The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20011212' ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION December 12, 2001 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOON - SITE VISITS - Meet at the first site: 950 Matchless Drive 110 E. Bleeker 334 W. Hallam 5:00 I. Roll call II. Approval of minutes - none III. Public Comments IV. Commission member comments V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) VI. Project Monitoring - (Next reso will be #58) ~ VII. STAFF REFERRAL 5:05 A. Sign permit for Shooters 0/6 VIII. OLD BUSINESS 5:10 A. 501 W. Main, Christiania - Final, Public Hearing03 7 rjr' ~ -0-0 5:35 B. 213 W. Bleeker Street - Schelling Remediation Plan'59 - 6 -0 IX. NEW BUSINESS 5:50 A. 110 E. Bleeker - Conceptual, Partial Demolition, Variances Public Hearing gm--, c> 3* d, 6,-odZ 6:35 B. 334 W. Hallam - Conceptual, Partial Demolition, Variances Public Hearing X. WORKSESSION 7:25 A. 950 Matchless Drive ~0 XI. ADJOURN PROJECT MONITORING ~~ Suzannah Reid 414 N. First- POLE 312 S. Galena 7m and Main 330 Lake Avenue 620 W. Bleeker Historical Society 328 Park Ave. - Lane 515 Gillespie 205 S. Third 935 E. Cooper Jeffrey Halferty 414 N. First- POLE 920 W. Hallam- Guthrie 312 S. Galena 620 W. Bleeker - Historical Society - ~213 W. Bleeker_.. 200 E. Bleeker 328 Park Ave. - Lane 209 S. Galena 332 W. Main 101 E. Hallam Lisa Markalunas 939 E. Cooper- Langley 200 E. Bleeker 302 E. Hopkins 110 W. Main 104 S. Galena - St. Mary's Church 620 W. Bleeker 214 E. Hopkins Wagner Park Gilbert Sanchez 312 S. Galena 333 W. Bleeker Street 501 W. Main Christiania Lodge 330 Lake Ave. 609 W. Bleeker- Ernie Frywald 200 E. Bleeker 214 E. Hopkins ~ Wagner Park l 1 > % e. 14 7 Ikk-- Rally Dupps 501 W. Main Street - Christiania Lodge 129 W. Francis 435 W. Main 0 104 S. Galena St. Mary's Church 302 E. Hopkins 610 W. Smuggler 232 W. Main - Christmas Inn 935 E. Cooper Melanie Roschko_ Teresa Melville 513 W. Bleeker 515 Gillespie 232 W. Main - Christmas Inn Neill Hirst 450 S. Galena 101 E. Hallam 205 S. Third CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: ~PC Legal Procedures (Submit affidavit of notice for PH - conceptual) Swear In Staffpresentation Applicant presentation Board Questions and Clarifications PH opened and closed Board Comments Applicant Comments Motion 0 3*1004â‚¬9% tknw i.1-0 Dppl ic,1--to t, JOLL 08 SIGN PERMIT APPLICATION ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT [ER]ity ECounty permit# 3 l %#00 1/el Job Address: 210 S. â‚¬afena- <Err. As-pakj , cO. â‚¬36 41 Owner: AS>24 ELKS LorAfe_ * Al'-1 Applicantfbor>Ict<141, u EA+< f~r,52% Ikic. "DRA/S}looTE 25 Ii:râ‚¬H TCLO-?, (47-d)(3 135~-Â£-IS-67 Name/Address/Phone Number . Use ofBuilding: 54 1 148 - 6400 Valuation of Work: Remarks: Permit will not be accepted unless complete! Above information complete; ; A letter of consent from the owner of building i f applicant is not the owner or tenant; Proposed location ofsign on the building or parcel; A biue print or ink drawing of plans which inciude method of construction for the sign and its supports, proposed dimensions, materials, color, type, intensity, and design of the sign's illumination, if any; The dimensions, measurements, and calculations of building frontages and line frontages on streets and alleys; the dimensions o f any other signs located on the property; and any other information needed to demonscate compliance with appropriate sign regulations. FEES: O Sign Permit Fee $1*09 12) 1 00 O Payment of Pitkin County Use Tax (if opting for deposiO O Monthly or Quarterly Returns will be submitted O Deposit Method: 3.5% of25% of the permit valuation paid at issuance. A final report on total actual cost must bc filed within 90 days ofsubstantial completion of work and/ or issuance of the certificatc of occupancy O Exempt Exemption Organization O Resale: Statc & Pitkin County Resalc No. Anyone who uses and/or consuma building materials and fixtures in Pitkin County is subject to the 33% tax. Property liens may be placed on Otc owner's and/or contractor's property when use tax is not paid. .1 O TOTAL $ 1 10.00 Check NumberJF < 1 82 Re ?04% . - ApproVals: 52(IÂ»::5 ' Zoning Â· HPC 71 - 5/80/-01 Date ' Date k. J O 0000 ,Â·lnk ~ ~ ~ 2'n~8-4.2 AlÂ·,6#1"4 6%:15642%9Â«1*4 *Â·.2 : gly.:.G ..46*6'~~.,~~43*~ r I ce.Â·*-2% * /*a 444.14$ ...... 47 4 99'rea 2 ':31 : 3.29& I . .1,r. 4* AVI . DV2Â£*. 61 '24./ Â·Fâ€¢tld . 44 '/,4.Â¢991Â· Â· L J L .7, 0 ' ).61Â·Â«AfÂ·I . t. - 4 Â·Â·Â·Â· 414 2#24./ 4/dz,r, te... 1 -.- 7 I i.Â· t.".AlÂ«: 1. ./ - p.: n 9. 64*4 ....4.4 Â·11,0-AN, Â·.I''I~.51 b. P.~t- Â£ LA, .9/JEAC/*A 1.99; 01 94.-314 4/k tiff r L &,4.9> 214..' 94,7.r . ,>kia L Â·-i; P:i Q 4%, ./ 3~IA ~fiff<<}2**432-649 31'ff Â·ti f'f~ yÂ© 3' .gr. *41$20 1 I /1 21 42411'JI.- 4/h %â€¢ /6 ~ 47 1.Â·' e .F 7.1* ...- t. u .,4 , 104.-f 1 â‚¬*.,2 . 74.f 4, , r. 4 14Â¥ 0139 ESÂ»,e= dA.*' .â€ž-Â·Â» -~Â·2% 12:::i.#%9 ~44Â«y;i a ...,<:-4.25 ~44-Â·JL %40. 2:tuf 3/y*Kul t/3 2.413l , 4*1 .922~03>11 %*.490 42:* 7. I.'â€ž-ike S 4 -.2*UB, .56%a~#+0, EN:-,1,- .462Â·K .5#96 lk. ~, .. 0..Ni f...212= 4}b,. 3 74.24# *.../ ..Fâ‚¬f:'r P.Â·'.Â·7 .5 9 A.769Â·~ : ...: 1*J F '.Â¥ ./C:,2-t'.2/'.. 4411* i 81 97 ' 4.4*.36# 4'.' *.3 2 ' Â·4436'2+Y Â£0 >26:91 -Sp-<A,~~6?. atÂ» 26.17 - ' *1269 1 Nfl ' *79 41,,5 Re'.41 ,> .3 94)Â·il tift-â‚¬6~~ -4 29.?.sl 443 t/;4;7 . 'Â·k:Â¢9Â·':f '-'i?:,/~w~./ . 3.' ..M-. c 4.1 J - ---Â·lt Z. tktr 4#600' 74 - $. f 4Â·'s ':~ 4"-24 61*.41 74 .%12 ., S 'Ar.4% 49, 04* -1 ..r Â·... Â£ 04 54â‚¬443Â«tbfuttr.>:.934</ .:,/*4 4 5 %,Â· ~/I. r .t.-,34%;.R.t :t >.. :403% c . . Rte*E , 1 .1 1 52.343 *R.:9:.-mi â€¢ K P 1 .. . 4 1%, 1. '.2 474 ~tÂ·Â·:fÂ»M~42Â·YÂ·~'i ~Â·V Â·Â· Â·af, t'bÂ· ;9:.,;.Â· w.g~4$E~ Â·Â· Att. ,~0'141 4 I .442 9"A 1 fld'.M,)6 :: Ve 4.,5,1131.% A,.% V/// 69 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Community Development Deputy Directott*D FROM: Fred Jarman, Planner RE: Christiania Lodge Redevelopment-Final Review / PIJBLIC HEARING DATE: December 12,2001 PROJECT: CHRISTANIA LODGE- CONCEPTUAL REVIEW REQUEST: > Demolition of non-contributing structures > On-Site Relocation k Design Review for new lodge building buildings PUBLIC HEARING: Yes ZONING: k Office Zone District > Lodge Preservation Overlay > Main Street Historic Overlay PROCESS: Final Review Historic Preservation Commission STAFF Approval with Conditions RECOMMENDATION: Summarg of Request The owners of the Christiania Lodge are requesting a Significant Development Review before the Historic Preservation Commission to conduct the following actions: 1) On-site Relocation of two pan-abodes and the Callahan Cabin; 2) Demolition of 1) the existing main lodge building on the corner of Fourth and Main Streets, 2) the existing furled and duplex located at the back of the site on the alley, and 3) a one-story dark brown structure located on the corner of 5th and Main Streets; and 3) Design Review of five new buildings to include a triplex, two fourplexes, a duplex, and the main lodge building. background The applicant, LLC / Austin Lawrence Partners, represented by Mitch Haas, is requesting Final Review approval before the HPC to 1) relocate three buildings on-site, 2) demolish four non-contributing structures, and 3) receive design approval to construct a main lodge 1 building, two furled buildings, a duplex, and a triplex on the site. The Applicant received Conceptual Review approval from the HPC on March 28th with a unanimous five to zero vote. The site is located at 501 West Main Street in the Office Zone District. Other applicable zoning districts include the Main Street Historic Overlay and Lodge Preservation Overlay District. The site is comprised of Lots A - I, Block 31, and contains 27,000 square feet and currently contains the Christiania Lodge consisting of a main lodge building, a fourplex and duplex, two pan-abodes, the Callahan cabin, a one-story structure, a pool, mature spruce trees and lilac hedge, and an irrigation ditch (not on the property) serving cottonwood street trees along the property's Main Street frontage. RECENTLY APPROVED LAND USE REQUESTS The Applicant has subsequently received the following land use approvals since Conceptual Review approval by the HPC as this project is a Lodge Preservation Project. 1) Conceptual Review approval from the HPC on March 28th (by a unanimous 5 to 0 vote) approving 1) on-site relocation of two pan-abodes and the Callahan Cabin; 2) demolition of the existing main lodge building, the existing fourplex and duplex, and a one-story structure; and design review of five new buildings to include a triplex, two fourplexes, a duplex, and the main lodge building. 2) Approval of GMQS Exemption for LP and Affordable Housing allotments and a recommendation to City Council to approve the PUD request on June 265, by a vote of4 to 0. 3) Approval of the Minor PUD by the City Council on August 27th by a unanimous vote of 5 to 0. Staff Comments As a result of the aforementioned approvals already granted to the Applicant, the Applicant is requesting Final Review before HPC for this project. As required by Final Review requirements, the Applicant has submitted the following changes from the design which received approval during Conceptual Approval. During the public hearing, Staff will present the drawings approved at Conceptual and show the precise changes .presented for this Final Review. There are no significant changes that have made to the plans approved by the Commission from Conceptual Review approval. However, the Applicant has responded to the three remaining issues that the Commission requested the Applicant readdress for this Final Review. Specifically, these issues were to restudy / readdress 1) the fourplex roof line & faQade treatment to break down mass and 2) the fenestration of the tower on the corner of the large lodge building, and 3) the preservation / restoration plan for the Callahan Cabin and Pan Abodes. In addition, the Applicant has depicted the types of exterior building materials proposed for use on the various portions of each structure. These three issues are discussed below: 2 1) Restudy of fourplex roof line & faâ„¢le treatment to break down mass As a result of the Conceptual Review, the HPC agreed on the final version of the design as presented for the new fourplex. However, the HPC did not agree on a specific roof form as there were several versions presented and several discussions over the course of the review. In the end, the main versions discussed included whether or not the main ridge of the roof should include small hips in its east and west ends. Alternative drawings have been submitted to illustrate both options. Staff finds the small hips further break down the mass of the fouplex better than the consistent roof line. (Please refer to drawings AC3.1 and AC3.2 for a comparison of these variations.) In addition, Comments were voiced as to the apparent large wall plane created on the east and west walls of the new fourplex and that they should be "broken-up" in an effort to mitigate their height and mass. The submitted drawings respond to this suggestion through differentiation of materials and extension of first floor shed roof forms over the stair and light wells of the sub-grade level. The first floor is treated with horizontal siding and the floors above are shingled. Each floor plate is reflected by a trim board that provides an element of scale and to further modulate the height of the building. Staff finds this new treatment effectively addresses this concern. 2) Fenestration of the tower The Applicant has restudied the main lodge structure regarding the tower and its associated fenestration as requested by the Commission. The main design has not been revised in any significant way. The Applicant has attached plan sets illustrating several options for the type and design of fenestration on the.tower element. (Please see drawings AI)3.1 and AI)3.2 for a comparison of alternatives.) 3) Preservation / Restoration Plan for the Callahan Cabin and Pan Abodes The Commission required the Applicant, as a condition of approval of the Conceptual Review approval to submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set upon receiving Final Approval, indicating exactly what areas of the historic Callahan Cabin are to be altered as part of the renovation. To this end, the Applicant has provided a textual response to this request as part of the this Final Review application. Please refer to the application pages 2-5 for this detailed description. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission approve the Final Review request for 1) an on-site relocation of two pan-abodes and the Callahan Cabin; 2) the demolition of the existing main lodge building on the corner of Fourth and Main Streets, the existing fourplex and duplex located at the back of the site on the alley, and a one- story dark brown structure located on the corner of 5th and Main Streets; and 3) the design review of a new triplex, duplex, two fourplexes and a main lodge with the conditions in the accompanying resolution. 3 Recommended Motion "I move to approve Resolution No. approving Final Review for 1) an on-site relocation of two pan-abodes and the Callahan Cabin; 2) the demolition of the existing main lodge building on the corner of Fourth and Main Streets, the existing fourplex and duplex located at the back of the site on the alley, and a one-story dark brown structure located on the corner of 5th and Main Streets; 3) the design review of a new triplex, duplex, two fourplexes, and a main lodge with the conditions set forth in the resolution." Review criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit A - Final Review Standards Exhibit B - Final Review Application 4 r-~ExHIBIT~ RECEIVED b /2-/2.104/ NOV 2 8 2001 LlnJ ASPEN / Pll KIN AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE C0MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE 501 West Main ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 12 , 200 1 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, Gregory P. Hills (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City o f 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: X 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. X Posting ofnotice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, Â· waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide f. h and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofietters not ~, less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at leastgen (10) days . . A prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible fro?4 tlie 21dayjif 1 11 November , 200 1 , to and including the date and timE of the public .Â·91 ~ I tf L 6, hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached huteto. i>09 X +T Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Â£ Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application, and, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet o f the property subj ect 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 ofthe owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) 0 X 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 o f this Title, or whenever the text o f 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 o f an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners o f real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. /1 rl Ava \\\ \ 1 # C The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledg44 before me this flo day of Novf-,mWr , 2001, by ~Titant- iduch WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL Mygmldssion expirp:) IP(wch '-1 (7003 . Â© K (L- ~711fdm TAMARA i Notary Public RAUCH 6 :O ...g 0 8,Â·tdoP ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 0 501 PUBLIC NOTME WI- UNE MY DATEDu. 17, ,(p, TMMEFOOPM ~.-V~~ACI- :#ANSE" PLACE::-v u AL L Â· 130 liNA S PURPOSE TC LM<3R AN Api'i [CANON AUMMI T IED [ty 501 WEr MA] 14110 R.QUEW :N(i 1 1 NAI 1111 DE:AN AppliovAI U., AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Â£60 l ki /1 14, L __51 , , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: )-2-/2-/DI , 200- l L STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, -I--2 Me-9 1-HJ{- (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: ./f Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper ofgeneral 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 ten (10) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing ofnotice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described iR Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application, and, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses ofproperty owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. Acopy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) ... Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or othenvise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners o f real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. -Wi-2/749 1 #ignature The foregoing "Affidavit ofNotice" was acknowledged before me this.14 day of Â£00,/ . , 200Â£, by 1,_-4.-6 41 Alt 1 - WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL FUBUC NOTICE My commission expires: 45.4(23 RE: CHRISTIANIA LODGE MNAL HPC DESIGN RE VIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing 4-0215 will be held on Wednesday, December 12,2001 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Notary Public Chambers, City Hall 130 i Galena St, Aspen, to consider an application submitted by 501 W Main LLC requesting Final HPC Design approval. g77%*~ The property is located at 501 W Main St. and Is Â·Â·- .:.....<,Nk legally described as Lots A-1, Block 31, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further Information, contact Fred Jmman at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development De- f i SARAH ' partment, 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, CO (970) 920- H u) i OATES ;10 ~ 5102. s/Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTACHMENTS: ..... g# Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in The Aspen Times on November 24, 2001.(8121) ''%t42;90, COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL i.,OV Â£101<U, 14*LUU 1 -6 aUU.1..UO . a.,--- - ' . U . . .;;:: .1'V , . 4 501 WEST MAIN LLC ALH HOLDING COMPANY GUNNISON fAOYAMATEISUJI V 408 AASC #202 A COLORADO CORPORAnON AOYAMA AKIKO 435 W MAIN ST 4/ 6105 NE KESWICK DR ASPEN CO 81611 SEATTLE WA 98105 ASPEN CO 81611 BAILEY MIRANDA 1994 TRUST 50% BART(iN META PACKAR[$/ EN MTN RESCUE V~ 630 W MAIN ST C/O JANUS CAPITAL 4 6507 MONTROSE AVE 620 E COOPER .ASPEN CO 81611 BALTIMORE MD 21212 ASPEN CO 81611 BECK GLENNA 1/~ BERR LLC 4 BOOMERANG LTD PO BOX 1102 611 W MAIN ST 500 W HOPKINS AVE VICTORVILLE CA 92392 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 3 v CARINTHIA CORP K'~ CITY OF ASPEN COMCOWICH WILLIAM L 633 E HYMAN AVE 130 S GALENAST " 420 W MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO B1611 ASPEN CO 81011 J CROCKE17 ANN R TRUSTEE OF THE COSCARELLO ROBERT & ELIZABETH CUNNINGHAM INVESTMENT CO INC PRICE LIVING TRU5T 515 E LAS OLAS #800 2461 F 164 RD 1089B MORA DR GRAND JUNCTION CO 81505-1203 FT LAUDERDALE FL 33301 LOS ALTOS HILLS CA 94024 4 1 DUNSDON S MICHAELE FERGUS EUZABETH DAWSON FELO ANNE S BOINENHAGEN DAVID A 1700 PACIFIC AVE STE 4100 PO BOX 1515 /1~MAIN ST DALLAS TX 75201 AspEN CO 81612 ~,. CO 81611-1519 4 4 HAISFIELD MICHAEL DOUGLAS & HUNTINGTON TRUST CO N ATRUSTEE GOLDENBERG STEPHEN R & CHERYL J HA]SBELD LISAYERKE C/O NATIONAL CITY BANK ATTN CE 430 W HOPKINS AVE 616 WEST HOPKINS WIGHTON ' : ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 155 E BROAD ST 5TH FL .: COLUMBUS OH 43251 1 J IGLEHART JIM IGLEHART JIM - ]LGEN BLEEN L & JACK D & ELOISE ILGEN IN JOINT TENANCY 617 W MAIN ST 610W HAUAM ST 518 W MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN-CO 81611 f ASPEN CO 81611 JOHNSON STANFORD JOHNSTON DANIEL R & MARGARET S KAPLAN BURTON B PO BOX 416 2018 PHALAROPE 1997 LAKE AVE ASPEN CO 81612 COSTA MESA CA 92625 HIGHLANDÂ· IL 60035 KLEIN DEBBIE 9/ v/ ,/0, KOELLE AUCE LEVIN WILLIAM A REV LIVING TRUST 4 COLORADO CORPORATION PO BOX 2871 1 PENN PLZ STE 725 ~ 81611 KIMMING RD ASPEN CO 81612 NEW YORK NY 10119Â·0799 IIAC DONALD BETTE S TRUST MADSEN. MARTHA W. 'MANCLARK DARLEEN Ii*BLACKMER RD 4 608 WHOPKINS AVE: APT. 9 313 BAY FRONT ~GLEWOOD CO 80110 ASPEN. CO 81611 BALBOA ISLAND CA 92662 4ARCUS RENEE A V MCGILL LEGACY LTD 4 - OSULLIVAN MIKE & LISA ~'0'' |132 W HOPKINS 11800 OLD KATY RD PO BOX 4476 ~SPEN CO 81611 HOUSTON TX 77079 ASPEN CO 81612 . 14/ . 2/ ~ATERSON CHARLES G RANKIN CONSULTING LLC RUDOLPH RICHARD E 000 W HOPKINS 336 VINE ST PO BOX 3080 -SPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 CAREFREE AZ 85377 9/ . b- COTT MARY HUGH SHADOW MIN CORP SMALL AND LARGE FRIES LLC /0 RUSSEU SCOTT HI & CO LLC C/O GATES HUGHES & KNEZEVICH P C 1265 MOUNTA[N VIEW )00 E BELLVIEW AVE STE 120 533 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN CO 81611 NGLEWOOD CO 80111 ASPEN CO B1611 . TASPEN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 4 J THROM ROBERT & PHYUSS 1/2 INT STRANOBERG JOHN J & JANET 0 JOHN STATON THROM DOUGLAS 12 INT 2510 GRAND AVE APT2403 191 PEACHTREE STREET SUITE 4900 617 W MAIN ST KANSAS CITY MO 64108 ATLANTA GA 30303-1763 ASPEN CO 81611 . 4 DGE INC 4 -Il. VIEIRA LINDA 50% INTEREST VERLEGER MARGARET B & PHIUP K JR ADO CORPORATION HALL TERESA 50% INTEREST 15 TORREY PINES LAI IN ST 605 W MAIN ST NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660-5139 PEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 b LLAR[JOHN TRUST 90' WEST ALFRED P JR 4 ./ YOUNG DONALD L WEST LORALEE S 0 BOX 2941 617 W MAIN ST 12 GREENBRIAR LN PEN CO 81612 Â· PAOU PA Sol ASPEN co--518-1 9 Â· - OUNG PAUL 111 6 3355 NOEL RD LB 28 ALLAS TX 75240 I $ -21 ~OB.1$ P~EESE&Â¥ATPN E,OMI, 1 f -j JIXON MEETING DATE: 13'JA 3 0 6/ NAME OF PROJECT: 52 h Ze . /71 CAL-- - CLERK: STAFF: 10 Â¢ WITNESSES: m /t 9/Â£/1. /?695 i,jo,1 N, 44 13)/bao j-~ v (4) (5) EXHIBITS: 1 Staff Report GK (Check If Applicable) 2 Affidavit of Notice Â¢ 1 (Check If Applicable) 3 Board Criteria Sheet C ) (Check If Applicable) 4 5 MOTION: VOTE: YES NO SUZANNAH REID YES NO MELANIE ROSCHKO YES NO NEILL HIRST YES NO GILBERT SANCHEZ YES NO - LiSAÂ·AUU~i*MINPiS~ YES NO_ JEFFREY HALFERTY YES, NO RALLY DUPPS YES NO TEr7373=71*E YES NO . YES NO YES NO AllicÂ·/Lut yv., 770 --- /1 n L/ 4- ALI JLL* HPCVOTE .I~E~i; 1 A ai i RESOLUTION NO. -, SERIES OF 2001 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING FINAL REVIEW REQUEST FOR THE CHRISTIANIA LODGE FOR 1) AN ON-SITE RELOCATION OF TWO PAN-ABODES AND THE CALLAHAN CABIN; 2) THE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING MAIN LODGE BUILDING ON THE CORNER OF FOURTH AND MAIN STREETS, THE EXISTING FOUR-PLEX AND DUPLEX LOCATED AT THE BACK OF THE SITE ON THE ALLEY, AND A ONE-STORY STRUCTURE LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF 5â„¢ AND MAIN STREETS; AND 3) THE DESIGN REVIEW OF A NEW TRIPLEX, DUPLEX, TWO FOURPLEXES AND A MAIN LODGE STRUCTURE FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 501 WEST MAIN STREET, LOTS A-I, BLOCK 31, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID: 2735-124-49-001 WHEREAS, the applicant, LLC/ Austin Lawrence Partners, LLC, represented by Mitch Haas, is requesting Final Review approval for 1) an On-site Relocation of two pan- abodes and the Callahan Cabin; 2) the Demolition of the existing main lodge building on the corner of Fourth and Main Streets, the existing fourplex and duplex located at the back of the site on the alley, and a one-story dark brown structure located on the corner of 5* and Main Streets; and 3) the Design Review of a new triplex, duplex, two fourplexes and a main lodge structure for the Christiania.Lodge, a property located at 501 West Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 31, City and Townsite ofAspen. WHEREAS, the property is currently listed as a Historic Landmark on the City o f Aspen's Inventory of Historical Sites and Structures; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department determined the Final Review application for 1) an On-site Relocation of two pan-abodes and the Callahan Cabin; 2) the Demolition of the existing main lodge building on the corner of Fourth and Main Streets, the existing fourplex and duplex located at the back of the site on the alley, and a one-story dark brown structure located on the corner of 5th and Main Streets; and 3) the Design Review of a new triplex, duplex, two fourplexes and a main lodge structure for the Christiania Lodge, a property located at 501 West Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 31, City and Townsite of Aspen met the applicable review standards, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission on June 26, 2001, at which time the Commission considered and found the application to meet the review standards, and approved a Conditional Use for the provision of three affordable housing units and Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemptions for Lodge Preservation and affordable housing and recommended approval to City Council for the Minor Planned 5 Unit Development with conditions, via Resolution No. 30, 2001, by a vote of four to zero (4 to 0) for the Christiania Lodge, located at 501 West Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 31, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting of the City of Aspen City Council on August 27th, 2001, at which time the City Council considered and found the application to meet the review standards, and approved Â· a Minor Planned Unit Development with conditions, via