Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20120523 P1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 23, 2012 — 5:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM 130.5. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO SITE VISITS- None INTRODUCTION A. Roll call B. Approval of minutes C. Public Comments Commission member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring G. Staff comments H. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued I. Submit public notice for agenda items OLD BUSINESS (Next Resolution will be #12) A. 720 E. Hyman Avenue- AspenModem Negotation for Voluntary Landmark Designation and Minor Development, Continued from May 9th' (1 hour) B. 610 E. Hyman- AspenModem Negotiation for Voluntary Landmark Designation, Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Special Review For Utility/Trash/Recycling Area, Continued from May 9th (1 hour) NEW BUSINESS A. None WORKSESSI®NS A. None ADJOURN 7:15 p.m. P2 Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation Applicant presentation Board questions and clarifications Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed Applicant rebuttal (comments) Motion *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. P3 PROJECT MONITORING- Projects in bold are currently under construction. Ann Mullins Boomerang 604 W. Main Lift One 316 E. Hopkins 610 W. Hallam-light Fox Crossing AspenCore 217 E. Bleeker Jamie Brewster McLeod 630 E. Hyman 518 W. Main 1102 Waters 205 S. Spring 302 E. Hopkins Jay Maytin 920 W. Hallam 518 W. Main 28 Smuggler Grove Red Butte Cemetery Lift One 205 S. Spring 320 Lake Nora Berko 28 Smuggler Grove 1102 Waters 332 W. Main Willis Pember 508 E. Cooper 202/208 E. Main AspenCore M:\city\planning\hpc project monitoring\PROJECT MONITORING.doc • 5/18/2012 P4 P5 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner THRU: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 720 East Hyman Avenue (Block 104, Lots Q, R, and S, aka Aspen Athletic Club Building Condominium) — AspenModern negotiation for Landmark Designation,Minor Development, Public Hearing DATE: May 23, 2012 SUMMARY: 720 E. Hyman Avenue, aka the Aspen Athletic Club, is located on the east end of downtown at the northwest corner of Hyman Avenue and Original Street. The property is included on the Aspen Modern map. The applicant proposes to voluntarily designate the existing Robin Molny designed building in exchange for benefits through the AspenModern - —= --- program. The applicant — �` ra proposes to convert a „ ---r= 0 ' portion of the second floor F office space to an affordable " 'J . housing unit and to convert -; the third floor office space _ - _ into two free market residential units. A roof Photograph 1: 720 E.Hyman Ave.,May 2012 deck is proposed. Minor exterior changes include adding glazing to original plywood "hoppers" that allowed for ventilation above the fixed windows with glazing and the addition of removable horizontal brise soleiel (a screen usually louvered placed on the outside of a building to shield windows from direct sunlight) above the windows. HPC is asked to make a recommendation regarding the historic significance of 720 East Hyman and to make a determination regarding the exterior changes through the traditional Minor Development Review process. Setback variances for the brise soleil are requested. BACKGROUND: 720 E. Hyman was built in 1976 by local Aspen architect Robin Molny with Art Yuenger assisting with construction drawings and some design details. Molny is HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 1 of 12 P6 a significant local architect who was part of the local Frank Lloyd Wright trained constituent. Similar to other Wrightian trained architects in Aspen, Molny worked for Fritz Benedict when he first arrived in town. In his practice, he designed the Mason and Morse Building on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2012), the Hearthstone House on Hyman Avenue (designated in 2006), the pedestrian malls and local area residences including a home that was listed in the 1975 Architecture Record publication. The existing building is located in the Mixed Use Zone District. It comprises 5 floors with 3 floors above grade and 2 floors below grade. The building is entirely commercial use. According to the current Land Use Code the building greatly exceeds the FAR. allotment for commercial uses (the maximum by-right is 6,750 square feet and the existing condition is 17,026 square feet) and it is over the height limit (limit is 28 feet up to 32 feet, and the existing condition is between 33 feet 3 inches and 35 feet 6 inches). There have been very few exterior changes to the building since 1976. In 2008 the building owner applied to HPC for voluntary landmark designation and minor development review with exterior changes very similar to those requested today. The 2008 HPC Resolution is attached as Exhibit C. The applicant acted on some of the approved changes: removal of exterior paint, accessibility upgrade, and removal of pine trees from the planter boxes. The applicant withdrew the landmark designation application and did not act on the HPC approvals to add brise soleil to the exterior of the building and to convert the original plywood hoppers to glazing. HISTORIC DESIGNATION §26.415. 030. C AspenModern 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of AspenModern, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet at least two of the criteria a-d, and criterion e described below: a. The property is related to an event, pattern, or trend that has made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific event, pattern or trend is identified and documented in an adopted context paper; b. The property is related to people who have made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific people are identified and documented in an adopted context paper; c. The property represents a physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 2 of 12 P7 the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman, or design philosophy that is deemed important and the specific physical design, designer, or philosophy is documented in an adopted context paper; d. The property possesses such singular significance to the City, as documented by the opinions of persons educated or experienced in the fields of history, architecture, landscape architecture, archaeology or a related field, that the property's potential demolition or major alteration would substantially diminish the character and sense of place in the city as perceived by members of the community, and e. The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. STAFF FINDINGS: Staff finds that review criteria a– e are met. 720 E. Hyman does not exemplify textbook Wrightian architecture. Restricting the analysis of a design profession like architecture to a uniform set of criteria that qualify a building as contributing to a specific style fails to recognize the artistic freedom architects like Molny exercised— as Wright expressed to Molny, "If you understand the principles of my architecture, then your buildings need not look like mine." Applying this idea to preservation of 720 East Hyman; while it does not replicate the exact teachings of a master architect, it is defined in part by Aspen's creative enviromnent where architects, and other creative professionals, could experiment with modern philosophies and the built environment in this specific context. It is exactly this creative adventure that produced interesting architecture in Aspen—architecture that communicates both a sense of place (the high country and extreme environment) and a higher level of design. Spatial connections, relationship to the site and connection with nature, and utilizing the materials for both aesthetic and structural functions are all examples of Wrightian philosophy. Molny used Wrightian design philosophy- for example: organic architecture (composing buildings with space rather than mass and scale; and creating a harmony of architecture and environment) - to create an open floor plan and an interior/exterior courtyard. Aspen was lucky to be home to many intellectuals, including modernist architects, who were starting out in the field. Molny used his foundation at Taliesen to draw upon the physical and intellectual environment of Aspen and create a building that is not a replica of Wright, but indicative of his own background, design, experiences, and client. Molny was not the only architect in Aspen whose training under Frank Lloyd Wright influenced the towns architectural character. Please refer to the white paper "Aspen's Twentieth- HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 3of12 P8 Century Architecture: Modernism 1945 — 1975", attached as Exhibit B, more information about this trend. Aspen was fortunate to attract a variety of highly trained architects who left a modern impression throughout the town. Among the architectural crowd was Robin Molny who trained at Taliesen under Frank Lloyd Wright for five years and in the 1950s was selected by Wright to supervise the Greenberg Residence in Dousman, Wisconsin. Wright is quoted as describing Molny as a "poet" saying "he'll be a good architect one day." Subsequently, Molny moved to Aspen, worked for Fritz Benedict, and opened his own architecture firm. The Hearthstone House (134 East Hyman, 1961), the Mason and Morse Building (514 East Hyman, heavily altered, 1971), and the downtown pedestrian malls (1970s) were all designed by Molny. The HPC awarded Molny two Welton Anderson Preservation Honor Awards in 1995 for the pedestrian malls and again in 1997 for significant architectural contributions to Aspen. Dick Carney, Chairman of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Board, wrote a letter honoring Molny when he was presented with the Welton Anderson Preservation Honor Award in 1997. Robin Molny's architectural contributions are locally significant in their representation and communication of Aspen life in the 1960s and 1970s. As indicated through the careful orientation of the main atrium, Molny was sensitive to spatial relationships: he designed the atrium to serve as a flexible, light-filled, transition between the exterior and interior, taking advantage of the views to the mountain, and creating interest for those inside the building. The style of the building is hard to categorize. • It best represents an eclectic commercial style that Molny created using natural materials, >`' _- repetition, and cutting edge building technology of the time. The elegant use of structural members to create the form, fenestration, and architectural interest, and attention to small details like bolt patterns display the craftsmanship and philosophy of a quality designer. Molny displayed his appreciation and knowledge of materials and architectural history in the construction of the Photograph 2: Detail of bolt pattern Aspen Athletic Building with the use of the current technology and construction techniques. The first patents for glu-lam beams were issued in Switzerland and Germany, and the first U.S. manufacturing standard for glu-lam was published in 1963. The structural glazing (also called structural silicone glazing) that spans between the first and second floors to create the interior atrium uses cutting edge technology that was developing in the late 1960s and early 1970s. 720 E. Hyman was built in 1976. Overall the physical integrity of the building is intact. Original materials have not been replaced and the form and site plan is unchanged. The plywood hoppers appear original but are no longer operable. The applicant proposes to restore the openings to operable HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 4 of 12 P9 windows and replace the plywood with glazing, as discussed in the Minor review section of the memo. Other minor repairs are proposed to the brick planter boxes. These repairs will not significantly affect the building's integrity score. The building scored a 17 on the integrity score sheet which qualifies it as a"best" example of organic architecture. The applicant proposes metal brise soliel above the windows on the south elevation to provide shade to the interior spaces. Staff believe that an interior solution is possible, which is discussed in the minor review section of the memo. This will change the form of the building and negatively affect the integrity score. The proposed rooftop deck and the replacement of the plywood hoppers with glazing will not significantly impact the integrity score. Staff that criteria a, b, c, d, and e are met. .ASPENIVIODERNfNEG®TIATiON%' " ....t.,. ', .. .,...,.5..,... ..�f k E.r�v:._a'`.,.,..,.;RW -w f.r:1., r.F:... ..... ...a:,..,,.rt.. ...'C,._a�+x d..e. §26.415.025.C.1.b. The Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, at a public meeting, regarding the proposed land use application or building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting. The Historic Preservation Commission, using context papers and integrity scoring sheets for the property under consideration, shall provide Council with an assessment of the property's conformance with the designation criteria of Section 26.415.030.C.1. When any benefits that are not included in Section 26.415.110 are requested by the property owner, HPC shall also evaluate how the designation, and any development that is concurrently proposed, meets the policy objectives for the historic preservation program, as stated at Section 26.415.010, Purpose and Intent. As an additional measure of the appropriateness of designation and benefits, HPC shall determine whether the subject property is a "good, better, or best" example of Aspen's 20th century historic resources, referencing the scoring sheets and matrix adopted by City Council. Staff Response: The applicant requests the following incentives in exchange for landmark designation: 1) Grant 250 square feet of net livable area (NLA) to be added to one of the free market residential units to allow it to exceed the maximum residential unit size cap after the addition of a TDR. There are two free market residential units (Unit A and Unit B) proposed on the third floor. The Mixed Use Zone District has a 2,000 square feet(sf)NLA cap for free market residential units with the ability to increase to 2,500 sf NLA by landing 1 TDR per residence. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 5 of 12 P 1 0 The applicant proposes to purchase and land 2 TDRs- 1 per residence for each Unit to meet the 2,500 sf NLA cap allowed by Code. The AspenModern request is to allow one of the Units to further exceed the cap by 250 sf NLA for a total of 2,750 sf NLA. Free Market Maximum unit size Land 2 TDRs, one per AspenModern request for Residential U nits cap (sf NLA) residence ( sf NLA) 250 sf NLA Unit A _ 2,000 2,500 2,750 Unit B 2,000 2,500 2,500 Table 1: Free Market Residential Units 2) Ability to exceed the allowable floor area ratio for free market residential use. The increase in the free market residential unit sizes exceeds the maximum floor area ratio of 0.5:1 allowed in the Mixed Use Zone District. The maximum allowed free market residential floor area is 4,500 sf and the proposed floor area is 7,014 sf (0.78:1). The overall building complies with the total overall maximum allowable floor area ratio of 2:1. The uses are broken down below: Allowable floor Difference Amount the area in Mixed Existing floor Proposed floor between Use is over Use Use Zone area (sf) area (sf) Existing and the allowable District(sf) Proposed floor area (sf) floor area (sf) Commercial 0.75:1 or 6,750 17,026 9,061 (7,965) 2,3111 Free Market 0.5:1 or 4,500 0 7,014 7,014 2,514 • - Residential Affordable No limitation , 0 961 961 - Housing Overall Total 2:1 or 18,000 17, 026 17,036 10 Table 2: Existing vs.Proposed Floor Area by Use 3) Waiver of$90,000 parking cash-in-lieu fee for 3 parking spaces. The Code requires one parking space per residential unit with the ability to pay cash-in-lieu for the parking spaces by right at $30,000 per space. The property is unable to accommodate parking onsite without demolishing a portion of the building. The 3 new residential units (2 free market units and 1 affordable housing unit) require 3 spaces for a total of$90,000. The cash in lieu fee is used for parking and transportation related construction or improvements. 1 The amount of commercial floor area in the building is an existing non-conformity that is allowed to be maintained or reduced.The proposal is to bring the commercial component closer to compliance by removing almost 8,000 square feet of floor area. A variance is not required for the commercial component. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 6 of 12 P11 As mentioned above, HPC is asked to use the designation criteria, adopted context papers, and scoring sheets to forward a recommendation to City Council regarding the importance of the building. The applicant requests benefits beyond those allotted to landmarks. As such, HPC is asked to use the Purpose and Intent of the Historic Preservation Chapter of the Land Use Code, provided on page 7 of the memo, to evaluate the proposed landmark designation and to forward a recommendation to about how far Council should go with the negotiations. f. rr X:rJ i Fy`7. t , :3 v Z F �I- ,7` a 7 v-r y t 1 „- .c a ..i r d• BENEFITS, f • r•�� ...i,SJ. .,.r x, s i.,a i; ,. .. ,.,:`. h:.t 4-,i,...c,x, _ , ,.i.....>;. ,.. ir.V.+�..da�rs„.._. r., "e...1, :?:A 4.Y.i.:11%::1• Because the property owner requested designation benefits that are not included in the list established in Section 26.415.110, Benefits, HPC must evaluate how the designation, and any development that is concurrently proposed, meets the policy objectives for the historic preservation program, as stated at Section 26.415.010, Purpose and Intent. HPC must also comment on whether the subject properties are "good, better, or best” examples of Aspen's postwar history, so as to inform any decisions on the granting of special benefits. §26.415.010. Purpose and intent. The purpose of this Chapter is to promote the public health, safety and welfare through the protection, enhancement and preservation of those properties, areas and sites, which represent the distinctive elements of Aspen's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history. Under the authority provided by the Home Rule Charter of the City and Section 29-20- 104(c), C.R.S., to regulate land use and preserve. areas of historical, architectural, archaeological, engineering and cultural importance, this Chapter sets forth the procedures to: A. Recognize, protect and promote the retention and continued utility of the historic buildings and districts in the City; B. Promote awareness and appreciation of Aspen's unique heritage; C. Ensure the preservation of Aspen's character as an historic mining town, early ski resort and cultural center; D. Retain the historic, architectural and cultural resource attractions that support tourism and the economic welfare of the community; and E. Encourage sustainable reuse of historic structures. F. Encourage voluntary efforts to increase public information, interaction or access to historic building interiors. The City does not intend by the historic preservation program to preserve every old building, but instead to draw a reasonable balance between private property HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 7 of 12 P12 • rights and the public interest in preserving the City's cultural, historic, and architectural heritage. This should be accomplished by ensuring that demolition of buildings and structures important to that heritage are carefully weighed with - other alternatives. Alterations to historically significant buildings and new construction in historic areas shall respect the character of each such setting, not by imitating surrounding structures, but by being compatible with them as defined in historic preservation guidelines. STAFF RESPONSE: Staff is supportive of the proposal for voluntary landmark designation. 720 E. Hyman represents Robin Molny as an architect and is indicative of post-war commercial development in Aspen in the 1970s. Molny had many different expressions of his architectural training and it is important to recognize the role of 720 E. Hyman in his career in addition to the designated Hearthstone House and the designated Mason and Morse Building. Staff finds that historic preservation standards a— e are met with the designation of this building and the adaptive reuse of the second and third floors. •MINQR"DEVELOPiVIENT. 1 The applicant proposes minor changes to the exterior of the building including the following: 1) Addition of roof deck, railing and stairway access. 2) Addition of brise soleil above the windows on the south, east and west elevations to provide shade. The brise soleils required setback variances as noted below. 3) A new skylight on the roof 4) Replacement of plywood hoppers with operable glazing. - STAFF RESPONSE: • Roof deck: The applicant proposes a 675 square feet roof deck with a glass guardrail. Stairway access is proposed to be clad in wood to match the existing building. As mentioned above the building is over the 32' height limit. The Code allows railings to extend 5' above the height of the building and stairway enclosures are permitted to • extend 10' above the maximum height limit if it is setback at least 15' from street facades. Both of the proposed features meet these requirements — the railing measures 36' 9" and the stair access measures 42'. Staff is supportive of the roof deck and proposed materials for the guardrail and the stair access, which meet Guideline 10.11 below. The deck is located in the center of the building and which will be minimally visible and meets Guideline 10.13 below. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 8 of 12 P13 10.13 Set rooftop addition back from the front of the building. • This will help preserve the original profile of the historically significant building as seen from the street. Brise Soleil: The large south facing windows of the existing building create a greenhouse in the interior spaces. Large spruce trees that were previously planted in the planter boxes offered shade, but obscured the building and mountain views and have since been removed. The applicant is interested in reducing the energy consumption of the building by installing removable brise soleil above the large windows on each floor. The brise soleil on the first and third floor extend 1'8" from the building and the second floor extends 4' 4". The depth of the brise soleil is related directly to the size of the window as illustrated in the application to provide adequate shade. The building is built almost to the required setback line, so any architectural projections over 18" are required to have a setback variance as described below. The brise soleil is proposed to be horizontal slatted metal that is removable—a sample of the material will be presented at the HPC meeting. Staff is concerned about the impact of the brise soleil on significant aspects of Molny's architecture and the effect on reading the building. Staff is supportive of conserving energy by providing shade to the interior spaces but recommends an interior feature, such as blinds,which do not obstruct the architecture and comply with Guideline 10.10 below. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. • For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. Skylight on roof: A new skylight is proposed on the roof that will not be visible from the right of way. Staff is supportive of the proposed change and finds that it meets Guidelines 10.10 and 10.13 above. Replacement of plywood hoppers with operable windows: I No , Al, The existing plywood hoppers located above the first, second and third story windows are highlighted in the I photograph to the right and below. ! I yls _—; 4 TAE P 11%4 i1 iii ii- j I-3 j Photograph 3:A few of the remaining operable hoppers HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 9 of 12 P14 Imo_ y I • Photograph 4: Detail of the second and third level plywood hoppers The applicant proposes to replace the plywood hoppers, some of which are still operable, with operable windows. Some of the plywood along the Original Street façade as already replaced with glazing. Photograph 5 is the only old photograph of the building that Staff could locate. It was taken about 10 years after the building was constructed and shows the plywood hoppers. Il LIMA"�II m 1111.c. • ,`J�. fir, s Photograph 5: Mid-1980s photograph of Aspen Athletic Club Staff is supportive of the replacement of the plywood hoppers with operable glazing. The change does not significantly alter or obstruct the important characteristics of the façade. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 10 of 12 P15 7"-V t ce n c.1e SETBACK'VARIANCES `mo gc u Fx• ' ;{ < 26.415.110.0. Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. The proposed brise soliel on the east, south and west elevations require setback variances. Following are the required setbacks, existing condition and proposed condition. Mixed Use Zone District Existing Proposed Requirement Front yard (south) 10' 10' 5 1/2" 6' 1 1/2" Side yards (east and 5, East—5' 5 1/2" East— 1' 1 1/2" west) West—5' West—8" 10' not including the Rear(north) 5' fire escape that is an No change allowed projection into a setback Table 3: Existing and Proposed Setbacks STAFF RESPONSE: The brise soleil obscure important architectural features. As such, Staff finds that the review criteria are not met and recommends denial of the variance requests. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC recommends that City Council negotiate for landmark designation and grant Minor Development approval with the following conditions: 1. HPC finds that 720 East Hyman Avenue meets all of the designation criteria, a— e, listed in §26.415.030.C.1 and Land Use Code Section 26.415.010 Purpose and Intent. 2. HPC finds that . 720 East Hyman Avenue is a "best" example of Organic/Wrightian style. 3. The brise soleil and requested variances are not approved. HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 11 of 12 P16 4. The mechanical equipment on the rooftop shall be screened for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 5. The planter beds located in the right of way are required to get an encroachment license from the Engineering Department prior to the issuance of a building • permit. 6. The applicant shall work with the Parks Department to determine appropriate planting for the planter boxes in the right of way for review by Staff and Monitor. 7. The applicant shall provide information regarding the clear sealer proposed for the planter boxes to ensure that it is appropriate for Aspen's climate and brick materials for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 8. A repointing test patch on the planter boxes shall be reviewed and approved in the field by Staff and Monitor. 9. There shall be no changes to the approved plans without Staff and Monitor approval. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines Exhibit B: Integrity Score Sheet. Exhibit C: Aspen's Twentieth- Century Architecture: Modernism 1945 — 1975. Exhibit D: HPC Resolution numbered 25, Series of 2008. Exhibit E: Application. • • • HPC Review 5.23.2012 720 E.Hyman—Aspen Athletic Club Page 12 of 12 P17 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL PURSUE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION THROUGH THE ASPENMODERN PROGRAM AND MINOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING CONDOMINIUM,AKA LOTS Q,R AND S,BLOCK 104, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION#_, SERIES OF 2012 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-11-008 through 2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182-11-801. WHEREAS, the applicant, John Martin, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, submitted an application requesting Minor Development review and voluntarily landmark designation of the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as the Athletic Club Building Condominiums and Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, 720 East Hyman Avenue is included on the Aspen Modern Map; and WHEREAS, the applicant submitted a letter dated March 7, 2012 requesting voluntary, designation in exchange for specific benefits through the AspenModern negotiation; and WHEREAS,the 90 day AspenModern negotiation commenced on March 7, 2012; and WHEREAS, Community Development evaluated the property pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.415.030.C.1(b) and determined that the property meets the criteria for designation and the integrity score qualifies as the "best" category; 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, Community Development determined that the proposed changes are exempt from Commercial Design Standard Review pursuant to Section 26.412.020.A of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on May 23, 2012 continued from May 9, 2012 the Historic Preservation. Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing, took public comment, considered the application, found that the application for Minor Development met the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines," the staff memo and 720 E.Hyman Avenue—AspenModern recommendation HPC Resolution# , Series of 2012 Page 1 of 2 P18. recommendation, and public comments, and found the building to be consistent with the designation criteria listed in Section 26.415.030.C.1, by a vote of to . NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants Minor Development review with conditions and recommends City Council negotiate for landmark designation of the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Lots Q, R and S Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. HPC finds that 720 East Hyman Avenue meets all of the designation criteria, a—e, listed in §26.415.030.C.1 and Land Use Code Section 26.415.010 Purpose and Intent. 2. HPC finds that 720 East Hyman Avenue is a"best" example of Organic/Wrightian style. 3. The brise soleil and requested variances are not approved. 4. The mechanical equipment on the rooftop shall be screened for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 5. The planter beds located in the right of way are required to get an encroachment license from the Engineering Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. The applicant shall work with the Parks Department to determine appropriate planting for the planter boxes in the right of way for review by Staff and Monitor. 7. The applicant shall provide information regarding the clear sealer proposed for the planter boxes to ensure that it is appropriate for Aspen's climate and brick materials for review and approval by Staff and Monitor. 8. A repointing test patch on the planter boxes shall be reviewed and approved in the field by Staff and Monitor. 9. There shall be no changes to the approved plans without Staff and Monitor approval. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 23rd day of May, 2012. Ann Mullins, Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 720 E.Hyman Avenue—AspenModern recommendation HPC Resolution# , Series of 2012 Page 2 of 2 P19 Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape designs and features. ❑ This includes the arrangement of trees, shrubs, plant beds, irrigation ditches and sidewalks in the public right-of-way. 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. ❑ Repair only those features that are deteriorated. ❑ Patch; piece-hi, splice, consolidate or otherwise upgrade the existing material, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. ❑ Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be used. ❑ Removing a damaged feature when it can be repaired is inappropriate. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. ❑ Flat skylights that are flush with the roof plane may be considered only in an obscure location on a historic structure. Locating a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is not allowed. ❑ A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be positioned below the ridgeline. 7.6 When planning a rooftop addition,preserve the overall appearance of the original roof. ❑ An addition should not interrupt the original ridgeline. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. ❑ A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the • primary building is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. ❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product-of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. ❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. P20 ❑ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. ❑ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. ❑ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 10.12 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. ❑ An addition should not overhang the lower floors of a historic building in the front or on the side. ❑ Dormers should be subordinate to the overall roof mass and should be in scale with historic ones on similar historic structures. ❑ Dormers should be located below the primary structure's ridgeline, usually by at least one foot. 10.13 Set a rooftop addition back from the front of the building. ❑ This will help preserve the original profile of the historically significant building as seen from the street. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. ❑ If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. ❑ Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or structure. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. ❑ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. ❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. ❑ Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. ❑ Shield lighting associated with service areas,parking lots and parking structures. ❑ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. ❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light. P21 ❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. ❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. ❑ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways,is strongly encouraged. ❑ Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. ❑ When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with commercial and multifamily developments. ❑ This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks. ❑ Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists. 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. ❑ Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. ❑ Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. ❑ Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges. ❑ A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. o Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant building facades or highly visible roof planes. ❑ Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds. Noi iiii+, il ►1 • 0i`' ! s+ (7)-rn cn � X � - mow 0- N 1t ?' o (n c — w CD QT _, CD• r _ C (D Q). Q ( 0 n Q -0 3 v o X n=' _ (D Q) • � O U O ( C D C ,_,_ -s O Q O N CI) YYY X p (D ir—mF i n v (p O• cn = E m Q) V 1 CD N U) E. 3 w N v '� O (D v Q) Q - N ► # a)=. Q �< to Q O 7 O D -s (D 0 r '. '( (7 O (D O (D 6 D (D 00 0 0 00 F� 3 Q Q m 7 CD -0 (D cD v o o -h X 3 (D 5- (D 3 OO lD w O O O -, (D O Q) O� !_o; —.o Q Q (D(Q (D o a U) (D Q (D O S 1 . 0C v o � c1 _ ) m j < O C — Q) Q) (D (Div!: T po S vv Q) 3W CD (o . ' I O O o 0 O N Q)\i/II X (D O f.L, '.:.'' ;O C (D w r. Q)* x 3 w ...< a 1 _v v J. o v CD ��i`I, Q ° o (n • ' \ m Cl) 0- o v i' 3 N -. u) 0- o 0 I W —F1 %�y p (D cQ Q 15 rF v. ! .;..t te 114,..i.9,:.:ic, .. 111 ' x., • r. O T= • \V st N !2 Q - v cD s t co 0 0 0 = : O W *.v O (p 3 O Q (D < C 0-' 0 fl1 CO i-F (/� Q. -m 0 CD W N O, O Cn Z 7 Q Q z n =, 5. cr Q Q D O T Sv n o n CD on ( v cD o Q 3 o m < v 0 rn cQ v o J •O, (D '"' (D = (D (Q (n O = �. Q v cD v CO Q ni a (�' o . _ _ r .r (7 D Q CD o N to G _� p Q v p N n' (D (D•G v co (Q O O Q c CD (D O (7) Li) D' O O O () CD D (D D v w v v, Q) v Q Q a N v , ° �, (D 0 Q c (D (D O9 Q Q (D (D p 0-(Q v CD Q (( O N cn Q O G (D v Q N1 C v -0 _ (D (D .0 c� -+• c (D Q 5 \ (n D-Z � Q E C = + v `C (D Q) 2 (D m- O (D 3 (D (n Q) (fl O 0 O O - O - SD 3 3 0) o -1 Q) N O n D- ( Q D Q O Q ii. (D o( co � n o- O '< 3 v x = � (D < 3 /) o D N (D v D O _ X 1 O O (D (D Q Q) Q (D c * ( Q a Q CD Q 0 - O CD CD o - < n Q O v (D 0 (Q ( (Q CD O , Q (D O D o (D j v * p u (D O O O ,, _. v v( c -a D (n < m- o ^ • V) =t,- Q + O OcD ' N cD _ � (D -, v - O 0 -,. X O_ 3 `O D nv CD 3 a Q c u' °(o v 3 o - 3 : co 0 v v — . w o p (D CD 0" v (D 0)- i a) -o co o o o Q (D • 3 5 v Q (D-o O - " p cO O (I) v 0 `V n CD (D 0 ....< ,..< (1) 12 MI MI I •P INTEGRITY SCORING If a statement is true, circle the number of points associated with that true statement. LOCATION OF BUILDING ON THE LOT: The building is in its original location. 1 2 point) The building has been shifted on the original parcel, but maintains its original 1 point alignment and/or proximity to the street. SETTING: The property is located within the geographical area surrounded by Castle �1' Creek, the Roaring Fork River and Aspen Mountain. �� The property is outside of the geographical area surround by Castle Creek, the 1/2 point Raoring Fork River and Aspen Mountain. DESIGN: The form of the building (footprint, roof and wall planes) are unaltered from ..111. 