The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20011024ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AGENDA October 24, 2001 REGULAR MEETING 5:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 12:00 Site Visits: 232 W. Main, Christmas Inn 5:00 I. Roll Call II. Public Comments III. Commission member comments IV. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) 5:15 V. Project Monitoring: A. 935 E. Cooper - Amendments to approved design 52) AL t..f-I VI. Old Business: ;:30 A. 409 E. Hyman Avenue - Minor Review (Public Hearing continued from September 263 00--1147 2.4/4. / 0, Puct 1-Â¥ 6. / 6:00 B. 735 W. Bleeker/106 N. 7~ - Minor Review, Final Review, and Variances, Public Hearing (Continue to November 28) VII. New Business: 6:00 ~ A. 718 W. Hallam Street - Variance, Public Hearing 912,7,16 7-0 6:20 B. 232 W. Main - Minor and Conceptual Review, Public Hearing 7:20 VIII. Worksession: A. Revised Historic Preservation ordinance 7:45 IX. Adjourn EXHIBIT-~1 9 54- L ( coo Ds-/ l - -*di_ allinaL 1 I - .U I <> - F'Mi 9 10 -*B /A~~e ,~-0 Iam' - -- - 1-Ji 11011 --1 1Â£31 â€ž -- X41 'mm -, 942 5 ,/IÂ« = -..IX x- ccIK-__au-J 1 - 31.- .lay ...... . mall- *4* al,ILLJIII 10 -am 0 9<EÂ·Â·-kgÂ·e. k|0rr#-w /14711 1>7111 1/,~JA i-Ill--lill- ... ff.M .. .. *9 1...."- ~e~T- .IN -ATO -#- .m ,~leâ€¢ aÂ¤ -I - 00 dap + k ATMI - r&/77 :=r Illlll 2-1/4 2,Â°94' nPEr-5-z8 c r- - u,=-m// *-Lj T 4,0 AM 84 - 111 ....\..............-.............. 1 1 1 1 1-1 - 11 L_,1 i 1 7 + -T- -*TOO -IJ - -7- ./.13 . , 1 \ 1~ 0 E =1 2 EAee-1- *u- 1 61111, C .. .. mal'RI' MAN glill.Ull Te -alli *-I ' A 1 LY 1 1 1245 + 1 61*1114 ' El' 1 ~ 17\+1_ 7- III 1 7--*-- 11~1 :/ -4- r 1 1 1 *rr,â€¢â€¢m //,0/U'/"e Uâ€¢Te 7-2 1 "a'a'.zz . -ITIU -1 ",0/m~ O 44&%86'7. '61 11 , e e 1- I. 1-, . r.[r -1-1 1Â· Â· Â· Â· i - -- 7 79 1 . 1 4 8 E i Iii 1 1 1 2 7 0 -_Â¥ --00 ./- 1 1111111.11 --Ill 1 1 1 *1â€¢~1- APâ€¢â€¢n-r INIT, IM. /3- 0 --- --- 4 7.-4 0 1792-0 4,914214 1/ 11 '271 '910 r - - jA MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Anne Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Directorj~<D FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 409 E. Hyman Avenue - Minor Review, Public Hearing DATE: October 24, 2001 (continued from September 26, 2001) SUMMARY: This non-historic structure is located within the Commercial Core Historic District. The applicant requests HPC approval to remodel the front fa*ade. APPLICANT: Birkwood Associates, owner; represented by Wedum and Associates LOCATION: 409 E. Hyman, the west 16' of Lot C, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: The property is zoned "CC, Commercial Core," with a historic district overlay. MINOR DEVELOPMENT No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.B.4) are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percents the Historic Preservation Commission may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units. 1 Response: The proposal involves removing the existing exterior materials, redesigning the storefront and upper floor windows and cladding the building with new materials. Some open porches on the rear of the building are to be enclosed. This building currently does not contribute to the historic character of the downtown in that it does not reflect any of the proportions or features typical of the 19th century buildings in the area. Remodeling this building is a good idea to the extent that its relationship to the neighborhood can be improved. At the September 26th meeting, the architect presented a revised design to respond to the comments in the staff memo. The board was generally in favor of the direction of the project, but asked for restudy on the following points: 1) make the wall surface on the upper floor as flat a plane as possible, 2) use materials which are more in scale and character with the surrounding buildings than the proposed stone tiles, 3) carry the columns shown on the upper floor down to meet the ground, 4) make the upper floor windows more vertical in proportion, 5) set the storefront parallel to the street, and 6) add mullions to the glass storefront to reflect the typical division of a historic storefront into a kickplate, display window, and transom. Unfortunately, staff finds that only issues 1 and 5 (assuming entry plan option "B" is selected) have been addressed. Instead of reflecting the scale and character of brick, which is the predominant material used on downtown buildings, the primary wall surface is flat stucco. There is a heavy beltcourse that runs above the storefront that is not a typical detail. The upper floor columns still float over the ground floor. The windows on the second story, while vertically proportioned in terms of each individual unit, still have a horizontal character because of the way they are arranged in a band across the front of the building. There is no wall surface breaking the windows apart, and a significant blank wall surface above the windows. No changes have been made to the storefront to address the comments made at the previous meeting. Staff and HPC have discussed with the applicant the fact that the goal is not to copy adjacent buildings but to reflect their fundamental characteristics. Progress has been made in terms of the architect's proposal to reflect the typical first floor height and to use details such as a decorative cornice. The character of the upper floor in particular though is problematic. Overall, staff does not find that the project meets this design review standard or the design guidelines. The language from the guidelines that was included in the September 24~h memo must be restated: "The street level features of traditional Aspen commercial buildings are clearly distinguishable from the upper floors. First floors are predominantly fixed plate glass with a small percentage of opaque materials. Upper floors are the reverse; opaque materials dominate, and windows appear as smaller openings puncturing the solid walls. These windows are usually double-hung. " 2 0././ %. - 7 6 -6Â·.4 1 - L./. - . ,Â·IR'-.1.-/- %./. 4 â€žu A:./.*: i 1:72.-Â£=. It-&-;cbm. L.i=~C 19Â·*447~ t 9 *gai . e t.'-'Â·-**'1- -â‚¬*Mi.*IM*i'"'pâ€¢ 1,44 1 1 2 1 Â¢'Â· ,,#-Â·Â«-'1 -GLe,yl'.1611440%6*4 F.c.654:1*y.fitikrLE/"flit,~.M./Sitill" 9409/Ni Â¥i 1 1., i . ..Â·t-1 1%*Ii/MEZ - - r " .. 1, ..1 -1/ 1 1 : F ./ 1 11 ... If l. %,1 ~1 ... (:11 1. Lf '11 . l.32-162 L.0 ' it fl Â·Â· 6 !1-1.Â·V:Â·' 1 I . - (ffjfjiGURN**7614%* .-1 f:.Â·s44*Â£,AIGA~ ~i % Lit n , i . 4- ; 3 1' : /9 A r . V I 7 + 1 .... 4 al - 1 ~~k 2.=:', 4.Eial=.1.42-, 1 -r. Â£==-7- 61.â€žsm.=UeetÂ·,Uâ€¢~j** Example of similarly sized historic building Proposal for 409 E. Hyman Relevant guidelines: 13.17 Maintain the distinction between the street level and the upper floor. o The first floor of the primary facade should be predominantly transparent glass. o Upper floors should be perceived as being more opaque than the street level. Upper story windows should have a vertical emphasis. o Highly reflective or darkly tinted glass is inappropriate. o Express the traditional distinction in floor heights between street levels and upper levels through detailing, materials and fenestration. The presence of a belt course is an important feature in this relationship. 13.15 Contemporary interpretations of traditional building styles are encouraged. o A contemporary design that draws upon the fundamental similarities among historic buildings without copying them is preferred. This will allow them to be seen as products o f their own time and yet be compatible with their historic neighbors. o The literal imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. o In essence, infill should be a balance of new and old in design. Staff recommends that the mullions previously requested for the storefront be added and that entry plan option "B" be required, that the heavy stone beltcourse above the storefront be eliminated, that the material on the upper fioor be brick, that the upper floor windows be restudied so that there be some wall surface that divides the individual units, that the cornice be lowered so that it is not perched on top of the building, but instead provides some detail to the upper wall, and that the columns be carried to the ground. Staff has no concerns with the proposed alterations at the back o f the building. 3 b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The proposal, when in compliance with the guidelines, has the potential to enhance the character of the neighborhood,Â· as it will be replacing a fagade which is out of character with the historic district. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: The proposal will not affect the significance of any designated structure. d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposal will not impact the architectural integrity of any designated structure. ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any of the following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the application as submitted. i â€¢ Approve the application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. â€¢ Table action to allow the applidant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) â€¢ Deny approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC continue the minor development application for 409 E. Hyman with the following direction: 1. Restudy the storefront. It should include some opaque elements, such as a kick plate and "heavier" window frame system. Entry doors should be parallel to the street as in entry option "B." 2. The upper floor windows should be punched openings into a more solid wall surface. 3. The wall surface should be predominantly a flat, masonry surface. 4. Remove the heavy stone beltcourse above the storefront. 5. The top of the cornice should align with the top of the existing building, not be perched on top of it. 6. C~ the columns to the groundi 4 . REVISED APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF REMODEL FRONT AND BACK MINOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION HISTORIC RIVIEW 409 EAST HYMAN October I 0,2001 Prepared By: WEDUM & ASSOCIATES Arch. & Development 101 Independence Place Aspen, CO 81611 970-925-1961 WEDUM - - ... 0 - -. .-0 ARCHITECT & ASSOCIATES ~ 101 Independence Mace Jâ€¢ Aspen. Co. 81611 ' Phone: 303-925-1961 Fax: 303-923-8454 REVISED - DISCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REMODEL October 10, 2001 The intent of the Applicant is to remodel the exterior fagde of the building on 409 East Hyman Street, Aspen, Colorado. The building has an existing double : arch brick fag(ie, which is not historic. The curtain wall behind is all anodized aluminum with glass for the entire front, which goes up two stories with no break for the floor. The owner wants to remove the false brick fa~ade and replace the existing curtain wall with a new store front on the main level, with a recessed entry for the upper tenant. The owner would prefer the angled entry wall as shown on drawing A-6 noted as Entry Plan "A". The second entry for the main level store will be where the existing door is. The rest o f the front is store front glass, which the owner would like to make into one piece, as it is only 6 feet wide and 8 feet tall, which is the size of a normal bay window. The fagade will be flanked with pitched faced stone on the end of the structural walls about 12" wide The upper level glass curtain wall will be replaced with 3' operable units on each side, above the doors below and a central window divided into three lights above the bay window display below. The entire metal frame for windows, canopy and cornice are finished with sealed rusted skee[ finish. The upper floor of the building will de done in synthetic plaster, to go with the color of the stone fafade columns. The second element is the canopy, which goes out flat from the building with a grill on top of the frame coming out 3.75 feet. The grill is steel with 37 holes coated with pre-finished plastisol coating. It is supported with metal brlickets at the ends, and hung on stainless steel cables in the middle bay. The final element is a decorative cornice, which is made to match the canopy with brace brackets and stainless steel cab14 holding up a grill that is the same as the canopy. REVISED - DISCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REMODEL October 10, 2001 2 On the back of the building at the alley the existing covered, and partially walled area which is now used for storage, is going to be enclosed. This will clean up the existing unfinished walls and cover up the clutter of storage and cleaning equipment left out on these areas now. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS BY STAFF AND H.P.C. MEETING SEPTEMBER 26, 1961 1. H.P.C. board were concerned by the 12" x12" tile look of the fa~ade. The stone tiles of the upper level have been replaced with plaster on the entire front to solidify the upper level. This also simplifies the design. 2. H.P.C. was concerned with the bay window now being divided lights. The upper bay window has been broken into three bays, which accents the vertical, as requested by the board. 3. H.P.C. was concerned with the fa~ade being short but limited by the physical ceiling height. The front glass store front has been raised visibly by adding a glass section above the doors to 11 feet for signage on the glass, and eliminating the canopy hanging down with the rounded ends. The canopy now creates a belt course as a feature in the fagade relationship to maintain the distinction between the street level and the upper floor, as requested. 4. The H.P.C. board recommended that the fagade be brought forward and are on the same plane. The store front has been brought forward as far as possible, about 10" for the original curtain walllocation. The stone and the plaster are at the front property line and are virtually on the same plane as possible. 5. The question arose about having a kick plate at the base of the front. As half of the front is glass doors, and the middle window section is only 6 feet wide, the owner feels that it is not appropriate to stick one on, as it breaks up the entry into the store and does not relate. The owner feels that we are trying interpret the main similarities of elements of historic structures, without coping them. We are not trying to do a literal imitation of the older historic style but to complement them, in their main proportions and elements. 1 1 .t f-~1--7 ----L~~ -1- --0-I.--- 4- -=ft,4-=- 1.rt- - - - IL CANOPY PLAN 4 <' t -1 L UP I .... . 1 .. - 1 - 1..9 1 - . I I. ./ 1 -=Â£1 1 61 1 4 . A. 11 , 44 , 4. 0 4 - ./ . 41 . 1 . 1~ i; 11 1 L 1 11 11 11 1 l 1 ENTRY PLAN ENTRY PLAN#"A" & CANOPY SCALE 14" = 1'- 0" A-6 11Â®111112 1 7 -1 1 , - It. ' f. . UPI - . .7 . 'DN Â·~ ' - /~1 2.. . . L 1 t.A.222 1. C . 