Aspen preservation panel presses city redesign of Armory Hall project, votes to continue review

The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission on Wednesday pushed back on the city’s design for the Armory Hall and Connor Memorial Park redevelopment, saying key elements of the city-led proposal risk damaging the building’s historic character and directing the applicant to return with revisions. After more than two hours of presentation and discussion the Commission voted to continue the review to allow staff and the applicant time to respond.

Commissioners voiced the strongest objections to three changes: the proposed removal of a southern eave added about 1906, the addition of large new window openings on the Hopkins/park-facing elevation, and a new standalone vestibule that the applicant proposes as a primary, ADA-accessible entry from Connor Park. Jillian, the city’s historic preservation officer, told the Commission that these interventions conflict with multiple provisions of the city’s Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and recommended continuation so staff could review additional documentation and potential design alternatives.

"Staff is recommending continuation of the application to a future meeting, which would allow for staff to further review additional documents and would allow for the applicant an opportunity to answer any commissioner concerns or update designs," Jillian said during her presentation.

Several commissioners said the proposal as drawn diminishes features that the guidelines identify as character‑defining. "You've totally disregarded and been disrespectful of the history of the building," Commissioner Roger said in a strongly worded comment during discussion, calling the design "insulting" and urging the city and architect to treat the armory like other preserved landmarks in Aspen.

The applicant team — led by the Capital Asset Department with Design Workshop and CCY Architects — said the proposal aims to preserve the Galena Street entrance as the primary façade, restore and repoint masonry, make the building fully electric and add a second accessible entrance to avoid locating ADA access in a back alley. The team described the interior program as a mix of food-and-beverage vendors, a mezzanine lounge and a flexible community hall in the basement, and said mechanical equipment and hood terminations have been sited to be visually screened.

Commissioners pressed the applicants on several technical points: why multiple new bay doors are needed if a prominent vestibule exists; how kitchen hoods and rooftop mechanicals will be concealed; whether copper cladding is appropriate on both the historic roof and new additions; and how the visitor center’s massing will affect visibility from Galena and the park. Staff flagged a requested variance that would allow mechanical screening up to 7 feet 6 inches, compared with a 6‑foot maximum in code.

Facing strong, consistent critique from members and requests for more information, the Commission moved to continue the item. The motion to continue passed on a voice vote; commissioners and staff agreed the continuation will give the applicant time to prepare alternate materials and for staff to analyze any proposed changes before the Commission issues a recommendation to City Council.

The item is continued; the Commission set a continuation on the record to the May 28 meeting with the understanding additional special meeting dates may follow depending on packet turnaround and staff availability.