HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20090325ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
March 25, 2009
5:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISITS: NOON -
I. Roll call
II. Approval of minutes -March 11, 2009 minutes.
IH. Public Comments
IV. Commission member comments
V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
VI. Project Monitoring:
VII. Staff comments: Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be #9)
VIH. OLD BUSINESS
A. 707 N. Third St. Substantial Amendment to Major
Development approval, Pubic Hearing (30 min.)
IX. NEW BUSINESS
A. 411 Pearl Court -Ordinance #48 negotiation (30 min.)
X. WORK SESSION
A. 28 Smuggler Grove Road (30 min.)
XI. Adjourn 7:00 p.m.
Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PIS
Staff presentation
Applicant presentation
Board questions and clarifications
Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing)
Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed
Applicant rebuttal (comments)
Motion
No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting
of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a
quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue
the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring
vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes
of the members of the commission then present and voting.
PROJECT MONITORING
Mike Hoffman 202 N. Monazch (Blue Vic)
426 E. Main (Main and Galena)
507 Gillespie (new single family home)
334 W. Hallam (Hayden Connor fence)
Paepcke Auditorium
Sazah Broughton 110 E. Sleeker
604 West Main Street
Firestation
Isis addition
308 E. Hopkins (LaCo)
222 E. Sleeker (new single family home)
214 E. Sleeker
426 East Main (Main and Galena)
Brian McNellis Fox Crossing Victorian
204 North Monazch (new single family)
332 West Main Street
510 East Hyman (Elks' deck)
Aran M„llinc 135 West Hopkins Street
Boomerang
604 West Main Street
300 South Spring Street
204 North Monazch (new house)
214 E. Sleeker Street
222 E. Sleeker (new single family home)
Deep Powder
Greenwald Pavilion
Jay Maytin Red Onion
Firestation
28 Smuggler Grove Road
707 N. Third
627 W. Main
Nora Berko 28 Smuggler Grove Road
707 N. Third
M:\city\planning\hpc project monitoring\PROJECT MONITORING.doc
3/20/2009
M:\city\planning\hpc project monitoring\PROJECT MONITORING.doc
3/20/2009
J1L A.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Saza Adams, Historic Preservation Planner
THRU: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: 707 N. Third Street- Substantial Amendment to Approved Development Order- Public
Hearing
DATE: March 25, 2009
SUMMARY: 707 North Third Street is a circa 1890 miner's cabin situated in its original location on the
corner of Gillespie Street and North Third Street in Aspen's West End neighborhood. The residence has
been altered over time including the addition of a wrap around porch and a dormer on the south elevation
that obscures the original hipped roof form. A few small scale additions were added to the north, west
and the south sides of the resource.
On May 14, 2008, HPC adopted .Resolution Number 8, Series of 2008, which granted Major
Development approval (including relocation approval and a south side yard setback variance for the
subgrade terrace.) The applicant did not provide any onsite parking in the project approved last May;
and requests a substantial amendment to the approved development order for a one story, single stall
gazage located in the southwest comer of the property.
Staff finds that the proposed garage is subordinate to the historic resource and meets the HP Design
Guidelines. Staff recommends that HPC approve the proposed substantial amendment with conditions.
APPLICANT: Carol Craig, 707 N. Third Street, Aspen, CO represented by Al Beyer Design Inc. 410
N. Mill Street, Aspen, CO.
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-09-004.
ADDRESS: 707 North Third Street, Lot 6 and %z of Lot 7, Block 100, Hallam's Addition, City of Aspen,
Colorado.
ZONING: R-6, Medium Density Residential.
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT- SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT
The HPC will review the application, the staff
hearing to determine the project's conformance
analysis report and the evidence presented at the
with the i _
Ciry of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with
conditions or continue the application to obtain
additional information necessary to make a decision to
approve or deny. (Ord No. 1-2002 § 7 (part), 2002).
Staff Response:
Form/Mass: The subject property does not have an
alleyway; access to the requested gazage is from Gillespie
Street. The applicant proposes a ten foot eight inch (10'
~r
.`~L~ -:
T"i~.,
`..,. _~
P1
P2
8") high one story, shed roof garage attached to the approved one story addition. Typically, accessory
structures on 19`h century lots are detached from the primary building; however, there is no room within
the building envelope for the gazage to be detached. Staff finds that it is more appropriate for the gazage
to be attached to the primary building as opposed to granting a setback variance for a detached structure.
It is tucked back into the rear comer of the property, which maintains the historic resource as the primary
focus. Staff finds that Guideline 8.3 is met. Staff finds that the shed roof and simple form and scale of
the single stall gazage do not overwhelm the historic resource and meet Guidelines 10.9, 11.5 and 14.18
below.
8.3 Avoid attaching a garage or carport to the primary structure.
^ Traditionally, a garage was sited as a separate structure at the rear of the lot; this pattern should be
maintained. Any proposal to attach an accessory structure is reviewed on a case by case basis.
10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building.
^ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate.
^ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs.
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property.
^ They should not overwhelm the original in scale.
14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene.
rvtatenats: -the applicant proposes horizontal wood siding and gazage doors with frosted glass on both
the north and south elevations. Staff is concerned about the frosted glass particularly on the north (street
facing) elevation. The Guidelines recommend using materials that are compatible with the historic
resource. Staff finds that the horizontal panel style of the garage door is appropriate because it breaks up
the flat plane, but the azea of glazing is our of character with the Victorian. Increasing the void to solid
ratio on the garage door may resolve this issue. Staff recommends that HP Staff and monitor review and
approve the amended gazage door design to meet Guidelines 8.4 and 10.11 below.
8.4 A garage door should be compatible with the character of the historic structure.
^ A wood clad hinged door is preferred on a historic structure.
^ If an overhead door is used, the materials should match that of the secondary structure.
^ If existing doors are hinged, they can be adapted with an automatic opener.
10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of
the primary building.
^ The new materials should be either similaz or subordinate to the original materials.
Landscape/ Hardsca~e: The applicant proposes two tracks of brick pavers for the driveway. A simple
gate entry that matches the existing wood fence (see attached photographs) is proposed. Staff finds that
the brick pavers and the proposed gate are appropriate for the property and meet Guidelines 14.17 and
14.19 below. The driveway does not detract from the historic resource and minimally impacts the
approved landscape.
14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact.
^ Plan parking areas and driveways in a manner that utilizes existing curb cuts. New curb cuts are not
permitted.
^ If an alley exists, anew driveway must be located off of it.
14.19 Use a paving material that will distinguish the driveway from the street.
^ Using a change in material, paving pattern or texture will help to differentiate the driveway from the
street.
^ Porous paving materials will also help to absorb potential water runoff typically associated with
impervious surfaces such as asphalt or concrete.
P3
Existine Shed: The applicant proposes to replace the existing garden shed roof that sits in the reaz yazd
setback. Roof replacement is considered maintenance and does not require that a setback variance is
granted for the existing condition. Any changes to the garden shed, other than work that qualifies as
regulaz maintenance will require a setback vaziance for the existing non-conforming structure.
