Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20110810 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 10, 2011— 5:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO SITE VISIT- NOON — NO SITE VISITS SCHEDULED. I. Roll call rtideV H. Approval of minutes —as 27 minutes III. Public Comments IV. Commission member comments V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) VL Project Monitoring: VII. Staff comments — (15 min.) VIII. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued • (Next resolution will be #'7) I. OLD BUSINESS A. 400 E. Hyman — Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Reduction of Pedestrian Amenity Requirement, Continued public hearing ( lhr.) II. NEW BUSINESS A. 1102 Waters Ave. — Major Development (Conceptual), Residential Design Standards Variances, Public Hearing (lhr.) III. WORK SESSIONS: A. NONE 7:00 Adjourn PROJECT MONITORING- Projects in italics are not currently under construction. Sarah Broughton 610 W. Hallam 110 E. Bleeker 604 W. Main 222 E. Bleeker Brian McNellis 132 W. Main Fox Crossing 332 W. Main Ann Mullins Deep Powder Boomerang 604 W. Main 300 S. Spring 222 E. Bleeker Lift One 135 W. Hopkins Jay Maytin 28 Smuggler Grove 627 W. Main Red Butte Cemetery Lift One 920 W. Hallam Nora Berko 28 Smuggler Grove Jason Lasser 630 E. Hyman Boomerang Lift One 135 W. Hopkins Red Butte Cemetery Jamie Brewster McLeod 630 E. Hyman 202 N. Monarch Willis Pember 508 E. Cooper M: \city \planning \hpc project monitoring\PROJECT MONITORING.doc 8/5/2011 P1 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 400 E. Hyman Avenue (Tom Thumb Building)- Major Development (Conceptual), Commercial Design (Conceptual), Public Amenity, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 10, 2011 SUMMARY: 400 E. Hyman Avenue was r. - �; �ti: h= 'a'' • built in 1981. It is a non - contributing 7e71. ; a' building with the Commercial Core . • c ' 4, • 4- Historic District. s- The property contains 15 individually '„ ; , 'k►* owned condominium units; 12 of which are ' ' • commercial space and 3 of which are • t , w residential. • M HPC is asked to review a Conceptual •, proposal to demolish and replace the structure. The applicant existing corner st _ _ _ owns all three commercial units that are 1' • ' - - affected. -` The project requires Growth Management review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. There are only two opportunities per year (August 15 and February 15 to enter the Growth Management competition and receive allotments for the type of new net leasable space and free market unit proposed. The property owner cannot apply for Growth Management until HPC Conceptual is granted. They hope to receive HPC approval at the August 10 meeting, or their Growth Management application will be delayed to a future round. HPC discussed the application on July 27 and continued it for further study and description of the height relationship to the surrounding area. Concerns were raised about the impact of the new mass on the courtyard level spaces and the impact of reducing public amenity area. The application has been significantly amended. The new building will maintain the footprint of the existing structure. The only intrusion into the public amenity area will be for the purpose of building an elevator. The height of the new building is proposed to be 35'9 ", a 1'9" increase from the last meeting. This increased height has created a more generous first floor level, which has been amended from 11'3" to 13'0 ". 1 P2 The program has also been amended since the last discussion. The courtyard level and first floor will be retail, and the upper two floors will be one free market apartment (the second floor was previously proposed as retail.) A primary entrance from Hyman Avenue has been added. There is no new net leasable space proposed, except for a possible below grade expansion. No parking requirements are generated. Employee housing mitigation for the free market unit is still proposed to occur off -site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The subject of Conceptual review is height, scale, massing and proportions. Some snapshots of a Sketch -up model are provided in the packet to evaluate the building in context. Staff finds that the proposed new building meets the relevant guidelines. Massing is comparable 0 to the existing condition except for height. The proposed building is 15' taller than the existing along the streetscape, but within 5' of the height of portions of the existing development that will remain in place. HPC should discuss the pros and cons of reducing the first floor height and/or floor structure. The material palette that is envisioned has the potential to offset the impacts of a taller building. APPLICANT: 400 Hyman LLC, Ken Sack -CEO, represented by Paul Irwin of Ripple Design Studio. PARCEL ID: 2737 - 073 -43 -001 through -005, 2737 - 073 -43 -009 through -015, 2737 -073- 43 -706 through -708 and 2737 - 073 -43 -801. ADDRESS: 400 E. Hyman Avenue, Tom Thumb Building, Condomium Units A -101 through A -103, A -201, A -202, A -301 through A -304, B -101, B -201, B -202, B -301, C -101, C -201, C -301 and the Condo Association Cominon Area, Lots K and L and a portion of Lot M, Block 88, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. ZONING: CC, Commercial Core. Tom Thumb Building FA" r n1 s a { .. { �� , . illiVAr ips, 3 6! • ti„ ....-.9.,, -.. , ... , , ,,, „, ,, 6 ,.' L„ t.... , wil % i r , s it , f 4.,./..,.. - ,!... „._!... , : 11 ' ■ -,-; 1 : • 4 a r * c r ' I '- 7 1 Legend P 3 CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW The procedure for a Major Development Review and Commercial Design Review, at the Conceptual level, 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 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. Major Development and Commercial Design review is a two -step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. STAFF RESPONSE: For new development in the Commercial Core Historic District, the guidelines found in the 2007 Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines are the applicable information. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." The subject site currently contains an L shaped building along the north and east lot lines, and a free standing building at the southwest corner. There is a sunken courtyard at the center of the development. The site is located in the heart of the downtown historic district. It is located at a busy intersection on the pedestrian mall, near the Dancing Fountain and The Wheeler Opera House. About half of the buildings in Aspen's Commercial Core are landmarked Victorian era historic buildings and half are not. The design guidelines encourage high quality new development, within the framework established by the 19 century architecture. The overriding policy stated in the design guidelines on page 91 is: Policy: Improvements in the Commercial Core Historic District should maintain the integrity of historic resources in the area. At the same time, compatible and creative design solutions should be encouraged. 3 P4 The proposal involves demolition and replacement of the corner building on the site. The existing building relates well to the district in terms of height and materials, but conflicts with the district in that the corner building is setback from the front property line, does not reflect the proportions (particularly first floor height) of the Victorians, and the building relationship to grade is inconsistent with the surrounding context. The proposed new building appears to improve some of the relationships to surrounding landmarks, but also creates new differences as well. SITE PLAN/PUBLIC AMENITY The new building matches the footprint of the existing, with the exception of a bump out the north facade to create an enclosed elevator, rather than the exposed man-lift that is in place now. The increased site coverage means that a small (25 square foot) area that is currently counted as "Public Amenity" space will be consumed. The zone district requires that 25% of the site be dedicated Public Amenity space. Traditionally this has meant that 25% of the site must be left essentially undeveloped, but amendments within the last several years have resulted in a number of options for meeting the intent of Public Amenity space. Options exist for providing open area at the ground level, within a courtyard, on an upper level, or through the payment of cash -in -lieu that can be used for beneficial improvements on public property or streetscapes. This property already does not meet the requirement for Public Amenity on the site. 14% of the open area counts as Public Amenity, instead of the 25% minimum. The below grade courtyard does not count at all. The proposal still calculates to 14% open area on the site. There is a small cash -in -lieu payment required based on the square feet of the elevator. FORM The proposed form of the new building generally meets the design guidelines which call for box- like buildings with flat roof and flat wall surfaces with limited projecting elements. HEIGHT The tallest portion of the existing structure is along the alley and is approximately 30' high. The corner building that is to be replaced is approximately 20' tall. The new building is 35'9" tall along the street facades, which is about a 15'9" increase. The new building is not limited to the size of the surrounding historic buildings, but must be related. At 13'0" the floor to ceiling height on the first floor of the proposed new building is consistent with the traditional 13 -15' range. Typically the upper floors are equal heights, as is the case in this project, and upper floors of recently approved projects have generally been 9 -10' tall. The guidelines state: 6.25 Maintain the average perceived scale of two - story buildings at the sidewalk. • Establish a two -story height at the sidewalk edge, or provide a horizontal design element at this level. A change in materials, or a molding at this level are examples. 4 r P5 The historic photograph below demonstrates that 2 story buildings predominated in the 19 century, though the height of the buildings varied slightly. l$:61iiiiii4 The Kobey building at 428 E. Hyman is the only intact Victorian era building �y ,, . remaining on the blockface. It is ,I v approximately 32' wide and 30' tall (plus a new penthouse level that is setback so it Subject site is not easily visible. i 11 / 7 . - 1 - -- --- . 1_,, ‘,_ . - - '- ,--gth , ---t f � ' A +' e. � tt - - '�A _ / 1 -- _ 4 ' s4 ' \ ''l Alt t . k' , , - • .. 4 i . i , w _ ' - • r . _ ; C Ni t . 'r' t i $ - . at • - iii , _ _ i 1 :,► . I The zone district allows for the possibility of thr ee story buildings g and the proposed building is under the 38' height limit along Hyman Avenue and Mill Street. In order to meet guideline 6.25, above, projects are often designed to have a third floor pulled in from the building edges. While that is a possible direction for this project, staff does fmd that the simple rectangular mass is more consistent with the guidelines given that this structure is exposed to view on all sides, as opposed to being in a mid -block location. While the project is within the height limit on the street facades, it exceeds the height limit when measured from the courtyard level to the top of the building. HPC may choose to approve a height in this area of up to 42' (the proposal is 41'), based on the following criteria. 5 P6 6.27 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Core. • Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height limit on the subject property. • A minimum 9 ft. floor to ceiling height is to be maintained on second stories and higher. • Additional height, as permitted in the zone district, may be added for one or more of the following reasons: - In order to achieve at least a two -foot variation in height with an adjacent building. - The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic Building, Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.) - Some portion of the property is affected by a height restriction due to its proximity to a historic resource, or location within a View Plane, therefore relief in another area may be appropriate. - To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units. - To make a demonstrable (to be verified by the Building Department) contribution to the building's overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved daylighting. The project does not have a strong argument for a height increase for any of the community benefits touched on above, but the sunken courtyard in the center of the property is a somewhat unique and unchangeable condition. HPC must determine the appropriate direction. It is debatable whether the first floor to ceiling height should be reduced, and the floor and roof assemblies of the proposed building are 1'6" thick, which could arguably be minimized. There are three nearby Victorian buildings which provide some guidance for redevelopment at 400 E. Hyman as illustrated on the next page. 6 P7 2 e. s -` i �' 4.