11111111 3 points the original design. a.) The form of the building has been altered but less than 25% of the original walls have been removed, OR b.) The alterations to the form all occur at the rear of the subject building, OR 2 points c.) The form of the building has been altered but the addition is less than 50% of the size of the original building, OR d.) There is a roof top addition that is less than 50% of the footprint of the roof. MATERIALS Exterior materials The original exterior materials of the building are still in place, with the 2 points exception of normal maintenance and repairs. 50% of the exterior materials have been replaced, but the replacements 1 point match the original condition. Windows and doors The original windows and doors of the building are still in place, with the 2 points exception of normal maintenance and repairs. 50% of the original windows and doors have been replaced, but the C1 poi nt replacements match the original condition. Best: 15 up to 20 points Integrity Score (this page) maximum of 10 points: Better: 12 up to 15 points Character Defining Features Score (first page) maxi- Good: 10 up to 12 points mum of 10 points: Not Eligible:0 up to 10 points HISTORIC ASSESSMENT SCORE: ��' P24 • iiiii bict C . . :..., ..••. '.......•,••••.':,.,:,,i;•,..y.y::,..y).;•'..•.: . .....)?;. ' .... ' t . , •Nt ,.., ■ .■ rl H-CENT , . RE : ' 6, w . N.' . . r. . . , 45-1975 t...i ,.. ...?, i 4 ,,• ',A •,,,k;A M,:,-,ii•i* . ••". .-- _---- \ ' .;-4 4:iiiefi*'.1•1;l...`":;,•41-4, .;,. , . i, MARGARET S . ,:i a,Y,I'd H • SE id10• r, )---)(0 Page 1 of 48 P25 Page 2 of 48 P26 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 7 CHAPTER 1:THE MODERNIST MOVEMENT: WRIGHTIAN/ORGANIC AND BAUHAUS/INTERNATIONAL STYLE 8 CHAPTER 2: MODERNISM IN ASPEN 1945-1975 -THE ARCHITECTS 11 FREDERIC "FRITZ" BENEDICT AND HERBERT BAYER 12 HERBERT BAYER 14 FREDERIC "FRITZ" BENEDICT 14 GORDON CHADWICK 16 CHARLES GORDON LEE 16 SAMUEL JEFFERSON CAUDILL,JR. 16 ROBERT OLIVER "ROB" ROY 17 • CHARLES PATERSON 18 ELEANOR "ELLIE" BRICKHAM 19 ROBIN MOLNY 19 CURTIS WRAY BESINGER 20 ELLEN HARLAND 20 JOHN MORRIS "JACK" WALLS 20 ROBERT"BOB" STERLING 21 GEORGE EDWARD HENEGHAN,JR. 21 THEODORE L. "TED" MULARZ 21 THOMAS WHELAN "TOM" BENTON 22 RICHARD TSENG-YU LAI 22 ARTHUR "ART" YUENGER 22 FRANCIS REW STANTON 23 HARRY WEESE 23 VICTOR LUNDY 24 CHAPTER 3: MODERNISM IN ASPEN 1945-1975-THE BUILDINGS 25 1945-1960 ASPEN ENTERS THE SKI AND CULTURAL TOURISM INDUSTRIES 25 SKI INDUSTRY 26 LODGING27 COMMERCIAL 27 PUBLIC 27 RESIDENTIAL 28 ASPEN INSTITUTE28 1960-1975 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT 29 LODGING31 COMMERCIAL 31 PUBLIC 33 ASPEN INSTITUTE &GIVEN INSTITUTE 34 Page 3 of 48 P27 RESIDENTIAL 34 SINGLE FAMILY MODERNISM 34 MODERN CHALET 35 MODERN CHALET MULTIPLIED-MULTIFAMILY 37 CONDOMINIUMS 38 CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION 40 BIBLIOGRAPHY 41 INTERVIEWS 44 EMAIL COMMUNICATION 44 APPENDIX I: ELIGIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS 45 WRIGHTIAN/ORGANIC DESIGN PRINCIPLES 45 BAUHAUS OR INTERNATIONAL STYLE DESIGN PRINCIPLES 45 ASPEN MODERN CHALET DESIGN PRINCPLES 46 APPENDIX II: THE ARCHITECTS 47 APPENDIX III:ARCHITECTS LISTED IN ASPEN PHONE DIRECTORIES 48 • Page 4 of 48 P28 ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1:Looking toward Red Mountain.Courtesy Aspen Historical Society(AHS). Figure 2:Looking toward Aspen Mountain from the Wheeler Opera House.Courtesy AHS. Figure 3:Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke.Courtesy AHS. Figure 4: Creating the scraffito wall at the Aspen Institute,from left-Ellie Brickham, Masato Nakagawa, Herbert Bayer,and Fritz Benedict, Coutesty Ferenc Berko Photography. Figure 5: Aspen looking toward smuggler mountain. Courtesy AHS. Figure 6: Herbert Bayer poster. Unkknown source. Figure 7:Fritz Benedict,top center,with fellow 10th mountain division soldiers.Courtesy AHS. Figure 8:Herbert Bayer.Source unknown. Figure 9:The Copper Kettle Restaurant.Courtesy AHS. Figure 10: Pioneer Park with Herbert Bayer paint scheme. City of Aspen files. Figure 11:Wheeler opera house interior designed by bayer. Courtesy AHS. Figure 12: Aspen Highlands Base Lodge. Courtesy AHS. Figure 13: Sundeck atop Aspen Mountain.Courtesy AHS. Figure 14: Edmundson House designed by Benedict.City of Aspen files. Figure 15: Bank of Aspen,now Wells Fargo Bank,designed by Benedict.Courtesy AHS. Figure 16: National Bank of Aspen,now US Bank,designed by Caudill. City of Aspen files. Figure 17:Stern Residence,designed by Rob Roy. Courtesy AHS. Figure 18: Boomerang Lodge,designed by Paterson. Courtesy of Sheila Babble. Figure 19: Strandberg Residence,designed by Brickham.City of Aspen files. Figure 20: Hearthstone House,designed by Molny.Courtesy Irma Prodinger. Figure 21: Pedestrian Malls,designed by Molny. Courtesy AHS. Figure 22: Villager Townhouses,designed by Sterling and Dagg. City of Aspen files. Figure 23: Prince of Peace Chapel.Courtesy AHS. Figure 24: Berko Studio,designed by Mularz. City of Aspen files. ' Figure 25: Patio Building,designed by Benton. Courtesy AHS. Figure 26: 54 Shady Lane residence.,designed by Yuenger. City of Aspen files. Figure 27: Christ Episcopal Church,designed by Stanton. Courtesy Denver Public Library archives. Figure 28:Given Institute,designed by Weese.City of Aspen files. Figure 29: 301 Lake Avenue,designed by Lundy. Courtesy Victor Lundy. Figure 30: Lift 1.Courtesy AHS. Figure 31: Sundeck atop Aspen Mountain,designed by Bayer and Benedict.Courtesy AHS. Figure 32: Buttermilk Base Lodge.Courtesy AHS. Figure 33: The Smuggler Lodge.Courtesy AHS. Figure 34: Red Brick School.Courtesy AHS. Figure 35: "Bonnet"house,designed by Stanton. Courtesy AHS. Figure 36: Koch Seminar Building,designed by Bayer. City of Aspen files. Figure 37:Center for Physics,designed by Bayer. City of Aspen files. Figure 38: Anderson Park,designed by Bayer.Courtesy National Trust for Historic Places. Figure 39: Base lodge at Buttermilk Mountain.Courtesy AHS. Figure 40: Aspen Square,designed by Benedict. Courtesy AHS. Figure 41: Aspen Sports,designed by Caudill. City of Aspen files. Figure 42: 300 South Spring Street,designed by Heneghan and Gale. City of Aspen files. Figure 43: Hyman Avenue Mall,designed by Molny.Courtesy AHS. Figure 44: 120 East Main Street,originally the Pitkin County Library,designed by Bayer and Benedict. City of Aspen files. Figure 45: Paepcke Auditorium,designed by Bayer. Courtesy Farewell, Mills,Gatsch Architects, Inc. Figure 46: Given Institute,designed by Weese. City of Aspen files. Figure 47: 311 West North Street,designed by Bayer. City of Aspen files. Figure 48: 625 Gillespie Avenue,designed by Benedict. City of Aspen files. Figure 49: 114 East Bleeker Street. Courtesy AHS. Figure 50: 219 South Third Street,designed by Friis. City of Aspen files. Figure 51: 1102 Waters Avenue,designed by Benedict. City of Aspen files. Figure 52: 608 West Hopkins Street,designed by Roy. City of Aspen files. Figure 53: Aspen Alps in the background,designed by Benedict. Courtesy AHS. Figure 54: 809 South Aspen Street,Shadow Mountain Condominiums,designed by Kirk. City of Aspen files. Page 5 of 48 P29 Page 6 of 48 P30 "Restore the best of the old, but if you build, build modern." Bauhaus founder Walter Gropius, Aspen town meeting, August 29, 19451 INTRODUCTION As in much of the United States, modern architecture made its first appearance in Aspen after World War II. While Aspen's image, to ,r '� ti f , �`rti1s� '`' the public and perhaps to itself, largely identifies with its heyday as s t a "�a � ;, 4.4. '#" ins f., ,: p p p g Y Y Y ��„�, �i,z i�����r, � }�tx 0 °x 1:4rpfk f = t �+ .gym r 4.� '��one of the most ros erous Victorian minin towns in Colorado, its Y` ` 6,0-,'` �� postwar prosperous mining p �r i ostwar modern architecture is significant: it re resents a mother �, w� � y,,z�t lode of the two competing camps of modernism, and it reflects :::-t ���' �a r. m .y modern architecture's dominance in 1950s and 1960s America. 4, , L J;,..1,4"<- 4 � � Modernism's iconic monuments—Frank Lloyd Wright's Guggenheim i , t F' '' L, r �: Museum, Mies van der Rohe's Farnsworth House in Illinois, Eero .- ',1 ' . ' ',1=`` Saarinen's General Motors Headquarters, and New York's Seagram ,, = $ ,^ ' 'qt}w ,, to „t �S t ' Y � Building and Lever House—went up in the 1940s and1950s. By the .. °ll .,"" ,1 .-� , mid-1960s, there were rumblings of a backlash. Robert Venturi's ' r, 4.4,a *=r :,-"'. ' Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (1966) signaled that Figure 1: Looking toward Red Mountain. modernism's authority was being challenged by a new generation, Courtesy Aspen Historical Society(AHS). although most architects and clients continued to value modernist ' I �+`'k,° buildings through the 1970s. Thus, for modernist buildings in ,.; 1 ,• . Aspen, the period of historic significance, a term that encompasses .��.m�, 4 : '. h `; architectural, historical, or geographical importance, is between "°� 4., t'-�`'4=' ` 1945 and approximately 1975. ' . G a js ' 6'4x: *1, The paper first examines the origins of the modernist movement in *,mil. ' , ; America and Europe. It then looks at modernist architects working � >r w -r„ in Aspen between 1945-1975 whose contributions to its built t`^i-. '� � -. ` environment continue to influence its character. Thirdly,it describes ;>;;' ,��� a? ,� ", , ". Aspens modernist buildings, organized by two eras: 1945-1960, E t „a — when Aspen entered the ski and tourist industries, and 1960-1975, "? '<s� 7- c ,r *y M' when growth and development accelerated. Fourth, it delineates = ` �. := . ; ,, !* 'i e a s a the characteristics that make a structure eligible for designation as �.. 4.0:61,,, -*.. . , : a modernist building that contributes to Aspen's history. Figure 2: Looking toward Aspen Mountain from the Wheeler Opera House. Courtesy AHS. 1 Gropius quoted in James Sloan Allen,The Romance of Commerce and Culture:Capitalism,Modernism,and the Chicago-Aspen Crusade for Culture Reform(Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1983), 135-37;Thomas J. Noel,Buildings of Colorado in series, Buildings of the United States,Society of Architectural Historians(New York and Oxford:Oxford University Press,1997),488. Page 7 of 48 P31 CHAPTER 1:THE MODERNIST MOVEMENT: WRIGHTIAN/ORGANIC AND BAUHAUS/INTERNATIONAL STYLE Modern architecture rejected the historic styles of the past. It began in the early 20th century, but followed two different paths: American modernism was rooted in the organic design of Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright; and European modernism was based on the utopian socialist ideals of the French architect Le Corbusier, among others, and the teachings of the German Bauhaus (1919-1933), founded by Walter Gropius in Weimar. American modernism, also known as "organic" architecture, started around 1900 in Chicago and the Midwest, where Louis Sullivan coined the phrase "form follows function" to express his rejection of historic styles. Frank Lloyd Wright emulated Sullivan's radical rethinking of architectural form and went on to develop highly individualistic designs such as the 1902 Ward Willets House in Highland Park and the 1909 Frederick Robie House in Chicago. Wright's "Prairie" houses reflected Arts& Crafts ideas. The architect designed "in the nature of materials," which,for Wright, could be stone or brick or steel and glass. He reconfigured the traditional "box" of a house into a series of interlocking geometric units or "modules"-90 degrees (square/rectangles), 30-60 degrees (triangles/hexagon), and circles or segments thereof—that governed both plan and elevation. Wright transformed traditional floor plans to create simplified flowing spaces and integrated the house interior with the exterior setting to redefine the suburban house. As Alan Hess, the major scholar of Organic Architecture, writes, Wright and others embraced both "contemporary machinery and ageless natural landscape."' Buildings reflecting an organic philosophy don't necessarily look alike, but they share a notion of design as growing from a germ of an idea and particular to a specific setting. According to the Wright approach, "First, pick a good site . . . a site no one wants—but pick one that has features making for character:trees, individuality,a fault of some kind in the realtor's conventional mind." Organic modernism has a complexity of line, form, structure,textures, and materials such as natural stone and woods or machine-made glass, concrete, and, later, plastic. Wright achieved such acclaim that his Robie House and other"Prairie"designs were published in an avant-garde portfolio for European audiences in 1914. Yet interest in the Midwestern architect and organic architecture declined in the 1920s. His career and design theories languished, while attention to European modernist architects,such as Gropius and Le Corbusier,increased. In the late 1930s,Wright's claim as the original modernist regained momentum with two major projects—Fallingwater in Bear Run, Pennsylvania, which combined a European modernist use of geometric concrete forms with an organic use of natural stone quarried on the site, and the Johnson Wax Company Headquarters in Racine, Wisconsin. His postwar practice and reputation soared with the visibility of the Guggenheim Museum and other public projects; and his small-scale Usonian houses created a new standard for domestic architecture across the county. Wright had kept the American organic architecture movement going, just barely, by creating the Taliesin Fellowship in 1932. Although he was opposed to official academic institutions, the reality of Depression-era economics and his lagging practice led him to formalize his ongoing apprentices into a fellowship. He envisioned Taliesin as an ideal community where aspiring architects would pay a modest tuition and could live and work with a "master" architect. Wright proclaimed that he was not a teacher, though the fellows could learn from him. Young apprentices, such Aspen's Fritz Benedict and others, were required to engage in physical labor—in the garden and household and on construction projects—for six months before getting into the drafting room. Taliesin was to be self-sustaining,and Wright believed that"growing things"was important to an understanding of"organic architecture." The fellows also participated in the related arts of music, painting, and sculpture and ongoing maintenance of the complex. Wright and his wife Oglivanna lived a rather abundant and culturally rich life with small means supported by a large group of apprentices—some 45 in 1939, increasing after the war to 50-60, including foreign-born fellows. 2 Alan Hess,text,Alan Weintraub,photographs,Organic Architecture:The Other Modernism(Salt Lake City:Gibbs Smith, Publisher, 2006),6. Page 8 of 48 P32 Wright's extended "family" worked and lived in two enclaves. They spent the summers in his hereditary homeplace in Spring Green, Wisconsin, and, after 1939, passed the winters in the desert camp near Phoenix, ' Arizona. Moving the entire operation from Wisconsin-to Arizona in November and then back to Wisconsin in the spring was Wright's way of"breaking up" the routine.3 In the desert, the fellows were expected to design and build their own dwellings. As his practice revived during the 1930s and 1940s, the fellows were essential to his productivity. They worked in the drafting rooms, supervised construction projects, and aided the venerable architect in promoting organic architecture through publications and exhibitions. European modernism, or the International Style, also rejected the past—its technologies, its architecture, its ornament, its societal structures—and embraced modernity, industrialization, urbanization, and the machine. European architects and designers believed that, by embracing the new industrial technologies, they could improve the physical and psychological environments for the mass of people and create a new society. Its premise was that modern design could transform society by applying industrial methods to housing and creating a "total art," including buildings, furnishings, interiors, clothing, and signage. Characterized by the absence of references to past historic styles, the European modernists used industrial materials such as steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to give the buildings a sleek, mechanistic look. Not only did the International Style avoid decoration or historic styles,it revolutionized interior space by reducing the building to metal frame and glass walls.As architectural historian Spiro Kostof wrote: "Architecture was seen primarily as volume and not mass. So the stress was on the continuous, unmodulated wall surface—long ribbon windows without frames, cut right into the wall pane, horizontally or vertically disposed; flush joints,flat roofs. Corners were not made prominent.Technically,the argument went, materials like steel and reinforced concrete had rendered conventional construction—and with it cornices, pitched roofs, and emphatic corners—obsolete. There would be no applied ornament anywhere, inside or out." Le Corbusier proclaimed in his 1923 manifesto, Towards a New Architecture: "A house is a machine made for living."4 A few European modernists arrived in the United States in the 1920s, but the major influx occurred in the late 1930s as Hitler rose to power. In 1937, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, who had succeeded Gropius at the Bauhaus, arrived in Chicago to head the School of Architecture at the Illinois Institute of Technology;that same year, Laszlo Moholy Nagy led a reincarnation of the Bauhaus at Chicago's School of Design. In 1939, Walter Gropius took charge of the Harvard University Graduate School of Design. In 1938,.Herbert Bayer, head of the typography workshop and one of three young masters under Gropius at the Weimar Bauhaus(the others were Joseph Albers and Marcel Breuer)s moved to New York City, where he created three exhibitions ("Bauhaus 1919-1928," "Road to Victory," and "Airways to Peace") for the Museum of Modern Art and worked as an art director designing books, exhibitions, and posters for major corporate clients and advertising agencies. American's postwar embrace of European modern architecture reflected important changes: there was no longer a cheap source of labor; modern building codes replaced the old rule-of-thumb; and new construction materials—concrete block, glass, steel, and aluminum—were increasingly available.' Furthermore, the public's concept of architecture now included an "international" component. Americans were first introduced to the international avant-garde in 1932 by the influential Museum of Modern Art exhibition, Modern Architecture of Europe. By the 1940s and 1950s, European modernists,such as Mies,Gropius,Joseph Albers,and Eliel Saarinen, dominated architectural and design schools and professional architectural publications. Through the 1950s and 1960s, young American architects were trained in the Bauhaus curriculum and enthusiastically disseminated 3 Curtis Besinger, Working with Mr. Wright. What It Was Like(Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1995). 4 Spiro Kostof,A History of Architecture:Settings and Rituals(New York:Oxford University Press,1985),701. 5 Albers and his wife Annie found refuge in 1933 at Black Mountain College near Asheville, North Carolina,thanks to MOMA curator Philip Johnson,who was also instrumental in bringing Mies to America. Breuer joined Gropius at Harvard and The Architects Collaborative(TAC),and Bayer came to Aspen. 6 Robert Frankeberger and James Garrison,"From Rustic Romanticism to Modernism and Beyond:Architecture Resources in the National Park,"Forum Journal,Journal of the National Trust for Historic Preservation(Summer 2002):8. Page 9 of 48 P33 it in flat-roofed, austere glass and metal-framed buildings across the American landscape. Modernism gained widespread acceptance as the most appropriate architecture for the new era, especially in major metropolitan areas. The International Style appeared in office buildings, airports, corporate campuses, housing, schools, churches, shopping centers, restaurants, and lodging. In 1955, when the National Park Service launched its Mission 66 campaign to update its rustic image, it adopted modernist designs for its new type of park structure, the visitor center. In its emphasis on individuality, Wright's organic architecture lacked the broad institutional base of the International Style. Wright famously advised Oklahoman Bruce Goff,who was clearly talented in expressionistic and organic design, not to study architecture and lose his unique gift. Frank Lloyd Wright had been America's most famous modern architect for decades,and many more Americans knew his name than those of Le Corbusier or Walter Gropius. Popular shelter magazines of the time, especially House Beautiful, promoted "American" modernism in the 1940s and 1950s, as represented by Wright, Goff, and the Taliesin Fellowship. In 1953, Wright mounted a major exhibition of his work in New York City as the Guggenheim Museum was going up— characterized by one of his apprentices "as part of the present war in Architectural circles between the 'organic' and the 'international'."7 Significantly, Wright's way of thinking about a building as organic, as something that grows according to its function and is specific to its site, along with his use of natural materials, fit the postwar mentality of the individualistic architects attracted to the nascent ski community of Aspen. 7 Besinger, Working with Mr. Wright,251. Page 10 of 48 P34 CHAPTER 2: MODERNISM IN ASPEN 1945-1975-THE ARCHITECTS Aspen is unique in that the widespread acceptance of modernism in America coincided with its postwar reinvention as an international resort. Two significant practitioners of the { competing modern approaches, Taliesin alumnus Frederic "Fritz" Benedict and Bauhaus master Herbert Bayer, arrived „," 'A, immediately after the war to establish their imprint on the Y p f i °, ,- 3i. .tg mountain community. Rather quickly,other young modernist .- '!�' `4 ,l .r "''-3 architects educated at Cornell, Colorado, Illinois, M.I.T., and 4�-, Taliesin moved there. Aspen had little new construction in its Y ;, : "Quiet Years" between the 1893 Silver Crash and the end of 'q " ` : . ., I �' - World War, hence no need for architects. This status changed ' when Friedl Pfeifer saw the potential in developing a major x ;? °, ,;1} '° . ski resort akin to his native St.Anton and Chicago industrialist 1.4 - Walter Paepcke envisioned the mountain town as an ideal ``��:x'X 00 y r, ,! setting for a community of intellectual engagement and .-... .- , •- s:• - . ... .,„.,,,. '1 cultural institutions. Figure 3: Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke.Courtesy AHS. The modernist Aspen architectural community began with a few pioneers and several prominent designers and grew rapidly,with some architects designing a single building or two, and many establishing their entire careers there. Fritz Benedict arrived in 1945, and Herbert Bayer in 1946. Gordon Chadwick and Charles Gordon Lee stopped in briefly in the winter of 1946-1947.Samuel Caudill first visited in 1947 and settled permanently in 1952. Charlie Paterson came in 1949, Ellie Brickman in 1951, and Rob Roy by 1953. Robin Molny was in town by 1955, and Jack Walls by 1957. Ellen Harland appeared in 1958, and Ted Mularz in 1959, along with George Heneghan, and Dan Gale. Richard Lai stayed from 1960 to 1965. Bob Sterling was part of the scene from 1956-1960,got his architectural degree, and returned in 1963. Tom Benton arrived in 1963. By 1969, Art Yuenger, among others, lived and worked in Aspen. Bauhaus founder Walter Gropius advised on town planning in 1945, thanks to benefactor Walter Paepcke who also had ambitious plans for a modernist architectural village, cut short by his death in 1960. Through the auspices of the Goethe Bicentennial and the Aspen Institute, Paepcke and his wife Elizabeth commissioned signature buildings by several "name" modernists, such as Eero Saarinen (Music Tent, 1949), Buckminster Fuller (Geodesic dome, 1952), and Harry Weese (Given Institute for Physics, 1973). Second home owner and Chicago architect Francis Stanton designed a residence and church (1954, 1963), and Texas (also Florida and New York) architect Victor - - — ---- Lundy designed and built his own elegantly modern vacation home in the West End in 4,.;.W ` q'h 1972. �— '' Most of the pioneer architects arrived in the ,4 *. -` 0,?j� first decade of Aspen's rebirth, 1945-1956 ,� ``�, a "�—° -•- w -c. • �� but did the majority of their work after the_'~1:,. ._.,..1.,,,,,,,r-o....:4.,=-;::1 1 _ mid-1950s, when growth and development t t w' T Y , t,1rr ,,, z ..,-_ accelerated. Educated at the top architectural I 4 s car t"Y — '- T_�, programs of the time,they articulate either a ji '2''i" ” __ Bauhaus/International or Wright-Ian/organic ---• t,. -- : esthetic—frequently, a creative blending of s . ,,. . .� �,•; ", ` .:-u -, � the two Their architecture communicates �7'="-'- x'11511 ` `' both a distinct sense of place—the extreme Figure 4: Creating the scraffito wall at the Aspen Institute,from left- Ellie Brickham, Masato Nakagawa, Herbert Bayer, and Fritz Benedict, Courtesy high country environment—and a high level, Ferenc Berko Photography. of design. As a group, they were attracted to Page 11 of 48 P35 the adventure and promise of Aspen. Most loved to ski, knew one another socially, worked in one another's offices, collaborated on projects,and immersed themselves in the community,often serving on the city planning and zoning commission and other local and regional boards involved with environmental concerns and urban issues of growth, traffic, and affordable housing. • It's important to remember that Aspen, though dilapidated, was a viable town when the newcomers started arriving in 1945. Before President Grover Cleveland • , '' • , 1 returned the United States to the gold standard in 1893, ' "s `` , 1�Y�' -4 ti* h Y devaluing silver in the process, Aspen had boasted „. � � a ,. .g..-� 4 � „. 12,000 residents, six newspapers, four schools, three °` 0 ' 'Ff'`. ' 4; banks, a hospital, three theaters, an opera house, : � 4 x ,, `- �- r �. sixteen hotels, a courthouse, stores and office blocks, a ;i ' `r� �° ...� � -. race course, a literary society, a glee club,two railroads, --- « ';°4} ,�Rrir-ZI-k 7z t'�; �1t °..rr, 1 � public electricity and water,and a brothel district.Its civic ..4 .� .,:-117.-.__t*e. . ;0,." leaders had erected impressive public and commercial buildings of red sandstone and brick and laid out broad t -, u tree-shaded streets in a regular grid pattern. Prosperous Figure 5 Aspen looking toward Smuggler Mountem merchants and mining elite had built Second Empire Courtesy AHS. and Queen Anne houses with mansard roofs, multiple gables, wrap-around porches, and fancy ironwork; ordinary miners lived in small clapboard cottages, the better ones often decorated with bargeboard trim on the gables. Once the silver market collapsed, the town fell into decline so quickly that much of its urban fabric remained intact. Thus the new architects and developers worked within a Victorian townscape with a residential district in the West End and a commercial core at the foot X._; " ,� 4 y of the mountain. Generally, postwar construction follows a geographic d fi :�j pattern, with Bauhaus modernism in the West End and -nearby Aspen 3" �}4 . ,; -" Institute campus;commercial, lodging,condos, and public buildings inserted t ` k v " near Shadow Mountain and into the downtown core;and the large Wrightian -p,.:„.3. , condo complexes and residential growth to the east of town. ' - ;7-:.2 '" ,. e ii ' FREDERIC "FRITZ" BENEDICT AND HERBERT BAYER Frank Lloyd Wright disciple Frederic "Fritz" Benedict (FAIA, 1914-1995) and i `''' 16$1011, - . Bauhaus-trained Herbert Bayer (1900-1985) represent the first generation .-' 4 ,--: ;' 'T� " of postwar architects in Aspen.They arrived at about the same time,though they came under circumstances that underscore their different architecturalunkn 6 Herbert Bayer poster. Y Unknown Source. traditions—one, American, anti-establishment, individualistic, organic, .. and nature-oriented; the other, European, establishment, e ,, ,, collaborative, corporate, and machine-oriented. Just as the ,.-. �"� town of Aspen was to reconcile the dynamic tension between �` F'1 "*" ski resort and cultural center, both men, dramatically different in ' '°V T "' , -,� their training,worked well together and helped shape the town's -• + � �-, � s ��l�;�� �g , rebirth in their designs for the ski,cultural,tourist,and hospitality i 5 ',l AM::::.?', f e l�,f itz.S{.2}fi t( industries and the scores of people who relocated to be part of .t.,„ v�,t« '" tip, .1,:,,,,,,4,� k ,. the new Aspen scene. r.} Benedict, thirty years old when he mustered out of the 10th Figure 7:Fritz Benedict,bottom center,with fellow 10th mountain division soldiers.Courtesy AHS. Mountain Division, was the first trained designer to arrive in Aspen after the war. Born in Medford, Wisconsin, he had earned a Page 12 of 48 P36 Bachelor's Degree and a Master's Degree in Landscape Architecture at the University of Wisconsin in Madison before joining Wright's Taliesin in Spring Green in 1938 as head gardener. He appreciated Wright's philosophy of integrating architecture and landscape, and, along with the other apprentices, he migrated between the two Taliesins for the next three years. On one of those Arizona-to-Wisconsin drives, in 1941, he first saw Aspen. An avid skier, he stopped for the National Skiing Championships and decided that the mountain town would be a good place to settle. That first impression was later confirmed when he was stationed with the US Army's 10th Mountain Division, an elite group of skiers, at nearby Camp Hale, north of teP I x t.' ;z*.. f} Leadville, and visited Aspen on the weekends. 1 r t ` !.< In 1945, Benedict purchased a 600-acre ranch on Red Mountain for $12,000, .• ' . ":i'x--,.,;.4 which he scraped together from his army pay, a loan from his mother, and .1 .3k' I `% selling his car. A self-described "hippie," Benedict planned to live in a small ..�.*r k.''y cr; a at',It g pp p • ; f, cabin and operate a subsistence ranch, then a dude ranch, saying that the '° mystique of ranching appealed to him as much as skiing. Eventually he added r 1 ..;'. ` , ,,, ? odd-carpentry and designed one house a year, rustic houses that evoked the k,¢p * � „ _,A‘,,N,. .,-,,, organic architecture of his mentor. x, q+a t `� ,i' is A°�'_ YItin7- 1, + In 1946, Austrian native Bayer was forty-six years old and an internationally i r 1, e fi t tv. `t' ' _,_ :.;,, -:�- ° r.; , famous designer who had been avidly recruited by Walter Paepcke and his Figure 8: Herbert Bayer:Source wife Elizabeth to help implement their vision of Aspen as a special community unknown. organized around art and culture, a Kulturstaat. An innovator in typography and graphic design, photography and exhibition design in Weimar and Berlin, Bayer designed the universal type ) font(1925),which was credited with "liberating typography and design in advertising and creating the very look \ of advertising we take for granted today."8 He moved to New York City in 1938,where he was a sought-after art director and designer. By 1946, all of his work was for Paepcke, head of the Container Corporation of America (CCA) and Robert O. Anderson, president of the Atlantic Richfield Corporation. A lover of nature and skiing, Bayer had considered returning to his native Austria after the war to open a "little ski hotel." Instead, Paepcke enticed him with the challenge of remaking the "ghost town" of Aspen, arranged for his purchase of a Victorian cottage in the West End, guaranteed annual consulting fees from both the CCA and Aspen Skiing Corporation, and provided a steady stream of design work on his numerous Aspen properties. A 1955 Rocky Mountain News article stated, "Even in competition with millionaire tycoons, best-selling novelists, and top-ranking musicians, Herbert Bayer is Aspen's most famous resident."9 Although Bayer and Benedict frequently collaborated, -!. each made his own mark on Aspen. Bayer's was Bauhaus modern and sleek like a machine; Benedict's exuded Wrightian principles, naturalistic and organic, even funky. In addition to designing numerous ' buildings, both men served on the Aspen Zoning and rt '�,, s d-k' Planning Commission and other local boards,their lives -,,,,v-,,,,,,r,{$ . , s£ ' 1 id j Vii" 7 z and careers irrevocably bound with Aspen's rebirth as a '' . L t ,1,,..;)-c,.,0., _ resort town. ' _ tom. .. -iox, ,...:qv f` .., � 4 � .�� .i '�' i` y 3`+�."4+'1"rY�d , rk '���;+`°Fih � �+t Benedict married Fabienne, the sister of Bayer's wife 1, " ��" `�'4 �� ° Joella, in 1949, and she convinced him to quit ranching '_ 4� , ;� s `' ,{{ F;F', and pursue architecture. He was awarded a license in ` . 4, -t1 lj ,r , '�� ,��� ��°�'t��a ,sue y� Est gtis��*��y�a•#'�`� 1956 under a grandfather clause that allowed licensure -r, based on experience, rather than testing. On April 1, Figure 9:The Copper Kettle Restaurant.Courtesy AHS. 8 Joanne Ditmer,"Schlosser Gallery Host to Major Bayer Show/Sale,"Denver Post,October 1, 1997. 9 Robert L. Perkin,"Herbert Bayer Changing the Town's Face,"Rocky Mountain News,September 27,1955. Page 13 of 48 P37 I 1960, Bayer, who had no formal training in architecture, also received a license to practice in Colorado, without examination. M ,:.. -f { HERBERT BAYER `' ,::' —�.�i Bayer's architectural work spans approximately two decades, from 'a} ��- ,=y- s "" , v -• 1946-1965. His clients were primarily the Aspen Skiing Corporation,the V: ;�t ..-s I q " { k' f i.4 Aspen Company(Paepcke's real estate firm),and the Aspen Institute for d'i4'` ri -. -,, ' `, ,4-, . , Humanistic Studies,where he,with Frederic Benedict as the associated i 4.-. -, 1-"-'° .; -) � _�3 architect through the 1950s, designed the Seminar Hall and its sgraffito t4*jwt ,1' �. • ; {-- t?ifift1 mural (1953,the first building on the campus), Aspen Meadows Guest 4ii ', i. ,!"`1 � . Chalets (1954, since demolished and reconstructed), Central Building ¢ : , - f • f-. ; 0 53, which housed the Copper Kettle restaurant (1954), the Health Center Figure 10: Pioneer Park with Herbert Bayer (1955),Grass Mound(1955,which predates the"earthwork"movement paint scheme. City of Aspen files. by ten years and was one of the first environmental sculptures in the = " - . f country), Marble Sculpture Garden(1955),Walter Paepcke Memorial t " Building(1962), Institute for Theoretical Physics Building(1962,since ,� 1 '� - demolished), Concert Tent (1964, removed in 2000), and Anderson *4. '` - Y Park (1970). ' r11` '"_ ".•'', 1 Bayer also spearheaded Paepcke's restoration of Victorian buildings �k it 3.91.z fi r:'tlk in town, including the Wheeler Opera House and Hotel Jerome, and . s - 114, ._.;',Z4:',.. .' �_ .ice , selected the paint colors for certain Victorians that Paepcke's Aspen .'t .� ,mom Company decided should be restored in the 1940s. A strong blue, , .. .,;; ' " a 'iitiiill'I known locally as "Bayer Blue", has persevered for some fifty years, Figure 11: Wheeler Opera House interior but is disappearing. His choice of a bright pink for the Paepcke's designed by Bayer. Courtesy AHS. West End residence, Pioneer Park(442 W. Bleeker Street) and a bold paint scheme for the Hotel Jerome are local legends. In his twenty-eight years in Aspen, Bayer lived at 234 W. Francis Street, a Victorian house in the West End, and an apartment in a downtown commercial building(501 E. Cooper Avenue). He then moved to Red Mountain where he built his studio and home(1950[Gordon Chadwick, architect] and 1959, demolished). He designed other modernist residences (1957, 240 Lake Avenue; 1963, 311 North Street) in the West End, located adjacent to the Aspen Institute campus. After his productive career in Aspen, Bayer moved to Santa Barbara, California, where he died in 1985. Influenced by Bauhaus and International Style principles, Bayer's architectural designs have simple rectilinear shapes,generally flat roofs,expanses of glass,cantilevered balconies,basic geometric shapes,industrial materials such as steel frames and cinder blocks,and use primary colors,whites, and grays. Bayer believed in the Bauhaus concept of designing the total human environment, that art should be incorporated into all areas of life, and he designed logos and posters as well as landscapes and _ r i buildings that brought high modernism to Aspen. -I e sf , ' tyy,rrn, r}t y I,4j 4 '' 3R ,1 FREDERIC "FRITZ" BENEDICT � , ,�� , � f , (l i � i 1� `ttl Benedict's architecture extends from the 1940s into the ;t;:; _f , i . r r, 1980s. His earliest projects were residences, such as a „ ; r4 ilk tiv,; ) (*1, i cabin at 835 W.Main(1947);a private dwelling for novelist F't'! „iy `�; r „1 , �-�+ John Marquand (1950, demolished) on Lake Avenue in ' �rf . , s�f"'?., , .7-11:4=.;::‘,,,.. s`l ; the West End overlooking Hallam Lake; modern chalets iii r i f at 625 and 615 Gillespie (1957, demolished); and the c _'„s.4-. ,"' " . 1,1 Edmundson House (1960, demolished), also known as '-t-,'" -. -5v.•" the Waterfall House, after Wright's famous Fallingwater. r 2: .ao Figure 12: Aspen Highlands Base Lodge. Courtesy AHS. In 1967, Benedict created Ski magazine's first"ski home of Page 14 of 48 P38 the month," in what was intended to be a regular feature on ,�} .. ,, �< ,, ;. affordable well-designed vacation homes. One of his modest r � � , 'v "Hillside Home" designs, built at 1102 Waters Avenue by Bill - , , �, _y.