11 . . 1.4 46 . .4 . 4 .. 1 ./ a 1/1 11 11 1 11 1 -+1 11. 1 ----7~-----1 LI ENTRY PLAN ENTRY PLAN OPTION"B" SCALE K" = 1'- 0" A-6 1 1 9,3,---'%Â· T ' T 1 1 , 1 -1 ...#J'.- --'-- '-'-I hy..9. .-~ .,-V .= - 1:A- 413. ... 3: 1 1 -Pr, ~ Â·Â·Â· ~ Â· ... / ... 4.2 <> f 7.7 . 1 : 1/Fi ' d i/ \ 4. ~ CS: i ,?: 1.#AÂ·-4 2 kk 2, I .j 14 Â· .-I . -..A iÂ»J. gallÂ».25*623, ESIEÂ·,2._Â«3 03 ~ l/.// @42,~ 4Â§~64. //,4 / ,/: I- 7Â·,/ 7 ~ lib 1 , 11 1 /1 1 117: / .' /./i' t,ft i :/ i l 1 1 11 1. 1 4 L.,Â£ f / 3/// / i.r , 1 ! 11 , / Â»-L :Â· I ' , l '' 1 ' ViI +1 . U 1: /' 141 f; / ieÂ·A . i f'. FRONT ELEVATION FRONT FACADE SCALE 1/2 = 1'- 0" A-7 i...11 Â·Â·-~ i ~ill MA: FIHISHES OF FACADE 409 EAST HYMAN NOTES: 1. PITCHED FACED STONE 2. SMOOTH STONE CAP 3. SYNTHETIC PLASTER 4. 4'X 4'STEEL TUBE SUPPORT RUSTED AND SEALED 5. Z'X Z'STEEL TUBE BRACHET RUSTED AND SEALED 6. OPERABLE STEEL FRAME WINDOW FRAME RUSTED AND SEALED 7. FIXED STEEL FRAME WINDOW FRAME RUSTED AND SEALED 8. STAINLESS STEEL CABLE 9. PERFORATED METAL GIRILL WITH M' DIA. HOLES-WITH PLASTISOL HEAT-FUSED FINISH OR EQUAL 10. 2'X 2'TUBE STEEL TUBE BRACKET RUSTED AND SEALED 11. 4'X 4'STEEL TUBE SUPPORT RUSTED AND SEALED 12. M' GLASS CURTAIN WALL WITH STEEL FRAME-RUSTED & SEALED 13. FRAMLESS GLASS DOORS, TYP. WITH BASE LOCK PLATE 14. CUSTOM STEEL DOOR HANDLE RUSTED AND SEALED 0 t 1 /3. : U LI U L 4 -1,Â· 7 1.../1 2, .~112& 9.7~ \ ~ 1 I.-4 2, 1 1// M lu-6 /0. S #* h / .I..4 ' .1 1. / 25 1 1 2 *1 A A ./ni â€¢i â€¢ 1. 811 li 0 N. t. - ./.. if ~/,y,4 1. ///1 /0 1 2-4-j , . . 1 1 FRON-1- SECTION SECTION OF FRONT FACADE SCALE K" = 1'- 0" An ~ 4 j ~ 1 '1.11( .I[J ~ .- --Â·-------- - ------- - ---------Â·----Â· --- ~ 800 237 3820 Mi .1 JI{31 iE)M!~ ui,g-j ~ I Perforated Metal 1 I Hound Hole IMustrations I "24 1-loin Stock Shipment!" (PSI - Per Square Inch) (C)/A ()pen Amd) .. I .... 0 0 0 .... RA~La~--I_I-_â€¢ ] 1/Â·1 ulamele, 5/16' Slaggeted Centels 020 .1,:i Flange.ted (Â·irs 011 rlia Slimght line I.Its 3/32 dia 5/32 Staggefed cos 3/32 (lia 3/16 Sla.Jge,ed i.lts 12 holes PSI 58 '. O/A 714 1.,les PSI 224 0/A 400 1Â»11-.1 151 11 21 0/A .17 holes PSI '13Â°: 0/A 32 holes PSI 23'19 0/A . .......................5. ...................... . ... ... .... lilli ........................ - a. .-. .. .....................- 1/4 <11,1 1,8 41;,ilit,jip,1,1, 6 5/16 (lia //lf) ' 51,44,Â·iÂ· d f ", 015 dia S laggeN,rl (Â·lis 0,15 'di:, Slfinghl line i In 117 dianueli 5/32 Staggeled cenlers t,5 holtÂ·:. PS I Â·11 ', l,Â·A 1 7211,,les PSI 28'. 0/A 2 1() 11(,leÂ·: 1':31 .11" , C)/,N Â·li 11,11,Â·s PSt 51% O/A ................. LIS1 1 . 0 .J Pacle 3/ . . .1 348" (Ita 1/2~ Slriggered ct'Â·, 3/8' All 1 9/16' Stagge/th| Ofs ----2--~-r~LE _ _tr~n-i.t~Zrzr2 1/16 dia 3/32" Slaggered cbs 1/16 dia 7/64' Staggered clis 1'8 dia 3/16 Slagge,3,1 clfs WEB dia 1,1 Staggered clfs 5 lunes Pbt 52to (WA 4 holes PSI 44) 'u U#A 132 holes PSI 41Â°/0 0/A 9/ holes 144110% 0/A .1 3 holes PSI '10' r O/A 18 5 lu;les *31 21% 0/A ..... ..... 0 . ..................1 .. lilli . . :.:::::::::.:::: .... ., .... ......... 92' dia 11)16" Stagge,ect Clis 528" dia 7/8 Staggeted clus 1/16 ' dia 1/8" Slaggeted cbs. 5/61' elia 7/61" Slaqgeted 4 Ps 9,64"dia 3/16 Staggeierl c lis 5/32 dia .1/16' Staggered , 1,9 2 5 holes PSI 4810 0/A 1 5 holes PSI 46" t.),A /5 holes PSI 23Â°/0 0/A 91 1,â€žles PSI dir/, 0/A 51'. 0/A 31 holes PSI 63% O/A 2........... . ..1 L., -1 5,6.1 dia 1/8' Staggered cars 083" dia 1/8" Stacige,ed i Ii. 3/16 ' dia 1/Â·t Staggmed (:Its 15 holes PSI 360 0 0/A 7,1 br,les /"4' Â·1 I ' ,: c WA 18 luilip; Phi 51)11,1 (DA 121,<,le< i" It?''c {)/A 3/16 dia 5/16 Shqi(]Ple,| (.Ip; ~~ -=_ - 1 ),11: to 1,111)!ing If,(ll]11,)111(:Ills, patternÂ·; 111,7 lu,1 1)'Â· .1' bird 1 1 1/,1' iii.i I ~ St,iuq,i/,1 ' 1,4 1" iIi,1 1 1/Â·1 Slagge,1,1 i le; ~~ 1 1 M iles PSI fi l "q, C HA At I,+ 1It~s PSI 5/KL (/A .... ...... ...... ...... IN//Wfid - fle. . 4 . I :390..frf w I t ...4, , f. t 41 .... '4' I Â¢ Eet,4), 34#. 40 . \*31:.90< . 36 -- 40.97Â»1.-~ . 4 **325Â«130Â»1 RU :-:7 K i N'j/S G; Â°1'E 4 0 >4-Â· **41%3J . . t. i ft fl L . C , 31 '1& - A ---#7 ..r- 4 ' 7 .1 ) 7 rn__, 4Â¥00+1 1 rb>j=3i~*.-i i. /4//AT--1.tiTUATI -c - -3*~*~2.., ' I -3.94 4 Â·-i; cu!-5 ,Â¥:r , .1, I. . n. , 9 0/7 =Tr *eÂ« 92 Â£3Aa; .-.24 40 C..9 .-7 V , I .r *Evil D . 4&1 -42 Â»NÂ· Â· 22 44& :iii}iiiiii t f,1 Xy.it . t mi' I - 1.- ./'ll/...-.'*../....'I'.I-/....=Ill ~ L , ,Â·Â·..5*.â€ž4613~â€ž',,f##,â€žt: â€ž*01 (flihtleW.KiE &< k.-r : .*.. . r .-9 - E ~44. ~lia] .* 4 ..6 ,-Â· ' Â·--i. 1 - Â· - J ./- 1 V Â«19 . '21.-. 1.4, Ul â€¢ i A . Afed.Siesti:'d %31 17: L: Fm *40 4 atgh -4 0 .- . /4,1.,4 1,1 ..1.t''A'. , #/.-t:* I.45:2 4-- V: , 4/4,2 n 440 00<fe. . ''fig . 44&2â‚¬8.:isi*4 0 .%, 0 - , u L .1 L. 1.2 4. . .10:' ' 1 4 '-Il I ..p +rfÂ· - . :,Fiet:546 444%Â· . ,~42â€¢;2444*,4~,4, 4 , i44!44 . A L.9.9... , A --Â¥ ***4:':4; '' ':4,;4,0:44 44423,; E#,2,%%*S - , ,~ 4744;92,4/4 - #02%08:01 .024; 044'.0.0.1.0.9 494:>-..:@44 :~ A 4%3 3 :i 3 1% r. 411 - ....0. ./.0 9,05*1* .'W'*,U.r, 4'000'0400'040 , t{. 1 . 31>.AR ,~,1 ..,1 .,1, 0,#'.0: " ...1 1.' ' .. . ./. ' ,.. le ~ . 444* 0,0. , t i. 191.4, . . 0 .L ....., + *Â£'C'' . 44 1/r 4*4:iF ... la / 1 10'rn .1. ''iÂ·'' iÂ·,1,1 1 te -1 t: ; Cif 0 :- a - 1,1 :C $ AMâ€¢'*VE= . 1 t '- / i f..4 V. m . :/2.. .f#.* *X p , i 1,F 1.,4 + I - 2 4 *08:'ll.,1,15'.., '32 61*4*#/6401-e ''Â· '. ' ~ 43 - 96~'~4--:.-'1*t' 1 3% 0 # Â·:.' 1.''* . r- r Â· :..Â·'w~ta 'Â· 'El,-3 42. f â€¢ O.44 .9#% 1 . '3~ 1/Ill. 2 :t 71 ,"-AR 1 ./ il .412.&-6,~2-9' 4. p ~ ..t ' 31!9 1,1, . -grin-4. MEMORANDUM 0 TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning DirectordAX) Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Christina Amato, Planning Intern DATE: October 24, 2001 RE: Residential Design Standard Variance for 718 W. Hallam Street SUMMARY: The subject property is a 9,000 square foot lot in the R.-6 zone district. The applicant requests a variance from the Residential Design Standards related to "fences." The applicant is proposing to replace the 42 inch high fence in the front yard with a fence 48 inches high, of similar wood materials, to contain their dogs and discourage bears. The "fences" standard requires that all fences, hedgerows and plane boxes in the front fÂ®ade, forward area of the house be 42 inches or less from natural grade. 6 APPLICANT: Linda and Nelson Gordman, represented by Larry Rather. The application is included as Exhibit A. LOCATION: 718 W Hallam Street, Cekovsky Condominiums, Lots O, P, Q, and the eastern 3 feet ofN, Block 16, Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: R-6. SITE DESCRIPTION: The proposed project site contains a historic building with two dwelling units on a 9,000 square foot R-6 lot I. Residential Design Standards Waiver Requested: The following text and graphic are applicable excerpts from the Residential Design Standards. Fences. Fences, hedgerows and planter boxes shall not be more than forty-two inches (42") high, measuredfrom natural grade, in atl areas forward ofthefrontfagade of the house. Man-made berms are 0 1 prohibited in the front yard setback. The site plan does not meet the Residential Design Standards because the proposed fence is over 42" in height. REVIEW STANDARDS AND STAFF EVALUATION: Pursuant to Section 26.222, in order to authorize a variance from the Residential Design Standards, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall make a finding that the following three (3) circumstances exist. The proposed building does not comply with the following design standard: Fences, hedgerows and planter boxes shall not be more than forty-two inches(42") high, measured from natural grade, in all areas forward of thefront fagade of the house. Man-made berms are prohibited in the front yard setback. In response to the review criteria for a DRAC variance, Staff makes the following findings: 1. Standard: The granting of the variance is in greater compliance with the goals ofthe AACP; or, Response: The granting of the variance will not allow the property greater compliance with the AACP. Fences 42" or shorter, as required by code, are more in keeping with the AACP goals because of the positive, pedestrian scale given to the Aspen streetscape and historic buildings. 2. Standard: The granting of the variance is a more effective method of addressing standard in question; or, Response: The granting of the variance is not an effective method of addressing the "fence" standard, as the standard's principles are in place to ensure the preservation of the essential elements to the character of the Aspen streetscape and the pedestrian relationship to these structures. 3. Standard: The granting of the variance is clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. Response: The granting of the variance is not necessary for reasons of fairness as there are no unusual site or case specific constraints. 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Residential Design Standard variance request for an increase of (6) six inches, to allow a (48) forty- eight inch high fence rather than a (42) forty-two inch high fence, be denied finding that the Review Standards have not been met. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. , Series of 2001, approving a variance from the residential design standards to allow for a fence to be constructed in the front yard setback to a height of (48) forty-eight inches above natural grade at Cekovsky condominium complex, located at 718 W. Hallam Street, Lots O, P, Q and the East 3" ofN; Block 16. " ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Application 3 Resolution No. _ (SERIES OF 200Ij RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS FOR"FENCES", TO ALLOW FOR A FENCE TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO A HEIGHT OF FORTY-EIGHT INCHES IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, ON THE LOTS O, P, Q AND THE EAST 3' OF N, BLOCK 16, 718 W. HALLAM STREET, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735-124-24-007 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Linda and Nelson Gordman, owners, represented by Larry Rather of Mountain Ranch Management, for a variance from the Residential Design Standards for the Lots O, P, Q and the East 3' of Lot N, Block 16, 718 W. Hallam Street; and, WHEREAS, the property located at 718 W Hallam Street is a 9,000 square foot, located in the R-6 Zone District, and currently contains a two unit condominium complex; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.410.020 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Community Development Department staff reviewed the applicant's application for compliance with the Residential Design Standards of Section 26.410.040 ofthe Aspen Municipal Code and found the submitted development application to be inconsistent with Standard 26.410.040(B)(1), Fences, ofthe Aspen Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Section 26.410.020(C) ofthe Aspen Municipal Code provides that if an application is found by Community Development Department staffto be inconsistent with any item of the Residential Design Standards, the applicant may either amend the application or appeal staff s findings to the Design Review Appeal Board pursuant to Chapter 26.222, Design Review Appeal Board; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, also serving as the Design Review Appeals Committee: Section 1 'l'hat a proposed variance for the replacement of a fence more than 42" in height maximum to a height of 48"in the front yard setback at 718 W. Hallam Street, Aspen, Colorado, is approved pursuant to Section 26.410.040(B)(1),Fences, of the Residential Design Standards. Section 2 All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Historic Preservation Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3 '1'his resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior approvals. Section 4 lf any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on October 24,2001. APPROVED AS TO FORM: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION: City Attorney Suzzanah Reid, Chair ATTEST: City Clerk g:\home\saraho\planningidrac\309nthird 2 ~-r LAND USE APPLICATION <1 1 PROJECt: Name.Â· 2.ada- w /76/300 Gord #07 0,4 \ ~ 1=kon. -7/ f U eat lk/la,n (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) APPLICANT: 1 , Nmet ,<, n do~- dord ,n 44 - f -3 A- Address: tO111 06 4 6006[4~et or,*4~ ng 63/5 2 p~Â°ne#Â· 1/01-3-7/ -2100 990 9#57- 5--3-6 -3 j LESENTATIVE: Name: 14 2 e a Ruhz-R- Add=ss. /00-4- fkJAr 1,). Ce/lonch/e- CO A23 pune*Â·. 930 963 6.200 9 10 3 79 20 F 9 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Conditional Use U Conceptual PUD Q Conceptual Historic Devt. Special Review ~ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) U Final Historic Development Design Review Appeal El Conceptual SPA El Minor Historic Devt. 4 GMQS Allotment ~ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) C] Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption U Subdivision U Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ~ Subdivision Exemption (includes U Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane El Lot Split U Temporary Use ~ Other: El Lot Line Adjustment El Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) "Extit,3 41 'l 4011 r X y I-edar Fcc re +, /reaft V PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) fernorn 12 -}Â» U. Ance . re-D)61,Le. Go,/A ity" AN Ance. 6 9 ' A oek r, 1 '\ p ~reet Ljot Â»te:+ a,Cle_Janare#e-Jo -u" 4-/.161 3044)61,5,4 e Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ 4 ~ Pre-Application Conference Summary A ~ Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement AC~ Response to Attachment #2, Dimensional Requirements Form El Response to Attachment #3, Minimum Submission Contents El Response to Attachment #4, Specific Submission Contents Â£ Response to Attachment #5, Review Standards for Your Application C]CIE]kclm ATTACHMENT 5 202 ' Review Standards: Design Review Appeal Committee I.... ./%/- 1Â· 2 ip-: I-*%0L// The following standards shall be used by the Design Review Appeal Committee when considering ~t~0,,/,/ granting a variance from the "Residential Design Standards." Please explain, in writing, how your project meets one of the following: ky A. The proposed design yields greater compliance with the goals of the Aspen area Community Plan (AACP); or, B. The proposed design more effectively addresses the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to; or, C. The proposed design is clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. reapanc~~ Ah) c /~ e /7- 27ee 03 4/ 6 con 4-uj n Jo~s o A J# 4,1 cour 046 e. ArÂ¥ )tut 44;1064 ) ir (16 i Â® i8, f) ea-4 enel mi 4 kik r )-j h 4(AÂ· 6-di 4/no n . 