HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20190327
AGENDA
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
March 27, 2019
5:00 PM City Council Meeting Room
130 S Galena Street, Aspen
I. 12:00 SITE VISITS
II. 4:30 INTRODUCTION
A. Roll call
B. Approval of minutes
Minutes - March 13, 2019
C. Public Comments
D. Commissioner member comments
E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent)
F. Project Monitoring
G. Staff comments
HPC Introduction to Sara Ott, Interim City Manager
H. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued
I. Submit public notice for agenda items
J. Call-up reports
K. HPC typical proceedings
III. OLD BUSINESS
A. None.
IV. 4:45 NEW BUSINESS
A. 4:45 300 W. Main, Relocation and Floor Area Bonus- PUBLIC HEARING
B. 5:15 549 Race Alley, Minor Development- PUBLIC HEARING
V. 6:15 ADJOURN
Next Resolution Number: 4
TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM, NEW
BUSINESS
Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH)
Staff presentation (5 minutes)
Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes)
Applicant presentation (20 minutes)
Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes)
Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes)
Applicant Rebuttal
Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed (5 minutes)
HPC discussion (15 minutes)
Motion (5 minutes)
*Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met.
No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4)
members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct
any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require
the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of
the members of the commission then present and voting.
Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission March 13, 2019
1
Public Comment not on the Agenda ............................................................................................................. 2
Commission Comments ................................................................................................................................ 2
Staff Comments ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Other Comments ........................................................................................................................................... 2
Conflicts of Interest ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Minutes ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
333 W. Bleeker – Major Development, Relocation and Setback Variations ............................................... 2
330 E. Main St – Hotel Jerome – Minor Development ................................................................................. 5
P1
II.B.
Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission March 13, 2019
2
At 4:30 p.m.; Gretchen Greenwood called the regular meeting to order with Commission Members Roger
Moyer, Nora Berko, Scott Kendrick and Bob Blaich present. Also present were Andrea Bryan and Linda
Manning.
Public Comment not on the Agenda
None.
Commission Comments
Ms. Berko asked if there is any movement around Main Street Bakery. Ms. Simon said there is a rumor
the property is being sold.
Staff Comments
Ms. Simon said they issued one certificate of no negative effect for windows at the Flora Dora building.
It is a large Victorian that has been expanded for office use. All of the original windows have been
replaced in the past
Other Comments
Ms. Simon said she has no project monitoring tonight. She will not be at the next meeting. Council had
first reading for the HP benefits on Monday. She will send updated language on the light well issue.
Second reading will be on April 8th. Council was almost entirely focused on affordable housing. They
basically said they want to stop doing the waiver. We want to try to keep alternatives on the table. Ms.
Yoon said 931 was presented for notice of call up. Council did not request call up.
Conflicts of Interest
None.
Minutes
Mr. Moyer moved to approve the minutes from February 27, 2019; seconded by Ms. Greenwood. All in
favor, motion carried.
333 W. Bleeker – Major Development, Relocation and Setback Variations
Ms. Yoon said this project was continued for restudy. The property is located on a corner lot on Bleeker
and 3rd. It is located in the R6 zone on a 3,000 square foot lot. There was a lot split in 2002. The
applicant is seeking conceptual major development, relocation and setback variations. For the revised
design the applicant no longer plans to move the asset forward or to the east. It will need to be suspended
to excavate the basement. They propose to relocate the historic outbuilding by rotating the structure to
have the opening face the alley. An eight foot connector is still proposed to connect the new one story
addition. It is pretty clear there has been constant change when comparing the Sandborn maps. The
outbuilding is not original to its current location. Staff can support the proposal to rotate the outbuilding
and remove the enclosed rear porch addition. Staff recommended restudy of the proposed skylight
feature. It was abutting against the historic landmark. It was not minimal in size and altered the
condition with the landmark and how it meets grade. Staff requested that feature be restudied. The
applicant has reduced the size of this feature, but staff is still concerned with the historic relationship with
the landmark and grade. It is not maintained with this particular side of the landmark and the
P2
II.B.
Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission March 13, 2019
3
recommendation is to further reduce the skylight. Changes were also made to the lightwells. The
applicant has revised so there are no longer floating lightwells in the new plan. There are two that abut the
resource. Staff wants to make sure the curb height for the proposed lightwells around the landmark are
minimized in height as to not cover any historic materials. Staff has been in ongoing conversations
related to stormwater mitigation. It has been determined they do need a drywell. The main concern is
that no feature of the stormwater mitigation is located in the foreground of the resource. Staff
recommends continued study of this process. The application is still proposing fenestration changes to
the resource and outbuilding. On the outbuilding it was to remove the non historic skylights. On the
historic house they are proposing to remove a non historic sliding door and changes to a series of
windows to two double hung windows. Staff recommends the fenestration changes require more study of
existing framing to determine that they are not original. These changes can be addressed during
construction and demolition. Staff and HPC had concerns with the one story addition related to the roof
form and fenestration because the design did not meet the guideline 10.6. The applicant redesigned the
roof and increased the siding on the addition. The location of the chimney was moved to the west
elevation. Staff understands the explanation regarding the outbuilding covering the addition from direct
view but it is important the new addition meets the design guidelines. Since it is on a corner lot there are
more points of exposure than just straight on. Staff finds the redesign is moving in the right direction, but
the proposed 8 12 pitch does not relate to any pitches seen on the landmark. We are asking for more
study of the pitch. In terms of materials, the new addition does draw from the landmark, but the glazing
remains the dominant material of choice. The roofing material doesn’t relate to the historic landmark.
Since the memo the size of the chimney has been redesigned. Staff recommends restudy so it strongly
relates to the landmark. Staff recommends the applicant continues to work with engineering on the
proposed path along the ditch. For the setback, staff is in support for the variation requests. They
reinforce the pattern of the district where the parking access is located to the alley. The overall design is
moving in the right direction. We recommend continuation for restudy for new addition compatibility
with the landmark.
Applicant
Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, said the biggest change is we are no longer proposing to move the
historic house. We are still proposing to rotate the outbuilding garage. We reworked the form on the
addition. It is replaced with a traditional pitched roof. We looked at matching the pitches of the historic
roofs but they are very steep. We did not feel it was appropriate to match the pitch since it would make
the addition taller than the historic buildings. While we recognize it is on a corner lot, it is not a standard
corner lot. The 3rd street elevation helps to hide almost all of the addition. We feel we have done more
than enough in terms of materials and form to satisfy guideline 10.6. For the skylights we eliminated the
floating skylight. On the east, we removed 4 or 5 feet of length. We feel we are consistent with the
guideline. The skylight is not visible from the street. On the drywell we are willing to look in to an
alternative location. If we have to it will require a variance from the engineering department. I don’t
consider foreground to include underground. I feel from an engineering perspective it is the best place to
put it.
Rally Dupps, architect, said we have been working with Josh Rice and because of the large green roof he
believes we will not need a very large dry well.
Mr. Halferty asked about the proposed location for the drywell. Mr. Dupps showed it on the site plan.
Mr. Halferty asked how does the subgrade work. Mr. Dupps said it is a typical drywell with a steel grate
with mesh and sod on top. Ms. Simon said the only one I know is in Nora’s front yard. I haven’t heard
quite what you are describing.
Ms. Berko said the skylight is in addition to the light well. Mr. Haas replied correct. Ms. Berko asked
what are you thinking for the chimney, brick or sandstone. Mr. Dupps said that is a good question. We
are happy to design anything. The client is happy to make it wood to match the house. Ms. Berko asked
is there a reason why it can’t be on the east where it can’t be seen. Mr. Dupps stated we thought it would
be hidden by the garage. Mr. Haas said every time we put stuff on the east it means less room for the
trees we have to mitigate for. Ms. Berko asked are there trees on the west. Mr. Dupps replied the
cottonwoods stay.
P3
II.B.
Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission March 13, 2019
4
Mr. Kendrick said rotating the outbuilding and the one foot setback, how will you get vehicles in and out.
It is narrow as is. Mr. Haas said the building today is less set back. This corner is the best spot for
getting any turning motion. Mr. Haas said as it is today you can’t get in the garage because there is a
curb in front of the driveway. Mr. Kendrick said if you went with a matching roof pitch how much higher
would it be. Mr. Dupps estimated 5 to 7 feet higher. Mr. Kendrick said I think there might be a happy
medium. Mr. Haas said we were going for compatible not matching.
Ms. Greenwood asked is the addition elevated off the ground. Mr. Dupps said the addition is at the same
finished level as the house. At the front it is about 18 inches and 12 at the back. Ms. Greenwood asked
is there a possibility to set the addition at grade. It would have been good to see some studies of the roof
at this point. What is the reason for the one foot off the alley. Mr. Haas said having some yard area and
exposing the historic house.
Ms. Berko asked why was the link not 10 feet. Mr. Haas said we are already too close to the alley.
Ms. Greenwood open the public comment. There was none. Ms. Greenwood close the public comment.
Discussion.
Ms. Greenwood said regarding the compatibility of the addition in terms of material selection, the size of
the windows negate the positive and negative space with what is occurring with the resource. There are
smaller openings with more material on the building. That is not compatible as well, in my opinion. I
agree with staff that this is not yet ready. The building is not compatible and does not belong on the
property with two historic resources. There is no relationship visually or design guideline wise to either
resource. There is minor restoration going on. We typically award variances for excellent preservation
efforts. I don’t understand the location of the historic outbuilding one foot off the alley. There is a
solution for moving it more to the north for a better relationship to the resource. I’m in favor of
supporting the staff recommendations of further study and work. There are better solutions. I support the
idea that the fireplace feels incompatible and should be hidden and on the east side of the proposed
addition. The windows need restudied for more compatibility with the resource.
Mr. Kendrick said he agrees with everything except the fireplace. It could be mitigated with materials.
Ms. Greenwood said that is a good point.
Ms. Berko said she would like to support the staff recommendation. She would like noted that the small
windows if historic need to be kept. She does not support the rear yard setback on the outbuilding. It is a
burden on the public not to use the alley. It should be moved to the north. Setbacks are there for good
reasons and if buildings need to be smaller to respect them then they should.
Ms. Greenwood asked about the sky light. Mr. Kendrick said it depends on the height. Ms. Greenwood
said there is an importance for natural light. She does not have a huge problem with them. It is probably
a good solution.
Mr. Moyer said he supports staff. He does not have a problem with the slope of the roof. Using asphalt
shingles would be good. The garage should be pushed more north. If there is an issue with the trees we
can deal with parks. The skylight on the east side is not an issue or a problem. He questions the need for
a fireplace in the world for which we live. Why do we need a protrusion with a gas fireplace. He would
support the fireplace on the east. Staff and monitor can deal with the walkway on the east. If the
windows are historic they should be kept. If not double hung are fine.
Mr. Halferty said it is getting there as far as staff has indicated. He agrees with staff on the majority of
the comments. He is not convinced on the pitch of the roof. It is better architecture then the prior
application. He agrees with the comments on the garage. There is enough room on the site that it could
be moved to the north. The fireplace is an architecture element and it would be better if it is minimized.
He does not support moving it to the east. He is ok with the skylight on the east side, it is 50 feet off the
street. The drywell, with additional study, either location is ok. He would like some detail on the sod and
relationship to grade. The walkway, from the west, he would be in agreement with the pavers. On the
outbuilding he would like it shifted more to the north for the alley condition and relationship to the
resource. He appreciates the reduction in the skylights. The glazing versus wall proportions on the
addition could be restudied. He could support this with additional tweeks.
Mr. Blaich said he agrees with Jeff’s comments.
P4
II.B.
Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission March 13, 2019
5
Ms. Greenwood said we are following staff recommendations. Restudy the form and materials of the
addition. Regarding the skylights, we support what the applicant has proposed so we can eliminate
number 2. 3 restudy the location of the drywell. They will be doing that regardless, so we can leave it in.
4, restudy the proposed secondary walkway. That can be handled at another time. Ms. Berko said she
would like to leave it in. 5, during construction investigate framing on the west and south for any
evidence of historic materials. We should leave it in. Besides number 2 I think that covers the form and
materials. The windows should be added to number 1. Ms. Berko said the fireplace should be included.
Mr. Haas said what I’m hearing is push the garage further off the alley. Ms. Greenwood said I think it is
more about the usefulness of the alley.
Mr. Kendrick moved to continue 333 W Bleeker to April 24, 2019; seconded by Ms. Berko. All in favor,
motion carried.
330 E. Main St – Hotel Jerome – Minor Development
Ms. Berko recused herself
Ms. Simon said this is for the courtyard at the Hotel Jerome. When the hotel went through the most
recent renovation we approved the landscape plan. They executed the plan and received a CO. Last
summer Tony came in with the struggles of the grass and asked if they could install synthetic grass for the
season. We permitted that. He is now back asking to install the grass permanently. We are concerned
about allowing it. We have not supported the request. We have suggested they come up with an
alternative that may be hardscape. Engineering and parks have a concern that it drains properly.
Applicant
Tony Delucia, general manager
Adam Mekies design workshop
Tony Delucia, general manager, said he has been at the Jerome for 31 years. Grass has been an issue the
entire time. We resod every spring and patch the rest of the summer. Last summer we laid the ground
with irrigation looking for a proper solution. We completed the project and opened the patio. The grass
died. We relaid sod and it still wouldn’t grow. At one point we had green spray paint. We came to staff
and proposed synthetic turf. Once we put the turf down people had kids out there and did yoga. With
hard scape you can’t do that. From the street this is appealing. In the winter we cover it with burlap so
you don’t see green. The garden historically had grass on it. We went out and got the best turf we could
that looked as real as possible.
Ms. Greenwood asked why is the grass failing. Mr. Delucia replied traffic. Last summer we served 5,000
more people than the summer before. The number of private functions has increased. A lot of people are
utilizing the space.
Mr. Kendrick asked what is the lifespan of the artificial. Adam Mekies, landscape architect, replied 10 to
15 years is the warranty. The longer it is there the more natural it looks. Mr. Kendrick asked when it is
time to replace the turf, I don’ t want a blanket approval. I want a similar quality. Ms. Simon said we
would want the burlap a condition as well. Mr. Moyer said there is a better solution than burlap.
Mr. Mekies said it really is the traffic. We installed 14 inches of USG heavy traffic soils.
Mr. Halferty said I understand the traffic. Is it something as simple as irrigation. Mr. Mekies said we had
Heinz irrigation, with a history of no total failures, reprogram the irrigation. We tried multiple irrigation
patterns. None of them improved the condition. Mr. Moyer said there is nothing you could put there
other than a path that would keep the grass alive. The fact we have artificial turf and it can be used is a
must. It won’t waste water, it will always look good and it is indestructible. I think it is a brilliant
solution. It saves us from having more hard pavement.
Ms. Greenwood said the concern of this is the precedent it is setting. Ms. Simon said we support using
natural materials for everything. We had a discussion about this being quite unique downtown with
events and food service. It is a different circumstance. Ms. Greenwood said I’m not afraid of precedent
because we take every property individually. Mr. Blaich said I’m very emotional about this project. I
support this. I recognize your concern. I think this is a very good solution.
P5
II.B.
Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission March 13, 2019
6
Ms. Greenwood said it is a commercial space used for commercial functions. It is not just a landscaped
yard. I’m not in favor of it but for your application it is essential.
Mr. Halferty asked have you tried other investigative lawns like a putting green. Mr. Mekies replied I’ve
never learned more about grass than on this project. We sent the contractor on an overnight drive to learn
more about grass. I spoke to a number of growers who custom grew grass for Aspen. I’ve never seen a
traffic condition like this.
Mr. Kendrick moved to approve Resolution #3 approving the use of artificial turf to be covered with
unobtrusive material in the winter and to be reviewed again when time to be replaced; seconded by Mr.
Blaich. All in favor, motion carried.
At 6:00 p.m. Mr. Halferty moved to adjourn; seconded by Mr. Kendrick. All in favor, motion carried.
Linda Manning
City Clerk
P6
II.B.
C:\Program Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\9754889E-C862-
407A-A736-29A6F5E22213\15916.doc
3/21/2019
HPC PROJECT MONITORS- projects in bold are under construction
Nora Berko 1102 Waters
602 E. Hyman
210 S. First
333 W. Bleeker
Bob Blaich Lot 2, 202 Monarch Subdivision
209 E. Bleeker
300 E. Hyman, Crystal Palace
128 E. Main, Sardy House
Gretchen Greenwood 124 W. Hallam
411 E. Hyman
300 E. Hyman, Crystal Palace
101 W. Main, Molly Gibson Lodge
201 E. Main
834 W. Hallam
420 E. Hyman
Jeff Halferty 232 E. Main
541 Race Alley
208 E. Main
303 E. Main
517 E. Hopkins
533 W. Hallam
110 W. Main, Hotel Aspen
Roger Moyer 500 W. Main
223 E. Hallam
300 W. Main
Richard Lai 122 W. Main
211 W. Main
Scott Kendrick 303 E. Main
517 E. Hopkins
419 E. Hyman
Sheri Sanzone 135 E. Cooper
Need to assign:
134 W. Hopkins
422/434 E. Cooper
529-535 E. Cooper, Stein Building
305/307 S. Mill
534 E. Cooper
210 W. Main
P7
II.F.
TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA
ITEM, NEW BUSINESS
Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH)
Staff presentation (5 minutes)
Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes)
Applicant presentation (20 minutes)
Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes)
Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes)
Applicant rebuttal (5 minutes)
Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed (5 minutes)
HPC discussion (15 minutes)
Motion (5 minutes)
*Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met.
No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least
four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present
shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All
actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than
three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting.