� , Geary, still remains in the Geary family. - M - ." '°4' r rh{ ; F" ;lunar r S s t �x 3y qi. k` As Aspen's economy revived, Benedict also designed 'j 'l . < ,' ' ' x i,.,, raft �m A'ci., l —.,„,3%. numerous commercial and public buildings. In addition to .. u., = ar ..z„,- _� ,44t4 4- early Aspen Institute buildings through the 1950s, he and1L'In :. -;; -.:�, Bayer collaborated on the Sundeck warming hut (1946, °�E' _ k 4 ;i:ii demolished). Benedict also designed the Bank of Aspen l , k , r, g (1956, 119 S. Mill Street), Bidwell Building(1965, E. Cooper), Y "zs � 4' the original Pitkin County Library(1966, 120 E. Main Street), u e 13: Sundeck p Aspen �n,de i Figure 13: Sundeck atop Aspen Mountain,designed by Benedict Building(1976,1280 Ute Ave),and the Pitkin County Benedict.Courtesy AHS. Bank (1978, 534 E. Hyman Avenue). He designed the base lodge at Aspen Highlands(1958,demolished)and planned the entire ski area at nearby Snowmass(1967)as well consulting at Vail (1962) and Breckenridge (1971). In the 1960s, he greatly influenced Aspen's condominium development and residential shift from downtown to the east, a , t designing the Aspen Alps (1963);Aspen's first large-scale urban .. '. ,£ e, itr _a condo, Aspen Square on Durant and Cooper Avenues (1967); it ,,t.-;.11:4,- ,a,.. � _ �$ . Aspen's largest condo complex, the Gant (1972); and the ' _t `a h: `t Crystal Lake condos (1976), at Aspen Club. In total, Benedict ---- > designed and renovated more than 200 buildings in Aspen and fot r A",.;,-,k:,-.`i':1.'',. .r' Snowmass.l° ,�t -.;_"-'41-v` '- ; r 'v4A, . The prolific architect was known for setting buildings into the a� 5 t �K landscape in a harmonious way, which reflects his landscape `` . "', - `: l.am -:=-.- ii t _• training and Wright's influence. At Taliesin East, he had been in Figure 14: Edmundson House designed by Benedict.City of Aspen files. charge of the gardens, while, at the Arizona camp, he worked with the natural desert landscape, even moving cactuses. He pioneered in passive solar and earth shelter design, exemplified in the Marquand house (1950) and his own solar and sod-roofed residence at Stillwater Ranch (1958). His masterwork,the Edmundson Waterfall House, an homage to Wright's Fallingwater, shared many of the characteristics of Wrightian design—dramatic cantilevered structure, massive chimney as the anchor, strong horizontal emphasis, low-pitched roof with deep overhangs, mitred windows in the corners, and, above all, an intimate and specific relation to its site. Benedict's office played a critical role in Aspen's emerging architectural scene, launching Ellie Brickham, Jack Walls,Robin Molny,Ellen Harland,Theodore Mularz,George Heneghan, Dan Gale,John Rosolack,Robert Sterling, Janver Derrington, Dick Fallin, Dierter Zenker, Tom Duesterberg, Bruce Sutherland, Arthur Yuenger, and Harry Teague, among others. Molny set up his own office in the late 1950s and later hired Yuenger. Mularz opened his practice in 1963 (employing Aspen's third woman architect, Jean Wolaver-Green), leaving on such good terms that his wedding reception(to Bayer's secretary, Ruth)was in the Benedict greenhouse.Walls and Sterling became partners in 1968. Heneghan and Gale were partners from 1966-1969. In the 1960s,when Benedict took on large-scale ski resort planning and design, his firm increased to thirty-five." Benedict also embraced the traditions of the Taliesin Fellowship; both his home and workplace welcomed young architects. In 1946-1947,Taliesin fellows George Gordon Lee and Gordon Chadwick lived and worked with him on his Red Mountain ranch, and Chadwick, a licensed architect, designed several Aspen residences and Bayer's Red Mountain studio (1950) with him in the late 1940s. Curtis Besinger returned to sojourn with the Benedicts 10 Mary Eshbaugh Hayes,Dedication plaque on"The Benedict Suite,"Little Nell Hotel,Aspen,Colorado. 11 Brian Clark,"Ski Country Style,"Ski Area Management 25(March 1986):55-57,78-81. Page 15 of 48 P39 regularly each summer; starting in 1956. After his years at Taliesin (1949- c. 1954), Robin Molny started his Aspen career ' f ' f - r in Benedict's office, then set up his own practice. Benedict ' �a: „ encouraged Boomerang Lodge- owner Charles Paterson to (' die i�e;�ne��1 p imi` 3 �xZ IE Iltt Of aSPmil � . � ,�,.�„►� ��� 'aHe� spend three summers in Spring Green(1958-1960). Des Plaines mom Illinois architects Donald Erickson and Arthur Stevens, who tr'i '' r is t,K >ila{"""°lr® ti�r� t �f ` designed the North of Nell (1968), were both Taliesin alumni of ` rQ " :Yg-�;1 aprzit3"� a ,ttipa„#4�ttign�#t the early 1950s. <,# Y V.1%, i , ” 4 a p mini ` 4 Fpbnh' �k �p� @� �� Aside from his architectural contributions, Benedict influenced . _ �r.. �t4 1 the Aspen environment in other ways. He served as the Figure 15: Bank of Aspen,now Wells Fargo Bank, first chairman of Aspen's Planning and Zoning Commission, designed by Benedict.courtesy AHS. developing height and density controls, open space and preservation policies, a City parks system, a sign code, and ban on billboards. He played a significant role in the founding of the Aspen Institute and the International Design Conference and served on the board of the Music Associates of Aspen for 35 years. He was the father of the 10th Mountain Hut System, established in 1980, and he and his wife donated more than 250 acres of land within Pitkin County for open space. Benedict and Bayer received innumerable honors for their contributions to Aspen. In 1995, Bob Maynard,former head of both the Aspen Ski Company and the Aspen Institute, stated: "Aspen was fortunate fifty years ago to be wakened from her sleep by visionaries. The trio of Benedict, Bayer, and Paepcke combined dreams and hope and reality uniquely to restore a community ravaged by mining, trapped in poverty—yet willing to follow the dreamers."12 GORDON CHADWICK Princeton graduate (1938)and Taliesin fellow(1938-1942), New Jersey-born Chadwick(1916-1980)spent part of the winter of 1946-1947 in Aspen with Benedict where he designed several houses, most notably, Bayer's studio on Red Mountain (1950). Before the war; Chadwick supervised the construction of the Fellowship's Loren Pope house (1939-1940) in Falls Church, Virginia, and, after the war; the residences of Arnold Friedman, Pecos, New Mexico (1946) and David Wright, Phoenix, Arizona (1951-52). During World War II, Chadwick served in the US Army monuments,architecture,and fine arts section. Afterwards, he designed at Colonial Williamsburg and was the partner of famed industrial designer George Nelson. CHARLES GORDON LEE Penn grad (1940) and Taliesin fellow (1940-1941 [Taliesin East]; 1947-1948 [Taliesin West]), Kansas-born Lee (1918-1966) spent part of the 1946-1947 winter in Aspen with Chadwick and Benedict, although it is unclear exactly what he may have designed. He served in the US Air Force as a Captain from June 1942 to January 1946, returned to service frdm May 1951 to September 1952. At Taliesin, he worked on drawings for a Pittsfield, Massachusetts, housing project and a Pittsburgh civic project. Briefly in partnership with former apprentice Kelly Oliver in Denver; he later was the Taliesin representative for the Rocky Mountain National Park Administration Office, a role Oliver assumed when Lee died in 1966. His papers are in the Western History Collection, The Denver Public Library. SAMUEL JEFFERSON CAUDILL,JR. Oklahoma-born,Kentucky-bred,Cornell-educated,Sam Caudill(FAIA,1922-2007)was working for Denver architect Tom Moore in January 1947 when he skied the newly opened Aspen (Ajax) Mountain. Five years later, in 1952, attracted by Aspen's potential and his future wife,Joy Maxwell, Caudill moved there permanently, married, and started his own architectural firm. He had interrupted college to serve in the Army's Office of Strategic Services, graduating in 1946 from Cornell, the only Ivy-League school to offer a bachelor's degree in architecture. Caudill 12 Robert A. Maynard,Remarks Given at Fritz Benedict's Memorial Service. Page 16 of 48 P40 has the distinction of being Aspen's first-licensed architect to establish a practice (Benedict and Bayer were . , ;ry' -` l� , .� F ,; ,r licensed by grandfathering, and Gordon Chadwick moved on). ,. `$ : �I .k '� a ;.' i ''. Although he started as a single practitioner, Rob Roy worked ur' `� ;*. * ' .k with him in the early years. Richard Lai joined Caudill's firm a ' � �� from 1960-1965 when he left Aspen to teach architecture ter: .. n �;. � p 177-2-;, w . , -�"' :` � and planning at the University of Texas. .A,.....„.,., :-. -___ t;. - � , „: - An avid outdoorsman and environmentalist, Caudill said yj F F � �� ,,} i that his designs were "usually inspired by the outdoors” and 4 �� ; A Ct reflected the "same elements as the mountains which frame :Aug � �',, +, 4` the valley," as in the curving brick walls of his Aspen High Via* ^�u4 k'0 r „�' n`,r: 13 41°*. ix ii i. k"}xF' , School. His first job in Aspen was adding a gymnasium and -� �# 7 s three classrooms to the Red Brick School in 1949-1951 when Figure 16: National Bank of Aspen,now US Bank, he was working for Moore. designed by Caudill. City of Aspen files. Caudill and his various firms designed a number of modern buildings in the city's downtown core that exhibit strong geometric shapes, dramatic massing, planar emphasis and consummate use of brick, as in his 1954 First National Bank of Aspen at 420 E. Main Street. Aspen Sports (1970) at 408 E. Cooper, a yellow brick cube, has a dramatic oversized arched entrance on the ground floor that evokes the Midwestern banks of Louis Sullivan. In addition to his modern designs, Caudill gave a nod to Aspen's ski culture with traditional "chalet" details in the Viking Lodge (1963) on 832 E. Cooper Avenue. He also designed many of the retrofitted and new facilities at Snowmass,including the plaza,conference center,and Silvertree Lodge. In 1986,with his firm Caudill,Gustafson, Ross,and Associates, he undertook another restoration(after Bayer's)of the Jerome Hotel and combined historic adaptation and modern design at the Aspen Art Museum, 590 N. Mill Street (1987). In 1991, they designed the new Pitkin County Library on the corner of Mill and Main Streets. Caudill led the successful campaign to force the state to build a more environmentally friendly highway project limiting the amount of asphalt through Glenwood Canyon. ROBERT OLIVER "ROB" ROY In the 1955 Aspen telephone directory, Rob Roy g� 'd t "� t i�t *t' fi hL { "�� r R cs,y� �t7'"�f`ird'� (1926-1992) and Samuel Caudill are the only two ifis `'�,` ' , ,44 l u t. .p its architects listed (Benedict and Bayer, neither yet ��„' "� i� , -”", f �* .$ licensed, list themselves as designers). Roy was the �,*;2 � F€ `i_ second licensed architect in Aspen, after Caudill. t� " `` ' - >' Lam. Receiving his degree in architecture from the ' . r.` m` , University of Illinois in 1947, he spent a brief time in � °` rr v# ‘,,;.i °'�. ak:_ tYa t ,y r.,. Boulder,and then Grand Junction,where he interned '# €z' Al,x, ' 1`{'`r'k"-z,, ' K!'-::,,t1? to get his license. Once he and his wife saw Aspen, ,_ �f •- & ' 9 �'r �R ' they loved it, and moved there, prior to 1953. As ,at-�� �,. ,` ,1�� � ���. .� .6 t j� ; >r . t ear+''° ' %— 4A:, ra; Cindy Roy remembers, "Mom and Dad were both i � r �� ,� ;,; �, �4�. � ,.F�.r eccentric, and Aspen was a perfect place for young, t,� „ r �; :R 4,, , ,;, c: "° bright adults. Roy learned to ski well and in the � � z, t�. r4 � �' �.,�, ;�.� -. .°y, � ; �` winters,when architectural work was scarce,taught _s=. 3 .i c �, '4- skiing at Buttermilk. He worked as an independent Figure 17:Stern Residence,designed by Roy. Courtesy AHS. architect from 1956, generally from home. He was also associated with Caudill and Benedict, although it is not clear exactly how. Roy loved the design process, appreciated Buckminster Fuller and Frank Lloyd Wright, and attended the summer international design conferences at the Aspen Institute. Bob Sterling, who quit school to ski bum for a while, remembers working as a drafter for Roy and then Jack Walls between 1956 and 1960 before going back to school. Roy's Aspen work dates from the 1950s into the 1970s, and he moved to Paonia, Colorado, 13 Jennifer Davoren,"A Presidential Honor for Coondog,"Aspen Times, May 26-27,2001. Page 17 of 48 P41 around 1975. A number of Aspen landmarks are associated with Roy, including the Mountain Chalet, Snowmass Mountain Chalet, Prospector Lodge, the Heatherbed, and Cortina Lodge, and residences for Fried! Pfeiffer and Edgar and Polly Stern,the latter structure universally admired. He designed his family's house on Castle Creek, later owned by Jack Lord, and then Barbara Walters and Mery Adelson. Roy designed the multi-family modern chalet at 608 W. Hopkins Avenue (1962), the modern chalet for Pietro and Dorothy Danieli at 232 McSkimming Road (1963), and the shake-shingled, dramatically mansarded multi-family at 700 W. Hopkins Avenue (1968). CHARLES PATERSON Charles Paterson represents another aspect of Aspen modern architecture. In 1949, Paterson (b. 1929), born Karl Schnazer in Austria, arrived in Aspen , ,V°•after a dramatic escape from the Nazis with rfr s i-,74::::.1:',:?:, ,, ,--.77,-7.: his sister through Czechoslovakia, France, 0 F :.":,,,:t1..4 Ce,�: w' , ,,r .. ._ and Portugal. They were finally adopted in ; Y•. a ` ,- `' f �... .s 2. Australia. He had finished high school and P " '� �, 5.� _ i":',14%-. h started engineering studies in New York Po . , :. £goa lx = I � -- .- a,, h City. Disappointed with eastern skiing, Er aK 2 _�> . -. a {°" ,4:-.4 ,; F: , he moved, first to Denver, then to Aspen, r.4;, X r F¢ ,� • , a,u. where he landed a job as a bellhop at the ,} ,� ` • i ., s3 ' Hotel Jerome and became, in his words, "a KY+ f e, #'" r.-TA, `r-`_-: st t ;ss� ski bum." Within a month of his arrival, he t ' - ' . - Figure 18: Boomerang Lodge,designed by Paterson. Courtesy of Sheila purchased three lots on W. Hopkins Avenue, Babble. shortly followed by another three that comprised a half block between Fifth and Sixth Streets. There, he built a one-room cabin from left-over lumber. Paterson followed a circuitous path from that initial construction project that eventually led to Taliesin and his Wrightian lodge in downtown Aspen. He returned to New York for two years to resume his studies at City College, then moved back to Aspen, became a ski instructor, and began expanding his cabin. After a stint in the mid-1950s with the 10th Mountain Division (Camp Hale's "Second Generation"), he added more units to his cabin and, in 1956, opened the Boomerang Lodge (recalling the Australian "boomerang," he hoped guests would.return). Fritz Benedict encouraged him to study architecture, and Paterson spent three summers, from 1958-1960, at Taliesin East, the GI Bill paying his tuition. He started out gardening, like the other apprentices, but discovered he was good at plastering and became the "official plasterer." Surprised at the quality of the plasterwork, Wright thought the Fellowship had hired a professional plasterer. Although Wright died on April . 9, 1959, before Paterson returned for his second summer, he went back that summer and the next. Through the years, he maintained strong ties to his Taliesin colleagues. In addition to Aspen locals Benedict and Molny, he encouraged other apprentices to stay at the Boomerang Lodge on their twice yearly trips between the two Taliesins. At Taliesin the fellows were encouraged to work on their own plans, after hours, in the evenings, and during breaks,and Paterson drew the plans for the Boomerang Lodge as it exists today. It continued to evolve organically. Twelve rooms, a lounge, and a pool were added in 1960. The novel underwater window, featured in a 1960s Life magazine, allows guests in the lounge to look into the pool. Other expansions took place in 1965 and 1970. Paterson described its Wrightian features—walls and fireplace of "concrete battered blocks, windows with 'corners of glass' . . .sort of a Frank Lloyd Wright signature."Though Paterson designed other structures,he never listed himself as an architect in the Aspen directory.The Boomerang Lodge is his life's work. Its distinctive facade with windows organized into a horizontal band just under the extended eaves provides a direct connection to Taliesin that inspired much Aspen design. Page 18 of 48 P42 ELEANOR "ELLIE" BRICKHAM Ellie Brickham(1923-2008)moved to Aspen in 1951 7' , ,, a T q,,..4.'4,,,,-;, >� ;t after attending the University of Colorado's School I s') . '"�- ; of Architecture from1941-1944. Construction was �.�r' 4='"v { 4 ' " w �' " i'> +7.-- ' l i.• i <a.� t3 ,, s '' 4 47.1 ^,r ,fi.7 .,_ a family business, and her motivation to become a � .� : �• d,re ,'t t tdrt „.. designer began as a child. She was attracted by the =. -- 'e„ t t .-`..1 c` p �A�.. . �'-�t skiing, but found herself the only female architect ?<i : ; ” - . ' 1 11 in town until Ellen Harland arrived in 1958. ; -: .x ■ 4 Early in her career, Brickham worked in Fritz .. i. `'` , ihW4 Benedict's office and collaborated on projects with ; i v -;',,t$5,,; -.0 .: e� F ,, ~ , both Benedict and Bayer, participating in work a,.Fi 4; , going on at the Aspen Institute. Like Benedict, she , n„;;, :�. °x---•"'-" -:,-.N,:,.:',..,-,, : had a strong interest in passive solar techniques. `Figure 19: Strandberg Residence,designed by Brickham.City of During her time in that office and, later, in her own Aspen files. practice out of her home, she designed a number of residences and commercial buildings in town, including houses for several Music Festival artists in Aspen Grove, the elegantly simple brick Strandberg Residence (1973, 433 Bleeker Street-demolished) and the Patricia Moore Building (1963, 610 E. Hyman Avenue). In Pitkin County, she designed numerous homes in Pitkin Green and Starwood, on Red Mountain, including her own house (1955), with south and west walls made completely of glass. Her works, which total at least sixty in the Aspen area, are generally characterized by spare, simple forms and minimal detailing. Brickham's projects focus on an "impeccable sense of proportion and feeling of lightness."14 ROBIN MOLNY Robin Molny (1928-1997) apprenticed at Taliesin for some five years, from 1949 to c. 1954, before moving to Aspen in the mid-1950s. While passing through Aspen on trips back and forth between Wisconsin and Arizona, he met Benedict, who later called and offered him work in Aspen. Molny worked for him for a year and half, then became a registered architect, and started his own practice. Born in Cleveland, Ohio, Molny attended the Carnegie Institute of Technology in Pittsburgh before Taliesin. His Taliesin years were pivotal, coinciding with the postwar resurgence of Wright's architectural practice and planning for the construction of the Guggenheim Museum. In September 1953, Molny was one of three apprentices who ,- traveled to New York City in the Fellowship station wagon to � � �� 1 _: . ''F.,;;77:,':: :,,, ,4;,...-,', help to set up "Sixty Years of Living Architecture,"an exhibition R i«tai a ? t' ; y ,: of Wright's architectural drawings and models. The exhibit x. 4,+;?', t.''4(, �„F �AMY ; .► ". `o had traveled to many cities worldwide and was going up in a ::,:,,A: . .,f. c r 4 t0 in..,�• temporary pavilion on the site of the new museum—sort of ,,, ,� ,., Wright's shot across the bow to signal New Yorkers that he was "' , �� �$ on the scene. Wright typically put an experienced apprentice 1 y in charge of constructing the Fellowship-designed Usonian 1° ..-:vim houses,greatly in demand; and Molny supervised the Maurice l? k if R` a"` i -� s g Y Y p =5`,i g,,I• Greenberg residence in Dousman Wisconsin and was working , "' & „ � with another Taliesin apprentice�in Park Ridge, Illinois, when ; '`'v ' -'-'- he left for Aspen. Despite Wright's appreciation for Molny, he #-; f '� x ;44 { f ,:§ ?) and Mrs. Wright did not get along, and he left Taliesin with ,:y,,,,,,,,..4„% °° 3_x _ `L°` = ° Figure 20: Hearthstone House,designed by Molny. some hard feelings. Courtesy Irma Prodinger. 14 Bill Rollins,"Brickham:Simplicity, Lightness,and a Sense of Proportion,"Aspen Times, December 22,1977. Page 19 of 48 P43 In Aspen, Molny designed several notable buildings, including 64 ,, p V the Hearthstone House (1961, enlarged 1963, 134 E. Hyman •G i t�n.���tPa�� � � �rp„ psi �� �c.tsry.? r r f n t� ` L�,T � ;� Avenue) and the Aspen Athletic Club (1976, 720 E. Hyman - '" Avenue, with Art Yuenger). He designed area residences, E= r .:-y e„tea„ +k'?• �t:? 1 ..^a��tkr z � � .: �.4a•t. ¢ l ,r a .;14 { `. '"+'. -:7;” including the W. Ford Schumann House,an Architectural Record house of 1975—a geometrically complex composition of *�'� ,'t `` •` stucco-battered walls that stepped up the side of the mountain. Wright told Molny "If you understand the principles of my i F '0�''f+r}tip{j�l� '. s. � 4xR t�� ' rr 15 q � "J sr � �.r = r f�i r � „� j @+� . ,�. architecture, then your buildings need not look like mine. 4� 1 Xt �� x ! ,,, , ;' Molny,s best known contribution to Aspen's "townscape" • 3 , • :; ' : is the transformation of Cooper and Hyman Avenues into a N. pedestrian mall (1976) on which he collaborated with veteran Figure 21: Pedestrian Malls,designed by Molny. Taliesin fellow Curtis Besinger. Courtesy AHS. CURTIS WRAY BESINGER Besinger (1914-1999) received his B. Arch degree from the University of Kansas in 1936 and joined the Taliesin Fellowship in the summer of 1939. He was to stay for 16 years, from 1939-1955. A conscientious objector, he took a break from 1943-1946 to undertake "work of national importance under civilian direction." After leaving Taliesin, with some angst and misgivings, he taught architecture at KU for 29 years, served as dean, and retired in 1984. From 1956 on, Besinger spent his summers in Aspen with Fabi and Fritz Benedict,working with their architectural practice. Although he undoubtedly worked on many projects, he is specifically associated with the design of the Aspen Music School and Cooper-Hyman pedestrian mall. He was also connected to House Beautiful magazine, which was strongly pro-Wright. In his account of his years at Taliesin,Working with Mr.Wright(1995),he mentions architects associated with Aspen—Lee, Chadwick, Benedict, and Molny. He notes that Benedict organized ski trips for the Taliesin fellows when they were in Arizona in the winter of 1941-1942. ELLEN HARLAND After graduating in 1956 from the M.I.T. School of Architecture, Ellen (née Dirba) Harland (b. 1934) worked for Denver architect C.Francis Pillsbury.On May 1,1958,she moved to Aspen to accept a job with Benedict,and Robin Molny was the only other architect in the office. Though not a skier, she loved the town of Aspen. She worked as a drafter and designer for Benedict for twenty years,taking time off when she married and her children were young. She worked on Benedict projects, such as the Pitkin County Library, from her home, and then returned to the office full-time when her children got older. Harland chose architecture as her career"because it seemed like a good profession for a woman—sort of an arty-mathematical thing."6 Even as a sixteen-year old, she knew she wanted to combine a career and family—architecture proved a good fit for her talents and goals. Harland and her husband Irwin left the valley in 1977 for Santa Fe,which reminded them of Aspen in the 1950s, and she established a practice. Eventually she moved to Washington, D. C.,where she drafted guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act for the Department of Justice. An impeccably trained modernist, she designed several Aspen houses, including a residence for herself and her family. She designed the sleek, one-story, flat- roofed residence defined by its simple rectilinear form and copious use of glazing for Benedict controller Pat Maddalone at 1411 Crystal Lake Road in Aspen Club in 1976. JOHN MORRIS "JACK" WALLS Born in Oklahoma (b. 1925) and educated at the University of Oklahoma (B. Arch '53), Jack Walls' schooling 15 Bruce Berger,"Robin Molny and the Taliesin Fellowship,"unpub., and. 16 Joan Lane,"Aspen's Women Architects Aid Building Boom in Town,"Grand Junction Sentinal,January 16,1965. Page 20 of 48 P44 would have overlapped with Bruce Goff's tenure as chair of Oklahoma's architecture school (1947-1955). After working briefly in Oklahoma City, he moved to Aspen because he liked the town and felt it sympathetic to his organic approach to architecture. He learned to ski after moving there. In 1957, only three architects were listed in the Aspen directory—Roy, Caudill, and Walls. Walls had a single practice from 1957 until 1968, when he became partners with Robert Sterling, a colleague in Benedict's office who had also worked as a drafter for him in the late 1950s. In 1958, Walls designed Buttermilk's dramatic glass and plywood base lodge. In 1970, Walls&Sterling (partners, 1968-1975) designed Aspen's first modernist gas station (435 E. Main Street), among other buildings. After leaving Aspen, Walls and his wife traveled and served in the Peace Corps in Honduras. He currently resides in Durango. ----,era , VI a ,;;''' ROBERT"BOB" STERLING �csNi 4riRl sr � TS� , xf.. •In 1956, when Ohio-born Sterling (b ;1 ;.=. 3, xr ,-,0 .� � . 1933 arrived in Aspen after dropping out “1:'-'-_, "'3 '� , ��'r ' `ti. of the University of Colorado to ski bum ,ik ,� —` , ,,,, ;; )71:47;17- 7 t4 w Ikk,. . for a while, Benedict, Bayer, Caudill, Roy, „,,„,,,,,4,.A..,.t r #fin t , if'° and Walls were the architects in town 1; ` it t”: irff `jt.t? , it .� ' who had studios. Between 1956 and � } �x I�:� � ,. .�, �' 1960, he worked as a drafter for Rob Roy, ,, - ;, ,t , r jN and then for Jack Walls before returning `: ` ,. ,,. ytea,� .6-i to school. He graduated with a BFA(1962) Figure 22 Villager Townhouses,designed by Sterling and Dagg. City of Aspen and B. Arch (1963) from Utah. Returning files. to Aspen, he worked three years with Benedict,who was then designing the Mountain Plaza, the Gant, and Snowmass lodges. In 1965, Sterling and a fellow Benedict employee, Bob Dagg, designed and developed a condo project, the Villager Townhouses (1001 E. Cooper). He and partner Wall (1968-1975) designed the Conoco station (435 E. Main Street, 1970), and Courthouse Plaza Building, among other buildings. As a single practitioner, he designed numerous residences and the original layout for the Roaring Fork Club in Basalt. Currently Sterling lives in Glenwood Springs and is involved with disaster housing in Kenya and Haiti. GEORGE EDWARD HENEGHAN,JR. Missouri native Heneghan (b. 1934) received his B. Arch .tom f, k; A ,�Y. fi from Washington University in 1957. He worked in r : r i � �I 4 Benedict's office where he met Daniel Gale, his partner `, �:�„'� �� ,_ �.� �,; ,rte , .„._; -4 Ir } .. . from 1966-1969. The last year of their partnership, 1969, i U F j' r�, ` was busy: they designed the Hannah Dustin commercial �' ; ,s s ',�" '_ ,• building (300 S. Spring), the Aspen Interfaith Chapel t,., �4¢! , ' ,4,4v0, *,,x of the Prince of Peace on Meadowood Drive, and the , ',_' ; 4 =' t.'zi Cottonwoods Condominium, as well as residences for •'- ? - ',, a��4s the Guggenheim and Horowitz families. Heneghan left 4a . `-s� a I �.' t : "' Aspen and Colorado to establish his practice in Hawaii. :.--;:v.----t73.'� • s �k Figure 23: Prince of Peace Chapel.Courtesy AHS. THEODORE L. "TED" MULARZ Born in Chicago, Illinois, Mularz (FAIA, b. 1933) served in the Coast Guard (1953-1955) and graduated with a B. Arch from the University of Illinois in 1959. He and Molny had worked together in Park Ridge, Illinois, and after Molny moved to Aspen and started working for Benedict, he called and said they needed help for the summer. At that point, Mularz didn't have his degree and didn't know where Aspen was. He spent the summer of 1958 working in Benedict's office for$1.75 an hour,went home to complete his undergraduate program and a semester of graduate work, and then returned for a permanent position in June 1959, starting at$2.00 an hour. Mularz remembers-working on projects for Bayer,whose office was around the corner,when things were slow in Page 21 of 48 P45 the Benedict office. Though not a skier when he came to Aspen, he became an avid skier afterward. ' -;-....,:::.,47-'`�� .- ., '. �,.,;r- In November 1963, he established his own practice. He , 1 r a , .■;: ,, ,,-, was briefly associated with Benedict in a corporate firm as „0.,', Benedict-Mularz Associates, Architects, from 1978-1981. ' { u :4? . `_ 4 w . x Among his designs are the modern studio adjacent to the rte, h fa cs, ,w „, :,:,,,,,:e.,,: P "r3; aS ;z', „y F'� 4, ,iir 1 L West End cottage of Aspen photographer Ferenc Berko S' . .� a')ib ' { 3 lF, ,- (1964); the Manor Vail and Lord Gore Club (1965), Fasching k f; yy+�. S to e ate$ ; e4S 110 .f' t d+ �. ,�'-- z1.4 emu Yy 4 �a.i t ,� ,t Haus Condominium (747 S. Galena, 1966), and the Scott t FA � ,Y;°,,tt=, 41 -` s Building (400 W. Hopkins, date) and numerous residences. .,- � ' ,,,q.. va 4. 4 Active in the community, he chaired the Historic Resources �” . 4S ;' : `,,, Committee in the 1960s, and he and his wife were founding , .; ) : members ofthe Aspen Historical Society. In 1990,Mularz left ` by M `rte Aspen for another attractive,culturally oriented community, Figure 24: Berko Studio,designed by Mularz. City of p Aspen files. Ashland, Oregon. THOMAS WHELAN "TOM" BENTON Almost twenty years after Bayer and Benedict, Tom Benton (1930-2007) arrived in Aspen in 1963, as the ski town's growth and popularity were shifting into high gear. Serving in the Navy during the Korean War, Benton used the GI Bill to study architecture at the University of Southern California (B. Arch, 1960) and worked in southern California for a time. Though trained as an architect, he . , . ,, ,,,,, ., , , ,,., really wanted to be a "working artist. A ski trip to Aspen convinced t� t;w . 4 1 1 him that it was where he should be Bringing a California sensibility £` ,�= ii"zy�, '- ' that fit well with Aspen's growing image as a counter-culture mecca, ' e , re = s / Benton designed his studio and gallery— unique, a clean and sharp ' - ;gg� '. blend of wood and cinder block" (heavily altered today) —at 421E44 ' N-�s ��-. » Hyman Avenue. He collaborated with Hunter Thompson and others :9,1 1. , ,`` 4 , to create"images that helped to define Aspen's tempestuous political a% `�,E ; I '13:,t and social upheavals" in the late 1960s. More interested in graphic :{ i0t •; , � �t -,.` an p r g .4. q b , i art than in architecture, he still designed the occasional building, % , ,r lid H, 3'4 it 0' including a residence for actress Jill St. John. His funky, organic, '"f+' I. x- I, , r+ .��`in ' �'` California esthetic was in sync with Aspen's Wrightian tradition. His „ . q �.iv .t designs, such as the Patio Building (1969), a flat-roofed commercial . rx M.� _ building at 630 E. Hyman (1969), exhibit a similar interest in natural `� o' 1;_Z4; -_ ' Figure 25: Patio Building,designed by materials, simple geometric shapes, deep overhangs, horizontal Benton. Courtesy AHS. emphasis, and orienting the building to frame views toward the mountains. RICHARD TSENG-YU LAI Born in 1937 in Beijing, China, Lai garnered several prestigious awards from Princeton University and received two degrees, a B. Arch (magna cum laude) in 1958, and an MFA. Arch in 1960. In 1960, he moved to Aspen, where he worked for five years for Samuel Caudill. In 1965, he left to join the faculty at the University of Texas to teach architecture and planning. During his Aspen years, he chaired Aspen's Committee for Experimental Pedestrian Mall (1960) and served on the City Planning and Zoning Comission (1963-1965). After more than 40 years,Joy Caudill remembers Lai as a key person in her husband's architecture practice. ' ARTHUR "ART” YUENGER After receiving his B. Arch. from Illinois in 1962, Yuenger (b. 1939) worked first for his father's Long Island, New York, architectural woodworking company and then interned with Paul Rudolph, Ulrich Franzen, and Victor Lundy in New York City, obtaining his New York license in 1968. During the 1960s, he skied in Vermont, but he Page 22 of 48 P46 decided that he had to master the sport and so moved to Aspen. He arrived in 1969 and worked with Benedict and Molny (Aspen Athletic Club, 1976) , '?k :, '`` '" A`._:, before establishing his own practice. He designed a number of residences, ''' -' q; a �_. including the striking concrete block house at 54 Shady Lane adjacent k,�., �r < _ '„ � , . ,- to Hunter Creek (1971). Living in Fairfield, Iowa, since 1999, Yuenger �A �. „:43,,,,, participates in World Peace Assemblies, an important aspect of his career, 1 A ,t �'-� `�"* '' v`�` but continues to design houses in Colorado and Aspen. I r '1140 I� "� , iii,*1 t- 4 ,: . i In addition to local architects with practices embedded in the community, ;1,1'; ; '` F ,� i., w . ;: -I • out-of-state architects and second-home-owners home owners Francis Rew Stanton, : Harry Weese, and Victor Lundy also added to Aspen's modernist legacy. ,,ne ,.y:: FRANCIS REW STANTON - .f � --,','N' ";. In November 1950, Paeckpe's Aspen Company sold an historic West End house to Chicago brothers Edgar and Francis Stanton and their wives, Rose Figure 26: 54 Shady Lane residence., and Louise, all four of whom would contribute significantly to Aspen's designed by Yuenger. City of Aspen economic and cultural life. Later, Edgar sold his half interest to his brother files. and in 1954 moved to a modern house designed by Francis on Red Mountain (0223 Placer Lane). Architect Stanton (1910-1995) also , � 1, „yF 3 ,� �, �,4� t ' + .. designed Christ Episcopal Church in the West End in 1963. iii�V K,�� �{3 :���- � � �., Both of his Aspen structures had distinctive parabolic ,s r''' k `s ,1`1 i,, fi,; 3 i ,%0Af R�� arched shapes. From 1948-1964, he was a partner in -_ r1§'�,{{`ANK'2. ,{34 t t z; � ,0; 'V 4: Stanton and Rockwell of Chicago and then practiced A x u r Y? :V�ry 4 independently until his retirement in 1989. He had a Yale a , I�,,',` r� 4.4 ''''.:14,1. ,, ',r„ BFA in Architecture (1935) and spent two summers at the• _ ` , ''° "#, � 4 r,; 'i, Ecole des Beaux Arts Americaine at Fontainebleau, France. I ¢ 1,7:4 s :c R,,; '° ; �h. , From 1948-1954, he served with Eero Saarinen, Joseph• a , , ,u„ „ . ,4v4,,s,i Albers, George Nelson and other on the Yale University Figure 27: Christ Episcopal Church,designed by Stanton. Subcommittee on Architecture, Painting, and Sculpture to Courtesy Denver Public Library archives. update the three departments' curriculum. HARRY WEESE The distinguished Chicago modernist Harry Weese (FAIA, 1915-1998) of Harry Weese and Associates designed the Given Institute for Pathobiology for the University of Colorado in 1972 on 100 E. Francis Street (located in Elizabeth Paepcke's garden, with supervision by Aspen's William eF s -y ,-7 -�,4 Lipsey). The concrete block building has been described as "one - .. }. .' _ yf 1ti. of Aspen's finest modernist works [which] gives a playful rigor to ' , F.',-' ; 'i I a simple circle with angular extensions. Weese was educated at .- ' ¢s=, , s .'' Yale(1936-1937),M.I.T.(B.Arch,1938)and the Cranbrook Institute r �g 4y, ` =. of Art(1938-1939)with Eliel and Eero Saarinen before working at I� �,. � ' '= 4 ` Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill, establishing �• He establishin his own firm in �.. '•`� �� ��� 1947. Renowned for a number of significant projects throughout ,� °. eft Et ^ ~,'q ...t,,,t k4 ge: K-'.R��HCt�i. the United States and the design of the Washington D. C. Metro ''°` :,,v1 V.,:;:41.. . System (1976),Weese had a home in the West End for many years 1,m,, ``�" 'f.> �`-`'� ' � and also designed vacation houses at Vail and Snowmass. -- t Figure 28:Given Institute,designed by Weese. City of Aspen files. 17 Noel,Buildings of Colorado,493. , Page 23 of 48 P47 VICTOR LUNDY Victor Lundy(FAIA,b. 1923)was a renowned modernist architect at the time he built a second home for his , f•%; family on 301 Lake Avenue in the West End in 1972 ; * ,4. , 441.4 A Harvard-educated (B. Arch, M. Arch) World War �s II veteran, Lundy had a successful career designing ( itiit r r, notable government, commercial, and educational ' ' � ffi� I buildings in Sarastota, Florida; New York City; and 7w,1464Vr ,s Houston and Dallas, Texas. At Harvard, he studied under Gropius and Breuer, with whom Bayer was also As'I � � ' '', ,� ' ;',E;;%.4"':0-L'‘4" y, Fri t Y ri ��- Y 4 {" - associated in 1920s Germany. The Lundy family was L ,� , if _ � .-0;7 • in Aspen in the late 1950s but left and then returned. p Lundy's vacation home is located next door to a Bayer design (1963, 311 North Street). Known for his Figure 29: 301 Lake Avenue,designed by Lundy. Courtesy dramatic roofs, Lundy cantilevered the roof to extend Victor Lundy. over the floor-to-ceiling windows that frame the 20' high great room. Other out-of-town architects designing modernist buildings in Aspen include Wheeler and Lewis of Denver(The Yellow Brick School, 1950s), Texan Donald W. Kirk (Shadow Mountain Condominiums, 809 S. Aspen, 1965), Eric Friis of Eagle River, Wisconsin (Tom Cleary family modern chalet, 219 S. Third Street, 1965), Brown Brokaw Bowen of Boulder (Coors family modern chalet, 1960s), and Erickson and Stevens of Des Plaines, Illinois (North of Nell, 1968). • Page 24 of 48 P48 CHAPTER 3: MODERNISM IN ASPEN 1945-1975 -THE BUILDINGS A significant amount of Aspen's postwar architecture represents either a Bauhaus Modern or Wrightian Modern esthetic, reflecting the training of the young architects moving to town,the taste of the clients, and the general acceptance that modern architecture is appropriate for modern times. Aspen's modern architecture shows a range of building types that articulate its three pronged identity—mountain resort, county seat for the Roaring Fork Valley, and cultural enclave. Examples will be organized by type, location, and chronology—downtown core, West End, east. During the years the resort town emerged, 1945-1960, relatively few new buildings went up; after 1960, the amount and scale of new construction increased dramatically. 