0 Â£48 4 41+A Ed L 41 r C r Linda Gordman OMAHA ' ASPEN 10777 North 60~ Street 718 West Hallam Omaha NE 68152 Aspen CO 81611 402 571 2200 970925 5563 402 572 8314 FAX 970 925 1209 FAX 4 9/17/01 , Mr. Greg Woods Community Development Department City of Aspen 130 S. Galena . , Aspen CO 81611 1 Dear Mr. Woods: , 0 ' 1 I am the owner of the house at 718 West Hallam Street. Most of the property is bordered by a wood picket fence that is many decades old, with rotted posts and pickets, and in constant need of maintenance and repair. It is time to replace it with a new cedar picket fence, and I am eager to have it installed before the snow flies. I am requesting a permit and also a small variance - only 6" - for the heighâ‚¬ofthe fence at the front ofthe house on Hallam. I have two new 6 month old Australian Shepherd puppies that are already sailing over the existing 32" to 36" fence, but I am confident that 4 48" height will confine them to the yard. , ier t I am proposing a very open wood picket fence with 2 M" spacing between the pick:ets as opposed to the more typical 1 M" spacing. I also note that the line that the fence is on is over a foot lower than the street. Both the openness of the fence and the elevation differences ensure that my house will be very visible from the street. As I understand it, this visibility is the objective ofthe height restriction. I invite you, or someone from your department, to visit my house and confirm what I have stated. While I understand that this height restriction is only a few years old, I would like to call your attention to the fact that within a short walk from First Street to Seventh Street on Frances and Hallam, there 19 properties with fence heights exceeding 42", with most of them being solid fences with very limited visibility to the houses. e . They are at these locations: West Frances: 202 - 6', 210 - 6', 212 - 6', 303 - 6 14,2 corner 58 & Frances - 5', 612 - 4'; 733 - 6' West Hallam: 308 N. 1St - 7% NW comer Ist & Hallam - 12' hedge, 220 - 4 1/6'' 316 N. 214 - 6 W, 302 N. 2nd - 5 M', 300 - 5% 426 - 6% 501 - 6' to 7',506 - 6% 520 - 6% 307 N. 68 - 6',630 - 5 W I have authorized Larry Rather of Mountain Ranch Management, 1007 Fender Lane, Carbondale CO 81623, to act on my behalf. His phone is 379 2787. Frank Brumby of Brumby Services, P.O. Box 5916,Snowmass Village CO 81615, will also be available to answer questions and provide input. His phone is 920 3166. I can be reached at the Omaha address and phone (see letterhead) from now through Christmas. Thank you very much for your consideration of my request. Sincerely, UG) 4/. 9 0-7 600t.Â·co--~ Linda Gordman '1111111//-./- 1 .J-r- F--~--F---F---r--1--r--F---T--r .1 I 1 1 1 4 1 1 LI--1-1--.-- 1/I 41 1 1 1 /, 1 i 1 1- . ---4 --%- v Obc a.}44 ----rewca-__ /9~ocÂ»Â£: / j _ __ 1 fl'â‚¬\W- tic.-/lkin \ 11 1 1 1 Â· f 1 ! 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 '1 4 <1 It 1 1 20.1 5, / 1 9 1 --- -Li 1.7- X.-9.1" -X H_- ' --Gyii--fptre 4 - _Ce.29-r Mif_r_l.e --_r..u~4311.458,_4_1~/65-,w->~~3~ 4 72*0,{MPSâ‚¬fi%%*fâ‚¬ tÂ«At**E%,Al*49'<Attf f - --__. i 1 I '1'lizi 14~1~ .f ivaÂ«tu'it,Ui.. Vh~,prd#*Â·39Â·1Â· *.. rn; 1,1 41Â· '. 9 1 1 4 f ~ Ni f Â· j~09.%1'1~49~932%Â©~"."31<jli9~~Â·r.e //1 6 Â¢ 41 1 I i: f l.'. I V 2.-1 -1,7 1.---1.> .73.-(921-n'-72/ ~ ...04â€ž14 8 ...1 t.+9'.-* - 4-1- I . -1... . -t:)17>11~ l,~~~d-Litep,4-/1 - ~%2$~~~~ W.14 '44~617% 'L ~.*9 1~4 A. - ~Â»~ti~s#ft#444â€žÂ·fird(444 . ~~~~ ~ilt f ' i ,( DIF~' 1 ~vt .1 1 i .fi#/P'.07'1'(:tr'.P,Prk'*aur.',+., 4-,1 k i 4 $~t.6~'*M.~*'&~*--'."W#@t#Y~~3BTÂ£5 4' 4 '/ i, -Uk--- /.//-,: 'tÂ·,gi: 'ff r 1 0 It 11 l., 1 4/7 1 5'4Â·Â·102 ' i F:/111 , 8 14,Â£ f f , - At Â·,. .; f ~ lib 1 . 1 1 - ~, 1 1 1, '-it- 2 .- -- -...... , ....1 1 LV 111 1 It ' I ~ Iriu(/At 1 1 ' 1.11. 1 ' de*een __ /(42,>r i ...=..i-6.-}-. -- ''.'-- I J ......-- . if i i & 1 1 Iii I 1 1 9 \ 1 1 1 lilli. 1. , 1 Iii 1 1 f.r .tgoae.33-43.1,2322%3NF>1~11'..Â«2-.griÂ»;Â·mt- -Â· . 1 - C~=L---- W 1 42â€¢52.30-7.1.Â·.3Â·--1-Â«0-22-1-Â·Â·7.--5..F.fÂ·,2.-'AGE,Crit~y--â€¢i-IÂ· Â· te'Â·'~- -1 . O STORAGE SHED 0 1 Z I El 211 N 14Â°50 E 100.00 0 0 0 0 g I ' I -,wIC:.r--rv 4. C .-CLA;r~-*Â£1 U ,*6= ayjÂ¢>. g r ., " rr tr-n- &5 &3Â· i 2<1 SMALL CONIFERS 47/lit \2 -= 9-74 e U 11% 01 - -0 0 7. L 1-6 24 PORCH U' - C EF~7 18.2 1.7 /h 9 49% J .33 i 6 / 3 - f N WALK O m k. r CONC. ~ 4.6 ~ 14.3 1~2.8 13.5 4 CONC. 20.3 7 6 u'l ~ 4.5 0 WALK 39.3 - f Â·Â· 1 1 A m .2 PORCH 212â‚¬gN~9*; 7 1 r ,-4,4.- r 0 - 2 0 0 1 N 0-4 Ln r NO CA JO 0 ~~-- 0 I . en 0 P 1- Z CE- - r S 2 - 0 04 Â· .,.4 r. 27.3 A 1 Â· . 4 -1 W r--M I f.1 V S 14Â°50-49-W 100.00 FENCE LINE AGREEMENT BOOK 520. PAGE 642 =.=tl- 1 al r A \ p I 1 it . -Ii.UX =-z..0--â€¢Av.-edâ€¢Â·--eâ€¢1-*90.14-'f.. 6. :. ' xj- J Â· _ ~ c Unllâ‚¬F 94 3 ANHAV KV 77 V H 1 63!M PORCH 4 t Fe A (6 WAOW All 3 N33M138 SDN I 8Â¥38 30 S I SVe M. 11.6005Â£ N TRASH 93.00 [3 STORAGE ALLEY B~K 16 ;TORY CONDOM\NIUM ~ CONC ~ 5 75Â°09 11-E TIE WALL ~ CONC. ~ CONC. Buno 00 Â£6 9'01 12.9 CONC. 50.3 ft 11031 /4 - L , *~Aiket,1,22 - ai 2,6.*,27,2, m-mmg~28>12 am=LED-b-,--m=*WNI PUBLIC NOTICE i' DATE TIME , . \\ PLACE PURPOSE .1 4 9 Ii,Et?jek= '.21.23'IL')21%1=.L.â€¢Ibsin'd.Eywilthf.#L.Jek@113. r 'I -it'*44'.,cr I *I' .1 .BLIC NOTICE DATE / D/av TIME 6+ PLACE ,-30.53 e oct 78%-**054-*40+ PURPOSE Â£*A c- 0 tu 0 n JIJan dcud ~1Â£1221.Â£1_ F o r _Â£gge- Hei 9 h 11_ 44" A Ye" + *i 6 74 '0 FOR FURTHER INFORMAT . 0 -4Â«4 2 1 0 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 3 1 1 0. fc, 4, , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 0 0,4 al , 2001 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) L A nec / 244 A- (name, please print) being or represÂ¢ting an Applicant to the City ofAspen, 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 obtairied from the 9 and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not Â£~- Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least tga=6101=fray; prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the tr day of 08 r +- , 200 / , to and including the date and time of the public heaing. 'A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing ofnotice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(IE)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least ten (10) days prior tot~*:, public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepalâ‚¬1-~ U.S. mil to all owners ofproperty within three hundred (300) feet of the pr**y subject to the development application, and, at least fifteen (15) days prior to tli 1 8 0 public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class 2001 U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, schoor/FD_ 4* F EVELOPMENT service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns 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. 0 (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in 0 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 o f owners of real property in the area o f the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. f /rÂ¢33 l e 1-1 l_/te*=2 -- / The foregoing "Affidavit ofNotice" was acknowledged before me this 2~day of ~22Â£(~t),2 , 2004, by l-Afel FAVâ„¢*2- . 4 . %1-1 AR I P \A ....%5Â©rk 0'0 #.~2~~WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL # t JACK/E jo a - US~ LOTHIAN ~ gvly commission expires: A~ jÂ·y,/0 ~ 2 U â„¢:ass:ss:P- NAN Public U. :1 / ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 0 EXHIBIT 171 ' l 61,4* Aet AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26304.060 09, ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 232 West Main Street , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 24 October ,200 1 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County ofPitkin ) I, Stan Cl auson (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 (IE) ofthe Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication ofnotice: 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 priorto the public heanng. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting ofnotice: By posting ofnotice, 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 ten (10) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of 5 October , 200l to and including the date and time ofthe public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing qfnotice. 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 ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners ofproperty within three hundred (300) feet ofthe property subject to the development application, and, 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 any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet ofthe property subject to the development application. The names and addresses ofproperty 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 ofthe public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) b.-1 k 4....3.r.* 0 Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part ofa general revision ofthis Title, or whenever the text ofthis Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal ofthis Title and enactment ofa new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement ofan accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of and the notice to and listing ofnames and addresses of owners ofreal property in the area ofthe proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. 90 - Signature The foregoing "Affidavit ofNotice" was acknowledged before me this,~ aay of Ocinbe/- , 2001, by 6104 C lat ~ 9,0 0 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 0 0 ~ L / /200 -3, My commission expires: /32/~ 7 WENDY S. 1 i HEMINGWAY i C *jou,t Â·Â·tl, 0 Notary Publid , 1 .V K 0 U OF CO\Â·- My Commission Expires 12/04/2003 ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL PUBLIC NOTICE RE: CHRISTMAS INN MINOR HPC REVIEW FOR EXPANS[ON OF LOBBY (PHASE 1) AND CONCEPTUAL HPC DESIGN REVIEW FOR LODGE EXPANSION (PHASE 2) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN tbat a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, October 24, 2001 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 pm before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers, City Hall 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Seven Seas Investment requesting Conceptual HPC design approval to expand the Christmas Inn and a minor HPC review expand the lobby. The pmperty is located at 232 W. Main St and is legally described as Lots K-M Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen For fbrther information, contact Fred Jarman at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, CO (970) 920-5102, ftedj@ciaspen.co.us. s/Suzannah Reid. Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Commi=ion Published in the Aspen Times on October 6, 2001 City ofAspen Account 0 0 J -- 212 N SECOND ST LLC ALG SECOND QUAL PERS RES TRUST ASPEN HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION C/O RICHARD CORBETT C/O GILDENHORN ALMA L A COLO NON PROFIT CORPORATION 2202 N WEST SHORE BLVD STE 110 2030 24TH ST NW 311 W MAIN ST TAIIAFL 33607-5749 WASHINGTON, DC 20008 ASPEN, CO 81611 BERNSTEIN ARNOLD A & POLLY A LIVING ASPEN MAIN LP BLAU SETH J TRST C/O MR H SCHMIDT BLAU JUDITH C/O ARNOLD A & POLLY A BERNSTEIN PO BOX 2768 3896 DOGWOOD LN 1870 JACKSON ST #304 ASPEN, CO 81612 DOYLESTOWN, PA 18901 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94109 BLEVINS J RONALD & PHYLLIS M BLONIARZ JOHN W & DONNA L BROWDE DAVID A 20320 FAIRWAY OAKS DR #353 1839 N ORLEANS ST 176 BROADWAY BOCA RATON, FL 33434 CHICAGO, IL 60614 NEW YORK, NY 10038 BUCHHOLZ EARL H & MARILYN E BROWN ROBERT STICKLER & SANDRA LEA CHAMBERS PETE C/O SWAIM BROWN & ELLIOTT PA 1115 20TH ST PO BOX 10086 PO BOX 6404 WEST DES MOINES, IA 50265 MCLEAN, VA 22106 SPARTANBURG, SC 29304 CHISHOLM EDITH 1/2 INT COLORADO AZURE LTD CONDER CANDIDA E 205 W MAIN ST PO BOX 11236 19816 GRAND VIEW DR ASPEN. CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 TOPANGA. CA 90290-3314 CRUSIUS FRANKLIN G C~SSOCIATES LP CROWLEY SUE MITCHELL CRUSIUS MARGARET J 3418 SANSON STREET , 409 S GREENWOOD AVE 5855 MIDNIGHT PASS RD APT 507 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 COLUMBIA, MO 65203 SARASOTA, FL 34242 DAVIS WILLIAM LLOYD DE WOLF NICHOLAS DEROSE V F TRUSTEE OF DAVIS LIVING TRUST 233 W BLEEKER ST 1209 N 14TH AVE 4924 BALBOA BLVD #489 ASPEN, CO 81611 - MELROSE PARK, IL 60160 ENCINO, CA 91316 - DOBBS JOHN C & SARA F DURANT AND ORIGINAL ASSOCIATES INC FARLAND MARISA J PO BOX 241750 PO BOX 7846 PO BOX 3542 MEMPHIS, TN 38124 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 GOLD RANDAL S FLECK KATHRYN GROSVENOR DENIS EPSTEIN GILBERT AND MOLLIE 27 N MOORE TOWER B PO BOX 3071 PO BOX 9813 NEW YORK, NY 10013 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 DONNA INNSBRUCK HOLDINGS LLC HANSEN WERNER AND HARRIET WINTER ERNST & SON INC C/O NWOOD AVE 435 E MAIN ST ORDINGER WEG 12 , DALLAS, TX 75205 ASPEN: CO 81611 HAMBURG GERMANY, 22609 - JACOBY FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP KARP MICHAEL KASPAR THERESA DOSS CASPER J JACO BY 111 GEN PARTNER 3418 SANSOM ST PO BOX 1637 PO BOX 248 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19102 ASPEN, CO 81612 A IL 62002 KEIM JAMES T KING LOUISE LLC KETTELKAMP GRETTA M PEITZ H QU]NN JR A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY CO 3408 MORRIS AVE 17550 BAR X RD Â· PO BOX 1467 PUEBLO, CO 81008 COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80908-1500 BASALT, CO 81621 M D W ENTERPRISES INC MCDONALD FAMILY TRUST MELTON DAVID COLORADO CORPORATION 320 W MAIN ST 135 W MAIN ST 233 W BLEEKER ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 PEITZ H QUINN JR NEWIOAM CLAIRE M POTVIN SALLY ALLEN KEIM JAMES T PO BOX 2808 320 W BLEEKER ST 17550 BAR X RD ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80908-1500 PRICE DOUGLAS L AND VALERIE RICKEL DAVID RISCOR INC 8611 MELWOOD RD 8324 BROODSIDE RD 200 CRESCENT CT STE 1320 BETHESDA, MD 20817 ELKINS PARK, PA 19027 DALLAS, TX 75201 SAMIOS CAROLE R . TNERS LP SAUNDERS MARGARET W SAMIOS NICHOLAS A 1717 MAIN ST STE 5200 231 ENCINO AVE DALLAS, TX 75201 ' PO BOX 867 SAN ANTONIO, TX 74609 WESTMINSTER, MD 21158 SHEEHAN WILLIAM J AND SCHELLING RONALD L & LORI L SEVEN SEAS INVESTMENT LLC SHEEHAN NANCY E PO BOX 343 1017 ELMWOOD AVE 10 GOLF VIEW LN PLAINFIELD, IL 60544-0343 WILMETTE, IL 60091 FRANKFORT, IL 60423 SILVERSTEIN PHILIP SLOVITER DAVID SIMON LOUIS & EILEEN SILVERSTEIN ROSALYN SLOVITER ROSALIE 1576 CLOVERLY LN 25 KNOLLS CRESCENT 1358 ROBINHOOD RD RYDAL, PA 19046 BRONX, NY 10463 MEADOWBROOK, PA 19046 STEVENS LESLEY 4.25% INT SLOVITOR DAVID AND ELAINE SMITH CHRISTOPHER H STEVENS BRUCE 95.75% INT 1358 ROBIN HOOD RD 234 W HOPKINS AVE 214 W BLEEKER ST MEADOWBROOK, PN 19046 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 PERTIES LTD LIABILITY CO TAD PROPERTIES LTD LLC TEMPKINS HARRY TOWNE CENTRE PROPERTIES LLC TEMPKINS VIVIAN P 9978 323 W MAIN ST #301 420 UNCOLN