnham, and even Daniel into something and translate film Metropolis. In other words, Lazo first step n the re to upgrade th e thing where— ranslate was , the Metro The Your drawing when he came by an enormous, game -than « first �P in the project was the You're the next n ay —h say, Were going to do one job in Ong hit Ii South Side. a lso s revitalization of the Near table you Pretty close: " Y, would be the your life, that Job to do," says Ha1•tray. "It Early as he changed an entire city for the Early as also saw the downtown better." an u acquired a sizable tract o f asset In land on the he tract f he west JULY 2010 CHICAGOMAG.COM 87 go's newest star, whom he referred to —long C x I c n c o after it had stopped being funny —as "Genghis Jahn!' Jahn's controversial State of NASAL & SINUS Illinois Building (now the James R. Thomp- son Center) in the Loop seemed to drive CENTER Weese crazy. "Futurism surfaced in the pub- lic sector of staid Chicago the other day, the • Comprehensive diagnosis and treatment of nasal and sinus disorders Palace for Peons, otherwise known as the • Featuring the new Balloon Sinuplastyn technology for sinus pressure State Office Bauble (SOB); he wrote in one of and recurrent infections the many articles and letters he published • In -office CT scanning to diagnose & treat patients faster during this period. "The aforementioned shapeless, and some would say tasteless, jel • Treatment of snoring and sleep apnea utilizing state -of -the -art technology lyfish sprawls off the site.... The gossamer • Diagnosis and treatment of seasonal and environmental allergies, featuring at -home sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) SOB is an expression of one fleeting mo- ment in time ...apiece of cake more suited • Convenient Loop location to a Parisian department store." JORDAN PRITIKIN, M.D. • 111 West Washington, Suite 903, Chicago, Illinois 60602 "If you're designing your life as an Tel: 312.372.9355 Fax: 312.372.9356 aesthetic statement, you probably want to plan on dying a little ear - www.chicagonasalsinuscenter.com ly." -Jack Hartray Weese was losing control. After a lifetime of al- ways seeming like the youngest person in the room, some inner discipline was crumbling. W W W, CH I C AG O M AG . C O M For a while, he maintained a precarious bal- ance. Doug Tilden recalls meeting Weese in DISH I D O M E S T I CA I CHICAGO GUIDE I SALES CHECK VIP Atlanta for a presentation the two were giving TWITTER.COM /CHICAGOMAG to design the new High Museum of Art, a commission that ultimately went to the archi- tect Richard Meier. "In those days; Tilden says, `you never wanted to get Harry at the -a end of a long flight, because you knew what he had been doing on the plane. He came in from Seattle that day and I thought, Oh, God:' /En Weese was plastered and proceeded to 9 -e �" e t ! _ , `�.'"� ,...� get more so at the hotel bar. "I finally man- SMOOTH aged to get him up to his room, take off his • shoes, and that was that," says Tilden. Hours later, however, a loud knocking , i awakened Tilden in his room. "It was 4:55 in the morning," he says. "I opened the door and there he was, all spit and polish: `Douglas, get - up. We have to go look at the site.' I've never � ' . F • • seen anybody recover like that." -" Those were the good days. Far more com- mon were the bad ones —the blackouts, the blown commissions, the crazy and embar- ), ° • rassing scenes. "There were all these things that were grossly disturbing, and there was I L , a lot of denial within the office about what t i y E RCEN 1'ER was happening; says Ben Weese. :, ,ra:tic.e fur pid,C, I econso-uctrve and cosmetic surgery The Chicago Historical Society, for exam- ple, became a major disaster. In the late •�. eighties, the society (today the Chicago His tory Museum) decided to construct an addi- LL tion to its building on Clark Street, just s across North Avenue from Weese's well - regarded Latin School building. Because of Peter D. Geldner, MD Lawrence H. held, MD this proximity, Weese's firm was the front- 312-981-4440 runner for the commission- With significant www. m yg e I d n e rCe n to r. Co m backup from his office, Weese managed to • pull together an impressive presentation. _ Look Better. Feel Better. Live Better. JULY 2010 CHICAGOMAG.COM 89 "When n '.ng a life changing decision HARRY WEESE r 1r you should only consult with the best. ����,,,, He got the job, says Ben. And then he lost I would like to present it several hours later at a celebratory dinner t to you my doctor. during which he became so drunk and dis ruptive that the society reversed course and The World's Best awarded the commission to another firm. Plastic Surgeon:" A certain lawlessness that had always — Shawna T. been part of his personality was starting to take over. The architect Stanley Tigerman, Dr. Michael Byun M.D. BOARD CERTIFIED PLASTIC SiJRGEONBYABPS who early in his career worked briefly for 0 MEnrBRR ASPS Weese, remembers walking with him in Riv- Schedule your Consultation w er North one day when a car alarm went off. A Weese's response was to pick up a rock, bash 847- 513 -6899 312-397-6900 w ww.chicagocosmeticsurge r � in the cars window, and continue walking. North Shore Downtown Kitty was at the end of her tether. "She loved him, but she couldn't stand going to these events anymore where he was drunk," ). At Borders, we know what moves you. says John Vinci, the architect Evidently she considered divorcing him but never went They're the same things that move us! through with it She also worried about fi nances. Weese's participation in the firm was to must have movies, winding down. (The remnants of the busi- ness eventually would be sold to Gensler, there's always something which today is one of the largest architecture firms in the world.) At the same time, there to be passionate about were now three houses to maintain —in ad- at Borders. t' dition to those in Chicago and Barrington, the family had acquired a third residence in shop Borders.com today _ % Aspen, Colorado. "Throughout their lives, Harry and Kitty had very serious money problems, and this was even more true at the .,. end," says Robert Bruegmann. Finally the family tried an intervention. Relatives and friends confronted Weese about his drinking. The results were discon- r f <t `z tv • r certang. "I think Daddy really enjoyed that," z t s says Shirley Weese Young. "He was the cen- r ' ter of attention" ri BORDERS From the mideighties on, Weese was in and out of rehab more than a dozen times. N. "He kept getting kicked out for being vio- lent, says his brother Ben. mi a During one such stay, he had a stroke MOMMY MAKEOVER that robbed him of his ability to draw. Short - 1 , r Our greatest pride in life, our ly afterward, the family decided to have him most valued treasure, is our chil committed to the Illinois Veterans Home in dren. However, the toll this takes Manteno. "We'd been struggling to find a BE F O R r on a mother's body can leave way to take care of him because everything we y behind reminders that drain ; y- tried,hewouldendupeseapingan dstartwan - your confidence and self - esteem, dering the streets;' says his daughter Marcia reminders that can only be cor The notebooks track his decline. He still " — reaed by a plastic surgeon. kept them, albeit with less regularity. During Dr. Malczewski is board certified by the American So- the eighties, the brief, staccato entries about BEFORE AFTER ciery of Plastic Surgeons. His results, his largest patient business and projects started to be replaced base the families of health care providers, say it all. the language of rehab: "Three things Liposuction • Abdominoplasty •Facelift P y that might Feelings of Forehead Lift •Eyelid Surgery ight make you relapse: 1. Feel' Lip Augmentation •Breast •Skin care To schedule your consultation, please call 219 945 - B Foreh Cosmetic Wrinkle Fillers entrapment. 2. Euphoria. 3. Frustration." Post- Bariatric Surgery Treatment 0669, and visit www.cosmeticaurgeryofnwi.com, to see The final notebook is undated but is al- 7865 Grand Blvd., Hobart, IN 46342 the results for yourself most certainly from 1988. On the flyleaf is a 219 - 945 -0669 Post -It note from Kitty: "Harry —start filling www.cosmeticsurgeryofnwi.com this book with your next 5 year plan" TI There are a handful of shaky notes, and C O S M E T I C A S T I C C SURGERY OF NWI then suddenly, defiantly, Harry Weese wrote \ A what would be his final words: "I'm OK —the 0. DR. MICH EL C. MALCZEWSKI, MD Member world's all wrong." .o....,,- • -.•.., -rte "" wsr n mbu ror ng. ■ 90 CHICAGOMAG.COM JULY 2010 I pov architecture and cities: Top1.0: 9. Harry Weese Page 1 of 7 Share Report Abuse Next Blog» Create Blog Sign In POV ARCHITECTURE AND CITIES "POINT OF VIEW." THESE ESSAYS CONVEY PERSONAL EXPERIENCES AND UNDERSTANDING OF ARCHITECTURE, CITIES AND THEIR PEOPLE, ANYTHING THAT MIGHT ILLUMINATE ANY DESIGN DISCIPLINE CARRIES THE POSSIBILITY OF FURTHERING UNDERSTANDING OF ANOTHER. SO, WHILE ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN ARE THE FOCUS HERE, ANYTHING THAT SEEMS TO CONTRIBUTE TO EITHER COULD BE INCLUDED. CLICKING ON OF MOST OF THE GRAPHICS SHOWN GIVES A HIGHER-RESOLUTION VERSION. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17, 2009 USEFUL LINKS Top 10: 9. Harry Weese Btog posts listed chronologically. http: / /www.ctaxtonarchitects.com/ Urbane and conversational, Harry Weese was an extraordinary ABOUT ME individual - a true Renaissance Y x; Man. He was greatly influenced by „ 'i RUSSELL CLAXTON _ Alvar Aalto, who was his professor w, r . -. ,.. >- VIEW MY COMPLETE P R OF ILE at MIT, and by Eero Saarinen at X a( Cranbrook. He worked for one of the largest corporate firms after ,r graduation, SOM in Chicago. Image viaWikipedia SLOG ARCHIVE He started his own practice in ► 2011 (2) Chicago in 1947. While unmistakably a modernist, Weese introduced richer detailing and materials than were commonly 10- 2010 (3) employed in most modern buildings. This came from his personal • 2009 (35) association with Aalto and with Saarinen, and, maybe, his • December (1) appreciation for historic buildings. ► November (1) P. October (2) His father was a banker, and Weese maintained a profit- making practice throughout his career. (On a visit with Aalto, he got the ► September (4) franchise for Aalto's furniture in the Midwest. He opened a furniture ■ August (5) shop in Chicago after the war, where this and other modern furniture ■ July (9) was sold, Baldwin- Kingrey.) He liked the juxtaposition of architecture June (13) • as an art and a business. A fascinating oral history of Weese's life Parting shots, Top 10 and career is housed in the Chicago Architects Oral History Project If you have to choose between reading Weese's oral history and Top 10: 1 Alvar Aalto reading this blog - go for the oral history . It has not only a fascinating Top 10: 2. Le Corbusier account of the development of modern architecture, it's the personal Top 10: 3. Mies van der Rohe perspective of one of the most accomplished practitioners. Here's an Top 10: 4. Louis Kahn excerpt, an anecdote about Eero Saarinen during Weese's year at http: // russellclaxton .blogspot.com /2009/06 /top -10 -9- harry- weese.html 3/14/2011 pov architecture and cities: Top/'"`: 9. Harry Weese . Page 2 of 7 Cranbrook: Top 10: 5. Frank Lloyd Wright Top 10: 6. Jorn Utzon • Weese: Oh, yes, he was a great friend. In fact, when I was there that summer, Eero challenged me to a duel. Top 10: 7. Ralph Erskine • Blum: What was that about? Top 10: 8. O'Neil Ford • Weese: His first wife, Lily, was something of a character, a Top 10: 9. Harry Weese sculptor, was kind of after me. She insisted she wanted to do Top 10: 10. Frank Gehry a portrait of my head, so I had to pose for her in her studio. That was the summer they declared the women's dormitory Top Ten off limits. Barstool History of • Blum: And there you were. Architecture • Weese: Eero found me in a bronze urn at the end of Academy Road curled up with his wife- to -be. After he got me out of there, he challenged me to a duel, but I talked him out of it. MY BLOG LIST A personal note - There were two professors in graduate school who TreeHugger Our Air Would Never be this most influenced my own approaches to architecture, Martin Price Clean Without the Government and Bernhard Hafner. Martin worked for Harry Weese after 6 minutes ago graduation, twice. While he was certainly "urbane and 0 New York Daily Photo conversational" as noted earlier, Weese also possessed truly Sidewalk University unusual stamina in the pursuit of design solutions. His methods of 8 hours ago design could be exhausting, but rewarded with an outcome that % Sensing Architecture by would be thoroughly thought out and infused with all the intuitive Maria Lorena Lehman resources of the designer. He was the real deal, as were all the 'top Greening Modernism by Cart Stein (Book Review) ten' listed here, 1 week ago 0 The Colorful Pastel He spoke at our school, Texas at Arlington, while I was taking Pastel Painting of a Baby Martin's design studio in 1978. Rightly anticipating a large crowd, the Elephant lecture was held in the gym. Weese's elegant double- breasted gray 2 weeks ago jacket and navy trousers were rumpled from travel, and he seemed 0 Hello Beautiful! tired as the talk got underway. He walked about on the Chicago gala - "Marshall's wall" - 9 Y gym floor, East Lake Shore Drive - turns mike in hand, and seemed to want to just get through the talk and 100 find a place to sit. When the question- answer part came, though, he 2 weeks ago became animated and energized. There wasn't any doubt this was a 0 MickeyAshmore.com guy who would find reserves of energy when he wanted to engage in Really, Deniz, Really? something. His presence was also remarkable. He was visibly an 4 months ago accomplished and forceful personality. but without any hint of Katarxis 3: New Science, arrogance or condescention toward students. Shaking hands with New Urbanism -- New Architecture? him, he had the politician's ability to connect by looking you in the • eye and clearly focusing on you to the exclusion of everything else joe's nyc • 8 July, 2009 that was going on. hell's kitchen Antony Gormley Weese was one of two architects on the 8- member jury for the ® thomas mayer_ http:// russellclaxton .blogspot.com/2009 /06 /top -10 -9- harry- weese.html 3/14/2011 • pov architecture and cities: Top, -M: 9. Harry Weese y Page 3 of 7 Vietnam Memorial design competition. Details are murky, but the archive / Architecture politics and emotions surrounding the competition, and the eventual construction, presented almost every conceiveable obstacle to the successful execution of the design as originally intended. This was a three -year struggle. and it's difficult to believe that Weese's influence didn't guide the eventual result to a significant degree. The winning entry, by then - student of architecture Maya Lin, was highly controversial. The stark monument was deemed inappropriate because it was "somber," "not uplifting," "focused on casualties without including survivors," and was the object of every opinion available to the imagination of millions of would -be critics. Ross Perot was a leading opponent of the Maya Lin design, and opinion coalesced in two camps. One favored Maya Lin's design, the other insisted on adding a realistic statue and a flagpole at the joint of the two wings of the memorial. An eventual agreement was made to build the memorial with both Maya Lin's plan and the statue -with- flagpole addition dead center of the wall. However, behind -the- scenes maneuvers somehow resulted in the successful solution that is seen today. • REPORT of the VIETNAM VETERANS MEMORIAL DESIGN COMPETITION The jury for the Vietnam Memorial Design Competition finds Entry Number 1026 the finest and most appropriate of the 1420 entries submitted. We recommend to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund that it be built on this site. Of all the proposals submitted, this most clearly meets the spirit and formal requirements of the program. It is contemplative and reflective. It is superbly harmonious with its site. and yet frees the visitors from the noise and traffic of the surrounding city. Its open nature will encourage access in all occasions, at all hours, without barriers. Its siting and materials are simple and forthright. http: // russellclaxton .blogspot.com /2009/06 /top -10 -9- harry - weese.html 3/14/2011 pov architecture and cities: Top'': 9. Harry Weese /"\ Page 4 of 7 This memorial with its wall of names, becomes a place of quiet reflection, and a tribute to those who served their nation in difficult times. All who come here can find it a place of healing. This will be a quiet memorial, one that achieves an excellent relationship with both the Lincoln Memorial or Washington Monument, and relates the visitor to them. It is uniquely horizontal. entering the earth rather than piercing the sky. This is very much a memorial of our own times, one that could not have been achieved in another time and place. The designer has created an eloquent place where the simple meeting of earth. sky and remembered names contain messages for all who will know this place. Agreed, 11:25 A.M., May 1, 1981 Pietro Belluschi rfiAfa Grady Clay Garrett Eckbo Richard H. Hunt Co stantino Nivo James Rosati Hideo Sasaki /4 Harry M. Weese Weese's largest project was the DC Metro system. Along with the extraordinary Metro, itself, considered the world's premiere transit system, the restoration of the historic Union Station was carried out by Weese's firm. SHARE IT © Share this on Facebook Tweet this Get more gadgets for your site • http: // russellclaxton .blogspot.com /2009/06 /top -10 -9- harry - weese.html 3/14/2011 _ __, _ - pov architecture and cities: Tops.(: 9. Harry Weese ^v Page 5 of 7 I . � °4 P.� \s te r .n - # above. DC Metro An informative essay on the design of the DC Metro. below, Union Station, DC y �L 4 , t. ry j. 4r k :-_-',A.- 4 t k } below, Swissotel, Chicago 3/14/2011 http:// russellclaxton .blogspot.com /2009/06 /top -10 -9- harry- weese.html pov architecture and cities: Top''': 9. Harry Weese ,..� Page 6 of 7 i E c.l ,I Xd I , + Iri w�l �1jE IU } F aer POSTED BY RUSSELL CLAXTON AT 5:50 PM 0 COMMENTS: http: // russellclaxton .blogspot.com /2009/06 /top -10 -9- harry- weese.html 3/14/2011 OAI1P1403 Official eligibility determination Rev. 9/98 (OAHP use only) COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Date Initials — Determined Eligible - NR _ Determined Not Eligible- NR Architectural Inventory orm — Determined Eligible -SR J Determined Not Eligible - SR (page 1 of 4) Need Data _ Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR District I. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT.970 2. Temporary resource number: 100.EFR 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: Aspen 5. Historic building name: Given Institute 6. Current building name: 7. Building address: 100 East Francis Aspen, Colorado 81611 8. Owner name and address: Regents of the University of Colorado c/o 100 East Francis Aspen, Colorado 81611 II. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 84 West SW V4 of SW t/a of NW r/a of SW r/4 of Section 7 10. UTM reference Zone 1 3; 3 4 2 7 2 0 mE 4 3 3 9 6 7 5 mN 11. USGS quad name: Aspen Quadrangle Year: 1960, Photo Rev. 1987 Map scale: 7.5' X 15'_ Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): A through F Block: 63 Addition: Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comprised of Lots A through F: Block 63 of the City and Townsite .f Aspen. Assessors office Record Number: 273 -124 -1 • -851 This description was chosen as the most specific and customary description of the site. III. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Irregular 15. Dimensions in feet: Length x Width 16. Number of stories: Two Story 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Concrete; Concrete Block 18. Roof configuration: (enter no more than one): Flat Roof 19. Primary external roof material (enter no more than one): Synthetic Roof 20. Special features (enter all that apply): v Resource Number: L.✓ 5PT.970 Temporary Resource Number: 100.EFR Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: A series of geometric volumes constructed out of concrete masonry units and painted white. The entry is from the west and oriented diagonally toward the building. A series of wide exterior steps create the edqe of a platform on which the building sits. On this platform sit a two story rectangle at the west; a two story rectangle with the long axis perpendicular to the west volume: and a two story triangular element that frames the view looking to the east. The two story central volume has a cut out opening on the first level for the entry and a large circular volume that occupies the remainder of the ground floor area. Glass curtain walls connect the volumes where the interior space is continuous. Other smaller cutout spaces occur within the main volumes and usually define outdoor spaces on the edges of the geometry. Overall the structure has minimal openings. where they are found they are generally horizontally proportioned and of a similar size and location in the pattern of the structure. A series of narrow windows faces south on the western most volume, the connecting curtain wall continues under the middle volume creating the entrance. 22. Architectural style /building type: Modern Movements 23. Landscaping or special setting features: South and west property lines lined with mature Blue Spruce; property scattered with historic cottonwoods. A large lawn is on the north side overlooking Hallam Lake 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: A late 19 century house sits on the site adjacent to the main building. It is a one and 1/2 story gable structure with the traditional pattern of window types and locations. The structure was relocated on to this site. date and original location unknown. This structure has significance in its own right. IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate Actual 1973 Source of information: Aspen /Pitkin Community Development Department Files 26. Architect: Harry Weese Source of information: Aspen /Pitkin Community Development Department Files 27. Builder /Contractor: Eidene & Buckwalter Source of information: Aspen /Pitkin Community Development Department Files 28. Original owner: Given Institute, University of Colorado Source of information: Aspen /Pitkin Community Development Department Files 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): No record of significant alterations is available, nor are any alterations apparent. 30. Original location X Moved Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Education 32. Intermediate use(s): Resource Number: ✓ 5PT.970 �. Temporary Resource Number: 100.EFR Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) 33. Current use(s): Education 34. Site type(s): Residential Neighborhood 35. Historical background: The Post WWII era in Aspen brought an international presence to the community. Walter PaeDcke and the Goethe Bicentennial attracted an international aroup of businessmen. statesmen and intellectuals to the community. The Aspen Institute was born and many people stayed. or continued to return. for the intellectual. physical and spiritual environment Aspen had to offer Herbert Bayer Bauhaus trained d ion r n Fritz B n dirt 10`" Mo ntain r and student of FrankLloyd Wright, set th . tone for an architecture at th for front of th post WWII period. They as well as their students and other ignificant architects attracted for imilar r ason have left a significant body of work which has influenced the pattern of the community. In particular this structure was designed by architect Harry Weese an internationally recognized architect responsible fora number of significant buildings throuohout the States including major historic preservation projects in the Chicago area and the Wa hington DC ubwav system Weese was associated with Eero Saarinen at Cranbrook, Saarinen was responsible for the first Music Tent. 36. Sources of information: Aspen's Architectural Context Post WWII part of th 2000 S ry y of Historic Sites and Strictures, and AIA Architect Obituary. published December 1998. VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes No X Date of designation: Designating authority: 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: _ A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; X C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: Architecture 40. Period of significance: Post WWII and the development of Aspen as an International Resort 41. Level of significance: National State Local X Resource Number: 5PT.970 Temporary Resource Number: 100.EFR Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) 42. Statement of significance: This structure is significant for its position in the development of Aspen after WWII. the period signifying the rebirth of the community into a recreational and intellectual resort.. Designed by Harry Weese, of Harry Weese Associates (Chicago) an internationally known architect, both for work in historic preservation and modern architecture. This structure displays the clarity of design concept. simplicity of decoration, and a modern approach to the use of materials and solid /void relationships characteristic of the Modern Movement. Weese is one of the many significant architects who worked in this area and have contributed to the wealth of modern architecture in the area. 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: Structure is a good example of the work of the architect and is intact. VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: Eligible X Not Eligible Need Data 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes _ No X Discuss: If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing Noncontributing 46. If the building is in existing National Register district, is it: Contributing _ Noncontributing VIII. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: R13: F24. 25 Negatives filed at: Aspen /Pitkin Community Development Dept. 48. Report title: City of Aspen Update of Survey of Historic Sites and Structures. 2000 49. Date(s): 6/29/2000 50. Recorder(s): Suzannah Reid and Patrick Duffield 51. Organization: Reid Architects 52. Address: 412 North Mill Street. PO Box 1303. Aspen CO 81612 53. Phone number(s): 970 920 9225 NOTE: Please attach a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad. map indicating resource location, and photographs. Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866 -3395 1 00 • E . Francis Id Ili, ....... -\\ \ 4 .\ 1\ 100 Ili 1 ;; 404?17 imi ii ■,7114,...et A 14 1.-------1_ ...„ . _ Nfti IV ekC12:1 a t Ilt_iorr-- '--__.' ..:•.:___,.._ - u AN%■,,,, /4 - hfAV i hmbh::„... ...,, ali‘ Of ' i ii ,„0--' - - - --- filligill '7; -:::,, ti 1 . , 4.. 14 404 rm., 41' -,- , ,t, lir e .?, wi .!, ,i) --;.-: ii...„ cr „... ,ft tj„ ry 1 Ar \ \ .4. A ,\ . , .. . ‘...\ /4 ...,... , . ‘....- ,....... ‘ . w� Sri _ � , y ,i L ` t t r 7 , ice, fr4 - -------** i,./ .. .,.. ki--P_Itli kfta „ ,.. -. Atli ,!_r ..... _ 4: 4 1 ,141", / ' 3 ig , & • L N .01.1 3.n? &IWO° me 14012.1UM7 Tole* con 'NO*) • °sett .rm .oainao • $t600 X011 .0.g Q nftE l V11 ,74fl f c„. ZWIVIIR.35:4 JAVIFOINA •om ing fri43,010132A :3TAC i . ••,, • _ ., - at, , - i7 ' - IL --. - — ihn svio 4. . . ,,... - • . ...- A: .• "•••.) _ • . S _ 1111 riffirrirMi• . • ..-- ( . t!-N• t 11, - ". C • r: '.4 9 i 4 . 4 • ' ' , -, , , a, #I1 r, FIFA', . thlgo 1 1110 ' 4g gillOtn 0 , '`if littrr i I '4 3v 4 _ sc.--- la tit allt P.O. SOX 6076311 • ORLANDO FL 32660 • {4071636-3100 *SPIRT EMULSION WOE DOWN Sllf LE NO. 57-215 F aisitvas FOP NO- :LATE. ASSIGN/ADM '--------7 4 f • . 4 4 I 4 I ' •,,,, ---- ----_,::::--___ ili 4 f1r., rat : * -b lir x • . , C . .. r 1 , --_. - ----------,_ f - ° ------ -`''•-■ - -__ ------ - - - - „. INIKEMMOMP .. - --'- ::C::- - --------- 1 ' 9% ',Milt 11611 14 1 , 0 1 , a . . . . . 6 i V � � i� ��.^.+���.. �"� ,er @Emu. � . �..�� v.� I �ZJ I - y am .,. $ ;! Ct �/ • L T\ \ t _�. , .i ' �- \mil , ,...,,„ . ____ , , -\\ , ..„.‘ ‘..-_--c. N ., 1-'''-‘7"..:•.-Pkt`c1/24k - ‘___=- , \,..,,.. , p. ,___,, \, _,.., ( .2 1.1. ' a N ,, • DOLE COURSE I ••r ' \ N. d \ �,. / 1 1- � o- % /,? • � u - \ 3 .. � . ' II J C y, Iowa / / c ' : 1 � I S 1 -1 ^ � _ I ''s ` p re ∎ Thi . "'J �1M� ®� p l. ► , W���) .1 a . 1 �► .. �'I� IN I `� ` /` ir -may .- !1 3 1 1/ \ _ ii �I A O VA 1 (, 1� n �"\ _. `—� \�i ■ - ----: 4 ' 1'./74.k. \ bli ) lt, 3 .:::.;1 '*;"1/4. \ „ -e cH r / � �% ��� • � -moo ?����„ �� { mo' = . WY I N,V*7: 1 AA( ii Mgt t fw All Survey Sites are included within the City of Aspen limits, See Sketch map for identification of specific location and building context Aspen Quadrangle Colorado- Pitkin County 1960, Photo Revised 1987 Scale: 1:24 7.5 Minute Survey MN GN SCALE 1:24 000 l2• 1 1 0 ~ -■ 1 MILE t•09' I 213 MILS I 20 MILS I I 3000 I 1------, • �-� , 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 ' • 6000 7000 FEET II`V II ' H a 1 I I 1 1 .5 0 1 KILOMETER UTM GRID AND 1987 MAGNETIC NORTH CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 ., .. A Man of Many Words and Works by Stan Allan, FAIA, chairman emeritus, Harry Weese Associates 1915_1998 - _ ...:. ..... • .1-: . . oait•ely - I ' s /„.,•'' i_ ... . I • ..... , A • , . ,,.. . --. --..„ 6 ._ _ '"' II I 14 la 414? -•■■ ■ NV ■ • Fl ' ' .._ , ill 1 : . . .....,.. .- i . . 4011, 1 , . . . ... ,. . i .41w ■■■', N 1 • 7 ... , r ._,-.. 1 - —, NI - ....agaiiras a ......- , . • 41%:111.,4 W t,„,11:::: ..,# . ' , .._ ...-4, ...; . - • '■■• 0. ."..": ?.. ,,74- , .. l ,. + ... ) gag 4 lig , • S . . ' . f ."..C-Z■ . . . -op.- ,, __ ........ ... . !,....:,...„ 8IP -%-"'"Nftiok . .. r . - ., . .:,.. . • , :N j ,---ii.t: • . . i. , .,, 1 A* i -- . , - k r•t+T' ---- .41•1 , - , ,. -.....--_ .. . 4 - I *ilk igl •..,, OPP 1.1 4114,111g .. II . • I - ' m . . . AI _____ m ....i■. ' 'z _ ---__ ..-= — - - Z.. 1 1111 111, \ Si m •— — , - -,• 10 INLAND ARCHITECT • 0 T ribij 1 . \ � ; Ka HARRY WEESE Horry Wows*: \ VPC0% Ic•w a wonrn• pliM /�` . Mt t- M retrospective iiiii,,, , NIP .... . A rumor making the rounds presumes that Harry Weese no longer graces our pres 11 %Nu ence. Not true! Don't believe 1 i `�, `' it for a minute. Why, it seems It just the other day I saw him standing on the stair - �� ' case that leaps across the light- drenched gallery inside ,:;- t his majestic Elvehjem Art . _� s, ,� Museum. Yes, students walked with him across his slim arched i' r concrete footbridge linking the upper campus with the far -out Humanities Building. That morning, members of 1 ,- a string quartet practiced there on the stage of one 1 of his many recital halls— r r ` designed forty years ago. f r ` •s. • f � ' Architectural splendor for A y, 4 the University of Wisconsin! . • Continued on next page. \ I- - IulandAr-chitectUSA.corn f 0 0 HARRY WEESE • before a swimming pool, one enters house to renew one spirit." 1 Tu ospeC 1 1' c the house by walking under an arched Now, in order to see Harry in top arbor covered with concord grapes each form in 1970, travel to, or fly over (in summer —the scene of many memorable an open cockpit plane) the office /study/ Go to Columbus, Indiana. He is office parties and weddings. retreat named Shadowcliff. Harry trans - there— within thirteen buildings design- Visit the 1960 Tangeman House, hid- formed Ben Heineman's raw concept ed between 1955 and 1965. See the First den on a small, heavily wooded island into a Cor -Ten steel and glass structured Baptist Church, a national AIA 25 -year on one of the Muskoka Lakes in Ontario. envelope, boldly cantilevered out from a award winner. It will win a 50 -year From the discreet boat dock, one can cliff on Ellison Bay Bluff, and 150 feet award too. As you survey some of these climb a footpath or take the elevator above Green Bay on Lake Michigan. buildings, individually and collectively, to a deck leading to the main entrance. A daring concept, thrillingly executed! you may have a subtle realization of The 4,000 square foot house is framed Don't miss it. Best by air, for it is a pri- Harry passing silently through the post- with an extraordinary combination of vate place. modern episodes of architecture before stressed -skin planes and suspended and If you can't fly by, look it up in Kitty it had a name. For confirmation, look compressed wooden counterparts. Weese's Harry Weese Houses. The at the design of his Oak Park Village Mrs. Robert S. Tangeman stated, book is her tribute to Harry to honor Hall buildings. The Columbus buildings "Each time we return to Lanfair, we feel him on his 70th birthday. It beautifully were derivative of his pre -war friendship a new sense of joy and discovery. It is a illustrates 38 of his 82 houses. with a fellow student at Yale, J. Irwin Miller, the distinguished chairman of the Cummins Engine Company. Before you leave Columbus, look at his Lillian C. Schmitt School. It's a gem! Harry Weese Houses If you are thinking of his house . designs, there are over 80 to delight you , _ with his ingenuities. Try to see him at his 1957 family retreat in Barrington. Set upon a wooded slope, above the lake, / , , i - w=, Below Harry Weese on the roof of the Tangeman House during construction, - , ' 1965.RightTangeman House I. 11 , - - MEW, , . ,. i r B i • III l o • . -.may.— . 12 INLAND ARCHITECT 4M - ...............A .0 1466.:"..17:".4'.'1\1111111144111111411 . I- . li:* f , T .. ,, Mir f 4 - 1 • • • • • 1 i- r '. k ♦i mor ,..,....... fir- : � • ; - • ,,, ► �, Ar' ' Tom; ` 4 ` r: ti;' ° _ % S ' f -, -,.. �, f e i ( • I 1 .' r * .• . 1 it 1, L. - . ..,' • 4 . - _ Above Shadowcliffe House, Green Bay, - Wisconsin. Right William J. Campbell Correctional Courthouse Annex, Chicago I , ir ill I 1 llrr 1 11 r 11 1 Urban Architecture - -- l II [ !I Back in Chicago, in the early '70s, the 1 1 1 i I f I III ' � General Service Administration sought - - -'� 1 1 11 1 1 11 1 1 Ir , to implement the concept of sequester- r - 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 ing persons awaiting trial in a building, 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 cheek by jowl with the courts—in lieu of 1 ( 11 1 li 1 1 1 1 1 1 r l 11 shuttling them back and forth every day 1 1 1 r i 1 1 1 I I 1 1 /- t g from remote sites. The challen e, from 11 1 1 11 1 I II 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 f ::. f . an urban real estate perspective, called - 1 for the presence of such a building to I 1 1 11 1 1 1 I ( - -. " - serve the purpose without jeopardizing a f l 1 1 1 1 11 (I1, adjacent neighborhood real estate values 1 11 1 i l 1 1 1 1 1 . ;' and, at the same time, to actually enhance :: �- 4 .- the quality of the urban scene. Harry's W W W / / / I /W , .:1 • 20 -story William J. Campbell Correc- 0. 1 1 1 1 1 "' tional Courthouse Annex, with its pleas- ' I I 1 I I1 1 1 1 I I it 1 ant grove of maple trees, achieves these I1 r r I 11 I r goals. The exposed concrete structure of _L IS_ . _ 1 t I - this triangular tower, with its very slender - f 11 iI 1 111 f 111 r windows, quietly reveals its function to II II 1 ' 1 1 II I I the observer without inciting threatening ` t�. I I ( 1 III _ ...„ feelings that its function might suggest. �, 1 1 Its urba dignified, yet stern presence I II 1 r ` I 1 - does enhance the positive rhythm of the • •ti bustle of life in the Loop. GSA found this — t. 11 ' ••• oq,...-r# g',0 4 , wirr A A* ilk Art Iiiir yr.„ s •..—....r 0 0 urban concept to be a prototype worthy stage. For the `98 IbsenBergman pro- Hey! That was it: the Embassy of the to adopt nationwide. Yes, Harry's build- duction of NORA, the seating was rear - U.S. —up on stilts. By New York, 'I had ing and Joe Karr's landscaped plaza fit ranged, for the first time ever, to create the first sketches ready, ' he said" well together. The plaza, a scene for bag a dramatic stage setting for a theater -in- His selection of native mahogany brunches or relaxation, catches the sun as the - round. Harry would applaud. ensured against the onslaught of insects it swings around giving light and shade Well, there are other theatres of and the weathering effects of the cli- on the long summertime days. course —all told, twelve small ones and mate. Interestingly, due to the force of nine large examples. Norm Zimmerman circumstances, the State Department no A Gifted Designer worked with Harry on most of them. longer uses the building. However, it Early on, Harry's reputation as a gift- Regarding the embassy at Accra, appears that it will become the National ed designer /architect was firmly estab- Angus MacLean Thuermer, formerly a Art Museum! lished upon the completion of two build- consul there, recently offered this reveal - ings designed in 1959: the United States ing recollection: Embassy in Accra, Ghana, and the Arena "I worked in one of Harry Weese 's Stage Theatre in Washington. buildings —in Africa. After I had been on There, he worked closely on the pro - duty there for about a year I wrote him gram for the theatre with his talented telling him how great the building was... clients, Zelda and Tom Fichandler— how I enjoyed working in an office every • Arena Theatre, resulting in the unique and distinctive day— enclosed or not enclosed— with Washington D.C. 800 -seat theatre -in- the -round with a 30' mahogany walls and shutters. He replied t' 1 x 30' stage —form following function. saying mine was the first letter of any sort ° • The later 1972 addition of the 500 -seat he had received from any source in the Kreeger theatre contains a 90- degree State Department. Shocking. Some time - thrust stage. The physical link joining later, he appeared in Accra. I 'showed '. S : ' . the two buildings determined the design him round' his own building. He related • • - . - and site location of the Kreeger addition how he had been sent out to Accra to ' (all new materials matching the older design a building to blend in with the "- theatre). The next time you are in the local culture, but still be a statement of • r; 11 I Capital, go to the theatre with Harry! This is America. He was stumped He ,-.+'' - - - +�-r*• You will find him at other theatres went up country, as far as Na. That's • = ` °`w. c!eot _ and concert halls in Milwaukee, Grand about the end of the line. There, he saw Rapids, Kansas City, Louisville, or in the the palace of the Wa. (We loved to say, ' Latin School in Chicago. Don't miss the 'The Wa of Na) He got a postcard of it. plays each season in his Court Theatre at On the plane leaving Accra, he looked at - the University of Chicago. This theatre's the postcard again. The 'Palace,' of mud _ :1,-., form is a pure 100 - degree semi - circle of and wattles, had spires all about it. Mr. t seating for 475 people around a thrust Weese turned the postcard upside down. '� , 1 — . 1 j_ • Cour, Theater, Universi 4," of Chicago' • Court Theater, - "� ` University of Chicago - Mit- w ik , - ---,Jr .. , _ ..-: .... ....pt.. ..._ , . 0 . , . , 1 .....,.. _ - , ,-,..-c. _.... , ... . . wr " ; e • I f w thmiiii" • . .. ., , U.S. Embassy, Accra, Ghana .... 4111......int +.1111111-.41•L vont _+= -a= .11M■ -IM +Me ...= +MO -.AN .1....... l I i ' 7 1 , ■ - • 'IF liV \ r' 1 li cll ,. 11,11. 1111 ■ i j 1 1 1 1 1 hi iii .. ., .4 II II MEN I . IIIMoull =AWL . --- i li 1 4 1 11 • ‘• .-- . - * r . - - - -' - --.; ..........„,wap. \ i . • Kreeger Theater Annex, Washington D.C. 4. ,,,,, , . i• , ... • 41 . . • 4 ' ; . • P ..,!•,- . , ' 3 • 0 , t'• , .. •'. ... - . --• * ' . ' k ' N, ‘ 44) . .. %, - .-- , - ,.. _ ....., .1 _ !I . ,44 1 . . I 10% otliffill - : ;---- — - - - : • -. -- _,.......,- .7,....„..:-..--'- 4 .... • _ .....?..-.. ......--„.-- _-_, --............_ -,, - . ..7.:,-.7.-_.-.-.;•---.--__-,-- -.00 --- W' 01 ......_ _. - . • ..r r• • '....- ' _.a...." 4, ., .I". I 4 . X: IR . • ..e ...... --- . lo .......- • -- il l ..... . ......k-,-e' ' . - -- --.., - - • 11- '_ ----,.." -- ‘,. , 0- ' ' •••••.-^,'•• .C• < % it t 11 . __ ,...•- . c- <, . J .. . t: . . ...... er - . e.-. - . 7. •-• " .. t V .. -- ...- , d er -- . .. • • ....•^' , ... . .....- --__ - .. • Pe .. , - 1 I -. - . 7 , r i . ' • r - ' 4 , :...., 4 .. --- . . .. . ‘ ..,,, .... -,, .1 ■"'""! ., .„, i -16, . ,..... ...., ..., ,-... r .... 1 . 4 , / ' 1 ..., ..... ...• -... , . -,... -A ail . .-- i .. . . Illi aoportrifite; '. • . . . ____,______ ..,.....,.... a • - - - '-- .-• • , 11 • . 4b.. .? . i t ' 4- " .4p '' . li ...—.11 _,,,,-- •• - - P -„''illift4411/1611arr* i 1 " - - . i iP r ,„itHt 4 A . A Y 7* • . R , 4/4 ' AIL 6 T 'Ilh':11 41. i11111° . . ... .e. . _ ..- , IN... •... . - T at ‘ r All ■4.„. No.. 111116.. MIK Il■ , .... . ma. 1„ • Ili • . - %A - ... - tut t -- I* 0 0 Adaptive Re -use— Given a tight budget, his challenge (one Wright called, "the greatest room for Restoration and Renewal he relished) was to restore the theatre to music and opera in the world —bar none," In the early sixties, Professor James use in its original form, and to renovate as was a striking example of adaptive re -use Marston Fitch, teaching at Columbia Uni- much of the original decor as possible. and historic restoration. versity, and Harry, architect at the Audi- A complete structural analysis revealed Additional restoration projects fol- torium Theatre, simultaneously invented, a basically sound condition; however, lowed; most importantly, Orchestra Hall, taught, supported, and practiced the arts some structure was replaced with rela- the Newberry Library, and the Field of adaptive re -use combined with the tively lightweight systems. The original Museum of Natural History the lat- restoration of historic buildings. duct systems, below the auditorium seat- ter two remaining as clients for over a In 1963, Harry knew the salvation of ing and elsewhere, were used in conjunc- generation. Sullivan's Auditorium Theatre was being tion with new fans, heating, and cooling Out of town, in Washington, take the threatened by others, with destruction as coils. The original direct current lighting Metro from the Ronald Reagan National a possibility. He resigned from its Board system was restored by using a new AC Airport to Union Station. You will see of Directors to be given the commission service and rectifier. 10,000 new bare and feel the excitement and grandeur to restore the 4,000 -seat building. filament light bulbs were manufactured of Daniel Burnham's 1907 train sta- The theatre had not been used since especially for the building. tion. Keeping Burnham's spirit within the 1941, and it had been poorly maintained. The restoration of what Frank Lloyd building intact, the restoration includes Field Museum of Natural History, exterior and interior ,J. Newberry Library, Chicago, exterior and interior IP T441 �1 k , • i 7_ ` a y4. s. in 1, ._ 41;� 4;m , _ ..���:' _" " ' I - n„'gIC -room ilk► 'r, I 1 M Me AMP' NW SOW - i IIIIII1 A MOW /NW Min .... , 411111 411111•10r, am .: 114-‘? :; Mt -- i I =" 1 : 1, l L I a v :�" • ` f . ) - g - . : 1 Ili ' ,,, I' I Or , Nom gill i I I a II ILI fi it — 4 i 0 0 accommodating 200,000 square feet of Many other restoration projects came Hotels retail shops and entertainment and dining Harry's way; perhaps most notable was When you stay at Harry's first hotel, facilities. It re- opened in 1998 to great the 1885 Alfred B. Mullett Custom Crown Center in Kansas City, you will be acclaim, now not only as a train station House/Post Office building in St. Louis. surprised and pleased to recognize some but also a "destination" for Washingto- This commission came by way of a GSA of his up -beat spatial/lighting/structural nians. A fitting triumph for a building design competition. form- giving characteristics and thought - whose abandonment had caused dete- Harry was the first architect in Chi- ful detailing...plus utilizing the natural rioration for over a decade. Secretary of cago to recognize the advantages of reha- landscape by incorporating it as a back - Transportation Elizabeth Dole and many bilitating old loft buildings. He secured drop for the lobby. others rescued it from destruction! ownership of several aging loft buildings Back in Chicago, the rounded corners In 1990, following this success, HWA on Printers Row on S. Dearborn St., the of the triangular tower for the Swiss joined with a New York firm as a team 70- year -old North American Cold Stor- Grand Hotel have another notable source to create a Master Plan for the rehabilita- age Warehouse on the river, and the 104- of his insight. Our client, Lester Melman, tion and adaptive re -use of Grand Central year -old loft building on Hubbard Street, wanted sharp corners because they were Terminal. Now completed with its star -lit into which he moved his office in 1964. the most economical. Harry told Lester ceiling aglow, the building, like Union that the sharp corners will make the 40- Station, is a destination. story tower look like an office building, Union Station, Washington D.C., interior Mullett Custom House, St. Louis, interior and exterior . * 0 1 j ,. t- 9. VIP f and o. i ' .� °P-11101746#''' 1 .I ....ii: r r 41. 4 sitor" 44§11 k 4 il. --....: t • 4 OA ' ' ' .0 1 I i i ....! . LS : i 7 . 7 % # . ... 41 11 1# 6 ■ — ' - i N'4 • _ • Al , 0 ' • .1, , -.,, fl . •,,,, • 4 ,,,,, , ii, . ,,, _ , ' , ,,,,i - ' ♦ 1 ii ; 1 , , , ......„....„...... .„.„, .,,, ...... ......-1 ii - .. 3 _ .6. .tea - - _ , : i.. , T • •" •'r \iik —' li kiikk I . • • e • • • Fr:. .„ _...„,......,•4„, .- . r - � -. 1 , ' ,+ A■ 1 _ • '.. _ ' wr }:.�. T• �; ■ II i. b. �4 `' IT .� ti_�� P111 T 4 I i 1 � /• F` i r Q � ` �y} •� ;� s y C l ` _ 1 _ _ . • 111110111 '- i Y . 1 •,•,;, ■ Crown Center, whereas the rounded corners will say "hotel." ', +4. •.. ' )'%'' Kansas City, interior When Lester found out they would cost $66,000 .. ` .�. 4. extra, he said, "No." Harry replied, "I'll pay for ;. •-•; ��' . r them!" So it turned out to be a distinct advan- ! „ ' tage — rounded corners, the cost split 3 ways, f 's+' " - owner /architect/ contractor. Lester knew all along that Harry was right! '. ' ' From your room at the Swiss Grand, you can F ; . , view the lakeside and the cityscape in general; . ' .■`- 1!"' r ; and just across the river to the north, your eye \ ,- will catch the golden gleaming windows of the "- ' ' '. � . r , Time -Life Building. The husky, masculine Cor- I* t? ` _, - - 1 ._ -, Ten structural frame and sub -frames rise 30- stories, accessed via double deck elevators (the I � ~ - ti first in the nation). ,� ,� .` ., This was Harry's first tall office building, ~'. - :' x • followed by one across town at 200 South +' �' ``›. ' .- t' .: f Wacker Drive for a new client, John Buck. A . '_ .,,�ti * `�' . , ,.. ` 1 t„�. stunning 40 -story white aluminum -clad tower �a ++ - right on the River, with a small "vest pocket" -k>_=.` .,11.3+ - • .. r park alongside! -' - - '. "-- - �a. -- - _ r f a _ - Houses of Worship - - Earlier, the Baptist Church in Columbus was ~ + *- mentioned, receiving an AIA 25 -year award. So % ` ti 1ge4l/` did the 17th Church of Christ Scientist—this #.; , _ _ ; {� one from the Chicago AIA chapter. It is promi- -.( - - ;� nently located inside the acute angular intersec- '�■► r., tion of Wacker Drive and South Water Street. Its a _ , 1. .. curving facade provides a distinguished urban '" design element at the eastern end of the Wacker _ .fr Drive axis. • Crown Center, Kansas City In Menasha, Wisconsin, on the north shore of Lake Winnabego, the original St. Thomas It i iik Episcopal Church suffered a fire in 1961 that damaged the sanctuary sufficiently to require a major restoration. Harry decided to design a new sanctuary. .,,h,„ . The ribs of the vaulted structural roof -fram- ing members above the sanctuary appear to resemble the skeletal ribs of a large vessel k turned upside down, each half sloping from MO,�,. �►- hi the ridge at a different pitch. The side aisle, a , ry P P mason wall ierced with several arched open- �" ings, gives a feeling of a medieval ruin restored. .. All in all, with its low -level glamorous lighting, Ilk 1 11114, Ilk Ilk - . the entire building had a bit of the old blended k* with a mysterious newness —a scene of strange delight. Architectural sculpture. My wife and I attended the 30th , 7 M IB IN um in t•� ''"_ anniversary Eucharist service, representing M IN 7 in 7 im in 7 7 � R the firm. The pastor delivered a homily praising MI • 1 ■Nr the architect to his eternal glory. We acknowl- _ ", 1 % iir kir edged a round of applause for Harry. Here, he responded to the freedom of impuls- Illir Ow ' 710 1. . - - 4. 18 INLAND ARCHITECT -" - , � .r`�r , . ~ i, « + � ' * . '� " • 0 + r , �t Baptist Church, Columbus Ohio es and followed them with good results. By all means, when in the area, visit this little known but splendid church. You will feel his presence. Its lofty spire rises to elegantly punctuate its i ' presence in the neighborhood. I 1 - Washington Metro _ -- - _ In regard to Harry's innate urban/ regional planning instincts, a commission came his e '' 'r'' #`i ' - - =- -; •' way to become a most gratifying example of applied regional transportation planning on a • St.Thomas Episcopal Church, Menasha, Wisconsin grand scale. In June 1967, eight political jurisdictions consisting of the Federal Government, the District of Columbia, Montgomery and Prince Georges' Countries in Maryland, the cities of Alexandria and Fairfax as well as Arlington and Fairfax Counties of Virginia, formed and signed a historic com -pact— agreeing to plan, design, finance, construct, and operate a 101 - mile, 86- station rapid rail system located vari- ously within these jurisdictions. This compact included the 25 -mile, 25- station system already authorized by the District of Columbia in 1965. This historic regional rail transportation plan was estimated at that time to cost $2.5 billion to build. ,r ,i r .. The Anatomy /Methodology of ,. Architect Selection .- • In December 1965, Harry received a letter a sent by John Rannells, the chief architect of the �` x `� National Capital Transportation Agency. The letter was sent to 30 large planning/architectural firms nationwide. This RFP letter stated the nature and scope of the architectural assignment, wherein the r � � selected firm would become the General Archi- —� tectural Consultant to the NCTA, under direct --- contract to them, rather than to the General Engineering Consultant. Architects were on a II First Bapt t Church • St TNabs Episcopal Church par with engineers for the first time on a major ` \ public work project! r The RFP wanted respondents to outline / \ how they would proceed in fulfilling their 11k, obligations to design the stations for this 25- station rail system. The inherent implications awakened an immediate recognition of a most unusual opportunity. Harry Weese's far-rang- . ing, open- minded attitude was receptive to this appeal for a generalist's approach; indeed, the II , _ 7 whole office was ripe for this kind of challenge. During the ensuing two weeks between _ _ ' '` a Christmas and New Year's Eve, Harry, Ben / - Weese and Jack Hartray formulated several • t r , t { ! InlandArchitectUSA.cam 19 II •..1 A p drafts of a response, trying to refine their looking for cues on how to structure their headquarters. understanding of the project. Almost approach. The interview started at two o'clock immediately, they recognized the need NCTA consultant architect Kent Coo- in the afternoon on February 6th and last - for prototype designs for each type of per drew up a series of criteria for ed for more than two hours. The NCTA station. They saw a correlation between evaluating the submissions. They were was represented by Administrator Walter this rail project and the work we had boiled down to a rating system based on McCarter; his deputy, Warren Quenst- done for the Purity Food Store chain six priorities: professional experience edt; Architect John Rannells; Planner of California and the Cummins Engine and creativity (30 %); understanding the William Herman; Chief Engineer How- Company dealership stores nationwide. scope (20 %); involvement and follow and Lyon; Public Relations Chief Cody For Purity, we designed seven prototypes through (20 %); leadership and experi- Pfanstiehl; and Architectural Consultant which were then site- adapted at 30 loca- ence with other individuals in coordi- Kent Cooper. tions. A similar process proved success- nating the work (10 %); team integra- Walter McCarter opened the interview ful for the Cummins assignment. tion, manning the job with key in -house dispensing with any formal presentation It was becoming clear to Harry, Ben individuals, and an experienced project by us, which was good, for we really did and Jack that every transit station above, manager (10 %); and performance, i.e., not prepare one. Instead, the client start- at, or below grade would serve the same the ability to meet commitments on time ed asking all kinds of questions leading basic functions: The safe, effective and and to be responsive (10 %). into a relaxed yet invigorating dialogue, convenient movement of passengers Using these standards, the NCTA covering a wide range of issues including through the station complex, to and from rated the 17 written responses as fol- the rail systems in Boston, New York, the trains. Proto - stations would be the way lows: Weese (85); Whittlesey, Conklin & Philadelphia, and Chicago, as well as the to go, adapted to each individual site. Rossant (70); Keyes, Lethbridge & Con- street car system in Washington. Harry, in Aspen for his annual family don (70); Helmuth, Obata & Kassabaum We learned much later on from John holiday with his wife and three daugh- (65); Geddes, Qualls & Cunningham Rannells that the reviewers were espe- ters, communicated over the phone every (65); John Warneke (65); Clotheil Smith cially impressed by Harry's interest in day with Ben and Jack to fashion a (65); Max Urban (65); Vincent Kling the people who would be riding the sys- convincing, systematic approach to this (55); SOM (55); Colbert (55); Dalton, tem— designing for their comfort, safety, design problem. A clear vision of the Dalton & Little (50); Gruzen (50); TAC and ease of orientation (no dark corners solution emerged. The letter closed with . (40); A.C. Martin (40); Cambridge Seven or long passageways, open attractive an indication that the firm would con- (35); and McGaughan (15). The NCTA spaces). These were some of the funda- sider it a privilege to dedicate a size- decided to interview Weese; Whittlesey, mental ideas jointly shared among those able portion of its capacity to project Conklin & Rossant; Keyes, Lethbridge present during the course of this interac- conception, design, and detailing during & Condon; John Carl Warneke; and tive brainstorming interview. the years it would take to complete. The Clotheil Smith. Today, Cody Pfanstiehl remembers clarity of this reply reflected the author's Though strongly impressed with the interview as follows: ability to use the English language to the Weese written response, the review "Harry ambled in, leaned back in his great advantage. Thanks to the diligence board looked forward to meeting with all chair, and asked us about the people who of Harry's secretary, Marilyn Levy, our of these firms to glean further evidence live here —what they were like, where response was mailed out in time on New of their relative strengths. At the time, do they want to go, what is the `human Year's Eve. none of the architects had any idea of the nature' of this region. highly organized selection process going After Harry (who was from Chicago) Short List of Five on behind the scenes at the NCTA. At left the room, our boss, Walter McCarter In Washington, the NCTA received 17 HWA, we were propelled by an intense (who was from Chicago), looked at us responses from among the 30 approached. enthusiasm for this unique design chal- and we looked at each other and we all According to John Rannells, the Weese lenge. Additionally, this was our first knew that Harry was the only choice. statement presented the only seriously response to an RFP from a United States This, in spite of the fact that some might detailed understanding of the challenge. government agency, lending another criticize us for Windy City nepotism. Several firms indicated only casual inter- layer of excitement. We were, of course, so right." est, paying little attention to the impact of The review board submitted its final the undertaking. Nat Owings, characteris- Weese Interview evaluation of the candidates to Walter tically, went directly to Walter McCarter As it so happened, I was in Wash- McCarter for approval, recommending the in person, offering SOM to do the entire ington for several days, early in Febru- selection of Harry Weese & Associates. project (planning, architecture, and engi- ary, working with Ralph Bush regarding neering) —a proposition that required design review at the FHA for his Chan- McCarter's Overview breaking the DeLeuw Cather engineering nel Square housing project. Harry called When McCarter realized a second contract. Several candidates called John asking me to extend my stay and accom- Chicago firm (the first being DeLeuw Rannells for more information, actually pany him to the interview at the NCTA Cather) had been chosen, he was con - 20 INLAND ARCHITECT 0 • Metro Center Station, r • • •ton D.C. cerned about the possible political impact • _ _ of hiring two firms from the same city for a og- _ _ . - • nationally important project. To sound out the �► .. ..• A ' possible implications, he made two key phone a ,r °' calls —one to Elizabeth Rowe who headed the 010 ... ..' ''' ...-- . _ r , r � . y �• •:,* + + a National Capital Planning Commission, and r the other to William Walton, chairman of the IRV • 1 � Commission of Fine Arts. He asked them if 1 ' they knew Harry Weese and if they thought �." they could collaborate successfully with him on this most important project. Both expressed r -........-- \ 4 1 admiration for Harry and his work, and said ` they would be delighted to work with him. '" ' Their "unofficial" approval set McCarter's I '1 f mind at ease. He was well aware that the pnn- s - f _ .. f cipal hurdles for the architectural consultant r ° would be Planning Commission reviews, and more specifically, the approval of the Com- .- ,. ,. 'WA.: ,MTNIPIIPirrantigleriMerli 1111111111111 mission of Fine Arts. As events turned out, his ins tincts were correct; ' • "•�•...a• � 111 theNCPCandtheCFA A ak a were to play crucial roles in the years ahead. i. . u ii • • . The NCTA selection process was profes- s , a. i sional and thorough, scanning the talents of a 10, C 'i wide range of the leading architectural firms in i • t' ,' i , an eight week time frame between issuing the y ! A . invitations and making the selection. On the -. ' , 15th of February, we were notified and invited ' to Washington to initiate contract negotiations. L . ;;c On March 6, 1966, Harry signed our first j 4. MID contract, designating HWA as the General t L. ' lo Architecture Consultant (GAC). Harry was now poised on the brink of the most important design opportunity of his career. After all of the years practicing as architects, we were ic..— now architectural consultants. The consider- able difference between the two became evi- ■Judiciary S• ' e Q • Q dent over the ensuing 32 years under contract. Metro Station _ An old Washington friend, experienced in ir: - the ways of the town, told me early on that 4 whatever fine talents a consultant may have, � Woodley Park Metro Stati s ngton O.C he should appear to be "threadbare but clean." Good advice! , -- - `'- -._� In early March, we quickly opened i a Washington office, as required, so that 4 ` . _ we could be in close proximity with our client, to begin to coordinate our work with 1111.11?1.111111.116 ,, `— -- `N - them and with Jim Caywood, Ken Knight, O'Neil, and their large staff at DeLeuw "" --'�6 Bo j '' �� _ - ;� • Cather (the General Engineering Consultant), / /7 - I > ��o-ti with the NCPC, CFA, National Park Service, ' -�, ' Federal Aviation Authority, and many more r organizations throughout the metropolitan _ _ - � region. Most importantly, we were now able to f l r . begin to develop a "hands on" familiarity with the alignment and profile and station locations l � \., 1 of the rail system. ,,, InlandArchitectUSA.com 21 i 40 plip,10 1111111111111.." c At the end of March, Harry, Bob Reynolds and I took off for a 42 -day ` - �' N, examination of the rail systems at Lisbon, , —T\ i N. Madrid, Barcelona, Rome, Milan, Vien- na, Frankfurt, Berlin, Hamburg, London, - t M Paris, Oslo, Stockholm, Leningrad, Mos- ,- ' �" cow, and Tokyo. This trip transformed ' the three of us from rail transit neo- ' " - 1 - phytes into three of the most informed architects in the country, with a wealth - iE li / _ _ . . . of information and sharp viewpoints on .. transit design. Brimming over with fresh _� impressions, we had to select from them - MP - 4 such characteristics suitable for Wash- • - ' ington. The pivotal task assigned to us _ '-, ' "' Plaster model of proto- station configuration was to recommend a design concept for the stations.` - Concept Charrette* The charrette finally began on July 2nd, in the seclusion of the studio at o �, = +,�'~ 6 0 "T'-•""". 'c Harry's country seat in Barrington. It ` 4 ' ` � - , 1 1 � -- . con non -stop through the 3rd and --- - — n . - , _ j. � 4th. The weather was fair, not hot, con- ` i - _ ducive to uninterrupted concentration... - �r ideas and drawings flowed together spon- ; sk.� taneously. Having had four months to formulate the design in his mind, without • hesitating, Harry drew 19 pen and magic - markered drawings, illustrating s, illustratin a vaulted , station configuration and the supporting "elements of continuity" to round out th t : 1 `, , ,. + " ' i � V. ' design parameters. No erasures or Chang- ti= * r �" es belied any doubts. The designs reflect- hk ".1 f�1 ' I �E ed a pristine, fresh originality. Harry ������� 1 I'�. kEtIL finished the written concept statement ' which likewise expressed a free flow of )"P design ideas matching the drawings. The .. . work in this 4th of July weekend concen- '"` trated all of our accumulated insights. ig4, CC ESS Harry, Bob, and I flew to Washington AI early on the 6th for the two o'clock pre- I Sketch of proto station configuration 7/6/66 sentation which lasted about two hours. Those present were Walter McCarter; Warren Quenstedt; Architect John Ran- from our worldwide exposure to other already embarked on their own particular nells; Chief Engineer Howard Lyon and systems, while seeking a solution unique- mission. his deputy, Vern Garrett; Chief Planner ly reflecting the influences of Washington When the presentation was over, we William Herman; and the community as our nation's capital city. felt a great sense of accomplishment, relations chief, Cody Pfanstiehl. The presentation was well received by having finally delivered the fourth and The content and nature of our con - all present. John Rannells was particu- most important requirement of our first cept represented the culmination of four larly gratified to finally have a working contract on schedule, so to speak. We months of intensive work in this new document of architectural design prin- knew its content and substance repre- field of transportation architecture. Using ciples to use for establishing parity with sented our very best effort. our creative efforts to focus on the spe- his NCTA engineering colleagues; and cifics of the Washington transit program, through them, capture the attention of Commission of Fi ne Arts we were mindful of inspiration gained the GEC engineering staff which had Approval of this concept by the Com- 22 INLAND ARCHITECT I. systema a .__ M s z � ��� , . _ - _ - ,., - . , - 04 , • ^ -'' 1 2 — ..- An NO000000 7. '. sue_ iii b IIII C1 � It 4 _ • - - v e, Ill - 0 — 0 rni (::: ,‘?. —A ' i p IL Lk ... - 1 Metro System Maps, Washington Terman Engineering Building, Stanford University mission of Fine Arts came about after Concept Approval Dan Kiley's trees, now grown to matu- four presentations to them. We encoun- rity, give the buildings on the site that tered the Commission at the peak of On November 17, 1967, the WMATA softening dimension. The buildings have its power (coming out of the Kennedy Board of Directors approved our station been well- maintained in near mint con - era) during President Johnson's "guns design concept. They further authorized a contract extension for HWA's continuing r o o m , . The student union, library, class - and butter" years. It ruled by the respect room, and theatre buildings are models held services. This contract has been renewed eld for the sheer power of its articu of how well buildings can be designed. late judgements. Seldom challenged, its based upon merit and performance each Really virtuoso performances of struc- recommendations were beyond appeal. year since, and still is in force in 1999. turallarchitectural spatial configurations, Harry went through with three grueling The dedicated staff members of the superb natural lighting, well- appointed presentations to the Commission —each NCTA and the WMATA have been guided materials, and the brick cladding is beau - over the last forty years by the steadfast one rejected. Finally, from out of the tifully detailed —Ben Weese, Jack Har- cauldron of turmoil, regardless of con- leadership of their Board of Directors. tray, Howard Pedersen, Kiley, and Harry flitting points of view among our clients We were blessed by being able to work collaborating. What a combination of (the GEC and others), Harry realized that for and with a truly great client. Together, talent! I came back from St. Louis after for the purposes at hand, the Commission they have magnificently executed con- accepting the 25 -year award for the firm alone, and superseding all others, became trol of the planning, design, financing, and declared to them, "I didn't know the our client for concept approval. construction, and operation of this major firm was that good!" For the fourth presentation, our draw- public works project. They have brought Additional commissions for academic ings showed the solution Harry had con- it to fruition, serving over two billion buildings at Reed College, Drake Uni- patrons on the rail system so far! ceived a year earlier, dramatically dis- versity, U. of Chicago, U. of Illinois, played by a plaster model of the coffered, In retrospect, the volume of Metro Carlton College, Williams College, U. of vaulted station trainroom. work in Washington, and the subsequent Rochester, U. of Massachusetts, Cornell work at Miami, Dallas, Los Angeles, At this fourth meeting, Commission College, U. of Colorado, and Stanford Chairman William Walton spoke, saying, Buffalo, New York, Chicago, Philadel- came along over a twenty-year period. "Well, gentlemen, we are happy with phia, Toronto, and Singapore, never the progress which seems to have been seemed overwhelming. However during O verseas Projects made," calling it "a magnificent new the same long time frame many build- o Tok approach." It was a crucial turnabout, ings were designed for clients all across Y saving the day for all concerned. the country and overseas. The next time you are in Tokyo, by all means, go see Harry's residential com- The jubilant commission members, Forest Park plex for 173 U.S. Embassy families — now approving of the "big design idea" Community College built upon a 12 -acre promontory...just a before them, were eager to now talk One of the most interesting examples 15- minute walk from the Ambassador's about details! of Harry and a project team at their best residence, with three 14 -story towers is the Forest Park Community College in plus townhouses, garden apartments, and St. Louis. parking out of sight. The buildings are InlandArchitectUSA.com 23 IC ® - -_ ' i , i, / __1 -._ - -1 > / u clad with white stucco panels separated morning (8 -9) with Harry and the entire ' it X 4 ' by relatively flexible neoprene joints to staff working together. prevent the plaster form cracking due to it L I t • stresses from earthquake tremors. Harry Si ngapore r wa realized Japanese domestic architecture Again, an assignment to develop cri- i 1 ~ ` ~ ' � .....„ 6 I. i / 01 had utilized stucco fmishes for dwellings teria and guidelines for the design of rail t ''� , for centuries. The use of it for these resi- stations for this extensive system. Also, a `! _ - _ I!` I 1 Z dences was a must. proposal of a design for a new Embassy f' � - -- _ 1 / .1114111 IN a At Two large Japanese gardens were laid compound, responding to the wave of ' - i out by us, to be located between the "hardening" of our overseas installation. �1 IPP towers. By a stroke of good fortune, an Never built. III � _ r 80 -year old Japanese landscape design By all means, stay at the Raffles Hotel. ii •. •. 0 � genius, Mr. Matsumoto, personally locat- a night or two. The firm had a governing ! • - :I ed each waterfall and the ponds, posi- hand in the historic restoration of this world 1 11 tioned the stone bridges, garden stones famous source of "Singapore Slings" U d .� ' • IC' -, t . 