Pazkin : A referral from the Engineering Department regazding the removal of the on-street pazking
spaces in lieu of the proposed pazking gazage and driveway is attached as Exhibit C.
DECISION MAHING OPTIONS:
The HPC may:
• approve the application,
• approve the application with conditions,
disapprove the application, or
• continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the Substantial Amendment to
Resolution #8, Series of 2008 for the house at 707 N. Third Street with the following conditions:
1. Staff and monitor will review and approve a revised gazage door design and material.
2. All approvals and conditions granted during Conceptual (Resolution 5; Series of 2008) and Final
(Resolution 8, Series of 2008) Review aze valid, with the exception of the approvals specified
herein.
3. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being
reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full boazd.
Resolution # _, Series of 2009.
Exhibits:
A. Design Guidelines
B. Approved HPC Resolutions
C. Referral from the Engineering Department regazding Pazking Requirements
D. Application
P4
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (IIPC)
APPROVING A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT FOR
THE HOUSE ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT-707 NORTH THIRD STREET, LOT
6 and'/: of LOT 7, BLOCK 100, HALLAM'S ADDITION, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF
ASPEN,COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO. _, SERIES OF 2009
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-09-004.
WHEREAS, the applicant, Carol Craig, 707 N. Third Street, Aspen, CO represented by Al
Bayer Design Inc. 410 N. Mill Street, Aspen, CO, requests a Substantial Amendment to HPC
Resolution #5, Series of 2008 and HPC Resolution #8, Series of 2008 for the property located at
707 North Third Street, Lot 6 and '/x of Lot 7, Block 100, Hallam's Addition, City of Aspen,
Colorado; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlazged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, at their regulaz meeting on April 23, 2008, the HPC considered the application,
found the application was consistent with the review standazds and the City of Aspen Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines, and approved Resolution No. 5 Series of 2008 granting
Conceptual Approval for Major Development, Relocation, and a Variance by a vote of 6 - 0; and
WHEREAS, at their regulaz meeting on May 14, 2008 the HPC considered the application,
found the application was consistent with the review standazds and the City of Aspen Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines, and approved Resolution #8 of 2008 granting Final Approval for
Major Development by a vote of 6 - 0; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070.E.2 of the Municipal Code states that "all changes to approved
plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appeazance
of the building elements as originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial
amendment; and
WHEREAS, the HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report -and the evidence
presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or
continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve
or deny. (Ord. No. 1-2002 § 7 (part), 2002); and
WHEREAS, Saza Adams, in her staff report dated March 25, 2009, performed an analysis of the
application based on the standards, found that the review standazds and the "City of Aspen
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines were met, and recommended approval; and
P5
WHEREAS, at their regulaz meeting on Maactrh n5~~00 onsistent with thesreview standazdssand
considered the application, found the app ~ roved the a lication by a vote
"City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and app PP
of to
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
Resolu font #8 PSenes ofo2008 forsthetlhouse oca ed att707RN.1Third Strew with the followang
conditions:
1. Staff and monitor will review and approve a revised gazage door design and material.
2. All approvals and conditions granted during Conceptual (Resolution 5, Series of 2008)
and Final (Resolution 8 Series of 2008) Reviews aze valid, with the exception of the
approvals specified herein. roved without first being
3. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as app
reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full boazd.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on-the 25~h day of March,
2009.
Michael Hoffman, Chairman
Approved as to Form:
Jim True, City Attorney
ATTEST:
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
P6
Exhibit A: Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines for 707 North Third Street, Substantial
Amendment.
8.3 Avoid attaching a garage or carport to the primary structure.
^ Traditionally, a gazage was sited as a sepazate structure at the reaz of the lot; this pattern should be
maintained. Any proposal to attach an accessory structure is reviewed on a case by case basis.
8.4 A garage door should be compatible with the character of the historic structure.
^ A wood clad hinged door is preferred on a historic structure.
^ h` an overhead door is used, the materials should match that of the secondary structure.
^ h` existing doors are hinged, they can be adapted with an automatic opener.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained.
^ Anew addition that creates an appeazance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary
building is inappropriate.
^ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is
inappropriate.
^ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate vaziation of the primary building's historic style should
be avoided.
^ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its ow n time.
^ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually
compatible with these earlier features.
^ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a
differentiation between historic, and more current styles aze all techniques that may be considered to
help define a change from old to new construction.
10.6 Design au addition to be compatible in size and-scale with the main building.
^ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred.
10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual
impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain
prominent.
^ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate.
^ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the
exterior mass of a building.
^ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to
remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended.
10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building.
^ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs aze appropriate.
^ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs.
10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of
the primary building.
^ The new materials should be either similaz or subordinate to the original materials.
11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property.
^ They should not overwhelm the original in scale.
P7
11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those. seen traditionally in the oof forms.
^ Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs aze appropriate for primary
^ Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context.
^ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similaz to those seen traditionally in the context.
^ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street aze
discouraged. The include geodesic domes and A-frames.
11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally.
^ Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective fmish:
11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale.
^ Materials that appear similaz in scale and fmish to those used historically on the site aze encouraged.
^ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged.
11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property.
^ These include windows, doors and porches.
^ Overall, details should be modest in chazacter.
11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
^ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings.
^ Highly complex and.ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history aze
especially discouraged on historic sites.
14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact.
^ Plan pazking areas and driveways in a manner that utilizes existing curb cuts. New curb cuts aze not
permitted.
^ If an alley exists, anew driveway must be located off of it.
14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene.
14.19 Use a paving material that will distinguish the driveway from the street.
^ Using a change in material, paving pattern or texture will help to differentiate the driveway from the
street.
^ Porous paving materials will also help to absorb potential water runoff typically associated wi
impervious surfaces such as asphalt or concrete.
14.20 Off-street driveways should be removed, if feasible.
^ Non-historic pazking areas accessed from the street should be removed if pazking can be placed on
the alley.
14.21 For existing parking areas that cannot be removed, provide tracks to a parking area rather
than paving an entire driveway.
^ Using minimally paved tracks will reduce the driveway's visual impact.
^ Consider using a porous paving material to reduce the driveway's visual impact.
^ Also consider using modulaz paving materials for these tracks to provide visual interest along the
street.
P8
. __ _ _ .____~~IT S
RECEPTION#: 549817, 06!02!2008 at •
11:35:42 AM,
t of a, R 527.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION
Janice K. Yos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN ffiSTORiC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL),
RELOCATION, AND A VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 707
NORTH THIRD STREET, LOT 6 and Ys of LOT 7, BLOCK 100, HALLAM'S
ADDITION, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO, S, SERIES OF 2008
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-09-004.