RD STE 258 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139 TORNARE RENE TWIN COASTS LTD WALGREEN JOANNE 308 W HOPKINS AVE 110 WEST C ST STE 1901 2258 N FREMONT A , CO 81611 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101 CHICAGO, IL 60614 WEESE KATE B IRREV TRUST NO 2 WEISE RICHARD H WHYTE RUTH 314 W WILLOW RD 5451 N E RIVER RD #503 PO BOX 202 CHICAGO, IL 60614 CHICAGO, IL 60656 ASPEN, CO 81612 WILLE O LOUIS & FRANCES LYNETTE 32% WHYTE RUTH WILLE RAOUL INT PO BOX 202 200 W MAIN ST 200 W MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 WILLIAMS DAVID & BONNIE JO 222 W HOPKINS AVE APT 5 ASPEN, CO 81611-1757 11 Â»4/ 1 To whom it may concern, regarding the Christmas Inn expansion I - I By far the single most important local issue to my life in Aspen is the preservation of my view-line of Aspen Mountain where I work all day, every day. As originally and understandably designed, the construction would have utterly destroyed that view if built full-height to the alleyway. I would have been faced with a very bleak disconnection from the mountains I love and came to live within. Fortunately, Dennis Chookaszian visited to discuss this, and a flurry of creative ideas to constructively solve the problem ocurred. This includes compensation by me to the Inn for the preservation of that view line. After a sight-line-pole test, a second round of invention was required, and a very good alternative was invented. The front of the building is unaffected by these considerations. I would like to praise Dennis very strongly for finding a practical way for us to be good neighbors that will have a minimum impact on other considerations. I do fervently hope we can continue unobstructed to solve this problem ourselves, and wish to commendand thank Dennis and the Christmas Inn project for being neighborly and considerate. Nick and Maggie De Wolf Oct 16, 2001 TUA L [Al# EXHIBIT f SCHEMATIC DESIGN PROGRESS SET \ /8 94 3 N / 11 JOB NO. 2011 DRAWN BY.JAY DATE: [0/06/01 CHECKED: AR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0 20' ALLEY (OPYRIGHT Â© GIA 2000 FILE ID: XXX LOT K LOT L LOT M A 1/2 LOT N REVISION: 108' 1 1 a a EXISTING CHRISTMAS INN A ROOF OVERHANe Z LI = <C I - NED ~fi-0 f-1- I $ 0( 0 * 0 11- ir STAR_. - lD X 1 -1 EXISTINe CHRISTMAS INN L- I DRIVE ZE= --- / RENOÂ·*MITH ARCHITECTS 111 BALCONY LLC. 106 210 EAST HYMAN NÂ·202 MAIN STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970) 925-5968 Â¥11 (970) 925-5993 371 SOUTHSIDE AVE. ~EXISTINe SITE PLAN ~ NÂ· 101 SCALE: 1/8- â€¢-O 81821 BASALT, COLORADO (970) 927-6834 FAX (970) 927-6840 WEB SITE Inry. renosmith.com EMAIL ADDRESS office'renosmith.com SHEET # Al.1 EXISTING SITE PLAN SCHEMAnC . PROGRESS , DESIGN SET JOB NO.: 2011 DRAWN BY:JAW . CHECKED: AR DATE: 10/05/01 BUILDING TO BE REMOVEE> SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ALLEÂ¥ FILE ID: XXX ABOVE COPYRIGHT Â© GRA 2000 -----nrr----r - ---Ill ~------ ~Â·rl----- ----- ----d -%- REVISION: a TH u u ROOM 1 ROOM 2 PARKINe J 14%14 14*14 0110 , a OPEN CORRIDOR ROOM 5 IS>/3 / ~-I OPEN TO BELOW <...<'= 27'lli 5 W Â§ 11&211=JAIL.1 1112*1 744 11-1 I E =1= HOT TUE 4 mi 0 10*7 .5 ROOM 4 EN SKI/BOOT 1 7 u -- DN OPEN CORRIPOR STOR.AeE 1- 11 ' 1 -U â€ž RECEPTION | IULiL 11==1 m r--~1- 13=K 11 I5xI4 t! 09 AM eAS LOe -Â·1-9 1 1 FIREPLACE IX'I \ 113 1 1 SITTING PININe 1 *ERVINS - 141 / 2oxI. LOBBY 15*24 lexie 1 _ffET 1 -~=3-1 - PLANTER LnE OF PbALL FApe EXISTINe i ABOVE .1 Rt6'.L CHRISTMAS INN Im I PLANTER TOTAL SGUARE FOOTASE ALL 4 LEVELS ZEÂ«= |0 8582 SP. HEATED SPADE 5655 SF. OPEN CLORRIPOR, STAIRS 4 STORASE 1 1-LINE OF BALOONÂ·r 41 Â® _ ___ I Â£ TOTAL SGUARE FOOTAeE FIRST LEVEL RENOÂ·SMITH FLOOR PLAN J 1 1 1752 5/ HEATEP SPACE AR'll./.TS 2011 SF OPEN CORRIDOR. Â¢ STAIRS Ill ~-LINE OF NER LLC. ROOF MA.IN STREET 210 EAST HYMAN N' 202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81811 (970) 925-5968 Â¥AX (970) 925-5993 SITE PLAN 371 Soul'HSIDE AVE. ~FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ P 101 BASALT. COLORADO 81821 SCALE: 1/&' â€¢ GO (970) 927-6834 Â¥/X (970) 927-6840 ... WEB SITE www.renoimith.com EMAIL ADDRESS officeereno.mlth.com SHEET # A2.2 SITE PLAN FIRST LEVEL FLOOR PLAN EXISTING CHRISTMAS INN EXISTING PARKING NN1 %31'gEHo SCHEMATIC . DESIGN; PROGRESS ' â€¢ SET JOB NO.: 2011 DRAWN BY: JAW ; . DATE: 10/05/01 CHECKED: AR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" FILE ID: XXX COPY]UGHT Â© GU 2000 ALLEÂ¥ REVISION: a 8*15212 Crl FI] 2=8=6: D IM#: OP'PEiABLE a f- MALL a h 18 611 1 , elim J *L GAS APPLIANCE -1 6 FIREPLACE \,irr- AI MEOH/STOR, ~ O SERVICE EMPLOYEE 2 EMPLOYEE /\-7 10*24 UNIT 00 UNIT PININe/ DINING/ 624 15Â«24 CONFERENCE CONFERENCE 25*24 25*24 -01 -r-'In=:~ 4- -1-,AJ Cl 1 EMPLOYEE B E ~~ UNIT Iex20 COURTYARD O d ON ' 5*TH || | 11&1All.1 *058 1 HOT TUB 1-1- 1 EQUIPMENT 11 11111111y MECH/STOR,/ LULU J . SERVICE - - -Prfner ~++F - ME~N~. 11<40 STORA&,El ili'11111 3 r----------- 2 .\ 4 1 1 r-7 IZE+ZE= 1 1 1 L- ----------7 1 1 RENOÂ·SMITH ARCHiTICTS 1 11/ TOTA. SatjARKE FOOTASE LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN LLC. 3000 9 â‚¬ATED SIP //LE 486 S.F. STAIRS. 6 STORA,DE 210 EAST HYMAN 74-202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 MAIN STREET (970) 925-5988 Â¥AX (970) 925-5993 371 SOUTHSIDE AVE. ~LOMER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ F 101 SCALE. 1/5 H -O' 81621 BASALT, COLORADO (970) 927-8834 YAX (970) 927-5840 WEB SITE -p-w.renogmith.com EMAIL ADDRESS officeerÂ®noâ€¢mith.com SHEET # A2.1 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN EXISTINe CHRISTMAS INN 13CIONnI/N EXISTINe PARKING SCHEMATIC DESIGN PROGRESS â€¢ SET JOB NO 2011 DRAWN BY: JAW DATE: 10/05/01 CHECKED: AR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" FILE ID. XXX COPYRIGHT Â© GRA 2000 REVISION: a F=1 6 4ALE,OW~ 6 Ezzl /OPTIONAL GAS a ~ APPLIANCE FCE -Lt.] 119 n Lid [23Â£21 'LAY= a BA TH ROOM 5 1 loT 1 ROOM 6 ROOM -7 15*14 11.8 15><14 45%14 r, Igid{In I 11 STOR U.2119 j 7,J - OPEN CORRIDOR i ROOM 8 1 -h--\ i !3.6 / OPEN TO BELO~Â« rOPT&Â©NAL / ELEVATOR / :13[alr'F;Tmrm - 1119*1 --4,~ T : 1[27*-1%11--11 OPTIONAL *AS *0 ~@ TRd I / 1 3 - \4/ AF'FLIANCE FIR--ACE / 6 1 1 -\Â«EN TO SEL:21*/-~ - - ~~StÂ· 39Â« ROOM q 1&16 NA DN OPEN CORRIDOR 0@AQ . // 2-~ ROOF EXISTING l 8: ID SLOPE. & TYP. OF (6)- 4 E U] UJ ILE=!1 161-1 \ : E 'Frl' rri1 Ifi=1 4.. \ 1 ' E.*191-1Ne 1 k--1-1 m----i--~ - - / ROOF\ EXISTINS /ID Â¥ ON / \ BALGONÂ¥ N~ 0 oF RENOÂ·SMITH E 2 / /\ \ ~ EXISTING 1 ARCHITICTS / 1 TOTAL SGUARE FOOTASE SECOND LEVEL !11 / , ROOF '. I Â· FLOOR PLAN LLC. 1 10115 SF. HEATED SPACE \ [545 9=. OPEN CORRIDOR, STAIRS â€¢ BAL.~ 210 EAST HYMAN NÂ· 202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970) 925-5968 VII (970) 925-5993 371 SOUTHSIDE AVE. ~SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ NÂ· 101 SCALEÂ· 1/8" â€¢ 1-0' BASALL COLORADO 81821 (970) 927-6834 YAX (970) 927-6840 WEB STTE Â¥Â·râ€¢.renoâ€žnith.com EMAIL ADDRESS office*renoamith.com SHEET # A13 SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN EXISTING 118Â©49 INN ROOF SCHEMATIC DESIGN PROGRESS sm JOB NO : 2011 DRAWN BY:JAW DATE 10/05/01 CHECKED: AR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" FILE ID: XXX COPYRIGHT Â© IRA 2000 REVISION: 6 FIJI e 412 |BALCON11 /-O/TIONAL 6*5 PALCO, 1 ~ AM'PLIANCE FIREPLACE 1. 1- =L/13 4% 2 ./--\ / 1 RCT'12 11 J j BAVEN ~TH 1 2 ROOM 12 i HOT TUE 1 ROOM 14 15.14 BELOR J 01 \ / 0110 CLO. 0 /13|11113 15Xil \/ 1 OPEN OORRIDOR . ROOM 15 : t_le-zÂ«4 KIC - / exie i mi // 1 -/- , ~ OPEN TO BELOYV~.-'---' fas:t%* Â§ "TH Irl, ROOM 10 Imr=-- R mejafilu Je><15 12=24[Mmlm E 04 \1= -OPT\CltÂ»L 6.6 %SZOO ; APPLIANCE FIREFLACE J.-1_ 9 RE/// -///Â«\-~-\ 1 ROOM 16 - 1*16 PN OPEN COIRRIDOR U~ AM 0 Â« EXISTINS Z IL F O BELVEPERE SU ROOF 82 SLOPE, 7'rP. OF (6)17@=11 ~ 11,7 Fill ILL!1 ILL, ILL' 1 u .. . ,%1 1/11,1 ' r-1--7 / ROOFÂ·; ! i EkISTING r--1- 1 L 4:12 V ZEÂ«=2 EXIST-INkS ./. BALCONÂ·r i~ EXISTINS \ RENO-SMITH ARCHITECTS / ROOF \ TOTAL SQUARE FOOTASE â„¢IRC LEVEL |~| ~ ~ FLOOR PLAN LLC. m' \% 10115 SF. HEATEP SPASE 1545 SF OFÂ°EN CORRIDOR STAIRS 4 SALC.ONÂ·r 210 EAST HYMAN NÂ· 202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970) 925-5968 Â¥KX (970) 925-5993 371 SOUTHSIDE AVE. ~THIRIP LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ NÂ· 101 SCALE: i/e' â€¢ !Â·-0Â· BASALT, COLORADO 81621 (970) 927-6834 Â¥AX (970) 927-6840 WEB SITE Â¥rÂ·rw.reno,mith.corn EMAIL ADDRESS office*reno.mith.com SHEET # AlA THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 13CIOWBIN/ . . PROGRESS SET JOB NO. 2011 . DRAWN BY:JAW DATE: 10/05/01 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" COPYIGHT Â© GRA 2000 FILE ID: XXX REVISION: ~ | T-O-RIDGE ~h r =12= 1 99=9 -r--153,2-7- i 7 \: / .01<Â»\ \\-4 ~----O,3ff~--- -- %5*%51Â«332-%-%-~W_ b r -<4--r-#w--- --4 2.--==7949----Â«Â« 25 . ' IrrET-17-T-7 ~ 124411 ~ ir-13 11 1177 I U r-7--11 1 R~f~i] ' ; I' -- 7-i_~ FI---Ulz ILICILLJOU' al' I M ."mt' M i:~Full'~111411 i,j-''~~,+4 11 1 t~97 t ' uÂ· MI ILLED IT, i, ' 1'Â·1 MI , '1 '1 JL ' '',iÂ·'11:11111111, | + auln-IDICCED; 1 ..L 'L-MA, "In,I:H,iii'11 IIi ill ,!111,17, 1.11 .CED'' " ' 'i'' 1 1 2.1,111111,1,11 411111 .1111.11 4117[~'-0-7 L.Ll! 1''I "'1"11 liLLUÂ£41:1 1-1./1111111~~ lilli ~11111,1~1 ~11,1 '1666|1 6~_Ul~lll.fr---1---LU['1~1' 1 i,11, 1 1~~~' il I i.. '1 ~ ' 1J'I '' '11'1Â·~'~~ 1 ~1~ It i~~I i 'HIP,Â·,aUU:ILI,1111 1Â·Iii! .11!fi I iÂ¥,;1 ' 'iii i 1' '11.1 .1;1' 11 li lilli'â€¢ ' 4 , SP ' ' if -1 il i" ~ i, i,:a , ~,472.372-7177-mitil '11 1ii li 1,1,1 Iâ€ž ;1 tq, l.! ~Â· ~1,~L-~LE-- 2112 1 1 Â· I i ': 1,1 1 1 ).1.11 1 : ~ 1,Â·1 1 1 1 il i; ' 1; 0 1, 1 1 1 1 4 ' tftf~E#AFÂ»~*w :: 9'i!! 'i |i 'I |' I:,|L Â·Il I 1,1 1 1111 1. Iii 1 i 9- 1 lilli' 111 :i miLF)F;FI IMAI_!1 0 4.11, i.:11, ,~-6 -"!,u-TriTit u,1 1 !,1 11.r I|t,' 1' '111 Iii ! 11"11' 1 IiI! 1| IP HaLLu :I,Ir t' '',11 :u i i ~1 1 T 111 M 111 Pil .. 4 \/,11'A :11., 111.11 11 '1111 1 1 11'11 lilli 1,111111,1,1 H j11111111 111111 ilillil, 111 1 1, 1 1 111 111 lilli I lili 111 1 'NILI~1 -1 111 1 1 ~ ~ !1 6., 1):')?i'V t'> ~:)2lx; b/Ytr'>Y,>yi'(x~x G AR+A XY'*WY'.,1 , #XY#x'X'K,'1 i |, 4 A kini i 'il ~ %ii 8*&5,4-! 3,3â‚¬yti~ ~***1Â·5:t:- i,-4*pi***{4**Ii>-:-!,Y******~ RNA!~:73':.:.,14 ~1*91, -,All I I!I'lili I'll I~lill| I||~|Il',Il!Il ' ' 1111'i 1 ' 8 El @%i U Â¤M~ =1 4 - . - - ----- '-723-- CE~ZJ~ - ---6== 32~Lub=0- - _ GRADE ~h -682-El,- r-)SOUTH ELEVATION JEEZI~17------------------- I=*=2 RENOÂ·SMITH ....11'ZITS 111 LLC. CIIIrEILIHI[jEIIECIII[IEII]~II]a IHITII HITil jil- 11 INT:i INTil INT li HITilltiT111 210 EAST HYMAN r]DII[XECIDIESMCIEIIDII[mE3]9 NÂ· 202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970) 925-5988 1.- - FAX (970) 925-6993 371 SOUTHSIDE AVE. N' 101 BASALT. COLORADO 81621 GRADE Ah (970) 927-8834 FAJI (970) 927-8840 WEB SITE -wÂ¥.re'llmith.com CFEAST ELEVATIâ‚¬N @ VESTIBULE office*renoimith.com EMAIL ADDRESS I V =el IA.. M SHEET # EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS PROPERTY LINg SCHEMATIC 4 ~ PROGRESS SET JOB NO. 2011 DRAWN BY:JAW DATE: 10/05/01 CHECKED: AR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" FILE ID. XXX COPYRIGHT Â© GRA 2000 REVISION: M M 1 T.O.RIC>eE..1 1 ' -i, 11' -111' il TIN, 11 I 1 1 1. 1 ' 1_Eli 1 111 1 1 1, Il I 13 111 lilli 11 1 1111'111 1111111111 111,11 1 m 111111 Izzli~il 14 .!=illip, li 11 li ~ 111 lilli ill, 1 03 in HHIP 0 AM 111 !1Ii 4444*90 iii| 1 11 11 11 111111 11 lit 1 !1; 11 lilli 11 11 1 1111 ill 1 8 8 8 'lilli 1111'ill I i 0 \ 11, ~...F ---37~-;-9-p---pÂ»34-3-3-------i I i i~ ~ i '~F--TTY-79-037-f---71*~----~-F-TI---4-7~73*3~7~' ~ RENOÂ·SMITH IdEl BIEI E 111 LLC. 210 EAST HYMAN NÂ· 202 GRADE ~ ASPEN, COLORADO -28.7 81611 (970) 925-5968 Â¥KK (970) 925-5993 /--\ALLEY NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION 371 SOUTHSIDE AVE. N 101 BASALT, COLORADO 81621 (970) 927-8834 YAX (970) 927-6840 F WEB SITE 111.renosmith.com EMAIL ADDRESS office*renoomith.corn . SHEET # EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS no E[H/ OLLIC[CIV SCHEMAT16 . SET JOB NO.: 2011 DRAWN BY:JAW DATE: 10/05/01 CHECKED: AR FILE ID: )00< COPYRIGHTÂ© GRA 2000 REVISION: JI k I ir,0.AImee Ah 9 0 Â· 1 ~Â· ltIIL_iii.01.-2-123221L1' 1 I ~1121Â« . 2.44 . _]. Ii~Lit I NZIFFIFEFFII 1~li 1111111 1 ,I1illl 111 !1 1 ! SRADE ~h 100'.O. \~.~ -0000 F 000-- L-nt/#pitil RENOÂ·SM I TH ID El FOULLILLI ARCHITECTS . 111 LLC. 210 EAST HYMAN NÂ·202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970) 925-5988 (970) 925-5993 C-)COURTYARD NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS t I 371 SOUTHSWE AVE. Pr 101 BASALT. COLORADO 81621 (970) 927-6834 Â¥Al (970) 927-6840 F WEB SITE www.renosmith.corn EMAIL ADDRESS office*renosmith.com . SHEET # EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS OCIVNO 00 'NEIdSV SCHEMATIC DESIGN Â· PROGRESS SET JOB NO.: 2011 DRAÂ¥11 BY: JAW DATE: 10/05/01 CHECKED: AR SCALE: 1/4~ = 1'-0" FILE ID: XXX COPYRIGHT Â© GRA 2000 REVISION: a a a a E *-% 1- Â«2 Â£7 T.O FRIC>eE 7=\ 7\*0 130'-0 â€¢1 1 1 L LUJ '-1) ' 1 1 1'111' i ' 11!, ;1 4.i 11 1!lt:' ill' Â·' 11 Il N lili p Ill[It lili Il :i i~i] Iii: 9 1 1 N 'lit 1 RZ E:u I I LL_L~ r---Â·-1 2 |- 3 OBI liB~i 0+11 1111 r Il 2 0 31 @@1* :111 11 0-7 1 ,-, 0@M~ 1 lililil: 1 111 1 lili 1 lilli -11 1 lili lili 1 11 1 '11! 1|1111 1;11[1 1!Ill Hilll-11 h 111]Ii lillil Ill'll lili'I Hill lilli! 111111111-11#111111 HI 11 11 18 111 li 111111 111111 IHIN liTT>r- :lanIN171'1!lk.. I l' 11'!111'11'lili 11 HAN'ill MU HAil'lil 11 l'i 'Ill 1]11'll iNI!' ill'B i 11,1 h' 1' 11'~1~ bli I'NT'd'll 11 (MI nri'3 h,~ i , i, 1~1~1 Illill ~1~1111~IINI 11'~p 1 ill 11||1~ Il|Ill I'll| ~1~ 1 111 # M~ N Illilt |~lill ,~!111 1 11|I |11|11~|!|| 111'11 HU~ lIlli| Ill| 1 11Â»>Â·- 1 11 1[.1 1 1 11 --I---- ill#i--- 1 -7 i 1 1 -0.'I i ' 111 E - -1 !1. 1 1 I iIi I#] 1 111 [3311 11- fT-1 11 - -- 7-Â·-nÂ·-m-Â· -4 1 1 11111111 111111111111 -1 1 1 11 111 1 li I lililil 11'1111 1 111 1 1~l 1 I lilli. lilli 11 11 11 111 1 11 11 ' lili 11 1 1 1 111 ./ 111 11 Iii 1 1 11111 111 - - 1-lin . . 121=.Eli 1121 RENUMITH -1--- -Ir -- - / 1.1 11 . --- â€¢ A RCHITICTS . II1 LLC. eR.*DE 210 EAST HYMAN 100.-0 r 202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970) 925-5968 Â¥AX (970) 925-6993 ~AEST ELEVATION ... 