HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20110209 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 9, 2011
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
SITE VISITS: NONE
I. Roll call
II. Approval of minutes — January 19 and 26th
III. Public Comments
IV. Commission member comments
V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
VI. Project Monitoring:
VII. Staff comments — (15 min.)
VIII. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
(Next resolution will be #2)
I. OLD BUSINESS
A. None
II. NEW BUSINESS
A. 610 W. Hallam St. — Minor Review, Public Hearing (30
min.)
III. WORK SESSIONS:
A. 1102 Waters Ave. (30 min.)
B. Aspen Modern scoring sheets, (30 min.)
6:40 Adjourn
Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH)
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.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: 610 W. Hallam Street, Minor Development, Public Hearing
DATE: February 9, 2011
SUMMARY: 610 W. Hallam is a landmark designated Victorian era miner's cottage. The
house was significantly remodeled in 1995, with an expansion on the west and rear, and the
addition of a walk out basement. The new property owner is undertaking a remodel. Community
Development issued a "Certificate of No Negative Effect" for changes to a non - historic window
and front walkway. Staff did not approve a proposed alteration to a street - facing deck, which the
applicant would now like to pursue through HPC.
L t •
n
r
r r ti:
I t Y Fs
y l� rti,
1980 photograph
a _ af4 Y � !
y. y a Y ,
K � ] .i. T 'Y,ti tl
aPL�7fi_ -" s ;
d .
at
,
.,
Current photograph
..........................
APPLICANT: Charley Moss, represented by Greg Tankersley, McAlpine Tankersley
Architecture and John Olson, John Olson Builders.
PARCEL ID: 2735- 124 -26 -009.
ADDRESS: 610 W. Hallam Street, Lot P and Lot Q, except the west 7.5 feet of Lot P, Block 22,
City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado.
ZONING: R -6.
MINOR DEVELOPMENT
The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal
materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design
guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the
HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue,
approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. 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. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and
the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision
shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet
of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316.
Staff finding: When this miner's cottage was expanded in 1995, the HPC was interested in the
possibility of improving the livability of the below grade space in order to reduce pressure to
create a two story addition. The board approved an addition to the side of the historic resource,
with a walkout basement. Staff believes this idea had some merit and helped to preserve the
scale of the miner's cottage. However it changed the symmetry of the building, and in fact very
little of the original house was preserved. HPC's more recent design guidelines and policies
would discourage an addition so close to the front of the house, as well as the exposed basement
level.
The addition on the west side of the miner's cottage features a deck that can be accessed from the
new or old parts of the house. The deck jogs in as it approaches the historic cottage. Staff
believes this was intentionally done so that the new construction was not overly intrusive from
the street, did not contact the miner's cottage too close to the front of the house, etc.
The applicant would like to extend the deck so that it is rectangular, moving the point where the
deck railing connects to the house forward approximately 7 feet, or about 2.5 feet back from the
front facade.
Staff finds the application in conflict with all of the relevant guidelines listed in Exhibit A.
Bringing the deck forward intrudes onto the west facade of the miner's cottage and further
2
diminishes the goal of making the addition secondary to the historic building. It further
emphasizes the point that the house is now twice as wide as it was originally.
Staff recommends HPC deny the proposed deck expansion.
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 HPC deny Minor Development for a deck
expansion at 610 W. Hallam Street.
Exhibits:
Resolution # , Series of 2011
A. Relevant HPC design guidelines
B. Application
C. Public comment
3
Exhibit A: Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines for 610 W. Hallam Street,
Minor Development
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained.
❑ A new addition that creates 'an appearance 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 variation of the primary buildings 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 own 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 are all techniques that may be
considered to help define a change from old to new construction.
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.
10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure
historically important architectural features.
❑ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be
avoided.