` f l - �: t ' . nawo 3f) it F I � , t}'' i. : . t ais_ 4is i { ..�) I y Y is II iN it:: y ' . . jt , ti, 7 a it I ! , —_ HILL 'c D.■'+ ' , . , _ 14'0" A. - as , These photographs illustrate an approximate comparison of building dimensions. HPC should consider whether the facade 1 7 1 proportions of the proposed new building are p com atible with the historic district. I I I 1 I I ,:� Pk -` �' " "r w 35'9„ .4C f I 20'0" = ___ k ).\\ I , z.:. r-- 13'0, 13'6" i. k. t A. 7 7 P8 As stated above, staff does find that the proposal is in keeping with many of the design guidelines. If the board finds that the overall height and floor level proportions are acceptable, or could be with amendments, we recommend that the project receive Conceptual approval. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the facade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. The application touches on many issues that will be topics for Final review, particularly options for the "skin" of the building. The applicant is eager for feedback, and HPC expressed openness to new exterior materials at the last meeting. The revised design includes opaque metal panels to screen some of the interior functions from the street. To the extent that HPC wishes to comment generally, it may help to guide future revisions to the project. For the board's information, the Building Department has expressed preliminary concerns with the glass facade facing the courtyard, due to fire code issues and the proximity to the adjacent structure. (Compliance with egress and accessibility requirements have been questioned as well.) Staff's position is that alternative facade materials, such as the proposed glass, could meet the guidelines if configured in a way that somehow relates to characteristics of the adjacent historic structures. For instance, mullions or opaque panels could create patterns that relate to nearby beltcourses, cornices, masonry joints, etc. That said, the guidelines do generally call for the use of traditional masonry as a primary material, a transparent first floor and punched openings on the upper floor, etc. Further discussion of the sensitivity or flexibility provided by the surrounding context will be needed. 8 P9 Construction management would be a major issue with this project. The Parks Department is concerned with the possibility of substantial demolition of surrounding mall and sidewalk areas during the project. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS The project would generate the need for a fraction of one on -site parking space to mitigate for the new net leasable commercial area only if the basement is expanded, as mentioned as a possibility in the application. No parking is required for the residential use. There is currently no on -site parking. The applicant has the right to pay cash -in -lieu for the parking space. The project would also generate affordable housing mitigation requirements. The applicant proposes to pay cash -in -lieu, or buy down off site units, or purchase affordable housing credits. This will be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant Major Development (Conceptual), Commercial Design (Conceptual), and Public Amenity approval per the attached resolution. Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2011 A. Relevant Design Guidelines B. Application 9 • P10 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL), COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW (CONCEPTUAL) AND PUBLIC AMENITY APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 400 E. HYMAN AVENUE, TOM THUMB BUILDING, CONDOMIUM UNITS A -101 THROUGH A -103, A -201, A -202, A -301 THROUGH A -304, B -101, B -201, B -202, B -301, C -101, C -201, C -301 AND THE CONDO ASSOCIATION COMMON AREA, LOTS K AND L AND A PORTION OF LOT M, BLOCK 88, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION # , SERIES OF 2011 PARCEL ID: 2737- 073 -43 -001 through -005, 2737- 073 -43 -009 through -015, 2737 - 073 -43 -706 through -708 and 2737- 073 -43 -801 WHEREAS, the applicant, 400 Hyman LLC, Ken Sack -CEO, represented by Paul Irwin of Ripple Design Studio, has requested HPC Major Development (Conceptual) and Commercial Design Review (Conceptual) and Public Amenity approval for the property located at 400 E. Hyman Avenue, Tom Thumb Building, Condomium Units A -101 through A -103, A -201, A -202, A -301 through A -304, B -101, B -201, B -202, B -301, C -101, C -201, C -301 and the Condo Association Common Area, Lots K and L and a portion of Lot M, Block 88, City'and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State. of 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 Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.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 Conceptual Commercial Design 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 Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines per Section 26.412.040 of the Municipal Code. 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 Public Amenity 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 Section 26.575.030 of the Municipal Code. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with 400 E. Hyman Avenue HPC Resolution # , Series of 2011 Page 1 of 2 P11 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 to HPC dated August 10, 2011, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had been met, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meetings on July 27, 2011 and August 10, 2011, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of _ to _ . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Commercial Design Review (Conceptual) and Public Amenity approval for the property located at 400 E. Hyman Avenue with the following conditions: 1. HPC approves the height of the building as measured from the courtyard to be 41'0 ". 2. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of August 10, 2011, 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 a one -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 its regular meeting on the 10th day of August, 2011. Sarah Broughton, Chair Approved as to Form: Jim True, Special Counsel ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 400 E. Hyman Avenue HPC Resolution # Series of 2011 Page 2 of 2 P12 1 I _ i , Mt !it- 1 sue a, 1 y , , '�1 . - it A 'J ■t :' ..... tim 'Mil '' , I ,. F-•-- L�� I f - . .. i� •- r-�- -•- / - , , r elm . y ,.. '.,-, t.,...- ,. 1 ei„,.1 :7,7_, . , ..... . . `l' fry f , Q , ) / a n., OW : , fr a . f „um MEI . ..\:\ I. li P 1 3 1 . . , . I It es 1 • 1 .. t. t kl sl‘ 1 - 4 • si - --, • . N .. . . •, ., , L • • 1 , .• ., . . . ,. . . , , pr , • ..• ,,,,. r / , ____,.. . • . ...____,...,„,„......_ ..1, . = - ,....:, ...■ . 15711 4,, #. , r mell `-* . ' V; ' . - z: '.. • 1 . . . . * ', 111, • . ' . , ',1': ' '''' . t • 1 ', ••-''... • '.. , — 11-F L ■wi l — , . lei; r.;;;.;! 1 . ..e 4 .t.:- 1. 1 .44 I'''.* t' ' '..' . .0 . " ' )• 7 .. ' ''.- . ' '' ', w . ' . ... • 1 • - .. .., ' A - ' ' ' . ,. -.. , % , . V \ -. ' 4 ,f : t . . 'I ttlii; le: . ri., .>: ' , , ... ' 0;01 ,..;.;' i', •-•:01.. - ) - .:f 3 - / " ' 1,1$•": - ' ' 4 , j - w . . . ,.. , • • • , , . , -1 '1 . It ... - ...I., ., • r.. •• , , . a It t imeiLli j... _..,. — .„ _ i fI • . 1 • I e. " 1 . - • . . . 1 • . ,, 1 , I , , , I r• . . , ?.... lipiiiiii' .„-:' '" • .4:',/ If" '.1 i . i - - -- P 14 �. , 1•w •., : , ...."--0.r. • o r fe roar+* °""' 1111 \Otlai •••••••••• ... , - : 1 - .y- . e • , • ...N. - 5 I l► . I - . . 1 M ..:, \ .:......... 114 i _ g Irmo -��p 4 0 04, Q . 4 E • - „, P 1 5 . ,.,1 ...i ... 1 1 , ... , ,,.,.., ,C •••■•- .4 1 4 .....- ..... , 1 . 1 .-,-4. - " n ' -- -•°--- i ' . 1 . , ' git■ IN . ,. , ff g• II ' ' ■ , # ' r..•••;', ,, ; ' •,q)'••'• ; I•,''..,,, , -. -- _--- , _ i 1 4'4-1'; '• , I' mil ----■=-%-- 7=7 ' 7: ::-.; & ik\VII■M ...”, 7 27:ii -.. , , wa=, ikr Bi ii= .... _5, .-" -.■ : . k 4 ' r■EM ", - P. ' .; ' 1 - . • 1 ' , --_-, ,.. ,:. if • 1V 4` :4:3 4 ■ - ' 40 ,.....•:.7t n' ..", ' .•';'••= ; . — 4tAk .•\ ' ' ' . 1 1 • . . r 1 -..,.■aat -me • • I . k '....■ \ .. 4 ..— . VA • ..'•,Z‘t,: t. 4 ---- ; sr 1; . — 1' I , ... 1 . . 1 , . II ili 1 i ir r I . .., a e f • 'p •t I — I lL - - . • .. . • - • it 0 , I , ' i , ..- 0; ' + ■ .' ' ' N 0 , , 1 \ ..-. 1 1 1 1LI . ii"fti I , I i_ g I , ..........,.. L ,,,.... „, ....: ,...: ,,,,e L. f,„...., r•■ri 1- 4,0., • i , • ;. 11 I/ . l'' 't l' '1 - It' a . a , I i ' I) ■ y ' • ii FL ............. P1 6 aii, i bi .k.- ,7 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Encompassing the Commercial Core Zone District Design Objectives and Guidelines Policy: Improvements in the Commercial Core Historic District should maintain the integrity of historic resources in the area. At the same time, compatible and creative design solutions should be encouraged. This chapter presents guidelines for new Existing Character construction and alterations to existing non- The heart of Aspen centers around the Commercial historic structures in the Commercial Core Core Historic District. It is the first area that Historic District. Key design characteristics of developed in the early mining days of the town this district are summarized and then specific and its character reflects this rich mining heritage, guidelines are presented. which is the image that many carry with them of this historic Colorado mountain town. Each Location historic building contributes to the integrity of the The Commercial Core of the city is defined by district and preservation of all of these resources Monarch Street to the west, Durant Avenue to the is, therefore, crucial. This is especially important south, Hunter Street to the east, and roughly the as new development continues. alley to the north of Main Street to the north. (See the Character Area map in the appendix.) Tn' ' 4 . +1 ` e, dr '.t " y+ � 'mil „ w ,4,,,.., -....- itisr*. 7 '113r.. - ir,, - A y■ 17 c -^4''. '- * ' 4,-' ----.4-4'4;. , Itir#::40 A ib i lt .... _ 2, 1P, 4 Iw K � NO , ' * , .1 -r- i i E , a } 4 • � ` ��; f `' X 1► The Commercial Core Zone District is located at the core of Downtown Aspen. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District er, page 91 Design Objectives and Guidelines Y':' • P17 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Street Pattern As the historic core of the city, its current urban form reflects these origins. It is a grid of streets aligned to the north. Rectangular street blocks of 270 ft. by 220 ft. with long axes and rear alleyways are oriented east -west, and subdivided into 30 by 100 ft. lots. Buildings generally occupy the full lot width within the core area and span the full depth • ' , t 1 from street frontage to rear alley. • This arrangement still anchors the historical urban form of the city, despite some recent departures 4 from the traditional hard street edge. The variety of building forms & scales is influenced in areas by previous site -based open space requirements. Ar The traditional lot widths continue to define the majority of the buildings in this area, either in total width or, where lots have been amalgamated, in their architectural composition, articulation and - - fenestration pattern. This ensures that the city center is still appreciated for its essential human scale, concentration of historic buildings and The street pattern frames spectacular scenic views. visual and cultural experience. Building Character The commercial buildings of the mining era establish the context for new construction, even though individual landmarks of later periods may also be found in the area. Buildings range in scale from early residential including miners' cottages to larger 'iconic' landmark Victorian commercial and community buildings. The latter tend to occupy corner sites and range in scale from one to three stories in height. This area includes the varied range of buildings dating from the city's early history and representing all periods of development in the evolution of Aspen. The character is predominantly urban, while the building pattern in many areas continues to exhibit the original traditional lot width arrangement. The street facades are strongly defined in many areas by a combination of larger Victorian and smaller scale buildings. This is particularly the case on street corners. • gage 92 4 4 Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P18 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Storefront context Most buildings have features associated with % Via' traditional commercial designs. Ground level . floors of the buildings are oriented to pedestrian ' ,„;,...n.. 7 views, with large display windows highlighting ' .. } ' 4 • i - ' the goods and services offered for sale inside. v t r y Recessed entries are also typical. A horizontal 4T r r f " .. b. band of molding usually separates the ground floor from upper portions of the facade and the i parapet is capped with a decorative cornice. r? These elements combined to establish a horizontal emphasis along the street. Fenestration on upper floors is predominantly ' solid and void 'hole in the wall' form and vertical - - in proportion, reflecting classical architectural { proportions. There are, however, departures from this pattern which contribute to the rich diversity _.tom of the street. A hard street wall as seen along the walking mall downtown is a Outdoor Spaces characteristic throughout Character Area I. There are also instances of small scale spaces created by the set back of building facades. They are, however, the exception to the historic alignment of building fronts. Where these are used for outdoor dining they provide attractive public 4. gathering spaces and street vitality. The intent is " ` • t ` to maintain the strong definition of the street wall . . in this area, and therefore creating further breaks .' in the street wall should be minimized. The resulting character is both intimate and stimulating, and in keeping with the variety and harmony unique to Aspen. There have been r departures from the hard street edge, where - • I ' •t•7ti.i.'