Ordinance No. 27, Series 2001, by a vote of five to zero (5 to 0); and WHEREAS, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on March 28th, 2001, at which time the HPC considered and found the application to meet the review standards, and approved Conceptual Review including 1) an On-site Relocation of two pan-abodes and Â·the Callahan Cabin; 2) the Demolition of the existing main lodge building on the corner of Fourth and Main Streets, the existing fourplex and duplex located at the back of the site on the alley, and a one-story dark brown structure located on the corner of 5th and Main Streets; and 3) the Design Review of a new triplex, duplex, two fourplexes and a main lodge structure for the Christiania Lodge, a property located at 501 West Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 31, City and Townsite of Aspen met the applicable review standards, and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of five to zero (5 to 0). WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, at a public hearing, which was legally noticed and held at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on December 12, 2001, at which time the HPC considered and found the application to meet the review standards, and approved Final Review including 1) an On-site Relocation of two pan-abodes and the Callahan Cabin; 2) the Demolition of the existing main lodge building on the corner of Fourth and Main Streets, the existing fourplex and duplex located at the back of the site on the alley, and a one-story dark brown structure located on the corner of 5th and Main Streets; and 3) the Design Review of a new triplex, duplex, two fourplexes and a main lodge structure for the Christiania Lodge, a property located at 501 West Main Street, Lots A-1, Block 31, City and Townsite of Aspen met the applicable review standards, and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of to C to __). WIIEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable ddvelopment standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements ofthe Aspen Area Community Plan; and 6 WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for 1) on-site relocation, 2) demolition, and 3) the design review for the Christiania Lodge, a property located at 501 West Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 31, City and Townsite of Aspen is approved with the following conditions: 1. That the applicant shall submit a demolition plan, as part of the building pennit plan set upon receiving Final Approval, indicating exactly what areas of the historic Callahan Cabin are to be altered as part of the renovation; 2. That the applicant shall submit a preservation plan, as part of the building permit plan set upon receiving Final Approval, indicating how the existing materials, which are to be retained, will be restored. The requirement is to retain/repair all original materials and replicate only those that are determined by HPC staff and monitor to be beyond salvage; 3. That no elements are to be added to the historic Callahan Cabin and Pan Abodes that did not previously exist outside of approval granted by the HPC and no existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor; 4. That the Â»HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures; 5. That there shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor; 6. That the preservation plan described above, as well as the conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction; 7. That the applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC Final Review Resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit; 8. That the General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit; 7 9. That all representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions; 10. That the applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during demolition. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction as a requirement of the City of Aspen Streets Department; and 11. That the applicant agrees that prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter construction agreement (if applicable) and pay the applicable recording fees; 12. That the applicant shall comply with the Universal Conservation Building Code; 13. The applicant shall submit an analysis / structural report by a licensed engineer to the HPC monitor and Staff demonstrating the soundness of the structures proposed for relocation; 14. The applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department a relocation plan including posting a bond or other financial security approved by HPC with the engineering department, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections as part of the Final Review Application; and Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Historic Preservation Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions thereof. 8 APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 12th day of December, 2001. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Deputy City Clerk 9 EXHIBIT A FINAL REVIEW STANDARDS Pursuant to Section 26.415.010(5), Review Standards, no approval for any development involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all of the following standards are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. Staff Finding: As unanimously approved during the Conceptual Review, the threshold issues such as general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume were discussed over a series of work sessions and public hearings not only with the HPC, but also with the Planning and Zoning Commission and City council through the PUD process. Staff finds the proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels in the Mai Street Historic District. Specifically, the historic structures in questions include the Callahan Cabin and the two pan abodes that are proposed to be relocated to the Main Street frontage. In effect, the relocation was approved by the HPC during Conceptual Review primarily due to the fact that the new locations better promoted the visual significance of these resources which 0 are currently more obscured by mature landscaping and fencing. This relocation will effectively better contribute to the historic interest of the Main Street corridor. This project received unanimous Minor PUD approval from both the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council which established the underlying zoning dimensional requirements including setbacks, height, parking, affordable housing requirements, FAR, etc., that essentially determined how large and in what location the structures are to be constructed on the site. These, as well as the design issues decided upon by the HPC during Conceptual Review, have molded the project to its final form as presented in this Final Application. Staff finds this standard to be met. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, and Staff Finding: This standards was found to be met not only as a requirement of the HPC Conceptual Review but also as a required standard of the PUD process. The proposal for this Final review has not substantially changed that would affect such compliance. Specifically, The proposed development's compatibility with existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and surrounding area with regard to traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources have also all been addressed. 0 10 Compatibility with historic resources has been specifically addressed by the proposal as evidenced by the HPC Conceptual approval granted in March of2001. The site is already developed and is completely surrounded by urbanized properties. There are no known natural or man-made hazards affecting the project site or the surrounding area. There are no steep slopes, landforms, or waterways affecting the project site or surrounding area, but there is an open-channel ditch running the length of the Main Street frontage. The ditch is located within the public right-of-way outside of the property and will not be affected by, nor will it affect, the proposed development. Given the location of the site on the south side of Main Street, solar access will be from the rear and will be adequate. As the proposed landscape plan demonstrates, the project involves the preservation of many significant trees, the relocation of a couple trees, the removal and replacement of other trees, and substantial new plantings. The ten trees located in the Main Street and 5th Street rights-of-way will not be altered in any way. The trees to be relocated will be moved to a suitable location along the 5th Street frontage unless otherwise directed by the City Forester. All tree removal, relocation, and planting will be coordinated with the City Forester. Staff finds that the Applicant has more than adequately addressed this standard in the submitted application. The proposed project is consistent with the eclectic character of the neighborhood where surrounding architectural styles vary and include a mix of lodges/chalets, offices, duplex, single-, and multi-family residential (both free market and affordable), and retail commercial. Again, relocating the cabin and pan abodes to the Main Street frontage and streetscape will add a consistent small scale historic element similar to the adjacent L'Auberge site. Also, Staff finds the proposed structures and their locations will contribute to the neighborhood and historic nature of lodges on Main Street by adding more interest to the streetscape and reintroducing a newer compatible small lodge to Aspen. Staff finds this standard to be met. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels; and Staff Finding: It was determined during the HPC Conceptual Review process by a unanimous vote approving the design, that the proposed development will enhance and not detract from the historic significance of the Callahan cabin and the pan abodes. As stated above, the cabin and pan abodes will be relocated from current locations where they are obscured to a prominent location of the Main Street frontage thereby celebrating their historic significance and adding to the historic nature of the Main Street corridor. In addition, the other new structures will enhance the architectural character and integrity of the entire Main 11 Street Historic Overlay District and are sensitive to the historic structures to be relocated and preserved. Staff finds this standard to be met. i The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Finding: Staff agrees that as part of the Conceptual approval, the HPC found that the proposed development will enhance the architectural character and integrity of the Callahan Cabin and Pan Abodes by completing much needed restoration work and by siting them more prominently. Staff finds this standard to be met. 0 0 12 . I HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC October 24, 2001 Mr. Fred Jarman Aspen City Planner 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: The Christiania Lodge, Final Application Dear Fred: Please consider this letter and the accompanying plan sets to constitute the Final Significant Development application for the Christiania Lodge property (the Project) located at 501 West Main Street (Lots A-I, Block 31, City and Townsite of Aspen). As you are aware Conceptual approval of the subject project was unanimously granted by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) on March 28, 2001. Since then, the Project has been reviewed and approved as an Ll?/PUD by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council with the adoption of Ordinance Number 27, Series of 2001 on August 27, 2001. No truly significant changes have been made to the plans approved at the Conceptual level, but the Final plan sets and the narratives provided below indicate a few minor revisions as well as a couple of alternative designs for various elements of the Project. As is customary with Final HPC applications, the plan sets depict the types of exterior building materials proposed for use on the various portions of each structure. This application is divided into three sections: first the foregoing introduction; second, a narrative description of the proposed plans with an explanation of each revision from the Conceptually approved plans; and finally, the review standards applicable to the Final review, which are the same as those used to evaluate the Conceptual application, are individually addressed. While the applicant has attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Code, and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application, questions may arise which require further information and/ or clarification. The applicant will provide such additional information as may be required in the course of the application's review. 0 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108 â€¢ ASPEN, COLORADO o 81611 â€¢ â€¢ PHONE: (970) 925-7819 0 FAX: (970) 925-7395 â€¢ .. October 24, 2001 Page 2 THE PROPOSAL The HPC Conceptual approval requested some further study of certain design elements for the main lodge structure and the proposed new fourplex along the alley. No direction was given for restudy of the approved designs for the new triplex, the replacement duplex, the replacement fourplex, the relocated Callahan cabin, or the relocated Pan Abodes. As such, only the Lodge and the new fourplex designs are specifically described below. Following these descriptions, the proposed restoration plans for the Callahan cabin and the Pan Abodes are described in detail. The Lodge. The main lodge structure design has not been revised in any significant way. The sole outstanding issue with regard to the Lodge is the composition of windows at the so-called " tower" element on the corner of Main and Fourth Streets. The attached pIan sets illustrate several options for the type and design of fenestration on the tower element. The New Fourpler. The HPC was in general agreement that the final version of the design for the new fourplex was the most desirable and most acceptable of the alternatives presented. The HPC was not unanimous in its preference with regard to roof design, specifically whether or not the main ridge of the roof should include small hips in its east and west ends. Alternative drawings have been submitted to illustrate both options. At least one Commissioner requested that the east and west walls of the new fourplex be "broken-up" in an effort to mitigate their height and mass. The submitted drawings respond to this suggestion through differentiation of materials and extension of first floor shed roof forms over the stair and light wells of the subgrade level. The first floor is treated with horizontal siding (a full 8' "wainscot") and the floors above are shingled. Each floor plate is reflected by a trim board (2" x 10") to provide an element of scale and to further modulate the height of the building. Restoration Plan for the Callahan Cabin, The preservation goal with respect to the Callahan cabin is one of restoration; however, depending on the approved details and elements of the Project this effort may in fact become one of "renovation" or "rehabilitation." Ultimately, efforts taken with regard to the cabin will become an appropriate mix of preservation, renovation, and rehabilitation, as such are described in the April 2000 Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Please refer to Sheet AF 2.1 of the plan sets while reviewing the following descriptions. October 24, 2001 Page 3 Prior to relocation, the structure of the cabin will be reinforced to prepare it for moving. The relocation will provide an opportunity to repair and replace both defective materials and materials that are inconsistent with the cabin's historic character and period of construction. The base log, which is approximately ten (10) inches high, is rotted out and simply beyond repair. It is proposed that this base log be replaced with a new log that has been hand-distressed to match the character of adjacent Iogs. The base log will be replaced in its original configuration. The existing chinking is also in disrepair and in need of attention. As such, all chinking will be repaired in a manner aimed at matching the texture, color, and composition of the existing chinking. The upper windows of the cabin appear to be original with respect to framing and hardware. These windows will simply be cleaned and refinished with a stain that is compatible with the existing worn appearance. All other windows found on the cabin are the result of various replacements that have taken place over the years. All inappropriate filler panels will be removed. The unoriginal aluminum windows will be replaced with Cedar windows but without any aluminum cladding. The Cedar replacement windows will be installed in a fashion that provides a deep recess "historic" profile with the window itself set toward the interior of the wall. In recognition of the fact that the new windows are not original parts and that the cabin will be used as a dwelling unit insulated sash/glass will be utilized. These insulated windows will be obviously new and honest as such. Installation of new single pane windows was considered but disregarded as such would only serve to deceive the observer and provide less insulation for the occupant from Main Street noise and the elements. There is a simple moulding trim on the existing upper windows. There is no trim on the lower aluminum windows, rather only a 2x rough frame. It is proposed that the new windows either be installed in the existing 2x rough frame without trim, as is common with cabins, or if the HPC prefers, a trim could be added to match the upper windows or another trim form. The existing entry door is not the original. The opening for the door is wider than the current door and has been "filled-in" with an inappropriate filler panel. This door and filler will be removed and, in their place, a 21/4-inch thick custom wood door with single flat wood panel made of vertical boards, below a single glass window with a true insulated divided lite will be installed. The door with insulated lite will be obviously new and, like the insulated windows, be honest as such. A screen door is also proposed and will be composed of panel October 24, 2001 Page 4 wood to match the character of the wood door. These new door features will replace an unoriginal and poorly fitted door. (Note: two alternative designs for the door replacement are presented on the west elevation drawings, Sheet AF 2.1.) The existing roof is in a dilapidated state and in need of replacement wood shakes. The roof and its framing will be reconstructed to meet current insulation and ventilation requirements, but the existing exterior details will be maintained. This will help to protect the wood in the structure from further deterioration. The existing eave depth and detail will be retained. Before being relocated to the central portion of the property's Main Street frontage, a foundation will be constructed with a well to provide access to the crawl space below. The crawl space is necessary for the location of new mechanical equipment and systems. The stair well will adjoin the cabin's east side and be accessed from the rear of the structure. The well will be covered with grating and be effectively screened by the planting of shrubs. Finally, the hand hewn timber log exterior of the cabin will receive a gentle cleaning and a preservative/stain compatible with the existing weathered stain will be applied. The board and battens located in the gable ends will also receive a gentle cleaning and application of preservative/stain to match the existing weathered stain. Restoration Plan for the Pan Abodes. Please refer to Sheet AG 2.1 of the plan sets while reviewing the following descriptions. Pan Abodes are essentially "kit" structures whose parts were manufactured at a remote location for assembly on site. The stucco covered chimneys on the Pan Abodes were not part of the original "kit," and will not be able to be relocated. As such, it is proposed that these chimneys be reconstructed to match their existing character. The roofs will be reinforced to allow for installation of additional insulation on the interior. No change is anticipated to the exteriors of either roof. The existing shakes will be inspected and repaired, or replaced with similar shakes if necessary. Both Pan Abodes have been painted, but the applicant proposes to gently remove the existing paint and stain the wood with an appropriate stain/preservative in order to make the structures more in keeping with the typical character of the era in which they were built and with the ' adjacent cabin. October 24, 2001 Page 5 Existing utility service equipment will be removed from the Pan Abodes, and the siding will be repaired as required. No other modifications are anticipated with respect to siding. As required by the Uniform Building Code, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the State of Colorado and Federal Fair Housing Acts, the Pan Abode structures must be made accessible to disabled persons. As such, 2- foot 10-inch doors, and accessible "Type B" kitchen and baths are required. The doorways and interiors will be reconfigured to achieve compliance with these requirements, as shown on the floor plans and elevation drawings, Sheet AG 2.1. All windows on the Pan Abodes will be replaced as noted on the elevation drawings, Sheet AG 2.1. The replacement windows will be double or triple-pane glazing, insulated wood, simulated divided lite windows. The new windows will aid in complying with current energy and insulation code requirements while better mitigating noise impacts from Main Street. Exterior lights will be replaced with fixtures to comply with the City's outdoor lighting code, and the existing fireplaces will be replaced with gas log appliances/fireplaces. Crawl spaces/basement will be located beneath the Pan Abodes in order to accommodate mechanical and cooling equipment. These spaces will be accessed from stairwells located along the rear one-third of each Pan Abode's western side. Simple railings will be located around the perimeter of the stairwells, and the fireplaces coupled with the landscape plan provide ample screening of these elements. Relocation Plan (Cabin & Pan Abodes). First the new foundation for the Callahan Cabin will be built. The cabin will then be moved to its new position, on the foundation. The foundations for the Pan Abodes will be constructed next (in part these will be located on the old site of the cabin), then the Pan Abodes will be moved onto their new foundations. In this manner, each structure is moved only once thereby minimizing the potential for damage and eliminating the need for any temporary relocations. Fencing. The proposed plan involves the installation of small and simple fences along the Main Street frontage of the property and around the crawl space access wells of the two Pan Abode structures. October 24, 2001 Page 6 The proposed design of the fencing along the Main Street frontage is shown in the plan sets. It is a visually permeable iron fence with a design similar to and reminiscent of historic fences found up and down Main Street as well as throughout Aspen. It is, however, of modern materials with a simple pattern. All balconies in the Project will use a simple wood pattern that is a contemporary interpretation of traditional fencing and is compatible with the historic context. The fencing around the Pan Abode access wells is depicted on Sheet AG 2.1 of the plan sets and will match the handrails found throughout the Project. The trash container located at the alley frontage will have a wood "fenced" enclosure (1" x 4" beams set vertically with 1" spacing) and a simple shed roof. The enclosure will comply with bear-proof trash container ordinances and provide for recycling facilities. THE REVIEW STANDARDS A. Section 26.415.010(0(5), Significant Development Review Standards Section 26.415.010(C)(5) of the Land Use Code provides that no approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark... and... The Project is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with the Callahan Cabin, the associated Pan Abodes, and with the adjacent parcels within the "H," Historic Overlay District. This standard was found by the HPC to be met at the Conceptual level and nothing in the proposed plans has changed to a degree that would affect such compliance. Furthermore, these design features/ elements have also been reviewed and approved as a Planned Unit Development by the Planning & Zoning Commission as well as the City Council. A more thorough description of the restoration efforts to be employed is provided above and in the Final plan sets accompanying this letter. In addition, detailed information is provided on how the existing materials will be treated and on what materials will be used elsewhere in the Project. All of the preservation, restoration and rehabilitation work as well as new construction will October 24, 2001 Page 7 be in keeping with the recommendations of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, and Again, this standard was found by the HPC to be met at the Conceptual level and nothing in the proposed plans has changed to a degree that would affect such compliance. Furthermore, a similar standard was considered as part of the review and approval of the Planned Unit Development by the Planning & Zoning Commission as well as the City Council. The Project reflects and is consistent with the eclectic character of the neighborhood. The architectural