Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.201910091 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION October 9, 2019 4:30 PM, City Council Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I.SITE VISIT - NONE II.4:30 PM - ROLL CALL III.MINUTES III.A.Draft Minutes of September 25th coa.hpc.092519.pdf IV.PUBLIC COMMENTS V.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS VI.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VII.PROJECT MONITORING VII.A.Project Monitor List VIII.STAFF COMMENTS IX.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED X.CALL UP REPORTS XI.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS XII.OLD BUSINESS XII.A.4:40 PM - 229 W. Smuggler Street– Minor Development Review and Variations, PUBLIC HEARING HPC memo.pdf HPC resolution.pdf Exhibit A_Minor Development.pdf Exhibit B_Setback Variation.pdf 1 2 Exhibit C_Application.pdf XII.B.5:00 PM - 202 E. Main, Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations, Parking, Fee Waivers, and Floor Area Bonus, PUBLIC HEARING, Continued 202EMain_Memo_10.09.2019.pdf 202EMain_Resolution_10.09.19.pdf ExhibitA.1_HPGuidelinesCriteria.pdf ExhibitA.2_DimensionalVariationCriteria.pdf ExhibitA.3_RelocationCriteria.pdf ExhibitA.4_FloorAreaBonus.pdf ExhibitB_ReferralComments.pdf ExhibitC_Application.pdf XIII.NEW BUSINESS XIII.A.6:00 PM - 314 W Main St. - Minor Development Review - Public Hearing Staff recommends the HPC approve the Minor Development review and requested parking waivers, including the cash-in-lieu fee. 314 W Main_Memo_10.9.19.pdf 314 W Main_Resolution_10.9.19_MinorDevelopment.pdf 314 W Main_Exhibit A - Parking - Special Review.pdf 314 W Main_Exhibit B - Historic Benefits - Parking Review Criteria.pdf 314 W Main_Exhibit C - HP Design Guidelines.pdf 314 W Main_Exhibit D - Public Comments for 314 W Main Application - 327 W Bleeker.pdf 314 W Main_Exhibit E - Application.pdf 314 W Main_Exhibit F - Public Hearing Noticing Affidavit1.pdf XIV.7:00 - ADJOURN XV.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1)Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clarifications of applicant 7) Public comments 8)Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal/clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 11) Applicant rebuttal/clarification 2 3 End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met or not met. Revised April 2, 2014 3 1 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 Chairperson Greenwood opened the meeting at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Roger Moyer, Richard Lai, Scott Kendrick, Nora Berko, Gretchen Greenwood, Jeffrey Halferty, Kara Thompson, Bob Blaich. Absent was Sheri Sanzone. Staff present: Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Planning Director MINUTES: Mr. Moyer moved to approve the minutes of September 11th, Mr. Kendrick seconded. All in favor, motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None. DISCLOSURES: None. PROJECT MONITORING: None. CERTIFICATES OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None. CALL UPS: None. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon said she will send an email to the board in the next couple of days. They will be revisiting all of the historic properties on the registry to check on their status, update forms on file about their condition, alterations, etc. This is something we have to do as a responsibility to History Colorado. We will break this project into pieces starting with the first 80 properties or so in the next month. Bendon Adams is doing the field work for us and will be issuing a press release. They will be leaving door hangars when visiting a home if no one is there so people are aware and understand what we are looking at from the street. I’m sure people will be curious why photos are being taken of their houses. We’re not sure yet how we will take on the additional phases, but we will talk to council about money. Lastly, Sarah Yoon is in London and not here with us tonight. PUBLIC NOTICE: Ms. Simon said we submitted the first one to Ms. Bryan and will discuss the second one when we get to that point. NEW BUSINESS: 303 S. Galena Amy Simon This project affects what is known as the Aspen Block. It’s a beautiful building in the downtown and one of the oldest masonry structures, built in 1886. The early stone was quarried at Maroon Creek but was discontinued in favor of the Frying Pan and other sources. This building has been painted for many decades since the 1940’s and repainted many times. Continuing to paint isn’t something we can continue to support or be exempt from HPC review. In 2016, we asked the owners to investigate the effects of the painting on the building. They hired Atkinson-Noland on the front range, who did some testing of the permeability of the brick. Brick and stone should have their natural surface exposed to weather, so the water can evaporate naturally. When you paint these surfaces, it can trap moisture 4 2 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 behind it, which damages the masonry surface. The applicant did the investigation with some success and some concerns and the work was put on hold for a while. They did start up work again before any approvals had been given, so the city issued a stop work notice. The staff recommendation is to deny the request to paint the masonry. They’ve said yes to the woodwork and metal. It is destructive and more investigation needs to be done. We support removing the paint from the entire building. Painting historic buildings results in a loss of character. This original sandstone is a whitish or buff color, and not a red sandstone. Applicable guidelines are not met. Ms. Greenwood asked what kind of damages have been seen by the continual painting and Ms. Simon said her biggest concern is what we’re not seeing. The sugared surface, kind of tells us that the brick has blown out and we’re not quite sure the extent of the damage. Ms. Simon said they are advocating additional testing and investigation instead of jumping right in, so they can find the gentlest means to see what is being uncovered. Mr. Kendrick asked if they can strip the stonework and leave the brick and Ms. Simon said yes to finding a middle ground. That’s all part of the discussion that hasn’t completely unfolded yet, but it’s too soon to apply more paint. Ms. Greenwood asked if the brick is in good shape when the paint has been chemically removed and Ms. Simon said it can be and we will find out in doing the testing. She said the 19th century brick here is fairly soft. Mr. Moyer said he thinks it’s the same brick as was used on the Jerome. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Sarah Adams of Bendon Adams, Erik Barbic, owner’s representative and Ian Walker of Walker Construction Ms. Adams showed a drawing by Herbert Byer of the building before working on it. Their objective is to paint an already painted building. This is challenging and not as linear as it may seem. We’re not here to debate whether painting masonry is a good idea, we inherited this issue. There is 80 years of paint on the building, so please consider a bunch of different factors. Please consider the impact on the tenants and the practicality of paint removal. The building was built in 1886 and the primary materials are brick, cast iron and buff colored sandstone. It was painted sometime before 1940. There are plenty of examples around town of recently painted historic landmarks. We understand the desire to remove paint from the masonry. The examples in the staff memo may not be the best comparisons for what we are trying to do. The other buildings have had a lot less paint layers and there were no impacts to local tenants. We have lead paint on this building so everything would need to be encapsulated, including the trees. This isn’t a linear conversation. She showed pictures of the patch testing that was done. They didn’t have the best results because the stone is sugaring so much. Mr. Walker said it took about a week to do that one column. Ms. Adams showed the guidelines on screen and where it states to consider removing paint but even where unpainted masonry is appropriate, the retention of the paint may be in the best interest of the building. Most important to be considered, are the local tenants. They would be forced to close to contain the lead paint. The timeframe would also be very difficult because the treatment has to be applied in 50 degrees or more. There are also limited contractors willing to perform the specified work and they would be limited to off season, weather permitting. The cost is 700k+ with an end result being potentially undesirable. Mr. Moyer asked who they contacted to do the stripping and Mr. Walker said BRS out of Denver and that they just did the Brown Palace in Denver. They are too busy and didn’t like the logistics of 5 3 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 downtown Aspen. The parks department wants the trees wrapped up. The whole building would need scaffold and you’ve got particles of lead. It is really hard to find someone to perform the work and there is no one local. Mr. Halferty asked if there has been any testing on the brick at all or just the sandstone and Mr. Walker said just the sandstone. Ms. Thompson asked if the estimate is cost and time for the whole building and Mr. Walker said yes. Mr. Walker said this building is in pretty good shape with no exterior water damage, but the brick is super soft and could be scraped with your fingernail. Ms. Adams said it was the same issue with Red Onion when they did