WHEREAS, the applicant, Carol Craig, 707 N. Third Street, Aspen, CO represented by AI
Bayer Design Inc. 410 N. Mill Street, Aspen, CO, requests Major Development (Conceptual),
Relocation, and a Variance for the property located at 707 North Third Street, Lot 6 and''/x of Lot
7, Block 100, Hallam's Addition, City of Aspen, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired,, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application,
a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a. hearing to determine the project's
conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelices per Section
26.4] 5.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC
may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain
additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHEREAS, for approval of relocation, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis
report and the evidence presented at a heating to detenztine, Per Section 26.415.090.0 of the
Municipal Code, it must be demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following
criteria:
1. It is considered anon-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation
will not affect the character of the historic district; or
2, It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on
which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the
historic district or propeRy; or
3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or
4, The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method
given the character ahd integrity of the building, structure or object and its move
will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was
originally located or dvninish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships
of adjacent designated properties; and
P9
1. It has been detemtined that the building, structure or object is capable of
withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and
2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and
3 An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair
and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the
necessary financial security.
WHEREAS, for approval of setback variances, the HPC must reviews tionp26.415.110.C of
analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per
the Municipal Code, that the setback variance:
a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district;
and/or
b. Enhances or mitigates an advers~l djoining designated hi~oric p operiy ot~historic
character of the historic property,
district; and
WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report dated Apri123, 2008, performed an analysis of the
application based on the standards, found that the review standards and the "Cityro ~As~m
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines have been met, and recommended app
conditions; end
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on March 12, 2008, continued to Apricdon Owes
the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the app
consistent with the review standards and ` Ctty of Aspen Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines" and approved the application by a vote of 6 to 0.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby recommends approval for Major Development (Conceptual), Relocation, and a
Variance for the property located at 707 North Third Street, Lot 6 and /~ of Lot 7, Block 100,
Hallam's Addition, City of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions;
1. Relocation is granted for the historic home. N,h~ three feet (3') is
2. A setback variance for the south sideyard setback of two feet (2'),
provided and five feet (5') is required, as illus ~ C~linoEf~ We$t elevation roof fortes, for
3. The applicant will provide line drawings, spec Y
approval during Final Review.
4. A structural report demonstrating that the building can be moved and/or information
about how the house will be stabilized from provide°nformation as to whether or not
building permit application. The app '
the existing floorv~ ctw~ ~a on~~n~ and the pro's and con's of the decision for
review and appro Y
P10
5. A bond or letter of credit in the amount of $30,000 to insure the safe relocation of the
structure must be submitted with the building permit application.
6. A relocation plan detailing how and where the building will be stored and protected
during construction must be submitted with the building permit application.
7. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one
(1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an
application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the
Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole
discretion and for good cause shown, grant aone-time extension of the expiration date for
a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written
request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at ita regular meeting on the 23ro day of April, 2008.
Approved as to Form:
amen R True, Special Counsel
Approved as to couteot:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Sara Broughton, Vice-Chair
ATTEST:
~~ ~'1~-~~~!
Kathy Stri Wand, Chief Deputy Clerk
_. siwiwrA
B11
I
~,
~~
~m
°Z
°v
' North Thira strew
.. s- a ~llflfr~Ei g;~
8 ~ `j DsF ^P F~t pt;l~ So
[~ i ~ !i ~i SB r
P12
RECEPTIONK: 549816, 06/0212008 at
11:35:41 AM,
t of d, R 121.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION
Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FIIYAL) FOR THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 707 NORTH THIRD STREET, LOT 6 and Y: of LOT 7,
BLOCK 100, HALLAM'S ADDITION, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
COLORADO
RESOLUTION N0.8, SERIES OF 2008
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-09-004.
WHEREAS, the applicant, Carol Craig, 707 N. Third Street, Aspen, CO represented by Al
Bayer Design Inc. 410 N. Mill Street, Aspen, CO, requests Major Development (Final) for the
property located at 707 North Third Street, Lot 6 and'/: of Lot 7, Block 100, Hallam's Addition,
City of Aspen, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, The property is listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic I.andmazk Sites and
Structures;" and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff
analysis report and the evidence presented at a heazing to determine the project's conformance
with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.4.of
the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove,
approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report dated May 14, 2008 performed an analysis of the
application based on the standards, and recommended that the project be approved with
conditions; and
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 14, 2008, the Historic Preservation
Commission found the application was consistent with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation
Design Guidelines" and other applicable sections of the Municipal Code and approved Resolution
No.7, Series of 2008, by a (6 - 0) vote, a Certificate of Appropriateness for an addition to the
historic home, Relocation and Setback variances located on the property at 707 North Third Street,
Lot 6 and %: of Lot 7, Block ] 00, Hallam's Addition, City of Aspen, Colorado; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby grants approval for Major Development (Final) with the following conditions:
1. The style and color of the retaining wall Proposed for the sunken terrace will be approved
by Staff and monitor prior to purchase and installation. A mock up of the color and style
will be provided the field prior to approva~•
2. The color and materials of the roofs will be approved by Staff and monitor prior to
purchase and installation. ved b Staff and monitor.
3, The front entry door on the front porch will be appro Y
4. Existing foundation stone will be salvaged for use on the historic h ro ~ by Staff, and
new foundation material for the additions will be reviewed and app
monitor. roved by Staff and monitor. A profile
5. The foundation color, style and height will be app
of the foundation in relation to the wall flame will be submitted t Staff and moni~V~ r
approval. A mock up of the color and style will be provided the fii 1~ddpdetails m the field.
6. Staff and monitor will review and approve the removal of gingerb
7. Any information indicating historic locations of windows or doors discovered during
construction will be reported t HPC staff and monitor for review. 'roved
8. lnformation on all venting locations and meter ] a by staff and morritor when the
drawings shall be provided for review and appro
information is available.
9. The applicant shall document, using Photographs and drawings, all historic elements prior
to restoration and relocation of the building.
10. A construction plan with detailed Phli ation fosrapproval by HPC Staff. 1The Kist ric
submitted with the building permit app
home.shall be secured, stabilized and Pro haste f Bevel pmt ction, and rehabilitation of
the historic home shall be in the primary p
11. A structural report .demonstrating that the building can be moved and/or information
about how the house will be stabilized ~ ~ st provide information as to whether~or not
building permit application. The aPP
the existing floor structure will be maintained and the pro's and con's of the decision for
review and approval by staff and monitor.
l2. A bond or letter of credit in the amount of $ x,000 tolimaur IIthe safe relocation of the
structure must be submitted with the building p PP
13. A relocation plan detailing how and where the building will be stored and protected
during construction must be submitted with the building permit application.
14. Thete shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being
reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitr, or the full boazd.
15. The conditions of approval, both Conceptual anndnFtmal HP i and all other prirents madPe for
be printed on the cover sheet of the building p
the purpose of construction.
16. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC
resolution applicable t this project application indicating that all condhons of o
HPC staff as part of the building p
approval aze known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer
prior to applying for the building permit.
P14
17. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty
license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit.