styles used on the surrounding buildings vary as much as their uses, and the surrounding uses include a mix of lodges/chalets, offices, duplex, single-, and multi-family residential (both free market and affordable), and retail commercial. Surrounding properties include the Boomerang Lodge to the south (across the alley); the L'Auberge Swiss Chalets to the east (across 4th Street); the Westec Building/Mesa Store, a parking area, a small single-family residence, and the Ullr Lodge to the north (across Main Street moving west from 4th Street to 5th Street); and, the Aspen Center for Women's Health to the west (across 5th Street). Other surrounding properties include a two-story residential duplex to the southeast (corner of 4th and Hopkins); a small, 1.5-story, gable roofed office building to the northeast (corner of 4th and Main); a small one-story single- family residence to the northwest (corner of 5th and Main); and a two-story multi-family residential structure to the southwest (corner of 5th and Hopkins). The architectural styles used on the surrounding buildings vary as much as their uses. Specifically, the architectural styles associated with the adjacent properties can be described as follows: Frank Uoyd Wright Modern to the south; motor court cabin to the east; Victorian and Austrian to the north; and, "Traditional" and 50s plywood modern to the west. Roof forms vary from flat and shed roofs (Boomerang, duplex at 4th and Hopkins, and multi-family at 5th and Hopkins) to steeply pitched roofs (L'Auberge, Aspen Center for Women's Health, Mesa Building behind the parapet facade, and single-family residences). The surrounding structures range from one to two-and-one-half (1 - 2.5) stories above grade. Along the alley adjoining the subject site and the Boomerang Lodge property, the Boomerang is 2.5 stories of concrete "battered" wall with balconies (outdoor hallways) separated from the alley only by parallel parking spaces. Building materials on the surrounding properties also vary greatly, from October 24, 2001 Page 8 board and batten to wood shingle, from horizontal and vertical siding to clapboard, and from log to stone/masonry. Given the eclectic, almost jumbled character of the neighborhood, it is difficult if not impossible, to pinpoint that which constitutes "consistency" with this character. Further, the character of many surrounding structures does not warrant repetition. The Final materials palette of the Project joins together many of the disparate elements found nearby. The designs greatly improve the appearance of the subject structures, thereby improving the character of the neighborhood. The dark, dingy, and gloomy character of the existing structures will be eliminated and replaced with a welcoming, home- and cabin-like character. This type of change is largely consistent with the fairly recent character alteration undergone at the adjacent L'Auberge Swiss Chalets. The deliverance of the cabin and Pan Abode structures to prominence on the Main Street frontage and streetscape will be highly consistent with the look and feel of the adjacent L'Auberge site. Also consistent with L'Auberge, is the siting of two-story structures on the block corners. The tower element proposed at the corner of the main lodge structure is consistent with similar building features and roof forms found throughout the Main Street Historic District such as but not limited to: St. Mary's Church with its spire and varied roof forms; the County Courthouse with its tower; the office building adjacent to the 7th and Main affordable housing site with its multiple roof forms and turret; the Stapleton building with its two gable ends, cross gable and turret; the remodeled Asia building with its turret; the Skin and Oxygen Therapy Clinic with its roof- top projection and weather vane; the Christmas Inn with its roof-top lightning rod/spire; the Tyrollian Inn with its roof-top sculpture; and, the Sardy House with its prominent turret to name just a few, The Project will make a positive contribution to the neighborhood by reinvigorating a full block of the Main Street Historic District and adding more interest to the streetscape. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. As part of the Conceptual approval, the HPC found that the proposed development will enhance and not at ali detract from the historic significance of the Callahan cabin and the Pan Abodes. In its current location, the cabin is virtually unnoticeable, and this obscurity detracts from its potential significance as an historic resource. By attracting greater amounts of attention/viewing to the site, the Project will enhance the character, integrity, and historic significance . October 24, 2001 Page 9 of the Callahan Cabin, especially after it is repaired and moved to the more prominent and more historically accurate central location on the site. Further, given the existing alley fronting location of the Pan Abodes at the rear of the property and behind the swimming pool area, most long-time locals do not even know of their existence, let alone recognize them as historically significant structures. The Pan Abodes will be delivered from relative obscurity to prominence and, thus, their significance as historic resources will be enhanced. When motorists and pedestrians travel Main Street the blocks on both sides (east and west) of the Christiania Lodge are interesting and visually pleasing. As it now exists, the Christiania site represents a break in this interest creating a block-long void in worthwhile viewing. The redevelopment will help to enhance the architectural character and integrity of the entire Main Street Historic Overlay District by making the visually pleasing nature of the corridor more continuous. The proposed redevelopment will greatly improve the site and will result in a block-long revitalization of the Main Street Historic District. That is, just as the fairly recent character alteration undergone at the adjacent L'Auberge Swiss Chalets has served to reinvigorate the south side of Main Street between Fourth and Third Streets, so to will this redevelopment for the contiguous Mock between Fifth and Fourth Streets. d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity Of a designated historic structure or part thereofÂ· As part of the Conceptual approval, the HPC found that the proposed development will enhance the architectural character and integrity of the Callahan Cabin and Pan Abodes by completing much needed restoration work and by siting them more prominently. B. Section 26.415.010(E)(8), Standards for Review of On=Site Relocation Section 26.415.010(E)(8) of the Regulations provides that "No approvalfbr on-site relocation shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that the standards of Section 26.415.010(E)(7)(b), (c), and (d) have been met. If the structure to be relocated does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel, only standard 26.415.010(E)(7)(b) must be met." Although corrected as part of the quoted language, the Land Use Code actually provides incorrect section number references. October 24, 2001 Page 10 The on-site relocation request involves the Callahan Cabin, which is the 0 only designated historic structure on the property according to the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. The proposal, however, also involves the on-site relocation of the two Pan Abode structures, which the Inventory refers to as "two excellent examples of Pan Abode cabins (built in 1962)." Thus, consistency with Section 26.415.010(E)(7)(b), (c), and (d) was demonstrated as part of the Conceptual review and approval. While the proposed on-site relocations were approved during the Conceptual review, a few points of clarification should be made herein. No structural analyses have been initiated yet, but a relocation plan has been described above (see page 5). The necessary structural reports will be provided as part of the building permit application for Phase One of the Project. Similarly, the applicant will provide the necessary financial security prior to issuance of a building permit for the site preparation and building relocations. Infrastructure connections will be made prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the relocated structures. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at the phone number provided at the bottom of this letter's first page. 0 Yours truly, Haas Land Planning, LLC Mitch Haas, AICP Owner/Principal CC: Greg Hills, 501 West Main LLC (owner) David Brown, Styker Brown Architects c:/my documents/City Applications/Christiania Final HPC ... 5'-9 3/4" 1 / 1 1 41,9 4 5'-1 3/4" 4" 6 ' 5'-5 3/4" 1/ 1/2" x 1/2" STEEL PICKETS .. ROTATED 45 DEGREES 1 1/2" x 3" STEEL TOP & ./ 1 -11- 1, BOTTOM, BAR OR TUBE 0 0/ 3" x 3" STEEL POST f 4+ 899 al "- N aE \ \ CD Itzoid FBROD- SEÂ·#MEN-O 18Â·22.01 ARCHITECTS 1. SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN.COLORADO *1611 Ph) *70/92>2100 {Fax) 970/,*2258 1/mall)*ballop,1/.1-1 PHASE Ill PHASE I Main Street 43 0 79 4~ 92 1 \ 41& .04 m 43& 8 1 -21Â· La . Sidewalk Kn~2211%31 P--- 2====1==C== ~~ 63=2= p=================n---- s i , PropertÂ¥ Line ~ : Lt 'W 1Jlron Fence~ i Il it U U-Â·Â· 1~ ~ ,.r uLÂ·.Â·Â· Â·IO~...':11:Lr '1 1J -t~ 'ulli t,Â·Â·Â·Â· Â·.r Â·Â· d Â·Â· Â·Â·Â· 4,Â· ~~ i 1 J YaTd p --413 -/ Waid 1 Â· Setback Line 0 0 0 *3.4-f >./ J 5 41 LIZILT -*li !,he -~G CABI~- ~ ~ ' ~~ Covered Porch PORCH PORCH I Covered Porch . . L 1 1 1 1 .'55--s------------Â·------Â· --------Â· ~ W - = 44/ P I~t~. 41 20 P-/6 0 Relocated I I I.Fi Â° C NEW POOL 19 C ) ~- NEW 3 PLEX ~ PANABODE %1% PANABODE . m Per Landscape Plan Relocated . Acces~u~ ' Relocated -==----e~ crawl ir--1 1 ----*K--1 18 L_EL Walkwa Per P j CHRISTLANIA .1 1 11 existing parking spaces 501 West Main Street Â£1.. -r.*j.f < -w~ ~ 49 41, :w'~ --- h , Aspen, Colorado 81611 ----7-- 27 , IX 3 i c--n //11 Trum-1 - 6 "F 'rf..~ Covered Porch 4 322 - '-<C---- I I . LODGE --- - -.. ~e=.60 Covered Porch . ; ~ Covered Porch : 4 -- ---~---, |~ Covered Porch i.._ -1 Â· 'p 3. Â£ . ..74 4--1 To Be Rebuilt 4- Kr'Â«3~7 " -) ~ Porch - ..9 I.I.- 1 t. -7< 4 -, .: I -Â·- DN ~~-| 34~1 < * FENCE . . 1\ \ 11 :,:'KB'~ up -2.-11 1 1 @+- 1 --i 15 Â¤7 --th / DUPLEX - -v- z i q. OLD 4 PLEX *3 1/ / im / / It--4- To Be Rebuilt v To Be Rebuilt , , IR=tz //-3 .. CN 14 1 1 ry NEW 4 PLEX 3-22,1 i 1 ' -- DATE: 15SUE: e $ '98 ..77--â€ž- L. 4/'t, ..:1'v.'%~'' 4 -- 1 04/13/00 PHASE 11 - 1 13 12/2189 HPC APPROVAL. PHASE I ~1~'.4,;0.0 |PORCH 1 2 \ \ 7 1'.'-I 1 1 -2-2 1 HPC &P&Z APPROVALS <42 "- . jljw*.1:-.~- ~- ~~--4~~~ - ~ CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL 1 6EEPE V 1 12 06/05/00 REVISED HPC APPROVALÂ· ~I - -~1--tr~---nir--4-7--.4 Sepacki.ine _._. ___ ____- _ --~ ~45-9 11/30/00 PHASE I & 11 $ 4~~Â»17 3 parking spaces ~ parking spaces , 1 , _shed roof i Â· 04/16/01 P & Z SUBMISSION ~ , parking spaces In 1 . i 5 1 1 1~ Dumpst" 1 1 111=~ 11 10/15/01 FINAL HPC APPROVAL 4----- enclosure ~ Bikes J.I 1 + 4 6 7 19 10 2 ' 3 : < |' 8 ~ (New) ~ Property Linel i Alley Elf f---3 Maintain l' Encroachment of overhang P.t'86_Eli *_PHA-S@J. These documents have been prepared specifically for the Christiania Project. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the Architect Reproduction prohibited Â© 2001 Stryker /Brown Architects LEGENDS: GENERAL NOTES: 1 EXISTING TREES TO BE RELOCATED OR REMOVED AS NOTED KEY PLAN 21Â»4 PEA LANDSCAPE PLAN 2 OCCUPANCY -Ax-9 R-1 DUPLEX. PANABODIES CABIN .: ~'8?~8IOEi- a uNIs OA GREATER 4 1' ~gs? EXISTING TREES NORTH Â¥.1 ; 1,449 i - 4 SITE PLAN- PHASE II f-- FENCES SCALE: 1"= 10Â·-0 A-1.1 \ %.0,1 , '7 9 Line L jeeils 411noa .N stryker-6--~-w_8_3 ARCHITECTS 119 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN,COLORADO 8,/11 (Pm g70~925Â·2100 (Faz) 97Gt925-2258 (..........op:!sicl TOP OF TCP CF ROOF RIDGE 0 ROOF- RIDGE. 6 A . CEDAR SHINGLES 131'-4' El.EV ' 131.-4Â· El.EV -Â·Â·-Â·Â·---Â·- CEDAR SH:NGLES TOP 0!F DORMER RIDGE ...5- - - _ - / DC)RMER Rint Â·F b 12*-10 3/4Â· El.EV. 'F ' PAINTED 2*8 WOOD 16,Â·1!2'Eliv ~~'~~~~"~ -~ ~ EB INÂ»~~*:Y,i-- 211--VIT- FASCIA (TYPICAL FASCIA GYPICAL) PAINTED 2x8 WOOD yan===7-2 6,Â· HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING 6Â· HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDNG TOP OF TOP OF _BEA.f~%~.713Yt --*- - - - - - - - . CHRISTIANIA BEABING PLATE _1_ 118'42 ELEV Y ri=*=ill Â·Â· '' re=4=Â·=1. mmp ~-Â· Â·TYPICAL WiNDOW UNITS FFÂ¥111 1.- 11 /'~, I /------- CEDAR SHINGLE SIDING DOUBLE. HUNS WINDDWI Â·WITH Dol-BlE OR TRIP'lE Gl B. L fil | 0 ._1.3 - '11 4 - .' 501 West Main Str=:et ALUMIN.:M CLAD AND Cx4 WOOD re:M A-p=n. Col :r/dn 61611 TOP OF 111111'111 1 - - - 1.lull JIT' 111 -4*4- . 37-01 till .52 TOP OF PAINTED 2xl. WOOD FASCIA ~/4-74 __ ~_~- - PAINTED 2112 WOOD FASCIA 1 PPER FLOOR .i UPPER FLOOR i 111'-9' ELEV - illÂ·Â·9Â· ELEV I NEW STAIR ILI[-E---- 3 --- -- * -----E --~210 G-*- 002 4Â»k=L mi- 361411[42 1 CEDAR SHINGLE 8!DING IMEICALY,UNDQF UN.TS DOWet F HUNG WINIÂ»WS ILLIi i i Â·Â· 1 . 141 lili _LLLi -2.-t Â·*,Ti, r,JI.'BLE 011 ImE GI A2.I ALUMINUM CU41 AND 2*4 WOOD 11*:M I oP OF I OP OF MAIN FLOOR i !01'Â·W Et EV V - 17-- --7-- Â®WIAÂ®]lit[94---3 7 ' "1,-4 6*6 IVP WOOL} COLUMNS MAIN FLOOR â€ž 101'-9 ELEV â€¢ , 1 1./,4 i - 1 eÂ·-1 - - 1 WINDOW WELL f | | Â· EMISTING BASEMENT . _ _~__ EXISTING BASEMENT i.. I ./ f UNDER 1 :2 OF Pl:!1 DING 1 UNDER 1/2 ,)1 B:JIE D:NG I ! EXISTINGBASEMENT ELEVATION I ' 1 EXISrINGBASEMEN-FELEVATION 1________i_-__3 L L.1 - i -- 11.4 T L : ISSLIE: SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION 1221/99 HPC APPROVAL.- PHASE I 04/1 1;00 PHASE 11 HPC KPAZ APPROVALS CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL CEÂ·'05,Â·C~ REV!SED HPC APPROVAL- 11/30/00 PHASE I & 11 03/2&'01 04, 16/01 P & 2 SUBMISSION -- CEDAR SH:NGLES TOP OF TOP OF / 110(OF_RIDGE . A. ._ _ _ _ _ _. - - â€ž. . 131'Â·4' ELEV 1 --Â·Â·-Â·--Â· Â·Â·Â·- --i--.- CEDAR SHINGLES 131Â·-4' ELEV ' Th,4/ 4Jf-imenth h â€¢vÂ·Â· been prepared Ip, 1 1, I br 1; ' n. Pr,Bell DORMEFARIDGE .6 ~ ' ''~ '~ '~~ Â·Â·CEDAR SHINGLE SIDING '-~' Il T'." ~tlitri, *,er TOP>OF Â·Â· Â· Â· Â·Â·Â· 127-1 1/2. ELEV. p PAINTED 2,0 WC)OD p'Â·'1 t. ir , ''llier ./..t PAINTED 2,8 WOOD thL ,!| | 4 1 .â€ž,1 p. ..0. â€¢ifthe 1-A SC!,7 :TYP!CAL J ' 4* / - --- -- -- -"-'~~~ FASC IA (TYPICAL) t., il, 1 FÂ·-:--i.1,-i~~i.Â·n prefutited 0' HORIZONTAI. WOOD SIDING TOP OP .,0â€¢ -Iri .t r br:Â·., 1 / ihit, .t. TOP OF '< 118Â·Â·9â€¢ELEV ' =--- / BEARING PLATE L 6Â· 1 toRIZONTA L WOOD 3~D ING BEABING PLATE. _.1 E-Â·Â·' 1 & I: AL HAND,lAÂ·L DESIGN 118'-9' ELEV Â¥ i [79- Ift]~ . :. Â· [x>UBLE I.J. .."N, Â·VI 41'i- 4---->--- 101 jt-it_--- All,MI. M L 1 -Â·Il â€¢ 1 w â€¢ I TnIM un___ , _iLL, -___~ ~ * _ LL]- ----__ l=* i i ~ ,.................-.-.-.--- Â·Â· PAINTED 2x 1 2 WÂ«>D FASCIA Pi'PICAE. WENDE. U.UNITS â€ž tx4 9.7â€¢ ~ 9.i Â· '. Â· Â· 1. ; Â· . Â·.,1, . Â· 4 ... Lr.,Eâ€ž Â· -/ING. 30Â£1ECTODE L,Â·IÂ·Â·ANÂ· '*IÂ·.1 1 Gl!. TE tENt :ril TOP OF roP OF UPPER FLOOR i PAIN:ED 2>12 WOOD FASCIA VIPER El.QQB 6 If 1 Â·-9â€¢ El.EV F - ~ 111'Â·9' ELEV ' P.... . 1. . 1 .-. .2 ; TYPK' Al WINE *i I :NETS 4.Al ..41 ~ 1.4-11 1 11 ~.1 CEDAR SHINGLE S'DiNG [Â»UB" 1"I.niÂ·IÂ·â€¢'i ~1Â· VV.T.6- I ' /Â·~~. .7 - y.:Ill/ 11 1 OR i lili 1.......4 Al'MINi '.'Â· I Al~Aril .' 1. i TE, ~.1 1 9/i #&19 Â· C:.0 TYP WOOD COl.UMNS - 4' ST()NF VENFER TOPOP MAIN FLOOR i MAIN FLOOR ... 10Â·Â·Â·9' ELEV ' 1 OP Of KEY PLAN 1. 11 101 9 El EV F - WINDOW WELL EXISI ING BASEMEN1 1 Â· 1 / UNDER 1/2 OF BUILDING EXISTING BASEMENT | i UNDER 1/2 0~ BUILDING 1 " DUPLEX 1 . 11 1 1 EXIS ING BASEMEN 1 ELEVA T:{)N -ALT 1 EXISTiNG BASEMENT ELEVATION I r-113 1 Elevations & Perspectives WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION bCALE: 1/16=1'-Ir AA 3.1 ~yker brown ~ ARCHITECTS 119 SOUTH SFR NG STREET ASPEN COLORADO 8161: 9/97~25Â·2100 (Fa"970/92.258 (e-in.qi~} 9.halselie.net CEDAR TOP OF CEDAR TOP Of SHINGLES .BOOF .RIDGE. 4 g / SHINGLES 027<ti~R95 0 128--81/4- ELFV LAL- . : 4.aFTÂ·.3.-Â·FÂ·Ii:. Â·11 dÂ· JÂ·~ /A PAINTED 218 WOOD rASCIA (TYPICAL) ' k. ;77 tL311 \\< *---- -1 TYPI,Al WINDOWUNITS Câ€¢31 IBL E HUNG WINE,)WS r :P Of ._1.4222- i-=4-- L- f> . -~=r CEDAR SHINGLE SIDING TOP OF --I.- W{1'11 [Kil;CLE tf~ THIPUL Â·GLAZ**A BEAPIN:.I'!ATE 1 _ ____ -TA G I--EA 31--~ h/...14 Lm + 'YE{CAL HAM 1 1 Â·?EgIGN '. _ _BEARING PLATE AIUMINel,!Cl.ADAN[)2,4 0~JOD IA. f I il#Â·.9Â· ELEV 4 .x-- 1 4 -T-- .TYPICAL NAN')11,AIL DF <41@N - 4 I ----9 f ......2, -Ll L.---4 . =--I...... eviwoct rÂ·/Â·rÂ· i 11.-111 , T. f m [+11 -Ill ]Hip-UL " .,ITOM RA!:5 al, PURZ 'Â· Â·1Â· Ati 11'I ~LS â€¢x, WWF W'... 3 li, :x, 1 !r ANSIES 4x Â· iÂ·i:*1 ...â€¢ . i ~ na 1.08" ANU bS *[F ------ _- __~ _-_-i-Â«0~q~~@]111&-1[1*IERÂ·Il _i le, 11; r . 1 -IF 1.4 S ANI Â· 1 NDPOSTS ./ ED'/Th- RAL AND'Neous CEIRISTIANIA TOP op 0~1||11|11 IU E-IrlÂ®Ell PAIN1ED 28 2 MOODÂ· FASC:A UPPER FL OOR I 11[-I]111*11]Ill'11111- 7 1 ---- 1 -. PAINTEC 2x12 WOODFASCIA UPPENU --0 : - 110 9Â· ELEV ' . -Â· ~t W. st Main Street .,-,4----- -Â·6Â· HORIZONTAL WOOD Si[JING -- i 6Â· HORIE)NTAi WOOD SiDING A,pen, C i !,r.â€¢di, Sti,11 TYPICAL WINDOW UNITS DC)Ual E liUNA WINDOWS CED.AR SH N(,1 ES 1/0 lilli- - ' 11 ./H DOUBLE INIT*rl E .A.Fra *-xik --~98 -130*0*i-FmitmsiilmilEPris-421Â·3-=~_-- ALUMINUM C LAD..... WOOD TRIM 5:.6 TYP. WOOD. COUJMNS TOP OF ~=---1_~_-----Â»i WrigT1<T9nTnmilnzirTHR1 - i~- li TOP OF MAIN FLOOR i MAIN FLOOR i - -Â·-Â·--â€ž- 4Â· STONE VENEER lotÂ·Â·9Â· ELEV p - 6*4 TYP. WOOD COLUMNS 101Â·-9' ELEV ' 11 - . W ..1- i 9,%'.,5,>----I--7-------- WINDOW WELL , 1- 1 1, ' 11 11 1--- - WINDOW WELL EXISTING BASEMENT UNDER 1/2 OF BUILDING 2-1 . 1 .1 0- + .1 EXISTING BASE.ME N[ 1 21: . 1 11 t i' L ._ .. UNDER 1/2 5,1 BUILDÂ»NG ),, 1 I '>ry J 'C_!.. ..1, l .-1- ..1, ../ 1 .519. . ,Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·--fÂ·---Â·--Â·-Â·Â·---Â·Â·Â·---- EXISTING STAIR EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVATION ------ EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVAUON 4 PLEX SOUTH ELEVATION 4 PLEX NORTH ELEVATION 1>SUI Â· TOP OF CEDAR SHINGLES TOP or ROOF R!DGE 1 iy:iltÂ·Evt 0 - Â·Â· 1-28-9 -1.'4Â· EIFV 0 CEDAR PA]NTED 2.*HWOOD , ,,i, ,, ~~~lif#,31Fy. FASCIA *TYPICAt) .1 PAINTED 2*8 WOOD 0' }fORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING 'e' 7 .4 , ''- u__ TOP Of ... . TOP OF -- - -- FASCLA :TYp,IRI. 1 till! BEARING PLATE ... -1 .... .....=-- --i. Tâ€ž -331 .71 1%>.-- REARING Pl.ATE .4 W HORIZONTAL rhe>*Â· 1. unÂ·Â·Â·.0 4.n,Â·been prepated 11Â·11 1.pl'.1, A , 111'b' 1 11.1.1,3/ia Prole. t tle'-9' ELEV r 1113'-9Â· ELEV 'F WOOD ,<1 D)!NG TYPICAL HANDRAIL DESIGN 1 1* i .Â·, I , t .uitc,~ .1 1 1 Â·1.e 'I. 'ither tr=:[ El 'b --I-- 1- -7-- , i 1 1~ -,{II 8,6WOCe.,4)POP-'2 hG POrl' P 4 60Â·1 .ILS PI...1 , Â·n c. ther li"* 1Â·4 ... Iâ€¢hÂ·,ut Â«4 WW! m Â·15 1, Â· Â·,1 1 9 MIG' F. I thiÂ· arprti. 31 and pall, 1/ "1 1 I l ' l lc TOP oF PAINTED 2*12 WOOD FASCiA tJPPER Fl. OOR 4 &}Mlill 1-1[1 6 1 WOOD FASâ‚¬.IA UPPER FLOOR . BollED u IÂ·* RA~ b AN[.~ 4Â·.Â·I'Â·iÂ©IS TOP OF PAINIED h.12 Architect. Repri.due,â€¢, . p, 1â€¢11 .ul I- 11'Plat WINDOW UNITS 1,201.OstrvÂ·ker/'browl- Ari'iÂ·:..th 110'-9 E'EV . 1 10'Â·9' El EV D HISLE HU,K.... Â·WS -TO= L-_ 1/ L.=.- .-- 6,4111. AUJUINUM C.1.1,[ AND 2<,1 #7.' 1 /:M ..:._....____.______---- -- PrP](>Al. WIN[)C)'A' lJNITS -] r--7 1____ F &01/ 1 DOURI E HONS WIN[Â¥).5 Â·*I.! De l :81 Â£ OA 1 /IP. 1 MNG. WE 11 DOUBLE OA T RPLE G L AZNG. 4*11.N.{1-11,1.11 Â»r='r-'-WI ALUM....) AND 2,4 Wâ‚¬â€¢De TAIM NEW_EMIEF; 1'19 STAIA :--ONS TRUE TION TOP OF 4.u * 'rul,LER. - MNIVEYO- -1, -------- '-,Â£ F l: 161-9 ELEV J. Â«Â·-US:I~ . *Â» 2 ~,~~9 yÂ© : %~ 4-~ Â·.:12Â« Â»b>4 Â»4*2kR~hyÂ» ~~ 1Â»'~~8*, Z==QN . . ~YU SEIÂ· HAN.â€¢'AG , A. ......â€¢â€¢'ST gig- ~- -f@n i 'WINDOW WEI.l. 1 ! IN E Â·LiWEE%'#*,6'4,~#.~*<,: 9 E-[ 1 1 - -L . Â·PICAL 'IAN' iqA.:1 :4 PON : 1.3.1. .4 7 EXISTING BASEMENT '' 1 I rli, E 1 ~ 2-3 .....UlÂ·1'Â· ./ 1 1 7 r UNDER 1,2 OFu BUILDING ~ ~ 4~,4 W.44 ;VEL[All. Â·Â· 1*1 1 19' ANGLES 2/6 HOR' ./ & [tf,TIC' I. IL 5 i *"A~m~ 4.1 80! TH} 10 T~Â·F P.4 ~ ANfl FNE,POSTS .1 11 11 1 --22-U EXISTING BASEMENT ELEVATION L_L____-__-_________1___] ki Â¥ PLAN 4 PLEX WEST ELEVATION 4 PLEX EAST ELEVATION 4 FLEX -ALT 1 Elevations & Perspectives 1/16 = 1-0 AB 3.1 1 E=94 ARCHITECTS .. ...TH S:RiNG STREET ASPEN COLORADO 3'Gl (Ph)97,*252,00 (Fax)970/92 S-2258 (e-nail) sbaÂ©sopris.net TOP Of ONE ALTERNATE 1002 OV ONE ALTERNATE ROOF.RIDGE * ,/ ' '~'~ '" ~ " WITH Hip ROOF RIC)pE 133-7 12' ELEV 4 hz '. |_-p94_I.EU.-LI6 I_ -J/**tyâ€ž=L -- *L- -er/Le.4 ... w -- ~"-- -'~- w!-TH HIP WOCÂ·D SHINGLE ROOF WOO[) SHINGLE ROOF- TOP OF il. '~.~i-~~,~,124~ 'e:~' ,Â· i' f~EZZZ~iE'.. -~~~' ;' ~ ~~"~~ ' ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~0'~Cl- 1 114--1-y-r. LJ ~..,~3t,~,i'-*,i.~.~ TOP OF- BEARING PLATE i Â¥52*9>96, rrbiltwrip . 12 2 1. 111 1,1 7/ Fl~ 1 $# mmt[<jm in~f~1@tt8,*~~** DO.jftl.E OR TRIPLE BEARING PLAI E L 125-0' ELEV V Â·Â·--- Â· -- GLAZE D At. 1.IMINUM CLAD 125Â·-0' EL EV V DOUBLE OR TRIPLE WINDOW (n'PIC:AL) Et--11 /:, ir-r,r.L, _--- GLAZED ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW (TYPiCAL) TOP OF 10Â¥'OF ~ t ,'-" '-i.17_Â£ El: r fl]Il.lf . Â·Â· ..Â·.1 CEDAR SHINGLE 1 / 1 .. BEARING PLATE + BEAAITY*N.5 + - '1.LI~....~..21-[Il'i~ Â·- - - - - CEDAR z,H!NGLE '19Â·0Â·ELEV .-Â·.1.-: .2 -4 -..aÂ·.Â·.: ....L4,4*d--1 - K SIDING ~ SIDING - - -- - .-: .2.'-'917- "' m .4 ---;1 M . A..- rri~ i - -- WH".1- 2~123-'it ~*74419/,JIL-#-=:11 Â· ~ /1 I~Unbefil[,~~/21/Z/~21~<A '-Â·----- EEJEftlk,~ -~~ ~1~ ~1'Â· I'l~41[f]IP~~Â·~2uI~'Â· ~9!11[iti\-9-. -- ---- -- TYP 2*4 TRIM BOARD 2x4 1 RIM BOARD 1,19 CIÂ· IREVIANIA ~ j-mytfMkfF~1~.~ 1, ~ 11-1~8, =;EF839F~~.--ilj~il METAL. ROOF TOP OF ----- Â·Â·Â· METAL ROOF TOP C,E f. . 11 J,44,-11,1 7,[FULÂ· LUU rf.Li . - vi W 51 Win Street -uep#%+R,EL -0 7 A.FÂ»Â·rt, C-:hir.id/:161 : 110 0Â» ELEV " - - --1 11 ---1.......1 - 1-Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· Â·Â·-Â·Â·Â·Â·Â· 2x8 -TRIM BOARD Â· 2x8 TRIM BOARD ~ f u f{Elt--32 1,41# ~ 0--i-- {Â®1]EL-IEN Â· LAP SiONG LAP SIDING - IE 2*8 TRIM BOARD 2,8 TRIM BOARD rOP OF TOP OF MAIN LEVEL. 4 , 11 MAIN LEVEL . L - --1 lE - 1 11 " - Â· Â·Â· Â· I , 100Â·04-LEV Â¥ NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION 1)AIL . ASUF..Â· 12/21'99 HPC APPROVAL- PHASE 1 04/13 00 PHASE '1 HPC .PAZAPPROVALS CITY COUNCIL Al '1'HOVAL 06j05:00 REVISED HPC APPROVAL 11/30/00 PHASE!& H 03/24/01 04i16'01 P & Z SUBMISSION TOP OF ONE ALTERNATE TOP OF DOUBLE OR TRIPt E ROOF R![),GE =*r/,/ . .... .. WITH HIP 1.33~~~.~'2~~~ ,~ . CLAZEDALUMIN:JNIC[AD 133;-7 1.02Â· El.EV ' ' "'~ ~ -- - A '- / WINDOW (TYPICAL) Â· ' '' : 1 . WOOD SHiNGLE ROOF . [}OLJBLE OR TRIPLE ~ 1 -1 .1 , 1. 'TL,~ â€¢ L.1.. WOOD SHINGLE ROOF .5 icAR~'f l:' ~ LAI.tÂ£ Rtii?..f t. ~..:.D}i . f - GLAZED At.UMINLJM CLAD 11 >e d=â€ž unt ':t-li.ive been prepared v./114[)()\5, (T'F)1(3,8.L ; .1-.11 lili r - . .: --1 .......- >p Lifi, Ally fer the Chri>h.mia Prine. 1 TOP OF .0.-r!,O, 1 1 : 1 11 1 * rleÂ¥ .,re not >uitr.Ne !0' u>e iÂ·n ether TOP OF I /ki . - - 3- -1 BEARING PI ATE i .L 2*6 PAINTE[) WO{>D FAS(1.4 BEARING PLATE A t.111 125Â·-0' ELEV " 1-, i Â· rn~Â·i in CEDAR SHINGLE SIDiNG prnl.Â·4154,1 int,ther k.,1,441. without 1/ lEol : i 125'-0- ELEV T thi' /rpâ€žâ€žal.ind p/rti...,p.itirn of the rE.:2,Â»jrr,Â·hi[+1111 41~ r L.Â·-- -- 2*4 PAINIED TRIM BOARD (TYPICAL] Arihitett. Repirduction rr,ihib:ted 1- \\ , il . 1ll 1 -E . mÂ·1Â·1-- r i ", ~, 1. 1 11,; : r.,11 1 -' I r.,6 -J TOP OF 2,8 TRIM BOARD TOP E)F 1. 1/M,/ >tr,ker.Â·brown Architeâ‚¬ tb BEARING PLATE * ,<..'UTJI. U' 1~.7.. ~" ~-=~= wÂ·..ran A i--w.Â·.61. 8.-..p:". Â·: :.Â· 1-1 I BEARING PLATE 4 _. 2*8 TRIM BOARD 1 19'-d' ELEV 1 -T-T----Â·Â·Â· ----- - - -- --" Â·TT-Â·7'-1 T J T 1-,-r- r- -- - m-t# -Â· -4 - 17-0 81 EV V FF -â‚¬5-4 7 /rl.Tr- --- Â·--- --- ---Â·r --1Â·Trr-Tri F-T[Tr -1 -7 I 11.11 1 {CEDAR SliINGLE SIDING - 16:11 11 - 11 ;Â·,i.i.|~~K:Â·~T Â·937-19-r[LL, 1- Â·Il 1/ I" 2Â·11 'll. Â·' / 11. i il, 1,-. i Â· Â·Â·- I Â·/ ,-Â·Â·Â·----2*4 GUARDRAil. 2*4 GUARDRAIL i [7------ f.i.,-,41[Vt'JLIE 11'.~....2...:..;' '.: ..ci~.i : ~Â·Â· I'::~1i,?-~7$ 6 i ,/.k.41, ul m Jiii -- '- ,-r..: 1.,. i rÂ·rdÂ·i'Â·' 1 : I--. =t Â·Â·Â·Â· 4 --: J. 2,8 TRIM BIARD 2xd PAINTED T RIM BOARD (TYPICAL; TOP OF TOPOF 11 Â·Â·Â· 7 -10.11.11 1 1 t.ir'PER LEVEL ,4 ..~ ~1'-â€ž_-_ |Ill-,U-7 -- ...... METAL.ROOF -/f=k .-1.1 I .1 410'Â·6' ELE'V V // 11 2,8 PAINT ED T Al,/1 BOARD (1 YPICAL ) 1 ! (.~c : fE rfi @U t---Â·Â· Â·--Â·Â· -Â·-Â·Â·Â· 616 POST -----Â·Â·--Â·--Â·Â·Â· Â·Â·Â·Â· 2*8 TRIM BOARD TOP oF- 1 - --- 1 TOP oF KEY 1'1.AN MAIN LEVEL * MAIN LEVEL .6 --7- . . .1..-.-- - 2/d~F,IMB<,AF,.D 100-0Â·ELEV Â· " Â·Â· Â· Â· 160'-0'31.tV 7 1 r Ll- NEW 4 PLEX 11 1 1 0 1 r 1 b ~i i I E _I I I 17 T /1 1 It 1-Â· 1 , Elevations & Perspectives :: ' Â·~' Â· â€¢ WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION 4 Ai] 1/16" =1'-0 AC 3.1 -1 1~~--briwn -1 ARCHITECTS 119 SOUTH SPRING STREET ASPEN. COLOR/00 8'61I (Ph)9709262100 'Fax)97/92&Â·2251 (e-In.11J *1)* 'sopil.n,t TOP OF TOP OF ROOF RIDGE : ONE Al.TERNATE ONE AL TERNATE (35271 2' ELEV --- - WITH GABLE W TH GABL. E iiÂ·7919&%-4 - ~~~ - ~~~~~- ~~~ ~- - - ~it-ftftÂ«245%3{~Y~4â‚¬43Â¢-tr/----.... WOOD S}Â·:INGLE ROOF : -.3-2--u't .UK/~-1: 1442Â·Â·.4' tÂ·~.Â·im-'Â· 'Â· 1.-..2.742tf-14.k.,e '. ,.i ' : : -=keEÂ£'IY:ly -4 4rrÂ·r-nle h..~,7.36:2â‚¬tlfaf**4#93~~.i}â€¢=====â€¢!Â·-.>~b'=Â«-9 41-1 : --.â€ž ......... .....â€ž - WOOD SIÂ·!INGLE ROOF - . 4 -1.. TOP OF Pr.-4 ic,~_[2.1-+,~,1-L; 1, 'LE--- 5Â«--2._--41:LrfÂ·J~L~y:]1~ ZES:Â·1 -ir'Â·Â·3~, TOP OF DOUBLE OR TRIPLE _REABING PLATE i Irt]Ir Â·Â·1 11-- -6-M DOUBLE OR 1~RIPLE GLAZED ALUMINUM CLAD 125'-0' El, 69 -Â¥- - - - - - - ~ -----Â·Â·-Â·â€ž GLAZED ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW (TYPICAL) W:NDOW (TYPICAL) TOP OF BEABING_RU\IE 4 TOP OF -U,rutii ,~irt' Â· 11Â·rin nÂ·Ir,4 1' 1! T' l! .: .. 