tests to remove the paint from the bar area. It would have damaged the brick, so that is why it is still painted. PUBLIC COMMENT: Terry Butler She currently lives in this building and runs the hotel, The Residence, which is inside of the building. If she’s closed down for months at a time, she will lose her business. She loves this building. She’s become, plumber, painter and carpenter over the years. The original exposed brick is on the inside and it was built as double brick. It has held up very well. I would literally be out of business if she had to shut down, as there is nowhere else, she can move to. Looking at it, it’s one of the prettiest buildings in town and one of the most photographed. The building looks great and if it’s been painted, it’s holding up well. She’s not an expert and she’s happy with it the way it is. She’s been in that building more than anyone in the building’s history. She’s been up there 32 years now. Michelle Hurley She is the store manager at CosBar, which has been open in Aspen for 43 years and in that location for the past 25 years. We are one of the only cosmetic stores in town and we would be shut down. This could hinder our business and hurt our name brand. Being in the building for 25 years in that location, it’s part of the history of Aspen. Closing us down, would not allow us to thrive. Mr. Moyer said the Jerome wasn’t shut down and he doesn’t feel like it would be necessary here. Ms. Hurley said any type of closure on the sidewalk hinders people from coming in. Our business was affected last week when they did this testing and obviously, we were still open. People will avoid coming in if they see that any type of work is going on. Ms. Adams said there’s a cost issue as well and the applicant can’t afford to undertake a 700k paint proposal. This also needs to be considered. Ms. Greenwood asked if there are grants available and Ms. Simon said there is a state grant, but nothing from the city of Aspen. She could have a discussion with city council as a gesture. Ms. Adams said that with the state grants, the property owner still needs to put up 50 percent. Mr. Barbic said the ultimate goal is to maintain the building as it is. It would currently cost 20k for wood facia and metal trim. There would be no change of color, just maintenance. Ms. Greenwood said this is a multi-faceted issue like Ms. Adams said. We can’t have the building looking in disrepair. 6 4 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 Mr. Halferty said it’s a fantastic building and well maintained. He understands and appreciates the tenant’s comments. To strip and take away lead paint is a major process. They don’t have timing and funds to strip this building. It sounds great, but our off seasons are difficult and are getting shorter and shorter. This would also affect many different departments. Painting to maintain the building is ideal in his eyes. He said they brush it and don’t spray it. He is ok with the applicant’s decision. He’s ok with letting them paint. Ms. Berko said to Ms. Butler, we all love your hotel and the building, and your flower boxes are so beautiful. We all sympathize with the short-term constraints and the money, but our charge is the preservation of the building. There are enough questions and she supports staff’s recommendation to look into it further. It’s a slippery slope. She would like to see what other solutions can be found. Ms. Greenwood said it’s very tricky. The city is recommending that they shouldn’t move forward and spend more money on testing. That’s a lot to ask of the tenants and there are significant tenants in this building. They don’t want to lose a half hour of inconvenience. She would love to see this go back to its original brick, but she thinks there has to be some process with the city. This is a big ask of the applicant. It’s a complicated dilemma. The guidelines can be unfair in many ways. The city needs to offer expertise and grants to help these applicants out. There are no incentives here that we can offer them. She, in good conscience, doesn’t see that we have the right to tell them to keep studying it. The city should spend the money on it. We don’t even know what the process would be or how tenants would be affected. Mr. Kendrick said he agrees that it’s a difficult decision to make, but he doesn’t think they have enough information yet. He doesn’t want the applicant to spend a bunch more money, but at the same time, he doesn’t want to give free license to paint the entire building. If there was a designation for maintenance or touch up, that’s one thing. There are places where the paint is chipping off and the stone is crushing under your fingertips, but he’s no expert, so he would want to know more about that. He understands it’s a difficult dilemma. Ms. Simon said there are design guidelines to apply. Everyone is getting so pulled in to the technical aspects, products, etc. The economic impact on the property owner is not one of your criteria. Mr. Halferty said it’s already painted. It’s a messed-up situation which they are trying to keep up and maintain best they can. They’ve done some studies and have spent a lot of money and now we’re going to ask them to go back to the drawing board and do more studies. He agrees with Ms. Greenwood and is wondering what their incentive is to keep paying to do these studies. Mr. Moyer concurs with staff. I f it can be proven, by a paint representative, that another layer of paint won’t damage anything, he would let them do that. Mr. Lai said it is a difficult problem. It reminds him of Solomon and the baby. He listened carefully to the comments from everyone and he doesn’t know whether he has the wisdom to referee between these points of views. He agrees with staff that the issue is the deterioration of the building and keeping the original design appearance. He is overwhelmed by the cost and the quandary of the tenants. What he thinks, and is his personal preference, he thinks the three parties should get together and find a solution. Staff, contractor and tenants need find a way to work this out together with the 7 5 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 understanding that this isn’t the only historic masonry building in Aspen. If we can get grants, that would be even better. Ms. Thompson said this is incredibly challenging. There is a benefit to the tenants being in a historic building. There is a lot of appeal in that, so we need to do our duty in maintain this structure, but she doesn’t feel comfortable saying they can continue to paint without more information. She doesn’t know if the current condition of the brick is continuing to deteriorate. Mr. Blaich said it’s important because our decision will set a precedent. He will always put in his best expertise that he can. He did a project years ago in Boston and was a building for Herman Miller. We did everything and attended the historic preservation meetings and it paid off. He said Mr. Moyer has all of these recommendations, so we need to go further with this and have them come back with recommendations that everyone can agree with. Ms. Greenwood said this is reasonable. Ms. Adams said they would like to request a continuance. She doesn’t want a denial by the board and have to start all over again. We would like to continue to January or February and have a discussion with council to see what they can figure out before they come back. Mr. Lai said he isn’t ready to vote either way. He agrees with a continuance. This shouldn’t just be among themselves but include others in the discussion. We need to come up with a policy that affects buildings like this as a template. Ms. Adams said we agree we would love to have a symposium and to have the owner foot the bill isn’t fair. Ms. Greenwood said this is a worthy discussion to have with city council. Mr. Kendrick moved to continue to February 26th, Ms. Thompson seconded. All in favor motion carried. NEW BUSINESS: 301 Lake Avenue Ms. Simon said she should touch base about the public notice. This is a minor review, so a sign needed to be posted on the property and needs to be notarized tomorrow morning. This afternoon around 3:00, she started getting emails from people around the property. They were objecting that they didn’t know sooner and asked for a continuance. The applicant did post 15 days prior to this date. Ms. Bryan said it’s appropriate to add their comments into the record, but the board isn’t obligated to continue. The affidavit does need to be notarized. Ms. Simon read the emails to the board. Ms. Greenwood opened the public hearing. Mr. Lai voted for continuance and the applicant was agreeable. Ms. Greenwood called for a straw vote of moving forward with the hearing and the vote was 7-1. Ms. Simon said this is a review for the Lundy House. One item is regarding a hedgerow that has been added without HPC approval and the other item is to replace some damaged glass railing. There are two things to be considered regarding the hedgerow. The city has a regulation that applies to all residential properties that you can’t have a fence or hedgerow more than 42 inches tall forward of the façade of a building. It does meet the description of hedgerow and there is a row of planter boxes sitting on the 8 6 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 ledge of a retaining wall and each planter has a couple of trees in it. They don’t have to be planted in the ground to meet the definition. Staff finds that the hedgerow is over the height limit. You need to decide whether the hedgerow meets the design guidelines. We feel you can no longer see the home because of the hedgerow. You could only approve this if reduced to 42 inches and if it meets the guidelines. One section of the outdoor fireplace has delaminated. The applicant wants to replace this with a cable railing. Staff finds that this doesn’t meet the guidelines and we are recommending denial of both requests. Mr. Kendrick asked where the height is measured from and Ms. Simon said grade. Six feet from the top of the retaining wall up. it’s well over 42 inches. Ms. Greenwood said this is a major component and wasn’t part of the landscape plan originally approved. Ms. Simon said there is no setback violation here. Only city council can grant a height variance. The retaining wall was the only element that was approved. She mentioned in memo that at the CO inspection, a number of trees were planted in the ROW that were not approved, to screen and provide privacy. We required the applicants to remove some aspens at that time. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Joe Krabacher, representing the owner & Bill Boehringer, project manager Mr. Krabacher said he knows it’s unusual to have attorney here instead of a planner, but he has some legal type comments. It was a surprise to them that a planter bowl was considered development and he doesn’t know when the hedgerow definition was added to the code. There needs to be some balance between the owner’s expectations and their use of it and felt that this was a major issue to have that much visibility into the house. This was an attempt to provide some shielding. HPC has powers to approve and control development. He read the hedgerow definition to the board and said there is ambiguity to the language. We want something that works for everyone. If we took out every other planter, would that be acceptable? We’re unsure what would be allowed. Is this similar to regulating lawn furniture? Mr. Boehringer said there were a lot of the landscape and drainage improvements that had to be done in concert with the city. We had to remove a lot of existing plantings. Some were evergreen trees and parks did not allow replanting in the right of way with evergreens. He showed some photos of the trees in front of the house. He pointed out that they are still trying to sell this home. Imagine whoever lives here would want some privacy. Mr. Boehringer showed slides and explained what they did and why. Joe we would like to have what we have now, but we realize there is a height limit. The neighbors feel the look of the property has softened. Ms. Greenwood asked if they considered curtains and Mr. Boehringer said we found in the winter, when the shears are drawn, we feel confined to the interior. Ms. Berko is a huge supporter of this project and said it was a lengthy and difficult one. It used to be that you saw the whole house and Nancy Lundy out there painting in her wild garden. There were a lot of incentives and bonuses given with the promise that this house would be left visible. People keep asking her what happened to the Lundy house, because they can’t find it. The hedgerow obscures the house. The public can’t see this beautiful piece of architecture. The fishbowl affect is all over town, but 9 7 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 people are finding other ways to deal with it. This house isn’t big and proud like we saw on the renderings. She is in agreement with staff and this is not what HPC had in mind. She apologized for getting emotional, but this has been a huge disappointment for her to not see this house as it was presented in the renderings and it was a tough project. Ms. Greenwood said the trees look like soldiers. You’re not going to get a variance of 42 inches from the city. This is a really misplaced idea. We were on a field trip for a different property the other day and walked by and just gasped. This isn’t temporary and this house is part of the fabric of the community. You need to think about other solutions and wait until you sell it. Perhaps you need some architectural help with screening, etc. after the beautiful job that was done on this development, she can’t imagine why you would want this here. We should continue this, and you should come back. She is in favor of finding the right glass product and rethinking the fireplace. Ms. Thompson said this is a problem that you designed your way into and now you need to design your way out of. Mr. Lai said I don’t know whether it’s a good idea to use landscape to cover up something architectural. He thinks it was a mistake to put a bedroom facing the street and think you’d get away with it. Overall, he concurs with staff. Mr. Kendrick is in agreement. It’s a shame to cover up the glass and adding a cable in between the glass panes isn’t consistent architecturally. He doesn’t like the planters how they block the home. Mr. Halferty said he doesn’t have a compliant from a zoning standpoint but said the boxes do seem tall. If they were to go into the ground, he’s wondering if a landscape plan could help meet somewhere in the middle. Maybe not a shrub, but an aspen tree. He would move to continue to find a solution more natural and not so regimented. He understands the fishbowl effect, however. As far as the handrail, there are kilns that have a tempered glass that could conform to the building guidelines. He would suggest a revised landscape plan. Ms. Greenwood said the Lundy house had this wild look to it and that’s why she had a visceral reaction when she saw what was put there. She supports going in a more wild direction. Ms. Simon said if you continue the project and want to hear restudy, that’s one option or you can deny this solution and they can reapply at another time. We can assign the glass material to staff and monitor. Mr. Blaich said there should be a site visit so we can see from their point of view what is advantageous. We need to go over and take a look. He shares staff’s feelings about seeing the property and always admired that house. He admired its visibility to the community, and he shares their feelings about the roughness of the property. If it makes sense to do a sight visit, that’s one solution, but he would like to experience it from the inside as well as the outside. Mr. Moyer said the guidelines are simply not met. The Lundy house was a marvelous thing and there was already too much of a wild forest around it to hide the view. We don’t need anything else around it. I would prefer to have more trees taken out actually. It’s an architectural issue. Mr. Krabacher said he wants the project to be continued. 10 8 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 25, 2019 Ms. Greenwood said the planter boxes are denied and we all like the glass. When you get that information, you can run it by the staff and monitor. Ms. Simon said we need a new monitor and to approve the resolution as written and set a time frame for the planter boxes to be removed. Mr. Kendrick said he will take the project. MOTION: Ms. Berko moved to approve the resolution as stated, Ms. Thompson seconded. Mr. Kendrick pointed out that 14 days was cited in the staff recommendation. Roll call vote: Mr. Blaich, yes; Mr. Halferty, no; Ms. Berko, yes; Mr. Kendrick, yes; Mr. Lai, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Greenwood, yes. 6-1 , motion carried. MOTION: Mr. Kendrick motioned to adjourn, Ms. Thompson seconded. All in favor, motion carried. ________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk 11 12 • • ½ 13 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION GRANTING MINOR DEVELOPMENT AND VARIATIONS APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 229 WEST SMUGGLER STREET, UNIT B, SECOND AND SMUGGLER CONDOMINIUMS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2735-124-17-032 WHEREAS, the applicant, 229 West Smuggler Street LLC, represented by CCY Architects, has requested HPC approval for Minor Development Review and Variations for the property located at 229 W. Smuggler Street, Unit B, Second and Smuggler Condominiums. City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for Minor Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.C.3.b of the Municipal Code, and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of Setback Variations, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.C, Setback Variations; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on October 9, 2019. HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comments and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval by a vote of _ to _. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1: Minor Development Review HPC hereby approves Minor Development and Variations for the property at 229 W. Smuggler Street, including a 6’ 1 1/2” reduction of the east and combined sideyards for a deck as depicted in the application. Section 2: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or 14 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019 Page 2 of 3 documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 3: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 229 W. Smuggler Street Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 4: Existing Litigation This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or 15 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019 Page 3 of 3 amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the _____ day of _______, 2019. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Gretchen Greenwood, Chair ATTEST: _________________________________________________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk 16 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A Minor Development Staff Findings 26.415.070 No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. 