1945-1960 ASPEN ENTERS THE SKI AND CULTURAL TOURISM INDUSTRIES Aspen saw little new construction in the period between the 1893 Silver Crash and World War II, known as the "Quiet Years." In the early 1940s, no architects or contractors/builders were listed in the telephone directory. Many of the town's Victorian structures had become dilapidated or vacant and were available for modest sums or back taxes. Still intact were such major public buildings as the Hotel.Jerome and Wheeler Opera House, numerous businesses and residences,and a street grid that dictated the orderly placement of buildings between Ajax Mountain to the south and Red Mountain to the north. In 1945, the lives and livelihoods of Aspen's 600 inhabitants revolved around one working mine and scattered ranches. Those years of inactivity caused economic hardship i �,, � - wi . ! , �' ,C4,w,a,y,, u *ts,,l''-K _iy; r�u t ' s 5;�' i aelr ,}i„��*1 igWit but also enabled the area's natural environment, degraded by mining operations, to recuperate. It s ,.i ', 'f '-;; - ' attracted Friedl Pfeifer and other 10th Mt. Division ` . "" f ;` 1 , ,� ' �-t`..7,-yam==.--+ : r`+S? *�wo 1 a - 4 veterans eager to create a ski resort and Walter and , art; Elizabeth Pae cke hoping to create an ideal community y.•f ' ' '�iT ; w" a .1. , of cultural, spiritual, and intellectual renewal. In her :4 .1 v `_- err_t -. ' !! " SST .s`. 4 'E, ,r. 1 . X history of Aspen, "Re-creation through Recreation," �`' t - T" r` �r1 � x z .4i,.:;,-,...,.;-1;„:ci t.ti�" �� L._::,"-vf r�� .i+�' historian Annie Gilbert writes, "As with other ski areas ,.,;.,,;'-,: 41..===',' '.'/J---' ; F-7 i * 4 F and other ski towns, Aspen joined the ski industry '�' ; ,. i' , r f '',_,, K =,. when ski enthusiasts teamed up with willing investors "` , M'; tl ;' A., ., , „ , to build a ski area that would attract destination skiers Figure 30: Lift 1.Courtesy ANS. (through staying for a week or more) as well as local skiers and competitors." Paepcke's ambitious plans for Aspen's rebirth as a cultural center, Pfeifer's dream of creating a ski resort equal to St. Anton, and the hopes of 10' Mt. Division veterans like Fritz Benedict to create new lives where they could continue to ski and make money doing so—were facilitated by the extraordinary resource of Aspen's existing urban fabric. Local residents,for the most part,adapted to the new tourist economy and formed a connection between Aspen's mining past and tourism future. Paepcke wanted to encourage particular sorts of people to come to Aspen. "We want writers and scientists and artists and businessmen and we want them to be [permanent] citizens of Aspen, not seasonal visitors." He acted quickly, buying up properties from the summer of 1945 and convincing Bauhaus master Herbert Bayer, who shared his views of the inextricable and important connection between modern design and consumer culture, to relocate to Aspen in 1946. Bayer, Paepcke, Paepcke's Chicago architect Walter Frazier, and other intellectual, artistic, and business elite renovated Victorian houses in the West End near the campus where the Bayer- and Benedict-designed modern buildings of the Aspen Institute would take shape over the years. In 1950, Bayer spearheaded the establishment of the International Design Conference, which further linked high design and high mindedness in Aspen. The "Aspen Idea", combining mind, body, and soul, began to take shape. The skiers wanted their new ski resort in the Rocky Mountains to attract as broad a clientele and accommodate as Page 25 of 48 P49 many people as possible. On December 14, 1946,two lifts opened unofficially for business on Aspen Mountain, with No. 1 lift ending at the Sundeck, Aspen's first new building in years. In January 1947,the mountain opened officially. It was slow going, but by 1956, the stalwart Hotel Jerome was joined by new lodges, the Prospector, the Boomerang,and three or four other places,competing for the skiers' dollar. Still, according to Fritz Benedict, Aspen "was so dead and starting to be a resort so slowly that there wasn't much to do in way of design. . . . Everybody who lived here was just eking out a living." "They just loved the place and didn't want to leave."8 By the early 1950s,Aspen was entering the tourist business full-time,year-round,resulting in a growing economy, new residents, and "a general feeling of optimism."9 From 1950 to 1960, Pitkin County increased its population by 44 percent. Bayer and Benedict had arrived in the mid-1940s; by 1955, Elli Brickham, Sam Caudill, and Rob Roy brought the number of architects in town to five; and by 1962, some ten architects and designers provided architectural services. In 1955, there were two contractors and two lumberyards; by 1957, a third contractor was listed. By 1960, 55 lodges and motels (2500 beds) had been erected, many with alpine motifs reflecting Aspen's emerging ski town identity—Swiss Alps being more identified with skiing than the Rocky Mountains—in a style that Elizabeth Paepcke, who preferred either the look of the Victorian mining era or Bauhaus modern, dismissively termed "bastard Tyrolean."20 SKI INDUSTRY In December 1946, the Sundeck warming hut opened on Aspen Mountain. Designed by Bayer and Benedict, the wood and glass lunch restaurant was sited at 11,300 feet, a hundred yards from where the new lift ended. Combining Wrightian and Bauhaus innovation, the hut had 41ti 1s 4 i4OAS. < ,i 4 { •an inverted roof that slanted toward the center so the central , � 64 . ,4 r ,r fireplace would melt the snow and the run-off drain to tanks � �, r in the basement to provide water. Offerin g a 360-degree panorama of the surrounding mountains, the octagonal *'r , �s restaurant provided shelter and conviviality. It also signified Aspen's challenge to Sun Valley's new Roundhouse facility- ` Aspen would be a player in the growing Colorado and national f Asarz ski industry! 4 Some 10 years later, in 1958, two new ski areas, Aspen Figure 31: Sundeck atop Aspen Mountain,designed Highlands and Buttermilk Mountain,opened nearAspen. Both by Bayer and Benedict.Courtesy AHS } featured spectacular modernist base lodges (demolished) r" 4 �. "� , Friedl Pfeifer's Buttermilk Mountain, geared toward novice 4 ,,:r {_ ,_ intermediate skiers, had a dramatic base lodge with a sweeping hyperbolic paraboloid roof cantilevered over a lazed base. architect Jack Walls remembers, he placed a g large glass square oriented to the mountain to spotlight the downhill skiers and spanned the entire interior space with "~''"V`'`.- •two buttresses at the end points. Whipple Van Ness "Whip" .<. Jones's Aspen Highlands, offered a challenging mountain similar to Aspen Mountain but with new terrain, ski school Figure 32: Buttermilk Base Lodge.Courtesy AHS. directors Stein Erickson and Fred Iselin, and lower rates. Benedict developed a theme of multiple and overlapping A-frame shapes for Aspen Highland's wood and glass base lodge and created a roofline that he compared to "an interpretation of an unusual nearby mountain called the Maroon Bells."" 18 Adele Dusenbury,"When the Architect Arrived after the War,"Aspen Times,July 31, 1975,1-B. 19 Annie Gilbert,Re-creation through Recreation,Aspen Historical Society,1995. 20 Elizabeth Paepcke quoted in Annie Gilbert Coleman,Ski Style:Sport and Culture in the Rockies(Lawrence: University of Kansas Press,2004),250,fn.21. 21 Benedict quoted in Noel,Buildings of Colorado,487. Page 26 of 48 P50 LODGING To provide lodging for ski-tourists, Aspen quickly erected a number of lodges—in alpine, pan-abode, rustic, a� ; » n w ,,,..7:, �ff � � a �•�7 ' g K� . i k e E tai y � . t p i f� Yt4t. WI. Ai 1:2.4.,tineqry . ; e — b } T Figure 33: The Smuggler Lodge.Courtesy AHS. and make-do styles. The Boomerang Lodge (500 W. Hopkins Avenue), which opened in 1956, was true Wright Modern. The Smuggler Lodge (c. 1960, demolished), a two-story, flat-roofed lodge with a continuous balcony cantilevered over the ground floor and dramatic diagonal details,was a project by developer Hans Kantrup that brought a "Googie", or playful, modernism to Aspen's mountain setting. COMMERCIAL As Aspen's economy began to revive in the late 1940s and 1950s, so did the need for financial institutions. Two modernist bank buildings appeared in the mid-1950s among the Victorian commercial structures that had defined Aspen's downtown. In 1954, Sam Caudill designed the First National Bank of Aspen on 420 E. Main Street, a striking modernist essay in brick with strong curved and rectilinear shapes, dramatic massing, and planar emphasis. Two years later, in 1956, Fritz Benedict designed the Bank of Aspen (119 S. Mill Street), an one-story, flat-roofed structure of salvaged brick that evokes Wright's influences in its rectilinear massing of the chimney, walls, and piers, horizontal emphasis, and the dramatic cantilevering of the roof over the porch. , PUBLIC { Aspen's economic revival also encompassed the construction of public `°" ,, * and private education institutions. In the 1940s, a red brick school n V building using brick salvaged from the Victorian-era Lincoln Street „::,,,...44i.:,_ , :.-,,i (where the Yellow Brick School now stands)went up at 110 E. Hallam Street. Sam Caudill's wife Joy remembers that his first job in Aspen ‘ st -:. �4 . was designing an additional gymnasium and three classrooms for the 1J 1 C 1 r , ' a f Y. school. Now reconfigured as the Red Brick Arts Center, it features the , s ,� ,�^. r . , original steel casement windows and later additions at the east end %'(Pti1,r ,•• ` ( ?$1";1 In 1951,Benedict adapted 1880s mining-era buildings on Castle Creek . . ¢4 . . Road in Pitkin County to create the Aspen Music School. Besinger has been cited as a collaborator, though he was immersed in the Taliesin Figure 34: Red Brick School.Courtesy AHS. Fellowship until 1956, when he did begin regular summer stints in Aspen. The simple frame and shake-shingled buildings got low-pitched roofs and balconies overlooking the creek to give the campus "a Japanese tranquility prized by both Bauhaus and Wrightian schools."22 In 1960, the yellow brick school at 215 Garmisch Street was designed by the Denver firm of Wheeler & Lewis. A typical postwar school building—long, low, and horizontal, as in Miesian architecture—the classrooms have extensive bands of glazing and direct access to the outside. Caudill remodeled the structure in the mid-1960s. 22 Noel,Buildings of Colorado,498. Page 27 of 48 P51 RESIDENTIAL Only a few modernist residences were built in Aspen between 1945 :$ and 1960. Paepcke encouraged his friends to purchase and restore old houses in the Victorian West End and led off with his restoration of Pioneer Park (1885), home of former mayor Henry Webber. Chicago architects Walter Frazier and Francis Stanton and their wives,Western - ,t. 7,; novelist Luke Short, and designer Herbert Bayer all moved into the .�'` e^'t r 6r w 4, c existing West End cottages. ; .t L By 1950, modernist residences, Wright- and Bauhaus-inspired bean it c � ` 4`�+► ��,� ; " ` . `:�`511` y i � g p i began Lf �•'f:� ..�t� �'r".7p�r,�s �,�- 9� '•.��,� to appear on Aspen's streets and Red Mountain. Flat roofs and white - °,... , • '�t t,' x ��'+ t��{ F ��; , pp p � , � �, w� stucco walls signified the 1920s Bauhaus .style and the 1930s and 4. t;` rt%C' -z '''',;?-"..---:,:`,•:-'''' 1940s International Style. After 1950, the American adaptation of the ,,x ' }''� �.,. `•_ - International Style held to flat roofs and minimal decoration but usually i , replaced the stark white stucco surfaces with various combinations of Figure 35: "Bonnet"house,designed by Stanton. Courtesy AHS. wood, stone, brick, or concrete block, the latter a favorite of Herbert Bayer. Attracting an artistic and literary clientele, many of these avant garde structures—such as Benedict's Hallam Lake residence for novelist John Marquand, and his "Waterfall" house for D. V. Edmundson on Castle Creek Road—have been demolished. In 1950, Bayer designed, with Benedict and architect Gordon Chadwick, his own Bauhaus-inspired studio of cinder block, wood, and glass on Red Mountain and, in 1959, a simple and economical two-bedroom pavilion nearby which he and his wife Joella decided to use as their permanent home (both demolished). Other Red Mountain modernist houses include Ellie Brickham's residence, its south and west prospects of glass (1955); and the house known locally as the "bonnet" house because of the parabolic shape of its roof, designed by Chicago architect and Aspen homeowner Francis Stanton in 1954 for his brother and sister-in-law, Edgar and Rose, two stalwart Aspen benefactors. Starting in the late 1950s, West End Bauhaus modernist houses appeared, their compact rectangular shapes in keeping with the scale of its modest Victorian cottages. In 1957, Bayer designed a sleek one-story, L-shaped, flat-roofed, cinder block(now stuccoed) residence at 240 Lake Avenue,overlooking Lake Hallam. Not far away, a modest board-and-batten vacation home with modernist features, such as a flat shed roof, over-hanging eaves, and simple square windows, went up at 434 Pearl Court for a physicist affiliated with the nearby Aspen Center for Physics. At the base of Shadow Mountain, a Wrightian structure of warm wood siding, expansive prow-like roof, overhanging eaves, expanse of glass, and tiled fireplace was built on 322 W. Hyman Avenue in 1953. The four-family abode, or quadraplex, signaled another audience for modern housing in Aspen—skiers. ASPEN INSTITUTE Spread across a meadow notfarfrom the West End,near the track where local plutocrats raced theirthoroughbreds ,,,,,I.Je in the town's heyday, is the distinctly modern campus of the C'ATM; Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies—German Bauhaus e"' $.-; - � design transplanted to the Colorado Rockies. The institute 1 ; was an outgrowth of Walter Paepcke's Goethe Bicentennial; V.', .,,,,,v, ,-, r At.-4�' ? r;11.0 >� 0:.:004,,"2.i: intelligentsia and elite traveled to Aspen in June 1949 to i 1y rbs i ,* 6::,s.,3-: , II .r, i • 4,�4,ti _ , celebrate the historic,deep,and abiding philosophical ties that Al ;,,r .• "h � I * p i R America and the rest of the world had with Germany, despite dim.. � "- C,t 'ii ! ' ,> - � � q � ��� a�€ the aberration of Hitler and the Second World War, and to r G �: , � ��' -' * hear concerts, lectures, and, best of all, Albert Schweitzer. Its -' 'zA+ architectural centerpiece was the Big Tent,designed by famed �n modernist Eero Saarinen, which epitomized the festive but Figure 36: Koch Seminar Building,designed by Bayer. City of Aspen files. modern nature of the august gathering. Page 28 of 48 P52 Everyone agreed that Aspen's mountain setting had much to do with the festival's success. The following June, the Aspen Institute opened the first of its summer seminars, where businessmen and intellectuals gathered to listen to such ; _*:s thinkers and doers as Mortimer Adler and Adlai Stevenson T and to ponder universal ideas similar to those of Paepcke's A ,•_ Great Ideas advertising campaign. - „ „-F The Aspen Institute campus was designed without a master , ,,i-.. ,..r - ..,_____;_,-,,,..„4,..:.. ,° plan but loosely organized in three main areas—housing for °,°�'- , ", `-'t:,;-V' r O �r guests, institute administration and activities, and affiliated ' x ; � r '"Ni �'k i 4 �?:1311t,t' institutes.The first permanent building was the 1953 Seminar Figure 37:Center for Physics,designed by Bayer. City Building, designed by Bayer with Benedict as the associate of Aspen files. architect,a pattern that held through the 1950s. Constructed ,�,, `", w of steel frame and cinder blocks, it had a sgraffito mural on its { . ,. „, ' 0, exterior and two hexagon-shaped interior spaces designed to ' , �'"! r° u facilitate discussions around a central table,a large room with ' <_, z ss+ ''zNUf "star-like folded planes” on the ceiling and gray walls, and a 4-. ' . , ?" smaller room with colorful walls. 4 - : In 1954, Bayer and Benedict designed two more institute p', ,L,- „ { tf ``. _ Ivry buildings. The Aspen Meadows Guest Chalets, three flat- ��N k roofed, two-story buildings, each with colorful balcony .'. -�, ;5c , , ' i ,,�f '`,: dividers of blue, red, and yellow, respectively, were loosely grouped around a central building that housed a restaurant y 1 �- .,.vim ;fit (known as the Copper Kettle),lounges,and offices.The Central Figure 38: Anderson Park,designed by Bayer. Building—flat-roofed, two-story, clerestory-lit—combines Courtesy National Trust for Historic Places. cinder blocks and local moss stone, creating a distinctive structure at once Wright and Bauhaus. A year later,the pair's 1955 Health Center for the Physical Therapy Program of the Aspen Institute,with the structural expertise of Otto Buehner, used pre-stressed and prefab concrete and open ends glazed for clerestory light. Sited at the junction of the Roaring Fork River and Castle Creek, the modern complex had a gymnasium; massage, sauna and steam rooms; a plunge pool; and library/sitting room. Bayer also created environmental sculptures, the 1954 Green Mound and 1955 Marble Garden, which predated the "earthwork" and environmental sculpture movement by at least ten years. In a sense, the rigorous Bauhaus modernist environment of the Aspen Institute mirrored the high-minded thinking within its boundaries as well as effectively separating it from Victorian mining-era Aspen, ski-town Alpine, rustic eclecticism, and organic Wrightian modernism. 1960-1975 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT Aspen's growth and development as tourist town, ski resort, and cultural center accelerated in the 1960s and 1970s. After 1958, visitors could ski on three mountains. Skier visits at Aspen Mountain rose from 93,000 in 1958-1959, to 174,000 in 1964-1965, and Buttermilk and Aspen Highlands saw similar growth. In 1967, nearby Snowmass-at Aspen opened, a huge year-round destination resort, in development since 1961, the creation of California land and real estate developer William Janss. In its first year, it attracted twice as many visitors as planned and more than Aspen Mountain itself. It also sparked the disdain of a local writer who felt that it "exemplified qualities that Aspen itself eschewed—large-scale, efficiency, group think, and a no-nonsense Page 29 of 48 P53 cost-profit ratio."23 Yet as Annie Gilbert writes in her history of Aspen, "Promoters of Colorado's economy saw ski industry growth as only positive: investments , f and expansions by the ski industry led to more '" investments by skiers as they came to the state for Y Y ' '.. vacation:"24 lea v ttl trfl 1:.41 , ., * �t;=.4r • }i'r ►; What this meant for the community of Aspen was x13 1 k,,q�Ny <'' 4: , 10 � 1 E 4� ' k:. more visitors, more residents, and more architects •+•I''" "1, and builders to respond to the demand for lodges, restaurants, bars, shops, housing, and the everyday goods and services expected of civic and commercial Figure 39: Base lodge at Buttermilk Mountain.Courtesy centers. Architect Bob Sterling remembers attending AHS. the FIS races in February 1950,which "sealed the deal" for him—he.wanted to live in Aspen. "At that time Aspen was just awakening from post-war blues and an exciting variety of US and foreign types were moving to town."25 Sterling quit college and "went to Aspen to ski bum for a while."From 1956-1960 he worked as a lodge caretaker,waiter,and drafter for Rob Roy and then Jack Walls. After going back to school and getting his architecture degree in 1963, he returned to Aspen and worked in Benedict's office for three years. In the five years between 1960 to 1965, Aspen's population increased 40 percent, with ski bums and movie stars, political elite and counter-culture gurus,.and increasingly affluent, ordinary people adding to the mix of old-timers (some of whom found themselves priced out of their hometown and moved down valley), 10th Mountain Division veterans, ski enthusiasts, and cultural mavens. In 1964, the building boom reached $3 million. Vic Goodhard, the owner of a local garbage company, recalled that"the changing of Aspen was kind of gradual until the 1960s,and then it really started popping." Serving both Aspen and Snowmass, Goodhard constantly had to buy new garbage trucks: "All of a sudden there were new places, bigger places that demanded more service, more people."26 By 1965, Benedict and others—including Ted Mularz, who chaired the Aspen Historical Society's Historic Buildings Committee, and Richard Lai, who chaired the Committee for Experimental Pedestrian Mall and served on Aspen's City Planning and Zoning Commission from 1963-1965--grew concerned about unchecked growth and destruction of the natural landscape and historic resources, and urged the city to adopt an Aspen Master Plan (1966). City leaders recognized that the need to provide not only a "growth" plan but affordable housing for the teachers, policeman, and others who provided essential services for what had become a resort town with very high property values geared toward the affluent visitor. In the autumn of 1962, Der Berghof, a new kind of tourist accommodation appeared at 100 E. Cooper Avenue- - Aspen's first condominium. That year, Colorado passed a law permitting condominiums, which would have a profound effect on Aspen's civic character and economic base. Condominiums, in which each townhouse or apartment in a multiple-unit building is owned by an individual, was a new concept in America. Touted as an economical alternative to buying a single family vacation home, condo development soon became a hallmark of resort communities everywhere. Jumpstarted by California real estate magnate William Janss, who developed Sun Valley and Snowmass, ski condominiums became as indispensable to new ski area growth in the West as lofty mountains, powder snow, and airplane packages. Along with other established ski towns, Aspen embraced condominiums. They transformed local real estate markets and townscapes by concentrating large numbers of people in smaller spaces but larger-scaled structures. After Der Berghof, other condo apartments quickly appeared, including the Aspen Alps, Mittendorf, Alpenblick, 23 Peggy Clifford and John M.Smith,Aspen Dreams and Dilemmas:Love Letters to a Small Town(Chicago:Swallow Press, 1970),97. 24 Gilbert,Re-creation through Recreation. 25 Bob Sterling,email to the author,4 June 2010. 26 Gilbert,Re-creation through Recreation. Page 30 of 48 P54 Fifth Avenue, Little Nell, and Aspen Square. Condos provided a far higher return on land than individual houses or dormitories, leaving the young "ski bums" who worked at menial jobs for the opportunity to ski scrambling for places to live. Architect z� �- r ,^ F Ellen Harland sees the condo boom as largely responsible for " �y- ;"'-3�{S . (:,.g tz, 4 k ... _- a change in Aspen's civic character; it allowed developers to ,''*1.--%a t' ;,,,P� t finance a project through pre-selling, accelerating the pace of - —44-'1' 3 •`.414-'1')1: �.° x change and exacerbating the shift to newcomers who could ant- .. - --- :> more easily get into the real estate market.27 By 1972, Aspen '�' 1 , ' , Y g Y p , y � g� � . ��® �l� ti. had more than 2000 condo units. As the Fifth Avenue condo . - t' ... a '4 x,. manager observed: ". . . three years ago people thought ' � condominium was something you shook on your steak. Now °-� ' � % ,, tie xt that's all over. The sort of Ed's Beds days are gone. G , ; , Y , ; �-, .t y Lam.� ,k Concurrent with 1960s growth and development, the Jsz �SS"?�a' �'` W` architecture and building community expanded. The number Figure 40: Aspen Square,designed by Benedict. of local builders and contractors grew to twenty in 1968, with Courtesy AHS. down valley builders increasing as well. Pioneer architects were joined by others, many of whom got their start in the Benedict office, such as Art Yuenger, Ted Mularz, Bob Sterling, George Henegahn, and Dan Gale. Recent Princeton graduate Richard Lai joined Caudill's.firm in 1960. Snowmass was a boon: Benedict designed the master plan, and he, Caudill, and others designed all types of buildings for the new resort complex as well as for Aspen's commercial, residential, and tourist needs. Tom Benton, perhaps a harbinger of Aspen's shift toward anti-establishment counter-culture, arrived from southern California in 1963, his tactile wood buildings in sync , with Aspen's Wrightian esthetic. In the early 1970s,two renowned modernists, Henry Weese and Victor Lundy, each designed a distinctive building that continued Aspen's Bauhaus modern traditions. By the 1970s, Aspen's success threatened to diminish the quality of life that drew people. The town tried to accommodate tourists and townspeople, workers and visitors, traffic and parking, shopping and entertainment by transforming Cooper and Hyman into a pedestrian mall and creating Rubey Park to facilitate public transportation. LODGING • Just prior to the condominium explosion, two lodges went up in downtown Aspen to provide short-term accommodations for.skiers. Robin Molny designed Aspen's second Wrightian lodge, the Hearthstone. Built in 1961 and enlarged in 1963, the handsome wood structure is set deep into its site on the corner of Hyman and Aspen and has two angled wings and a sheltering shingled roof. In 1963, Caudill designed a chalet-style building, originally called the Viking Lodge, at 832 E. Cooper Avenue. The two-story,gable-roofed building has a simple L-shaped layout, with wood and stucco exterior and a balcony defining the front facades. More typically a modernist, Caudill created this ski lodge in a picturesque alpine style that was important to Aspen's ski-town imagery at the time. COMMERCIAL Between 1960 and 1975, Aspen's downtown commercial core reflected the economic boom, with new office, retail, recreational, and service buildings inserting new functions and a modernist presence among the extant Victorians.Two striking brick structures, dated 1960 and 1970, feature oversized entrance arches that recall the urbane commercial architecture of Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright. At 307 S. Mill Street, the red brick building has a large arched entrance with five receding brick moldings and an off-center low parapet and pier 27 Ellen Harland,telephone interview with the author,26 May 2010. C 28 Burton Hersh,"Economy is a Luxury Condominium,"Ski 37(August 1972):68-70; Burton Kaplan,"Condominiums—To Buy or Not to Buy,"Skiing 25(November 1972):110-13,161-63. Page 31 of 48 P55 ` 4;., ��! �� j .: (1960). Though the architect is unknown, the Mill Street ?� . fit. ,"4' D.1, }rtr ' ', + ' building anticipates Caudill's 1970 impeccable yellow brick Ott x6kj a'�R ♦ S.+ r `�j" �' ' 'e1y "`-.4: T'" -' Aspen Sports on 408 East Cooper, a cube with a dramatic i'' , Yr—1 . ' ;1 central arch, low parapets flanking the central entrance, ,,'� 4 :'11, 1. , # ,� and a large horizontal window set into the second-floor .-4-...,.i M :vim, a� v�' 2„ �: r '1:774:-‘1"‘ attic. 44q# 2 l, , s �-� /fir [ ' LL'f4) "4 ,; ,' F,� t ' ` The E. Hyman Street area attracted several new ff` t. .,-j $. . RS 1`e'+t i e�i,,,,m4T,�, d _ : ,, commercial buildings in the 1960s, two of them by }:, .,'ya:y l.Y y.r - .1" 2- r„`-,�,y, ?5: EY: K jlR i', £Y �." ,4.4, 'FtY# }, .' Aspen's first female architect, Ellie Brickham. Her two- >`s x �- r `l � =-- story, flat-roofed, concrete block structure at the corner .,,-.:,'A,,,,,,,-,4,,-.3 ,V� -17.--,,,,, . uP of Hunter and Hyman (606 E. Hyman Avenue, 1960) has the simple geometry, minimal decoration, ribbon Figure 41: Aspen Sports,designed by Caudill. City of windows, and cantilevered second floor associated with Aspen files. Bauhaus design, reminiscent of her work at the Aspen Institute with Bayer and Benedict. Next door,610 E. Hyman Avenue (1963),described as "a most unusual shop" for client Patricia Moore had shops and offices on the ground floor and the owner's apartment on the second floor.29 Oriented to the street, the façade has six attenuated brick piers that extend from the base to the eaves and stucco arched spandrels for a more"d'ecorated" look that reflected the 1960s evolution of modernist design, as in Phillip Johnson's Lincoln Center in New York. In the same block is the Patio Building (630 E. Hyman Avenue), designed in 1969 by Tom Benton, a local icon known for his printmaking flair and personality. This flat-roofed building feels both Wrightian and Californian in its exploration of, and delight in,the nature of the materials—wood, concrete blocks and glass; use of geometric forms, such as the large-scale horizontal second story cantilevered over the open first floor and the prominent round central window on the Hyman Avenue facade; and its attention to its corner location, with the Spring Street façade reiterating themes and materials of the Hyman Street front. In the next block, at 720 E. Hyman Avenue, is Robin Molny's Aspen Athletic Club of 1976, his only unaltered commercial building. A massive cube with three stories of offices above grade and an athletic club in the basement, it shares with Benton's Patio Building a Wrightian sense of materials, prominent flat roof, and massive capstone floor cantilevered over a glazed lower floor. The heavy timber construction with glue-laminated wood beams and columns contrasts with the glass atrium in the lobby, the open floor plan, and interior/exterior courtyard. ,r , /. Cattycorner from Benton's building, on 300 S. Spring 'fe Street,is the Hannah Dustin Building,designed in 1969 Y'v, 1 f re by George Heneghan and Dan Gale, both of whom ` 2 . ., � t t had worked for Benedict. The flat-roofed, multistory `' ,• '# s'_�.t 41 ��"; �i y building minimizes its scale by the artful use of planar :, " x -i�` er,t,K � h,l brick panels extending above the eaves, set-back �, ' 44 slj "" '; !,ri4� e e i , ;; �,i • stucco spandrels, cantilevered roof and balconies, and , ,, �`tt l_.'. „ ,.\t,., ;d. k €€n: ' ` '. en,l • r ...w.-s F ky. L ly� w use of natural materials such as brick, wood, and tile. `a 7 : K- ` -' I L y ;1;.•:. .''.�v u On the corner of Galena and Main Street is Aspen's ; ,„ -. ,,i'g@ I«r: } first modernist gas station (435 E. Main Street), built ' `` .;. ....r- - w. in 1970, across the street from Caudill's pristine 1954 Figure 42: 300 South Spring Street,designedby Heneghan National Bank of Aspen. Designed by Jack Walls and and Gale. City of Aspen files. Bob Sterling,who had both worked in Benedict's office,the award-winning gas station was commissioned by the president of Conoco Oil, who wanted a signature station in Aspen—as Walls remembers, it was just about the 29 Lane,"Aspen's Women Architects Aid Building Boom in Town." Page 32 of 48 P56 first filling station in town. The elegant rectilinear brick station is divided into two parts, a higher office/service bay/car wash and the lower gas pump area, both topped by cantilevered flat roofs. The smooth brick surfaces and rounded corners created a modern structure set back from_the street with a flow around the building and unobstructed views of the station's pumps and service bays. • In the 1970s, when pedestrian malls became a popular urban concept, and Colorado laws were enacted that facilitated their construction, Aspen attempted to y , ";� ',. + N.„ i;,-; ,-. , ' ��• resolve some of its traffic and parking problems by 1,'.,=--4-....`:-.:=. 4,.:,. :4 r 1'ti lc 4 1 {.�.i °4 `'`'..4 I. , } fi� ,, , - 4-,,-. , :' f � stat • tr ansforming five blocks of two major commercial X44 a ' ,ly El m._,, '? ' avenues, Cooper and Hyman. The concept of a b I a 't., pedestrian mall for Aspen dated back to the 1960s, ` t " ' l 2,t , #>' '.g.'�j with architects, such as Ellie Brickham and Richard Lai, i (ffi 11 k! i , 6'P, E,. k;" ;1y$ participating on citizen committees wrestling with the 3 , { i }~ Y t {'� 1D {y R t .i,, , I t F =Pt1} y3., Issue. . , ' .r._ ; ' 2.7 4. In 1976, Molny collaborated with Besinger, who later 0 '` ' i' z ,_ 3+' consulted for Boulder, Colorado, to create Aspen's ...- automobile-free commercial space. The Cooper-Hyman pedestrian mall maintains the town's traditional urban Figure 43: Hyman Avenue Mall,designed by Molny.Courtesy grid but eliminates automobile traffic so pedestrians AHS. can shop and socialize in an updated tourist-friendly environment "enlivened by native trees, sculpture, grass-water-courses,and playground."3°The newer buildings emulate,in scale and material,the older ones,some of which are Aspen's most significant, such as the Cowenhoven Block (1890) and the Red Onion, formerly the Brick Saloon (1892).The mall's proximity to Rubey Park and the newly constructed bus station facilitated public access to downtown for both tourists at Snowmass and other places and workers,who lived down valley. Along with his Bidwell Building at 434 E. Cooper Avenue in 1965, Benedict designed other commercial projects. In 1976, he moved his architectural office from the downtown Victorian-era Bowman Building to his newly designed Benedict Building on 1280 Ute Avenue, east of Aspen's commercial core. According to the Society of Architectural Historian Guide to Colorado Architecture, it conforms to the "'Aspen style,' exemplified by well- sited, low-slung Modernist structures of indigenous materials, notably wooden beams that often seem to fade into the aspen grove."31 In 1978, Benedict designed the Pitkin County Bank at 534 E. Hyman. PUBLIC --V Yr, `,r4 ), ,, -.',,,,T, While accommodating tourist and commercial demands, , ' *, � +; . y,,v ;+ ,} .,=p , ;. aw Aspen modern architecture also served community needs. �'` „c; `'�r r ";r According to a 1961Aspen Times article,Benedict and Bayer 1,;, s" r-` 4 w s. , , were selected to design a new Pitkin County Library, and �w _;; Benedict drafter Ellen Harland remembers working on the 1M :i ` I' ' z` " " •4 design. In 1966, the library at 120 E. Main Street opened, ° 'r , N „ an auspicious occasion, with CBS news anchormanWalter ( .. j i } � .fy ,rv,; ..„ t Cronkite participating in the dedication. Now replaced 3 h a "' " nt, + by another public library designed in 1991 by Caudill, the ,-,2-,*:.:,,,: k�v ; ,,,..,*.,:3;000,, i � p h �," o, 1966 red brick Wrightian library had a low-pitched hip roof, 4 ,>': ,°-, a,h : , ,, .-ii, ;, overhanging eaves, horizontal emphasis, and a clerestory Figure 44: 120 East Main Street,originally the Pitkin band-of windows. County Library,designed by Bayer and Benedict. City of Aspen files. 30 Noel,Buildings of Colorado,495. 31 Ibid.,498. Page 33 of 48 P57 Two very different churches contribute to Aspen's modernist legacy. Christ Episcopal Church at 536 W. North Street in the West End was designed by Francis Stanton of the Chicago firm Stanton & Rockwell. Built in 1963, it has a parabolic arched roof that reflects the modern design technology of World War II-era Quonset huts and Eero Saarinen's St. Louis Gateway Arch as well as the esthetic of the Red Mountain "bonnet" house Stanton designed in 1954 for his brother. Still visible in a recent renovation,the arched roof is a distinctive feature of the church. In 1969, George Heneghan and Dan Gale designed the Aspen Interfaith Chapel of the Prince of Peace, 70 Meadowood Drive, on the road that enters Aspen. Said to be inspired by"wayfarer's chapels in the Alps," it is a "happy wedding"32 of wood, stained glass, and local "moss stone," a distinctive feature of many of Aspen's Wrightian buildings. (Evidently builders gathered moss rock for free on Independence Pass, which may explain its frequent appearance in 1960s Aspen structures.33) ASPEN INSTITUTE &GIVEN INSTITUTE x 1 :,:,*(411,1t44.4 ' ' �s Walter Paepcke died in 1960, and one of the ambitious plans that A t, - a '', '' . Y ,t �tr` p died with him was his 1950s scheme to build an architectural village ,-.4..,;,•,, r, �x ':` ' ' ' on the outskirts of the Aspen Institute, featuring seventeen of the • `°• NEB` ;,.,t,,, .,_ world most notable architects. Walter Gropius, Marcel Breuer, I 7 -y M. Pei, Minoru Yamasaki, Edward Durrell Stone, and Phillip Johnson kf ,:.- .� were among those who accepted his offer to design and build houses. ', ..k,-•,:- ., •,:- ,°. : Eventually Henry Luce and Time magazine agreed to put up a million ' ,)- ,. , dollars for the "living architectural museum." Groundbreaking was Figure 45: Paepcke Auditorium,designed set for April 1960, but Paepcke died on April 13, and plans for the by Bayer. courtesy Farewell,Mills,Gatsch village were never realized.' Architects,Inc ,r%. Yet the Aspen Institute continued to play a vital role in Aspen's r 1,+° cultural and intellectual life and to carry on the International Style 'ter; t, °�w 1 , ' T �_ yf, 4�' as•of modern architecture. In 1962, Bayer, with H. Ellenzweig as „{ ,� ,�,�.*` } ."<•1� . t-f- , ' . . r•i ds a fits. t itki 04) assistant architect, designed the Aspen Institute for Theoretical ��} rr� l� �•#. Physics (700 W. Gillespie Street, demolished), a one-story, terne ,:-:;{ t} 'l ,,N roofed structure of cinder block and redwood, with offices for the - 3 a i �`` s -i-4 ,,_, s rr � �4 � theoretical physicists and a walled patio for social gatherings. An - , � � „A .