1 f } I and trees and shrubs saved from the Bombay 1 !: � original site. The ponds are home for t t Early on, the design and construction of ► _ �1 a goodly number of handsome Japa- p' .: I Ili housing came about for employees of Air t «' ■ {" + nese carp which Vince Ziolkowski and I �, q • A placed there in 1983. Resident ducks now India. Interesting ways of combining, yet — - -. , enjoy the ponds. separating, living quarters for the different castes was a requirement adroitly handled. During the initial development of the .,; project, our client at FBO, William Slay- Riyadh International Airport r e 4 ton, and the administrative staff at the Community Facilities - Embassy stressed the need to provide The opportunity to design a "city" - ''. ,. individuality of floor plans /views /orien- from scratch arose when Bechtel, who tation. The task called for assembling a _ -- ' were the engineers, asked HWA to design • dignified composition befitting the stat- facilities for the families of employees • 1 • 1• - J. ure of the United States Government on " who worked at the airport, plus those 1 - . ' this , prominent site in Tokyo. ' P k}' f or security and army personnel. A � �, *1`• Look at the aerial hoto a h here- - _ _ .. p gT p derful opportunity— housing, schools, 1- p in to realize the result. A well - defined [ ' 4 �- `► mosques, shopping, medical, health, and , program resulted in a strong solution, recreational facilities. All in all, a com- - - . - ` responsive to their aspirations. We were munity for 10,000 initially, expanded ' fortunate. A powerful client, excellent later to 20,000 (designed and built 1973- .40 '. r•-0► local engineering consultants, a first class 1977). Harry, Ben Weese, Paul Hansen, � ! : contractor— Obayashi -Gumi, apprecia- Dave Munson, and a host of others tive embassy personnel and immaculate worked on the project. �_ 4 r = r maintenance! In 1985, a competition arose in Ara- -:_ - / i We spent a great deal of time in Tokyo, bia, wherein Harry threw himself into a -' - during the site planning and prelimi- long, intense weekend charrette design- r �* , - s nary building design period, at meetings ing three mosques for Mecca, Jedda, and ,r �' . • go with our engineers —P.T. Morimura and Medina. Absolutely marvelous, sponta- ;• r�, ,, ' ' Kimura Engineers; with them we coor- neous perspective sketches and plans —a r /- ' dinated the design development with the virtuoso performance —alas, to no avail. • ,y Y municipal g o munici al overnment "Guidance Soon thereafter, Harry and Bob Bell, Tokyo " A f� 1 �� Committee." This committee's approval responding to another competition oppor- _ ;. • • i was required in order to obtain a building tunity, designed a bank for a block -sized `° f "'t z permit. Its surveilla included strict site at Jedda, overlooking the Red Sea. ,, r` l ' •, adherence to the "sunshine shadow" re The program called for separate banking f f ' ulations...thou shalt not cast a shadow halls for men and women and a small • J upon thy neighbor's property during the • - - • winter solstice. + During the entire length of the design ~ e • 410 °Sellb development phase in Chicago, we held U.S. Embassy Housing, Tokyo :` • I what I called "design calisthenics" every exterior and aerial views ( sa.�_ , ' k 24 INLAND ARCHITECT r .. t . I ' o 0 parking garage. Our design enclosed the structural solution), were handed over to ...Gene Street drew about a thousand site on three sides leaving the fourth open the team to be deciphered and fleshed 20x30 color renderings for our transit to the sea. Three one -story buildings out. system presentations over a period of were clad in cool pink granite. The ulti- Every evening, the staff pinned all fifteen years. All of this in the long span mate in luxurious appointments! drawings around the walls of the office. of Harry's practice. Work and responsi- A scale model and renderings were He always arrived at about 6 a.m. to red bilities for everyone. Hummm...you get prepared. Harry was too preoccupied to line changes and show additions and/or the picture. go to Jedda for the presentation. Since I new ideas to be developed that day. On was about to fly to Singapore for meet- and on until the project was done and Firm of the Year Award ings with our client, he asked me to stop ready to bid. Sometimes, not often, he Of the sixty design awards HWA at Jedda on the way and do the honors. would abandon schemes well along to received over the years, the coveted AIA The client response to the five presenta- veer off toward a new design —which did Firm of the Year Award in 1978 was tions was so positive that we were asked tighten up the deadlines! the most prestigious. Its mantle rested to present again a week later to senior It all worked because he controlled proudly and rightfully upon the shoul- Arabian officials at Geneva. So it was the process in a positive, energetic, but ders of everyone in the firm. We indeed done. No decision was made then, or congenial manner. His charismatic nature had a group practice, with Harry leading later, as far as we know. flowed into his sketches —a kind of raw the way. There was a high state of cama- To see the drawings of Harry's Islamic talent, alive with ideas. He was endlessly raderie. We had momentum, never a dull architecture, you will find them amongst restless; always shifting ahead to a new moment - - -all driven by Harry's surging, his other drawings in the archives at the idea for a new client; and leaving a huge restless, inventive, surprising, daring, Chicago Historical Society. amount of the work to be done by oth- mercurial, witty, charismatic leadership. ers— coordinated with the engineers, etc. In 45 years, the firm completed over 300 Vietnam Memorial Competition Of these 100 or so, there were prob- commissions of almost every building To go back to Washington, Harry ably 35 -40 really talented design devel- type except hospitals. Probably an equal arrived at the start of the first day of opment architects, project managers, and number of unbuilt designs, competitions, the jury deliberations. He first looked job captains. etc. were produced. at all of the over 1400 entries very There was always creative work for About eight hundred individuals quickly... Maya Lin's rather unprepos- the whole team which produced a uni- worked for Harry over the years...three sensing design drawing caught his eye. fied sense of sharing. You know...Harry hundred in the Washington office alone, He fetched it over to include it with meeting alone with the CEO to lay out where John Corley has held the fort for the the entries under consideration. He the program...charrettes for conceptual last fifteen years...all 800 names enshrined thoroughly explained its virtues to the presentations...program development forever in the firm's recent publication other jurors —the splayed arms reaching and refinement...code analysis and zon- containing a record of the works since the toward Lincoln and Washington, bearing ing...site planning and underground beginning...a roll call of champions! the names of those who did not return utilities... building layouts...landscaping from battle —an open grave of warriors, Coming i n of Age P g ideas... structural, mechanical, electri- g g embedded in the heart of our nation's cal, and special systems to be analyzed Beginning in 1976, continuing and capital. Yes, everyone finally agreed. and coordinated with architectural plans, essentially ending in 1983, many of the Typical of his instinctive, compassionate sections, and elevations...be careful, no architects in this group practice left to insight and understanding was his capac- stray currents !...design /changes /modifi- open their own offices. Unable to become ity to immediately recognize the superior cations...revising drawings...charrettes one of Harry's partners, for he chose to idea in Lin's primitive entry drawing. for meetings with clients' staff mem- reign alone, they left. Now experienced, bers...materials selection/specifications... registered, full of self - confidence and A Group Practice cost estimates... construction details... bolstered by the rewards of the firm's How could so much work, at such a bid documents...a final charrette, you profit- sharing program, they left. Harry high level of excellence, be done? By the hope...hundreds of meetings and minutes encouraged this maturation process. end of the 70s, Harry had assembled a of meetings...the bidding process...shop Even as the pace of work slackened, staff of over 100 architects at the Chica- drawing reviews ...full -time resident Harry's energetic concentration contin- go office. His technique, or methodology, clerk -of -the -works ...change orders... ued. Often, without a specific client, he was clear. We never had an organization punch lists...final acceptance...guar - would design a hotel or an office building chart (never needed one). Harry, a proj- antees...and later on, hopefully, design or an apartment house sited on any num- ect manager, and a design development awards, of course! ber of the choice remaining vacant Tots in staff tackled every job together. Harry's The old- fashioned practice of archi- and around the Loop. At 333 Wacker, he initial sketches, transmitting about 25% tecture...hand drawn sketches, details, attacked the KPF curved riverside tower, of the design direction (sometimes just bid documents, wonderful handmade removing the lower masonry -clad floors squiggles, but always featuring a specific models, inimitable perspectives by Harry so that one could see through the base of InlandArchitectUSA.com 25 . i} ,.. . AN f • : ` •. a o. . 1, h r • - 1 - i i ' , . .... t. - Union Underwear, Bowling Green, Kentucky the building to the river. This lightened went—Rome, the Cyclades, Aspen, at that post as a platform from which to pro - the effect of the building mass at that home or in the office, you name the mote his ideas. bend in the Loop, and strengthened the place, and during his lifetime he filled A sustained series of Monday morning bold glassy impact of the superstructure. over a hundred pocket -sized notebooks discussion meetings at HWA with the yet - Surely an improvement. with sketches, ideas, poems, diagrams of to -be- elected Jane Byrne, Vicky Ranney, As an example of his energetic drive, details, doodles, etc. recorded for refer- Nancy Stevenson, Mike Powills, Jerry he went to a meeting at Bowling Green, ence or whatever. His book of alphabeti- Butler, Joe Fitzgerald, Ira Bach, Jack Kentucky to develop the initial program cal drawings entitled Crazy Critters to Hartray, and others covered a whole host for a corporate headquarters for Union Color remains a collector's treasure. of ideas for the betterment of the city. Underwear. Upon returning to the office The June '68 Esquire cover boldly on Friday afternoon, he worked almost In Architect stated...Harry Weese should have his way non -stop through Sunday night. On a 30- You will find Harry's ideas and aspi- with Chicago. Why not ?! foot roll of 18 -inch tracing paper, he drew rations for the city of Chicago, for its He was a relentless crusader. His moral the design for the entire building —site people, expounded in Inland Architect. consciousness, sensitivity, and homespun plan, landscaping, floor plans, elevations, He assumed responsibility as the pub- ingenuity were all an extension of the details, structure, materials, perspectives, lisher for many years. He guided the virtues extolled by the idealism of Emer- and even a logo; the way the 65,000 cultural content of the magazine, which son, Thoreau, Sandburg, Sullivan, and square foot, one -story high bay office bristled with informed commentary by Burnham. Free of traditional European building was built, of course...period! him and a host of articulate contributors. orthodoxy, his teacher Alvar Aalto was Later, this finished building attracted He strengthened and reinvigorated the his god... Eero Saarinen was a men- the attention of a passing motorist, causing promise of the original mission of the tor...Charles Eames was greatly admired, him to double back down the highway. He magazine —to stimulate the thinking of as were I.M. Pei., Mies, and Edward went in to find out who was the architect. Midwest architects and thrust forward Barnes. His associations with the first From this intuitive grasp, Len Zaiser told a wide variety of ideas to be examined. three stemmed from their pre -war days Harry that he wanted a house to look just There wasn't an issue of importance about together at MIT, Yale, and Cranbrook. All like it. So, by Admiralty Bay in Naples, the city, or its people, or each mayor, that lifetime kindred spirits. Florida, on a double lot, Harry designed escaped his constructive wrath or enthusi- The words and works of Harry's lega- a truly elegant and spacious two -story astic support. The lakefront, his Navy Pier cy endure. For many, they will be discov- dwelling for him and his bride...with a Floating Marina, which Mayor Washing- ered for the first time. For some, they will swimming pool by the veranda, shaded by ton endorsed...the proposed 1992 World's be rediscovered. • an open section of the mansard roof —a Fair, which he supported vigorously, are path through the garden leading to the examples. Saving the Loop El, the Cross- Photos provided by: boat dock for the Zaiser ocean-going town Expressway, and his scheme for the Weese and Associates, yacht. Harry's original design sketches international airlines terminal at O'Hare Balthazar Korab Ltd, from 1983 were built in 1986. are others. In addition, while president of Hedrich Blessing, Harry loved to draw wherever he the Chicago Chapter of the AIA, he used WMATA. 26 INLAND ARCHITECT DMK articles Page 1 of 3 Donald Maurice Kreis articles about DM _. hat atone MS Cara back to table of contents How to Get that Big Commission The Secret is Buried in this Article -or- Why I'm Just Wild About Harry Donald Maurice Kreis Now that architecture is blessedly post -post- modernism, and it is possible to look with affection and even respect on the major public }° designs of the 1960s, one might well ask: What - major American architectural project of that era, through which millions of people pass each year, is still as fresh and functional is it was on the day its creator first presented the design's _ initial drawings? New Englanders might think of I.M. Pei, or Paul Rudolph, or maybe even Benjamin Thompson and his now- ubiquitous festival marketplaces. But for unsung architectural heroes of the 1960s, you can't beat Harry Weese FAI It was Weese, in 1967, who dreamed up the enduring and distinctive design cony for the Washington, D.C. metro system, with its vaulted, column -less spaces of cc concrete, its richly textured walls awash in reflected light. In its grandeur, reflectii abiding love of the subway- commuting masses, the system has no equal outside r Moscow, whose metro obviously influenced Weese's design choices. Weese was certainly a New England architect, in the sense that no one who receiN bachelor's in architecture from MIT, with a year spent at Yale, could not have bees steeped in the region's design traditions. But Weese's name seems to have faded kind of obscurity here, if not everywhere - because he had the misfortune of hailir from and practicing in Chicago. Although no American city outranks Chicago in importance to the history of the nE architecture, the Windy City was something of a curse to Weese, who died in 1991 the age of 83. While many American architects came to Chicago and found the pn to be liberating, as a native Weese was painfully aware of Daniel Burnham's legac http:// www. dmkdmk .com/articles/harryweese.html 4/5/2007 DMK articles ^- Page 2 of 3 was Burnham, who warned against making "small plans" because they "have no r to stir men's souls, "and followed his own advice. Weese ended his career disappoi that he did not earn recognition as the successor to Burnham's mantle as great bt of a mighty American metropolis. He deserved such recognition - or at least very nearly so. That a 27 -story building Weese designed in Chicago has become something of an on that city's skyline is no great surprise, until one ponders the fact that the proje actually a prison. The Metropolitan Correctional Center, completed in 1975, has a triangular plan and a distinctive concrete facade with a syncopated array of (understandably) narrow windows. The Oak Park Village Hall, completed in Oak Park, Illinois in 1974, is a similarly invigorating addition to the public realm. Most of the building is a square, cloister - structure with offices arrayed around a courtyard - but one quadrant has been orr in favor of a sharply triangular, plan- busting module that contains the village's col chamber. An earlier project, the First Baptist Church completed in 1965, is one of several pr Weese designed in the American architectural Mecca known as Columbus, Indiana a rare example of a church design from that era which does not seem, 30 or 40 yi later, to have forgotten that the beautiful does indeed connote the spiritual. The t tall, triangular sanctuary spaces that comprise the major elements of this design I simple, modern lines, but still look richly satisfying against the sky. The unifying theme, and the accomplishment that makes Weese worthy of study 1 is the ability to achieve architectural success in the public realm. At his best, Wee. knew how to design beautifully as well as how to convince committees and bean - counters to invest in those designs, which look lavish by today's denuded notions what passes for building in the public and nonprofit sectors. One must also confess that Weese had a mixed record, with some major projects no longer look like great successes. The Sawyer Library, completed for Williams C in 1975, has a warehouse -like ambiance - and, alas, it is not just the books that a being warehoused. The library was designed with a series of warren -like study cat arrayed in a kind of sawtooth pattern, that must have seemed innovative at the ti but today seem uniquely calculated to induce claustrophobia. The building Weese designed for the Law School at SUNY Buffalo similarly seems preoccupied with gel the job done as cheaply as possible at the expense of creating spaces that inspire least empower their occupants. Architects who sense a resonance with the practitioners of a generation ago, but t are already well versed in the great works of familiar names northeastern names Kahn or Breuer or Barnes, would do well to head for the nearest art library and ch out the two published monographs of Weese's work. One is Harry Weese Houses, the architect's wife, Kitty Baldwin Weese. The other, which is a thorough survey o winners and losers among Weese's commissions, is Issue No. 11 of the journal Pr Architecture, entitled Harry Weese: Humanism and Tradition. If you do not sense such a resonance, but you have read this far into a tribute to http:// www. dmkdmk .com/articles/harryweese.html 4/5/2007 DMK articles Page 3 of 3 dead architect, you deserve to learn Weese's secret when it comes to landing a ht public commission like the Washington Metro. "It was the letter we wrote," Weese the oral history project of the Art Institute of Chicago in 1988, confessing that he actually delegated the task to a well- spoken associate in his firm. "It was beautifu written. We showed that we were more enthusiastic than anybody else for the Me No other firms gave it more than perfunctory attention. So our letter was longer a better and the English was better." Weese himself was quite articulate, and prescient about trends in the profession. live in the age of the consumer and he is rich and uncertain," Weese wrote long a before the era of gender - neutral language. "And with his accelerating estrangeme from nature in industrialized society, artificial substitutes for natural processes, ar foregoing of tradition produces cultism, superstition enters the vacuum of angst, < decadence naturally follows. It is being reflected in our architecture." back to top http:// www. dmkdmk .com/articles/harryweese.html 4/5/2007 Page l of l Amy Guthrie From: Amy Guthrie [amyanddavidguthrie @msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2007 10:17 PM To: Amy Guthrie (Fuller b. July 12 1893; d. July 1, 1983) Buckminster Fuller invented the geodesic dome, and a wide range of other paradigm- shifting machines and structural systems. He was especially interested in high - strength-to- weight designs, with a maximum of utility for minimum of material. His designs and engineering philosophy are part of the foundation of contemporary high -tech design aesthetics. 4/5/2007 Harry Weese - Wikipedia, the 'e encyclopedia 1 Page 1 of 2 Harry Weese From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Harry Mohr Weese (June 30, 1915 - October 29, 1998) was an American architect, who was born in Evanston, Illinois [I I in the Chicago suburbs who had an important role in 20th Century modernism and historic preservation. His brother, Ben Weese, was also a renowned architect. Harry Weese studied under Finnish architect, Alvar Aalto at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, graduating in 1938, and went on to study city planning while on a fellowship at the Cranbrook Academy of Art in Michigan. Weese was also influenced by Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen, whom he met at Cranbrook. He built primarily in the modern architectural style, but integrated other styles as he felt appropriate for the project. Out of Cranbrook, Weese joined the major architectural and engineering firm, Skidmore, Owings and Merrill. During World War II, Weese served as an engineer on a U.S. Navy destroyer. In 1947, he started his own architectural firm. Weese is also well known for his firm advocacy of historic preservation and was remembered as the architect who "shaped Chicago's skyline and the way the city thought about everything from the lakefront to its treasure -trove of historical buildings." 121 Weese also served as a judge for the Vietnam Veterans Memorial design competition. Works Harry Weese is most famous for having designed the stations of the Washington Metro system, considered one of ri~'` ,;.. the best examples of the brutalise style of architecture.. "- ht "$ y 14 x <k Other well known works include: }w i • The United States Embassy Building in Accra, Ghana. • Arena Stage, Washington, D.C. • Time -Life Building, Chicago, Illinois [21 • First Baptist Church, in Columbus, Indiana • Seventeenth Church of Christ, Scientist in Chicago, Washington Metro station Illinois • The Humanities Building at the University of Wisconsin- Madison, widely considered one the Midwest's best examples of brutalist architecture but slated for demolition soon • The Chazen Museum of Art at the University of Wisconsin- Madison, formerly known as the Elvehjem Museum of Art • The Washington, DC Metro System. • The former U.S. Embassy to Ghana in Accra. • River Cottages at 357 -365 N. Canal Street in Chicago. Sloped, structurally expressive facade responds to the angle and cross bracing of the railroad bridge directly across the river. • William J. Campbell United States Courthouse annex in downtown Chicago. Brutalistic jail which has no window bars, instead each cell is provided with a vertical slot window. These tall narrow window openings work with the triangular footprint of the building, making the building reminiscent of a slender I.B.M computer card from the 1950's and 60's. http: / /en .wikipedia.org /wiki/Harry_Weese 4/5/2007 Harry Weese - Wikipedia, the fr' Page 2 of 2 Weese also led numerous restoration projects including: • Louis Sullivan's Auditorium Building in Chicago, Illinois 1967. [21 • Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois [11 • Orchestra Hall, Chicago, Illinois 1I I • Union Station, Washington, DC lt1 References ^ a b e d Muschamp, Herbert. "Harry Weese, 83, Designer of Metro System in Washington ", The New York Times, 1998, November 3. 2. A a b C ',Harry Weese, Visionary Architect Known as 'Chicago's Conscience ', Chicago Tribune, 1998, November 1. External links • Oral history interview with Harry Weese (http: / /www.artic.edu/aic /libraries /caohp /weeseh.html) Retrieved from " http:// en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Weese" Categories: 1915 births 1 1998 deaths 1 American architects 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology alumni 1 People from Chicago • This page was last modified 04:28, 21 March 2007. • All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.) Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a US- registered 501(c)(3) tax - deductible nonprofit charity. http : / /en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Harry Weese 4/5/2007 ............... . NPS Form 10 -900 USDIMPS NRHP Registration Fonn (Rev. 8 -86) OMB No. 1024 -0018 FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH Page 8 United States Department of the Intenor, National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form State Significance of Property, and Justify Criteria, Criteria Considerations, and Areas and Periods of Significance Noted Above. First Baptist Church, completed in 1965, is nationally significant under Criterion 4 in the area of Architecture. Though the property is less than 50 years old, it qualifies for listing under Criteria Exception 8 for its exceptional importance. The building relates to the Multiple Property Listing, "Modernism in Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Design, and Art in Bartholomew County, 1942- 1999," and to the Historic Context, "Modern Architecture and Landscape Architecture in Bartholomew County, 1942- 1999." It is an outstanding representation of the work of distinguished American architect, Harry Mohr Weese (1915- 1998), and generally thought to be his best work in Columbus, where he was the most prolific contributor to the body of Modern architecture that made the city famous. The First Baptist Church was one of Columbus' early congregations. In the mid- 1950s, the church building was located in a late nineteenth century Gothic Revival style building on Franklin Street. The church was experiencing the same problem of many local institutions at the time, that of rapid population growth. Though the membership was increasing, the church had no room for expansion on its small downtown site. In 1956, land for a new church at Midway and 20th streets was purchased. The next few years were spent raising construction funds. In 1962, the congregation hired Harry Weese and Associates to plan its new building. By that time, Weese was familiar to Columbus residents. He had designed Columbus Village (1951), the Boys and Girls Club (1954; demolished 1998), Lillian Schmitt Elementary School (1957), branches for Irwin Union Bank (1958 and 1961), Lincoln Center ice arena (1958), the Bartholomew County Home (1959), Northside Junior High School (1961), offices for Hamilton Cosco (1962), and several projects for Cummins Engine Company. Soon after Weese was engaged, the congregation decided to sell the Midway property and purchase a different site on the northeast edge of the city. The first site had been located close to the city's hospital on a flat site in a residential area. The new, larger site was located on Fairlawn Drive, adjacent to Rocky Ford Park and a proposed elementary school. The seven -acre, irregularly shaped site was distinctive because of a knoll at its northeast corner. Weese may have seen possibilities for the Fairlawn site and convinced the congregation to buy it. In an Inland Architect article, architectural critic Nory Miller identified three significant church buildings in Columbus: First Christian (1942), North Christian Church (1964), and First Baptist Church. She called Weese's design "eclectic innovation" and compared it to a medieval monastery, with its angular sanctuary and chapel, office wing that resembled monk's cells, and cloister -like courtyard. Weese justified his references to the past, which broke with prevailing Modernistic thought: "We feel the whole gamut of architecture is our preserve, and we are not afraid to use forms that are outdated if they have any function. Faced with the choice, I would rather be right than contemporary. "' The following statement, released by Harry Weese's offide at the time First Baptist Church was completed, explains the architect's simple reasoning for the building: Nory Miller. "Exploring the Fundamentals in Fundamentalist Columbus, Ind." Inland Architect (December 1972). OrN NPS Form 10 -900 USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8 -86) OMB No. 1024 -0018 FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH Page 9 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form The First Baptist Church is located on a hill in the northeastern part of Columbus. It is basically a two story building which utilizes the natural topography so that the principle entrance is at the upper floor. The narthex, a chapel seating 100 persons, a community room with kitchen facilities, the pastor's office and administrative space are located at the level of this entrance with the main sanctuary seating 500 a few feet higher. These elements are grouped around a central court which, in good weather, is utilized for religious services. The lower floor of the building consists entirely of Sunday School rooms plus a small heating plant. This Sunday School floor, which is never more than two feet below the surrounding grade, also has direct access to the central court. This two story scheme grew out of an effort to take advantage of as much height as possible in a generally flat countryside and to emphasize the chapel and sanctuary which otherwise might have been dwarfed by the large Sunday School requirements of the congregation. There were, of course, also economic advantages to building a more compact structure. The structural system is basically brick bearing walls with concrete floors and a heavy timber roof. The building is naturally ventilated, but was designed to accommodate the future installation of air conditioning.' Writing about the building in his 1989 book on Columbus architecture, architect and architectural photographer Balzathar Korab (1926 -) opined that Weese was ahead of his time in integrating the principles of Modernism with elements of historical and vernacular architecture. Korab wrote in the book (as if addressing Weese), "As for historic allusions, nobody has built a more Romanesque church than your First Baptist Church since H.H. Richardson." Weese received his Bachelor of Architecture from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1938. After graduation, he received a fellowship to study city planning and architecture at Cranbrook Academy of Art. After a brief period of working for Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill in Chicago, he opened his own firm, Harry Weese and Associates in 1947. Weese was relatively unknown when he was hired around 1950 to design Columbus Village in the small city of Columbus, Indiana. As the city's fame surrounding its Modern architecture grew, so did Weese's. Weese has had the largest number of commissions in Columbus of any nationally known architect (at least 18 built projects). In addition to those mentioned above, notable Weese buildings in Columbus are Otter Creek Clubhouse (1964); Cummins Engine Company Technical Center (1968), and several private residences. Architectural critic Paul Gapp, who wrote about Columbus for the Chicago Tribune in 1976, called First Baptist Church the best of the Weese buildings in Columbus. In a 1979 interview with Robert Cross of the Chicago Tribune, Weese discussed how his work in Columbus helped his practice in the early years: "Our firm was young, and we were competing against some very big stuff here in Chicago. So for the first 10 years I was very involved in 2 Harry Weese & Associates. "The First Baptist Church, Columbus, Indiana." (Architect's statement, c.1965). 3 Balthazar Korab. Columbus Indiana. Documen Press, 1989. 4 Paul Gapp. "Discovering Columbus." Chicago Tribune Magazine (22 August 1976). ..r NPS Forth 10 -900 USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8 -86) OMB No. 1024 -0018 FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH Page 10 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Fonn Columbus, Ind., and Irwin Miller was my mentor."' (J. Irwin Miller was CEO of Cummins Engine Company and founded the Cummins Engine Foundation architectural program.) Though much of Weese's early work was in Columbus, he was the architect for many high - profile commissions in other places. He designed the U.S. Embassy in Accra, Ghana (1958), and thus became a member the elite group of architects chosen by the U.S. State Department for such projects. On a national level, Weese was probably best known for his design of the Washington, D.C. Metro system in the 1970s, called by the New York Times, "among the greatest public works of this century." Weese received many honors and accolades during his half - century career. He was elected to the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Architects in 1961. In the January 1966 issue of Architectural Forum, he was named one of the country's 14 leading architects.' In 1977 he received the Gold Medal of the Tau Sigma Delta Honor Society in Architecture and the Allied Arts. Harry Weese and Associates was named Firm of the Year in 1978 by the American Institute of Architects. Among other numerous awards received by the firm were: • AIA National Honor Award for Buckingham Fountain • President's Historic Preservation Award for Union Station in Washington, D.C. • 25 Year Award for the Seventeenth Church of Christ Scientist, Chicago Chapter, American Institute of Architects Weese loved his hometown and was a major figure in Chicago architecture and planning. Some of his important commissions there were the Metropolitan Correction Center and Federal Courthouse Annex (1975), the Time -Life Building, and the Seventeenth Church of Christ Scientist. Weese's firm grew to be one of Chicago's largest and most respected. Upon his death, the Chicago Tribune called Weese "the renowned architect who shaped Chicago's skyline and the way the city thought about everything from the lakefront to its treasure -trove of historical buildings. "' Weese's buildings were admired by many as pragmatic solutions to human problems. Korab wrote, "Harry's buildings never beat their chests or stood on their hands in an effort to dazzle. They simply answered the needs of body and soul.' J. Irwin Miller said after Weese's death in 1998, "Anything Harry did was sympathetic to human beings. If he built a house it was a good place to live. If he built a factory, it was a nice place to work."' In Columbus, as in Indiana in general, churches were historically built in town centers in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Few new religious buildings were constructed between about 1920 and 1960 in the city, partly because of slow population growth in the 1920s and 30s, and partly because of economic reasons. In the post -World War II era, congregations grew rapidly, and churches were challenged to expand existing structures or build new ones. The new churches were built on the outskirts of the city on larger tracts of land, for, in addition to larger Robert Cross. "Rest Assured Harry Weese is Keeping Chicago." Chicago Tribune (20 May 1979). 6 Architectural Forum. January 1966. 9 "Harry Weese, Visionary Architect Known as `Chicago's Conscience. "' Chicago Tribune (1 November 1998). Balthazar Korab. Columbus Indiana. Documen Press, 1989. 9 "Weese left imprint on Columbus." The Republic (1 November 1998). The Given Institute" — 100 E. Francis St. CD 73 Aspen, Colorado 81611 0 E w ce oa 0 '0 j 13 . < 1 NV` — dif • Y ` 0. • 2 z W 0 University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center Program Narrative Given Institute The Given Institute has a viable mission serving the University of Colorado as an important off campus seminar and retreat site for a variety of programs with special emphasis on programs associated with the School of Medicine. The property is also scheduled for non University events for revenue enhancement and to support the community. The Given Institute needs to be a year round facility available as a retreat and seminar site whenever the University has a need for it and to be financially self sustaining. There are numerous facility shortcomings, and a facility renovation and new construction need to achieve the following: ADA compliance including elevator access to all functional levels, meeting rooms, and restroom facilities Auditorium updating of seating and technology Additional breakout meeting rooms Adequate restroom facilities A new 200 seat dining room Adequately sized and equipped caterer's kitchen IACC certification that includes climate controlled meeting space Fire detection and suppression system Improved delivery access and secured trash storage Improved site lighting and handicapped parking Maximum capacity for use of the building continues to center on the maximum capacity of 190 in the auditorium (100 seats at tables and additional peripheral seating on the upper level), and the size of other facilities (dining room, kitchen, breakout rooms, toilets, circulation) relates to this figure. The facility needs to be as energy efficient and low maintenance as economically possible. The overall character of the building needs to be maintained with contemporary updates to lighting and finishes. The total project cost is estimated at $4,835,000. • ‘ --• - - t - "" - ' 4 . A , - r ty - e , A C A ft ' ^ - , t-AiL-te•c...; - --... - 1:2-7..--------..- --...... '-- - --; --.' l er .": ''') • ' • ' . • ' - ..........,.............., .--• -._ ..,_, ..._ ,„,_ ___, „,.. to -- ...- -. - - .+ 6 .-::::.•..- '-- -_,„,..., # ' .•.) .../ ' ""- - • --- --""....'... '-::":"... :7 „ ........."*. I I '. r . .., , ,,. 't' ;: :;4Q ''' - ' '-'• • 4IPIMI'" 4 .... : :,47- ALI , - ' •- i, 3"--77: 05 ;0 ::-- - --•*--.. ...""••■■■ ''''' "7 - - - - •-:- --- -- .------=,.....--- --- - —___ _,........... _ • • • . ./.. rrin..../CoSvo ......, __. — ... ...-- • ' ■ ---- ---- (at, VT 1, i 1 -,-.'"••• - ___ --... - ''''" ----..-. - -- - . . . %.* ''':". ,,. \.„..1,..-fc Zit,( / - EL - ......___ .... ....................._ ---....... __,_ --...,__- ,,,. , , AttmlON1 ........ , i • 1 -.-.. , "--"------.. `---., '.......".. .. .. . / \ 'S, \ - -- - - '--,,,, - - --------- *-- ---...- , ,---.. **-- -I' -,-...,„ •••■ *"- - --.;` „.• / , , \ / ,.......y.„,c..4-..,...:z .....-,,....__,_.......,----- ----.- .... .., -..... „_ ,,:-`°------- ., .....':-....... \ \ ‘ ‘ ...___, ._ ■... 74Z3 •- N'• -. / ' '.. if - i", .• I • t ---. — ....„,..... •-•. ...." . -• - - - . , , •••••.. -•••-• -,--- "*----..„ •• ........ T. s t, 4 ' '■:1 . -'''' "e: ' ' t Al i . ) -' --s• ). '-''`,,.....' ''‘ '' \ 1 VV n I \ ...-.... ._ _. Y V...... , ....... - .. - 450 . -.... , \ • 1 L, •t . - . -; • , tr.-J e '-- -.- __ " t..- -I - 1 r't' % ,_ , ...,• - , ti•r' — _ _ _ \ 1 1 „,' 1 j. - 1 1 r k A \ / 1 ._.,„;...... rex' • .: \ -""-- -. - - - I . POI 1 00 ''. ' 1 / ,,... ' / II V-f-a'. P./4\ k t '', ' L i % 4 ' 1 1.• veaC* .4 1 1 ... L ......,-, i i 0 , • . .. t•• 'J., 1 .... ‘ .. ii ■•••• A ..„.. K. e... ( a • r ' V ...- --" - - --\ , • at ...1.......1.... I ' I " I 1 ‘ r i r. .0011 S. r , , li, - 14._.--•: 1 I • fl. • , •••• ,, 1, i . k ) • 0 s \ ,'. ) '''..' 1 ...›. 1 11. \ s •ffe. i \ ) I . 1 1 1 A k ' '': 7 \ 5 \ t i 11 ‘.";', . . \ ,,,.„, ...... . ,.. . , Ili i ,, v A •, ' 1• Tref . ' 4 e t 1....1-A. litel .."?... • 1 • 1 1 il?t I ' '' .11. • kN ••••, - -•-• . --:•i,•_--.,,I , \k it ) ----• 7 ' /.' / \ \ , . i .9 './r'r , „ , _ .. , .. •,. e . .. ••;...* • -....- --.~ ,.. Z. • . , , ••., 4 , : i:-. 1111 1 ; A 1 ) -,.., - .•-' ;el .., .1'1 _ A . . , , ,, t.„ I I A . ce 1. k .., e... i Iti i il 1 i • „II i . \ ,...1,_-,.i.-- - ,_.- _ ' .'-' --- .._ '-' • 1 \ 1 , 4 i I • NI • . • 1 4 l l k 1 l iNt-• • ' ( #. ) i ,,- : 11 il I 1 L ‘l \ 1 / /1.1ro-4 ki • , \ 11 : i kW itic <i' -ir '''''' .., ,,... _ F.,....____________...e__...., , , i , ,, v N )! 1 ek•AragoNwit2-4rAL ' .... ::: ..- . \' "-- • ' '' - i t * r • - ■it Ilb .... . . - - '-. --- • 4 • ... ,. I IL: •• ,.. • • ``,... . • .."''. i i ...,, .,..,9 •,- , .,. 1 \ I ,...• - 'LI ... ..../.. ">•-• '''''/S ' 1 \ I . • - limy .' . 1 1 , II. ' I • ,_ . . . ••• • cnul •• , 1 -- , -1- 1 - %7 -- -----.Y. r.• \ )f 1 . V I . - 1 - --. ' \‘‘ . k 7*. \ \ \'\ \ \ =rtd \ ..• , -.... 4. _ "lir t "" \ 1 - 1. ''' \ \ki Ci '.‘ \\\ '' s . Cle4 ft • •••' 4 (1 • • t ''i --•'11 'iS , 4X .,‘ 4\ \ \ .• N.•\. '-'..4 .o.r ... ' l' • ,- - — :01 1 ...--, ,,....•,. I .. ... , . ..... ,,.. + g ■ . 0 , .... AC? A / i • Il , - • • ‹.. • ,," , N... .." i 4,(.... t,',.. ■ 1 1 1 . . :' ,„ • 1, i , • •\ P. ' { ...-' - • , , . .. , s..... \ ‘ '.., 11. t \ \ ., .•:''''',. ...,„,/ N, .c. \ •■,. \ • , ••,-. r"..-:),. , • • .. ... '-. / . . \ ,... .. • . ..--- . '' 1 I 1 • \ --- 6 . , t t, ‘..,, , ••„‘ \ \ , ,- •,.. • ±, kb k \ \\,,, \ ., / 1 .e. N. ■ fill . • 1 ............................ '' Il a ---- ...-.. ......J , .......,,, .,.....-_, ., / PI i .,, .,. .., • ,,-- ,, ‘ \ • .i. doe t . 4, 1 1/41 ' ' . - ;1"61. . '-':\ ' - - - -- -''---- . : . ''':.a i , , L. ..., ' )..., ' -_,...,. \ \ 1 11 . \ ....."...... \ 7 $.. .\\\ .,..., , s4 e_ ,....... ,,,,.:t...41.01: '■ t .. '-e0*''' :: \ \ 1\5\\‘, \t„.. .,%. . .. . ... . A \ ■,.. .,...7' f \ \ \ -- -- ,••• I 'z,,",•, i( rt, l o , • /1.---"47,11eit■ - - ....4%, 11; • ,.• Ok • 'c • f ' • , t ,. ,t -., . t/6•6 - 1 :,-.. '-. .s .,•-' , i • 1 I \\ •••••. :7.r- • ---...<'. tr. • • .... , . - 0 C / .,‘',-• 1 r r CI \ __ •••••'" 1 C 71 11;5 _ l 'ec • - --• , or- t , ,.. , ._ . ,,.. t. . ••••■ as N., e \ , , i `to N. J ••• . • _ ,.. .,,,,, 75-07 •• .1, •••• ry ....../ ! ..._.-- se ._ r;- - - ;, \ • .::`,..,.. . . • .--,, ft .:!1'..6- ... -- it , 1111111111111 NEW REVISED PARKING WIFIRMIllin EXIS1ING ///////,' AGCI LEASE site plan • THE GIVEN INSTITUTE - Addition & Remodel \-\ i 1 Hard surface Porches allow dining to flow outside in nice weather „ 2 If,. + C� S • Aspen Clot., 0 mss” �O ./,' . ,.-1.1(7)-1 {� 0) c kr " : . 1 2) Ensting bathrooms to be mod f ed ._ !a - p 1 16 c 16 to be acoosrble with a net gain of , d tout womens toilets ------ rc eny» roan Q e t7 + al It°p +e D removable U e . dame floor <removable aw etarafle IlL 1,7 alaage Now five-stop , 4 kit with acres +h t8 C +100 and me 1 O - to ,, tam dek.ery ♦ibi :b 'men. wore' O * j • 1 1 . " New elevator with canal access to • 100 and audtotrun • • 108 capacity 19c Hr] sf d r \ New kft provides access from +104 • to • 102 podium level meaty 330 I 'ori+ , . -- 300 it ^w- herrKel it E esti g level +104 accessibl /�"� toilets in btiby to remain o 1 �` 0 Seldom used closet to be modified to create ramp access from +102 to +100 breakout room MAIN LEVELS • • THE GIVEN INSTITUTE - Additi & Remodel Windows in corner 01 clerestory look up Hunter Creek _ T — / l i Windows in breakout rooms ` root 6 • equp swan — -- — J overlook dining area below d■ing MOM baaw W Mows in comer of is breakout room look up Windows in comer of NW Breakout room provide views Hunter Creek down info garden 1 /� rod f f New five stop lift with access • i tr • t: ■ „ • • *lot to *109 and .112 v a -bridge • connects lobby to upper level confersnco continence breakouts r , 1 UN r , go cic4oty 26 o cspecty 24 p 400 st 366 W 1 'library' cont. morn Capauty 43 0 IN■I 6580 lounge lounge Now tattooers pfOvrde r IIKOSsflble toilet (Beatles lkfl /' g an level • 112 • / New elevator provides access kbEpy from all lower levels to .112 bM / ,tar ..... f •' Existing widows into aualtor I to be txovufed vrdh Vght prom} shades orfich ,:rj. V 1 rr� �.....a . ofkce ore capsoty 29 p 137 st • • TT1 Audio visual control room to be converted to breakout room. UPPER LEVELS • THE GIVEN INSTITUTE - Additi & Remodel Storage to store auditorium desks and dining tables and general items craw space below dining Exterior stair to be covered over with now Interior floor. • unexcaystad `.. , t•-.""`."t� slab on own • ee auWO visual t00n1 New s'x -stop two -door c't: connects storage to all keel New lift to access +95 level breakout room. 'war level breakout room cap. c ty 43 D 948 st ■ • • unexcaysted stab on Shade IA di 0 S 10 20 LOWER LEVELS CD 0 r CD CD CD CD C < ra �. = S - 1 y a li r" a 't z -Alk Iwo ` 4.,. • CO r 1, ca co co • O 0 a • 1 4 • 4'p -� T I .: _ : . • 1•r ^ �;'-�/'•� , _' K 1 4► .■' .f I, x. 4. 1 1, ..„,...i. _ „ . s ...,.., , , 4 i \ t ." ' / 0 ... ' N. �. .j •. � tK Ks E. N.- y% • '+ Ati' r rte. - . 4 . ' ,i t \ , � / r ` r f ' • - ` \t ii i t xt.' t • s ! f : a/ 1 / r , i t+ . � \ r' 1 . 6" . �. 1 ti liktikiVr' f ' . P 411///C • { _ '!� - • _ , .e A -, ^!. / , ..• •~ i,. 4't Jcr.�{rt ' - / :s rI 'b l�r•.61J J bU l��i w p p Y c to U = Z W v a� O LL- ¢ o c4 2 ¢ W = n - LE, C �,' — = w z r o ? E s *• . ❑ Gt- O O O , b Z U @„ > o m n tr p �p ,� a- � L „ c4 w 0- rn v, rn 3 v ++ ¢ u. W 0 A. O (xi, x V O CI O Q 0�0 LL E C p Z U J / o o H a Q Z }, Q w U > O w h 2 E•- > > Z ❑ a o E p O © w Z ry w w w 2 V > Z H _ I:° V ,a ,c w w W � _ 0 O Q Lu F O >- Z ¢ h c4 = U = Lu p E– w cn IS eule0 vi ' (-I a. a O ¢ Z r- 0 < W V)) w 1 o ¢ O w >"' ¢ O O = O O 1 S WIN 1 U 1 EH 0 1 > a �1 Z 1 c(-4 c4 W w ;s 9DJ UOj 4 c a r V 1 C4 5 = m U co E:" ¢ ■ E - v = •, uadsy cE ;Li 0 cn E-- Z _ = ;; b 1 1 1— = O .-..1 CMG a. ¢ = W = m IS LIDsluJ [2D -I--) 0 ¢ Z ¢ ¢ U ❑ 0 1 S ; to w w p W O ;S P °Z V °' Z p F. ° � Q o F, Z a w a. 0 IS PIE = 0 O Z U ¢ > W 1 o . E °' Z O } S lilt z = O a. w ° O E— U I.1 .....1 I . ' , ', I 1,: :. ;., 1 .A.......-1- • . 1 i ', • - . ... • ' - e A 4{___ , . ----____ - - - , t 6r.':,• . , - . , . •, ' ''•,;11 - -,,, - ; • ,,,. 1 . • •_____ ., . , ,. , , ,, ...-. - ' „, i \ • ''1 - , • . . --1 •1101•6.,.. ••,4 -, ' -;', --,- tz .• - .-:..--. f•- A , 74- 6 - ; „ 4... _ . ,.,,,. ,•, 11, .. ........, •. , f , : -.;•, i 1, • ,;.., .... • •, : - , , ' -- p: , . . : .. . . . • ..-1: , ' . .i _ ipt.:,.... -. ,•., ., :-'>':. I _. 4 ' . ' ''Y'..# 1 ) , . .i5:,. •-... . . 114 , ,'. =,,. , ,, ,,,a ' 1 ) . .„-4 f,' . .."[':' .. :' '''. .'iik # ,; , . •A' ” ."....- . I i ' N 1 -,.- e i ,'•., / , .. . - --- _L_ - 11 \ i , ' . • - . , IW : pki 4 , N ... . . .... -. 4 ;.........,:,„4, .._. .1.....:...7 , ...8 ..,-... 1 . N t•- e' ,.• : • -. 1 r ; 1 sl r, •, ) . .. , Z C''.;7:'• ‘7 - ':', — , .1 . . , . .......4 F-- ....., • A ' 1 $ 4.1 ) t r?, !.i.' . .-i * 4 .',. ,,, .. , .... • 4160.00010: , — ct 8 . i .,.. .....-, < 'R .. M ' •• >-• -J -.< 1 • = (2 , H U 8 > 0 . ■-■ " H 2 z - ...., a . • W H , d Ei m r_.= H z Z I . , . „ - i ,,.., - > Z 0 0 H Z vi 12 0 H L1.1 cr , H H < H z 0 .>. 0 , LI-1 HZ H LL.1 C5 _ ....- 0.. FA r t t P ¢ i 7) ' 6 L " u (RI () 0 p -,- b u 5; o i ( . Z 0 ± z 1- u o 1 - 1 LLJ z , > -r > < Lj ' > '--- Z ° P. L1 -,c wJ )' "t Z • 5 i ...1 W LW < 0 H _ .. ..(..!r.) 6-.. 0 Z cn 1— 0 LL Lu co MD ..' z c) cn..< (1) > .< V = Ljj LLT -L, H WA CY. 2 c.. " • -J ... a z < H v) w 0 U U I-. LL1 ° C A •-• E" 0 < Z 0 •e (-) ¢ , ,L'- 1— Z • w i C) ..., — 0 L " w U Z Z Z 0 Lu — LIJ < n- H Z H . 16 . .. 2, LLI z <r. H 2 — H t_ E6 L E.Li a c4 I = P (/) ,.J-. u ,_,— L M ....,H UJ .- 4...) -- 1 2 ° .t — ce. < x _.,:t H F,5 ,.. H 0 L11 < z 1-- tx > H ,c _I .._1 ce 0 Z (1) ..; 111 ,. u LU C4 1< a H - Lu u H -1 ... ,,... . • . .... .. .. . —... . _. . .- .. .: ,. • Z O w Z Z I w Z 1O Z g Z H < > = ¢ H H cL ua H cr Q H H < U U w 1 U O U O H >, LLI = w Q ° O H H i a V o Z H Z w 0 w w > w V w 0 0 0 �, O z — 04 - - ¢ m H w z - w • 0 x - Z v, H Ca w 0 w Q w Z U 0 F¢ ci 0 Z O w > Ln U U¢ • Z w Z w w O Z Z w C4 ¢ a Z w Z U w = 0 ¢ v' Z [ ¢ - • c a n LA Z w 0 H G = w 'u: O H 0 Q ¢ ¢ _ ¢ w ¢ „, H LU 1. cn w `) w O Z ¢ c� -� 1 a H Z O Z O LU r x O Z w 5 a! [- w a Q O O H _ c4 a ' Z 2 0 H > 2 0 P O U a 6. p p Li a ,�� a ¢ v o c 4 w H x U V 0 H O U 0 w0 LA = H= F..., Z Z U ¢ x w (1) Z v, w w U U w F H Q H �a'- < S v) O 0 a ¢ H 0 w F- 0, 0 w w Z O r_.., O p < F- >- 2 < Z H 0 I O O a. O Z a 0 0 z 5.:-.) >- 0 w Li) H c p c U w p h [ -- w _ w O c= c4 x r....11 , a' w Q >- 0 V 2 0 0 Z < U-i w U ¢ > U w = < U < [ [ w H m 1 ¢ ¢ w 2 w Z V 0 a ° E ° , Z Z m H w �IIP� r. < z Q t Z '� 4.2-14M vi w T R _ i s Z >_ Q r� i .."� � O U w < 0 • _� Ft -1 s - '^? r •S 4 . . i \\0,4\ t . 4- Ca , . : - ,• .. . i , ,,i g A vt -N 1 . in i ii .- . ', .. 1 __ � . 4 i • • 1 rRn • - p. W rialr i, - _ A *i`' - - _ 1 • �. - -7. - aim... -. ... -- _._. , -4_ S. # ---.--- I lb - -----,- • - 1 . : . ..--■------, i •. , - « - ... • - 4'4 } H O O '"6 .� 1 ... JA r r N Fl u W 1 j .4. • A V.� 6 a e , �� �'' $ / 7 , r . .tog , :: , , On .1 S. _ 1 1 :,, 1.,.. V, , • . ..,. ,. i . lit it'. ._ , ., • . -- l 1,0,_ ) . . •. • ....,, 4 it, ,.., . • , , ...c. , , .._ J ■ - , . _ . • , ,,, • ''' ,,,,, : ''. , . i t, : s - ,,,,, • , ... .1 . ,,,,,ii%y,'.; ..:',..„ f P,;(f •, ir, 11' ''-• : 4'..- ... .*:44 '4: . r f ..,- . .. . . . ri. ot ... _ ,:74.%;4:;%:...z 4 , 1 - If 4 i ,, t '-'' , .1 ' ',.•• - - . 7.......:.; ... , ::.'..: •:::1:4:: : ..,. . . ;;;;;;;;;::;;;;%:;;%,:::,::::•::::: • _ ,..-:;.e' .. , - ;;;;. .: . re tAt''.. .-.."::.:', -.'.' ...,. Jr` It, . - .;:. r .10 . i ' .4.4 .." - ..0. '.: ‘.' • ,,,,, ''''' • ' ' ' ' ' . ' ' - /0 ' - •'"...:•:E: - ,:r -- - 7 - *-4-4 . • ., - ,.. 1 .,...„;;;;;:..., . ...,„!... ;;;;;;Ifohlar-st. ,,,'' 1 ' -, ..:".., gr ::1: . .. • .. „ „ * ! • i ' .. '‘ .T.,......-.. ...... I ,,,,...,, . \::::::',.. .,...•:•: ,...,:.. ..: -s,. ig 5,!1 -,, 4.1.1- 7,7,11, - - ‘ • )::::::::' ::::.::::::::::::' . iv. .k - ...... _ . , . ..,... _ .. .. . ..... , ., . - 47,47,711 :..:-. ,,•••••••.......:, ,,, ',..... ,,,,,,, .. , , „, ,,,,,,,,,, v., . :-.•...',.... . ...v.....„ , , v .... .4, , ,,0 ,_ , .: < .,.. , ,. .. .., • • . ,,. ••:, ., 0,.. - e ...,„. -.....4,, , ."4. 1,, • : ,-, , '''-- .•,':•.„ • . t •sr,,. . - ,,, - 42, , ,, \ !Lk ,,,,, • ' - ' . , I \ -'-., ,',.',. .0, ? " 8 . , . :, t ,, !,-‘,. .., '. • . / / wp , -• .„.„,.:,„1,. I ' , 0 ''''''''' . ' . i 1 ,,, / _ . – 1 . 4 \‘ ‘ .,.. ,.--___ ._. „,.:„..i,..,.., ,,.... p,P.,,,,,„ • d 0.,.^ ' ..,44;,, '',, ■ .4? \O '' - /' ilk ,..st.s...4 s ' ' - ..8 ' / '' . • ,18 1.--1 j. ''. '. ' ' ',:.. • ( 3 :, E.' 'i.. ±... . f . . - , . • . . . 2- ' .4- ..-•?...'',.'s .0 , 1 - i 4 .1 1 r 4 , I . - - 1 0 0 l'• 1 , A .s... --z. .k 4. ,... , • '1 -...z. . . .,...., . .. , ..,.- • , 0.....44 .. _ . mow, . , , . , . ...___ 0: , •• 44, . .• , , ,,,,. , v) >-, H f.: .,` 14 ' , ',,..4,,i .. , io ;:*, "X. ' * Z *--.> 11 V) („) ''' ......,•:11' If.. C. - t ;1- '' '. 4 •15 0 W • Z Z. f , . t .0 4 % E 0. U C4 5 0 < (/) U - .., •. , ‘ . „41 '' fe . ■ S1141t, • • •1 , ,. .?...i:,,. ilk '=. 0 . w x ,-„ -•< w L.1.1 nor. is oimplo gro posk 7: -• ... t --," * U ce LA 1M — H 0 = = rillZ , F:: -. "Nar",6111111wir . ' , , `t ■ R, , <2. - LL1 LLi .. • ,- 1. 7 , . .... I • ' . * = ' ,*" ", . 4.'1/4' • ('' u j >-' ( ..1 ) H W < .4. (/) W WOO * • ' ' ''' . 1Y' ' t P411 ,'.' , a, UJ = u , o . , ,, . . . " 4 . • . • . ..,..r.. - r--. < u Z CQ -. - LL- "tr CI >'-' 0 < Z (J) 0 [-• < Lu •,,- .< 0 0 =i > - ›- '' > El 0 -. U Z > '-' = CL, ........ , LU z 0 — a (...) > u • -6, .. ■-• {L, Li j C4 •L. I Z I (3 Z • X I C L E-1 0 0 LU Z H < < P.■ CCI ,.r Z I Z (1) ›.... .< U■ LU 0 L1.1 Z 0 t 0 Z -.' H ... I 0 0 0 > < = '-.. w cr) E H z 0 (./1 04 ._ 0 0 in Lu 0 LLI >7 1J u_c4 o > 0 LLI ,.—. •.(c ce [--. g *) z o • ..... cn 0 u.-1 i Lu LIJ (.1) LiJ 0 0 8 Lei z >-, - 1 = J r u m H 04 m_. 0 0 w 0 < < H H u U Z z 0 U < w = Z0 a 0 0 ws ›- z Lil E- ›.. a. w = > c4 — 0 ..." .-. 1 - - ¢ U .-J >-' ..— LW c4 cr) Z • [ j j U H CC F - 4 0 p, >1 Lu >- w L Z I-U 0 0 .v) 2 m p4 .- t = cr. Z o -c 0 P _ Z 0 z v), 0 5 „ i ce o m — — ,r, I.11 0 < 12 C1- '2 ,-- L..] .._ (f) c- "J " '-' =•:- a Z U.) .< ,-.1 t. ) > ..-.1 < CO Z. LL H H >. <t. 0 U ., 1 Z U Harry Weese, Visionary Architerl Known As 'Chicago's Conscience' - (' sago Tribune Page 1 of 1 ASPiN ar �! n ,Lee ' - 500sNOW o yy -, � `.. _ Mp" uwdows Rewa. CO . . ((hiraao rtbun µ ARl let F COI, ECTION9 Ads by anal. Harry Weese, Visionary Architect Known As 'Chicago's Cenegenicse Official Sae Conscience' lake Control of Aging anm Get your r lee inartny Aging Kit today hi ivy M1 se. n 'mooned archilaol who shaped Chicago skyline and the was the city thought about everything Ili, I aksti. fro to its lieasure trove of rusk) cal b: iIontgs. died hursday in a veterans home in Manteno. 111. He Computer Room Design w as 6. - ' the rsr.0 of death was a stroke said iris laughter D ale Free Server Room )c: - S^ & Operal o C s 'a'* f W e Wee se' s e c. 111011.0 111)11w el body of w e. ork he inclides the 1005f ulai T lme and Life Building and the DCU n o ! oday opoldon [ cotton' Center a slit windowed Mandl( ndle whose +acades resemble an ltd computer punch card H ., warderpp-ice is the silbway system in Washington 0 0 whose graffiti free underground has spectacular concrete Hire an Architect 55 lint evoke but do not imitate the capitals classical momrmenls Free Archneclura au.erosemem Consultation 0n Residential and Bad ness projects IS YOUR CARD RICHY FOR YOUR BUSINESS? Si EP Residential Architect The Art Institutes We Refer You 10 lire How much does your Ous.ness charge per month? Screened Residential Design. Media Arts, Fashion, & _.._ Archdeas fri Your Area Culinary Programs - Get Info Today! r. sit edr' rg5.000 7E51 roue caps Denver Fashion School .oc faanp talent inma Care ear +low at 7. r I ocal Campus FOR Eee ruNrO 551Ice 55. ' harry belFeved m democracy. He believed That the public sector was a barometer of society He couldn't stand a wadd where there were great individual buildings. but the streets were out of eider ' said Chicago architect Jack H Sub ay who worked with Ml Weese ler 15 years A planner a ws01a05 a consummate city elan with a prorcmg rent Mr Weese was known in the shorthand of neodline wire's as'Omcagiis onsc'ence lr 1ieyday f e e arly 1Ufa, to the eery 19805 he Ares+ led - twnlanut : altemabye to the sterile steel -and- 1 s cprklmg he ig tu.led out by lnllawers of l udw'g M der kph, len ,many da lute, is Imhad their ha. ICS on 1551015. Mr VW, sc. Pr DI 3C II wading - h acclaimed restoration of Jbvo e Inoruvn I rt. re 1907 bansiiive drab 19119 a Virrebe specialty embracing everything 1 , 0 1 6 1 1 1 6 1 : 'win 1 ulr. of Nor - 1 d srory m hhis ago to Jur bl YbOri in Vbislimgton He kept everybody aware of the larger issues He may have made more of a coninbution nationally than In Chicago." oonrav said Indeed. Mr. Weese'9 role as a civic tnstemaker extended to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington. While others on the compehtiOn Airy paid lidle altentinn to a rough pastel rendering submitted ev 10 arA+neoture student reamed Maya Lm. Weese lobbied the design into reality and today the men1onsl rs widely 16901' led as Washington's roost emotionally powerful Mr. Weese was born In Evanston. He graduated from New Trier High School and the Massachusetts Institute 01 Technology He served as an engineer on a U S Navy destroyer In Wodd War II and established Os own firm in C hicago in 1947 Green Buildings Learn how to save 30% off your energy costs from the experts' ('hicaao tribun htt. p: / /articles.chicagotribune.com /1998 -11 -01 /news /9811010367 1 harry- wecse- buildings... 6/16/2010 Harry Weese, Visionary ArchiteAKnown As 'Chicago's Conscience' - Pa+e 2 - Chicago ... Page 1 of 1 ,if xe k / The heart ofCityCenter PESERVATrnNS Las Vegas. AnIAL vVt .•.COM 10 • i11int (inhume AR rICLE COLLECTIONS Ads by cough Harry Weese, Visionary Architect Known As 'Chicago's Be!t ghege Towns Conscience' Discover America's Top 13 College Towns to Visit w /Bing Travel Images`' vwav n,nr,r� IPnge 2 01 2) Architecture Clip Art Between then and the early 1990s when he gave up control of the firm that still bears his name, Mr- Weese led the Spectacular Vector Art design of scores of significant structures hotels. office buildings embassies banks churches- city halts and houses Low Prices Visit 'n'iora,es from the Loop to the srnall -town off ndeclural mecca of Columbus Ind The firm also designed transit iStockphoto & Search system in cities and hiding M' Today dewier in r • e Weese hnr yr severe fire o fa design awards horn Ere Arner Institute of Architects. Including the coveted ^rm of the year award n 1978 Vega Architecture Commercial. Historic, Mr Weese enjoyed other triumphs Modern Res. Creative, Advertisement Sustainable Architecture ad b. Oa wye s she Lakeview Chicago v , Dentist Chicago dentist providing The Art Institutes general 8 aesthetic dentistry Cu Media Arts, Fashion, & t ¢ e Culinary Programs -Get Info Today! =.> Master Architectural M mt ' Architectural Management & Design - Study a Full time master in Madrid' e FEATURED ARTS LS He played an early and major role in conceptualizing the Printers Row area He took over Chicago -based Inland Amhhect magazine when it was on the edge of extinction and helped to transform it Into one of the nation's best f ' design periodicals. Mr Weese was equally well -known for more than 30 years of promoting more creative uses of Chicago's waterfront, though hrs proposals for manmade islands marinas and less intrusive Lakeshore roads went mostly unimplemented. Other Chicago projects completed under his direction include the 200 S Wacker Drive office building. Swissotel Chicago and the restoration of the Hotel Inter I nc base of his lone clunker the graceless Marriott Hotel on North Michigan Avenue Is now being given a face lift 10 addition to Kate Weese. he i5 survived by his wife Kitty two other daughters. Shirley Young and Marcia, and five grandc hildren. A memonai service is being planned Acd': uv 0' Vle Architecture Graphics Spectacular Vector Art. Low Prices Visit iStockphoto & Search Today. 2 (Chicano Tribuu :e http: / /articles.chicagotribune.com /1998- 11- 01/news/9811010367 1 harry- wecse- buildings... 6/16/2010 Harry Weese, 83, Designer Of Ivtro System in Washington - Obituary; P' agraphy - NY... Page 1 of 2 Welcome to TimesPeople (1 TimesPeople rc::.oTine mane Hooked on Gadgets. and Paying a Mental Price " - Recommend Get Started l HOME PAGE TODAY'S PAPER VIDEO MOST POPULAR TIMES TOPICS Leg In Register NOw Elie E Yew Um* Elates Search All NY limes. cam G Arts WORLD t N.Y. /REGION IIUSINESS TECHNOLOGY SCIENCE HEALTH SPORT'S OPINION ARTS SETH. TRAVEL JOBS REAL ESTATE ART B DESIGN 80051 DANCE MOVIES MUSIC TELEVISION THERIEIOS EL71/AL7N % Book Online :111 if TOURISM Lwati today and save! Advertise on NYTimes.com Harry Weese, 83, Designer Of Metro System in Washington fi+ae Ff Eri' M'US.0 HAMF .I Nay vw3 1938 Harry Weese, a Chicago architect whose design for the Washington SIGN IN TO Metro system produced some of the most powerful public spaces of RECOMMEND our time, died on Thursday at a veterans' home in Manteno, 111. He TWITTER was 83. SIGN IN TO E- MAIL A major figure in Chicago architecture and planning since the 195o's, PRINT Mr. Weese specialized in historic preservation as well as new buildings in the modern idiom. In 1967, he undertook the renovation �b of Adler and Sullivan's Auditorium Theater in Chicago, one of the S WA FFESStWAAL country's most architecturally distinguished performance halls. He also supervised the restoration of the Field Museum of Natural Ilistory and Orchestra Hall in Chicago and Union Station in Washington. In Chicago, his modern buildings include the Time and Life Building, a concrete tower with a skin of glass and dark steel, and the Metropolitan Corrections Center, an imposing, triangular structure of concrete patterned with irregularly spaced slit windows. He also championed the redesign of large areas of the city's lakefront shoreline, proposing the development of recreational areas on artificial islands. Mr. Weese's most spectacular project came his way in 1967, when his firm, Harry Weese Associates, was awarded the contract to design Washington's loo -mile Metro system. Given the opportunity to work as an equal partner with the project's engineers, Mr. Weese designed a systemwide network of stations that rank among the greatest public works of this century. With their soaring vaults of coffered concrete, unencumbered by columns, these stations recall the visionary designs of Piranesi. At stations where two subway stations intersect, Mr. Weese created narthexlike spaces that induce an almost religious sense of awe. That may be one reason why the stations have remained free from graffiti since the system's opening in 1976. Rippling lights, embedded in the subway platforms, do more than announce incoming trains. They also provide underground delight. At the tubelike entrances to some of the stations, like Dupont Circle, escalators offer commuters a giddy descent into a spatial vortex. Harry Mahr Weese was born in Evanston, 111., in 1915. He was educated at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he graduated in 1938 with a bachelor's degree in architecture. Later, he studied city planning under Eliel Saarinen at the Cranbrook Academy of Art in Bloomfield Hills, Mich., with a group of students that included Charles and Ray Eames, Harry Bertoia, Florence Knoll and Benjamin Baldwin. Breaking News Alerts by E -Mail Sign up to be notified when important news breaks ANA http: / /www.nytimes.com/ 1998/ 11 /03 /arts/harry- weese-83- designer -of- metro- system -in- was... 6/7/2010 Harry Weese, 83, Designer Of Irro System in Washington - Obituary; $,iggraphy - NY... Page 2 of 2 He and Baldwin opened an architectural firm in 1941, but their practice was interrupted by World War II. Mr. Weese enlisted in the Navy and served as an engineering officer until 1945. I le reopened his own practice in 1947, after a year in the Chicago office of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. In 1950, an introduction to Irwin Miller, owner of the Cummins Engine Company, led to commissions for Columbus, Ind., the town Miller was developing as a showcase for postwar American architecture. Mr. Weese's design for the First Baptist Church, a structure of brick and slate completed in 1965, remains the town's most prominent landmark. The Metro system is not Mr.Weese's only important achievement in the nation's capital. In 1962, he designed the Arena Stage theater, which pioneered the use of lighting equipment, catwalks and other functional elements as esthetically expressive features. Mr. Weese also A srvi L L Si SP deserves credit for the realization of Maya Lin's stunning Vietnam Veterans Memorial on CAN MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. the Washington Mall. In 1981, as a juror for the competition to design the memorial, Mr. tverymr<anhelp change the wodd one step at a unit. MgReiMI ,J ct s proposal from among 1,420 entries, and helped the design Mther ¢s one volont cr hnw one -pause click or t dollar. you can make a ddietence,althMembers o,ejen survive the considerable opposition it aroused. TakeCherge.u+ Mr. Weese is survived by his wife, Kate; three daughters, Shirley Weese Young of Chicago, ,. a. 3a xu r t. Marcia Weese of Santa Fe, N.M., and Kate Weese of Kensington, Calif., and five grandchildren. MEMBERS PROJECT V Photos: Metro Center in downtown Washington, a subway station with coffered concrete - ANTI VOU " ceilings designed by Mr. Weese (Marty Katz); Harry Weese (1988) Times Reader 2.0: Daily delivery of The Times • straight to your computer. Subscribe for Just $4.62 a week. SON IN TO E- MAIL PRINT mlamurr E SUNDANC FILM MUM INSIDE NYIIMES.COM 4 ∎ BUSINESS n OPINION • WORLD • OPINION • U S. s ARTS • er 4101 e Is Any Job WV-A' ' .... d CAGASO Better Than No 111 rcz Job?.< 1 -4" _ 4 • t • A Room for Debate _ _ -- -. 'q • f ' forum on whether new ' "" •• graduates should be so {{i "'*` choos in this weak App Makers Worry as Data Ttte Stone'. Should This Be Relaxing Its Grip to Play for Bubbling Up From the New CDs Plans Are Capped the Last Generation? a Winning Hand Earth, a Cool. Clear Gift - .. ■ 5 'e y,p e -( -rue Hee Rt Spogs . { o Ar ' ravel lobs Rsal store Autos Baca m T' , ,,• , v. nn s. oro s :n 5 Tm u 'vi 4 cnect:o 4,4 Lcor HeG ConOc' lax aA.rk :o■ Us 4 dredse t he Map http: / /www. nytimes. com/ 1998/ 11 /03 /arts /harry- weese -83- designer -of- metro -system -in- was... 6/7/2010 Environment: The Landmark Man.---- Printout -- TIME Page 2 of 3 JiI ME Monday, Jul. 23, 1973 Environment: The Landmark Man IN PARTNERSHIP WITH ([ INM Given the chance to tear down some musty old theater and to design a glass - walled new "culture center," most architects would rejoice and turn to their drawing boards. Not Chicago's Harry Weese. Though he is one of the nation's most talented architects, he goes out of his way to preserve landmark buildings. "We do it because it has to be done," he explains. "Fine old buildings give our cities character and continuity. They give us a sense of stability." Weese, 58, is a natural landmark man. He loves cities, he bicycles to work, not so much to get the exercise as to feel Chicago's texture. Characteristically, he installed his office in an old warehouse with a greenery-filled atrium and a glass- roofed elevator — "so you can look at the clouds." His own designs, from Washington's Arena Stage theater to the U.S. embassy in Ghana, are similarly lyric, and they always respect their architectural context. In hi Walton Apartments in Chicago, for example, he used bay windows to echo those used by the city's great turn -of- the- century architects: Daniel Burnham, John Root, Louis Sullivan and Dankmar Adler. Says Weese: "I would rather match a cornice line, or set one that could be matched, than try to build a spectacular building that stands by itself." This concern for urban fabric led Weese to his first renovation job— Chicago's Auditorium Theater. Designed by Adler and Sullivan in the 188os, it had become a U.S.O. club with bowling alleys and finally ended as a neglected shell. Its roof leaked; its 4,000 velvet- covered seats were rotting. Weese meticulously restored the stately interior with its soaring arches, curving balconies and richly ornamental plaster friezes. The work cost $2,000,000 and was finished in 1967. The result: a glowing, golden concert and opera hall with near perfect acoustics. Some of Weese's restoration jobs — notably Chicago's huge, Greco -Roman Field Museum of Natural History, its Newberry Library and Orchestra Hall — involve what he calls "good housekeeping." He makes no major structural changes, but he reorganizes layouts and adds air conditioning and modern lighting. The point: to keep old buildings useful, and so to give them new life. Daring Required. Sometimes that is a difficult task. Weese went to Louisville to save a small bank that he describes as "one of the nation's most sophisticated examples of Greek Revival style." By building a new auditorium and stage between the bank and an old warehouse on a rear lot, he turned the complex into a theater. Residents of Montgomery, Ala., called Weese to save the classical pre -Civil War state capitol from legislators who want a new building. He has proposed new lighting and air conditioning and a refurbishing of the gracious old details, down to the yellow -pine floors and marble fireplaces. (nn,,rinht 0 90 V1 Tbne Inn All rinhte remntnrl Renrndi irfinn in ',,hnle nr in n rt wifhni if nermiecinn ie nrnhihiteH http: / /www.time.com/time /printout /0,8816,878609,00.html 6/24/2010 Environment: The Landmark J-1/4n -- Printout -- TIME Page 3 of 3 "It requires some daring to keep a building's integrity and still plan for maximum feasible use," Weese says. "You have to concentrate on what not to do. If you touch one thing, like the plumbing, you can sometimes start a chain reaction." As much as possible, he follows the original plans. That takes selflessness, the willingness to let a long - dead architect dictate nearly every step. But, Weese wryly notes, "Modern architects have a hard time matching the quality of work of the old masters." Weese is convinced that renovation almost always costs less than leveling old buildings and constructing anew. Boston's old Jewett Theater, an intimate Georgian structure, would have cost at least $5,000,000 to replace. Boston University is spending $400,000 to fix it up. Even Less striking buildings are worth refurbishing. Weese is currently starting a project, funded by the Federal Housing Administration, to rehabilitate an elegant, old three - story walk - apartment house in a Chicago slum. "You can't duplicate it today," he says. "Saving this kind of building saves a bit of the urban environment." There is a definite place for new buildings in his philosophy too. "Coexistence is the key," Weese says. "The old with the new." Then he adds a more personal reason for his efforts at preservation: "It might sound a bit chauvinistic —but maybe someone will save one of our buildings some day." 8 Click to Print Find this article at: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artiele/0 http: / /www. time. com / time /printout/0,8816,878609,00.html 6/24/2010 Printable r . Page 1 of 1 r a r. r, Kitty Baldwin Weese Kitty Baldwin Weese, wife of the late Chicago architect Harry Weese, died of natural causes on Friday, March 18, in Chicago. She was 87 years old. Kitty started coming to Aspen in 1947, and since 1969 she was a part -time resident of the West End. She ran an interior design business with Aspenite Jackie Green Wogan for a number of years. In the early '80s, she began painting watercolors, studying with Anstis Lundy. Kitty had numerous exhibitions of her work in Chicago and Aspen. Kitty was a great friend of Aspen old- timers Elizabeth Paepcke, Fritz and Fabi Benedict, Mirte and Ferenc Berko, Dick Durrance, Herbert and Joella Bayer, Jimmy Smith, Betty Moore, Pat Moore, Ellie Brickham, Johnny and Laurie McBride and Tukey Koffend, among others. She is survived by two sisters, three daughters and five grandchildren. A memorial service will be announced in the spring. http: / / www. aspentimes. com /apps / pbcs.dll /article ?AID= /20050402/ OBITUARIES/ 104020022 &template =pri ntart http: / /www. aspentimes .com /apps /pbcs.dll /article? AID = /20050402 /OBITUARIES / 104020... 