26.415.070.C. Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development. 3. The procedures for the review of minor development projects are as follows: a) The Community Development Director will review the application materials and if they are determined to be complete, schedule a public hearing before the HPC. The subject property shall be posted pursuant to Paragraph 26.304.060.E.3.b. b) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. c) The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a certificate of appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a development order. d) The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guideline 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. • Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood. • Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful open space visible from the street. 17 Page 2 of 2 STAFF RESPONSE: The Historic Preservation Design Guidelines do not address a raised deck like the one proposed in this application, other than Guideline 1.1, which speaks to setback conditions. Staff finds that the design guideline is met. A deck already exists on the east side of the Victorian. It is recessed from the front lot line and screened by vegetation. No historic materials are affected by this work. 18 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit B Setback Variation Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.110.C: Variances: Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. STAFF RESPONSE: The applicant requests an additional 6’ 1 ½”reduction of the east sideyard and combined sideyards for the deck only. Staff finds that review criteria b is met for the requested setback variations because during the review of the existing additions, HPC placed a high priority on leaving the northwest corner of the site as open yard. The discrete location of this east deck is sympathetic to the historic resource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est Smuggler Street LLC 229 West Smuggler Street, Aspen, CO 81611 Lots A, B, & C Block 48 273512417032 229 West Smuggler Street LLC 3509 Crescent Ave., Dallas, TX 75205 214-354-9635 NA ddowler@lkcm.com CCY Architects - Evan A. Barrett, AIA 228 Midland Ave., Basalt, CO 81621 970-927-4925 NA ebarrett@ccyarchitects.com At a recently completed Historic residence, there is an existing metal deck off the Victorian kitchen that the owner wants to change. The owner would like to change the existing metal deck to an IPE wood deck. Also, the owner would like to change the orientation of the stairs (currently face East) down to the breakfast area to face North. 20 21 City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 Land Use Review Fee Policy The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. Review fees for other City Departments reviewing the application (referral departments) will also be collected when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative – meaning an application with multiple flat fees must be pay the sum of those flat fee. Flat fees are not refundable. A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff time is required. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff may also charge their time spent on the case in addition to the case planner. Deposit amount may be reduces if, in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the project is expected to take significantly less time to process than the deposit indicates. A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre-application conference by the case planner. Hourly billing shall still apply. All applications must include an Agreement to Pay Application Fees. One payment including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the City of Aspen. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required fee. The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required for the processing of a land use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at the applicant’s request. The applicant will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes more time or expense than is covered by the deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a project review shall be billed to the applicant with no additional administrative charge. In the event the processing of an application takes less time than provided for by the deposit, the department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited fee to the applicant. Fees shall be due regardless of whether an applicant receives approval. Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final and recordation of approval documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purpose of billing. Upon conceptual approval all billing shall be reconciled and past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director accepting an application for final review. Final review shall require a new deposit at the rate in effect at the time of final submission. Upon final approval all billing shall be again reconciled prior to the Director accepting an application for review of technical documents for recordation. The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid invoice is 30 or more days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 days or more past due may be assessed a late fee of 1.75% per month. An unpaid invoice of 120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be assigned by the Municipal Court Judge. All payment information is public domain. All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements and plats. The City will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits already accepted, and unpaid invoice of 90 days or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or issuance of a stop work order until full payment is made. The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use application for the property. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing the owner (e.g. a contract purchaser) regarding payment of fees is solely between those private parties. 22 City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Property Phone No.: Owner (“I”): Email: Address of Billing Property: Address: (Subject of (send bills here) application) I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No., Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $___________flat fee for ____________________ $____________ flat fee for ____________________________________ $___________ flat fee for ___________________ $_____________ flat fee for____________________________________ For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $________________ deposit for_____________ hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $________________ deposit for _____________ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: ________________________________ _______________________________________________ Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director Name: _______________________________________________ Title: ____________________________________________________ City Use: Fees Due: $____Received $_______ David Dowler 229 West Smuggler Street, Aspen, CO 81611 214-354-9635 ddowler@lkcm.com 3509 Crescent Ave., Dallas, TX 75205 David Dowler Property Owner Propopertyt Owner: ________________________________________________ 23 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY DATE: November 12, 2018 PLANNER: Amy Simon, amy.simon@cityofaspen.com PROJECT NAME AND ADDRESS: 229 W. Smuggler REPRESENTATIVE: John Schenck, jschenck@ccyarchitects.com DESCRIPTION: The applicant would like to modify an existing deck and steps on the east side of the Victorian home at 229 W. Smuggler. The proposed work may require setback variations to proceed. This review is a one-step hearing, meaning that all details of the proposal will be presented to HPC in one application. Staff will review the project and make a recommendation to HPC, based on the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. HPC will make a decision to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the proposal. Below are links to relevant documents and a list of information needed to submit an application. RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: Section Number Section Title 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.070.C Development involving designated historic property or property within a historic district, Certificate of Appropriateness for a minor development 26.415.110.C Variances 26.575.020.E Measuring Setbacks 26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential (R-6) For your convenience – links to the Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below: Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Historic Preservation Land Use Application Packet Land Use Code REVIEW BY: • Staff for Complete Application • Historic Preservation Commission for decision PUBLIC HEARING: Yes 24 PLANNING FEES: $1,300 Deposit for 4 hours of staff time (additional/lesser hours will be billed/refunded at a rate of $325/hr.) REFERRAL FEES: No, however staff will seek referral comments from the Building Department, Zoning and Parks regarding any relevant code requirements or considerations. TOTAL DEPOSIT: $1,300 APPLICATION CHECKLIST – These items should first be submitted in a paper copy.  Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.  Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).  Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.  Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.  HOA Compliance form (Attached to Application)  A site plan and survey showing property boundaries, the location and orientation of existing and proposed improvements, proximity to any preserved view planes, and predominant site characteristics.  A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property.  Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the proposed work and its relationship to the designated building.  An accurate representation of all building materials and finishes to be used in the development.  Photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location, extend and design of proposed work. 25 Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the applicant/applicant’s representative will receive an e-mail requesting submission of an electronic copy of the complete application and the deposit. Once the deposit is received, the case will be assigned to a planner and the land use review will begin. During review of the case, additional items may be requested. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 26 June 28th, 2019 To: The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) Thru: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner From: CCY Architects, Evan Barrett, AIA (Authorized Agent to David Dowler) Re: 229 West Smuggler Street Legal Description of Land Use Application for Deck Remodel 426 North Second Street and 229 West Smuggler Street. LEGAL: Condominium Units A and B, SECOND AND SMUGGLER CONDOMINIUMS (A CONDOMINIUM), according to the Amended and Restated Condominium Map appearing in the records of the County Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado, in Plat Book 124 at Page 79 as Reception No. 654047, and as defined and described in the Amended and Restated Condominium Declaration recorded February 19, 2019 as Reception No. 654048, Pitkin County, Colorado. Evan A. Barrett, AIA C C Y A R C H I T E C T S 27 28 29 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030000 (1-31-17)Page 1 of 13 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Commitment COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued By FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions,First American Title Insurance Company, a Colorado Corporation (the "Company"), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within six months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. First American Title Insurance Company If this jacket was created electronically, it constitutes an original document. 30 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030000 (1-31-17)Page 2 of 13 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1.DEFINITIONS (a) "Knowledge" or "Known": Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records. (b) "Land": The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term "Land" does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (c) "Mortgage": A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. (d) "Policy": Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (e) "Proposed Insured": Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) "Proposed Policy Amount": Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (g) "Public Records": Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (h) "Title": The estate or interest described in Schedule A. 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: (a) the Notice; (b) the Commitment to Issue Policy; (c) the Commitment Conditions; (d) Schedule A; (e) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; (f) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and (g) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. 4.COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5.LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY (a) The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: (i) comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; (ii) eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or (iii) acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. (b) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (c) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. 31 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030000 (1-31-17)Page 3 of 13 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) (d) The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (e) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any. (f) In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (g) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy. 6.LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT (a) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment. (b) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. (c) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (d) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (e) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company. (f) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy. 7.IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8.PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9.ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. 32 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5033708-A (4-9-18)Page 4 of 13 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule A ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule A Transaction Identification Data for reference only: Issuing Agent:Winter VanAlstine Issuing Office:Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC Issuing Office's ALTA® Registry ID: 1019587 Loan ID No.: Commitment No.:19004184 Issuing Office File No.:19004184 Property Address:426 North Second Street, Unit A and 229 West Smuggler Street, Unit B, Aspen, CO 81611 SCHEDULE A 1. Commitment Date: June 27, 2019 at 07:45 AM 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount Premium A.ALTA Owners Policy (06/17/06)TBD $0.00 Proposed Insured:TBD Certificate of Taxes Due $0.00 Endorsements: Additional Charges:$0 Total $0.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is Fee simple. 4. The Title is, at the Commitment Date, vested in: 426 North Second, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (Parcel A) and 229 West Smuggler, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (Parcel B) 5. The land referred to in the Commitment is described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO For informational purposes only, the property address is: 426 North Second Street, Unit A and 229 West Smuggler Street, Unit B, Aspen, CO 81611. 33 SCHEDULE A (Continued) This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5033708-A (4-9-18)Page 5 of 13 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule A Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC By: Winter VanAlstine Authorized Officer or Agent FOR INFORMATION PURPOSED OR SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COMMITMENT, CONTACT: Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC,715 West Main Street, Suite 202, Aspen, CO 81611, Phone: 970 925-7328, Fax: 970 925-7348. 34 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030008-BI&BII (5-18-17)Page 6 of 13 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule BI & BII ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII Commitment No: 19004184 SCHEDULE B, PART I Requirements All of the following Requirements must be met: 1.The Proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. 2.Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. 3.Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. 4.Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. 5.Payment of all taxes and assessments now due and payable as shown on a certificate of taxes due from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent. 6.Evidence that all assessments for common expenses, if any, have been paid. 7.Final Affidavit and Agreement executed by Owners and/or Purchasers must be provided to the Company 8.Warranty Deed must be sufficient to convey the fee simple estate or interest in the land described or referred to herein, from 426 North Second, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company and 229 West Smuggler, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to TBD, the proposed insured, Schedule A, item 2A. NOTE: C.R.S. Section 38-35-109(2) required that a notation of the purchaser's legal address, (not necessarily the same as the property address) be included on the face of the Deed to be recorded. 9.Release of Deed of Trust from 426 North Second, LLC, to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County for the benefit of Iberiabank, to secure an indebtedness in the principal sum of $9,264,480.00 dated July 7, 2016, and recorded July 11, 2016, as Reception No. 630601 (affects Parcel A only). 10.Release of the Deed of Trust from 229 West Smuggler, LLC, to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County for the benefit of Iberiabank, to secure an indebtedness in the principal sum of $9,264,480.00, and any other amounts and/obligations secured thereby, dated July 7, 2016, and recorded July 11, 2016, as Reception No. 630599 (Affects Parcel B only). 35 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII (Cont.) Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 7 of 13 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado 11.Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of 229 West Smuggler, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172. 12.A copy of the properly signed and executed Operating Agreement if written, for 229 West Smuggler, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to be submitted to the Company for review. 