Procedure for amending motions:
A “friendly amendment” to a Motion is a request by a commissioner to the commissioner
who made the Motion and to the commissioner who seconded it, to amend their Motion.
If either of these two do not accept the “friendly” amendment request, the requesting
commissioner may make a formal motion to amend the Motion along the lines he/she
previously requested. If there is no second to the motion to amend the Motion, there is
no further discussion on the motion to amend, it dies for a lack of a second; discussion
and voting on the Motion may then proceed.
If there is a second to the motion to amend the Motion, it can be discussed and must be
voted upon before any further discussion and voting on the Motion for which the
amendment was requested. If the vote is in favor of amending the Motion, discussion and
voting then proceeds on the Amended Motion. If the vote on the motion to amend fails,
discussion and voting on the Motion as originally proposed may then proceed.
P8
II.K.
Page 1 of 4
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer
MEETING DATE: March 27, 2019
RE: 300 W. Main Street- Relocation and Floor Area bonus, PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICANT /OWNER:
Dennis Chookaszian
REPRESENTATIVE:
Charles Cunniffe Architects
LOCATION:
Street Address:
300 W. Main Street
Legal Description:
Lots Q, R and S, Block 44, City
and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado
Parcel Identification Number:
PID# 2735-124-41-006
CURRENT ZONING & USE:
Mixed Use Zone District,
Single-family home
PROPOSED ZONING & USE:
No change
SUMMARY: The subject property contains a 1944 log cabin with a
1980s addition. In May 2018 HPC approved a re-cladding of the
addition and alterations to its roof. There was no proposed
relocation of the cabin or new basement development, though an
exterior stair to the existing below grade space under the
addition was requested and approved. Floor area was not
available to add the stair, so HPC allowed a 40 square foot bonus
as a preservation benefit.
The project is now
moving towards building
permit. The applicant
wishes to underpin the
historic log cabin and
excavate a full basement
beneath it for storage.
This requires HPC
approval to ensure the
resource is protected.
The basement also
increases floor area by
110 square feet, so an
additional bonus is requested, which would bring the total award
to 250 square feet.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends HPC approve the request for Relocation, but
not the Floor Area Bonus, finding the criteria for this benefit are
not met.
300
P9
IV.A.
Page 2 of 4
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
BACKGROUND:
300 W. Main is a 9,000 square foot landmarked property located in the Main Street Historic District.
The property was designated early in the City’s discussion of mid-century preservation as a
representation of the Rustic Style in Aspen. The log structure on the site was built in 1944 and was
expanded in 1988. There are numerous large trees surrounding the historic resource today.
REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals:
• Relocation (Section 26.415.090.C) to excavate a basement with the cabin left in place.
• Floor Area Bonus (Section 26.415.110.F) granting 110 square feet to create the new storage area.
The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is the final review authority, however this project is subject
to Call-up Notice to City Council.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Relocation approval would allow the historic cabin to remain in place while the foundation is
underpinned for the construction of a full height basement. Staff finds that the criteria for Relocation
and the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines are met, as described in Exhibit A. As a condition, a
financial assurance will be held by the City until the work is completed. The City Parks Department was
previously supportive of a larger project on this site that involved potentially moving the historic
resource closer to trees. That concept was withdrawn, but the applicant must still coordinate their
excavation plans with Parks’ tree protection regulations.
Staff does not find that the criteria are met for a Floor Area Bonus for this application. The 2018 approval
for 40 square feet was reasonable to improve use of the existing basement and was granted partly in
response to the owner’s commitment at that time to install appropriate roof materials on the resource,
and to remove a somewhat intrusive ramp at the front of the structure. Any further bonus for new
development ought to include additional improvement to the circumstances of the historic resource.
While it could be argued that this adjustment to the approved project will improve the condition of the
foundation under the resource, that could be accomplished without a full basement.
In making findings on the floor area bonus criteria, staff reflected not only on the new basement
excavation, but also the May 2018 remodel approval. Staff recommends that any additional bonus award
to this property be reserved for such time as a more sympathetic, more physically separated addition
can be made to the log cabin. Renderings of the approved remodel are attached as Exhibit D.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission approve Relocation, but not the Floor Area
Bonus. The work can proceed if it can be redesigned to be completed within the established floor area
P10
IV.A.
Page 3 of 4
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
limit of 3,805, which includes a legally established overage of 105 square feet and a previously granted
Floor Area Bonus of 40 square feet. Conditions of approval are:
1. A financial assurance of $30,000, in the form of a letter of credit, cashier’s check or personal
check, must be provided at the time of building permit application and will be held by the City
until the basement construction is successfully completed.
2. The existing exposed foundation at the historic resource is to be preserved, and repaired if
needed, after approval by staff and monitor.
3. The applicant must coordinate with the Parks Department regarding protection of all trees in the
vicinity of the new basement.
4. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested
for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any
failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the
forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to
properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180
days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said
vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of
Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific
development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain
a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a
newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice
advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a
vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan,
and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the
Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes,
pertaining to the following described property: 300 W. Main Street.
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and
approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City
of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval.
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the
period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the
date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section
26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution
and the Aspen Home Rule Charter.
P11
IV.A.
Page 4 of 4
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution #____, Series of 2019
Exhibit A – Relocation Criteria/Staff Findings
Exhibit B – Floor Area Bonus Criteria/Staff Findings
Exhibit C – Application
Exhibit D – Renderings of approved addition remodel, May 2018
P12
IV.A.
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2019
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
GRANTING RELOCATION APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 300 W.
MAIN STREET, LOTS Q, R AND S, BLOCK 44, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-41-006
WHEREAS, the applicant, Dennis Chookaszian, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects,
submitted an application requesting Relocation and a Floor Area Bonus for the property located
at 300 W. Main Street, Lots Q, R and S, Block 44, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been
submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the
procedures established for their review;” and
WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen
Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property; and
WHEREAS, for approval of a Floor Area Bonus, the application shall meet the requirements
of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.F, Floor Area Bonus; and
WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for
compliance with the applicable review standards and recommended approval of Relocation but
not the bonus; and,
WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on March , 2019. HPC considered the application, the
staff memo and public comments, and found the proposed Relocation, but not the Floor Area
Bonus, to be consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a
vote of __ to __.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
Section 1: Relocation Approval
HPC hereby approves Relocation with the following conditions:
1. A financial assurance of $30,000, in the form of a letter of credit, cashier’s check or
personal check, must be provided at the time of building permit application and will be
held by the City until the basement construction is successfully completed.
2. The existing exposed foundation at the historic resource is to be preserved, and
repaired if needed, after approval by staff and monitor.
P13
IV.A.
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019
Page 2 of 3
3. The applicant must coordinate with the Parks Department regarding protection of all
trees in the vicinity of the new basement.
4. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development
plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development
order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to
this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless
otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements
required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of
the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights
and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050
(Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan
shall not result in the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews
necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk
shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of
a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this
Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific
development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of
three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24,
Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property:
300 W. Main Street.
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent
reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and
ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not
inconsistent with this approval.
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial
review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not
begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval
as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as
set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter.
Section 2: Material Representations
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 Community Development Department, the Historic
Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan
development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless
amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority.
P14
IV.A.
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019
Page 3 of 3
Section 3: Existing Litigation
This Resolution shall not affect 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: Severability
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 _____ day of _______, 2019.
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content:
_________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________
Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Bob Blaich, Vice-Chair
ATTEST:
_________________________________________________________________
Linda Manning, City Clerk
P15
IV.A.
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit A
Relocation Criteria
Staff Findings
26.415.090.C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building,
structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following
standards:
1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect
the character of the historic district; or
2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is
located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or
P16
IV.A.
Page 2 of 2
3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or
4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the
character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect
the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic,
architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and
Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met:
1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the
physical impacts of relocation;
2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and
3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation
of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security.
Staff Finding: The historic cabin is proposed to remain in place, while the foundation is underpinned to
allow for the construction of a full height basement. The applicant has provided an explanation of the
proposed approach from their structural engineer.
The design guidelines, namely Guideline 9.1, below, encourage the development of basement space
without actual relocation of the resource.
9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in
place may help to preserve the historic fabric.
• This activity will require the same level of documentation, structural assessment, and posting of
financial assurances as a building relocation.
Staff finds that the review criteria are met. There is no impact on the character or integrity of the historic
building. The existing exposed foundation will be unchanged. Adequate demonstration that the
building can withstand the below grade alteration has been provided. The applicant is required to
provide a financial security in the form of a bond, letter of credit or personal check in the amount of
$30,000 until the work is fully completed.
P17
IV.A.
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit B
Floor Area Bonus Criteria
Staff Findings
26.415.110.F. Floor area bonus.
1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet
of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered
for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that:
a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines;
b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a
manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building;
c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance;
d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's
form, materials or openings;
P18
IV.A.
Page 2 of 2
e) The construction materials are of the highest quality;
f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building;
g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or
h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained.
2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole
discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project
and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that
demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded
additional floor area.
3. The decision to grant a floor area bonus for major development projects will occur as part of the
approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Subsection 26.415.070.D. The floor
area bonus may also be approved as part of a Historic Landmark Lot Split Review.
4. Floor area bonuses are cumulative. A property shall receive no more than 500 square feet total.
Staff Finding: In May 2018, the applicant received HPC approval for a remodel of the 1980s era addition
to this historic structure. The approval included the granting of a 40 square foot floor area bonus to
allow for a new exterior stair to the existing basement below the addition. The basement currently has
no egress, so improvements were necessary. With regard to the floor area bonus criteria, it was found
that the stairwell would improve the usability of the property with a minimal above grade impact and
the bonus request was perceived to be reasonable. The applicant also committed to undertaking
restoration work to the roof of the historic resource and removing a ramp at the front of the house.
Like the previous floor area bonus request, this one has no above grade impact, so concerns about
overburdening the historic resource are lessened. However, the development on the site does not meet
current guidelines for additions The proposed remodel was found to be acceptable and to perhaps
improve some of the relationship to the historic resource, however the fundamental issues that there is
limited separation between the new and old remain. The addition wraps around the historic log cabin
in a way that would not be allowed today. Staff cannot make a finding that a 250 square foot floor area
bonus (the total including the 40 square feet previously granted) is appropriate. Staff recommends the
applicant rework the interior of the project in another way in order to build the proposed basement
below the resource within the 3,805 square feet currently permitted for the property.
P19
IV.A.
300 W Main Street
HPC Temporary Relocation Review
Submitted By:
Charles Cunniffe Architects
610 E Hyman Ave
Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-5590
22 January 2019
P20
IV.A.
1
Table of Contents Page
I. Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………….………2
II. Property Description…………………………………………………………………………………….…...….3
III. Character Defining Features………………………………………………………………………….…...….4
IV. Variance Request – Floor Area Bonus………………….………………………………………………..….5
V. Relocation Request………………………...………...………………………………………………………....6
VI. Historic Preservation – Design Guideline Review…………………...………………………………..…....8
VII. Conclusion…..………………………………………………………………………………………......………34
Appendix
Appendix A – Photos of Existing Conditions
Appendix B – Historic Photographs
Appendix C – Cabin Foundation Details
Exhibits
#1 Proof of Ownership
#2 Letter Authorizing Submission of Application
#3 Pre-Application Conference Summary
#4 Land Use Application
#5 HOA Compliance Form
#6 List of Adjacent Property Owners
#7 Written Report of Structural Integrity
Drawings
Area Calculations
Improvement Survey
Proposed Floor Plans
Proposed Site Plan
Vicinity Map
P21
IV.A.
2
I. Introduction
This is an application to excavate the basement below the historic resource at 300 W. Main Street in Aspen. The
property is a landmarked 9,000 sf parcel, located within the Main Street Historic District and zoned Mixed Use
(MU). The property’s parcel ID number is 273512441006. The Land referred to is located in the County of Pitkin,
State of Colorado, and described as follows:
Lots Q, R, and S,
Block 44,
City and Townsite of Aspen
300 W Main St is owned by Dennis Chookaszian. Proof of ownership is provided in the form of a certificate
provided by a title insurance company (see Exhibit #1). Dennis Chookaszian (hereinafter, “the applicant”) has
designated Charles Cunniffe Architects as its representative for this application. A letter from Dennis
Chookaszian authorizing the submission of this application is attached hereto as Exhibit #2.
A pre-application meeting was held between the applicant and the staff of the Community Development
Department prior to the submission of this application. A copy of the pre-application form staff provided to the
applicant is attached hereto as Exhibit #3. The form indicates that the application will be subject to the
following Land Use Code Review Procedures:
Land Use Code Section(s)
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.415.090 Relocation of Designated Historic Properties
26.415.120 Appeals, notice to City Council and call up
26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements
26.710.180 Mixed Use (MU) zone district
The following sections of this application are organized to demonstrate how the proposal complies with the
applicable review standards for each of these review procedures. First however, some background information
is presented to summarize existing conditions at the property.
P22
IV.A.
3
II. Property Description
The 300 W Main Street property consists of a log cabin, completed in 1944, and an addition to the original
structure, completed in 1988. The historic cabin sits at the center of the property, spanning all three townsite
lots. The non-historic addition is located on a portion of lots Q and R. The original cabin, which is approximately
1,400 sf in size, is identified on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, approved by
Ordinance 21, Series of 1988. While only built in 1944, it was historically designated due to the “type, style of
architecture, and construction” and was further recognized as a “noteworthy surviving example of a style
becoming rare in the locale or is identified with a street scene or other landscape.” (Staff memorandum, dated
13 June 1988, page 5). Moreover, the large spruce trees were also recognized as providing, “a special, rustic
character to the site and contribute to a sense of maturity, permanence, and visual relief from the buildings on
Main Street. (IBID, page 6). The addition consists of a wood framed structure attached to the log cabin on the
north and west sides. The exterior cladding of the 1988 addition consists of wood siding darker in appearance
than the original logs, differentiating itself from the cabin. A green standing seam metal roof was added to the
historic cabin to match the new roof of the 1988 addition. The roof structure of the 1988 addition consists of
complex combinations of gabled and shed roofs, with portions of the gabled roof at an elevation higher than
the ridgeline of the log cabin.
The owner has recently received HPC Minor Development approval for a remodel that retains aspects of the existing
addition, with revisions to roof form, exterior materials and fenestration. This application is being submitted as a
change of scope is proposed, involving excavating a basement beneath the historic resource, leaving it in place
and underpinning the existing foundation. While the cabin will not be moved during this process, excavation below
the structure has been determined to have similar risks, therefore HPC Relocation review is needed.
The cabin walls currently sit on their original footings. The excavation and new basement are meant to stabilize
the foundation and prevent any further deterioration to the historic asset.
See Appendix A for photos of the existing site conditions.
P23
IV.A.
4
III. Character Defining Features
The original log cabin is an example of Rustic Architecture, characterized by the following:
- Circa 1900-present, Residential, Commercial, Public
- Popularized by the designs of the National Park Service for its institutional buildings, these
structures were designed to blend with the environment and were constructed of native building
materials. An emphasis upon simplicity, hand craftsmanship and the natural environment
made this a popular style for vacation homes, hunting lodges, dude ranches and tourist facilities.
In Aspen, these appear similar to Pioneer Houses, but usually include larger timber elements and
emphasize more craftsmanship in details.
Characteristics:
- Hand built out of locally available materials, using limited tools.
- Single story or 1 1/2 story.
- Low pitched gable roof.
- Simple rectangular footprint, with smaller additive elements.
- Small porch or entry feature.
- True log construction with overlapping log ends, coped and stacked, with chinking to infill
irregularities between the logs.
- Stone at the base or in the fireplace and chimney.
- Small window openings, spare and usually horizontally proportioned with wood trim.
- Minimal detail and decoration.
See Appendix B for Historical Photos provided by the Aspen Historical Society.
P24
IV.A.
5
IV. Variance Request – Floor Area Bonus
The applicant is requesting a floor area bonus of 110 SF. This is in addition to the 40 SF bonus that was granted
by HPC on May 9, 2018 as part of the Minor Development Approval. The maximum allowed FAR for the
property is 3660 SF. The property in its current state is non-conforming at 3765 SF. With the addition of the
basement below the historic cabin, the proposed floor area now totals 3910 SF. The requested floor area bonus
will allow for new foundations below the entire extent of the original historic cabin foundations. It will also
provide two exits from the new basement storage space; one exterior access point from the exterior stairwell
and one interior access point from the Lower Level Rec Room.
Section 26.415.110f in the Land Use code reads as follows:
C. Floor Area Bonus
1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor
area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated
that:
a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines;
b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that
maintains the visual integrity of the historic building;
c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance;
d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or
openings;
e) The construction materials are of the highest quality;
f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building;
g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or
h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained.
Response: The requested additional 110 SF is well within the 500 SF that HPC is permitted to grant.
(a): As demonstrated in the document below, the project meets the applicable guidelines.
(b): It is the proposal’s intent that the historic cabin maintains its location on the property and that the integrity
of the property and its longevity is extended with the addition of new deeper foundations below the original
foundations of the cabin.
(c) & (d): The addition of the basement below the cabin will have no impact on the historic appearance of the
property.
(e): The new foundations will be of the highest quality and are meant to improve the structural integrity of the
historic cabin.
(f) & (g): Not applicable.
(h): The (5) historic spruce trees on site are being maintained. The excavation work will not encroach within or
near the dripline of the historic trees. Construction will not be staged within the driplines of the trees.
P25
IV.A.
6
V. Relocation Request
While the historic cabin will not be moved during the addition of a basement below this historic resource,
excavation below the structure has been determined to have similar risks, therefore an HPC Relocation Review
is needed. The Applicant understands that posting a security of $30,000 with the City during the excavation
process is a required condition of the approval.