18. HPC recommends to the Engineering and Parks Departments that the on-street pazking
spaces are reduced to two head in spaces with one of the spaces meeting Code
dimensional requirements for a handicapped space. HPC recommends that the existing
gravel be replaced with sod and the two spaces that aze maintained shall have gravel.
HPC recommends against curb and gutter.
19. The applicant is required to submit a list of the mailing labels with the notarized affidavit
for proof of public notice by Spm on May 15, 2008.
20. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute asite-specific development plan
vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order.
However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen,(14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews
necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City
Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public
of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property
right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific
development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of
three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code.of the City of Aspen and Title 24,
Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described
property: 707 R'orth Third Street
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent
reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations
and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are
not inconsistent with this approval.
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and
judicial review; the period of time permitted bylaw for the exercise of such rights
shall not begin to run uritil the date of publication of the notice of final
development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of
referendum shall be limited as set forth. in the Colorado Constitution and the
Aspen Home Rule Charter.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 14th day of May 2008.
Approved as to Form:
ames R True, Special Counsel
Approved as to content:
HISTORIC PRESER ATION
G / ~ ,ei2i~
ATTEST:
~ o
thy Stri land, Chief Deputy Clerk
P16
Sara Adams
Page 1 of 1
~~~
From: Adam Trzcinski
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 2:04 PM
To: Sara Adams
Cc: Amy Guthrie; Tricia Aragon
Subject: 707 N 3rd.
All,
Access to 707 N. 3b will need to conform to the current code. This means that off-street parking in the right-of-
way will not be permitted. If a garage for this property is proposed then a driveway not exceeding 12' in width will
be used to access it. If a garage is not sought, then a single parking space, on private property, and accessed by
a 12' drive will be required. In any case, off-street parking in the right of way shall not be permitted and the owner
will need to restore portions of the rightof-way previously used for parking into a condition acceptable to City
staff.
Regards,
Adam
Engineering
~C2783
P17
Yz
rc
° ~aa.~~5 7~!U1 47~oN
~
ry
p
S
rUd
r Z w
dJ W z
r10®
- ----- - .
'
~
, ~ i
i
~
`y ~
,,, _ _ Sun ua3aoa3
i
~ ~~
/
r
,_
~~m ~ hp.w~
_
l ~
~ rovei3
~
,
__
___ LL_________~_______~
_______________
~ ',E
n
JZ i tll .m..v. x~ i
~- L-~
i ~
~ o
L ~ -l
L n ~ 1 s
,, , l 1
~
~
;
t ~= dooa lVl~ ~
a J
w0 ^^^ y ~ K
0 0 e ' ~ f
n n I
wi
~,
LL
~ ~ ~ I =
~ ~ c ~ 1'LL CP LI _..1___ 0
m ; ~
~ i ~ Q
Q i >z ~ ~ J
7 ~
~ O
FLi O
~_
Q ~Y
~ ~~
9V9135
9
y
tJ LL_
`
-
°' Q N
N J
F f- Q
Ll'Cl Ll'Ll N IU
o 1
rc
i
~~ Ll'L/L l/L l
e13 '
z l~sroro ,S
.~ ~~ ~ ye __ ____ ~ ~ __
w
D
_
Yx
~
w
~ p m
N o
K
p
w<
0~
aw
Oz
KU
aQ
~'~' $
A
f3
.~
4
~y• • ~ ~iP~l•
~,a ;' j:
p ~!., .
~I' ,'
.'~
_ ~
^Y
y*}'
Ip
p
T_
CEG{0
Ll
m
W
0
D
~~ P 19
a.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Saza Adams, Historic Preservation Planner
THRU: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: 411 Pearl Court, Ordinance #48 negotiation process
DATE: March 25, 2009
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-landmazked 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
azchitectural 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 HP
Task Force.
411 Peazl Court 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.
P20
Jim Curtis, the property owners of 411 Peazl Court, submitted a building permit for
exterior changes. Staff reviewed the proposal and determined that the work was
detrimental to the potentially historic architectural chazacter. Mr. Curtis is a local land
planner and understands the historic designation process, benefits and incentives
available. He prefers to proceed with obtaining a building permit (option C above),
rather than negotiate with the City at this time.
Within the 90 day negotiation period, meetings are scheduled with the Historic
Preservation Comrission and the City Council regarding the proposed changes and the
nature of the Potential Historic Resource. HPC review is not a public heazing, the
acceptance of comments from the public or property owners are at the discretion of the
Commission. The Commission is asked to make a recommendation to City Council
regarding Council extending benefits to the owner to preserve the property without
inappropriate alterations. City Council will meet on April 13, 2009 at Spm in Aspen City
Hall.
APPLICANT: Jim Curtis, 411 Pearl Court, Aspen, CO 81611
PARCEL ID: 2735.121.10.002.
ADDRESS: 411 Peazl Court, Block 101, Lots 7 and 8, Hallam's Addition to the City of
Aspen, Colorado.
ZONING: R-6, Medium Density Residential.
2
DICUSSION: 411 Pearl Court was built in 1963 for Justin Wolfson, a doctor who lived
in New Mexico and wanted a vacation home in Aspen. It is a Pan Abode log kit house
located on Pearl Court between Third and Fourth Streets. Manufactured log kit homes
gained popularity in Post- War Aspen because they were cheap quickly constructed
buildings that were typically used as vacation homes. Manufactured "log" cabins were
indicative of American's romanticized image of the Wild West that was fueled by series
like the Lone Ranger (1933 - 1954) and Davy Crockett (1955.) Exhibit D outlines
national context for the Rustic Style. Examples of Pan Abode homes built in Aspen in
the 1950' and 60's are shown below.
3
P21
P22
There aze only ten (10) Pan Abode/manufactured log homes left in Aspen and the
majority of them have additions. Two (2) of the ten (10) are designated landmarks and
the remaining eight (8) are unprotected, including 411 Peazl Court. A collage of the
unprotected Pan Abodes is attached as Exhibit C.
Building permit records indicate that there were a few minor alterations in 1998 that
include window replacements on the east and north elevations. Gazage doors were
added. Overall, the form seems to be unaltered. The context of 411 Peazl Court has
changed over time; however, 615 North Third Street (directly to the east) is also a Pan
Abode home.
As built drawings aze attached to this packet, as is Staff's integrity assessment. We find
that the house merits 79 out of 100 points, which exceeds the threshold for designation
(75 points for Post War buildings).
PROPOSED CHANGES:
Staff finds that the following proposed changes are not minimally intrusive or reversible
and will adversely impact the character defining features of this architectural style:
1. The proposal to replace the original window located on the primary fagade (north
elevation) with a style uncharacteristic of a Pan Abode is not minimally intrusive.
2. The vertical board and batten veneer proposed for the residence will obscure the
chazacteristic Pan Abode logs and is not minimally intrusive.
DECISION MAHING OPTIONS:
• The HPC is asked to make recommendations to the Aspen City Council
regarding the nature and value of the Potential Historic Resource and the
proposed changes.