6/24/2010 0 � i \ �„ ,) i I I I ;;!,1 !: ! I I I I II I l i ,Ii 1 LI 11 14"-1 II 'I a . © , 1 jI I � - III F �� } 1 !i f I r 11 1 , X17 y,ICK 4I 1 n:a9 1 , [�e f , _ % Ir I , Y II uY �I • '\ \ • . 99 yToll 1 � .• � ;f "41 1 O I I ,' 4 � 1 \ -; . 6.) f I + ill 1F : , f 1 Y � 1 11 I du 1 1 F/ 1 f Ii \ . i t \ C � � a a I; � 1 „CIE / ; I II '' I, • 3 \ a �._ it 41 * ‘ • .'7 ' a rt> L, _---{ i _ a 1 t } �Y f a 1 }' �./ 1 - r `p 1 u ftI l LU fSf Il a p 1 S r c6' Q T, � 'R'I L IN i p . t f L ;991 I I rL r u� l' :. , v it WEE w � � . . . ji v 4 � s 11 ® yl — - > A . ® ib i f a . t N ¢n 0 —' u 6 4i.., -- j- ,,. 4 .. `! n i • -- 1.0 r _I 1 .s �Z '�a i 1 i i i I I : `• "' 1 ` - F i a t l S. sit eo. 4 P., • 4 oa, 1 �v ,_ 1 1 - 1 ✓ J m :,+ _.� � �� 131 At r / - ll.. y I 11 t "- • i / a x- _ - - 11 ti 8 ,9w VA ft` i 41 n e I I s� m m 1 _ ffi 1 1 � 1 43 I il� A W - - - -W M R AH 1 Z \ 1A 1 � ut m ' I J I , ;e re v 1 4 I r ai: a , '•'' ✓ / FrT 111' i , ' _ 1 p 4, it , - 1 0; s 11 I LA 4 _ t i _ s , f 1 I � I∎ , • i)+ -- - If r ;c « - . L 4 % T ® � 14 it / _ r r+ t + r I �: tF k'-__�_ x , i„ Irk I at , # 5 k 1 ii IA I i1 k i x --a m X Y �M I � 8® "4� s f } rs t 1 ' 1 -1- .wok , O p * / • 'bl J wN a i s q { ra 1 k li . ti = : ' r_ ij li t I l � ) ( � i L Ji J a 1 _ 1 1 .° 1 � _ } 1%. � ��lt ' i- Ir,. a�b till r 1 .� . 4 i _ I i � � - 1 rm 1 - t .o.. ! I .. ® ' 01 ill li j I 111111111i .14 t# b o -- t e fi�a s ki i. s .. 3t C. 2. y� 3S 3322 4. . 41 ,,..,. T _ — — S fl � � �i �. ,, IRE ---- r ---51: [ t ___, I ._ i l i , {h a i� Ii l I ll , jI t 11 ' i 1 I IjjI : e r i n• 5 : !s • C 1 1 1 U s' , / —1 r it: , a< _ w `' t di Y ! • 1 . _ i iii _ . W r a P I i il 4. -:.i _ (i lib a�� ,., lilt .. ill 4 • Sl ±IH3 V 3fOV31 ) kIVH lepowei - uoirippB - e :niijsu� ueniO . 16 =s. O z4 OC m VF C t 0 A LL I ~ O — ---.. 0 { / l y3 $ I � �`\ - � / / / , // / /o �'. k,a I 1 • / / / i / , -- 1 K r / �� / •• I , �••- S �� N `Ir1ao 5y 3� , �i�i� j /// 1, ! i ` - -_ - -- - -__ - " �b I / ' , 'ft/ / I / i / — — — // 1 p ,,,— III // 'Ili/ // / 1 �� - - -- 7 III/ / l/ I (� /,' 0 I s 1 - \ \ o illy/ tl /IlI /�� 1 � -1 �.". h 1111 ! /� r / 1� n A n / I 1 ; �l� 1 1 ' ! Y' y9, I' � l11 / ! e L I .i ts I er aa l � 3/' fi � 1 ` /I I i -_ ,. I . • b � I1 � I f i I 1 �; ;- � 1 I I I i 1 1 i II 11 1 1 f! / / v;: z gg � I 1 1 j 1 I 1 I; b ∎\ • 1` 1 S Di CI I )7it'( I / "', , : I lily ' ( ' , • .‘ 1:::; . ■ . .."1 9 ,� r` a4 a �} \ t 1 4rp � , 1 C '- - ,f : � \�\1 1 f 5'. \ X1, \ , i 11, I I I i I I , j1 — 133111S_ __ HnSIWITY0- 1-1.1110N ope+oloo ;o N!..mun TD N Q c C �— Fa p E Q 73 Q 1I ++ > "' • G 1 tn�m C'aE Z m ■ > S gt �. H m D Z -. K = W p < -.6 S a G W C O C S 1- QZN TB > m C 4 X10 y c i `, .6 T r i ,'1 1 �'1 ` 1 6 rrll dal • ... ....._ Li. yl /71 y N ':: I P� 9 'oa'� ere. a�,A ° o xe $ ° _ ti 13 R • -: ) \ , de. d 1\ ?Or m ' � _ -. \ 0 < u ■ • 1 1 s, i T‘ -- o m G m 9 U 0 a 3° lli / \ • opeloloo to Rl O I N CD O C a O Q 13 V a 1 H CD .- ,_ t r e ^ N N om' Of Y y o — :2 `t ,. c d °1 E � / 111 m • �Q H P L7 > W H Uh �i,• .i x= W W G i a ~ 1L? k' ig a w V 0 0 P = - < 7. N I 1 t J J a ,/ m 1 11 { t ] • Y N I. Y 0, \ i: c E c 'c 3 sry c . o J i" T ' u _ mr I J-- /2.// 8 ,ifg - -- 1 - 0 PLAYFUL RIGOR L, Geometry toys with nature in this small , conference building do sk , The land for The Given institute ' of Pathobiology in Aspen was donated to the University of 4,_. ' r , f� Colorado by Mrs. Walter P. . ` ' Paepcke whose late husband founded the famed Aspen Con- r ference. Mrs. Paepcke had ,' strong interest in maintaining - . �a ., - -. the grounds, and her Chicago friend, Architect Harry Weese, - .' s w" , agreed. He describes the site as , / "almost a botanic garden." Little . �. wonder. There are firs and _ . '-- spruces, some 50 to 60 feet high. ' -, -'- -. - Only one tree was removed dur- ing construction of the Institute, r , , _ ` 'r " and a deep bow was made to the cottonwood on the west. The - r building embraces this garden - . and looks north to a pond which - w - - - _ r . is part of an ecological preserve. - On the south and east, the build- ing extends into the landscape '° -,.-. by way of fences (not yet corn- _ , plete). One wall will extend diagonally from the southwest _ _ "__._..4 "__ -: corner; the other from the northeast corner towards a creek. This will make the build- --- — _ ing a gateway to the garden. _.. - -w.- The geometry of the building _-" °"`.'- has a playful rigor. The circular seminar room seats 50 in con- centric circles of desks and has ~ - "''"" 4 , " a a hexagon superimposed at the A 4 second level by three dual -pur- � , , -, � � � : pose conference rooms and the ;.. bridge. This bridge, which at first appears to be wildly free - , * '- ' form, and could have been since r 4 , it is suspended from above, is -. actually tamed by the circle and hexagon. The basic square of ,, `. , the plan is maintained by brick terracing. * " aog s But the dominance of the full x, ,f,,.--,„„:-..- circle can be enjoyed from at least three sides. As Harry Weese puts it, they "extracted as much from the three-dimen- sional possibilities" as they could, especially by nudging the circle a little beyond the bound- aries of the square. The port- hole windows are reminders of - the circle where it is least ap- parent. One gives a special view of the cottonwood from the 62 Y ' r W - i - -. • � +' rt + a rit ;, tip , , 1 4 x .£ r�z '%�,ti,_ ... ' �n All . .., ...,,..L..„,.„_.„0„,.....,,,,_ , e, - 4, m x r - 4si z : a • A \ ‘ , , a na r , -i ' , 4.4.1,` ... ._._ - .,. G institute is 01— t r° i v ` 3 nt�a) area and makes Inrii *' estates towards its nerghbcarr w+ s k n?� f= . S e3if Crately franc + off its B . , 4 4 1 e existing utility shed at the to _��� -,1.-.1;,..,.' m �` Pict plan '(above) is rerryi -.:4 e rs <a f rn!ning era b:ii`din s anti ,, r t? . i , .deted to serve as a' c3 t " r C • u e ', '[ n.�` ca ;' Thy CI; 1 ,. i) le notch to the en V { o osit e a boi ngs tight Into trance .f f it / a i ° ` *. the pp lobb and s eco nd floor rooms and ' f" em hasi the g eometry ve) br by separa inB the circular and a left triangular of the volumes f rom rest whicfi com the square. T he eastern facade (top) is the most sculptural. Stots in plete the wakl at right the a re for bikes. 63 Cooly M -MARCH -1973 r .4..,„!' . g* `p - R , , . ry ; .� • _ r : . 0 , .ttt t i„w e liil d a ,. — f >* a. t V, Z. library; others illuminate the Dr. King hopes to have public The northern facade (above) is tnt first floor hall and kitchen. lectures one night a week with most open. The library balcony facia The other windows are like- chamber music concerts. The the pond (seen only from the swot floor) gives readers a chance for 1 wise emphatic. The first floor seminar room desks can be pleasant breather. From the malt conference room w i n d o w s, taken up in about an hour, leav- entrance (below) one feels the build . planned from a sitting point -of- ing carpeted risers as seating in contrast ts within its geometry as wdl:4, view, look right out into the the round, When the building as with nature. From the northaFd grass; the library windows is not being used by the Insti- (right) one sees how variously "` above, on the north, give a full tute, it can be rented for small building responds to its site way; rooms quite different in feeling be , view of the pond and mountains lectures or concerts. cause of the fenestration. beyond; and, on the west, low The building is equipped with slit windows draw attention to open conduits for telephone . the flower beds. lines to computer terminals and , This painted white block build- for closed - circuit TV connection ing with black mullions and rail- with University branches. The t ings is crisp in its setting of laboratory, with centrifuges, an greens and harks. White inte- electron microscope and dark - rior walls and a green carpet room, is equipped for five -day on all but laboratory and service demonstration experiments. floors bring the basic color The seminar room desks have scheme inside. The walls span microphones and individual re- ;„ as much as 30 feet over open- cording machines which enable " 'j ings, using no structural steel; conferees to tape just what they +.� reliance is on regular reinforcing need of a session. This room , rods. The horizontal joints of also has rear and front screen A - -,,-;„.... ,, +... the block are raked; vertical projection; the glass walls above �' t` joints are flush. are adaptable as screens. , i Under the direction of Dr. Satisfying acoustics have re - 7. «. , - Donald King, the University of suited from isolating the me- -' "',- Colorado gives 13 summer chanical equipment in a building `• ,v., r r g . courses at the Institute for pro- of its own and the hexagonal r ri lessors and students of biology form of the second level. j and related fields, Receptions Harry Weese says this build- and catered lunches for the ing is light hearted —after all, p! week -long conferences are held it's 8,000 feet above sea level. rx, � : %.4 t: ... on the terrace just outside the We think it would be welcome kitchen. at any altitude. -- -JANET BLOOM � � r t �' . wxn 64 , (�; h 3 xs " s }. a Ai, 1 ` A 4 WP..p n #^ S. E • � �t ' " i t f 4 4A" . , µ 1 i.—A.', v , t `t, fi a'� Yn !trt , -lilt.' a .� 1 'i 1 LOBBY lei v." / FACTS AND FIGURES ,� 2 COAT ROOM } The Given Institute of Pathobioiogy. ' 1 3 DEMONSTRATION LABORATORY 100 E. Francis St., Aspen, Colo. .i 't'r _ 4 DARKROOM ?`i Owner: University of Colorado. Arch!/ 5 COUNTING ROOM 4; tect: Harry Weese & Associates. Proi- 4 6 JANITOR'S CLOSET ect Manager: William Hauhs. Job 7 SEMINAR ROOM Captain: Philip Prince. Engineers: The j �' , s 8 FOYER Engineers Collaborative (structural); 9 HALL James Burke & Assoc. (mechanical & ' 10 KITCHEN electrical). Interior Designer: HWA. 11 CONFERENCE ROOM Contractor. H.E. Anderson, Inc. Build- i e 12 MECHANICAL ROOM ing area: 12,800 sq. ft. Construction • 13 BRIDGE cost: 5100,000.00. 14 LIBRARY (For a listing of key products used ' 15 CARRELS in this building„ see p. 77.) 15 OFFICE - ' 17 SUPPLY ROOM ' 18 REPRODUCTION ROOM I 4 • 19 CONFERENCE/PROJECTION ROOM 1d 1 —, E _ AtIlli i 1 Hli I ......,,, _ .1 --: . 1 I 1 I 1 It . ; I. L 15 19 to 'y 7 SLCTiON AA r 4 (.3 _ -� ° .. 1 . » t 4Iiiill j,! , ` 41 I _t t t a t urn nr.�r «. ,gy ,u ,: _ 14 � 0 41111 CO.° M1WWMI11 . 1 5∎1 . f. _ _ • 14 ! 3I i lA SIMtOtt 8.8 65 FORUM—MARCH -1973 ____,----------„,.,-----------------,. ------..............,___....... TilE A ........ • - -;11. 3 P E N TIM E S . . .., .. ...... _ ..... . , `,._ . la Pb ..! s . aap Colatado 81611 • 15 Cents ....r ............ „., 7.,.. -, • NI en Inst D ed .. ......x.,,..„,‘...„..„. , . . „..,,,,...... ......„ . e.. ,... ani ...gt tiv rotiz1/4' ' vs rS ivarratier . , “ . . • ' A .' t . " 000, , ■ a held cr - - :NV t ;tiler the . _ . ... -a rama v.: W Kia$,. .: , . . . .. „ .. ... . .., r ,,, --,. . .. ........ , . ., . ....... , . - weft r Coe Mt** ' , , ',.::.,:'-.,'.'.(,'.;;.-':4''", ..4•• .,.'• ' ' '' ' '-'''' - ,... , :, -•'. '''' . 4: '..•]'''' '''''„''' • • tiosatt.i A fae*kY et 1 .41 6 , . u New,: 7r1a. WORNOTS ▪ neinkers A ate National • ti testreet , • - . . , • - 4ie .... - akra3..' , :'. a ' .-.-, .... - ,.. ...- ..• ' , . - r.-....a.: • , '''• ' ' .., .... . , .: ...,... --,.: .,.... : lama ot None! Grr... :-.....-: . ---- ''.;4.,:.: , . ' - . , . • - talking W tii Jrzettneti , . Vic „, *Wee *auto ' C„ Patipat. :I pmekires a .. , . : -, .., • .' . ,,,,' . • ' ' , .....„.;.... ‘,. , - ^..„. mai • tente bat neat: cearreth.-e ' ,.. ',. ae alam,,,-„, ktto.rattary with arrow .„,- -. ' -..'. ' :•.,... -, , „ . ' Matta act. „ sr.m•Vatars- d a taietrar, dara, anted aath - ' M C•1 - - f: o'''' v; 3 • 1,14114t.a• kt4..4 Latzer!: at .......,,.. a t4Fakars.N. ?dada:a'," Center au t:' . i, anat. ' ' 4 t ataneata 4 the E..%1401.te *as V ! b..) a gtt at S'405..tVe . . .... . . ' ' 011 tra tvat Heinz Gisaaa ard Fi ".....,,:wit;4444., s, 4 4Ort Girtil utaciO404 4 '''"7t: . , Ot! Mrs Sarah Ca ."'''',.. *.. 'Z ,,,,;•,. ' ,', ' n - ,-.;. iou ',..:.:'.. .:t., . '' .. ------ - :.. a .,........7—• u..* piax,p,,at im tbe ' , '...; , • ...• ..la U.i.ti 3110 part %aMs. , q' • „' ille Ikeibmwe. t and ;1‘ . . • , .. • ,,, . .14 ' • - 'el formAZ present Over .,;.' .. 40 . ,' r -;14 ,.. .'t' litak bt ac 1 " Or 1 • , . . :- . .. v Prestdent Fretirack n Ak .. .., - • Nale;' th, unietettle d 41 rf • i ikania . ,.. ,, , ,,, ,,,,, ,:: ima ., ...,‘, .. , . tite,,, ,,,i. .r. 10. ., '. , .... • At t. ,..,S 47,0,4'4,4,, ..4.* , t three...Ia openini , ,44 ,•, el ..' .., " . .,, ..„ A t. 41 . ■- '" : m te*Iti Itss morning . ,,, , ,. Iganglestesi tist re i f, t „ ,,...' . I , - ' 4e the program ,; w. ,. •',..'".:•,g,,,;,,...." ,. ': - , -, ' . '';. .',,,',. ,,,•. ta N46e, ue :at:metes, tte • J. .,,,,,, ., [ 'I * Xa..., Wiatute of 1 -..; • , I-14 preadents of 31ree • ":".'*;„ :'''' , . , '.,,,. „ .,,... . . ..„... allti ..1 half a fX , ' !•q. ., T, ' f,/,',,' " ‘,.• todl be dev *tea' *•••' . , ,„. the wend. 114' •,. ''',. e 4&„.e.et weeetka, - Mr. , ■ ; -ttkit141 ena :it . 1 be g.1,,,'-' owei (Wwa** 'O . " 44'163' 47 '''41"" " 14'4 ,, - 4■14, V" Al."' F*11." INKi Dtt21*e 04 , a n k s h f : ,,,, :at: ,,.. ..a , : g a v ad ca taz . F rt ast , :::a CO ;casstra ir agaPaahloa" . . 7 4., 4, ,...,.. ..,„....... „, m ... k . Director 0.,. i.... . ..,,,,, 1,.. ,... Or ..., . .. ''...,,, , r - :"=" 1970 lane a .6. or ap th :t, '"1 7 .. .4.,.,... 12 1 --- i. :: ,.t.r..1... ro w t iv 0,1,0 1 to4 to dedwkt *to Chombat 5roshoo $o fo.,+r o m eo Iowa t: ' ' , :av , - - .,. ■ - ,-- .tha AN:m. p y f its 0 C a. S T .... 0 , a dat ,,,f • pfkatfarT. t......:,Li-A4, O C.,..4.K City a {4 �' "`- 4? � `� � , " a .4 r , ci e , . - - , (4. ,- , , ,, ,,,c, -- .,, , . , , _, 4 . , .,.... Przy g). -4: §4 ' 1:ig IP le 2- Q . , . 0 4. 0-4, .;',.,.,, ,, P v et) et;) s rt.' ,0 00 et# 0.0* 40 IYYT ,f 3 ., v, .z . r . < , s + ' 1 A 4....... a r e. 0 0 r „,„ ,,, ,, a , ,,,.. :,,,` -....0, , 7 , ox , ,,,,, 4 , *so. roi 8 ,, , ki ! ,,,, ; bi ' v :"W.,,,t t 0 ow* (1) _. w .si.,., 8 ...i, 3 moss t *, 7 �p * ^ e ... g w t 0%4 g ” I' s oi" # 4 i) ***4 . 0. ,,-,,,,, ick a e - 1 .. 5 ,.... , ro r oi if:3 ci ..., do ilk 8 401 .01,- 4:0 0..4 ..1 ..0. f IP 0 ' if,,,,,, 4 r k *444 7 , , , ,.., .... . f ,g e ?I; .... ...... to 4 .00..... if, p,,,,,, .. Nor 'ffl �, 1004°1 M R ti ,�y'l *le: g 0 e'41' gi c;r, Pre 4 t eft, r° , `.' '�, ,w +►p ,„,,,. 4.- ,-.t.. rt.) 8 f/C4 '.0 r 0 **''' r.. r , ,I ,.ter a ,,,.. * , �' r...t ..... ..„,„.„. ? "4'f:4 : *i.444.**fa '" 1 : 1-1--i i 9:'": 4 0 ft, ' , , is-,,,, I'D * ,#, 0 044 r ' * 4 41, 04) t144 a g # .,,,, . ,,,,, .., ,,, .,..., ! 0 ,„ 4 „ � , , fill 4 .4 #r+ 4 pr ., ,, $0,4 ,,. .1,0 r) r n 8 ' g 0 (0.1 •,,,, :7 '1 f ' 0 , 04 4, 1 40 ,„„ 0 . ,. 4 givowt ` T , 404* 0.44 , o tios .. ! 7e , , ., -,,, „,„.„ „. ,;,... .... ,..0„, rt „ n � * R = eke” ylwoM c _ 0 t5 I 1 I I MN 0 1 i — ... '-- 0 0 ea " .*.* c te ,., g , -6,..- - -,...‹ 7, ..... z , ..., .1 -0,. ,„„ n c , .., = I Lli C kli . i git i F - I - - 0 3 ; 7 z l' - ''. . . e ? ' E ' ` _ M 1-1 - - ..., - -I, 1 .... .4 "„.... ....: .; ••".' 4 ,,„, -- :.-,_ -...i. - -- - uu u, x ,....= , r ...: , ,, , ..... , . 7 - ` 7, .. 74 t: " * ;1 ' .< 5: 7 „., 3 0_ .. , cv. g It let f t it et M. VI • 4*. 0 4 ... 'n _ 2, - "si 0. K.& ,-.. , ,t i,-, a pit- 4 ..;,..„ .., ,!.,.., .„.. = ..,.., I , t7,.... ..:,..,, ,,,,.. ,... .. Cr ; ' ... ..„ . •-••• ; ' - ';'• . • r, er.. -.] - '• kr - -s. 4:7 „ . 3 a, , vi 0 ag 1.`1. R 5 ' '; ,^.-", ... * ...! • - 0 a• * Z ,, - 9 e ''' ', fi . i 6 6 0 - 1,3 ..... 0, !„,, sa , e E ii -, ... „„„ w 2 tfl ,.... i;., • t* i " "7 .',5 X., = 7 . ; s 5 8. n '•. - :',' *4 B e r .. ° ! !T 2 ,..., ,,,, * !...,.. ,.., .:-.. ?,,,... . IA . 3 ,,, cr. ek F. D .r, t3 t- --.,., ''' ' ;t '..• 2 "'' 4 " -- • s '•-• Cr . qQ ''' 7.; Di ''''' ..— '1 ..- .rr '`'' - i A "l< (1 , r• a 2 l ', Po : P- •-. t:/ 8 ",.% '-', ''',:.', ' 5 •-. ' v• cr ' c-, ' A m4P16 ' „ n - - e , .,.. s.. a .. 314 mi.. 2 Z A 0 ,-, Z ":,.." ' 5 N Z ( 0 Q a %LI (..6 °7. ■i. ' " g" cr a c P-n 13 . K 7 ° et ' •••• 11 M 5 , 9 ; - - 5 ,r, -, `,2.. - '.',' m .1'2 .7 c.,, * , ,„ " n , ,-, •s et, '''' = •••, ...- r i fr, ' r, .3 cr 0 ,... - r, i • •,-, P, t ; • , .; , P. . , 6 '-' - , imis • 0 ._,..e° _ a 5 .0 ( 2 a , .. ,,,,, .... ci.. z -,;-; ..; 0 7 .., 5 _ c.. .. 7 ..... r = NEN= 6, ro g . = 0 co 5 rt; " - ' . — 0 ■ 0 * eG --"' O. - . '3. X ... ' ' . . . . . ". ; , , ,C:) ev re., et, .--. 5, M ' 5 = .-- a, m -:. a, w. - „. - 2., c 0- 2 _, tr <, I 'E ,- cf 1 ), 2 V B 1 2 . , , g • _ , ,5 , , ) 9' • Frj. . Ya: i , , ,t " 2 .;... . 'II '; .:, ,.. c2 ,..E ii :.„, ,,,,,,, , 5 8 ,,,,., 8 .,,._ c 8, 71 i - ge, 4 ,.. , (413 (f) .-,0 „,c,„„.... 7 „,. c .., rt•,. tr J. o a . e3, „4. a- _, z-• ..e, a-• '•,' = p., ::::, c Rog ` tA I t< ,_... ........ _ _. x - z _: cro a, .'":r - rD e''' .-.., • -r!: 0, r= ''''" Cl• '-' = "'"" > rD eD ' .f .....: - .-1 . ;•• -a ,,, tn ri . .. ,-, a c .-. a `^ 2 - Pc 0 w 's n' eD Cfr r P 4- 1 t '' eD • •-•:"" ,:, a ... , , ..7:ati3E - ra r" `F '-' ', el " ,-: •-' la:: - -' cra ''' E. (D F_o_ - , ,f, Er g- . ,-1, - 4-,-, t w ::..... - g (-A ,;.,. ,,--;-. c3 x .. et, ..< ,-,• -1 - , ta. , C) ,,- ", a, 0 ,-- ,., ,.., CD .-, • :7, c: ,.. _, E ,...., , ta, r --, ., 0 ..1 " 0 a si., , ,_ F s g, .., E-,. - rp 0 a' .1. .E,--, (0 E ,.,. E . 0 , Q . 0 ,,, -, p, - --... 2) ,S a ( ci a- c r, t..., ■- P. -.' - 05 ri ' a. a - ,--- g .- - . a , ra , - 3 DI 5.- „_,. ..., , 1 ro -... -1 ••-•, tz , -, - c-) ,,,, (A , - 0, P '-'. ''‹ r ga m tl7 w "a" 6 ' 2 ,. L' R - ' 5 tt ; ' = E o - 6' > '' ' a ), a • cr, " ' cr 6 7 ,0 , -au .,, 20 I . 2 - ro 2 , " u , 1 4 r ' r.. c'i '5 . - .-• ' c' .:- ' g- ' ' ' ; - " *-, ° 2 a 7- ::' 8 ' " , - 1 - - w o Lt = - r" o•- FA'n roc)._g"c4';': (7" ' rr ; - - 5 n B. 0 ' 7 30 6 . * . ,_,-.. ,' < cr ,-_-,. 0 -, ,-- = = ,.. .... o & . . . ,,,,,, z „ -..-. , -, z co ni as co f . .. < . = ..., o.„ a. ro co w eo Ott ;1 ,..., .-1 • •• ''f'I''' , , i".." ''' "I'' ''''' 6... - ` A 4.- ' . 14. . ' 1,... -,..-=. -, ,. ,..: _ , . - .• .•,.., .., c 3 :...• ' -:'4,it .„.,.......... ,/,.. •;•-., 4,, s. „ ,_•,,„ - •e V ,,-:‘, 3 ;:. ....., 9 t •,,c .4 4. t.J ;;.. = a a :1- ..., a 1 __._ _ -. _ _ _. _. ___ .. 4 ii . W G w N'O ° a „ m u • 9 k 0 W . _- N W 4 A C° _ -0 0 p, o Q 0 ° °i , Gw H C d �� o • W E —) Q n ,_ m U >Qu. d a 'lJ mmiaw a, ” ' O i H O 0 nq u ti u y u o° O m�� ° rW CID V m 4; G 0 ea c 4.„ w£ 8 T� CS A ai c, P . 0 •12 — a cl : a an x w G y O G > o ._ 'o u p4 u c.G > > a) e. - -� W >' N 7 G 'z O' „ 0 0 C c •O `a •a m �� N d , a� p Z. E ° w .. a„a La ._ c a g o a u m e r o ..cg-1‘11 ,c0;14-•...c F— ; � � J w � r7 GO OyiZ NN EW 3 ,a N� .,UBa Ca • O, Q Q I _ v V w N C. ...• rn� w S" > i J m� ° 0 •- mm To' 0 00 , >0Q o ca E o o m Z cc W u .. a r ..'am • c' o Of 5. M ° a i,_ . r ~ 1 m N m CC p j Q r J � W . � •a . ° 0 a�3 X WE3 c 3 , o v m E ` ° 3 m0 • 'O o _0 t) d20 a / e o G° I d' o W • H C = u. 1.0.01 W O I �� 7 A w m A °+ � W Tm: =O WG Cw a m O m ti. Q. CO 00 A -. F'. • ^Tm' «;�dAti2' .l EA U ° m C r ` as . ' 3 _ �_. LL y � ; A3�'�x, a"iai�a0'xw`u'G�'a'� m 0 , E Q Q w O N c. a 'O V N a)o U _ � y t I N y a 3 o E' N O cr ` O ' 9 o ' Q„`° c O ° • c m e °' o m o I m Q cV ° aw ... n 0 4 G em L P ill u O 2 a . .f ,,,_,..‘4,0,9,=.0 ,, O c d c ' a F AO ° u d 1 al m `o 0 .... E . .._ z ca –on =W ° 3 oA amA rn_ w 0 N H m m m m MIS o c .° ^ ;y, ..Gp +4i - : � Et p o r d o g a .. U O ■ a, w 6m c .'�` Y �7 + Z NE =Bi'�n n a '• O LL T I ..1.4. O 0 r oo 6 coil o G1 ai , „ « G ° g ° ° o - (a LL H a, ..CI MU a m Pill • E O ., w w G t u m a ' O C L .0 :ti L G • i ;)1.47 ” w G O E c?R ?. p m rain_ C 9 CL C 1 ai U .aC" w , _, b C 3y r 0.10 Cl 5 0 C ` cc? O o : A TJ FJ , m �.! T � u m Z L G m a a, w a, � £'O a >c , 3 aZ3 u co w E 4 w' a d N N O m t Fe' t2 15 ..•o a,v ° - E to v o'd d' vi« 3 0.« Z 't E u C Y m ; � ' y ..:. u� a s f m..2 t ° LL. �'3 T v ) s c c • o m A .. .. N a , o bd G1 C . c e c C ' A a W > a, m. m d a ', d O w, r •o m w a, d m . 3 . 4 y A v i E u C y • + . m j p . vw G � . m 7 . b .u. ' S' i •� 4.-.4, 'a £ "� g W F O ae, in u'EL dm a mmdawd.a¢cppaS4'E°a E£ 0U LI 0 m pp yC ,,w , y yaA •6 :irN 4a0.'.A .e a tA ..,C m 02 W W ° P. L - ' a,a,a, °G' 00,.U". %w Qw OC6 'HC ..•5 a a) y2.iu Mvl _ �f 4 ;y �+ ' Si as 8 A a a, V m .d « d i e r w •w H t a w , ,, N y y ! ° $gsoo8c8.ac, E aum.wD..,o «UGL'mON dw oo o o 0 c . ya , ' . 'C a rc/ am. m L b 00= a op U TO C 004"" a a- : N c m f y m U •, '- 0 le 8 m ., TO0 b yy 5 oF.E iNN." ,a1 C. .�w � ' � m ao Vi a C , a,m . .. T'7 a4 E • -o a•oca c . o . • I pm'a .8 ataa)SA a as e mv 6 as N8 a � O 0 0N d u ' c A . « on a) � •m o °y5vba£ � £ o u 'w G �a 0:4 o pO 42 T01 G m m w w E w ., .. a, 2 y g. a3 •OO C 0 •; A o % .. .. a a a. v A '3a w 0 -. go O . 80 W ' Q uc a0a •d...., U m U •O W 0) 5 a, O i+ ^� ,,, 0 £ ... : .+ 't a Ca C w .. m P'. " .. N N ° '° m u m s y +' p �. .. iR .. .G � O , ; m « m a 7' m P. • O o£ C m N C O .a 0 a. ... ,. u. m A eo . m 0 A Q. x_ u ❑ -o b c p pa u ' v y co .E a " a ... C C s y O w O w • . a, u , /h a C .0!/�. £ . w • °' 5 7 A g m 7 Oi 2 m y •o G � •o St, - , A ' c� aF' m too A .' 2, d a o w'pU Gw GGA� L wt 7t gyp a U C m a A' mY C. O G' yC N .Ew ca GF ba y ° a, 7'°-q c o o c m 0 y m `° o 1 a) m • . m p e a A 3 vNl o ° m' P . c 2 o° 8, p M m 0 L -. ° u •• m , ° u . w o O 0 °° 3 ^ C O C 1 .4 ip TT i � v 5 a p L] o u N E- E O N A . 4 o a s a W N co .6 N 7 ro .a N ' O �� d ' O U E. N EOdw - T d =. 4) 4) .. C m a E�y a cY E G Om .a m A G m O G A >' m .. w m w d _ - r m w a. H m . . E ou u - -M ✓ . - • - . , tn S •° o m uC ❑ Am tA d ' F 7 0 � 7 Y �� W Q O � • 'CI 71 n ~W O aa C y° O 0 d Z I•! ' O O ) , — to O G.a', N U a, CG „bE,1 ,13-1 •t ._. _ . � � j t H LH •"a « A «o ° 1 ^ p O ' ., G. a , `A 4 F � � \ � ,` \\ p ' •\ ▪ i ' / `"J4, C`r'zH al co o a'' Zi �— CZ . • O aA 0 o . -. R7 r-7 mai V C. Is U v, .°. o, m a. � ' �'�. Ira S O L O. . cC .b C O N y ye L ` Q7 `` .l . ca y CC w u ii1 r NO ❑ N 7 L O- y 't cc) o o y a MI i Lt Y J Q ? a) u ` r a as 0 `j ❑ re CO 01 0 d —gy i (4/65) 2 ILL B INSPECTION DEPART!' 'NT CITY C "EN - COUNTY OF PITKIND, t ' 'RADO ADDRESS f_ ° ', /jam -Gc , GENERAL 1 OF JOB - Given Institute ' CONSTRUCTION PERMIT WHEN SIGNED AND VALIDATED BY BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES THE WORK DESCRIBED BELOW. CLASS OF WORK: NEW Ja ADDITION ❑ ALTERATION ❑ REPAIR MOVE ❑ WRECK ❑ OWNER NAME Colorado University ADDRESS PHONE cc LICENSE LICENSE F NAME (AS LICENSED) H, E. Anglers on, Inc, CLASS NUMBER 2860 v 4 .INSURANCE z ADDRESS 796 26 Road Grand Jct, PHONE S 242-4298 ❑ O SUPERVISOR V FOR THIS JOB NAME H. E. Anderson DATE CERTIFIED LEGAL A,B,C DESCRIPTION LOT 140. BLOCK 140. 63 ADDITION SURVEY . ATTACHED DESIGN A uc BY Deryl Gingery BY H arry Weese & Assoc PE NO. AREA (S.F.) HEIGHT NO. TOTAL OCCUPANCY AT GRADE 12 Sq FtI (FEET) 22' STORIES 2 UNITS 1 GROUP 13 DIV. 3 BASEMENT FIN. ❑ GARAGE SINGLE ❑ ATTACHED❑ TOTAL 26 TYPE {�'I FIRE UNFIN. ❑ DOUBLE ❑ DETACHED ❑ ROOMS G CONSTR. ` 1} ZONE BELOW FIRST SIZE SPACING SPAN AGENCY AUTHORIZED DATE Z GRADE 51 H FLOOR 2x10 16" center BY o REVIEW F FO N CEILING Q SIZE standard O same ZONING Z EXTERIOR CONC.11 heavy timber 3 and 4" dec = THICKNESS 10 T 9l❑ ROOF O INS LL THICK CAISSONS ROOFING PUBLIC HEALTH SLAB ❑ R. GR.BEAMS ❑ MATERIAL Built-up Composition MASONRY ABOVE ABOVE ABOVE ENGINEERING EXTERIOR THICKNESS big 1 ST FLR, 2ND FLR. 3RD FLR. WALL & SPACE E ffi 1ST ABOVE ABOVE FLR. 2ND FLR 3RD FLR. REMARKS Institute for Colorado Univ. NOTES TO APPLICANT: FOR INSPECTIONS OR INFORMATION CALL 925 - 7336 FOR ALL WORK DONE UNDER THIS PERMIT THE PERMITTEE ACCEPTS FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR VALUATION COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, THE COUNTY ZONING RESOLUTION OR CITY a( 88 ZONING ORDINANCE, AND ALL OTHER COUNTY RESOLUTIONS OR CITY ORDINANCES WHICHEVER QF WORK ,8 807, APPLIES. SEPARATE PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING AND HEATING, SIGNS, PLAN TOTAL FEE SWIMMING POOLS AND FENCES. PERMIT EXPIRES 60 DAYS FROM DATE ISSUED UNLESS WORK 15 STARTED. FILED T P Cr 511.5 °fermi t REQUIRED INSPECTIONS SHALL BE REQUESTED ONE WORKING DAY IN ADVANCE. DOUBLE CHECK ❑ 255.75 pl Ck ALL FINAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE MADE ON ALL ITEMS OF WORK BEFORE OCCUPANCY IS PERMITTED. FEE ❑ CASH ❑ 67 . 25 tot.1 THIS BUILDING SHALL NOT BE OCCUPIED UNTIL A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN ISSUED. ❑ BUILDING DEPARTME T - . PERMIT SUBJECT TO REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION FOR VIOLATION OF ANY LAWS GOVERNING SAME. SIGNATURE OF �-'� ?�''G�� 7-- APPLICANT: � A APPROVAL BY DATE THIS FORM IS A PERMIT ONLY DATE PERMIT NO. LICENSE # RECEIPTS CLASS AMOUNT WHEN VALIDATED HERE ...,=■>. / 'ja7/ w • y ...nFi.n. A1.-1. Ci.A.:A ciCX:CS:.A. C:C)� nn.. * :iC JG ******** **." -� n��i�i�'�ci'i'�ii:i:**** .1. / - * 3 J 2 { R ' ' CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY x * 1 = City of Aspen Pitkin County x * Colorado H E — I F Date July 24, 197 Lot' &'7'�'Bloc 63 T * • yT * 1 This is to Certify that a certain structure located ^L * T at 100 E. Francis : I and owned by Co1or.ado Unniveraity • erected under Building Permit No. . 224 ,197 0, complies • with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, 19 71: 1 • 4c Edition. - J y n : 1 Occupancy Croup 3 $ _. Type- Construction V_11 * : r 1 1 Fire Zone • C i Comments and Restrictions: (a to: Carl HamcerRren;Unniversit Colo. Ned. Center; 4200 E. 9th St.p Denver, Colo. 80220 : ic Cony:to: I. E. nderscn Inc. 796 26 Road; Grand Junction, Colo. ti 'i� • • f _ 3 y y n * T _ t * ie Signed: * :< ♦ - C f Building Inspector_ - r rq..j.r.rry x.r .p: .Jr ➢r Jr )r :JC r fl 1 • n i s ... -:ti- �r -I- -. � r . i'P'' c - . _ .. u w♦ . Es C Q. qina W tE 3 H .o,�'£ �o c ` '. 33 3 o� 9 Z . o CL a c � r t , •� `- < I. :Si m p ; ?i n P$ Q., r _ mEEa 5 c 'E iwg m0 am ;";;;;;11:11..4,,;2.;s: _ � 9E�u °,Y9. H ¢a � ^ :k ° a na_ ° S=N IS _ 3'..S o�9 u.. - u GS4 ' -o m- Ci Z m° u o X ) } Iii N 242- _ E 3 - Z � r E m i . } � MI ` 2 el 0 NW e u zC ; > w 0Z I 1 , n o c D lib " - rc5 w ( a! tai,3 2 )III mc o E m l6 0 S / \' �jq LL � _ u ezC E EmE E ER 0 HI ` {A r O � a t E e E Q • • ..$3ZZ ,42 E6. c,.m o S A �'-. - . _ m - «q ^ S U a 3 _f 3 3 c t ".,6,81-21,x, cv,_ma " c < _ 3 Qm - _ E u f ' V C LL5 cu e p _ _ a - III - Ym 3._nGE'ym ^L � i E S c:R - n _ E e5 - � ;. ° 0 23 -- vo -Ym m cop E t 3 < 5'. L - d s { r m OS - e SrU Zm - 3 m g m `o_oL [ E c u u°T $ E C v Q 9 EO ` m ` -6 - m °n m:1- E o` C , V ° c 40 ° =F N , n h aE a 5 ._°°:i, C E E+So 0 L n g.9oE f. _ Q ti1) N < a" Ev d Ua,T - o .. .. -,Z - Ecm f -[ 03 . _ . ..� a ' c ES ❑° 0 CEo rc 3co ❑ vU m , 3 m ` h • ^3'. E9W me < C :c sass � �.: ° 3 ua Y_ L m E & S y 06. 0 °Y o m. i ° ; L �°`a 3m: e � [)e.Va`<3E- pE ESC "vaEga - aaa y m ° o " °. -u9UsE °m 3 8i a .....,n"UEm..m o �o x o a z f p Ec E .. -- ° ;Eu T� a 2 E - • 6'2 [ 9 2. o A '3 m - - m - � - i - C ▪ ., 3 ! , _. uF 3i 0 aE ° • Ea E 3 u g E E g l � � - 8 ¢ "i n =G E °c` - _, CS i, me '° m= - nz i m 6a G LL�aE -.r T A N a `O ' - 0 .. ' " _ � F" M -w Ili W N c L� Ea `E nmo`c `u`Q E,E ^d o om E P . '�: .. a 3vo 0 Ed I r to �Gt 0 VVV oN Fpc_ " yn " u m ° L9c�3 .y . � � ° = v r$ tv m " m N f >1..) c o a r l 5a 0 r C r �] ,4-7;, ,4-7;, ' WF 0 <_ . E qq os a E. 5 t."5:541. To c �a 3. °_ < "o ,25.2a8 ..d. 3 m a, C« °3 ' " p 1 0 = r, m ° E. . o d t� ' • m u c _ u . u. q . „.. ° c 2°� a c ., a - ,o m-n3Eyp i g , v 0 '^ 1 w 3 9 ` ° - ° c m ” : .. ^ w ' o a - -: g.°0.1 mE ▪ e c a o . Ci$ V a m ° ° v m m °3` ° > >°° ^3 - pE. 2aE y i = : 3" = c a Z v U U O " E ". o a < - co "Sv - .su . -" °[m - a up eu- E c coau3:lc -. N mo r = ❑ N N 'es'w - .,a° ^a =2:::.2-..r-1 1, a< E - m - W =EE ° aR a! 88 • Y_ ¢Z Z iE o ° o c c m o - ° c E l aet" °2=.5.4=- o3 a- 4, . —° � 1 m W C ° A s . 3 FO • mo o < ^ S. " = T Y.P - q Y "= mE ^ aa` ° aoa c� N W O c V Gl 3 W 0' m S 2 °c 'aan3° o y 13,244402a . ' c ==go - EB- -"°uv : N d @ O a m c 'm : _ . 'o E. ,m ° - [ oaa o � as _.. � ,- $ ¢ C a _51 3T� m " . 4)° S "' ` EYw u AE<'Oa " .S °laz , .um.'3m oFC \ O f n N e 2 _ " ns_ $a - " „3 E me3`oai 32°.55 -.00a c.. ,. - uam _ - 304 _ p ;e> u ES - - a ”" n - D 53m aa a m a s _c m_o° °_o °e ° c c c -EY a3u " °o`c3. c e,t a - L-s=g�? 0 `oc c i : `u`og C 2 aEEt - E3E' +: rite o U ^ 3 �o _ w m HE 1,- ° 2 ,-0-g-.; c" " SEE ° EE:�� F V L a . S _ °,lt 0 ! .-S oo .c ° Ed - -c 3° -3. 0,EgEo2 ° E m Y 9_m `° o' 2,90 ` o• ml °e'o= ov'°°d 3"3m °3 -< < o c° a + l ' m u F . p m ^ «'. '`'_ ° mm ` = °`o ° u i 3n = 3EceEo`u; -.E Ei L' t . c� 1.9 wc� ° oN $_' ti Printable r. Page 1 of 1 Aspen gives Given negotiations more time t } OCTOBER, 27 2010 •I AARON HEDGE 'ad g ,.. THE ASPEN TIMES ASPEN, CO COLORADO Janet Urquhart / The Aspen Times ASPEN — The Aspen City Council on Tuesday night approved another extension for negotiations between the city and the University of Colorado's medical school to preserve the Given Institute. All five members voted in favor of the extension with no deliberation. The council also extended negotiations late last month, continuing a month -long saga during which the university has tried to get rid of what it says is a financial burden. The city, meanwhile, has tried almost everything within its power to keep the building. University officials have said operating the Given costs about $200,000 annually — more than CU can continue to pay given its fiscal situation. CU originally wanted to demolish the Given because a potential buyer didn't want the lot unless the building was gone. It has been used for nearly four decades as a conference center for medical talks. The City Council has met many times since in executive session to establish a deal that would save the building, which many consider a community icon. Aspen philanthropist Elizabeth Paepcke donated the site to the university for academic purposes. On Nov. 8, the council is scheduled to decide whether to pass an emergency order that would zone the property as academic, making it illegal to build a single- family home on the lot. That order passed a first reading in early September as a piece of leverage in the negotiation. The lot, located on 100 E. Francis St. in Aspen's West End, overlooks Hallam Lake. ahedge®aspentimes. com http: / / www. aspentimes. com/ apps / pbcs. dU /article? AID = 2010101029815 &template = printart http:// www .aspentimes.com/apps /pbcs.dll /article? AID = 2010101029815 &template = printart 6/30/2011 Reaular Meetine Aspen City Council October 25, 2010 Councilman Skadron said he would like to know to what degree the original approval relied on the gallery space. Councilman Torre asked if there are other ways to increase the rental space 427 square feet. Hills reiterated he is trying to honor his commitment to the tenants who need help purchasing their space. Roll call vote; Romero, yes; Torre, yes; Skadron, yes; Johnson, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #27, SERIES OF 2010 — Code Amendment Calculations & Measurements Councilman Johnson moved to read ordinance #27, Series of 2010; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 27 (SERIES OF 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE: 26.575.020 — CALCULATIONS AND MEASUREMENTS 26.104.100 — DEFINITIONS Councilman Johnson moved to adopt Ordinance #27, Series of 2010, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Romero. Councilman Torre said he would like to have P &Z comments for second reading. Councilman Johnson said he would like a synopsis of the public outreach on these code amendments. Roll call vote; Torre, yes; Skadron, yes; Johnson, yes; Romero, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 2010 — Rezoning Given institute Councilman Torre moved to continue Ordinance #22, Series of 2010, to November 8, 2010; seconded by Councilman Skadron. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Ireland closed the public hearing. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #17, SERIES OF 2010 — Code Amendment — Signs 6 Special Meetine Aspen City Council September 8, 2010 Mayor Ireland called the special meeting to order at 2:10 PM with Councilmembers Skadron and Johnson present. Mayor Ireland said this meeting was continued from September 7 and from 10:30 AM when there was not a quorum. Mayor Ireland noted this ordinance rezones the Given Institute to Academic, which will not prevent the demolition of the Given but will give the city an opportunity to negotiate with parties interested in purchasing the property from CU. Mayor Ireland said this is an emergency ordinance to act before the demolition permit period expires. Jim True, special counsel, said this emergency ordinance rezones the Given Institute parcel from R -6 to Academic. The Given is bordered by an academic parcel, ACES and a public parcel, the Red Brick. True noted the history of the Given Institute since its • construction has been as an academic use. The property was donated to the University of Colorado for their use as an academic parcel. Councilman Johnson said this does preserve the city's options and does allow Council to hear from the public. Councilman Skadron said he feels this is an appropriate step and serves the best interests of most of the parties involved. Councilman Johnson moved to read Ordinance #22, Series of 2010; seconded by Mayor Ireland. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 22 (SERIES OF 2010) AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, REZONING THE GIVEN INSTITUTE, LOCATED AT 100 EAST FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO FROM R -6, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO A, ACADEMIC, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Councilman Johnson moved to adopt Ordinance #22, Series of 2010, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Skadron. Roll call vote; Johnson, yes; Skadron, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. Councilman Johnson moved to go into executive session at 2:20 PM pursuant to 24-6 - 402(4)(a) The purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of any real, personal, or other property interest and (b) Conferences with an attorney for the local public body for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions; seconded by Councilman Skadron. All in favor, motion carried. 1 w., Continued Meetine Aspen City Council September 20, 2010 Mayor Ireland called the continued meeting to order at 5:05 PM. with Councilmembers Torre, Romero, Johnson and Skadron present. ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 2010 — Rezoning Given Institute City Attorney, John Worcester, requested Council continue this Ordinance until October 25` . Worcester told Council he has been discussing this with counsel for University of Colorado and they are aware and consent to this extension. Councilman Torre moved to continue Ordinance #22, Series of 2010, to October 25, 2010; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. Worcester noted this is also continuing the Ordinance #48 negotiations; CU is also aware of this. Councilman Johnson moved to adjourn at 5:06 PM; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. e; Kat n S. Koch, City Clerk 1 ORDINANCE NO. 22 (SERIES OF 2010) AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO REZONING THE GIVEN INSTITUTE, LOCATED AT 100 EAST FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO FROM R -6, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO A, ACADEMIC, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY WHEREAS, The City of Aspen is a Home Rule Municipal Corporation organized under and pursuant to Article XX of the Colorado Constitution and the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen currently regulates land uses within the City limits in accordance with Chapter 26.104 et seq. of the Aspen Municipal Code pursuant to its Home Rule Constitutional authority; and WHEREAS, Section 4.11 of the Charter authorizes the City Council to enact emergency ordinances for the preservation of public property, health, peace, or safety upon the unanimous vote of City Council members present or upon a vote of four (4) Council members; and WHEREAS, the University of Colorado Board of Regents, owners of The Given Institute, have submitted a demolition permit to remove the structures located at 100 E. Francis Street, Parcel ID #2735- 124 -19 -851, more specifically described as follows: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER STREET, AND PART OF THE NW '/. OF THE SW '/ OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST, AND PART OF THE NE'/. OF THE SE Y. OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID PARCEL IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF FRANCIS STREET AND 24.00 FEET EASTERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF CENTER STREET; THENCE N. 14 DEGREES 50' 49" EAST 121.59 FEET; THENCE N. 33 DEGREES 03' 19" EAST 42.21 FEET; THENCE N. 7 DEGREES 19' 05" EAST 112.35 FEET; THENCE S. 70 DEGREES 18' 15" EAST 286.57 FEET; THENCE S. 6 DEGREES 18' 51" WEST 103.11 FEET; THENCE S. 18 DEGREES 12' 00" WEST 108.73 FEET; THENCE S. 9 DEGREES 25'21" EAST 52.10 FEET; THENCE S. 23 DEGREES 21'00" EAST 83.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FRANCIS STREET EXTENDED EASTERLY; THENCE N. 75 DEGREES 09' 11" WEST 288.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 64; THENCE N. 31 DEGREES 00' 50" WEST 107.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; and Emergency Ordinance Page 1 Ordinance No. 22, Series of 2010 WHEREAS, this property was identified within City of Aspen Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 as a potential historic resource and as such is required to participate in a 90 -120 day negotiation period, which is currently on- going, to discuss preservation alternatives; and WHEREAS, the University of Colorado Board of Regents has been unwilling to identify any preservation incentives that would be of interest and did not execute an agreed upon Memorandum of Understanding that would have allowed the voters of the City of Aspen to consider purchasing the property; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that The Given Institute has such value to the City of Aspen as to warrant an emergency action, namely rezoning of the property to a designation that accurately reflects the education activity land use that has been in effect on the site for the past 38 years; and; WHEREAS, rezoning requires a finding that the criteria for a Map Amendment stated at Section 26.310 of the Municipal Code are met; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommends approval of the proposed Map Amendment, as described herein; and, WHEREAS, the City Council fmds that the Map Amendment, as described in this Ordinance, is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare and should be implemented immediately to preserve the health, peace, safety, and general well -being of' the residents and visitors of Aspen, pursuant to the provisions of Section 4.11 of the City of Aspen Municipal Charter. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: Man Amendment. City Council hereby finds that criteria of Section 26.310 of the Municipal Code are met and rezones The Given Institute, 100 E. Francis Street, from R -6, Medium Density Residential to A, Academic. Upon the effective date of this ordinance, the Community Development Director shall place the amendment on the city's official zone district map, which is kept in the Community Development Department. Section 2: Emergency Declaration. It is hereby declared that, in the opinion of the City Council, an emergency exists; there is a need for the immediate preservation of the health, safety, peace, and welfare of the City of Aspen, its residents, and guests; which will be addressed by the identification and protection of historic resources. Emergency Ordinance Page 2 Ordinance No. 22, Series of 2010 Section 3: Publication. The City Clerk is directed that publication of this ordinance shall be made as soon as practical and no later than ten (10) days following final passage. Section 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 6: Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon final passage. INTRODUCED AND READ as provided by law as an emergency ordinance by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 8th day of September, 2010. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this _ day of _, 2010, by ❑ the unanimous vote of all City Council members present; or ❑ a v of four (4) council mem rs. hi U `x /200 M ichael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John Worcester, City Attorney Emergency Ordinance Page 3 Ordinance No. 22, Series of 2010 Continued Meeting Aspen City Council August 24, 2010 RESOLUTION #72, SERIES OF 2010 — Amending MOU with CU Given Institution Mayor Ireland moved to table Resolution #72, Series of 20010; seconded by Councilman Romero. Mayor Ireland said there is inadequate protection for the citizens of Aspen in this proposed MOU amendment. Councilman Torre said he would prefer to deny this Resolution. Mayor Ireland withdrew his motion. Councilman Torre moved to approve Resolution #72, Series of 2010. Motion DIES for lack of a second. RESOLUTION #73, SERIES OF 2010 — Ballot Question Given Institution Mayor Ireland said he does not think there is anything to offer the voters. No motions were forthcoming. GIVEN INSTITUTE ORDINANCE #48 NEGOTIATION Amy Guthrie, community development department, told Council the Given Institute has until September 22 on this issue and requested Council continue this until the next meeting. Councilman Johnson moved to continue the Ordinance #48 negotiation for the Given Institute until September 13; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Johnson moved to adjourn at 6:30 PM; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried. N �f Kat S. Koch, City Cler. 5 nffr Nix) PMD cil RESOLUTION NO. T (Series of 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO REGARDING THE GIVEN INSTITUTE. WHEREAS, the City Council did approve a Memorandum of Understanding ( "MOU") between the City of Aspen and the Regents of the University of Colorado relating to the Given Institute with the adoption of Resolution No. , Series of 2010; and WHEREAS, the Regents of the University of Colorado have asked that the original MOU be modified before they can agree to its terms; and WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council an MOU that has been amended from the original MOU at the request of the Regents of the University of Colorado, appended hereto as Exhibit A; and WHERAS, the City Council desires to approve the MOU as modified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: The City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Aspen and the Regents of the University of Colorado, a copy of which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does he of the C hereby authorized the City Manager to execute said Memorandum of Understanding on Aspen in substantially the form as appended hereto as Exhibit A. INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2010. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk CU MOU Amend MEMORANDUM REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF C ASPEN AND THE COLORADO THIS DOCUMENT CONSTITUTES, IN PART, A SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN PURSUANT TO C.PRS§U� TO 4 ( g 2 A DEVELOPMENT PMENT AGREEMENT U.§ This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into this — day of 2010 by and between the Regents of the University of Colorado, a body corporate (the "University") and the City of Aspen, a home rule municipal corporation of the State of Colorado (the "City"). RECITALS A. The University is the owner of the Given Institute, consisting of' approximately 2.256 acres of land located within the municipal boundaries of the City, and more particularly described on the attached Exhibit A (the "Given Institute Property"). B. On the Given Institute Property are located several existing structures (the "Institute Buildings "). C. The University is processing an application pursuant to the requirements of Section 26.415.025 of the Aspen Municipal Code ('Ordinance 48 ") of the City to obtain a demolition permit for the Institute Buildings. On May 26, 2010 the City acknowledged that based upon the May 25, 2010 letter from the University, the 90 day negotiation period outlined in Ordinance 48 commenced on May 25, 2010. D. Upon demolition of the Institute Buildings, the University desires to sell the Given Institute Property to a private purchaser for the purpose of residential development in conformance with the current zoning for the Given Institute Property. E. The current zoning of the City for the Given Institute Property is R -6, Medium - Density Residential. F. The University is willing to sell the Given Institute Property for $15,000,000. G. The City, pursuant to Resolution No. 51, Series of 2010, has stated its desire to preserve the Institute Buildings while supporting the University goal of sale of the Given Institute Property. H. The City desires that the University delay the demolition of the Institute Buildings and sale of the Given Institute Property until after the November 2, 2010 general election, at which election the City will place a question on the municipal ballot with regard to the purchase by the City of the Given Institute Property in accordance with this Memorandum of Understanding. (A0001624/4 ) el% I. In return for the promises of the City set forth in this Memorandum of Understanding, the University is willing to delay the demolition of the Institute Buildings and sale of the Given Institute Property until after the November 2, 2010 election. Based on the promises and covenants set forth herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Placement on Ballot. The City agrees to place a ballot question (the "Ballot Question ") on the November 2, 2010 general election ballot of the City. The Ballot Question, if approved, shall authorize the City to pay the University 515,000,000 at a closing for the Given Institute Property, and shall identify the funds or source of funds for the City to pay the University, all in a manner where the City could purchase the Given Institute Property for $15,000,000 no later than March 31, 2011. A. If the Ballot question is approved, the City shall purchase the Given Institute Property from the University at a closing date mutually agreed to by the parties, but not later than March 31, 2011. B. The City agrees that if the Ballot Question is not approved by the voters of the City at the November 2, 2010 general election, the City will not take any action for a period of ten (10) years following said election by ordinance, resolution, initiated measure or otherwise to designate the Institute Buildings for historic designation, adopt new historic building procedures that would apply to the Given Institute Property or prevent the demolition of the Institute Buildings in accordance with the City's current regulations. In addition, if the Ballot Question is not approved by the voters of the City at the November 2, 2010 general election, the City will not take any action for a period of three (3) years following said election by ordinance, resolution, initiated measure or otherwise which would directly or indirectly alter, impair, prevent, diminish, impose a moratorium or otherwise delay the development or use of the Given Institute Property for residential purposes in accordance with the standards and requirements of the R-6 zone district and the other applicable provisions of the City of Aspen Land Use Code as it exists as of the date of this Memorandum of Understanding. The actions not to be taken by the City shall include, but not be limited to, rezoning the Given Institute Property from its current designation of R -6 or substantially modifying the provisions of the R -6 zoning district as they apply to the Given Institute Property. It is the intent of this subsection B that if the voters of the City do not approve the Ballot Question, the University, and its successors and assigns, shall have a vested property right pursuant to C.R.S. §§ 24 -68 -101 through 106 (the "Vested Property Rights Act ") to demolish the Institute Buildings and develop the Given Institute Property in accordance with the R -6 zoning and other applicable provisions of the City of Aspen Land Use Code currently in place (subject to the time periods described above). This Memorandum of Understanding constitutes a site specific development plan and a development agreement pursuant to the Vested Property Rights Act and shall be enforceable by the University and its successors and assigns pursuant to the terms of the Vested Property Rights Act. The City shall cause a notice of this Memorandum of Understanding satisfying the requirements of Section 24- 68- 103(1)(c) of the Vested Property {A0001;24 / 4 } 2 _-- -- \ J P days following the Rights Act to be published not later fourteen day g approval of this Memorandum of Understanding by the City. 2. Actions by the City. In consideration for the representations set forth in this agreement„ and except for placing the Ballot Question on the November 2, 2010 ballot, the City agrees that it will take no direct or indirect actions to prevent the sale of the Given Institute Property or the demolition of the Institute Buildings before the November 2, 2010 vote or thereafter if the voters should not approve the Ballot Question to purchase the Given Institute Property from the University for $15,000,000. The City agrees to process all applications or permit requests submitted by the University with regard to the Given Institute Property or the Institute Buildings with the express agreement by the University that it will not act on those approved applications or permits should the Ballot Question be approved by the voters. Furthermore, within five (5) business days of the signing of this Agreement the City shall withdraw and or cease any such actions that may directly or indirectly prevent the sale of the Given Institute Property or the demolition of the Institute Buildings, including but not limited to the pending application for local historical designation of any of the Institute Buildings or any applications or actions that may assist or persuade the historic designation of the Institute Buildings by the State of Colorado or any department of the federal government. 3. Limitation on Police Power of the City. The City acknowledges that the promises made herein are a limitation of the police power of the City. The City agrees that the limitations set forth herein are a reasonable limitation on the police power of the City made in exchange for the promises of the University set forth herein. 4. Ballot Ouestion. The City agrees that the Ballot Question shall satisfy all requirements of the Colorado Constitution, including but not limited to Article X Section 20, all requirements of Colorado law, and all requirements of the Charter and Ordinances of the City of Aspen as are necessary to have the election be a permanent and enforceable commitment of the City to pay the University $15,000,000 for the Given Institute Property within the time frame set for closing in Paragraph 1(A), and that no other voter approval is required. The City represents that it has the funds for closing or that the Ballot Question will authorize the issuing of bonds, certificates of participation or other financial instruments to generate sufficient funds for the purchase price by the closing date. 5. Title. The University shall deliver a title commitment to the City not later than ten (10) days following approval of this Memorandum of Understanding. The University agrees that prior to the November 2, 2010 election not to cause or willingly permit any additional exceptions to title without the written approval of the City. 6. Ordinance 48 Approval. The City agrees to issue a demolition permit to the University for the Institute Buildings in accordance with the procedures set forth in Ordinance 48. The City acknowledges that the procedures of Ordinance 48 will allow the issuance of the demolition permit prior to the November 2, 2010 general election. 7. Specific Performance. The City agrees that the promises made in paragraph 1(B) may be specifically enforced and that damages may be inadequate if the University or any of its (A)001624 /4) 3 f e successors or assigns is unable to enforce these !� promises. Accordingly, the University any of its successors or assigns shall have the ability to waive its right to receive compensation, and the University any of its successors or assigns shall have the right to enforce the provisions of paragraph 1(B) above by obtaining relief in the form of specific performance, injunction, or other appropriate declaratory or equitable relief. This right of the University shall be deemed assigned by the University to any purchaser of the Given Institute Property. 8. Exercise of Demolition Permit. Notwithstanding that the University has or will have received from the City a demolition permit for the Institute Buildings, the University agrees that it shall not exercise the right to demolish the Institute Buildings prior to or on November 2, 2010. If the voters of the City of Aspen approve the Ballot Question, and the Ballot Question satisfies the requirements of this Memorandum of Understanding, then the University agrees not to carry out the demolition of the Institute Buildings prior to the sale of the Given Institute Property to the City of Aspen. 9. Failure to Close. If the voters approve the Ballot Question, but the City does not close on the purchase of the Given Institute Property by the date set forth in paragraph 1(A), then the University may demolish the Institute Buildings in accordance with the approved demolition permit and proceed with the sale of the Given Institute Property. 10. Given Institute Property Purchase Price. The City and the University agree that the purchase price for the Given Institute Property is $15,000,000.00, subject to normal closing adjustments. The University represents that should the voters not approve the Ballot Question, the University has a private buyer prepared to purchase the Given Institute Property for $15,000,000.00, without any conditions other than the demolition of the Given Institute Structures. The University shall provide a letter to the City Attorney's Office verifying the contents of the offer as represented in this paragraph. (This letter may be made available for public disclosure.) The University shall disclose to the City Attorney's Offence, on or before September 15, 2010, documentation of the actual offer from the private buyer evidencing that the offer to purchase the subject property is, in fact, for $15,000,000.00, as described in this paragraph (This documentation shall be held confidential by the City Attorney until, and unless, the voters of Aspen approve the purchase ballot question at the November 2, 2010, special election.) 11. Open House. The University agrees that between the date of the execution of this agreement and the November 2, 2010 election it will make the Given Institute Property available for members of the public to view on three (3) separate occasions, the date and time of which will be set by the University so as not to interfere with the operations of the Given Institute 12. Failure to Place on Ballot. If the City does not place the Ballot Question on the November 2, 2010 election ballot, then this Memorandum of Understanding shall terminate; provided, however, that the City shall still be obligated to issue the demolition permit in accordance with paragraph 6 above, and the provisions of paragraph 1(B) shall be enforceable against the City. (A0001624 /4 1 4 13. Jurisdiction. The City and the University acknowledgement that this Memorandum of Understanding is not an agreement by the University that the City's ordinances apply to the University. Neither is this acknowledgement an agreement by the City that its ordinances do not apply to the University. Except as is specifically agreed to in this Memorandum of Agreement, neither party shall be precluded from asserting its legal position as to the question of whether the University is subject to the ordinances of the City. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] (A0001624 / 4) 5 EXECUTED this day of , 2010. CITY OF ASPEN, a home rule municipal UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, acting by corporation of the State of Colorado and through the Board of Regents, a body corporate By: B Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Name: Title: ATTEST: APPROVALS: By: STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk OF LAW By: , Attomey General APPROVED AS TO FORM: By John Worcester, City Attomey (A0001624/4} EXHIBIT A 7 (A0001624 /4 ) v\ AV K+ gfrAlro RESOLUTION NO. 7 (Series of 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, SUBMITTING TO THE ELECTORATE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN A CERTAIN QUESTION SEEKING AUTHORITY TO INCREASE CURRENT AN ADVALOREM PROPERTY TAXES AND FOR THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING, OPERATING AND MAINTAINING THE GIVEN INSTITUTE PROPERTY IN ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the University of Colorado is the owner of the Given Institute, consisting of approximately 2.256 acres of land located within the municipal boundaries of the City of Aspen, and more particularly described on the attached Exhibit A (the "Given Institute Property"); and, WHEREAS, the Given Institute Property contains several existing structures (the "Institute Buildings "); and, WHEREAS, The University of Colorado is processing an application pursuant to the requirements of Section 26.415.025 of the Aspen Municipal Code ( "Ordinance 48 ") of the City to obtain a demolition permit for the Institute Building; and, WHEREAS, Upon demolition of the Institute Building, the University of Colorado desires to sell the Given Institute Property to a private purchaser for the purpose of residential development in conformance with the current zoning for the Given Institute Property; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of' the City of Aspen desires to give the voters of Aspen an opportunity to preserve the Institute Buildings by purchasing the Given Institute Property by approving a ballot question seeking authorization to levy a property tax and the issuance of bonds for the purchase price, operation and maintenance of the Given Institute Property; and, WHEREAS, the University of Colorado has represented to the City of Aspen that it has received a bona fide offer from a private party to purchase the Given Institute Property for $15,225,000.00; and, WHEREAS, The University of Colorado is willing to sell the Given Institute Property to the City of Aspen for the same amount at the same terms and conditions of the private offer; and, WHEREAS the City of Aspen and the university of Colorado have entered into that certain memorandum of understanding approved by the City council in Resolution No. 51, Series of 2010; and, WHEREAS, Article X of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter requires voter approval to increase City debt by the issuance of general obligation bonds or the levy of ad valorem property taxes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: The following question chall be placed on the ballot at the November 2, 2010, election: CITY OF ASPEN — REFERENDUM _ GIVEN INSTITUTE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE AND GENERAL OLIGATION BONDS. SHALL CITY OF ASPEN DEBT BE INCREASED BY UP TO $15,485,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF $23,550,000 BY THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASING THE GIVEN INSTITUTE PROPERTY CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 2.256 ACRES AND THE EXISTING STRUCTURES (PRIMARILY CONFERENCE FACILITIES) THEREON LOCATED IN ASPEN, COLORADO; SHALL CITY TAXES BE INCREASED BY UP TO $1,200,000 ANNUALLY IN ANY YEAR BY THE LEVY OF AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES, WITHOUT LIMITATION AS TO RATE OR AMOUNT OR ANY OTHER CONDITION, TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL OF, PREMIUM, IF ANY, AND INTEREST ON SUCH DEBT, TO OTHERWISE COMPLY WITH THE COVENANTS OF THE ORDINANCE OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS GOVERNING SUCH DEBT AND TO FUND UP TO $250,000 OF ANNUAL OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES FOR SUCH PROPERTY; SHALL SUCH DEBT MATURE, BE SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION, WITH OR WITHOUT PREMIUM, AND BE ISSUED, DATED AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME OR TIMES, AT SUCH PRICES (AT, ABOVE OR BELOW PAR) AND IN SUCH MANNER AND WITH SUCH TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE; AND SHALL THE CITY BE AUTHORIZED TO COLLECT, RETAIN AND EXPEND ALL OF THE REVENUES OF SUCH TAXES, THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH BONDS AND THE EARNINGS THEREON IN 2011 AND EACH SUBSEQUENT YEAR, NOTWITHSTANDING THE LIMITATIONS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION (TABOR), SECTION 29 -1 -301, COLORADO REVISED STATUTES, OR ANY OTHER LAW? [ ] YES [ ] NO INTRODUCED, READ AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of ,2010. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held on the day hereinabove stated. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk JPW- saved: 08/17/2010 4:14:00 PM- 51011:\ john \word resosTallotl0- Nov -Given Instiade.doc kePs The Cite oilmen Memorandum city Otterners Office TO: Mayor and Members of Council FROM: John P. Worcester DATE: August 23, 2010 RE: Givens Institute - Amended MOU and Ballot Question There are two items on Monday night's regular meeting agenda relating to the Given Institute. The first is a resolution to submit a ballot question to the voters at the November election seeking authority to levy a property tax to purchase the Given Institute. The second item is a resolution which, if approved, would authorize the City manager to execute an amended version of the Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the University of Colorado. As you may know, we still do not have a signed Memorandum of Understanding with CU regarding the future of the Given Institute. The last formal action by City Council regarding this matter was approval of a proposed MOU that we thought CU would execute. At that time, our concem was the City's ability to verify that CU had, in fact, a firm offer of $17.0 million for the property. This was naturally important to verify as that was the amount the voters would be asked to approve in a bond question. Following Council's approval of the MOU, CU was not able to agree to the language of the MOU that required CU to disclose the offer and eventually disclose the identity of the potential purchaser. The reason given was that the potential purchaser would not agree to that arrangement. I received a letter dated July 26, 2010, from the Dean of the College of Medicine verifying that CU "had received a firm offer from a private owner ... for $17.0 million... without any conditions as to how the University is to use that $17,000,000." The Dean left the country for awhile and I didn't hear back from CU for several days. On August 3, 2010, I spoke with the Dean and he advised me that the potential purchaser had withdrawn his offer, but was still interested in purchasing a smaller parcel that did not include the historic resources on the property. In other words, the parcel containing the historic buildings along with some additional open space would be available for purchase and the historical building was no longer at risk of being demolished. He indicated that he wanted to have a meeting with all persons interested in the sale of the Given Institute and try to work out an amicable solution. The Dean agreed to contact everyone involved and schedule a meeting during the week of August 9 or the week of August 16. No meeting was scheduled. On Monday, August 16, I received a phone call from CU's attorney indicating that their "back- up" purchaser had agreed to make an offer of $15.0 million for the entire property. (That was the first time that I heard that CU had a back -up offer.) The back -up purchaser was willing to agree to the MOU (meaning he would be willing to allow the voters of Aspen to match his offer, etc.) On August 17, I again spoke with counsel for CU and he informed me that the back -up purchaser wanted to make some changes to the MOU between the City and CU. I informed him that their last minute changes made it very difficult for the City to place a bond question on the ballot as the time for such an action was quickly running out. Moreover, the changes that the new buyer wanted to make to the MOU would need to be approved by the Aspen City Council. Between August 17 and August 20, 2010, I attempted to negotiate amendments to the MOU that I thought Council would be amenable to considering. I received the attached MOU as the last and best offer from counsel for CU and counsel for the potential purchaser. This version of the MOU seeks to introduce the potential purchaser as a third party beneficiary of the original MOU negotiated between the City and CU. In that original MOU, the essence of the agreement was that everyone would hold off on any further activity until the voters had an opportunity in November to approve a property tax increase to purchase the Given Institute. The City agreed not to designate the property as historic or rezone the property and CU agreed not to take any further actions to demolish the historic resources on the property. If the voters decided not to approve the ballot measure, CU would then be free to demolish the buildings and sell the property to a private purchaser. The attached proposed MOU would grant to the potential purchaser a ten year period of time in which to demolish the buildings and also be granted a three year vesting of his rights to develop the property under the City's current land use code. In other words, the potential purchaser would be insulated for three years from any changes to the City's land use code that affected his/her ability to develop the property. The reason given to me from counsel for the potential purchaser for insisting on the vested rights periods is that his client is prepared to spend $15.0 million for the property and wants some assurance that when he is ready to develop the land that the City's land use code will not prevent him from doing so. The Community Development staff, including the historic resource officer, has asked me to convey to you that they do not support the amended MOU. Their feeling is that the original MOU was appropriate as CU was willing to allow the community to decide if they wanted to purchase the property. The amendments merely grant to the potential purchaser additional incentives to purchase the Given Institute and speculate on future developments on the property. cc: City Manager MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director W1 FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, Ordinance #48 negotiation DATE: August 23, 2010 PROCESS: On August 9, 2010, City Council passed Resolution #64, Series of 2010, extending the Ordinance #48 negotiation period on the preservation of The Given Institute to September 22 A noticed public hearing is in place, and Council is able, at this meeting or any time up until September 22 " to offer incentives through an Ordinance that would secure landmark designation. However, the University of Colorado has never indicated any incentives are of interest. Staff has met with a citizen's committee who have brainstormed possible future tenants, and buyers of The Given Institute, as well as development options that might include subdividing just a portion of the property for residential use, or the creation and sale of TDRs. The committee also believes that it is important to communicate with the would -be buyer of the site, if an offer exists, to determine if any public /private partnership is possible. City participation in the purchase of the site must be authorized by the voters. This is the last regular Council meeting before ballot language is to be completed for the November election. Staff requests that Council provide direction to draft a ballot question, pursue partnership options, or suspend efforts. r Amy Guthrie From: sally broughton [broughton38 @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 1:10 AM To: Sally Spaulding Cc: Amy Guthrie Subject: Given Institute Dear City Council, I understand that you are being asked to sign a variation of the original MOU with the University of Colorado regarding the Given Institute on Monday night. Without knowing the particularities of the MOU, I am writing to express my support of the Given to be maintained as an important part of the fabric of our community. The context and the importance of the people involved in the development of the Given all contribute to it's importance in our community. The price tag is high and clearly the University of Colorado cannot continue to maintain this facililty. I would encourge City Council to work with members of our community to come up with a possible public /private relationship for this property. This public /private relationship and use can keep the residential scale and character of the neighborhood and allow for there to be future public access to the building and bluff overlooking Hallam Lake. Sincerely, SarSh Broughton s Email secured by Check Point • c Amy Guthrie From: Amy Guthrie Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 1:09 PM To: Amy Guthrie; 'stan @scaplanning.com'; 'Harry Teague'; 'Philip Jeffreys'; 'mfox @aspenclub.com'; 'jackie kasabach'; Sara Adams; 'Ziska Childs'; ' thomas .griffiths @vectrabank.com'; 'billriverstudio @me.com'; 'bill @stirlinghomesinc.com'; 'Sarah M. Broughton'; 'Shirley Tipton'; 'Tom Cardamone'; 'kmarsh @avmfaspen.org'; 'John Katzenberger' Subject: Given update Hello all- Sorry I have not sent out a report yet from the last Given meeting. It was a productive discussion that focused on the value of attempting to reach out to the buyer of The Given (if possible) to see how public /private interests could be met. I slowed down on sending out a summary as I heard rumors within City Hall that there were changes brewing and I wasn't sure what to report to you. I do have an update now, which doesn't seem particularly encouraging. The original buyer has backed out and there is a new buyer in line for $15 million. This new buyer's interests appear to be redevelopment. On Monday night, Council will be offered the chance to sign a new "Memorandum of Understanding" with this unnamed buyer. We have no indication at all who the buyer is. The MOU gives the City the same promise not to demolish until after the voters have had a chance to approve purchase in November. At this point, however, the new buyer is asking for some additional considerations that were not part of the July agreement, in exchange for allowing the vote to happen. City staff is currently not supportive of their additional requests, so it is uncertain if Council will sign the MOU. No MOU means no vote. (The buyer requests that the demo permit be issued and be valid for 10 years, and that their redevelopment plans be allowed, for the next 5 -10 years, regardless of any changes the City may make to land use regulations. Council would have to decide whether these unusual assurances are too risky or not.) If you have an opinion on what Council should or should not do, you may want to contact them before Monday night. Contact info is here: htto://www.asoenpitkin.com/Denartments/City FYI, a photographer named Greg Watts just sent me this link, with some beautiful pictures he's taken of The Given. http: / /gnwatts. photoshe Ite r.com /Ra I le ry/The - Given - Institute /G0000EvNOW SEM W L4/ The threat to The Given has also recently been featured in these blogs, and picked up by the AP: http: //a rchitectsa nda rtisa ns.com /i ndex. ph p /2010 /08 /demolish- weese%E2 %80%996- 1972 -give n- institute/ http: / /www.wash i ngtonexa m i ner.com /loca I/a p/a spen -m ay- ask- cu -to- keep -give n- institute- 97274149.htm I http:// blot. preservationnation .org /2010/07/26/ aspen modern - debate - and - discuss/ http: / /www.docomomo- us.org /iuly 2010 enews brief And this book on Weese will be out in a couple of weeks: http: / /boo ks.wwno rto n.com /boo ks /The- Architecture -of- Harry-W eese/ 1 Amy Guthrie From: Donald King, MD [dking2 @bsd.uchicago.edu] Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 3:44 PM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: Re: National Register nomination Thank you for showing me your excellent work in applying for the National Register Designation -- without the owners endorsement we both realize the chances of being accepted - -- nevertheless your effort is much appreciated by me and undoubtedly by others On Aug 17, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Amy Guthrie wrote: Attached is the nomination that has been submitted for The Given Institute to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The City of Aspen has submitted this nomination. I don't know that it will be actually be listed, because CU would have to consent. But it has at least caused us to put substantial documentation of the history of the property together. This nomination is heavy on architectural info, but about halfway through is a section about the founding of The Given Institute. Your role is discussed, and there is a picture of you at the groundbreaking in the attachments. Please let me know any additional information that comes to mind. Thank you! Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 (p) 970 -429 -2758 (f) 970- 920 -5439 www.aspenpitkin.com <NR Given Institute Aspen FINAL.doc> Email secured by Check Point 1 Amy Guthrie From: Amy Guthrie Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2010 3:01 PM To: 'dking2 @bsd.uchicago.edu' Subject: The Given Institute Dear Dr. King, I work for the City of Aspen, in the Planning Department. I wonder if you would be willing to email, or speak with me by phone regarding The Given Institute? I don't know whether or not you are aware that the University of Colorado is looking to sell the facility. There is a possible sale pending that will result in demolition, however the City of Aspen has been working with CU to determine if the property and buildings can be preserved and kept in public use. I am aware of your fundamental role in the creation of The Given Institute and would like to ask you some questions, if possible. My phone contact information is below. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 (p) 970 -429 -2758 (f) 970- 920 -5439 www.aspenpitkin.com 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL EXTENDING THE ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007, NEGOTIATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF THE GIVEN INSTITUTE, 100 E. FRANCIS STREET Resolution No. ot, Series of 2010 WHEREAS, the property at The Given Institute, 100 E. Francis Street, is subject to Ordinance #48, Series of 2007. This Ordinance identifies potential historic resources and creates a review process for any proposed alterations. The Ordinance also establishes a framework for City Council to negotiate with the property owner to secure voluntary historic designation; and WHEREAS, The Regents of the University of Colorado, owners of The Given Institute, have communicated their intention to demolish the buildings located at 100 E. Francis Street, which property is legally described as: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER STREET, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED ON THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND PART OF THE NW ''A OF THE SW ''A OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST, AND PART OF THE NE 'A OF THE SE /, OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID PARCEL IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF FRANCIS STREET AND 24.00 FEET EASTERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF CENTER (AKA GARMISCH) STREET; THENCE N. 14 DEGREES 50' 49" EAST 121.59 FEET; THENCE N. 33 DEGREES 03' 19" EAST 42.21 FEET; THENCE N. 7 DEGREES 19' 05" EAST 112.35 FEET; THENCE S. 70 DEGREES 18' 15" EAST 286.57 FEET; THENCE S. 6 DEGREES 18' 51" WEST 103.11 FEET; THENCE S. 18 DEGREES 12' 00" WEST 108.73 FEET; THENCE S. 9 DEGREES 25'21" EAST 52.10 FEET; THENCE S. 23 DEGREES 21'00" EAST 83.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FRANCIS STREET EXTENDED EASTERLY; THENCE N. 75 DEGREES 09' 11" WEST 288.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 64; THENCE N. 31 DEGREES 00' 50" WEST 107.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2.2556 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING THAT PORTION OF NORTH ASPEN STREET LYING NORTH OF HALLAM STREET VACATED BY CITY OF ASPEN ORDINANCE NUMBER 3, SERIES 1953, BY PITKIN COUNTH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RECORDED JUNE 24, 1955 IN BOOK 80 AT PAGE 356, AND AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 256 AT PAGE 877, AND THAT PORTION OF PUPPY SMITH STREET (FORMERLY SMUGGLER STREET) VACATED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 13, SERIES OF 1997, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, LAKEVIEW ADDITION (TO THE CITY OF ASPEN), ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2 AT PAGE 13, WHENCE THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7 AND 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGES 84 AND 85, RESPECTIVELY, WEST OF THE SIXTH PRICIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, BEARS NORTH 14 DEGREES 39' 51" WEST 772.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70 DEGREES 18' 15" WEST 46.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2 DEGREES 00' 00" WEST 18.555 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72 DEGREES 18' 08" EAST 44.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79 DEGREES 11' 00" EAST 7.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 15 DEGREES 15' 22" WEST 20.06 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 903 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado asserts that as a state entity, it is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado has indicated that it is voluntarily participating in a ninety day negotiation process established by Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, relative to potential historic resources identified in the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025 (e) of the Municipal Code, which codifies Ordinance #48, states that "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the Potential Historic Resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission;" and WHEREAS, the property owner was notified of the Historic Preservation Commission meeting and representatives of The University of Colorado attended the meeting; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 14, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission approved a motion to recommend Council pursue negotiations to preserve the Given Institute by a vote of 5 to 0; and WHEREAS, The Community Development Director shall confer with the City Council regarding the proposed building permit, the nature of' the Potential Historic Resource, and the staff and Historic Preservation Commission's assessment of the Resource and ,the effects of the building permit upon the resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with City Council; and WHEREAS, the property owner was notified of the City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie in her staff report dated August 9, 2010, performed an analysis of the property at 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, found that the City's criteria for historic designation to be met, and recommended that Council extend the Ordinance #48 negotiation period by 30 days, in order to pursue all options to preserve this important historic resource; and WHEREAS, City Council finds that an extension is necessary to execute a draft Memorandum of Understanding with the University of Colorado, or to explore other preservation solutions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: The negotiation period established by Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, as it affects the property at The Given Institute, 100 E. Francis Street, is hereby extended to September 22, 2010. Council furthermore extends the noticed public hearing for consideration of preservation incentives to August 23, 2010. APPROVED by the City Council at its regular meeting on August 9, 2010. Approved as to form: John or ,ester, City Attorney Attest: Mayor: a , / P athryn Koch f ity Clerk Michael C. Irelaiill, Mayor ` NOMi'ATIONS DUE AUGUST 1, 2010! Colaradoss J i {OSr Please complete the form below and attach additional sheets. Be sure to include photographs ENDANGERED (minimum of 3 photos, digital prefered), letters of support, and a map of the site's location. No materials submitted with this application will be returned. Submission of this application grants PLACES_ uv� Colorado Preservation, Inc. permission to include these items in any brochures promotional 2011 NOMINATION FORM =• To materials prepared for/by Colorado Preservation, Inc. Site Name: t ' `V 6 a'A I 41 4'4C Property Address: 1 /00 a'1"tCI �, Town /City: County: \ _e -AC 1/1 ( J Name d Address of Property Owner: -1n'c D \ . `� " vt IU 5 ( — Public ❑ � Private /t �t / p Date Built: I { 1 sow I Designations: ❑ National Register of Historic Places ❑ Sta e Register of Historic Places ❑ Local Landmark C� ' / ❑ Contributing to a historic district Other: l&hO171QA F i tskCv v a ul tAJ o ? DLO Contact information for all groups /individuals nominating the site:. ❑ Check if you '- lw'�7t v t. U 1 'Pc''� 0 IA keep th like to \ � , ss \ Q � I s Q S I j � St. l keep this information on / I 1 � confidential v/D 4. l / PLEASE USE ADDITIONAL SI- EET TO WS ER E FOLLOWING QUESTIONS i Q 1. Provide a brief description of the site and it current condition. ca 2. Why is the site endangered and how imminent is the threat? I 3. What is the historical significance of the site, and why should it be saved? In particular, describe how the site is important to the community, region, and/or state. 4. What was the historical use of the site? Current use? If vacant, proposed use(s)? S. Is there community support or local groups /individuals interested in saving the site? If yes, please provide their contact information. 6. Please provide contact information for local media outlets (television, radio, web, print, etc.) 7. Please supply any additional information that will help the Colorado Preservation review committee understand why this site is a good candidate for the 2011 List of Colorado's Most Endangered Places 8. How did you hear about Colorado's Most Endangered Places List? TO SUBMIT - Mail, fax or email (PDF): Colorado Preservation, Inc. Phone: (303) 893 -4260 333 W Colfax Ave, Ste 300 Fax: (303) 893 -4333 Denver, CO 80204 Email: peidman @coloradopreservation.org For more information contact Patrick Eidman, Endangered Places Coordinator at (303) 893 -4260 or peidman <bcoloradopreservation.org t- a g .= -, = " 1 7. -7 - . ci � c 0 to ` it } J J L . �: 0 . o Z Z x 1,1 4 c Q o � , ' �1 z * rr U r , :. y ga w p. _— - t ter `• (i1 J S ,, _.... • " rr ,r Atq ,_� � 1Z_ ; � M e- or . n ?' o a J Ili oa v E L C vi t L_ A C O4 j j b N W C 'O m ra .; C N U V w =` bG a! '^ d N w C ' N C - C , m V N -° . R , _c „ _8 C > - - • , a) 4 -O > > ° o O - N C � . �c O A a_ LL Ta m C O .y. O cr. L 6 C C9 6 .= , -c N U r, C O v A r 1 0 S rn - o w '^ O tC o o L 0 c u v ,,, ° o_ a > u = 0 L 2 8 v C v O in v 'A 3 a} "' v ° -Po ` Ql o :°, c v °- o v L ti ° m ,o A o ,^ r q o ii, < 06 g_ O a>! L b L « v O- m 0 C- M v - ts V CO t v am .L.. R LL h N v O w -O O u .'^. d O t - v 6 U v • N V L q ∎ . ,o 0-+ ti O v u n v a r -',td _ o v° o 6 `° A o o v a >` , ° 3 0 C r o o . t ' v -o v— o v E o ea 3 0 `° v T. a s y p Av U N— .7, C O (0 N Q! N c O — C O 3 .- m ^ v ° . � " z oil m Z- C v o ° - c o v s > m 3 " o- ( S a o Y N a! - O u .0 v T v s O u-c A a. v ` C Y W c l �•� v " C N O C Cu . i x C C N O m o v CV s u L. A N O ' a) E M $ ' ta- a e '- N 3 1 b L A u . L .. L H ' in H > d Q u C d H L H COLORADO'S MOST ENDANGERED PLACES NOMINATION, THE GIVEN INSTITUTE The Regents of the University of Colorado, the property owner of The Given Institute, have informed The City of Aspen of their intention to demolish all of the existing buildings on the site, which includes the modernist primary building and two Victorian era structures. In 2007, Aspen City Council adopted a list of "potential historic resources" from the postwar period which they commit to work with, on a case by case basis, to find incentives and alternatives that will lead to landmark designation. From the beginning, representatives of The University of Colorado have very clearly indicated that no incentives, negotiation, or development options are of interest, and that their goal is sale of the property. They have indicated receipt of an offer for $17 million for the property with no structures on it. The Regents assert that "as a state entity, the University is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances, zoning, etc." In early July, the City worked with the University to develop a Memorandum of Understanding, that would allow the community to consider purchasing the property on the November ballot. Council placed certain conditions on their signing of the MOU, such as verification of the offer from a private buyer, which have not been satisfied to date. The MOU is not in effect and the University has submitted a demolition permit. Although the MOU called for the City to withdraw a National Register of Historic Places nomination that was prepared by City staff, the nomination has gone forward and is scheduled before the Colorado Historic Preservation Review Board on October 1 CU has indicated that they will object to listing. A committee of interested citizens is meeting on a weekly basis to brainstorm possible organizations and funding sources that could assist in a public purchase. The significant purchase price is a great hindrance to public purchase or non - profit use, however there are some possible options for a public /private partnership. Demolition of this building would be a very significant loss to Aspen's small collection of resources remaining from the post -war period. The significance of the property is stated below. The property has had very few alterations since construction and appears to be in good physical condition. Connection to "The Aspen Idea" Aspen has a long standing tradition as a location for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, and Spirit." Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity. The founding of the Institute grew out of a conference on Advances in Molecular Biology that was sponsored by CU and held in the Aspen Middle School gymnasium starting in 1 1964. Dr. Donald West King, then Chairman of the Department of Pathology at the University of Colorado Medical School, spearheaded the program, envisioning the need for a central meeting place where leading scientists could exchange information, at times a significant logistical challenge in the pre - internet age. The purpose of the creation of a conference center was to enable residents, fellows and faculty to remain current with the revolution in biology, genetics, and medicine taking place in American research. The National Institute of Health, National Research Council, and National Academy of Scientists all sponsored programs. Aspen provided a location more central in the country than similar conferences held at the time on the East and West coasts. In addition, the opportunity to combine research with the natural and cultural amenities available in Aspen was appealing, and the community already had a well established tradition as a summer retreat and intellectually stimulating environment for academics. The conference grew to four sessions per summer. Articles in the Aspen Times reported that registration was denied to several thousand would -be participants due to limited meeting space. In 1967 negotiations began with the Aspen Institute to develop a more suitable permanent conference facility and laboratory. Ultimately Elizabeth Paepcke, who with her late husband Walter had worked to create many foundations of Aspen's post World War II renaissance, sold the University of Colorado two acres of land at approximately half its market value for construction of the facility. Dr. King, since appointed Chairman of Columbia University's College of Physicians and surgeons, negotiated with the Irene Heinz Given (daughter of food giant H.J. Heinz) and John LaPorte Given Foundation of New York, to secure a $500,000 donation for the building's construction, which was then named in their honor. The Given Foundation was also the source of tens of millions of dollars of donations to Harvard University and other schools. Initially, the cost of maintaining the facility and providing the programs was provided by the National Institutes of Health and donations, at no cost to CU. In the late 1980s, the financial support from NIH ended and The Given Institute became concerned with their isolation from the Aspen community in terms of offering public access to its programs. An Aspen Times profile noted that: "while most Aspenites remain oblivious to the brilliance in their midst, some of the most renowned names in medical research, including Nobel laureates, come together at a spot overlooking Hallam Lake to share their discoveries and advancements in highly specialized fields." Significant investment was made by CU to upgrade the property from a summer building to a year -round facility, and in 1991 a local advisory board spearheaded the establishment of a public lecture series, or "Mini College" that continues today. The Given Institute now hosts some ten free public lectures a year, bringing cutting edge experts on everything from bio- terrorism to sports medicine. In addition there have been youth summits on substance abuse, brown bag lunches on health topics for local senior citizens, and free dental and optical screenings for the community. Connection to the Paepcke family, credited as the founders of Modern Aspen 2 As noted above, in 1970, Elizabeth Paepcke, town matriarch, provided the property (a portion of her garden at the time) for the construction of the Institute. The year before, she had donated 22 adjacent acres behind her home for the development of an environmental center and preserve known as ACES (Aspen Center for Environmental Studies.) Elizabeth Paepcke, forming her own legacy in the years following her husband's death in 1960, must have seen value in the nurturing of additional educational organizations within the community. Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke were patrons of twentieth century Modern art and architecture. As a stipulation in the gift- purchase of the land for The Given Institute, Elizabeth Paepcke retained the right to select the architect. She chose Harry Weese of Chicago, an internationally known Modern architect and part-time resident of Aspen. Connection to renowned modernist architect, Harry Weese Harry Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design the Given was in no way happenstance and fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began here in 1945, when Walter Paepcke brought Walter Gropius to attend an Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Work by Herbert Bayer, Eero Saarinen, Marcel Breuer, and Buckminster Fuller followed. Numerous Taliesen fellows practiced in Aspen. Into the 1970's and beyond Harry Weese designed in the Aspen area, as did Elliot Noyes, John Lautner, Charles Moore, Robert A.M. Stern, and more. Aspen's modernist buildings can be generally organized into two periods, 1945 -1960, when Aspen entered the ski and tourist industries, and 1960 -1975, when its growth and development accelerated. The Given Institute, was constructed in 1972 and embodies the tenets of the International Style. International Style architecture systematically rejected the past —its technologies, architecture, ornament, societal structures to embrace modernity, industrialization, urbanization, and the machine made. The premise was that modern design could transform society by applying industrial methods to housing and creating a "total art," including buildings, furnishings, interiors, clothing, and signage. Differentiated by the radical absence of references to past historic styles, the International Style is defined by industrial materials such as steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to give a sleek, mechanical, look to the buildings. Modernism was appropriate to the optimism and progressive thinking of midcentury America. The forms and materials worked well in a time when booming national growth required the construction of many new buildings. Harry Weese, (June 30, 1915 - October 29, 1998), attended both MIT (studying under Alvar Aalto, and creating a friendship with fellow students Eero Saarinen and I.M.Pei) and Yale, graduating from MIT in 1938. After graduation, he studied with famed architect and father of Eero, Eliel Saarinen at Cranbrook Academy in Michigan. The New York Times proclaimed that "the effect of Cranbrook and its graduates and faculty on the physical environment of this country has been profound (...) Cranbrook, surely more than any other institution, has a right to think of itself as synonymous with contemporary American design." Eero Saarinen would become one of the most 3 recognized architects of the twentieth century, designing the St. Louis Arch (1947), Aspen's first music tent (1949), and the TWA terminal in New York (1962). As his career took off, he regularly referred work to Weese. Charles Eames, an architect and furniture designer responsible for many iconic designs of the twentieth century was also an associate when Weese attended Cranbrook. Before and after serving in World War II, Harry Weese worked for the one of the largest and well known architectural firms in the world, Skidmore Owings and Merrill, who are credited with having invented the "glass box" skyscraper and who designed many landmarks, including the Lever House in New York City (1951), constructed shortly after Weese's tenure with the firm. Weese, said to be a sceptic of the "Less is More" edict of Mies van der Rohe that was heavily influential at SOM and in Chicago in general opened his own firm, Harry Weese and Associates, in 1947. While he was classically trained in the ideals of modernism, Weese was more strongly affiliated with the Finnish architects Aalto and Saarinen than the Bauhaus masters. His work reflects their humanistic approach by incorporating natural materials, particularly wood, reflecting his own experience as a sailor, and undulating lines. Early in his career Weese was invited, at the encouragement of Eliel Saarinen, to design a building in the town of Columbus, Indiana. There, a manufacturing company, recognizing the business value of creating livable communities, began to offer to pay architectural fees for local property owners who would engage firms identified on a specific list, which included the most significant modernists of the time. Much of downtown Columbus, Indiana is now listed on the National Register of Historic Places, in recognition of its incredible collection of over sixty modern buildings designed by Eliel and Eero Saarinen, I.M. Pei, Robert Venturi, Richard Meier, and others. While most architects were invited to design just one building, Harry Weese designed at least eighteen, including the National Historic Landmark First Baptist Church (1965) considered one of the most iconic buildings in the town. The building achieved National Historic Landmark Status in 2000, when it was thirty five years old. Weese was a prolific architect, particularly revered in the Midwest. Harry Weese also designed the U.S. Embasy in Accra, Ghana in 1958 and became one of an elite group of architects selected to work for the U.S. State Department. He was inducted, at a relatively young age, into the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Architects in 1961. Weese's most recognized project is the system -wide network of station designs for the 100- mile long Metro subway in Washington, D.C., heralded by the New York Times as: "among the greatest public works of this century." Shortly after the famed D.C. Metro project, Harry Weese created the design for The Given Institute, built in 1972. A longtime visitor to Aspen, having first visited town with his wife in 1947, Weese's family purchased a Victorian home at 118 N. First Street in 1969, and it is still owned by them today. Weese was likely well known to the Paepcke's, as both families resided in Aspen and Chicago. Herbert Bayer reportedly 4 insisted Weese be selected as the architect, and supervising local architect William Lipsey recalls the presentation of Weese's design to Bayer in Aspen. The Given Institute sits on an approximately 2.25 acre site characterized by a flat bench area and a slope that drops quickly to the north, towards the Hallam Lake Nature Preserve. The lot is abutted by private property on the west, a bike trail and the Red Brick Arts Center to the south, and nature preserve on the east and north. The Given Institute is a 12,000 sq. ft. building comprised of a series of geometric volumes constructed out of concrete masonry units with raked joints, painted white, with a flat roof and no ornamentation. The neutral color scheme allows the form of the building to predominate, and it fits within a perfect square, 90' x 90,' with circles, squares and triangles that are deliberately interweaved, cut out of and pushed beyond the boundary of the square. Harry Weese carefully located rectangular (horizontally oriented) and circular windows that frame the outdoors as viewed from the interior. The interior is three levels: a basement/garden level, ground level and second level. The geometric volumes that Weese overlaps and weaves are clearly evident and repeated with subtle details, for example a curved railing on the second floor runs parallel to the cylindrical seminar room to reiterate the shape. The geometry of the design appears to have been of equal importance to the overall program. Some of the interior rooms are triangular, for instance, an intentional result of the plan form. The centerpiece of the building is the United Nations- style amphitheater, which seats 175 people. The University requested a simple design that would harmonize with other buildings on the grounds and relate well to the site, a bluff overlooking Hallam Lake. Program components included a laboratory, a library, and several smaller conference areas, along with office facilities, a printing/reproduction area, storage space, restrooms, and a kitchen. Other specifications were a seminar space configured to promote free interchange between speakers and audience and interior spaces that were warm, relaxed, and comfortable and conducive to informal, spontaneous discussion. Weese had extensive experience in the design of theaters. The seminar space is organized as a "theater in the round," and could be used for demonstrations and experiments core to the sharing of knowledge at this research facility. The landscape on The Given Institute property also has cultural and natural resource value. Weese located the building to take advantage of views and preserve natural site features. Mature trees are abundant, and they provide significant contributions to the community forest. Some of the trees are estimated to be as old as 80 years or more and many are believed to have been planted by Elizabeth Paepcke, who is reported to have continually tended the trees during construction of The Given Institute. The trees are a mix of Colorado blue spruce, aspens, cottonwoods, a single white fir (which is believed may be the largest in the Roaring Fork Valley), and numerous shrubs and shade trees. The Blue Spruce trees have a direct connection to the Hallam Lake property below. They provide a seamless flow between the wetland plantings below, transitioning to the gardens and common upland plantings on The Given Institute grounds. 5 According to supervising architect Bill Lipsey, the trees surrounding the building were "not to be touched." No landscape architect was engaged in the project. On the north side of the building, Weese included a limited sheltered patio area, leading out to open lawn area for functions and receptions. Two observation decks overlooking Hallam Lake may have been constructed by the Paepcke's, who had built similar overlook areas nearby, adjacent to their residence. The only noteworthy alteration to the landscape that has occurred since construction is a memorial garden dedicated after Elizabeth Paepcke's death in 1994. Harry Weese's wok continues to inspire study, with recent coverage in Chicago publications such as ChicagoMagazine, Reconstructing Harry Weese, (Robert Sharoof) July 2010, and a new book entitled The Architecture of Harry Weese (Robert Bruegmann and Kathleen Murphy Skolnik) being released in September 2010. Harry Weese received many honors throughout his half - century career. In 1966, Architectural Forum named him one of the country's 14 leading architects. Throughout his work, Weese actively promoted historic preservation and received a Presidential Award for his efforts to restore landmarks such as Louis Sullivan's Auditorium Building in Chicago, where Weese donated his time on the project as a gift to the city. He helped to shape the Chicago Skyline of the 20` Century. Other influential buildings of his include the Time -Life Building, Chicago; Mercantile Bank, Kansas City; 17 Church of Christ Scientists, Chicago; and the US Courthouse Complex (Metropolitan Correctional Center), Chicago. His preservation work includes: Fulton House; Field Museum; Orchestra Hall, all Chicago; and Union Station, Washington D.C. Notably, the design for The Given Institute retained and adaptively re -used two small nineteenth century buildings, which appears to have been moved to the site before The Given Institute project began. Weese stated to Time Magazine, "Fine old buildings give our cities character and continuity. They give us a sense of stability. Coexistence is key, the old with the new." And he noted in 1973- "maybe someone will save one of our buildings some day." Public support Both the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission and City Council have passed resolutions committing to find a preservation solution. A Facebook page was created by citizens, and a similar group has been meeting to discuss options. The situation has been regularly covered in the Aspen Daily News and Aspen Times since December 2009. 6 Isar MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council 'A^ THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director (� All An FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officery RE: 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, Ordinance #48 negotiation DATE: August 9, 2010 PROCESS: In July 2007, Aspen City Council adopted an emergency ordinance, Ordinance #30, Series of 2007. That ordinance prohibited any exterior alterations, land use applications, or building permits affecting all non- Iandmarked buildings constructed at least 30 years ago, unless it was determined that no potential historic resource was negatively affected. The purpose of the Ordinance was to protect Aspen's significant architectural heritage; not only Victorians, but more modern structures as well. Ordinance #30 was in place for 5 months, during which time Council held numerous meetings to discuss the effect of the new regulations and potential amendments. In particular, Council wished to see the applicability of the Ordinance narrowed down dramatically from all properties over 30 years of age to a specific list researched by staff and found to potentially qualify for landmark designation. In December 2007, Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 was adopted to replace Ordinance #30. Ordinance #48 creates a formal list of potential historic resources in Aspen that may have historical, architectural, archaeological, engineering and cultural importance. Detrimental development or demolition actions affecting these properties will be limited while the City undertakes an evaluation of the historic preservation program via the Historic Preservation Task Force. The Task Force is completed and code amendments are expected to be presented to Council in the coming months. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, is identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources as part of Ordinance #48. Owners of a property listed on Ordinance #48 can still move forward with proposed projects if they: A. Submit the plans and seek staff determination that the work is exempt from delay under Ordinance #48 (routine maintenance work for example); or B. Submit plans and seek staff determination that the work, while not exempt from Ordinance 1448, can move forward by voluntarily complying with Staff or HPC review (depending on the scope of work) of the project, or 1 C. Submit plans with the intention of triggering a 90 day delay period, during which time City Staff and Council will negotiate for appropriate preservation of the property. If the negotiation does not result in an agreement to landmark designate the property, the building permits will be processed as requested. The Regents of the University of Colorado, the property owner of The Given Institute, have submitted a letter (Exhibit A) indicating their intention to demolish all of the existing buildings on the site, which includes the primary building and two Victorian era structures. Typically, a letter of intent, as opposed to an actual permit or land use application, is not adequate to trigger Ordinance #48 review, however The Regents assert that "as a state entity, the University is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances, zoning, etc." The City Attorney's Office has requested evidence that this authority exists, but no further information has been provided by The University of Colorado. HPC had several discussions about this issue, held a worksession on June 23, 2010, and attended the City Council meeting on June 28, 2010, successfully lobbying City Council to pass a resolution committing to take action to try to preserve the property and buildings (Exhibit B). From the beginning, representatives of The University of Colorado have very clearly indicated that no incentives, negotiation, or other development options are of interest, and that their goal is sale of the property. They have indicated receipt of an offer for $17 million. In early July, the City worked with the University to develop a Memorandum of Understanding, that would allow the community to consider purchasing the property on the November ballot. Council placed certain conditions on their signing of the MOU, such as verification of the offer from a private buyer, which staff understands have not been satisfied to date. The MOU is not in effect and the University has submitted a demolition permit. Although the MOU calls for the City to withdraw a National Register of Historic Places nomination that has been prepared, the nomination still stands (since the document has not been signed) and will go before the Colorado Historic Preservation Review Board on October 1s A committee of interested citizens is meeting on a weekly basis to brainstorm possible organizations and funding sources that could assist in a public purchase. If the efforts to maintain the property as a community asset are unsuccessful, a private owner could take advantage of the R -6 zoning in place on the site, which allows for residential development, including subdivision. A single family home on the current undivided lot would be allowed to be approximately 6,200 square feet of FAR. On July 14, 2010, HPC approved the attached resolution (Exhibit C), finding by a vote of 5 -0 that the property meets all landmark designation criteria, has considerable historic significance to The City of Aspen and is worthy of historic preservation. HPC recommends Council pursue negotiation to preserve the property. 2 APPLICANT: Regents of the University of Colorado, owner. PARCEL ID: 2735- 124 -19 -851. ADDRESS: 100 E. Francis Street. ZONING: R -6. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: Council is asked to decide whether this property's significance warrants negotiations with the property owner for its preservation. The criteria for designation are listed below and staff's analysis follows. The City cannot designate properties listed on Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 without the owner's consent. The 90 day negotiation period began on May 25 2010 and ends on August 23, 2010, unless extended for an additional 30 days by a majority vote of Council. 26.415.030.B. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The significance of properties will be evaluated according to the following criteria. When designating an historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet the criteria described below: 1. A property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it is: a. In whole or in part more than one hundred (100) years old, and b. It possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age; or 2. A property or district is deemed significant as a representation of Aspen's 20th Century history, was constructed in whole or in part more than thirty (30) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made, possesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association and is related to one (1) or more of the following: a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history, b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national history is deemed important and the specific contribution is identified and documented, or c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. STAFF FINDINGS: Staff finds that all three designation criteria, and the integrity considerations, are met. Criterion 2.a Aspen has a long standing tradition as a location for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, 3 and Spirit." Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity. The founding of the Institute grew out of a conference on Advances in Molecular Biology that was sponsored by CU and held in the Aspen Middle School gymnasium starting in 1964. Dr. Donald West King, then Chairman of the Department of Pathology at the University of Colorado Medical School, spearheaded the program, envisioning the need for a central meeting place where leading scientists could exchange information, at times a significant logistical challenge in the pre- internet age. The purpose of the creation of a conference center was to enable residents, fellows and faculty to remain current with the revolution in biology, genetics, and medicine taking place in American research. The National Institute of Health, National Research Council, and National Academy of Scientists all sponsored programs. Aspen provided a location more central in the country than similar conferences held at the time on the East and West coasts. In addition, the opportunity to combine research with the natural and cultural amenities available in Aspen was appealing, and the community already had a well established tradition as a summer retreat and intellectually stimulating environment for academics. The conference grew to four sessions per summer. Articles in the Aspen Times reported that registration was denied to several thousand would -be participants due to limited meeting space. In 1967 negotiations began with the Aspen Institute to develop a more suitable permanent conference facility and laboratory. Ultimately Elizabeth Paepcke, who with her late husband Walter had worked to create many foundations of Aspen's post World War II renaissance, sold the University of Colorado two acres of land at approximately half its market value for construction of the facility. Dr. King, since appointed Chairman of Columbia University's College of Physicians and surgeons, negotiated with the Irene Heinz Given (daughter of food giant H.J. Heinz) and John LaPorte Given Foundation of New York, to secure a $500,000 donation for the building's construction, which was then named in their honor. The Given Foundation was also the source of tens of millions of dollars of donations to Harvard University and other schools. Initially, the cost of maintaining the facility and providing the programs was provided by the National Institutes of Health and donations, at no cost to CU. In the late 1980s, the financial support from NIH ended and The Given Institute became concerned with their isolation from the Aspen community in terms of offering public access to its programs. An Aspen Times profile noted that: "while most Aspenites remain oblivious to the brilliance in their midst, some of the most renowned names in medical research, including Nobel laureates, come together at a spot overlooking Hallam Lake to share their discoveries and advancements in highly specialized fields." Significant investment was made by CU to upgrade the property from a summer building to a year -round facility, and in 1991 a local advisory board spearheaded the establishment of a public lecture series, or "Mini College" that continues today. The Given Institute now hosts some ten free public lectures a year, bringing cutting edge experts on 4 • everything from bio- terrorism to sports medicine. In addition there have been youth summits on substance abuse, brown bag lunches on health topics for local senior citizens, and free dental and optical screenings for the community. Criterion 2.a is met through the property's strong connection to the legacy of "The Aspen Idea." Criterion 2.b. The Given Institute is directly connected to the Paepcke family. credited as the founders of Modern Aspen. As noted above, in 1970, Elizabeth Paepcke, town matriarch, provided the property (a portion of her garden at the time) for the construction of the Institute. The year before, she had donated 22 adjacent acres behind her home for the development of an environmental center and preserve known as ACES (Aspen Center for Environmental Studies.) Elizabeth Paepcke, forming her own legacy in the years following her husband's death in 1960, must have seen value in the nurturing of additional educational organizations within the community. Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke were patrons of twentieth century Modern art and architecture. As a stipulation in the gift- purchase of the land for The Given Institute, Elizabeth Paepcke retained the right to select the architect. She chose Harry Weese of Chicago, an internationally known Modern architect and part-time resident of Aspen. Criterion 2.b. is met through the property's direct connection to Elizabeth Paepcke and the institutions and tradition of high modernism that her family introduced to Aspen. Criterion 2.c. Harry Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design the Given was in no way happenstance and fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began here in 1945. when Walter Paepcke brought Walter Gropius to attend an Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Work by Herbert Bayer, Eero Saarinen, Marcel Breuer, and Buckminster Fuller followed. Numerous Taliesen fellows practiced in Aspen. Into the 1970's and beyond Harry Weese designed in the Aspen area, as did Elliot Noyes, John Lautner, Charles Moore, Robert A.M. Stern, and more. Aspen's modernist buildings can be generally organized into two periods, 1945 -1960, when Aspen entered the ski and tourist industries, and 1960 -1975, when its growth and development accelerated. The Given Institute, was constructed in 1972 and embodies the tenets of the International Style. International Style architecture systematically rejected the past —its technologies, architecture, ornament, societal structures to embrace modernity, industrialization, urbanization, and the machine made. The premise was that modern design could transform society by applying industrial methods to housing and creating a "total art," including buildings, furnishings, interiors, clothing, and signage. Differentiated by the radical absence of references to past historic styles, the International 5 Style is defined by industrial materials such as steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to give a sleek, mechanical, look to the buildings. Modernism was appropriate to the optimism and progressive thinking of midcentury America. The forms and materials worked well in a time when booming national growth required the construction of many new buildings. Harry Weese, (June 30, 1915 - October 29, 1998), attended both MIT (studying under Alvar Aalto, and creating a friendship with fellow students Eero Saarinen and I.M.Pei) and Yale, graduating from MIT in 1938. After graduation, he studied with famed architect and father of Eero, Eliel Saarinen at Cranbrook Academy in Michigan. The New York Times proclaimed that "the effect of Cranbrook and its graduates and faculty on the physical environment of this country has been profound (...) Cranbrook, surely more than any other institution, has a right to think of itself as synonymous with contemporary American design." Eero Saarinen would become one of the most recognized architects of the twentieth century, designing the St. Louis Arch (1947), Aspen's first music tent (1949), and the TWA terminal in New York (1962). As his career took off, he regularly referred work to Weese. Charles Eames, an architect and furniture designer responsible for many iconic designs of the twentieth century was also an associate when Weese attended Cranbrook. Before and after serving in World War II, Harry Weese worked for the one of the largest and well known architectural firms in the world, Skidmore Owings and Merrill, who are credited with having invented the "glass box" skyscraper and who designed many landmarks, including the Lever House in New York City (1951), constructed shortly after Weese's tenure with the firm. Weese, said to be a sceptic of the "Less is More" edict of Mies van der Rohe that was heavily influential at SOM and in Chicago in general opened his own firm, Harry Weese and Associates, in 1947. While he was classically trained in the ideals of modernism, Weese was more strongly affiliated with the Finnish architects Aalto and Saarinen than the Bauhaus masters. His work reflects their humanistic approach by incorporating natural materials, particularly wood, reflecting his own experience as a sailor, and undulating lines. Early in his career Weese was invited, at the encouragement of Eliel Saarinen, to design a building in the town of Columbus, Indiana. There, a manufacturing company, recognizing the business value of creating livable communities, began to offer to pay architectural fees for local property owners who would engage firms identified on a specific list, which included the most significant modernists of the time. Much of downtown Columbus, Indiana is now listed on the National Register of Historic Places, in recognition of its incredible collection of over sixty modern buildings designed by Eliel and Eero Saarinen, I.M. Pei, Robert Venturi, Richard Meier, and others. While most architects were invited to design just one building, Harry Weese designed at least eighteen, including the National Historic Landmark First Baptist Church (1965) considered one of the most iconic buildings in the town. The building achieved National Historic Landmark Status in 2000, when it was thirty five years old. 6 Weese was a prolific architect, particularly revered in the Midwest. Harry Weese also designed the U.S. Embasy in Accra, Ghana in 1958 and became one of an elite group of architects selected to work for the U.S. State Department. He was inducted, at a relatively young age, into the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Architects in 1961. Weese's most recognized project is the system -wide network of station designs for the 100- mile long Metro subway in Washington, D.C., heralded by the New York Times as: "among the greatest public works of this century." Shortly after the famed D.C. Metro project, Harry Weese created the design for The Given Institute, built in 1972. A longtime visitor to Aspen, having first visited town with his wife in 1947, Weese's family purchased a Victorian home at 118 N. First Street in 1969, and it is still owned by them today. Weese was likely well known to the Paepcke's, as both families resided in Aspen and Chicago. Herbert Bayer reportedly insisted Weese be selected as the architect, and supervising local architect William Lipsey recalls the presentation of Weese's design to Bayer in Aspen. The Given Institute sits on an approximately 2.25 acre site characterized by a flat bench area and a slope that drops quickly to the north, towards the Hallam Lake Nature Preserve. The lot is abutted by private property on the west, a bike trail and the Red Brick Arts Center to the south, and nature preserve on the east and north. The Given Institute is a 12,000 sq. ft. building comprised of a series of geometric volumes constructed out of concrete masonry units with raked joints, painted white, with a flat roof and no ornamentation. The neutral color scheme allows the form of the building to predominate, and it fits within a perfect square, 90' x 90,' with circles, squares and triangles that are deliberately interweaved, cut out of and pushed beyond the boundary of the square. Harry Weese carefully located rectangular (horizontally oriented) and circular windows that frame the outdoors as viewed from the interior. The interior is three levels: a basement/garden level, ground level and second level. The geometric volumes that Weese overlaps and weaves are clearly evident and repeated with subtle details, for example a curved railing on the second floor runs parallel to the cylindrical seminar room to reiterate the shape. The geometry of the design appears to have been of equal importance to the overall program. Some of the interior rooms are triangular, for instance, an intentional result of the plan form. The centerpiece of the building is the United Nations- style amphitheater, which seats 175 people. The University requested a simple design that would harmonize with other buildings on the grounds and relate well to the site, a bluff overlooking Hallam Lake. Program components included a laboratory, a library, and several smaller conference areas, along with office facilities, a printing/reproduction area, storage space, restrooms, and a kitchen. Other specifications were a seminar space configured to promote free interchange between speakers and audience and interior spaces that were warm, relaxed, and comfortable and conducive to informal, spontaneous discussion. Weese had extensive experience in the design of theaters. The seminar space is organized as a 7 "theater in the round," and could be used for demonstrations and experiments core to the sharing of knowledge at this research facility. Weese's work in the late 1960s was characterized by geometric motifs. As noted by one architectural historian, "Triangles often pop up in Weese's buildings that allude to the sails of boats Weese knew so well." The Given Institute has been described as: "one of Aspen's finest modernist works [which] gives a playful rigor to a simple circle with angular extensions." The landscape on The Given Institute property also has cultural and natural resource value. Weese located the building to take advantage of views and preserve natural site features. Mature trees are abundant, and they provide significant contributions to the community forest. Some of the trees are estimated to be as old as 80 years or more and many are believed to have been planted by Elizabeth Paepcke, who is reported to have continually tended the trees during construction of The Given Institute. The trees are a mix of Colorado blue spruce, aspens, cottonwoods, a single white fir (which is believed may be the largest in the Roaring Fork Valley), and numerous shrubs and shade trees. The Blue Spruce trees have a direct connection to the Hallam Lake property below. They provide a seamless flow between the wetland plantings below, transitioning to the gardens and common upland plantings on The Given Institute grounds. According to supervising architect Bill Lipsey, the trees surrounding the building were "not to be touched." No landscape architect was engaged in the project. On the north side of the building, Weese included a limited sheltered patio area, leading out to open lawn area for functions and receptions. Two observation decks overlooking Hallam Lake may have been constructed by the Paepcke's, who had built similar overlook areas nearby, adjacent to their residence. The only noteworthy alteration to the landscape that has occurred since construction is a memorial garden dedicated after Elizabeth Paepcke's death in 1994. Harry Weese's wok continues to inspire study, with recent coverage in Chicago publications such as ChicagoMagazine, Reconstructing Harry Weese, (Robert Sharoof) July 2010, and a new book entitled The Architecture of Harry Weese (Robert Bruegmann and Kathleen Murphy Skolnik) being released in September 2010. Harry Weese received many honors throughout his half - century career. In 1966, Architectural Forum named him one of the country's 14 leading architects. Throughout his work, Weese actively promoted historic preservation and received a Presidential Award for his efforts to restore landmarks such as Louis Sullivan's Auditorium Building in Chicago, where Weese donated his time on the project as a gift to the city. He helped to shape the Chicago Skyline of the 20` Century. Other influential buildings of his include the Time -Life Building, Chicago; Mercantile Bank, Kansas City; 17` Church of Christ Scientists, Chicago; and the US Courthouse Complex (Metropolitan Correctional Center), Chicago. His preservation work includes: Fulton House; Field Museum; Orchestra Hall, all Chicago; and Union Station, Washington D.C. 8 ry A Notably, the design for The Given Institute retained and adaptively re -used two small nineteenth century buildings, which appears to have been moved to the site before The Given Institute project began. Weese stated to Time Magazine, "Fine old buildings give our cities character and continuity. They give us a sense of stability. Coexistence is key, the old with the new." And he noted in 1973- "maybe someone will save one of our buildings some day." Criterion 2.c. is met as The Given Institute is an outstanding and relatively unaltered example of the work of Harry Weese. Integrity: Based on Weese's original floor plans of the building, original model, and building permit files, the exterior of the primary building on the property and the site itself are largely unaltered from their original design, with the exception of the deck located in the northern portion of the property overlooking Hallam Lake that was rebuilt in 2002, and minor landscaping. The form, plan, scale and proportions of the building are entirely intact and it remains in its original location. The materials and workmanship are true to the Modernists tenets: monochromatic white color scheme, concrete masonry units and glazing, detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects, the materials are manufactured and standardized and the "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Some glazing was replaced in 1996 to increase "u" value; however the original window composition remains. Most of the interior is original. The original built in desks and microphones in the seminar room are intact. There have been minimal alterations that include updating the interior bathrooms, and entrance into the seminar room (by adding a ramp) to meet accessibility standards in 1993 and converting a laboratory into a conference room in 1993. Some paint finishes and light fixtures have been altered as well. Overall, the integrity of the building is very high. Typically, as part of the designation assessment, staff completes an "Integrity Assessment Form," for the property. Our assessment is attached (Exhibit D.) Staff finds that the building warrants 96 points out of 100. Staff believes that demolishing this building would be a very significant loss to Aspen's small collection of potential historic resources remaining from the post -war period. RECOMMENDATION: This meeting was noticed as a public hearing, which would have been required for Council to grant any incentives to the applicant. No incentives are of interest to them. Council may choose whether or not to accept public comment at the negotiation meeting, though there has been community interest in this topic. Staff is concerned that the MOU remains unsigned. At this time the applicant will automatically receive their demolition permit on August 23, 2010, the expiration of the negotiation period. 9 Staff recommends that Council communicate the immediate need to complete the MOU with the University of Colorado. Ballot language must be drafted within the next few weeks. Because the negotiation period ends very soon, Staff suggests Council pass a resolution now, extending negotiation by 30 days, to September 22, 2010. In addition, staff recommends Council continue the noticed public hearing in order to preserve the opportunity to grant incentives, if a preservation solution other than what is defined by the draft MOU, arises. Exhibits: Resolution # 4 Series of 2010 A. Letter from The University of Colorado B. City Council Resolution #47, Series of 2010 C. HPC Resolution #8, Series of 2010 D. Integrity Assessment E. Process: Architecture No. 11, Harry Weese; Humanism and Tradition F. Historic photos related to The Given Institute 10 -'% University of Colorado Denver Office of University Counsel Campus Box 183 P.O. Box 173364 Denvn CO 80217 -3364 Office: 303-315-6617 Fax: 303-315-4446 May 25, 2010 • Ms. Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 • Re: Given Institute and Property Dear Ms. Adams: By way of introduction, I am a lawyer in the Office of University Counsel for the University of Colorado. Pursuant to state statute 23 -20 -101 et seq, UC Denver is one of the campuses of the • University of Colorado and is under the control of the University of Colorado Board of Regents. CRS 23 -20 -102 provides that the members of the Board of Regents are elected by the voters of the State of Colorado. The election of the members of the Board of Regents for the University of Colorado is also outlined in Article DC, Section 12, of the Colorado Constitution. CRS 23 -20- 111 outlines the supervisory powers of the Board of Regents over all of the campuses of the University of Colorado, including UC Denver. In summary, the University of Colorado is a state entity under the supervision and control of the elected members of the Board of Regents. As I believe you are aware, the Board of Regents has been the property owner of the Given Institute since the early 1970s. Since that time, the Board of Regents has maintained and operated the Given Institute as a conference center. For a variety of reasons, the University is going to sell the Given Institute. This decision was not made lightly. In anticipation of the sale, the University will be moving forward with the demolition of the structures on the property. As a state entity, the University is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances, zoning, etc. However, without granting jurisdiction to the City of Aspen over the Board of Regents or its property, and without waiving the sovereign authority of the Board of Regents, with respect to the demolition, the University plans to follow various City of Aspen processes and procedures. We value our relationship with the City of Aspen and its citizens and want to be good neighbors. The University will be submitting an application to the City's Building Department in the near future to demolish both Given Institute buildings and the Blue House that is also located on the property as well as their associated foundations. It is my understanding that the Given Institute property has been listed as a "Potential Historic Resource" pursuant to Aspen City Council Ordinance 48, Series of 2007. It is also my understanding that the 90-day negotiation period provided for in Ordinance 48 cannot begin until a complete demolition permit and associated 1111 . � ,���.. Dowentown Colora Camo pus Ansdlutz o edlpl Campus IIIII v t i ' i DemS d Au rora, Colorado documents have been submitted to the City. Although we are already working on the demolition permit package and anticipate it will be submitted sometime soon, we hereby request that the Ordinance 48 process be triggered immediately and that it not be delayed until the University has submitted the complete demolition permit. We will not be requesting any incentives from the. • City of Aspen in lieu of obtaining the permit, In addition, we ask that once the completed demolition application is submitted that the application be processed immediately without having to wait until the Ordinance 48 process has been completed. The University will agree not to at on the demolition permit until the Ordinance 48 process is completed I look forward to hearing from you regarding our request. Sincerely, Steve Zweck- Bronner Managing Senior Associate University Counsel SZB /md I I II RESOLUTION NO. De. (SERIES OF 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE PROPOSED DEMOLITION OF THE GIVEN INSTITUTE WHEREAS, The City of Aspen has been informed that The Given Institute, located in Aspen and owned by the Regents of the University of Colorado, is proposed to be demolished in October 2010, and sold for residential development; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission and other citizens have urged City Council to take action towards preventing the loss of the facility as a community asset; and WHEREAS, City Council recognizes that Aspen has an over 60 year long standing tradition, initiated by Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke, as a location for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, and Spirit." Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity; and WHEREAS, The Given Institute building was designed by Harry Weese, a prominent modernist American architect. Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design The Given Institute fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began in Aspen in 1945; and WHEREAS, integration of non - profit and community facilities throughout the West End neighborhood adds enormous vitality to Aspen. The value of the property as a publically owned asset, with important cultural and natural significance, including the only remaining public overlook adjacent to the Hallam Lake Nature preserve, cannot be replaced. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council commits to take immediate action to establish an on -going dialogue with the University of' Colorado with the intention to support them in achieving their goals for sale of the property, without damage to the community's history and interests. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on June 28, 2010. Kathryn S. Koch, f ty er Michael C. Ireland, Mayor APPROV. ' AS TO FORM: i . f John • ce e , City Attorney A RECOMMENDATION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) REGARDING ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007 NEGOTIATIONS FOR PRESERVATION OF THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE GIVEN INSTITUTE, LOCATED AT 100 E. FRANCIS STREET, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 8, SERIES OF 2010 PARCEL ID: 2735 - 124 -19 -851 WHEREAS, The Regents of the University of Colorado have communicated their intention to demolish the buildings located at 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, which property is legally described as: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER STREET, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED ON THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND PART OF THE NW 'A OF THE SW ''A OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST, AND PART OF THE NE 'A OF THE SE 'A OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID PARCEL IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF FRANCIS STREET AND 24.00 FEET EASTERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF CENTER (AKA GARMISCH) STREET; THENCE N. 14 DEGREES 50' 49" EAST 121.59 FEET; THENCE N. 33 DEGREES 03' 19" EAST 42.21 FEET; THENCE N. 7 DEGREES 19' 05" EAST 112.35 FEET; THENCE S. 70 DEGREES 18' 15" EAST 286.57 FEET; THENCE S. 6 DEGREES 18' 51" WEST 103.11 FEET; THENCE S. 18 DEGREES 12' 00" WEST 108.73 FEET; THENCE S. 9 DEGREES 25'21" EAST 52.10 FEET; THENCE S. 23 DEGREES 21'00" EAST 83.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FRANCIS STREET EXTENDED EASTERLY; THENCE N. 75 DEGREES 09' 11" WEST 288.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 64; THENCE N. 31 DEGREES 00' 50" WEST 107.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2.2556 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING THAT PORTION OF NORTH ASPEN STREET LYING NORTH OF HALLAM STREET VACATED BY CITY OF ASPEN ORDINANCE NUMBER 3, SERIES 1953, BY PITKIN COUNTH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RECORDED JUNE 24, 1955 IN BOOK 80 AT PAGE 356, AND AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 256 AT PAGE 877, AND THAT PORTION OF PUPPY SMITH STREET (FORMERLY SMUGGLER STREET) VACATED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 13, SERIES OF 1997, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, LAKEVIEW ADDITION (TO THE CITY OF ASPEN), ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 1 of 12 RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2 AT PAGE 13, WHENCE THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7 AND 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGES 84 AND 85, RESPECTIVELY, WEST OF THE SIXTH PRICIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, BEARS NORTH 14 DEGREES 39' 51" WEST 772.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70 DEGREES 18' 15" WEST 46.