A structural engineer reviewed the existing cabin structure and concluded that the existing foundation walls
and footings are suitable to be underpinned down to create a basement storage area. Refer to Exhibit #7 for a
Written Report of Structural Integrity. The structural engineer will provide detailing and sequencing information
to ensure the existing structure remains intact.
The existing area well at the northeast corner of the historic cabin provides the most accessible point from
which to initiate the excavation. An existing access panel in this location provides an entry point to the existing
crawl space. This allows construction to remain clear of the historic trees located on the east and south sides of
the site. The basement will be excavated in stages as the existing foundation walls and footings are
underpinned down to create the basement storage area.
Refer to Appendix C for existing and proposed details for the cabin foundations.
Section 26.415.090(C) in the Land Use code reads as follows:
C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be
approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards:
1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the
character of the historic district; or
2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and
its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or
3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or
4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character
and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect City of Aspen Land
Use Code Part 400 – Historic Preservation Page 23 the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally
located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties;
and
Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met:
1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical
impacts of relocation;
2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and
3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the
building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security.
P26
IV.A.
7
Response: This request complies with Item 4 in the first section below Item C above. The historic cabin will not be
relocated; thus the historic character of the building and the site are maintained. By providing new, deeper
foundations below the original cabin foundation wall and footings, the integrity of the historic asset is improved.
P27
IV.A.
8
VI. Historic Preservation – Design Guideline Review
The property is a landmarked parcel located in the Main Street Historic District. The applicable review standard
for Conceptual Review is a determination of consistency with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design
Guidelines. In considering whether the proposed development is consistent with the Guidelines, the following
statement, which appears in the introduction of the Guidelines, must be taken into consideration:
“… not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines must occur on
a case-by-case basis. The HPC must determine that a significant number of the relevant guidelines have
been adequately met in order to approve a project proposal.”
Responses have been provided to each of the Guidelines to demonstrate the project’s compliance with “a
significant number of the relevant guidelines”.
1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or
district.
• Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood.
• Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is
typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful
open space visible from the street.
Response: The historic cabin is to remain in its current location. The excavated basement will follow the existing
foundation walls below the cabin.
1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. When HPC input is
requested, the following bullet points may be applicable.
• Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining historic
ancillary buildings or constructing new ones.
• Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add
landscape.
• Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged.
• Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas.
• Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged
on a case by case basis.
Response: Alley to remain unpaved gravel.
1.3 Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the
original development of the site.
• Do not introduce new curb cuts on streets.
• Non-historic driveways accessed from the street should be removed if they can be relocated to
the alley.
P28
IV.A.
9
Response: Not applicable.
1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact.
• If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it.
• Tracks, gravel, light gray concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for
driveways on Aspen Victorian properties.
Response: Not applicable.
1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces.
• Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a
semi- public walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces.
Response: The historic cabin, porch, and entry sequence are to remain in place as-is.
1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects.
• Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of
the period of significance.
• Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and
install them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an
Aspen Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete.
Light gray concrete, brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most
landmarks.
• The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties.
A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an Aspen Modern property.
Response: Not applicable.
1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site.
• Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather
than many small unusable areas.
• Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building.
Response: Ample open space is provided in the front and side yards of the property.
1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process.
• When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better
integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least
a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be
reviewed and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal.
P29
IV.A.
10
• Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from
the historic landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the
site, reduce the generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into
the ground. Stormwater facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should
have minimal visual impact when viewed from the public right of way.
• Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements.
Response: The new basement footings will include foundation perimeter drains with appropriate outlets to drain
water away from the foundations. This will be an improvement to the condition of the current cabin
foundations. No perimeter drainage is assumed to be present at the current historic foundations.
1.9 Landscape development on Aspen Modern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis.
Response: Any new landscape design as a result of disruption from the excavation process to be comparable
with current site conditions.
1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs that could interfere with or block
views of historic structures are inappropriate.
• Site furnishings that are added to the historic property should not be intrusive or degrade the
integrity of the neighborhood patterns, site, or existing historic landscape.
• Consolidating and screening these elements is preferred.
Response: Not applicable. No new site furnishings included as part of this proposal.
1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and
shrubs.
• Retaining historic planting beds and landscape features is encouraged.
• Protect historically significant vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Removal of
damaged, aged, or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department.
• If a significant tree must be removed, replace it with the same or similar species in coordination
with the Parks Department.
• The removal of non-historic planting schemes is encouraged.
• Consider restoring the original landscape if information is available, including original plant
materials.
Response: Five large spruce trees on site are historically protected. Historic trees to remain and be protected
during construction as directed by the City Forester. Refer to the site plan for historic tree locations.
1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram.
• Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not over plant a site, or install a landscape which is
over textured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In
Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes.
P30
IV.A.
11
• In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod,
and low shrubs are often appropriate.
• Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more
contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of
the property, in Zone C.
• Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited
patio where appropriate.
• Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the
landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building
must be honored.
• In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to
over plant either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before
the property was divided.
• Contemporary landscapes that highlight an Aspen Modern architectural style are encouraged.
Response: Plantings to maintain simple arrangement on site similar to the current conditions. Any plantings
disturbed during the excavation process will be replaced in kind.
1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic structures
are inappropriate.
• Low plantings and ground covers are preferred.
• Do not place trees, shrubs, or hedgerows in locations that will obscure, damage, or block
significant architectural features or views to the building. Hedgerows are not allowed as fences.
• Consider mature canopy size when planting new trees adjacent to historic resources. Planting
trees too close to a landmark may result in building deteriorate or blocked views and is
inappropriate.
• Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed.
Response: Plantings to maintain simple arrangement on site similar to the current conditions. Any plantings
disturbed during the excavation process will be replaced in kind.
1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting.
• Landscape and pathway lighting is not permitted in Zone A (refer to diagram) on Aspen
Victorian properties unless an exception is approved by HPC based on safety considerations.
• Landscape, driveway, and pathway lighting on Aspen Modern properties is addressed on a
case- by-case basis.
• Landscape light fixtures should be carefully selected so that they are compatible with the
building, yet recognizable as a product of their own time.
• Driveway lighting is not permitted on Aspen Victorian properties.
• Landscape up lighting is not allowed.
Response: No landscape lighting will be provided as part of this proposal.
P31
IV.A.
12
1.15 Preserve original fences.
• Fences which are considered part of the historic significance of a site should not be moved,
removed, or inappropriately altered.
• Replace only those portions of a historic fence that are deteriorated beyond repair.
• Replacement elements must match the existing.
Response: The existing fence along Main Street will remain.
1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence.
Response: Not applicable.
1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution.
• Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve
the character of a property.
Response: There is no fence in the front yard. The fence screening the property from Main St will remain.
1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style.
• The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of
significance.
• A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations.
• Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen
Victorian landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed
on the site.
• A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen
Victorian properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including
transparency, a low height, and a simple design. When this material is used, posts should
be simply detailed and not oversized.
Response: Not applicable.
1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street.
• A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature.
• For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the
picket.
• For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate,
proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
• Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment.
Response: Not applicable.
P32
IV.A.
13
1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important
features of a designated building.
• A privacy fence should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual
impacts. Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give
the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. Also consider using lattice, or other
transparent detailing on the upper portions of the fence.
• A privacy fence should allow the building corners and any important architectural features that
are visible from the street to continue to be viewed.
• All hedgerows (trees, shrub bushes, etc.) are prohibited in Zones A and B.
Response: Not applicable.
1.21 Preserve original retaining walls
• Replace only those portions that are deteriorated beyond repair. Any replacement materials
should match the original in color, texture, size and finish.
• Painting or covering a historic masonry retaining wall or covering is not allowed.
• Increasing the height of a retaining wall is inappropriate.
Response: A concrete retaining wall exists along the south property line and a portion of the west property line.
A stone retaining wall exists along a portion of the west property line on the adjacent property. Both retaining
walls will remain as-is. Please refer to the site plan for further information.
1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized.
• All wall materials, including veneer and mortar, will be reviewed on a case by case basis
and should be compatible with the palette used on the historic structure.
Response: Not applicable.
1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be
reviewed on a case by case basis.
Response: Site grading to remain as-is.
1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations.
• An analysis of the historic landscape and an assessment of the current condition of the
landscape should be done before the beginning of any project.
• The key features of the historic landscape and its overall design intent must be preserved.
Response: The five historic trees will remain and be protected during construction. No other historically
significant landscape features are present on site. Refer to the site plan for historic tree locations.
P33
IV.A.
14
1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built
features.
• Do not add features that damage the integrity of the historic landscape.
• Maintain the existing pattern of setbacks and siting of structures.
• Maintain the historic relationship of the built landscape to natural features on the site.
• All additions to these landscapes must be clearly identifiable as recent work.
• New artwork must be subordinate to the designed landscape in terms of placement, height,
material, and overall appearance. Place new art away from significant landscape features.
• Avoid installing utility trenches in cultural landscapes if possible.
Response: Not applicable.
1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system.
• Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation.
• Minimize the visual impact of new parking.
• Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically.
Response: Not applicable.
1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site.
• Protect established vegetation during any construction.
• If any tree or shrub needs to be removed replace it with the same or similar species.
• New planting should be of a species used historically or a similar species.
• Maintain and preserve any gardens and/or ornamental planting on the site.
• Maintain and preserve any historic landscape elements.
Response: Historic trees to be maintained and protected during construction.
2.1 Preserve original building materials.
• Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place.
• Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments,
steps and foundations, should be preserved.
• Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place.
Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity.
• Original Aspen Modern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the
weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy.
Response: Materials of the historic log cabin are determined to be in good condition and will be maintained in
place during the underpinning and excavation.
2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically.
P34
IV.A.
15
• Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that
was not historically painted shall not be painted.
• If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time,
consider removing it, using appropriate methods.
• Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the
building.
Response: Finish materials of the cabin are original and in good condition.
2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary
surfaces.
• If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be
wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish.
• Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only
those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For Aspen Modern buildings, sometimes the
replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent.
Response: Not applicable.
2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials.
• Original building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic
materials.
Response: Not applicable.
2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate.
• Regardless of their character, new materials obscure the original, historically significant material.
• Any material that covers historic materials may also trap moisture between the two layers. This
will cause accelerated deterioration to the historic material which may go unnoticed.
Response: Not applicable.
2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material.
• Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material.
Response: Not applicable.
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
• Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills,
heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows.
• Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them.
• Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration
P35
IV.A.
16
glass for the repair.
Response: Not applicable.
3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall.
• Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate.
• Do not change the size of an original window opening.
Response: Not applicable.
3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
• If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the
sash have divided lights, match that characteristic as well.
Response: Not applicable.
3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original.
Response: Not applicable.
3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
• Changing the window opening is not permitted.
• Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past.
Response: Not applicable.
3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window.
• A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back
to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually
only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the
actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall.
• The historic profile on Aspen Modern properties is typically minimal.
Response: Not applicable.
3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed.
• Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear or secondary walls.
• New windows should be similar in scale to the historic openings on the building, but should in
some way be distinguishable as new, through the use of somewhat different detailing, etc.
• Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a façade.
• Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character defining façade will negatively
affect the integrity of a structure.
P36
IV.A.
17
Response: Not applicable. No new windows in the historic structure.
3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic window.
• Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the original
window to be seen from the public way.
• If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the
original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub-frames or
panning around the perimeter. A storm window should not include muntins unless necessary for
structure. Any muntin should be placed to match horizontal or vertical divisions of the historic
window.
Response: Not applicable.
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
• Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door
frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking
sidelights.
• Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances.
• If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that
the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic
position.
• Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible.
Response: Not applicable.
4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening.
• Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height.
Response: Not applicable.
4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance.
Response: Not applicable.
4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door
or a door associated with the style of the building.
• A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement.
• A historic door or screen door from a similar building also may be considered.
• Simple paneled doors were typical for Aspen Victorian properties.
• Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic
evidence can support their use.
P37
IV.A.
18
Response: Not applicable.
4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed.
• Place new doors in any proposed addition rather than altering the historic resource.
• Greater flexibility in installing a door in a new location may be considered on rear or secondary
walls.
• A new door in a new location should be similar in scale and style to historic openings on the
building and should be a product of its own time.
• Preserve the historic ratio of openings to solid wall on a façade. Significantly increasing the
openings on a character defining façade negatively affects the integrity of a structure.
Response: A new door will be added to access the new basement below the cabin. This door will be below
grade and will be accessed through the exterior stairwell located on the east side of the Addition. It will not be
visible from the street or sidewalk.
4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry
door.
• Match the material, frame design, character, and color of the primary door.
• Simple features that do not detract from the historic entry door are appropriate for a new storm
door.
• New storm or screen doors should be in character with the primary door.
Response: Not applicable.
4.7 Preserve historic hardware.
• When new hardware is needed, it must be in scale with the door and appropriate to the style of
the building.
• On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any modern elements such as entry key pads.
Response: Not applicable.
5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony.
• Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and
spacing of balusters.
• Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate.
Response: Not applicable.
5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details.
• Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate.
P38
IV.A.
19
Response: Not applicable.
5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate.
• Reopening an enclosed porch or balcony is appropriate.
Response: Not applicable.
5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail.
• Match original materials.
• When reconstructing an original porch or balcony without historic photographs, use dimensions
and characteristics found on comparable buildings. Keep style and form simple with minimal, if
any, decorative elements.
Response: Not applicable.
5.5 If new steps are to be added, construct them out of the same primary materials used on the original,
and design them to be in scale with the porch or balcony
• Steps should be located in the original location.
• Step width should relate to the scale of entry doors, spacing between posts, depth of deck, etc.
• Brick, red sandstone, gray concrete, or wood are appropriate materials for steps.
Response: Not applicable.
5.6 Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly where visible from
the street.
• If handrails or guardrails are needed according to building code, keep their design simple in
character and different from the historic detailing on the porch or balcony.
Response: Not applicable.
6.1 Preserve significant architectural features.
• Repair only those features that are deteriorated.
• Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized
preservation methods whenever possible.
• On Aspen Modern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve
the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily
deteriorated material.
Response: Existing materials to be preserved.
6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize
damage to the original material.
P39
IV.A.
20
• Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing
the disassembled material in its original configuration.
Response: Not applicable.
6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced.
• Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features.
• If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be
wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish.
Response: Not applicable.
6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs.
• The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a
misrepresentation of the building’s heritage.
• When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence,
develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and
maintains similar scale, proportion and material.
Response: Not applicable.
6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts.
• Where scars on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other
physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar
in character to related buildings.
• Using ornate materials on a building or adding new conjectural detailing for which there is no
documentation is inappropriate.
Response: Not applicable.
7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof.
• Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen
from the street.
• Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing.
• Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration.
Response: Not applicable.
7.2 Preserve the original eave depth.
• Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource.
• Aspen Modern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key
character defining features of the architectural style.
P40
IV.A.
21
Response: Not applicable.
7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices.
• Skylights and solar panels are generally not allowed on a historic structure. These elements may
be appropriate on an addition.
Response: Not applicable.
7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color.
• Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures.
• Locate vents on non-street facing facades.
• Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible.
Response: Not applicable.
7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional.
• Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists.
Response: A new, deeper foundation will be placed below the original masonry chimney to improve its
structural integrity.
7.6 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character.
• A new dormer is not appropriate on a primary, character defining façade.
• A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and
set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building.
• The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic
building.
• While dormers improve the livability of upper floor spaces where low plate heights exist, they
also complicate the roof and may not be appropriate on very simple structures.
• Dormers are not generally not permitted on Aspen Modern properties since they are not
characteristic of these building styles.
Response: Not applicable.
7.7 Preserve original roof materials.
• Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is
necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities
and use a color that is similar to that seen historically.
Response: Not applicable.
P41
IV.A.
22
7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original.
• If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and
have a matte, non-reflective finish.
• Flashing should be in scale with the roof material.
• Flashing should be tin, lead coated copper, galvanized or painted metal and have a matte,
non-reflective finish.
• Design flashing, such as drip edges, so that architectural details are not obscured.
• A metal roof is inappropriate for an Aspen Victorian primary home but may be appropriate for a
secondary structure from that time period.
• A metal roof material should have a matte, non-reflective finish and match the original seaming.
Response: Not applicable.
7.9 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof.
• Adding ornamental cresting, for example, where there is no evidence that it existed, creates a
false impression of the building’s original appearance, and is inappropriate.
Response: Not applicable.
7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible.
• Downspouts should be placed in locations that are not visible from the street if possible, or in
locations that do not obscure architectural detailing on the building.
• The material used for the gutters should be in character with the style of the building.
Response: Not applicable.
8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved.
• When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These
include its materials, roof form, windows, doors, and architectural details.
• If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. The
determination of significance is based on documentation of the construction date of
the outbuilding and/or physical inspection. A secondary structure that is related to the period of
significance of the primary structure will likely require preservation.
Response: Not applicable.
8.2 Preserve a historic secondary building as a detached structure.
• Any proposal to attach a secondary structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
• The position and orientation of the structure should be maintained except when HPC finds that
an alternative is the best preservation option.
• Some Aspen Modern properties incorporated garages and carports into the architecture. This
pattern should be maintained.
P42
IV.A.
23
Response: Not applicable.
8.3 Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not in keeping with
its original character as a utilitarian structure.
• Most secondary structures are basic rectangular solids, with simple finishes and no
ornamentation.
Response: Not applicable.
8.4 When adding on to a secondary structure, distinguish the addition as new construction and minimize
removal of historic fabric.