Exhibits:
A.) Proposed drawings
B.) Building permit information
C.) Pan Abode collage
D.) National Context for Rustic Style Timeline
E.) Rustic context paper
F.) Criteria for designation
G.) Integrity Assessment Sheet
4
P23
__
A RECOMMENDATION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION
COMMISSION (HPC) REGARDING NEGOTIATIONS FOR LANDMARK
DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 411 PEARL COURT, BLOCK
101, LOTS 7 AND 8, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE N0.48, SERIES OF 2007
RESOLUTION NO. _, SERIES OF 2009
PARCEL ID: 2735.121.10.002.
WHEREAS, Jim Curtis, 411 Peazl Court, Aspen, CO 81611, have applied for a building permit
to alter the exterior of the building that will destroy character defining features on the house they
own located at 411 Peazl Court, Block 101, Lots 7 and 8, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado.
Under the provisions of Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, Mr. Curtis subsequently consented to a
ninety day review and negotiation of potential historic significance of the subject house; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025 (e) of the Municipal Code states that "the Community
Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public
meeting, regazding 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 attended the meeting; and
WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report dated Mazch 25, 2009, performed an analysis of the
building as a potential local historic landmazk; and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on Mazeh 25, 2009, the Historic Preservation Commission
considered the application and approved a motion to recommend Council does not pursue
negotiations for landmazk designation by a vote of _ to _.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
HPC recommends City Council does not negotiate with the owner of 411 Peazl Court, Block 101,
Lots 7 and 8, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, to seek landmazk designation of the
property.
(signatures on following page]
411 Peazl Court
Ordinance #48 Negotiation Review
Page 1 of 2
P24
__
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 25th day of March
2009.
Michael Hoffman, Chair
Approved as to Form:
Jim True, Special Counsel
ATTEST:
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
411 Peazl Court
Ordinance #48 Negotiation Review
Page 2 of 2
m^0~~......... Date Filed.....~~~`~ ........................P..;.
Estimated Cost =......1~' .....Q...
~/
Building Fee ~......... ~....'.....~r.......... ~ /~/
APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT
TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, PITSIN COUNTY, COLORADO
Permission is hereby requested to perform and do the work, repaus construction teration or dev pmeat described as
Location by Street No. and Lot and Blo No J O f ~ G 6
Zonin¢ Classification ~ ~~ ~ ~ "' Sub Div ~/~~
f
Distance from finished grade to bottom of footing f ~ ~`~
Size of footing ~ ~ f ~ Thickness and T pe of Fovn atioa Wall=
Size and Type of 1st story wall ~ i1 X ~ 11 R'4RS ~
Size and Type of 2nd story wall f~c
Style and pitch of mot'
Joists, floor supportts andrrafters:~(Giw~e ~siz~eypdistan a apart, and ma'teials:) ( ^ 1 (1
First Floor Lj(x W Il r "° e"„~t^' ~^'eJP- CT^'d \lL \~/°_-ml- p1h.,.~CQnr
Second Floor ZP K 11
Rafter `~t:Id`~ S
~ qj t t LwV ~f' ~ ~~ p ~~~~
Floor support CA.t-aF~C t ''
Roof Materi l~~a ~ 1 rz1h.+~
Additional particulars and remarks: (If above data is inapplicable, describe in detail here the work or construction contemplated.)
Draw plot plan oa reverse side. '
Thu appGcauov u made with the specific vvdentavdivg thar fny Permit issued is ovbt'~ect to avepemiov or rt ourion for 5ilurt m comply ~irb the terms avd mnditiom of
the Uniform Buddrvg Code. the Zomvg rcgu4UOV and all other condmov t nyov which eud Yermtt u ueved; or Ftv v-devutiov from the rums of the applinvov m the ~
lave of Colorado. .$'~ (' +l
Sn ", ................
Dated and si ed this ..................................::........day of........ ..:.......'~`.. ............~.............., 19..1..?.. :~.
tc .k ...................~...(~~t..............~ ~} 4 . ........:......................
\1\A A e .\\ A rr~Lf'Sd~~~~~ ~ (APPlicant)
BUILDING PERMIT
The above and foregoing application for a Building Permit is hereby approved, subject to compliance with the following conditions:
~/c cY-~- ~1 ~M b iiv MusST 1°t L~~/~sc.,~~~•sed '$ RSen-~ .
~ft 1rS c T Pfa u~ L`'' ~~` ~~-'o~/_ t f S u I~ M ~ % ~ P/e ~ /~/.o.rl'
... .
Dated this.........../...~"~W ........day of.....~` .......... .. ....................... ... 19._.1~..~~
_ ...................!. ..~...~4o~fro.~~,~.,~~...,.......
~~~~~Bvilding Inspector.
BUILDING PERMIT REJ TE
The above and foregoing application for a Building Permit is hereby denied and rejected for the following reasons:
.3 Dated this ...............:............................day of.......
......., 19..........
....................................................................................................
Bvildin~ Inspector.
P26
l~
FEo..-Aft
Date- ~~~ ! ~~
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
County of Pitkin
BUILDING
Extended to - ~ ~-
by_ 7
$.F.
N° ...184
PERMIT
~ Y~~"'
is Permif expires from
date of issuance unless extended otherwise and
~ grants permission only for the work indicated below.
Permission is hereby granted ~~~ 'T' ~~"~~ ~ ~89E~II ~ ~~
as ~~ ~~ t^ bl'8'Rtr i ~++sfAlP ~83b~.o8 ~ ~1"SretA 6t.Yfl4~83'ib ~01" Q#!!)
u.9 8 93nR18+~~i,Y R@~idAlxrB
on Lot ~~ Block ~d~ Addition He776n1 Zon= ~"~~ ~ ~~
Fire Dist ~ ~ Occupancy ~ Address ~~~ ~~~ ~~
Type of Const ~'~ Y~li ~9i-V ~' & t>xLarioT 3P OesT81~-lOg w813.a w F9~i AB~DS
Intended Use end Purposes ~$ F9ffi~:P s _
No. of Living Unit ~ No. of Room ~ "~' No. of Baths ~ ~3
Size Haight #+'~t Width ~0~ Len th ~~ S Ft, f6~8
Basement ~~ Garage Fence
Setbacks N-~,.~- 5-.~f W K# E ,~_ R.O.W. Pa~-~3 ~'+"~`-
Architect ~~ ~ ~ ~`$ ~~~7~t"*' Addres
tab
'~~ ~tlt~E s4 thing maiat ire by
~« i+'~ ~!it9~^+ 4F piBRS ~ 8ni~it ~~ Pik
pWrrt:~
•• ~'lgnsn suivia;a
APPLY FOR CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY'BEFORE OCCUPYING'~ST~IUCT~IRE:
CALL FOR INSPECTIONS AS REQUIRED:
For all work done under this permit the pernittee accepts full rasponsibilit,~for compliance wi+h the Uniform Building Code ~
and all other County Zoning Resolutions. (~ /~ _ ("~ (~ ~ ~
Signed ""'•-'7C`'~Y/ ~ yr .v. r-•.