371 SOUTHSIDE AVE. SCALE 1/4" â€¢ 1'-0Â· 147 101 BASALT. COLORADO 81621 (970) 927-6834 VAX (970} 927-6840 FER SITE Â¥wâ€¢.renownith. com EMAIL ADDRESS office*renoâ€¢mlth.com 5HEET # A3A EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS SCHEMATIC DESIGN PROGRESS SET JOB NO. 2011 DRAWN BY:JAW DATE: 10/05/01 CHECKED: AR SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" FILE ID: XXX COPYRIGHT Â© IRA 2000 REVISION: 1 111111 1,1 1/1~1'JI '111'jl' i!1:11'KT- Lilli T.D.RIPeE * 111 1 ~\ 1 30-0- I M I; I I H-ll !11: l' Il u Il le M i'JI I li I'lll I Il il li il :1 b li li 11 11 [I I li L N I.I ii Il lili : I! il Il Il 11 1% i] IF-- ' 1f I Ill k lili 4 H Il ll '111 1,11114 Ali P lili 1 2|| H 11!, PHÂ·I || lili H 1111 H Ill It H,1 t. 1111 - -11 1 It!11 '- 1 Fil 1 21Â® - am -*'lillilli'!11!1 1 I i 1 1 3 ~ "El 11 1 j 11 1 It 111 -*Ell 1 11 1 1 11 L- F E I TI 33s-- fe 1 ' P [- 3 It i i i i 8 8 3 8 A I 88 88 6'RAPE W oÂ· 4 RENOÂ·SMITH ARCHITECTS It' LLC. 210 EAST HYMAN NÂ· 202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970) 925-5968 TAX (970) 925-5993 ~ EAST ELEVATION Â·Â·Â· 371 SOUTHSIDE AVE. 5CALE: 1/4 4'-0Â· r 101 BASALT. COLORADO 81621 (970) 927-8834 FAX (970) 927-6840 WEB SITE www.renoomith.com EMAIL ADDRESS office*renoâ€¢mith,com SHEET # A35 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 44<1< 13(IC C:1,4727 APPLICATION Christmas Inn HPC Minor Development Review 17 September 2001 Applicant: Seven Seas Investment, LLC Location: 232 West Main Street (Lots K, L, M, and the westerly one-half ofLot N, Block #51) Zone District: Office, Main Street Historic District Overlay, Lodge Preservation Overlay An application for Historic Development Commission Minor Development Review Represented by: Stan Clauson Associates, LLC 200 E. Main Street Aspen, CO 81611 970-925-2323 STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning â€¢ Urban Design Transportation Studies Project A4anagernent 200 EAST MAIN STREET 17 September 2001 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE: 970.925.2323 Mr. Fred Jarman, Planner FAX: 970.920.1628 E-MAIL: clauson@scaplanning.com Ms. Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer WEB: www.scaplanning.com City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Christmas Inn-HPC Minor Development Review Dear Community Development Staff: On behalfofSeven Seas Investment, LLC, owners ofthe Christmas Inn, I am writing to request that the City of Aspen schedule an HPC Minor Development Review for the Christmas Inn, located at 232 West Main Street in Aspen. This application is intended to provide a Minor Development Review that will allow for the immediate re-finishing ofthe exterior ofthe Christmas Inn, along with the addition of lobby and entry areas to the building. The owners believe that immediate improvements are necessary for the current season, while undergoing other development reviews as part oftheir comprehensive application for a PUD and Lodge Preservation unit allocations. This would constitute a three-step process that to improve the appearance and economic viability ofthe Inn. The three steps in the process are: 1. Non-FAR related improvements to the exterior ofthe structure, as described below; 2. Lobby and entry addition, requiring both HPC and P&Z approval as part of a PUD; 3. Demolition and replacement ofthe rear section of the Inn, providing a remodeled courtyard and new two-story element with eight (8) additional lodge rooms, subject to the Lodge Preservation lodging unit allocation process. Our review before the HPC is intended to provide Minor Development Review for the Step 1 activities, as well as review and recommendations to the Planning & Zoning Commission for the Step 2 activities, which involve an addition ofapproximately 205 square feet to the lobby and the enclosure of a portion ofthe main floorporte cochire. In addition to general painting and trim replacement, Step 1 activities are noted on the attached plans, and include: â€¢ New stucco finish for the lower faâ„¢les on Main Street and Second Street; â€¢ Replacement 1" x 6" tongue and groove cedar siding for the upper facades; â€¢ New railings for the porch facing onto Main Street; â€¢ New decorative belvederes along the Main Street roofridge; and â€¢ New clad awning windows along the Second Street faoade. As the first step in this process, it is the owners' intention to renew the exterior ofthe Christmas Inn. i: 1 <\ 42:0% \ h<44\ PLANNING AND DESIGN SOLUTIONS FOR CO-MMUNITIES AND PRIVATE SECTOR CLIENTS City ofAspen Community Development Department 17 September 2001 Page 2 This would be undertaken in a respectful and conservative way, consistent with the historic guidelines for this district. Please see the attached drawings for an accurate description of the materials and forms proposed for the fagade work Step 2 activities, submitted for review include: â€¢ Lobby and entry addition of205 square feet, with new clad easement windows; â€¢ New stone columns with wood truss; and â€¢ Removal ofthe curb cut, restoration ofthe landscape parkway, and planting areas on the Inn property. All of the elements in this application are reflected in the comprehensive application submitted on 19 June 2001. The activities requested as Step 1 represent a set ofactivities that do not require an increase in floor area or lodging units, and can therefore be permitted by the HPC acting through its Minor review process. The activities represented as Step 2 involve less than 250 s.Â£ of additional floor area, but will require additional review by the Planning & Zoning Commission as part ofthe PUD application. Fees for this application have already been paid under the deposit provided with our application of 19 June 2001. The earlier application also provided the required application attachments, which are not included here. We look forward to an opportunity to present this application for the preservation and enhancement ofthe Christmas Inn to the Historic Preservation Commission, and remain ready to answer any questions that you or may have regarding the application. Very truly yours, Stan Clauson, AICP, ASLA STAN CLAUSON ASSOCIATES, LLC Attachments: 1. Land Use Application Form 2. Plans and Elevations A3.1 South Exterior Elevation A3.2 West Exterior Elevation Casement Window cut sheets CC: Owners Reno-Smith Architects, LLC ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name Christmas Inn_ Lodge Preservation Proiect 2. Project location 232 West Main Street (Lots K,L.M, and the Westerlv Half of Lot N, Block 51) (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning O, Main Street Historic Overlay District, and Lodge Preservation Overlay 4. Lot size 10,600 sa. ft. 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number Seven Seas Investment, LLC 1017 Elmwood Avenue Wilmette, Illinois 60091 925-5267 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number Stan Clauson Associates, LLC 200 East Main Street Aspen. Co 81611 925-2323 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD x Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot Spli#Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) Existing lodge. consisting of 27 rooms in a structure arranged in a courtvard formation. The structure consists of 1, 2. and three storv elements. 9. Description of developrnent application An application for the re-finishing of the exterior skin of the building. See the attached drawinas for proposed areas of work and materials. 10. Have you completed and attached the following? 4 Attachment 1- Land use application form 4 Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form * Response to Attachment 3 * Response to Attachment 4 *Included as part of Full Application ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: Christmas Inn Address: 232 West Main Street, Aspen, Co Zone district: Office, Main Street Historic Overlay District. and Lodge Preservation Overlay Lot size: 10,600 s. f. Existing FAR: 8,778 s.f. Allowable FAR: 7,966 s.f. Proposed FAR: 8.983 s.f. Existing net leasable (commercial): -0- Proposed net leasable (commercial): -0- Existing % of site coverage: NA Proposed % of site coverage: NA Existing % of open space: NA Proposed % of open space: NA Existing maximum height: Principal blda:28.25' Accesorv bldg: Proposed max. height: Principal blda:28.25' Accessory bldg: Proposed % of demolition: Step 1: 0%: Step 2: approx. 5%: Step 3: approx. 25% Existing number of bedrooms: 28 lodge rooms Proposed number of bedrooms: Step 3: 35 lodae rooms + 3 AH studios Existing on-site parking spaces: 11 On-site parking spaces required: 20 Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed: Front: 4.7' Front: 10' Front: 4.7' Rear: 1-2' Rear: 15' Rear: 1-2' Combined Combined Combined Fron#rear:N/A Fron#rear: Fron#rear:_ Side: 3.4' Side: 5' Side: 3.4' Side: 0' Side: 5' Side: 0' Sides: N/A Sides: Sides: Existing nonconformities or encroachments: Parking, setback, floor area, and height nonconformities are currently existing Variations requested: Parking. setback. floor area. and height variances to be requested as part of PUD/Lodge Preservation review (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft., site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) SCHEMATIC DESIGN PROGRESS SET JOB NO. 2011 DRAWN BY: JAW DATE: 8/30/01 CHECKED: AR SCALE: AS NOTED FILE ID: XXX COPYRIGHTÂ© GRA 2000 liti i r-NEK BELVEDERE, TYP. REVISION: 1 1 Â« f 4 a /-1'5,6' Te CEDAR SIC>ING, -NEA GUARDRAIL TO ~ TÂ¥'P., AS -â€ž4. 9. MATCH EXISTINS ~ L 4 u' 1~ 1 ~ 1 1 1 11 '/1 11 1 1 1 J4r<04Â¤0130~1111| 1 1~1 01 1 ' - ~~~~~ 11~ 1 Â»*441 I 41111111111~~,]111111111111 411111,[11111,1 1 1~,ILL#I].1111 1111111111111ill 1 i T'Tiir'TifitfiP:+1['tritttiÂ¥1' 'i'-Mi'tri'[fitrITii'trr'fri'Trifi.tftti'tâ€žYffilli 1 1 - ir|' ri| -18 - -1- .-7- Emil ~1 - - --- / :f H 1 1 *1. 1 4 OPEN t ' I - -J-~m u-t ~3~ -~ 9-Â«7 *Unn=pEi 43-368*93 L~S~1 BRADE L*rUCCO AbUSW TÂ·re.0 L NErl CLAD CASEMEMT L--LOBBÂ¥ ADDITION 15 PENDING BUILPINe APPITION IN TH!5 AREA IS 100-0.4 W 0 AS SHOWN P'NINE>OWS, TYP PLANNING 4 ZONINe AFFPâ‚¬OVAL PENDINe PLANNING Â¢ ZONINe APPROVAL 0 : es % ~ SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE. 1/4* = 1'-O A ,-1 -- RENOÂ·SMITH â€¢ ARCHITECTS 8.6 LLC. 210 EAST HYMAN ~ NER STUCDO FINISH rrP., ASPEN, COLORADO NÂ· 202 AS SHOret 81811 (970) 925-5968 FAX (970) 925-5993 371 SOUTHSIDE AVE. EA -Eti - NÂ· 101 BASALT, COLORADO 81821 (970) 927-8834 FAX i GRADE (970) 927-6840 - WEB SITE NEÂ»1 STONE COLUMNS Â»0/ - NER CLAP CASEMENT wÂ·â€¢w.renosmith.com MOOD T'~93 MINCPOFNE, TYP. EMAIL ADDRESS office@renommith.com Â© EAST ELEVATION @ VESTIBULE A3.1 SCALE: 1/4" , 1'-<20 SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION SCHEMATIC DESIGN PROGRESS SEr JOB NO.: 2011 DRAWN BY:JAW DATE: 8/30/01 CHECKED: AR SCALE: AS NOTED FILE ID: XXX COPYRIGHTÂ© GRA 2000 REVISION: Fl=xb- TIS CEDAR Sm>INe, 1 TYP ASSHONN ~ ~ f f NErt BELVEPERE, TiP.-1 /,3443 r ' ~# 6; Z - u g Â»fp 1 111 1134\ 0001. r--li*.. -i~e~g~R SIDINe. -,MM~ SHON. L -- @E Z & 2 r7 N W l'IN-=--~~~_~In 1.1111 ' 111--'711-7 1 -3-1--1 1 1 1 1 111 J' 1 IL--_ -_-L-~~- ! Ill 111-r lf--7.-1---- -711' HEE' 1-/--1~7- I -~~ GUA~L To Uic RM >994 Ji~Fitf j - 1 .~ ji-1 l ~~' j~l lf-0 ~~ Il Â¢0%0% ~ MATCH EXISTINS 1- r r i-ri r 1.1 - ~1-71-7 - -1 lilli .. lili I -31 j -EEIEBEEPÂ·Â·- 42 . .. A BRAE>E .# L NIEFN STUCCO MINISH M .RCHITIOTS RENEEMITH AS SHOFNN LLC. 210 EAST HYMAN ~ JAIEST ELEVATION 81811 NÂ· 202 ASPEN, COLORADO SCALE: 1/4" = !LO' (970) 925-5968 FAX (970) 925-5993 371 SOUTHS1DE AVE. N 101 BASALT, COLORADO 81821 (970) 927-8834 FAX (970) 927-6840 WEB SITE www.renosmith.com EMAIL ADDRESS officeerenosmith.com A3.1 WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION AwninG ' WillDOWS - e CLAD AWNINGS: STANDARD FEATURES Â· Built using mortise-and-tenon joints for maximum strength : and durability. Sash is 2-3/32" thick. Â· Clear insulating glass with UltraEdgeâ„¢ warm edge technology. â€¢ Airtight weatherstripping system. â€¢ E-Gard" lever operator with heavy-gauge scissors arm design i i exterior aluminum clad finish and unison lock. i Â· Factory-applied jamb extensions come in a variety of widths. M Â· Hardware is available in White, Bronze or Champagne. Â· Exterior is low-maintenance aluminum cladding with a baked-on, , ~ Â· u commercial grade 70% Kynar 500Â® resin system in six standard â€¢ Vinyl nailing fin and aluminum drip cap. colors:White, Bronze, Champagne, Cambridge White, Hunter -4 i Â· 4 | .,.-Ate:.ily~ 11 / Green and Redwood. CLAD AWNINGS: OPT]ONAL FEATURES â€¢ Thermal bar glazing offers a simulated divided lite look. See page 14. 3.- i. Â· Full perimeter wood grilles in 3/4", 1" and 1-1/2" bar widths. f Â· Exterior is low-maintenance aluminum cladding with a baked-on, commercial grade 70% Kynar 500Â® resin system available in 25 ~ lever lock operators for wood & clad ; Designer Choiceâ„¢ colors. Custom color matching is also available. ; Â· Choose from a variety of glass options. See page 16, white i : â€¢ CoastGardâ„¢ hardware for maximum corrosion resistance. 1 ..7. . -e I-* â€¢ Hardware available in Polished Brass. bronze Â· Round or folding handles. â€¢ Extension arm operators or remote electric motors are available 1 champagne ~ for windows installed in a clerestory application. Â· Exterior trim options are: extruded aluminum brickmould, 3-1/2" flat easing and 3-1/2" Adams casing. 1 Â· Folding vinyl nailing fin. â€¢ Builder Series awnings with sash thicknesses of 1-7/ 16" in standard ! DEfAi LS sizes and cladding colors only. See page 59. (FOR AWNING SIZING SPECIFICATIONS, SEE PAGE 51) 0 200- HORIZONTAL VERTICAL .Aff 111] --21-- Ul-7 1 CASEMEnT WinDOWS CLAD CASEMENTS: STANDARD FEATURES Â· Built using mortise-and-tenon joints for maximum strength exterior aluminum clad finish and durability. Sash is 2-3/32" thick. Â· Clear insulating glass with UltraEdge- warm edge technology. A.Â· 1 â€¢ Airtight weatherstripping system. '7Â· â€¢ E-Gardâ„¢ operator and single action unison lock. Â· Hardware is available in White, Bronze or Champagne. c- 4 31 Â·...Â· 7. Â· Vinyl nailing fin and aluminum drip cap. i . Â· Exterior is low-maintenance aluminum with a baked-on, commercial 1 ; grade 70% Kynar 500Â® resin system in six standard colors:White, Bronze, Champagne, Cambridge White, Hunter Green and Redwood. Â· Full 90-degree operation makes cleaning from the interior easy. CLAD CASEMENTS: OPTIONAL FEATURES â€¢ Thermal bar glazing offers a simulated divided lite look. See page 14. 1 â€¢ Full perimeter wood grillesin 3/4",1 "and 1-1/2"bar widths. i â€¢ Exterior is low-maintenance aluminum cladding with a baked-on, 1Â· . Â·r'Â·. :9Â·Â·-Â·T- Â· r . , commercial grade 70% Kynar 500Â® resin system available in 25 13 Designer Choiceâ„¢ colors. Custom color matching is also available. 1 4 â€¢ Choose from a variety of glass options. See page 16. â€¢ CoastGardâ„¢ hardware for maximum corrosion resistance, â€¢ Hardware available in Polished Brass. operators for wood & clad Â· Exterior trim options are: extruded aluminum brickmould, 3-1/2" flat easing and 3-1/2"Adams casing. Â· Folding vinyl nailing fin. Ft, j 0 4 Â· Builder Series casements with sash thicknesses of 1-7/16" in polished white bronze champagne brass standard sizes and cladding colors only. See page 72. (FOR CASEMENT SIZING SPECIFICATIONS, SEE PAGE 60) DEtAi LS 2-7 rr..SE' i 11 7 f VERTICAL HORIZONTAL ==:=:==~ i~-~~ -YEE MEMORANDUM . TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission DA,JI THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Community Development Deputy Director \~/ ~ 0~- FROM: Fred Jarman, planner /,4 RE: Christmas Inn Reno,)*tion- Minor Review & Conceptual Review PUBLIC HEARING DATE: October 24, 2001 ,. V -- --.99.'