(•110.11i more recent development has stepped back to create semi - basement space and detached or internal retail frontage often on more than one level. In many cases these have detracted - from the immediate relationship between shop i frontage and public sidewalk and the sense of ` - U ' -t_t street facade definition, with adverse effects on ,' ..c...: : A:: it -` ' ." -" =ta' =- street vitality and the urban character within Victorian storefronts anchor the Commercial Core and define downtown Aspen. the key characteristics of building height, mass, articulation and materials. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District r+, page 93 Design Objectives and Guidelines t.'ir • P19 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Design Objectives 4. Reflect the variety in building heights seen These are key design objectives for the Commercial historically. New development should stay within the range Core The City must find that any new work will of building heights, and be designed to reflect the hellp p to meet them: variation in height across traditional lot widths. 1. Maintain a retail orientation. The scale and form of a new building should be Traditionally the hub of Aspen and the center of designed to safeguard the setting of a historic commercial and cultural activity, the Commercial building, whether single story or the large 'iconic' Core should remain so. Designs for new three plus stories. construction should reinforce the retail- oriented 5 Accommodate outdoor public spaces where function of the street and enhance its pedestrian they respect the historic context. character. The street vitality associated with the center of the city should be retained and enhanced 2. Promote creative, contemporary design that through a combination of the form and design of respects the historic context. the walkable street network and the associated Whitt new construction on should be compatible areas of public gathering space at street level and should the historic ocopy early styosthe ios but instead designs shouuld ld above. The design of any public space within eek ccree ative n creative new ear ew sollutut the core should be a central consideration in seek that convey the the design and configuration of the building, to innovations. l co .s At the same sa time, in exploring the ensure that it contributes to a positive experience principles ame in the streetscene, whether or not used for street principles oof traditional t f ditional design must be respected. This means that each project should strike a dining. balance in the design variables that are presented 6. Promote variety in the street level in the following pages. experience. 3. Maintain the traditional scale of building. Architectural form should recognize existing scale and diversity and build upon established design The Commerci u core a the city is f e for ss o o r ho el, traditions, creativity and innovation in a manner come contining market pressure development and which strengthens the architectural richness commercial and ro and identity of the city core. The contextual the fu pa nco of a nable sommerciat and contribution of building and storefront design f e growth acknowledges, It es, do i mplements and important that will depend on detailed consideration of the street ture wth knknoledament facade and associated landscaping and paving. enhances s the existing scale and character of this area. 7. Preserve the integrity of historic resources within the district. The original form, character, materials and details of historic resources should be maintained. This applies to individual structures of landmark quality as well as more modest "contributing" structures. Cononercial, Lodging and Historic District page I Design Objectives and Guidelines P20 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Conceptual Review Design Guidelines The following design guidelines shall apply at the conceptual review stage. Street & Alley Systems j UV� ��"., The street pattern is essential 'infrastructure' 1'+11 for the character of the district. The north/ ( � /� ` � � ' * _ ' R south orientation of the streets accentuates ®� ' ; •� a the relationship of the City with its dramatic C `Y � 11 A landscape setting. i } ^ !7n 17 The circulation pattern provided by the network % I of streets, alleys and courts should be retained to C2' .. �( � ensure maximum public access. It should not be r � r ^ `� . i f *+ 7 enclosed by gating and it should not be spanned •14/ �!� ��r y 4 . i by development above. Wherever possible �� r .1� pedestrian access to alleys should be enhanced. Q cpd The creation of additional public walkways to . et r- ) C rear alleys and other public spaces enhances the interest of the city center. The network of streets, alleys and existing pedestrian passageways enhances access in the downtown. Additional links and an enhanced public circulation pattern can increase commercial frontage and access to the side, to the rear and also to the interior of development sites. Improved access also creates opportunities for additional commercial space, which is to be encouraged. Street Grid The original arrangement of parcels significantly affects the visual character of the area. The city was platted on a grid system of lots and blocks, and buildings were typically sited parallel with these lot lines. The layout of early buildings, streets, sidewalks and alleys still can all be seen in this system, and should be maintained. 6.1 Maintain the established town grid in all projects. • The network of streets and alleys should be retained as public circulation space and for maximum public access. • Streets and alleys should not be enclosed or closed to public access, and should remain open to the sky. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District A page 95 Design Objectives and Guidelines t,b P21 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Internal Walkways 6.2 Public walkways and through courts, _ when appropriate, should be designed to create a C - access to additional commercial space and frontage, within the walkway and/or to the rear rF , _ of the site. ` • See also: Public Amenity Space design guidelines. - Alleys _ - Historically, alleyscapes were simple and utilitarian in character, with a variety of materials Maintain the established town grid in all projects. and building scales. Many structures had additions that were subordinate to the main building, stepping down in scale at the alley. Others had loading docks, stairs and balconies that contributed to the human scale. This traditional character should be maintained, while accommodating compatible new uses. The continued development of visual interest in these alleys is encouraged. Greater variety in forms and materials is also appropriate here. 6.3 Develop an alley facade to create visual interest. • Use varied building setbacks and changes in materials to create interest and reduce perceived scale. • Balconies, court yards and decks are also appropriate. • Providing secondary public entrances is strongly encouraged along alleys. These should be clearly intended for public use, but subordinate in detail to the primary street -side entrance. � Commercial, Lodging and Historic District page 96 ark Design Objectives and Guidelines P22 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Parking The character of the Commercial Core Historic District is one which is primarily appreciated on foot. The human scale and concentration of walkable streets is a key attraction. Therefore , + s the visual impact of parking should in all cases ' be minimized. Parking should be structured or placed underground where the scale and setting of the site affords this opportunity. Where a parking structure is considered this should be contained within a'wrap' of commercial and /or Where a parking structure might be considered this should be residential uses within a 'wrap' of commercial and/or residential uses, as this building is. 6.4 Structured parking should be placed within a 'wrap' of commercial and /or residential i !; uses, a • The exposure of auto entry areas should be , minimized. ": ''I r, 6.5 Structured parking access should not have a negative impact on the character of the street. The access shall be: • Located on an alley or secondary street if necessary. , • Designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building fagade. Parking access located on an alley and integrated into the building design. • Integrated into the building design. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District "�.,, page 97 d Design Objectives and Guidelines " ^ ' P23 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Public Amenity Space In every case Public Amenity Space should be On -site and communal open space has been a well defined and carefully designed. The design long- standing priority and characteristic of the of public gathering space, its enclosure, layout city. Where it is required the form, orientation, and content, will be an integral consideration quality and use of such open space is of the utmost in the proposed form of the space. Although a importance. Well defined public space should be matter for full review and approval at the Final integrated with traditional streetscape character. Stage, its design should be envisioned at the time The Planning and Zoning Commission and / or of conceptual review. the Historic Preservation Commission will decide whether, where and in what form Public Amenity Design Objectives Space will be required. Where considered to be compatible within the Commercial Core Historic District, public amenity In the past, open spaces occurred as accents along space should be designed and placed to achieve the street, usually where a house existed in the the following objectives: historic context or where a lot stood temporarily • Createan activeandinterestingstreetvitality vacant. In more recent years, outdoor spaces were through the promotion of public gathering built that sometimes eroded the character of the space. street edge. These conditions are not precedents . Maintain a well - defined street edge and for future development. While some open space street corner to ensure that such public space may occur, it should be subordinate to the creates an accent within the street facade. • traditional character of the street. Create an additional commercial frontage Public amenity space along the primary street and /or space to the side or rear of the site frontage should be an accent within, and or building exception to, an otherwise well defined street • Create a well defined, localized public space facade. There will be locations within the city at the street edge, where e.g. additional core where the character and setting of the site space for street dining might be beneficial. or a historic building will also influence the form, • Design a space that maximizes access to location or appropriateness of such a space. sunlight throughout the year. • Create a second level space designed to yrr ensure that it is permanently open to the public and provides interest in the form of a scenic or other interpretive marker for the life SW' - of its service as a public amenity space. ., .1ff'g "' • Achieve second floor patio space that R \ '; a ` l�(f j a a provides access to affordable commercial " • ii t uses. y t The Downtown Enhancement and Pedestrian Plan „r 4' should serve as an additional reference. Where open spacewithin a parcel is appropriate, develop an amenity that can be experienced by the general public. P ° 0 98 " mod Commercial, Lodging and HistoricDistrict ;i:;a Design Objectives and Guidelines P24 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District y r Public Amenity Space Types :: �` r r Public amenity space is a requirement in the t ;if Commercial Core. In this area, particular types Prit 4. of public amenity space would be in character pi , y l f * 1, with the urban form of the Commercial Core area. l . p . ' A These include: • Street facing amenity space • • Mid -block walkway amenity space • Alley side amenity space = jog • Second level amenity space • Front yard amenity space �k Guidelines for the location and design of each of these types follow. A variety of public amenity spaces exist in Downtown Aspen. In future development it is important to focus on the quality of the space rather than the quantity. 