1 -- --7'2-- . BEABING, PLATE 6 1 - .1 CEDAR SHINGLE CLOARSHINA ---- f-lf'.1,3.ill.I.'~'I.I.. .1 119'-0' ELEV -'Fr -- I a._E 119Â·0Â· ELEV -p - - . ...1 11 . SIDING CHRISTIANIA 1.41 --:--glr.1.-111-1~---7 - .111 [ll_JU i.-3- . .1 UL.,j-Â· --,Â£ _ S]DING 1, ..1. f 444Â»99*Ejkft 2x4 TRIM BOARD 2*4 TR!M BOARD lili 1YP 1YP. 501 West Nlain Strif t A?.pen, O.:lor,idi,Blnll 4,21Â·. -- il -Â£1Â·4-4, -~ 17 1 :..,~i .'~ ':f~~-I' ''-E '2.' 21 i .Â·r u Â·' 4: ::n i... ~'4 L - ~ -4 .-*A ~; --Â·Â·Â· ME ! AL HOOF uppÂ£42 _t Â·- 4~ 1.41 -11 1-1.,[3~~tp-F-p mT~T79 : .1-.><:C----..-... MEIAL RO, DE TOP OF :1701, 4-10, IL UPPER LEVEL 1 10Â·4Â·ELEV -- ---- - 2*8 1RIMBOARD - -1 itO'-0' ELEV 0 - Â«/ TW-li-'Il ,...........- 2*8 TFiIM BOARD ~ _ er-- -~ LAID SIDING i - LAP SIDING 1 ./ 238 1 HiM BOARD .. - 7 U Ami---ra U_Ed_ -fl-Hmimfa- , -2-- ~-,r-T-Ti-T-I|[---lhet- -ItibMI-- ---~Â» L_1 ..... 7Â« L &11-=114 --/ , ' 2>Â·8 TRIM BOARD TOP OF . MAINLEVEL -1 MAIN.LEVEL 0 -- TOP OF i ~ !I 1 IÂ·Â·! 1 I Â·' i ' I !00Â·-0' ELEÂ¥ p - NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION DATE: thS LIF: 12:21/99 HPC APPROVAL.- PHASE I [64/13/00 PHASE il HPC &P&2 APPROVALS CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL 06i05/00 REVISED HPC APPROVAL- 11/30/00 PHASE!&11 0:3/28/01 04/16,*01 P & Z SUBMISSION TOP OF T{* OF DOUB.1.E OR TRIPLE ONEALIERNili_ GLAZEDALUMINUM:LAD / ROOF RIDGE 1 ROOF RIDGE i WrIH SABLE , 135-71,2'El. EV ' 133-7 to' El.EV r , WINDOW {TYPICAL ) Â·Â·Â·Â·--Â·.-Â·, WOOD SHINGE ROOF L â€¢>1<0*< ' The>e docunne,it' have been prepared EffÂ®it.19226&7$&*F Â·M' ~~~ . -~ DOLBLE{')1 1 HIPLE / --- 92(>Of: SHiNGLE RO<)F TheY are net >uitable Jur u.e 'Â·n other Â·â€ž GLAYED AL.UMINUM CLAD piÂ·:,leÂ·cts:>r :r, tittier lt), .12:1Â·ns Â·.Â·ith'Hut spetifially for the Chri>t,inia Prl ieit M-3./DX/ y, 6 WiNDOW iT YF.ICAI ) the approul and Frli-/p,!ti,in.if the TOP OF - HÂ·I TOP OF 2),0 1Â·'AINI ED WOOD FASCIA Al.h:teâ€¢.1. Repiodu,-ti,}r, pr,;hitÂ·:terl P,1 '1 )kpg 1+1+ ....1ILLM~:41......6 - BEAR}NG PLATE ~. BEARING PLATE 6 125-0 Et.EV p CEDAR SHINGI F SIDING 125'-0' ELEV r .1 2(Â»j >tr v ker / brow n Archite~ h M P.'\INTED TRIM BOARD (TYPICA!.1 I 1 -Â· Â· . ra'b u [1, JU J, i tfkx I r TOP OF /54< ' ..' Â·!Â· 1,Â·",~-Â·.-Â·- ~ L .Liz.Fy",u--7=Tf. b-)---_.. 2,0 TRIM BOARD loP OF BEARING PLATE * REARING PLATE 6 11940' ELEV 4Â· i â€¢ wâ€žrÂ·,riÂ·â€žF,-,4- r,1,>145(35'1 119'-0' ELEV V -1- 1'! 11 .' ..JI. ,1 L"41.'11'2".1'4.~' ..'.; fÂ·32Â·-,il:ID'ultr ~, t. 1 ..1: - Â· 1.1.1,111:Ir.U-,I J.L .. 1 ... - r--~T.~Â·Â·IÂ·J-:~ F~JAUL.]~11 ..~ty! $ CEDAR SHINGI. E SIDING 4. 1/4 6% BRACKET I ---- 2*4 GUARDRAIL 1 1,6 64*1 Ir....,11 .ir=iliq -~ TOP OF ~ ~~~'~ , li Ill I~T ' l' I Lili.r. TOP OF ~ ~7. ... ~ : : : ..gÂ· : ..., : 119.:,I :;.9'1%-f ?'~U,1...:~".i~.~./i.: ~, 1 --._._L -_--- METAI ROOF 2*8 T RIM BOARD 071.1... 1,11.41 -- - -L-- - 16 1,FiWâ€žEr - 2 x4 PAINT E D TRIM BOARD t'T 3 FPSAL) UEPLAiÂ©/EL * UPPER 1EYEL -0 - ..... - 110Â·-0Â· ELEV 110*4' ELEV 1, .. L.-1..... -- --- - 2*8 P AIN 1 E D ! HIM BOARD ( T YPICAL) .......4,Â«< - --- ------- 1 - LAP SiDeNG .AP SIDING i KEÂ¥ FLAN - ik -- . fix,;POST 2 -2-4 -Â· Â·"Â· --2.f = E-_2 2 2_21.-' 1-~ 2 2,8 T RIM 8Â· AR[) . I. li TOP OF rop OF ---.....'.' 2x8 T RIM BOARD NEW 4 PLEX MAIN_l.EvEL ".i. - .... - - Â·- - ~ i MAIN 1 EVEL .4 100'Â·0Â· ELEV V 1 1- , I '97 0' ELEV ' - -Â· i L1 1 i i i iII F I Elevations & Perspectives i L , I , pr-1 11 1 .1-1 11- ~ 1 1 '' Jr l Ir WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION 4(Al L 1/16" : 1'.O AC 3.2 L J Istryker brown ~ ARCHITECTS t19 90/TH SPRt/G STREET ASPEN. COLORADO 01611 ~Ph)970/925-21. (Fal 970/25Â·2258 I.mall' s........net TOP OF TOP OF DORMER RIDGE . DORMEH RIDGE 46 132'-4 :14Â· EL.EV- 9 132-4 3/4. ELEV A 2111(1490>Â» /31---1- 1~ ~jtiÂ»ot-~ijf-~li~it~~ -~--~1~--~1 â‚¬-1 ---c- -1 N. 1 1 TCP Or CHRISTIANIA BEARING PLATE -4 118'-0'ELEV 4316-7 71 it+4 ~01 WÂ· Â·st Main Stret REQ. REVOKABI. E 1 REQ. REVOKABLE ~ EASEMENT PERMIT - EASEMENT PERMIT - 2 , L...Z...'.//,=-,.--- , . L... .. 1 A,pen, Coleradit'Â·41611 i TOP oF '~ Â·'1'. '.T<-_--' -tmt . TOP OF Lk UPPER L EVEL ... 1 1 UPPER.LEVEL + ~-4.-~: 1. ~.i .1 110'-O' ELEV 9 110'-0Â· ELEV ~~* ___EBE3 - --E]Fs#[flf fir - -- . . .1- 7 '- 1 11.1 41-a TOP OF ==m F77-L 4 ! TOP OF 'Â·18!N LE\(EL i_ _ _ - ILL - _- _MAINEVIL-+ - 100'4Â· ELEV- - 100:-0Â· ELEV Â· ./Fic/ er-r~%*~* -mar/min~. 9-Ail.*=i*i*444444ee=zm.-p NORTH ELEVATION - ALT 2 NORTH ELEVATION - ALT 3 !,ATE: 1>SCE. IOP OF -9222*BRitt- + A TOP OF [fll_. 11- TH / d, 'ment> have bren prepared th,Â·Christiania Pruin t BEARING PLATE i Tike) ..1 â„¢le 21 1,>eonâ€¢;ther 118Â·-0' ELEV Â¥ N Â· Â· 1-F~ Â· '~ ~ 'r--1 - - - - : W. ..Lil ,-' Prl,11 r hitations p. 'thuiR ~ 1.- 1.-1 -IL--1 1[Ell 1 AF "euttion p.,hibited 121.1 th /7 p.irtit ipation iiI the REG REVOKABLE â€¢ _. . Â· 1. e.Â·brow,1 Archile( t, EASEMENT PERMIT -- ~~-11 &* I loP OF UPPER.LEVEL + .1 - - .1 4 11 0-0â€¢ El. EV Z 1< . UtÂ®p_x-= ICEj t/11 lDp OÂ¥ ... %%4nt + '''' r f ki Y 14.AN NORTH ELEVATION - ALT 4 LODGE -ALT 1 Elevations & Perspectives 1/16"= 1'-0 AL) 3.2 -1 ~ brown ARCHITECTS 119 SOUTH SFR;NG STREET ASPEN COLORADO 8161, (Ph) 970m5Â·2100 IFax?/70~9/S-n. *main Rballopils.net TOP OF DORUER RIDGE .L TOP OF DORMER RIDGE 1 132Â·-4 3/r ELEV ' 132Â·4 3,Â·4' ELEV r , CEDAR SHINGLE ROOF / 6 1 DOUBLE OR TRIPLE GLAZED ALUMINUM ..~. \ . - 7/ (TYPICAL) CLAD WINDOW ........t 7. - CEDAR SHINGLES ///-3.1... ......1.1...... 4 CEDAR SHINGLES REARINC,~~. 0 NEEE-EE-itt 1 TOPOF ... REARINGPLATE 1 - hAF{t~ 118'-0' ELEV Â· ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2x WOOD TRIM (TYPICSAL) , Â·H--1: .12Â»... n : lili 2x WOOD TRIM (TYPI{.:Al.) 118Â·-0'ELEV V , . CLIRISTIANIA , - --------- - CEDAR SHINGLE SIDING 0 : ~ J -81 i ma -----------=-=-Â·--- CEDAR SHINGLE SIDING ~ 4 ..r 4/i,EUVRM4RIM{TYPICAL-) i . Ih*=8.-, rÂ·-4â€¢--Â·r-*--v- '~ . 1 â€¢ ~ ' iÂ·Â·Â· 11|111||- 2*WOODTRIMBYPICAL, TOP OF ~ ' ~~t ~ i ~,-I -- METAL ROOF TOP OF ~//-,, : ~~ FIt rlillilll "111'147''llt '#1~- 9-1 LPF it=Ill'fi - i (- Â· 53Â·1'6'tÂ·3!M PAINTED 2,6 WOOD A.pen, Culor, dâ€ž 816!1 l;PPER l.EVEL . UPPED LEVEL 4 TAIMÂ·[TYPICAL) 1 16,10Â· ELEV 0 42.__--._... - _ - 110Â·-O' ELEV Â· ' I - -X* 75/-1-L=.a,4 2,4 ~ ...-.~~~~T~O,P~~A~~)<)D ,~ aÂ«-2 94 , Â«t.Ilt-t. .,-Â» tÂ«--â€ž-â€ž- 1/ -1 1 1 DOUBLE OR TRIPLE GLAZED ALUMINUM 11-- -~-cm - 7 ER - AT IO.*F ~72---thMAW:17/ .i-- CLAD WINDOW ITYP:CAL, 5' HORIZONTAL !14-'11 Pr : ----- wooD SIDING .- -f ead' i -66!1 1-711 114. ; - -7-~ 2_= ! 6- HORIZONTAL WOOD 1 OP OF , . , ~ TOP OF 1 1 Ill 1 11 -I ''r.===9 P ,.c -- - SIDING MA!N LEVEL Â· r 1 160Â·elliV + - - --- -' ' , La- _-_--- -- i ~~c Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·~ Il- - na.,-r':rig 1 1 1-1-1 /1 1 r' -r r J' 1 NORTH ELEVATION - ALT 1 WEST ELEVATION T~A f L - ISSUE: A TOPOF r \ TOP OF ROOF RIDGE 4 ROOF RIDGE ' / - CEDAR SHINGLE REX-}F 1-20-3-Me ELEV ' 128,3-1/2' ELE, 4 / 7,-Â·i:: \ K i . ~ . 7 1 -Â·- CEDAR SHINGLF ROOF DOUBLE OR RIFLE DOUBLE OATRIPLE Â»- GLAZED ALUMINUM GLAZED At. UMiNL.Jil - v,-*,r -,i 'Â·-~- . -- ~-- ~b //-'7'YAQI?3;JDow CLAD WIN[>OW TOP OF 1 , - - Â·. , >P .ifitally Il,r el,e Chri>11.ania Prtilec.t iTYPICAL) -rep /:r PAINT ED 2 xd WOOD BEARING PLATE ~~ Luff,21743~ i --- -/ 45444) 118'LOÂ· EL-EV 4 < '- - =- ~ | b[ Atlny,L.62 5 4 Of' â€¢ - - ~ 1 4 ~dj,/---- TRIM (TYPICAL, The>e J:k untent' heive born prepared PAIN'1302*WOOD ' 9141@ 11Â».. Imm[1.11 - TRiM (IYPICAL) prole:ts ar in other h./tien' . ithout Thev are n * suit.ible for u.â€¢ iln "ther CEDAR SHINGLE SiD NG the apprli,Â·,1 and p.wth.ip.:tion ut the -I' ./ CEDAR SHING! E SIDING TOP OF UPPERLEVEL Â· Â·Â· Â·Â·Â· 4.2(Â»istiker/braviArchile<th Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·-Â·--Â· MEATL ROOF -TOP OF Arch:trit. Reprudw_tiÂ¢ ir, f.r, hitÂ·Ill'tl UPPER LEVEL 1 ' p I 110'-0' ELEV ' 4.-1 - 4 1. Â·q.Â·,7~ ~.-5 -,---- NX 110-0' Itt EV * \. 1 - ._41Â· '~ ' b 1. 4 /Â« +c- WOOD BRACKET ~91{ 1-- m---- fi .1~iT-fi -: PAINTED 2*4 WOOD TRIM (TYPICAL) 6' HORIZONIAL 11 1 1 'WOOD SIDING ==r 1 16*-~-|| EL~JI ftÂ» E-* 1+LLIM.Ell@]414413-Â·- I- 11 -Id Â¢ 6' HORIZONIA!, WOOD SIDING TOP OF MAIN I EVEL 0 MAIN LEVEL : - 100 0 ELEV ,~JAL...~. 1// leotÂ· ELEEV 0 - -r-- 1-r- ---0 r----_~~E@-'~~J~~~~~~Â£D,Â·Â· .1 "Â· Â· Â·Â·'~Â·.7 6 Â·-Â·:Â·~#Â·'Â·Â·4Â·,~:'â€¢Â·:~tr':OÂ·.'UAC; 111 16 1_ 1 11 1 .L J L :, 3 J KFY FLAN SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION LODGE -ALT 1 Elevations & Perspectives ~ 1/16"= 14' Al) 3.1 strykerbr<wn -J ARCHITECTS N' SOUTH S:RING STREET ASPEN COLOAADO 816 t1 (Ph) 97~925 2100 'Fa~)970?92~2258 .,1,0//selilnet DOUBLE OR TRIPLE GiAZED ALUMIN{:M PAINTE D 2*8 WOOD / C.LAD WINDOW FASCIA (TYPICAL) / (TYPICAL) TOP OF , 6' HORIZONTAL RCOF RIDGE a 6' HORIZONTAL TOP 07 / Ff / = ----- --- SIDING SWiNG ROOF RIDGE .. i 125'-10 3/4 ELEV ' 125-303'4'6110/ ~ r. -- '-1 ,~Lul~LJ= J. . , 1 Â·LÂ«,1 1. r ruA f --Â·F~13'-r-,1 ..,Â«'Â· Ul*ilLL~~'--Â· ~~=E Â·--Â·Â· Â·Â· WOOD SIÂ·liNGLES i.TYPICAL) . ..Il.,Â·Lil _.'2 I... Â·i ' _~. Ap' ir..~ ~ ~ ., .â€ž,,-,-.. 0 2, ; Â· ---%%% _ ,Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·-Â·Â·-.Â·Â·Â· Â·Â· ----- WOOD SHINGLES PAINTED WOOD PAINTED M WOOD FASCIA (TYPICAL) .3'3~'GLI,3,1111Â«. 1, 1 1I~ /k --1,0 ~,~77,Â·, 4' l, FASCIA CI-IRISTIANIA TOP oF 6 -Â·Â·?1'Â·Â· -'i=JÂ· :-7> ' 9.Ir-&=1~7. \9:z:0:0241.1 il' Il Â·Â·.X TOP OF % - - Â·Â·-Â·-Â·--Â· Â· 2*4 WOOD TRIM (rfP!{-:.Al a BEARiNG PLATE 3 214 WOOD TRIM (TYPICAL> BEAR:NG PLATE .. 118Â·-0' El E.V ' -= - --Al ~Â¢1~[2198*31r--Ed-iss,*- -Â·~:IÂ·: :~::t.:Â·i---I - i~Â®fi]EQEBE~-1 -/-, 118'-0' GLEV -r illu--4 .r Â·F==i 501 W. 51 N Ia:n Street [Xy.JIBLE OR TRIPLE A-pen. (ljonh~181All GLAZED ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW . -Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·-+Â·-- 2*2 PICKETS (TYPICAL: 1-- 1 --- WOOD POST CAP TOP OF WIX)!) Ski!NGLES TOP OF .11-244Â·14 ===1--1-1-1- - .4-4.2 :.2-"L.:11..:'fitlilil''il:1:Ii Â· UPPER LEVEL . 110'-0Â· ELEV ' UPPER[EVEL A 1 10Â·-0'ELEV ' ' 6*6 POSTS & BRACKETS 9 -- -= l[YpICAL) r- --:-en-U~-pÂ«--c- m fi-4-i-Â»tr~ In/-- GUARDRAIL TOP 01- IÂ·op of 1 1. . 1.1 11 L :1::T' 11: . i - - - MAIN LEVEL. 1 ..1/11111,1 Â·Â·'. i MAIN I EVEL . 100-0' ELEV ' - ---- " lofÂ·-6Â· fliv 'P 1 1 1 : b- STAIRS i TOP 01 i 1 1 2 TOP OF BASEMENT SLAB Â· BASEMENT SLAB + <,0-0- Fir: e rÂ·Â·Â·-. 90Â·-0 ELEV T'All. lbS LIE: NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION 12:2109 HPC APPROVAL- PHASE I 04/13Â»3 PHASE H HPC SPAZ APPROVALS CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL- (43â‚¬352(30 REVISED HPC APPROVALÂ· 11/38Â·00 PHASE,8 1 03/2&'01 04Â·1601 P&Z SUBMISSION 6 HORIZONTAL TOP {I* FF S:DiNG TOP OF ROOF RIDGE '. 992[22% 0 6. HOR{Zor,[~AL SID:NG 125-5 Et.EV v 3 01 - -1/2\ 1 1 .1 ,1=2111-.---Ir.-.11,11 *-, WOOD Sll:NGLES WOOD SHU*31. ES -I.Â·i.,4- Lf Â· L / , 01 -DE- . ....1..~ J 19.01 -'Fril \':...Â·A.T;,Â·,' â€¢Â·r-:'. PAINTED 2,8 WOOD The>r JÂ·Â·Â· un': jvt. havtÂ·been prep.,red r J...: 11 ./. TOP OF >peli A.,Ili v fer tht: Christ:j,iia PrtÂ» 1 '.:t:11?061'48<1:.E:-;-4444-RÂ·.:t,% :'~L -,/ - - 'A5< 14<TY'I AL) PAIN FED 2*8 WOOD FASCIA (TYPICAL) TOP OF & ....'I "Â·24 - 1.---'-It 111'Â«Â«rEâ‚¬:GAL- BEAR,N,3 PLATE i n .; 1-Â· ~ c-Z. .Â·; ..i, .i. ..... -Â·'.Â»'.Â·.:.(.1:14'Â·E' 13Â·fll:<---- BEARING Pl.ATE ..----_--._-_-_ ~~;rd--Al'-11 .W Lul . 1&--,# WOOD SHINGLES The' arp i, t 4;it,+11} far tÂ»eenother 118.yEL EV ' 118'-6 ELEV- I. :i 'Â·.1 ..1 Â·n' 'therhi,_al;en-without ~TriÂ·Â·3Â¥7 :~Â·'.~ '-T''A. .vl7=13:.lf- WOO[} SHINGL ES 7 Â·.r . ' 12 .LI - ...,3 :' Â· '-' T ..' ~ ,~ ~ ' U,' 4 DÂ·Â·T El-.- i...: -2,,w--, fixp,i!<,1 DOLIBLE OR TRiPLE 11Â·, .,ppimal .ind piwliapeititin,}f lbe GLAZED AL 1 IMINt Al 4 1, trit Repr:~uctiou pri:|jitâ€¢,Wll 1 1.1 1 - ti]]141444*iftlit~. TOP OF i 2.-IF~Ll, J14'ALI, :- ~Â· .~ ~9'. "Â·' ~'p.':6~ ,/ -.... (LA[) WINDOW UPPER LEVEL i , (TYPICAL) [~ :-:- 44Â·*42Â·1Â»0Â·G.4.4 (GiAZED ALUM}NIJM CLAD W'NDOW 1 3-40.trvAir..Â·brewn Ar.:i,le<t. DOUBLE OR TRIPLE ..... ..4.2. U -14.- (TYPECAL) TOP OF 110Â·Â·0'ELEV 'F . i . ..~' 3-523--,3 ...Â· . i,- , ta, i -,L 4.'iuÂ·verb,254 m~gR,8 + 2*4 WOOD TRIM (TYP~CAL> 72- - 011, n: 2x4 WOOD TRIM i'rYPKAL) il=-11 6*6 WOOD POSTS 8 1 1.1; - : 1-111121[ Flu GUARDÂ·HAIL--n 7,1 11-- 1 <[110[....~,7--Iff < 6Â· HORIZON1 AL SiDiN(3 1%1 - Lul ----- - rt,Ir.0.-,lubtl TOP OF: Â£:L - - --- - tl I L. 1 1.'. ~ .1 TOP 01 MAIN I EVEN .. 205'4Â· ELEV- Ag Â·- -./4 IP-- umzz~ - _4.- Â·Â·-'1TÂ·rÂ·.1- . 1 j MAIN LEVEL 0 10[7Â« El EV .. STAIRS - ~-: i kin PLAN TOP OF ; TOP OF 1 BASEMENT SLAB . BASE~N(f ~[25 9 90-0Â· El.EV' r NEW 3 PLEX WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION Elevations 4-Al E 1/16 = 1-0 AE 3.1 iat REPLACE PLYWOOD TRIANGLE ABOVE - VANDOW'WITH Erown 1 SCREEN WLTH HEIJAIH: RESTORE / TYPICAL WOOD SIDING INTERIOFI MODIFICATIONS ,---- SHRUBS PER ORIGINAL CASEMENT / - -- ~-- --~ ---~ FOR DISABLE D Â·-Â·Â·Â·- --- - , / LANDSCi l'E PLAN WIN[)OW PER liPC - ACCESSIBILITY ~ .1.Â· 'I C t .C i ~21 1.'fl, GUIDELINES 4.Vi---=2>hÂ» ARCHITECTS I A 2... /$<f==El Â»x 119 SOL'TH SFRiNG STREET 4 ~ ASPEN;COLORADO 816,1 8' VERTICAL BOARD & /4 14, 11 : A" (Phi .925Â·2100 Ili~) 970926-22. 19:.1.... 11 4- 1 .- ,-4 i PATTEN RESTORE PER --Â·..._ /7| h 1- 4 (,~'A,11) **/sep.IA.ne' HI>C GUIDELINES NEW DOUBLE-GLAZED 1. WOODFRAME PANtRY 1/2- SILL -Â·Â·Â·Â· LIVING ~ /f/li ~11 Â«43Â» --- - CASEMENT EGRESS WINDOW /71 11: 1 1/4 i X 111111:t# 54!Â·-*,(N UNCH _~ 1 ?.1 L r.'Â·!- Â·Â·ti~: 1 I _ d '';1 1 106Â· '1Â·F!, %.Â· 10" HORIZ. LOG Wi IL 9 X --- ACCE:ES WELL TO PEA HPC CHINKING SIDING GRATE OVER RESTORE,REPAIR Â·------Â·-Â· -â€ž Â·- . ... .. REPLACE BOTTOM LOG CONCRETE - MATCH CHARACTER OF PATIO 1 ADJACENT LOG O _ I \ *C; ; 3 1 CRAWL SPACE GUIDELINES - 1 / \ P.".5- 1 - KITCHEN DINING BEDROOM - 1 NEW FOUNDATION -----Â·-----. ~~~--"-~ ~ ---- Â·"Â·Â·Â·/' 70 sq It ' 01,-7 i MAIN Ft.ex>R ) 4:4' â€¢ - 0 9 'O_QI --- 1 - NEW CONCRETE !F Â¥ 100-9. BEV. ~~ . FOUNDATION & CRAWL R ~li / " 1 3 1 i .------- -Â·Â·Â·-Â·Â·-â€ž SPACE ACCESS TO i el// 1 V 4 4 MECHANJCAL r 46 9.- .P tft- . -- I 1.2--f ifipaÂ·Â·Â· Â· i EQUIPMENT \ 1,1 1 \ \ CHRISTIANIA LOG CABIN PLAN * \ HATCH DOOR FOR LOG CABIN - EAST ELEVATION :1 W'est Main Strirl MECHANICAL ACCESS Aspen. Ct:10 r.,di,81â€ž11 'O,Of F DGE . 79/*Â·L 'Iialt f J.1 Â»r A Â·8 1,17. FLEV b 1 REPAIR /RESTORE b Â· " ' ORIGINAL. CASEMENT yL.-1423 WINDOW PER HPC -->p< 41 -4.1 \ NEW 9" LOG JAMBS GUIDELINES 4 4 -11. -1 - 1,1 N.\ FOR NEW 3Â·Â·0 Bf=ti[%X DOOR TOMATCH --Â·-Â·---w 'f< ILL==111 ' -3-%~ -i: 7 Â« HISTORIC SOUTH e====â€ž 1 1 [\~ 8= VERT BOARD & WINDOW JAMBS Â» 1 Â»-- 1 111 1 11 1 :. 1 :: :1 ,6 1 EVE[ WEST WALL 751-1-'11 n n it 1 34\ BETTOM OF UFFE H Â»f-44 1 In\. < 1,: Â·: 1-' loT-6 3 4Â·Ut EV 10" HOFAIZ LOG W/ /9, CHINK SIDING -\. : 1) All: ISS Lie ,, NEW CUSTOM WOOD DOOR BUILT 03/28/01 REVISED HPC APPROVAL- FOR ORIGINAL 4.-0- 9Â·Â·Â·Â· PHASE I & PHASE 11 OPENING CEI - -- - - -- --- - r[3 -- ---- - - . ,-6 MA'tiFLOOF. _ 1- 109-0Â· ELEV 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 J -1% .~ -- -- -- --5.-~~i-~ .li-- -- - ----- --- - J- 1 1 LOG CABIN - WEST PHOTO LOG CABIN - WEST ELEVATION LOG CABIN - WEST ELEVATION OPTION ONE OPTION rUO Thiâ€¢>e Jocunients have been prepillÂ·ed >pii fhally torthe (Jhri>tiani;, Prtito. t rheY are not .uilatÂ·le fur un,e '111 Other prorets ir in other !,Kations without the appâ€žWai .md par lip.tion If the Architect. Repnductio,1 Fri:hibited 1.20(,1 strv ker.brewn Arc hite,- b li i ir ~1.-1 NEW CEDAR SHAKES ' ' 1 1 . 1 1 . $ . . . REPLACE NON-HISTORIC .11 1 , , 1- 1 11 SHEET METAL BAND WITH 1 1. 4 4 TYPICAL CEDAR SHAKES :)11:'' 1 -~11 2/1. ' 11 1 1{r HORIZ. LOG W/ : RFÂ¥ PLAN CHINK SIDi NG --- 0--1 - - , 1 DOUBLE VERTICAL - REPLACE ----- - LOG JAMBS CABIN NON-HISTOGIC 2 :/ -../-- 1~ f.fi. FLOOR PLAN . At.UM WINDOWS W/DOUBLE - -22..222=-.'...............m- . 1--- 1--J & ELEVATIONS - HUNG WINDOWS -- -- --- -- ---- --- - - WITH INSULATED GLASS, WOOD FRAMES & NO z CLADDING ' -1 : i - I O BE 1 Il 'DETERMINED / , /, It 5 % fli '1 I iii I 1/8" = 1'-0" LOG CABIN - NORTH ELEVATION LOG CABIN - SOUTH ELEVATION AF 2.1 r , stryker i i Â£ 9 N - 1 1 1 - r. . 1 1,-- ARCHITECTS 119 SOUTH SPRING STREET I.. ASPEN.COLORAD'.1611 . h qr ......11 (Ph)970925Â·2100 (hz}97692~2258 .. STAIR 11 - --2 - I i~ 11 1 . 1 1 1 1 -- -- 1 - e~ BATH ' 1 BEDROOM WEST ELEVATION (EXISTING) SOUTH ELEVATION (EXISTING) ' 1-) HOTE WATER a~ ! GENERAL NOTESÂ· 1 REMOVE PAJNT . 1. I I STAIN/PRESERVATIVE 2. STAIN SIDING WITH 1 CLOSET REPLACE CHIMNEY FRAME, , 3. .. 1 1 CEMENTACEOUS STUCCO TO . .. . . . ; MATCH EXISTING 1 R ' - El t~ 11 1 BE LOCATED IN NEW 11 4-E--7 Â·Â·Â·Â·-- --Â·-,1 '1 li 1-- g - Â· 4. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO ' i LIVING ROOM FROM EXTERIOR CRAWLSPACE ACCESSIBLE CONFORM WITH SPECIFIC ~ 1 ., : REQUIREMENTS OFTHE HPC 11 21 V F p r . r --- - -- - -- Â·- - -Â·--- 9 -'-r KITCHEN EAST ELEVATION (EXISTING) NORTH ELEVATION (EXISTING) 6 5 1 '- REPAIR / I I REBUILD STUCCO REPLACE WOOD I : CHRISTIANIA CHIMNEY TO --Â·--- - - z | SHAKES AS Â· i MATCH EXISTING 1 1 Â· REQUIRED COVERED : 301 West Main Street - Â· Aspen. Colorado 81611 INSULATED - GLASS UPPER I PANEL STAIRS 0 NEW 3'- ~ DOOR FOR 1 4 6 1 2 - DISABLED ACCESS TO METAL Â·FENCE" 1 ! ! 1 .- = - MATCH CHARACTER GUARD RAIL ~ '-"n EXISTING FLOOR PLAN ..11 OF EXISTING DOOR 1 - 1 1, 41-97-Â«-= p 11 .-/ 2 405 7 SF PLACE PANABODE ON NEW ACCESSIBLE i FOUNDATION - --RAMP 1 - / 1 ACCESS TO - CRAWLSPACE ---, SOUTH ELEVATION (PROPOSED) rt:~ 6 ACCESSIBLE - - DOC)f --- DATE: ISSUE: m - FENCE AROUND -''#.'"3. 'c_ y--#*Y--1~Â»-Â«e -J -ACCESS WELL TO 12/2189 HPC APPROVAL- PHASE I - CRAWL SPACE REMOVE 04/13/00 PHASE Il HPC &P&Z APPROVALS ' EXISTING -- - E MODIFY EXISTING ;. CITY COUNCILAPPROVAL 71 I I REPLACE ALL WINDOWS 1 ; LIGHTS TO WINDOWCS) k ... Â·i, 06/05/00 REVISED HPC APPROVAL- 4-r - D 4Â·4 WITH INSULATED WOOD , 7 ~- COMPLY WITH CITY ' --, BATH ~ 11/30/00 PHASE 1 & 11 1 4 SIMULATED DIVIDED LITE LIGHTING CODE 1 JUN ~ BEDIQ01111 WINDOWS 03/28/01 ; 04/16/01 P & Z SUBMISSION NEW 3J-01' DOOR FOR f.< 10/15/01 REVISION i :Â· -i Il~ ' DISABLEDACCESS TO liliÂ· -1--- MATCH CHARACTER i,~ 11!1 4-- 11,1 1 OFEXISTINGDOOR ' 11_ .-_ i._IIi 2- Â· i P -=il ACCESSiBLE RAMP --- -Â·Â·Â·--- ,~ R , These donurents have been prepared 1 L=,4 i 1- -1-=3- 11 REPLACE W/ , specifically for the Christiania Project. =~~s~ ------- NEW GAS LOG -fhey are not suitable for use on other NORTH ELEVATION 2- REMOVE STAIR & SIDEWALK --1----4 --_ , ______j . 9 - hi FIREPLACE : projects or in other locations without I the approval and participanon of:he Architect Reproduction prolubited 4 LIVING ROOM Â© 2001 Str.ker / Brown Architect. MODIFY OR REPLACE LIGHT WITH 'HISTORICAL'Â· REMOVE UTILITY EQUIPMENT. NORTH ELEVATION (PROPOSED) , ; .18 1 FIXTURE â„¢AT COMPLIES \ REPAIR SIDING WITHASPENÂ·S LIGHTING CODE \ \ CH -HZ -2 E .- -IN --1 JIL- - I --2-J - 13 22-CILL_t-J- Â·_ _ l~lill REBUILD STUCCO m. r CHIMNEY h - - - â€¢ --- -- REMOVABLE Â·Â· Â· ----- STRUCTURE PER , 11 2 - -7- - COUNTER HPC GUIDELINES 1 $ . 1 1 .1 16 1 1 ,-1 r /1 11-1 1 J 1! 11 1 44+-,i: t# ** i A .4- 1Â·*t KITCHEN ; 1 INTERIOR ! MODIFICATIONS â‚¬* t TO BATH / m - -37Â·NI 5 -Le .4/'C KITCHEN FOR ; , DISABLED 1 ACCESS REPLACE DOOR TO , MATCH EXISTING W/ KEY PLAN 3'-0" DOOR FOR I DISABLED ACCESS 9 COVERED PORCH ACCESSIBLE PANABODE RAMP $ 1/2 THRESHOLD SIDEWALK: - ----- --- ---- -- 1','1~~X. T'(P i MAIN FLOOR PLAN & ELEVATIONS -- PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN rh NSÂ·: ill..1 :2*11 405.7 SF SCALE: 1,4' = 1'-0" ' /. SOUTH ELEVATION ~-- REMOVE ADJACENT FENCING, WEST ELEVATION REPAR/PATCH AS REQUIRED AG 2.1 PLANT LEDGEND TREES PERENNIAL FLOWERS NOTES: Aspen Populus Iremwtoldes 2 5'~ Componula Fltependula Spiuce Plcea pungers 10'Â·12 Vinco mInci Mople Ace, globium . 9011 Brlsitecone Pine Flnus oristal' 6. 90'turn Fragarlo ves" 00' Apple Malus dolgo 3Â· KInlnnIck Concolor Fli Ables concolor compx:0 6 01/ent' SHRUBS Aquilegl Colomblne - - 'proÂ·'recter-, -to 1>fu p 1.-(rucE . Noictssls Dir#odlls \4~ l E-01 MT iNG A SPIE-6...1 ~92%6 70 86 Mugo fine pINs mugo 36" Iris -Mlisourlensts Alplie CHInt Rlbes Alprnium 5goll -Slbtrlco Rocky Mountain BItch Betula occldenlalls 5go!1 Heme,ocalll: Daylilly Snowberr'y Symphoilcarpo: 59011 Chockcherry Pruflus V[rginfo 59'11 GRASSES/FERNS Accoe DAÂ«E WITU C{T7 FofatestÂ« WIllow Sc!ex brachyccipa 5gal] Ribbon gross Pholorharuncinalnocea Dogwcod Coinu; ccrdinot.inscnt] 5gall Fem Dry'pleils fllix-mi' CPL-prÂ»"T f..16- 0&43 cor-4â‚¬Te-oct-LONÂ·Â© Gicpeholly Mohonta iepens 2gon 81ue eyed Grass Slsy,inchium ongustlatium PERENNIAL FLOWERS WETLAND BOG PLANTS Companulo 19.IllypIC.1 Carex ebene/ (Sledge short) Fllependul/ Veronica omelcana Vineo mInoi CoreXTOSIcto - (Sledge tell) gorium Frogaila ve'ca KIninnIck Dicenta Aqugegl Colomblne Na,clssis Dollodlls Iris -Mlisou,lensts -Sibl,Ica 5TMEEL\G-wr- MAN erÂ·REE T Hemerocams Day[Illy 63 NE 23 8 0 Au ...h\\ ~ E><16-rr~a .re tS e 9 \- 5'DEWALC / N- \ \ j 4. AA'- % *.-.-I.'-W -.-# ------- I - -.-M.*-P-ly-*-#*.-I- -/ -*- -1-*.M- -'*--4*.-1---IM r.l#.o.c--x_ 'PAer g p.-r-X--6-1 It&ED -1- 14'// 1 7_/ ' -i)'i-731 7.-':I--i- - 7 '7~' Â·/71 02 ~4 L - 1 g ~fÂ© 3 03{1,Â·- Â» ~ f ~ <Â» FE;Â»t ~fA~S 053,1--~ ~(/ 1 fl /nAc .~y ,; 1 '.JI- ~ 1 I.-4 500 Sploc.E V) 11**i- ZziL,- C.-09U/- ' gji:~~~5*~2. ,/* **j: i* ~ %_~\O% LAS\N J,f~j ~~A:-â€ž*.*.-,~., i <:1677*4f= : tm=j Â»14.Â» 1 (Tuav E_lu ' '144 4 -pi ,-;~ pAilo~Â·1186 3/ %-11 - 1.... 1 t,ffp--~ --- - \32- /*--1 1 -1 -1.-lj \ 7u_Â·Â·<:r-n taÂ·:,aÂ®*%A\942'JONIP=ra. 9 11?14 < { t/ 1 /*40/,T- 1 /./ / 6 feR 3 '.1./ . Â· r. 1 .. FOUNT. 4 (.i B PLE>< l.'-5-.afga Oe '' 47 - -bki . \ , -. 'CO i 1 *07 4.1Â·A i -Vt, n., Rl :2 44,- ' re t.,1 A if A LODGE i PAr......6- 1512;TA~At~~l...~~--~~ 21 -02 4 PANAe,00. 4--f ' if ' /Lwxl;4 1.2<(\~.Y>,1.03 'FL-,65 For-AE 0 0 1/9 f. \ \ 1 0141101 N --Â·-- rn ~ f>TA ExÂ·tj>, f th-__2~ ~ ~'0'' ~ \1- Ilâ‚¬~~ 1 ~ 7 Â«IlyilkÂ·~ ENTELY . "- \ / -- 7ft ./ - *.4* '- -3\ Â£2 1 /.4 Â·a . L=U 17227Â«\ ~~ '. , Ft-Â»!~ap.Â·s'.43 W f . C pkh,Are{35--Â® 0 . 2%77%27>\ | perÂ·10. . ..F~Â·rt O .' 'i '.1 % 1 PA:.2\ 'Â©_.-: 9- c ." PAÂ·rl/- l .fÂ·...r/\ 1 14Â· t506- 12 (Â· f~~~:= ,-1 . -\' PATio , 11 1/ \ \ fl- 211------- \4 i fl, '1 i lepati \ 1 2-32 %*-1------Â·Â·-Â·Â·- V ..7 , Al. f Â·1:3:Â«62 DUPLEX k / 1 4 PLEX \ 4 FLEX C. BINES 44 1/4 -- ~Uced--4 5 . _39-3,43 4 ~ oATE 4.// 4 5 i -111: 1.11 / 2 k.-ill</ I. 1 ..4111~!.1,1 g*.1 ,-1 ,/ MN*Vly U tZ Â¥2â€¢ ak ING- miÂ·,111!:1* 40,7 0,0 7 X .1,4.g,t,42-n , i \ \897 ir. 1 yi / \25,57#AWLV FAA Ar-46 PAA< 1 --16- COMPS-rep-1 Irs/, M \ 7%Â¥1v9â‚¬m?* / 1 / . 1 I. * /-/ / BINBILLA , / 66.OUND COVEP, <31 2"Obeeverist*tee> ~ re?(TORED co-LCE.2-re ~~ pED,P,OUS st,Sub LANDSCAPE PLAN: CHRISTIANA LODGE & APARTMENTS A S PE N. PEREARIALS 176 6 g NoloMASe Ch= UD 0 8Â£/sT ASPEN S- ecTÂ©{BER: 100\. 6/1/T.le- â‚¬Nou}MA65 CO â€¢ 9614 LL) Wow .,6Fght Â¢'3 Vihas ~ A EL ICATO -11%2435. 927322* . I I I 51 to< 15 341= 1: o ~ 8*15(ING, spRUCE ]~ BeÂ® Eve=~6/694 . W. F IPER STRGE-i- -1,22216 *U-â‚¬1005 'Hilht SIDEVALK MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 213 W. Bleeker, Remediation Plan DATE: December 12,2001 SUMMARY: An agreement between the City of Aspen and Ron Schelling, settling the violations of Building Department and Land Use Regulations, has been signed. Along with the financial penalty that is being assessed, Mr. Schelling is required to submit a remediation plan to the Historic Preservation Commission for approval before construction can re-commence. In meetings with Mr. Schelling and his representatives, staff has determined that there is only one area of the existing construction that must be modified or "remediated" in order to meet the Uniform Building Code. The "miner's cottage," when it was considered historic, was allowed to be set onto the new foundation very close to the west property line, as originally constructed. However, when the house wasput on the new foundation, an error in the placement of the building resulted in the eave actually hanging over the adjacent property. All parts of the building must be entirely on Mr. Schelling's property and a gutter must be added to prevent drainage onto the neighboring site. Attached is an architectural drawing illustrating how this will be accomplished. A fascia board on the front of the house will give the appearance of a normal eaveline, but in fact there will be no overhanging eave. A built in gutter will run the length of the west portion ofthe "miner's cottage." Staff finds this to be an acceptable treatment and recommends HPC approval. The City is eager to see the project underway again. As part of this approval, the Community Development Department wishes to formalize a construction schedule. A completion date for the entire project and milestones to monitor the progress will be requested at the hearing. In addition, as staff understands that 213 W. Bleeker Street may be listed for sale, it will be made clear that all terms of these agreements are binding, no matter who is the property owner. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the remediation plan for 213 W. Bleeker Street. ALLEN, ~ERTZ & FELDMAN, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW ALAN JAY FELDMAN* 520 EAST COOPER AVENUE Â· SUITE 230 JEFFREY LARKIN WERTZÂ» ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 OF COUNSEL: (970) 925-6105 DOUGLAS R ALLEN *** FAX (970) 925-9398 www. aspen-law. com *also licensed in New York **also licensed in Pennsylvania *** also licensed in Texas November 26, 2001 Mr. Stephen Kanipe Mrs. Amy Guthrie Chief Building Official Historic Preservation Officer 130 South Galena 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Schelling, 213 West Bleeker Remediation Plan Dear Mrs. Guthrie and Mr. Kanipe: This letter is written in response to your letter of November 9, 2001 and our recent meeting regarding the above matter. This letter with its enclosures constitutes the Remediation Plan required by City of Aspen Resolution 48, Series of 2001, adopting the Stipulated Order regarding the above. You have in your file the Settlement Agreement between Maggie Block and my clients, the Schellings. The enclosures to this letter consist of 2 drawings dated November 19,2001 addressing the issues in paragraph 1 of your letter regarding the size and appearance of the overhang which must visually disappear to accomplish the desired result. You'll note from the Section Drawing that the overhang is now entirely within the Schelling property and a gutter has been provided on the west wall of the Schelling property together with three rows of snow brakes. The gutter will drain to dry wells previously approved and installed. The north elevation prepared by Mr. Mathis reflects a street view that is basically the same as the previously approved Palomino Barth Architects drawings. If you compare the drawings prepared by Stan Mathis with the same north elevation on the Palomino Barth plans, the appearance is basically the same although the eave now consists of a custom gutter with trim on the north end of the gutter to simulate the appearance of an eave. Mr. Mathis will be present at the December 12th hearing to address questions should there be any. Ltr.1179 KanipeGuthrieSchellingRemediation 1 Regarding the work plan and construction schedule, once the remediation plan has been approved, work will commence within two weeks, with the initial work consisting of drying in of the existing structure and framing of the rear portion of the house. This activity should be complete within 75 days. Should you need any further information or clarification prior to December 12 please let me know. C-Yery truly yours, V 00Â·iHCL<9(10 ~Nas P. Allen 0.:21,1&-- Enclosures - 2 pages CC: David Hoefer, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Ron & Lori Schelling Stan Mathis Ltr.1179 KanipeGuthrieSchellingRemediation 2 ~/FOFEI*NEUVE- 77. ;- -10Â¢MELLING KE.31Â»105 ' - -m- - 8040 0 - a 3.Le-41 }51,6:0 91, 611--r â€¢r Â»rfu, co: 1 - -OHABCâ‚¬. OFÂ·DEK - 5/24/2001 ~ ' (.95 511&0*1117 E' (<-I~M PUVI'947 1 1/ \9 j Â¢all ,-, Â«Â»a f . ONOW' -BR+Fite I ( 2 M *,r FLNW b -Â·c--%.2 trist \ ~1 45 -3 Fol* . - _ .- mvi N\/ As~HACF Â©14*go i 'f Mn=0110 *Hbr---1 r Pt Ex-r'DRICK"- ./ .gaiM *Â¥-2-3~ ;, 174211 ~ r 1 -*FIEND ellu..TH+UE .' N . .-7-- ri aL+- U ,/C 1 - AALL-* i h :/Â·- Â·Â·- ... f f~~~94â‚¬1~pI-ZOKIH -:17 ~ L-Â·>*+4- 69Â£149GAIN 0,4 94" EDAÂ© 4 0-all ~ 2 3--7~ 1 41 -ML- E -JI~- --- <F**@*Bk . --~ pÂ»09 9 01144 - f l 64 % -, . \1 rjr 1 - 6.32.6,-FANT I - 71 â‚¬111*114 -- fl -lled'A j. St*Fl-r --- ..+1 'i ' W.n 123+ *05 1... 7291 Alt~ 447 11 1 1 L . 4-# 4. AMP, FED ve' fl>(14 'P ---.--4. i - 1 0 Btf MIWâ‚¬ H - 7- ~ . 5*t , 9#WH*r-FNEPIC i 7,1 50643;10;4 1 ,: I ..1/%~E&(A~&-A I 'l't w, Cof' 117-t 4,H'T --1/Â£.FL>fN' P *rt If AFL--c ' PROFFED '--*-~5.1. 11 - 1 J.-21 1 1 9,01/44 _1124{ S 1.4-- I--18 1 1 1 4 1 4 *J,1- f . 1 1 1+IR FIKE,r RESWSTKS dALLD - 199Â¥ goc- a*prEF+~a~ 33-16,1,1 11'--11-01, -5141 MÂ»(16Â· 35 COAL CMEÂ£)4 C#ALLE., 1410EF/ELD CD - A-8 A.-ai. aa..50& ki 0 0 0 \ 4 CE) 1 ) cy 4. Â»/ P J 1 11 . 1 - 1 1Â¢9 I IVY C A 1 4 --11 It I 1 2,%1- 019.bUMer) . 1 1 . a j . 1 FLAI~*T *ttlm 34?.4 â‚¬ 18 0.0 (1Ywo - ejil ~Â· 05Ak[ MODF 7- : miNGLL (TYP.3 -- EE. 12 4 .5 1 V.I.F. ~ 14.5* ~~> IUCLE-orrE) fl 1 : - 7116450 Hoptla ---1 -1 g~I-- Lifilfs, 7----I' 0 - fAILMED 1%4 MC'rfF) d rn FRiDPOSEÂ© N*TH %4-EVAÂ»hi ~ . cM= 1 980 - 1 1/N i ta) 1 -. ALLEN, ~AFERTZ & FELDMAN, LI,p - ATTORNEYS AT LAW ALAN JAY FELDMAN* 520 EAST COOPER AVENUE Â· SUITE 230 JEFFREY. LARKIN WERTZ ** ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 0 (970) 925-6105 OF COUNSEL: FAX (970) 925-9398 DOUGLAS R ALLEN *** www. aspen-law. com *also licensed in New York **also licensed in Pennsylvania also licensed in Texas November 21, 2001 Mr. Stephen Kanipe Mrs. Amy Guthrie Chief Building Official Historic Preservation Officer 130 South Galena 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 213 West Bleeker Dear Mrs. Guthrie and Mr. Kanipe: This letter is a formal request on behalf of my clients, the Schellings, in connection with the above property. Your November 9, 2001 letter refers to cessation of work on an active pennit. It was impossible for my clients to substantially continue with work on the above property due to the Stop Work Order and the lawsuit that was filed by 0 Maggie Block. However, there has been work at the property that was allowable in the nature of backfilling and compacting regarding portions of the site as required by the settlement agreement with Maggie Block and her attorney, Paul Taddune. Thus this letter constitutes a formal extension request for substantial work to be allowed to continue on a date not less than 45 days after the Remediation Plan is approved by the City of Aspen. Thank you in advance for your consideration to this extension request. ~ Very truly yours, 4 j (.le(i (((l v -~Dou;3~~ Allen ~~~- ~ CC: Ron & Lori Schelling David Hoefer, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Stan Ma&is Ltr.1180 KanipeGuthrieSchelling 1 EXHIBIT STIPULATED ORDER [=] The Aspen City Council has concluded by a preponderance of the evidence that Ron Schelling violated Historic Preservation Commission approvals and the building plan at 213 West Bleeker, Aspen. Thus, the Aspen City Council, and Ronald and Lori Schelling agree, that the City Council may impose the following penalties upon Ronald and Lori Schelling: 1. Require Mr. and Mrs. Schelling to submit a remediation plan to the City of Aspen for its review and approval, said plan to result in a residence conforming to the original approved plans pursuant to permit # 1379.2000 issued August 22, 2000 retaining the variances shown thereon pursuant to HPC resolution No. 11, Series of 2000Â· and i rendering attached to this Order. Until approval of remediation plan no construction, demolition, or other alteration of the property at 213 West Bleeker shall occur except completion of the foundation diaphragm and backfill that has been permitted as limited exception to the red-tag because of safety considerations. The remediation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission. 2. There shall be no increase in the FAR, now or in the future, said covenant and agreement to be evidenced by a recorded covenant recorded against the property. 3. The landmark status of the property is revoked and removed from the property . The property shall remain on the inventory but will not be eligible for any further HPC benefits other than the variances originally granted by HPC. 4. Mr. and Mrs. Schelling shall pay a penalty in the amount of $120,000.00. Said penalty shall be payable upon the first of the following to occur: A. (1) $25,000.00 payable contemporaneously with written acceptance by the City of the remediation plan and reinstatement of building permit for construction. REContracts.013StipulatedOrderSchelling06121 STIPULATED ORDER 0 The Aspen City Council has concluded by a preponderance of the evidence that Ron Schelling violated Historic Preservation Commission approvals and the building plan at 213 West Bleeker, Aspen. Thus, the Aspen City Council, and Ronald and Lori Schelling agree, that the City Council may impose the following penalties upon Ronald and Lori Schelling: 1. Require Mr. and Mrs. Schelling to submit a remediation plan to the City ofAspen for its review and approval, said plan to result in a residence conforming to the original approved plans pursuant to permit # 1379.2000 issued August 22,2000 retaining the variances shown thereon pursuant to HPC resolution No. 11, Series of 2000 and i rendering attached to this Order. Until approval of remediation plan no construction, demolition, or other alteration of the property at 213 West Bleeker shall occur except completion of the foundation diaphragm and backfill that has been permitted as limited exception to the red-tag because of safety considerations. The remediation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission. 2. There shall be no increase in the FAR, now or in the future, said covenant and agreement to be evidenced by a recorded covenant recorded against the property. 3. The landmark status of the property is revoked and removed from the property . The property shall remain on the inventory but will not be eligible for any further HPC benefits other than the variances originally granted by HPC. 4. Mr. and Mrs. Schelling shall pay a penalty in the amount of $120,000.00. Said penalty shall be payable upon the first of the following to occur: A. (1) $25,000.00 payable contemporaneously with written acceptance by the City of the remediation plan and reinstatement of building permit for construction. REContracts.013StipulatedOrderSchelling06121 (2) $25,000.00 payable one year from the date of signing of this Stipulated Order; (3) $25,000.00 payable two years from the date of signing this Stipulated Order, (4) $45,000,00 payable three years from the date of signing this Stipulated Order, or B. Contemporaneously with the closing of a sale of the property by the Schelling. However, in the event that the Schellings are actually in receipt of money from either Palornino-Barth Architects or Jack Palomino, Architect, in connection with his activities relating to the property, to the extent the above sum is unpaid by the Schellings, all money from Palomino to the extent necessary to pay the balance, if any, of the penalty shall be paid to the City of Aspen by the Schellings to reduce the above amounts. Payment of the remaining $95,000.00 shall be evidenced by a promissory note secured by a second deed of trust encumbering the property which is the subject of this order. 3. Mr. and Mrs. Schelling shall write a letter of apology to the community concerning the damage to the historic resource, which shall be reviewed as to form by the City Attorney and which shall be submitted to the Aspen Times and the Aspen Daily News no later than then (10) days after signing of this Stipulated Order. AGREED BY THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL at its regular meeting on the 29th day of May, 2001. REContracts.013StipulatedOrderSchelling06121 0 Agreed: CITY OF ASPEN ATTEST ~By:<0-RM-<~14~.ER &~ By: /LM,Ut/Â£4â‚¬2 &IX Terry Paulso~~yor Pro Tem Kathryn Koc]Udity Clerk By: \-:. 1 k Daidi Hoefer, AsimmiTENty Attorney AGR~D:l , / ! Ronal(Nchelling 13,2 30A O 2 glÂ» Lori Scheltint' g 0 ro d as to,Foyin: 1 1 / Dougl~ Allen, Attorney for Schellings REContracts.013StipulatedOrderSchelling06121 11 aÂ»-2 1 DISTRICT COURT, COUNT OF PITKIN STATE OF COLORADO 506 E. Main Street, Suite E Aspen, Colorado 81611 MARGARET W. BLOCK, TRUSTEE OF THE MARGARET W. BLOCK QUALIFIED PERSONAL RESIDENCE TRUST #2, MAGGIE MCGOVERN AND DANIEL MCGOVERN V. A COURT USE ONLY A RONALD L. SCHELLING AND LORI L. SCHELLING, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND THOMAS MCCABE, 7..\ JIM MARKALUNAS, RACHEL RICHARDS, TONY HERSHEY, AND TERRY PAULSON AS MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN Paul J. Taddune, Esq. Paul J. Taddune, P.C. CASE NO. 01-CV-131 323 West Main Street, Suite 301 Division Two -Aspen, Colorado 81611 Telephone: (970) 925-9190 -Telefax: (970) 925-9199 E-Mail: taddune@compuserve.com Ate. Reg. No. 10824 Daniel M. Fowler, Esq. Fowler, Schimberg & Flanagan, P.C. 1640 Grant Street, Suite 300 Denver, CO 80203 Telephone: (303) 298-8603 Telefax: (303) 298-8748 Atty. Reg. No. 6357 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION is entered into as of the 21st day of September, 2001, between the Plaintiffs, Margaret W. Block, Trustee of the Margaret W. Block Qualified Personal Residence Trust #2 Aspen Residence, Maggie McGovem and Daniel MeGovern Clereinafter collectively " "Plaintiffs"), and Defendants Ronald L. Schelling and Lori L. Schelling (hereinafter collectively the "Schellings"). 2 i 1 1 16/FO i RECITALS A. Plaintiffs own real property and the residence thereon in the City of Aspen commonly known as 215 West Bleeker Street, Aspen, Colorado, more specifically described as Lot F, Block 51, City and Township ofAspen, County ofPitkin, State of Colorado. B. The Schellings are husband and wife and own real property in the City ofAspen commonly known as 213 West Bleeker Street, Aspen, Colorado, more specifically described as Lot G, Block 51, City and Township of Aspen, Colorado, located to the east of and sharing a common boundary with Plaintiffs' property. C. In or about August 2000, the Schellings commenced construction to restore a locally designated historic landmark miner's cottage located on their property. During the course of construction, the Schellings demolished the historic landmark structure, excavated two large basements upon their property which caused subsidence on Plaintiffs' property and reconstructed a pitched roof which overhangs onto Plaintiffs' property. D. In or about October 2000, a stop work order was issued to the Schellings by the City of Aspen Building Department on the basis that the historic structure previously located on the Schellings' property had been totally demolished, contrary to City approvals for the restoratibn of the historic structure and landmark designation. E. This civil action has been filed by the plaintiffs in which their claims against the Schellings are for trespass, nuisance, negligence, unlawful forcible entry and detiner, injunction and declaratory relief, arising out the demolition of the historically designated structure on the Schellings property and the reconstruction of a residence thereon, all as more specifically alleged in the Complaint, which is incorporated herein by this reference. The Complaint further alleges that the City Defendants unlawfully re-instituted governmental approvals and entered into an unlawful settlement agreement. F. Plaintiffs and Schellings desire and intend to settle all claims arising out ofthe aforesaid litigation, whereby the Schellings have agreed to remediate and repair all damage in accordance with recommendations from Patillo Associates Engineers, Inc. dated August 1,2001, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A" and to pay to Plaintiffs the costs incurred by them, as set forth in this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation. G. If the City-of Aspen is willing to grant approvals to the Schellings, the Plaintiffs a shall support said approvals, subject to the terms ofthis Settlement Agreement and Stipulation. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth below, the parties agree and stipulate as follows: 1 Â¢ '1 L~/1-M Â¢3)1 1. In consideration for the Plaintiffs' support of the approval of the remediation plan. to be submitted to-the City ofAspen Historic Preservation Commission and the settlement ofthe litigation, the Schellings hereby agree to perform, comply with and complete at their sole cost and expense the following remediation to assure that the construction occurring on their property Gill not encroach upon or cause damage to the Plaintiffs' property: (a) There shall be no encroachments into, on the surface of or above the surface of Plaintiffs' property by the Schellings. Although it is the intent ofthis Settlement Agreement and Stipulation that there be no encroachments, Plaintiffs agree that no legal action will be taken against Schellings or their successors or assigns by Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs' successors or assigns to remove any concrete foundation material below the surface of the ground that may have seeped underground onto 215 West Bleeker. This estoppel, however, shall not preclude Plaintiff or Plaintiffs' successors or assigns hereto from removing said concrete to the extent that it might encroach onto Plaintiffs' property in any respect, such that Plaintiffmay represent to future property owners that any such underground encroachment may be removed by such subsequent owners. The overhang encroachment shall be removed as promptly as practicable and the Schellings shall request the gas company to remove, at the Schelling's expense, the gas service pipe jutting onto Plaintiffs' property. All such encroachments shall be removed no later than thirty (30) days after the City of Aspen issues a permit allowing the reconstruction to proceed. Any and all claims for the right to continued encroachments by adverse possession or otherwise shall be deemed to be waived and abandoned by the Schellings and the Schellings shall be estopped from asserting any such presently existing or future claims. (b) The Schellings shall place and maintain ice breaks and gutters and down spouts feeding to the engineered dry wells on the Schellings' property to avoid snow, ice and water cascading onto the Plaintiffs' property; (c) The Sdhellings shall resod, at their sole cost and expense, the front yard east of the Plaintiffs' sidewalk and north of the Plaintiffs' residence after the water tap is made, but in no event later than June 1, 2002; (d) A new fence, approved by either Margaret W. Block or Margaret Saunders McGovern, the daughter of Margaret W. Block, who currently resides in Pacific Grove, California, shall be constructed along the boundary line between the Schelling's property and the Plaintiffs' property; (e) The Schellings shall, as soon as practicable but not later than sixty (60) days after approval of the remediation plan by the City ofAspen, remediate the subsidence that has occurred on Plaintiffs' property in strict conformance with the report of Pattilo Associates Engineers, Inc, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A". In addition, the walkway on Plaintiffs' property shall be regraded by the Schellings so as to slope toward the Schellings' property, and the wooden boardwalk leading to the side entry shall be returned to its normal height and proximity to the wall of Plantiffs' residence. The Schellings 3 El--4 shall provide written notice to Margaret W. Block and Margaret Saunders MeGovern of all phases of construction, particularly the work to be performed pursuant to Exhibit "A", so that the Plaintiffs can monitor the work to assure that it is being satisfactorily performed. (f) Plaintiffs shall cooperate with the Schellings in order to allow the construction to be completed along the west facing side of the Schellings structure in a manner that shall cause no interference with Plaintiffs' residence or property. The completion of such construction requiring temporary use of Plaintiffs' property shall take no longer than twenty (20) days to complete and shall be in strict accordance with a planto be submitted to Plaintiffs and approved in writing by either Margaret W. Block or Margaret Saunders McGovem, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. (g) All such work and obligations to be performed by Schellings shall be of good quality and workmanship and shall not cause further subsidence or damage to Plaintiffs' residence. 2. The Schellings, as a condition to the recommencement of construction shall pay the Plaintiffs the sum of Twenty Thousand ($20,000) Dollars as a contribution toward engineering, surveying and legal expenses incurred by Plaintiffs. Such amount shall be paid no later than ten (10) days following execution ofthis agreement by Plaintiffs and Schellings. In addition, the Schellings shall pay all invoices for monitoring as required in the remediation plan. 3. In consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, Plaintiffs agree that the above referenced lawsuit shall be settled in accordance with the terms of this stipulation and the terms hereof shall be incorporated and enforced as an order of the Court. 4. Each party hereby acknowledges and agrees that this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation is made in order to amicably resolve the disputes hereinabove referenced. 5. Each party hereby acknowledges that he, she, or it has carefully read this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation, understands the contents of this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation, and has executed the same as their own free and voluntary act after having this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation explained to such party by such party's counsel. 6. This Settlement Agreement and Stipulation may be executed in counterparts and, as executed, shall constitute one agreement binding upon all of the parties hereto, notwithstanding that all said parties may not be signatory to the original or same counterpart. The parties agree that telefax, signed copies ofthis Settlement Agreement and Stipulation shall be deemed effective, and that each party will forward originals to the other party, when requested. 4 7. This Settlement Agreement and Stipulation shall be deemed to be an agreement . made under the laws ofthe State of Colorado and for all purposes it shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of such state. 8. The parties agree that the aforementioned civil action and all claims including each and every claim for relief contained therein shall be settled and dismissed with prejudice upon full performance of the obligations of Schellings pursuant to this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation. 9. This Settlement Agreement and Stipulation is binding upon the heirs, successors and assigns o f all of the parties. 10. The parties represent, warrant, and agree to each other as follows: (a) The facts stated in the recitals hereof are true. (b) Each party hereto has made (or has had the opportunity to make) such investigation of the facts pertaining to this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation, the claims underlying this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation, and all matters pertaining hereto as such party deems necessary, and no party relies upon any promise or representation by any other party, or by any officer, agent, employee, representative or attorney 0 of any other party with respect to any such matter. (c) Each party hereto has read this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation and understands the contents hereof, and has taken such action as required by law for the approval of the person so signing. (d) Each party hereby represents and warrants that she or it has not heretofore assigned or transferred, or purported to have assigned or transferred to any person or entity not a signatory to this Settlement Agreement and Stipulation, any claims or matters herein released. Each party hereby agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and.defend the other parties, to the extent permitted by law, from and against any loss, cost or expense, including, but not limited to, attorneys' fees arising out of or occasioned by, or arising in connection with, any such assignment or transfer, or any purported such assignment or transfer, of any claims or other matters released herein. 11. This Settlement Agreement and Stipulation contains the entire agreement for settlement between the parties hereto and any other prior agreements of whatever kind regarding settlement or compromise of the above-entitled actions are deemed merged into this Settl~lent ~ Agreement and Stipulation. g 2, 2001 4:43?M + PAUL TADDUNE No,0491 P, 7 12. The parties further stipulate and agree that the claims against the Scheillings shall be dismissed without prejudice and an appropriate order may be entered dismissing said claims without prejudice as provided herein without Airther notice to or by any of the parties. 13. In the event of any litigation commenced to enforce the terms of this Agreement, " tile prevailing party shall be entitled to Costs, expert witness fees, and attorneys' fees. Dated this _dt: day of 2*44+1- , 2001. OffÂ» Margaret Block RonabL. Schelling AA 0. (.4 A.JA,b Maggie Mcoovern Lori L. Schelij~ Daniel MeGovem Represented by: Represented by: PAUL J. TADDUNE, PC ALLEN, WERTZ & FELDMAN, LLP t rvr~~ 4;~ ~j~~ yj-j--- By: -- \ 42. -9-~--~- 4,3 Paul J. Ta*lune, Esq. 7" DouglaÂ¢?.Allen, Esq. 323 West Main-Street, Suite 301 520 Jfajâ‚¬ Cooper Avenue, Suite 230 Aspen, CO 81611 As ]O 81611 (970) 925-9190 (970) 925-8800 C:Â»WDUIZGWlock,Fi=J,$Â¢ttlemot,{.Agmt / \I 1- .\1 ill- el 6 12. The parties further stipulate and agree that the claims against the Schelllings shall be dismissed without prejudice and an appropriate order may be entered dismissing said claims without prejudice as provided herein without further notice to or by any of the parties. 13. In the event of any litigation commenced to enforce the terms ofthis Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to costs, expert witness fees, and attorneys' fees. Dated this'215[ day of St rqir,~Â·eji-C ,2001. Margaret Block Ronald L. Schelling /k.1,3 3- 6-4~ Maggie MeGovern Lori L. Schelling Daniel McGovern Represented by: Represented by: PAUL J. TADDUNE, PC ALLEN, WERTZ & FELDMAN, LLP By: By: Paul J. Taddune, Esq. Douglas P. Allen, Esq. 323 West Main Street, Suite 301 520 East Cooper Avenue, Suite 230 Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-9190 (970) 925-8800 C:\WpiPJnLITIG\Block.Final. Scutenlent.Agmi 5.. t. . 