� t even more elaborate multi-functional structure of concrete and ?a xe` W •' ', . ', ''`, �,'• cinder blocks with a neoprene roof, the Walter Paepcke Memorial : . '''' Building also went up in 1962. Bayer was the head architect, with Figure 46: Given Institute,designed by Weese. assistance from F. Bates and Ellenzweig, and structural engineering city of Aspen files. by Bierbach and Horton. In 1964, Bayer designed the Concert Tent,which was demolished in 2000 and replaced by Harry Teague's design. Some ten years later, Elizabeth Paepcke commissioned "one of Aspen's finest modernist works,"35 the Given Institute of Pathobiology at 100 E. Francis Street,that was dedicated in August 1972. Designed by famed Chicago modernist Harry Weese, the concrete block building on a its compact site is a simple but striking example of "High Modern" design. / ■ RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY MODERNISM Between 1960 and 1975, International Style single-family houses with flat roofs, planar walls, rectilinear shapes, and glass walls continued to be built in various neighborhoods scattered throughout Aspen. Such modernist houses can be found in the urban neighborhoods of the West End as well as on spectacular sites along the 32 Ibid.,497. 33 Local contractor. 34 Aspen Institute website. 35 Noel,Buildings of Colorado,493. Page 34 of 48 P58 • Roaring Fork River as it meanders east-to-west through Aspen. Occupying a small footprint compared with today's houses,these classic modernist homes are scarce. Bayer designed three residences still standing, at 311 North �t k d 1 .:: � Street (1963), 240 Lake Avenue (1957), and 850 Roaring ` rr ic,_ ���"; Fork Road (1965), which may be a remodeling rather than , . ; � an original Bayer design. Next door to the North Street ;; ,.' r residence is the truly elegant vacation home (301 Lake Avenue) designed in 1972 by Texas modernist Victor Lundy for himself and his artist wife Anstis. A studious well as a Iwo, p vacation home, the roof is cantilevered to extend over the floor-to-ceiling wall of windows that frames the 20'-high ., 4. � 3 b great room. The proximity of Bayer's and Lundy's modernist ,,ir. -w,, . € � 1�, r>` $ '`' .t*t ,Ct �.�,.. y,l h+c Ufa,r Eit „,¢ ^!> masterpieces makes the West End corner of Lake and North � ; ,,. ? `�` 4.i ctb fJ 1 an important convergence of early and late Bauhaus design. Figure 47: 311 West North Street,designed by Bayer. City of Aspen files. Three classic modernist houses are by two of Aspen's pioneer women architects. In 1971,Ellie Brickham designed a straightforward modernist house at 592 McSkimming Road. Closed to the road, but open to the views below, the house sits dramatically halfway up the hillside. Another Brickham design, 433 West Bleeker Street (1973) in the West End (demolished) was a simple brick cube. Ellen Harland designed a sleek, one-story, flat-roofed residence for Benedict controller Pat Maddalone (1411 Crystal Lake Road in Aspen Club) in 1976. Its rectilinear form and copious use of glazing make the most of its site along the Roaring Fork River. At the base of Red Mountain on a spectacular site overlooking Hunter Creek, Art Yuenger designed a striking concrete block house—both muscular and elegant—in 1971. Located at 54 Shady Lane, the flat-roofed house, with blue trim and unusual clerestory windows, consists of three distinct cubes, sensitively integrated into the forested landscape. Further east but also oriented to the river is 258 Roaring Fork Drive. Although the architect is unknown, the 1974 residence has normative modernist features such as overall rectilinear massing of the L- shaped plan, flat roof, and sheer treatment of the concrete block walls. MODERN CHALET A distinctive postwar housing type in Aspen is locally termed a modern chalet. With its moderately pitched gable roof oriented to the front, it recalls traditional chalets associated with ski country, but in its expansive glass and minimal decoration, it also seems classically modernist, as if the architect and client liked the chalet idea for Aspen's emerging ski identity, but updated it and made it modern to fit the community's avant-garde tastes. Characteristically, modern chalets have low-to-moderately pitched roofs based on a 3:12 ratio; broad facades organized in rectilinear solid or glass panels; overhanging eaves, frequently with exposed roof beams; glass often extending to the eaves; minimal decoration; and sometimes stone or brick piers.The symmetrical modern chalets generally have a tripartite organization: a large central glazed area flanked by wood or masonry piers. Predominantly built between the late 1950s and late 1960s,these compact buildings were custom-designed for clients as well as erected by speculative builders. They have a rectangular footprint and fit well on the gridded streets of the older West End and Shadow Mountain neighborhoods. For the most part, their sizable window walls are oriented to Aspen Mountain. Although some modern chalets,such as 500 E.Durant Street,served commercial purposes;most extant examples are residential. They encompass a range of options,from single family to duplexes and even quadriplexes. While evoking such contemporaneous hybrid modernist homes as Eichler in California, Honn in Oklahoma, Keck in Chicago,and Koch (Tech Built) in the East,when compared side-by-side,the Aspen modern chalets not only look different, but arise out of different circumstances. Eichler and the others were meeting the postwar demand for suburban homes that fit the American Dream of home ownership, up-to-date while still affordable. The Aspen Page 35 of 48 • P59 real estate market was geared toward affluent vacation home owners who might be attracted to Aspen for a variety of reasons—the culture of the Aspen Institute, the skiing of Aspen Mountain, the charm of'an authentic western town, or the cachet of owning property in such a desirable place. Many of Aspen's modern chalets were built in the West End, close to the Aspen Institute and its intellectual and cultural offerings. Urban lots in this established neighborhood fitted the compact modern chalets well,yet they still offered mountain views.The modern chalets added to the West End's rich building mix, including Victorian cottages and Second Empire and Queen Anne mansions as well as postwar traditional gabled chalets and classic flat-roofed modernist houses. Often two- and multiple-family structures, they also represent a shift in Aspen's evolution as a vacation destination serving both winter and summer tourists. ,� In 1957, Benedict designed two free-standing early A ` r � „ modern chalets side-by-side on separate lots, at 625 & 4 - ` T`" rt :': ' 615 Gillespie Avenue (demolished). Identical, the one- 'i*. R � ` story structures had a horizontal base of board-and- �`"' �, 's 3 g}k batten siding punctuated by two vertical windows defining A`r ° i 11p the ground floor and glazing in the upper gabled section )� ��'i i below the low-pitched roof Simple and straightforward, `; '.i `7#A ,; '` they were topped by overhanging eaves and an extensive ,� w e : 'r roof that'encompassed a car port.36 Figure 48: 625 Gillespie Avenue,designed by Benedict. City of Aspen files. Five other West End modern chalets date from 1962 to 1965 and show the range of variations within this simple vacation house. Many modern chalets have glass to the eaves and flanking brick piers. Projecting balconies cantilevered across the front, injecting a three-dimensional rectilinear base that hover just above the ground are also common characteristics. Not far from the Aspen Institute campus is 621 W. Francis (1965) a two-story chalet with a steeper pitched roof—not as steep as an A-frame, but not as broad as the typical modern chalet. The balconies on all three Francis ' ' � x' -7 qtak Street houses, in their overall horizontality and use of simple balusters, maintain the rectilinearity - � hk�r associated with modern design. In 1965, two "`7 44 identical two-story multi-famil y modern chalets T o- IT were built at 114 and 118 East Bleeker Street, also _ = � ,< in the West End,but one block off Main Street. The truly dramatic overhang of the low gable roof, the L , ; ; �r, r� ,��,77; 7�� exposed rafters, pilotis, usable deep balconies,and (1-a�: l 4 central expanse of glass reflect a hybrid modernism similar to that of tract homes, but the decorative v. y. motifs on the balconies emphasize the continuing Figure 49: 114 East Sleeker Street. Courtesy AHS. appeal of chalet imagery in ski-town Aspen, while the massive chimneys and piers flanking the ground floor(on 114) use a favorite Aspen building material—moss stone. Two other West End modern chalets deserve mention. A dramatic one-story duplex at 500 W. Smuggler went up in 1970, four blocks from 949 W. Smuggler, Aspen's first postwar chalet, built in 1946. With two massive chimneys of moss rock projecting from the glazed façade and punctuating the roof, the later vacation home is 36 Cliff May's design of the Eichler Ranch House in Potrola Valley,California,1958, is a similar board-and-batten, low-gable-roofed modern house.Paul Adamson and Marty Arbunich,Eichler/Modernism Rebuilds the American Dream.(Salt Lake City:Gibbs Smith Publisher,2002),28. Page 36 of 48 P60 an intriguing modern contrast to its traditional neighbo. On 407 N.Third Street,the Coors family of Golden built a single-family modern chalet of wood and stone, now hidden from view by vegetation. Designed by Brown Brokaw Bowen Architects of Boulder, this residence suggests that a vacation home of this scale and style suited elite Colorado patrons in the mid-1960s. ; , k 3�3, lf A striking 1965 modern chalet sits near the base of Shadow ) ,' }E r .-1 �� f ar �j Mountain and original ski lift No 1 at 219 S. Third Street. The E t large duplex was designed as a second home for a Wisconsin 0. % / ' ' ' �t. ti', T _T�� � f 1Y� family by "hometown"architect Eric Friis(b.1916,Copenhagen, , V, Denmark; practiced in Eagle River, Wisconsin). It has a low- '--. ;fl pitched, gabled roof that sweeps down to encompass flanking " '•!'0+1i111. . SF • 4 "xA ' " car ports, a façade of rectilinear glass panels and board-and- ` ' "� ' batten, and a deck oriented to the mountain. �� s°; On Aspen's east side, in the neighborhood near Glory Hole Figure 50: 219 South Third Street,designed by Friis. City of Aspen files. park, 1005 Waters Avenue is a modern chalet designed in 1959 (later enlarged in 1964) by Ellen Harland. The M.I.T.-trained architect planned it for herself and her husband, �{ local builder Irwin Harland, when they married. Close to the `"--,_:-,,,,j;� 4„ ., ,c_.-"', -,,,_. „1 t' ground, with a low-pitched roof, it had a glazed facade (now •1 €'`"vt' °”, ' , altered) that extended up to the eaves. Harland remembers x� - }W'"�t.13 `" k ,,4 designing such structures in Benedict's office—always "a ratio ? ✓ re Z �.i "seamless";,.•�r _ ;� ,� 4 � �4� of 3 to 12"—for a seamless roof of tar and gravel that also -.• ,- ' "' shed snow.37 On the same street (1102 Waters Avenue) is the ' '.• "` vacation home built for the Geary Family of Denver following ., Benedict's specifications for an "affordable" ski home based on 1, - :_,:'' .s Frank Lloyd Wright principles that was featured in Ski magazine „LL r y , : *t j r 7 ,. (Spring, 1967). Figure 51: 1102 Waters Avenue,designed by AtBenedict. City of Aspen files. the bottom of McSkimming Road, which was developed by Fabi and Fritz Benedict, and zigzags up the mountain off Highway 82, is No. 24, built in 1960. Although the architect is unknown, the residence is similar to the West End modern chalets in its low roof, minimal decoration, and windows on the upper floor that carry through the gable end. A variation of a modern chalet is No. 232, designed by pioneer architect Rob Roy for the Danieli family in 1962. Located further up the mountain, it has typical features, but the roof projects like a ship's prow and the balcony extends outward to enclose the carport in a dynamic thrust. b*t.4-'''1 � '', r a �Y V laTi f a in MODERN CHALET MULTIPLIED—MULTIFAMILY ' ',, -� 4x`` ,�". • As Aspen accommodated ever more tourists in the 1960s, 'j= .» `g� , a ` 7 architects created multi-family versions of the modern f 'r 4.4.1,Ex� t � V chalet. In 1962, Rob Roy designed the Madsen Chalets on 3,1 � - qi 608 W. Hopkins Street. The handsome wooden complex I �C" ' •-, , i* "` x ` ' is characterized by a low-pitched roof, deep overhangs, ,i , rr, '_ '-' T.. : . � � kl�T— r balconies, simple rectangular forms of glass and wood, with 1 , 'I.. k A ti 1glazing in the gables, and oriented toward the mountain. In 'd 7'2 1` ,.' . �- .". 965,at 1001 E. Cooper, Benedict-employees Bob Sterling and ','` .;-`'' ` �' � � Bob Dagg designed and developed the two-story, multi-family Villager Townhouses. Inspired by Swiss chalets and their Figure 52: 608 West Hopkins Street,designed by modernist training, they set two chalets side-by-side to create Roy. City of Aspen files. 37 Ellen Harland,telephone interview with the author,26 May 2010. • Page 37 of 48 P61 an extended horizontal, reinforced by the second-floor balcony that extends the entire width of the building. The project had two other partners,Gordon Forbes and Bill Dashner,and each of the four partners bought a unit when they were finished and later sold them. CONDOMINIUMS f Undoubtedly the major influence on Aspen's economy, built environment, and quality of life between 1960 and 1975, condominiums changed the scale of its townscape, attracted outside money and developers, and allowed ' even more people to own property and settle. The footprints of those built within the downtown proper adhered to Aspen's urban grid, and city zoning restricted the height to three stories. Condos frequently were "mixed use" properties,with retail and restaurants on the ground floor and apartments above.This concept was later used by "total" resorts like Snowmass, Vail, Beaver Creek, and Whistler Blackcomb, which lacked Aspen's intrinsic street life and tried to inject it a resort environment. Aspen's condo-mania started in the western neighborhood of Lift No. 1, with Der Berghof, which had twelve units and appeared on 100 E. Cooper Avenue in the fall of 1962. The two-story, concrete block, rectilinear building evokes both the Bauhaus-inspired Aspen Meadows Guest Chalets (1954) of the Aspen Institute and a more vernacular"motel modern" represented by the Holiday Inns of the era. Rather quickly, rustic- and alpine- themed Mittendorf,Alpenblick, Fasching House, Fifth Avenue, and Little Nell condos followed. Benedict contributed to the transformation by designing condominiums in the 1960s and 1970s, for which he was both praised and criticized. He designed four of Aspen's largest condo projects and spearheaded the residential shift ever more eastward. In 1964, he designed what are usually touted as Aspen's first luxury condominiums, the Aspen Alps, on 700 Ute Avenue. Now consisting of eight Wrightian buildings (not all by Benedict) that flank the east side of Aspen Mountain, the complex demonstrates Benedict's skill in integrating ,- his building harmoniously into the landscape—what he "� k' xt'� t•r � , ` ii had done earlier with single family dwellings, he now did 3; s ,,4, ' {4I, . �t-: +_z.'� with the multi-family structures. The three-story wood ti. structures have moderately pitched roofs,with local stone ,r-:,= ry ,y,t�, '.' ,` used to emphasize chimneys,corners,and, in many cases, i =w , t4 j K: 1 the sides, in a way somewhat similar to the encasing of ` y �”'°' ,'"� _ f local rock in concrete at Taliesin West. The large Aspen � ';� �{, , , ,. Square condominium of 1967 (617 E. Cooper) occupies if "F ., z z ,, , , , i q i r 19' the entire block defined by Durant, Hunter, Cooper and , – 1, i v� '` ._.:aJy,,.-{ ' r, �_ A ,''ssl,ii to''" i3 m I Spring, with an interior landscaped courtyard. Benedict , _ 41 4 �_„r �, � skillfully accommodated the urban setting by breaking ,h .:, up the Durant Street facade into five segments of two ' Figure 53: Aspen Alps in the background,designed by units each, using alternating setbacks to minimize the Benedict. Courtesy AHS. building's impact. The Hunter, Cooper and Spring Street facades have commercial activity on the ground floor. Typical Wrightian devices include its overall rectilinearity, flat roofs, emphatic brick corners and piers, overhanging eaves, cantilevered balconies, and consummate use of materials. Even so, one ski writer compared Aspen Square to "a big city apartment house,"38 and it was strongly criticized because its scale seemed out of place in Aspen. In 1972, Benedict continued his eastward movement,with The Gant,Aspen's largest condominium,at 610 West End Avenue. Its multilevel areas, staggered buildings, and use of wood break up its scale so that the complex fits naturally into its setting. Even further east, Benedict's design for 1411 Crystal Lake Condos at the Aspen Club in 1976 also incorporated site planning. With the use of stucco, broken-up wall surfaces, and numerous cantilevered balconies,these condos suggest Benedict's design work in the late-1960s on the Snowmass condos, 38 M.L(Morten Lund), "When Biggest is Best,"Ski 36(August 1971):64-66,68. Page 38 of 48 P 6 2 mall, and town center. A reiteration of Aspen Square can be seen catty-corner across Durant Street in the 1968 North of Nell (555 E. Durant). Occupying a prime location at the base of Aspen Mountain and adjacent to the ticketing and lift facilities, the large modernist condo complex has shops and eateries on the ground level and lodging above. Designed by award-winning architects Erickson and Stevens of Des Plaines, Illinois—both Taliesin fellows in the 1950s—the multi-gabled roofline extends the length of its Durant Street ; facade and echoes its mountain location. A 1965 project that i 4:-0.4 ' '�6_s�;=w -� t; 3 : -. Ar Y also responds to its setting is Shadow Mountain Condominiums, f -,� . . -_ af,'� y kl*-2 ,,' "t;',',4-:',--r " ',: AS. .. located at the top of Aspen Street (809 S. Aspen) near Lift No �:,— .� `,4 It4., �'' , 1, the original skiers' portal to Aspen Mountain. Designed by F:.: Y /11,- ,, '` a1a4i ` , Fort Worth, Texas, consulting engineer Donald W. Kirk for a _ ,. •t' � . + , 's Fort Worth client, Charles Haws of Haws & Garrett General ,, '' '" n ' s�,. 1'F$ • ` "6 Wit. Contractors, Inc., the complex combines traditional chalet u �� it and modern variations. The buildings step up the mountain, '"` ,` `- "r .A ' the many gable roofs stacked like traditional chalets in alpine 1fr=;,1 =' ;•.�., .,� 1¢ry'.,, Switzerland. Though the Aspen Times referred to Shadow Figure 54: 809 South Aspen Street,Shadow Mountain as an"instant Chinatown,39 the designer remembers Mountain Condominiums,designed by Kirk. City of Aspen files. that he was thinking about the Swiss chalets that characterized resort Aspen. Other, slightly smaller-scaled, multi-family complexes also appeared in Aspen at this time, often in established neighborhoods with single-family housing. A striking"Mansard Modern" at 700 W. Hopkins,with shake shingles extending to the ground,was designed in 1968 by Rob Roy. Nearby, at 720 W. Hopkins,the Skandia Townhomes (1971)feature wood and stucco siding,ground-level garages,cantilevered balconies,and a series of gables subtly defining each unit. 39 Aspen Times,date. Page 39 of 48 P63 CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION Although modernism has likely changed the course of architecture forever, the style in its purest form began to wane—nationally in the mid 1960s and into the early 1970s in Aspen. Its iconic monuments went up in the 1940s and1950s. By the mid-1960s, there was a growing unease with some of the ways it had reshaped cities and the sense that flat-roofed, austere, glass and metal-framed buildings looked too uniform. Robert . Venturi's Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture (1966) signaled that a new generation was challenging modernism's dominance. Thus, the period of historic significance for buildings of this style in Aspen is between 1945 and approximately 1975. Aspen has been fortunate in attracting the top talents in many professional fields since the end of World War II. The architects and buildings described in this paper have made important contributions to Aspen's built environment, which continue to influence its character. While many towns in Colorado have retained some of the character of their 19th-century mining heritage, few are as enriched with excellent modernist buildings as Aspen. - Page 40 of 48 P64 BIBLIOGRAPHY Adamson, Paul, and Marty Arbunich. Eichler: Modernism Rebuilds the American Dream. Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith Publisher, 2002. Allen,James Sloan. The Romance of Commerce and Culture: Capitalism, Modernism, and the Chicago-Aspen Crusade for Cultural Reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983. Bancroft, Caroline. Famous Aspen:Its Fabulous Past—Its Lively Present. 8th ed. Boulder: Johnson Publishing Co., 1975. Bayer, Herbert. Herbert Bayer:Painter, Designer,Architect. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corp.; and London: Studio Vista, 1967. . Benedict, Frederic. "SKI Home of the Month,"SKI 31 (Spring 1967):65-67. Berger, Bruce. "Robin Molny and the Taliesin Fellowship," unpub. Und. Besinger, Curtis. Working with Mr. Wright: What It Was Like. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Bowker, R. R. American Architects Directory, 1956, 1962, 1970. TheHistorical Dictionary of American Architects. Chanzit, Gwen Finkel. Herbert Bayer and Modernist Design in America. Ann Arbor and London: UMI Research Press, 1987. . "Herbert Bayer and Aspen," Exhibition Notes, Adelson Gallery/Paepcke Building, Aspen Institute, Aspen, Colorado, December 1999-December 2000. Clark, Brian. "Ski Country Style,"Ski Area Management 25 (March 1986):55-57,78-81. Clifford, Peggy, and John M. Smith.Aspen Dreams and Dilemmas: Love Letters to a Small Town. Chicago: Swallow Press, 1970. Cohen, Arthur A. Herbert Bayer: The Complete Work. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1984. Coleman, Annie Gilbert.Ski Style:Sport and Culture in the Rockies. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2004. Davoren,Jennifer. "A Presidential Honor for Coondog."Aspen Times, May 26-27, 2001. Dial, Scott. "The Boomerang Lodge:The Lodge that Charlie Built, and Built, and Built." Destination Magazine. Ditmer,Joanne. "Schlosser Gallery Host to Major Bayer Show/Sale." Denver Post. October 1, 1997. Dunlop, Beth. "Bauhaus' Influence Exceeds Its Life." Denver Post, April 20, 1986. Page 41 of 48 P65 Dusenbury,Adele. "When the Architect Arrived After the War."Aspen Times,July 31, 1975. Frankeberger, Robert and James Garrison. "From Rustic Romanticism to Modernism, and Beyond:Architectural Resources in the National Parks." Forum Journal, Journal of the National Trust for Historic Preservation (Summer 2002). "Fritz Benedict." Colorado Ski Museum and Ski Hall of Fame. http://vailsoft.com/museum/index.html. "Fritz Benedict Honored by Peer Group of Architects."Aspen Times,June 20, 1985. Fritz Benedict Memorial Service Program,July 25, 1995. Gilbert, Anne. Re-creation through Recreation:Aspen Skiing from 1870 to 1970. Aspen: Aspen Historical Society, 1995. Goldberger, Paul. "The Modernist Manifesto: Why buildings from our recent past are in peril and why saving them is so crucial." Preservation (May/June 2008):30-35. "Harry (Mohr) Weese." Artnet, AG.www.artnet.com. Hayes, Mary Eshbaugh. "Benedict's House in the Hill."Aspen Times, March 11, 1982. . Dedication plaque on "The Benedict Suite," Little Nell Hotel, Aspen, Colorado. . "Fritz Benedict, 1914-1995,The Passing of a Local Legend."Aspen Times,July 15 and 16, 1995. Henning, Randolph C. "At Taliesin": Newspaper Columns by Frank Lloyd Wright and the Taliesin Fellowship 1934-1937. Carbondale & Edwardsville, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press, 1992. Hersh, Burton. Condominiums—To Buy or Not to Buy,"Skiing 25 (November 1972): 110-13, 161-63. . "Economy is a Luxury Condominium,"Ski 37 (August 1972): 68-70. Hess, Alan,text, Alan Weintraub, photographs. Organic Architecture: The Other Modernism. Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith, Publisher, 2006. "Is It Time for the Preservation of Modernism?"The Architecture Issue. The New York Times Magazine (May 15, 2005), Kostof, Spiro.A History of Architecture:Settings and Rituals. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. Page 42 of 48 P66 Lane,Joan. "Aspen's Women Architects Aid Building Boom in Town." Grand Junction Sentinel,January 16, 1965. Laverty, Rob. "50 Years of Benedict: A Forefather of Modern Aspen Looks at What Has Been Wrought." High Country Real Estate,Aspen Daily News, February 6-12, 1999. Lund, Morten. "When Biggest is Best,"Ski 36 (August 1971): 64-66, 68. Marty, Myron A. Communities of Frank Lloyd Wright: Taliesin and Beyond. Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 2009. , and Shirley L. Marty. Frank Lloyd Wright's Taliesin Fellowship. Kirksville, Mo.: Truman State University Press, 1999. Noel,Thomas J. Buildings of Colorado. New York and Oxford: Society of Architectural Historian Series, Buildings of the United States, and Oxford University Press, 1997. "Noted Designer Herbert Bayer Dies."Aspen Times, October 3, 1985. O'Rear,John and Frankie O'Rear. The Aspen Story. New York:A. S. Barnes, 1966. Perkin, Robert L. "Aspen Reborn: Herbert Bayer Changing the Town's Face." Rocky Mountain News, September 27, 1955. Pfeifer, Friedl, and Morten Lund. Nice Goin':My Life on Skis. Missoula: Pictorial Histories Publishing Company, 1993. Prudon,Theodore H. Preservation of Modern Architecture. Hoboken:John Wiley &Sons, Inc., 2008. Randl, Chad.A-frame. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2004. Rollins, Bill. "Brickham: Simplicity, Lightness, and a Sense of Proportion."Aspen Times, December 22, 1977. Rothman, Hal K. Devil's Bargains: Tourism in the Twentieth Century American West. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1998. "Transitions: Robin Molny Changed Aspen-and Made His Friends Laugh."Aspen Times,January 10-11, 1998. Urquhart,Janet. "History Ricochets Through the Boomerang"Aspen Times November 16 and 17, 1996 Page 43 of 48 P67 INTERVIEWS Caudill,Joy.Telephone interview with the author, 8 June 2010. Conrad, Chris. Interview with the author, 17 August 2000. Harland, Ellen.Telephone interview with the author, 26 May 2010. Kirk, Donald W.Telephone interview with Amy Guthrie,July 2010. Maddalone, Pat. Interview with the author, 18 August 2000. McBride,John.Telephone interview with the author, 8 June 2010. Paterson, Charles.Telephone interview with the author, 15 June 2010. Walls,Jack.Telephone interview with the author, 4 August 2010. Wright, Geri. Interview with the author, 17 August 2000. EMAIL COMMUNICATION Mularz,Theodore L., Email communication with the author, 19 July 2010. Roy, Cindy, with input by Rob Roy, Barbara A. Roy, and Doug Roy. Email communication with the author, 16-18 July 2010 Sterling, Robert. Email communication with the author, 4 June 2010, 18 June 2010. Yuenger,Arthur. Email communication with the author, 18 July 2010 Page 44 of 48 P68 APPENDIX I: ELIGIBILITY CONSIDERATIONS WRIGHTIAN/ ORGANIC DESIGN PRINCIPLES If influenced by Wrightian/Organic design principles, a property must possess specific physical features to be considered historically significant. Aspen's examples of modernist buildings should exhibit the following distinctive characteristics: • Low horizontal proportions, flat- or low-pitched hip roofs. • Deep roof overhangs that create broad shadow lines across the facade. Glazing is usually concentrated in these areas. • Horizontal emphasis on the composition of the wall planes that accentuates the floating effect of the roof form. - • Materials are usually natural and hand-worked, such as rough-sawn wood timbers and brick. Brick is generally used as a base material,wall infill, or in an anchoring fireplace element. Wood structural systems tend more toward heavy timber or post- and-beam than typical stud framing. • Structural members and construction methods are usually expressed in the building. For example, load-bearing columns may be expressed inside and out; the wall plane is then created by an infill of glass or brick. • Roof structure is often expressed below the roof sheathing • Glass is used as an infill material which expresses a void or a structural system, or it is used to accentuate the surface of a wall through pattern or repetition. •There is typically no trim isolating the glazing from the wall plane.Window openings are trimmed out to match adjacent structural members in a wood context. Brick openings tend to be deeply set with no trim other than the brick return. • Structures are related to the environment through battered foundation walls, cantilevered floors and/or porches, clear areas of glazing that create visual connections between outside and inside, and the effect of the roof plane hovering over the ground. • Decoration stems from the detailing of the primary materials and the construction techniques. No applied decorative elements are used. • Color is usually related to the natural colors of materials for most structures: natural brick, dark stained wood, and white stucco. Accent colors are used minimally and mainly to accentuate the horizontal lines of the structure. BAUHAUS OR INTERNATIONAL STYLE DESIGN PRINCIPLES If influenced by Bauhaus or International Style design principles, a property must possess specific physical features to be considered historically significant. Aspen's examples of modernist buildings should exhibit the following distinctive characteristics: • Simple geometric forms, both in plan and elevation. • Flat roofs, usually single story, otherwise proportions are long and low, horizontal lines are emphasized. • Asymmetrical arrangement of elements. • Windows are treated as slots in the wall surface, either vertically or horizontally. Window divisions are based on the overall idea of the building. • Detailing is reduced to the composition of elements rather than decorative effects. No decorative elements are used. • Design is focused on rationality, reduction, and composition. It is meant to separate itself from style and sentimentality. • Materials are generally manufactured and standardized. The "hand" is removed from the visual outcome of construction. Surfaces are smooth,with minimal or no detail at window jambs,grade, and roof edge. Page 45 of 48 P69 • Entry is generally marked by a void in the wall, a cantilevered screen element, or other architectural clue that directs one into the composition. • Buildings are connected to nature through the use of courtyards, wall elements that extend into the landscape, and areas of glazing that allow a visual connection to the natural environment.This style relies on the contrast between the machine-made structure and the natural landscape to heighten the experience of both elements. • Schemes are monochromatic, using neutral colors,generally grays. Secondary color is used to reinforce a formal idea. In this case color, or lack there of, is significant to the reading of the architectural idea. ASPEN MODERN CHALET DESIGN PRINCPLES If representative of Aspen modern chalet design principles,a property must possess specific physical features to be considered historically significant. Aspen's examples of modern chalets buildings should exhibit the following distinctive characteristics: • Rectilinear footprints, classic chalet orientation to the street and/or mountain view • Broad gabled facades organized in rectilinear solid or glass panels, generally in a tripartite organization • Low to moderate pitched roofs based on a 3:12 ratio • Overhanging eaves, frequently with exposed roof beams • Glass often extending to the eaves • Large central glazed area, flanked by brick or stone piers • Minimal decoration Page 46 of 48 P70 APPENDIX II: THE ARCHITECTS Herbert Bayer(1900-1985) Bauhaus, Weimar '21 Dessau '25-'28 Frederic Allen "Fritz" Benedict(1914-1995) Wisconsin '38/Taliesin '38-`41 Gordon Chadwick(1916-1980) Princeton '38/Taliesin '38-'42 Charles Gordon Lee (1918-1966) University of Pennsylvania '40/Taliesin'40-'41;47-'48 Samuel Jefferson "Sam" Caudill,Jr. (1922-2007) Cornell '46 Robert Oliver "Rob" Roy (1926-1992) Illinois '47 Charles "Charlie" Paterson (b. 1929) Taliesin '58-'60 Eleanor "Ellie" Brickham (1923-2008) Colorado'41-'44 Robin Molny (1928-1997) Carnegie Institute of Technology/Taliesin '49-c.'54 Curtis Wray Besinger (1914-1999) Kansas '36/Taliesin '39-'55 Ellen Harland (b. 1934) Massachusetts Institute of Technology '56 John Morris "Jack" Walls (b. 1925) Oklahoma '53 Robert"Bob" Sterling (b. 1933) Utah '63 George Edward Heneghan,Jr. (b. 1934) Washington U. '57 Daniel Gale Theodore L. "Ted" Mularz(b. 1933) Illinois '59 Thomas Whelan "Tom" Benton (1930-2007) University of Southern California '60 Richard Tseng-Yu Lai (b. 1937, Beijing, China) Princeton'58, '60 Arthur"Art" Yuenger(b. 1939) Illinois '62 Francis Rew Stanton (1910-1995) Yale '35, Ecole des Beaux Arts Americaine'31;34 Victor Lundy (b. 1923) Harvard Graduate School of Design '47, '48 Harry Weese (1915-1998) Massachusetts Institute of Technology'38, Cranbrook '38-'39 Donald Edward Erickson (b. 1929) Illinois '48/Taliesin '51 Arthur Dennis Stevens (b. 1930) Purdue '55/Taliesin '52 Jean Wolaver-Green-Oklahoma '52 Wheeler& Lewis Brown Brokaw Bowen Donald Kirk Eric Friis (b. 1916, Copenhagen, Denmark) Acad of Art, Copenhagen '43 Page 47 of 48 P71 APPENDIX III: ARCHITECTS LISTED IN ASPEN PHONE DIRECTORIES 1942- none 1949 Herbert Bayer in white pages Frederic Benedict in white pages 1951 Herbert Bayer in white pages Frederic Benedict in white pages 1955 Bayer& Benedict listed as "designers" in yellow pages Sam Caudill, architect in yellow pages Rob Roy 1957 Bayer& Benedict listed as "designers" Sam Caudill, architect Rob Roy " Jack Walls " Wallace Oakes (no info) " (Elli Brickham in white pages) 1962 Bayer& Benedict listed as "designers" Butler-Bartosek " (no info) Robin Molny Jack Walls " Sam Caudill, architect Rob Roy Jack Walls " (Elli Brickham in white pages) 1963 Bayer& Benedict listed as "architects" Sam Caudill, architect Robin Molny Ted Mularz " Rob Roy Butler-Bartosek listed as designer(no info) Jack Walls " 1965 Bayer, architect Benedict " (inc.Rosolack, Sterling,and Heneghan in his office) 1968 Benedict, architect Caudill Heneghan &Gale Molny Mularz Roy Walls &Sterling Page 48 of 48 P72 e RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION(HPC) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT AND FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 720 EAST HYMAN AVE (COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB BUILDING),ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB CONDOMINIUM&DUVIKE CONDOMINIUM,CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 25, SERIES OF 2008 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-11010(through 11031) & 2737-182-11800 (and 11801) WHEREAS, the applicant, CM LLC do Roger Marolt, represented by Lenny Oates, Oates Kenezevich, Gardenswartz, and Kelly, P.C., has requested Minor Development for the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club Condominium & Duvike Condominium, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado 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, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC reviews 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; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for Designation and states that an application for listing on the Aspen Inventory of Historic - Landmark Sites and Structures shall be approved if City Council, after a recommendation from HPC,determines sufficient evidence exists that the property meets the criteria; and WHEREAS,Jason Lasser, in his staff report dated October 2, 2008 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and Commercial Design Standards have been met; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 8, 2007, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application for Minor Development and Historic Landmark Review met the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and the Aspen Municipal Code Historic Landma-'- c+-4-10 r°• °•• nrit ria and a ■nrnverl the iinolication by a vote of four to one(4 to 1). RECEPTION#: 555802, 01./16/2009 at 09:08:25 AM, 1 OF 3, R $16.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K.Vos Caudill, Pitkin County,CO P73 NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC approves the application for Landmark Designation of the property at 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen Athletic Club Condominium & Duvike Condominium, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, and approves the application for Minor Development with the following conditions; 1. The applicant will replace the ground floor exterior sliding doors and maintain their existing configuration and operation. 2. That the applicant will retain the existing planters,primarily on the Hyman side but will look at the planter configuration on Original Street and work with the new accessible needs and try to maintain as much of the original landscape as possible. 3. The applicant will remove the Coniferous trees in conjunction with Parks and Engineering. 4. The beige paint will be removed. 5. The applicant will apply for a right-of-way permit for all the landscaping items as stated in staffs memo. 6. The applicant will work with parks to choose the appropriate tree species from the Arbor Guide and those plantings will be appropriately and carefully considered in size as they grow. 7. The new awning windows are approved. 8. The brise-soliel as proposed are approved but final design will be approved by staff and monitor. 9. Historic Designation is approved. 10. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance,the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes,pertaining to the following described property: 720 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen,Colorado. P74 Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules,regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review;the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 8th day of October 2008. Approved as to Form: Michael Hoffman,Chairman Jim True,Special Counsel ATTE T: kland,Chief Deputy Clerk Kathy I. The applicant will replace the ground floor exterior sliding doors and maintain their existing configuration and operation. 2. That the applicant will retain the existing planters,primarily on the Hyman side but will look at the planter configuration on Original Street and work with the new accessible needs and try to maintain as much of the original landscape as possible. 3. The applicant will remove the Coniferous trees in conjunction with Parks and Engineering. 4. The beige paint will be removed. 5. The applicant will apply for a right-of-way permit for all the landscaping items as stated in staff's memo. 6. The applicant will work with parks to choose the appropriate tree species from the Arbor Guide and those plantings will be appropriately and carefully considered in size as they grow. 7. The new awning windows are approved. 8. The brise-soliel as proposed are approved but final design will be approved by staff and monitor. 9. Historic Designation is approved. • c\,(0; AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE �.. REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 7Zo r yNoNn. , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUB IC HEARING DATE: pea q e �: , 20, 2._.. STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) 1, 4,-. L (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereb y personally certify that 1 have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication_of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper\or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen(15) days prior\to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials,which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in •height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A • copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) • Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use • regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other • sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However,the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for-fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this2 j day • of d I , 201Z, by Acrn-ete4 UBLIC NOTICE WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL . RE:72 HYMAN AVENUE(AKA THE ASPEN ATHLETIC CLUB)ASPENMODERN NEGOTA- • // TION FOR VOLUNTARY LANDMARK DESIGNA- TION,MINOR DEVELOPMENT My co • Sion GX lI S. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday,May 9,2012,at a reg- J / ular meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m.before the As- pen Historic Preservation Commission(HPC), Council Chambers,City Hall,130 S.Galena St., Aspen,to consider an application submitted by CMC,LLC do John Martin,P.O.Box 297,Queen- Notary Pub stown,New Zealand,9348. The applicant is repre- sented by Charles Cunniffe Architects,610 East - 1:‘,RY PO‘AA1 Hyman Avenue,Aspen,CO 81611,970-925-5590. ••••••• The project affects the property located at 720 East Y� ••� •• Hyman Avenue,legally described as Aspen Ath- letic •o� Club Condominium,Lots Q,R and S,Block I ` .`e�• • (S 104,City and Townsite of Aspen,County of Pitkin, CO R;7 J;- :- State of Colorado,PID4s 2737-182-11-008- - . . 2737-182-11-031,and 2737-182-11-801. o GARSKE a f The n Athletic proposes building it ing in voluntarily i ion to minor the ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: �) V. • Aspen Athletic Club building in addition to minor tt '� r exterior changes. Through the Aspen Modern ne- '1 1 • • gotiation the applicant requests approval to•con- HE PUBLICATION ••,• ir vert uses from commercial into two free market HE 1\.� 'O ' residential units and one affordable housing unit. I' The applicant requests of the HPC the following: !KPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) My Commission F„ irpg 0 012011 evaluation°of the voluntary landmark designation r and requested benefits-as part the AspenModem T OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED ninety day.negotiation period to be forwarded to City Council;Minor Development review for histor- io ntac Sara prdaesiat t-a City o As pen Commu- CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE contact Sara Adams at the-City of Aspen Commu- nity Development Department,130 S.Galena St., I 'Aspen,CO,(970)429-2778,sara.adams @ci.as- ED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 pen.co.us. s/Ann Mullins • Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission • Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on April 19, 2012. [7801287] . AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 720 G &' r 4k`1µAS A,��vE , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: µ• d q ,200,2 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, 4-4-VARL15 Gut-it`'(FFE (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. ‘/ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the )6 day of A FRI , 2042. , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ■ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. 4A, Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged befcte me this Z3`t day of i.4p1 , 209Jra, by Ckc.r le_s L. Can P -- * '••.le WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL i TONI ROSE: % �0 I2 / SWERSKY : My commission expires: l b �. ', ., oF Notary Public My Commission 06/26/2015 ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 • PUBLIC NOTICE • RE: 720 E. HYMAN AVENUE (AKA THE ASPEN ' ATHLETIC CLUB) ASPENMODERN NEGOTATION FOR VOLUNTARY LANDMARK DESIGNATION, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARD REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, May 9, 2012, at . a regular meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission(HPC), Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by CMC, LLC c/o John Martin, P.O. Box 297, Queenstown, New Zealand, 9348. The applicant is represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, 610 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, 970- 925-5590. The project affects the property located at 720 East Hyman Avenue, legally described as Aspen Athletic Club Condominium, Lots Q, R and S, Block 104, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, PID#s 2737-182-11-008 —2737-182-11-031, and 2737-182- 11-801. The applicant proposes to voluntarily designate the Aspen Athletic Club building in addition to minor exterior changes. Through the Aspen Modern negotiation the applicant requests approval to convert uses from commercial into two free market residential units and one affordable housing unit. The applicant requests of the HPC the following: evaluation of the voluntary landmark designation and requested benefits as part the AspenModern ninety day negotiation period to be forwarded to City Council; Minor Development review for historic landmark properties. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2778, sara.adams @ci.aspen.co.us. s/Ann Mullins Vice Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on April 19, 2012 City of Aspen Account Easy Peel®Labels I A riffiffin Bend along line to 10 AVERY® 51600 Use Avery®Template 5160® j Feed Paper miEsim expose Pop-Up EdgeTM A A 300 SPRING STREET ASPEN LLC 630 EAST HYMAN LLC 635 E HOPKINS LLC PO BOX 5000 532 E HOPKINS AVE 532 E HOPKINS SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 818 ASPEN LLC 803DKS LLC. ANTHONY T SMITH ADAM P T 15280 ADDISON RD#301 PO BOX 9066 ADDISON,TX 75001 50 S LASALLE ST B2 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60603 ALEXANDER THOMAS L ANDERSON ANGUS A FAMILY LLLP ANSON WESTON T&SUSAN BAILEY 715 E HYMAN AVE#27 C/O ERIC RICHELSON 8030 EL PASEO GRANDE 13 EVERGREEN ROW ASPEN,CO 81611 LA JOLLA,CA 92037 ARMONK, NY 10504 ASPEN 719 HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN 835 LLC ASPEN ART MUSEUM PO BOX 11600 333 LAS OLAS WY#2105 590 N MILL ST . ASPEN, CO 81612 . FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301 ASPEN,CO 81611 • ASPEN ASSETS LLC AVP PROPERTIES LLC BARNETT JERALD M REV TRUST 3361 MEANDER LN 630 E HYMAN AVE#25 3/3/2003 SAFETY HARBOR, FL 34695 ASPEN,CO 81611 500 PRESIDENT CLINTON BLVD#310 LITTLE ROCK,AR 72201 • BARTLETT KATY I BAUM ROBERT E BEAUDETTE PETER C 715E HYMAN AVE#18 PO BOX 1518 501 E SPRINGS RD • ASPEN, CO 81611-2066 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 COLUMBIA, SC 29223 BELKOVA DASHA BELL MTN QUAL RES CONDO ASSOC BERGMAN ALAN M 819 E HYMAN AVE#7 LLC C/O ALAN M BERGMAN. ASPEN, CO 81611-2092 320 S SPRING ST 10960 WILSHIRE BLVD 10TH FL ASPEN,CO 81611 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BESTERFIELD LLC 65 FIRST NECK LN 944 PARK AVE 14TH FL 200 JAMES ST S STE 202 SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 NEW YORK, NY 10028 HAMILTON ONTARIO CANADA L8P3A9, BG SPRING LLC • BILCO PROPERTIES LLC BILL FAMILY LLC 300 S SPRING ST#202 CLARIDGE CONDOS#9N 2350 W LAKE OF THE ISLES PKWY ASPEN,CO 81611 19950 BEACH RD MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55405 TEQUESTA, FL 33469 BOELENS GREGORY S BUCKHORN ARMS LLC BUYERS BRADLEY M&BRUCE PO BOX 2360 730 E COOPER AVE • 835 E HYMAN#K ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ttiquettes faciles a peter ® Repliez a la hachure afin del .www.avery.com Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®5160® chargement reveler le rebord Pop-UpTM l 1-800-GO-AVERY 1 Easy Peel®Labels i A Bend along line to 1 Q ®5160® Use Avery®Template 5160® A Feed Paper miEssmai expose Pop-Up EdgeTm 1 A CALHOON THOMAS C CARVER RUTH A& MARTIN G CDP RESIDENCE TRUST 3405 CLEARVIEW DR 10 BYRON LN 601 E HYMAN AVE AUSTIN,TX 78703 MUSCATINE, IA 52761 ASPEN, CO 81611 CLARY EDGAR D.IV COLBY WARD COLOSI THOMAS W 715 E HYMAN AVE#9 " - 715 E HYMAN#20 715 E HYMAN AVE APT 6 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611-2099 COOPER SPRINGS LLC COORS WILLIAM SCOTT DAILY CONNIE M 393 N COLUMBIA AVE 727 E HOPKINS AVE#A 715 E HYMAN AVE#14 COLUMBUS, OH 43209 ASPEN, CO 81611 ' ASPEN, CO 81611 DANIELE ROBIN DAVIS HARRIET S&MARTIN DECK WARREN&MARCIA PO BOX 1023 835 E HYMAN AVE APT G 5363 S LAMAR ST ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611-2603 LITTLETON, CO 80123 DELPHINIUM ASSOC DEVINE RALPH R DODEA NICHOLAS T 6050 RIVERVIEW WY 715 E HYMAN #13 715 E HYMAN AVE#19 HOUSTON,TX 77057 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 DONNELLAN SHAUN K&SHEILA F DOWS PATRICE J DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST 1250 W SOUTHWINDS BLVD#118 1411 9TH ST SW 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY VERO BEACH, FL 32963 CEDAR RAPIDS, IA 52404 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST EDGE OF AJAX INC EDGETTE JAMES J&PATRICIA 8051 LOCKLIN LN 201 E SILVER ST 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI 48382 MARBLE, CO 81623 JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 ETTLIN ROSS L FAATH CARLOS M& MOLLY G FELLMAN THOMAS 715 E HYMAN AVE#7 PO BOX 11435 809 NO 96 ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 OMAHA, NE 68114 FIGHTLIN JONATHAN D FOX HERB FRANKS ROOK 715 E HYMAN#46 PO BOX 1355 1901 PORT WEYBRIDGE PL ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 WINTER PARK, CO 80482 NEWPORT.BEACH,CA 92660 GAUBA ALENA GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY&BARBARA GOLDMAN JEROME K TRUST 715 E HYMAN AVE#21 460 ST PAUL ST PO BOX 249 ASPEN,CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80206 ASPEN, CO 81612 Etiquettes faciles a peter i A Sens de Repliez a la hachure afin de; www.averycom Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®5160® 1 chargement reveler le rebord Pop-UpTM�' 1-800-GO-AVERY. Easy Peel®Labels i A WEINN Bend along line to 1 C\ AVE ®5160® Use Avery®Template 5160® j Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTM A A GOLDMAN MICHAEL VICTOR&GLORIA GRAY DALE F REV TRST 20% INT GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES ANNA GRAY CHERYL W REV TRST 20% PARTNERS LLC 6919 GLENEAGLE DR 5921 SEAR!,TER 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD#2222 TUCSON,AZ 85718 - BETHESDA, MD 20816 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 HAYLES THOMAS HEWINS SAMUEL HIMAN LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE#5 715 E HYMAN AVE#23 PO BOX 6159 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 SWANBOURNE WA 6010 AUSTRALIA, HOPKINS ASSOCIATES LP HOZACK WILLIAM HUNT SARAH J C/O SHIEKMAN 2100 CYPRESS ST 715E HYMAN AVE #22 2000 MARKET ST 10TH FL PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 ASPEN, CO 81611 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103-3291 HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES II LLC IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 PO BOX 642 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 INDY HOUSE LLC IRVINE DOUGLAS FORBES ISRAEL FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD 605 OCEAN BLVD 201 N MILL ST 263 OCEAN BLVD GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 ASPEN, CO 81611 GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 JENKINS ASIA JOFFE LIVING TRUST JOHNSON BARBARA WEAVER LIVING 734 E HOPKINS AVE 23820 LONG VALLEY RD TRUST ASPEN,CO 81611 HIDDEN HILLS, CA 91302 PO BOX 3570 LAS CRUCES, NM 88003 JOSHUA&CO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS KANTAS NICOLETTE KARST REBECCA LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE#15 6230 SW 44TH ST 300 S HUNTER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 MIAMI, FL 33155 ASPEN, CO 81611 • KASHINSKI MICHAEL R KELLY SIMON P TRUST KNODE MICHAEL C 732 E COOPER AVE 0343 GROVE CT 2142 VISTA CASCADA CT ASPEN, CO 81611 ATTN:JOHN HOFFAMN III GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81503 . ASPEN,CO 816112061 KOUTSOUBOS LOUIS KOUTSOUBOS TED KRANS ROSEMARY PO BOX 9199 430 E HYMAN AVE#PH 298 4TH AVE#429 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94118 KRAVITZ MICHAEL C KROEGER HAROLD R&HEATHER R LANDA MICHAEL B PO BOX 11207 16 FORDYCE LN 851 S JOSEPHINE ST ASPEN, CO 81612-9630 ST LOUIS, MO 63124 DENVER, CO 80209 Etiquettes faciles a peter i A Repliez a la hachure afin de; www.avery.com Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®5160® chargement reveler le rebord Pop-UpTM b 1-800-GO-AVERY 1 • Easy Peel®Labels i ® INEMBII Bend along line to 1 a AVERY®5160® Use Avery®Template 5160® j Feed Paper Brimmmm39 expose Pop-Up Edger"' A LANDIS JOSHUA B LANDRY ELIZABETH J LAWROM LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE#4 PO BOX 3036 533 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612. ASPEN, CO 81611 LEGNAME RUDI REV TRUST LIBERATORE DOUGLAS LIEB MADELINE TRUST 202 STANFORD AVE PO BOX 1838 800 E HYMAN AVE#A MILL VALLEY,CA 94941 SARASOTA, FL 34230 ASPEN, CO 81611 LONG MONA HAYLES TRUST MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MANNING FREDERICK J&GAIL P BOX 3849 317 SIDNEY BAKER S#400 222 W ADAMS ST#2290 ASPEN, CO 81612 KERRVILLE,TX 78028 CHICAGO, IL 60606 MARTELL BARBARA MARTIN ROBERT A MASINI ALDA 702 E HYMAN AVE 322 WEST 17TH ST#3E MASINI ALDA TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10011 830 E HOPKINS#201 ASPEN,CO 81611 MAYLE KENNETH D MCCUTCHIN GENE P MCFADDEN GORDON K 715 E HYMAN AVE#3 14833 MIDWAY#200 18519 E VALLEY RD ASPEN,CO. 81611-2063 ADDISON,TX 75001 KENT,WA 98032 • MICHELSON BRUCE V REV TRST MIKI MONTANARO JOHN&SUSAN FAMILY 7701 FORSYTH STE 900 PO BOX 444 TRUST ST LOUIS, MO 63105-1813 ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 457 MALIBU,CA 90265 NA DEVELOPMENT LLC NETHERY BRUCE NJH CENTENNIAL LLC 601 E HYMAN 715 E HYMAN AVE#25 314 S GALENA ST#300 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 NONNIE LLC OCONNELL SARA G PACIFIC WEST INVESTMENTS LLC PO BOX 565 PO BOX 491167 320 MARTIN ST#100 ASPEN, CO 81612 MIAMI, FL 33149 BIRMINGHAM, MI 480091485 PERLMUTTER JAMES ROBERT PRICE GAIL SH UFRO SUSAN PLATT HARLAN & MARJORIE C/O ASPEN POTTERS INC PO BOX 11385 1 CHARLES ST SOUTH#5G 715E HYMAN#10 ASPEN, CO 81612 BOSTON, MA 02116 ASPEN, CO 81611 QUARRY INTERESTS LTD RAYMOND KIMBERLY A RICCHIUTI JOSEPH F 9932 LAKEWAY CT 1280 S UTE AVE STE 5 558 N 23RD ST DALLAS,TX 75230 ASPEN, CO 816112259 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19130 Etiquettes faciles a peter ; A Repliez a la hachure afin del www.averycom Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®5160® chargement reveler le rebord POPUPTM l 1-800-GO-AVERY �' Easy Peel®Labels i A EMIIIM Bend along line to I 0 AVERY@ 5160®Use Avery®Template 5160® i Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTm i A RICHARDSON JOHN &MARK ROGER RICHARD R ROTH LEWIS 15 TORONTO ST#400 16251 DALLAS PKWY 6230 SW 44TH ST TORONTO ONTARIO CANADA M5C ADDISON,TX 75001 MIAMI, FL 33155 2E3, RUST TRUST RYERSON GEORGE W JR SAGARIA SABATO DOMINIC III 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD#760 715 E HYMAN AVE#17 P.O. BOX 8376 BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90212 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 SAHN KAREN R SAHR KAREN M SAKSON"DREW 715 E HYMAN AVE#11 ' 715 E HYMAN AVE#8 PO BOX 1091 ASPEN,CO 81611-2063 ASPEN,CO 81611 NEWPORT, RI 028400999 SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST SCHULTZ REV TRUST SELBY TROY E&MAY EYNON PO BOX 4897 5110 SAN FELIPE ST UNIT 381 WEST PO BOX 8234 ASPEN, CO 81612 HOUSTON,TX 77056 ASPEN, CO 81612 SESTIC ZORAN SHAPIRO LAND LLC SHAPIRO REGINA 530 E MAIN ST LOWER LEVEL 2438 JUNIPER HILL RD 14024 MONTRACHET LN ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 TOWN&COUNTRY, MO 63017 SIMON JONATHAN H SKLAR LEONARD E SKLAR WILLIAM P 19 W 21ST ST STE 902 PO BOX 246508 7238 MONTRICO DR NEW YORK, NY 10010 PEMBROKE PINES, FL 33024 BOCA ROTON, FL 33433 SMART EDWIN J I SMITH ALICIA M SMITH JEFFREY L 2009 MARKET ST 715 E HYMAN AVE#16 851 S JOSEPHINE ST DENVER, CO 80205-2022 ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80209 SNOWMASS CORPORATION STEINER MICHAEL C&JENNIFER E STRIBLING DOROTHY PO BOX 620 PO BOX 8312 WACHOVIA BANK NA FL0135 BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 40062 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32203-0062 THOMPSON RICHARD P THOMPSON ROSS&LYNETTE TWO SEASONS HOLDINGS LLC RUSHING JIMMY C PO BOX 1186 191 UNIVERSITY BLVD#816 1171 BEACH BLVD CARBONDALE,CO 81623 DENVER, CO 80206 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32250 UPTON MARY E WALKER JOHNS WEBB MARSHALL B ASPEN QPRT PO BOX 2360 PO BOX 11538 53 OSPREY CIR ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612-9537 CALLAWASSIE ISLAND OKATIE, SC 29909 Etiquettes faciles a peler ; A Repliez a la hachure afin de; vwwv.avery.com ; Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®5160® b chargement reveler le rebord Pop-UpTM 1-800-GO-AVERY 1 Easy Peel®Labels i A NAMEEN Bend along line to , A Y® 5160® Use Avery®Template 5160® j Feed Paper, expose Pop-Up EdgeTM V A WILLIAMSON CHERYL EXEMPT TRUST WILLIAMS CRAIG&LEE FAM PTNRSHP 6000 WOODS FAMILY TRUST 5577 CEDAR CREEK 2717 OLIVE AVE NW 111 BIRDSONG WY#E103 HOUSTON,TX 77056 WASHINGTON, DC 20007 HILTON HEAD,SC 29926 • • Etiquettes faciles a peter ® Repliez a la hachure afin del wvvw.averycom Sens de Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®5160® cha gement reveler le rebord Pop-UpTM 1-800-GO-AVERY �' THE CITY OF ASPEN Mailing Instructions 1. Obtain mailing text from the planner handling your application. 2. Obtain mailing labels from the GIS office, Bridgette Dolan—920.5453. Note that the mailing labels may take a few days to obtain and that there is a fee. City code requires the list to be current within 60 days of the scheduled public hearing. 3. Photocopy the mailing labels before attaching to envelopes and attach list to affidavit form with one copy of the mailing text. 4. Mail the text to each of the property owners on the list. Additional notes, text, graphics, etc. can be included if you desire. 5. Complete the affidavit form acknowledging the mailing. 6. Deliver the affidavit form to the planner handling your case prior to the hearing. . Posting Instructions 1. Obtain public notice poster from City Planning office front desk and fill in the appropriate information. In general, please copy the text within the mailing notice onto the poster with a minimum of one inch in height for lettering. Call the planner handling your case if you need help. 2. Mount the poster on a hard board and laminate(or otherwise protect from the elements). 3. Secure the poster on-site in an obvious location. 4. Take a picture of poster and attach the picture to the affidavit form. 5. Complete the affidavit form acknowledging the posting. 6. Deliver the affidavit form to the planner handling your case prior to the hearing. Date: May g Time; 5pm 13_lacs; City Hall, 130 S. Gala t„_basement level Purpose: Notice is hereby given that a- A hearing will be held before the spen Historic Preservation Commission to consider an application submitted by CMC, LLC c/o John Martin, P.O: Box 297, Queenstown,New Zealand 9348 The applicant is represented by _-- Charles Cunniffe Architects, 610 E. Hyman Avenue 970-925-5590. The applicant proposes to voluntarily_ designate the Aspen Athletic Club PUBLIC NOTICE _ _ in addition to minor exterior changes. Through the AspenModern negotiation the applicant requests approval to convert uses from commercial to 2 free market residential units and 1 affordable housing unit. The applicant requests of the HPC the following: recommendation of landmark designation to City i Council, Minor development review for the exterior c aaages. For further information plese contact Sara Adan 3ratfloor,Hall, 130 S. Galen a773 Aspen, CO (970) 429-2 srara.adamsCci.aspen.co.i,s - � 3i2 pp u; 0. 0 -in Cn C Z Z • c: , --, •: . . I ., ill', -.• .1 -4i. ■ . -.is.. : -'• ..-, sr 6'. - :- ,-10=MM I!".#.• f . ..* ., f _ , N.- .015 VW 0 MI . ,. AIR . i L .:._,,,,x.11.- _ . ,..... ii‘, .. 1 R. I • ,:i › . ., Z Cn r..7.Z. - ' bommemel :71--- i m • Tim '• 411Pr' I-- —. •_—_s i 0 > .— —I . :-Tt■ a = co 172 r— .- . c M ,='-' —11 0 _ z (") p T-- ...... / 4 .. 0 ._ . •, ._ . ...1 r-. , , , •;-,ti m • z x -- i 07 t'., I . = -< › -0 a . _< 0 p r- * . t.) x cl , i Ant 'e.. -. 0.) m > i k t - , • .b:r %,: . . , - , - 0 z . ts.) 0 rn 0 k 1 r• k t.-..Ii.k ii.k - c--- ----A--;— H aa��■ ._/�/� /rn per, _• _ r 46 D rt �- tr°41'il- Z m r �� �� R 11/tllll ' ' 'j 11 ';�i f...t• -ate Pi f *Pi' .14 . _ ( ...,.._ . - .1, .,4 • .111,-.‘-'*%%.4' ' Licio,eir .Tit $,,y.i. ._- 1:`,7 f 4 �! N ,� _ 6� • co 1 ~... ,F• ' \ r Z .. GI Z I T ! fl 'LENA 3T 4 n O _ J J 1. Z'.. kU _. $A'/ /f4 ,----,6. err ' 1 4 ±s' „;..„.,, -_. ,,,,....#, . ' mire .4...ie ,.._ _ .4,7,,x, 0 0 ,, ,.., •, _.1. • ix, , ,,,i, ..„.. .--8.,,,,,c„;,,...„ . ..„..,_ . • . . ,I/� J RR..� r y / J;yr . I lug z ...._'\.. ,uj ir f•� /,ice_ Q mot! a� ....I ;`,t i a I‘r!fi''.''-'.. I 417 -. ' V.Z.P,. .1 ail -CIP r`l? 4 , - -13 RI y l rso• 'rn b �./ � I �.Z ' .' 1: a � oz it ; ; c t ; p , c,,„) m > 141:41.4 if,.1 - .. ZIP tffil" "a viir iti. r 10,4•.,4, I-. - > < 40■41„ , ril +'•ti 'ipvil: 1--4,3"--741!, /-, -,' -,--4 ti,;(-,' n'2 000r n m g. nN n NC Q Z Z m �. .. • 8 • a t•. it c4114' r t -fir __...�....N I lit. 0/10 . , f -_ 1 oft " r 4' '_ x, fi • • D N D o m I. N O -• D TA Z D- 0 D CD .o N x _O D O Q 7 Q 77 n SSE‘,Q x cn C c o CD O -' co co co Q + , a N CD O C , , -. . �_ co „ CD , _. ,,, .1.i, __L _ ad G1 N Cp O O cn Q 0, po �' I -, cn C Q V 1 MN N cDn o Q D ,, M RI D 7�• iff- z x CQ _ �� - O n -< 0a a a it z wD < n CO NA7 rn CQ 0 O Z C : in N0rn —1' • oa �� s r 4 -ate O■ -r M e - o Z q; m I�I I F 1114 1 I r ° :, • vo •. _ > , rn rn. �. , (/) 0 w. .. N rn Z 0 --u CO r*+ Z D = N r- CD —I O n • • • co n C r -p co D cD 3CDDn - 0 p Q 0 -v Z CD rn ,,r. Q O CD n N ~5''r '• `k .:O CD n 4— 1r N CD N 3 — O ...I D X xj ■ CD a, „q v, o Q `C Z -13 n1 0 C Ar . ,_ � nD P CQ �`d . -..A". -z N m D Q Q Q ,� N 70 ran t { ;r o Z Z to N 0 rn A / itax oa sa ■�^ n N 1 n NC m 11° Z I O rn rn f7 n � C co p° C M N o 0 > �' '' ` 'I 0D i C: Z t : lt-IA wD < N � rn o Z N o rn V2 [EN D. 2 33 �r m"' co • Nz A m Z w`! (./) i .• :1i ..,,s,. m r-M M i i r +, . , _,--/ D CA C�� t I i' Z rll (AZ >> j I I l iki — -< •'111.61,..:, :-:. :. 1 , • 0 L ...,.. : ___:$ . • .. • •• „ _ _,1 1, cc, ._ . ,..r C :Y , . :1 co • . .... ,.„.... ... if- , Z : f'i. " 'I �1F� ,o.�( 41 V )i .yKY . V 1i_ '` • --urn 11' ' , � ,- t, R' s= ~ti» Z i0 N DZ ay I 0.• , 'I W rn 'A'" ° ..'wl "' , r N w rn - NG) rcn on/ OM ((�� 2Ne ;0 ! E�#s! 2 \l / °71 } @ rn rn \/ ( \0//\} \� q v ®a \ � / � §a £! - CD g as ; £/ ()\22E / f 2 \ zZ : ° . 2 - m § / ///\ / : \/ �| f \ 2 � P65T \ / / / ZI w BiP5 9 0 / �d. _> ® ` ® 3-° \ y k \-)3/ E§ S� j/ //////// / « z \/ƒ» } I / / II 0 \ 7 \2\ k / ///\ \ § £ƒ� � I \ Z 0/ ��� Z / / / / / \� , , ( (§ \a \/ �/ E . 2 ' / ; § k . ( / / I a k7 R. `% ri / o co 0 2 /\ / { k n IT 1\ � ( a/ m , ; op 2 • -/ ƒ > >2 � V X r -i 0 , 1 \ c \ . . . . f. � c . ) » °y O « %\ 'x z �'Q , �r ` .:�.1 0 . {, � ! m • , • , � � � \ \.4) ;.,t, y 2 = , - 1 \ i !m• D = k :« `` . � , - , � / ,\ s D < . 77 m �N44t11111414111111 x O 2 2 ' , . ) Dm xa 66 v4- m 66 cut?' m Rf 7 a }? C N s+ i NZ fir. ';N{7 d 1 El '4 rn iO o a k 9.7 t"� n n Ll f D N -a Za D x rn C) n r C W W C Z , [II j It tbi i �V rrj,jry I;rlr,'i,mml N -7 rn Z Z ,glif 0 D0D y Z m CA) D < f 1111111171" Nam rn O Z Z N rn DO �� ax nD za D■ r ^' 0 ' nN c cnc D _ r: m m O 0 N 1) 0 0 r O rn C7 co O z m r �v > p 65 0D rn C '4 rn 0 Z < co M 70 *o 0 rn p z f7 "� 0 C Z CO W z 0 0 '-C31r 0 V DN y o rn m • Z N = Z (I) m > 0 Z r.) m ao o0c0> mN g:. + .12 Al Ill fAZ 10 ,, N :, .• "' D r: ' rN i \ *r ■ S 1 4 laiimmo 1r f n rrrrrrrrr � � �� � ,,.. i ..... 0 Y , rn ie^!. , . r- c Inne ' ti Gny'i.II S! I ,_...•. A. ► ' w ' lI) N -n rn m D r b r —I A i r -10'-3 V2'+/- i A rn r� -�-------•—�=-------- —I c x N V) I A '- c CO 13 L_ z `_I v Z s z 0 1 --, L U[ 1 r Ill €o • 0 _, DN Ip (1 A ' 9N 1,1 I ID A CA 0 rn i rn o rn W I �m � kJ �Z 2 Z C �m O D Io,o .1- u A D z M Z rn 7 w m 5 D Q $ ,, -a A) n teNr Q Z Z 1I �j A PATIO PATIO 5TEP5 - OROISINAL ST,OW 02) XI X 0> ME ©■ 50LAR SMADIVS DENAGES ABOVE _I r (S�MN DA91ED) m NC Z =mot M I --_ -- re -co Rii 1 XI ;%-a. ,NJ If_iii _ • Limf I O H I 1'77 I 6 • v 1 -- p7 c, vat\ NI I I i. I_ \ iIA Li \ • - m Z D I- Ill -f O _- -= IMMIB MIM n -- I - C= C 07 1 ' ° CO Z `bI x E v 1 C7 m z = D Z I • _ . 0 I 5 - O 0 r - – C) N = Z •R o x a - —1 C i wD < �--_--- D , MI�-. •,\ = O ,� - _ *32 oiloo 0› = SAM!teft1/47111■rx.ca.-1 NAVA; it Ill ow --- .5..0..f..P.18.1M (.0 C '---% - - - Z -7i -n t- 15 1 i - 4. • I I _ , II -1 1 ..I I ml, _ 73 _, C31 li. t, 0 t 1 • 9 1 -CI 0 _ CA _ M _rp-- I I 0 - ________ , l I ,..) r-4 . El No III -r. > > (1, --r1 'V -11 M 0 Z 7D1 > 0 —I > = CO 1' r- ... ___,n__. n——n a „ ITI 1 M a , , L 0 CU -------:---==---- _-r--,- :;'' ,, - a - ----_ - -I $ . I- _1.j _ ,-, --. Z -,„ I, -m .. 0 _ El — M o r471, v, a tin =i -10 m —11 . n _ m • m > z x Z -< - O n = ,.. 0 > -a > 70 ` r— o L. . = 1 F 1 '' '1 1 N) M 0 04 rn > ' > < --1 0 ° Z Z ,N a \\ , , , , , I I =0■ I Dn [iii go QD _a 0. Se�Ne 9✓ADlue DEVICES ABOVE .fir — — — Sr1OW1 OA844!D — — mm T I - : a miw __ I r a a_G ELI II i 1 � N I m -- 1 L- F __.. D -, N 70 -13 rn rn rn Z 2 M ✓ 7� rn r - A rn ✓ 0 c C' CA b /z W = _ m., U/ C cia �° I f1I .£ M z _ ME s mmil . NM - rn j• •••4 X I n rn D p.) O X) Z xZ ,,,,,„J ( r -< 0Z LLL' * n D z Z O wrCn z N li ��0■ 1n 1 NC Z � , Z m 1 m S b • q ,.- rim. , , .... , . . , ... __ s, NMI W / F =MI WWI MD rr III XI Li will= ue O _ ll eumu I ; O M s /4 ii 1111111 I • J ❑ N , 0 rn rFri n Z I 7c • -n _ a 73 r rn - - - - - - n e f) • r a C W i r I v r Z {, ❑ rn .1 X F, n N o � rn rn "si ` 0 n Z = Z > r 0 ragpri ,s > Z x n W D I -� OQ I D< N) A.) M 61 ill _, oz z o N0rn Z C 7 oa zx ■ �r EI m„, n N .. 2 y � ' D n A A g A T iil0 III N m 8 E n n n n m m m � _ - a � !Lii"IIi\ I :�,I I I■NI 1 1 11I i I_ h I Ik n I I - 1 Iv li Z fi I i 11 D l •- t � ■ I � m _ 1 _ I I L � i i I I II um i -_J I I -- I I I - II I 1Ili Ii I co r — i i iJ I►I i I I I - I v_ pp pp Z i FA 3 P IN P9 V r yN D y c m rn rn i z = A7 _ z X o O N ° O Wn < Z < c , N 71 71 ,n c E z 0 n v rn N0rn acs ME xx os ,i9 O■ r M"' N n NC Z Z_ T T M 1 • . l \ Iii L. I - 1 0 _ i � r _ i . . ' *4\ II _ I _ 11 i1__ I L 1. ! j 4 1. � L _ i I j c l� __ Z ! I . I ] ill 5 c 1i _ * I ; I / I 0 _._I — --- — — c I I j. r ------11 , i - I -- Z i i i . .. f,i po 0 i V 1 l l y O V WI rn _ "< X -< nn y 0 z .1_ 0 W > rn' C^ 0Ez 0 v 1 .) 0rn Do wig i OD ©■ r m^ ca. � c tA z T v m m af '�1� P 14, 1 1 1 17 til Pit 171 , ' 1-711 ' I U , ' i 1 lI ;) i 1 la \ i IS 1 1 I I_Q_ ilia _mill t IiT -] riIll c �I III 1 ICI I I ....._ l!H1� !`.S- I _ � ill D i�{� u ! �� 1 U y 1 �. rn II,, `, i6 �1 � {i i11i1"1,.... y \'� IllkI'.\% I j I i Ill11L i ( ����� i" ;i hA` . ;t I o 5 1111 , I 11.1_ I I(lill , f1 • Of �,j1,:, ,,__ 1, __ , c I r 11 ® fill I� I I' CC o J. g6¢ i I Z 1 ?" N 7? 1 P�{ , PI ` 1 J °Ia 9zz ti $ ! A � e 4 s 4y A QZ 6i !� V ol: 1 i / / •PI O ` - rn n n n m Z = rn _ � 0 MI X W > m Z O 1..) x:1 0 rn N 0 rn 0 • ao no©■© (s xa (2r m'" nN N C z Z_ T m T ---------- !'c- 1 If A I i 1 IC 11 I ,�I i I I I d l 'I' :1; 111 � I I sI „I' { - = lll !..- E f r: - N a l - � I1 Z 1 1 I 1 �t E ' m - - _ A, T � I — —T '_t II E C r . � � � r i v F# II Py 0 6,i t'l q, E i 1 e i • V r m rn D N D m . m H O m m m �p� m m ( .a Z rn • _ Mi e6 zx T D _ � X o � n > y 0 —p Z .1 WD < Z < N N7vM o_ ZZ 0 n M rn N 0 rn N 0 oN �■ r z WM r` T. T . M rwc rr. c , t 'P 2 .w .4." \ . . 10 I N. 1 1' it I . ,4, �p. ';' r u j�V y{l,.X Z Y� II 1 1 -1 ‘01 II . it\ ir / —I 1 _ o i /\i. , III/ co - 3 ' • IF/ Iri v � ( it 1 '''' i .e,'''' ,: t y 0 f_ rn 0 / Z I 'NG,. ' _ < I __ _x. . ›..< 0 p,) , z r., .. co m > , - > < xi p.) zi m is _ • — .:,... ,i ...clot, , -MAC.... . N rn * ' 11 Y o i .r; 0 ',unr•` IIx . a OW a In m y M � NC •1 m m }} n"� . I Ili T ) :7- \ 1 \,'. ' Ali \ 1 ' i J' r • cn ty, �„ rn Z M , D rn . 1 i = 70 t. I- �� �.. n i r I c E , CO 4 TI v 1 ( 1 0 I i . 1 r Ail I 10111' x i :,,,: . I ., . • 4. .' D N 1 ..,4,- Z x• • � rr:ny,lf�44 i s: ID �. �E 1K) XI rn / z. itiy fri j ill "": F. "lit-et ' , ,r 4. r _ i , . d OD mm >. c 1 ON 1n j ti. z ., z m — w,, `= Bp NM ta J r t. 'WM :.\ I tc. ,',)•.;.-,,k. z i , I\''- M mil Z �� u ; � _-- I 0 +! `� •4 2 rn o,,, s-,1 $i �I It r W , .:r -r�''..'"r— v loss ':1 W i 'r <kl? <r j . `t (l. '!; 7 'ate Ft� d; I , ~ �. •r I ,, �' < rc4,^ V I I I I 1 � vkV ra ti l D N W D < li—I 1* ''' i'.)7,' , c. ' N � rn v �� 5 ; .aa. ' �7.0, OZZ cr °g7xt A -4"'"'" ` r, " ,, m ,.... • ..., ‘-.7 7.•- •4'.-.-1 •'..' _ ,o, ' ‘,..., ..7.e.-..-;' e�1 1 1 g xx � on m"' N NC �, ,„ I_ / T n p m I _4 1 r ,I'! I I ac , . . \e / A y. ..M17.∎ ` ■ ' q _ le; � 'I l Pit r - O8Z 1. 1 , . ').;„: „► r ;,9141 1 / rn 1 il i CO , ,,,,r .„,....K.s.c., . ' 1 \,P' 1 n:i m j 1 I t-T , w' 1• ►! Zip" : 1.'4. 1 T' Wm D a' /�_ ,:? r r,, as► 4th } e If 0 Z ii 'e'1 SDI;tP M� y, . �I1 H �c� I'r'' r, z • -_ y 5 m • \ `� . IVs* •`• • 0 ii-1 i f ! ■ ` . rNy li . r y i it Y 'rn D. {1 i Z O i� F -I y -„ I n 1t� u I ' n . y'> 1 ,. I co S ,' • N I I rn z ‘ 0 . = rn = -< ., Q , � N = D �1'• ' "-'k.. qF ice;_ ' .h i N � rn I. • R, y pZZ �;;, r' f'' N rn ' . 4� l•�/ Tp I uu,' f w a t • DO �5 , is .. - 22 ror m unc 1 2 2 ' m �. 1 Alt AR, •ji` ' r li ::: _i1 ,. 4'' .. " :+ zS' 1 , tltp�'f • ,..,..,4 C • N ; z 4 -0 n ni 2 Xi ,;,i III i1 n .r ,,an co z ,y; ' I i /AO'',' V I D i , . , N te) Co m • ,1 1 Z D -v � 0 > r N = Z l( 1•w . W > m II` j "��w"0'• X •iii: - •a�, 4 17 � r.t F ■ , N Z i k.'q r1 . O Z C of r..) to - •„�, 0 a0 3,x �� .1-Y, - 1,;. xa xx I . , . —, m i 1�i ■ 1 . • 1 ihiti ' � ""� ,\ I ` I \ \•.. ii I 1 1 Illi ..... . \. > CU '' i ji '‘'..4 •• rn M "77 t`". ,, E_: Z O I 1 'f 4. •• W --'"F. t 02 , T t 1 dmrt t A r t,s> , -., i, D N N C � IM• 4 • I •4 � -< O Z D ' I ',�� � i �: ,t, ` " N fib m r"" ' ` r . . v Oitf. .G S$ '4e. f 1 ,` '}i`r 332 Y .::; 0> Gaga , =gym mm Z Z 7 F m ,' ? _ J. - 1 m yy�- ' g' \---- i ' 10/TIN .1 .7, \ ... • ,, E 'I t c I li I I t ll I i - it _ r_ 6- I 1, ' i ,, ,„.,, D !� af\ %w{--.. -- , lig ... v,> '"''' / t ,yett 11i 3I/� x '1,) � '��'� r t. I r c 0. 4H. � i• s .• t T ', • s _ a' , • '� CO •s � 1- ! 0-• t ' !■ . 's: 4, r r• ... yip ,. 333 f- C N .. • Z • .lam , ` rtt-•� - e. Z 1 �` , ' D III , •-. yr:: ;.. . ;. - -< - D iii nI ,11,,, 0, ` .Wk c.' 1,,. Z sjjlIIII! 1•a.� sr ' wt--' , 0 Z Z 1 ' . . .: :40:: ,:,.:,,,:,.4::. :401,,,,,,,,,,,. i.:it. ... ii.: .sitt,, 444,1 0^ a {;��; i ,!1� . 1.'., 'I1Nl110 k,, AC7 �� ti �2 OA ' .i^y ce m to r. , ,t . to C '- ----- Z RI �. r \ y • \, . _ — .7.:■■it . : \ '‘ '‘'. . i _ JR 3z r iit, f f+- + .' + ' 1 :ter .,,..1..„:,10,7., e s {r.�, is - V' , ..K' is Z -[ 'h ' +... a*. , 4 re I1 1 �' 1 ti sl • I '. tt 'w ' ; . '',r .. .V.! 4f.. a Y 8<W 1i ' ,� •a,.* z-•,+ ``y N'T"Y ;L+t, t-Y�I 6 i,J S4 j� •' C 4t..y -ids y y Sy l 'p RI , 'M + 3 YkL t+ {+e1 I. rn T -'j` ,{,-. , $ '?.. .'`'o ,i "' g "`�,+,I, Y ^++yx. ..z yip D O �f '- A�Y; ij . `} f 1 tM FC s�t Y• �,� s �t Y 0 C W W c r 0 ..j L t ., ,aa } N D -0 � t� �Ya -< 0 D o72Z � '40• • a i _ --i-- 4,1 I f 1. g ax - .Al., s • 4 v..-it 01 c TI H 'yT ti •' it . ,. l+i il: ; -.',:-::' . '? c':' \Wilk .S T lr• • yi .'�._ 7..'1 1 fit••.• �,\ SK� I-+. j \�" \ -� _. ... . _ „,t.7„,ltsit\r,+TT _ ♦^ W `t by .p.ka 1„;■."` iii I. .-„__.. ,:-- A . D 1'17 • rn n 1 c co co . c 1- v z 0 V t NN 0 -0 rn rn • Z = -< _ N = z ` wDD J. ? k--- < : ,- N 7, rn I N rn . ,. DO �� aS AD xa A -Im 1n c z z m m I D N Z, rn Z Z r rn m- 0 C cn C •— v V DN tel m rn - Z D0 > Z wD < N rn O z N rn • P1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 610 E. Hyman Avenue— AspenModern negotiation for Landmark Designation, Conceptual Major Development and Commercial Design Review, Public Hearing DATE: May 23, 2012 SUMMARY: 610 E. Hyman Avenue was constructed for . � r r well known gallery owner Patricia Moore in rye . 1963. It was designed by Ellie Brickham, ,..�� who in 1951 was the first female architect to 124T'51,91=7:1-Y. :t7:—L- y arrive in Aspen. Today, the offices of Charles Cunniffe Architects are located in the building. x, Y 41 Charles Cunniffe proposed voluntary x: i as, x designation and a building expansion " . through the Ordinance #48 landmark negotiation process. HPC reviewed the g i ah 1 1 project twice before the application was is suspended. In April 2012, the application gat111,, was re-submitted in advance of reduced s� height limits going into effect in the = w downtown. The process for review now Patricia Moore Inc. occupies the first floor of this falls under the As enModen ordinance - boudping di gnseecd o nbd y fli ss a:Pp kmhen Mi. Moore (largely similar to Ordinance #48) within which the applicant can request special benefits as an incentive for preservation. The applicant proposes to expand the existing office space on the second floor, on top of a garage that was added in 2003. The applicant also proposes to enlarge the,existing upper floor apartment by constructing a rooftop addition. HPC is asked to make a recommendation to City Council regarding the historic significance of 610 East Hyman and the appropriateness of the incentives that are requested. HPC is asked to make a determination regarding Conceptual review of the exterior changes. HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 1 of 13 P2 APPLICANT: 610 E. Hyman LLC, Charles Cunniffe, represented by Haas Land Planning. PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-004. ADDRESS: 610 E. Hyman Avenue, Lot M, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: C-1, Commercial. Historic Designation §26.415. 030. C AspenModern 1. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of AspenModern, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet at least two of the criteria a-d, and criterion e described below: a. The property is related to an event, pattern, or trend that has made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific event, pattern or trend is identified and documented in an adopted context paper; b. The property is related to people who have made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific people are identified and documented in an adopted context paper; c. The property represents a physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman, or design philosophy that is deemed important and the specific physical design, designer, or philosophy is documented in an adopted context paper; d. The property possesses such singular significance to the City, as documented by the opinions of persons educated or experienced in the fields of history, architecture, landscape architecture, archaeology or a related field, that the property's potential demolition or major alteration would substantially diminish the character and sense of place in the city as perceived by members of the community, and HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 2 of 13 P3 e. The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt. and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. STAFF FINDINGS: 610 E. Hyman Avenue was built in 1963 for owner Patricia Moore. The Patricia Moore Gallery was a respected business in town for many years, and displayed the work of many important artists on the main floor of the building. An upper floor residential studio unit was part of the original design. Ms. Moore sold the property in 1988. It is now the office of Charles Cunniffe architects. 