*r..2.- AM.I..........Ir ..4j~ 1,1-.....4 4....i#i~~~Â·, aun... . --)-Â·-1.4 .1 4 ...':5-~r ~ Â·.4 7,7~Â· fâ‚¬Â·5.-*9.)*'=S"79;A.e:. Â·Â· *,1.--- 1 1, ALL'.~'1*G-yiÂ©#A':A.ff;*.tzâ€žeAM'A#t~"-4â‚¬:4: - 4,.1.'4-*A -' ''. Â· .4..Â·>-7~gNÂ·-:,7*-'*Pgmilk.9.?â€¢0:(60.~AA%#Â¢â€¢Â»''fâ‚¬9*10,2941Â£%4,WH~ â‚¬"3{4.>4 7 :, 'Â·liil- c In Â·. /55- _~04.4 - t - =. . . . 4~,4 41 , Â· Â· 'Ma . '' j Imimmilbif hil *,;3.y . Â·2~: .1, 01---{i2..04:...j 'i ;4Â¥~ , 11, , 4. t .4:16.- ... l. View of the Christmas Inn Lodge from Main Street LE- ... L/6 LEI * 4 fl - 4 ,-r-/ ~ 7 D.1:1.13 CZEIT] irr-1 U %4,1 lili.lilli / Ft,1 11 Fil -6,11 1 1 11.1.LIW,J+,-*q+. 1 Ii'll!' I '...Ii lIlli 61 ~ Â· *UUB I PROJECT: -5 '9'4 CHRISTMAS INNVOL- MINOR & CONCIkPTUAL REVIE*55352 REQUEST The Christmas Inn is a non-designated building within the Main Street Historic SUMMARY: District. The Applicant has applied for a two-phase expansion of the lodge to accommodate additional lodge rooms consistent with the City's Lodge Preservation (LP) program. The LP program allows individual lodge properties to adjust their zoning specific to their circumstance through a Minor Planned Unit Development process that requires hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. 1 Applicant: Seven Seas Investment, LLC ~ Address: 232 West Main Street Zoning: Office (O), Main Street Historic District & Lodge Preservation Overlays Current & Proposed Land Use: Lodge Request: The owners of the Christmas Inn are requesting land use approvals to conduct a two-phase -renovation of the Christmas Inn. Phase I will be addressed through a Minor review and Phase II will be addressed through a Conceptual Review. Phase I includes the following requests: > New stucco finish for the lower facades on Main and Second Streets; > Replacement of 1"x 6" tongue and groove cedar siding on the upper facades; > A new replacement of the railing on the Main Street faGade; 1 Addition of 6 belvederes along the Main Street roo f ridge; and > Replacement clad awning windows on the Second Street fa~ade It is the intent of the Applicant to seek an approval for Minor Review for the above noted actions so they may proceed with a "face-lift" prior to the start of the ski season. Phase II includes the following requests: 1) Remodeling the existing lobby area by enclosing the current covered car pull-in / unloading area off Main Street and adding an entry vestibule for the front door, and 2) Partial demolition and replacement of the rear portion of the structure in order to add a new 3-story section in the rear of the structure, to accommodate 8 new lodge rooms and 3 affordable housing units as well as remodeling the interior courtyard to produce a two level atrium. Background The Christmas Inn is not on the Inventory; however, this property is being reviewed by the HPC because of its location in the Main Street Historic District. It should be noted that the Christmas Inn had been considered for the inventory in 2000 and may still be a candidate for designation once the designation process is again started under a new ordinance. At present, the lodge is located on a 10,600 sq. ft. parcel (3.5 City Lots) on the corner of Main and Second Streets and currently contains 24 rooms in a structure arranged in a courtyard configuration. The current inner courtyard is at grade and contains a Jacuzzi and entrances to lodge rooms, sauna, and lobby. The structure consists of 1 and 2-story elements, totaling 8,778 sq. ft. of floor area (FAR). At its tallest point, the lodge is 28.25' . in height. 2 Staff Comments The Main Street Historic District is defined as Aspen's Main Street corridor that includes a one-half block (to the alleys) on either side of Main Street from Seventh Street to Monarch Street. Starting in the 1940s, development of lodging occurred on Aspen's Main Street, either as stand-alone hotels and motels or as bed and breakfasts. While some of these more recent buildings may also be of significance, they do not establish the historic context for Main Street. Minor Review Standards for Phase I a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, the Historic Preservation Commission may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units, and Staff Finding Phase I is an upgrade of the existing Main and Second Street fa~ades with new materials. At present, the materials on the most visible facades include the Main and Second Street elevations. The Min Street elevation (lower leveD consists of Tl-11 Exterior Masonite panels divided by vertical wood boards similar to the upper fÂ®ade. The Second Street elevation is consistent with the Main Street fa~ade on the lower level but consists of vertical wood paneling on the upper faGade. The Applicant is not requesting any variances from the HPC regarding setbacks, FAR bonus, site coverage, or distance between buildings. The minor review request (Phase I) involves subtle changes to the Main and Second Street facades. Specifically, this phase involves the following requests: S New stucco finish for the lower facades on Main and Second Streets; > Replacement 1" x 6" tongue and groove cedar siding for the upper facades; > A new replacement of the railing on the Main Street fa*ade; > Addition of 6 belvederes along the Main Street roof ridge; and > Replacement clad awning windows on the Second Street fa~ade 3 . These requested changes only include the replacement of existing materials (omate balcony railing, clad awning windows, and 1" x 6" cedar siding) and introducing three new elements (6 belvederes, stucco, and 1" x 6" cedar siding). The 1" x 6" cedar siding proposed for the upper facades will replace the current Exterior Masonite panels and vertical board spacers with vertical siding that closely resembles the current exterior treatment of the existing clock tower and the upper faGade of the Second Street elevation. The clock tower elements themselves will remain unchanged. Staff finds these minor changes are compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with the current look and feel of the Christmas Inn. While the aforementioned involves either replacing or slightly modifying current material treatments of the exteriors of Second and Main Streets, the Applicant also wishes to add a new architectural feature: 6 belvederes on the Main Street roof. Staff finds that the proposed belvederes alter the roof line from a simple ridge as seen today and conflicts with Section 12.16 of the Guidelines which states that roofing materials should be used that are "similar in appearance to those seen historically." It is evident that the ridgelines of buildings on the Min Street corridor do not historically or currently include belvederes. However, it is not certainly clear what architectural style perfectly defines the Christmas Inn as it maintains characteristics from a variety of periods and styles. In this light, it appears that belvederes offer an interesting architectural detail to an otherwise simple roofline and adds an architectural element that breaks down the mass created by a solid uninterrupted roofline. Staff recommends the Applicant remove the belvederes from the proposed design. This request for minor review approval will allow the Christmas Inn to conduct a "face- lift" in order to update the lodge's fa~ade with hew materials that will, in effect, make no changes to the structure's current mass, scale, and volume, and site plan. Staff finds the proposed minor development meets this standard. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, and Staff Finding The proposed minor changes mentioned above are consistent with the current structure in virtually all of its existing architectural elements including general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume. Due to these minor changes, there are effectively, no changes to the character of the Main Street as a result of this minor development On the contrary, this renovation will enhance the streetscape rather than detract from it. Staff finds this standard is met. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance Of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels, and 4 Staff Finding Staff finds there are no other historically designated structures on the same parcel as the Christmas Inn. In addition, none of the adjacent structures on the same block within the Main Street Historic District are historically designated. If anything, the requested actions will allow the Christmas Inn to enhance its exterior appearance adding to the pedestrian experience and better contribute to the Main Street corridor. Staff finds this criterion is met. i The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Finding The Christmas Inn has remained virtually unchanged since it was constructed in 1950. These proposed changes are intended to improve the aesthetic value of the lodge as a contributing member of the Main Street streetscape. Staff finds that this proposed minor development is consistent with the primary goal as stated in Chapter 12 of the guidelines regarding design in the Main Street Historic District that is "to preserve the character while accommodating compatible changes." Staff finds this standard is met. Conceptual Review Standards for Phase 11 a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark Staff Finding The Christmas Inn is not designated as a historic landmark nor is the Applicant seeking any variances through the HPC such as the 500 sq. ft. bonus, setback, or site coverage variances. However, the structure is in the Main Street Historic Overlay. And as such, the standard above applies to this request. (The variances requested to the dimensional requirements are incorporated in the Planned Unit Development (PUD) request.) Phase I[ involves 1) enclosing the current covered car pull-in / unloading area off Main Street, eliminating the curb cut, and adding an entry vestibule for the front door, and 2) demolition and replacement of the rear portion of the structure in order to add a new 3- story section in the rear of the structure to accommodate 8 new lodge rooms and 3 affordable housing units as well as remodeling the interior courtyard to produce a two level atrium. This proposal will clearly affect general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with development on adjacent parcels. As mentioned earlier, the current scale and massing of 5 the Christmas Inn is defined as a one and two-story lodge structure configured with an inner courtyard. This section will outline and discuss each of the major proposed changes including the third story addition, lobby expansion, and courtyard reconfiguration. A. Lobbv Expansion The Applicant proposes to remodel the existing lobby area by enclosing the current covered car pull-in / unloading area off Main Street and adding an entry vestibule for the front door indicated by the image below. Enclosed Carport New Entry I A =Frm El 11121 kn 6 2 1 5!*R 11*1 -,42Â»Â· 1 1 mIr LEI 0 ' 2E1' A t,Cl .El 1- h / Ef93% EE EE -74f,#.T--- The entry is discussed in the Guidelines (p. 95) as follows: Entries are clearly defined on most structures in the neighborhood. Porches, porticos and stoops are elements that typically define entries. These features add a one-story element to the fronts of buildings, helping to establish a uniform sense of human scale along the block They are essential elements of the neighborhood that should be maintained. Other architectural details also contribute to the sense of character of the street, adding visual interest for pedestrians. Their continued use is strongly encouraged. Staff finds the entry element better defines the current entrance but finds the proposed stone material for the support columns to be out of character with the existing wood and stucco materials and do not maintain a visual continuity with the texture of the existmg and proposed materials for the Main Street faGade. Moreover, this is in direct conflict with Section 12.17 of the Guidelines that indicates, "when selecting materials, reflect the simple modest character of historic materials in their placement." Staff recommends the Applicant restudy the stone columns in order to achieve a more "simple modest character." Lastly, Staff finds the carport enclosure and curb cut elimination to be consistent with the overall character of the structure and Section 12. 6 of the Guidelines that states the importance o f "minimize[ing] the use of curb cuts along the street." B. Third Storv Addition The Applicant proposes to demolish the rear portion of the structure and replace it with a three-story element adjacent to the alley, which is currently one story high to accommodate an additional 8 lodge units. Clearly, this will increase the mass and volume of the structure. 0 6 Staffraised several issues pertaining to the appropriate placement of mass along the Main Street corridor. It should be stated that while this structure is not on the Inventory, it is in the Main Street Historic District. As such, scale and massing are certainly important issues in this context. Section 12.14 states that: the designs of new buildings should appear similar in scale to those seen traditionally in the district during the mining era. Generally, a new building should be one to two stories in height - E 1 1 21 1 1 111 1 1 1 111111111111111~111111 The proposed structure is three stories and placed along the rear and east portions of the, site. This third story will rise to about 30 feet to the ridge of the roofline from finished grade. As a result of this proposed massing, Staff raised the following points for discussion regarding the proposed structure's massing. 1) Mass located on the Allev: As proposed, the three stories along the alley represent a substantial change in the relationship between the Christmas Inn on Main Street and how it relates or transitions to the adjacent residential (R-6) zone across the alley to the north. In addition, the proposed massing on the rear and east side of the site represent an unbalanced massing away from the comer of Second and Main Streets where buildings of this size are able to celebrate their structure and massing. In this case, the massing is reduced as one reads the Second Street elevation from North to South toward the corner with Main Street: a prominent corner. Conversely, the massing located on the alley may preserve and further define the distinct two-story Christmas Inn Main Street faGa(le that is its defining feature. A third story on Main Street might further dwarf the pedestrian experience due to the structure's sheer size; again, the structure rests on 3.5 city lots spanning 106 feet of street frontage (39% of the block) which equates to approximately 30,000 of fa~ade area three stories high. In addition, the Applicant has worked with a neighbor behind the lodge which resulted in the separating of the massing on the alley into two sections. Lastly, it should be noted that none of the lodges on Main Street have three stories located on Main Street if at all on their sites. In fact, there are very few (if any) buildings which are three full stories in the Main Street Historic District. 