• Additions to a secondary structure must be smaller in footprint than the original building and
lower in height. Maintaining the overall mass and scale is particularly important.
• Do not alter the original roof form.
• An addition must be inset from the corners of the wall to which it attaches.
Response: Not applicable.
8.5 Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary.
Response: Not applicable.
8.6 Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings.
• If an original carriage door exists, and can be made to function for automobile use, this is
preferred.
Response: Not applicable.
8.7 If a new garage door is added, it must be compatible with the character of the historic structure.
• The materials and detailing should be simple.
Response: Not applicable.
8.8 Adaptation of an obsolete secondary structure to a functional use is encouraged.
• The reuse of any secondary structure should be sensitive so that its character is not lost.
Response: Not applicable.
9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place
may help to preserve the historic Fabric.
P43
IV.A.
24
• This activity will require the same level of documentation, structural assessment, and posting of
financial assurances as a building relocation.
Response: This proposal requests to develop a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic
structure remains in place. This is intended to improve the structural integrity of the historic resource and ensure
its longevity on the site. A letter from the structural engineer (See Exhibit 7) verifies that the existing foundation
walls and footings are suitable to be underpinned own to create basement storage areas.
9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis
• In general, on-site relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those
in a historic district.
• In a district, where numerous adjacent historic structures may exist, the way that buildings were
placed on the site historically, and the open yards visible from the street are characteristics that
should be respected in new development.
• Provide a figure ground study of the surrounding parcels to demonstrate the effects of a building
relocation.
• In some cases, the historic significance of the structure, the context of the site, the construction
technique, and the architectural style may make on-site relocation too impactful to be
appropriate. It must be demonstrated that on-site relocation is the best preservation alternative
in order for approval to be granted.
• If relocation would result in the need to reconstruct a substantial area of the original exterior
surface of the building above grade, it is not an appropriate preservation option.
Response: The historic cabin will be underpinned in its current location during excavation and construction of
the basement below.
9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation.
• It must face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. In general, a forward
movement, rather than a lateral movement is preferred. HPC will consider setback variations
where appropriate.
• A primary structure may not be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new
building in front of it.
• Be aware of potential restrictions against locating buildings too close to mature trees. Consult
with the City Forester early in the design process. Do not relocate a building so that it becomes
obscured by trees.
Response: Not applicable. The historic cabin is to remain in its current location.
9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade.
• Raising the finished floor of the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable if
needed to address drainage issues. A substantial change in position relative to grade is
inappropriate.
P44
IV.A.
25
• Avoid making design decisions that require code related alterations which could have been
avoided. In particular, consider how the relationship to grade could result in non-historic
guardrails, etc.
Response: The historic cabin will remain at its current elevation above grade.
9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation.
• On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a
miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and is
not allowed.
• Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate.
• Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone
salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut of
the stone and design of the mortar joints.
• New Aspen Modern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure
preservation of the design intent.
Response: The exposed existing foundation walls will remain in place. The new basement foundation walls will
be placed below the existing footings and will be entirely concealed below grade.
9.6 Minimize the visual impact of light wells.
• The size of any light well that faces a street should be minimized.
• Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining
features, such as front porches.
• Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a
street.
• Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” in
the landscape except where they are screened, or on an Aspen Modern site.
Response: Not applicable.
9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving
historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings.
• The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the HPC.
• During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect
existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door
and window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural
details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration.
• The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process.
Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis
and may require special conditions of approval.
• A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen.
P45
IV.A.
26
Response: Noted. All methodology for underpinning, excavation, and construction below the historic cabin will
be reviewed and approved by HPC. Special care will be taken to prevent any damage to the historic resource
during the underpinning, excavation, and construction process.
9.8 Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged.
• Permanently relocating a structure from where it was built to a new site is only allowed for
special circumstances, where it is demonstrated to be the only preservation alternative.
Response: Not applicable. The historic cabin will remain in its current location.
10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right.
Response: Not applicable.
10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed.
• For Aspen Victorian properties, HPC generally relies on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps to
determine which portions of a building are historically significant and must be preserved.
• HPC may insist on the removal of non-historic construction that is considered to be detrimental
to the historic resource in any case when preservation benefits or variations are being approved.
Response: Not applicable.
10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is
maintained.
• A new addition must be compatible with the historic character of the primary building.
• An addition must be subordinate, deferential, modest, and secondary in comparison to the
architectural character of the primary building.
• An addition that imitates the primary building’s historic style is not allowed. For example, a new
faux Victorian detailed addition is inappropriate on an Aspen Victorian home.
• An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
• Proposals on corner lots require particular attention to creating compatibility.
Response: Not applicable. The addition of the basement below the cabin does not change or alter the historic
appearance of the asst.
10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as
viewed from the street.
• The historic resource must be visually dominant on the site and must be distinguishable against
the addition.
• The total above grade floor area of an addition may be no more than 100% of the above grade
floor area of the original historic resource. All other above grade development must be
P46
IV.A.
27
completely detached. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following
are met:
• The proposed addition is all one story.
• The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource
and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of
the historic resource.
• The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is
considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource.
• The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as
existed historically.
• The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the
street.
• There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic
conditions that aren’t being changed.
• The project is proposed as part of a voluntary Aspen Modern designation, or
• The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees
that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc.
Response: Not applicable. The addition of the basement below the cabin does not contribute to the above
grade floor area.
10.5 On a corner lot, no portion of an addition to a one story historic resource may be more than one story
tall, directly behind that resource, unless completely detached above grade by a distance of at least
10 feet HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met:
• The connector element that links the new and old construction is a breezeway or transparent
corridor, well recessed from the street facing side(s) of the historic resource and the area of two
story construction that appears directly behind the one story historic resource is minimal
• The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and
the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource
• The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to
have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource
• The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as
existed historically
• There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions
that aren’t being changed
• The project is proposed as part of a voluntary Aspen Modern designation, or
• The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that
must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc.
Response: Not applicable. The addition in this proposal is contained entirely below grade.
P47
IV.A.
28
10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
• An addition shall be distinguishable from the historic building and still be visually compatible with
historic features.
• A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material, or
a modern interpretation of a historic style are all techniques that may be considered to
help define a change from historic construction to new construction.
• Do not reference historic styles that have no basis in Aspen.
• Consider these three aspects of an addition; form, materials, and fenestration. An addition must
relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from
the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary
design response.
• Note that on a corner lot, departing from the form of the historic resource may not be allowed.
• There is a spectrum of appropriate solutions to distinguishing new from old portions of a
development. Some resources of particularly high significance or integrity may not be the right
instance for a contrasting addition.
Response: Not applicable.
10.7 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street.
• Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings may align at approximately the same
height. An addition cannot be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered
or obscured.
Response: Not applicable.
10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
• An addition that is lower than, or similar to the height of the primary building, is preferred.
Response: Not applicable. The addition of the basement below the cabin is contained entirely below grade.
10.9 If the addition is taller than a historic building, set it back from significant façades and use a
“connector” to link it to the historic building.
• Only a one-story connector is allowed.
• Usable space, including decks, is not allowed on top of connectors unless the connector has
limited visibility and the deck is shielded with a solid parapet wall.
• In all cases, the connector must attach to the historic resource underneath the eave.
• The connector shall be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary
building.
• Minimize the width of the connector. Ideally, it is no more than a passage between the historic
resource and addition. The connector must reveal the original building corners. The connector
may not be as wide as the historic resource.
P48
IV.A.
29
• Any street-facing doors installed in the connector must be minimized in height and width and
accessed by a secondary pathway. See guideline 4.1 for further information.
Response: Not applicable. The addition of the basement below the cabin is contained entirely below grade.
10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize
the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain
prominent.
• Locating an addition at the front of a primary building is inappropriate.
• Additions to the side of a primary building are handled on a case-by-case basis and are
approved based on site specific constraints that restrict rear additions.
• Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter
the exterior mass of a building.
Response: Not applicable. The addition of the basement below the cabin is contained entirely below grade.
10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building.
• A simple roof form that does not compete with the historic building is appropriate.
• On Aspen Victorian properties, a flat roof may only be used on an addition to a gable roofed
structure if the addition is entirely one story in height, or if the flat roofed areas are limited, but
the addition is primarily a pitched roof.
Response: Not applicable. The addition of the basement below the cabin is contained entirely below grade.
10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important
architectural features.
• Loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices, and eave lines must be avoided.
Response: Not applicable. The addition of the basement below the cabin is concealed entirely below grade.
10.13 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of the historic
building.
Response: Not applicable.
10.14 Set a rooftop addition back from the street facing façades to preserve the original profile of the historic
resource.
• Set the addition back from street facing façades a distance approximately equal to its height.
Response: Not applicable.
10.15 The roof form of a rooftop addition must be in character with the historic building.
P49
IV.A.
30
Response: Not applicable.
11.1 Orient the new building to the street.
• Aspen Victorian buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional
grid pattern.
• Aspen Modern alignments shall be handled case by case.
• Generally, do not set the new structure forward of the historic resource. Alignment of their front
setbacks is preferred. An exception may be made on a corner lot or where a recessed siting for
the new structure is a better preservation outcome.
Response: Not applicable.
11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch.
• The front porch shall be functional, and used as the means of access to the front door.
• A new porch must be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally.
Response: Not applicable.
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings on a
parcel.
• Subdivide larger masses into smaller “modules” that are similar in size to the historic buildings on
the original site.
• Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic resource.
Response: Not applicable.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
• The primary plane of the front shall not appear taller than the historic structure.
Response: Not applicable.
11.5 The intent of the historic landmark lot split is to remove most of the development potential from the
historic resource and place it in the new structure(s).
• This should be kept in mind when determining how floor area will be allocated between
structures proposed as part of a lot split.
Response: Not applicable.
11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time.
• Consider these three aspects of a new building; form, materials, and fenestration. A project must
relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from
P50
IV.A.
31
the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary
design response.
• When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource.
• When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to
those used historically on the site and use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense
of human scale.
• When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size and
shape to those of the historic resource.
Response: Not applicable.
11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
• This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings.
• Overall, details shall be modest in character.
Response: Not applicable.
12.1 Address accessibility compliance requirements while preserving character defining features of historic
buildings and districts.
• All new construction must comply completely with the International Building Code (IBC) for
accessibility. Special provisions for historic buildings exist in the law that allow some flexibility
when designing solutions which meet accessibility standards.
Response: The property will follow requirements as set out in the 2015 International Residential Code.
12.2 Original light fixtures must be maintained. When there is evidence as to the appearance of original
fixtures that are no longer present, a replication is appropriate.
Response: Not applicable.
12.3 Exterior light fixtures should be simple in character.
• The design of a new fixture should be appropriate in form, finish, and scale with the structure.
• New fixtures should not reflect a different period of history than that of the affected building, or
be associated with a different architectural style.
• Lighting should be placed in a manner that is consistent with the period of the building, and
should not provide a level of illumination that is out of character.
• One light adjacent to each entry is appropriate on an Aspen Victorian residential structure. A
recessed fixture, surface mounted light, pendant or sconce will be considered if suited to
the building type or style.
• On commercial structures and Aspen Modern properties, recessed lights and concealed lights
are often most appropriate.
P51
IV.A.
32
Response: Not applicable.
12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage.
• Place mechanical equipment on the ground where it can be screened.
• Mechanical equipment may only be mounted on a building on an alley façade.
• Rooftop mechanical equipment or vents must be grouped together to minimize their visual
impact. Where rooftop units are visible, it may be appropriate to provide screening with
materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. Use the smallest, low profile
units available for the purpose.
• Window air conditioning units are not allowed.
• Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Group them in a discrete
location. Use pedestals when possible, rather than mounting on a historic building.
• Paint mechanical equipment in a neutral color to minimize their appearance by blending with
their backgrounds
• In general, mechanical equipment should be vented through the roof, rather than a wall, in a
manner that has the least visual impact possible.
• Avoid surface mounted conduit on historic structures.
Response: Not applicable.
12.5 Awnings must be functional.
• An awning must project at least 3 feet, and not more than 5 feet from the building façade.
• An awning may only be installed at a door or window and must fit within the limits of the door or
window opening.
• Awnings are inappropriate on Aspen Modern properties unless historic evidence shows
otherwise.
Response: Not applicable.
12.6 Signs should not obscure or damage historic building fabric.
• Where possible, install a free standing sign that is appropriate in height and width. Consolidate
signage for multiple businesses.
• Mount signs so that the attachment point can be easily repaired when the sign is replaced. Do
not mount signage directly into historic masonry.
• Blade signs or hanging signs are generally preferred to wall mounted signs because the number
of attachment points may be less.
• Signs should be constructed of wood or metal.
• Pictographic signs are encouraged because they add visual interest to the street.
Response: Not applicable.
12.7 Sign lighting must be subtle and concealed.
P52
IV.A.
33
• Pin mounted letters with halo lighting will not be approved on Aspen Victorian buildings.
• The size of a fixture used to light a sign must be minimized. The light must be directed towards the
sign. If possible, integrate the lights into the sign bracket.
Response: Not applicable.
12.8 Locate signs to be subordinate to the building design.
• Signs should be located on the first floor of buildings, primarily.
• Signs should not obscure historic building details.
Response: Existing sign to remain. Refer to Appendix D for existing signage location.
12.9 Preserve historic signs.
Response: Not applicable.
P53
IV.A.
34
VII. Conclusion
In summary, the applicant has submitted all of the materials requested during the pre-application conference,
has responded to the applicable portions of the appropriate Standards and Guidelines, and has demonstrated
the compliance of the proposed development with said standards. The applicant will respond in a timely
manner to requests by any reviewing agency for additional information or clarification of any of the statements
made herein.
P54
IV.A.
FLOOR AREA
GARAGE AREA
FAR TABULATION_________________________________________________________ _______
OVERHANGS OVER 8'-0"
DECKS
EXEMPT
EXPOSED WALL
BELOW GRADE
1341 SF
LOWER LEVEL FLOOR
AREA
A
A
C
C
2 2
3 3
B
B
5 5
D
D
1 1
E
E
4 4
402 SF
GARAGE
A
A
C
C
2 2
3 3
B
B
5 5
D
D
1 1
2384 SF
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR
AREA
321 SF
PATIO - EXEMPT
95 SF
FRONT PORCH -
EXEMPT
E
E
4 4
1305 SF
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR
AREA
A
A
C
C
2 2
3 3
B
B
5 5
D
D
1 1
36 SF
STAIR - EXEMPT
60 SF
EXTERIOR BALCONY
E
E
4 4
CHARLES
CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTSC
610 EAST HYMAN AVE.
ASPEN, CO 81611
TEL: 970.925.5590
FAX: 970.920.4557
cunniffe.com
SHEET NO.
JOB NO.1/22/2019 2:27:52 PMA0.2
1703
FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS
- EXISTINGANNABELLE CABIN300 WEST MAINASPEN, CO 1/8" = 1'-0"1 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"2 MAIN LEVEL_FAR EXISTING
1/8" = 1'-0"3 UPPER LEVEL_FAR EXISTING
ISSUE: DATE:
HPC REVIEW 3/16/18
HPC UPDATE 5/ /18
PROGRESS SET 5/11/18
PROGRESS SET 7/23/18
HPC UPDATE 10/15/18
PRICING SET 1/4/19P55
IV.A.
UP
FD
UPUP
FD
UP
FLOOR AREA
GARAGE AREA
FAR TABULATION_________________________________________________________ _______
OVERHANGS OVER 8'-0"
DECKS
EXEMPT
EXPOSED WALL
BELOW GRADE
A
A
C
C
2 2
3 3
B
B
5 5
D
D
1 1
2713 SF
LOWER LEVEL FLOOR
AREA
E
E
1.
2.3.
4.
5.
4 414'-2"24'-0"16'-6"50'-1"40'-9"
5" 10'-6"
57 SF
STAIR BELOW GRADE
6.
4'-3"
7.8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.15.
16.2'-3"6'-2"16'-7"2'-8"21'-0"17'-11"4'-0"8'-6"25'-9"1'-9"8'-6"84 SF EXPOSED
1.
168 SF TOTAL
14'-2"
192 SF
2.8'-0"24'-0"
132 SF
3.8'-0"16'-6"
50'-1"
401 SF
4.8'-0"8'-0"315 SF
40'-9"5.
11 SF EXPOSED
326 SF TOTAL 5"10'-6"1'-1"A
A
C
C
2 2
3 3
B
B
5 5
D
D
1 1
443 SF
GARAGE
Not
Enclosed
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR
AREA
95 SF
FRONT PORCH -
EXEMPT
443 SF
PATIO - EXEMPT
E
E
36 SF
ENTRANCE TO
GARAGE - EXEMPT
4 4
15 SF
STAIR TO PATIO
44 SF
CONDENSING UNIT
WELL
A
A
C
C
2 2
3 3
B
B
5 5
D
D
1 1
1269 SF
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR
AREA
55 SF
STAIR - EXEMPT
E
E
4 4
CABIN ROOF
ROOF
EXISTING CHIMNEY
6.
4'-3"8'-8"37 SF
EXPOSED
7.
2'-3"8'-8"20 SF
8.
6'-2"9'-8"9.
16'-7"9'-8"160 SF TOTAL
14 SF EXPOSED
10.
2'-8"9'-8"26 SF
11.
21'-0"9'-8"203 SF TOTAL
7 SF EXPOSED
12.
17'-11"9'-8"173 SF TOTAL
15 SF EXPOSED
13.
4'-0"9'-8"39 SF TOTAL
3 SF EXPOSED
60 SF TOTAL
5 SF EXPOSED
14.
8'-6"9'-8"15.