610 E. Hyman was constructed for a woman who played an important role in the local . arts community, and it was designed by Aspen's first woman architect. This is one of the few Ellie Brickham buildings that remains in Aspen. Ellie Brickham (1923-2008) moved to Aspen in 1951 after attending the University of Colorado's School of Architecture from 1941-1944. Construction was a family business, and her motivation to become a designer began as a child. According to the research paper, "Aspen's Twentieth-Century Architecture: Modernism 1945-1975:" "Early in her career, Brickham worked in Fritz Benedict's office and collaborated on projects with both Benedict and Bayer, participating in work going on at the Aspen Institute. Like Benedict, she had a strong interest in passive solar techniques. During her time in that office and, later, in her own practice out of her home, she designed a number of residences and commercial buildings in town, including houses for several Music Festival artists in Aspen Grove, the elegantly simple brick Strandberg Residence (1973, 433 Bleeker Street-demolished) and the Patricia Moore Building (1962, 610 E. Hyman Avenue). In Pitkin County, she designed numerous homes in Pitkin Green and Starwood, on Red Mountain, including her own house (1955), with south and west walls made completely of glass. Her works, which total at least sixty in the Aspen area, are generally characterized by spare, simple forms and minimal detailing. Brickham's projects focus on an "impeccable sense of proportion and feeling of lightness," according to a 1977 Aspen Times article." The building that Ellie Brickham designed for Patricia Moore appears to have been influenced by "New Formalism," an architectural approach of the early 1960s which emphasized symmetrical, smooth-skinned, flat roofed buildings with screens and grilles. The façade of 610 E. Hyman has six attenuated brick piers that extend from the base to the eaves and stucco arched spandrels for a more "decorated" look that reflected the 1960s evolution of modernist design, as in Phillip Johnson's 1962 Lincoln Center in New York, on the next page. HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 3 of 13 P4 HPC presented an Honor Award to Ellie , Brickham in 2001, in recognition of her �; „; �; influence on the built environment in ' . ; I " ' - ,, Aspen. The neighborhood where this ' !} f,1%1. ' structure was built includes several other ., : 4 ' ' le;,,,...441 AspenModern related properties. - „,• x ,4' '�, , > Relatively few of the noted postwar m� d;■ t _44`. MI -4k: 4k;° properties are commercial structures. It i .ik is important to carefully consider 't'!"' _ „ar ' �'r'1 � `; ci�� , preservation opportunities for this small _ '. 4 V-14�A f collection of highly visible downtown R '' structures. 11111111c,,,,,U4-44 The second component of designation is x �:, ,: :, ..t,,..; scoring the physical integrity of the building. Staff's score sheet is attached as Exhibit B. Please note that the scoring system was revised with the adoption of AspenModern and is no longer based on a 100 point scale. Several elements of this building were altered through previous remodels. The front entry door was originally centered on the façade. Now there are entries on both ends of the storefront level. Originally all of the street-facing opening were arched, but the ground floor windows have been changed to have square transom windows. A lightwell has been added to the front façade so the building no longer meets the sidewalk in the center, the basement office level is exposed to view, and there are no kickplates below the windows. The stucco color has been changed from white to a masonry color. A seasonal canopy has been added to enclose the rooftop courtyard. These alterations have affected the integrity score for the building and need to be taken into account when determining the appropriate package of preservation incentives to approve for the project. Staff scored the building as a "Better" example of AspenModern, with 15 out of 20 points. Staff finds that criteria a, c, and e are met. . ASPENMODERN NEGOTIATION §26.415.025.C.1.b. The Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, at a public meeting, regarding the proposed land use application or building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting. The Historic Preservation Commission, using context papers and integrity scoring sheets for the property under consideration, shall provide Council with an HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 4 of 13 P5 assessment of the property's conformance with the designation criteria of Section 26.415.030.0.1. When any benefits that are not included in Section 26.415.110 are requested by the property owner, HPC shall also evaluate how the designation, and any development that is concurrently proposed, meets the policy objectives for the historic preservation program, as stated at Section 26.415.010, Purpose and Intent. As an additional measure of the appropriateness of designation and benefits, HPC shall determine whether the subject property is a "good, better, or best" example of Aspen's 20th century historic resources, referencing the scoring sheets and matrix adopted by City Council. Staff Response: The applicant requests the following incentives through AspenModern negotiation in exchange for landmark designation. (The applicant also requests a parking reduction and affordable housing mitigation, which are standard benefits offered to landmarked properties. These benefits are discussed later in the memo.) 1) The existing residential unit is currently just below the 1,500 square feet maximum floor area allowed for free market apartments on this property. The applicant wishes to enlarge the unit. As a preservation benefit, a floor area increase of 1,197 square feet is requested. (The application addresses this issue through a request for a 500 square foot FAR bonus. The FAR bonus which HPC may offer as an incentive can only be used to increase the total floor area allowed on a site, not the limitations for specific use categories on a mixed use property.) A, portion of the FAR assigned to the residential use is actually common area, open courtyards, stairs, garage, etc. 2) Along with a floor area limit for free market uses on the site, no individual unit can be larger than 2,000 square feet of net livable area, unless a TDR is purchased and landed. TDRs have an approximate cost of $200,000 and can increase unit size to 2,500 square feet of net livable space. As a preservation benefit, the application mentions a bonus of 249 square feet of net livable area is requested instead of the purchase of a TDR. A later addendum eliminates this request, so clarification is needed. 3) The applicant requests extended vested rights. All projects receive an automatic three years of vested rights, or protection from changes to Land Use regulation. The applicant requests 10 years to allow for the start date of the project to be more flexible. • The Land Use Code states that, as a further measure of the value of negotiation, Staff and HPC should evaluate whether the proposal meets the Purpose and Intent Statements of the Historic Preservation program, which are: HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 5of13 P6 • §26.415.010. Purpose and intent. The purpose of this Chapter is to promote the public health, safety and welfare through the protection, enhancement and preservation of those properties, areas and sites, which represent the distinctive elements of Aspen's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history. Under the authority provided by the Home Rule Charter of the City and Section 29-20- 104(c), C.R.S., to regulate land use and preserve areas of historical, architectural,,archaeological, engineering and cultural importance, this Chapter sets forth the procedures to: A. Recognize, protect and promote the retention and continued utility of the historic buildings and districts in the City; B. Promote awareness and appreciation of Aspen's unique heritage; C. Ensure the preservation of Aspen's character as an historic mining town, early ski resort and cultural center; D. Retain the historic, architectural and cultural resource attractions that support tourism and the economic welfare of the community; and E. Encourage sustainable reuse of historic structures. F. Encourage voluntary efforts to increase public information, interaction or. access to historic building interiors. The City does not intend by the historic preservation program to preserve every old building, but instead to draw a reasonable balance between private property rights and the public interest in preserving the City's cultural, historic, and architectural heritage. This should be accomplished by ensuring that demolition of buildings and structures important to that heritage are carefully weighed with other. alternatives. Alterations to historically significant buildings and new construction in historic areas shall respect the character of each such setting, not by imitating surrounding structures, but by being compatible with them as defined in historic preservation guidelines. STAFF RESPONSE: The negotiated benefits are policy matters for Council to decide. HPC is asked to use the designation criteria, adopted context papers, and scoring sheets to forward a recommendation to City Council regarding the importance of the building. HPC may choose to comment on the specific incentive requests. OTHER BENEFITS 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 6 of 13 P7 Affordable housing The new office space triggers affordable housing mitigation, however the applicant will take advantage of a preservation benefit which is already in place. The Community Development Director can grant an exemption to affordable housing requirements for up to 4 employees as part of the expansion of a mixed use, landmarked building. If the property is not landmark designated, and mitigation were required for this development, it would be for the equivalent of 1.725 employees, or $242,000 if paid as cash-in-lieu. Parking The expansion of the free market residential unit does not trigger additional parking requirements, but the new office space does generate the need for a fraction of one space. A full space could theoretically be provided on-site to meet the requirement (although it is apparently not physically possible), or the owner could pay cash-in-lieu. Parking waivers are one of the standard benefits that HPC can review and approve. HPC must find that the review standards of Section 26.415.110.0 of the Municipal Code are met. They require that: 1. The parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. STAFF RESPONSE: The parking requirement generated by the new construction requires a fraction of one space to be provided. Normally a property owner would handle this as a cash-in-lieu payment, which in this case would be $28,050. The applicant is requesting a waiver of the fee as a preservation incentive. When paid, the cash in lieu fee is used for parking and transportation related construction or improvements. CONCEPTUAL MAJOR,DEVELOPMENT AND.COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW 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 HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 7 of 13 P8 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." The existing building contains office space on the garden level and main floor, and a residential unit and courtyard on the upper floor. The commercial space amounts to approximately 2,850 square feet of FAR. The residential unit is currently 1,450 square feet of FAR, for a total of 4,300 square feet. The property is within floor area limitations. The proposal is to create an addition at the back of the site, sitting on top of a garage/carport constructed in 2003. Immediately above the carport will be two new office spaces. On top of that will be a master bedroom expansion that will change the existing studio unit into a 1 bedroom. Because the proposed new construction is located at the rear of the property, visibility of the addition from the street will be very limited, in staff's assessment. Only a small portion of the proposed third floor encroaches onto the 1962 structure at all. Staff finds that the HPC guidelines for Conceptual approval are met. During the 2011 discussions of this project (minutes attached), HPC was more focused on the importance of restoring the front façade of the building as much as possible, given the requested preservation incentives. No significant progress was made towards an approvable plan at the time. The proposal currently before HPC does not address this issue. The canopy over the original upper floor deck is to be removed and replaced with a photovoltaic canopy, the details of with are not fully described. The application mentions options for reinstating the arched openings on the front, however an amendment submitted on May 7th drops this part of the proposal. Staff assumes that HPC's commitment to restoration of this building is the same as it was last year. Community Development does not support the award of the benefits that are requested without the effort to return some of the character defining features of the building. This includes re-instating the arches and the white stucco at the least. We are interested in the proposed translucent canopy on the upper courtyard, but need more information to evaluate. It may or may not create the openness that the area originally had. Historic and current images of the building are depicted below. HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 8 of 13 P9 • / r. x rt 1,�' r ' , ,t fi # p7li 1M . f r e� a?}'bca k 4n �. yds.fIdk I 4 "� a tiE'q .. 11:5}, +f IR r.s •-yew '. + §fi ., + '::::..--..:..E..'.:. .. ...;:i....::.:.:E:',:...:;..:-:::.....:-.-1.1:H..:i...--.:...... ..-:::::.E:..:::::::...:!-1-',.; :,::::::::.:'::i'.1:..:::.::':::::.' '''''re—_-"*..!':::'..:: :':� _ � f fir ; s i 3 N f tiy� ,?Y � `�4 t t• 1 0 Q k .�-C ::n. 7''�LL t ; 4+r ••Y-w 7 1.:!.*- :',.'' I Y� ' :„.,.... .....:..., ..; „....: .._ _h �..... � I r t r s ; ti 5R t i a s i y +.is .,` a\, ,. .. „91 I ! I ��s+� --s'�+�t� � t't ti ,ry.g�3�4�.. -� �f sue t p� i''''';'''''1.'.. • 'r j rL i., t r„i„ } 4 { .t ( y 4 1,. se i.• 1�, 1 ,'\) it ill a ' " h r i 1 i y� �� +;I 111 ,�:.I r y—�' x tx • .t`y ., E':.''1{ f + r z. •I s ► f ,�! t 6 i s s3 i k u� R- ! ti�5� .� i ! \� ti, i rf( r it it$ r . sf t 4i 1411 `' 11 ��' /14 e� } t z x 4 Ic' 1 fie- .. + I ' 1..' 1' 1 I� h+ � Ila ..- .F•7"111111NiI)@htil Itt" � , _" k' ,:;i:,,,:..„..?,:,.:.:,,,...` " I I 1 r ) r „ -, t13@oi4 <gat a"@ @fm" � 9N t rr+.: III Iilll!.CII 'HIIIIIl�lo I III` ' I+ th li" iql x .�!! 1 I i I I}s . t'--urn . e t ;:r zs " I 1 ----_ +ir 1 4 f •#k .- 7,'.:. l yi Yr4a T �t S k� ff(� �� d7 �5� ` s< ° �s a a h ^'4yrk#+ �n G;' e r' r`k`' yw x` 5" 5 = ^1 d '' F i' T ° ? �i�,1 a `' . .3 ' `�`k�,j t �. �„� :', t 4' 'z'3 3 M,} "rl r <<,5` ors f t, 3 .-c "'S° .vy ss y{f4t1'..-x`- €H.,�'t', 'yv�, • �.k�,nk�1?,..),,,,'`.-, AY e :fS :M"4`4 F �" N .,"'T Y`P kl �} �'+W:.f`.0 �.+ ,. �F-' ; -.', e'J -:;.', f P +� e k i s ue ' }� r P + to 4Zgliad � � i'i�"fi f { a >F k t"r . . a i•'r "•x f,'r'".a� , ,4 N-i !`r as c r S :, * s ` }x#5">th 'ky7 k1i'{i"�r te.s?sS,'sr'"P .rS'Fa¢t a t ? .,�' - ;p S '�., + ' yvF.l" N �k. -c t '#;g '''x edG t++ . ! aIt i >s n L ;� ti�a� ; 1 ���`� sat. a,�, .�a.•y `� '*°` 2:.,. w�tSi:� .. ' i 1• 4 s ! .'� '.- t " • '8.75_44t1.4' "r �: ws aa:- `' I ..3"?" i"r As 7.'r t r E•.-•- :.si:•' t{ + "y .fix T Kr s 2 'u : t } x r r Y{•.� * j�a Y ad- H . 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 9 of 13 • P10 COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW The City has an adopted set of guidelines, "Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives" which are in addition to the HPC design guidelines. Development on this site is affected by the chapter that addresses what is known as the "Commercial Character Area." All of the Conceptual level guidelines address setback and height issues that are not generally applicable to a remodel, rather than all new construction. Staff finds that no additional review is needed, except for discussion of the applicants request to exceed the 36' height threshold for three story buildings, discussed below. Any additional design guidelines that are applicable to Final will be presented to HPC at that time. 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 façade 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. STAFF RESPONSE: The application does request to exceed the 36' height limit for third story elements. When measured from the alley grade, which is lower than the elevation at the front of the building, the addition is 38'11" tall. The elevator overrun is 43', which would be allowable. The Commercial 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. HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 10 of 13 P11 Staff finds that the goal of keeping the building scale low along the streetscape is achieved. UTILITY,DELIVERY AND TRASH SERVICE PROVISION Along with architectural design concerns, the Commercial Design Standards address location of utility, delivery and trash service. Staff understands that when the garage/carport was built in 2003, trash was relocated off of this property to a shared location with the adjacent building. This is somewhat concerning in terms of a long term solution, and the proposed addition will generate additional service needs. The adjacent building has submitted an application for redevelopment, threatening this trash area sharing agreement for the long-term. 610 E. Hyman cannot be further expanded without providing for these functions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is supportive of the proposal for voluntary landmark designation. The 610 E. Hyman building represents Ellie Brickham as an architect and is indicative of post-war commercial development in Aspen in the 1970s. We are generally supportive of the proposed addition. Tthe applicant must provide additional information about how utilities and trash will be handled in the long term. The extent of the requested benefits are similar to recent AspenModern projects, but Mason and Morse and Aspen Core, for example,proposed major renovation to restore the affected historic resource. Staff recommends this project be continued for restudy, including clarification of floor area calculations that are contradictory in the application. If restudy is not possible, HPC should not support the designation request and negotiated benefits. EXHIBITS: • Exhibit A: Design Guidelines Exhibit B: Integrity Score Sheet Exhibit C: Previous HPC minutes Exhibit D: Application "Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines for 610 E. Hyman , Conceptual Review" HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 11 of 13 P12 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. ❑ Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads,jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows. ❑ Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them,whenever conditions permit. ❑ _Preserve the original glass, when feasible. 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. ❑ Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature. ❑ Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. ❑ Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. ❑ Flat skylights that are flush with the roof plane may be considered only in an obscure location on a historic structure. Locating a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is not allowed. ❑ A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be positioned below the ridgeline. 7.6 When planning a rooftop addition, preserve the overall appearance of the original roof. ❑ An addition should not interrupt the original ridgeline. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. ❑ A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. ❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. ❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. ❑ A 1-story connector is preferred. HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 12 of 13 P13 ❑ The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. o The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. ❑ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. ❑ Typically, gable,hip and shed roofs are appropriate. ❑ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. ❑ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.12 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. o An addition should not overhang the lower floors of a historic building in the front or on the side. ❑ Dormers should be subordinate to the overall roof mass and should be in scale with historic ones on similar historic structures. ❑ Dormers should be located below the primary structure's ridgeline, usually by at least one foot. 10.13 Set a rooftop addition back from the front of the building. ❑ This will help preserve the original profile of the historically significant building as seen from the street.' 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. ❑ If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. o Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or structure. HPC Review 5.23.2012 616 E.Hyman—Charles Cunniffe Architects Page 13 of 13 '----,_....,,zA,,,k,;\,' -IV ^ 5 , , . . . . . . . , ., , _.„. . . �}rTmY. ,.4,y�, ,�.gy4 :��{.S-'4 7 ; } {" - v YY /� .4,. 3 ♦ x p������k vim+-# �,tv r s J # Cr CD 3 x f�, s 0 P ^, : tom)- •,v,,,- .s M1 Wert - • '.4.'t,-).•'‘''..5:;'.. s.*x ik - 0. r+ ` , n f .X. •C �� s k.sy 1-,-.•;•..f._�... ...� 11,..; ;..i.4-4 .•- _ = .�v 'CD Q)- -(fl__ (P .9 .. •fl) ()^ ) CD �.i•=t +�t i yak 4,,::.,•;.,V, CD O-- • o , ' CD'. . 3 O n .-, 3 . '.CU •'O O (D •�Z 6 •\ e�. raj•\e,, r.' `. -'.S7 CAD N — 0 ? O . 0O , T # ea w�. n� a n• CD . v i V` i - , s `. ,.•• n- (n, (aD• fl) - •N •(0!) (D• :e 4# _ x `' r i O Vi � CCD al C < -, C) CD O. • C= O ••0 CD' CDC O CD O (/) : • aa T 1+,acvr.. ,w +.r i s ri>' =-CD (D 0 1V• ..SV O o•ate € .,F r 3 P yh � .(D '< v —I ,3 ^ •- 50•. € 3 ' f' ? r� {'. •.. ( ..-• O 0. in—. .fn• ��' ti 1,4.•-f i 3 .�f a., O m o - O CD O //� Ft fl) C n \V v CD •O V r , s 11i S b i ' .,4i Q• G C a.co .-. N. v ,• t *gAt k• Y�• r r r" f'a , ,..a.,-n- a O ...0. = O .O. °J ' a :, ,- ' x t , t + af . (D '. .r CD n IHw .-+ CD HUU = h = u - D — ? St N O co—� O m c.. • 00 0) 0 —•.�-t• -.• flr C �, � f. -, (D ,_,• (D •Q J —,- -O p ( N 3 , �.0 .v =r) < o- .-4 -w �. 0 O 3. o �, p CQ O'. .. Q 3 o 3 om 0 O `< Q C o m n D v Q 0.3 Q i-J.•O (I) CD CD :� 'D.,p .—.. p .(D. CD' ° :o '. 43 v CD o. (/) is • Q (D Q (D c_-,N, 0 .C) � . .(7) ,3 ,� a (D—s— = : o ;-►`< 0 CD D C) C -0 w • 0• n C (� �_ O v v. 0.0 O • • , O " (Q (D r O r. O V)O (D co- 0 (n �- rn cD r1-:.. .. . , . . - _ . , = . _ . . . . .. _ . . . \V .. .. . . - _ . . . ... M . .. ‘. ,. III . , :,...,.. . . . • o . . N iil r I;;.•. f,.• . . • , , INTEGRITY SCORING P15 If a statement is true, circle the number of points associated with that true statement. LOCATION OF BUILDINGON THE LOT The building is in its original location. 2 points; The building has been shifted on the original parcel, but maintains its original 1 point alignment and/or proximity to the street. SETTING': rr The property is located within the geographical area surrounded by Castle 1 poi n_t Creek, the Roaring Fork River and Aspen Mountain. The property is outside of the geographical area surround by Castle Creek, the 1/2 point Raoring Fork River and Aspen Mountain. :DESIGN: The form of the building (footprint, roof and wall planes) are unaltered from the original design. 3 points a.) The form of the building has been altered but less than 25% of the original walls have been removed, OR b.) The alterations to the form all occur at the rear of the subject building, OR 32 points.; c.) The form of the building has been altered but the addition is less than 50% of the size of the original building, OR d.) There is a roof to_ p addition that is less than 50% of the footprint of the roof. MATERIALSa z r i Exte.nor materials � $:,. " The original exterior materials of the building are still in place, with the exception of normal maintenance and repairs. Ports: 50% of the exterior materials have been replaced, but the replacements 1 point match the original condition. 5 rWindows and.doors The original windows and doors of the building are still in place, with the 2 points exception of normal maintenance and repairs. 50% of the original windows and doors have been replaced, but the replacements match the original condition. 44 pon_t .Best: 15 up to 20.points Integrity Score (this page) maximum of 10 points: ___ --- Better 12 up to 15 points, Character Defining Features Score (first page) maxi- ;Good: 10 up to 12 points mum of 10 points: r- Not Eligible:0 up to 10 points HISTORIC ASSESSMENT SCORE: ( 2 P16 B ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 2010 Sarah said in the drawings the breezeway is lower. Chris said the breezeway is about 15 inches lower so we don't have a lot of play. We would like to get as high as we can. Jamie said per the two drawings the ridge is exactly the same and we need to make sure the breezeway is lower and that condition should be in the resolution. Ann said regarding the light well, it would go to the project monitor first and if they are uncomfortable it would then go to the board. Jay said he recommends that the public come and address the commission at the time that it is offered. MOTION: Ann moved to approve resolution #15 as proposed. Sarah amended condition #1: The reconfigured breezeway is approved to be below the ridge and eave of the garage. Motion second by Sarah. All in favor, motion carried 6-0. 610 E. Hyman Ave. — Landmark Designation, Major Development and Commercial Design Review, Ordinance #48 negotiation, Public Hearing Public notice - Exhibit I Photo of bldg. —Exhibit II Drawing of the building—Exhibit III Amy said 610 E. Hyman was built for Patricia Moore and her well known Aspen Gallery in 1963 and it was designed by Ellie Brickham, Aspen's first woman architect. She attended the University of Colorado and worked with Herbert Bayer before opening her own firm. Charles Cunniffe is the owner of the building. He is here to discuss voluntary designation and an addition to the back of the house that adds a penthouse element. Staff finds that the landmark criteria are met, particularly criteria C. This 1960 building relates to new formalism. As part of the designation we need to look at the integrity scoring process. Staff scored 75 and the assessment was due to the alternations in the front of the building. 4 P17 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 2010 There is a removable canopy at the top of the building that has created a cover that was previously opened to the sky. It has a barrel vault shape to it and it changes the light in the space and affects the way the space looks. It is reversible but scoring points were removed due to the change. The ground level previously had arched openings similar to the top level and they have been changed to a more of a squared off transom. The entry doors were originally centered in the building and now moved to the outer edges. The garden level did not exist historically. In the integrity score we brought points down because the stucco appears to be originally white. Staff feels this building is worth saving because we don't have very many examples of Ellie Brickham's work. Amy said in terms of the HPC guidelines the addition is sympathetic and not visible from the street. Some of the incentives are standard and some are new ideas that can be brought up for voluntary designation of a modern building. 1. 500 square foot FAR bonus is being requested. Staff feels some of the previous alterations should be considered to be taken back to the original Ellie Brickham design.. Staff is not suggesting changing the floor plan of the building. 2. A parking waiver is being requested. A site visit occurred today and there doesn't seem like there is any additional space for parking. As a landmark incentive we are suggesting that the requirement be waived. They should not have to provide anything on-site and they should also have the waiver of the cash-in-lieu fee which has the value of about $28,000. Landmark buildings are exempt from affordable housing mitigation. The two new offices would generate around $250,000. They do not have on-site trash storage right now and they share with the building next door. This might be concerning if there is an addition being made and we don't want to end up with a dumpster in the alley in the future which is not an acceptable solution. On a free market residential unit in the downtown there is a cap of 2,000 square feet and they would like to exceed. that. Typically the only,way to do that is purchase a TDR, transfer , development right and they do not want to do that. TDR's are worth around $250,000. and they would like to have the development right without having to pay that. There is a request to not provide an elevator in the building. This would cause a significant challenge in accessibility. In talking to the Building Dept. this would probably not be waived. The applicant is requesting rights for 12 years. This gives the applicant the time to decide 5 P18 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 2010 when to build. At the final review we should discuss restoration efforts. They are also asking for a one foot in height increase for the addition which is allowable for any building historic or not. The standard is no more than 36 feet tall and they are asking for 40 feet on the elevator. On the addition we are requesting that it be set in a foot or so, so the façade isn't just up three stories. Mitch Haas, Haas planning. Mitch said we are land marking the building in exchange for incentives. It is not our intent to landmark and undo changes that were done for very good reasons in the first place. All the changes proposed are on non-historic portions of the property and they are fully set back from the property some 40 feet from the street façade. Asking for the height is allowed through the Commercial Design review. There is an existing free market studio in the building and the allowable FAR is 13 square feet more than what is already there. The building has a lot of common space due to the split levels so a good chunk gets pro-rated into the free market floor area. The only way to expand the apartment is through the Ordinance #48 negotiations and we feel we have done that where it is in the back on the non-historic part of the building. Charles has off-site offices which are being rented. The proposal is to ad a bedroom. We feel it is not much to ask in exchange for forever having this property designated and HPC will have purview over the property. Charles Cunniffe, owner On the trash service needs I have an agreement with the neighbor that has a dumpster that we use and their recycling needs come to our building. In the covered back we can always add a trash can. Council approved the addition with the recycled cans as being adequate for our building. Almost everything we do is recyclable materials, glass, newspaper and magazines. Regarding the minor setback from the alley we can explore that but it does cut into the bedroom space. Regarding the restoration the awning serves as a valuable purpose. It serves as a snow removal area. There is no place to throw the snow that collects there and having the awning allows the snow to roll back to the roof and then melts and goes down the roof drains. I can control snow management by virtue of the awning. The façade location has not changed and the window line has always been there. Splitting the entries allows the downstairs to be open when the upstairs isn't. Adding the light well allowed light to the lower level and ventilation. This is an improvement that doesn't detract from the history or look of the building. 6 P19 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 2010 The monochromatic look makes the building hold together. The columns by themselves look like sticks. The white stucco with brick columns doesn't hold well together. Questions: Jamie asked about the height. Charles said there is a slight slope from sidewalk to alley. On the street side the height would comply but on the back there is a one foot height difference request. Nora asked Charles to explain the evolution of the changes of the building by date. Charles said he bought the building in 1989. The first change was a tenant request which was moving the door from the center to the two sides. It was important to not alter the columns and we stayed with non-structural changes. The light well was done in 1991. When I moved in the space in the late 90's is when the windows were changed. The awning windows now double the view and light coming in. The existing stucco was painted at that time. In 2002 the garage and lower level were added. Chairperson, Sarah Broughton opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Land marking: Jay said the changes to the door specifically affect the landmark. The addition of the awning is not in the spirit of the original design. If we vote for land marking I would prefer to have input on color to preserve the original intent. Charles added that this building is a good example of a single occupant and business residence and there aren't many of those left. It is a mixed us building that was designed as a residence and a gallery. Ann said she feels the building is modified way beyond land marking it. You have lost the essence of the design. There is real lightness with the arches on either story and the transparency of the top. The original was a very graceful looking building. If you had the open roof top garden that would be fabulous. Changing the arches and moving the entrance I couldn't support designation of this building the way it is right now. 7 P20 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 2010 Nora said if this building is landmarked how far back could the changed be removed. Charles said except for the door being moved it is not that much different. The door has been pushed to the side but it is still within the arched definitions. I don't feel that is a negative at all. The atrium inside was totally dysfunctional and a waste of space. Nora said land marking is because it is a building that has historic value. Charles said he thought the changes were in the spirit of the Ellie Brickham building. I tried to do nothing evasive structurally. The taking of the lower arches does not denigrate the building. Jason said Ellie Brickham was trying to duplicate aqueducts and show the verticality of a downtown building with brick columns with the lightness and .transparence of an aqueduct. She had a one-story building on the ground with a transparent light structure above. She was taking a one-story building and making it look like a two-story structure. The lightness of the upper piece makes the building special. When you cap it and get the light out that transparency is lost. I need to see an effort to make this a great project. A light weight solar panel collecting PV roof that is semi-transparent like the one in Wagner Park so you get light and see through the entire thing is a suggestion. You need to get back to the original reading of the building. Jamie,said she is in agreement with the rest of the board members in getting the façade back to the original state. For designation it is getting the arches back and the light and dark coming back instead of monolithically. Sarah said in order to recommend historic designation under criteria C you need to do significant restorations of the building in order to get it back to the period of significance. I would be curious to see how the bringing the door back would work. Charles said the door is in the middle of the conference room and can't be changed. Sarah also commented that the arches are significant. The proposed back is incongruent to the original design. 8 P21 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8,2010 Jay said it also needs to be mentioned if we designate we would be preserving mass and scale of the building. With the new land use code height can go to 46 feet. The idea of restoration is good but by preserving what is left is preserving mass and scale in town. Mitch said a good portion of this commission is taking the approach of all or nothing. Unless you restore it back we aren't working with you. Jay said we have the opportunity to preserve and work with these people. This is not an exceptional piece of property that would warrant all the requests and incentives. I don't want to see this die immediately and would like to see what can be done. Maybe there is a medium that we all can work with. Charles said with the appraisal etc. he is giving up a lot if this is designated and he is willing to do it. A bedroom is needed for his family. The doors are just window infill's between columns. The architecture is the form of the building which within are infill's. Amy said this is the first time the HPC is dealing with a Post War designation application in which the building is somewhat altered. This building has gone through changes. Charles came here tonight to designate the building as is and the HPC is on the opposite of the spectrum where you want to see the building as it was. The applicant needs to determine if he has any flexibility and the HPC needs to think about flexibility. Charles said he is the second owner of this building since 1962. The building is relatively unaltered. The alterations I made are non-invasive and non-structural. I understand the merit of what this board does and as an applicant it is painful to weight what you are giving up and I am asking for flexibility. The awning is a removable device. Jamie said she is fine where the doors are because I agree that it is more of an infill. The lower arches and upper awning should be gone in order to make that an airy two building approach and to restore it back in order to do the designation. Charles said Jason mentioned the roof and translucent solar panels. You would get the best of both worlds, the light coming through plus the solar energy. 