•
4
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
DENYING MINOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR 610 W. HALLAM STREET, Lot
P AND LOT Q, EXCEPT THE WEST 7.5 FEET OF LOT P, BLOCK 22, CITY AND
TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO
RESOLUTION # , SERIES OF 2011
PARCEL ID: 2735- 124 -26 -009
WHEREAS, the applicant, Charley Moss, represented by Greg Tankersley, McAlpine
Tankersley Architecture and John Olson, John Olson Builders has requested Minor Development
review to expand a deck at 610 W. Hallam Street, Lot P and Lot Q, except the west 7.5 feet of
Lot P, Block 22, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The property was designated a historic
landmark by Ordinance #58, Series of 1994; 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 Minor 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 Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.0 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, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated February 9, 2011, performed an analysis of
the application based on the standards, found that the review standards and the "City of Aspen
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines would not be met by the proposed revisions and
recommended denial; and
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on February 9, 2011, the Historic Preservation
Commission considered the application, found the application was not consistent with the
applicable review standards and denied the application by a vote of _ to
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC denies Minor Development approval to expand a deck at 610 W. Hallam Street.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 9th day of February,
2011.
Sarah Broughton, Chair
Approved as to Form:
Jim True, Special Counsel
ATTEST:
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Appli iE t��t
JA N 21 2011 B
CITY OF ASPEN
PROJECT:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPIAENT
Name: 770 111049 /SEy /DENG9
Location: f/O kN. Masi 47 � PT f'AW# EXa lN6 7710 711N w. 7 5o
tarot LOT P . /N 'Goa- 44 /.pry 41/6 risavcvre or /f4/'t/•
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property)
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 27* - /2¢ • X1400
APPLICANT:
Name: Oil/t M
Address: /4A0 f/ WOO SS, Al Ma*
Phone #: 212. 7( . Poo Fax#: 2/2 .161. 71 E -mail: L;lh} egpflO , ur/6/ .03: 4OM
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name: a44 VIIVA.Wear
Address: 6// 601/0/ttM AMP tare 2./ HONT6/ ati ?'6/O
Phone #: net .ZZ gP' /bl Fax #: S? // E -mail: G,v. TANLr '/•
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
❑ Historic Designation ❑ Relocation (temporary, on
❑ Certificate of No Negative Effect ❑ or off -site)
❑ Certificate of Appropriateness ❑ Demolition (total
jg -Minor Historic Development demolition)
Historic Landmark Lot Split
❑ -Major Historic Development ❑
❑ - Conceptual Historic Development
❑ -Final Historic Development
- Substantial Amendment
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
A6I'6itl N /S•an/c /flpwrnt7(6Mwren J 47 Gea c.x. .1* /n#)
PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
/NTFP//R• 1i v/VATAOC4, Ejf/ gemtv,4 7' /. 006
4) R*,tr paex. A AT /a✓.
Aspen Historic Preservation
Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29, 2007
- --
-
vf101kfrke 10 1..r1 .......0.••• .1 nr,---,.,
..;;-;;;;Tkirisf stsw“itikkai , - , a
- ----- _ —
1 ciCfl ' E5
-
I t 41 i117)11tHilly
A 31S-1131[4V1 , ...., .;.•
t aVireart0f 4 3 NI d IV)14
I MA,
I
I I ; ,
i okir, , 1 •
4 0 - • m I t i 1 t ,
, a I \ , k , .
Ili I '. s 4 1"SIMMIIIIIIIIn- Mka.
'4 Ili 'l c . '. 11111. 1 1 1 , ' , 11.11111 , re 4 11171 1
i k I 4 , ' i ' 011. lal MIMS 1 SlifialTil 11.11.' ''. ' ‘-'4
,..„
•
1 1 1 I 1 I 1 i 1 ...,,IIIMM.t,
i 1 1 ' C.
1 1 t t , .loi..-,.--r--.
. ,, ...
V SiSINIM -.. -
M
- . \ 1 1 1 1 1111111n011 ' us -'e -- -s - minal=rie
1 ' 111,- -7 -t-,=-.Fan..att rfIQ
- • ii, i i M ‘ . 11111111111111111fli ':- — •-...- INS
• 1 ° .