A6FNT, OWNER OR CONTRACTOR
N
0
~-
C
L
C
C f0
O N
C
O
~
.
C .
~. -
V
~/ ~ ~ j
Y O ra ~
~ ~ v ~ i
~ N O ,.. O N
~ ~
° -o v
v -p
c a
01 a
a
w ~
~ .o
J ¢ ,~. ~
_
4:
~ ~
V- ~ '6 f0 f0 C _C
~ ~
~ ~
V O ro j ~
~ d
E v
.v.
o Y
c
ro
N v v
m ~ v O _O
O
~ v
~ C ~ - ~ ~ vVi v ¢ T -6 C 'a
¢~ C O
~ 'Q
r ~ v
'
~ 7 C
O ~ 0
N ~ ro
~' ~v
4i
O ro
'O C C -Q J~ i Q C .,~ C O
~ c c U~ = 3 c o c a
v c
~ -fl
O ~ N
> ~
¢ > ~
¢¢ Q ~' v
v v ~~
v vl
~
~~ ~
3 v
N v+ i^ v
a. v
a-. ~ i
O C~ O F+
Q .~
U C C ~ ~ N Vl ~ 7 tL C V1
1 Y C _C > ~ 01 nJ ~ -Q
V LL _ ~ ~ i i`9 ro ~ N
=
ui ?~
~ ~
w ~
~ d
a ~ _
~ ~
Z
O O Q~ ~ O O O O M ~- ~O ~' O ~.n
N ~- O N M M O ~- V' P N
•- N ~ N M N ~O I~ ~ V N L7 ~ l0
. o~- ~~ m a
~- N M 7 i/1 ~O I~ W ~ a- r- ,- .- r-
1 `'
-1
~27
P28
z
0
z
a
r
n
0
z
m
X
T
Q
.TJ
7]
C
N
n
r
m
D•
ASPEN'S 20TH CENTURY ARCHITECTURE:
RUSTIC STYLE BUILDINGS
~29
The Rustic Style of architecture was symbolic of early 20`~ century attitudes that embraced
not only the mythology of the "hardy outdoor life of American pioneers" ~ in the western United
States, but also, to an extent, the larger dream of Manifest Destiny. There was embedded
within the style a desire to live up to the spirit of adventure and rugged determinism of those
who had ventured West.
Though heavily steeped in western legend, the Rustic Style's roots actually lay in the
simple pioneer cabin, and in the vacation homes of the Adirondack Mountains which were built
in the late 1800's. As early as 1916, however, with the founding of the National Park Service,
the style became a cornerstone of the NPS's belief that "buildings should blend in with their
natural surroundings" 2 and that "natural settings could influence architectures3 The majority of
entryways, information centers, and guest lodges that were built in the Pazks throughout the
country in the first decades of the 20a' century were log and stone buildings constructed in what
came to be known as the "National Parks Service Rustic" style. "The high point in the
development of this `rustic' design ethic occurred in the late twenties and spread throughout the
nation during the work-relief programs of the Depression."4
Hand-in-hand with the growth of the National
Parks Service was the development of resort areas
throughout the Rocky Mountain States, and Rustic
Style buildings, which ranged in size from small
cabins to substantial lodges, were constructed in
Colorado starting in 1905.5 Early examples of the
buildings can be found in burgeoning tourism and
vacation spots such as Grand Lake, Thomasville,
Woodland and Estes Parks. Rustic style
"represented an early 20u' century movement in
American architecture It was picturesque,
romantic azchitecture that recalled the American
past.„6
In Aspen, Colorado, Rustic Style cabins used as
lodges and residences, began to be built in the
1930's, though the tourism industry was still in its
infancy. The Waterman Cabins, built in 1.937, and
once located at the corner of 7u' and Hallam Streets,
have since been demolished, but were one of
Aspen's first group of small tourist cottages. The
Swiss Chalets (now L'Auberge, and suffering from
~ Cazley, Rachel, "Cabin Fever: Rustic Style Comes Home"
Z Rocky Mountain National Park, Home Page, Historic Buildings
' Kaiser, Harvey H., Landmarks in the Landscape, 17
° Harrison, Laura Soulliere, Architecture in the Parks, National Historic Landmark Theme Study, 1
s Colorado Historical Society Home Page
a Throop, E. Gail, "Rustic Architecture: Period Design in the Columbia River Gorge"
1
Grand Lake Lodge, built in 1925
Sumers Lodge, a vacation home in Glenwood
Springs, built in /935
P30
the "chalet" misnomer- as they are, indeed, in the rustic style) are located at 435 W. Main
Street, and were built during roughly the same period. Prescient, and perhaps with a nod to the
automobile's growing influence in American society, a motor court configuration at the Chalets
allowed guests to drive right up to the individual units. Single family residences in Aspen
employed the Rustic Style as well.
~.
300 W Main Street, residence built in
1944.
Swiss Chalets, 435 W. Main Street, built circa
/ 9 i0'.c
Also in the 1930's, a WPA sponsored structure that was used as
a bell tower was constructed at the present location of the town fire
station on East Hopkins Avenue. It fell under the supervision of
the National Park Service, who managed the WPA program and the
design of all its projects. The Park Service's architectural
philosophy was summarized at the time in a volume entitled "Pazk
and Recreation Structures,"which stated that,
"Successfully handled, (rustic) is a style which, through the
use of native materials in proper scale, and through the
avoidance of rigid, straight lines, and oversophistication,
gives the feeling of having been executed by pioneer
craftsmen with limited hand tools. It thus achieves sympathy
with natural surroundings and with the past."~
its relocation ro Paepcke After the Second World War, looking to the past- and in
Parkin 195x. Ir was particular, the American past- was the result of a nation turning
reconstructed in 1990. inwazds, and away from foreign battlefields. The romance and
heightened idealization of the West, and the appeal of the rugged individualist's lifestyle, was
evidenced by the popularity of television shows like "The Lone Ranger" and "Davy Crockett",
and further, by the proliferation of Western movies (many of which were produced as a result
of the McCarthy Era effect on post-waz Hollywood productions). The American public
acculturized the West's ideals, and the Rustic Style even found its way into children's toys like
"Lincoln Logs."
WPA Bell tower, built in the
1930's and shown here after
~ Harrison, 8
2
~~ °-
P31
The American landscape was transforrned in the 1940's. The tmpazalleled growth and
prosperity of the United States (spurred on in part by the GI Bill), and the "baby boom" that
began- and didn't slow down- until the late 1960's, brought with it success, comfort, and a
blossoming middle class. Americans were enjoying greater financial freedom, along with
increased leisure time, and they were looking for adventure. They looked West.