9 P22 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 2010 Jamie said she would be willing to look at that. With the stairway going up to the next level what would the head clearance be and would it be fully covered or not. Charles said it could probably be done with a hatch. Jason said there would be a flat panel over the entire thing like what they are doing for the art museum. Ann pointed out that the building in its current condition doesn't qualify for designation and it doesn't meet any of the three criteria. Ordinance#48 is a whole different program. With the task force they would not have considered this building because it has been so modified. Ann said the building is fine but it is not an example of Ellie Brickham's work. Jay said possibly we should recommend to council to take this property off the Ordinance #48 list. Sarah said in the current state it doesn't fit the criteria for designation. That doesn't mean that there isn't a middle ground. I would be willing to see a solution keeping the doors where they are. We need to see something come back so that we feel we are meeting the criteria. Mitch said it is about the opportunity of keeping this building and work with doing some preservation. Sarah said she is willing to look at a middle ground. The middle course of arched is critically important to the historic significance of the building. Charles suggested the doors stay where they are and the translucent awning/solar panels add light and put the arches back above the awning window so that it is in a panel. You would still get the arch but the transom window would stay and the arch appears. Nora said if we are designating an Ellie Brickham building it needs to look like an Ellie Brickham building. You need the light coming into the building. 10 P23 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 2010 Charles said emotionally he doesn't agree that it has been transformed because he tried very hard to do things in keeping with the architecture and not alter the building to where it is unrecognizable. I made it more livable in the spirit of her work. I was trying to improve her building to make it more functional. Jason said he is willing to look at options in order to make this an exceptional project. Jason said he is flexible on the door but likes the exhibit that was presented. The transparent view up through the roof is good and the color is important, the vertical columns are one color and the white infill for the arches. Back of the building comments: Jason said he would like a response to the rhythm of the columns. Sarah said she would like to see original drawings of the back of the building before the alterations occurred. Jay said the translucent roof would lessen the mass of the building from the front view. Jamie suggested a little more relief on the back due to the vertical wall. MOTION.- Jay moved to continue 610 E. Hyman to 1/26/2011; second by Ann. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Sarah. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 11 P24 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2011 Chairperson, Sarah Broughton called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Ann Mullins, Nora Berko, Jason Lasser and Brian McNellis. Excused were Jamie McLeod and Jay Maytin. Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Nora announced that Ann was awarded a National Parks Grant for Historic American landscape surveys in Colorado. Congratulations Ann. Election of officers Sarah commented that she is happy to serve as the chair on HPC. Ann said she became interested in preservation ten years ago and has gained a lot of knowledge and with the grant an incredible amount of knowledge will be available. For the next few years this board will be focusing on Ordinance #48. I am starting to see how we can make it work. Having the extra experience being on the task force has helped. Thirdly, I have very few conflicts on the board. Sarah said she has been on the board for seven years and she feels she brings an understanding of not only the preservation guidelines but also the multitude of other codes that this city looks at when reviewing development. I am also an architect which is very important for this board and passionate about preservation. Brian said Jay has also put a lot of tenure on this board and would be interested in being vice-chair. Brian nominated Jay as vice-chair and Jason second the nomination. Ann nominated herself as vice-chair and Sarah second the nomination. Vote 4-1 for Ann. Sarah nominated herself as chair. Jim said someone could move to accept Sarah by acclamation, which is a unanimous vote 5-0. 1 P25 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2011 Motion: Jason moved to create an alternate vice-chair position, second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried. Jim said that position is in the event that the chair or vice-chair aren't present. Motion: Sarah moved to nominate Jay as alternate vice-chair; second by Jason. All in favor, motion carried. 610 E. Hyman — Landmark Designation —Major Development—Public Hearing— Ord. #48 negotiation- Commercial Design Review Amy said staff is interested and supportive of this building being a landmark and we find that it meets the criteria and the negotiated benefits are appropriate except for the request to waive the accessibility requirements. At the last meeting it was clear that more restoration of this building is necessary to truly convey what its original character was. We did get some information in the packet about restoration on the front façade about recreating the arches over the ground floor windows and putting in a translucent canopy for the upper floor courtyard. Right now there is a vinyl vaulted piece that is up off and on which is distracting from the original architecture. The submitted materials did not give us enough information to say that it was adequate. Exhibit I—New photographs Staff does not have any particular concerns about the addition and we are recommending continuation. Mitch Haas and Janver Darrington presented for the owner Charles Cunniffe Mitch said Charles is unavailable and we cannot make decisions but can explain the rationale around our presentation. Janver said the photograph handed out is of the city shops anodized material above the windows and it shows the infill panel. Amy suggested spandrel glass but we haven't received the samples yet. The second photograph is of the canopy we are suggesting. Regarding the trash that was mentioned in the memo we have an agreement with the neighbor to put our trash in their container and they put their recycling in our recycling bins. 2 P26 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2011 Janver said regarding the materials on the alley side we favor a single material rather than a two tiered material. We are going to a lighter color and the only view is from the alley. The samples of the photovoltaic canopy material have not arrived . Clarification: Sarah asked when the horizontal band was added.to the window because it was not there originally. Nora agreed that the brow was never there originally. Janver said on top of the parapet is just a metal cap. That metal piece could be part of the canopy attachment. Sarah said if the canopy goes away will that horizontal banding go away. Janver said they have not figured out how the photovoltaic system is attached. Sarah clarified that the rendering is overplayed a little. Sarah asked if there is any way to do the arched windows within the height of the historic proportion of the windows on the first level. Mitch said the arches shown are more of a façade than a window. Sarah asked why the decision was made to make the arches higher than they were historically. Janver said Charles wants to keep the awning windows as they are and add the arched element above to simulate the original arched windows. The windows are all fixed. We are trying to keep the same curved radius as above. Nora said she has been struggling with this building for two months. How far are you willing to go back to the original design. The operative word is restoration. Or do we start at a different place and say this is a compromised building and there is a compromised discussion. Mitch said it is his understanding that Charles is not willing to back 100% on restoration. The points he is unwilling to budge on are putting the doors back in the center and getting rid of the garden level and taking out his operable glass window. 3 P27 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2011 Mitch said the arched topped windows at the base of the building have been changed. At the garden level there are offices with a conference room above it. That part has not been real flexible. The stucco color has been changed. We are trying to figure out the canopy. The roof, canopy opening, and the . lower arch openings we are trying to work with. Nora asked if they would consider re-working the proportion of the arches. Mitch said you can't without replacing the operable windows. Janver said if you had operable windows below the arched tops the bottom of the arched windows would be at eye level which would be impractical. Jason asked if there was discussion about reworking the south façade. At the last meeting we talked about the rhythm and the proportions of the brick columns on the south façade. Janver said it is set back so far we didn't think there was a relationship. Jason said on the west façade we need to talk about the windows and why there isn't fenestration to break down the mass and height. Janver said that level is new office space and those windows would have to be fire resistance because it is a party wall. Chairperson, Sarah Broughton opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Preservation: Ann commented that she is not sure this property should be landmarked. It has changed so far from the original with simulations. Simulations are not restorations. The arches are in a different place and economically it is not feasible to take it back to the original. The entrance and light are all important parts of this building and they are all gone. Brian said he does not have enough information to make a decision one way or the other. MOTION: Ann moved to not designate 610 E. Hyman; second by Nora. Discussion: 4 P28 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2011 Jason said he is not willing to give up on this and we are not done negotiating and we need to get a compromise. I can bend on the door and keep it where it is presently. If we had the transparent roof that would be a compromise. The arches in the original location is the key and I would be willing to have a metal panel so you can have a functioning window which is a compromise. The brick columns need to read like they are going into space which was the intent of Ellie Brickam. We can accomplish designation on this building. Sarah said she has similar views as Ann. There have been so many alterations. Is this a new use and a new life of this building. Sarah commended the applicant for voluntarily coming in for designation. The façade needs to get back to the original configuration. I am flexible on the door location and understand why they have moved. I would also like to see the arches brought down for the mass proportions that were there historically. Ann said it is a building that has evolved and has been changed out for the users. It has changed too far from the Ellie Brickham building. This building should not be part of Ord. #48 negotiations and should go through a normal process. Brian said he likes the building and it has evolved but it does contribute to the downtown area and the streetscape. It is a trade off as they are requesting the 500 square foot FAR and no parking mitigations. This building has parking issues but I am willing to have the applicant come back. Sarah said she is also willing to continue the application because the owner is not present. Jason said this needs to be an exemplary project and we are basically talking about the south façade. Sarah said the beauty in this building is it's simplicity. The proportions are everything. Mitch pointed out that structurally the doors moved out of the center. The columns have not changed and the brick work has not changed. The upper • 5 P29 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2011 windows and openings haven't been changed. Not everything has changed on this building. Vote on Ann's motion: Ann,yes; Nora, yes; Jason, no; Brian, no; Sarah, no. Motion denied 3-2. Mitch said we need to look at the restoration and incentive package. MOTION: Brian moved to continue 610 E. Hyman to February 23rd, second by Jason. Ann, no; Nora, no; Jason, yes; Brian, yes; Sarah, yes. Motion carried 3-2. Incentives: Brian said he is willing to entertain incentives but not the package that is presented. Amy pointed out that the dollar value is over a million dollars. Can't you have an operable window that is an arch shape? Amy said it is the windows and bringing back the white color and roof solutions. Jason said the FAR bonus is for exemplary projects above and beyond and that would mean if the window went back to the original location. Mitch said the parking waiver is less than one space. Jason mentioned the affordable housing. Mitch said if it is designated the affordable housing is not an incentive anymore. Jason mentioned that in the current configuration it is not worth a million in trade offs. Sarah said you can't put a price tag on a great building. The long term benefit is worth more than the short term dollar value. • Nora said as a tax payer the amount of these waivers is staggering especially with the Given. If the tax payer is taking on the burden then the project needs to be a community asset in its historic value. Sarah mentioned that she doesn't see any clients talking about TDR's. We built 100 projects and had one TDR. 6 P30 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2011 Jason also mentioned the addition and the loft on the south side should reflect the rhythm of the historic facade. There needs to be more detail on the west which is the alley side. Sarah echoed Jason's concerns. Referral comments on Historic Landmark Lot Split Code Amendments No minutes MOTION: Sarah moved to adjourn; second by Jason. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. • Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk • 7 P31 J,' E� [� "D\>. J.' .. 1, s� t®s ^ �i 4 �®' vex �, � � �; }}}[���� fl�,� 1!i q LLC k;',272 May 7, 2012 Amy Guthrie,Historic Preservation Officer COO,NrrY ;;E ° , EP O�4' City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Addendum to the 610 East Hyman Avenue Aspen Modern Application Dear Amy: Please consider this letter and the attached plans as an addendum to the recently submitted 610 East Hyman Avenue Historic Preservation Application. This application was submitted on March 28, 2012, and deemed complete by your office in a letter dated April 6, 2012. The letter deeming the application complete also requested that the following additional information be provided/addressed, as applicable: 1. The front facade elevation does not include the arches indicated in the perspective drawings; 2. A streetscape elevation showing the proposal in the surrounding context is needed; 3. The application includes a gross floor area calculation, but please provide a table that also summarizes floor area calculations by use (commercial, free market and affordable). Include allocation of non-unit space; and, 4. The application requires a letter from the applicant indicating an understanding that a 90-day negotiation period has been initiated. In response to 1 and 2 above, please see the new perspective drawings and street elevation attached to this addendum. Please note that the perspective drawings no longer include the arches. These faux arches have been removed from the proposal so as to avoid any further obscuring or altering of historic elements and architectural detailing. In response to item 3 above, the floor area calculations by use are as follows: • 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108 • ASPEN, COLORADO • 81611 • • PHONE: (970) 925-7819 • FAX: ('970) 925-7395 • P32 610 East Hyman Avenue Addendum. Page 2 o Existing Commercial FAR = 2,037sf of unit space, plus 649sf of non-unit space, and 163sf of non-exempt garage space for a total of 2,849sf (0.95:1) of Commercial Floor Area; o Proposed Commercial FAR = 2,878sf of unit space, plus 546sf of non-unit space, and 163sf of non-exempt garage space for a total of 3,587sf (1.2:1) of Commercial Floor Area; m Existing Free-Market Residential FAR = 1,099sf of unit space, plus 350sf of, non-unit space for a total of 1,449sf (0.483:1) of Free-Market Residential Floor Area; and o Proposed Free-Market Residential FAR = 2,104sf of unit space, plus 593sf of non-unit space for a total of 2,697sf (0.9:1) of Free-Market Residential Floor Area. m Total/Cumulative Proposed FAR = 6,284sf (2.095:1), where 1,302sf (20.7%) is non-unit space. © Total Proposed Free-Market Net Livable = 1,814sf (0.605:1), while the Total Proposed Commercial Net Leasable = 2,686sf (0.895:1). With regard to 4 above, although the application did mentioned the 90-day negotiation period on Page 5, we would like to reiterate that it is understood by the applicant that a 90-day negotiation period has been initiated by this application. It is further understood by and acceptable to the applicant that this may be extended to accommodate the planning staff schedule. As the authorized representative for the applicant, Haas Land Planning, LLC, can convey this understanding on the applicant's behalf. - Additionally, during the prior HPC review of this application, in 2010, staff gave this building an Integrity Assessment Score of only 75 (the minimum threshold for designation). We believe that some of the scoring was erroneous and that the building should be given a score of at least 87 for the following reasons: o The structure is in its original location (5/5 points); O The original plan form is intact (10/10 points, subtotal 15 points); O The original roof is unaltered (10/10 points, subtotal 25 points). Staff gave this a score of 6 because of the removable awning on the second level. It was stated in.the assessment that this awning changes the appearance of the building from the street. Whether or not this is true, the • P33 610 East Hyman Avenue Addendum Page 3 original roof form is still unaltered, therefore the building should receive 10 points; ® The original scale and proportions of the building are. intact (5/5 points, subtotal 30 points); ® The original pattern of glazing and exterior materials has been altered, but in a manner consistent with the original design intent and would meet the design guidelines; (6/10 points, subtotal 36 points). Staff gave the building a score of 0 on this criterion and stated that the exterior wall was originally a screen, with the enclosed spaces recessed some distance behind them. This is not correct and can even be seen in the photo of the building that staff provided. This area has always been enclosed and, therefore, the awarding of 6 points is more appropriate;. O There are minor alterations to the horizontal or geometric form, minimalist detailing and features that relate the building to its environment. (6-8/10 points, subtotal 42-44 points): ' We scored this as an eight (8) because we are of the belief that a number between 6 and 10 should be assessed. If that is not the case, we agree with staff's scoring of six (6). However, it should be noted that in the staff scoring it was stated that open air spaces have been enclosed; as previously mentioned, this is not a correct statement; © The physical surroundings are similar to that found when the structure was originally constructed (5/5 points, subtotal 47-49 points); o The original material palette, brick and stucco, is intact (15/15 points, subtotal 62-64 points); .O Some of the original door and window units have been replaced but the new units are consistent with the design guidelines (5/10 points, subtotal 67-69 points). The original front doors have been moved from the center to the sides and some windows were added/altered; ® The structural composition that distinguishes the stylistic category of Modernism is intact. No decorative materials are used. Design is focused on rationality, reduction, and composition. Materials are generally manufactured and standardized (15/15 points, subtotal 82-84 points); P34 610 East Hyman Avenue Addendum Page 4 o The neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define Modernism remain intact (5/5 points, total 87-89 points): Staff only gave this building 3 points for this category and stated that it appears from photos that the stucco on the exterior was originally white. That is not how it appears to the applicant and even if that were true, in order to receive 5 points for this standard the neutral or monochromatic color scheme and finishes that define the stylistic category of Modernism must be intact; it does not say that the color must be the same as the original. The current building maintains neutral and monochromatic color schemes and finishes consistent with its Modernism character. As noted above, the applicant believes that this building achieves a score of at least 87-89 points, making this a "better" example of an Aspen Modern property, with regard to its contribution to and significance in Aspen's 20th century history. In addition to the foregoing, the applicant has corrected the building elevations ' and section drawings to depict the proposed building height of 40 feet at the alley, which will make it 38 feet and 11 inches above the Hyman Avenue sidewalk. Finally, the applicant is withdrawing the request made in the application to waive the elevator and/or access requirements that are triggered by the proposed development. The proposed development will comply with all ADA requirements. If you require any additional information, please contact me at (970) 925-7819 or by email at mitch©hlpaspen.com. Very truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC Mitc11' Haas cc: Charles Cunniffe, Applicant/Architect 'Timi qi(l rt- 5- ,D, --./ ;L AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: nn (a 1 0 H ona, � "n. , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: W Pa .1 614N P 5"-o0 pyre ,20 f 2— STATE OF COLORADO ) \ • J ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, 54.e4 Gc`1 (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City,of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or apaper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice,which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inct- -ir height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the_day of , 20 ,to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred.(300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of • property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) • • Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such . revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use • regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to andlistirig of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public ' inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days , prior to the public hearing on such amendments. i • Signature • The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this 20day • of 'V t , 20a, by :.A, - 1` , . HYMAN LI�N AVENUE-A WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL RE:610 E.HAN AVENUE-ASPENMODERN NEGOTIATION FOR VOLUNTARY LANDMARK • DESIGNATION,CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVEL- OPMENT ANr'iZONCE SPECIAL COMMERCIAL ^,� I DESIGNT'cVIEW,SPECIAL REVIEW FOR My CO 1'$$1 n ex lIe �(}�/l UTILE i/TRASH/RECYCLING AREA ��J �. . NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing' / will be held on Wednesday,May J meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m.jSS10 before G City Council • --(. I N' ink Preservation Gom Galena S1..Aspen,. [ Consider anappiication suomi tea or'a1O=.----- - Notary Pu i man,LLC,c/o Charles Cunniffe,610 E.Hyman ` .,.•.e•••>�w, ' Avenue,Aspen,co,81611. The project affects '1..:c ��/ P�!�\� ' the property located at 610 E.Hyman Avenue,Lot Q.��„oao.�` �� M,Block 99,City and Townsite of Aspen,Cat Colo- ro- y %/n it rado,PIDk2737-182-12-004. The applicant p. 1 (3 a poses voluntary landmark designation,an addition ( u o 10 on top of an existing garage/carport,expansion of , CORY J. t an existing residential unit,and alterations to the front facade of the building.The following varianc- e GARSKE = , es are requested from NPC:a height increase of 1', _ . eJ e L a waiver th on-site parking and cash-in-lieu ener t fees for ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE• / ,,t,\rJ'c° :� just less than one parking space generated by the V�• new development,l waiver of and the 500 srequired square E PUBLICATION ►,��..,........�p utility/trash/recycle area,and a 500 square foot 4k; covor"6 FAR bonus. HPC is asked to make a a teed pre er- vv� vation to City Council regarding requested preset- IiH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) '�'`"" �c' �y►y vation incentives related to.voluntary landmark NI CORIn'sS. �n FXJIr designation,including an increase in the maximum Ay 85�p,' IY`.?S residential floor area and residential unit size,the OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIE determination as to whether an elevator is required for the development,and the establishment of 10 , years vested rights status for the project. For fur- l Cher information,contact Amy Guthne at the City of SS Ga ena Stn AsspenDevelopment ,CO n(970)a429--2755, II;ERTICIICcATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE amy.guthrie@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Ann Mullins )BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 . Vice Chair,Aspen Historic CPreservation ommission I ' Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on April 19, ., . 2012. [78012381 . • • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: t0 � MAts AV W-10 , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: IN4 e' ,2042 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, 6-NdRL-.E5 GIN 1 1 tEf E (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. '/ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the 1p day of Apr,11- , 2042- ,to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ✓ Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses.of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) • Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However,the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before this23_day of 14A-_ , 20111, by C—kAr1Q-s 1... Cuter. . 1+7 PVe`', 1 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL i S . it T0N1 ROSE My commission expires: Og Cq atvc SWERSKY f op o • '1 AoYO•0 •. OF•._ •' : Notary Public My C011110*11 EpOes 0812612015 ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 610 E. HYMAN AVENUE- ASPENMODERN NEGOTIATION FOR VOLUNTARY LANDMARK DESIGNATION, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, SPECIAL REVIEW FOR UTILITY/TRASH/RECYCLING AREA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday,May 9,2012 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by 610 E. Hyman, LLC, c/o Charles Cunniffe, 610 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO, 81611. The project affects the property located at 610 E. Hyman Avenue, Lot M, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, PID#2737-182-12-004. The applicant proposes voluntary landmark designation, an addition on top of an existing garage/carport, expansion of an existing residential unit, and alterations to the front façade of the building. The following variances are requested from HPC; a height increase of 1', a waiver of on-site parking and cash-in-lieu fees for just less than one parking space generated by the new development, waiver of the required on-site utility/trash/recycle area, and a 500 square foot FAR bonus. HPC is asked to make a recommendation to City Council regarding requested preservation incentives related to voluntary landmark designation, including an increase in the maximum residential floor area and residential unit size, the determination as to whether an elevator is required for the development, and the establishment of 10 years vested rights status for the project. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St.,Aspen, CO, (970)429-2758, amy.guthrie @ci.aspen.co.us. s/Ann Mullins Vice Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on April 19,2012 City of Aspen Account PUBLIC NOTICE Date: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 --___Time: 5:00 p.m. Place: .Aspen City Hall, 130_S. Galena__Street___ Purpose: HPC will review voluntary_ landmark designation Conceptual Develo rn ent and Commercial Design Applicant is 610 E,Hyma_C,c/o Charles_ Cunniffe,610 E.H man, Aspen.The1 j ro'ect is an ad_ditio_n at hack and upper floor, and than es to the front.__ Variances include parkin floor area unit size_�ht,and utilit /trash area. For further information c _Planning —tact Aspen 0-- �. at 970-920-5090. F. - f .� t ice- i �' ... �....a.. 1 r- ��q . .--.. d c k c � T $ .v.r.e.! Sa Yrr:� mZ . ,E ( 4 i _ I. ! _ 1 i. — I PUBLIC NOTICE Date I Twit I l Plat %v+ccse if/23/1 2— 091.9/091-9®Many Dane a;gltadwoo ww lg x ww gZ}ewao;op 809nb43 EXHIBIT 0918/0919©Aaeny gi!M algltedwoo<<8/9 Z x„ azls law 1308 HUNTER LLC ' 14 SKIERS LP i 517 EAST HOP I '490 WILLIAMS ST 1108 NORFLEET DR ' 517 E HOPKIN• - - DENVER, CO 80218 ! NASHVILLE,TN 372201412 ! ASPEN, CO 81: - - I 520 EAST COOPER PTNRS LLC 1530 HOPKINS LLC 630 EAST HYMAN LLC 402 MIDLAND PARK ' 5301/2 E HOPKINS ' 532 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 ICI i 1 ALPINE BANK ASPEN 633 SPRING II LLC ; 635 E HOPKINS LLC ATTN ERIN WIENCEK 418 E COOPER AVE#207 532 E HOPKINS PO BOX 10000 ASPEN, CO 81611 (ASPEN, CO 81611 ; GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 !ARCADES ASSOCIATES LTD LLC • 1 CIO KRUGER&CO ASPEN ART MUSEUM i ASPEN BLOCK 99 LLC 400 E HYMAN AVE !590 N MILL ST ' 532E HOPKINS AVE 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ;ASPEN, CO 81611 I 1 ASPEN CORE VENTURES LLC ASPEN PLAZA LLC AUSTIN LAWRENCE CONNER LLC 418E COOPER AVE#207 PO BOX 1709 532 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 C/O STEVE MARCUS ! ASPEN, CO 81611 2 • I BATTLE GERALD LIVING TRUST AVP PROPERTIES LLC BASS CAHN 601 LLC HIXON BURT LIVING TRUST 630 E HYMAN AVE#25 PO BOX 4060 ! PO BOX 2847 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659 i ' BAUM ROBERT E '• ;BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BG SPRING LLC j PO BOX 1518 i 65 FIRST NECK LN 300 S SPRING ST#202 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 ; !SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 ASPEN, CO 81611 li Ij 1 BISCHOFF JOHN C • BOOGIES BUILDING OF ASPEN LLC j BORGIOTTI CLAUDIO 1502 S VIA GOLONDRINA CIO LEONARD WEINGLASS ; 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN ' 534 E COOPER AVE VIENNA,VA 22192 j TUCSON,AZ 85716-5843 i ASPEN, CO 81611 ! ' i CHATEAU ASPEN UNIT 21-A LLC CHATEAU ASPEN CONDO ASSOC 421 ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CTR 1 CICUREL CARY 1 630 E COOPER AVE 2615 N LAKEWOOD 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 STE G ! CHICAGO, IL 60614 !ASPEN, CO 816113551 j 1 I 1 COOPER STREET DEVELOPMENT LLC C/O PYRAMID PROPERTY ADVISORS ;, DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST 1 EDGETTE JAMES J &PATRICIA 8051 LOCKLIN LN 119900 BEACH RD STE 801 418 E COOPER AVE#207 1 COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI 48382 ! JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 !1 ASPEN, CO 81611 • label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery®5160/8160 :' I tinnatta ria fnrmat 9f mm x fi7 mm nmmnatihIe aver.Avery®51160/8160 0918/0915®tianV pane algledwoo ww L9 x ww gZ fewaof ap atiariblf3 0918/091g®AaanV tat!M alglfedwoo„8/g Z x„I.azis tap S3dtl1S ERGAS VENESSA BLAIR&CLAUDE I EXELCEDAR INC 20% FERRY JAMES H III 'PO BOX 4316 534 E HYMAN AVE BOX 167 ASPEN, CO 81612 j !ASPEN, CO 81611 GLENCOE, IL 60022-0167 I I FITZGERALD FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD , i FURNGULF LTD GELD LLC C/O PITKIN COUNTY DRY GOODS LLC i 1 A COLO JOINT VENTURE C/O LOWELL MEYER 520 E COOPER 616 E HYMAN AVE PO BOX 1247 ASPEN, CO 81611 ! ASPEN, CO 81611 !ASPEN, CO 81612-1247 it I i l GOFEN ETHEL CARO TRUSTEE GONE WEST LLC GOODING SEAN A 80%&RICHARD L 20% 455 CITY FRONT PLAZA 1 401 W CENTER CHICAGO, IL 60611 SEARCY,AR 721451406 � C/O PARAGON RANCH INC 620 E HYMAN AVE#1E !ASPEN, CO 81611 GREENWAY COMPANY INC GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES , HIMAN LLC PARTNERS LLC I PO BOX 6159 666 TRAVIS ST#100 SHREVEPORT, LA 71101 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD#2222 SWANBOURNE WA 6010 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 AUSTRALIA, HOPKINS DEV LLC HORSEFINS LLC HUNTER PLAZA ASSOCIATES LLP 345 PARK AVE 33RD FLR 601 E HOPKINS AVE 205 S MILL ST#301A NEW YORK, NY 10154 j ASPEN, CO 81611 ;ASPEN,CO 81611 JARDEN CORPORATION , JENNE LLP j JOSHUA&CO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS 2381 EXECUTIVE CENTER DR 1510 WINDSOR RD ! ; LLC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 . AUSTIN,TX 77402 ! 300 S HUNTER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 I ' LCT LP i JOYCE EDWARD ' LUCKYSTAR LLC 1310 RITCHIE CT j TENNESSEE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP PO BOX 7755 PO BOX 101444 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60610 NASHVILLE,TN 37224-1444 MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP ' MARTELL BARBARA MASON &MORSE INC 317 SIDNEY BAKER S#400 1 702 E HYMAN AVE 514 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 8161 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 KERRVILLE,TX 78028 , I MCMURRAY WILLIAM&HELEN MIA()SANDRA MORRIS ROBERT P 129 MIDDLE HEAD RD 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN 600 E HOPKINS AVE STE 304 MOSMAN NSW 2088 VIENNA,VA 22182 ASPEN, CO 81611 I AUSTRALIA, 1 NATTERER HELEN MYSKO BOHDAN D 67 BAYPOINT CRES NIELSON COL STEVE&CAROL D 615 E HOPKINS 501 S FAIRFAX OTTAWA ONTARIO ASPEN, CO 81611 CANADA K2G6R1, ALEXANDRIA,VA 22314 Ij ' label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery®5160/8160 STAPCESi Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery®5160/8160 I . 0918/0915®h.lanv Dane alglledwoo mu L9 x au gZ leWJol ap a11013 0q1,8/091.go Monv Om alglledwoo„8/9 Z x„L azls lagel 0S3 015 iNONNIE LLC 10LITSKY TAMAR&STEPHEN , P&L PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 565 ; 1P0 BOX 514 , 101 S 3RD ST#360 ;ASPEN, CO 81612 . GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 : I GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 1 I i CENTER CONDO OWNERS !ASSOC ,PITKIN COUNTY BANK 80% i REVOLUTION PARTNERS LLC 1517 W NORTH ST 534 E HYMAN AVE PO BOX 1247 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ; ;ASPEN, CO 81612 ROTHBLUM PHILIP&MARCIA RUST TRUST I RUTLEDGE REYNIE 40 EAST 80 ST#26A 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD#760 151 COUNTRY CLUB CIR NEW YORK, NY 10075 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 ' SEARCY,AR 72143 SCHNITZER KENNETH L&LISA L ;SHUMATE MARK SILVER DIP EQUITY VENTURE LLC 2100 MCKINNEY AVE#1760 : ',1695 RIVERSIDE RD 2100 MCKINNEY STE 1760 DALLAS,TX 75201 : I ROSWELL, GA 30076 DALLAS,TX 75201 ' SJA ASSOCIATES LLC ,SNOWMASS CORPORATION , STERLING TRUST COMP 418 E COOPER AVE#207 PO BOX 620 2091 MANDEVILLE CYN RD • ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 1 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 I I ; ' STEWART TITLE CO C/O JENNIFER SCHUMACHER SWEARINGEN WILLIAM F TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS CO 450 CONWAY MANOR DR NW ; 602 E HYMAN#201 TAYLORSVL LE, NC 28681 'll ATLANTA, GA 303273518 I ASPEN, CO 81611 . 1 TENNESSEE THREE I TENNESSEE THREE RENTALS C/O J H COBLE THOMPSON ROSS&LYNETTE PO BOX 101444 i 5033 OLD HICKORY BLVD ' 1 1502 GREYSTONE DR I !NASHVILLE,TN 37224-1444 : CARBONDALE, CO 81623 NASHVILLE,TN 37218-4020 1 I � TOMKINS FAMILY TRUST TREUER CHRISTIN L 1 TROUSDALE JEAN VICK 520 E COOPER AVE#209 981 E BRIARWOOD CIR N ! 611 E HOPKINS AVE j ASPEN, CO 81611 I ; I LITTLETON, CO 80122 �ASPEN, CO 81611 i1 ' I VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC ' WAVO PROPERTIES LP ; ; i WEIDEL LAWRENCE W 1 418 E COOPER AVE#207 512 1/2 E GRAND AVE#200 ! • ! PO BOX 1007 ':,ASPEN, CO 81611 ; DES MOINES, IA 50309-1942 MONROE, GA 30655 • WISE JOSEPH I WOLF LAWRENCE G TRUSTEE 1WOODS FRANK J III 1320 HODGES ST I 11 22750 WOODWARD AVE#204 1 205 S MILL ST#301A I RALEIGH, NC 27604-1414 1 ; FERNDALE, MI 48220 �ASPEN, CO 81611 ,. ! label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery®5160/8160 STAPLES"'' Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery®5160/8160 0919/0915®tianV Dane algltedwoa ww L9 x ww gZ}ewao}ap ananbl13 �S3�dtl1S 091-8/091-9®Many tip algO. dwo „8/g g x G azls lapel WRIGHT CHRISTOPHER N ! YERAMIAN CHARLES REV TRUST 13 BRAMLEY RD PO BOX 12347 , LONDON W10 6SP UK, ', j ASPEN, CO 81612 { ( • i I I I I I I I • • • • • d .e label size 1"x 2 5/8"compatible with Avery®5160/8160 STAPLES Etiquette de format 25 mm x 67 mm compatible avec Avery®5160/8160