__ Z.Z.,:
, 1 , i , S
,, "I _
., i,
I I I 1 44 , r,; ! 1 1 L '1,,...44..n....- - MISIPS - ..:
i ,i.i ; , r :sese niusalteme
00'
, ii %
,
--
e i
f t
; 111. 111111111 "taleThi 1
S Illi I \
1 ? i 1 I I' I mitt alighan mist ' - i \
t II , , . 1,.____
------, --, -
v
•
mearn ___%•-iiPiiiiiNglii•les, k %
ii.,.„
, ii
r 1
1
I 1 nsiCuali...„Lumined • 4
al t I
' ' 1 t 1 1111 .1111111111 - -
[ I ,
' - , *al I " - - ---r- • . 1.1.1.1.4 11 aw.
0
I ' t Ma ' 1111111111 i .--a-si Pi
1 - ignmetak
,
.. -
, . a
b ,
, il s .......--- ii---”planuvitis igi
. 9 1 •
4 1
... -
7 pry
/ . ,
(
• i 1 ii-,: OPINESIMN no --ti >
i i i i -, _ -
I
I .
Ate
- ___,----
1/vii t _Ls3N 0 19
° 'a8 �� w ° ° e u
• °° �•
a �Ra a N g n -
m ( o � 5 a Pt 1 N 00 �. b o
‘.
gka Pm In k, a o n i ' Y O
g � ° C. 7 g � � .. - r . g w r - . ad d
w� a- l bl
°O m W.5 2 u E' °S�wa �. a3 �
°� s a9 4
o t g § z ^ ° °° m " d S ° - ° ° ,� _ € m g _ _ Z W N W _ CC
o ° 3 � . q
°vp . �o'-m7 N ao o�
v o ^ °' i F f 5 ° 0. - o °_ ` ae ppz w � 'w O k m
S G p E F €� w `go' `b U � - -• ic F m o m �u � ZI- S rop
rim m a a•r ill o a v r�0 000 °gi o Za - 1 = 4
O ' � ( +] °` ' o &� •� 6 ¢c° u u, ,.. .. c e al � \em m u i <ZilB`; W U Is ' SO z � 0 4gs
W �O ul y ° fi g 0. 61 00 m n, � °u 0: 061:1 `. l R � ' � o gmill W L i—< r L
w J m �� 9 5m m .. `s'� -€ ,3.. ° �a S E 2> I -o < m W Nb = .
1 .° ° ° o w a m
180Ei u �- r •,1 « ° b c 0 i aa•g c 3 S m �a. - Y u Y� � � ^
n.awoR 4 • ma `3 ° 9 - °° ° a g3 $zW d'0.___<18.7.--
o 1 � $ Gz Z n � °E- : « ° s °�3 PU i a u
�I 1 1 I I � �O p ,i� p� ; Z^ m a ?5 oo ;Ili [ ' O 3 � d � M Q-N� m
° m a s y I—a 0 ' 6 � °'g.Fb m• n $ i ate- I-N In
k R4; o e < r m 'F ee G � < gg 18 N :
Z o,' 9 :9 1Fgig �b \ Oyu <
M o m 7 m ° 7 F II �. -a m ° il , o� ° � e 'dg J < 6 4..ori�Rm a ; 0; m MI Dn. w'o4E «' m. n: f . m € §; O aj
. `a ° P w ed �. - v 5 u ? SSa°° m`
X§01:90
0 ; i 1 Qm� PP 0 Yy 1 •� Il g i g + ! i
.r Nno . - u Q5 W <
C
p
�Zbl 4
k
U 4 G : 3
rn —
11
1 M1
9
U b
5
l h 0""'°m J \ b
0 0 01 mo -0.034.0,
Jn �oo °
°0 ' �a1.4 Wrs y
*Wa
1 Hna / b ' *V M oo .o t� s " � !
Qm S'T ,S 1 P y74 A➢� AY1 6
1
R ti I le
Ca
/LI j 11
Q
C.3 L o 1 ' ii 'I �` 9 I
0 b
n: 6 "„ b4 ° p o a, 8 ;' 5 i 4‘ p
SIC c_) yQ 1 I ` amt. � 1ty..g L '• I ' o b b 0
oatik
b 1 \
8
3 p y j � .� g a.