Falling gasoline prices, the construction of cross-country highway systems, and a young,
flourishing automotive industry (by-products of the post-waz economic climate), "gave greater
numbers of people the means to travel, and previously inaccessible places were more easily
reached."s Vacationing and tourism became the hallmark of the American lifestyle, and the
West held a particulaz interest for a people with newfound freedom, and the desire for
adventure. "To Americans the West is their refuge, the home of the `last best place.s9
Vacation homes, hunting lodges, dude ranches, and tourist-related facilities began to increase in
number after the Waz, many built in the Rustic Style, which was perfect for the "frontier
spirit"10 of the new American tourist.
Aspen was the ideal destination for the "new American tourist." Purple mountains majesty
aside, it had a growing reputation as a ski town- a sport that was gaining increasing
popularity. And as people ventured out west to vacation in the late 1940's and early 1950's,
they were looking for what so many had sought before them: the spirit of adventure, romance,
and ruggedness. Yet what Aspen offered, even then, was so much more. It became an
"archetype for the beginning of tourism in the post-World War II American West."tt The
effort to create a cultural and artistic haven, and yeaz-round resort town that offered "good
opportunities for combining work, play, and culture,"tZ only added to the town's uniqueness, as
a "post-waz consumer culture and the nation-wide growth of tourism, combined with the
beginning of the ski industry, meant that people no longer had to belong to an elite club or live
in a mountain town in order to ski.'>ts
Rustic Style buildings continued to be
constructed in town during this period,
including Deep Powder Lodge (circa late
1940's/early 1950's), at 410 S. Aspen
Street, and The Hickory House (initially
christened The Silver Chicken) at 735 W.
Main Street, which was built in 1950. At
the time, it was one of the few restaurants
operating in town, and the original sign,
located on the west side of the building,
reads "restaurant," and is lettered to look
like logs, harmonizing the theme of the
structure down to the last rustic detail.
s Rothman, Hal K., Devil's Bargains -Tourism in the Twentieth-Century American West, 202
s Rothman, 14
10 Carley
~~ Rothman, 207
12 Rothman , 213
13 Gilbert, Anne M., Re-Creation throu¢h Recreation: Aspen Skiing from 1870 to 1970, 46
3
Deep Powder Lodge, 410 S. Aspen Street, built circa
Inca 1940'.c/¢nrly 795o'.c
P32
There was no shortage of young male labor during the period these buildings were constructed,
and the materials were readily available locally. Small cabins could be erected during a
summer, readying them for the new American tourist seeking the "Western adventure."
Between 1940 and 1959, the number of full-time residents in Aspen increased by 1000, and
"by 1959 at least 200 part-time residents joined the year-round crowd."14 As Aspen's
amenities began to attract a lazger, more influential and wealthy group of second homeowners
(including some of Hollywood's brightest stars), the city began to transform itself into a
premiere, yeaz round resort, and many people "chose to move to or build vacation homes in
Aspen."15 For some, a second home built in the Rustic Style was a natural choice, and things
were moving fast:
"A gala opening of the lifts and reopening of the Jerome was held in January,
1947, and people poured in from all over the country. A boom was on, and every
tax title was gone at the court house. If you wanted a lot or a house in Aspen, you
could no longer step around to the county commissioners and make an offer of a
hundred dollars or so on some abandoned property. You went to a swank new
real estate office and paid through the teeth, several thousand dollazs. Aspen had
been bought up in a twinkling, and by a strange assortment of people- artists,
writers, and movie actors who wanted to get away from city life, wealthy
sportsmen who wanted a fishing and hunting lodge, mid-westerners who wanted a
summer mountain cottage, eastern couples who wanted to try their hand at
ranching, and ski cranks who wanted to start a business, any sort of business, to
be close to Aspen's slopes.'>ie
In part, as demand and mechanization quickly
began to replace the handmade in many aspects of
American life, log cabin kits that could be ordered by
catalog, delivered by train or truck, and then
assembled on site gained in popularity. The kits were
another version of mail order houses that were
populaz during the depression era, lazgely due to their
affordability. Following the lead of Seazs, Roebuck,
& Co. and Montgomery Ward (who sold hundreds of
thousands of homes during the Depression), other
companies began selling different styles of kit houses,
including Pan Abode (established in 1952), a 211 West Hopkins Street, a Pan abode built in
manufacturer that specialized in log cabins. After ~9sF
1950, Rustic Style buildings in Aspen were more commonly machine-made kit log structures
than hand-built, but they still reflected the same American West iconography. Materials in
these later buildings simulated log construction and referenced the particular visual details of
the original log structures. Examples of kit log structures built as second homes during this
period are found at 211 W. Hopkins and 765 Meadows. The kits were also used for quick-to-
build housing to fill the growing needs of the ski resort workforce, many of whom could not
14 Rothman, 223
15 Gilbert, 72
16 Bancroft, Cazolyn, Famous Asuen
4
P33
qualify for traditional mortgages, due to the part time nature of their jobs, and therefore relied
on affotdable oonsttvction methods. _ _- -
Eligibility Considerations
There aze specific physical features that a property must possess in order for it to reflect
the significance of the historic context. Typical chazacteris6cs of the Rustic Style are "log
construction, stone foundation, small paned windows, overhanging roof, stone chimney, and
battered walls."~~ To be eligible for historic designation, Aspen's examples of Rustic Style
architecture should have the following distinctive chazacteristics:
• Hand built structures that aze constructed out of locally available materials, usually
log; stone may be incorporated at the base, or in the form of a fireplace and chimney.
Later examples include machine cut logs.
• The buildings aze usually single story, with aloes-pitched gable roof.
• True log construction with overlapping log ends, coped and stacked. Logs maybe
dressed and flattened for stacking or may be in rough form. Chinking infills the
irregularities between the logs either way. Machine made buildings mimic these
details, though without the chinking.
• Window openings aze spaze and usually horizontally proportioned, wood trim is used
to fmish out the window openings.
• Building plans aze simple rectangular forms, with smaller additive elements.
• The roof springs from the log wall, and gable ends aze often infilled with standazd
framing. This may be a small triangle or a second level of living space.
• The emphasis is on hand-made materials and the details stem from the use of the
materials, otherwise the detail and decoration is minimal.
Though Pan Abode structures aze still being manufactured today, which poses a greater
challenge in determining the end date for the Rustic Style period, changes in the type of
accommodations and facilities that were desired for both tourists and homeowners began to
eviderice themselves in Aspen in the eazly 1970's. As land became more valuable, the era of
the small vacation cabin came to an end, and custom-built homes were faz more common, as
were condominiums.
Aspen's 1973 Growth Management plan, a reaction to the magnitude of change and
development that the town was experiencing, recognized the need to preserve the quality of life
that many felt Aspen was losing due to its popularity. Second homes began displacing
permanent residents, and in fact, the City passed a controversial ordinance in order to stem the
loss of resident-occupied housing. Concurrently, modest lodges were being replaced with
higher-end accomodations.