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2 DEGREES 00' 00" WEST 18.555 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72 DEGREES 18' 08" EAST 44.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79 DEGREES 11' 00" EAST 7.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 15 DEGREES 15' 22" WEST 20.06 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 903 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado asserts that as a state entity, it is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado has indicated that it is voluntarily participating in a ninety day negotiation process established by Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, relative to potential historic resources identified in the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025 (e) of the Municipal Code, which codifies Ordinance #48, states that "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the Potential Historic Resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission;" and WHEREAS, the property owner was notified of the Historic Preservation Commission meeting and representatives of The University of Colorado attended the meeting; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie in her staff report dated July 14, 2010, performed an analysis of the property at 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, found that the City's criteria for historic designation to be met, and recommended preservation; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 14, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission approved a motion to recommend Council pursue negotiations to preserve the Given Institute by a vote of5to0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC finds that The Given Institute buildings and property meet all designation criteria, have considerable historic significance to The City of Aspen and are worthy of historic preservation. HPC recommends Council pursue negotiation. HPC's specific findings regarding the designation criteria are as follows: Criterion 2.a Aspen has a long standing tradition as a location for thinkers, leaders. artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, and Spirit." 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 2 of 12 w f Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity. The founding of the Institute grew out of a conference on Advances in Molecular Biology that was sponsored by CU and held in the Aspen Middle School gymnasium starting in 1964. Dr. Donald West King, then Chairman of the Department of Pathology at the University of Colorado Medical School, spearheaded the program, envisioning the need for a central meeting place where leading scientists could exchange information, at times a significant logistical challenge in the pre- internet age. The purpose of the creation of a conference center was to enable residents, fellows and faculty to remain current with the revolution in biology, genetics, and medicine taking place in American research. The National Institute of Health, National Research Council, and National Academy of Scientists all sponsored programs. Aspen provided a location more central in the country than similar conferences held at the time on the East and West coasts. In addition, the opportunity to combine research with the natural and cultural amenities available in Aspen was appealing, and the community already had a well established tradition as a summer retreat and intellectually stimulating environment for academics. The conference grew to four sessions per summer. Articles in the Aspen Times reported that registration was denied to several thousand would -be participants due to limited meeting space. In 1967 negotiations began with the Aspen Institute to develop a more suitable permanent conference facility and laboratory. Ultimately Elizabeth Paepcke, who with her late husband Walter had worked to create many foundations of Aspen's post World War II renaissance, sold the University of Colorado two acres of land at approximately half its market value for construction of the facility. Dr. King, since appointed Chairman of Columbia University's College of Physicians and surgeons, negotiated with the Irene Heinz Given (daughter of food giant H.J. Heinz) and John LaPorte Given Foundation of New York, to secure a $500,000 donation for the building's construction, which was then named in their honor. The Given Foundation was also the source of tens of millions of dollars of donations to Harvard University and other schools. Initially, the cost of maintaining the facility and providing the programs was provided by the National Institutes of Health and donations, at no cost to CU. In the late 1980s, the financial support from NIH ended and The Given Institute became concerned with their isolation from the Aspen community in terms of offering public access to its programs. An Aspen Times profile noted that: "while most Aspenites remain oblivious to the brilliance in their midst, some of the most renowned names in medical research, including Nobel laureates, come together at a spot overlooking Hallam Lake to share their discoveries and advancements in highly specialized fields." Significant investment was made by CU to upgrade the property from a summer building to a year -round facility, and in 1991 a local advisory board spearheaded the establishment of a public lecture series, or "Mini College" that continues today. The Given Institute now hosts some ten free public lectures a year, bringing cutting edge experts on everything from bio- terrorism to 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 3of12 sports medicine. In addition there have been youth summits on substance abuse, brown bag lunches on health topics for local senior citizens, and free dental and optical screenings for the community. Criterion 2.a is met through the property's strong connection to the legacy of The Aspen Idea." Criterion 2.b. The Given Institute is directly connected to the Paepcke family, credited as the founders of Modern Aspen. As noted above, in 1970, Elizabeth Paepcke, town matriarch, provided the property (a portion of her garden at the time) for the construction of the Institute. The year before, she had donated 22 adjacent acres behind her home for the development of an environmental center and preserve known as ACES (Aspen Center for Environmental Studies.) Elizabeth Paepcke, forming her own legacy in the years following her husband's death in 1960, must have seen value in the nurturing of additional educational organizations within the community. Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke were patrons of twentieth century Modern art and architecture. As a stipulation in the gift - purchase of the land for The Given Institute, Elizabeth Paepcke retained the right to select the architect. She chose Harry Weese of Chicago, an internationally known Modern architect and part-time resident of Aspen. Criterion 2.b. is met through the property's direct connection to Elizabeth Paepcke and the institutions and tradition of high modernism that her family introduced to Aspen. Criterion 2.c. Harry Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design the Given was in no way happenstance and fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began here in 1945, when Walter Paepcke brought Walter Gropius to attend an Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Work by Herbert Bayer, Eero Saarinen, Marcel Breuer, and Buckminster Fuller followed. Numerous Taliesen fellows practiced in Aspen. Into the 1970's and beyond Harry Weese designed in the Aspen area, as did Elliot Noyes, John Lautner, Charles Moore, Robert A.M. Stern, and more. Aspen's modernist buildings can be generally organized into two periods, 1945 -1960, when Aspen entered the ski and tourist industries, and 1960 -1975, when its growth and development accelerated. The Given Institute, was constructed in 1972 and embodies the tenets of the International Style. International Style architecture systematically rejected the past —its technologies, architecture, ornament, societal structures to embrace modernity, industrialization, urbanization, and the machine made. The premise was that modern design could transform society by applying industrial methods to housing and creating a "total art," including buildings, furnishings, interiors, clothing, and signage. Differentiated by the radical absence of references to past historic styles, the International Style is defined by industrial materials such as steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to give a sleek, mechanical, look to the buildings. Modernism was appropriate to the optimism and progressive thinking of midcentury America. The forms and 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 4 of 12 materials worked well in a time when booming national growth required the construction of many new buildings. Harry Weese, (June 30, 1915 - October 29, 1998), attended both MIT (studying under Alvar Aalto, and creating a friendship with fellow students Eero Saarinen and I.M.Pei) and Yale, graduating from MIT in 1938. After graduation, he studied with famed architect and father of Eero, Eliel Saarinen at Cranbrook Academy in Michigan. The New York Times proclaimed that "the effect of Cranbrook and its graduates and faculty on the physical environment of this country has been profound (...) Cranbrook, surely more than any other institution, has a right to think of itself as synonymous with contemporary American design." Eero Saarinen would become one of the most recognized architects of the twentieth century, designing the St. Louis Arch (1947), Aspen's first music tent (1949), and the TWA terminal in New York (1962). As his career took off, he regularly referred work to Weese. Charles Eames, an architect and furniture designer responsible for many iconic designs of the twentieth century was also an associate when Weese attended Cranbrook. Before and after serving in World War II, Harry Weese worked for the one of the largest and well known architectural firms in the world, Skidmore Owings and Merrill, who are credited with having invented the "glass box" skyscraper and who designed many landmarks, including the Lever House in New York City (1951), constructed shortly after Weese's tenure with the firm. Weese, said to be a sceptic of the "Less is More" edict of Mies van der Rohe that was heavily influential at SOM and in Chicago in general opened his own firm, Harry Weese and Associates, in 1947. While he was classically trained in the ideals of modernism, Weese was more strongly affiliated with the Finnish architects Aalto and Saarinen than the Bauhaus masters. His work reflects their humanistic approach by incorporating natural materials, particularly wood, reflecting his own experience as a sailor, and undulating lines. Early in his career Weese was invited, at the encouragement of Eliel Saarinen, to design a building in the town of Columbus, Indiana. There, a manufacturing company, recognizing the business value of creating livable communities, began to offer to pay architectural fees for local properties owners who would engage firms identified on a specific list, which included the most significant modernists of the time. Much of downtown Columbus, Indiana is now listed on the National Register of Historic Places, in recognition of its incredible collection of over sixty modern buildings designed by Eliel and Eero Saarinen, I.M. Pei, Robert Venturi, Richard Meier, and others. While most architects were invited to design just one building, Harry Weese designed at least eighteen, including the National Historic Landmark First Baptist Church (1965) considered one of the most iconic buildings in the town. The building achieved National Historic Landmark Status in 2000, when it was thirty five years old. Weese was a prolific architect, particularly revered in the Midwest. Harry Weese also designed the U.S. Embasy in Accra, Ghana in 1958 and became one of an elite group of architects selected to work for the U.S. State Department. He was inducted, at a relatively young age, into the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Architects in 1961. Weese's most recognized project is the system -wide network of station designs for the 100- mile long Metro subway in 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 5 of 12 r Washington, D.C., heralded by the New York Times as: "among the greatest public works of this century." Shortly after the famed D.C. Metro project, Harry Weese created the design for The Given Institute, built in 1972. A longtime visitor to Aspen, having first visited town with his wife in 1947, Weese's family purchased a Victorian home at 118 N. First Street in 1969, and it is still owned by them today. Weese was likely well known to the Paepcke's, as both families resided in Aspen and Chicago. Herbert Bayer reportedly insisted Weese be selected as the architect, and supervising local architect William Lipsey recalls the presentation of Weese's design to Bayer in Aspen. The Given Institute sits on an approximately 2.25 acre site characterized by a flat bench area and a slope that drops quickly to the north, towards the Hallam Lake Nature Preserve. The lot is abutted by private property on the west, a bike trail and the Red Brick Arts Center to the south, and nature preserve on the east and north. The Given Institute is a 12,000 sq. ft. building comprised of a series of geometric volumes constructed out of concrete masonry units with raked joints, painted white, with a flat roof and no ornamentation. The neutral color scheme allows the form of the building to predominate, and it fits within a perfect square, 90' x 90,' with circles, squares and triangles that are deliberately interweaved, cut out of and pushed beyond the boundary of the square. Harry Weese carefully located rectangular (horizontally oriented) and circular windows that frame the outdoors as viewed from the interior. The interior is three levels: a basement/garden level, ground level and second level. The geometric volumes that Weese overlaps and weaves are clearly evident and repeated with subtle details, for example a curved railing on the second floor runs parallel to the cylindrical seminar room to reiterate the shape. The geometry of the design appears to have been of equal importance to the overall program. Some of the interior rooms are triangular, for instance, an intentional result of the plan form. The centerpiece of the building is the United Nations- style amphitheater, which seats 175 people. The University requested a simple design that would harmonize with other buildings on the grounds and relate well to the site, a bluff overlooking Hallam Lake. Program components included a laboratory, a library, and several smaller conference areas, along with office facilities, a printing/reproduction area, storage space, restrooms, and a kitchen. Other specifications were a seminar space configured to promote free interchange between speakers and audience and interior spaces that were warm, relaxed, and comfortable and conducive to informal, spontaneous discussion. Weese had extensive experience in the design of theaters. The seminar space is organized as a "theater in the round," and could be used for demonstrations and experiments core to the sharing of knowledge at this research facility. Weese's work in the late 1960s was characterized by geometric motifs. As noted by one architectural historian, "Triangles often pop up in Weese's buildings that allude to the sails of 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 6 of 12 boats Weese knew so well." The Given Institute has been described as: "one of Aspen's finest modernist works [which] gives a playful rigor to a simple circle with angular extensions." The landscape on The Given Institute property also has cultural and natural resource value. Weese located the building to take advantage of views and preserve natural site features. Mature trees are abundant, and they provide significant contributions to the community forest. Some of the trees are estimated to be as old as 80 years or more and many are believed to have been planted by Elizabeth Paepcke, who is reported to have continually tended the trees during construction of The Given Institute. The trees are a mix of Colorado blue spruce, aspens, cottonwoods, a single white fir (which is believed may be the largest in the Roaring Fork Valley), and numerous shrubs and shade trees. The Blue Spruce trees have a direct connection to the Hallam Lake property below. They provide a seamless flow between the wetland plantings below, transitioning to the gardens and common upland plantings on The Given Institute grounds. According to supervising architect Bill Lipsey, the trees surrounding the building were "not to be touched." No landscape architect was engaged in the project. On the north side of the building, Weese included a limited sheltered patio area, leading out to open lawn area for functions and receptions. Two observation decks overlooking Hallam Lake may have been constructed by the Paepcke's, who had built similar overlook areas nearby, adjacent to their residence. The only noteworthy alteration to the landscape that has occurred since construction is a memorial garden dedicated after Elizabeth Paepcke's death in 1994. Harry Weese's wok continues to inspire study, with recent coverage in Chicago publications such as ChicagoMagazine, Reconstructing Harry Weese, (Robert Sharoof) July 2010, and a new book entitled The Architecture of Harry Weese (Robert Bruegmann and Kathleen Murphy Skolnik) being released in September 2010. Harry Weese received many honors throughout his half - century career. In 1966, Architectural Forum named him one of the country's 14 leading architects. Throughout his work, Weese actively promoted historic preservation and received a Presidential Award for his efforts to restore landmarks such as Louis Sullivan's Auditorium Building in Chicago, where Weese donated his time on the project as a gift to the city. He helped to shape the Chicago Skyline of the 20` Century. Other influential buildings of his include the Time -Life Building, Chicago; Mercantile Bank, Kansas City; 17 Church of Christ Scientists, Chicago; and the US Courthouse Complex (Metropolitan Correctional Center), Chicago. His preservation work includes: Fulton House; Field Museum; Orchestra Hall, all Chicago; and Union Station, Washington D.C. Notably, the design for The Given Institute retained and adaptively re -used two small nineteenth century buildings, which appears to have been moved to the site before The Given Institute project began. Weese stated to Time Magazine, "Fine old buildings give our cities character and continuity. They give us a sense of stability. Coexistence is key, the old with the new." And he noted in 1973- "maybe someone will save one of our buildings some day." 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 7 of 12 Criterion 2.c. is met as The Given Institute is an outstanding and relatively unaltered example of the work of Harry Weese. Integrity: Based on Weese's original floor plans of the building, original model, and building permit files, the exterior of the primary building on the property and the site itself are largely unaltered from their original design, with the exception of the deck located in the northern portion of the property overlooking Hallam Lake that was rebuilt in 2002, and minor landscaping. The form, plan, scale and proportions of the building are entirely intact and it remains in its original location. The materials and workmanship are true to the Modernists tenets: monochromatic white color scheme, concrete masonry units and glazing, detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects, the materials are manufactured and standardized and the "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Some glazing was replaced in 1996 to increase "u" value; however the original window composition remains. Most of the interior is original. The original built in desks and microphones in the seminar room are intact. There have been minimal alterations that include updating the interior bathrooms, and entrance into the seminar room (by adding a ramp) to meet accessibility standards in 1993 and converting a laboratory into a conference room in 1993. Some paint finishes and light fixtures have been altered as well. Overall, the integrity of the building is very high. An "Integrity Assessment Form," concluding that the building warrants 96 points out of 100, is attached as "Exhibit A," to this resolution. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 14th day of July, 2010. Sarah Broughton, Vice Chair Approved as to Form: Jim True, Special Counsel ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 8 of 12 EXHIBIT A INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- MODERNIST Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 5 - The structure is in its original location. 3 - The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 0 - The structure has been moved to a location that is dissimilar to its original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) — 5 points. The structure is in its original location. • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. BUILDING FORM 10 -The original plan form, based on authenticating documentation, is still intact. 6 - The plan form has been altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Alterations and/or additions to the building are such that the original form of the structure is obscured. Response: 10 — The original plan form is unchanged based on original Weese sketches and floor plans. ROOF FORM 10 -The original roof form is unaltered. 6 - Additions have been made that alter roof form that would meet the current design guidelines. 0 - Alterations to the roof have been made that obscure its original form. Response: 10 — The original flat roof is unaltered. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 9 of 12 SCALE 5 - The original scale and proportions of the building are intact. 3 - The building has been expanded but the scale of the original portion is intact and the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - The scale of the building has been negatively affected by additions or alterations. Response: 5 — The original scale and proportions are intact. SOLID/VOID PATTERN 10 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is intact. 6 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials has been altered but in a manner that would meet the design guidelines. 0- The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is altered. Response: 10 — the original pattern of glazing and materials is intact. CHARACTER- DEFINING FEATURES 10 — The horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment are intact. 6 - There are minor alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. 0 - There have been major alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. Response: 10 — the character- defining features, including cottonwood trees that dictated the location of building and influenced Weese's design remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 45) = 45 points. • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. 5- The physical surroundings are similar to that found when the structure was originally constructed. 3 -There are minor modifications to the physical surroundings but the changes conform to the design guidelines. 0- The physical surroundings detract from the historic character of the building. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 10of12 TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5 points. The physical environment is largely unchanged from the date of construction. • MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR SURFACES 15- The original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing are intact. 10 -There have been minor alterations to the original exterior wall materials and glazing made in a manner that conform to the design guidelines. 5- There have been major changes to the original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing. 0- All exterior wall materials and glazing has been replaced. Response: 15 points — the original combination of concrete masonry units and glazing is intact. DOORS AND WINDOWS 10 All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 5 - Some of the original door and window units have been replaced but the new units would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Most of the original door and window units have been replaced with units that would not meet design guidelines. Response: 8 — Some of the glazing was replaced in 1993, but the window composites remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 25) = 23 points. • WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. COMPOSITION 15 -The structural composition that distinguishes the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. Detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects. No decorative elements are used. Design is focused on rationality, reduction, and composition. It is meant to separate itself from style and sentimentality. Materials are generally manufactured and standardized. The "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Surfaces are smooth with minimal or no detail at window jambs, grade, and at the roof edge. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 11 of 12 d 10 -There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would meet the design guidelines 0 - There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would not meet the design guidelines Response: The building is void of decoration and is clearly follows Modernist tenets. All exterior surfaces are CMU blocks or glazing. FINISHES & COLOR SCHEME 5 - The neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. 3 - There have been minor alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. 0- There have been significant alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. Response: 3 — The color scheme has been altered: instead of pure white the building is painted off -white and the window trim is green instead of the original black TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 20 points. GRAND TOTAL= 96 POINTS MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 75 POINTS Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 12 of 12 INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- MODERNIST Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 5 - The structure is in its original location. 3 - The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 0 - The structure has been moved to a location that is dissimilar to its original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) — 5 points. The structure is in its original location. • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. BUILDING FORM 10 -The original plan form, based on authenticating documentation, is still intact. 6 - The plan form has been altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Alterations and/or additions to the building are such that the original form of the structure is obscured. Response: 10 — The original plan form is unchanged based on original Weese sketches and floor plans. ROOF FORM 10 -The original roof form is unaltered. 6 - Additions have been made that alter roof form that would meet the current design guidelines. 0 - Alterations to the roof have been made that obscure its original form. Response: 10 — The original flat roof is unaltered. SCALE 5 - The original scale and proportions of the building are intact. 3 - The building has been expanded but the scale of the original portion is intact and the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - The scale of the building has been negatively affected by additions or alterations. Response: 5 — The original scale and proportions are intact. SOLIDNOID PATTERN 10 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is intact. 6 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials has been altered but in a manner that would meet the design guidelines. 0- The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is altered. Response: 10 — the original pattern of glazing and materials is intact. CHARACTER - DEFINING FEATURES 10 — The horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment are intact. 6 - There are minor alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. 0 - There have been major alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. Response: 10 — the character - defining features, including cottonwood trees that dictated the location of building and influenced Weese's design remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 45) = 45 points. • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. 5- The physical surroundings are similar to that found when the structure was originally constructed. 3 -There are minor modifications to the physical surroundings but the changes conform to the design guidelines. 0- The physical surroundings detract from the historic character of the building. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5 points. The physical environment is largely unchanged from the date of construction. • MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property . EXTERIOR SURFACES 15- The original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing are intact. 10 -There have been minor alterations to the original exterior wall materials and glazing made in a manner that conform to the design guidelines. 5- There have been major changes to the original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing. 0- All exterior wall materials and glazing has been replaced. Response: 15 points — the original combination of concrete masonry units and glazing is intact. DOORS AND WINDOWS 10- All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 5 - Some of the original door and window units have been replaced but the new units would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Most of the original door and window units have been replaced with units that would not meet design guidelines. Response: 8 — Some of the glazing was replaced in 1993, but the window composites remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 25) = 23 points. • WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. COMPOSITION 15 -The structural composition that distinguishes the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. Detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects. No decorative elements are used. Design is focused on rationality, reduction, and composition. It is meant to separate itself from style and sentimentality. Materials are generally manufactured and standardized. The "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Surfaces are smooth with minimal or no detail at window jambs, grade, and at the roof edge. 10 -There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would meet the design guidelines 0 - There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would not meet the design guidelines Response: The building is void of decoration and is clearly follows Modernist tenets. All exterior surfaces are CMU blocks or glazing. FINISHES & COLOR SCHEME 5 - The neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. 3 - There have been minor alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. M 0- There have been significant alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. Response: 3 — The color scheme has been altered: instead of pure white the building is painted off -white and the window trim is green instead of the original black TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 20 points. Grand Total = 96 points MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 75 POINTS Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. 4 RoCES I WM Architecture ��.1 HARRY WEESE :HUMANISM AND TRADITION { b 1. 4t iegA , o 3 0/4 Gn , G ' a ;W M 1 s 4. rfr . - i , " -# 1 V _ ;:: .P.,,, . i 1IW / r ‘‘‘., `‘,‘ 0 ...+4•-.4. 1\71 i trea°-"is\ t Attatelje ii, _,; i tom , liy�K •... Cad ,%�. i i � 'k ' rit‘ l v r. \ fir" 4' 1.A. rd 3-• 34 Q . i ,r GIVEN INSTITUTE OF PATHOBIOLOGY Aspen, Colorado, 1972 emo71:01 U rti 3 tit. A • • ' t� v1L �.. 41•i -`Y u� yyp L `.' r 9 11 / y • •• Ittc , rst,„, . ...�i1 _ r ._ • -- " A a ail C illt i ii .. � - :Th l � ` ` � ► it it, ��-- N, - � �" `j � ,f Ids�u �, \ 1 11.'\11 \\ \ \. \\ \` ?' .� J' TS 1 111 \ \ \ C " rR • uC a�. Conceptual sketches Conceptual sketch • v s,...................._. , . _ . I _f ----1- ro -- r ' 1 _ - _ t 11111111_1111-1111111;11.11 . 1 it ■ - 1 • 6 li G ,, k-\ -u,- -4--, - cc :_-_ 09 1 9 /a'Y7 Afcf31 C500-k 3 f , 1Z The project program included a main seminar at Boulder and Denver by means of closed cir- 'kR ( 12�161�1�t�Hl1Ra"t, 3F36h room to seat 50 people, a laboratory, a library, cuit TV. Through the use of such electronic one special conference room for 12 -16 people, equipment, the building serves as a national J110)x'�4 /MSght• It1.TNr , 5ift t tAllAag,g and three multi - purpose conference /rear screen center for the gathering and distribution of the KR k LTft, *7 .4.7h 2 -'), 9 7 a ' ✓ • m projection areas. Related facilities required latest research and development in pathobio- werc two offices, reproduction area, storage logy and related fields. 9 7, Alt. O tM, ;i1 4P 3. lr, m a I ,rl areas, toilets, and kitchen. Total space provided A major design requirement was that the 12, 000 7 4 1 . 7', tIV fiT --ditE 90x90 is approximately 12,000 square feet. The build- building relate well to its site, a beautiful garden 7 .(— 1• T i63, •k J -i f F13(!it`, �p yllf}� 7 — ing measures 90' x 90' in plan, The main semi- overlooking Hallam Lake. nar room is in- the -round with a center working The load- bearing and non - bearing walls are 4-:.." • = 9 7ht2b 5, — *iitifalbta,.6. area and dais. concrete block masonry, exterior and interior. Jf3, f'g *iv),iN& sa k 01,1140 t ; . f -- The building is used for seminars of various Roof and columns are heavy timber. Floors are sizes dealing with medical topics. At these wood frame and concrete slab on- grade. All ffl1` " b. ' 6' •t > t — I C # a/1sT i t ' " 69 / 035 " .2 seminars actual demonstrations can be per- block is painted and all floors (except for lab and A - t i'#)ft. If .t; . t formed in the laboratory, and a complete sys- service spaces) are carpeted. Heat is furnished tem of audio - visual and television equipment by perimeter hot water radiation. There is will afford the best possible communication of natural ventilation in all areas except the main 0411k146:1 V 7i 3. , r1 v 01 = n 7 1'k* information to all participants. The building is seminar room, which has forced air heating and p>>i rJriy— •#•i•://-x7:./A- -•,i•✓A7L linked with the University of Colorado campuses cooling from a roof - mounted package unit. lt:6f111 -- Ve. - c -)t 4 Ct \ ;10)1 5 t ,tx'F'= *Ve4Cii0iPiH &i$t LT, kg Jt3* 531f :: Y r d ' N � fi ' VAL 5t ‹Ittso5xiK �oi fo) s � di#iJv, 1 -- j]m13, #ti�a;/h 9- f- • 7a r7 � - s titt7IV. l iX* r =✓h 9- hit1 !:/ g- a - 79 1` •7 - t''-zT , <: , Nt9 - 6, I ;s L _y4 ;•=97 I %k 111 Ck' — .". 1 j1 -- - _'._— r ')�ili fId}c93 =5 tLko Ti7fi#13. _ _ i - yam.' sr -k�t- /I3kft± »x --ii• s- r hf Rt ~ - r ' te n 'i itg • 7Ilmtfh#1. 3. fL� S>'i3 eittimt , 7T AT 0 '.5:-..;:'-- r_ '`�. :: i `,4 3 } p � y r~ Fr t t r lR l." ¢ r.i�"'' f, t rw4rr, % Ss S` h d. � 1 E ...r fl�^ "'F �. 3 y' �� - Illll■ ti , `� :� + ., r 2F " s.; 4 `aq> '�� ,. .4,-. - �a,(�. s ski - '.W4,4,--, \ . r ` ' '� F< '' mo 4 _ ..rte. " - "`.XV f R l -4�"' 9 1 �-� Y � ; ''''zn .� y .` fi t i .l � x a N. M �rfyY . >,' -'. : �` - -. ' te a w y , a 3 4' "�. -.°` vim" ti y .. S i P�./ f. ':'="-.:'..`f"'''' k� Y i S R� ; A7 a5 .. J Y� 0.{ x * ''iii--''''... `� o. m .. �" • �' a' 4 srr. "r ' }. 5 �c� + {j ° -- .� 4 - ."!}F, �. r �. ' k S ': • ... 3 . 4 ^ �� r s ` ,i� w�,} w klielt t. . �; ? ,e s ,r, \:.. 1 4 • 1: ! ' R ' .wt�at 3 ° �✓ .• {.. + r 3 { r•• ' w * . `ma � • { F ' . (i '' S '�1°ct .. 1 f r ' k _ ,}S y � �' `� kl - l • '..---!••••,.-2. "t ~ - ,,.. . y , saiaf f'a . >k _ s , ( H' t _ `, r , s ue- s 4 ,' y c, iS " ya }y A^ _ `.ate .:'-'be f j p 94- f '°'-'14-!•'.:54`.,:•:',.' �, .,fp ^ 4' .2 1 .1 t' + II F 7t - - ',a� At ' . .n, t x , I i .. '''� - - ry �F ac§ ' 7 { %" c^ . . 1 , fi t t µ ;a d s-.g a � 5r° �,,,,. :�,rer� r thh v a , -+- ' E. .� ^ 2 ;4o- ' , .T' wY ,- ' , t - .f f .Y4 '.""".. `x - ,sr,,,,.r,,�+ , r 3 ' .;f, r ,., ' ,�, yam\, ," . ; % ` ::. w ,, ` r .- ;. . a;i4r .y w -rY x f 1'�' ,\ h .1.1 e' , k K »' ,,.- w _ t a . n .fit _ • • w .. F4 •� `3v,Y - '� l : .#y S�'ry,..t -0 , .,-.:'3,,. sr a t,r y(.7i ! y • ^l+ x ii K • � '- . z r .c K z :4 ' ," 3`K'0 , l yy.d- •, tk .`ST f • :, ' 'k'+ ,r.'1 • A r S o w ti r� w ...i..,:-:- • C j4 " w k �4 T <1 � " ,k4=4.' _ : C i' ▪ .? S G , •f , +, A ' cC ' ,4s.. o, ,.,it,„. a- ` -' • •7 1 , -, i -• '� ,- ,, r E: „ : , C{ S t _ • � , ✓x l r r , 4 A.,4,...-.1 + ":. .2 f a • ` � :,,ft.-- e 3 v -w. n ��Y g ` N t` � •a '..'4,-,3:-.7,. ylfi, a { 'yf y i r �z 5.'. ,'rt' `4 t by � w7• 'So = 3E ;;,,. `c•r j" +G g a w ss - . a a4� r rrs a ' t , a 5, .�, a a< •ll "" � I t 3 a i t � ; ` > Y , Y ; � ���� .? v ' � - � � !O : 4 ", . *r. : 5 �e 'E:5� 94i' s . ;a..s ... , �t iit.: . 3 7i ` : � ,t . i? F o , .,... .. .: . ,.. : . . , . . ... . . - , . • - . : • :••-•:- • , . . .... . - . ,. .... .... . . • - , . . - .. . . , , ' :: ., : : . • : -..,....- -..::....;:.::::-...::,,-..:'...:;.!.,..4:-...V*F4;,,"'-0.4%; ' ' . ' - ' .." '• '''''' ' '' ' ;'-'' ' ' ' ' ' ' '''' .:: - , :;',"& . ::V.'t . :,,v."*„." , 4 :: :,"' . 4 , ..,. :, . ' . :i; --. - .-: ' ' ..':'.:... _:... ., ,1 '.'• ,:-..:.:•:....,..',...,:::.•:':::::::'•-j,.i.-...L.,,A:,-,..:--ii:,:..,••‘..V...,e4,1%.".*VP. .. . .. . . . .. - . . .. . . . . ... . . ,-. , . ,:, • .. • . - • . • . .. . , .. .... ,.— ..,_ ,...,-_,... . ., , .., „„, ....7 • .,...•.:-.;:-.-:.::: :::-,:-....-• .:..... •-:•-••••:: ..., :.:.:, . --- .......,., ...-::- - ----. . - . .. :,.. .., .... ,- .: ,. ... -, : - :.::::' , .. , .: - .:':. , .. ,.., i , ..-!':: ., -';c-F,-;.:17.wm.::,... ,, ..L. - 3 , , , ,,--:•„4.-:,-;.-At .. ' 7' ; 71.i ri:10...! :.::..::..,7:rr::: : : ...,. . .:.. ':::, ..... r: ir . . , r r . rr r '. .. r ., : i r i : ... -, ,.. -: .: rir: :: r,i1,:r ..:.:,...4::r.:OTt..:rgiq::R5:640;t10:"*;7 ,..,,,,.7f2j ' ' it; • .:. .,,, -.,.,..','",;-_''-'::::::- •••••,.: -,:,-• :.... ,• . :-- ..: . :: - .:... : :: .: •.i..: - . --, : - : : .• ,.--- . - :c.,.. , •::: : ;. -, .' , , , :::• • - --;;;::.:i.:::,;:.--:-..-.:',.]:.!:"..,:.• :•'•--:::. ' •:.-- : .-7-,:-.. ... „.. L... -• . ;- .:•"`i;i:,Aii.:: : :f,•41 - 1,*,Pi.: 41- :" - -.!,.,:a.,,iz' 11 • -., 1 .: ' .:' ' -'''.--.- ---:-..: - • - -.•-,:-. -,.:, ,,,,...,.......:. .,_.. , ; , , .,,.....„. . . . • , -;-:•::::Aliv: ,- . ', . Uf'-`:- :. . • - ...-,:;:,.:gf'''-_, ,,,..:.,,...tr-,,,To.-:Tgff;fg.;T.;A'•:,•3'!','..i'f.7';:<.4:'.;::'.::.:4-.W iiii ' . IIPP'ilit' '' --''::%.: er , --Ed , , , , -1:0.---, ri - . ' 6 r1 • .. :,... .. ...,.vf,e • „..,,,,,,,:.•:: ,,.. . • • . , •-. • , •,- ,:,• ..,-.: • •.• . ••• :.... ,, - . . . :. - . ' . •, . _ : , .. . ,•• . ..-• - :.• .,:-. -,,,.. •.• . , : :. . ' , • : • : , :: ..„. .. , • , . . . . . . , - • . , .. . . . . , . • .. . . . . _ . .. . ... ........_ - ' • -..= . .-. ': .; ••: - • . .i..4,.. •••.:::,...,:i,;,,,,,,A.:..,.:t0:44.444_,,,,,•____, • - - .. . _, - • •-, . .. . ,._.> - „ --,-...,... ',,,,',.,,.. '.:•.:•:...:::.:.::!;:4=t1.;;"0.:.?,..4..:::::A. -.:7'...7.:',.V.::C.:-1,i'lik.i.;;:11:774F.•"?.!Ni;',,-,:::;,..,:f .:c.,_,..1-:,:"... ./41:::;-;-=''''77."-H.I..!:,;.',..-ti-t 06.4:.-.4.S___ 1r..-t.tt-7?....YL's."-'". -7:77''''...'..f'-.i,,f,....:i:'',F'7,';',::=';;-.*:'::.. ...:Z:::::,7;::::',::114cig;O:•'fil.:"...::.:.'.::,.,.. .___,,_.,—.-4.:,_,_„,„,,..—f:i.31..!..1t.:,1'..;:.: :..,.::::„.:.,:;,.?:,-,::4:3,-5-..,-..w.l!':.:::,..,,,71':- ' -.''''''': - ....-.:"'''''7-'....,,,...,7--'-.",,,?';." '''''.••-:x-'"'.....-t. -.5i7, ' - ''': ::.:-.,,„=-4 ' ,. ' ,1 3 4. . , ; - ..;:;g0-1W,.a. ,- "7 : .„,. ; .,,.,.. : . , ' ''-.,-.,,t''..,,,,:'.,,,,,-.,-..,',L,.,-,-....L.,::,.Z.-..;;:..,,,•.-iv, ,...,,,..Z-.1,,,-",:•"'"ii:,,,-..,:ig","''''''..te,''..]';',.'"" '' " ' . •-' ' ,•,-, • • . • . -.',....."-Z:,•:::.'•'::•':•,...1..--';:.'iligi'. C • ‘.1.'-' ''''.-- .. , . • - '''''''''''''''.,':".'.•:•,'..r1:..31••••'‘','Z':' ."..•..,:,.. •■ ' - - As....... . . . : ".f....;••3t.!:• W:ff f'''.:'4.'7- '''. ..--,......“, '-•:' . . ,.. ,......... .17 • . .• ...„-,-., : ., - ...;-• .5.?,•. ?p.i. '•'-'.- :: ._ ....., F. ...,. ....:,,,,, ... T' -;:-...-.7-..::::,..':-.:7i':;.,.,...g.g.i.:4+,0,YA...-.':,-,:... . : ' ' - IV' ..'7'''':-:'•:::',':''::•::','''''',.:7'...':6:?'!'.t.'Zintl,i*I;.'....-.J.'-:. ' I - I - 7 oi .„_,--,-,-.-,,,,:ftit4.:1.:,:-1 . .- „„, ic..,...,„..-,:,:•:.•„,...-.:,•,;,:..„:,-..-.,•,:•.•••„::::,,,..,,:,,,:,,,,R.,:-.,..,,,,,,,,-$.-„TA,...;;.„0Ac,-. ,••,ilitol Illi ! • --,- :.. ..,-, -.,...-,,w i f i - 'f -. ... ;el_ z',-';‘,i,s•-::.;;;:-',-.--: , . ' ':--,;;;'-'•:-.:-.•'•--- '"---','• . ''-----. - -- : • .,-1...*;4;!..=.4.,...-_:;.-44=.4,.,3-:::::-ti.7..r.:§,E7-4•.:,!,..:,3,-_,Toi..--.,=fipt.tv.:7--7:77-4, , . • — - ,:,---.4 .';':;-,-.'7= : 7t- ,,. -.---., :t . ... 7 ' ; ','. 17 7.7- 7 --.:.•::: .,- , -"-- ''':':-, ' ' -.: ' '!."=-1'40 . . ..,.., 4 ''11 - '-'•".''''':.-.. 1 ".%.141 .. . .. . ....: . . ,,:.,.. „ .,„. 7.7,_ , :,_7,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,,,„:,....- , .. • : '''' •,.. . - l' '' ' . , :',,, :r. .. .. .:-.7 .;'z.,..':W.2:TIV"'"'.ir.:Wi'''..:,:::' . .. . .., . , . • . . , . . . • „ .. . • . , -. • . . • • 0 – _. _.. elevation . x-" tom•* -- , -.:. � „ - _.. B . P . G o v ,.. _ III _ IiiN : 11 Eli l iJ l �i J l.. 5 I :101. i1'; ' 1 r 1���a ILL7 =I 0=1 1 �.. , ti — IT �f \ b 1 .,,� I Irl, i1 11 111 , _,, E w-- ,— 4 Site plan • ! X111 f .. 7� �aS..F.e �_. - t ._# 5 �., 59 •- ■ T) ,.,.... mot, �. 'x %' ■ r • P 2 M - X ' ro x a� K ?. y.m g. � ..: .! a^'4�'.S'`v j ai; Z I I o '' f t f z1 K` ` Y+h 1 �k gg r W" ha . P ik F ' ,� „ f k P s. [i Z • , , 1 -ii,:lr _ ..,,_. • r 1 ____,.. 2 —..�. , r 4 .. 2 . 3 ` `., — -� 6 1 _ 5 1 1 f 8 [.----''''. 1 �; II I i • ` 7 I i J f; #w wr ee 4 �1 ► 9 8 9 i I► y 1st floor plan 2nd floor plan 1— Seminar room 1 -- Seminar room 2— Conference room 2— Library 3— Kitchen 3— Carrels 4 —Foyer 4 -- Conference /projection room 5 —Hall 5 —Lobby 6 —Lobby 6— Bridge 7— Closet 7— Office B-- Demonstration laboratory 8— Supply room 9— Mechanical 9— Reproduction room iman,!iIII wiu ' I �� i_ , NI ill North -South section — - i� I I II larawannaalr 7IDallllat ; ....altl nun i 1 - -,ih.i ... h n '1' r.0.. East-West section 1111 art n_ ' - „a . i. 4 '• , * A Isi • , S .. .■ , tt 11‘ i .;‘ .., • 4 ; •*. ■ ”- ..., ',....t ., ',,,,, , k. •- ..,:.,„ ;, ,,,,,, - -, -: ‘.. - L. t • . . ', 4 ;...,111116% : I : 44 '1 . ie .,t,. „L•i• : ' '' ..■**',; 4 4 ' r y 40 1 /N • * 'Ct., r■ i 4. '....N.,,,. - - ."1, ....--- .., - ..• .,..,, . ,.) . ..•' • . P. \ ,, ... .. c, — . . . ,.• ', ' 4•1 , . 4.:. • - • • #1 , • • , . ..„ i ------ ..- , • -1,. - .4 , . --- -• -4:4- • li ' /Or. ",,...Ar.-' `t..4 s fe. ,,t,.. ' ., 1-' . -,'„; 4, ' -.......,. - . if-i .„--------- ,., ,.-...... s, 1.- • ., .... , •„ , .....4• ‘..,,,,,,,,, ..,„, ,,,,..‘,„ A ... . .4..'40,' . (.' ' 7 ■ '''':^1 . % ., ' $ • Ay- .. .. • . ,,.: .,..,, • - , V.-94, .,.......v-if'' . ,. .'.• • .‘ .4.. . . 0 ' . -- . .....,. . 4 ,,,,,,... ':.., . _ '. .: .. -,,, . ,.. ,, • .:,.- ..' — .4. - - ,, -:. . , ..-.4. ,,. 1; ,... s „; , , t ..,-• ' . At , ...,....,.,_ . ....... .... ...„..,,,,....,...4...„: .,x. .,... 00y . 4 1 . ' ' . ' f s ,...' , 'Sf( . A •• . 0 ' ..s"- " isz,' 7 • ' -' sr", 4- ■ ri . L •-• . ,10 .. •••• .. . f _,..... .:■ rr .,"...14' ei';41-'• 4.4 ...i -- •''. ... - ..n. ' . .14,.•.' .4s :At .. ' • Illk ' . 0, •• , .. .. ."'..... it . .. 4 %... . „... • b 0.3 ' , ii 1. . • • • • , . • ' W. • ' . 4 1;letl* . . ,' .... / '14 .: l'''' ''' .. ' - v•if., , - • , , - ' - . :: -.7 -, • — •• - ... - . - --•••••if -..- et , ..,,,, ..te..- . - - ... .z.1,1)‘. - --:- .,,,.. - ..- 4 .--..- , = ii- .. ....Mil' . b - . ' ** '•': :.''...". .•Pj°11'^'':.0,4tW 77 ' '- ' 4 "" - - At' .. ',...• . - '''' ' • .-'1.i.'•!L° '',..... . ,' r ' 4 p 4.... ...01. - ,,6444t. • ,,, . '. ,yr ' • , ..,i-1. ' -4,- , t7r ,- i ,-! . . :::: ''' - I:1'. ' ...„ , .. . . _ ... 110.1.... I.. . • s a .s.:100 .',.f.:. ,i ."'"'' - ' • ' Iv . • ' lic ..°•4 , • • 1 . . ...-,. . ,•:. 4.f.• ,4•••••,.... ... „,, : .' ..::`'• atri . i . ,....., . .• „. ;. .. . , . • • • - ..%:;0?' .: ,,,,,, ., -". . - ‘ ' • • __ _ . . • . .. ,.. —.u ' .‘ ...... - .•,' ,44. ,--• ,,,, ,,, ..., . ,,,,..--.7....... . ' 4 ■4 afidi.7. ..... , . .■ '',2, !,,,,,2%, '' .4 '.. , ''' • ! , :". 1 ';'., ■ ...,, ,.. ■4 , ....... ..i■•• ,, .,,, t . .Y • br:',/ ; .."'' 4 '......-. .." 1. 7 "7 ` ...... .. r ' 4 7 .''' o'.0'. Al • ..c.- . •- - :. , :• : ......, . orr*,... - • __ . ..,,y. .>“:4.." , ..c tr...4.^:;.;11,41"*! ' - ' - .' — .,.- 06- .,,,„..• . • .- 41 ;°'.'• • 4 ' . S0..74 '''' ' .' • . • .....1 ;11••.4!‘ . ' ." t,t,ii#V4ir: .; ' .. • R ' . ,.. ,„... • ' : ''.:"''''• ;44'0 S ■ ' • ., . 7 ,0 7 ..;*. - , . 0, , . . „,.. ,,,_, ., . . . 1. ' .. ....... ' ... • 0. . ,,,, ', 0 " , > , t "1, . i '6. ' ' ' ' ' ''' N ' .. 0... . ( S ' '' . '' '''. '..' - 0 .4. .1.4.•-. -4 . • : • ...IA' ,, , .. . ... . . , .•.......- . .• , _, - i...:.•.••:.:„ •• .,‘,:fi•-') - -- • -.- --'0,z ' ,%. -, .. - . . ... , ,. ,1100014i;.,,;4v!, %lope .. • .1 . ..trfir , :‘,...,''. • - !'''' "..;'3!.• , ...s.,- • • ' • . . .. • • 4 ,*' , . ..s..t..v.... : .. .•, - :— •, 4 , ......."... ' - • ., - ' .. ' • ,.-,z. 1 P.A..1.1`,'. . ' - , . . — . . ._ -.41:411• - 8 r. : , . • . , .. .... . .44 ...... dil j ,<:?.;:..le..1"':Vir ' . • • • ,,,,, : ' .■ , ff .;,,,,,;, , . - , ,... ' ' . . orrod .., F.' • --- • i ... . ,`“ .t• '. ' ‘,..,:,!'' ' .i '. . . i• ..., .i..• . . ( ‘'` .• - -.. . , , T - ■ ,..,!!!.. !ITA,,,, V 4$4' • . ' '''••, i t.'"`''. ••• . . 4'1 • l ." • ,:•.04 .''' .7.';' . „ „ ' ' .....' : ..' I i ' ....' - ,•,,,,i.,-, . , „ 4 — , • .„. , , .4. .0,41, ,. .,,. , .*, ..,, /„.,.,„, -.... ',.. .--,..... 7 -. .7% •. „, , • A— ' ' _.„. .- • • • '. „.......,.,..„,,,,,.. ,... . ,k , . --* • ' • .. " " ' .• .. • . 4 - 70 • . . Go 4,Q.2,Qci. 43*.0 AcQ p kQ, ...- ...+�. .< 4 . --1-1.' --ii-Ii i : t 4 P4 , ,,,:lilli " 1 Thilt*iti; - — ' :-...-'‘41111 ''. ' " 1 4 1 . 1 ° x T T" _ w i x a w . .„ „..,.. P } ■ ..,. . ,., . .. , ..! ,,, 1 + ,. ...„. orr." . . ' . I , ., , ' 4 4 Ailiik e w - e. re . ° - . a? • ra E II pc - . +�..nS'•'•m" ro roa ° a 4 fit ° . y ..� , '' ' or �C sr • Sc » • ,' ° 3 t • 4 �� • . . \ <2/ E .\ . ©\ . , f . ^2 • »,» • <«' ' • • { % =‘.± » � . � ...� / . y \ . . . y • • 1 � < � I A- 4 . , AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 1 00 6 & M ,r: n Sired' , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Mr,vic ac1 I 'lr/ / F-l.. f J c •4) 20iQ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, MN.. A a SCO / (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch ii height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days to the public h ring and was continuously visible from the day of , 200 9 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) • Mineral Estate Owner Notice. B y the certified mailing of notice, return receipt at least thirty (30) days prior to affected mineral estate owners by Y ( ) Y p requested, to affec Y the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. S Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowled ed before me this aday of4■ L. , 20'Q, by Anne 0, Scp.(e`1 . "STRE WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL INS 100 E. FRA CIS STRETHEGIVE INSTITUTE, OROIN CE #48. SERIES ET, OF 2007. POTENTIAL HIST IC RESOURCE NEGOTIA- ....... , `, TION ,-�;� PV@ II NONCE IS HERE GIVEN that a public hearing ' t .�' " e, I I I My commission expires: , 3'7 / P.O14 August 9, 2010 ata t Y l will be he ay, 9 / ngto b alSAOp6 the is&, meal- 10 e �'� + Galen t . , o pen , t Chambers, Cit Hall, 130 or _ INDA M. n Aspen, Lion inceane under /v-]l� ��, /`/,�,/ uc Galena St P / Tl.` // 1 { {{ I 1 ` L f/l F,--1 d ance 8 4 8 of preservation incentives ortliance is•a NM+NG dance # rp Series of 2007, e otary Public Aspen, identified submitted by group of the potential Regents historic re University in o Col sub 80309, are t Reg , Boulder, Boulder, .` re o, tin 3 o the properly known as The ; hN 0 /88 Institute to affecting theerl Steen Aspen, CO, 8161 8161 , 100 1 legally descnbed as ncis \\µ\`— Street, Aspen, O, 81611, A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, Caron 0312912014 PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER Expires � STREET, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED ON THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND SEC O ; ?OWNS IP 1D SOUTH, RANGE 84 LTTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: WEST, AND PART OF THE NE THE SE 'F 7BLICATION OF SECTION 12, 85 WEST OF THE 6T'H PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID SAID PARCEL IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS AP NT ON THE NORTH LINE )1 THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) of v ° F " s A eoF �gD G0 NTY ERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED historic ai9N8^ of the and mapeu ep ^s u r 1 erg 1On wl`h TIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE cou8 will eveluale tlIe . building o ,4.ner. For tine GUY of 1 30 S t prope G at C.R.S. §24- 65.5 -103.3 che onta y. tY Aevelopmaul Department, Comm unity D CO 81611, (9]0) 429 -2] Ga l e na B iers^ n co.0 am. N M�ol eM I 1 11 Aspen e8 i me Aspen Times Weekly on June 27, PuYllsbed in fie 2010. j52016651 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: \G tiAr ' ` S Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: � ?A t o , 200_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin /� ) (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the.,, Community Development Department, which was made of suitable,, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inehes Wide I} and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not' /. f less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the '2 day of , 204 , to and including the date and time of the public 1 hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. �/ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. lYAN 1/4+, '.,,as 0 o'-t t,r. '��,^^e �o -. �P L H2A'�.O .n '1 I • .41. t O 1 (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in Amok any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. pi „:", Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this3"-E of A ,/.'i.,� ,20(IIb,by A- fon 12. (',� ntnM U WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL f.I PUBziN4 0 A Q 4 . ""'" '•• t M �.mmission •xpires: _ , i Np % \\ /2% Notary Pub is / 4 TEOF C > > ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL Ash i • J a a ra u5. } 1 v 'M€y'a'u ash a i4x be d1' " ix 'c. '+i'n, S 9 fV Epld `ti,, ag .8.1 i f p ''a°�' k � t\1 R4 ' F. RESOLUTION NO. 5 1 Series of 2010 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN AND THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO REGARDING THE GIVEN INSTITUTE. WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Aspen and the Regents of the University of Colorado regarding the Given Institute and the present plans of the Regents of the University of Colorado to sell the property on which the Given Institute is located; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen and the Regents of the University of Colorado desire to allow the City of Aspen time to pursue funding for the purchase by the City of Aspen the property. NOW, WHEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section One That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Aspen and the Regents of the University of Colorado, a copy which is annexed hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said memorandum of understanding on behalf of the City of Aspen in substantially the form as appended hereto as Exhibit A. Dated: , 2010. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held 1/411.c2y- /oZ , 2010. / fir _ _,/ _ ' LA Kathryn S. Koch /City Clerk JRT-7/14/2010 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN. AND THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into this day of 2010 by and between the Regents of the University of Colorado, a body corporate (the "University ") and the City of Aspen, a home rule municipal corporation of the State of Colorado (the "City "). RECITALS A. The University is the owner of the Given Institute, consisting of approximately 2.256 acres of land located within the municipal boundaries of the City, and more particularly described on the attached Exhibit A (the "Given Institute Property "). B. On the Given Institute Property is located several existing structures (the "Institute Buildings "). C. The University is processing an application pursuant to the requirements of Section 26.415.025 of the Aspen Municipal Code ("Ordinance 48") of the City to obtain a demolition permit for the Institute Building. On May 26, 2010 the City acknowledged that based upon the May 25, 2010 letter from the University, the 90 day negotiation period outlined in Ordinance 48 commenced on May 25, 2010. D. Upon demolition of the Institute Building, the University desires to sell the Given Institute Property to a private purchaser for the purpose of residential development in conformance with the current zoning for the Given Institute Property. E. The current zoning of the City for the Given Institute Property is R -6, Medium - Density Residential. F. The University is willing to sell the Given Institute Property for $17,000,000. G. The City, pursuant to ResolutionNo. (Series of 2010) has stated its desire to preserve the Institute Building while'supporting the University goal of sale of the Given Institute Property. H. The City desires that the University delay the demolition of the Institute Buildings and sale of the Given Institute Property until after the November 2, 2010 general election, at which election the City will place a question on the municipal ballot with regard to the purchase by the City of the Given Institute Property in accordance with this Memorandum, of' Understanding. I. In return for the promises of the City set forth in this Memorandum, of Understanding, the University is willing to delay the demolition of the Institute Buildings and sale of the Given Institute Property until after the November 2, 2010 election. given memorandum of uodentMding with city of upew Based on the promises and covenants set forth herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. PIacement on Ballot The City agrees to place a ballot question (the "Ballot Question ") on the November 2, 2010 general election ballot of the City. The Ballot Question, if approved, shall authorize the City to pay the University $17,000,000 at a closing for the Given Institute Property, and shall identify the funds or source of funds for the City to pay the University, all in a manner where the City could purchase the Given Institute Property for $17,000,000 no later than March 31, 2011. A. If the Ballot question is approved, the City shall purchase the Given Institute Property from the University at a closing date mutually agreed to by the parties, but not later than March 31, 2011. B. The City agrees that if the Ballot Question is not approved by the voters of the City at the November 2, 2010 general election, the City will not take any action for a period of ten (10) years following, said election which would directly or indirectly interfere with or preclude a private purchaser of the Given InstituteProperty from developing the Given Institute Property for residential purposes. The actions not to be taken by the City shall include, . but not be limited to, the following: a) The current zoning of the Given Institute Property is R-6, which the City agrees is an appropriate zoning. The City shall not rezone the Given Institute Property from its current designation of R -6, or substantially modify the provisions of the R.-6 zoning district as they apply to the Given Institute Property; b) The City shall not designate the Institute Building for historic designation, nor shall the City adopt new historic building procedures that Would apply to the Given Institute Property; and It is the intent of this subparagraph 8 that if the voters of the City do not approve the Ballot Question, the University, and its successors and assigns, shall have a vested right to develop the Given Institute Property in accordance with the R-6 zoning currently in place. 2. Actions by the City. In consideration for the representations set forth in this agreement„ and except for placing the Ballot Question on the November 2, 2010 ballot, the City agrees that it will take no direct or indirect actions to prevent the sale of the Given Institute Property or the demolition of the Institute buildings before the November 2, 2010 vote or thereafter if the voters should not approve the Ballot Question to purchase the Given Institute Property from the University for 317,000,000. The City agrees to process all applications or permit requests submitted by the University with regard to the Given Institute Property or the Institute Buildings with the express agreement by the University that it will not act on those approved applications or permits should the Ballot Question be approved by the voters. Furthermore, within five (5) business days of the :signing of this Agreement the City shall withdraw and or cease any such actions that may directly or indirectly prevent the sale of the 2354903_1 doe 2 Given Institute Property or the demolition of the Institute Buildings including; but not limited to the pending application for historical designation of any of the Institute Buildings 3. Limitation on Police Power of the Citv. The City acknowledges that the promises made herein are a limitation of the police power of the City. The City agrees that the limitations set forth herein area reasonable limitation on the police power of the City made in exchange for the promises of the University set forth herein. 4. I allot Question. The City agrees that the Ballot Question shall satisfy all requirements of the Colorado Constitution, including but not limited to Article X Section 20, all requirements of Colorado Law, and all requirements of the Charter and Ordinances of the City of Aspen as are necessary to have the election be a permanent and enforceable commitment of the City to pay the University $17,000,000 for the Given Institute Property within the time frame set for closing in Paragraph 1 (A), and that no other voter approval is required. The City represents that it has the funds for closing or that the Ballot Question will authorize the issuing of bonds, certificates of participation or other financial instruments to generate sufficient funds for the purchase price by the closing date. 5. Title. The University shall deliver a title commitment to the City not later than ten (10) days following approval of this Memorandum of Understanding. The University agrees that prior to the November 2, 2010 election not to cause or willingly permit any additional exceptions to title without the written approval of the City. 6. Ordinance 48 AvprovaL The City agrees to issue a demolition permit to the University for the Institute Building in accordance with the procedures set forth in O dinanee 48. The City acknowledges that the procedures of Ordinance 48 will allow the issuance of the demolition permit prior to the November 2,. 2010 general election. 7. Specific Performance. The City agrees that the promises made in paragraph 1(B) may be specifically enforced and that damages may be inadequate if the University is unable to enforce these promises. Accordingly, the University shall have the ability to waive its right to receive compensation, and the University shall have the right to enforce the provisions of paragraph 1(B) above by obtaining relief in the form of specific performance, injunction, or other appropriate declaratory or equitable relief. This right of the University shall be assignable by the University to any purchaser of the Given Institute Property. 8. Exercise of Demolition Permit. Notwithstanding that the University has or will have received from the City a demolition permit for the Institute Building, the University agrees that it shall not exercise the right to demolish the Institute Building prior to November 2, 2010. If the voters of the City of Aspen approve the Ballot Question, and the Ballot Question satisfies the requirements of this Memorandum of Understanding, then the University agrees not to carry out the demolition of the Institute Building prior to the sale of the Given Institute Property to the City of Aspen 9. Failure to Close. If the voters Approve the Ballot Question, but the City does not close on the purchase of the Given Institute Property by the date set forth in paragraph 1(A), then 2354903 1.dee 3 the University may demolish the Institute Building in accordance with the approved demolition permit and proceed with the sale of the Given Institute Property, 10. Given Institute Property Purchase Price. The City and the University agree that the purchase price for the Given Institute Property is S17,000,000, subject to normal closing adjustments'. 11. Open House. The University agrees that between the date of the execution of this agreement and the November 2, 2010 election it will make the Given Institute Property available for members of the public to view on three (3) separate occasions, the date and time ofwhich will be set by the University so as not to interfere with the operations of the Given Institute 12. Failure to Place on Ba11ot. If the City does not place the Ballot Question on the November 2, 2010 election ballot, then this Memorandum of Understanding shall terminate, provided, however, that the City shall still be obligated to issue the demolition permit in accordance with paragraph 6 above, and the provisions of paragraph 1(B) shall be enforceable against the City. 13. Jurisdiction. The City and the University acknowledgement that this Memorandum of Understanding is not an agreement by the University that the City's ordinances apply to the University. Neither is this acknowledgement an agreement by the City that its ordinances do not apply to the University. Except as is specifically agreed to in this Memorandum of Agreement, neither party shall be precluded from asserting its legal position as to the question of whether the University is subject to the ordinances of the City. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] 2354903 iaoe 4 EXECUTED this day of , 2010. CITY OF ASPEN, a home rule municipal UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, acting by corporation of the State of Colorado and through the Board of Regents, a body corporate B By Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Name: Title: ATTEST: APPROVALS: By: STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk OF LAW By: , Attomey General APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: John Worcester, City Attorney 2354903_1.doc 5 Given Institute Meeting Summary July 29 2010, 3 -5:00 p.m., Rio Grande Meeting Room Attendance: Sarah Broughton, Ziska Childs, Stan Clauson, Tom Griffiths, Amy Guthrie, , Philip Jeffries, John Katzenberger, Junee Kirk, Jim Lindberg, Bill Lipsey, Ann Mullins, Barbara Pahl, Bill Stirling, Harry Teague. Why save this property? Association with Elizabeth Paepcke Illustration of The Aspen Idea (intent of the gift was to benefit science and education) Association with Harry Weese Protect Hallam Lake bluff, ensure public access, make open space connections Create an Art and Cultural District (adjacency to ACES, Red Brick) Preserve a community facility /amenity (Once it's gone, it's gone.) Possible users (Note: It was recognized that a proposal to increase use /impacts of the facility could face opposition, or at least logistical issues that would need to be addressed.) Performing Arts groups (experimental theater, dance, poetry, music, readings, lectures, etc.) The Wheeler Opera House Non - profit users • The Aspen Institute • The Red Brick Center for the Arts • ACES • Aspen Global Change Institute • Aspen Valley Medical Foundation • Aspen Science Center Other "schools" • Aspen Country Day School • CU Denver, or CU Boulder, CU School of Architecture • University of Denver Who to reach out to Neighbors A corporation who might purchase and preserve the property as a conference facility The Crown Family A potential purchaser who could buy now and hold the property for a short period, until longtime purchasers are lined up A "white knight" A developer, who might separate off a portion of the property for another use, helping to preserve the balance for the public. Additional funding sources Transferable Development Rights (TDRs) Subdivision (Possible value of a smaller lot split off for residential development= $5 million ?) Historic Preservation Tax Credits Future needs Paepcke Auditorium rehabilitation cost approximately $11 million Need additional information on annual building operation costs Need an endowment or other source of funding to bring building up to potential Next steps Stan Clauson will research possibilities for creating /selling TDRs to help fund purchase John Katzenberg and Harry Teague will contact other departments of the University of Colorado to see if they are interested in retaining or using the building. The group should identify locals, such as Gail Schwartz or Tom Clark, who may be able to speak to CU President Bruce Benson. Ann Mullins and Amy Guthrie will search for historic photos of The Given to send to Ziska Childs, who will put together a documentary piece about the history of the property. Amy Guthrie will confirm whether or not The Given Institute property is on the City's Sketch -Up map. r 1 ✓G 6b V I.A.Acti Stan Clauson: stan@scaplanning.com 'i Tom Cardamone: tcardamone(alaspennature.org G MitrA t I ! - _ "A-Q-61' Harry Teague: harry@teaguearch.com Gail Schwartz: gail.schwartz.senate @gmail.com U ✓�( L*Q ✓ �/' Alan Schwartz: alan @kandumedia.com George Stranhan: geo @sopris.net ( Aggs? John Katzenbereer:iohnk@agci.org R 7 ,Y.r �'� E bTd � r Philip Jeffreys: philipjeffreys@gmail.com Michael Fox: mfox@aspenclub.com Jackie Kasabach: ikasabach@yahoo.com Janet Ferrara: iaf(dgiveninstitute.org Tom Griffiths: thomas.griffiths@vectrabank.com Ziska Childs: ziska(&ziskachilds.com Fred Peirce: fpeircePaps- pc.com Bill Stirling: bill @stirlinghomesinc.com Sarah Broughton: sarah(Orowlandbroughton.com Ann Mullins: mullins.ann@gmail.com Yes f 4 F N4 HISTORY July 21, 2010 Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Aspen /Pitkin Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: National Register of Historic Places nomination of the Given Institute at 100 East Francis Street Dear Ms. Guthrie: In accordance with Colorado's Certified Local Government guidelines, nominations to the National Register of Historic Places must be presented to the local historic preservation commission and the chief elected official of the applicable Certified Local Government for review and comment. The above referenced property will be considered for National Register listing at the next Colorado Historic Preservation Review Board meeting on October 1, 2010. As a Certified Local Government, you have the opportunity to participate in this action. A copy of the draft nomination for this property is enclosed. Following your review, a letter outlining the support or objection of both your community's chief elected official and the Historic Preservation Committee should be forwarded to this office prior to September 28, 2010. The enclosed CLG Report Form may be used in place of a formal letter. The report form is also available on our website at coloradohistory -oahp. Please see the enclosed instructions for additional information. You are also welcome to attend the State Review Board meeting to be held on October 1, 2010 at the Grant Humphreys Mansion, 770 Pennsylvania in Denver. The National Register meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. during which public comments are welcome concerning the eligibility of nominated properties. Please find enclosed a tentative agenda. A final agenda will be available the Monday before the meeting date. If any Historic Preservation Committee members anticipate attending the meeting, please contact our office at 303 -866 -3392 so we may note your planned attendance in the agenda. We look forward to receiving comments from your community. Sincerely, NJ ;elo Are er W. Turner, AIA Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Enclosures CLG Nomination Instructions CLG Report Form Draft Nomination Form Tentative Agenda THE COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY CIVIC CENTER PLAZA 1560 BROADWAY SUITE 400 DENVER COLORADO 80202 www.historycolorado.org . a HISTORY July 21, 2010 Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Aspen /Pitkin Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: National Register of Historic Places nomination of the Given Institute at 100 E. Francis Street Dear Ms. Guthrie: We are pleased to inform you that the Colorado Historic Preservation Review Board will consider the Given Institute for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and Colorado State Register of Historic Properties. The National Register of Historic Places is the Federal government's official list of historic properties worthy of preservation. The State Register is Colorado's official list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture. These contribute to an understanding of the historical and cultural foundations of the nation. Properties listed in the National Register are automatically listed in the Colorado State Register of Historic Properties. The State Register is Colorado's official list of historic properties deserving preservation. As a Certified Local Government, the Historic Preservation Committee has an opportunity to make comments on this nomination. A copy of the nomination has been forwarded to the HPC and its contact, yourself, and the chief elected official, Mayor Mick Ireland, has been notified. The comments of the HPC and the support of, or objection to, the nomination will be forwarded to this office prior to the meeting of the State Review Board. Listing of a property or district provides recognition of the community's historic importance and assures protective review of Federal and State projects that might adversely affect the character of the historic property/district. It is hoped that these properties will be given special consideration in any future planning activities. If the property/district is listed in the National and State Registers, certain Federal and State investment tax credits for rehabilitation and other provisions may apply. Listing also provides eligibility for State Historical Fund grants. We invite you to attend the State Review Board meeting on October 1, 2010, which will be held at the Grant Humphreys Mansion, 770 Pennsylvania St., in Denver. The National Register meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. during which public comments are welcome concerning the eligibility of nominated properties. We hope that you can come. A final agenda for the Review Board meeting will be available the Monday before the meeting date. THE COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY CIVIC CENTER PLAZA 1560 BROADWAY SUITE 400 DENVER COLORADO 80202 www.historycolorado.org 0 0 If you plan to attend the meeting, please contact our office so that we may note your attendance in the agenda. Should you have any questions about this nomination before the Review Board meeting, please contact our office at 303 -866 -3392. Sincerely, teve W. Turner, AIA Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Enclosures: Tentative Agenda; CLG in Nomination Process NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETINGS OFFICE of ARCHAEOLOGY and HISTORIC COLORADO HISTORIC PRESERVATION *� � �* PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD * 1816 * And COLORADO STATE REGISTER REVIEW BOARD October 1, 2010 Grant Humphreys Mansion 770 Pennsylvania, Denver, Colorado TENTATIVE AGENDA* 10:00 COLORADO HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD CALL TO ORDER Edward C. Nichols, State Historic Preservation Officer APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of meeting minutes for May 7, 2010 10:20 NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION REVIEW Explanation of program and procedures Public review, discussion and Board eligibility recommendation Sixth Avenue Community Church (CLG) 3250 East Sixth Avenue, Denver (5DV.10975) Provost & Claymore Farm 2405 N. Overland Trail, LaPorte (5LR.878) Foster's Stage House & Hotel Aguilar vicinity (5LA.11224) Given Institute (CLG) 100 East Francis Street, Aspen (5PT.970) Matchless Mine East 7 Road vicinity, Leadville (5L(.57) Animas Forks Silverton vicinity, San Juan County (5SA.26) Gold Prince Mine, Mill, and Aerial Tramway (Sunnyside Extension Mine, Hanson's Mill) Silverton vicinity, San Juan County (5SA.26, 5SA.37, 5SA.585) NATIONAL REGISTER REMOVAL Big Thompson River Bridge I US Hwy 34, Estes Park vicinity (5LR.9515) Big Thompson River Bridge II US Hwy 34, Estes Park vicinity (5LR.9514) 12:00* ADJOURNMENT OT STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD * * * ** 12:05 ** STATE REGISTER REVIEW BOARD CALL TO ORDER Edward C. Nichols, President, Colorado Historical Society APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of meeting minutes for May 7, 2010 12:10 STATE REGISTER NOMINATION REVIEW Explanation of nomination review procedures Board nomination review and eligibility recommendation Hyatt Spence - Pulliam Ranch (CLG) Loveland vicinity (5LR.12400) Baca Land Exchange 5FN.883 5FN.2134 La Jara Archaeological District (5CN.1418) Biedell Creek Archaeological District 12:40 ** ADJOURNMENT OF STATE REVIEW BOARD LUNCH FOR BOARD MEMBERS UPDATE ON THE POWER OF PLACE: A2020ACTIONPLANTOADVANCE PRESERVATION IN COLORADO -- COLORADO STATEWIDE PRESERVATION PLAN2020 * *Preliminary agendas are subject to change. The final meeting agenda will be available on the Monday before the meeting. For a copy, contact the National Register Staff at 303 -866 -4681 or by e -mail at astrid.liverman@chs.state.co.us * *Time shown is approximate and subject to change depending on the length of time required for board review of each nomination. Copies of the nominations to be reviewed may be examined at: Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, National Register and State Register Offices, Civic Center Plaza, 1560 Broadway, Suite 400, Denver, CO 80202 Monday — Friday 8am to 5 pm NOMINATION SUBMISSION DATES AND REVIEW BOARD MEETING DATES Board meetings will typically be held at the Grant Humphreys Mansion in Denver SUBMISSION DEADLINES BOARD MEETINGS SUBMISSION DEADLINES BOARD MEETINGS June 7, 2010 October 1, 2010 February 25, 2011 June 10, 2011 °° October 22, 2010 February 2, 2011 July 1, 2011 October 7, 2011 ° Official nomination submissions must include all required materials including the nomination form, maps and photographs. Only complete and adequately documented nominations will be forwarded to the Review Board. Draft nominations maybe submitted at any time. °° Location subject to change Preservation Programs of the Esi COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY P016 CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION IN THE NATIONAL. REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES NOMINATION PROCESS The Certified Local Government program establishes a partnership between the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and Certified Local Governments (CLG) as nominating authorities for Colorado's National Register program. It does not delegate to CLGs the sole authority to nominate properties directly to the Register. The following procedures make clear the shared role of CLGs and the SHPO in the nomination process: 1. Nominations of Colorado properties to the National Register of Historic Places shall be made directly to the SHPO. Nominations may be made by any parties, including CLGs. 2. Upon receipt of an adequately documented nomination of a property within the jurisdiction of a CLG, the SHPO shall notify the owner, the chief elected official, and the local Historic Preservation Commission of the proposed nomination and shall transmit the nomination to the commission for comment. 3. The commission, after reasonable opportunity for public comment, shall prepare a report as to whether or not such property, in its opinion, meets the criteria of the National Register. 4. Within sixty (60) days of receipt of the nomination from the SHPO, the chief elected official shall transmit the report of the commission and his or her recommendation to the SHPO. The report should concentrate on the property's eligibility under the National Register criteria of eligibility. a. In the event that the Historic Preservation Commission and the chief elected official agree that the proposed nomination meets the criteria for listing the property in the National Register, the SHPO will transmit the proposed nomination and the CLG's comments to the Colorado Historic Preservation Review Board for consideration. The Review Board is an independent advisory board appointed by the Governor and SHPO that evaluates and recommends sites for nomination to the National Register. b. In the event the Historic Preservation Commission and the chief elected official disagree that the proposed nomination meets the criteria for listing in the National Register, both opinions shall be forwarded to the SHPO, who will transmit the proposed nomination and the CLG's comments to the Review Board for consideration. c. In the event the Historic Preservation Commission and the chief local elected official agree that the proposed nomination does not meet the criteria for listing in the National Register, the CLG shall inform the owner of the property and the applicant of its recommendation and shall inform them that within thirty (30) days an appeal of the recommendation may be made by letter directly to the SHPO. The Historic Preservation Commission shall forward the CLG's recommendations and the nomination to the SHPO, who will take no further action unless within thirty (30) days of the receipt of such recommendations by the SHPO, an appeal is filed by any person with the SHPO. If such an appeal is filed, the SHPO shall transmit the nomination and CLG's recommendations to the Review Board for consideration. 5. If no report is received by the SHPO from the chief elected official within the allotted sixty (60) days, the state shall make the nomination pursuant to section 101(a) of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. Failure of the CLG to submit reports on proposed nominations within its jurisdiction will be considered by the SHPO in its review of the CLG. 0 y CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTICIPATION IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES PROCESS Page 2 6. Appeals of the SHPO's decisions may be made directly to the Keeper of the National Register in accordance with federal regulations (36CFR60). 7. For proposed nominations of historic districts to the National Register of Historic Places, the CLG shall assist the SHPO in: a. Assisting the preparer of the form in verifying the names and addresses of the owners of properties within the proposed districts, if necessary. b. Providing for public information meetings at times and places agreeable to the SHPO and CLG. 8. The SHPO will notify the CLG, the owner, and the applicant when a property within the CLG's jurisdiction is listed in the National Register. 9. The Historic Preservation Commission shall be responsible for providing oversight and monitoring of historic properties and historic districts listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The commission is responsible to recommend in writing to the SHPO removal from the National Register of any property or district which has lost its integrity because of the demolition or alteration of structures. NOTE: This section addresses only properly completed National Register nomination forms which have been prepared in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Registration and Guidelines for Registration (Federal Register, v.48, no. 190, September 29, 1983, pp. 44726- 44728) and the National Park Service's National Register Bulletin How to Complete National Register Registration Forms. NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION CHECK -OFF LIST fred 3 -2005) „ The check -off list is provided to insure that an ecessary materials are turned in with the nominationtorm. Check off each item as you prepare the nomination for mailing and include the check -off list in the mailing. The Colorado Historical Society will use the list to verify the receipt of all materials. Property Name Given Institute Required Nomination Materials Sent Received [X] [ ] Computer disk containing Registration Form and all Continuation Sheets (hard copy of Registration Form with Continuation Sheets is not required if disk is submitted) [X] [ ] Completed 4 page Registration Form Continuation Sheets for: [ ] [ ] • Multiple Property Owners Of applicable) [X] [ ] • Description [X] [ ] • Significance Statement [X] [ ] • Bibliography [X] [ ] • Verbal Boundary Description Office Use Only Date eceived [X] [ ] • Boundary Justification AMB L 1edits 7/12/10 6/24/10 2 //1 0 41 0 (second draft); [X] [ ] Sketch map(s) Materials checked in by: [X] [ ] USGS topographic map [X] [ ] Black & white photographs - 2 sets Name SEE NEW NATIONAL REGISTER PHOTO POLICY BEFORE SUBMITTING http://www.cr.nps.gov/nr/poheyexpansion.htm [X] [ ] Color prints or digital images [X] [ ] Proof of ownership Please Note: Official nomination submissions must contain all required materials, including the nomination form, maps and photographs. Exceptions may occur only with the advance approval of the OAHP nomination staff. Only complete and adequately documented nominations will be scheduled for Review Board consideration. Draft nominations may be submitted at any time for staff review. Use of Nomination Materials Upon submission to the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, all nomination forms and supporting materials become public records pursuant to CRS Title 24, and may be accessed, copied, and used for personal or commercial purposes in accordance with state law unless otherwise specifically exempted. The Colorado Historical Society may reproduce, publish, display, perform, prepare derivative works or otherwise use the nomination materials for Society and /or National Register purposes. Mail or deliver all nomination materials to: Colorado Historical Society Attn: National Register 225 E. 16 Avenue, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80203 -1606 NPS Form 10 -900 � OMB,rn .11 0024 -0018 United States Department of the Interi '"` J • National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determination for individual properties and districts. See instruction in How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form (National Register Bulletin 16A). Complete each item by marking "x" in the appropriate box or by entering the information requested. If an item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional entries and narrative items on continuation sheets (NPS Form 10- 900a). Use a typewriter, word processor, or computer, to complete all items. 1. Name of Property historic name Given Institute other names /site number 5PT.970 2. Location street & number 100 East Francis Street [N /A] not for publication city or town Aspen [N /A] vicinity state Colorado code CO county Pitkin code 097 zip code 81611 3. State /Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this ❑ nomination X ❑ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property X ❑ meets ❑ does not meet the National Register criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant ❑ nationally ❑ statewide X❑ locally. ( See continuation sheet for additional comments.) Depute State Historic Preservation Officer btgnature of certitying official/ 1 itle Date Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, History Colorado, TheColorado Historical Society State or Federal agency and bureau In my opinion, the property ❑ meets ❑ does not meet the National Register criteria. (0 See continuation sheet for additional comments.) Signature of certifying offcial?itle Date State or Federal agency and bureau 4. National Park Service Certification I hereby certify that the property is: Signature of the Keeper Date of Action ❑ entered in the National Register ❑ See continuation sheet. ❑ determined eligible for the National Register ❑ See continuation sheet. ❑ determined not eligible for the National Register. ❑ removed from the National Register ❑ See continuation sheet. ❑ other, explain ❑ See continuation sheet. Given Institute X, • _ Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property � County/State 5. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property (Check as many boxes as apply) (Check only one box) (Do not count previously listed resources.) Contributing Noncontributing [ ] private [X] building(s) [ ] public -local [ ] district 1 1 buildings [X] public -State [ ] site [ ] public - Federal [ ] structure 1 0 sites [ ] object 0 0 structures 0 0 objects 2 1 Total Name of related multiple property listing. Number of contributing resources (Enter "N/A" If properly is not part of a multiple property listing) previously listed in the National Register. N/A 0 6. Function or Use Historic Function Current Functions (Enter categories from instructions) (Enter categories from instructions) EDUCATION /research facility EDUCATION /research facility EDUCATION /education related /housing EDUCATION /education related /housing 7. Description Architectural Classification Materials (Enter categories from instructions) (Enter categories from Instructions) MODERN MOVEMENT /International Style foundation CONCRETE walls CONCRETE GLASS roof SYNTHETICS other Narrative Description (Describe the historic and current condition of the property on one or more continuation sheets.) Given Institute fir'+_ Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property a County /State 8. Statement of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria Areas of Significance Irdark"..ri one or more boxes for the criteria Qualifying the properly for National (Enter categories from Instructions) ejiater Ilaeng) EDUCATION pc] A Property is associated with events that have made a ARCHITECTURE significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history. [ ] B Property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past. Periods of Significance p(] C Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a 1972 type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. Significant Dates [ ] D Property has yielded, or is likely to yield, information Building Dedication, August 3 -5, 1972 important in prehistory or history. Criteria Considerations (Mark' x' in all the boxes Nat apply.) Significant Person(s) Property is: (Complete if Criterion B is marked above). N/A [ ] A owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes. [ ] B removed from its original location. Cultural Affiliation N/A [ ] C a birthplace or grave. [ ] D a cemetery. Architect/Builder [ ] E a reconstructed building, object, or structure. WEESE, Harry Mohr [ ] F a commemorative property. [X] G less than 50 years of age or achieved significance within the past 50 years. Narrative Statement of Significance (Explain The significance of the property on one or more continuation sheets.) 9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography (Cite the books, articles and other sources used in preparing this form on one or more continuation sheets.) Previous documentation on file (NPS): Primary location of additional data: Dpreliminary detemlination of individual listing (36 CFR 67) has been ®Scam Historic Preservation Office requested 0 Other State Agency ❑ previously listed in the National Register ❑ Feder& Agency ❑ previously determined eligible by the National Register ❑ Local Government ❑ designated a National Historic Landmark ❑ university ❑ recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey D Other Name of repository: ❑ recorded byHismdcAmerican Engineering Record Colorado, The Colorado Historical Sroclety given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property ,, County /State 10. Geographical Data Acreage of Property 2.26 UTM References (Place additional UTM references on a continuation sheet.) 1. 13 342720 4339675 (NAD27) Zone Easting Northing The UTM reference point was derived 2. from heads up digitization on Digital Zone Easting Northing Raster Graphic (DRG) maps provided to OAHP by the U.S. Bureau of Land 3. Management. Zone Easting Northing 4. Zone Easting Northing [ ] See continuation sheet Verbal Boundary Description (Describe the boundaries of the property on a continuation sheet.) Boundary Justification (Explain why the boundaries were selected on a continuation sheet.) 11. Form Prepared By name /title Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer organization City of Aspen, Colorado date 6/10/10 street & number 130 S. Galena Street telephone 970 - 429 -2758 city or town Aspen state CO zip code 81611 Additional Documentation Submit the following items with the completed form: Continuation Sheets Photographs Representative black and white photographs of the Maps property. A USGS map (7.5 or 15 minute series) indicating the property's location. Additional Items A Sketch map for historic districts and properties (Check with the SHPO or FPO for any additional having large acreage or numerous resources. items) Property Owner (Complete this item at the request of SHPO or FPO.) name Regents of the University of Colorado (contact: Secretary of the Board of Regents) street & number 1800 Grant Street, 8 Floor telephone 303 - 860 -5686 city or town Denver state CO zip code 80203 Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: This information is being collected for applications to the National Register of Historic Places to nominate properties for listing or determine eligibility for listing, to listproperbes, and to amend existing tisanes. Response to this request is required to obtain a benefit In accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act as amended (16 U.S.C. 070 el seq. Estimated Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to range from approximately 18 hours to 36 hours depending on several factors including, but not limited to. how much documentation may already exist on the type of property being nominated and whether the property Is being nominated as part of a Multiple Property Documentation Form. In most cases. it is estimated to average 36 hours per response including the time for revieMng Instructions, gathering and maintaining data, and completing and reviewing the form to meet minimum National Register documentation requirements. Direct comments regarding this burden estimate or any aspect of this form to the Chief, Administrative Services Division, National Park Service. 1809 C St. NW, Washington. DC 20240. NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No 1024 -0018 (8 -86) (E "+}s 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 7 Page 1 NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION Given Institute Main Building (contributing, 1972): The Given Institute sits on an approximately 2.25 -acre irregularly- shaped semi-urban site characterized by a flat plateau that slopes abruptly to the north towards the Hallam Lake Nature Preserve. The lot is abutted by private property to the west, a bike trail and the Red Brick Arts Center to the south, and nature preserve to the east and north. The Given Institute is a 12,000- square -foot building comprised of a series of geometric volumes constructed of concrete masonry units with raked joints, painted white, surmounted by a flat roof. The building facades correspond to a square, 90' x 90,' into which other geometries of circles, squares and triangles are deliberately interwoven, juxtaposed with and pushed beyond the boundary of the square. The four corners of the square are anchored by two -story rectangular forms at the northwest (Photo 8) and southwest corners (Photo 7). Triangular forms dominate elsewhere, including the floating second -story triangle at the northeast that is grounded by a thin column (Photo 16) and a two -story detached triangular form at the southwest corner (Photo 23). The square is disrupted at two key locations: by the cylindrical volume that functions as the seminar room or nucleus of the building (Photo 21) and by a small triangular second -floor balcony that extends the line of the triangular volumes that sit atop the cylinder (Photo 15). A triangular volume is cut out of the west facade to avoid a cottonwood tree, which in turn serves as a focal point for the curtain wall that spans between two solid rectangular anchors at either end of the west facade (Photo 8). The solid to void ratio on the west elevation emphasizes the geometric shapes interwoven within the building. Architect Harry Weese carefully located horizontally oriented ribbon and circular windows that frame the outdoors as viewed from the interior, while at the same time guiding the experience of the outside viewer through repetition of shapes (Photos 7, 10, 39). The north facade comprises a two -story triangular cut -out that reveals the cylindrical shape at the ground level. A low wall with vertical slits functions as a bike rack and reiterates the boundaries of the square at the northeast corner (Photos 18 -20). The east facade is devoid of fenestration. A long open corridor divides the triangular anchor at the southeast comer, which houses mechanical functions, from the primary building (Photos 22 -23). The corridor connects the gravel parking area located in the eastern portion of the property to the entrance. The main entry is from the south and cuts diagonally into the building (Photos 25 -26). A series of wide exterior steps create the edge of a platform on which the building sits. The interior consists of three levels: a basement /garden level, ground level and second level. The original interior finishes appear to be intact and the geometric volumes that Weese overlaps and weaves throughout are NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8-86) ("" (E 11 -31 -2009) • United States Department of the Intefior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 7 Page 2 clearly evident and repeated through subtle details. For example, the curved railing on the second floor echoes the spatial volume and rhythm of the cylindrical seminar room (Photos 28 and 42). The original built -in desks designed by Weese for the seminar room remain in situ (Photos 29 -35). Alterations to the interior are limited to updates to the interior bathrooms, water fountains, and entrance to the seminar room through the addition of a ramp to meet accessibility standards and conversion of a laboratory into a conference room. These minimal alterations all date to 1993. In 1996, some glazing was subsequently replaced using the same configuration, material, and type. As evidenced by the building's continued functionality, the aesthetic geometries of the design complimented the overall building program in the evolution of the architect's design for the Given Institute main I1uild nm._ _ _ _- _ - tio it(a111: Elaborate floor ptan 6xe• Site Landscape (contributing,_1972): Vehicular access to the property is from a narrow curb cut at Garmisch Street, which opens up into a gravel parking area that accommodates service and delivery uses. In 1970, Elizabeth Paepcke, town matriarch, sold the property comprising a portion of her garden at half its value to facilitate construction of the Given Institute. The year before, she had donated twenty -two adjacent acres behind her home for the development of an environmental center and preserve, the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies. Mature trees are abundant on the site, and contribute to the dense community forest. Some of the trees are estimated to be as old as eighty years or more and many are believed to have been planted by Elizabeth Paepcke, who is reported to have continually tended the trees during construction of The Given Institute. The species include Colorado blue spruce, aspens, cottonwoods, a single white fir (among the largest in the Roaring Fork Valley), and numerous shrubs and shade trees. The blue spruce provide a seamless connection to the Hallam Lake property below, transitioning between the wetland plantings to the gardens and inidgenous upland plantings on the Given Institute grounds. Based on an oral interview with supervising architect Bill Lipsey, the trees surrounding the building were "not to be touched." No landscape architect was engaged in the project. On the north side of the building, Weese designed a small sheltered patio leading out to open lawn for hosting functions and receptions. Two observation decks overlooking Hallam Lake may have been constructed by the Paepckes, who had built similar overlook areas nearby, adjacent to their residence. The only alterations to the landscape since 1972 have been: minor landscaping: creation of a memorial garden dedicated after Elizabeth Paepcke's death in 1994; and the 2002 reconstruction of the deck located in the northern portion of the property overlooking Hallam Lake. Aspen Global Change Institute (non - contributing, ca. 1890): NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8 -86) (F//Is 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the In or National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 7 Page 3 Adjacent to the main building is a 475- square -foot late - nineteenth -century frame vernacular residence featuring rectangular plan, gable roof, clapboard siding, and double -hung windows. The precise history and original location of this building is unknown. Local tradition cites that the building was relocated to the site during the Paepckes ownership of the property. With the establishment of the Given Institute, the residence became the summer caretaker's unit and later staff housing. In 1999 the current tenant, Aspen Global Change Institute, vacated space it had been occupying inside the Given Institute main building and moved into this building. The scope of alterations that may have been made to this building since its construction are unknown. Integrity: Based on Weese's original floor plans and scale model, and building permit files, the exterior of the Given Institute main building and the site landscape remain largely unaltered from their 1972 design. The design and setting of the building are entirely intact and it remains in its original location. The materials and workmanship embody Modernist tenets: monochromatic white color scheme; concrete masonry units and ribbon glazing; minimized functional detailing; and standardized pre- fabricated materials. Overall, the integrity of the main building and landscape is very high. The Given Institute design conveys a relationship of interior and exterior spaces and the feeling of a stark and simple, yet successfully deliberate geometric building. NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8 -86) "r (F s 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the Inferior • National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 8 Page 4 SIGNIFICANCE The Given Institute is eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A in the area of Education and Criterion C in the area of Architecture for the year 1972. The complex meets Criterion Consideration G, that of exceptional significance for a property less than fifty years of age. With regard to significance in the area of Education, the founding of the Given Institute (also known as the Given Institute of Pathobiology) launched a legacy of regular national and international conferences of leaders in the medical science and research field. The Given Institute facility has facilitated dialogue among scientists that in turn contributes to tangible advances in the medical field. Past conferences have included topics as diverse as: carcinogenesis; pediatric infectious diseases; epidemiology; immunology; and environmental pathology. The New York Academy of Sciences and Aspen Brain Forum Foundation conference scheduled for September 2010 entitled "Building Better Brains" will address: The interaction between neuroscience and bioengineering to construct "replacement parts" for the brain is one of the most exciting and potentially fruitful areas of translational neuroscience. With new advances in understanding the biology of neurodegenerative diseases and the link between brain and behavior, the ability to develop therapeutics to replace lost motor, sensory, and cognitive function is now on the horizon. Patients with diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, paralysis, stroke, Parkinson's disease, Amyotrophic lateral scleroses (ALS), depression, epilepsy, and other maladies stand to benefit from these developments. The University of Colorado, its owner, describes Given Institute conferences as state -of -the -art, with a stated purpose to "provide a forum for tomorrow's health advances." The architectural design of The Given Institute meets Criterion C. Harry Weese, a prominent modernist American architect, designed the main building, which remains and outstanding and relatively unaltered example of his work. Much of Weese's early work was in Columbus, Indiana, but he was a major figure in Chicago architecture and planning and continues to inspire study, with coverage in Chicago publications such as ChicagoMagazine, Reconstructing Harry Weese, (Robert Sharoot) July 2010, and a new book entitled The Architecture of Harry Weese (Robert Bruegmann and Kathleen Murphy Skolnik) being released in September 2010. Weese was a prolific architect, particularly revered in the Midwest, however, Weese designed the U.S. Embasy in Accra, Ghana in 1958 and became one of an elite group of architects selected to work for the U.S. State Department. He was inducted, at a relatively young age, into the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Architects in 1961. Weese's most recognized project is the system -wide network of station designs for the 100- mile long Metro subway in Washington, D.C., heralded by the New York Times as: "among the greatest public works of this century." (NY Times) NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8 -86) � (Fs 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the Interior J • National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 8 Page 5 Weese received many honors throughout his half - century career. In 1966, Architectural Forum named him one of the country's 14 leading architects. Throughout his work, Weese actively promoted historic preservation and received a Presidential Award for his efforts to restore landmarks such as Louis Sullivan's Auditorium Building in Chicago, where Weese donated his time on the Auditorium project as a gift to the city. While The Given Institute is less than fifty years old, Harry Weese is no longer living. His First Baptist Church in Columbus, Indiana, achieved National Historic Landmark Status in 2000, when it was thirty five years old. Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design the Given was in no way happenstance and fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began in Aspen in 1945, when Walter Paepcke brought Walter Gropius to attend an Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to discuss the future of the town. Work by Herbert Bayer, Eero Saarinen, Marcel Breuer, and Buckminster Fuller followed. Numerous Taliesen fellows practiced in Aspen. Into the 1970's and beyond Harry Weese built homes in the Aspen area, as did Elliot Noyes, John Lautner (who's famed "Turner House" was built in Aspen the same year as The Given Institute), Charles Moore, Robert A.M. Stern, and more. A current project is underway by Renzo Piano. Founding of The Given Institute The Given Institute, located at 100 E. Francis Street, in Aspen, Colorado, is owned by the University of Colorado (CU) and administered by their School of Medicine. The founding of the Institute grew out of a conference on Advances in Molecular Biology that was sponsored by CU and held in the Aspen Middle School gymnasium starting in 1964. Dr. Donald West King, then Chairman of the Department of Pathology at the University of Colorado Medical School, spearheaded the program, envisioning the need for a central meeting place where leading scientists could exchange information, at times a significant logistical challenge in the pre- internet age. The purpose of the creation of a conference center was to enable residents, fellows and faculty to remain current with the revolution in biology, genetics, and medicine taking place in American research. The National Institute of Health, National Research Council, and National Academy of Scientists all sponsored programs. Aspen provided a location more central in the country than similar conferences held at the time on the East and West coasts. In addition, the opportunity to combine research with the natural and cultural amenities available in Aspen was appealing, and the community already had a well established tradition as a summer retreat and intellectually stimulating environment for academics. Inspired by its great natural beauty, (Walter Paepcke) envisioned (Aspen) as an ideal gathering place for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to step away from their daily routines and reflect on the underlying values of society and culture. He dreamed of transforming the town into a center for dialogue, a place for "lifting us out of our usual selves... To make this dream real, in 1949 Paepcke made Aspen the site for a celebration of the 200" birthday of German poet and NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8 -86) A., (E ; 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the Interior • National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County/State Section number 8 Page 6 philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. The 20 day gathering attracted such prominent intellectuals and artists as Albert Schweitzer, Jose Ortega y Gasset, Thorton Wilder and Arthur Rubinstein, along with members of the international press and more than 2,000 other attendees. This tradition has been solidified in the community through organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972.) The Aspen location contributed to the success and international interest in the conference, which grew to four sessions per summer. Articles in the Aspen Times reported that registration was denied to several thousand would -be participants in the conferences due to limited meeting space. In 1967 negotiations began with the Aspen Institute to develop a more suitable permanent conference facility and laboratory. Ultimately Elizabeth Paepcke, who with her late husband Walter had worked to create many foundations of Aspen's post World War II renaissance, sold the University of Colorado two acres of land at less than market value for construction of the facility. Dr. King, since appointed Chairman of Columbia University's College of Physicians and surgeons, negotiated with the Irene Heinz Given (daughter of food giant H.J. Heinz) and John LaPorte Given Foundation of New York, to secure a $500,000 donation for the building's construction, which was then named in their honor. The Given Foundation was also the source of tens of millions of dollars of donations to Harvard University and other schools. CU constructed The Given Institute as a "think tank," primarily for the exploration of advances in bio- medical science relating to human health and well being, attracting thousands of participants to its important presentations. Initially, the cost of maintaining the facility and providing the programs was provided by the National Institutes of Health and donations, at no cost to CU. In the late 1980s, the financial support from NIH ended and The Given Institute became concerned with their isolation from the Aspen community in terms of offering public access to its programs. An Aspen Times profile noted that: "while most Aspenites remain oblivious to the brilliance in their midst, some of the most renowned names in medical research, including Nobel laureates, come together at a spot overlooking Hallam Lake to share their discoveries and advancements in highly specialized fields." Significant investment was made by CU to upgrade the property from a summer building to a year -round facility, and in 1991 a local advisory board spearheaded the establishment of a public lecture series, or "Mini College" that continues today. The Given Institute now hosts some ten free public lectures a year, bringing cutting edge experts on everything from bio- terrorism to sports medicine. In addition there have been youth summits on substance abuse, brown bag lunches on health topics for local senior citizens, and free dental and optical screenings for the community. For The Given Institute's 25' anniversary, fundraising began towards installation of gardens of native plants and favorites of Mrs. Paepcke as a way to honor the donation of the land and to contribute to the Aspen community. The setting and relative privacy of the property are promoted as a major aspect of the retreat atmosphere that The Given Institute offers. CU underwrites about half the cost of The Given Institute, with conference leasing accounting for the rest. Background on Modernism Modernism as a style of architecture describes the works produced in the mid - twentieth century as a result of a clear philosophical shift in design practices and attitudes, and incredible changes in building technology. The NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8-86) (Bo Iv 1d1 -2009) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 8 Page 7 roots of this style can be attributed in part to the Industrial Revolution, which led to dramatic social changes and an inclination to react against all that had come before. In addition, there was a new abundance of available materials, including bricks, timber, and glass, as well as stronger materials, particularly metals, which prompted architects to push the limits of building science and develop structural innovations. Gone were the interiors filled with columns and frames resisting the wind (with substantial help from the "non structural" cladding and interior partitions. Instead there was a whole new structural vocabulary of framed tubes, braced tubes, tube in tube, bundled tubes, frame shearwall interaction, outrigger systems, etc...A rchitecture and structure were one and the same, inseparable. (Baker) Initially, modern technologies were employed in ways that reflected the preference for decoration and organic design that had preceded the twentieth century, for instance in the Arts and Crafts Style of the 1920s and the influential designs of Frank Lloyd Wright. However, Le Corbusier's Villa Savoye at Poissy, France (1929- 1931) led a movement towards what would be known as the International Style. The demands of the automobile and the need for buildings to serve uses previously unknown, such as airports, challenged architects to search for innovative architectural solutions. Streamlined and austere building designs became more relevant. "Functionalism" and "Rationalism" were terms used to describe architectural philosophies related to this period. "Modem building codes had replaced rules of thumb" which was indicative of the available building technology and the importance of a trained architect. Architecture was seen primarily as volume and not mass. So the stress was on the continuous, unmodulated wall surface; long ribbon windows without frames, cut right into the wall plane, horizontally or vertically disposed; flush joints; flat roofs. Corners were not made prominent. Technically, the argument went, materials like steel and reinforced concrete had rendered conventional construction, and with it cornices, pitched roofs, and emphatic corners, obsolete. There would be no applied ornament anywhere, inside or out...A house was a machine made for living Le Corbusier provocatively declared in 1923 in his Towards a New Architecture, which has proved the most influential book on architecture in this [the twentieth] century. Architecture of this period was also concerned with a humanistic approach, seeking architecture that did not reflect the disparity of wealth in society. Removal of all hand - crafted ornament was one way to achieve this goal. A few European modernists arrived in the United States in the 1920s, but the major influx occurred as Hitler rose to power, in the late 1930s. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, who had succeeded Gropius at the Bauhaus, came in Chicago in 1937 to head the School of Architecture at the Illinois Institute of Technology. Walter Gropius arrived in 1939 to lead the Harvard School of Design. Herbert Bayer, who had been one of three young masters under Gropius at the Weimar Bauhaus (the others being Joseph Albers and Marcel Breuer) moved to New York City in 1938 where he designed books, exhibitions, and posters, including work for Walter Paepcke, head of the Container Corporation of America (CCA). NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8 -86) (E 1-31-2009) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County/State Section number 8 Page 8 Modernism in Aspen The period between the Silver Crash in 1893 and the end of World War II saw little new construction in Aspen. This changed when interest began to grow in developing a major ski resort, and when Walter Paepcke envisioned the town as the ideal setting for a community of intellect, cultural institutions, and pristine natural environment. As a result of this renaissance taking place, many important architects were drawn to live and work here and left a distinct Modernist design legacy in the landscape and built environment of the town of Aspen. While Aspen's image, to the public and perhaps to itself, largely identifies with its heyday as one of the most prosperous Victorian mining towns in Colorado, its postwar modern architecture is another layer of significant history that is unusual among Colorado mining or ski towns. The particular architects who practiced in Aspen starting in the mid - twentieth century represent a physical manifestation of the two major competing camps of American modernism, Frank Lloyd Wright's organic approach as compared to the Bauhaus and International Style. Aspen's modernist buildings can be generally organized into two periods, 1945 -1960, when Aspen entered the ski and tourist industries, and 1960 -1975, when its growth and development accelerated. The subject of this nomination,The Given Institute, was constructed in 1972 and embodies the tenets of the International Style. International Style architecture systematically rejected the past -its technologies, architecture, ornament, societal structures to embrace modernity, industrialization, urbanization, and the machine made. The premise was that modern design could transform society by applying industrial methods to housing and creating a "total art," including buildings, furnishings, interiors, clothing, and signage. Differentiated by the radical absence of references to past historic styles, the International Style is defined by industrial materials such as steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to give a sleek, mechanical, look to the buildings. Modernism was appropriate to the optimism and progressive thinking of midcentury America. The forms and materials worked well in a time when booming national growth required the construction of many new buildings. Harry Weese and The Given Institute In addition to being credited with transforming Aspen into an international destination and retreat for the "mind, body and spirit ", Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke were patrons of twentieth - century Modern art and architecture. As a stipulation in the gift- purchase of the land for The Given Institute, Elizabeth Paepcke retained the right to select the architect. She chose Harry Weese of Chicago, an internationally known Modem architect and part-time resident of Aspen. Born in Evanston, Illinois in 1915, Harry Weese died October 29, 1998. In his formation as an architect, Weese attended the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.), studying under Alvar Aalto and forming friendships with fellow students Eero Saarinen and I. M.Pei and Yale. He graduated from M.I.T. in 1938, following which he studied for a year with renowned architect Eliel Saarinen at Cranbrook Academy in Michigan. The New York Times has posited: "the effect of Cranbrook and its graduates and faculty on the physical environment of this country has been profound (...) Cranbrook, surely more than any other institution, has a right to think of itself as synonymous with contemporary American design. "Eero Saarinen would become one of the most recognized architects of the twentieth century, designing the St. Louis Arch (1947), NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8 -86) (PAWN 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the Interior "'` National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 8 Page 9 Aspen's first music tent (1949), and the TWA terminal in New York (1962). As his career took off, he regularly referred work to Weese. (Sharoff.) Charles Eames, an architect and fumiture designer responsible for many iconic designs of the twentieth century was also an associate when Weese attended Cranhrook. Before and after serving in World War II, Harry Weese worked for the one of the largest and well -known architectural firms in the world, Skidmore Owings and Merrill, who are credited with having invented the "glass box" skyscraper and who designed many landmarks, including the Lever House in New York City (1951), constructed shortly after Weese's tenure with the firm. Weese, said to be a sceptic of the "Less is More" edict of Mies van der Rohe that was heavily influential at SOM and in Chicago in general ( Sharoff) opened his own firm, Harry Weese and Associates, in 1947. While he was classically trained in the ideals of modernism, Weese was more strongly affiliated with the Finnish architects Aalto and Saarinen than the Bauhaus masters. Self- described as eclectic, Weese's prolific work in typologies including churches, educational facilities, single- family and multi -unit residences, and prisons, reflects a humanistic approach by incorporating natural materials, particularly wood, reflecting his own experience as a sailor, (Nye) and undulating lines. Early in his career Weese was invited, at the encouragement of Eliel Saarinen, to design a building in the town of Columbus, Indiana. After World War II, a manufacturing company in Columbus, recognizing the business value of creating livable communities, began to offer to pay architectural fees for local properties owners who would engage firms identified on a specific list, which included the most significant modernists of the time. Much of downtown Columbus, Indiana is now listed on the National Register of Historic Places, in recognition of its incredible collection of over sixty modern buildings designed by Eliel and Eero Saarinen, I.M. Pei, Robert Venturi, Richard Meier, and others. While most architects were invited to design just one building, Harry Weese designed at least eighteen, including the National Historic Landmark First Baptist Church (1965) considered one of the most iconic buildings in the town. Architectural historian Claude Massu has compared the design of the Columbus First Baptist Church with that of the Given Institute due to a similar preferential use of wood elements in the interiors (Massu 252). Shortly after the famed D.C. Metro project, Harry Weese created the design for the Given Institute, built in 1972. A longtime visitor to Aspen, having first visited town with his wife in 1947, Weese's family purchased a Victorian home, still owned by the family, at 118 N. First Street in 1969. In the vicinity, Weese also designed the Lavatelli House at Snowmass and the Baird House in Aspen (Noel 493). Weese was likely known to the Paepcke's, who resided in Aspen and Chicago. Herbert Bayer reportedly insisted Weese be selected as the architect, and supervising local architect William Lipsey recalls the presentation of Weese's design to Bayer in Aspen. The University requested a simple design that would harmonize with other buildings on the grounds and relate well to the site, a bluff overlooking Hallam Lake. Program components included a laboratory, a library, and several smaller conference areas, along with office facilities, a printing /reproduction area, storage space, restrooms, and a kitchen. Other specifications were a seminar space configured to promote free interchange between speakers and audience and interior spaces that were warm, relaxed, and comfortable and conducive to NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8 -86) ', (E 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 8 Page 10 informal, spontaneous discussion. (Bruegmann, 2010) Weese had extensive experience in the design of theaters. The seminar space is organized as a "theater in the round," and could be used for demonstrations and experiments core to the sharing of knowledge at this research facility. Weese's work in the late 1960s was characterized by geometric motifs. "(Triangles often pop up in Weese's buildings) that allude to the sails of boats Weese knew so well." The Given Institute has been described as: "one of Aspen's finest modernist works [which] gives a playful rigor to a simple circle with angular extensions." The centerpiece of the building is the United Nations- style amphitheater, which seats 175 people. The basement was designed to accommodate an electron microscope. Notably, the design for The Given Institute retained and adaptively re -used a small nineteenth century building, which appears to have been moved to the site before The Given Institute project began. Weese stated: "Fine old buildings give our cities character and continuity. They give us a sense of stability. Coexistence is key, the old with the new." And he noted in 1973 - "maybe someone will save one of our buildings some day." (Time) Comparable Institutions The Paepckes commissioned Herbert Bayer to design the buildings of the Aspen Institute complex, located at 3" and Gillespie Streets, including the Boettcher Seminar Building (1953), Marble Sculpture Garden 91955), Grass Mound (1955), Health Center (1957), Paepcke Monument (1960), Paepcke Memorial Building (1963), Anderson Park (1962), and Trustee Houses (1964) (Noel 489 -490). Founded in 1959, the Center for Humanities at Wesleyan University is among the oldest dedicated humanities research institutions in the United States. Other notable examples include the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford (1954), and the Rand Institute in Santa Monica, the latter two of which are also housed in notable mid - century Modernist buildings Originally It developed from the Center for Advanced Study, which was established at Wesleyan University in 1959 as a place where visiting scholars, especially in the humanities, could pursue research and writing projects. The Center assumed its present name in 1969, when it was reorganized by a group of Wesleyan faculty and opened up to the Wesleyan community. With the expansion of the community of fellows to include Wesleyan faculty members and students, the Center added the promotion of innovative, interdisciplinary teaching to its initial task of supporting research. These remain its primary activities. Wesleyan faculty fellows and the Mellon fellows combine teaching with research, while other visitors devote themselves fulltime to research. Besides supporting individual research and teaching projects, the Center is a place for sustained communication between the humanities and the social sciences. Its program each semester is organized around a focal theme, which shapes a weekly series of public lectures and smaller seminars. At these events, and in other, more informal settings, Wesleyan faculty, students, and visiting scholars from diverse disciplinary backgrounds carry on a wide - ranging inquiry into the social dimensions of the NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8-86) (E 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 8 Page 11 imagination and the imaginative dimensions of social life. As a meeting ground between the humanities and social sciences, between Wesleyan faculty and visitors, and between faculty and students, the Center for the Humanities is one of the key sites of intellectual life at Wesleyan. The Center for Advanced Studies (now the Center for the Humanities) brought to campus outstanding scholars and public figures who worked closely with both faculty and students. The Graduate Liberal Studies Program, founded in 1953, is the oldest liberal studies program and the first grantor of the MALS (master of liberal studies) and CAS (certificate of advanced studies) degrees. In this same period, the undergraduate interdisciplinary programs, the College of Letters, College of Social Studies, and the now - defunct College of Quantitative Studies, were inaugurated. htto://www.wesleyan.edu/about/uhistory.html NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 ( /^^ (E ; 1-31 -2009) • United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 10 Page 12 BIBLIOGRAPHY Baker, William F. "Building Systems and Concepts: Structural Innovation." Proceedings of the CTBUH 6th World Congress, 26th February-2nd March 2001. Melbourne, Australia: Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat. "Environment: The Landmark Man." Time (23 Jul 1973). "Given Institute and Aspen Given Foundation Merge" (1 Nov 2008). http: / /www.cufund.org /2008/11 /01 /given- institute - and - aspen - given- foundation - merge/ Ichinowatari, Katsuhiko. Harty Weese: Humanism and Tradition. Process Architecture, 1979. Kamin, Blair. "Harry Weese, Visionary Architect Known As 'Chicago's Conscience' [obituary]." Chicago Tribune (1 Nov 1998). Massu, Claude. Chicago: de la modernite en architecture 1950 -1985. Collection Eupalinos. Marseille: Editions Parentheses, 1997. Noel, Thomas J. Buildings of Colorado. Society of Architectural Historians Buildings of the United States. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. Nye, Caroline. Blueprint: Chicago. The Stories behind Chicago's Buildings both Famous and Forgotten. "River Cottages" (2 Mar 2010). http:/ /blueprintchicago.wordpress.com /2010 /03/02 /river- cottages/ Muschamp, Herbert. "Harry Weese, 83, Designer of Metro System in Washington [obituary]." The New York Times (3 Nov 1998). Sharoff, Robert. "Reconstructing Harry Weese." Chicago Magazine (Jul 2010). Thayer, Laura, Margaret Storrow, John Kinsella, et. al. Modernism in Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Design and Art in Bartholowmew County, Indiana, 1942 -1999, National Historic Landmark Theme Study. National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form. United States Department of the Interior, September 1999. NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8-86) t / , �+ , � (FMS 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the InfUior ✓3 National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number 10 Page 13 GEOGRAPHICAL DATA VERBAL BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER STREET, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED ON THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND PART OF THE NW Y+ OF THE SW ''A OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST, AND PART OF THE NE Y< OF THE SE Y< OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID PARCEL IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF FRANCIS STREET AND 24.00 FEET EASTERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF CENTER (AKA GARMISCH) STREET; THENCE N. 14 DEGREES 50' 49" EAST 121.59 FEET; THENCE N. 33 DEGREES 03' 19" EAST 42.21 FEET; THENCE N. 7 DEGREES 19' 05" EAST 112.35 FEET; THENCE S. 70 DEGREES 18' 15" EAST 286.57 FEET; THENCE S. 6 DEGREES 18' 51" WEST 103.11 FEET; THENCE S. 18 DEGREES 12' 00" WEST 108.73 FEET; THENCE S. 9 DEGREES 25'21" EAST 52.10 FEET; THENCE S. 23 DEGREES 21'00" EAST 83.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FRANCIS STREET EXTENDED EASTERLY; THENCE N. 75 DEGREES 09' 11" WEST 288.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 64; THENCE N. 31 DEGREES 00' 50" WEST 107.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2.2556 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING THAT PORTION OF NORTH ASPEN STREET LYING NORTH OF HALLAM STREET VACATED BY CITY OF ASPEN ORDINANCE NUMBER 3, SERIES 1953, BY PITKIN COUNTH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RECORDED JUNE 24, 1955 IN BOOK 80 AT PAGE 356, AND AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 256 AT PAGE 877, AND THAT PORTION OF PUPPY SMITH STREET (FORMERLY SMUGGLER STREET) VACATED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 13, SERIES OF 1997, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, LAKEVIEW ADDITION (TO THE CITY OF ASPEN), ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2 AT PAGE 13, WHENCE THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7 AND 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGES 84 AND 85, RESPECTIVELY, WEST OF THE SIXTH PRICIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, BEARS NORTH 14 DEGREES 39' 51" WEST 772.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70 DEGREES 18' 15" WEST 46.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2 DEGREES 00' 00" WEST 18.555 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72 DEGREES 18' 08" EAST 44.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79 DEGREES 1 I' 00" EAST 7.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 15 DEGREES 15' 22" WEST 20.06 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 903 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. BOUNDARY JUSTIFICATION Legal Description of Real Property recorded with Deed at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado and found in the records of the City of Aspen, Colorado Building Department. NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 (8-86) � (E 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County/State Section number Page 14 PHOTOGRAPH LOG PHOTOGRAPH LOG The following information pertains to all photograph numbers: Name of Property: The Given Institute, 100 East Francis Street City: Aspen County: Pitkin State: CO Photographer: Sam Adams Date of Photographs: June 2010 Location of Original Digital Files: 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, CO Number of Photographs: 40 Photo No. Photographic Information 0001 Entrance, South facade, camera facing !northeast _ _ - - Comment tal2J: Mit down photo list; 0002 Entrance, South facade, camera facing northwest draw figure reforms; 0004 Entrance, south facade, camera facing north 0005 West facade, camera facing northeast 0006 West facade, camera facing east 0007 North facade, camera facing east 0008 West facade, camera facing south 0009 West facade, camera facing south 0010 North facade, camera facing east 0012 North facade, camera facing south 0013 North facade, camera facing southeast 0014 North facade, camera facing southwest 0015 North facade, camera facing south 0016 North facade, camera facing northeast 0017 North facade, camera facing southwest 0018 North facade, camera facing east 0019 East facade, camera facing west 0020 East facade camera facing west 0021 East facade, camera facing south 0022 East facade, camera facing south 0023 East facade, camera facing west 0024 East facade, camera facing south 0025 South facade, camera facing west 0026 Entrance, South facade, camera facing west 0027 Interior lobby, first floor, camera facing south 0028 Interior lobby, first Floor, camera facing south NPS Form 10 -900 -a OMB No. 1024 -0018 • (8 -86) (F I 1 -31 -2009) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Given Institute Pitkin County, Colorado Name of Property County /State Section number Page 15 0029 Interior, seminar room, camera facing east 0030 Interior, seminar room, camera facing southeast 0031 Interior, seminar room, camera facing northeast 0032 Interior, seminar room, original desk and microphone 0033 Interior, seminar room, original built -in desk 0034 Interior, seminar room, original built -in desk and step 0035 Interior, seminar room, original built -in desk and step 0036 Interior, seminar room, second floor projection booth, camera facing southeast 0037 Interior lobby, first floor, camera facing west 0038 interior lobby, first floor, camera facing southwest 0039 Interior, second floor library, camera facing southwest 0040 Interior, garden level hallway to study rooms, camera facing west 0041 Interior, second floor offices, camera facing northwest 0042 Interior, second floor hallway overlooking seminar room to right, camera facing north ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 Chairperson, Michael Hoffman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Jason Lasser, Ann Mullins, Jay Maytin, Jamie McLeod and Sarah Broughton. Brian McNellis and Nora Berko were excused. Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel Amy Guthrie, Preservation Officer Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Michael Hoffman stated that he is resigning from the HPC. Michael served the HPC for 8 '/2 years of service and the board will miss his expertise. Jay disclosed that his company does business with Ute City, 308 E. Hopkins but he doesn't directly. Michael will recuse himself on the Given Institute as his firm is involved. The Given Institute - 100 E. Francis Street, Ordinance 48 negotiation for Preservation of Potential Historic Resources — Public Hearing Dick Crogman, Dean of Colorado University School of Medicine — Anschutz campus. Steve Zweck - Bronner — Office of Counsel for the University of Colorado Amy explained that the City is entering in a memorandum of understanding with CU. The demolition will be put on hold until the question on the ballot is voted on in November. Possibly a coalition of community organizations can occur to purchase the property. All three of the designation criteria are met. This is a very important property that illustrates Aspen's post war history. The Colorado Historic Society has preliminary indicated that they think the property is eligible for the National Register of Historic places. We need to determine how to make this a successful preservation. Jim said hopefully there will be a joint effort with other non - profits to purchase the property and utilize and preserve it. Council cannot step in unless it goes to a vote in November. The applicant is willing to delay and give us the opportunity to contract if the voters approve it. In order to agree 1 _ I ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14.2010 with the delay the City Council has ageed to not rezone it and not to go forward with designation. Jim said brainstorming is a good idea and HPC should reiterate its position that the property is worthy of designation. If the memorandum of understanding doesn't occur then Ordinance #48 discussion needs to happen. HPC should make a definitive statement of the value. Sarah said at the last meeting we made a motion to ask staff to go forward with designation. Jim said in November if the vote passes the purchase would be under the contract amount. Steve Zweck - Bronner pointed out that the MOU addresses the fact that the University would agreed to open the Institute on three occasions. We also put in the price and if someone wants to give us $40million dollars for it we don't sell to them, we sell to the city for 17 million. It is a locked in price. Sarah said in the MOU not only the city can purchase it but non - profits that are part of the city could be involved. Jim said the city has asked for that amendment and the MOU has to go to the regents of the university. Steve Zweck - Bronner said that portion of the amendment needs to be approved. Jim said CU is asking in the agreement that we will not take action to designate or rezone it and it is our request that we would have the right to purchase it. The goal is to allow the city to put together groups of people to and purchase the property. CU has made it very clear that they don't want the election to come along and if it fails then the city asks for another six months to find someone to come up with the money. That is not the deal. If it passes on Nov. 2 " and we can find a non - profit to participate so the tax obligation is less then that will be part of the agreement. If it fails Nov. 2 and no one steps up for $17million then they will go to the buyer and the building will be removed. 