I7 \ 424
, 1 441 .4Y
r 41.
G
db 4 `1 $ .4. y / 3
NE E
3 4T 44� 1, -- j
F W
pg l 1 ft. I
id
R a bler ly . `
I
.aiii" se
. p
amrlrv4 ._ a4aums° suvslev
n
m ausew mu M tram AV 08101
ti 1
,.,, .,. E 6 3 ' U
;.�a? g
A 3 T S ZI 3 x N V 1• 3 N I d T V D W F : y •` p� 0'
g411 1
—
•
O
I
I.
i
. p l
1
i
i
Y
Win. _ Q f' 1
3 '
E
5
r
n 1`1i. A:
4 j �'
1.1 1 1 . c . ?
y yI1IIII r j ! 4 i 1 L % / � / � z ,
Illiiiiiiiii 3� ` \_) 3
• 2
I 1
inn ..1n11410.1.4 a
® r J� O O 3
1
f
4
H
•
0
I I I I I
j 'iP•)..Yis...ir f •n .p.. Yn i _
• f•'fi• ♦ YY112JZLIXDYY _ I i !
ryQ
A 3 1 S N 3 N N V 1 3 N I d 7 V a W '' ` p�
•
•
. ..
1 t el
All A •
ilin Lam" s�
'���� ilift II 1 1111111 .
',-: O I e
......
A ilirs _
4
i
, 1
,..
I ..:!.. 0
F IiF I
i 1_7111 4
_=_-_, is „______.,
,...,
114. Itita.,,:, .
..,,,,,.7...,.. ,, 4
, -!; : iii - i--4 ---- L'' ; ,
i,{iiii- P1 . ,.'
�i \II —�I
its _ — ..I
'
Llltl
Amy Guthrie
From: James Martin [jimmartin61 @gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 5:10 PM
To: Amy Guthrie
Subject: Fwd: 610 W Hallam - HPC & Deck Adjustment
Attachments: 610 W Hallam - Proposed Deck Adjustment - Sketch - 2011.01.17.jpeg
•
Dear Members of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission,
/ am the owner of the property immediately to the west of 610 West Hallam Street in Aspen, Colorado. Having reviewed the
architect's drawing of the proposed adjustment to the street facing deck al 610 Hallam Street, I am writing to inform the members cf
the Historic Preservation Commission that / have no objection lo the proposed changes, nor do I believe the proposed changes detract
from the historic nature of West Hallam Street or Aspen's West End Neighborhood.
Thank you for your time in reviewing this letter.
Sincerely,
Jim and Tam Martin
620 West Hallam Street
Aspen, CO. 81611
920 -468/
Email secured by Check Point
1
Amy Guthrie
From: Tom Derosa [tdrbalto @aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 10:55 AM
To: Amy Guthrie
Cc: ddorr @johnolsonbuilder.com
Subject: Fwd: 610 W Hallam - Proposed Deck Adjustment and HPC Application
Attachments: 610 W Hallam - Proposed Deck Adjustment - Sketch - 2011.01.17.jpeg; image001.jpg
Dear Amy,
I am the owner of 602 West Hallam Street and hereby state that I have no objection to the proposed deck adjustment at
610 West Hallam Street by the new owner, Charles Moss.
Yours truly,
Thomas J. Derosa
602 West Hallam Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Original Message--- -
From: David Dorr <ddorr @johnolsonbuilder.com>
To: tdrbalto @aol.com
Sent: Tue, Feb 1, 2011 10:48 am
Subject: FW: 610 W Hallam - Proposed Deck Adjustment and HPC Application
Hi Tom,
I hope you are well. John mentioned to me that you might be willing to get a letter out to HPC for Charley Moss' deck
alteration at 610 Hallam. The easiest way to do this is to just write an email to Amy Guthrie, the city's historic preservation
officer. She will include your note in the package that each HPC member receives. Her email address is
Amy.Guthrieaci.asben.co.us.