4 • x, r{ , L i • ,: r# A c„ - 1 j The walking mall in Downtown Aspen provides substantial public amenity space for the buildings located there, and therefore creating breaks in the block facade within this area to provide more street - facing public amenity space should be carefully considered. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 4 -4\ page 99 Design Objectives and Guidelines P25 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen - ` Street Facing Amenity Space 4_ A street facing amenity space, usually located ^! I ! i � r l towards the middle of a block, maybe considered. L. t I I However, within the heart of the district, where the greatest concentration of historic storefronts . �� C r - Li � � 1,U 1 j . J . 1 align, creating new gaps in the street wall is f Ill _ U _ � _' j discouraged Providing space on sites that are 1 r1 1 •, located in the outer edges of the district, especially l. I I i M 111 " i � � "' along the ag southern edge is more appropriate. c 1�� 1!i a I _ � 6.6 A street facing amenity space shall meet ,. . all of the following requirements: • Abut the public sidewalk Street facing amenity space should abut the public sidewalk, be • Be jewel with the Sidewalk level with the sidewalk, open to the sky, directly accessible to the public and be paved or otherwise landscaped. • Be open to the sky • Be directly accessible to the public `'. ''- ' " "` • Be paved or otherwise landscaped s . a ,• „<,; 6.7 A street - facing public amenity space shall ,' rt e` C remain subordinate to the line of building fronts in the Commercial Core. • • Any public amenity space positioned at the I , street dge shall respect the character of the } streets tp �ape and ensure that street corners are ;� well d@fined, with buildings placed at the T sidewa edge. W • Sunken spaces, which are associated with some past developments, adversely affect 1 4`1-, - .r k the street character. Where feasible, these '' ; fr should be replaced with sidewalk level improvements. �` � � ._, 6.8 Street facing amenity space shall contain ��_� features to promote and enhance its use. These may include one or more of the following: Street facing amenity space should contain public art and other • Street furniture amenities to promote its use. • Public art • Historical /interpretive marker The detailed design of Public Amenity Space, with regard to guidelines 6.8, will be a [natter for approval at the Final Review Stage, although it may be discussed at the Conceptual Stage. page 100 Comme a4 ial, Lodging and Historic District :.,,; Design Objectives and Guidelines P26 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Mid -Block Walkway Amenity Space 4, r i I t" New buildings on sites occupying more than r 'c'e + one traditional lot width may provide a mid - block walkway or through court within a single r , y ' i development or between two developments. , 7 t t' , This type of space shall be an extension of and a - t complement to the street and public circulation s- - i network within the center of the city. See also ro ' r � � * '. Street & Alley System design guidelines. difrO y - The Commercial Core is highly regarded for :C_ms-s its pedestrian character and 'walkability'. The to t opportunities created by the extension and 0 A enhancement of the public circulation network has distinct urban benefits and is encouraged. k"' Typically only one such space would occur along i - ", , " "` a single block face.' }" •trµ This form of Public Amenity Space should be e1 . ` dl • - ''''`* a consideration on larger development sites s - nyrr within the city. It links the potential of additional commercial frontage and access, with human scale space and circulation, enriching the _s «s ' L L , ;.: ' ..11. - public experience. Situated along the edge of a development site, it should extend to link with the Amid -block passage may link through a property to provide access to uses along the side of a building or to businesses on an alley. rear alley. Adjacent to a residential type historic building it can provide a respectful break and a r' space between the two. s a Mg r r f 6.9 Mid -block walkways shall remain '"II R ti l r ! � subordinate in scale to traditional lot widths. "�' t � - -., y, l{ • Mid -block public walkways shall be between _ t" "m''",k lf' 8 ft. and 10 ft. in width. i .t, e E' j ., 6.10 A mid -block walkway should provide t ;. . public access to the following: '' " la • Additional commercial space and frontage j 0 Ti % within the walkway a a • Uses located at the rear of the property M • , III A passageway may be considered as Public Amenity Space when it remains subordinate to the continuity of the block face. It should be designed to visually appealing and to provide access to active uses. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District a -4 page 101 Design Objectives and Guidelines r P27 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen " " _ Alley Side Amenity Space Public amenity space may be located to the rear _ of the site in association with the alleyway. Such + - -__ a space shall provide access to commercial uses at the street or second floor level. Public amenity space may also be located at the corner of an alley 1� � � - and a street. Such spaces should be designed to enhance the use of alleys for supporting - commercial uses. iM +L- 6.11 An alley side amenity space shall be e designed to have these characteristics: • Direct public access to commercial space at street or second floor levels Public amenity space located at an alley should generally be south • Maximize solar access to the alley side facing to maximize solar access for the space and provide access to amenity space commercial space that may be located there. • Enhance of the attractiveness and use of the rear alley • Minimize the adverse impacts of adjacent service and parking areas page 102 Commercial, Lodging and Historic District ;,.,,y Design Objectives and Guidelines P28 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Second Level Amenity Space 1 An outdoor patio space on a second floor, which is directly accessible to the general public, will be considered as a form of public amenity space _r. when it is compatible with the historic context I ' ' s _ r and is clearly inviting for public use. This will ( r be most successful in association with outdoor . t 4 t. 1 dining space. In this respect it may be favorably ; k le 1 considered within sites affected by mountain 14 I view planes. 6.12 Second level amenity space should be Second level space shall be accessible from a public space such as compatible with the character of the historic a sidewalk or street facing amenity space. district.' It shall remain visually subordinate to any _ 1 ��_ • historic resource on the property. L • If located on a historic property, it may not alter the appearance of the resource as seen 00 1 S OP . , M u, ' 1 I � from the street. I i. , - -- ', `- ~`i` siiia 6.13 A second floor amenity space should meet 1 all of the following criteria: �, Ensure consistent public access • Be dedicated for public use ' s • Provide a public overlook and /or an I interpretive marker Outdoor private space shall be demarcated from the public amenity • Be identified by a marker at street level space. . 6.14 Second level space should be oriented to _ maximize solar access and mountain views, or t ' views of historic landmarks. "i 6.15 Second level space should provide public n II l � access by way of a visible and attractive public ^�' stair or elevator from a public street, alley, or street level amenity space. i i I- 0 tiiAt lit• k i i . . ..4 Second level public amenity space shall provide permanent public access from the street. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Q,(r #,, page 103 Design Objectives and Guidelines • . P29 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Front Yard Amenity Space Certain areas within the Commercial Core retain a distinct historic residential character. This is often se defined by a landscaped front yard and side yard • ►. setback. To maintain and enhance this tradition in certain areas, a landscaped front yard amenity space may be considered. Mali ■ ribi. 6.16 Second level dining may be considered. If the use changes, the space must remain *,�'� accessible to the public, so long as it is to be considered meeting the public amenity Certain areas within the commercial core are identifiedwith historic space requirement. single story buildings with setbacks. Front yard setback areas may be considered as public amenity space in such an instance. 6.17 Front and side yard amenity space should be considered in the context of a historic one I- � , TM's story residential type building. u , 3 11 ' ■ . Id : Building Placement is, wit's r � E. Hyman Ave. Street Corners l` Street corners are important elements in the ■ ■ street block and in the framing of many of the ��� ° s r views which characterize the Commercial Core. • f Many buildings on corner lots exhibit special features that add accents. Comer entrances and This figure ground study illustrates the alignment and amount of storefront windows that extend along intersecting open space along the street edge during the year 1904. street facades are examples. These elements are _ appropriate in many corner lot locations and .. 0 i 5 1 I should be encouraged. Here the buildings should confirm the pattern of a strongly defined building s MP wall at the street edge. Building facades should TM �n ma e oriented parallel to the street, with variation E. Hyman Ave. A ,s&... in front wall setbacks kept to a minimum. Any NUL s 'Nil departure from the street wall, for well defined and designed public dining space, should occur as an accent within the street block, not the ups predo pattern. The same blocks in 1999. Notice how the increased use of open Exceptions for street dining might be considered, space has eroded the building wall along the street. in the outer southern edge of the Commercial Core. These sites often serve as focal points for public activity and therefore sitting areas and other gathering spots are appropriate in the outer edges of the district. Comnumc Lodging and Historic District page 104 Design Objectives and Guidelines P30 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Building Setbacks - The Commercial Core has a strong and relatively . consistent street facade line. Corner buildings, often of late 19th/ early 20th century form, anchor , the street block in many instances. Within the street facade however there are some departures , from this where small areas of open space provide ; j i e " individual street dining experiences. i, . " 4 e t. ; 4,.I, e ��3f {A Setbacks within the central commercial area ja i ' should reinforce the objective of maintaining ,,,,,_.'.,.. and enhancing the special urban and traditional .._"- character of the strong urban edge of the street facade and street corner. Local areas of open space Traditionally, commercial buildings were built to the sidewalk edge also further the objective of the street vitality and anchored the corner. This should be continued. created by well defined dining space within the city. These should however remain as an accent +, . within the street facade. 