1 1 k Lf j i 6 12. The parties further stipulate and agree that the claims aginst the Schelllings shall be dismissed without prejudice and an appropriate order may be entered dismissing said claims without prejudice as provided herein without further notice to or by any of the parties. 13. In the event of any litigation commenced to enforce the terms of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to costs, expert witness fees, and attorneys' fees. Dated thic ur- day of 4,9 9 1-tmta ,2001. Margaret Block Ronald L. Schelling Maggie McGovern Lori L. Schelling 0414 Daniel MeGovern Represented by: Represented by: PAUL J. TADDUNE, PC ALLEN, WERTZ & FELDMAN, LLP By: By: Paul J. Taddune, Esq. Douglas P. Allen, Esq. 323 West Main Street, Suite 301 520 East Cooper Avenue, Suite 230 Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-9190 (970) 925-8800 'lf.~+. il r.%. 1 +X, Of,h-GTh C:\Wp\PJT\LITIG\Block.Fillal.Scincment.Agmt U 6 1 4/ 12. The parties further stipulate and agree that the claims against the Schelllings shall be dismissed without prejudice and an appropriate order may be entered dismissing said claims without prejudice as provided herein without further notice to or by any of the parties. 13. In the event of any litigation commenced to enforce the terms ofthis Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to costs, expert witness fees, and attorneys' fees. Dated this 1 6-7 day of <t Prhro ,2001. Margaret Ikock Ronald L. Schelling Maggie MeGovem Lori L. Schelling Daniel MeGovern Represented by: Represented by: PAUL J. TADDUNE, PC ALLEN, WERTZ & FELDMAN, LLP By: By: Paul J. Taddune, Esq. Douglas P. Allen, Esq. 323 West Main Street, Suite 301 520 East Cooper Avenue, Suite 230 Aspen, CO 81611 * Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-9190 (970) 925-8800 A Af 1 Al I I -ilf/\ 1 2- r d * ff./ - CH. i,i C.tWF.PJT\LITIG\Block.Final.Setuen,ent.Agmt ...Za=.; 6 \ 0, 580,12, 2001 4:44PM PA'IL TADDUNE No,0497 P, 11 ; FF %.#Ll_J 'WUUL' BLUEPRINT TO 96331)39 7.02 PATTILLO ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. STAUCTURAL CONSULT A:NTS 713 grand ave:me, postoffics bo'Â£751 glanwood smings, eatorâ€¢db:1402 phono (970) 945-9695 fbi 070) 945-492 1 0-clilit spattill@paen@ts.Â®in AugustIl, 2001 Mrs- Margaret Block 215 West Bleaker Street Aspen,;CO 81611 Re: REsidence at 215 Blecker Dear Margaret: Our office has recently received additional information regarding the excavation problem at 213 West Bleeker, adjacent to the ea#t side of your house. Copies of the E geotech report to Schelling Developmdnt dated July 20,2001, andDoug Allen's:letter and attachments of July 27, 2001, were Airwarded Eus by Paul Taddude's office, Our comments and recommendations are presented hetein. Thc H.2 Geotech rcport recommends that a three foot depth of crushed rock backfill be removed in the vicinity ofthe adjoining properiies, filter fabric placed over the remaining crushed rock and up tile side of tile excavation (adjacent to the 0 fine-grained soils on your property), and well-graded soil be compacted upro finiah grade elevation. ~ They also recon*nond improved smfaoc drainage between Be twa bâ‚¬ildings. Our comments regarding the proposed backtill mitigation are as follows: 1. This appears to be a reasonable proposal, based an our technical concerns, 2. The excavation and backfiI[ replacement should probably extend farther to the north, albng the previously baclcfilled fbundation because of evidence offill settlement and unlmown material/compaction eforts. 3. Mitigation should include filling and scaling ofthe gap between the Block foundation andÂ·the adjacent soil, amieed by the excavated slope faiture, to prvvent waterinfiltration. Perhaps a : benionite clay sluny would be appropriate. 4. The proposal backfill material should be tested and approved by a geotechnical engineer and reviewed/approved by Mrs. Block prior to construction. 5. The geotechnical engineer should be retained by Schelling Development to observe the excavation and backE operation to assure conformance with the intent of the proposed repairs. - Construction observation reports and compaction testing Insultsh V should be provided forMrs. Block's review and approval. ~~~_*_ fr-mial?-4 i "An *-/ 03 l Sep..12. 2001 4:44PM PAIIL TADDUNE No.0497 P, 12 i â€žb,-1 - J Â· 2.-I..,1 .1~ U ' JU Fi. uumtÂ·twuuD BLUEPRINT TO :0,Â£09199 213 W.:Bleeker o Augtist 1,2001 Page two 24. The drainage improvement recommendations are 911 important part ofthe proposaL Because of the limited space between tite buildings, the high ggade. of the alley, and the flat slopes to the nortli~ effective improvements are difficult to malize. We suggest thai gutters and downspouE be employed fbr the west roof saves of 213 West Bleeker, connecting to shallow subsurflce drain pipes which would lead to a sump or drywellaystem. R would be advantageous to install a concrete catch basin near the boundary between the lots that will accept sudace water.runofT for both pmperties. The catch basin could alao be connected to the subsurface drain systam. A plan for the drainage improvements, preparedby a qualified engineer, should be provided forMrs. Block's review and approval prior to constuotion. The*information included with Mr. Allen's letter of July 27, 2001, describes a chemical grout material that was specifically designed to prevent swelling of expansive clays. This is probably not appropriate tbr excavation' stabilization - purposes, and we doubt it was used by an experienced granting constuction company such as Denver Grouting Services, Inc., in this caser The grouting specuication and installation may be moot issues ifthe proposed backfill mitigation is executed. Nonetheless, with additional information it would be belpfulto understand why the grouting failed in the problem area This coinpletes our review of the most recent submittals. Please contact me if you have any questions or require further information. Sincerely, /*2*st44%b --**6794 ~:*~m 49 1 ' 04. Robe#*34' Pattillo, P.E. ~tot':66,*~%':, Principal Engineer 94*APP COL-0-'44 wOM,â€¢tmm#w. Enclosures: Plan and Section Drawings of Observed Excavation 5/15/01 (2 sheets, 31& SA dated 7/17/01) , Facsimile copy: Paul Tadd[= @ 925-9199 . 0.-ke \\ Fel / - - il-Ly el j MEMORANDUM 0 TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director._AO Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Christina Amato, Historic Preservation Intern ~ . RE: 110 E. Bleeker Street- Conceptual Development, Partial Demolition and Variance - Public Hearing DATE: December 12,2001 SUMMARY: The project involves building an addition to the existing house. The applicant is requesting the 500sq/ft FAR. bonus variance and proposes some restoration work on the historic house. The property is listed on the City's historic inventory, but has not been designated as a landmark. Landmark designation will be required in order to receive the proposed and any future valiances. 0 APPLICANT: Robert and Lexie Potamkin, represented by Alstrom Group. ' PARCEL ID: 2735 - 124 - 37006. ADDRESS: 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lot L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential) SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all of the following standards (Section 26.415.010.C.5) are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side h 0 yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between 1 buildings on the lot, exceedtheallowed floor area by up tofive hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant necessag variances after making afinding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(21 for detached accessory dwelling units, and Staff Finding: The proposal is to make an addition on the west side of the existing house. No alterations are proposed for the historic building other than the restoration of the front porch, which is an enhancement offered as part of an FAR bonus request. In terms of the addition, staff has concerns that it affects the integrity of the existing structure and does not comply with the design guidelines. Staff finds the addition does not follow this essential design guideline criteria: 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. The proposed addition is only 6.6 ft back from the front fa~ade of the historic structure, a minimum of 3.4 ft short. This is also not taking into consideration the proposed porch on the addition, which encroaches almost entirely on this 10 ft minimum, making the two structures virtually parallel. Because the addition (at 1657 sq/ft) is larger than the existing structure (at 1263.3 sq/ft), sits very prominently in the front faGade area of the existing house, and has a larger, competing front porch and entryway, the proposed addition does not "minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and... allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent." While the proposed addition is not taller than the majority of the existing structure, it is too intrusive on the existing structure's integrity where it is proposed. In order to meet design guideline standard 10.8, the addition should be moved back on the site. This would require removal of the large spruce and smaller trees already affected by the proposed design. The Parks Department is willing to permit these tree removals with proper mitigation. In regard to access to the side loaded garage, which would be affected by relocating the addition, City Engineering has stated that the garage doors could be moved to the alley side. Alternatively, as there is no evidence that the garage has any historic significance, it could be demolished and reconstructed in any location of the site; possibly set on the 2 property lines if variances are granted. A connection between the new garage and the 0 new addition should be considered. FAR Bonus Until recently, staff has had no concrete evidence of the appearance of the original porch. But in the process of preparing this memo, we have located an historic photograph and recommend as close a reconstruction to this design as possible. Attached is a copy of a view ofthe historic photograph, likely taken sometime in the 19th century. In order to rebuild the porch to its original condition, an exterior wall, that has been demolished, will have to be rebuilt. It is important that proper consideration is taken in the procedure and choice of materials when constructing this wall and porch. The following guidelines are relevant to this work: 5.5 and 2.7. 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. o Use materials that appear similar to the original. o While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. o If the original Â· material is wood clapboard, for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, the amount of exposed lap and finish. 0 The photo documentation also shows the original decorative front faqade window, which was removed. It is recommended to restore the window to its original condition, per design guideline 3.4 and 3.6. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. o If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should aIso be double-hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. o Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. o Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. o Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. Staff further recommends that the owner consider removal of the paint from the brick surface to reveal the underlying material and original character of the home. There are relatively few 19~h century brick homes left in Aspen and the renovation of this nicely 0 3 detailed Victorian would benefit the neighborhood and the community. The HPC should consider the following guideline (2.10). 2.10 Consider removing later covering materials that have not achieved historic significance. o Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material. In order for this project to be "exemplary," as is necessary to qualify for the additional FAR bonus, consideration of these restoration recommendations is highly encouraged. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, and Staff Finding: The proposal is in line with other efforts to restore and expand historic homes throughout the neighborhood. If the recommendations made above are considered and in some form executed, then the project will be a successful addition to the neighborhood. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels, and Staff Finding: The project as proposed has the potential to affect the significance of the home by destroying its scale and character. i The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Finding: The project could enhance the current state of historic significance ofthe home by restoring the porch, and hopefully the front window and brick, to its original condition. Once the addition is in compliance with the design guidelines, it should not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of the designated historic structure or part thereof. PARTIAL DEMOLITION No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all of the following standards are met: A. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel. 4 Staff Finding: The partial demolition of the existing porch is necessary for restoration and is recommended by staff. The partial demolition of the west wall of the existing house may be necessary to attach the addition, but should be as minimal as possible to allow for a connection of the two structures. B. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: (1) Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions, and (2) Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions that are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Staff Finding: The addition could be connected to the original structure with less impact to the house, by a smaller connector. Impacts to the existing structure's integrity could be lessened by the recommendations for placement of the new addition as noted above. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the four review standards are not met. Staff recommends HPC continue the hearing on conceptual development, partial demolition and FAR. bonus request with the following direction: 1. The addition must comply with the design guidelines by moving further back from the front fa~ade of the existing structure. 2. The connection ofthe addition to the existing structure must be minimized. 3. In order for this project to qualify for the additional FAR bonus, the porch and front window, should be restored to original condition. Removal of paint on the masonry is also recommended. 4. As part of an overall restoration of the historic character of the property, staff recommends the owner work with the City Parks Department to remove and replace the existing trees on the City right of way with more appropriate trees. The current trees disrupt the relationship between the front of the house and the street. This will be done at the City's expense. RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to continue the application to a date certain." Exhibits: 5 A. Staff memo dated December 12,2001 B. Application 0 6 t m Z X Ul E XEr,-7 ~@S J VN 0 eARAe= FA 2 :IN e p. ~fS- NE 5 PA C E S 1 VAN L.EVER Exis- 42 i S Â°AC~ E 101-,1 1 '- i !11,1 i- rp-4-1 jill ; ;:1 HtltÂ·~Â·4 1 ~Il 11 ~ o b '111 0 =r-1=ZI'll.:.0'11~'Illi'll'11 Z=31 -1:,K-~ 11'+Eft~ 33- 84,-I. - 1-ir, 1 400= Ltd 1 Il STD R -4-11 0 MUDRM U.DAUINORFE -4 *-rr.r,~9 ..1+1 --- I. \ . Ir.- i .1 11 IK L- t==~ ita i i CL,0 : 7 iA#I,I~~ -,F'~ I 1 th/ 1 1 r:-1 F 1 - 10--2 Lk[ 1-3~0.1 I 1 j r.: 11 ----- 4 .41! -~=,---~ E- LORE *5 | '' |'1-1 -522&29 I i-,AUL 1 111 ~ EX S- < _ ----1' 32;Roov ~1 ' j| *-G'-EN 1 .4 "~~ /ELAR all l icâ€¢ 1 -6. r J 1 -t Illj r--- ,-]1Â«.Â» ~i'<Lr--M-Â»\ 0 :11'11 11 il'J@'L r i*~Fl r.----- , 1 1 1 5'6? r' ~3 EXERC SE ----4 100Â»1 i -tÂ·Â· gli=24 I -ER 1 r Ge 410 1 DININ0 4 3=:~ r. r 1 ~ E~CÂ»'526 3Dgz:Vf 48% 70 1 -2 '-' 1~r==1 1 1 3De.1 1 1 LÂ» /------ - 19= In NANNV ~ Wvn \ 4.-4 16,<.v~=.*E 1 J 1 , 1 &â€¢â€¢ 60Â· CON Y 4219 1 5 ~EZZE -IZ~: . o I l 13--- ./\ i \4\ Drfc--1 0 42 +KÂ»- 91 1 -? / \C, 7 ~~ RES--cÂ·%53 FtÂ·RE - -2 11 1- . 104 / 94 / \ 4 1 1 1 1 -1-111 1 4 -2 tai. 9" 9-0' ALSTROM GROUP ECOLOGICAL ARCHITECURE POB 551 ASPEN. COLORADO 81612 432 TWINING CM A ~ 1 RATS ROAD 1 1 â€¢=3â€¢7=:C, 5Â°,AN >0/al IN 45952/ D./AN 2,5,/NER -=k--- vn'N WOODY CREEK L. 9 1-\ 970/ 925 1745 TEL ./61 =i'-O N L/V . 1 1 - Oil /6 '- ' - 3 COLORADO bah =.AR -c->Ac- 970/ 925 4576 4X 'NAN =,t R 6 3 6,12 J FÂ° E R >v L. 1,9- 6. 26, POTAMKIN Kie>Â·d FAf -792, 3 =: \R VfÂ»" hi >VL 9, c 7, 3 C Ny Is- =Â»pa. 8 0. 762 SKI ST . 7 --7 1 1 r RESIDENCE (DESS =rÂ«?443 -C (8.câ‚¬D 110 EAST 8LEEKER - ASPEN. COLORADO -:-0-TÂ»v =Â»9 1, 979. 16, 54. :-. 3, 312-. 99 54,=T. 31611 -FC-/\. , =AR. 3,0 7. 50 59 i-7 date: 9 EQUIRES 331 342 30%,LE 12 DEC 2001 drawing no: HPC CONCEPTUAL 1 EXHIBIT 1 a lik ;gINC-CLAD /1 1 LIL--ZN--9/~- 76~4NECTIEL .A / 1\ 141' DIA . 0 // k\ 1 4 57-AINED /.~~ 1 - 7-471 M---4--- PANELIZ-ED I I i -13-Ii I \ ..JNOOD SIDINg Â· 1 . L --a - T-- De, 41,%4-5 ,Â» 3111Â· C' 1 3 PECE 'llilifip=ili & mi...i 7 168 -4 SLAS Ne -5>(,IS-7, +302>4 ]. toi - ell . h A * -04 1 6654@8 02 -TD BSÂ»lt'IN -IN. |aâ‚¬SS " 1, -MOR EeSÂ©UND 52204*Ru NORTE SUEVA- ON (A'.EY S DEJ 1811 . i 1 2 o # 10 911#1,# NE'/N -'RE- 2.-Â·rÂ»,~FCÂ».N-7 / AES- 59.,Ni RE) CEDAR / 54 Mel-E Nor A f -9406-5 liNe*6 s / e.=LACE>/5Â·31- il' 1. ' 11\ 104 21 + '1 ' / - 61/ FRANE ..2Â·ED ~ F'INS - ~ 1 iv' 3000[3 SIDINe - Aol / 4-11 01Â» 1 ,*' 2857095 0-1 /\ NÂ»oop' SHNeLES 8! NE j (EYONÂ© CRIalÂ»41, ROOFLINE<Â© 20 - 1 . : .1 ' Â·415-0'220 6 oir-Â»f 5 1<X ./ 1 a' AX . Â°QE-='NiST-,D <-' Mize:SICE*CE 7'25-='N,9â‚¬29 ~~' 024(3 BOO- 1-MS SIDIN@ / '1111,1 \1 4 ,/3 1 </0'i ~G '1[~1-1~1 '[,__-1 / \ 1 \D K - / '11 3 11 ird .9- 1 NUILE K 1.! 1 ' -1.1.1113|Ellji~ ~ 1~ ~11'.UL i ALSTROM GROUP 11 -+ 1 *9 --[E= ~ ~]11111~j"Ir' 2.---/ 0-1'* 4 , L - 1 > ECOLOGICAL ~\ L. m 6 -,4-- i 1 [''t-&0~ cve:,~...ks t/1-1 â€ž- 1 1 -7-- ARCHITECTURE 1 el 1 1 ' 31 1 '12 POB 551 ! 11, 1 141 - ASPEN: COLORADO ~ mEl~ 1 432 TWINING 1 -- : 81612 1. lilli 1 111 i : \ .-- " 1,1 1-4-l It :Al . 1 1 + 1 1 1 If=*11 lili 11 -40 -1-C BRICK. PUTS ROAD 1 I 1 1,1 1 IiÂ· 111!1 U k ,1. 1 Mki 1 f~3 t=~ 11Â· ---*-=-- 1 ------ ' ~ WOODY CREEK, 1 - 1 42:- O, I i, 3 -G . i -1 1 1 TES-TORS COLORADO '7'-81 1 1 111 m 091Â«NAL, 4 970/ ~25 1745 TEL 970/ 925 4576 FAX rl.1-0 POTAMKIN 2-1 - 011 k -2--4-.-_1.-- ~- - 4 f .il < 71 + 1 ; RESIDENCE - =4070 RES-0 Q- 110 EAST BLEEKER ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 . 2 /0 Noch 3AY date: 12 DEC 2001 4 teful 600-Â» 5/=NA- Ch (3YED<293 / Â«,ES- E>ENÂ»J-'ON drawing no: HPC CONCEPTUAL 2 1/811.1-01 Â·,1 1 9,2'T ,- Â· i -21K* . 71 ., ...13*,4, 4 tishbaÂ» f , ' .:.,-,1.-, /16/itsÂ£4 -is'. . '9429.AN ..",F,1 V. . .il '. 42.3. / --14923,3.fei.f>{0Â£ I , V 1 12740&9 -r I .. V,-,V .-Lf#th=7 1- r , JUJU-'0 4- ' r - Â· c ,~ .. JvvwL' .0 i , '2*%*a 7, -0, ' . 64' E 129.6-- . 4. I 0 5412/Fa@OL - ':Ae. .Nt-*42Â¢71 .. . 1. r .. 1%-- '. 4, 4 1* TWALF '7 4%#t#14 '' 4 , ?*a. ZANV- b -= =r... a . 1-â€¢ . 4 '1 a , ,1 . /5/ ill .2 1.8:\ U ...==r --- r.-- I -- r. ' 1 11 -.. .:..,21 I - 416 ' 1 - - :it.,Antln 11mT,r ilitilli A 1 ..... 111 2: Ei-Ill[El[-T Illmilt r.=.-1 -: ill'MMIWII*14 lilli# 111!11.11 IT 311 /1 lili .... . ...0 , ... .,71 .4:, tu %02. 64 7, ~-1- 75 - 1 *7-y 9 z <, ;2-~ I - . . T.\ f . S 0/ r. ~1-- * 6 ,,~ r . , . 1 -- 1 ,-1 P/Wr-p Â·-2 -SUUGJ&:4,. A comfortable Aspen home of modest wage earners. ~ David S. Digerness Collection -4. Â· #99'frp,"-"--3 ="4-F-:052Â£*-0.=reD. -~ 1 I Â·,MI'fir' M * *.-*--- ' . 1-Wr.dilt - . 1 .-lt- r.g -=044-3, et . 1,=C = =4 .-li 21, 1 4 Ele , 0 1 .0*=.-4. #=.~*".-""14 v <*w u* ~~--=---ims-ZE-----~*- MAR-Ffami.,~1.- >dI 'i i 7. 2 - t--i .: tkaÂ»â‚¬~ . - Al- 1 -, 1 - - 1.6 1 /7.4 r. 1 - <t--/*70 J. R. Williams residence AHS - i ..-Â· 6.& Ill /..-V 1.06 14 Wi Mrs. Billie Brown and J. R. Williams Al 154 ....... 1 - ...7.. -21/2..._1 , - Tr-[ r 1~ n . 1:\/ -[ - 1/ , , ' t 4 1 ,/1.29 - 1. ...P-' kLI\10 I 4.4 : - .36 412 . F \ 1,3,32 +-9. I /4.9 , C â€¢ 1< 14 , - 9 - .1 5 . . NOV-20-2001 TUE 09:25 AM FAX NO. P. 03 I C ALLitul hAA i 4--1~ AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (Eh ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: /1 0 BAST- 15LS)Â£,M:2*2-, up=,CS SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: /2- Clâ‚¬<L , 2001 STATE OF COLORADO ) Colinty of Pitkin ) 4 431/EAJ ERK ALS-719 0/K (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 St:ciion 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: _ _ Publication of'nomÂ·e: By the publication in the legal notice 8:ction c fan oficial paper or a paper ofgeneral circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen ( 15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy qfrhe publication is cutached hereto. _ _ Posting ofnottee: By posting ofnotice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waerproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (223 inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed o f letters flot lesE than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least tea (10) days rior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the/572ay of 462<OnÂ£024,200 l , to and including the date and time ofche public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) ts artuched hereto. Waiting ofnonce. By the mailing of & notice obtained from tha Community Development Department. which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. Atleast ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. and, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand detivered or mailed by firs: class postage prepaid U.S. rnail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal goverament, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental afency thar owns propercy within three hundred (300) fecr of the property subjecl m the development application. The names and addresses of propert> owners shall be those on the Current tax records of Pitkin County es they appeared no more than sixny (60) days prior to rhe date of the public hearing. A copy o frhe owners apld governmental agencies so noticed is Oftclched hereto. (continued on next page) 0 1% NOV-20-2001 TUE 09:26 AM FAX NO. r. uq 0 - Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental zo or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever che rext 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, o f 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 propose:d change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been avai.lable for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for tifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing Ce such amendments. .Â»1844 /(~62 Â· Signature d-L The feggoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acyiowledged before me thiall day of \_.*Ce ARy.16 , 2001, by --Ate.,4 64. Aks)rn/,1-,9 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ~My-21!trnissiertlxpices: expire@ 7118#05 My Commbsion Notary Puflic I ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBUCATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THEOWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 0 NOV-20-2001 TUE 09:25 AM FAX NO, P. 02 0 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 110 E. BLEEKER STREET CONCEPTUAL HPC DESIGN RJEVIEW, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, VARIANCES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing uill be held on Wed.iesday, December 12, 2001 at a mccling to begin at 5:00 pm before the Aspen Histolic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St.,Aspen, to consider an app]ication submitted by Robert Potmnkin requesting conceptual design: partial demolition, and variance approvals. Thc variancc requested area 5% site coverage variance and a 500 square foot 14\R bonus. The proper6 is located al.] 10 E. Blceker Street, and is legally described as Lots L & M, [Mock 65, City and Townsite ofAspen. For further infonnation, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin County Commiwity Development Department. 130 S. Gatona St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5096 amyg@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Suzannah Reid. Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on November 24.2001 City o f Aspen Account 0 e L . P , 120 EAST MAIN PARTNERS LLC ASPEN COMMUNITY UNITED HENRY FREDERICK B 120 E MAIN ST M DIST CHURCH 100 W HALLAM ST ASPEN, CO 81611 f PEN ST ASPEN, CO A01 , CO e ASPEN CLINIC BUILDING ASPEN HOTEL ASSOCIATES LLC ASPEN HOTEL ASSOCIATES LLC A COLORADO GENERAL 250 MARTIN ST STE 100 CO VETRA BNK-COMM LENDER PARTNERSHIP BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009-3383 534 E HYMAN 100 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 # 2 BROCKWAY LEXIE BROWN ANTHONY CITY OF ASPEN 7714 FISHER ISLAND DR CIO VE'IRA BANK-COMM LENDER 130 S GALENA ST FISHER ISLAND, FL 33109-0966 534 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CRAWFORD RANDALL & ABIGAIL EPSTEIN RUTH E W/ SHAFIR F 124 N GARMISCH ST 38 BIGELOW AVE G ASPEN, CO 81611 Â·- MILL VALLEY, CA 94941 CITY OFÂ·ASPEN ASPEN, CO 130 S GALENA ST FRINK ALBERT A TRUST GARCIA SCOTT D GORMAN JAMES & PATRICIA 9 OCEANCREST 120 N GARMISCH 1426 ROSE GLEN RD NEWPORT COAST, CA 92657-1802 ASPEN, CO 816 i 1 GLADWYNE, PA 19035 E ADELINE M REVOCABLE GSW FAMILY INVESTMENT LTD HOGUET CONSTANCE M Li v uiG TRUST PARTNERSHIP 333 E 68TH ST GROSEE EDWIN J & ADELINE M RD #1 BOX 110 NEW YORK, NY 10021 TRUSTESS WHEELING, WV 26003 100 E BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 HOTEL ASPEN LTD HOTEL ASPEN LTD JOHNSON RICHARD & MONTAE IMBT C/O ASPEN GROUP C/O VETRA BANK-COMM LENDER 6820 BRADBURY 600 E HOPKINS 534 E HYMAN AVE DALLAS, TX 75230 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 JOHNSON-HAUGLAND HELENE L KRUMM DONALD PAUL LANDIS CAROLYN 105 E BLEEKER #B PO BOX 874 128 N GARMISCH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 LISS ARTHUR LUBIN RICHARD G MORGAN JOAN la INT 250 MARTIN ST STE 100 1217 S FLAGLER DR 2ND FL FLAGLER C/O LARRY SNYDER INC BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009-3383 PLAZA 500 OLD YORK RD WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 JENKINTOWN, PA 19046-2852 [ & SOUTH ASPEN LLC PARDUBA JIRI PENN PAUL E & SUSAN W - ASPEN ST PO BOX 9903 3830 E 79TH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46260-3457 PRICE DOUGLAS QWEST CORP FKA US WEST TL393 SADLER PRISCILLA ANNE TRUSTEE 86 11 MELWOOD RD ATIN: S JACKSON - FOR BETHESDA, MD 20817 6300 S SYRACUSE WY STE 700 N SADLER PRISCILLA A REVOC TRUST < ENGLELVOOD. CO 80111 PO BOX 2989 ASPEN, CO 81612 SEGUIN WILLIAM L SHOAF JEFFREY S * SILVERSTEIN PHILIP PO BOX 4274 PO BOX 3123 SILVERSTEIN ROSALYN ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 25 KNOLLS CRESCENT BRONX, NY 10463 SUTTON JENNY W SUTTON KERM[T S & JENNY W ZATS JULIE 4101 CUTLASS LN 801 12TH AVE S STE 400 118 N GARMISCH NAPLES, FL 34102 , NAPLES, EL 33940 ASPEN, CO 81611 0 0 31 ,3 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 334 W. Hallam Street- Conceptual Development, Partial Demolition and Variances - Public Hearing DATE: December 12,2001 SUMMARY: This property is a designated landmark and is on the National Register of Historic Places. The proposed project involves demolishing an addition on the existing house and rebuilding a somewhat larger addition with an attached garage. The applicant proposes to relocate the house on the site to avoid removing an old, large cottonwood tree. The applicant also requests two FAR bonus variances; one for an exemplary historic preservation project and one as a waiver to the FAR restrictions on the calculation of the garage. APPLICANT: Hayden Connor, owner; represented by Patrick Cashen Architect. PARCEL ID: 2735 - 124 - 23005. ADDRESS: 334 W. Hallam Street, Lot K, L and M, Block 42, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential) SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.C.5) are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up tofive hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC 1 may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the 0 neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwe!!ing units, and Staff Finding: The proposal is to demolish and replace an existing addition to the house and to build a garage. There are two threshold issues with the project. If the house remains in the current location, there is a large, old cottonwood tree in the way of the proposed addition. The applicant requests permission to either cut down the tree or move the house to accommodate for the tree and the addition. The Parks Department is not willing to let the cottonwood in question be removed. They will allow a basement to be excavated under the existing footprint of the house, but no further expansion in the area that would affect the cottonwood. As there are other alternatives to the placement of a new addition, staff finds that moving the structure is not the best or most appropriate alternative for the preservation of the historic resource. The guidelines state that "A part of a historic building's integrity is derived from its placement on its site and therefore, its original position is important." Therefore, the proposed plans for the addition are not viable per the Parks Department and design guideline 9.1. 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. o It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative. 0 With regard to rebuilding the existing addition on the north side of the house, staff has determined that only a portion of that addition is modern construction. As shown on the attached 1904 Sanborne map of the property, a 15'x20' portion of the construction at the back of the house is historic and should be further researched and properly preserved. The owner has stated to staff that this area is not intended to be demolished, but that is not clear on the drawings and more of this piece is destroyed by the new garage. Staff recommends that the proposed addition be restudied in light of the restrictions created by the tree and the fact that more of the existing construction must be preserved. In regard to the proposed new garage, a separate structure is preferable to one that is attached to the house. 8.3 Avoid attaching a garage or carport to the primary structure. o Traditionally, a garage was sited as a separate structure at the rear of the lot; this pattern should be maintained. Any proposal to attach an accessory structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. 0 2 HPC FAR Bonus The applicant is requesting a 500 square foot bonus, which is reserved for exemplary projects. This may be an appropriate site for the extra square footage, given the size of the lot and the large, detached "carriage house" structure on the alley, which serves to take some of the bulk away from the historic building, however the project as proposed does not currently meet the design guidelines. If it can be amended accordingly, and there is a successful effort to preserve the character of the property, the bonus could be awarded. Staff acknowledges that the house is in need of repair and the owner is making a substantial financial commitment to this important historic structure. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel propfsedfor development, and Staff Finding: The surrounding neighborhood contains a mix of old and new homes, and a wide variety of architectural styles. 19th century structures throughout the West End have been restored and expanded and an acceptable solution can be found for this project so that this standard will be met. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels, and Staff Finding: The project as proposed would detract from the historic significance of this home if the building were relocated. This house, the Eugene Wilder House, was built c. 1885. From the National Register nomination, "The Wilder house was undoubtedly constructed from local lumber and may have been built by the Aspen Lumber Company. Wilder was associated with the Aspen Lumber Company, along with R. F. Roberts from the mid-1880s to the early 1890s. This business was one of the pioneer Aspen lumber companies established ca. 1880-1882." i The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Finding: The integrity of the building and the historic landscape could be negatively affected by the project as proposed. PARTIAL DEMOLITION No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all of the following standards are met: 3 1. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parceL Staff Finding: Staff agrees the partial demolition of the existing 1960's remodel is necessary for the proposed remodel, but the demolition of the historic portion of the addition as mentioned above, is not appropriate. 2. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions, and b. Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions that are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Staff Finding: The applicant has not mitigated the negative impact on the existing historical structure in the proposal as discussed above. VARIANCE FROM THE CALCULATION OF FAR RELATED TO GARAGES Garages are exempt from FAR if they are accessed from an alley when one is available. Because this applicant is choosing to use an existing, not formally permitted driveway off of Third Street, the garage will count in FAR. A variance from this policy, based on hardship, is requested. In order to authorize a variance from the dimensional requirements of Title 26, the HPC must make a finding that the following three (3) circumstances exist: 1. The grant of variance will be generally consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan and this Title; Staff Finding: The AACP does not specifically address this issue. The Land Use Code clearly intends to remove garages from the streetscape and to minimize pedestrian/ automobile conflicts created by backing out into a street. 2. The grant of variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the parcel, building or structure; and Staff Finding: A garage is not necessary for reasonable use of a parcel. 3. Literal interpretation and enforcement of the terms and provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other parcels in the same 4 zone district, and would cause the applicant unnecessary hardship or practical dijficulty. In determining whether an applicant's rights would be deprived, the board shall consider whether either ofthefollowing conditions apply: a. There are special conditions and circumstances which are unique to the parcel, building or structure, which are not applicable to other parcels, structures or buildings in the same zone district and which do not result from the actions of the applicant; or Staff Finding: There is room available on the site to place a garage along the alley. b. Granting the variance will not confer upon the applicant any special privilege denied by the Aspen Area Community Plan and the terms of this Title to other parcels, buildings, or structures, in the same zone district; and Staff Finding: The applicant has other options to create a garage that complies with the requirements. Although there are other garages that are accessed from streets in the West End, most are historic and they are not exempted from FAR. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the review standards are not met and recommends HPC continue the hearing on conceptual development, partial demolition and FAR bonus requests with the following direction: 1. The remodeling of the 1960's addition needs to take the historical portion of the existing building into consideration. 2. A feasible proposal for the placement of the new addition must be submitted and must comply with the design guidelines. 3. The FAR bonus for the garage will not be granted because the criteria are not met. 4. In order to receive the additional HPC 500square foot FAR bonus, the concerns stated above must be addressed in a manner that successfully preserves this building. RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to continue the application to a date certain." Exhibits: A. Staff memo dated December 12, 2001 B. Sanborne map C. Application 5 :0- 4 D 1 6 039 ij 11 4 11 F.4. 0 dZ ST. N.3.9 80% u 400 - 300 310 3/8 75' ~ - '\ 2 /20' -21 751[ 11 11 K ~ - ~ 3 44 11 /2 / 'C N 41 11 9 411 --7- a Â£ 8 11 9 10 11 11 - 11 11 11 11 & i.7 --- VF-1 At C 11 9 3|1 j(77 ~R1:94 4 ~ 1 /1 0 11 0 & (01 #4 LWN 11 4 % : 1,1 27, I R li LCE,1 ~ 1 1:-00 Rt N k A 11 0 -42 11 A/ 1 / " Â£ --1-7 11 ./0,0/ b 10 C a --t ~ 3 - 11.2 L-WJ 0 Â¥. 1, '. 1 9 4 404.... 34 F pi-=L_Â· 11 / 1 1% 17 .IH 4 [73 6 11 11 11 / U R 11 11 RH" 0 - 11 - ..... & 11 11 - 0 / 1% % 8 A . If - S 11 11 11 40/ 30/ 1 11 0 11 11 11 0- I . K ST. 22 N .2 Np 11 11 . 11 0 11 11 400 300 11 11 1! d Lt 11 2 ri--*3 & i K R 11 LV 3 1 OJ Â¥AeÂ· 11 10 11. 3 - 11 11 * ' 2 11 0 , 11 1 8 11 -lili 11 11 /\1 M 0 1 9 M c 27 E 2 11 + - 4,1 1 It - - 11 11 - N i' *4 0 11 I ----~---- 11 11 11 88149 71 11 0 ne I BEr 4 4 Mj O E. Fl N ,li 14Â£ 1 '*26,721 A . ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name hi M DEK] 014).POK P#ofâ‚¬*Pt HISTDAI c /43(?EVELOPMENT 2. Project location 354- WEET -HALLAÂ·K 51*â‚¬81-i Asft>Ji CÂ·D 00 Ts Kil-1 /41 BUDEK .42.1 r,Irt Cf Asted (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning r-- G 4. Lot size 1,092- SF 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number H ATOâ‚¬2 Coh] PDA 4-+4- 61 BAfâ‚¬ STRasr:1.MeN ve*- f CO i Bo 220 503-6llÂ· 2-319 6. Representative's name; address,-and phone number PPfT*4a. CMHEW, Â«55 eiST JEW atu A.VIE *106 DE,Nea- ce Â©02,2.2 - 64 1 6 - 151LL POSS +05 ghsT /na-iN, 559641,0 9 19_ 4195 7. Type of application (chedk-all that apply): Conditional Use 1. Conceptual SPA X Conceptual HPC 0 Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor HPC Stream Margin - Final PUD X Relocation HPC Subdivision ~ Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark 0= GMQS allotment * GMQS exemption _k_ Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot Split/Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) 2 D â‚¬1,90{60 1*â‚¬*i#(WrIAL PWEUANqj UNIT 14- 1 - OR,6/0/DÂ· skTAUCT~U,24 + ADP I nOPS j I E heoL = 1'544 'Sp SE Lotue p Loo,L =613,91 4f i 4 BR. DALT *2- 14.r pubb,LÂ£75:66-10 â‚¬F ; 2* pwo, 0 620 5Fj BASemeâ€¢'r- 19 ..56+ 42 84 q r. . I 9. Description of developrnerit fapplication AEÂ»01/ME UNIT *1 W 1114 New f:ou hÂ»41100 W.LIM... MASEmEUT j Rea*Mnz.Ucrla) f,a}latu ke 0 1 11 04 w 11)4 fÂ°or f Riwt CH AA 66 i /rD, 6/1~AAGE No 000* K AT- 0,1 jr f '*F-2- 10. Have you completed and attached the following? J Attachment 1- Land use'application form .....2 Â·Â·- Â· Â·Â· Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form ~ _Ef Items requirekllh Attachment 3 4 Response to Attathmohts 4 and 5 APR-12-01 THU 08:15 AM PATRICK CASHEN FAX:3037590852 PAGE 2 1 f .. - '. ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM & Applicant: Ar~ 4-=~ny-Â·Â·JL-,/ Address: 3 3 7 vu . RA 1 001" Zone district: (R - 6 Lot size: 9003 W 3 Existing FAR: 9 9 5 -5- 1% Allowable FAR: 452,0 8 4 Uu / 500Â» b arn,5 3 Proposed FAR: 450 0 dk Existing net leasable (commercial): - Proposed net leasable (commercial): - Existing % of site coverage: 14-590 Proposed % of site coverage: ale . 6970 Existing % of open space: Proposed % of open space: Existing maximum height: Principal bldg:-15 ' Accesory bldg: n /4 Proposed max. height: Principal bldg:,25 1 Accessory bldg:.' . ' Proposed % of demolition: 390 Existing number of bedrooms: 4 (prAndo~ 11 3 Proposed number of bedrooms: 5 Existing on-site parking spaces: 1 On-site parking spaces required: 4 - but rhabrihu)~4 nan -cm-F. J Setbacks Existing: , Minimum rfquired: Proposed: , Front: 1 0 Front: 79 Front: / 0 Rear: 3' Rear: 4.'/ 0' Rear: 11 --2 Combined , Combined <- - 1 Combined , FronUrear: / 03 Fronf/reac: ..1- Front/rear: )3 . Side: 12 -41 Side: * , r-2 . Side: S ' Sider + 2 ..' 42~ Side: 7 -;' /0' Side:- 4-3 ' Combined Combined Combined 1 Sides: 5% Sides: Â·Â·T: f 30 Sides: -fi 93 Existing nonconformities or encroachments: 0-2*Â·r 0-y-,A lÂ«-9, 5 1 zi-t- >1' ,Â£,Â« 42-* b~,241 6 - -01*-rkine 0 , Variations requested: *,4 R, hant,9 7 r'M-,6 -'JU,-1~1jzlL <z:Â£,eM>1~-Y, r5'*6Â«-1.,L&.,rl .< AL,r--i-r,5 1 7.,104 "fL/) rer,~2-75 -Wo 4Â·u_ 4Â«4,4- -49<Pr-O+ 971 (HPC has the ability to vilry che following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft., site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R.6, R-15, RMF, CC. and O zone districts) I - 1 1 0 334 wEST HALLAA STRE ET 934 t 1 02\ 3,= r,- / 1,/Â·Â·fe# S 'St Mr *34 1 ...4 h It cc 2 Stir:C, % : 4. 1 tr==t -4 ;ff- 4â„¢4 1 47. ' 29 . J WC Wami knch Ct 24#%90 61 2 4,4 40 9 Bleâ€¢k St St 00:A 4. B Al.in 4 ... E Ho Â· 82 A. 4 . S -,0, .1% 4 4.4 i: 49Â©4 5 - a - 0-- Unch 9- 4 -4 1.sor W 2 4 tax 89.,1>-5> 0 4.- i *5 4 Whifi 017, 4 Cily i Nationâ€¢! Fateâ€¢ - .,U F M:conâ€¢ 6, # . A GrovelldÂ·rÂ·Â·Â· Â·...._ 0 Whit,4 River N/tion.,1 Firest 44 E morâ€¢ Ct 'i * :4Â· 4. + Â· 5 4. 1041 % 1 ft:Â·4 ~ 94 6 - Â· l 1 Downtown a ' a 18 4- '. ~ ..: ..tN Aspen il 4- W..tview Or 4. , BM m.#' 1/.1 .. .. 4 9 0 1/4 ~11 4: = .L .. M Â¥ la) -4 Scaler== . f .0 1 -2 - , 4 1 ty.* m 0 0 J 21 -- '16 ;i , - ff M 00'44454- ' 2001 -4, ..Â»a 4 / t'-4444>~,. HAYDEN CONNOR PROPERTY HISTORIC REDEVELOPMENT 334 WEST HALLAM STREET Patrick Cashen Architect 4155 East Jewell Avenue, #1106 Denver, CO 80222-4516 303-759-0650 303-759-0852 FAX Page 1 ATTACHMENT 3 GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS All development applications must include the following information. (Section 26.304.030): 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 the behalf of the applicant. Owner's Letter - Table of Contents item 3. 2. The street address, legal description, and parcel identification number of the properw proposed for development. Owner's Letter - Table of Contents item 3. 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 for the Development Application. Current Certificate from Title Insurance Company - Table of Contents item 5. 4. An 812 x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. Vicinity Map - Table of Contents item 8. 5. A site plan depicting the proposed layout and the project's physical relationship to the land and its surroundings. 11 x17 drawings 7 & 8; 24x36 drawing 21 - Table of Contents items 7.d. & 7.e. 6. A site improvement survey certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the State of Colorado, showings the current status of the parcel including the 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.) Draft Plat - Table of Contents item 9. 7. A written description of the proposal and a explanation of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Written Description & Responses to Requirements - Table of Contents item 10. 8. Additional materials, documentation, or reports as deemed necessary by the Community Development Director. None requested thus far. Page 2 0 ATTACHMENT 4 SPECIFIC SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: CONCEPTUAL REVIEW All applications for conceptual review must indude the following information: 1. A site plan and survey showing property boundaries and predominant existing site daracteristics 11 x17 drawing 1 & Draft Plat - Table of Contents items 7.d. & 9. 2. The conceptual selection of major building materials to be used in the proposed development. Project Overview - Table of Contents item 10.a. 3. If applicable, a statement of the effect of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure and/or the character of the neighborhood. Project Overview - Table of Contents item 10.a. 4. Scale drawings of all elevations of any proposed structures, including a roof plan. 11x17 drawings 12,13 & 14; 24x36 drawing 23 - Table of Contents items 7.d. & 7.e. 5. Without adding excessive costs to the applicant,a visual description of the neighborhood context through at least one of the following: diagrams, maps, photographs, models, or streetscape 0 elevations. Photographs - Table of Contents item 7.c. Page 3 PROJECT OVERVIEW EXISTING CONDITIONS This property is at the northeast comer of 3rd and Hallam Streets with a site area of 9,002 sf. There are large cottonwoods on the site and more along the street frontages. Constructed in 1890, the Eugene Wilder Residence is a classic example of early Aspen architecture with a two story front polygonal bay accented with colored glass transom windows on both floors. Lap siding, fish scale shingles in the gables, finely detailed brackets with pendants, and small scale dentils complete the exterior trim. The roof is wood shingles with brick chimneys. A two story addition was constructed prior to 1961 to the north. It varies substantially from the original character with a large low slope roof and an assortment of window sizes and shapes. It is also compromised by having portions of the addition second floor lower by 24" from the original, making the window alignment and wall heights even more disparate. A separate two story dwelling with basement was built in 1990 on the northwest comer of the site. Interior remodeling of the house and addition has occurred over the years. The street elevations of the original structure are essentially intact, and the extent of the east wall is clearly visible even though the addition wall is in the same line. Settlement of the foundation coupled with decay in the wood members dose to the ground has left the structure with uneven floors, wall bulges, and other signs of distress. Heating is uneven with a combination of electric baseboard, electric ceiling units, and limited hot water baseboard. An inspection report from August 1998, table of contents item 11, details the condition of the structure. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A complete renovation of the main structure is planned; no work is contemplated on the second dwelling. A. Replace the foundation entirely with a full basement and structural repairs to the framing. B. Preserve and repair the original exterior materials and elements. C. Replace the addition, with a slightly modified footprint, and align the floor levels; provide a sympathetic exterior character with matching materials. D. All new interior systems and finishes. E. Add an attached single car garage. Two sites plans are presented recognizing the existence of a cottonwood tree in the middle of the east yard. Site plan (A) proposes to move the structure to the west ten feet to allow an addition to be built and maintain the tree. Site plan (B) portrays keeping the structure in its present location with the addition encompassing the tree; removal of the tree would be necessary in this scheme. Page 4 ATTACHMENT 6 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDARDS No approval for any development in the "H" Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all the following standards are met: 1. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing, and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to a Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the Ininimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowable floor area by up to 500 sq. ft., or exceed the allowed site coverage by up to 5%, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. The proposed project respects the character and massing of the original structure by designing the replacement addition to be secondary in these areas: -lower roof line (within height limitations) -maintain existing principal roof pitch on the addition but with smaller gables Additionally, these aspects of the parcel are maintained: -no change in front or rear setbacks; side yard setback increased with Osage relocation -preserve the orjginal exterior materials and extend them onto the addition, as well as keeping the new window proportions the same as the original -preserve in their entirety the street frontage elevations of the original structure as well as the east side gable -allow the three dominant gable ends of the original structure to be easily distinguished from the addition Combining all these attributes on the site results in a very sensitive design which qualifies for the 500 sq. ft. bonus. 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development; The scale and massing of the project maintains the street experience of the neighborhood while replacing the previous addition with a compatible structure. All four sides of the development have received specific design attention to complement the original architecture. Page 5 3. The proposed deve/opment enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels, By addressing the west, east, and north sides of the parcel with a sensitive replacement addition, the adjacent parcels are actually enhanced. The extent of the original residence can readily be understood and is supported by the replacement addition. 4. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. The proposed project removes the previous addition which is perceived to be non contributory to the parcel. Careful offsets in the plan and roof design has created a much more livable structure while respecting the original personality of the residence. 0 0 Page 6 ATTACHMENT 6 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDARDS Standards for review of on-site relocation. No approval for on site relocation shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all of the following standards are met: b. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation On site relocation preserves the large cottonwood in the east yard while permitting a significant improvement in the functionality of the first floor plan. Moving the structure closer to 3rd Street will generate a more substantial corner presence and a solid architectural anchor for the block. c. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation To be provided. d. A relocation plan shall be submitted, induding posting a bond or other financial security approved by the HPC with the engineering department, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receMng site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. This bond will be posted should the relocation be approved. Standards for review of partial demolition. No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all of the following standards are met: a. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historical significance of the parcel The previous addition intended to be removed degrades the original architecture and was constructed without regard for the quality of the original design. Floor level alignments, window proportions, and roof slopes were ignored. These elements have been given careful consideration in the replacement addition. b. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: Page 7 (1) Impacts on the historical significance of the structure of structures located on the 0 parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions The original street frontages are maintained and highlighted by the replacement addition. No significant features are removed and the east wall gable, currently compromised, is set apart from the replacement addition. 2) Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions that are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. The replacement addition acknowledges the integrity and charm of the original structure. 0 Page 8 VARIANCES The variances requested are as follows: a. Variance from Residential Design Standards: 26.410.040 (C)(1) and Alley Access: 26.410.040(C)(2)(b) - garage must be set back 10' from front facade of house. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCE: Standards shouldsimp/yand succinct/yiden* why, # granted, the exception would: (1) yield greater compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan, and (2) more effectively address the issue or problem a given standard or provision responds to, or to be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. A garage placement on this corner lot was made difficult by the construction of the second dwelling unit in 1990. Placed on the northwest corner, this structure takes the space where a garage would normally be placed on this parcel. The only available non street position for a garage is the northeast corner where a 500 sq. ft. building would present an atypical arrangement of two large secondary structures on the alley. By attaching the one story garage to the house on the 3rd Street side, the open space normally associated with the alley is preserved. The attached garage could be viewed as a subordinate structure to the main house and inflects as a one story element between the two story dwellings. The driveway is placed on the short dimension of the block on this comer lot mitigating its impact away from the predominant street frontage. b. Variance from the dimensional requirements of the code: Section 26.575.020 states: For any dwelling unit which can be accessed from an alley or private road entering at the rear or side of the dwelling unit, the garage shall only be excluded from floor area calculations up to two hundred fifty (250) square feet per dwelling unit if it is located on said alley or road. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCE (Section 26.314.040) /n order to authorize a variance from the dimensional requirements of Title 26, the appropriate decision making body shall make a finding that the following (3) circumstances exist: 1. The grant of variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the parcel, building or structure The proposed location for the garage is on the short dimension of the block, away from the predominant frontage of Hallam Street. It is only 308 sq. ft. 2. Literal enforcement and interpretation of the terms and provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other parcels in the same zone district. and would cause the applicant unnecessary hardship or practical difficulty. In determining whether an applicant's rights would be deprived, the board shall consider whether either of the following conditions apply: Page 9 0 a. There are special conditions and circumstances which are unique to the parcel, building or structure, which are not applicable to other parcels, structures or buildings in the same zone district and which do not result from the actions of the applicant The second dwelling unit construction in 1990 preceded the applicant"s ownership of the property. Its location has created a unique situation for this corner parcel. b. Granting the variance will not confer upon the applicant any special privilege denied by the Aspen Area Community Plan and the terms of this Title to other parcels; buildings, or structures, in the same zone district. Note that there are other off street garages across 3rd Street and in the immediate neighborhood. Page 10 STATEMENT OF THE EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The efforts of this project will replace the addition with a structure in keeping with the original character of the residence, but respecting its integrity in time. Particularly, roof lines of the addition have been designed to maintain views to the original gable end walls and to be lower than the original ridge line. Window proportions have been affirmed and matching wall materials are specified. Structural repairs, foundation replacement, and interior amenities will assure that the structure will be stable and easily maintained for continued use, enjoyment, and contribution to the historic streetscape. This street comer receives a high volume of pedestrian traffic in the summer and this project will be a noticeable asset to the streetscape. Page 11 0 RESPONSE TO RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS The proposed work respects the original site orientation and setbacks. An existing 6' fence along Hallam Street will be removed opening up views to the backyard from the street. A low open iron fence will be placed along the street frontages at the property line. The form of the replacement addition has been carefully considered to permit the recognition of the original house form. This has been accomplished with wall offsets and roof design. A variance is requested for the garage access from 3rd Street and a dimensional variance if site plan (A) is approved. No windows exist in the exterior walls between nine and twelve feet. One basement window light well is proposed on the 3rd Street frontage. This location is unavoidable due to a corner lot and the separation required between the two basement egress windows required by the building code. The other light well is on the southeast side but well back from the street. Exterior wall materials are the same on all exposures with exposed concrete foundation and painted wood siding, wood windows and wood trim. 0 Page 12 RESPONSE TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION GUIDELINES Chapter 6 - Architectural Details Nearly all of the original exterior materials are present in a sound or repairable condition. The two story south bay was restored in 1965 and remains in very good condition. The west porch will need to be dismantled but the material will be reinstalled in a similar arrangement. The use of replacement materials is expected to be minimal. At some point in time, a cold roof was was placed over the original roof surface. This setup will be maintained on the replacement addition and gutters added. Chapter 9 - Building Relocation & Foundations Replacement of the foundation is essential to stabilize the structure and allow a thorough renovation. As the site currently has negative drainage toward the structure, the new floor level will be raised slightly, to be determined by a detailed topographic survey of the historic drainage patterns. The original foundation is concrete so the exposed portion of the replacement will be the same. The proposal to relocate the structure ten feet to the west is solely to preserve the cottonwood tree in the middle of the east yard. The Hallam Street setback and building orientation are unchanged. Two basement window light wells are proposed; the historic grade relationship to the first floor level puts the actual windows completely below grade. Chapter 10 - Building Additions The recent previous addition is perceived to be non-contributing to the historical character and is intended to be removed. The design of the replacement structure will use similar exterior materials and matching roof slopes as the original. Being lower than the original ridge, the addition roof is not competing with the strong line of the original ridge. Eave height is maintained on the addition. A :'flaf' roof over the east addition will isolate the original east gable from the addition roof. Any other roof over this portion of the addition would compromise the independence of this shingled gable. The replacement addition will preserve the historic alignment of the Hallam Street frontage. OTHER ITEMS The concrete driveway strips leading to the proposed garage are intended to be heated. If the garage construction is denied, these heated driveway strips would lead to a heated concrete pad for parking two vehicles. Page 13 i, PUBLIC NOTICE DATE 12 /12 TIME 1191 PLACE<_1*21_ PURPOSE Â·-Â·PL '. wiLÂ£Â£:a!Â£6.* ---------T--1 c=AR ke'ls E-Edifk- ' Â· Â· -9&2 -1 --2, -46- i ,;-..Vy a i li; *' i la m y . a 4. -1 21 li 1 3 , *er . . .NOV-20-01 TUE 09:48 AM PATRICK CASHEN FAX:3037590852 PAGE 4_-_..~.~_~~~~~~~~~~~~ NOV-20-2001 1UE 09:27 AM FAX NO, EXHIBIT ~ 14Â«3 4Â» AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREDBY SECTION 26.304.060 {E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: *334 106-sr #ALLAÂ«1 97- a..,co SCHEDULED PUBLIC E{Â£ARING DATE: 6/4% NeS-DAY, 38(.,2, , 1001_ STATIC OF COLORADO ) Cotmty or Pitkio ) 4 (name. please print) being Or [eprest:nting an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally ceflitk that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 CE) of the Allpen Land Use Codo in the following manner: ---- Publication of notice: BY rhe publication in the legal notice section of na official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen M least fifteen (15) dayg prior to the public hearing. A copy â‚¬/'thz publication ir anached hereto. Poaring of notice: By posting of notice, which foun was obtained from the Communky Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than rwenty-twa (22) inches wide 0 and twentyÂ·six (26) inche5 high, and which was composcdo fletters not tess than onc inch in height. Said notice was postedut teast ten (10) days prior to the pubtio hearing and was continuously visible from the 18 day of ,404,2,w ge>E . , 2001 -,, to and including the dale and timc ofthe public -hearina. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. .- Moiting ofnotice. By [he mailing o f a noriee obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the inrormation described in Section 26.304.060(E)(21 of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least ten (10) days prior co the public being, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid U.&. mail to all owners of property within tbree hundred (300) foet of the property subject to ihe development applicarion. and. at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first elaSS Bostage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, sram, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quast-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses ofproperty owners shall be those on the Clirrent tax records of Pitkin County w Ihey appeared no more than Sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. Acopy q/the owner.r and governmental agencies so notiued U witaehed hereto. (contimled on next page) 0 t . . NOV-20-01 TUE 09:49 AM PATRICK CASHEN FAX:3037590852 PAGE 5 Nuv-zu-iduul TUE 09: 27 AM FAX NO. P, 04/04 0 - Resoning or #ext amandment. Whenever the official zoning district map 13 in any way to be changed Dr amended incidental re or 05 port o f a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amendÂ©d, whether such mvision be made by repeat of this Title and enactment of ariow land use regulation, or othenvise, the requirement ofan accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description ot; and the notice to and listing ofnamgs and addresses of owners ofreal property in theamaof the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been avnitable for public inspoution in the planning ageagy durizil: all businesi hours fur fifteen (15) days prior to the pubtic hearing on Such amendments. i 1 Signattire// The foregoing "Affidavit of Notico" was acknowledged before me this:16 - day of we vtro607 , 200Â£ by k. Hal&"\ CD"ne~r WITNESS MY *SAM@Wg'At 84*2002 My commission expires: td'kv-~ 1102_ - -Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: COPY O.F THE PUBLKA notÂ¥ PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOT{CE {SIGN> LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTALAGENCIES NOTICED RY MAIL 0 . NOV-20-0 1 LE 09: 48 AM PATRICK CASHEN FAY 1407590852 PAGE 3 ./.1, . 4. NOV-20-2001 TUE 09:27 AM FAX NO. P. 02/04 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 334 W. HALLAM STREET- HPC CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, ON-SITE RELOCATION, VARIANCES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hea~ing will be held on Wednagday, Docembor 12, 200 1 cl a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.In, beforethe Aspen Historic PrcsÂ¢ivation Commission, Cotaticil Chambers, City IIall, 130 S. Galena Stâ€ž Aspen. to consider an application submitted by IÂ»cien Conner, requesting conceptual development approvd, partial demolition, on-site relocation, and variances for the property located at 334 W. Hallain Street. Lots K. L: and M, Block 42, Clly and Townsitc of AspÂ©n. 11* voriangos requested ate a 500 square foot floor ana bonus, a var:ance from the way that floor area is calculated for garages, and a variance from the Â£*Residential Design Standards" in regard to garages and lightwells. For further information. contact Amy Oti hrie al the Aspen/Pirkin County Community Development Deartment. 130 S. Gatena St. Aspen, CO (970) 920Â·.5096, amyg@Â©i.aspen.co.us. 5/S' -riannah Reid, Chair Aspen Ilistoric Preservation CommiSSion Pill.,1,3hed in the Aspcn Times on November 24,2001 Ciry of Aspen AÂ©Â¢ount .. . WALNUT CREEK RANCH LLC UHL MARGARETE A TITUS JOHN & JOAN REVOCABLE mUST 4520 MAIN ST STE 1050 PO BOX 122 ' 3025 BRYN MAWR SAS CITY, MO 64111-1816 ASPEN, CO 81612 DALLAS, TX 75225 TEAGUE LEWIS TRUST SIRKIN ALICIA SCHLOFFER BRUNH[LDE P 862 NORTH BEVERLY GLEN BLVD 3500 S BAYHOMES DR PO BOX 941 LOS ANGELES, CA 90077 MIAMI, FL 33133 ASPEN, CO 81612 SAX JOEL D RISPOLI PETER 1/2 RH ASPEN LLC 303 W FRANCIS ST 323 W HALLAM ST 323 W FRANCIS ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 PITKIN EXCHANGEHOLDINGS OF ASPEN POTVIN SALLY ALLEN PATRICK JAMES K LLC 320 W BLEEKER ST 417 W HALLAM ST 601 E HOPKINS 3RD FLOOR ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN', CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 MCANIFF RICHARD J NEISSER JUDITH E REVOCABLE TRUST NATHAN REVOCABLE TRUST C/O KATHY KUNZ 132 E DELAWARE APT 6201 718 NLINDEN DR 777 108TH AVE NE SUITE 2000 CHICAGO, IL 60611 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 BELLEVUE, WA 98004-5118 KOHNER ELLEN P 'SOUBOS TED A . HUNT ELLEN C/O KINNEY STEPHEN J & SUSAN M E HYMAN AVE #206 P O BOX 330010 PO BOX 8770 ASPEN, CO 81611 MIAMI, FL 33233 ASPEN, CO 81612 JANSS MARY 1992 REVOCABLE LIVING HOUGH JENNINE HALPERIN ELLEN & BARRY TRUST 265 BRIGHTON RD NE 420 W FRANCIS ST 403 W HALLAM ATLANTA,GA 30309 ASPEN, CO 81611-1233 ASPEN, CO 81611 HALLAM LLC . GREENWOOD WILLIAM , GALLANT MARILYN 5850 SAN FELIPE \ PO BOX 4778 617 VINE ST STE 1430 SUITE 205 ASPEN, CO 81612 CINCINNATI, OH 45202 HOUSTON, TX 77057 FIVE CONTINENTS ASPEN REALTY FRIEDBERG BARRY S FISCHER SISTIE 00 EDWARDS JOSEPH In 555 PARK AVE 7W 442 W BLEEKER 502 MAIN ST STE 201 NEW YORK, NY 10021 ASPEN, CO 81611 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 EPPLERMLAWS TRUSTEE TEIN CHESTER & BEVERLY PROSKAUER ROSE GOETZ & DOBBS JOHN C & SARA F VILSHIRE BLVD STE 501 MENDELSHON C/O PO BOX 241750 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 2255 GLADES RD #340 W MEMPHIS, TN 38124 0OCARATON, FL 33431 -7 9277;'3777 -E:...92â‚¬h'~i-.:I Â·Â·0 'P DEVOS ESTHER LEONARD COX CAROLYN M CONNOR F HAYDEN PO BOX 3238 961 PASEO DEL SUR 444 GRAPE ST EN, CO 81612 SANTA FE, NM 87501 DENVER, CO 80220 CITY OF ASPEN BUDINGER WILLIAM & PEYTON BLEVINS J RONALD & PHYLLIS M 130 S GALENA ST 728 E FRANCIS ST 20320 FAIRWAY OAKS DR #353 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 BOCA RATON, FL 33434 BARKER JACK 1/2 INT BENNINGHOFF ESTHER BARKER CARRYN ADRIANNA TRUST 1/2 ALLEN ROBERT H & JUDY LEY 233 W HALLAM AVE INT 4545 POST OAK PL STE 101 ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 7943 HOUSTON, TX 77027 ASPEN, CO 81612 318 FOURTH STREET LTD C/O BUSTER FELDOM PO BOX 445 HOUSTON, TX 77001 -- . OAHP1403 --4-J..0 Official eligibility determination Rev. 9/98 (OAHP use only) Date Initials COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Determined Eligible- NR Determined Not Eligible- NR Architectural Inventory Form Determined Not Eligible- SR Determined Eligible- SR (page 1 of 4) Need Data Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR District 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT.220 2. Temporary resource number: 950.MAT (950.MD) 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: AsDen 5. Historic building name: 6. Current building name: 7. Building address: 950 Matchless Drive Aspen, Colorado 81611 8. Owner name and address: Alan K. Becker PO Box 119 Woodv Creek, CO 81656 11. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 84 West NE 1/4 of SW 1/i of SW y of SE W of Section 7 10. UTM reference Zone 1 3;3 4 3 6 7 OmE 4 3 3 9 3 0 0 mN 11. USGS quad name: Aspen Quadrangle Year: 1960. Photo Rev. 1987 Map scale: 7.5' X 15' Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): 4A Block: Dunn / Bishop Subdivision Exemption Addition: Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comprised of Lot 4-A: of the Dunn / Bishop Subdivision Exemption, City of Aspen. Assessors office Record Number: 2737-074-02-003 This descriotion was chosen as the most specific and customary description of the site. 111. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Rectangular 15. Dimensions in feet: Length x Width 16. Number of stories: One and 1/2 Storv 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Horizontal Wood Sidina 18. Roof configuration: (enter no more than one): Gable Roof 19. Primary external roof material (enter no more than one): Asphalt Roof 20. Special features (enter all that apply): Porch Resource Number: 5PT.220 Temporary Resource Number: 950.MAT Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: A one and 1/2 story wood frame Miner;s Cottacle. A front qable faces the street with a single tall double hung on the upper level, and a door with flanking tall double hunas on ibm-!mYRUmm[=8-Q[ga@_921112-@MiÂ®*-tg-ih@-dgbLEbiab.@imgf_mmb_Mlliog-lbimm@LIhe Dorch has a single square post on the corner and a scalloped frieze. A single entry door with a tall double hung to the right sit on the cross qable wall under the porch roof. Windows are two over two and have a small crown molding at the head. The cross qable has a shed roof extension off the back of the structure, a single double hung on the upper level, and a pair of double hunas on the main level, all similar to the front windows. A short chimnev sits on the cross cable ridge. Both front doors are traditional tvpes: the one on the front qable has a single square light with windowpane muntins: the second door has two arched glass panels. 22. Architectural style/building type: Late Victorian 23. Landscaping or special settlng features: Larce. mature pinvon pine scattered across the site: historic lilac mass in front yard: mature scotch pine at front property line. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: A contemporary residential structure sits on the rear of the site. IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate Late 1880's Actual Source of information: Based on building stvle 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: 27. Builder/Contractor: Unknown Source of information: 28. Original owner: Unknown Source of information: 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): New residential structure sits behind the house, circa 1998 30. Original location X Moved Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Domestic 32. Intermediate use(s): 33. Current use(s): Domestic 34. Site type(s): Residential Neighborhood Resource Number: 5PT.220 Temporary Resource Number: 950.MAT Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) 35. Historical background: This structure is reoresentative of Asoen's minina era character. The building has the characteristics of typical mining era structures such as: size, simple plan, and front clable / porch relationship 36. Sources of information: Pitkin County Courthouse records; Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maos:_1990 and 1980 Citv of Aspen Survey of Historic Sites and Structures VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes X No Date of designation: Ord 28 - 1998 Designating authority: Aspen City Council 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; X C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: - Architecture 40. Period of significance: Late 1800's Silver Mining Era 41. Level of significance: National State Local X 42. Statement of significance: This structure is sianificant for its DOSitiOn in the context of Aspen's mining era. It describes the nature of the life of an average familv or individual during that period. as well as the construction techniques. materials available and the fashion of the time. 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: Structure is intact in its oriainal form; new structure on site interferes somewhat with the oriainal context. VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: Eligible X Not Eligible Need Data 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes No X Discuss: If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing Noncontributing 46. If the building is in existing National Register district, is it: Contributing Noncontributing Resource Number: 5PT.220 Temporary Resource Number: 950.MAT Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) Vlll. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: R4; F31, 32 Negatives filed at: Aspen/Pitkin Communitv Development Dept. 48. Report title: Citv of Aspen Update of Survev of Historic Sites and Structures, 2000 49. Date(s): 6/29/2000 50. Recorder(s): Suzannah Reid and Patrick Duffield 51. Organization: Reid Architects 52. Address: 412 North Mill Street. PO Box 1303, Aspen CO 81612 53. Phone number(s): 970 920 9225 NOTE: Please attach a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad. map indicating resource location, and photographs. Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 0 950 Match less 11\ e a 1 i 1 \1 7 8/ . 4 1 + 1 'A . *2 \ 0 4 4,4 4 i \ \ 1 \ \ 0 \ \ T \ 1 0 \ 1 -6 o *2 1 N 4*-2.L r ~94-2-9-1 c---t(&3~44:wzam#~2,~WeirE<~3~,<fÂ« ft>4~1:111'fÂ« - -)<,r.- :44: i ..'Â·l.I,~~>//41=532 ~~~- ~Â· i~~ 1%\\~4 FÂ»4Â» 3~~Utt/Â»* ~1154 *ma*i~ Â·4~4Â«i . -2-14~ 1.6-j,I~*'' aÂ«jstÂ»Â«.),i~*f.: 4, \1\\1\ .' 1\\Â·111"11Â·n 1 ft- 47--3*--al--~-*r.bzi,~1r.i-tg#43#ML*Bv 13\ lfÂ«lit..4~-RÂ«t~-Â»14:1Â»4 1*44Â«~ ~'*tÂ·tx>4.'4i~1~: ) 1 \ 7*02*644*0~60 ' U , , ...1. liu/â€¢- ... r '. filit.te - 9 -\4 / X /772Â« I Â· '' â€¢ 1,1â€žâ€¢ /n h. 1.\ \ T \44. n. t.1 - .\.:.f L i ~5-2 / , Â£03,7 -- / -Â»- 1.6â€ž 1 f \1 ', \Â« -Â«x 14/7 . r . / 8 .441 -g / -721--'X - >x . 0..2. ' < '~FL.).4 / 1 1 N. 1. -/.4 _,~T . . '' L \./ .C 1 01 )i-~r&2~ 3 7 -* . 7- / 7 1 -- ~ 3 3Â· ~ -~34*/(((4 -:*#. fl ; e 'thGOLF COURSE ~JF3419.pery. 1 T h \ /7 . A .< 1 7-.<4Â· flfi.4 21 1 12// 21,41. 1 1 0 - 1, 1 ..11*11 -3 :<114-1--3.3 1--~1< 1,~ I a nit .-=-- Â· ~4~~4 C NE 4 41<% m',0~,c,Â·':'i<#~f<4%91kyacke'n 1 1/5/ 1 .11â€¢Cl WÂ·./*9 1 1 '1'=t Â·He-~:427~?eri.7 p .5 ..Â£ batt' OÂ» ..4,12Â·.Cf.f:=~EM 79~ *r-+ 14, '<,4 I,fZ--: rZeÂ«~ 4 u n\-/Â«Â·4 Dr\.. 2 bawenploverd )\0Â·313 77,1 j'/~ /1 9 7 244/ . 3.< 61 ,44~ .-/.,7/9167/Â«1-.F ' b 1-**LEAb.'*0.j< 137/)121.39(114,fi'~~tf~41Â« 1 ~11\ 1,1 9X 4- , ,. ...6 - I .1 3 K 111 ' 1 .3 -7 2 irk*- - - 1 1 111 1 ' 241 0 1~Â«21 ~1 3.1143<tfi'4jl/1~~ 1 1.1 - 1 )\.t 1 1 4 1 # 'ew- - 92 4704:~,71'~,1",1,#1,~4~114â€ž~, ,. 4'9 )<O~,iN,))~,; 41<it= ~ 4Jf-~Â« * IIAS<f Af - r- ~I~.ff~2,6 ~): 1 ~-4 <<jÂ¢3 . _M I:. , 4*3~-lz--fÂ» /- -1/ 41\317~ 9~1,1 - 2-\ Â«Â» -'--1 --71 -<t. ,Â·4( .. - 1 ~ 20Â«/42,1/.t.,>2 3/8 lilill 11 <1 11 1-*41/ Â«41 /-5 9/47/ 4 4 1 11. ... 1 # 4 -,4 ki' I r . 9~01;61 Pitsl~:zi <:4 D -ew: .9, ' . '.'f-92Â°4 VIA,ILF ~ "'I'. ' ~ ic Â»baÂ«, 24~~l 4 -â‚¬~ *419*,//(~}~5 ,Â®Â®11 r j \ \ Â·j#~f** 1 7.jul /4 1 , \ , All Survey Sites are included within the City of Aspen limits, Aspen Quadrangle See Sketch map for identificaaon of specific location and building context Colorado-Pitkin County 1960, Photo Revised 1987 Scale. 1:24 7.5 Minute Survey A.IN GN i 1 i SCALE 1:24 000 2 0 1 Mit.~ 1 1 ----1 -- 1'09' 1 0 213 MILS 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET 1 .5 0 1 KILOMETER 1 1 1 1 1 1 =+-- k---41 JTM GRID AND 1927 MAGNETIC NORTH CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET DECLINATION AT CENTER OF SHEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 ' r-Tnt File .. . ::. I . .. . 7%42> i , *u. . fi}It. > ./." ...: 2, LI 7/ , 1/ ' Mâ€¢ , : Ve r#**Â«-21 4.1 2 0. ...fdwal 0-4 1. 3%#074 :,!,t:/12.......; . . -+, .t...(r:V. J... -, I t., . ri -1-1 1.\ . 2--i'. Â·-'.}i- if.:*cÂ· +1 Â· ~ 4 , ./1 . 1 ~ -10 .1 ... ' 3.4 1 / 1 g. .Â· Â· . .,:k Â· -\ Â·~~~ C/-Â·r-.7.*57*~/ t".-'il.7-i I . -- --- Â·f .2 2 .2.3..f...;fof.,14:"--14Â·2Â° k .5 t.' al; E. 4 ..... 4>J'-4>.41%.': t.' T . '..9 I. I k 1 . r'"1 / '111 2 4-7 hz ,Â£ f r i ? f r P .5. 111. J , I. - 2 j':' H.UjÂ·L-~,filL: 42.~1. ').tiu.. .%01 . -Â· I .'/Â· .At ':Â·,4,; .:-:i.:. -+1 9.425-,61 'Â·â‚¬ Â·i.- ': Â·Â·.>.j Â· 421,7.1,-iÂ· .,i.t'. Â·.: *.~u..F= 43:r.-0:4.:i:k:,54Â¢5964.2:~u,ilk.. . 0% + . , 21. . # 4"â€¢ Â·:Â»4334, *39;47'+ ~ 2> 4 ..... - W ./' . * TT# ~611!~:m :-C : '2.40....ue. '43.1. tf'-2 .h. 1,3%:tr#.1 1.1 : . :'3 ....461:2'AMAC:.'6 -44Â· .Â£ 3, leâ€ž.1., . f 4*Â· Â·' LLfR~#tlk-Wmj4twif9:?t,rit,i #.9,4.,?,14.,1, :.. . -l 1 2 3ri'.*i#Fi "IM"Zi, . . Â£ t i' 7 ..0.I'<.. . . . *) 1 - . 1 , 9 . . 4. I. , 4 . t .. i i - iÂ· C Â¢.5~~IC....1 1 . , D... Â· ) dfic I. i.,4.b ifi,f;'140Â·.41.;3.-~.st. Â·i,Â·9 .~44> ..â€¢ etÂ·...74Â· , 3. ' -t:,~