•
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
-Dave
David Dorr
John Olson Builder, Inc.
200 East Main Street
Aspen, CO 81611
970.923.4233 office
970.923.2977 fax
970.379.7110 mobile
www.iohnolsonbuilder.com
JOHN N
From: David Dorr
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 4:30 PM
To: 'lelaorder@aol.com'; 'tdrbaltoC@aol.com'
1
Cc: John Olson
Subject: 610 W Hallam - Proposed Deck Adjustment and HPC Application
Hi Tom and Leslie:
As you may know, we are working with Charley Moss on the renovation of the home at 610 West
Hallam Street. As a part of this project, we are proposing an adjustment to the front deck, a matter
which is under the jurisdiction of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). I just spoke with
Charley, and he suggested I contact you guys with a copy of the sketch of the proposed adjustment
(attached to this email), as well as an example of what might be said in a brief letter to the
Commission. If you will allow me, here is some sample language that could be used in a letter to
HPC:
Dear Members of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission,
We are the owners of the property immediately to the east of 610 West Hallam Street in Aspen, Colorado. We have
reviewed the architect's drawing of the proposed adjustment to the street - facing deck at 610 Hallam Street. We are writing
to inform the members of the Historic Preservation Commission that we have no objection to the proposed changes, nor
do we believe the proposed changes detract from the historic nature of West Hallam Street or Aspen's West End
Neighborhood.
Thank you for your time in reviewing this letter.
Sincerely ..
Please call my cell or email with any questions. The application for this deck project will be reviewed
by HPC on February 9m
Best Regards,
-Dave
David Dorr
John Olson Builder, Inc.
200 East Main Street
Aspen, CO 81611
970.923.4233 office
970.923.2977 fax
970.379.7110 mobile
www.Ohnolsonbuilder.com
2
EXHIBIT
ATTACHMENT 6 1 ,r C), rr _
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE t
e. REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CO E
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 1 , Aspen, CO
mot
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: . 1 ,""—
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of Pitkin )
1, 14V l Ailf., elA. ft (name, please print) being or
representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that 1 have complied
with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the
following manner:
k•
Publican. : • • • e - • • ication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper
of general ci .. ion in the i , • ' .: at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A
co. : e publication is attached hereto.
x 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 osted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the
public hearing and was continuously visible from the 25 day of 3zn , 201 , to
and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the p6sted notice (sign) is
attached hereto.
Li a' Mailing of notice. By the 'ling of a notic= obtained from the Community Development
Department, which contains the •rma '.n described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the
Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifte- days prior to the public hearing, notice was
hand delivered or mailed by first .ss postag repaid U.S. mail to all owners of property
within three hundred (300) fee • f the property su • : to the development application. The
names and addresses of pr• .erty owners shall be those o e current tax records of Pitkin
County as they appeare. no more than sixty (60) days prior to .e date of the public hearing.
A copy of the owner: and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
Aspen Historic Preservation
Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29, 2007
•
Vl r� Rezoning or text a • dment. Whenever t - official zoning district map is in any way to be
changed or amended inci• :. al to or as p• of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text
of this Title is to be amended, w I - • uch revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment
of a new land use regulation, or • erwi : he requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient legal description o • nd the notice t• : • d listing of names and addresses of owners of real
property in the area of th- •roposed change shall be ed. However, the proposed zoning map
shall be available for • , •lic inspection in the planning age • during all business hours for fifteen
(15) days prior to t' - public hearing on such amendments.