These trends were noted again in 1986, when, according to the 1993 Aspen Area
Community Plan's, it was found that the number of second homes had significantly increased,
and that the size 'of these second homes was particulazly lazge compazed to traditional
residences in the city. The shifts in Aspen's development pattern suggest that it would be
"Colorado Historical Society Home Page, Guide to Colorado Architecture
18 Aspen Area Community Plan, 1993
5
P34
appropriate to establish the end of the period of historic significance, which is a term used to
____
e e the time span during which the style gained azchitectural, historical, or geographical
importance, for simple, small scale, Rustic Style buildings as roughly 1970. With regazd to Pan
Abode structures, of which there is a relatively lazge collection remaining in town, a finding of
historic significance must go beyond the basic chazacteristics of the building as an example of a
kit house, and demonstrate a connection between a specific structure and the local story of
vacation home construction and ski industry related housing, lodging, or facilities.
P35
0
Deep Powder Lodge
The Castle Creek Cabins/Waterman Cabins, once located at 7'~' and Hallam Streets
7
Sunset Cabins, once located near 7'h and Main Streets
P36
Bibliography
Aspen Area Community Plan, 1993, Aspen, Colorado
Bancroft, Cazolyn, Famous Aspen.
Cazley, Rachel, "Cabin Fever: Rustic Style comes Home" September 1998,
www.uniauerustiaue.com/historv
Colorado Historical Society Home Page, Guide to Colorado Architecture, www.coloraohistorv-
oahn.or guides
Directory of Colorado State Register Properties, www.coloradohistorv-oahn ore/publications
Gilbert, Anne M. Re-Creation throu Recreation: As en Skiin from 1870 to 1970, 1995.
Aspen Historical Society, Aspen, Colorado
Harrison, Laura Soulliere, Architecture in the Pazks: A National Historic Landmazk Theme
Studv, National Pazk Service, Department of the Interior, November 1986
http://www.cr.nns.gov/historv/online books/harrison
Kaiser, Harvey H., Landmazks in the Landscane California: Chronicle Books, 1997.
Rocky Mountain National Pazk, Home Page, Historic Buildings
h ://www.n s. ov/romo/resources/histo /historic.html
Rothman, Hal K., Devil's Bazeains -Tourism in the Twentieth-Century American West,
Kansas: University of Kansas Press, 1998.
Throop, E. Gail, "Rustic Architecture: Period Design in the Columbia River Gorge", 1995.
CRM Volume 18, Number 5, httn://crm.cr.nns.eov/azchive/18-5/18-5-4 ndf.
s
THE V I I OF /LSI'F]J
P37
Criteria for Desienation: 26.415.030.B of the Aspen Municipal Code
B. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmazk 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 yeaz 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.
3. A property that was constructed less than thirty (30) years prior to the yeaz in
which the application for designation is being made may be considered under
Paragraph 2 above, if the application has been filed by the owner of the property at
the time of designation or, when designating an historic district, the majority of the
contributing resources in the district meet the thirty-yeaz age criterion described
above.
4. The construction date of a property shall be established by the date of issuance of
the eazliest building permit for the subject structure found in the records of the
Community Development Department. If there aze no building permit records
available, the building shall be assumed to be, in whole or in part, at least thirty (30)
yeazs old.
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.
P38
INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- RUSTIC, 411 PEARL COURT
Integrity is the ability of a properly 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 dissimilaz to its original
site.
TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5)
Staff Response: 5 points.
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 aze such that the original form
of the structure is obscured.
Staff Response: 10 points. The original plan form appeazs to be intact and
match that of the 1963 building permit on file.
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.
Staff Response: 10 points. The original roof form is unaltered.
SCALE
5 -The original scale and proportions of the building aze 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
P39
alterations.
Staff Response: 5 points. The original scale and proportions of the building
aze intact.
DOORS AND WINDOWS
10-The original door and window pattern aze intact.
8- Some of the doors and windows aze new but the original openings aze
intact.
4- More than 50% of the doors or windows have been added and/or the
original opening sizes have been altered.
0- Most of the original door and window openings have been altered.
Staff Response: 6 points. Windows on the east and north elevation aze new
but the original openings aze intact. The gazage door is new and we aze
unsure as to whether this was always a gazage or if it was living space
previously.
CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES/SPARE QUALITY OF THE
DESIGN
10-The form and features that define the Rustic style aze intact. There is an
overall sense of simplicity. Window and door openings and decorative
features are spaze.
5- There aze minor alterations to the form and features that define the Rustic
style.
0- There have been major alterations to the form and features that define the
Rustic style.
Staff Response: 8 points. Overall, the form and features of the Rustic style
aze intact. The window styles on the north and east elevations aze
unchazacteristic of the rustic style.
TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 45) = 39 points.
• SETTING Setting is the physical environment of a historic property.
5-The physical surroundings aze similaz to that found when the structure was
originally constructed.
3-There aze minor modifications to the physical surroundings.
0-The physical surroundings detract from the historic character of the building.
P40
TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) = 2 points. The neighborhood has
changed a lot since 1963, but there is another Pan Abode directly adjacent to
411 Pearl and a 1960s building a few houses down the block.
• MATERIALS Materials are the physical elements that were combined or
deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or
confguration to form a historic property.
EXTERIOR SURFACES
15-The original exterior wall materials (log, wood siding, and stone) and the
decorative trim materials are intact
10- There have been minor changes to the original combination of exterior
wall materials and the decorative trim materials, but the changes have
been made in a manner that conforms with the design guidelines.
5-There have been major changes to the original combination of exterior
wall materials and the decorative trim materials.
0- All exterior materials have been removed or replaced.
Staff Response: 10 points. The logs are intact, but there is a new wooden
gazage door.
DOORS AND WINDOWS
10-All or most of the original doors and windows units aze 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.
Staff Response: 4 points. Two of the windows were replaced with styles
that would not meet our guidelines.
TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 25) = 14 Points.
• WORKMANSHIP Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a
particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.
DETAILING AND ORNAMENTATION/HAND-BUILT CHARACTER OR
IMITATION OF HAND-BUILT CHARACTER
15-The original detailing is intact. The building is built from locally available
materials and exhibits evidence of handwork, or is attempting to do so if mass
produced.
10-There have been some alterations of loss of the original detailing or
handwork chazacter.
P41
5- Detailing is discernible such that it contributes to an understanding of its
stylistic category.
0- New detailing has been added that confuses the character of the original
structure.
0- The detailing is gone.
Staff Response: 15 points. The original detailing is intact
FINISHES & COLOR SCHEME
5- The natural finishes and color scheme that define the Rustic style are
intact
3- There have been minor alterations to the natural finishes and color scheme
that define the Rustic style.
2- There have been substantial alterations to the natural finishes and color
scheme that define the Rustic style.
Staff Response: 4 points. The home is painted brown with colorful trim. It is
unknown as to whether the exterior was originally unpainted, but the present
color scheme is consistent with the rustic style.
TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20) = 19 points.
GRAND TOTAL NUMBER OF POINTS = 79 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.
P42