25'-9"9'-8"82 SF TOTAL
7 SF EXPOSED
249 SF TOTAL
1 SF EXPOSED
16.
1'-9"8'-8"15 SF
CHARLES
CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTSC
610 EAST HYMAN AVE.
ASPEN, CO 81611
TEL: 970.925.5590
FAX: 970.920.4557
cunniffe.com
SHEET NO.
JOB NO.1/16/2019 3:05:52 PMA0.3
1703
FLOOR AREA
CALCULATIONS
- PROPOSEDANNABELLE CABIN300 WEST MAINASPEN, CO 1/8" = 1'-0"1 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLANSUBGRADE WALL ELEVATIONS
1/8" = 1'-0"2 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"3 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
ISSUE: DATE:
HPC REVIEW 1/ /19P56IV.A.
C:\General CADD 12\Gxd\34156BA.gxd -- 08/06/2018 -- 11:19 AM -- Scale 1 : 120.000000P57 IV.A.
FD
UP
A
A
C
C
2 2
3 3
B
B
5 5
D
D
1 1
13'-10" 4'-8"24'-3"3'-8"13'-10"7'-9"9'-8"20'-11"UP
E
E
EL. = 90'-10 1/2"
T.O. SLAB
UP
52'-2"46'-5"
BUNKROOM
001
BATH
002
MECH
005
OWNER'S
CLOSET
006
REC ROOM
008
STAIR
6"
4 4
LAUNDRY
007
CORRIDOR
009
SHOWER
003
SHOWER
004
EL. = 90'-10 1/2"
T.O. SLAB
STORAGE
011
STORAGE
010
STORAGE
012
NEW EXTERIOR STAIR TO
LOWER LEVEL APPROVED AS
HPC MINOR DEVELOPMENT ON
MAY 9, 2018
PROPOSED DOOR TO NEW
BASEMENT STORAGE AREA
NEW BASEMENT FOUNDATION
WALLS TO FOLLOW ORIGINAL
FOOTINGS OF HISTORIC CABIN
PROPOSED DOOR TO NEW
BASEMENT STORAGE AREA
EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN
NEW WALL
EXISTING LOG WALL
WALL TYPES
NEW CONCRETE WALL
WALL TO BE DEMOLISHED
NOTE: ALL WALLS ARE TYPE W-4 U.O.N.
CHARLES
CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTSC
610 EAST HYMAN AVE.
ASPEN, CO 81611
TEL: 970.925.5590
FAX: 970.920.4557
cunniffe.com
SHEET NO.
JOB NO.1/17/2019 11:46:06 AMA2.1
1703
LOWER LEVEL
FLOOR PLANANNABELLE CABIN300 WEST MAINASPEN, CO 1/4" = 1'-0"1 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
ISSUE: DATE:
HPC REVIEW 1/ /19
2 4 8P58 IV.A.
FD
UP
EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN
NEW WALL
EXISTING LOG WALL
WALL TYPES
NEW CONCRETE WALL
WALL TO BE DEMOLISHED
NOTE: ALL WALLS ARE TYPE W-4 U.O.N.
A
A
C
C
2 2
3 3
B
B
5 5
D
D
1 1
BEDROOM
LIVING
DEN
DN
.
DN
PORCH
EXTERIOR PATIO
PLANTERPLANTER
13'-10" 4'-8"24'-3"3'-8"13'-10"7'-9"9'-8"20'-11"EL. = 101'-4"
EL. = 100'-0"
T.O. PLY MAIN LEVEL
T.O. PLY HISTORIC CABIN
E
E
52'-2"46'-5"
GARAGE
101
MUD ROOM
102
POWDER ROOM
103
KITCHEN
104
DINING
105
BEDROOM 1
107
CLOSET
108
BATH 3
109
BATH
EXISTING HISTORIC CHIMNEY
4 4
DN
CORRIDOR
106
6"
6"
EL. = 100'-0 3/4"
T/O TOPPING SLAB
H.P. SLOPE
1/8" PER FT.
NEW EXTERIOR STAIR TO LOWER
LEVEL APPROVED AS HPC MINOR
DEVELOPMENT ON MAY 9, 2018 CHARLES
CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTSC
610 EAST HYMAN AVE.
ASPEN, CO 81611
TEL: 970.925.5590
FAX: 970.920.4557
cunniffe.com
SHEET NO.
JOB NO.1/17/2019 11:46:06 AMA2.2
1703
MAIN LEVEL
FLOOR PLANANNABELLE CABIN300 WEST MAINASPEN, CO 1/4" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
2 4 8
ISSUE: DATE:
HPC REVIEW 1/ /19P59
IV.A.
PROPERTY LINE 90'
PROPERTY LINE 90'PROPERTY LINE 100'PROPERTY LINE 100'W MAIN STREET N SECOND STREET2 STORY
BUILDING
2 STORY
BUILDING
1 STORY
BUILDING
PATIO
EXISTING CONCRETE
RETAINING WALL AND
WOOD FENCE TO
REMAIN
EXISTING PLANTER TO
REMAIN
LAWN
EXISTING HYDRANT
EXISTING BUS STOP
EXISTING PARKWAY
TREE, TYP.
EXISTING PLANTER TO
REMAIN
EXISTING PLANTER TO
REMAIN
EXISTING LIGHT
POLE, TYP.
EXISTING STONE
RETAINING WALL TO
REMAIN
NOTE:
LOTS Q, R, & S
BLOCK 44
LOT SIZE = 9,000 SF
PROJECT 100' = 7896.77'
8'-6" 8'-6" 8'-6" 8'-6"18'-0"HISTORIC RETAINING WALL
ENCROACHES ON PROPERTY LINE
ADJACENT ROOF ENCROACHES
ON PROPERTY LINE SETBACK5'-4"12'-10"5'-0"5'-3"6'-11"SETBACK
5'-2"20'-0"ALLEY7895'7 8 9 5 '
7896'7899'7900'EXISTING CONCRETE
RETAINING WALL AND
WOOD FENCE TO REMAIN
HISTORIC SPRUCE TREE
HISTORIC SPRUCE TREE
HISTORIC SPRUCE TREE
EXISTING PARKING AREA TO
REMAIN
NEW GRASS PAVERS
FRONT SETBACK
10'-0"SIDE SETBACK5'-0"REAR SETBACK
5'-0"SIDE SETBACK5'-0"NEW EXTERIOR STAIR
TO LOWER LEVEL
APPROVED AS HPC
MINOR DEVELOPMENT
ON MAY 9, 2018
CHARLES
CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHT CHARLES CUNNIFFE
ARCHITECTSC
610 EAST HYMAN AVE.
ASPEN, CO 81611
TEL: 970.925.5590
FAX: 970.920.4557
cunniffe.com
SHEET NO.
JOB NO.1/17/2019 11:16:10 AMA1.1
1703
ARCHITECTURAL
SITE PLANANNABELLE CABIN300 WEST MAINASPEN, CO 1/8" = 1'-0"1 SITE PLAN
2 4 8 16
ISSUE: DATE:
HPC REVIEW 1/ /19P60IV.A.
Annabelle Lodge
16 March 2018
NORTHLocation: 300 W Main Street, Aspen CO
W MAIN STREET
W HOPKINS AVE
W BLEEKER STREET
N SECOND STREETN THIRD STREETN FIRST STREETVicinity Map
P61
IV.A.
Annabelle Lodge
16 March 2018
Appendix A - Existing Conditions
East Elevation
North Elevation Northeast Corner
North Elevation
East Elevation East Elevation
P62
IV.A.
Annabelle Lodge
16 March 2018
Appendix A - Existing Conditions
South Elevation East Elevation
South Elevation South Elevation
P63
IV.A.
Annabelle Lodge
16 March 2018
1979.001.0045 Print, Photographic *Aspen Historical Society*
One b/w photograph of a house at 300 W. Main Street, on the corner of Second and Main, 1978. The photo shows
the chimney.
Description
h:\collections\pp5\images\019\19790010045.JPG08/17/2017 13:36:25
1975
*All historic photos provided by the Aspen Historical Society.
Appendix B - Historic Photographs
P64
IV.A.
Annabelle Lodge
16 March 2018
1978
*All historic photos provided by the Aspen Historical Society.
Appendix B - Historic Photographs
P65
IV.A.
Annabelle Lodge 25 January 2019Existing Condition as shown in Documents for the 1988 Addition Appendix C - Cabin Foundation DetailP66
IV.A.
Annabelle Lodge 25 January 2019Proposed Section 1/4” = 1’-0”Appendix C - Cabin Foundation DetailP67
IV.A.
CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP
Pitkin County Title, Inc., a duly licensed Title Insurance Agent in the State of Colorado hereby certifies that
DENNIS CHOOKASZIAN are the owner's in fee simple of the following described property:
LOTS Q, R AND S,
BLOCK 44,
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
ADDRESS ACCORDING TO THE PITKIN COUNTY ASSESSORS OFFICE: 300 WEST MAIN ST., ASPEN,
CO
ENCUMBRANCES:
Deed of Trust from : DENNIS CHOOKASZIAN
To the Public Trustee of the County of PITKIN
For the use of : PERL MORTGAGE, INC.
Original Amount : $1,840,000.00
Dated : December 2, 2015
Recorded : December 11, 2015
Reception No. : 625533
This certificate is not to be construed to be a guarantee of title and is furnished for informational purposes only.
PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC.
BY:
authorized signature
CERTIFIED TO: SEPTEMBER 29, 2017 at 8:00 A.M.
Job No. PCT25113P
P68
IV.A.
PROFORMA TITLE REPORT
SCHEDULE A
1. Effective Date: September 29, 2017 at 8:00 AM Case No. PCT25113W
2. Policy or Policies to be issued:
Proposed Insured:
PROFORMA
3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the
effective date hereof vested in:
DENNIS CHOOKASZIAN
4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is
described as follows:
LOTS Q, R AND S,
BLOCK 44,
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN
PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC.
601 E. HOPKINS, ASPEN, CO. 81611
970-925-1766 Phone/970-925-6527 Fax
877-217-3158 Toll Free
AUTHORIZED AGENT
Countersigned:
P69
IV.A.
SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1
REQUIREMENTS
THIS REPORT IS FURNISHED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, IT IS NOT A CONTRACT TO ISSUE TITLE
INSURANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH. IN THE EVENT A PROPOSED INSURED IS NAMED THE
COMPANY HEREBY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS AS
DEEMED NECESSARY. THE RECIPIENT OF THIS INFORMATIONAL REPORT HEREBY AGREES THAT THE
COMPANY HAS ISSUED THIS REPORT BY THEIR REQUEST AND ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE ALL INFORMATION
CONTAINED HEREIN IS ACCURATE AND CORRECT, THE COMPANY SHALL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANY
FINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD THAT PROVE TO BE INCORRECT AND THE COMPANY IS NOT OBLIGATED TO
ISSUE ANY POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE
P70
IV.A.
SCHEDULE B SECTION 2
EXCEPTIONS
The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to
the satisfaction of the Company:
1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records.
3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct
survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records.
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law
and not shown by the public records.
5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public
records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured
acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment.
6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer
service or for any other special taxing district.
7. Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract or remove his ore therefrom, should the same be found
to penetrate or intersect the premises hereby granted as reserved in United States Patent recorded
January 16, 1889 in Book 59 at Page 538.
8. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Ordinance No. 60, Series of 1976
by City of Aspen recorded December 9, 1976 in Book 321 at Page 51.
9. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Encroachment Agreement recorded August
24, 1988 in Book 571 at Page 653.
10. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in Quit Claim Deed recorded September 2, 1999
as Reception No. 435152 and Correction Quit Claim Deed recorded November 7, 2005 as Reception No.
517193.
11. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in instrument recorded May 14, 2002 as
Reception No. 467410
12. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Aspen Historic
Preservation Commission recorded January 25, 2008 as Reception No. 546081 as Resolution No. 18
Series of 2007.
13. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Aspen Historic
Preservation Commission recorded January 25, 2008 as Reception No. 546082 as Resolution No. 25
Series of 2007.
14. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Ordinance No. 33, Series of 2013
by City Council of the City of Aspen recorded December 2, 2013 as Reception No. 606033 and
Termination of Covenants recorded January 8, 2014 as Reception No. 607200.
15. Deed of Trust from : DENNIS CHOOKASZIAN
To the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin
For the use of : PERL MORTGAGE, INC.
Original Amount : $ 1,840,000.00
Dated : December 2, 2015
Recorded : December 11, 2015
Reception No. : 625533
P71
IV.A.
PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC.
601 E. HOPKINS, THIRD FLOOR
ASPEN, CO 81611
970-925-1766/970-925-6527 FAX
TOLL FREE 877-217-3158
WIRING INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL TRANSACTIONS REGARDING THE CLOSING OF THIS FILE
ARE AS FOLLOWS:
ALPINE BANK-ASPEN
600 E. HOPKINS AVE.
ASPEN, CO. 81611
ABA ROUTING NO. 102103407
FOR CREDIT TO:
PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., ESCROW ACCOUNT
ACCOUNT NO. 8910 354 425
REFERENCE:PCT25113W/PROFORMA
P72
IV.A.
P73
IV.A.
300 W. Main
HPC Relocation review
1
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER: Amy Simon, amy.simon@cityofaspen.com DATE: November 27, 2018
PROJECT: 300 W. Main Street
REPRESENTATIVE: CCA, Ashley Satterfield, ashleys@cuniffe.com
REQUEST: Temporary Relocation/excavation of basement
DESCRIPTION: 300 W. Main is a landmarked 9,000 square foot parcel, located within the Main Street Historic
District and zoned Mixed Use (MU). The historic resource on the site, a 1944 log cabin, sits in the center of
the property, spanning all three townsite lots. A non-historic addition is located on a portion of lots Q and R.
The owner has recently received HPC Minor Development approval for a remodel that retains aspects of the
existing addition, with revisions to roof form, exterior materials and fenestration. A change of scope is proposed,
involving excavating a basement beneath the historic resource, leaving it in place and underpinning the existing
foundation.
While the cabin will not be moved during this process, excavation below the structure has been determined to
have similar risks, therefore HPC Relocation review is needed. Standard conditions of approval include
verification of how the historic resource will be protected during the process, and the owner posting a security of
$30,000 with the City during the excavation process.
This review is a one-step hearing, meaning that all details of the proposal will be presented to HPC in one
application. Staff will evaluate the project and make a recommendation to HPC, based on the Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines and Land Use Code. HPC will make a decision to approve, approve with
conditions, or deny the proposal.
Below are links to relevant documents and a list of information needed to submit an application.
Relevant Land Use Code Section(s):
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.415.090 Relocation of Designated Historic Properties
26.415.120 Appeals, notice to City Council and call up
26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements
26.710.180 Mixed Use Zone District
For your convenience – links to the Design Guidelines, Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below:
P74
IV.A.
2
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines
Historic Preservation Land Use Application Packet
Land Use Code
Review by: Staff for completeness and recommendation
HPC approval for decision
City Council Notice of Call-up required for Relocation review. Council will be
informed of the HPC decision and has the authority to remand the decision back
to HPC for further consideration.
Public Hearing: Yes.
Neighborhood Outreach: No.
Referral Agencies: No.
Planning Fees: $1,950 for 6 billable hours of staff time. (Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/
refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.)
Referral Agencies Fee: $0. The Parks Department, who provided referral comments to an earlier
application for this property, will be consulted regarding any necessary
conditions of approval for tree protection.
Total Deposit: $1,950.
Please submit one copy of the application to the City of Aspen Community Development Department
including the following:
Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement.
Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).
Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur,
consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an
ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing
the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts
and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the
Development Application.
Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the
name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the
applicant.
HOA Compliance form (Attached).
An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
List of adjacent property owners within 300’ for public hearing.
P75
IV.A.
3
Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, certified
by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado.
A written description and/or graphic illustrations of the building, structure or object proposed for
relocation.
A written explanation of the type of relocation requested (temporary, on-site or off-site) and
justification for the need for relocation.
A written report from a licensed engineer or architect regarding the soundness of the building,
structure or object, its ability to withstand the physical move and its rehabilitation needs, once
relocated.
Evidence of the financial ability to undertake the safe relocation, preservation and repair of the
building, structure or object; site preparation and construction of necessary infrastructure through the
posting of bonds or other financial measures deemed appropriate.
A written explanation of how the proposed development complies with the review standards and
design guidelines relevant to the application.
Once the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:
1 digital PDF copy of the complete application packet
12 sets of all graphics printed at 11x17
Total deposit for review of the application.
Disclaimer:
The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on
current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may
not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right.
P76
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
Attached is a Development Application for properties listed on the “Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites
and Structures” or properties within Aspen’s Historic Districts. Included in this package are the following
attachments:
1. Development Application Fee Policy, Fee Schedule, and Agreement for Payment Form
2. Land Use Application Form
3. Submittal Requirements
4. Summary of the Application Process
5. Matrix of Land Use Application Requirements/ Submittal Requirements Key
6. Public Hearing Notice Requirements
7. Affidavit of Notice
All applications are reviewed based on the criteria established in the Aspen Municipal Code and
“The City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines,” both of which are available to purchase at
City Hall or on the web at www.bpcnet.com/codes/aspen under “Title 26” and
www.cityofaspen.com , respectively.
A CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT may be issued for minor work that does not
materially change the historic character of the property or district, and the proposed work is
clearly within the adopted design guidelines.
A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPIRATENESS must be applied for if the proposed work will make a
material changes that alter, diminish, eliminate or effect the historic or architectural character
of the property or district in any way.
We strongly encourage all applicants to hold a pre-application conference with a Planner in the
Community Development Department so that any questions regarding the requirements for submitting
a complete application, and the review process, can be addressed.