7 2) Mass proposed on front: Proposing the three story mass on the front of the structure may favorable contribute to further defining the Main Street corridor similar to the 7th and Main Structure. Appropriately placed massing on the Street can better define the corridor as one looks down Main Street, rather that having buildings that step up and away from the street which do little to define the corridor. In this sense, maintaining the rear of the site to two stories continues to preserve the transition to the adjacent residential zones. Given the pros and cons of the massing, Staff contends that the massing, as proposed, allows the distinct two-story Main Street fa~?acle to remain the prominent defining feature. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood oftheparcel proposed for development, and , Staff Finding None of the structures on this particular block are historic landmarks. An eclectic mix of building types, sizes, and uses characterizes Main Street. Clearly, the Christmas Inn itself is a mix of architectural styles that adds to the eclectic mix of the neighborhood and of the District. The Guidelines recognize that lodges are unique anomalies in the District and should not be remodeled to resemble more Victorian-style structures nor should they be expanded in a way that detracts from the 19th century characteristics o f the District. The addition of the third story addition on the rear of the structure increases the mass of the building, butÂ·is set back 85 feet from Main Street, so the two-story look will remain in place; Staff feels this standard has been met and the proposed development maintains a consistent neighborhood character. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels; and Staff Finding The parcel is not identified as a historic resource and therefore the proposed development will not detract from historic resources on the subject parcel, proposed for development. The massing along the alley was purposefully broken up to minimize its impact on the adjacent historic house across the alley. Staff finds this standard is met. i The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Finding The parcel is not listed as a historic resource, but the proposal maintains the character defining front faQade that is of value to the community. and the proposed development will not detract from historic resources. Staff finds this standard is met. 8 Exemption from Partial Demolition The demolition, partial demolition, off-site relocation,. on-site relocation, or temporary relocation of a structure located within an "H," Historic Overlay District, may be exempt from meeting the applicable standards in Section 26.415.020(B),(CD, (D),(E) or (F) ifthe Historic Preservation Commission finds that the following conditions have been met: a. The structure is not identified on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. Staff Finding The property is not listed on the inventory. b. The structure is considered to be non-contributing to the historic district. c. The structure does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district, and its demolition, partial demolition, off-site relocation, on-site relocation, or temporall relocation does not impact the character of the historic district. Staff Finding The Christmas Inn is a prominent building and contributes to the identity of Main Street. The building is not listed on the inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. The portion proposed to be demolished and rebuilt as part of the three story addition is located in the rear of the site adjacent to the alley and not visible from Main Street. As it currently exists, it does not contribute to the Main Street Historic District and its demolition will not impact the character of the historic district. Staffbelieves this standard to be met. i The demolition, partial demolition, off-site relocation, on-site relocation or temporary relocation is necessary for the redevelopment of the parceL Staff Finding The partial demolition is necessary to accommodate the redevelopment proposal. e. The redevelopment or new development is reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission pursuant to Section 26.415.010. Staff Finding The Applicant has applied for Significant Review by the Historic Preservation Commission. Staff Recommendation for Phase I (Minor Review) Staff finds the proposed Phase I portion of the Christmas Inn expansion generally complies with the review standards for Minor Review with the exception of the proposed belvederes. Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission approve the Minor 9 Review request for Phase I for the expansion of the Christmas Inn with conditions as set forth in the resolution. Staff Recommendation for Phase 11 (Conceptual Review) Staff finds the proposed Phase n portion of the Christmas Inn expansion generally complies with the review standards for Conceptual Review. Specifically, Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission approve the Conceptual Review request for Phase I[ for the expansion of the Christmas Inn, with the condition that the Applicant can address the expanded vestibule materials to create a "simple modest charactef' at Final Review. Recommended Motion for Phase I (Minor Review) "I move to approve Resolution No. approving the Minor Review for Phase I for the Christmas Inn expansion, with the conditions." Recommended Motion for Phase 11 (Conceptual Review) "I move to continue the Christmas Inn review for Conceptual Development for Phase I[ for the Christmas Inn, with the conditions." Attachments: Exhibit A - Resolution No. _, Series of 2001 (Phase I) Exhibit B - Resolution No. , Series of 2001 (Phase Il) Exhibit C - Application for Minor Review (Phase I) Exhibit D - Application for Conceptual Review (Phase 11) Exhibit E - Architectural Inventory Form Exhibit F - Letters From Neighbors H:\My Documents\Current Cases\PUD and LP Projects\Christmas Inn\Christmas Inn Conceptual Memo.doc 10 Exhibit A RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2001 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING A MINOR REVIEW FOR PHASE I OF THE CHRISTMAS INN EXPANSION FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 232 WEST MAIN STREET, LOTS K, L, M, AND WESTERLY HALF OF LOT N, BLOCK 51, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID: 2735-124-40-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, Seven Seas Investment, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, is requesting Minor Review approval for Phase I for the expansion of the Christmas Inn, a property located at 232 West Main Street, Lots K, L, M, and the westerly one-half ofLot N, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen; WHEREAS, the Phase I (to be addressed as a Minor Review) proposal includes the following actions: k New stucco finish for the lower facades on Main and Second Streets; k Replacement 1" x 6" tongue and groove cedar siding for the upper facades; 1 A new replacement of the railing on the Main Street faede; > Addition of 6 belvederes along the Main Street roofridge; and k Replacement clad awning windows on the Second Street faâ„¢le; and WHEREAS, the property is currently located in the Office Zone District with Lodge Preservation and Main Street Historic District Overlays; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department determined the Application for Minor Review for Phase I meets the applicable review standards, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on October 24~,2001, at which time the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission considered and found the application to meet the review standards, and approved a Minor Review for Phase I for the Christmas Inn with conditions by a vote of to L - D. WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Historic Preservation Guidelines, the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the 11 approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements ofthe Aspen Area Community Plan and the Historic Preservation Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for Minor Review for Phase I for the expansion of the Christmas Inn, a property located at 232 West Main Street, Lots K, L, M, and westerly half ofLot N, Block 51, City and Townsite ofAspen, Colorado is approved with the following conditions: 1. That the Applicant remove the belvederes from the proposed plan; 2. That no elements are to be added to the lodge that did not previously exist outside of approval granted by the HPC and no existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor; 3. That the HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures. All such lighting shall comply with the City's Lighting Ordinance 0 pursuant to Section 26.575.150; 4. That there shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by appropriate Staff and monitor; 5. That fEp~ervation p!911 described above, as well as the conditions of approval will be required tkb,g*0f%Lon_the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints madUor theporposÂ¢*construction; 6. That the applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC Final Review Resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building pennit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit; 7. That the GGibâ€¢! Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a â€¢ j speciau*.ucens,Lwmpiene,eservation prior to receiving a building permit; 8. That the HPC monitors for this project shall be appointed by the HPC at the public hearing to be designated as or other appropriate designees as assigned; 12 Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Historic Preservation Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 24~~ day of October, 2001. 4**Â£- /h~ti--11717 0 / Approved as to Form: JUL , 16.- David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Deputy City Clerk 13 Exhibit B RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2001 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW REQUEST FOR PHASE II OF THE CHRISTMAS INN EXPANSION FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 232 WEST MAIN STREET, LOTS K, L, M, AND WESTERLY HALF OF LOT N, BLOCK 51, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID: 2735-124-40-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, Seven Seas Investment, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, LLC, is requesting Conceptual Review approval for Phase II for the expansion of the Christmas Inn, a property located at 232 West Main Street, Lots K, L, M, and the westerly one-half ofLot N, Block 51, City and Townsite ofAspen; and WHEREAS, Phase II (to be addressed in a Conceptual Review) includes the following: 1) Remodeling the existing lobby area by enclosing the current covered car pull-in / unloading area off Main Street, eliminating the curb cut on Main Street, and adding an entry vestibule for the front door, and 2) Partial demolition and replacement of the rear portion of the structure in order to add a new 3-story section in the rear ofthe structure, to accommodate 8 new lodge rooms and 3 affordable housing units as well as remodeling the interior courtyard; and WHEREAS, the property is currently located in the Office Zone District with Lodge Preservation and Main Street Historic District Overlays; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department determined the Application for Conceptual Review for Phase II meets the applicable review standards, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on October 24 2001, at which time the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission considered and found the application to meet the review standards, and approved the Conceptual Review for Phase II for the Christmas Inn, with conditions, by a vote of to L - D; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Â· Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the 14 Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan and the Historic Preservation Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for Conceptual Review approval for Phase II, a property located at 232 West Main Street Lots K, L, M, and westerly half of Lot N, Block 51, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado is approved with the following conditions: 1. Vkat th# applicant shall submit a demolition plan, as part of the building peRhit/plan set upon receiving Final Approval, indicating exactly what areas ' are ~0%6gmoved as part ofthe renovation; 2. 'Â¤at th,f applicant shall submit a preservation plan, as part of the building pefiniÂ¢plan set upon receiving Final Approval, indicating how the existing mate~which are to be retained, will be restored. -- The requirement is to r /repaiqall original materials and replicate only those that are detennined by HPC staff and monitor to be beyond salvage; 3. That no elements are to be added to the lodge that did not previously exist outside of approval granted by the HPC and no existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval o f staff and monitor; 4. That the HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures in compliance with the City's Lighting Ordinance pursuant to Section 26.575.150; 5. That there shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by appropriate Staff and designated HPC monitor; 6. <Chat-~09-_RI@@en-Â¥G-lescdked-aheE-9--well-*-th: conditions--of ~pproval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction; 15 = 7. That the applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC Final Review Resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit; 8. That the General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit; 9. That the HPC monitors for this project shall be appointed by the HPC at the public hearing to be designated as or other appropriate designees as assigned; and 10. That the Applicant shall be required to return the HPC, as part of Final Review, to present a restudied entrance vestibule on the Main Street fa~acle as described herein. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Historic Preservation Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 24th day of October, 2001. 