1JJ- 1 I' I Side setbacks provide the opportunity to create or enhance public passageways or through courts to '' the rear alley, with the advantages of improved y public permeability, access and additional S ; commercial frontage. See also Street & Circulation 1 Pattern design guidelines. Rear setbacks create !;., the opportunity to achieve more creative and . < °?y attractive commercial and public space to the rear of the site and alley. € li In sum, buildings create a strong edge to the •1 Iltl 1 ,, .' street because they traditionally aligned on the _ ,' y 1 4 front lot line and were usually built out to the full s width of a parcel. Although small gaps do occur 1 between some structures, these are exceptions. \ _ _ N This uniform wall of building fronts is vitally This second floor patio incorporates an abstract interpretation of important to the historic integrity of the district upper -story windows and cornice elements to define the space and and should be preserved. maintain the building wall line along the block. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District A page 105 Design Objectives and Guidelines P31 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District 6.18 Maintain the alignment of facades at the sidewalk's edge. - 4 • Place as much of the facade of the building at the property line as possible. t • Locating an entire building front behind the established storefront line is inappropriate. • 4 - • A minimum of 70% of the front facade ,, shall be at the property line. 6.19 A building may be set back from its side lot lines in accordance with design guidelines identified in Street & Circulation Pattern and T Public Amenity Space guidelines. � t Building Orientation Development within the core area has been if I traditionally oriented with the street grid. This R 7 L: 11 1 relationship should be maintained. 6.20 Orient a new building to be parallel to its 1.1, lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. • The front of a primary structure shall be oriented to the street. Maintain the alignment of facades at the sidewalk's edge. 6.21 Orient a primary entrance toward the street. • Buildings should have a clearly defined primary entrance. For most commercial buildings, this should be a recessed entry way. • Do not orient a primary entrance to an interior court. • Providing secondary public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger buildings. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District page 106 &` Design Objectives and Guidelines P32 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Building Form . ... A prominent, unifying element of the Commercial i' Core is the similarity of building forms Commercial buildings were simple rectangular solids, deeper than they were wide, with flat roofs. In a few instances, gabled roofs, with false fronts, may have been seen. This characteristic of flat ° roof lines is important and should be continued '' T_. _ qi l in new projects. 6.22 Rectangular forms should be dominant Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core on Commercial Core facades. facades. • Rectangular forms should be vertically - oriented. r — — — — T - i - • The facade should appear as predominantly flat, with any decorative elements and projecting or setback "articulations" appearing to be subordinate to the dominant form. YES! NO! YES! YES! 6.23 Use flat roof lines as the dominant roof — — — form. sidewalk • A flat roof, or one that gently slopes to the street rear of a site, should be the dominant roof - form. Orient a building parallel to its lot lines. • Parapets on side facades should step down towards the rear of the building. • False fronts and parapets with horizontal emphasis also may be considered. 6.24 Along a rear facade, using building forms • that step down in scale toward the alley is encouraged. • Considerusing additive forms, such as sheds, stairs and decks to reduce the perceived scale. These forms should however, remain subordinate to the primary structure. • Use projecting roofs at the ground floor over entrances, decks and for separate utility structures in order to establish a human scale that invites pedestrian activity. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 4^43 page 107 Design Objectives and Guidelines P33 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Building Height, Mass & Scale -..i. . "'�� The character of the Commercial Core derives -..-11; - ° -- in part from the range and variety of building heights. These vary from one to three stories. y -- r • Building height with traditional lot width and � ! '" e 9 � tl creates a constantly changing cornice profile along ii a block face. This is the basis of the human scale, �. -;, • architectural character and visual vitality of the a t ( city center. New development in this area should continue this variation. With respect to scale, a new building shall also be Maintaining a block facade and orienting new development with sensitive to nearby historic building These range the street grid are two key objectives in the Commercial Core from single story historic residential structures to District. three story Victorian commercial buildings. _ ;. r IA ) ° Two Story Scale • ill 6.25 Maintain the average perceived scale of 4 , — two -story buildings at the sidewalk. • Establish a two -story height at the sidewalk 1 » a _ _ edge, or provide a horizontal design element I ` . I ` r s at this level. A change in materials, or a 1 1 a molding at this level are examples. � c 1 .a Height Variation Maintain the average perceived scale of two -story buildings at In the Commercial Core area building heights the sidewalk. range from one to three stories. This variation in facade height is a key characteristic that should be maintained. Variation in height should occur where the site is larger than two traditional lot widths, in order to reduce overall scale of the building. A variation in facade height, often in conjunction with setting back an upper floor, may be required. 6.26 Building facade height shall be varied from the facade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories. • If an adjacent structure is three stories and 38 ft. tall, new infill may be three stories, but must vary in facade height by a minimum of 2 ft. page 108 6,t Commercial, Lodging and Historic District ,;d Design Objectives and Guidelines P34 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District 6.27 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Core. • Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height limit on the subject property. • Aminimum 9ft. floor to ceiling heightis tobe maintained on second stories and higher. ;: °i: " °;;'! !;;; i +, • Additional height, as permitted in the zone • district, may be added for one or more of the �+ following reasons: - In order to achieve at least a two -foot variation in height with an adjacent A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation building. in building height of the Commercial Core. - The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic Building, Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.) . , � Ili t - Some portion of the property is affected - - - bya height restricfiondue to its proximity � �`+ j'1' • ' I • - s,11; !j • to a historic resource, or location within ' t • • � � 1 „r 8 a View Plane, therefore relief in another 'tl tct11 ► r ,,. —.• tp , .�µ _ area may be appropriate. A iilit) ti + - To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units. - To make a demonstrable (to be verified by Methods of achieving height variation within a single building include (A) stepping the building down as it approaches the alley the Building Department) contribution to and (8) stepping the building along the primary facade. the building's overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved day- Existing Building New Building lighting. 6.28 Height variation should be achieved using one or more of the following: • Vary the building height for the full depth 42! sa' of the site in accordance with traditional lot width. • Set back the upper floor to vary the building facade profile(s) and the roof forms across Building facade height shall be varied from the facade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories. the width and the depth of the building. • Vary the facade (or parapet) heights at the front. • Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District page 109 Design Objectives and Guidelines ;^y P35 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District - Height Variation for Larger Sites - - — _ _ - - ----' _ - -- Buildings within the commercial center and — ' 4. - historic core of Aspen represent the traditional lot • - ,„ widths of the city (30 ft), either in building width '01.% or the horizontal and vertical design articulation f f of the street facade. New development occupying ' Ii. a site of more than one traditional lot width , .' f should be designed to integrate with the scale Ilk . � f d r created by narrower existing buildings. The � architectural rhythm of earlier street facades should also be reflected in new development to retain and enhance the human scale and character .: „,_1% of the center of the city. -+ =� 1-- 6.29 On sites comprising more than two ` traditional lot widths, the facade height shall t (” y be varied to reflect traditional lot width" 4� , ,.` lTj • The facade height shall be varied to reflect C{s it 1 traditional lot width. • Height should be varied every 60 ft. �.. ,.' minimum and preferably every 30 ft. of linear frontage in keeping with traditional _ lot widths and development patterns. • No more than two consecutive 30 ft. facade Height variation can occur in a number of ways, depending on site modules may be three stories tall, within an conditions and design intent. individual building. • A rear portion of a third module may rise to three stories, if the front is set back a minimum of 40 feet from the street facade. (e.g. at a minimum, the front 40 feet may be no more than two stories in height.) 6.30 On sites comprising two or more traditional lots, a building shall be designed to reflect the individual parcels. These methods shall be used: • Variation in height of building modules across the site • Variation in massing achieved through upper floor setbacks, the roofscape form and variation in upper floor heights • Variation in building facade heights or cornice line page 110 a`ft"r') Commercial, Lodging and Historic District • Design Objectives and Guidelines P36 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Height Adjacent to Historic Structures The Commercial Core Historic District is the y _ setting for a very diverse range of historic "_ structures. Designing a building in the historic ~' , district demands a sensitivity in design analysis 1 and approach which is exacting and which will vary with each situation. The intent is that a e new building or addition to an existing building I re' should be designed to respect the height and r t scale of historic buildings within the commercial core. - . j •_: Historic One Story �l ' .;•y' 6.31 A new building should step down in Commercial Type g p Building scale to respect the height, form and scale of a historic building within its immediate setting. Building facade height shall be a maximum of one floor higher within 30 ft. of an adjacent single story historic building. 6.32 When adjacent to a one or two story historicbuildingthatwasoriginallyconstructed rs.-.t , • 1 for commercial use, a new building within the same block face should not exceed 28 in height * _ t-•+ within 30 ft. of the front facade. - r - • In general, a proposed multi -story building • 7 ; i _ - must demonstrate that it has no negative , • impact on smaller, historic structures 'I? nearby. cl • The height and proportions of all facade components must appear to be in scale with q nearby historic buildings. Historic One Story Residen i I l i y g s. type Building 6.33 New development adjacent to a single New infill adjacent to historic miners cottages shall not exceed story historic building that was originally 28 ft. in height within 30 ft. of the property line adjacent to the constructed for residential use shall not exceed historic structure. 28 ft. in height within 30 ft. of the side property __ line adjacent to the historic structure, within the same block face. Iconic Historic Structures Visually prominent historic structures 6.34 The setting of iconic historic structures influence the design character of Downtown should be preserved and enhanced when Aspen and should be recognized. These are: feasible. • • On sites comprising more than two The Wheeler Opera House • traditional lot widths, the third floor of The Elks building the adjacent lot width should be set back a • The Independence building • minimum of 15 ft from the front facade. Pitk n County Courthouse • • Step a building down in height adjacent to Hotel Jerome an iconic structure. City Hall • • Locate amenity space adjacent to an iconic St. Mary's Church structure. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District page 111 Design Objectives and Guidelines a 1 • —� P37 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 1102 Waters Avenue- Major Development (Conceptual), Residential Design Standards Variances, FAR bonus- Public Hearing DATE: August 10, 2011 SUMMARY: 1102 Waters Avenue was approved for landmark designation and a Historic Landmark Lot Split in 2010. The property has been in the ownership of the Geary family since 1967, when they constructed a vacation home prototype which was designed by Fritz Benedict and marketed for construction around the country by Ski Magazine. The three Geary children still own and use the original A -frame home, but would like to have individual living space on the property. The proposal before HPC is Conceptual design review of a new duplex on the vacant lot. No changes to the historic house are proposed now, other than relocation of the front sidewalk, which HPC will need to approve as part of the landscape plan at Final review. The lot split approval was part of a voluntary designation and negotiation of preservation incentives. An envelope was established on the vacant lot to define the buildable area. This involved a waiver of the 25' front yard setback and forgiveness of the requirement to setback new construction 15' from the top of slope. Typical FAR reductions for steep slopes were not applied. The applicant was allowed a total of three dwelling units instead of one. These exceptions were found to be appropriate in order to cooperatively preserve this important example of Benedict's work. Only two of this prolific and influential architect's buildings are currently protected from demolition. Without the negotiation, the ability to build much beyond the historic house was very limited. It was recognized during the lot split that the new envelope is irregular and of limited depth. Development in a manner that is sympathetic to the landmark is challenging. HPC has held two worksessions on the proposed new duplex and expressed reservations about the complex form and roof plan. The property owners have applied for formal review, which requires Major Development approval and waivers of Residential Design Standards. An FAR bonus is requested for the purpose of creating basement lightwells. The design includes two driveways, serving single stall garages for each unit. In earlier conversations about the proposal, it was recognized that this is in conflict with the Municipal Code, which allows only one curb cut per property, regardless of the number of residential units. Unfortunately, this was not vetted with the City Engineer earlier in the process. She has 1 P38 determined that only one curb cut will be approved. The property owner has the option to redesign or appeal to the Board of Adjustment. Because of this outstanding issue, HPC cannot grant Conceptual approval for the proposed design. The board is asked to provide feedback on the project and a recommendation to Board of Adj ustment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC continue the hearing to October 12th, to allow the applicant sufficient time to redesign and/or meet with Board of Adjustment. APPLICANTS: Susan Geary Griffin, Bonnie Geary Grenney, and William Scott Geary. PARCEL ID: 2737- 182 -66 -001. ADDRESS: 1102 Waters Avenue, Lot 14, Calderwood Subdivision, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: R -15, Moderate Density Residential MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, 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. Major Development is a two -step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. STAFF RESPONSE: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." 2 P39 The subject lot has a maximum allowable FAR of 2,975 square feet. The building envelope is vested, however the placement of new construction within that envelope is the focus of HPC's design review. The plans indicate that some features, such as eavelines, and perhaps building foundation, project past the building envelope. This is not permitted. All areas of the building must be entirely within the envelope. The main living area of each unit in the duplex has a footprint that is similar in size to the historic house, and a gable end oriented in the same direction as the historic house. In staff's opinion, this is the only strong relationship between the structures. The multiple smaller gable and shed roof elements that are added to the primary living area are out of character with the historic house and have been the focus of HPC's comments in the previous worksessions. Staff finds that there is conflict with the following guidelines, particularly 11.5. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. ❑ Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. ❑ The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. ❑ The front should include a one -story element, such as a porch. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. ❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. ❑ Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. ❑ Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. ❑ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. ❑ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A- frames. Pulling some or all of these additive elements into a smaller number of basic forms may meet the design guidelines more successfully. There are numerous examples within Benedict's other work, within local examples of the Modern Chalet style, or even by referencing the two story rear fagade of 1102 Waters Avenue that can be used as a model for creating a new residential structure that enhances, rather than overwhelms the landmark. 3 P40 r r i hI ---- 7 `t r a l 0 � 0. it • 01 • 1 / t . - pp � ,. 1111 Ar d 'Y' • t 1 l • ..: _. " \ 1 , , '∎L►.. . kit' . -- _._ , : 1r1 . y - ' I , ' ' --0 - • i - — -- .140 The project includes a possible request for an FAR bonus, which wells o s is r wind provided on wells ' to serve the basement. No information about the locatio n f window drawing. This is needed to evaluate the bonus and to ensure that the window wells don't conflict with the Residential Design Standards. _. 4 - P41 Driveways Each of the proposed new dwelling units typically requires two on -site parking spaces. All four spaces were waived during the lot split. This was done because it was anticipated that it would be difficult to fit all of the program in the envelope. The property owners would still prefer to have one space each on site. The proposal to locate garages on each end of the building does result in one story elements abutting neighboring properties and the historic resource, which is appropriate. Because the lot is only about 25' deep, and a garage stall is about 20' deep, there is little opportunity to slide the garages back from the front facade or decrease their prominence. It is clear that the area in the center of the envelope is most desired for living space. HPC suggested at a worksession that the garages be paired together at the western end of the site. HPC staff is not opposed to the possibility of two driveways if the garages, and the overall massing of the project are made to be more related to the Benedict house. Benedict's houses frequently featured carports which housed parking under an extended roof line. At the bottom left is a house by Fritz Benedict on Gillespie (demolished) and a house at 1112 Waters Avenue, designed by long -time Benedict employee and 1956 MIT School of Architecture grad Ellen Harland. .1 '�f+^`. ✓ `." - "'s • ti.� Y.' y�.� : } a : S I go,± ��1: _3(„�'- - �` v . p r, �; . t , < , F' ..+: -. ' " + 7t y ,. i . ,& 1 NIL „ y Yn � • C � � s � I ., LE r . Apr , % L ' t )t • ,x^45 ), !iPi , . ,, t, i ...,....._,, ,,„ .._.. .,_-- ai. An HPC recommendation to Board of Adjustments is needed. As designed, both garages are out of compliance with the Residential Design Standards because they are not recessed at least 10' behind the front doors (they are closer to the street than the front doors.) These features would perhaps be more in compliance with the guidelines if they were open carports or incorporated into a more simple massing approach. 5 P42 RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS The project does not comply with Residential Design Standards related to Building Orientation, Secondary Mass, Garage setback, Street Oriented Entrance, and Inflection. All Residential Design Standard Variances, Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410.020(D)(2) must: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site - specific constraints. The design standards requiring variances are: Building orientation. The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both I , street- facing facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures ''''���'� �`'i ( `, IT oint of the arc of the 1 I � the midpoint be parallel to the tangent of p street. Parcels as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall No. 1 j Yes . be exempt from this requirement. Yes. One (1) element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front comer of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. Secondary mass. All new single - family and duplex structures shall locate at least ten percent (10 %) of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building or _ �. linked to it by a subordinate linking element. This standard shall only apply to parcels within the Aspen infill area pursuant to Subsection 26.410.010.B.2. Accessory buildings such as garages, sheds and �'-- -. accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate uses for the secondary mass. A subordinate linking element for the purposes of linking a primary and secondary mass shall be at least ten (10) feet in length, not more than ten (10) feet in width, and with a plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. Accessible outdoor space over the linking element (e.g. a deck) is permitted but may not be covered or enclosed. Any railing for an 6 P43 accessible outdoor space over a linking element must be the minimum reasonably necessary to provide adequate safety and building code compliance and the railing must be 50% or more transparent. I Garages: The front facade of the garage or the front -most supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further I 1 from the street than the front -most wall of the house. ; Il!lII{jIjilltll — , e ' k-x- "I`3x.s-4' Street oriented entrance and principal window. All single - family homes and duplexes, except as outlined in Subsection 26.410.0103.4 shall have a street- oriented entrance and a street facing principal window. Multi - family units shall have at least one (1) street - oriented entrance for every four (4) units and front units must have a street facing a principal window: On comer lots, entries and principal windows should face whichever street has a greater block length. This standard shall be satisfied if all of the following conditions are met: a. The entry door shall face the street and be no '1;_ more than ten (10) feet back from the front -most 18. wall of the building. Entry doors shall not be �I O taller than eight (8) feet. � Inflection. The following standard must be met for parcels which are six thousand (6,000) square feet or over and as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.2: a. If a one -story building exists directly adjacent to the subject site, then the new construction must step down to one -story in height along their common lot line. If there are one - story IIiINOI!I ® IPi41!dltlt', in buildings on both sides of the subject site, the pi 1 o00 ° on II 1 applicant may choose the side toward which to inflect. If.. Then A one -story building shall be defined as follows: A one -story building shall mean a structure or portion of a structure, where there I I _ h is only one (1) floor of fully usable living ' space, at least twelve (12) feet wide across the � ,QIIIIIIII6 I f st frontage. This standard shall be met by ` � providing a one-story element which is also at I i ,L . I ill ( ea' � I - 7 P44 least twelve (12) feet wide across the street frontage and one (1) story tall as far back along the common lot line as the adjacent building is one (1) story. Staff Response: Some relief from the Residential Design Standards may be appropriate. The intention of creating the envelope was to identify where new development should be located. There are unusual characteristics of the site that could justify exceptions in order to best preserve the adjacent historic landmark. 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 continue the hearing to October 12, to allow the applicant sufficient time to redesign and/or meet with Board of Adjustment. A recommendation to the Board of Adjustment regarding a driveway variance is needed. Exhibits: A. Relevant HPC Guidelines B. Application 8 P45 Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines, Conceptual Review 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. ❑ The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern of the site. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. ❑ The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry. ❑ A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. ❑ In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. ❑ Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. ❑ The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. ❑ The front should include a one -story element, such as a porch. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. ❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. ❑ Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. ❑ Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. ❑ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. ❑ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A- frames. 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 are especially discouraged on historic sites. 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, a new driveway must be located off of it. 1438 Garages should not dominate the street scene. 9 000. ao /m, Any° P46 ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application PROJECT: . .. _. Name: 'W1 S AL\t \lYr' �vf'LA Location: (0 3- Wei ' , 7 kie , L07 6oThiptvcslm / fa A( C (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel 1D # (REQUIRED) ` 7 277- )e3 67G - Co / APPLICANT: Name: CleA-Y FAtil Address: (62 Wk EI . Acpe v, Cn Phone #: l e (" 37( - 733 1 Fax#:lq- 7S3 q3 E -mail 4YVVeCCkj 1CC � vino((. CUM REPRESENTATIVE: Name: 1;9 . C H - 1 Address: 1 G✓ / -D - A6S C9c 4)' ) � C\ICWr4AA.S 1691 Phone #: 2-7 - `7 SO Fax#: 0/2;7- frn E -mail: QPo N TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): 1 f � ' ❑ Historic Designation 111 Relocation (temporary, on ❑ Certificate of No Negative Effect ❑ or off -site) ❑ Certificate of Appropriateness ❑ Demolition (total ❑ -Minor Historic Development demolition) ❑ / -Major Historic Development ❑ Historic Landmark Lot Split 11K Major 1 - Conceptual Historic Development ❑ -Final Historic Development - Substantial Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) '`6 'ALT I/7 fl t , 1/i`: I En 4p.)A- tT 'tn PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) ! os: - S ' 2.0c7 i OF - al I..1e' Ts. talk Au Cfft-C JUL 1 2 2011 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEp! pen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29, 2007 07/12/2011 10:53 9705275745 ANA CAD LTD PAGE 01102 P47 ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form (item MO on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects) Project WPrWts eve— ` Dt)pleie Applicant Project Location: 1 i U2 W C1 of u - p - & Co Zone District: — 2 — (rj • Lot Size: Lot Area: _Leal( LOF w►-at ..L -. i inWeste ) (For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: 0 .Proposed: 0 Number of residential units: Existing: 0 Proposed: 2 Number of bedrooms: Existing: 0 _ Proposed.: (p Proposed % of demolition: 0 DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the lone district) Floor Area: Existing : 0 / Allowable_ ZqI S t roposed-- 2 43 He• t Principal Bldg.: ,Existing: 0 Allowable: 05 Proposed. c94 ' — 11 1 Accessory Bldg.: Existing: 14 k Allowable: I A Proposed: ti I A On -Site parking: Existing: 0 Required- Proposed: i Z Site coverage: Existing: NI\ Required. Proposed-• • t A % Open Space: Existing: J■J I W Required: ) 1q Proposed-• Front Setback: Existing: 1S IA Required• 0 Proposed.• 1 t Rear Setback: Existing: IQ P'. _Required :: 4:20'- $ Proposed : 1p1 .- 1 tt Combined Front/Rear: N I .A lce- g " indicate N. S. E. W Existing: A Required :PIA Proposed.• ' " Side Setback: t.{ Existing:4j_Required : J ©' Proposed: r— t — tr Side Setback: 5 Existing: 111 Requited.• /0 ' Proposed.• 1 ' Combined Sides: Existing: 1' Q Required: . 0 0' Proposed. .2 3 e - t" Distance between ,Existing: f �I I t� Requires: 15 Proposed.- bi ` • „tit buildings: • Existing non - conformities or encmachments and note ifencroacbanent licenses have been issued: Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Raqune-ueads, Updated: May 29, 2007 • P48 7. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how the proposed development complies with the review criteria and The City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines relevant to the development application. The design proposal submitted for conceptual review by the Historic Preservation Commission is for a new duplex residential structure to be located at 1102 Waters Avenue, which is Lot 14, Calderwood Subdivision, Aspen, CO (parcel identification number 2737 - 182 -66 -001). The duplex will occupy Lot 2 of the Lot Split approved by the Aspen City Council on November 8, 2010 pursuant to Ordinance No. 23, Series of 2010. The purpose of the lot split was as an incentive for the historic landmark designation agreement for the existing & well preserved Fritz Benedict designed "Ski Home of the Month ". The home plans were prepared by Fredric A Benedict A.IA. for a Ski Magazine feature and are dated 1966. Construction drawings were received by the Aspen Building Department on March 24, 1967. The home has functioned very well through the years as a Ski Home for the original family exactly as Fritz Benedict had envisioned. The home is now prepared to continue forward into the future with the original concept & structure intact & protected. The duplex program requirements call for an approximately 2970 square foot building with roughly equal sized units & including a single car garage for each unit. Main Living space is requested to be near ground level with river side deck space. Second floor area with a relatively modest Master Bedroom & Bath for each unit + small deck spaces at both the street & river sides. Below grade space utilized for additional Bedroom/Bath, Laundry, & Mechanical spaces. River views are to be maximized for both units. Most of the allowable floor area available for the duplex is dedicated to the above grade areas. The owners request that the Historic Preservation Commission consider granting the available five hunderd square foot bonus that is mentioned in Section 3.9 of the Subdivision Exemption Agreement. The aditional floor area would be utilized by providing larger area wells for the below grade level. Larger area wells would provide additional light & ventilation for the below grade space. Granting the five hundred square foot bonus would not significantly increase the mass of the proposed duplex structure. The proposed new duplex design relates foremost with the adjacent Benedict house & design cues were adopted from that building. One element of the new design that "relates to the fundamental characteristics of the historic resource" is the repetition of the simple shingled gable roof form which is dominating at the Benedict house. The duplex design does not attempt to exactly imitate the Benedict "A - frame" form but instead strives for "visual compatibility" through form, detail, & materials. The duplex design respects the adjacent condominium building with approximately half of the building mass adjacent at only one story. Additionally, the important river view from the Southeast corner of the condominium building remains unblocked by the proposed new structure. Building Orientation The primary entrances of the proposed duplex do orient to the street. The South unit entrance is arranged parallel to the street - facing lot line. The adjacent neighboring structures including the condominium building & the Benedict house are not oriented in a "traditional grid pattern". Likewise, the proposed Entry to the North unit is not arranged parallel or exactly tangent to the curvilinear street - facing lot line. Nonetheless, the North entry is clearly defined with a walkway & porch that orients to P49 the street. The primary entrances to the new building are both clearly defined by using "functional" front porches. The proposed porches are similar in size & shape to those seen traditionally. Mass & Scale The proposed new duplex building is intended to appear similar in scale with the historic building adjacent. The larger masses of the new building has been subdivided into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic building on the original site. The primary plane of the front of the new building does not appear taller than the historic structure. The front of the new building does include one -story elements including front porches. The new duplex scheme locates a one story shingled garage structure adjacent to the Benedict house. The garage is pulled off of the allowable envelope line at the front of the lot opening the Benedict front yard and front elevation to the street. Building & Roof Forms The duplex uses roof "forms that are similar to those of the historic property". The roof forms used are of equal or smaller span & therefore "should not overwhelm the original in scale ". The roof forms are "similar to those seen traditionally in the block ". The sloping roofs used "are appropriate for primary roof forms ". Flat roofs are not used. Eave depths are "similar to those seen traditionally in the context ". Exotic building & roof forms are not used. Asphalt composite shingle roofing of a natural color is proposed for the roofing of the duplex structure. This material is "similar in scale & texture to those used traditionally ". The composite shingles do have a matte, non - reflective finish. Materials Cedar tapersawn shakes are proposed for exterior wall covering. The shakes will repeat & match the texture and scale of the wood shakes covering the A -frame roof of the Benedict house. The wood shakes of the Benedict house are a historically used element that are primary to the character of the home. Highly reflective materials are not proposed. Architectural Details "Overall, details (proposed) are modest in character ". Riverside French doors with non - orthogonal transom windows are proposed for the new building closely matching in size & shape to those of the historic property. Riverside decks are also similar in size to those of the historic property. The older historic "A -frame" style of the Benedict house has not been imitated and the distinction between old & new buildings is apparent. The new building is not ornately detailed or of a revival style. P50 #14 Verification that the proposal complies with Section 26.410, Residential Design Standards, or a written request for a variance from any standard that is not being met. 26.410.010 General A. Purpose. The purpose of the proposed design for a duplex at 1102 Waters Ave. is not exactly to preserve the "established neighborhood scale and character" as the Residential Design Standards opens with, the design is intended to transition neighborhood scale and character from a line of older large multi- family condominium buildings along Waters Avenue to the small scale Fritz Benedict designed & now historic Landmark designated ski house. Preserving the integrity of the Benedict house while infilling the open lot adjacent is the primary goal of this application. A design that is "conducive to walking" on the street & through the neighborhood & that contributes to the street -scape is a stated residential design standard purpose. The street -side on -grade deck of the Benedict house enjoys a strong relationship with the street where residents can easily interact with the passerby. A similar relationship to the street is proposed for the two duplex entry covered porches including elements that are small scale, street level, & landscaped providing "animation to the landscape ". The duplex front facade relationship with the street is somewhat more complicated than is typical due to the curve of Waters Avenue, non - parallel to the street front facades of the adjacent condominium building & Benedict house , plus non - parallel sideyard envelope lines. Additionally, the building envelope available for the duplex is small, not very deep & oddly configured. The intent is that the proposed duplex front facade complete a successful transition between the condominium units & the intimate Benedict house while responding to the curve of Waters Avenue & the non - parallel neighbors. The duplex front facade optimizes the building envelope area available as dictated by the curve of Waters Avenue. The existing neighborhood "front setback pattern" is unusually inconsistent. There exists almost no "interaction possible between residents and passerby and the built environment" at the neighboring condominium units because of the large existing front yard parking lot. However, starting at the Benedict house, to the Paterson house & on, the neighborhood has very strong "interaction possible between residents and passerby and the built environment ". The duplex design has a comfortable small scale relationship with the street extending the positive neighborhood setback pattern to the boundary with the adjacent condominium units. "Front porches (do) provide outdoor living space & animation to the street - scape, & one -story entryways provide an appropriate domestic scale for a private residence." "Street- facing windows (do) establish a hierarchy of spaces with larger, formal windows denoting public areas & smaller ones suggesting private rooms." "Acknowledgment of the context that has been established by the built environment is important to protecting the uniqueness of the City." The preservation of the Fritz Benedict designed ski house, "important to protecting the uniqueness of the City "is the goal of this project. Building materials selected for the duplex project have `relevance to Aspen's history" & relevance to Benedict house. The duplex project does "avoid a significant overshadowing" of the Benedict house. The design for the proposed duplex intends to be "architecturally interesting & lively ". No alley exists & parking areas can not be concentrated to the rear or side of each of each duplex unit. However off street parking accommodated & is located to the ends of the duplex building. On- street parking works well & remains as now existing. P51 B. Applicability. 