Signa l idatt„
re
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ?Stay
of ,f -mA- -ptiy ,;aer , by fe..pVIN tie Gt4 P-a
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
ERIC KULBERG
NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: 9. 2 7 • i y
STATE OF COLORADO
My Commission Expires i C' •
Notary Public
ATTACHMENTS:
COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
Aspen Historic Preservation
Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29, 2007
t .
ils
41r4 *
— - _
I JO
0 •
All I e 1 .
• 4
. i
..• ' . t
It
.t.,
. .
..,....„,
_ ...
4
1
1
.._
PINILIC NOTICE
, z ,
......,
1 row
4. Cl....apliwygorse iabiliall
•-• ^ Vikabiktlaiiesgt bed.
ai- -"e
TIMAITirnih
.1.
. . I
_, . ....
. _
_ .._
-•:-.
_ -
. ail
W k."4
. _ 4444
Z
/ / i :
virogn
III - - •
■
1
•
R
__.....summommidliellallorenn 11811 ' ,,:..,ri
lc, ; ,..
, ..,
..
.. ,
, ,
:0,
111. 4
L.
1 Ad 1111
• ill
1111 10 II
an ......_
. . , ,,,„„„„
fo
\ ' 1
:' ! :�
immor
ow itir
1 ; '
' S
+ 4 1 a i
.........
■
1 dr.
iiit
.. ..„„,,,,,,,-. -
4* l' iti 1
lir i 4.
r ea
� s ' 0
s if
A
_ . i 1
fa.
I i
►; ' ^ i
r s _ J
4 , a
.__, i-
iiiiii
hiw ,,,
I .......................••••••••
• , f y r^
_ :,„
. ,
I
"d
• 1 . f ill." H.
; , ar° i 1 ,
i ) ,
Mr
.y
F - I •
4 111 ! ' r T
IF
i i #
, r „..
. , ,,,
O � <f
1.
li i l MI W
t .
tw ,
j �
r
i ii 1 Pt _ I., ,,. ....I 1 .,-, - 9 ! I % .0p. i ' it :
VI li 1 1
i i 1 t f • i 114 I. ill 11
.. . lighimm -4 .... ",
' 1 it tes g. vil g \ . itk' ' ' - O .. ),
/ .. A. le. . .
'' 41$ ;.6 r it ,.
,„,.....„-,, \ , , i ria - _ ...
. .. i i of '.i- . i I , as tit •
it
ft , k ' •
Aik /
1
r -, , �. .
• ♦ t
,.
0?/. "v t b' ..,‘ *
. k \ - No. '.. k `
I , it
to) -' y , '' 1 i
. r
1
` i 1 •
�.
t • .. } ,
. it: ‘ 4, II 4111%
� % Ns
, ' t is,. i ' ,. C IA I I ttt f'4 • t o
i '
ifik
� r� , , .
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: AspenModern Integrity Scoring
DATE: February 9, 2011
SUMMARY: Since 2002, the preservation program has utilized a scoring system to
assess the architectural integrity of any building being considered for landmark
designation. The scoring system, while not entirely objective, uses the 7 aspects of
integrity that have been defined by the National Park Service and assigns point values for
the degree to which the property has or has not been altered. Any Victorian era property
must achieve 50 out of 100 points to be an Aspen landmark. Any postwar property has
been required to score 75 out of 100 points.
The new AspenModern ordinance keeps the scoring process in place, but there is some
desire to further distinguish the good, better and best examples of historic structures from
the late 20 century in order to gauge the preservation incentives that should be offered
during negotiations for voluntary designation.
Attached, as an example, are the scoring sheets developed for Chalet style properties in
2002, and the improvements recommended by the Task Force. The Task Force version
attempted to graphically illustrate the style and character defining features, and to be
more clear and understandable to property owners or those outside of the historic
preservation process.