16 Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney . HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Deputy City Clerk 17 E K 4; 6 1.4 E- c OAHP1403 Official eligibility determination Rev. 9/98 (OAHP use only) Date Iniuals COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Determined Eligible- NR Determined Not Eligible- NR Architectural Inventory Form Determined Not Eligible- SR Determined Eligible- SR (page 1 of 4) Need Data Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontnbuting to eligible NR District 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT. 1007 2. Temporary resource number: 232.WMA 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: Asnen 5. Historic building name: 6. Current building name: Christmas Inn 7. Building address: 232 West Main Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 8. Owner name and address: Seven Seas Investment LLC h -A' A.h L.-j / 1017 Eimwood Ave. Wilmette. IL 60091 / ht.Cky c 4*4â‚¬0*Ulzkkafbdbo#940ABLM21,4 - 4,4 -dIA.3 11. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 85 West SE lA of NW 1/4 of SE 1/4 of SE 44 of Section 12 10. UTM reference Zone 1 3 ; 3_ -_lk_ 12_ 4 5 5mE 4 3 3 9 4 8 5mN 11. USGS quad name: Asoen Quadrancle Year: 1960, Photo Rev. 1987 Map scale: 7.5' X 15' Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): K. L. & M Block: 51 Addition: Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comorised of Lots K, L. & M: Block 51 of the City and Townsite of Asoen. Assessors office Record Number: 2735-124-40-007 This descriotion was chosen as the most specific and customarv descriotion of the site. 111. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Irregular 15. Dimensions in feet: Length x Width 16. Number of stories: Two Story 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Stucco and Wood 18. Roof configuration: (enter no more than one): Gable Roof 19. Primary external roof material (enter no more than one): Asphalt Roof 20. Special features Center all that apply): Tower 1 - . 04... Resource Numbec 5PT.1007 Temporary Resource Number: 232.WMA Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: A larae two storv volumes arranged around a paved courtvard. ooen to the south. The bulk of the structure sits back from the edae of the street with a side qable roof, a verv low-oitched hip roof extension runs to the street on the west side. A square DIan tower sits on the end of the main structure at the east end with a single story extension back to the street. The main volume has stucco divided into numerous vertical oanels bv vertical wood elements imbedded in the surface, similar to half timberinq, on the lInDer level. This level is supported bv white CMU oiers with glass infillinq between the oiers at grade. A horizontal band of wood runs across the top 'of the oiers and separates the upper volume from the base. Three shallow bavs, covered bv small extensions of the roof, occupv the length of the main volume with a pair of verticallv prooortioned windows with diamond pattern muntins. One larger bav with a shed roof sits on the west end it has two larce fixed panes of diamond pattern class with an operable unit in the center. The hipped roof volume at the west corner has a second level balconv with a cut-out rail running around it andÂ· cennecting to the main volume. with sliding glass doors accessing the balcony and the grade level. The half-timberinq surface treatment exists on both levels here and turns the comer alonq the west side. At the opoosite end of the court the tower infills the corner, it has a stucco base rising up one and 1/2 levels and vertical siding running up the remaining surface, iust above the ridge of the main volume. The tower has a shallow hipped roof with a tall squar plan spire at the peak. The sidinq has decorative cut ends which overlay the stucco wall below, the south facing face of the tower has a round clock in the center of the wood siding area. A single storv cable roof volume runs from the tower out to the street. with some cut-out rail details and a similar pattern as seen on the main level of the lame volume. A single storv side cable log structure runs along the alley, with minimal aluminum windows, and returns to the rear of the tower structure. 22. Architectural style/building type: Modern Movements: Novelty 23. Landscaping or special setting features: Structure occupies a corner lot with sianificant trees on either side of the south facade. A series of young trees run the length of the site in typical street tree oattern. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: none IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate Actual 1957 Source of information: Asoen/Pitkin Community Development Department Files 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: 27. Builder/Contractor: Unknown Source of information: 28. 0Mginal owner: Unknown Source of information: Resource Number: 5PT. 1007 Temporary Resource Number: 232.WMA Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) 29. Construction history. (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): No specific records of alterations are available 30. Original location X Moved Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Domestic: Hotel 32. Intermediate use(s): 33. Current use(s): Domestic: Hotel 34. Site type(s): Main Street. mixed Small Lodae, Office and Residential 35. Historical background: - This structu re is reoresentative of Asoen's earlv develooment as a ski resort. The 1932 Winter Olvmoics in Lake Placid. NY soarked an enthusiasm for skiina and Eurooean stvle in the US. and skiers as well as lodae owners came to Asoen and brouaht the characteristic buildina stvle of the Tvrol to the area. 36. Sources of information: Asoen's Architectural Context. Post WWIL Dart of the 2000 Survev of Historic Sites and Structures. VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes No X Date of designation: Designating authority: 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; X C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction: or D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Qualifies under CriteMa Considerations A through G (see Manual) Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: . Architecture 40. PeMod of significance: Mid 1900's Skiina Develooment 41. Level of significance: National State Local X Resource Number: 5PT.1007 Temporary Resource Number: 232.WMA Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) 42. Statement of significance: This structure is significant for its position in the context of Aspen's development as an international skiing resort. It is indicative of the Europeans who came to participate in the develooment of the ski resort, and brouaht this European style with them. During this time manv resorts were based on this stvle of buildina. and ultimately the soort and the architectural stvle became svnonvmous. This structure includes some uniaue stvlistic elements that have been blended with the more traditional Chalet Stvle elements. however it still convevs the Chalet stvle aualities. Small lodaes were intearal to the develooment of skiina and tourism in the vallev. 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: Structure is intact VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: Eligible Not Eligible X Need Data 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes - No X Discuss: If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing Norlcontributing 46. If the building is in existing Natiohal Register district, is it: Contributing Noncontributing Vlll. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: R14: F8,9 Negatives filed at: Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 48. Report title: City of Aspen Uodate of Survev of Historic Sites and Structures, 2000 49. Date(s): 6/29/2000 50. Recorder(s): Suzannah Reid and Patrick Duffield 51. Organization: Reid Architects 52. Address: 412 North Mill Street, PO Box 1303, Aspen CO 81612 53. Phone number(s): 970 920 9225 NOTE: Please attach a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad. map indicating resource location, and photographs. Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 ' 232 W. Main St. 1 6*â‚¬ ~.1 -4-:=257 /'' r /x----4 7 ,/ i ~==11 /9*zzv-~ 44zt~ -4 Ell' i'K,1,6,/cil QÂ« /0,<.Af 4,"'"I~...' / ~Lj/449;*9-*.~I-:~-i'.-Tiw"fril X !! 66.-*r: . 4. 1-2.-4- ,//27~ =249 1/ Vvids-34 -32.14,7* Â»2~/ /7-2-1 , - ~AN :ri:y Â»*U..6 -x- *vixill'::mt:lb.*12 52TE#~illi~Il#,3ff,11216.r~51:r *-- 65<1"'Bil Ev,,# i 8 I 1-tÂ» ~R?41 -412 'f /,i*~64/ 454/il-6/Imil-l/ t': 4 11\ .\ek I Tt~xi~/w# 7* Fd fe ---- ''i,27 '7': 4.1 /6 1- itt==-A -LÂ»J 2 15 - - >AUUÂ» \.4,555;(irr:Jillililillilifi f~Ezill.-1- 1, '71 Lir~~i.~l......" 1 N1 22~ ' P_E-EL-:- --Â·22\ -7=E- t\ U~ .-.. 1.. u_- ..._1- 3,Â· g flin ,Â·.gr--2 4 f i '' r. -- I , -- - ~ -'S=:EN:Z:=4.~,i \, 'c r-'....Ii Â·. 0\\ ,- X ,-LE, -3:..Ff: frisif'-- 224 : * %6 4 **4*Jam:*d, 9%7<--4---S-:10Â·:/ _ -. t . - ant\.\1'4~,4---3-5---3.<,/1.0/7 -:- *t Itt f , ' FgÂ«/ r L . . ... 1 , 4 4 .- 3.--cs==-<i 4.-/-,~ 76,/rr==SUV.27%$10--) %./ - /-~J A f . Â·,4 ,0- fl I /!Al ' - 4 3 i 424"' Ad'-ff/5 ' ~ I///6- // .p ./ - 11 , *Â»*__ RA autte,(1 416---i.-* - , t.#I-,- '; 1 4 i;(ill r-\-/,-1 1 , 14 11-1 7, 7%~IN\----*4.--,c----,71-1 7/ V IN-.-ot d /4.9~~ ~ '/ .t;GOLE COURSE 1:~fer'er:44 1 1 ..,I -- r- -- . ./. 1 (' H / -#i##49.39.-1 ' >1~ , 1 < N-:.--- #4#%94<43093&~l/fit./4 . ' A. 1 21 ,9 Ch(7;YVT :Mv 'Â». i 7, , 1 1 /-- â€¢ / 1 ih~ Â· 3.. - - *- 1 z:r--- 7 , i,<Â· 14.k.' f A/(1'404 .P..% .wacxei' 1/ l :ff, ' 'F. , )1 14?7. '1 1.1;!1114- . /1 I X n / .- 1Â· t.\ , 5"2~263))1*/)~~42%9'~9 '~,i~-Â«eg_.. -,#,,I -- .1~:. - ./ ..9.4 1.-4 7.:cfkl~ 3..,BM J~n 3,1 4~ 4- i -42:u:Â»*79â‚¬fÂ» .... /. LHTÂ». 1 CU--9 --- 1\ . i h., I Ir?4NÂ¢kAÂ·Li.Eaw- .~ \ rifie ,'L- Â·Â·â€¢ Â· -Lâ€¢,4Â£W "amâ€¢, - - 4 - \ '\ .' t.4, I \ i ." ;414Â· C./*-:-AL"r -n=alÂ£1'/4,9-2-f -7- e - V-Fatimy 9 46,1~ G'&*arp' 77/0 J52:& '1. .-,d:%**U .. 72.7~~~'4..1.~ .<:9:: .\. 1~ . '0/ 1 7 . I - 3 0 7,46.1- "62&5:2444<. .441 'Addlp# O.<\~t~jii\~ ., A' ; u : 6-â€¢ .t=:1/ -â‚¬ 72 4-= dts, . Â»%. I. 1 ' , ' \ 99 :3\ ..Aht v --5--Ft<3>191.-,/.9, -Â», . 79.. ..4 1\\ .Â·-.Phhir- Â·Â·t.,+ - ..2-2/ a -4 - ..35,..ib 2,7-'.- Â·Al 4;,4 .0 -#3-02-.. <- ...... J \ - .0 , W\224\ CE< * 1 1. CA ../ . 1 .Ar :.=24 1,1 1 ~ - ~ ~~37<49\ - ' - '9# / :Fll -'- - --'- ., ~ ~â€¢,r~*ZZEJ'I~ ./\ 40 W ri= . ..11: ...r Â·Â· '4.4 ~ - 24>1 - ---h /' -JEUTZET<*er,~:' I ~~'.'..~/1 lili 7111 - <,St..'4:w - - -1 Nrk: I A .f ~~~'~i~'~ ~ ~~~~:-R:JU~---45;Ft*fL.~4*1~t~ 6~44 --11-2 Â·. .....1. /' I'./.-'lilli /8 /- 1 1 , / i., n...6 3, -**P- Â·Â»i~ai â€¢254-/~4 4 -9 It / Nâ‚¬1-JILL<.1/ 1 . A 49\ 4 ' 1 W -*--Il . -1 1 -'r-- # CK er .44.A ..,a 'mil in . 1.. 4%4~1~ , N 1;,1 -e nu ' f * . , ; 1 4 .. tf:% 1. W . +- 1- 1,1 1 .. 15 - n .. .- . #1-.irr/21#Lify/All ft 5542:===* 31 1/11 1 114 ~~CREE~ / ,\i' '. 11 L . \ 2 L \ -I- -..... \ . C NX. t. 1 *4. rÂ·\ - ~ 1 r L.-.55 11'f / 9 J.-ifi-/-1Ar, - 4,#rger Or --N-h \\ e . , 1 4 -1 *.E-*Rz=*=-4 ..1, 7 2-Ii-Al'b<~1- f--,~C ,&.4.394.~ u.â€¢d' -'JUÂ·:CL' ? f, '"- 1.01 11 . 2 41/,tty 2 11Â» -8./0 0944/ ;'. 1 ' : 1- --- 4 44 ~ 7 4111Â» i _,(i_.mitÂ«-: -<7142.ques-Lfti.~97*4/86*L<5<442663~ , i , ,/4 Â£ - , , â€ž-0.-~24-' 1, #,IC~~~L~E-&1 '1~9-21 #~tfah -1 .3 94\74 - 4- S 6-4~5~.~Af Â«4 ' .. e.t . 7-- + A A 9 - 1.- , r i 2' ./' ' , 49--:=~ 1 1 #'I. '// fj(fifi-#8*WijW . ' . ,c 2%' ,-34~ '~('itu#*64#fÂ«414it';,*-r-40417~~. v~.~f j-~iÂ°ht \, ,Â»\\ 11~~~11~ij 1(1 '1(ELy/.il~ .144 'i--- 4,0 -)W . \\ U rq),///'b//**0~' 1 1.- 11111't:4&-Xj]; )1:~1;1111(\1'l-"J/.7/Â»3 7/ E.ftl,p#Hy:3.~12 ,/U'' \ Sur/ey Sites are included within the City of Aspen !imfts. Sketch map for identifiation of ipedfic location and building contax[ .Aspen Quadrangle Colorado-Pitkin County 1960, Photo Revised 1987 â‚¬r. 1.' 1Â·74 7.5 Minure Survey~ 1 SCALE 1.24 SCo i , 0 1 111LE 12-- - - I '.-990 0 i 2122 >,ILS 20 MILS 0 1 '.too 1 'COC /CO 000 40'00 3000 :CCO 7000 FEET --- \\ 3 1 1 OLOMETER ----- \\/1 F /11. 1 h" N ..4 . . D e 3. I 59 - ..>r Â· - 4 4 i 41 - .. . =-2Â© I. 1 h:.32402_-6 L -- -. :eff . '11-i//9/I--45/ - ki- . 5/ 1 . . 1.1 1 tzâ‚¬ . ...1.. .1 .. I A -u,Â· .4.Â· - AP" 1 7 -1 t. Â·: Coef t. 2, Â· S. -. ../5.25 ' Â¥t .- L . C 9 2 2. Â·Â·:. - . .2 Z- )4-21111.- f *36 - 1 aa.! 21 1.-- -0 - - I. 1 - 5/ Â·tifl.. "W ~~' d!~Â·."f . q.... - '-a=r=Â®FETmr-Â· . .. ..J: â‚¬.. .........,4.54..... - -' .1 : 6,.: :It~f- â€¢64~7% L 0.4. t.'4= I :--9 .I .i...'7.'34.1 .Â· Â·.<Â· f .T~.5*.:':79'<0.~~=YS#tET -'5*.Li-0--:~:-21.ati-ye :*_<,:-*,..*r..,titity ~et: . - -4 1*. - i .1 0 11 E.3 1 1 1 j%->44~61-fi~<#1--r':,s ill ~i 9-li~jit-Â·f--0- i ~.... Â· ,Â·.Â· f::.1-~:f Â·97 k / ---/ ..', JI)obbs1166@aol.com, 11:33 AM 10/17/01 -0400, Christmas Inn Expansion Page 1 of 1 4-1/ k Â£- 20 0 1- From: JDobbsl 166@aol.com Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 11:33:15 EDT Subject: Christmas Inn Expansion To: fredj@ci.aspen.co.us X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10535 X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Suzannah Reid, Chair Today I received notice of the Christmas Inn proposed expansion. I am very opposed to their desire to expand to three stories. I own a home on the corner of Second and Bleeker, 207 N. Second. The view of Aspen Mountain was the main reason I bought the lot If the city allows this expansion, my view will change significantly for the worse. Anyone walking on Second S*â‚¬ toward Main will also have their view of Aspen Mountain restricted. Please do not allow this three story exbansion whether on Main Street or on the alley side. Do not open the door to other three level expansion along Main Street. I would hate for Aspen to look like Vail. Respectfully, John C Dobbs RECEIVED 0 11 Printed for Fred Jarman <fredj@ci.aspen.co.us> 10/17/01 *11]r. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Proposed new historic preservation ordinance DATE: October 24, 2001 Attached you will find the latest draft of the new ordinance for our program. Please review it in detail and write comments to turn in to me. We will discuss it as a group somewhat briefly at the October 24th meeting. Your input will be incorporated into the next draft, which will be provided to you on or about October 31St, in preparation for the worksession with Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission. There will be a detailed presentation of the ordinance at that time. On Novembet 14th, HPC will hold the first public hearing and be asked to endorse the final ordinance. We hope to be through the adoption process in December, which is the goal we set with the public. If we able to achieve this, we will go back to reviewing specific properties for the inventory in the new year.