A Preliminary consultation with the Zoning Officer and Building Department is
also required in order to determine code compliance and to avoid changes to
projects after the review process.
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
_____________________________
P77
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
Land Use Review Fee Policy
The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or
deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted.
A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications which normally take a minimal and predictable
amount of staff time to process. Review fees for other City Departments reviewing the application (referral
departments) will also be collected when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative – meaning an application with
multiple flat fees must be pay the sum of those flat fee. Flat fees are not refundable.
A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff time is required.
Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff may also charge their time spent on
the case in addition to the case planner. Deposit amount may be reduces if, in the o pinion of the Community
Development Director, the project is expected to take significantly less time to process than the deposit indicates.
A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre-application conference by the case planner.
Hourly billing shall still apply.
All applications must include an Agreement to Pay Application Fees. One payment including the deposit for
Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the City of
Aspen. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required fee.
The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the
processing of a land use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at the
applicant’s request. The applicant will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the processing of
an application by the Community Development Department takes more time or expense than is covered by the
deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a project review shall be billed to the appl icant with no additional
administrative charge. In the event the processing of an application takes less time than provided for by the
deposit, the department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited fee to the applicant. Fees shall be due
regardless of whether an applicant receives approval.
Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final and recordation
of approval documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purpose of billi ng. Upon conceptual approval all
billing shall be reconciled and past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director accepting an application for final
review. Final review shall require a new deposit at the rate in effect at the time of final submission. Upon final
approval all billing shall be again reconciled prior to the Director accepting an application for review of technical
documents for recordation.
The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid invoice is 30
or more days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 days or more past due may be assessed a late fee of 1.75% per month.
An unpaid invoice of 120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be assigned by the Municipal Court
Judge. All payment information is public domain.
All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements and
plats. The City will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits already
accepted, and unpaid invoice of 90 days or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or issuance
of a stop work order until full payment is made.
The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use application for
the property. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing the owner (e.g. a
contract purchaser) regarding payment of fees is solely between those private parties.
P78
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
Agreement to Pay Application Fees
An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and
Property Phone No.:
Owner (“I”): Email:
Address of Billing
Property: Address:
(Subject of (send bills here)
application)
I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No., Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of
these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I
am responsible for paying all fees for this development application.
For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are
non-refundable.
$___________flat fee for ____________________ $____________ flat fee for ____________________________________
$___________ flat fee for ___________________ $_____________ flat fee for____________________________________
For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not
possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application.
I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for
City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be
made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full.
The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the
City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an
invoice by the City for such services.
I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no-payment. I agree to pay
the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not
render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree
to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates
hereinafter stated.
$________________ deposit for_____________ hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time
above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour.
$________________ deposit for _____________ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the
deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour.
City of Aspen: Property Owner:
________________________________ _______________________________________________
Jessica Garrow, AICP
Community Development Director Name:
_______________________________________________
Title:
____________________________________________________
City Use:
Fees Due: $____Received $_______
P79
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application
PROJECT:
Name:
Location:
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property)
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)___________________________________________________________
Applicant:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:_______________________________________________
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:________________________________________________
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
Historic Designation
Certificate of No Negative Effect
Certificate of Appropriateness
-Minor Historic Development
-Major Historic Development
-Conceptual Historic Development
-Final Historic Development
-Substantial Amendment
Relocation (temporary, on
or off-site)
Demolition (total demolition)
Historic Landmark Lot Split
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
P80
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
General Information
Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This
information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that
may be involved.
YES NO
Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions,
new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration?
Does the work you are planning include interior work, including remodeling,
rehabilitation, or restoration?
Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time?
In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative
Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places
Property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits?
If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in
Conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed
on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential
properties are not.)
If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for
Historical Preservation?
Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use:
Rehabilitation Loan Fund Conservation Easement Program Dimensional Variances
Increased Density Historic Landmark Lot Split Waiver of Park Dedication Fees
Conditional Uses Tax Credits
Exemption from Growth Management Quota System
P81
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form
(Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
Project:
Applicant:
Project
Location:
Zone District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
(For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high
water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the
Municipal Code.)
Commercial net leasable: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________
Number of residential units: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________
Proposed % of demolition: __________
DIMENSIONS: (write N/A where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area:
Height
Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Principal Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Accessory Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Front/Rear:
Indicate N, S, E, W
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Distance between
buildings:
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
P82
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
Matrix of the City of Aspen’s Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements
To review full procedures for all applications, reference 26.415 of the City of Aspen building code, Historic Preservation Ordinance.
When submitting multiple step applications, do not replicate submission materials. Two copies of the application are required for a
Certificate of No Negative Effect, 15 copies are required for each meeting. Also note that an electronic version of all text documents
is required.
Type of Review Application
Requirements
Fees
Deposit Fee
Notice Requirements
Designation 1-9, 11,12 $0 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections
26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.) at HPC and Council
Exempt Development Consult with Historic Preservation
Officer to confirm exempt status
$0 None
Certificate of No Negative Effect 1-9, 15, 17 $245 None
Minor Development 1-10, 15, 16, 17, 36 $735 Posting Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (b)
Major Development/Conceptual 1-10, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20 Development under 1,000 sf, $1,470
/Development over 1,000 sf, $2940
Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections
26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.)
Major Development/Final 1-10, 16, 21, 22, 36 Paid at time of conceptual Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections
26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.)
Substantial Amendment 1-10, 16, 23, 24, 25, 36 $735 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections
26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.)
Demolition 1-9, 26 $2,940 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections
26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.)
Relocation 1-9, 27-34 $2,940 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections
26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.)
Historic Landmark Lot Split 1-10 $1,470 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections
26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.) at HPC and Council
Rescinding Designation 1-9, 35 $1,470 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections
26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.) at HPC and Council
P83
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
KEY
1. Contained within a letter signed by
the applicant, the applicant's name,
address and telephone number, and
the name, address, and telephone
number of any representative
authorized to act on behalf of the
applicant.
2. The street address, legal
description, and parcel
identification number of the
property proposed for development.
3. A disclosure of ownership of the
parcel proposed for development,
consisting of a current certificate
from a Title insurance company, or
attorney licensed to practice in the
State of Colorado, listing the names
of all owners of the property, and
all mortgages, judgments, liens,
easements, contracts and
agreements affecting the parcel, and
demonstrating the owner's right to
apply for the Development
Application.
4. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map
locating the subject parcel within
the City of Aspen.
5. A site plan depicting the proposed
layout and the project’s physical
relationship to the land and its
surroundings.
6. A site improvement survey
certified by a registered land
surveyor, licensed in the State of
Colorado, showing the current
status of the parcel including the
current topography and vegetation.
(This requirement, or any part
thereof, may be waived by the
Community Development Director
if the project is determined not to
warrant a survey document.)
7. A written description of the
proposal and a written explanation
of how the proposed development
complies with the review criteria
and The City of Aspen Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines
relevant to the development
application.
8. Additional materials,
documentation, or reports as
deemed necessary by the
Community Development Director.
9. Completed Land Use Application
Form, Signed Fee Agreement, and
Fee.
10. Dimensional Requirement Form.
11. Site or historic district boundary
map.
12. Property or district description including
narrative text, photographs and/or other
graphic materials that document its
physical characteristics.
13. Identification of the character-defining
features that distinguish the entity which
should be preserved.
14. Verification that the proposal complies
with Section 26.410, Residential Design
Standards, or a written request for a
variance from any standard that is not
being met.
15. Photographs, building material samples
and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately
depict location, extent and design of the
proposed work.
16. An accurate representation of all major
building materials and finishes to be used
in the development, depicted through
samples or photographs.
17. Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the
proposed work and its relationship to the
designated historic buildings, structures,
sites and features in its context.
18. Scaled drawings of the proposed
structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their
form, including their height, massing, scale,
proportions and roof plan; and the primary
features of all elevations in the
neighborhood context.
19. Supplemental materials to provide a visual
description of the context surrounding the
designated historic property or historic
district including at least one (1) of the
following: diagrams, maps, photographs, 3-
D model (digital or physical) or streetscape
elevations.
20. Preliminary selection of primary building
materials to be used in construction
represented by samples and/or
photographs.
21. A statement, including narrative text or
graphics, indicating how the Final
Development Plan conforms to
representations made or stipulations
placed as a condition of the approval of the
Conceptual Development Plan.
22. Final drawings of all proposed structures(s)
and/or addition(s) included as part of the
development at ¼” = 1.0’ scale
23. A revised site plan
24. Revised scaled elevations and drawings
25. Photographs and other exhibits to
illustrate the proposed changes.
26. Written documentation that the Chief
Building Official has determined the
building an imminent hazard, or narrative
text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits
that provide evidence that the building,
structure or object is of no historic or
architectural value or importance.
27. A written description and/or graphic
illustrations of the building, structure or
object proposed for relocation.
28. A written explanation of the type of
relocation requested (temporary, on-site
or off-site) and justification for the need
for relocation.
29. A written report from a licensed engineer
or architect regarding the soundness of
the building, structure or object, its ability
to withstand the physical move and its
rehabilitation needs, once relocated.
30. A conceptual plan for the receiving site
providing preliminary information on the
property boundaries, existing
improvements and site characteristics and
the associated planned improvements.
31. Evidence of the financial ability to
undertake the safe relocation,
preservation and repair of the building,
structure or object; site preparation and
construction of necessary infrastructure
through the posting of bonds or other
financial measures deemed appropriate.
32. Supplementary materials to provide an
understanding of the larger context for the
relocated property and its impact on
adjacent properties, the neighborhood or
streetscape.
33. If the applicant does not own the receiving
site, proof from the site’s property owner
of the willingness to accept the relocated
building, structure or object.
34. Evidence that the applicant has or is
seeking the necessary approvals to place
the building on the identified receiving
site. If the site is outside of the city limits,
verification that the building will be
preserved on its new site through a formal
action of the other jurisdiction or a
preservation easement.
35. A written description of how the property
does not meet these criteria for
designation.
36. A lighting plan indicating the location of all
exterior light fixtures and site lighting, and
cut sheets for each type of fixture
proposed. Light fixtures must comply with
the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation
Design Guidelines" and meet the City
Lighting Code.
P84
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 4
General Summary of Historic Preservation Review Process
(Please see Section 26.415 of the Aspen Municipal Code for more detailed information)
1. An application is first transmitted to the Community Development Director to determine if it is
complete. A complete application for a Certificate of No Negative Effect may be approved by the
Community Development Director with no further review if it meets the requirements set forth for
that type of work in the Aspen Municipal Code.
2. For all other types of reviews, the applicant shall be notified in writing whether the information is
complete or if additional materials are required.
3. A date for a public hearing on a complete application will be scheduled before the HPC. Notice of
the hearing shall be provided as required in the Aspen Municipal Code.
4. City Community Development Staff will review the submittal material and prepare a report that
analyzes the project’s conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code
sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project
and a recommendation to approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the
recommendation.
5. The HPC will review the application, the report and the evidence presented at the hearing to
determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
The order of proceedings at the HPC meeting are as follows:
1. Applicant and public are sworn in
2. Staff presentation
3. Commission member questions
4. Public comment
5. Commission member comments
6. Applicant response/clarification
7. Commission motion and vote
6. The HPC will approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain
additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is a one-
step review, and it is approved, the HPC will issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community
Development Director will issue a Development Order. If the application requires submittal for a final
review, materials must be prepared and submitted according to the processes described above. A
project that receives final approval will be issued a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community
Development Director will issue a Development Order.
7. HPC decisions are final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three
hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as provided in the Aspen Municipal Code. For
Major Development, Demolition, or Relocation, a resolution of the HPC action will be
forwarded to the City Council to allow them an opportunity to “call up” the decision if they
feel there has been an abuse of discretion or denial of due process. No building permit can
be issued for construction of the project until the thirty (30) day “call up” period has expired.
P85
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
8. For Historic Designation and Historic Landmark Lot Split, the two types of historic
preservation reviews in which City Council makes the final determination, staff will prepare
a report including the recommendation of the HPC, and a hearing will be scheduled before
Council. Council will evaluate the application to determine if the review criteria are met.
The Council may approve, disapprove or continue the application to request additional
information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny.
9. HPC assigns a member of the Commission to be the “project monitor” for each project
they approve. The monitor (and Staff) may periodically visit the site as work is under
construction. If the applicant requests a change to any aspects of the project change after
the HPC approval, the applicant, Staff, and the project monitor will attempt to address them
without returning to the full HPC.
10. Before an application for a building permit can be submitted, a final set of plans reflecting
any or all required changes by the HPC or City Council must be on file with the City. Any
conditions of approval or outstanding issues which must be addressed in the field or at a
later time shall be noted on the plans.
11. Once a Development Order has been received, a building permit application may be
submitted. At this time the proposal will be reviewed for compliance with the Uniform
Building Code and zoning regulations. Fees for water, sewer, park dedication fees, and
employee housing will be collected if due. Any document, such as a plat, deed restriction,
or other agreement which is required to be filed, must be recorded before the building
permit will be issued.
P86
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 5
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICING REQUIREMENTS
The forms of notice are required by the Aspen Land Use Regulations: publication in the newspaper,
posting of the property, and surrounding landowners. You can determine whether your application
requires notice, and the type of notice it requires, from the matric found in this application packet.
Following is a summary of the public notice requirements, including identification of who is responsible
for completing the notice.
1. Publication - Publication of notice in a paper of general circulation on the City of Aspen is to be done
at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing. The legal notice will be written by the Community
Development Department and will place the notice in the paper within the appropriate deadline.
2. Posting - Posting of a sign in a conspicuous place on the property is to be done fifteen (15) days prior
to the hearing. It is the applicant’s responsibility to obtain a copy of the sign from the Community
Development Department, to fill it in correctly and bring proof to the hearing that posting took place
(use attached affidavit)
3. Mailing – Mailing of notice is to be made to all owners of property within 300 feet of the subject
development parcel by the applicant fifteen (15) days prior to hearing. It is the applicant’s responsibility
to obtain a copy of the notice from the Community Development Department, to mail it according to
the following standards, and to bring proof to the hearing that the mailing took place (use the attached
affidavit).
Notice to mineral Estate Owner. An applicant for surface Development shall notify affected mineral
estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the
application for development. The applicant shall certify that the notice has been provided to the
mineral estate owners.
The names and addresses of property owners shall be those in the current tax records of Pitkin County
as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of public hearing.
Proof of notice must be provided at the public hearing.
P87
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 6
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: __________________________________________, Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: _________________________________, 20____
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
County of Pitkin )
I, _____________________________________________________ (name, please print) being or
representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have
complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use
Code in the following manner:
_____ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a
paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public
hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
_____ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community
Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was
not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was
composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen
(15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the ___ day of
________________, 20___, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A
photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
_____ Mailing of notice: By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E) (2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of
property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A
copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(Continued on next page)
P88
IV.A.
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
_____ Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to
be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or
whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal
of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of
an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing
of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change
shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection
in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public
hearing on such amendments.
____________________________________
Signature
The foregoing “Affidavit of Notice” was acknowledged before me this ___ day
of ____________________, 20___, by _______________________________________.
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires: _________________
______________________________________
Notary Public
ATTACHMENTS:
COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
P89
IV.A.
Dennis Chookaszian
dennis@chookaszian.com 847-778-2971
300 West Main Street Aspen, CO 81611
Sept 15, 2017
Dennis Chookaszian
P90
IV.A.
Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius
Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web
site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to
ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic
system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral
estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County
does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners.
Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning
the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this
site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and
reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the
user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and
liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or
data obtained on this web site.
This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be
printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to
page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the
margins such that they no longer line up on the labels
sheet. Print actual size.
From Parcel: 273512441006 on 01/17/2019
Instructions:
Disclaimer:
http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com
P91
IV.A.
JACOBY FAMILY LP
VERO BEACH, FL 32960
700 20TH ST
RICKEL DAVID
LANDSDALE, PA 19446
275 GOLDENROD DR
GLICKMAN ADAM
SAN JUAN PUERTO RICO 00907-3122,
644 FERNANDEZ JUNCOS AVE #301
DISTRICT VIEW PLAZA MIRAMAR
TATE ELIZABETH & CHARLES
SAINT GEORGE, UT 84790
1967 PINNACLE CIR
PESIKOFF DAVID
HOUSTON, TX 77098
1811 NORTH BLVD
CROWLEY SUE MITCHELL REV TRUST
DUBLIN, OH 43017
6000 RIVERSIDE DR #A366
WEST MAIN VENTURES
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11977
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
220 WEST MAIN PARTNERS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
730 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN A CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
308 W HOPKINS AVE
CHISHOLM HEATHER M
ASPEN, CO 81611
205 W MAIN ST
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
VANCE STEPHEN M 2017 TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
625 E MAIN ST #102B264
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
SPERAW ENDEAVORS LLC
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
PO BOX 6575
233 WEST BLEEKER LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
400 E MAIN ST #2
211 WEST MAIN LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
323 W MAIN ST
JEWISH RESOURCE CENTER CHABAD OF ASPEN
ASPEN, CO 81612
435 W MAIN ST
TAD PROPERTIES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9978
WHALEN JOSHUA L & KATHRYN M
DENVER, CO 80207
2256 ASH ST
TOLER MELANIE S TRUST
BRYAN , TX 77807
3013 HICKORY RIDGE CIR
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
BROWDE KRISTEN PRATA
CHAPPAQUA, NY 10514
604 QUAKER RD
STEVENS BRUCE
ASPEN, CO 81611
214 W BLEEKER ST
KING LOUISE LLC
BASALT, CO 81621
PO BOX 1467
TYROL APARTMENTS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
200 W MAIN ST
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
A & H LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
332 W MAIN ST # 101 (A)
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
220 WMAC LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8346
P92
IV.A.