In order to sort out the relative importance of each property considered for designation,
the Task Force suggested the following issues should be assigned points; authenticity,
age, location, visibility, setting, and original materials. These topics are addressed to
some degree in the attached draft, but need to be worked out a little further.
REQUEST OF HPC: Staff is to provide updated scoring sheets for all of the
AspenModern styles for Council adoption on February 28 HPC input is needed. The
board has been using the 2002 forms developed for Modern, Rustic and Chalet style for
years. Staff will need to create new language for Modem Chalets.
Exhibits
A. Chalet style scoring sheet developed in 2002
B. Chalet style scoring sheet developed through the Historic Preservation Task Force
INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT- CHALET
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)
• 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.
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.
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.
DOORS AND WINDOWS
10- The original door and window pattern are intact.
8- Some of the doors and windows are new but the original openings are
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.
EXTERIOR BALCONIES AND WALKWAYS
5- The exterior balconies, walkways and their decorative form are intact.
3- The exterior balconies and walkways have been enclosed but maintain an
open character and some original materials.
1- The exterior balconies and walkways have been enclosed or most original
materials are gone.
0- Original exterior balconies and walkways are gone.
CHARACTER - DEFINING FEATURES
5- The form and features that define the Chalet style are intact.
3- There are minor alterations to the form and features that define the Chalet
style.
1- There have been major alterations to the form and features that define the
Chalet style.
TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 45) =
• 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.
0- The physical surroundings detract from the historic character of the building.
TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 5) =
• 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 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.
DOORS AND WINDOWS
10 -All or most of the original doors and windows 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.
TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 25) =
• 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
15- Original detailing and ornamentation is intact
10- There have been some alterations or loss of the original detailing and
alteration.
5 -Some detailing is discernible such that it contributes to its understanding
its stylistic category
FINISHES & COLOR SCHEME
5- The finishes and color scheme that define the Chalet style are intact
3- There have been minor alterations to the finishes and color scheme that
define the Chalet style.
2- There have been substantial alterations to the finishes and color scheme
that define the Chalet style.
TOTAL POINTS (maximum of 20)
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.
C X 4t) )--
Postwar architectural styles in Aspen
*Style means "a definite type of architecture distinguished by special characteristics of
structure and ornament.
Chalet Modern
r
T " ---- ciiiiii-
POP Modern Chalet Wrightian
p"
__-- w ®l •.L._.. r
,;. J
Rustic— Handbuilt Rustic — Manufactured
f`
CO - 0
}' �' L
-C - N > N N
O a) _ c O CO (ts a
= >, ca O a_
d' CO m ' (/) N O N c • u) _ > O � �
-C TT, O _ a. ' = O N N
N
}' (n S= _ O (n 1--- ,•_. O L i
O _c CI
CO C a) 4_ ca CD C N a3 CD 4-
-C - 0 U E � s=
- 0 .+_• O O U O = � °
U a� =O 0- 0- v ; CI
(a 0 0 >, s) }'
To N 4- ' 4) }'
Q U 4) d) U) Q O F es - ± Q O
cu
4 CD
cu
14 i , ,
, ,
CO cz
> 45 LL O i�
W > 0 1 u
E o a o •, •
C o cc o 0 o o 4 {=
O ' O w U
W Q> > Q O O ` i °
0 -;- D >, co 1_ --
i -
c
u) oi a_ 0 0 O O U U
O .
■
Cv ,
÷..° r c I CO n CD 0 N-
U
CO 4
L
9 .—
o L .
X r
.. ..
ca
l � 1 /} — ■^ _c D ca - ._ A. 1
i ( i `V
o V5 O (D a� - r .` Are f al.
•
Integrity Scoring - Chalet Style
If a statement is true, circle the number of points associated with that true statement.
8. LOCATION OF PROPERTY:
The property is located within the geographical area surrounded by Castle Creek,the 2 points
Roaring Fork River and Aspen Mountain.