2. Parcels located within the Aspen infill area are required to comply with all the standards. C. Application. An application for residential development shall consist of of an application for a development order as may be required by the Historic Preservation Commission pursuant to Section 26.304.030 and an application for "Residential Design Standards" review pursuant to Section 26.410.020. D. Exemptions, not appicable to this proposed duplex project. Section 26.410.020. Procedures for review. A. Determination of applicability, pre - application through HPC review. B. Determination of consistency, pre - application through HPC review. C. Appeal of adverse determination. Seeking variances, see below. D. Variances 2. Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which do not meet this Section may be granted by the Historic Preservation Commission, if the project is subject to the requirements of Chapter 26.415 (Development involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites & Structures) An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate & the deciding board shall fmd that the variance, if granted would: a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed & the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site - specific constraints. The proposed duplex project will require variances from the Residential Design Standards. Requests for each variance required are listed below 26.410.030. Administrative checklist. 26.410.040 Residential Design Standards A. Site Design. The intent is to encourage residential buildings that address the street in a manner which creates a consistent "facade line" & defines the public & semi - public realms. 1. Building orientation. The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On curvilinear streets, the front facade shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. One element placed at a front corner of the building may be diagonal from the street if desired. Variance request #1. The proposed South duplex unit is oriented parallel to the street as required. The North unit responds to the curvilinear street but is not exactly tangent to the mid -point of the arc of the street & therefore requires a variance. The North side of the North unit is nearly parallel to the South side of the adjacent condominium building & the common property line. The North unit one car & one story Garage utilizes a narrow area available within the approved building envelope. The North unit Garage has a gently curved driveway accommodating an additional off -street parking space while preserving the large existing cottonwood trees & large rock features near the NW property line. P52 As noted previously, the existing adjacent setback pattern is unusually inconsistent & the existing adjacent structures are not parallel to the street. 2. Build -to- lines. On lots of less than fifteen thousand square feet, at least sixty percent of the front facade shall be within five feet of the minimum front yard setback line. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. 3. Fences shall not be more than (42 ") high in all areas of the front facade of the house + no man made berms. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. B. Building Form. The intent of the following building form standards is to respect the scale of Aspen's historical homes by creating new homes which are more similar in their massing, by promoting development of accessory units off the City alleys & by preserving solar access. 1. Secondary mass. All new duplex structures shall locate at least 10% of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building or linked to it by a subordinate linking element. Variance request #2. The Waters Avenue neighborhood does not have any historical homes for which this Design Standard is intended to protect. The massing of the proposed duplex is intended to transition between the large scale adjacent condominium and the small scale Benedict ski house. The duplex design provides one story elements adjacent to both the condominiums and the Benedict house. Additionally the duplex design provides one story massing at the street - scape. The duplex massing is broken down into simple gabled forms of similar scale to the Benedict house. Although not exactly "linked ", the relationship of the duplex one story massing with the two story massing does provide a comfortable transition which is respectful of the scale of the neighboring homes & condominiums. C. Parking, Garages, and Carports. The intent of the following parking, garages & carport standards is to minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian & automobile traffic by placing parking, garages & carports on alleys or to minimize the presence of garages & carports as a lifeless part of the street -scape where alleys do not exist. 2. For all residential uses that have access only from a public street, the following standards shall apply: a. On the street facing facade, the width of the living area on the first floor shall be at least five feet greater than the width of the garage. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. b. The front facade of the Garage or the front -most supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten feet further from the street than the front -most wall of the house. Variance request #3 The approved building envelope is simply not deep enough to accommodate the ten foot garage setback requirement. The site does however have unusual depth between the front property line & Waters Avenue which does greatly relieve the street - scape. Waters Avenue is wide with existing parallel parking on both sides of the street and perpendicular parking at the Paterson house. The adjacent condominium building has a Large front yard parking lot which is a far more "lifeless part of the street - scape" than what is proposed with the design for the duplex. Because Waters Avenue is a dead -end street, traffic is limited to residents & guests. Conflicts between pedestrians & automobile traffic is very much reduced in the Waters Avenue neighborhood because of the wide & dead -end street. c. On lots at least fifteen thousand square feet...not applicable to this project. d. When the floor of a garage is above or below street level, the driveway cut within the front yard setback shall not exceed two feet in depth, measured from natural grade. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. e. The vehicular entrance width of a garage or carport shall not be greater than twenty four feet. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. P53 f. If the garage doors are visible from a public street, then they shall be single -stall doors... The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. D. Building Elements. The intent of the following standard is to ensure that each residential building has street - facing architectural details and elements, which provide human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience and reinforce local building traditions. 1. Street oriented principal window. All duplexes shall have a street- oriented entrance & a street facing principal window. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. a. The entry door shall face the street & be no more than ten feet back from the front -most wall of the building. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight feet. The South unit entry door meets this requirement & the North unit entry door does face the street but is not exactly tangent to the curve of Waters Avenue. The proposed duplex design generally meets this requirement. b. A covered entry porch of fifty or more square feet, with a minimum depth of six feet, shall be part of the front facade. Entry porches & canopies shall not be more than one story in height. One story Entry porches for both the North & South duplex units are part on the proposed design. Although space available for the porches is limited the design conforms to the intent & very nearly conforms to the required minimums. If it is determined that a variance is required for this requirement, it would be of minor significance. c. A street facing principal window requires that a significant window or group of windows face the street. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. 2. First story element. All residential buildings shall have a first story street- facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent of the buildings overall width & the depth of which is at least six feet from the wall of the first story element is projecting from. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. 3. Windows. a. Street facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine & 12 feet above the finished floor. For interior staircases, this measurement will be made from the first landing if one exists. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. b. No more than one non - orthogonal window shall be allowed on each facade of the building. A single non - orthogonal window in a gable end may be divided with mullions and still be considered one non- orthogonal window. Variance request #4 Apparently a variance is needed for this requirement. The river side elevation illustrates one non - orthogonal transom window over French doors at the upper level of both the North & South duplex units. The transoms are intended to repeat a similar arrangement of non - orthogonal transom over French door that exists at the river side elevation of the Benedict ski house. The repetition of similar architectural elements is intended to make the adjacent structures more compatible with each other. Only two non - orthogonal windows are proposed & they are both located on the river side elevation. 4. Lightwells. All areaways, lightwells and/or stairwells on the street- facing facade of a building shall be entirely recessed behind the front -most wall of the building. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. E. Context. The intent of the following standards is to reinforce the unique character of Aspen & the region by drawing upon Aspen's vernacular architecture & neighborhood characteristics in designing new structures. 1. Materials, The following standards must be met: a. The quality of the exterior materials & details & their application shall be consistent on all sides of the building. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. P54 b. Materials shall be used in ways that are true to their characteristics. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. c. Highly reflective surfaces shall not be used as exterior materials. The proposed duplex design meets this requirement. 2. Inflection. The following standard must be met for parcels which are six thousand square feet or over & as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.2. a. If a one -story building exists directly adjacent to the subject site, then the new construction must step down to the one -story height along their common lot line. If there are one -story buildings on both sides of the subject site then the applicant may choose the side toward which to inflect. This requirement is met with a proposed one -story garage element located adjacent to the Benedict ski house. Also note that the one -story garage element is pulled off of the sideyard element line near the street creating more space between the historic resource & the proposed new duplex.