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
TAD PROPERTIES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9978
SHEEHAN WILLIAM J & NANCY E
FRANKFORT, IL 60423
10 GOLF VIEW LN
BOND RICHARD CAREY
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130
320 JULIA ST
GREENASPEN LLC
KEY BISCAYNE, FL 33149
30 ISLAND DR
COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA
CARSON CITY, NV 89702
PO BOX 1927
GUNNING JANINE L
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11705
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
ELKINS LESLIE KEITH TRUST
HOUSTON, TX 77002
1001 FANNIN #700
ROSENTHAL DIANNE
ASPEN, CO 81612-7311
PO BOX 10043
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
KARP MICHAEL
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
1630 LOCUST ST #200
WEST MAIN VENTURES
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11977
FCB LLC
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615-6622
PO BOX 6622
SPERAW ENDEAVORS LLC
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
PO BOX 6575
220 WEST MAIN PARTNERS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
730 E COOPER AVE
EDGEWATER PROPERTIES LLC
OMAHA, NE 68022
18081 BURT ST
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
ASPEN MEDICAL CENTER CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
W MAIN ST
LADA COMMUNITY PROPERTY TRUST
LAS VEGAS, NV 89109
2860 AUGUSTA DR
HERRON APARTMENTS CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
333 W MAIN ST
BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC
BOCA RATON, FL 33431
4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100
220 WEST MAIN PARTNERS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
730 E COOPER AVE
SNYDER GARY
ELKINS PARK, PA 19027
8324 BROODSIDE RD
KETTELKAMP TRUST
PUEBLO, CO 81008
3408 MORRIS AVE
CARINTHIA CORP
ASPEN, CO 81611
45 E LUPINE DR
GIERTZ JAMES R & TAMARA J
KIAWAH ISLAND, SC 29455
144 FLYWAY DR
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
P93
IV.A.
ASPEN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
ASPEN, CO 81611
311 W MAIN ST
SPERAW ENDEAVORS LLC
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
PO BOX 6575
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
CLICK JANE
ASPEN, CO 81611
333 W MAIN ST #2A
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
ALLAN ANDREW S
DENVER, CO 80218
154 MARION ST
TWIN COASTS LTD
BOCA RATON, FL 33432
433 PLAZA REAL #275
GROSVENOR DENIS
TAOS, NM 875716922
209 CAMINO DE LA MERCED # C
330 WEST BLEEKER ST LLC
WASHINGTON, DC 20007
1000 POTOMAC ST NW #102
ASPEN MAIN OFFICE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST
ASPEN CONDOS ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
311 W MAIN ST
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC
BOCA RATON, FL 33431
4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC
BOCA RATON, FL 33431
4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100
BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC
BOCA RATON, FL 33431
4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100
220 WEST MAIN PARTNERS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
730 E COOPER AVE
HEINEMAN S MARLENE
DALLAS, TX 753810323
PO BOX 810323
CRETE ASSOCIATES LP
BRYN MAWR, PA 19010
1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B
LEVY ROBERT I
STUART, FL 34994
2099 NW PINE TREE WY
RISCOR INC
DALLAS, TX 75251
12221 MERIT DR #1400
320 W BLEEKER LLC
AUSTIN, TX 78703
1717 W 6TH ST # 470
CRETE ASSOCIATES LP
BRYN MAWR, PA 19010
1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B
SAND KATHERINE M
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 51
STEVENSON KAREN H
ASPEN, CO 81611
205 W MAIN ST
TEMPKINS HARRY & VIVIAN
MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139
605 LINCOLN RD #301
LAMBERT HENRY M
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130
320 JULIA ST
GROVER FREDRICK W & PAULA J
WEXFORD, PA 15090
399 MARSHALL HEIGHTS DR
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
P94
IV.A.
STEVENS LESLEY
ASPEN, CO 81611
214 W BLEEKER ST
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
TAD PROPERTIES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9978
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
SEVEN SEAS INVESTMENT LLC
WILMETTE, IL 60091
1120 MICHIGAN AVE
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
CRETE ASSOCIATES LP
BRYN MAWR, PA 19010
1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B
PENSCO TRUST COMPANY
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33417
5114 OKEECHOBEE BLVD #203
BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC
BOCA RATON, FL 33431
4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100
TAD PROPERTIES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9978
3RD & MAIN CONDO ASSOCIATION
ASPEN, CO 81611
332 W MAIN ST
GILDENHORN MICHAEL S
BETHESDA, MD 20816
5008 BALTON RD
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
DOUBLE D CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
300 W BLEEKER ST
220 WMAC LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8346
212 N SECOND ST LLC
TAMPA, FL 33613
509 GUISANDO DE AVILA #201
SHADOWVIEW CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
320 W HOPKINS AVE
MAYER KEVIN
ASPEN, CO 81611
222 W HOPKINS AVE #2
NANOOK RIDGE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
324 W HOPKINS AVE #B
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
JOSEPH RUSSELL C & ELISE E
HOUSTON, TX 77019
3682 WILLOWICK RD
HOLTZMAN L BART & PATRICIA G
SAINT LOUIS, MO 63124
9741 LITZSINGER RD
SPERAW ENDEAVORS LLC
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
PO BOX 6575
BRAFMAN STUART & LOTTA BEA TRST
CHEVY CHASE, MD 20815
5630 WISCONSIN AVE #401
TWIN COASTS LTD
BOCA RATON, FL 33432
433 PLAZA REAL #275
TAD PROPERTIES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9978
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
P95
IV.A.
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
MARTIN SCOTT M
ASPEN, CO 81611
PO BOX 51
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC
BOCA RATON, FL 33431
4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100
BLEVINS J RONALD & PHYLLIS
ASPEN, CO 81611
310 W BLEEKER ST
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
LORENTZEN AMY L
HERMOSA BEACH , CA 90254
125 22ND ST
PIONEER PARTNERS LTD
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST
SPERAW ENDEAVORS LLC
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
PO BOX 6575
220 WEST MAIN PARTNERS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
730 E COOPER AVE
TAD PROPERTIES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9978
TACO 2 LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
220 W MAIN ST #202
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
BLEEKER & 3RD LLC
DALLAS, TX 75219
PO BOX 195457
BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC
BOCA RATON, FL 33431
4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100
CRETE ASSOCIATES LP
BRYN MAWR, PA 19010
1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B
SPERAW ENDEAVORS LLC
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
PO BOX 6575
WEST MAIN VENTURES
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11977
NEWTON BARBARA
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9410
TAD PROPERTIES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9978
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
TYROLEAN LODGE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
200 W MAIN ST
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
ASPEN HOUSE LLC
IRVINE, CA 92614
17595 HARVARD AVE # C511
GUNN ROBERT W FAMILY TRST
MARBLEHEAD, MA 01945
409 OCEAN AVE
P96
IV.A.
GUNNING RALPH
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11912
MARTIN SCOTT M
ASPEN, CO 81611
PO BOX 51
DH ASE LLC
WILMINGTON, DE 19808
2711 CENTERVILLE RD # 400
MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
WEST SIDE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
234 W HOPKINS AVE
233 WEST BLEEKER LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
400 E MAIN ST #2
331 W BLEEKER LLC
HOUSTON, TX 77019
2727 ALLEN PKY #1400
JACOBY FAMILY LP
VERO BEACH, FL 32960
700 20TH ST
CRETE ASSOCIATES LP
BRYN MAWR, PA 19010
1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B
GARET CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
400 E MAIN ST #2
SILVERSTEIN PHILIP & ROSALYN
BRONX, NY 10463
25 KNOLLS CRESCENT APT 81
INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
233 W MAIN ST
SAND KATHERINE M
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 51
WINER CAROL G
BETHESDA , MD 20817
6740 SELKIRK DR
314 WEST MAIN LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
314 W MAIN ST
P97
IV.A.
P98
IV.A.
Annabelle Cabin08 May 2018Perspective 1 : 8 in 12 Roof SlopeKEY:P99
IV.A.
Annabelle Cabin08 May 2018Perspective 2 : 8 in 12 Roof SlopeKEY:P100
IV.A.
Page 1 of 6
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
Memorandum
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner
THROUGH: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer
MEETING DATE: March 27, 2019
RE: 549 Race Alley – Minor Development Review, PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICANT /OWNER:
Aspen March, LLC
REPRESENTATIVE:
Escape Garden Design, LLC
LOCATION:
Street Address:
549 Race Alley
Legal Description:
Lot 5, Fox Crossing Subdivision,
City and Townsite of Aspen,
Colorado.
Parcel Identification Number:
PID# 2737-073-92-005
CURRENT ZONING & USE
R-6 (Medium-Density
Residential); Single-family home
PROPOSED LAND USE:
No change
SUMMARY:
The applicant has requested a Minor Development review for
landscape improvements including site grading, plants, retaining
walls and fences.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval with conditions as identified on pages
5-6 of this memo.
Site Locator Map – 549 Race Alley
549 Race Street Walnut Street P101
IV.B.
Page 2 of 6
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
BACKGROUND:
549 Race Alley in the Fox Crossing Subdivision is a Victorian era home that was restored and
redeveloped with a new addition, completed in 2018. The historic house sits on the west side of the
property on an elevated grade. The site has a unique condition where street access is only available at
the rear of the property and the entrance to the historic house is off the paved park trail. As part of the
restoration and redevelopment plan, eight flagstone steps and a simple pipe railing were introduced as
the main access to the historic house.
Figure 1 – 549 Race Alley, Nov. 2017 Figure 2 – 549 Race Alley, Jan. 2018
REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval:
• Minor Development (Section 26.415.070.C) for exterior remodel of the structures, addition of a
covered walkway and carport. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is the final review
authority.
This project is not subject to Call-up Notice to City Council.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
The applicant proposes to modify the grade surrounding the historic house because the steep bank has
made it difficult to maintain and grow plantings in this area. A 30” tall retaining wall with a 36” tall gate
at the base of the flagstone steps are proposed. The proposed material for the retaining wall is red
sandstone with a rough-cut veneer. Wooden fences are proposed in two areas as part of this proposal.
New plants are called out to be installed around the front of the site.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Staff finds that the proposed changes to grade around the historic house may be appropriate with
modifications to ensure no historic architectural details are covered, and revisions to the design of the
proposed retaining walls are needed but can be handled at the staff and monitor level. A critical
component for the revisions is to make sure that Engineering’s comments regarding drainage and
P102
IV.B.
Page 3 of 6
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
stormwater mitigation are fully addressed. Staff recommends the applicant work closely with
Engineering and staff and monitor to address these comments as a condition of approval.
The following points go into more detail regarding the proposal for HPC discussion:
1. Site Planning: The existing steps and railing leading up to the historic house were designed to
be simple and visually minimal and will remain. The applicant proposes a 30” tall retaining wall
for the entire west side of the property and a portion of the south side of the property in order
to reduce the steep embankment in front of the house. The proposed location for the retaining
walls must consider the drainage and stormwater mitigation structures that are already in place.
Engineering expressed concerns regarding the north west corner of the property where the
drainage swales are located, and staff recommends the applicant work closely with Engineering
to ensure full compliance.
According to Design Guideline 1.23, re-grading of the site is typically not permitted because how
the building meets grade is historically significant. Although the overall grading of the site was
previously altered, efforts were made to maintain the detailing of the historic resource and how
it met grade. The vertical skirt board around the foundation of the west elevation was restored
as depicted in Figure 3 under existing. This condition must remain, and staff recommends the
applicant restudy their plan so that soil and plants do not cover this restored architectural detail.
Figure 3 – Proposed Re-grading and Retaining Walls around Steps
A red sandstone material with a rough-cut surface finish is proposed to veneer the new retaining
walls. Although this material was used historically around town, it was typically reserved for
buildings of higher architectural style and prominence and rarely found on modest miner’s
cottages. The use of this stone for the retaining wall is out of character with the historic resource
and gives this feature visual prominence. Staff recommends exposed grey concrete or brick
veneer to demonstrate a more compatible material palette with the historic house (Design
Guideline 1.22). New retaining walls are also proposed on either side of the steps with a
continuous, sloping stone cap on top and two pillars at the base of the steps. (See callout no.1,
P103
IV.B.
Page 4 of 6
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
Figure 4.) These features create a stair which is out of scale with the resource. Staff recommends
the retaining wall and cap along the steps be removed or significantly reduced.
Figure 4 – Proposed Site Plan
At the base of the steps, the applicant proposes a gate that opens to the paved trail. The Building
Department prohibits a gate in this location due to code that would require a landing at the gate,
and the Parks Department has stated that a 2’ fall free zone with no obstacles must be maintained
in this area since it directly abuts the trail. (See Exhibit B for referral comments.) Staff
recommends this gate be eliminated.
The retaining wall on the south side terminates where it meets the proposed wooden fence that
extends from the cross-gable end of the historic house. The height of this wooden fence ranges
from 35” to 42” and encloses a portion of the side yard. (See callout no. 2, Figure 4.) This fence
needs to have a transparent quality to allow views of the yard and the historic resource from the
street in order to comply Design Guideline 1.19. Staff recommends additional detail for the fence
along the south elevation be provided to ensure the design complies with the Design Guidelines.
A wooden privacy fence is proposed on top of a retaining wall at the rear of the property by the
new addition. (See callout no. 3, Figure 4.) Staff finds that the proposed material and locations
are appropriate.
A planting list was provided in the application and a majority of the proposed plantings are native
perennials that range from 6-36” in height. The plants and shrubs are to soften areas of transition
created by the retaining walls. The planting list must meet Water Efficiency Landscape
Standards (WELS) and cannot interfere with or block views of the historic resource (Design
Guideline 1.13).
3.
2.
1.
P104
IV.B.
Page 5 of 6
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
Staff finds that the overall proposal to re-grade, landscape, and install retaining walls and fences is
appropriate but needs some modification to fully comply with all relevant HP Design Guidelines.
Staff finds that the revisions may be handled at the staff and monitor level with clear conditions for
approval.
ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATIONS:
The current owner of 549 Race Alley also owns the lot north of the property and plans to develop it into
a landscaped yard. There are features, such as the retaining walls and fences, that will extend from the
historic property (549 Race Alley) into the adjacent lot but HPC does not have purview over the changes
proposed on this adjacent lot because it is not designated.
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
The application was referred out to other City Departments who have requirements that will
significantly affect the permit review. See Exhibit B for more details.
Engineering Department:
1. Accommodate for existing drainage swales in the north west corner of the property.
2. Show drainage pipes directed to the drywell around the proposed retaining wall on the south
west corner of the property and provide additional information regarding impact.
3. Provide detail showing interaction with the drywell.
Building Department:
1. The proposed gate at the bottom of the steps is not permitted because IRC section R311.7.6
requires a landing at the bottom of each stairway.
Parks Department:
1. A fall free zone needs to be maintained along the trail that is a minimum of 2’. This will impact
the location of the proposed pillars and gate.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) approve this proposal with the following
conditions for review and approval by staff and monitor before submitting for Building permit:
1.) Revise the grading conditions on the west elevation of the historic house to ensure that the
restored vertical skirt board at the foundation is not covered.
2.) Restudy the placement of the retaining wall to accommodate the drainage swale on the north
west corner of the property. Work closely with Engineering to meet all relevant requirements.
3.) Restudy the proposed retaining wall feature along the steps by reducing the height and
removing the stone cap.
4.) Restudy the materials for the retaining wall to be more compatible with a miner’s cottage by
using more modest materials such as exposed grey concrete or brick veneer.
P105
IV.B.
Page 6 of 6
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
5.) Eliminate the front gate and the pillars that abut the trail at the bottom of the steps.
6.) Fence design for the south elevation must comply with the relevant Design Guidelines.
7.) Proposed planting list must comply with the Water Efficiency Landscape Standards (WELS).
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution #____, Series of 2019
Exhibit A – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria /Staff Findings
Exhibit B – Referral Comments
Exhibit C – Land Use Application
P106
IV.B.
HPC Resolution #___, Series of 2019
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2019
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
GRANTING MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 549
RACE ALLEY, LOT 5, FOX CROSSING SUBDIVISION, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
COLORADO
PARCEL ID: 2737-073-92-005
WHEREAS, the applicant, Aspen March, LLC, represented by Escape Garden Design, LLC,
has requested HPC approval for Minor Development for the property located at 549 Race
Alley, Lot 5, Fox Crossing Subdivision, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado;
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been
submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the
procedures established for their review;” and
WHEREAS, for approval of Minor Development Review, the application shall meet the
requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.070.C, Minor Development involving a
designated historic property or property within a historic district; and
WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for
compliance with the applicable review standards and recommended approval of Minor
Development with conditions; and
WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on March 27, 2019. HPC considered the application,
the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review
standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of __ to __.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby approves Minor Development for 549 Race Alley, Lot 5, Fox Crossing
Subdivision, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO with the following conditions:
Section 1: Minor Development Review
HPC hereby approves minor development for landscape improvements including site grading,
landscaping, and installing retaining walls and fences with the following conditions for review and
approval by staff and monitor before submitting for Building permit:
1.) Revise the grading conditions on the west elevation of the historic house to ensure
that the restored vertical skirt board at the foundation is not covered.
P107
IV.B.
HPC Resolution #___, Series of 2019
Page 2 of 3
2.) Restudy the placement of the retaining wall to accommodate the drainage swale on
the north west corner of the property. Work closely with Engineering to meet all
relevant requirements.