The property is outside of the geographical area surrounded by Castle Creek, the Roaring 1 point
Fork River and Aspen Mountain.
9. LOCATION OF BUILDING ON THE LOT:
The building is in its original location. 2 points
The building location has been shifted on the original parcel, but the on -site relocation 1 point
would comply with the current historic preservation guidelines.
The building has been moved off of its original parcel. 0 points
10. FORM: 2 points
The form (roof and wall planes) of the building is unaltered.
The form (roof and wall planes) of the building has been altered, but the alterations would
comply with the current historic preservation guidelines and /or can be reversed accurately, 1 point
based on physical or photographic evidence.
The form (roof and wall planes) of the building has been altered in a manner that would not
comply with the current historic preservation guidelines and /or cannot be reversed 0 points
accurately, based on physical or photographic evidence, and /or would require the recon-
struction of more than 25% of the building.
11. MATERIALS:
The original primary exterior materials of the building are still in place, with the exception of 3 points
normal maintenance and repairs.
There has been wholesale in -kind replacement of some original primary exterior materials. 2 point
Some of the original primary exterior materials have been replaced with a different material,
but these alterations would comply with the current historic preservation guidelines and /or 1 point
can be reversed accurately, based on physical or photographic evidence.
There have been wholesale changes to different primary exterior materials than existed
originally in a manner that cannot be reversed accurately, based on physical or photo- 0 points
graphic evidence.
12. ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS: 3 points
The original decorative details of the building are still in place, with the exception of normal
maintenance and repairs.
There has been wholesale in -kind replacement of some original decorative details. 2 points
Some of the original decorative details of the building are missing or have been replaced
with new designs, but the alterations would comply with the current historic preservation
guidelines and /or can be reversed accurately, based on physical or photographic evidence. 1 point
The original decorative details of the building have been removed and cannot be accurately
recreated based on physical or photographic evidence. 0 points
To determine the class for the subject Chalet Integrity Score point total (this page):
style property, add the points accrued on Character Defining Features point total (page 2):
the Character Defining Features worksheet 'AL paws EARNED:
and this worksheet together.
CLASS 1: v 17 20 points
CLASS 2: 14- 16 points
CLASS 3: 11 -13 points
NOT ELIGI 0 -10 points
1
p
e
0 V e
/ - iW
\ Y V—
I .
� �_.. , U
1 o
,r K
ti E
I 1 3 2
i
y t
\ 1 I
7L
g G
s.
/ , 4'
�
4 3 i Al � 00 '4!
\ ,iw i0y % ,
x y
1 r
I 3 / Ii / _
z
m � �� 7 \
■ /L' ✓ i j ''b y
i
y / J, i '
,
2
/
/
iff
Z
�_
�
o.
�h o
U
I I
Q
../ Jr> \ 7 Lt
F
i U a
If e r y ? "
/...' Q = Q
/ o
1i 7 w`
\ i � p m
N
N
A
1
/ /a. /-5- \
/ \?
I 4- / '� fir / / `� / I � U
I >) k' c
�` r
f /\
,- '
J r e
F
5 i / _ /
/
t.
/ /
�r� \�
\� `�
y�� ‘
1 yj j� i
\� \ l
\\>
Wd71A1 o9u -¢6 ( ot6) YGO rP •'9 ssewmovs 'va 400,7 cvcwmoug oAn
' 9'd 1 9311NO2N - 212VV?1 Ci
k
rai
I • mow � � 0 IL
i
4
/, } G
4 11 ,
G P �I
.,Nr
ti
s y )S�tv,j i
"\` Mil - =
v'
l N I 1
Y N \II _ - U " - L - ., - I
0
1 \ I 1
._ i \ i _ .1.
2 I I
,I
C - k
r _
I
- I, _0, •i. L .......„.:4,,, t_ _ --4. 2r 1
1 V C4`'- . \ k ... \ \ 1
1 [ lik kst___
1 -