13.Certificate of Good Standing from the Colorado Secretary of State for 229 West Smuggler, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. 14.Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of 426 North Second, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172. 15.A copy of the properly signed and executed Operating Agreement if written, for 426 North Second, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to be submitted to the Company for review. 16.Certificate of Good Standing from the Colorado Secretary of State for 426 North Second, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. 17.Additional Requirements may be included once the name of the Buyer is provided. 18.Evidence to the Company that all assessments and liens due under the Declaration referred to in Schedule B have been paid. 19.This Title Commitment is subject to underwriter approval. 36 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030008-BI&BII (5-18-17)Page 8 of 13 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule BI & BII ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII (Cont.) Commitment No.: 19004184 SCHEDULE B, PART II Exceptions THIS COMMITMENT DOES NOT REPUBLISH ANY COVENANT, CONDITION, RESTRICTION, OR LIMITATION CONTAINED IN ANY DOCUMENT REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SPECIFIC COVENANT, CONDITION, RESTRICTION, OR LIMITATION VIOLATES STATE OR FEDERAL LAW BASED ON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, HANDICAP, FAMILIAL STATUS, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN. The Policy will not insure against loss or damage resulting from the terms and provisions of any lease or easement identified in Schedule A, and will include the following Exceptions unless cleared to the satisfaction of the Company: 1.Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the Public Records, but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 2.Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the Public Records. 3.Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct land survey and inspection of the Land would disclose, and which are not shown by the Public Records. 4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown in the Public Records. 5.Any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter that appears for the first time in the Public Records or is created, attaches, or is disclosed between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements are met. Note: Exception number 5. will be removed from the policy provided the Company conducts the closing and settlement service for the transaction identified in the commitment 6.Any and all unpaid taxes, assessments and unredeemed tax sales. 7.Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. 8.Any water rights, claims of title to water, in, on or under the Land. 9.Taxes and assessments for the year 2019, and subsequent years, a lien not yet due or payable. 10.Exceptions and reservations as set forth in the Act authorizing the issuance of the Patent for the City and Townsite of Aspen dated June 2, 1881, and recorded March 1, 1897, in Book 139 at Page 216, as Reception No. 060156. 37 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII (Cont.) Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 9 of 13 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado 11.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Statement of Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision dated March 1, 1979, and recorded March 14, 1979, in Book 364 at Page 769, as Reception No. 212659. 12.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Resolution of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Recommending Landmark Designation of 426 N. 2nd Street, Units A and B, Second and Smuggler Condominiums, Block 48, City of Aspen (Resolution No. 99-26) dated September 21, 1999, and recorded October 7, 1999, as Reception No. 436340. 13.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under An Ordinance of the Aspen City Council Granting Approval for Landmark Designation of 426 N. 2nd Street, Units A and B, Second and Smuggler Condominiums, Block 48, City of Aspen (Ordinance No. 40 - Series of 1999) dated October 12, 1999, and recorded October 18, 1999, as Reception No. 436711. 14.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Resolution of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Approving an Application for Landmark Designation, Minor Development, Partial Demolition, Residential Design Review and Variances to Remodel a Historic House at 426 N. Second Street, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado (Resolution No. 44, Series of 1999) dated September 8, 1999, and recorded November 12, 1999, as Reception No. 437683. 15.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Resolution of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Approving an Application for Landmark Designation, Minor Development, Partial Demolition, Residential Design Review and Variances to Remodel a Historic House at 426 N. Second Street, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado (Resolution No. 42, Series of 1999) dated September 8, 1999, and recorded December 16, 1999, as Reception No. 438637. 16.Any and all notes, easements and recitals as disclosed on the recorded Improvement & Topographic Survey Plat dated May 24, 2012, and recorded January 4, 2013, in Plat Book 101 at Page 52, as Reception No. 595803. 17.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under Resolution #1, Series of 2015, recorded January 21, 2015, as Reception No. 616812. 18.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under Resolution #9, Series of 2015, recorded March 26, 2015, as Reception No. 618454. 19.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the City of Aspen Easement Agreement, dated September 23, 2016, and recorded November 4, 2016, as Reception No. 633601. 20.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Stormwater Best Management Practices Operations and Maintenance Agreement, recorded January 3, 2019, as Reception No. 653113. 21.Any and all notes, easements and recitals as disclosed on the recorded Amended and Restated Condominium Map of Second and Smuggler Condominiums, recorded February 19, 2019, in Plat Book 124 at Page 79, as Reception No. 654047. 22.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Amended and Restated Condominium Declaration of the Second and Smuggler Condominiums, recorded February 19, 2019, as Reception No. 654048. 23.Any existing leases or tenancies, and any and all parties claiming by, through or under said lessees. 38 Form 5000000-EX (7-1-14)Page 10 of 13 Exhibit A ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Exhibit A File No.: 19004184 The Land referred to herein below is situated in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and is described as follows: Parcel A: Condominium Unit A, SECOND AND SMUGGLER CONDOMINIUMS (A CONDOMINIUM), according to the Amended and Restated Condominium Map appearing in the records of the County Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado, in Plat Book 124 at Page 79, as Reception No. 654047, and and as defined and described in the Amended and Restated Condominium Declaration recorded February 19, 2019, as Reception No. 654048, Pitkin County, Colorado. Parcel B: Condominium Unit B, SECOND AND SMUGGLER CONDOMINIUMS (A CONDOMINIUM), according to the Amended and Restated Condominium Map appearing in the records of the County Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County, Colorado, in Plat Book 124 at Page 79, as Reception No. 654047, and and as defined and described in the Amended and Restated Condominium Declaration recorded February 19, 2019, as Reception No. 654048, Pitkin County, Colorado. 39 Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 11 of 13 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to C.R.S. 30-10-406(3)(a) all documents received for recording or filing in the Clerk and Recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one-half of an inch. The Clerk and Recorder will refuse to record or file any document that does not conform to the requirements of this section. NOTE: If this transaction includes a sale of the property and the price exceeds $100,000.00, the seller must comply with the disclosure/withholding provisions of C.R.S. 39-22-604.5 (Nonresident withholding). NOTE: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title insurance company shall be responsible to the proposed insured(s) subject to the terms and conditions of the title commitment, other than the effective date of the title commitment, for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title insurance company, or its agent, conducts the closing and settlement service that is in conjunction with its issuance of an owner's policy of title insurance and is responsible for the recording and filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed. Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, the company will not issue its owner's policy or owner's policies of title insurance contemplated by this commitment until it has been provided a Certificate of Taxes due or other equivalent documentation from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer's authorized agent; or until the Proposed Insured has notified or instructed the company in writing to the contrary. The subject property may be located in a special taxing district. A Certificate of Taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer's authorized agent. Information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner's policy commitments containing a mineral severance instrument exception, or exceptions, in Schedule B, Section 2. A. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and B. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-1, Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium, fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. 40 Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 12 of 13 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado NOTE: Pursuant to C.R.S. 38-35-125(2) no person or entity that provides closing and settlement services for a real estate transaction shall disburse funds as a part of such services until those funds have been received and are available for immediate withdrawal as a matter of right. NOTE: C.R.S. 39-14-102 requires that a real property transfer declaration accompany any conveyance document presented for recordation in the State of Colorado. Said declaration shall be completed and signed by either the grantor or grantee. NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado division of insurance within the department of regulatory agencies. Nothing herein contained will be deemed to obligate the company to provide any of the coverages referred to herein unless the above conditions are fully satisfied. 41 TELEPHONE 970 925-7328 FACSIMILE 970 925-7348 ATTORNEYS TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY OF ASPEN, LLC 715 West Main Street, Suite 202 Aspen, CO 81611 Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V. of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through it affiliates, from sharing non-public personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC. We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: Information we receive from you, such as on application or other forms. Information about your transactions we secure from out files, or from our affiliates or others. Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customer to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. 42 43 44 CONCRETE CONCRETE MASONRY STONE FRAME WALL TILE STEEL ALUMINUM OR SHEET METAL BATT INSULATION GYP. WALL BOARD/ STUCCO/ PLASTER PLYWOOD SOIL/ COMPACTED FILL ROCK/ NON-COMPACTED FILL / GRAVEL SAND / GWB/ PLASTER FINISHED WOOD ROUGH FRAMING OR ROUGH SAWN TRIM WOOD BLOCKING GLU-LAM WOOD PARTICLE BOARD OR WOOD FIBER BOARD RIGID INSULATION CARPET ROOM NAME 101 FLOOR FINISH WALL SECTION CUT BUILDING SECTION CUT SECTION NO. SHEET NO. SECTION NO. SHEET NO. SECTION NO. SHEET NO. DETAIL CUT GRID REFERENCE LINE ROOM NUMBER 101bDOOR MARK Name Elevation SPOT ELEVATION DRAWING REVISION INTERIOR ELEVATION WINDOW MARK DETAIL A4.1 1EXTERIOR ELEVATION A9.1 2 3 4 1 1 A101 1 A101 1 A101 1 A101 1i SIM SIM SIM SIM 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: HISTORY: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' As indicated EAB 14027 COVER A-000229 W. Smuggler StreetCOA HPC DECK APPLICATION 6.28.2019 229 W. Smuggler Street 229 WEST SMUGGLER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO 229 WEST SMUGGLER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADOCCY GENERAL NOTES ABBREVIATIONS PROJECT DIRECTORY MATERIAL LEGEND SYMBOL LEGEND F. SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ARCHITECT FOR HIS OR HER REVIEW WHERE CALLED FOR ANYWHERE IN THESE DOCUMENTS. REVIEW SHALL BE MADE BY THE ARCHITECT BEFORE WORK IS BEGUN, AND WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE REVIEWED SHOP DRAWINGS, SUBJECT TO REPLACEMENT AS REQUIRED IN PARAGRAPH "E" ABOVE. G. THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SHALL BE NOTIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR WHEN THERE IS NEED OF INSPECTION AS REQUIRED BY THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE / INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIONAL CODE OR ANY LOCAL CODE OR ORDINANCE. H. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY AND CARE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING CONSTRUCTION, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE O.S.H.A. REGULATIONS, AND FOR THE PROTECTION OF ALL WORK UNTIL IT IS DELIVERED COMPLETED TO THE OWNER. I. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES WITH THE ARCHITECT. J. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND COORDINATE ALL OPENINGS THROUGH FLOORS, CEILINGS, AND WALLS WITH ALL ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS. K. CONTRACTOR WILL ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY OF ITEMS REQUIRING COORDINATION AND RESOLUTION DURING THE BIDDING PROCESS. O. ALL DIMENSIONS ON STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS TO BE CHECKED AGAINST ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. NOTIFY ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION. A. THE AIA DOCUMENT 201, "GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION", LATEST EDITION, ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THESE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. COPIES ARE ON FILE AND ARE AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT THE OFFICES OF THE ARCHITECT. B. THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS CONSIST OF THE AGREEMENT, THE GENERAL NOTES, THE SPECIFICATION/ DETAIL BOOK, AND THE DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE COOPERATIVE AND CONTINUOUS. WORK INDICATED OR REASONABLY IMPLIED IN ANY ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE SUPPLIED AS THOUGH FULLY COVERED IN ALL. ANY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT PARTS SHOULD BE REPORTED TO THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY. C. ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES, AND SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF CRAFTSMANSHIP BY JOURNEYMEN OF THE APPROPRIATE TRADES. D. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE INTENDED TO INCLUDE ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES REQUIRED TO COMPLETE ALL WORK DESCRIBED HEREIN. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT ANY CONDITIONS WHICH WILL NOT PERMIT CONSTRUCTION ACCORDING TO THE INTENTIONS OF THESE DOCUMENTS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ARCHITECT TO PROVIDE DETAILS AND/OR DIRECTIONS REGARDING DESIGN INTENT WHERE IT IS ALTERED BY EXISTING CONDITIONS OR WHERE NEGLECTED IN THE DOCUMENTS. E. ANY MATERIALS PROPOSED FOR SUBSTITUTION OF THOSE SPECIFIED, OR CALLED OUT BY TRADE NAME, IN THESE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PRESENTED TO THE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLES WHEN REQUIRED BY THE ARCHITECT, AND ALL SUCH SAMPLES SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE ARCHITECT BEFORE THE WORK IS PERFORMED. WORK MUST CONFORM TO THE REVIEWED SAMPLES. ANY WORK WHICH DOES NOT CONFORM SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH WORK WHICH CONFORMS AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL SUBMIT REQUESTS AND SAMPLES FOR REVIEW THROUGH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR WHEN WORK IS LET THROUGH HIM OR HER. REQUIRED VERIFICATIONS AND SUBMITTALS TO BE MADE IN ADEQUATE TIME AS NOT TO DELAY WORK IN PROGRESS. S.T.D. SLOPE TO DRAIN SAN SANITARY SECT SECTION SEW SEWER SHLV SHEET SHT SHELVES SIM SIMILAR SPEC SPECIFICATION SQ SQUARE STC SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS STD STANDARD STL STEEL STRUCT STRUCTURE(AL) SUB SUBSTITUTE SUPPL SUPPLEMENT(AL) SUSP SUSPEND(ED) T TREAD T&B TOP AND BOTTOM T&G TOUNGE AND GROOVE T.O. TOP OF TEL TELEPHONE TEMP TEMPERED THK THICK TPH TOILET PAPER HOLDER TS TUBE STEEL TV TELEVISION TYP TYPICAL U.N.O. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE UBC UNIFORM BUILDING CODE UG UNDERGROUND UNFIN UNFINISHED USG UNITED STATES GAUGE V.I.F. VERIFY IN FIELD VAR VARIABLE VENT VENTILATE(D) VG VERTICAL GRAIN WD WOOD GWB GYPSUM WALLBOARD GYP GYPSUM H.T. HEAVY TIMBER HD HEAD HDW HARDWARE HOR HORIZONTAL HT HEIGHT HVAC HEATING VENTILATING AND COOLING HWY HIGHWAY IBC INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE ICP INTERGRATED COLOR PLASTER ID INSIDE DIAMETER IE THAT IS INS INSULATION INT INTERIOR IRC INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE JT JOINT LAM LAMINATE LAV LAVATORY MAX MAXIMUM MC MEDICINE CABINET MECH MECHANICAL MFG MANUFACTURER MIN MINIMUM MISC MISCELLANEOUS MO MASONRY OPENING MTL MATERIAL NA NOT APPLICABLE NIC NOT IN CONTRACT NTS NOT TO SCALE OC ON CENTER OD OUTSIDE DIAMETER OPG OPENING OPH OPPOSITE HAND OPP OPPOSITE PERF PERFORATED PFSM PREFINISHED SHEET METAL PL PLATE PLSTR PLASTER PLY PLYWOOD PROD PRODUCT PROJ PROJECT PROP PROPERTY R RADIUS OR RISER REF REFER REFR REFRIGERATOR REINF REINFORCE REQ'D REQUIRED RHSM ROUND HEAD SHEET METAL RM ROOM RO ROUGH OPENING RW ROOF WINDOW AAD ATTIC ACCESS DOOR ADD ADDENDUM ADJ ADJACENT AFF ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR AGG AGGREGATE ALT ALTERNATIVE AOR AREA OF REFUGE ARCH ARCHITECTURAL ASS'Y ASSEMBLY B.O. BOTTOM OF BD BOARD BET BETWEEN BLDG BUIDLING BM BEAM BRG BEARING BS BOTH SIDES CAB CABINET CER CERAMIC CJ CONSTRUCTION JOINT CL CENTERLINE CLOS CLOSET CLR CLEAR CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT COL COLUMN CONC CONCRETE CONT CONTINUOUS DET DETAIL DIA DIAMETER DIM DIMENSION DN DOWN DP DAMPPROOFING DR DRAIN DS DOWNSPOUT DW DISHWASHER DWG DRAWING EA EACH EJ EXPANSION JOINT ELE ELEVATION EQ EQUAL EXIST EXISTING EXT EXTERIOR F.F. FINISH FLOOR FD FLOOR DRAIN FDN FOUNDATION FE CABT FIRE EXTINGUISHER FIN FINISH FL FLOOR FOC FACE OF CONCRETE FOS