3.) Restudy the proposed retaining wall feature along the steps by reducing the height
and removing the stone cap.
4.) Restudy the materials for the retaining wall to be more compatible with a miner’s
cottage by using more modest materials such as exposed grey concrete or brick
veneer.
5.) Eliminate the front gate and the pillars that abut the trail at the bottom of the steps.
6.) Fence design for the south elevation must comply with the relevant Design
Guidelines.
7.) Proposed planting list must comply with the Water Efficiency Landscape Standards
(WELS).
Section 2: Material Representations
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 Community Development Department, the Historic
Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan
development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless
amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority.
Section 3: Existing Litigation
This Resolution shall not affect 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: Severability
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.
Section 5: Vested Rights
The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan
vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order.
However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall
result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended,
failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein,
within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture
of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of
P108
IV.B.
HPC Resolution #___, Series of 2019
Page 3 of 3
Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific
development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to
obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be
published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of
Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan
and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in
the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan,
and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the
Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes,
pertaining to the following described property: 549 Race Alley.
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and
approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City
of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval.
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the
period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the
date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section
26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado
Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the _____ day of _______, 2019.
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content:
_________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________
Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Bob Blaich, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
_________________________________________________________________
Linda Manning, City Clerk
P109
IV.B.
Page 1 of 6
Exhibit A
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria
Staff Findings
NOTE: Staff responses begin on page 5 of this exhibit, following the list of applicable guidelines.
26.415.070.C – Certificate of Appropriateness for a Minor Development
1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for minor
development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the
proposed project constitutes a minor development. Minor development work includes:
a) Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the floor area of the structure is
two hundred and fifty (250) square feet or less or
b) Alterations to a building façade, windows, doors, roof planes or material, exterior wall
materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim when three (3) or
fewer elements are affected and the work does not qualify for a certificate of no negative
effect or
c) Erection or installation of a combination or multiples of awning, canopies, mechanical
equipment, fencing, signs, accessory features and other attachments to designated
properties such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of
no negative effect or
d) Alterations that are made to non-historic portions of a designated historic property that do
not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or
e) The erection of street furniture, signs, public art and other visible improvements within
designated historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative impact
does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect. The Community
Development Director may determine that an application for work on a designated historic
property involving multiple categories of minor development may result in the cumulative
impact such that it is considered a major development. In such cases, the applicant shall apply
for a major development review in accordance with Subsection 26.415.07.D.
P110
IV.B.
Page 2 of 6
Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines:
1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces.
• Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a semi-public
walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces.
1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on
residential projects.
• Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of the
period of significance.
• Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install them in
the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen Victorian landmark
set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick or red sandstone are
appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks.
• The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties. A
wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property.
Chapter 1: Site Planning & Landscape Design MET NOT MET DOES NOT
APPLY
1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces.
1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on
residential projects.
1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site.
1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process.
1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram.
1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of
historic structures are inappropriate.
1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution.
1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type
and style.
1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street.
1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of
important features of a designated building.
1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized.
1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will
be reviewed on a case by case basis.
1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its
built features.MET
MET
CONDITION
CONDITION
MET
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review Criteria for 549 Race Alley
The applicant is requesting a Minor Development reivew for regrading, landscape changes, new retaining walls and fences. As a
historically designated landmark the proposed design changes must meet applicable Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
MET
MET
MET
MET
CONDITION
CONDITION
MET
CONDITION
P111
IV.B.
Page 3 of 6
1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site.
• Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than many
small unusable areas.
• Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building.
1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process.
• When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better integrated
into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least a preliminary
representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be reviewed and approved by
Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal.
• Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the historic
landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site, reduce the generation
of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the ground. Stormwater facilities and
conveyances located in front of a landmark should have minimal visual impact when viewed from the
public right of way.
• Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements.
1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram.
• Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not overplant a site, or install a landscape which is overtextured
or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In Zone A, new planting
shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes.
• In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod, and low
shrubs are often appropriate.
• Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more contemporary
landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the property, in Zone C.
• Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited patio where
appropriate.
• Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the landscape will
be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building must be honored.
• In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to over plant
either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before the property was
divided.
• Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged.
1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic
structures are inappropriate.
• Low plantings and ground covers are preferred.
• Do not place trees, shrubs, or hedgerows in locations that will obscure, damage, or block significant
architectural features or views to the building. Hedgerows are not allowed as fences.
P112
IV.B.
Page 4 of 6
• Consider mature canopy size when planting new trees adjacent to historic resources. Planting trees too
close to a landmark may result in building deteriorate or blocked views and is inappropriate.
• Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed.
1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution.
• Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve the
character of a property.
1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type
and style.
• The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of
significance.
• A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations.
• Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen Victorian
landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed on the site.
• A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen Victorian
properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including transparency, a low height, and
a simple design. When this material is used, posts should be simply detailed and not oversized.
1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street.
• A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature.
• For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the picket.
• For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate, proposals
will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
• Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment.
1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of
important features of a designated building.
• A privacy fence should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts.
Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a
solid plank fence when seen head on. Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing on the
upper portions of the fence.
• A privacy fence should allow the building corners and any important architectural features that are
visible from the street to continue to be viewed.
• All hedgerows (trees, shrub bushes, etc.) are prohibited in Zones A and B.
1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized.
• All wall materials, including veneer and mortar, will be reviewed on a case by case basis and should be
compatible with the palette used on the historic structure.
P113
IV.B.
Page 5 of 6
1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will
be reviewed on a case by case basis.
1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its
built features.
• Do not add features that damage the integrity of the historic landscape.
• Maintain the existing pattern of setbacks and siting of structures.
• Maintain the historic relationship of the built landscape to natural features on the site.
• All additions to these landscapes must be clearly identifiable as recent work.
• New artwork must be subordinate to the designed landscape in terms of placement, height, material,
and overall appearance. Place new art away from significant landscape features.
• Avoid installing utility trenches in cultural landscapes if possible.
Staff Findings: The applicable section of the design guidelines for this proposal is site planning.
Staff finds Design Guideline 1.8 regarding stormwater mitigation must be addressed because
Engineering provided comments expressing concerns related to the placement of the proposed
retaining wall interfering with existing drainage swales in the area. Applicant will need to work closely
with Engineering to resolve these concerns and any changes will need staff and monitor review and
approval. This has been included as a condition of approval.
Staff finds Design Guideline 1.17 related to new fences in the front yard applies to the wooden gate
proposed at the base of the steps that abut the trail. The Design Guidelines encourage no fences be
placed in the front yard to help preserve the character of the property. The Building department
provided comments indicating that the proposed location would not be permitted. The Parks
department also provided comments requiring a 2’ fall free zone needs to be maintained and the door
swing of the gate would need to comply. Staff recommends the removal of the gate preserve character
and meet the requirements of the other departments. This has been included as a condition of approval.
Staff finds Design Guideline 1.19 related to new fences having a transparent design quality applies to
the proposed fence on the south elevation. Detailed drawings about the design of the fence were not
provided in this application but it will need to comply with this Design Guideline where the spacing
between the pickets must be a minimum of ½ the width of the picket. This has been included as a
condition of approval.
Staff finds Design Guideline 1.22 related to new retaining walls are not met as proposed but may be
conditioned to meet this Design Guideline. The proposed retaining walls are 30” in height but the red
flagstone material gives it a prominent visual presence, particularly in the areas around the existing
steps. Staff recommends the use of a different material such as grey concrete or brick for the retaining
P114
IV.B.
Page 6 of 6
wall and removing the stone cap and reducing the height of the retaining wall to the minimum
requirement around the steps to reduce the scale of this feature. Staff recommends removing the pillars
that abut the paved trail to soften the transition from the steps to the trail. This has been included as a
condition of approval.
Staff finds Design Guideline 1.23 related to re-grading the site is not met as proposed, but simple
modifications that may be reviewed by staff and monitor can bring the design into compliance. Re-
grading is generally not allowed in order to maintain the relationship of how the historic building meets
grade. During the restoration of the historic house, the vertical skirt board around the foundation of
the west elevation, north of the steps, was restored. The proposal covers this area with soil and plantings
and staff recommends the grading be done in a way that does not cover this detail in order to meet the
intent of this Design Guideline. This has been included as a condition of approval.
In summary, staff recommends approval with conditions.
P115
IV.B.
Exhibit B - Referral Comments
P116
IV.B.
From:Denis Murray
To:Sarah Yoon
Cc:Bonnie Muhigirwa; Nick Thompson
Subject:RE: HPC Referral Project: 549 Race Alley
Date:Tuesday, March 19, 2019 1:31:22 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image005.png
Sarah,
The IRC section R311.7.6 requires a landing at the top and bottom of each stairway. The gate would
not be permitted in this location. The rest of the proposal looks good.
Thanks
Denis Murray
Plans Examination Manager
Community Development
130 South Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
p: 970.429.2761
c: Cell 970.309.6283
f: Fax 970.920.5440
www.cityofaspen.com
Notice and Disclaimer:
This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
confidential and exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the
sender that you have received the message in error and then delete it. Further, the information or opinions contained in this
email are advisory in nature only and are not binding on the City of Aspen. If applicable, the information and opinions
contain in the email are based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations
that may or may not be accurate. The opinions and information contained herein do not create a legal or vested right or any
claim of detrimental reliance.
P117
IV.B.
From: Ben Carlsen
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 11:26 AM
To: David Radeck <david.radeck@cityofaspen.com>; Austin Weiss <austin.weiss@cityofaspen.com>;
Matt Kuhn <matt.kuhn@cityofaspen.com>
Subject: RE: HPC Referral Project: 549 Race Alley
Hey Dave,
I’m good with the planting list.
A fall free zone next to the trail is important – minimum of 2’. The gate must not open onto the
main trail. Otherwise, the design seems reasonable.
Best, Ben
Ben Carlsen
Open Space and Natural Resource Manager
p: 970.429.2034
www.cityofaspen.com
P118
IV.B.
P119
IV.B.
P120
IV.B.
DATE: January 24, 2019
PLANNER: Amy Simon, amy.simon@cityofaspen.com
PROJECT NAME AND ADDRESS: 549 Race Alley
Parcel ID #: 273707392005
REPRESENTATIVE: Jennifer Dolecki-Smith, Escape Garden Design. LLC
jennifer@escapegardendesign.com 618-1019
Type of Application: Minor Development Review by HPC
Dear Amy,
Attached please find the following supplements to our application:
•
•
•
•
Regards,
Jennifer M. Dolecki-Smith, RLA
Escape Garden Design
P121
IV.B.
P122
IV.B.
P123
IV.B.
P124
IV.B.
P125
IV.B.
P126
IV.B.
P127
IV.B.
P128
IV.B.
DATE: January 14, 2019
PLANNER: Amy Simon, amy.simon@cityofaspen.com
PROJECT NAME AND ADDRESS: 549 Race Alley
Parcel ID #: 273707392005
REPRESENTATIVE: Jennifer Dolecki-Smith, Escape Garden Design. LLC
jennifer@escapegardendesign.com 618-1019
Type of Application: Minor Development Review by HPC
Dear Amy,
We are applying for review to modify the landscape and to add a retaining wall and fence
on this designated property. The existing landscape between the historic house and the
adjacent pathway to the West is a very steep hill, creating a difficult growing space. The
house is perched on top of this slope. In this application, we are proposing low retaining
walls that will help create garden spaces and visually support the structure. The retaining
walls (30”) at the bottom of the existing steps would have a modest gate (36”) supported
on its own wooden posts.
The gate will match the style of the fencing which is being proposed approximately half
way back on the historic portion of the house. Initial designs had the fence on top of the
wall, and in front of the historic house. In an effort to be more modest and respectful to the
structure, the fence has been separated from the wall in the areas of the Historic structure.
Plantings around the historic structure consist of common lilacs and native perennials and
grasses.
Regards,
Jennifer M. Dolecki-Smith, RLA
Escape Garden Design
P129
IV.B.
Existing Steps at Victorian
Stone Retaining Wall Pattern
549 Race Alley- HPC Application for retaining
walls and fence
P130IV.B.
Fence Style ExampleP131
IV.B.
P132IV.B.
P133
IV.B.
1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces.
• Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a
semi-public walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces.
Response: The design of the entry to the historic house respects a hierarchy of spaces. The
pathway running along the house is public. The gate separates into a semi private entry, and is
really the only logical location for the gate. Patio spaces beyond compose the private spaces.
1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on
residential projects.
• Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of
the period of significance.
• Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install
them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen
Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete,
brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks.
• The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential
properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property.
Response: the alignment of the walkway and steps to the historical house shall not change. It is
a straight simple walkway running perpendicular from the path to the porch entry. Materials
would be red sandstone. Steps are currently dry set and can remain dry set. The width of the
existing walkway is 3’ + 1.5” for rough cut
1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site.
• Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than
many small unusable areas.
• Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building.
Response: the open space surrounding the historic house is a consistent space to the south
and west. It will be handled in a consistent way of planting consolidating it visually into one large
space. Retaining walls will be softened by plant materials.
1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process.
• When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better
integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least
a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be reviewed
and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal.
• Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the
historic landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site, reduce
P134
IV.B.
the generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the ground.
Stormwater facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should have minimal visual
impact when viewed from the public right of way.
• Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements.
Response: Storm water needs have already been addressed for this property. The proposed
changes will not disturb the existing infrastructure.
1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram.
• Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not overplant a site, or install a landscape which is
overtextured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In
Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes.
• In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod,
and low shrubs are often appropriate.
• Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more
contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the
property, in Zone C.
• Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited
patio where appropriate.
• Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the
landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building
must be honored.
• In the case of a historic
landmark lot split, careful
consideration should be
given so as not to over
plant either property, or
remove all evidence of the
landscape characteristics
from before the property
was divided.
• Contemporary landscapes
that highlight an
AspenModern
architectural style are
encouraged.
P135
IV.B.
Response: the plant palette around the historic structure in Zone A will be native perennials and
grasses with a few lilac shrubs.
No patios or hard scape surfaces are proposed aside from the retaining walls.
1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of
historic structures are inappropriate.
• Low plantings and ground covers are preferred.
• Do not place trees, shrubs, or hedgerows in locations that will obscure, damage, or block
significant architectural features or views to the building. Hedgerows are not allowed as fences.
• Consider mature canopy size when planting new trees adjacent to historic resources. Planting
trees too close to a landmark may result in building deteriorate or blocked views and is
inappropriate.
• Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed.
Response: Most of the plantings being proposed are native perennials 6-36” tall. A few lilac
shrubs are proposed, however will be placed so as not to obscure views of significant
architectural features on the house.
1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting.
• Landscape and pathway lighting is not permitted in Zone A (refer to diagram) on Aspen
Victorian properties unless an exception is approved by HPC based on safety considerations.
• Landscape, driveway, and pathway lighting on AspenModern properties is addressed on a case-
by-case basis.
• Landscape light fixtures should be carefully selected so that they are compatible with the
building, yet recognizable as a product of their own time.
• Driveway lighting is not permitted on Aspen Victorian properties.
P136
IV.B.
• Landscape uplighting is not allowed.
Response: no landscape lighting is being proposed.
1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution.
Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve the character
of a property.
Response: Contrary to our initial design, we have pulled the fence back behind the façade of the
historic house leaving zone A without a fence.
1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building
type and style.
• The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of
significance.
• A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations.
• Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen
Victorian landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed on the
site.
• A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen
Victorian properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including transparency,
a low height, and a simple design. When this material is used, posts should be simply detailed
and not oversized.
Response: the fence being proposed would be a painted wood fence. See photos of inspiration
fence.
1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the
street.
• A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature.
• For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the
picket.
• For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate,
proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
• Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment.
Response: The fence is not in the front yard. The fence proposed is transparent in nature- see
image below
P137
IV.B.
1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of
important features of a designated building.
• A privacy fence should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual
impacts. Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the
appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. Also consider using lattice, or other
transparent detailing on the upper portions of the fence.
• A privacy fence should allow the building corners and any important architectural features that
are visible from the street to continue to be viewed.
• All hedgerows (trees, shrub bushes, etc.) are prohibited in Zones A and B.
Response: Though there are areas taller than 42 inches, due to grade change on the property,
fences that are close up to the house and in general will be 36 inches. There are no hedge rows
being proposed.
1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized.
• All wall materials, including veneer and mortar, will be reviewed on a case by case basis and
should be compatible with the palette used on the historic structure.
Response: The top of the proposed retaining wall in front of the historic house is 18” lower than
the entry porch. The retaining along the steps above the top of the wall is sloped so as to have
the least amount of visual impact. These walls do not need to attach to the house, and can end
just below the siding . See Image Below. Given the design, it does not interfere with any views
of the house. Perennials shall soften the retaining wall. Materials of the proposed wall are red
Sandstone -rough cut. Height of the proposed retaining wall is 30”. See imagery attached
P138
IV.B.
1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed
and will be reviewed on a case by case basis.
Response: existing grade of the house shall not be changed. Minor grading in the area of
the retaining walls would allow for shallower pitched garden spaces.
1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and
its built features.
• Do not add features that damage the integrity of the historic landscape.
• Maintain the existing pattern of setbacks and siting of structures.
• Maintain the historic relationship of the built landscape to natural features on the site.
• All additions to these landscapes must be clearly identifiable as recent work.
• New artwork must be subordinate to the designed landscape in terms of placement, height,
material, and overall appearance. Place new art away from significant landscape features.
• Avoid installing utility trenches in cultural landscapes if possible.
Response: Upon the completion of the work that was done to develop this site, there was no
historic landscape or plants left. Setbacks are being maintained, the location of the house shall
be unchanged.
P139
IV.B.
P140
IV.B.