2 0 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 Jason said for clarification if the vote fails we cannot pursue designation or rezoning for ten years. We have a very quick timeline for community buy in. Jim said Council has made the agreement that says we will not institute designation proceedings if the ballot issue fails. If it passes and we buy it then council can designate the property. Jason asked if the new owner wanted to pursue designation can they do it. Jim said absolutely, they can do . whatever they want. The understanding is that CU would deliver the property without a building. Jay asked if CU will be campaigning for or against the question. Steve Zweck - Bronner said CU is not taking any position on the ballot question. Dick Crogman said as a state entity we try not to campaign for anything under the fair campaign act. Amy said the city can endorse the ballot issue but they cannot campaign. Dick Crogman said the memorandum is a nice potential compromise from CU's perspective. Ann asked Dick to explain to the board what the history is and why the property needs to be sold. Dick said he came to Colorado as an intern in pediatrics in 1968. Was there three years and as a resident talked to people who wanted to develop the site. After joining the faculty in 1973 he came up to the Given for conferences. He's been coming here for more than 30 years. In 1990 he became the dean of the medical school. The Given is operated by the medical school and is under the medical school's budget. It was clear by the late 90's that the business model for the Given as a conference center. Originally in the 70's the Given was a laboratory and people were learning molecular biology. When OSHA decided there was no appropriate ventilation then the laboratory was shut down and turned into a conference center and it has been a conference center ever since. In the late 90's it was determined that the business model doesn't work. While it is a beautiful building it does not 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 have the ability to be functional in the winter. The facility has no kitchen and no place for people to dine. All the meals are served out in the back yard which works from June to September. We can only make it work four months a year which has let to progressively larger deficits. The school of medicine has subsidized for 20 years $200,000. Since the Tabor amendment and the cuts for state funding that began in 2001 we have lost 50% of our state appropriation in the school of medicine. We used to have 20 million from the state and we are down to 10.9 million and I am told we will drop 25 to 50% over the course of the next year or two. Given the fact that we have been looking at state budget cuts I have to focus our state resources and student's tuition on what our core mission is. Our core mission is not to run an operative facility in Aspen. It has been fabulous and terrific and I wish it could go on forever. We have had posters etc. in the lobby of the Given to see if people will contribute to the five million that it would take to expand it so it could be used year round and to make it ADA compliant. We don't have the resources to do it or the resources to maintain it. We have had a community advisory board at the Given for the last 15 years or more and I met with them every two months and we have tried to raise money. We have been very successful in raising funding for the public lectures. We have been totally unsuccessful in raising funds for the renovation. No one will contribute to a building that the state should be fixing up. The state's capital construction list would put the Given in the bottom thousand of the state priorities. When I met with people last year what everyone wanted was the public lectures. I met last year with a buyer and explained that we could not accept the appraised value and that the school is in such dire straits financially that I needed to not sell it for 11 million but substantially higher. I asked for double than 17 million but over the course of conversations we arrived at 17 millions. Selling the building and having the bulk of the money in an endowment could in fact substantially improve the financial situation of the school and help us with our core mission. An endowment would give us around $500,000 a year and I wouldn't have to spend $200,000 on a facility that I couldn't operate. Our mission is education and that is how we got to where we are. Sarah said the commission talked about designation and it would be prudent to go through that discussion. The criteria for designation is in 26.415.030.b and we feel that this building falls within the three criteria and the integrity considerations are met. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 Ann asked why the university entered into the Ord. 48 process when you don't have too. Steve said the university doesn't have to go through a number of city processes anywhere but we want to be good citizens. Dick said when we went through the expansion process with Harry Teague we went to the Planning office not because we had to but because we wanted input from the city. State and city governments need to communicate to each other and try to collaborate as best they can. Jason asked if there were other way to have an open house at the Given and possibly do some public lecture series. Dick said we have public lectures all the time and everyone is welcome. Dick said anyone who wants to see the Given just needs to call. Dick said with the public lectures we were able to raise $75,000 to $100,000 with 20 lectures given. Dick said he is prepared to continue the lectures but not at that building. Jay asked if we became the owners of the building would you be willing to keep the lectures there. Dick said he didn't know that answer. If there are 200 people in a lecture they wouldn't fit there. It is the lectures and the content that is important; it's not the building and property that is important to them. Sarah said hopefully there is a buyer in conjunction with the City of Aspen and that we could then pursue designation. Exhibit I - Ann presented the designation criteria on why HPC feels this building is important. The property needs to be 30 years old and has integrity of location. Everything under the requirement is met. 2 a) An event, pattern or trend. The pattern has remained for 29 years. 2b)People associated with it such as Elizabeth Paepcke who sold the university the property and Irene and John Given who are philanthropists in the medical community. Harry Weese, 20 century architect is also associated with the institute. 2c) Physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics. Amy explained how Harry Weese designed the building. This property needs to be saved among the Post War properties. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 Sarah said CU embellished all of Colorado and the history of that is important. The philanthropic community that we have here in Aspen allowed the building to be here today. Jason said criteria 26.415.030 b 2a,2b,2c, are the primary criteria for designation. Suzanna Reid, public Suzanna expressed her excitement in the discussions on how to save the building. She appreciated the City and the University working together. It is a critical building to preserve. People don't appreciate the physical location and how valuable that is. I hope a group will take that on as a challenge to promote the preservation of the building and site for our community. John Katzenberger, public - Director of Aspen Global Change Institute We have maintained continuous programs at the Given since 1990 and the programs have been national and international in scope. We have had scientists come to study different aspects of the earth's system, Global change topics such as atmospheric chemistry and oceanography. These scientists are from all over the world and are supported by grants from federal agencies such as NASA and the National Science foundation. The Given has been our home for the workshops and there have been roughly 1,000 scientists over the last 20 years and we have public lectures. This is a fantastic educational facility and it is very important that we find ways to keep this educational facility. There is a short time line to convince the public for a purchase like this. National and International discussions occur at the facility. Ziska Childs, public — Ziska said she owns property in Aspen and would be affected by the bond issue although she would not be able to vote on it because she lives in Garfield. I was here in the 70's when the Given was built and I have attended lectures there. The building is a lovely space that functions beautifully for its original intent. I started a face book group that has 135 members on it but for a small community most of the people are from Aspen. If the non - profits have a history of speakers who spoke at the Given that should be supplied and also if you have history as to what has been accomplished in this building during your tenure that would history would be very important for this town to have. It would also help in the campaign to save this building. As a long time resident of Aspen there are 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 people who are not familiar with the Given so at the very least if we have a solid record of the history that has happened in that space it would be beneficial. MOTION: Sarah made the motion that HPC finds that the Given Institute buildings and property meets all 3 criteria of the land use section 26, 415, 030 2. a, b, c and the property is worthy of history designation. HPC recommends that council proceed negotiations; motion second by Jason. Jason asked if we should talk about the benefits. Amy said in the resolution she will insert the entire findings from the staff memo and Jamie's findings so that they are stated as well as they can be expressed. Ann asked that the score sheet be attached as an exhibit. Amy said we will include, staff's findings, HPC finding's and attached the integrity scoring as an exhibit. Vote: Motion carried 5 -0. 308 E. Hopkins Ave. — Ute City Restaurant - Minor Development — Public Hearing Michael was seated. Walt Harris, owner Amy Guthrie said as part of the HPC review the canopy that is covering the area was approved to be used during the summer months to protect diner's when sitting out in that space from weather changes. There are no records about sides rolling down so this would be a new request. The sides are already installed but there would be an additional set running perpendicular. They are canvas with a see through window cut out in each one. As much as we want this business to be successful staff is recommending against the pull down sides because we feel it is not in the spirit of the outdoor space. This is entirely private property but it is deemed public amenity space which is a requirement of downtown properties to provide some sort of contribution to the street. There are a variety of ways that can be done and in this case the idea was outside dining. The property technically should have had almost 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 twice as much space physically provided for this type of use on the site but a request was granted by HPC to waive half of it and not require cash in lieu. We don't find that the roll down sides meet the guideline 6.60 of the Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines. Part of the objection is the inferior quality of the canvas wall attached to the building that really doesn't contribute to the street in the way the building was intended to. Walt Harris, owner We only desire to do this temporarily. We have applied for a temporary use with the city that has a six month window of operation. The primary reason for having these is the weather which can change quite quickly and dramatically. When it rains we want to lower the curtains and when it stops we will roll them up unless the weather changes substantially. It is a livelier experience in the restaurant when they are rolled up. If it is a busy night and all the tables inside are full we are left with telling the customer to sit and get wet or we impinge the business and save ten tables inside in case it does rain to be able to move the people inside. It is the simple solution when the weather changes we lower them and when it clears up we raise them back up. It is not something that we are looking at for a year round use. We would be happy to follow the guidelines for outside dining which is May 15 to October 15 The material is canvas because it is temporary. Jay said if we approve this can we put use restrictions on it; only use them in the rain; do not use it for keeping people warm. Amy said if the roll down sides are permitted they may go down every night. We need to accept if approved that they will go up and down as deemed necessary by the business owner and we can't have expectations on how to control that. Jamie asked if the Fire Department has looked at this for egress. Walt said there is plenty of egress on the sides and we might not put them on anyway. The front will be covered and the sides going back will be covered. Walt said the main concern is the front and there is a small corner that hasn't been installed that would be a similar type thing. It is for the protection from the rain. We can leave the sides open. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 Sarah asked about the color of the awning. Sara Adams said the awning can stay up and then when it needs to come down an approved color will go in its place. Walt said he had no purview over the color. Charles Cunniffe architects presented the color. Walt said any darker color will cause more heat and be problematic. Ann asked if the awning was removable. Walt said it is removable but there is not a set time but we could tie the awning to the outside seating. The awnings would be a temporary use during the summers. Sarah said we need to be clear about the public amenity in the land use code. Sunny Vann, planning consultant said he did the original approval and the reason why the open space was minimized was something HPC requested and has the ability to do. In 2006 they were required to pay cash in lieu for the difference. The temporary use provision in the code which council has purview on specifically provides for temporary uses within public amenity space. The two are not inconsistent. HPC may weigh in as to the purpose but council can approve the temporary use such as the awnings in the public amenity space. It specifically speaks to roll down plastic awnings. We are putting together a temporary use application for council. Amy went over public amenity: It is required in most of the downtown commercial and lodging district. You have to provide 25% of the parcel size in the manner that meets the definition of public amenity or there are options to provide cash -in -lieu to do other valuable improvement to the downtown like contribute to the malls, benches etc. If you are going to provide on -site like this project has the idea is to create exciting pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. It doesn't mean you can bring your lunch to the restaurant and sit there, it just means that there has to be some contribution to the streetscape. There are physical qualities that the space has to have if it is on -site. It has to be open to view, open to the sky and not have a solid roof. The property has to be at grade with the street. Sarah said we should discuss the aesthetics and how they relate back to our guidelines. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Jay commented that he works with restaurants all the time and the model in this town is almost impossible to work. Although I don't agree with putting it out before it was approved and our guidelines are clearly against this I can move away from that because the vitality and growth and infill structure in this town is not growing right now. It is our responsibility as a commission member to understand why the restaurant model could be improved by approving a very temporary use in this situation. I am usually very staunch on our guidelines but with the education that I have and dealing with businesses maybe the guidelines should be changed. I would support the application. When a thunderstorm comes at 6:30 at night there is a necessity for the sides because there is nowhere for his patrons to go. Ann said the idea of the public amenity space is to add something back to the street and once you drop those plastic walls you cut that off and you turn your back to the public and it has lost its value to the streetscape. I am torn because if it rains and gets cold for the comfort of the patron you need to do it but I believe it deadens the streetscape once you drop the sides. The guidelines require 25% and there is only 11% and it was good to hear the explanation why it was reduced. Jason said the guidelines talk about designing a space that maximumizes sunlight throughout the year and there is a lot of discussion about creating a street edge. Council should make the decision and I feel the guidelines should be adhered too. Having a temporary structure is questionable. The historic component is the historic building next door and we pushed to have the open space carved out so they could respond to their open space. Jamie said the awnings are not taking away from the building because it is a temporary use. I would ask that the front be installed and not the sides. For the record they should be up when you are not in service even in the morning. The monitor will handle the color but I would be careful so that it doesn't blend too much so people won't walk into them because they don't see them. I am not concern about the historic context because this is a temporary canopy. Sarah said the public amenity part of our code is troubling for our board. In the historic context this building is the largest building on the block besides 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 the Wells Fargo building. I wish the awning was up all year long to make use of that space. If we go by the code this is not an allowable use. If we look at the streetscape and historical context it doesn't take away because it is temporary. I am torn on this decision. Ann said this is a difficult decision because we don't want to make your business any harder. On the other side I think the awning just kills the streetscape. I can back this up with the guidelines. Amy explained the process: HPC has an independent decision and council is looking at a temporary use. IF HPC denies this we have suggested to the applicant that they either cannot proceed to council because HPC is required or if they proceed they would actually have to ask council to appeal and overturn HPC's decision and grant the temporary use. Jim said you need to keep separate the two issues of the historic aspect of it which is in your purview vs. the public amenity aspect and the temporary use aspect. Jay said this is very temporary, a storm comes through they awning goes down and the storm is out and they go up. Had not the awnings been there then nobody uses the space. The vitality and interaction on the street is gone. It makes the amenity space more usable. In the winter there is no roof and no sides. Michael said he totally agrees with Jason and staff that the side walls do a lot of violence to the streetscape and they are not consistent with the historic context of the central core but I have also heard the applicant make a number of promises all of which are acceptable to me as conditions of approval. I would suggest that we grant approval and make the conditions that it is only used from protection of rain and cannot be used for warmth and that the awning be kept up except under those conditions. If someone comes in with a photograph at 11:00 a.m. in the morning with the sidewalls down then the permit is revoked. Sunny clarified that the application for council is for inclement weather which is defined as high wind, rain and snow. Michael said he is willing to define it as inclement weather, 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 MOTION: Michael moved to approve the front awning for 308 E. Hopkins with the following conditions: The awning is only used for protection from inclement weather. The awning be kept up except under those conditions. The awning can be up from May I5`" through October 15 yearly. Review the application after the summer of 2011. The request is for the front of the restaurant only, the south facade. Walt Harris explained that no one will be sitting in inclement weather. Jay mentioned that this application is not the same as Pacifica. Sarah said it is enclosing space that should be outdoor space. Michael pointed that there is no precedent value. Amy asked the applicant if they have to go to council every year for the temporary use. Sunny Vann explained that council can grant a temporary use up to ten years. Amy suggested that it should be revisited in five years. Sarah suggested a review after a year. MOTION second by Jay. Jim suggested deleting inclement weather and adding high wind, rain and snow. Amended motion: Michael amended the motion to delete inclement weather and add high wind, rain and snow. Vote: Jason, Ann, Sarah, no. Jay, Michael Jamie, yes. Motion denied 2 -2 tie. Sarah asked for the motion to be re -read. MOTION: Michael moved to approve the front awning for 308 E. Hopkins with the following conditions: The awning is only used for protection from high wind, rain and snow. The awning to be kept up except under those conditions. The awning can be up from May 15 through October 15`" yearly. 12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 14, 2010 Review the application after Oct. 15`", 2011. The request is for the front of the restaurant only, the south facade. There is no precedent set. Jay pointed out that this application was publically noticed and no one from the public came. There are a lot of businesses etc. that were public noticed and no one came. Michael added to the new motion that the awning can only be dropped during business hours or at times when patrons are seated. New motion second by Jay. MOTION carried 4 -2. Yes vote: Michael, Jay, Jamie, Sarah No vote: Ann, Jason MOTION: Michael moved to adjourn; second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. t atA. A el ( Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 13 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, Ordinance #48 negotiation DATE: July 14, 2010 PROCESS: In July 2007, Aspen City Council adopted an emergency ordinance, Ordinance #30, Series of 2007. That ordinance prohibited any exterior alterations, land use applications, or building permits affecting all non - landmarked buildings constructed at least 30 years ago, unless it was determined that no potential historic resource was negatively affected. The purpose of the Ordinance was to protect Aspen's significant architectural heritage; not only Victorians, but more modern structures as well. Ordinance #30 was in place for 5 months, during which time Council held numerous meetings to discuss the effect of the new regulations and potential amendments. In particular, Council wished to see the applicability of the Ordinance narrowed down dramatically from all properties over 30 years of age to a specific list researched by staff and found to potentially qualify for landmark designation. In December 2007, Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 was adopted to replace Ordinance #30. Ordinance #48 creates a formal list of potential historic resources in Aspen that may have historical, architectural, archaeological, engineering and cultural importance. Detrimental development or demolition actions affecting these properties will be limited while the City undertakes an evaluation of the historic preservation program via the Historic Preservation Task Force. The Task Force is completed and code amendments are expected to be presented to Council in the coming months. 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, is identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources as part of Ordinance #48. Owners of a property listed on Ordinance #48 can still move forward with proposed projects if they: A. Submit the plans and seek staff determination that the work is exempt from delay under Ordinance #48 (routine maintenance work for example); or B. Submit plans and seek staff determination that the work, while not exempt from Ordinance #48, can move forward by voluntarily complying with Staff or HPC review (depending on the scope of work) of the project, or C. Submit plans with the intention of triggering a 90 day delay period, during which time City Staff and Council will negotiate for appropriate preservation of the property. If the negotiation does not result in an agreement to landmark designate the property, the building permits will be processed as requested. 1 The Regents of the University of Colorado, the property owner of The Given Institute, have submitted a letter (Exhibit A) indicating their intention to demolish all of the existing buildings on the site, which includes the primary building and two Victorian era structures. Typically, a letter of intent, as opposed to an actual permit or land use application, is not adequate to trigger Ordinance #48 review, however The Regents assert that "as a state entity, the University is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances, zoning, etc." The City Attorney's Office has requested evidence that this authority exists, but no further information has been provided by The University of Colorado. HPC has had several discussions about this issue, held a worksession on June 23, 2010, and attended the City Council meeting on June 28, 2010, successfully lobbying City Council to pass a resolution committing to take action to try to preserve the property and buildings (Exhibit B). To date, representatives of The University of Colorado have very clearly indicated that no incentives, negotiation, or other development options are of interest given the offer they have for a more simple disposal of the property at a price that they feel is beneficial to their institution. The property is zoned R -6, which allows for residential development, including subdivision. A single family home on the site would be allowed to be approximately 6,200 square feet of FAR. Within the negotiation, it is staff's belief that focus on traditional historic preservation incentives is not productive. The most effective action may be to identify an alternative, preservation minded owner who could purchase the property and continue to make it available as a community facility. The Ordinance #48 review before HPC is not a public hearing, and the acceptance of comments from the public or property owners are at the discretion of the Commission. HPC is aware that there are numerous people concerned about the proposed demolition. The Commission is asked to make a recommendation regarding the potential historic significance of the property and any benefits that might be offered to the owner to preserve the property. APPLICANT: Regents of the University of Colorado, owner. PARCEL ID: 2735- 124 -19 -851. ADDRESS: 100 E. Francis Street. ZONING: R -6. 2 arx DISCUSSION: HPC is asked to weigh in on whether this property's significance warrants preservation negotiations with the property owner. The City cannot designate properties listed on Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 without the owner's consent. The criteria for designation are listed below and staff's analysis follows. 26.415.030.B. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The significance of properties will be evaluated according to the following criteria. When designating an historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet the criteria described below: 1. A property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it is: a. In whole or in part more than one hundred (100) years old, and b. It possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age; or 2. A property or district is deemed significant as a representation of Aspen's 20th Century history, was constructed in whole or in part more than thirty (30) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made, possesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association and is related to one (1) or more of the following: a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history, b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national history is deemed important and the specific contribution is identified and documented, or c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. STAFF FINDINGS: Staff finds that all three designation criteria, and the integrity considerations, are met. Criterion 2.a Aspen has a long standing tradition as a location for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, and Spirit." Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity. The founding of the Institute grew out of a conference on Advances in Molecular Biology that was sponsored by CU and held in the Aspen Middle School gymnasium starting in 1964. Dr. Donald West King, then Chairman of the Department of Pathology at the University of Colorado Medical School, spearheaded the program, envisioning the need for a central meeting place where leading scientists could exchange information, at times a significant logistical challenge in the pre- internet age. The purpose of the creation of a conference center was to enable residents, fellows and faculty to remain current with the revolution in biology, genetics, and medicine taking place in American research. The 3 National Institute of Health, National Research Council, and National Academy of Scientists all sponsored programs. Aspen provided a location more central in the country than similar conferences held at the time on the East and West coasts. In addition, the opportunity to combine research with the natural and cultural amenities available in Aspen was appealing, and the community already had a well established tradition as a summer retreat and intellectually stimulating environment for academics. The conference grew to four sessions per summer. Articles in the Aspen Times reported that registration was denied to several thousand would -be participants due to limited meeting space. In 1967 negotiations began with the Aspen Institute to develop a more suitable permanent conference facility and laboratory. Ultimately Elizabeth Paepcke, who with her late husband Walter had worked to create many foundations of Aspen's post World War II renaissance, sold the University of Colorado two acres of land at approximately half its market value for construction of the facility. Dr. King, since appointed Chairman of Columbia University's College of Physicians and surgeons, negotiated with the Irene Heinz Given (daughter of food giant H.J. Heinz) and John LaPorte Given Foundation of New York, to secure a $500,000 donation for the building's construction, which was then named in their honor. The Given Foundation was also the source of tens of millions of dollars of donations to Harvard University and other schools. Initially, the cost of maintaining the facility and providing the programs was provided by the National Institutes of Health and donations, at no cost to CU. In the late 1980s, the financial support from NIH ended and The Given Institute became concerned with their isolation from the Aspen community in terms of offering public access to its programs. An Aspen Times profile noted that: "while most Aspenites remain oblivious to the brilliance in their midst, some of the most renowned names in medical research, including Nobel laureates, come together at a spot overlooking Hallam Lake to share their discoveries and advancements in highly specialized fields." Significant investment was made by CU to upgrade the property from a summer building to a year -round facility, and in 1991 a local advisory board spearheaded the establishment of a public lecture series, or "Mini College" that continues today. The Given Institute now hosts some ten free public lectures a year, bringing cutting edge experts on everything from bio- terrorism to sports medicine. In addition there have been youth summits on substance abuse, brown bag lunches on health topics for local senior citizens, and free dental and optical screenings for the community. • Staff finds that Criterion 2.a is met through the property's strong connection to the legacy of "The Aspen Idea." Criterion 2.b. The Given Institute is directly connected to the Paepcke family, credited as the founders of Modern Aspen. 4 As noted above, in 1970, Elizabeth Paepcke, town matriarch, provided the property (a portion of her garden at the time) for the construction of the Institute. The year before, she had donated 22 adjacent acres behind her home for the development of an environmental center and preserve known as ACES (Aspen Center for Environmental Studies.) Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke were patrons of twentieth century Modern art and • architecture. As a stipulation in the gift- purchase of the land for The Given Institute, Elizabeth Paepcke retained the right to select the architect. She chose Harry Weese of Chicago, an internationally known Modern architect and part-time resident of Aspen. Staff finds that Criterion 2.b. is met through the property's direct connection to Elizabeth Paepcke and the institutions and design influence brought to Aspen by her family. Criterion 2.c. Harry Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also Lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design the Given was in no way happenstance and fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began here in 1945. when Walter Paepcke brought Walter Gropius to attend an Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Work by Herbert Bayer, Eero Saarinen, Marcel Breuer, and Buckminster Fuller followed. Numerous Taliesen fellows practiced in Aspen. Into the 1970's and beyond Harry Weese designed in the Aspen area, as did Elliot Noyes, John Lautner, Charles Moore, Robert A.M. Stern, and more. Aspen's modernist buildings can be generally organized into two periods, 1945 -1960, when Aspen entered the ski and tourist industries, and 1960 -1975, when its growth and development accelerated. The Given Institute, was constructed in 1972 and embodies the tenets of the International Style. International Style architecture systematically rejected the past —its technologies, architecture, ornament, societal structures to embrace modernity, industrialization, urbanization, and the machine made. The premise was that modern design could transform society by applying industrial methods to housing and creating a "total art," including buildings, furnishings, interiors, clothing, and signage. Differentiated by the radical absence of references to past historic styles, the International Style is defined by industrial materials such as steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to give a sleek, mechanical, look to the buildings. Modernism was appropriate to the optimism and progressive thinking of midcentury America. The forms and materials worked well in a time when booming national growth required the construction of many new buildings. Harry Weese, (June 30, 1915 - October 29, 1998), attended both MIT (studying under Alvar Aalto, and creating a friendship with fellow students Eero Saarinen and I.M.Pei) and Yale, graduating from MIT in 1938. After graduation, he studied with famed architect and father of Eero, Eliel Saarinen at Cranbrook Academy in Michigan. The New York Times proclaimed that "the effect of Cranbrook and its graduates and faculty on the physical environment of this country has been profound (...) Cranbrook, surely more than any other institution, has a right to think of itself as synonymous with 5 contemporary American design." Eero Saarinen would become one of the most recognized architects of the twentieth century, designing the St. Louis Arch (1947), Aspen's first music tent (1949), and the TWA terminal in New York (1962). As his career took off, he regularly referred work to Weese. Charles Eames, an architect and furniture designer responsible for many iconic designs of the twentieth century was also an associate when Weese attended Cranbrook. Before and after serving in World War II, Harry Weese worked for the one of the largest and well known architectural firms in the world, Skidmore Owings and Merrill, who are credited with having invented the "glass box" skyscraper and who designed many landmarks, including the Lever House in New York City (1951), constructed shortly after Weese's tenure with the firm. Weese, said to be a sceptic of the "Less is More" edict of Mies van der Rohe that was heavily influential at SOM and in Chicago in general opened his own firm, Harry Weese and Associates, in 1947. While he was classically trained in the ideals of modernism, Weese was more strongly affiliated with the Finnish architects Aalto and Saarinen than the Bauhaus masters. His work reflects their humanistic approach by incorporating natural materials, particularly wood, reflecting his own experience as a sailor, and undulating lines. Early in his career Weese was invited, at the encouragement of Eliel Saarinen, to design a building in the town of Columbus, Indiana. There, a manufacturing company, recognizing the business value of creating livable communities, began to offer to pay architectural fees for local properties owners who would engage firms identified on a specific list, which included the most significant modernists of the time. Much of downtown Columbus, Indiana is now listed on the National Register of Historic Places, in recognition of its incredible collection of over sixty modern buildings designed by Eliel and Eero Saarinen, I.M. Pei, Robert Venturi, Richard Meier, and others. While most architects were invited to design just one building, Harry Weese designed at least eighteen, including the National Historic Landmark First Baptist Church (1965) considered one of the most iconic buildings in the town. The building achieved National Historic Landmark Status in 2000, when it was thirty five years old. Weese was a prolific architect, particularly revered in the Midwest. Harry Weese also designed the U.S. Embasy in Accra, Ghana in 1958 and became one of an elite group of architects selected to work for the U.S. State Department. He was inducted, at a relatively young age, into the College of Fellows of the American Institute of Architects in 1961. Weese's most recognized project is the system -wide network of station designs for the 100- mile long Metro subway in Washington, D.C., heralded by the New York Times as: "among the greatest public works of this century." Shortly after the famed D.C. Metro project, Harry Weese created the design for The Given Institute, built in 1972. A longtime visitor to Aspen, having first visited town with his wife in 1947, Weese's family purchased a Victorian home at 118 N. First Street in 1969, and it is still owned by them today. Weese was likely well known to the 6 Paepcke's, as both families resided in Aspen and Chicago. Herbert Bayer reportedly insisted Weese be selected as the architect, and supervising local architect William Lipsey recalls the presentation of Weese's design to Bayer in Aspen. The Given Institute sits on an approximately 2.25 acre site characterized by a flat bench area and a slope that drops quickly to the north, towards the Hallam Lake Nature Preserve. The lot is abutted by private property on the west, a bike trail and the Red Brick Arts Center to the south, and nature preserve on the east and north. The Given Institute is a 12,000 sq. ft. building comprised of a series of geometric volumes constructed out of concrete masonry units with raked joints, painted white, with a flat roof. The building fits within a perfect square, 90' x 90,' with circles, squares and triangles that are deliberately interweaved, cut out of and pushed beyond the boundary of the square. Harry Weese carefully located rectangular (horizontally oriented) and circular windows that frame the outdoors as viewed from the interior. The interior is three levels: a basement/garden level, ground level and second level. The geometric volumes that Weese overlaps and weaves are clearly evident and repeated with subtle details, for example a curved railing on the second floor runs parallel to the cylindrical seminar room to reiterate the shape. The geometry of the design appears to have been of equal importance to the overall program. Some of the interior rooms are triangular, for instance, an intentional result of the plan form. The centerpiece of the building is the United Nations- style amphitheater, which seats 175 people. The University requested a simple design that would harmonize with other buildings on the grounds and relate well to the site, a bluff overlooking Hallam Lake. Program components included a laboratory, a library, and several smaller conference areas, along with office facilities, a printing /reproduction area, storage space, restrooms, and a kitchen. Other specifications were a seminar space configured to promote free interchange between speakers and audience and interior spaces that were warm, relaxed, and comfortable and conducive to informal, spontaneous discussion. Weese had extensive experience in the design of theaters. The seminar space is organized as a "theater in the round," and could be used for demonstrations and experiments core to the sharing of knowledge at this research facility. Weese's work in the late 1960s was characterized by geometric motifs. As noted by one architectural historian, "Triangles often pop up in Weese's buildings that allude to the sails of boats Weese knew so well." The Given Institute has been described as: "one of Aspen's finest modernist works [which] gives a playful rigor to a simple circle with angular extensions." The landscape on The Given Institute property also has cultural and natural resource value. Mature trees are abundant on the site, and they provide significant contributions to the community forest. Some of the trees are estimated to be as old as 80 years or more and many are believed to have been planted by Elizabeth Paepcke, who is reported to have continually tended the trees during construction of The Given Institute. The trees 7 are a mix of Colorado blue spruce, aspens, cottonwoods, a single white fir (which is believed may be the largest in the Roaring Fork Valley), and numerous shrubs and shade trees. The Blue Spruce trees have a direct connection to the Hallam Lake property below. They provide a seamless flow between the wetland plantings below, transitioning to the gardens and common upland plantings on The Given Institute grounds. According to supervising architect Bill Lipsey, the trees surrounding the building were "not to be touched." No landscape architect was engaged in the project. On the north side of the building, Weese included a limited sheltered patio area, leading out to open lawn area for functions and receptions. Two observation decks overlooking Hallam Lake may have been constructed by the Paepcke's, who had built similar overlook areas nearby, adjacent to their residence. The only noteworthy alteration to the landscape that has occurred since construction is a memorial garden dedicated after Elizabeth Paepcke's death in 1994. Harry Weese's wok continues to inspire study, with recent coverage in Chicago publications such as ChicagoMagazine, Reconstructing Harry Weese, (Robert Sharoof) July 2010, and a new book entitled The Architecture of Harry Weese (Robert Bruegmann and Kathleen Murphy Skolnik) being released in September 2010. Harry Weese received many honors throughout his half - century career. In 1966, Architectural Forum named him one of the country's 14 leading architects. Throughout his work, Weese actively promoted historic preservation and received a Presidential Award for his efforts to restore landmarks such as Louis Sullivan's Auditorium Building in Chicago, where Weese donated his time on the project as a gift to the city. Notably, the design for The Given Institute retained and adaptively re -used two small nineteenth century buildings, which appears to have been moved to the site before The Given Institute project began. Weese stated to Time Magazine, "Fine old buildings give our cities character and continuity. They give us a sense of stability. Coexistence is key, the old with the new." And he noted in 1973- "maybe someone will save one of our buildings some day." Staff finds that Criterion 2.c. is met as The Given Institute is an outstanding and relatively unaltered example of the work of Harry Weese. Integrity: Based on Weese's original floor plans of the building, original model, and building permit files, the exterior of the primary building on the property and the site itself are largely unaltered from their original design, with the exception of the deck located in the northern portion of the property overlooking Hallam Lake that was rebuilt in 2002, and minor landscaping. The form, plan, scale and proportions of the building are entirely intact and it remains in its original location. The materials and workmanship are true to the Modernists tenets: monochromatic white color scheme, concrete masonry units and glazing, detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects, the 8 materials are manufactured and standardized and the "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Some glazing was replaced in 1996 to increase "u" value; however the original window composition remains. Most of the interior is original. The original built in desks and microphones in the seminar room are intact. There have been minimal alterations that include updating the interior bathrooms, and entrance into the seminar room (by adding a ramp) to meet accessibility standards in 1993 and converting a laboratory into a conference room in 1993. Some paint finishes and light fixtures have been altered as well. Overall, the integrity of the building is very high. Typically, as part of the designation assessment, staff completes an "Integrity Assessment Form," for the property. Our assessment is attached. Staff finds that the building warrants 96 points out of 100. We believe demolishing this building would be a very significant loss to Aspen's small collection of potential historic resources remaining from the post -war period. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: • The HPC is asked to make recommendations to the Aspen City Council regarding the significance of the Potential Historic Resource and the value of pursuing negotiations for preservation. Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2010 A. Letter from The University of Colorado B. City Council Resolution #47, Series of 2010 C. Process: Architecture No. 11, Harry Weese; Humanism and Tradition D. Integrity Assessment 9 A RECOMMENDATION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) REGARDING ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007 NEGOTIATIONS FOR PRESERVATION OF THE PROPERTY KNOWN AS THE GIVEN INSTITUTE, LOCATED AT 100 E. FRANCIS STREET, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2010 PARCEL ID: 2735- 124 -19 -851 WHEREAS, The Regents of the University of Colorado have communicated their intention to demolish the buildings located at 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, which property is legally described as: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER STREET, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED ON THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND PART OF THE NW '/a OF THE SW ''A OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST, AND PART OF THE NE A OF THE SE ''/ OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID PARCEL IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF FRANCIS STREET AND 24.00 FEET EASTERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF CENTER (AKA GARMISCH) STREET; THENCE N. 14 DEGREES 50' 49" EAST 121.59 FEET; THENCE N. 33 DEGREES 03' 19" EAST 42.21 FEET; THENCE N. 7 DEGREES 19' 05" EAST 112.35 FEET; THENCE S. 70 DEGREES 18' 15" EAST 286.57 FEET; THENCE S. 6 DEGREES 18' 51" WEST 103.11 FEET; THENCE S. 18 DEGREES 12' 00" WEST 108.73 FEET; THENCE S. 9 DEGREES 25'21" EAST 52.10 FEET; THENCE S. 23 DEGREES 21'00" EAST 83.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FRANCIS STREET EXTENDED EASTERLY; THENCE N. 75 DEGREES 09' 11" WEST 288.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 64; THENCE N. 31 DEGREES 00' 50" WEST 107.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2.2556 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING THAT PORTION OF NORTH ASPEN STREET LYING NORTH OF HALLAM STREET VACATED BY CITY OF ASPEN ORDINANCE NUMBER 3, SERIES 1953, BY PITKIN COUNTH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RECORDED JUNE 24, 1955 IN BOOK 80 AT PAGE 356, AND AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 256 AT PAGE 877, AND THAT PORTION OF PUPPY SMITH STREET (FORMERLY SMUGGLER STREET) VACATED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 13, SERIES OF 1997, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, LAKEVIEW ADDITION (TO THE CITY OF ASPEN), ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 1 of 3 !.1 .,., RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2 AT PAGE 13, WHENCE THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7 AND 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGES 84 AND 85, RESPECTIVELY, WEST OF THE SIXTH PRICIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, BEARS NORTH 14 DEGREES 39' 51" WEST 772.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70 DEGREES 18' 15" WEST 46.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2 DEGREES 00' 00" WEST 18.555 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72 DEGREES 18' 08" EAST 44.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79 DEGREES 11' 00" EAST 7.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 15 DEGREES 15' 22" WEST 20.06 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 903 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado asserts that as a state entity, it is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances; and WHEREAS, The University of Colorado has indicated that it is voluntarily participating in a ninety day negotiation process established by Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, relative to potential historic resources identified in the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025 (e) of the Municipal Code, which codifies Ordinance #48, states that "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the Potential Historic Resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission;" and WHEREAS, the property owner was notified of the Historic Preservation Commission meeting and representatives of The University of Colorado attended the meeting; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie in her staff report dated July 14, 2010, performed an analysis of the property at 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute, found that the City's criteria for historic designation to be met, and recommended preservation; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 14, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission approved a motion to recommend Council pursue negotiations to preserve the Given Institute by a vote ofto _ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: li �/1 °�k \ o,,,- 7 a HPC finds that The Given Institute buildings and property have considerable historic significance Cj.L to The City of Aspen and are orthy of historic reservation. HPC recommends Council pursue negotiation. c ' t S � fk � < � 'p�j v t, APPROVED BY E COMM N at its regular meeting on the 14th day of July, 2010. CD 0 Sarah Broughton, Vice Chair 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 2 of 3 r. Approved as to Form: Jim True, Special Counsel ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 100 E. Francis Street, The Given Institute Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Page 3 of 3 University of Colorado Denver `7 Office of University Counsel Campus Box 183 P.O. Box 173364 Denver, CO 80217-3364 Office: 303-315-6617 Fax; 303-315-4446 May 25, 2010 • Ms. Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 • Re: Given Institute and Property Dear Ms. Adams: By way of introduction, I am a lawyer in the Office of University Counsel for the University of Colorado. Pursuant to state statute 23 -20 -101 et seq, UC Denver is one of the campuses of the • University of Colorado and is under the control of the University of Colorado Board of Regents. CRS 23 -20 -102 provides that the members of the Board of Regents are elected by the voters of the State bf Colorado. The election of the members of the Board of Regents for the University of Colorado is also outlined in Article IX, Section 12, of the Colorado Constitution. CRS 23.20- 111 outlines the supervisory powers of the Board of Regents over all of the campuses of the University of Colorado, including UC Denver. In summary, the University of Colorado is a state entity under the supervision and control of the elected members of the Board of Regents. As I believe you are aware, the Board of Regents has been the property owner of the Given Institute since the early 1970s. Since that time, the Board of Regents has maintained and operated the Given Institute as a conference center. For a variety of reasons, the University is going to sell the Given Institute. This decision was not made lightly. In anticipation of the sale, the University will be moving forward with the demolition of the structures on the property. As a state entity, the University is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances, zoning, etc. However, without granting jurisdiction to the City of Aspen over the Board of Regents or its • property, and without waiving the sovereign authority of the Board of Regents, with respect to the demolition, the University plans to follow various City of Aspen processes and procedures. We value our relationship with the City of Aspen and its citizens and want to be good neighbors. The University will be submitting an application to the City's Building Department in the near future to demolish both Given Institute buildings and the Blue House that is also located on the property as well as their associated foundations. It is my understanding that the Given Institute property has been listed as a "Potential Historic Resource" pursuant to Aspen City Council Ordinance 48, Series of 2007. It is also my understanding that the 90 -day negotiation period provided for in Ordinance 48 cannot begin until a complete demolition permit and associated p- I.Er VOJ" tr, . S� r ) �. l; ua'n' 0 aHn:c \:x D owntown Cam us "VI ;� P Anschutz Medical Campus ,p • Denver Colorado Aurora, Colorado documents have been submitted to the City. Although we are already working on the demolition permit package and anticipate it will be submitted sometime soon, we hereby request that the Ordinance 48 process be triggered immediately and that it not be delayed until the University has submitted the complete demolition permit We will not be requesting any incentives from the. City of Aspen in lieu of obtaining the permit. In addition, we ask that once the completed demolition application is submitted that the application be processed immediately without having - to wait until the Ordinance 48 process has been completed. The University will agree not to act on the demolition permit until the Ordinance 48 process is completed. I look forward to hearing from you regarding our request. Sincerely, Steve Zweck - Bronner Managing Senior Associate University Counsel SZB /md II RESOLUTION NO. /4" (SERIES OF 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE PROPOSED DEMOLITION OF THE GIVEN INSTITUTE WHEREAS, The City of Aspen has been informed that The Given Institute, located in Aspen and owned by the Regents of the University of Colorado, is proposed to be demolished in October 2010, and sold for residential development; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission and other citizens have urged City Council to take action towards preventing the loss of the facility as a community asset; and WHEREAS, City Council recognizes that Aspen has an over 60 year long standing tradition, initiated by Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke, as a location for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, and Spirit." Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity; and WHEREAS, The Given Institute building was designed by Harry Weese, a prominent modernist American architect. Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design The Given Institute fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began in Aspen in 1945; and WHEREAS, integration of non - profit and community facilities throughout the West End neighborhood adds enormous vitality to Aspen. The value of the property as a publically owned asset, with important cultural and natural significance, including the only remaining public overlook adjacent to the Hallam Lake Nature preserve, cannot be replaced. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council commits to take immediate action to establish an on -going dialogue with the University of Colorado with the intention to support them in achieving their goals for sale of the property, without damage to the community's history and interests. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on June 28, 2010. • li_s__,_,/ - 721 a* 7 Kathryn S. Koch, / ty er Michael C. Ireland, Mayor APPRO�AS TO FORM: John ce e , City Atto 0 0 GIVEN INSTITUTE OF PATHOBIOLOGY Aspen, Colorado, 1972 O r7: *s —F $ a 1:19 F9IIt17 7i<> • a LL, _ 3 v,, a' "'mot - ., • . ....._...< L4.. •' t..,. er ! ys ,,,, --N, 0 #. ,,,..„ (.„,•,, ci„ ��_ _.� ma y._ j �—- A , , .... J 3, ,,,,, • 4i ' f �-•`y= 1 o' —ice' •e-r 14 4_1!!i3 1 t r J. l�_ j IV. 11 • i $ a fly , XL1y' X1:1 L ( \ 0i I , w;' i � i., i�t. I`r� .i IPA `; *� �� !! � ! i ‘ i'� v .. v��; � ; ( fi t Conceptual sketches ; : k „i x Fp iF, w r . !� , I.ay� 6 g / Si : ... . v -0 T ' z ! �� .: a . .-4''e - S — 4. t4 5 - > .. t ,, a e. y v -tilt t +ni JA�r ' w- r.' Y4'_ r *. � ' 1 � a x . to LY V { A _ N l,Y 91 r i . , ew -- Y '..:7-",•."•, . ' j `s • s �y/ }* d;_� - "e r• �`" " r: a 7;2.1 +7 s 7 . 3vK.- '" 1 � . _ $ 0. y Y 1 ^F Ti T 5 . 4• 4 . y ^ A . 1k,` 4 '� t '� 1 u ° 6 i > 'I . a;et r ^1, )r ',w. . . t } Fw^. r I II u= Y i W4 �k { '700-411 W i .... �!T 0' e , \ +'y�,.,� i j gt ' ;- F t p o- } i 4, e ft 4 -.4-,-,_. I 1. qg �� ?+ •57 -r_s: ,fi t ; ,.. r .. 1 n " x`+o-. a _,- A -;,....,..,„,...$4.7,-5,3.-„,':__. w - - `{. pa '� .} » r v 3 a u e 5 - p P}4 " N q -xF` a ., 1., " h '+ ��' u 5, sa Cr a t, .,€ ,1 L : �ao a� 5 3 ': � , y ,l a _ .q ',,,--8. .7:144,--,,,'-'47..-T, :,,,,',1:4-' s �`' &^ - - ' ' ti t ' �S , "ia} k 'n n a $ sx a u 4 t , }L. - 34T b d 1 „a..�f . , .,. r.. -3. mxi.., z. v4: n a. L • {• ... ... 1 t ; # , „,,, . ..,...,,_. t y r „,, - elevation I.9 I tt =TT — 0 �� i ui ° - - -4 4 Site plan . x F. y7 1 1. a 0 4� r ' r .-'+, 3 I • 2 I . 3 , i d PY 2 4 n , 6 , v 5 s 1 \ . / 8 . , „ ....<:1 e 'I 1st floor plan 2nd floor plan 1— Seminar room 1— Seminar room 2— Conference room 2— Library 3 —K itch en 3— Carrels 4 —Foyer 4— Conference /projection room 5 —Hall 5 —Lobby 6 —Lobby 6— Bridge 7— Closet 7— Office 8— Demonstration laboratory 8— Supply room 9— Mechanical 9— Reproduction room - -- l i I 0 . 11 North -South section ■ I East -West section - I INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- MODERNIST Integrity is the ability ofa property to convey its significance. • LOCATION Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 5 - The structure is in its original location. 3 - The structure has been moved within the original site but still maintains the original alignment and proximity to the street. 0 - The structure has been moved to a location that is dissimilar to its original site. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) — 5 points. The structure is in its original location. • DESIGN Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style ofa property. BUILDING FORM 10 -The original plan form, based on authenticating documentation, is still intact. 6 - The plan form has been altered, but the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Alterations and/or additions to the building are such that the original form of the structure is obscured. Response: 10 — The original plan form is unchanged based on original Weese sketches and floor plans. ROOF FORM 10 -The original roof form is unaltered. 6 - Additions have been made that alter roof form that would meet the current design guidelines. 0 - Alterations to the roof have been made that obscure its original form. Response: 10 — The original flat roof is unaltered. SCALE 5 - The original scale and proportions of the building are intact. 3 - The building has been expanded but the scale of the original portion is intact and the addition would meet the design guidelines. 0 - The scale of the building has been negatively affected by additions or alterations. Response: 5 — The original scale and proportions are intact. SOLID/VOID PATTERN 10 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is intact. 6 - The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials has been altered but in a manner that would meet the design guidelines. 0- The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials is altered. Response: 10 — the original pattern of glazing and materials is intact. CHARACTER - DEFINING FEATURES 10 — The horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment are intact. 6 - There are minor alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. 0 - There have been major alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. Response: 10 — the character - defining features, including cottonwood trees that dictated the location of building and influenced Weese's design remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 45) = 45 points. • SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. 5- The physical surroundings are similar to that found when the structure was originally constructed. 3 -There are minor modifications to the physical surroundings but the changes conform to the design guidelines. 0- The physical surroundings detract from the historic character of the building. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 5 points. The physical environment is largely unchanged frotn the date of construction. • MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. EXTERIOR SURFACES 15- The original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing are intact. 10 -There have been minor alterations to the original exterior wall materials and glazing made in a manner that conform to the design guidelines. 5- There have been major changes to the original combination of exterior wall materials and glazing. 0- All exterior wall materials and glazing has been replaced. Response: 15 points — the original combination of concrete masonry units and glazing is intact. DOORS AND WINDOWS 10- All or most of the original door and window units are intact. 5 - Some of the original door and window units have been replaced but the new units would meet the design guidelines. 0 - Most of the original door and window units have been replaced with units that would not meet design guidelines. Response: 8 — Some of the glazing was replaced in 1993, but the window composites remain. TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 25) = 23 points. • WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. COMPOSITION 15 -The structural composition that distinguishes the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. Detailing is reduced to composition of elements instead of decorative effects. No decorative elements are used. Design is focused on rationality, reduction, and composition. It is meant to separate itself from style and sentimentality. Materials are generally manufactured and standardized. The "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Surfaces are smooth with minimal or no detail at window jambs, grade, and at the roof edge. 10 -There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would meet the design guidelines 0 - There have been some alterations to the structural composition that would not meet the design guidelines Response: The building is void of decoration and is clearly follows Modernist tenets. All exterior surfaces are CMU blocks or glazing. FINISHES & COLOR SCHEME 5 - The neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. 3 - There have been minor alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. 0- There have been significant alterations to the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism. Response: 3 — The color scheme has been altered: instead of pure white the building is painted off -white and the window trim is green instead of the original black TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 20 points. Grand Total = 96 points MAXIMUM NUMBER OF POINTS= 100 MINIMUM THRESHOLD FOR DESIGNATION= 75 POINTS Note: Each area of the integrity analysis includes a description of the circumstances that might be found and a point assignment. However the reviewer may choose another number within the point range to more accurately reflect the specific property. • ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: \G, a 5...AeS P—A—LLS CAN-1-.4 , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: . >\.1 , 20a? STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ✓ Publication of notice.: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not Tess than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the tf day of - -e , 201 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ✓ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) r -� r s Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signa ure The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me thisoN day of —.2.— , 200o, by A 6 , ch WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 111!R rp % My commission expires: 30 a- 9/0 ../ACT14 Liz ∎k hZe ( Notary Public (l F i i OF COLO" ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL w s • t z- a . • . � ay ' f . a u •^r x: PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 100 E. FRANCIS STREET, THE GIVEN INSTITUTE, ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007, POTENTIAL HISTORIC RESOURCE NEGOTIATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application for negotiation of preservation incentives under Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, an ordinance which identified a group of potential historic resources in Aspen, submitted by the Regents of the University of Colorado, Regent 201, 3 SYS, Boulder, Colorado, 80309, affecting the property known as The Given Institute and located at 100 East Francis Street, Aspen, CO, 81611, legally described as: A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER STREET, AS DEPICTED AND DESCRIBED ON THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND PART OF THE NW 'A OF THE SW ''A OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST, AND PART OF THE NE '/ OF THE SE Vt OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6 PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, SAID PARCEL IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF FRANCIS STREET AND 24.00 FEET EASTERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF CENTER (AKA GARMISCH) STREET; THENCE N. 14 DEGREES 50' 49" EAST 121.59 FEET; THENCE N. 33 DEGREES 03' 19" EAST 42.21 FEET; THENCE N. 7 DEGREES 19' 05" EAST 112.35 FEET; THENCE S. 70 DEGREES 18' 15" EAST 286.57 FEET; THENCE S. 6 DEGREES 18' 51" WEST 103.11 FEET; THENCE S. 18 DEGREES 12' 00" WEST 108.73 FEET; THENCE S. 9 DEGREES 25'21" EAST 52.10 FEET; THENCE S. 23 DEGREES 21'00" EAST 83.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FRANCIS STREET EXTENDED EASTERLY; THENCE N. 75 DEGREES 09' 11" WEST 288.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 64; THENCE N. 31 DEGREES 00' 50" WEST 107.29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2.2556 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING THAT PORTION OF NORTH ASPEN STREET LYING NORTH OF HALLAM STREET VACATED BY CITY OF ASPEN ORDINANCE NUMBER 3, SERIES 1953, BY PITKIN COUNTH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RECORDED JUNE 24, 1955 IN BOOK 80 AT PAGE 356, AND AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 256 AT PAGE 877, AND THAT PORTION OF PUPPY SMITH STREET (FORMERLY SMUGGLER STREET) VACATED BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 13, SERIES OF 1997, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, LAKEVIEW ADDITION (TO THE CITY OF ASPEN), ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2 AT PAGE 13, WHENCE THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7 AND 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGES 84 AND 85, RESPECTIVELY, WEST OF THE SIXTH PRICIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO, BEARS NORTH 14 DEGREES 39' 51" WEST 772.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70 DEGREES 18' 15" WEST 46.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2 DEGREES 00' 00" WEST 18.555 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72 DEGREES 18' 08" EAST 44.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79 DEGREES 11' 00" EAST 7.90 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 15 DEGREES 15' 22" WEST 20.06 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 903 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. HPC will discuss the significant characteristics of the building and make a recommendation to City Council regarding potential preservation options. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen CO 81611, (970) 429 - 2758, amv.guthrie @ci.aspen.co.us. s /Sarah Broughton Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Vice -Chair Published in the Aspen Times on June 27, 2010 City of Aspen Account AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 11 11 � ‘Or) E • �ran.c.13 S t , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: W x'""4'1 1(a -'t• , 201 1) STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin q ) 1, A el-eL UCO•r (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ✓ ublication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days- prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 200, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) s .. Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments, Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ZS day of w. Q_ , 20t „", by t4"„c 1 4 S • — — PUBLI NOTI E EET, THE GIVEN " RE: 100 E. FRAN POTENTIAL OI H TO C RESOURCE :', p� ,' � WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL %%04 . I NEGOTIATION ai 4 i a i r NOTICE IS y Ga l4,2010 s % : LINDA Ae will ti h eld HERE begin W a 5:00 p IVEN th . July t ay 14, M. meeting to begin et 5:00 p.m. before tha Aspen 4 -N 3 2 t 7 / Historic Preservation Commission, Ci Council y R� / v My •.mmission - xpire : Chambers, City Man, 130 S. Galena 5 ty Aspen, to � ) NING ' \ / cvnsideraePllunder Or,nance#48 eserva v ;1�', co, / tl00 . an an ordinance u Ortl e ntice a g r . SSeries of i 11:;9*:,.. -. ({ , •Y / / / 1 / • C ' - Y7 / /A ` ) 200], an ordinance which itl Aspen, sub a u i of Po- l� ' w auks/ 1 e It,e R l historic resources in Asdo, R eg 1 the Regents SYS, B ul er , of Colorado, Colorado, Notary Pu elk the 3 knower, ThGive affecting and ��.� gryDAIA I the a d at 1t0 known as The Given It Asp and lo- 1I.� p N Expires ON'<p(y�4 6161tl � Oy dpi is Straet described ax, Aspen, CO, �n1 if Expires A PARCEL OF LAND BEING ALL OF BLOCK 63, PART OF FRANCIS STREET, PART OF CENTER THE ORIGINAL TOW NSITE MAP OF TIHE CBED OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO AND PART OF THE NW z 10 THE SOUTH, )4 N - BEG ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: TION ], TOWNSHIP PART OF THE SOUTH, RANGE 84 O SE, T PART T O NEB OF RAT OF SECTION 12,TOWNSHIP 6TH PRI PRINCIPAL SOUTH, MERANGE C 1 T OF SA D IS MORERPARTICULARLY DIDE- OF THE PUBLICATION SCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ')GRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) BEGINNING FRANCIS STREET T POINT AND THE TEETH LINE F THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED B E I T A A PO O THE FEET LINE ERLY OF THE WEST LINE OF CENTER (AKA GARMISCH) STREET; THENCE N. 14 DEGREES 50' 49' EAST 121.59 L FEET; FEE, THEN EN�DE�REES 9 5T ;ANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE EAST 112.35 FEET; THENCE S. 70 DEGREES 18 18' P W EST 103 FEET: ET, THENCE S. D E- !WIRED BY C.R.S. §24 -65.5 -103.3 THENCE S. 6 GREES 12' 00' WEST 10873 FEET; THENCE S. 9 DEGREES 25'21" EAST 52 1 D FEET; THENCE S 23 DEGREES 21'00" EAST 83.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF FRANCIS STREET EXTENDED EASTERLY; THENCE N. 75 DE- GREES 09' 11" WEST 268.99 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 64; THENCE N 31 DEGREES 00' 50" WEST 10].29 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 2.2556 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, INCLUDING THAT PORTION OF NORTH N ASPEN STREET I 8V CITY D P F A EN 0RD AN NUMBER D SERIES 1953, BY PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RESOLUTION RE- CORDED JUNE 24, 19551N BOOK 80 AT PAGE 356, AND AS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED RE- CORDED IN BOOK 256 AT PAGE 877, A ND (FORMERLYISM GGLER S ST REE VACATED T BV ORDINANCE NUMBER 13, SERIES OF 199], DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE ' NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, LAKEVIEW ADDITION (TO THE CITY OF PLAT RECORDED I PL 2 AT PAGE WHENCE THE QUARTER CORNER COMMON TO SECTIONS 7 AND 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGES 84 AND 85, RESPECTIVELY, WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. BEARS NORTH 14 DE- FEET; THENCE GREES 39' 51" WEST NORTH 70 DEGREES 15' 15' 772.54 5' 46.63 FEET; THENCE NORTH 2 DEGREES 00' 00' WES 18.555 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72 DEGREES 118' 8 08' EAST 44.16 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 79 DE- GREES SOUTH 15 DEGREES 5'22' WEST 20.06 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 903 SQUARE OF PITKIN, STATE OF LESS, COUNTY F COLORADO HPC will discuss the significant characteristics of the building and make a recommendation to City Council regarding potential preservation options. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development DepaH- meet, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen CO 81611, (970) 429 -2758, aa3 guthrie@Ci.aspen.co.us. A sp g_hloenh rou nBrouahlon Aape (c Preservation Commission ViceClvlr .,...,.- ...e.., •h anon Times Weekly on June 27, Given Institute Designation 26.415.030. Designation of historic properties. Properties are a value to the community and in the public interest to protect. B. Criteria. The significance of properties shall be evaluated according to the following criteria. 2. A property or district is deemed significant as a representation of Aspen's 20th century history, was constructed in whole or in part more than thirty (30) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made, possesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association and is related to one (1) or more of the following: • Constructed in whole 30 + years ago • Has integrity of location — has not been moved from original location, setting has been modified only slightly since original construction, design, materials and workmanship is intact and unchanged since the building was built in 1971 • Association has remained the same, i.e. a venue for medical education, discussion and interaction. a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history, or • Pattern of medical events promoting interaction among participants and stimulating intellectual advances in the biomedical field beginning with the first conference held at the Aspen Physics Center before the Given was built. That conference was the impetus for the Elizabeth Paepcke to donate the land for the Institute and the Given Foundation to donate the design and construction of the building, Paepcke and the Given Foundation partnered to create an intellectual center to foster interaction between biomedical scientists from the US and abroad b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national history is deemed important and the specific contribution is identified and documented, or • Land donated by Elizabeth Paepcke who with her husband founded the Aspen Institute and Music Festival, donated the land for ACES (Aspen Center for Environmental Studies) and championed with her husband the 'Aspen Idea' which positioned Aspen as an intellectual center as well as sports center • Design of the building and construction donated by the Given Foundation, which was started by Irene Given, the daughter of Henry 1 Heinz, founder of H.J.Heinze Co to provide support to medical institutions and universities. • Designed by Harry Weese, well know 20 century modernist architect, important role in modernism and historic preservation, helping to shape the Chicago Skyline of the 20` Century. Studied under Alvar Alto at MIT, studied city planning and worked with Charles Moore and Eero Saarinen while at Cranbrook Academy of Art. Modern works include: Washington Metro Station; Time -Life Building, Chicago; Us Embassy, Ghana; Mercantile Bank, Kansas City; 17 Church of Christ Scientists, Chicago; Is` Baptist Church, Columbus, IN; Us Courthouse Complex (Metropolitan Correctional Center), Chicago. His preservation work includes: Fulton House; Field Museum; Auditorium Theater; Orchestra Hall, all Chicago; and Union Station, Washington D.C. c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. • The Given Institute was designed in the Mid- Century Modern architectural style. A combination of the Modernist movement of the first half of the 20` century, with influences from the International style from the Bauhaus and incorporation of organic modernism which emerged after WWI. The form is strictly geometric with little ornamentation, yet the spaces flow together and overlap /interact with each other, the materials are simple and the color neutral to allow the formof the building to predominate. The function of the building determines the design and the building is well - integrated with the site, by locating the building to take advantage of views and preserving natural site features and providing fenestration which allows expansive and numerous views out of the building. 5. The Historic Preservation Commission shall adopt, maintain and make available to the public guidelines, score sheets and other devices used by the Commission to apply the criteria set forth in this Chapter to properties potentially eligible for inclusion on the inventory. • We need to check with Amy: does she have score sheets or other devices to rate the integrity and importance of the site. Printable Page 1 of 2 Aspen Historic Preservation Commission r tries to save Given Institute , i nuiwu '. JUNE, 10 2010 - '1 ' AARON HEDGE - Janet Urquhart / The Aspen Times THE ASPEN TIMES ASPEN, CO COLORADO ASPEN — In a last -ditch effort to save the Given Institute from demolition as its owner grows cozier with a potential buyer, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission is applying to get the building listed with the National Register of Historic Places. The effort was approved Wednesday night by unanimous vote in response to a University of Colorado medical school letter received near the end of May that it intended to sell the property to an unnamed buyer who won't purchase the property unless the building is already gone. CU's attorney said in the letter that the city has no purview over the building because the land is technically owned by an arm of the state. To begin the effort, which the HPC said is to create a dialogue about the cultural importance of the structure, it will draft a nomination. The deadline for that application is soon, said Amy Guthrie, Aspen's historic preservation officer. "The most important thing right now is to initiate the discussion," Guthrie said. She said it will probably take about a week of wading through all the red tape before that discussion begins. The reasons the HPC said CU should reconsider the deal included its status as a structure designed and built by a world - renown architect and the fact that it was a gift to CU in 1970 by prominent local community advocate and expansionist Elizabeth Paepcke. If the application is successful and the building gets listed with the national register, CU will still technically own it and have the right to do whatever it wants. Guthrie said the HPC hopes the initiative will convince the university to keep the building. Dan Meyers, the medical school's chief spokesman, said Wednesday that the school is "getting close" to finalizing a deal with a potential buyer who offered a little less than $20 million for the property. Meyers couldn't give a date for the sale or provide any more detail because of private nature of the negotiation, but he did say several other people have expressed interest in acquiring the land. Lately, the building, which has served a venue for academic lectures and conferences, has been a drain on the university, netting between $150,000 and $200,000 in operating expenses from CU every year. Meyers said CU didn't know about the HPC discussion, which City Hall spokeswoman Sally Spaulding said was scheduled at the "last minute," until just before it happened. "Just now we were told about meeting," he said. "We're in Denver; we couldn't be there." CU's local representative, planner Alan Richman, attended the meeting, but declined to comment in the public discussion section because of the short notice. CU officials, including medical school dean Richard Krugman, will be at the next HPC hearing on the issue on July 14. http: / /www.aspentimes.com/ apps /pbes.dll /article ?AID= /20100610/NEWS/ 100619999 &par... 6/30/2011 Printable r , ^ Page 2 of 2 The meeting was called after City Council discussed the matter with lawyers in private Monday. Jay Maytin, who sits on the commission, said the organization should take this as an opportunity to look ahead to similar sales of buildings in the future. "A catalyst for this has been the demolition. But I'd like to be proactive about other structures in town," he said. HPC member Michael Kraftman recused himself from the discussion because he works for a local law firm that is involved in brokering the deal. ahedge@aspentimes.com http: / /www. aspentimes.com /apps / pbcs.dll /article? AID =/ 20100610/ NEWS/ 100619999 &parentprofile = search &template = printart • http:// www .aspentimes.com/apps /pbcs.dll /article ?AID= /20100610/NE WS /100619999 &nar... 6/30/2011 HPC presentation, June 2010 • City Council met in Executive Session on Monday night to discuss alternatives to the potential demolition of the Given Institute. • Out of that discussion, they requested that HPC discuss directing staff to submit a nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. Any individual or organization has the right to submit a nomination. • Nominations are accepted three times a year. Staff has discussed a nomination with the Colorado Historical Society. We are working to submit the application within the week. • The process of nomination will increase the documentation and quality of information regarding the Given's high level of historical importance. It will help to protect the public interest by generating discussion that determines the historic value of the property to the community, state and country. • City staff and the Historic Preservation Commission did not actively pursue designation of this property in the past because it was already in the public domain. We always felt CU would be a responsible steward of this property and felt assured that a level of protection and historical significance would be granted to this structure moving into the future. That level of protection may soon be gone, and we are discussing what steps, if any, the Commission may want to take to help protect this historical resource in Aspen. We feel there are numerous aspects of the property that are historically significant. First, the nature of the Given Institute and its program clearly illustrates "the Aspen Idea." Since 1964 the organization has provided a venue for leading scientists to exchange information and remain current with revolutions in biology, genetics, and medicine taking place in American research. Aspen has provided an appealing setting, allowing academic research to be combined with access to the natural environment and cultural events. The community has a well established tradition as a summer retreat and intellectually stimulating environment for academics through the successful programs taking place at the Aspen Physics Institute, Aspen Institute, etc. The Paepcke's felt this kind of organization was so important to the community that Elizabeth Paepcke sold the University of Colorado 2 acres of her gardens at half their market value. The Paepcke's were patrons of the 20 century masters of modern art and archtitecture. The transfer of the property to the University stipulated that Elizabeth Paepcke would select the architect. She choose Harry Weese, famed Chicago modernist, graduate of MIT and the Cranbrook Academy of Art under the guidance of the likes of Alvar Alto and Eliel Saarinen. The concrete block building is a simple but striking example of "High Modern" design. Weese had a long and prolific career that included designs described as "among the greatest public works of the 20 century." His First Baptist Church in Columbia Indiana was designated a National Historic Landmark when it was 35 years old. The Given is integral to the West End. Its proximity to downtown, the other intellectual and natural touchstones of the Community is noteworthy. ,-• RESOLUTION NO. / (SERIES OF 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THE PROPOSED DEMOLITION OF THE GIVEN INSTITUTE WHEREAS, The City of Aspen has been informed that The Given Institute, located in Aspen and owned by the Regents of the University of Colorado, is proposed to be demolished in October 2010, and sold for residential development; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission and other citizens have urged City Council to take action towards preventing the loss of the facility as a community asset; and WHEREAS, City Council recognizes that Aspen has an over 60 year long standing tradition, initiated by Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke, as a location for thinkers, leaders, artists, and musicians from all over the world to join together in a setting that feeds the "Mind, Body, and Spirit." Organizations like the Aspen Music Festival (1949), Aspen Institute (1950), Aspen Center for Physics (1962) and The Given Institute (1972) are strongly tied to the town's identity; and WHEREAS, The Given Institute building was designed by Harry Weese, a prominent modernist American architect. Weese practiced primarily in Chicago and the Midwest, but also lived part-time in Aspen. His commission to design The Given Institute fits in to a broader context of a "who's who" of modern architecture that began in Aspen in 1945; and WHEREAS, integration of non - profit and community facilities throughout the West End neighborhood adds enormous vitality to Aspen. The value of the property as a publically owned asset, with important cultural and natural significance, including the only remaining public overlook adjacent to the Hallam Lake Nature preserve, cannot be replaced. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council commits to take immediate action to establish an on -going dialogue with the University of Colorado with the intention to support them in achieving their goals for sale of the property, without damage to the community's history and interests. APPROVED by the Aspen City Council at its regular meeting on June 28, 2010. Aries - /2 ��l %( -7--1- C AL_ Kathryn S. Koch, ( ty er Michael C. Ireland, Mayor APPRO�AS TO FORM: John ce e , C ity Attorney Printable Page 1 of 1 Aspen chamber board: Save the Given JUNE, 29 2010 ASPEN TIMES STAFF REPORT ASPEN, CO COLORADO ASPEN — The Aspen Chamber Resort Association board of directors has thrown its support behind efforts to save the Given Institute buildings in Aspen's West End. The board on Tuesday approved a resolution urging the University of Colorado School of Medicine to continue working with the community to preserve the conference facilities on a lot that overlooks Hallam Lake. Board member Stan Clauson proposed the resolution, though he acknowledged the community may somehow need to compensate CU for the property. "There will have to be some way of taking them out of the loop," he said. The Given was designed by 20th century American architect Harry Weese. "It really is a masterpiece of architecture by an extremely significant architect," Clauson said. In addition, the facilities are a community resource worth preserving, he argued. "It seems appropriate at this point to provide some sort of resolution for this resource remaining in the community," Clauson said. CU officials say operating the Given costs as much as $200,000 annually and that they have a buyer interested in the property, but not the buildings. The proposed razing of the structures, however, has spurred Aspen's Historic Preservation Commission to pursue steps to have the buildings designated as historic. http: / /www. aspentimes .com /apps / pbcs.dll /article ?AID= /20100629/ NEWS/ 100629827&parentprofile= search &template= printart http: / /www. aspentimes .com/ apps /pbcs.dll /article ?AID= /20100629/NEWS/ 100629827 &par... 6/30/2011 NATIONAL TRUST FOR June 24, 2010 HISTORIC Dr. Richard D. Krugman, MD PRESERVATION® Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs & Dean, School of Medicine Mountains /Plains 13001 E. 17th Place, Building 500 OFFICE Campus Box C290, Room E1354 Aurora, CO 80045 Dear Dr. Krugman, The National Trust for Historic Preservation has learned of the University of Colorado, School of Medicine's plan to demolish the Given Institute in Aspen. We understand that the School of Medicine is planning this demolition in order to ready the property for sale to a new, private owner. Designed by the prominent Chicago architect Harry Weese and completed in 1972, the Given Institute is among the most important buildings from Aspen's post World War II history -- an era which is increasingly being recognized and celebrated by the community. Along with the Aspen Center for Physics and the Aspen Institute, the Given provides a tangible connection to the legacy of Elizabeth Paepcke and her late husband Walter, who envisioned Aspen as an international center for intellectual inquiry and modern design. Ms. Paepcke donated the land for the Given and personally selected Harry Weese to design the building. As a national gathering place for discussions regarding medical research, the Given has attracted some of the most prominent leaders in the field, including a number of Nobel laureates. In recent years, the Given and its "U.N. style" amphitheater has also been used for numerous community events and discussions. It has become a much -loved local landmark. The outpouring of interest in the fate of the Given since the demolition plan was announced indicates how strongly many area residents feel about this structure. Rather than moving forward precipitously with the decision to demolish this irreplaceable architectural and community asset, we strongly urge the University to allow time for alternatives to be more fully explored. The National Trust for Historic Preservation would welcome the opportunity to assist and participate in discussions with the University and the community regarding preservation options for the Given Institute. If sufficient time is allowed, we believe that a creative, win -win solution can be found that addresses the needs of both the University of Colorado and the Aspen community. !would welcome the opportunity to discuss this important issue with you or your representatives. Sincerely, `% l �. Barbara Pahl, Director Mountains /Plains Office Mountains /Plains Office National Office 53516th Street, Suite 750 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Denver, CO 80202 Washington, DC 20036 P 303.623.1504 P 202.588.6000 P 303.623.1508 F 202.588.6038 E mpro @nthp.org E info @nthp.org Serving: CO, KS, MT, NE, ND, SD, UT & WY www.PreservationNation.org CU not swayed by historic applcation Page 1 of 2 aspen dai lynewsonline Published on Aspen Daily News Online (http / /www.aendailynews.com) CU not swayed by historic application Writer: Curtis Wackerle Byline: Aspen Daily News Staff Writer Colorado Historical Society considering Given for designation The city of Aspen has submitted an initial application to have the Given Institute listed as a historic landmark, but the move has not swayed the University of Colorado in its aim to demolish and sell the building. The application to designate the modernist structure in Aspen's West End neighborhood goes first to the Colorado Historical Society. A panel of historians will weigh in on whether or not the building is worthy of historic designation. If it is, the application will be passed on to the National Park Service, which will make its own ruling on whether the Given should be placed on the National Register of Historic Places. The timeline on the process is unclear. Also, even if the building makes it onto the national register, CU will still be able to tear it down if it wants to. The university is looking to sell the property for a reported $20 million sum. Buyers who are interested in the property have told the university they will only purchase the property as a vacant lot, the school says. As a state institution, CU is not subject to local zoning. Shortly after CU made it clear earlier this month that it intends to tear the building down, the city's Historic Preservation Commission voted unanimously to move the historic registry application forward. Dan Meyers, communications director at the CU School of Medicine, which runs the conference facility, said that the designation move "doesn't change anything." "We are still in a position where -we cannot afford to operate (the Given)," Meyers said. "It still will be closed." The university has seen its state funding cut in half in recent years with more cuts likely coming, Meyers said. The Given requires up to a $200,000 annual operating subsidy, which Meyers notes could provide tuition for eight medical school students. "We are in a position of trying to raise money to support our core purpose, which is (providing) medical education in Colorado, which benefits the entire state, including Aspen," Meyers said. Meyers said the university intends to use a portion of the proceeds from the sale to continue holding medical lectures and conferences in Aspen in a partnership with the Aspen Institute. http:// www. aspendailynews.com /print/141124 6/21/2010 CU not swayed by historic app4,atjon ,,,s\ Page 2 of 2 Besides the city's historic application, other movements are afoot to try and save the Given. An e- mail is making the forwarding rounds encouraging residents to write City Council members and letters to the editor advocating for saving the Given. A letter to the editor published on Friday from historic preservation advocate and architect Bill Wiener recommends the tactic of cutting off donations to the university if it proceeds with its demolition plans. "By working together, we may be able to stop this senseless irreversible act of destruction by using the same parameters and values which were established by the Colorado Board of Regents in order to justify the destruction. Money," Wiener wrote. The $200,000 annual subsidy is "just an excuse," Wiener said Saturday. "What they are looking at is the $20 million," he said, adding that he is hearing that whoever buys the property would likely build one or two large homes on the 2 1/4 -acre lot. If the university can't carry the operating expenses for the Given, "maybe they should just mothball the property and in better times open it back up," Wiener said. The Given grew out of a conference on advances in molecular biology that was sponsored by the University of Colorado and held at the Aspen Middle School beginning in 1964. The conference expanded over the years until Elizabeth Paepcke, who helped launch many of Aspen's cultural institutions, and the Aspen Institute started looking to provide a permanent home for the convocations. Paepcke sold a part of her garden to the university for a below - market rate and the Given Foundation in New York donated the $500,000 required to construct the building. It was designed by architect Harry Weese, who also designed the subway stations for the Washington, D.C., metro system. curtis @aspendailynews. com archive_date: 1 day active: active Source URL: http: / /www.aspendailynews .com /section/home /141124 http:// www. aspendailynews.com/print/141124 6/21/2010 A - Amy Guthrie From: Sally Spaulding Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 4:02 PM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: Fw: From: Stephanie Smith To: Sally Spaulding Sent: Fri Jun 18 15:59:34 2010 Subject: I would like to add my name to the list to save the Given Institute from demolition. Stephanie E Smith 601 Brenden Ct Aspen, Co 81611 1 Amy Guthrie From: Sally Spaulding Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 1:34 PM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: FW: Given Institute Sally Spaulding, Community Relations Director City of Aspen 1 130 South Galena 1 Aspen, CO 1 81611 Voice: 970- 920 -5082 1 Fax: 970- 920 -5119 1 Web: www.aspenpitkin.com Follow the City of Aspen on Facebook or Twitter. From: Joseph E. Edwards Jr. [mailto:joeedwards @sopris.net] Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 12:18 PM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Given Institute Please keep the Given Institute as the building now stands on the beautiful site where it belongs. It is an integral part of Aspen. Please do not allow the Given Institute to be demolished, moved or in any way disturbed. It is valuable for the City of Aspen to keep this useful and historic site. It is a place to enjoy the Bauhaus style of architecture and peaceful grounds. It is too precious to be lost and never again available to the public. Sincerely, Linda Edwards Email secured by Check Point i Printable Page 1 of 1 Give the Given a chance Dear Editor: What makes Aspen different than the other post-WWII ski resorts? Is it just a music festival? Is it just the World Cup and the X Games? Is it just the Wild West mining town mystique? is it only breathtaking beauty? Is it just (shudder) the commedia quality of our politics? is it just the level of our greed? Nope, none of these are exclusive to the rarefied air of the Roaring Fork Valley. What Aspen has is an idea. What Aspen has is respect for a healthy mind as welt as a healthy body. Cling to that idea. Welcome the scientists as well as the snowboarders. Make diversity a good thing. Economic and social diversity we no longer have. Let's try and keep a little intellectual diversity. The Given is uniquely suited to the sharing of ideas, The conference space is near perfect in its relationship of speaker to audience, It is in a setting which promotes contemplation of the deepest sort. Why isn't it making money? 1 could point to many things, but the bottom line is it's not the job of an educational institution to make money. They don't do it well. What are the possible solutions? Well, I'd love to know how much of that 5200,000- a-year expense tag is property taxes. It seems the city could do something about that. Everybody is hurting but surely one of our local institutions could tied a sponsor for this. Perhaps CU isn't the best custodian (attempts to rent it as a wedding venue leads me to that conclusion) but surely with the depth of connections flowing from this town, we can find a worthy steward for this wellspring of ideas. After alt, why should the politicians at The Aspen Institute have all the fun? Ziska Childs Carbondale http: / /www. aspentimes. com /apps / pbcs. dtl /article? AID = / 20100611 /LETTER/ 100619970 &parentprofi te= search &template= printart httn://www.asnentimes.com/apps/pbes.dlUartiele?AllY /20100611 /1. F`1'TER/ 1 00619970 &... 6/16/2010 Amy Guthrie From: Bruegmann, Robert [bbrueg @uic.edu] Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 9:18 AM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: RE: Ben Weese Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Amy: I spoke to Ben about Given. Aside from being quite unhappy with the situation he didn't have much to say about it. Sorry to hear Mrs. Paepcke didn't put more conditions on the gift. I suppose she couldn't have imagined that Aspen and the University of Colorado and, I suppose, our society in general, would change so quickly that the University would be unloading the property and the building would be coming down in less than 50 years. I suppose it is understandable that all of the players would be acting they way they are, but it is nevertheless a very sorry tale. This is far from the only academic /educational building by Harry Weese that has or will come down. The science building and science library at Beloit College, the library at Williams College and the Humanities Building at the U. of Wisconsin at Madison are all down or scheduled to be demolished. Bob On Tue, June 15, 2010 4:50 pm, Amy Guthrie wrote: > FYI, we did get a hold of the deed. The only restriction was that the > Paepcke family (property donors) had to approve any building on the > site for a 20 year period, starting in 1972. > Original Message > From: Bruegmann, Robert [mailto:bbrueg @uic.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 12:53 PM > To: Amy Guthrie > Subject: Re: Ben Weese > Dear Amy: > Ben doesn't do e mail so I send things to him via Cindy Weese, his > wife. I copied Cindy on the last e mail with an actual message (not > the one where I actually supplied the attachment) so if they are > checking e mail he is up to date. I know that they are up at their > house in northern Michigan. Not sure how much communication with the > rest of the world they have or want up there. But I know he will be > back in Chicago today or tomorrow because I'm having dinner with them > tomorrow. What I will do right now is copy the part about possible > deed covenants (It's hard to imagine Mrs. Paepcke not having some > such) to him in case Cindy and he are monitoring e mail. > Bob > On Tue, June 8, 2010 12:38 pm, Amy Guthrie wrote: 1 » Hi- I just talked to Bill Lipsey, who I think you spoke with for the » book. He was the local architect who supervised the Given » construction. » Bill (and other people) have been asking a lot of questions about » whether or not there were any covenants on Elizabeth Paepcke's gift » of the land (or covenants by the Given Foundation, who paid for the » building.) The City is pursuing a title search. Bill suggested that » Ben Weese might have a memory of some of this. I don't think Ben was » copied on the last email. Can you forward this question to him? » Thank you. » Amy Guthrie » City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer » 130 S. Galena Street » Aspen, CO 81611 » (p) 970 - 429 -2758 (f) 970 - 920 -5439 » www.aspennitkin.com Email secured by Check Point 2 , a Amy Guthrie From Sally Spaulding Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 1017 AM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: FW Givens Sally Spaulding, Community Relations Director City of Aspen I 130 South Galena I Aspen, CO 81611 Voice: 970- 920 -5082 I Fax: 970 -920 -5119 I Web: www.aspenpitkin.com Follow the City of Aspen on Facebook or Twitter. Original Message From: Joany lebach [mailto:joanylebach @yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:17 PM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Givens Please share with the mayor and council. It would be great if the city alone or with partners, bought the Givens. It is our national treasure. I think we should have bought the Stage 3 theater. It would have given us 6 theaters, and less then the 1 from the Wheeler. We need to think out of the box. Many thanks, to you all. J. Email secured by Check Point Amy Guthrie From: Sally Spaulding Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 20104:13 PM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: FW: The Given Sally Spaulding, Community Relations Director City of Aspen j 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Voice: 970 - 920 - 5082 I Fax 970- 920 -5119 Web. wwwaspenpitkin com Follow the City of Aspen on Facebook or Twitter From: John 'JR' Ristine [mailto:jrix©zirrus.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 3:53 PM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: The Given Sally, Junee Kirk gave me your address. I work in finance at the Aspen Post Office, and I write novels and screenplays about the Roaring Fork Valley. Let's find a way to keep the Given. My experience with this conference room includes: audio visual technician for the School of Medicine and audience participant in various speaking engagements sponsored by the Aspen Writers' Foundation. The City of Aspen should not let the property be demolished for the construction of a private dwelling. The best possible outcome is to reconstruct the building for improved capacity for storage, office space, loading dock, and parking space. As I recall, the original design called for a domed roof for the conference hall. Let's find a way for the City of Aspen to buy the property. It could generate revenue by renting space to the School of Medicine for the times they can afford a trip to Aspen, and it could be rented out to other groups. The City of Aspen should not prevent the School of Medicine from selling the property as the resulting burden would not benefit anyone. John Zirrus.net Communications AspenCrest.com - a literary workshop that helps agents find you. Genereden.org - connections through genealogy Email secured by Check Point Amy Guthrie From: Sally Spaulding Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 8:34 AM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: FW: Please block the demolition of the Given. FYI. 5 Sally Spaulding, Community Relations Director City of Aspen 1 130 South Galena I Aspen, CO I 81611 Voice: 970 - 920 -5082 I Fax: 970 - 920 -5119 1 Web: www.aspenpitkin.com Follow the City of Aspen on Facebook or Twitter. From: Steve Goldenberg [mailto:steve ©goldenberg.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 7:09 AM To: Mick Ireland forward; Derick Johnson; Dwayne Romero; Steve Skadron forward; Torre; Sally Spaulding Subject: Please block the demolition of the Given. It's not hard to figure out which of the neighbors wants that land added to his property /compound and can afford to do what's unfolding. Don't issue a demolition permit etc. etc. Thanks, Steve Goldenberg steve @.goldenberg.com 430 W. Hopkins Ave phone & fax 970 - 925 -1294 Aspen, CO 81611 cell phone 970 - 379 -9778 Email secured by Check Point 1 Amy Guthrie From: Mary Janss [maryjanss @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:57 AM To: Mick Ireland forward; hitorre @aol.com; Steve Skadron forward; djohnson @aspensnowmass.com; Dwayne Romero Cc: Sally Spaulding Subject: Given Institute To: City Council Cc: Sally Spaulding RE Given Institute From: Mary Janss June 15, 2010 Dear City Council, The Given Institute has served the City of Aspen, the people of Aspen and multitudes of people who come to give talks, and to listen to them, and to [earn about health, science, global health and other issues. I am writing to urge you as strongly as possible to rescue the Given Institute from privatization, and demolition. We must not let this precious asset be destroyed nor let Walter and Elizabeth Paepcke's trust be betrayed. Mary Janss Email secured by Check Point 1 Amy Guthrie From: Junee Kirk [junee.kirk @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:08 AM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Fw: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Original Message From: Jasmine Tyare To: Junee Kirk Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 10:27 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Please add my name to the list. Jasmine Tygre - -- On Mon, 6/14/10, Junee Kirk <%unee.kirk(a�,comcast.net> wrote: From: Junee Kirk <iunee.kirk@comcast.net> Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? To: "ZZZ" <junee.kirkth comcast.net> Date: Monday, June 14, 2010, 10:08 PM Dear Friends: Please help us save the Given Institute from demolition and sale by adding your name to the list of community members who find this site, and 20th Century building , worthy of preserving for community benefit. The site overlooks Aspen's Center for Environmental Studies(ACES), and many in Aspen feel it should continue to serve the public use for meetings in the arts, sciences, cultural events, and non profit use. It was designed by 20th. Century Harry Weese in the "Modernist" style advocated by Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. It has served the public for almost forty years. As more and more of Aspen's history is demolished , Aspen is rapidly losing its character and charm. This site provides office space for the Aspen Global Change Insitute, and could serve as a valuable needed public resource center for the arts /cultural, scientific, and other non - profit uses and events. Please add your name to the list ( by return email) and please email all your own comments to Council if you are strongly in favor of the City working to save this beautiful historic site. Writing letters to the editor will also help. Please email Sally Spaulding sally .spauldinq(a)ci.asoen.co.us for your) comments to Council so they can be made of the public record. Also are email addresses of individual council members are below. Thank your for your support. Mayor Mick: mick(d)sopris.net Torre: hitorrena.aol.com Steve Skadron skadronacomcast.net Derek Johson diohnsonna aspensnowmass.com Dwayne Romero dwavne.romero(a.ci.aspen.co.us Email secured by Check Point 1 Amy Guthrie From: Junee Kirk (junee.kirk @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:00 AM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Original Message From: Marcia Goshorn To: junee.kirk @comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 8:26 AM Subject: RE: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? I definitely want my name added to the list. Thank you for organizing this. From: iunee.kirk @comcast.net To: iunee.kirk @comcast.net Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:27:39 -0600 Dear Friends: Please help us save the Given Institute from demolition and sale by adding your name to the list of community members who find this site, and 20th Century building , worthy of preserving for community benefit. The site overlooks Aspen's Center for Environmental Studies(ACES), and many in Aspen feel it should continue to serve the public use for meetings in the arts, sciences, cultural events, and non profit use. It was designed by 20th. Century Harry Weese in the "Modernist" style advocated by Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. It has served the public for almost forty years. As more and more of Aspen's history is demolished , Aspen is rapidly losing its character and charm. This site provides office space for the Aspen Global Change Insitute, and could serve as a valuable needed public resource center for the arts /cultural, scientific, and other non - profit uses and events. Please add your name to the list ( by return email) and please email all your own comments to Council if you are strongly in favor of the City working to save this beautiful historic site. Writing letters to the editor will also help. Please email Sally Spaulding sally.spauldino @ci.asoen.co.us for yourl comments to Council so they can be made of the public record. Also are email addresses of individual council members are below. Thank your for your support. Mayor Mick: mick @sopris.net Torre: hitorre @aol.com Steve Skadron skadron@comcast.net Derek Johson diohnson@,aspensnowmass.com Dwayne Romero dwavne.romero@ci.asoen.co.us Email secured by Check Point 1 A ^; Amy Guthrie From: Junee Kirk [junee.kirk @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:00 AM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? • Original Message From: Roberta Alien Miller To: Junee Kirk Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 7:24 AM Subject: Re: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Please add my name to the list. Roberta Aspen Phone: 970 - 925 -7668 Aspen Fax: 970- 544 -8301 Connecticut Phone: 860 - 904 -6637 Connecticut Fax: 860 - 904 -6653 Cell Phone: 860 - 716 -7884 Original Message From: "Junee Kirk" <junee.kirkcomcast.net> To: "ZZZ" <junee.kirkAcomcast.net> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 11:46:58 PM GMT -05:00 US /Canada Eastern Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Dear Friends: Please help us save the Given Institute from demolition and sale by adding your name to the list of community members who find this site, and 20th Century building , worthy of preserving for community benefit. The site overlooks Aspen's Center for Environmental Studies(ACES), and many in Aspen feel it should continue to serve the public use for meetings in the arts, sciences, cultural events, and non profit use. It was designed by 20th. Century Harry Weese in the "Modernist" style advocated by Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. It has served the public for almost forty years. As more and more of Aspen's history is demolished , Aspen is rapidly losing its character and charm. This site provides office space for the Aspen Global Change Insitute, and could serve as a valuable needed public resource center for the arts /cultural, scientific, and other non - profit uses and events. Please add your name to the list ( by return email) and please email all your own comments to Council if you are strongly in favor of the City working to save this beautiful historic site. Writing letters to the editor will also help. Please email Sally Spaulding sallv.spauldincaci.asoen.co.us for your) comments to Council so they can be made of the public record. Also are email addresses of individual council members are below. Thank your for your 1 '"1 ''g support. Mayor Mick: micksopris.net Torre: hitorreAaol.com Steve Skadron skadron(ct�.comcast.net Derek Johson diohnsonAaspensnowmass.com Dwayne Romero dwayne.romero Email secured by Check Point 2 Amy Guthrie From: Junee Kirk [junee.kirk @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:02 AM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Fw: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Original Message From: Sy Coleman To: Junee Kirk Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 7:07 AM Subject: Re: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Please add my name to the list. Sy Coleman At 09:37 PM 6/14/2010, you wrote: Dear Friends: Please help us save the Given Institute from demolition and sale by adding your name to the list of community members who find this site, and 20th Century building , worthy of preserving for community benefit. The site overlooks Aspen's Center for Environmental Studies(ACES), and many in Aspen feel it should continue to serve the public use for meetings in the arts, sciences, cultural events, and non profit use. It was designed by 20th. Century Harry Weese in the "Modernist" style advocated by Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. It has served the public for almost forty years. As more and more of Aspen's history is demolished , Aspen is rapidly losing its character and charm. This site provides office space for the Aspen Global Change Insitute, and could serve as a valuable needed public resource center for the arts /cultural, scientific, and other non - profit uses and events. Please add your name to the list ( by return email) and please email all your own comments to Council if you are strongly in favor of the City working to save this beautiful historic site. Writing letters to the editor will also help. Please email Sally Spaulding sally.svauldingnci.aspen.co.us for your! comments to Council so they can be made of the public record. Also are email addresses of individual council members are below. Thank your for your support. Mayor Mick: mick @sopris.net Torre: hitorre @aol.com Steve Skadron skadron(alcomcast.net Derek Johson djohnson @asoensnowmass.com Dwayne Romero dwayne.romero @ci.asoen.co.us 1 Amy Guthrie From: Junee Kirk [junee.kirk @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:11 AM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Original Message From: Jerry Blumberg To: Junee Kirk Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:06 AM Subject: Re: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Jerry Blumberg From: Junee Kirk Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 10:08 PM To: ZZZ Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Dear Friends: Please help us save the Given Institute from demolition and sale by adding your name to the list of community members who find this site, and 20th Century building , worthy of preserving for community benefit. The site overlooks Aspen's Center for Environmental Studies(ACES), and many in Aspen feel it should continue to serve the public use for meetings in the arts, sciences, cultural events, and non profit use. It was designed by 20th. Century Harry Weese in the "Modernist" style advocated by Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. It has served the public for almost forty years. As more and more of Aspen's history is demolished , Aspen is rapidly losing its character and charm. This site provides office space for the Aspen Global Change Insitute, and could serve as a valuable needed public resource center for the arts /cultural, scientific, and other non - profit uses and events. Please add your name to the list ( by return email) and please email all your own comments to Council if you are strongly in favor of the City working to save this beautiful historic site. Writing letters to the editor will also help. Please email Sally Spaulding sally.spauldingAci.aspen.co.us for yourl comments to Council so they can be made of the public record. Also are email addresses of individual council members are below. Thank your for your support. Mayor Mick: mick(ilsopris.net Torre: hitorrena,aol.com Steve Skadron skadron(a�comcast.net Derek Johson dlohnson(cilaspensnowmass.com Dwayne Romero dwavne.romeroaci.aspen.co.us Email secured by Check Point i Amy Guthrie From: Junee Kirk [junee.kirk @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:12 AM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Fw: Given Original Message From: "Georgeann Waggaman" <gwagg @rof.net> To: <junee.kirk @comcast.net> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 4:01 PM Subject: Given > Junee, Pls put my name on the list to save the Given, Georgeann > Waggaman (Hayes - if you need my voter reg. name) Email secured by Check Point 1 Amy Guthrie From: Junee Kirk [junee.kirk @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:14 AM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Original Message From: Su Lum To: junee.kirk(a@comcast.net Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:38 PM Subject: FW: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? From: nessennvc @aol.com [mailto:nessennyc @ aol.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:28 PM To: Su Lum Subject: Re: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? I would sign Hermine Original Message From: Su Lum <SLumaaspentimes.com> To: Gypsvles@.aol.com <GVPsvlesaaol.com >; Arjunatelesoftvc.com <Arjun(a�telesoftvc.com >; bert@myrin.com <bert@myrin.com >; bill_wiener @hotmail.com <bill_wiener @hotmail.com >; pbronson @outfit.com <pbronson @ouffit.com >; ellen35 @comcast.net <ellen35 @comcast.net >; ellenaspen @aol.com <ellenaspen @aol.com >; gwagg @rofnet <gwagg @rof.net >; mathemusician @hotmail.com <mathemusician @hotmail.com >; jkrabacher @krabacher.com <jkrabacher @krabacher.com >; josedeleon2000 @hotmail.com <josedeleon2000 @hotmail.com >; Maureenaspen @aol.com <Maureenaspen @aol.com >; NESSENNYC @aol.com <NESSENNYC @aol.com >; Robertoxenberg @aol.com <Robertoxenberg @aol.com >; roxanneeflin @yahoo.com <roxanneeflin @yahoo.com >; tammybaar @hotmail.com <tammybaar @hotmail.com >; timothy_wagner @roadrunner.com < timothy_wagner @roadrunner.com >; theobald @colorado.net <theobald @colorado.net >; alloyluna @me.com <alloyluna @me.com >; travisl @sopris.net < travisl @sopris. net >; wycoff @safeandsoundnannies.com < wycoff @safeandsoundnannies.com >; zgholly @msn.com < zgholly @msn.com> Sent: Mon, Jun 14, 2010 4:26 pm Subject: RE: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? I don't see a list but you can add my name. I think the Wheeler Opera House should buy it. They have the money and want a place to expand. Su Lum From: Gypsyles @aol.com [mailto:Gypsyles @ aol.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 1:13 PM To: Arjun @telesoftvc.com; bert@myrin.com; bill_wiener @hotmail.com; pbronson @outfit.com; ellen35 @comcast.net; ellenaspen @aol.com; gwagg @rof.net; mathemusician @hotmail.com; jkrabacher @krabacher.com; josedeleon2000 @hotmail.com; Maureenaspen @aol.com; NESSENNYC @aol.com; Robertoxenberg @aol.com; roxanneeflin @yahoo.com; Su Lum; tammybaar @hotmail.com; timothy_wagner @roadrunner.com; theobald @colorado.net; alloyluna @me.com; travisl@ sopris. net; wycoff @safeandsoundnannies.com; zgholly @msn.com Subject: Fwd: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? 1 hi, anything but another 12000 square ft house overlooking ACES and the lake happiness les From: junee.kirk @comcast.net To: junee.kirk @comcast.net Sent: 6/14/2010 11:12:36 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time Subj: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Dear Friends: Please help us save the Given Institute from demolition and sale, by adding your name to the list of community members who find this site and 20th Century building part of our history and worthy of community benefit for meetings in art and science and Aspen's cultural events. It was designed by 20th. Century Harry Weese. It is one of the most well known styles of Aspen's 20th Century "modernism ",encouraged by Water Paepcke, and has endured with the Aspen Insitute for forty years. As more and more of Aspen's history is demolished and replaced with common place architecture, Aspen is rapidly loosing its character and charm, not only as a 19th cent mining town but as a 20th century cultural center with the influence and direction of Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. Please add your name to the list ( by return email) and please email all your councilmen if your are in favor in the city working to save this beautiful historic site for future needed cultural and scientific events.. Writing letters to the editor will also help. Below are email addresses of council. Email secured by Check Point 2 Amy Guthrie From: Junee Kirk [junee.kirk @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:12 AM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Original Message From: Dr. Phyllis J. Bronson To: junee kirk Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 3:56 PM Subject: Re: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? yes, add my name On Jun 14, 2010, at 2:26 PM, Su Lum wrote: I don't see a list but you can add my name. I think the Wheeler Opera House should buy it. They have the money and want a place to expand. Su Lum From: Gvosvles @aol.com [mailto:Gypsyles @ aol.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 1:13 PM To: Arjun@telesoftvc.com; bert@myrin.com; bill wiener @hotmail.com; pbronson @outfit.com; ellen35 @comcast.net; elle nasoen @aol.com; uwagq@ rof .net;mathemusician@hotmail.com; ikrabacher @krabacher.com; josedeleon2000@hotmail.c om; Maureenasoen @aol.com; NESSENNYC @aol.com; Robertoxenberg@ aol.com;roxanneeflin@yahoo.com; Su Lum; tammvbaar @hotmail.com; timothy wagner @roadrunner.com; theobald @colorado.net; allovluna @me.com; travisl @sopris. net ;wvcoff@safeandsoundnannies.com; zgholly @msn.com Subject: Fwd: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? hi, anything but another 12000 square ft house overlooking ACES and the lake happiness les From: junee.kirk To: junee.kirk(dtcomcast.net Sent: 6/14/2010 11:12:36 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time Subj: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Dear Friends: Please help us save the Given Institute from demolition and sale, by adding your name to the list of community members who find this site and 20th Century building part of our history and worthy of community benefit for meetings in art and science and Aspen's cultural events. It was designed by 20th. Century Harry Weese. It is one of the most well known styles of Aspen's 20th Century "modernism ",encouraged by Water Paepcke, and has endured with the Aspen Insitute for forty years. As more and more of Aspen's history is demolished and replaced with common place architecture, Aspen is rapidly loosing its character and charm, not only as a 19th cent mining town but as a 20th century cultural center with the influence and direction of Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. Please add your name to the list ( by return email) and please email all your councilmen if your are in favor in the city working to save this beautiful historic site for future needed cultural and scientific events.. Writing letters to the editor will also help. Below are email addresses of council. Sincerely, 1 Phyllis Phyllis J. Bronson, Ph.D. E. phyllisbronsonphd(cr�me.com P. (970) 920 -2523 Biochemical Consulting Company Biochemical Research Foundation, Aspen Adjunct Associate Professor, University of Denver: Department of Chemistry /Biochemistry International Society for Orthomolecular Medicine Email secured by Check Point 2 Amy Guthrie From: Junee Kirk [junee.kirk @comcast.netj Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:06 AM To: Sally Spaulding Subject: Fw: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Original Message From: Marcia Corbin To: Junee Kirk Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 10:57 PM Subject: Re: Given Institute worth saving; add your name? Please add me to the list. Thanks Junee! Marcia Corbin On Jun 14, 2010, at 9:27 PM, Junee Kirk wrote: Dear Friends: Please help us save the Given Institute from demolition and sale by adding your name to the list of community members who find this site, and 20th Century building , worthy of preserving for community benefit. The site overlooks Aspen's Center for Environmental Studies(ACES), and many in Aspen feel it should continue to serve the public use for meetings in the arts, sciences, cultural events, and non profit use. It was designed by 20th. Century Harry Weese in the "Modernist" style advocated by Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke. It has served the public for almost forty years. As more and more of Aspen's history is demolished , Aspen is rapidly losing its character and charm. This site provides office space for the Aspen Global Change Insitute, and could serve as a valuable needed public resource center for the arts /cultural, scientific, and other non - profit uses and events. Please add your name to the list ( by return email) and please email all your own comments to Council if you are strongly in favor of the City working to save this beautiful historic site. Writing letters to the editor will also help. Please email Sally Spaulding sally.spauldin 7a ci.aspen.co.us for yourl comments to Council so they can be made of the public record. Also are email addresses of individual council members are below. Thank your for your support. Mayor Mick: mickAsopris.net Torre: hitorreaaol.com Steve Skadron skadron(cilcomcast.net Derek Johson diohnson(a aspensnowmass.com Dwayne Romero dwavne.romerolaci.aspen.co.us Email secured by Check Point t Printable Page 1 of 1 Su Lum: Slumming On the Endangered List: The Given Institute SU LUM THE ASPEN TIMES " ASPEN, CO COLORADO, Here we go again, with another nonprofit slithering around our zoning codes to transmogrify itself as free market property. The Silver Lining Ranch is on the cusp of doing this with the land donated by Fabi Benedict, who would probably rise up and curse the perpetrators if she could. I hope she can. Now the University of Colorado School of Medicine is putting The Given Institute on the chopping block. The Given is one of Aspen's best buildings, in a gorgeous setting donated by Elizabeth Paepcke. If this goes through I don't think well be seeing many donations in the future. Here's how this one works. CU, being an educational institution, is exempt from our zoning laws, meaning they can scrape or enlarge at will. Comes a buyer ( "unidentified," of course) who is smart enough to know that, as the new owner, he will be subject to reviews and approvals so he stipulates that the entire complex must be scraped. Isn't that clever? The real irony will be if the buyers are the ones we think they are. The University of Colorado appears to be making a serious attempt to come across as the good guys. "I understand the sentiment and I feel badly (sic)," said Dean Richard Krugman. CU has agreed to the 90 -day negotiation period with the city, though it doesn't have to, and they have already said that expansion or refurbishing won't work for them so good luck with that. They have also promised not to scrape the buildings until the money is in hand — whoopie. You'll get the chance to speak out on this at the Historic Preservation Commission meeting on July 14, but its never too soon to start the agitation against a demolition project of this magnitude. Will The Aspen Institute be next? Is nothing sacred but the second home? The first step may already have been taken, but I haven't heard about it. The first step is to discover and reveal the original agreement between Elizabeth Paepcke and the University of Colorado. If there were any strings attached we could fight it on those grounds: You may not have to follow our codes, but you are honor -bound to follow your agreement with Ms. Paepcke. CU is already planning their good -bye party, so wed better get cracking. One reason The Given isn't making enough money to sustain itself is the lack of an adequate kitchen! Good golly, if that's the deal - breaker I think the city should be able to negotiate getting them a state -of- the -art kitchen (and a personal chef) worthy of a $20 million property that could be in demand for rental year- round. If all else fails, we can count on Fabi and Pussy to exact their revenge. Su Lum is a longtime local who is horrified. Her column appears every Wednesday in The Aspen Times. http:/ /www.aspentimes.com/apps/pbcs.clit/articte? AID =/ 20100602/ COLUMN / 100609993/ 1021 &parentprofile =1061 &template = printart http: / /www.aspentimes. com /apps /pbcs.dl l /article ?AID= /20100602 /COLUMN/ 100609993 / 1... 6/2/2010 May 26, 2010 Alan Richman Alan Richman Planning Services THE CITY OF ASPEN 201 North Mill Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Given Institute Ordinance #48 Review Dear Alan, In July 2007, Aspen City Council adopted an emergency ordinance, Ordinance #30, Series of 2007. That ordinance prohibited any exterior alterations, land use applications, or building permits affecting all non- landmarked buildings constructed at least 30 years ago, unless it was determined that no potential historic resource was negatively affected. The purpose of the Ordinance was to protect Aspen's significant architectural heritage; not only Victorians, but more modern structures as well. Ordinance #30 was in place for 5 months, during which time Council held numerous meetings to discuss the effect of the new regulations and potential amendments. In particular, Council wished to see the applicability of the Ordinance narrowed down dramatically from all properties over 30 years of age to a specific list researched by staff and found to potentially qualify for landmark designation. In December 2007, Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 was adopted to replace Ordinance #30. Ordinance #48 creates a formal list of potential historic resources in Aspen that may have historical, architectural, archaeological, engineering and cultural importance. Detrimental development or demolition actions affecting these properties will be limited while the City undertakes an evaluation of the historic preservation program. The Aspen Historic Preservation Task Force was appointed to lead that evaluation and to make recommendations to Council. Ordinance #48 is expected to ultimately be superseded by code amendments. As you indicated in your letter, the Given Institute, located at 100 West Francis Street, is identified on the List of Potential Historic Resources as part of Ordinance #48. Based on your letter dated May 25, 2010, we understand that the University wishes to begin the 90 day negotiation period prior to submitting a demolition permit. As requested, the 90 day negotiation period commences May 25, 2010. Upon submittal to the Building Department the demolition permit will be processed concurrent with the Ordinance 48 Review; however it will not be issued until the negotiation is complete. A meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission will take place on July 14, 2010. Community Development Staff will present HPC with the proposed demolition request and the significant characteristics of the Potential Historic Resource. HPC will likely ask the applicant if there are any possible incentives to prevent demolition. HPC will make a recommendation to City Council. Negotiation before City Council will take place in July and/or August. We will finalize the date with you as soon as possible. Staff will confer with City Council regarding the demolition application, the nature of the Potential Historic Resource, and the Historic Preservation Commission's assessment of the Resource. Council will likely ask if there are any measures to prevent demolition. If no agreements on the preservation of the building are met by the end of the 90 day negotiation, the demolition permit shall be released. The City greatly appreciates the willingness of the University to follow local processes and procedures. I can be reached at (970) 429 -2778 or saraa(alci.aspen.co.us with any questions or if you would like to schedule an appointment to discuss possible benefits for historic properties. Sincerely, c 4174- 44,14/144-- --- Sara Adams Senior Planner Cc: City Attorney University of Colorado Denver Office of University Counsel Campus Box 183 P.O. Box 173364 Denver, C080217 -3364 Office: 303 - 315 -6617 Fax 303 - 315 -4446 May 26, 2010 Ms. Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: GIVEN INSTITUTE PROPERTY ORDINANCE 48 REVIEW Dear Ms. Adams: The University of Colorado Board of Regents is the owner of the Given Institute property in Aspen. By letter to you dated May 25, 2010, the Board of Regents has triggered the Ordinance 48 review process for this property. The purpose of this letter is to designate Alan Richman Planning Services as our local representative for the Ordinance 48 review process. Mr. Richman is authorized to submit materials to and receive materials from the City on behalf of the Board of Regents and to represent the Board of Regents in meetings with staff and the applicable decision - making bodies. Should you have any need to contact us during the course of this review process, please do so through Alan Richman Planning Services. Please also feel free to contact me directly at the address and phone number listed above. Sincerely, Steve Zweck - Bronner Managing Senior Associate University Counsel 4 F r a ' l { t � 1 __ - 4 1 � l Downtown Campus Anschutz Medical Campus (` ' J - Denver, Colorado Aurora, Colorado 4, University of Colorado Denver Office of Unlverslty Counsel Campus Box 183 P.O. Box 173364 Denver, CO 80217.3364 Office: 303 - 315 -6617 Fax: 303- 315 -4446 May 25, 2010 Ms. Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen Conununity Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Given Institute and Property Dear Ms. Adams: By way of introduction, I am a lawyer in the Office of University Counsel for the University of Colorado. Pursuant to state statute 23 -20 -101 et seq, UC Denver is one of the campuses of the • University of Colorado and is under the control of the University of Colorado Board of Regents. CRS 23 -20 -102 provides that the members of the Board of Regents are elected by the voters of the State of Colorado. The election of the members of the Board of Regents for the University of Colorado is also outlined in Article IX, Section 12, of the Colorado Constitution. CRS 23 -20- 111 outlines the supervisory powers of the Board of Regents over all of the campuses of the University of Colorado, including UC Denver. In summary, the University of Colorado is a state entity under the supervision and control of the elected members of the Board of Regents. I I I As I believe you are aware, the Board of Regents has been the property owner of the Given Institute since the early 1970s. Since that time, the Board of Regents has maintained and operated the Given Institute as a conference center. For a variety of reasons, the University is going to sell the Given Institute. This decision was not made lightly. In anticipation of the sale, the University will be moving forward with the demolition of the structures on the property. As a state entity, the University is not legally bound by City of Aspen ordinances, zoning, etc. However, without granting jurisdiction to the City of Aspen over the Board of Regents or its property, and without waiving the sovereign authority of the Board of Regents, with respect to the demolition, the University plans to follow various City of Aspen processes and procedures. We value our relationship with the City of Aspen and its citizens and want to be good neighbors. The University will be submitting an application to the City's Building Department in the near future to demolish both Given Institute buildings and the Blue House that is also located on the property as well as their associated foundations. It is my understanding that the Given Institute 1 property has been listed as a "Potential Historic Resource" pursuant to Aspen City Council Ordinance 48, Series of 2007. It is also my understanding that the 90 -day negotiation period provided for in Ordinance 48 cannot begin until a complete demolition permit and associated w,. ` 4%,•( q i 1 , fA „ Y y F 7�f it dK , j Downtown Campus Anschutz Medical Campus ,,ryry /IV Denver, Colorado .gip 74! �/ Aurora, Colorado ' . '; ,t documents have been submitted to the City. Although we are already working on the demolition permit package and anticipate it will be submitted sometime soon, we hereby request that the Ordinance 48 process be triggered immediately and that it not be delayed until the University has submitted the complete demolition permit. We will not be requesting any incentives from the City of Aspen in lieu of obtaining the permit. In addition, we ask that once the completed demolition application is submitted that the application be processed immediately without having to wait until the Ordinance 48 process has been completed. The University will agree not to act on the demolition permit until the Ordinance 48 process is completed. I look forward to hearing from you regarding our request. Sincerely, Steve Zweck - Bronner Managing Senior Associate University Counsel SZB /md