FACE OF STUD FP FIREPROOF FTG FOOTING GA GAUGE GALV GALVANIZED GC GENERAL CONTRACTOR GLB GLU-LAM BEAM GR GRADE OWNER 229 WEST SMUGGLER LLC 3509 CRESCENT AVENUE DALLAS, TEXAS 75205 CONTACT: DAVID DOWLER (ddowler@lkcm.com) ARCHITECT CCY ARCHITECTS, LTD. 228 MIDLAND AVENUE (P.O. BOX 529) BASALT, CO. 81621 970.927.4925 FAX 970.927.8578 CONTACT: EVAN A. BARRETT (ebarrett@ccyarchitects.com) GENERAL CONTRACTOR KORU CONSTRUCTION, ltd. 417 MAIN STREET, SUITE Y CARBONDALE, CO 81623 970.963.0577 FAX 970.963.9389 CONTACT: JIM GOHERY (jim@korultd.com) VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX SITE HPC APPLICATION -BREAKFAST DECK STRUCTURAL ENGINEER KL&A, inc. 215 N. 12TH STREET, UNIT E CARBONDALE, CO 81623 970.927.5174 CONTACT: DAN DOHERTY (ddoherty@klaa.com) JUNE 2019 S-000 SURVEY A-000 COVER A-100 SITE PLAN A-101 DECK FLOOR PLAN & MATERIAL FINISHES A-102 DECK ELEVATIONS A-103 DECK SECTIONS AND DETAILS ISSUE DATE ISSUED S-100 DECK FRAMING 45 46 7883 7883 7883 7 8 8 3 788478847 8 8 4 7 8 8 4 7885 7 8 8 57885 78847885 7885 7 8 8 4 78847884 7884EXISTING HOUSE UNIT 'B' (VICTORIAN) UNIT 'B' ONE STORY ADDITION UNIT 'B' ONE CAR GARAGE UNIT 'A' (MUSIC BOX) FRONT SETBACK REAR SETBACKSIDE SETBACKSIDE SETBACKREAR GARAGE SETBACK EXISTING LIGHT WELL BELOW DECK. MEETS IRC R310.2.4 B1 B4 B7 BC BD BE BG A5 AA AB A4 AC B6 BF B5 BB A1 BA A2 B3 B2 PROPOSED DRIP THRU WOOD DECK W/ STEEL SUB STRUCTUREPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINESECOND STREETN14 50' 49" E(BASIS OF BEARINGS) S75 08' 11" E SITE BENCH MARK N75 08' 11" W S14 50' 49" WB8 A3 A-101 1 EXTENT OF EXISTING DECK PROPOSED DRIP THRU WOOD STAIRS W/ STEEL SUB STRUCTURE WEST SMUGGLER STREET EXISTING BREAKFAST PATIO GREY PAINTED STEEL GUARDRAIL. TO MATCH EXISTING EXISTING PLANTINGS SHALL HELP SCREEN PROPOSED DECK DN 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: HISTORY: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' 1/8" = 1'-0" EAB 14027 SITE PLAN A-100229 W. Smuggler StreetCOA HPC DECK APPLICATION 6.28.2019 229 WEST SMUGGLER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADOCCY 1/8" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN 1 0'8'16'4' ISSUE DATE ISSUED 47 B1 BD B3 B2 PROPERTY LINELIGHT WELL BELOW DRIP THROUGH THERMORY ASH WOOD DECK W/ STEEL SUB STRUCTURE. RE: STRUCTURAL EXISTING LIGHT WELL BELOW DECK. MEETS IRC R310.2.4 W8 GREY PAINTED STEEL HANDRAIL PER IRC 311.7.8 TO MATCH EXISTING GUARDRAIL COLOR AND DESIGN 99'-10" 100'-0" 7887.34 2 A-103 1 A-103 GREY PAINTED STEEL HANDRAIL PER IRC 311.7.8 TO MATCH EXISTING GUARDRAIL COLOR AND DESIGN 7887.09 6' - 1 1/2"10' - 10 1/2"2' - 4 7/16"3' - 8"DN 3' - 9 1/16" 3' - 1 9/16" EXISTING VICTORIAN KITCHEN AND BREAKFAST NOOK EXTENT OF EXISTING DECK & STAIRS EXISTING BREAKFAST PATIO A-1021 A-102 3 A-102 2 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: HISTORY: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' 3/4" = 1'-0" Author 14027 DECK FLOOR PLAN & MATERIAL FINISHES A-101229 W. Smuggler StreetCOA HPC DECK APPLICATION 6.28.2019 229 WEST SMUGGLER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADOChecker 3/4" = 1'-0" DECK FLOOR PLAN 1 ISSUE DATE ISSUED THERMORY ASH 5/4 WOOD DECKING (STAINED TO MATCH EXISTING FRONT PORCH) GRAY PAINTED STEEL -RAILINGS & STEEL SUBSTRUCTURE (PAINT COLOR TO MATCH EXISTING BREAKFAST DECK RAILING & STRUCTURE) NOTE: COLOR MAY NOT BE EXACT REPRESENTATION. COLOR AND STAIN TO MATCH EXISTING FRONT PORCH. 48 UNIT "B" FIRST FLOOR 100'-0" BDAC 1 A-103 LIGHT WELL3' - 0"2 1/2"3' - 0 1/4"10' - 10 1/2"4' - 6 1/2" T.O. LIGHT WELL 96'-7 1/4" EXTENT OF EXISTING DECK EXISTING LIGHT WELL BELOW DECK. MEETS IRC R310.2.4 GREY PAINTED STEEL HANDRAIL PER IRC 311.7.8 TO MATCH EXISTING GUARDRAIL COLOR AND DESIGN DRIP THROUGH THERMORY ASH WOOD DECK W/ STEEL SUB STRUCTURE. ALL STEEL SUBSTRUCTURE TO BE PAINTED GRAY TO MATCH EXISTING. RE: STRUCTURAL. STEEL STRINGER RE: STRUCTURAL. ATTACH TO CONCRETE COLUMN. 3 A-103 B1 B4B3 B2 2 A-103 EXISTING GRADE SITE SETBACK PROPERTY LINE 3' - 0 1/4" 2 1/2" 3' - 0" 6' - 1 1/2" 3' - 9 1/16" 3' - 1 9/16" 2' - 4 7/16" LIGHT WELL T.O. LIGHT WELL 96'-6 1/4" EXTENT OF EXISTING DECK 3 A-103 B1B3B2 2 A-103 EXISTING GRADE SITE SETBACK 6' - 1 1/2" 2' - 4 7/16"3' - 0"2 1/2"3' - 0 1/4"LIGHT WELL T.O. LIGHT WELL 96'-7 1/4" EXTENT OF EXISTING DECK3 A-103 0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: HISTORY: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' 1/2" = 1'-0" Author 14027 DECK ELEVATIONS A-102229 W. Smuggler StreetCOA HPC DECK APPLICATION 6.28.2019 229 WEST SMUGGLER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADOChecker ISSUE DATE ISSUED 1/2" = 1'-0" VICTORIAN (UNIT B) -EAST DECK ELEVATION 11/2" = 1'-0" VICTORIAN (UNIT B) -NORTH DECK ELEVATION 21/2" = 1'-0" VICTORIAN (UNIT B) -SOUTH DECK ELEVATION 3 49 UNIT "B" FIRST FLOOR 100'-0" B1B2 2 A-103 3' - 0"T.O. EXISTING DECK 99'-4 1/2" 6' - 1 1/2"5 1/2"2' - 9 1/4"96'-7 1/4" EXTINT 3' - 0 1/4"3' - 2 3/4"STEEL COLUMN-MOUNT TO SUB GRADE SUPPORT FOOTER OR EXISTING CONC. LIGHT WELL WALL. RE STRUCTURAL STEEL DECK SUB STRUCTURE. RE STRUCTURAL. ALL STEEL TO BE PAINTED GRAY TO MATCH EXISTING DECK STEEL COLOR. EXTENT OF EXISTING DECK DRIP THROUGH THERMORY ASH WOOD DECK W/ STEEL SUB STRUCTURE. PAINTED TO MATCH FRONT PORCH STAIN & COLOR. GREY PAINTED STEEL HANDRAIL PER IRC 311.7.8 TO MATCH EXISTING GUARDRAIL COLOR AND DESIGN A-103 3 UNIT "B" FIRST FLOOR 100'-0" BD 3' - 2 3/4"3' - 0"3' - 2 3/4"T.O. LIGHT WELL 96'-7 1/4" 9 1/4" 1 3/4"3' - 0 1/4"7 3/4"7 3/4"7 3/4"7 3/4"7 3/4"STEEL STRINGER-MOUNT TO SUB GRADE SUPPORT FOOTER. RE STRUCTURAL EXTENT OF EXISTING DECK GREY PAINTED STEEL HANDRAIL PER IRC 311.7.8 TO MATCH EXISTING GUARDRAIL COLOR AND DESIGN DRIP THROUGH THERMORY ASH WOOD DECK W/ STEEL SUB STRUCTURE. PAINTED TO MATCH FRONT PORCH STAIN & COLOR. ALL STEEL SUBSTRUCTURE TO BE PAINTED GRAY TO MATCH EXISTING. RE: STRUCTURAL. EXISTING GRADE 1"5 1/2"LIGHT WELL 1' - 0" EXISTING LIGHT WELL BELOW DECK. MEETS IRC R310.2.4 A-103 3 1" STAIR TREADS AND SUPPORT ANGLES. RE STRUCTURAL A-103 4 2 3/4"2 3/4"3/4"1 1/2"1/4" HANDRAIL TO MATCH EXISTING DECK HANDRAIL. TOP, BOTTOM & STANCHIONS TO BE 3/4" X 1 1/2" STEEL TUBE. PAINTED GRAY AND WELDED TO STEEL SUBSTRUCTURE. PICKETS TO BE 1/4" TUBE STEEL PAINTED GRAY. WELD PICKETS TO TOP AND BOTTOM RAILS. 1/4" TYP. HANDRAIL PICKET. WELD TO STEEL SUBSTRUCTURE SCREW WOOD DECKING TO STEEL SUBSTRUCUTRE. THERMORY ASH WOOD DECKING TO MATCH FRONT PORCH 5/4 DECKING0 228 Midland Avenue | PO Box 529 | Basalt, Colorado 81621 970-927-4925 | www.ccyarchitects.com DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PROJECT NUMBER: ISSUE: HISTORY: SCALE: © COTTLE CARR YAW ARCHITECTS, LTD. 4'8'2' As indicated Author 14027 DECK SECTIONS & DETAILS A-103229 W. Smuggler StreetCOA HPC DECK APPLICATION 6.28.2019 229 WEST SMUGGLER STREET, ASPEN, COLORADOChecker 1 1/2" = 1'-0" EAST/WEST DECK SECTION 1 1 1/2" = 1'-0" NORTH/ SOUTH DECK SECTION 2 ISSUE DATE ISSUED 6" = 1'-0" DECK HANDRAIL DETAIL 36" = 1'-0" DECK FLOOR DETAIL 4 50 A A B1 BD AC B2 9'-10 1/2"4'-8"12 " C IP C O N C C O L3'-8" TYP OF 3 TY P O F 3 H S S 3 x3 x1/4 TY P O F 4 STAIR STRINGERS TO BE HSS 6x3x1/4 3'-6 1/4"3'-8"3'-8"3'-3 1/2"11 1/2"89'-0" T/FTG 2'-0"x2'-0"x0'-10" FTG, REINF W/ (3)#5 EW BOT, TYP T/CONC GRADE +4" ’ 1'-1" TYP OF 2 T/CONC GRADE -8" RE: 4/S100 RE: 3/S100 B1 BD AC B2 DECK FRAMING MEMBERS TO BE HSS 3-1/2x1-1/2x1/4 (LLH), TYP 3 S100 99'-10" T/DECKING 4 S100 5 S100 1'-7 3/4"1'-7 3/4"1'-10"1'-10"1'-10"1'-10"HSS 6x3x1/4 STRINGER, TYPMAX 2'-4" EQ EQ EQ EQ B1 B2 2"T/CONC 12". CONC PILASTER W/ (4)# 5 VERT W/ STD HOOK INTO FTG BELOW AND #3 TIES AT 12"OC (2 AT TOP) 1-1/2" NON-SHRINK GROUT BASE 13/4x4x0'-9" W/ (2) 3/4". ANCHOR RODS (6"-GAGE) STEEL FRAMING, RE: PLAN, TYP CONT L5x3x1/4x0'-5" (LLV) W/ 1/2". SS TITEN HD SCREW ANCHORS AT 24" OC WOOD DECKING, RE: ARCH CAP 11/2x4x0'-5" 3/16TYP 3/16 3/16 T/DECKING TYP 1 1/2"CLR COLUMN TO BEAR ON EXISTING WALL AT LIGHT WELL, FASTEN TO CONCRETE WITH 3/4". SS TITEN HD ANCHORS, RE: PLAN FOR LOCATION 3/16 3/16 BD TYP 1 1/2"CLR 12". CIP COLUMN, REINF W/ (4)#5 VERT W/ STD HOOK INTO FTG BELOW AND #3 TIES AT 12"OC (2 AT TOP) BASE 13/4x6-1/2x0'-7" ON 1-1/2"± NON-SHRINK GROUT W/ (2) 3/4". SS TITEN HD ANCHORS HSS 6x3x1/4(LLV) STAIR STRINGER DECKING, RE: ARCH DECK FRAMING MEMBERS, RE: PLAN 3/16 SECTION A-A8" MIN1/2"1/2"1 1/2"1 1/2" TYP 1 1/2" CJP 3/16 RE: 3/S100 FOR BASE OF COLUMN L8x4x7/16, FULL LENGTH BETWEEN STRINGERS AT EA STAIR TREAD CENTER STAIR TREADS ON SUPPORT ANGLE 3/16 BD FACE OF (E) CONC WALL HSS 6x3x1/4 STAIR STRINGER W/ 1/4" THICK END PLATE 1" L3x3x1/4x0'-4" W/ 3/4". SS TITEN HD SCREW ANCHOR RE: 4/S100 FOR UPPER CONNECTION OF STRINGER AND CONNECTION OF TREAD TO STRINGER 3/16 1. ALL STEEL TO BE HOT DIP GALVANIZED Buffalo, WY Golden, CO Loveland, CO Carbondale, CO KL A, Inc.& Structural Engineers and Builders 1717 Washington Avenue, Suite 100 Golden, Colorado 80401 P: (303) 384 9910 F: (303) 384 9915 N SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO: ISSUE: CONSULTANT: S100 DECK FRAMING B0335 DOWLER STAIR 229 WEST SMUGGLER STREET & 426 NORTH SECOND STREET, ASPEN, COLORADO 1/2" = 1'-0"1 FOUNDATION PLAN 1/2" = 1'-0"2 DECK FRAMING PLAN 1" = 1'-0"3 DECK FRAMING DETAIL 1" = 1'-0"4 STAIR STRINGER CONNECTION DETAIL 1" = 1'-0"5 STAIR STRINGER CONNECTION DETAIL 5/30/2019CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 05/29/2019 51 June 28th, 2019 To: The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) Thru: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Planner From: CCY Architects, Evan Barrett, AIA (Authorized Agent to David Dowler) Re: 229 West Smuggler Street Written Explanation of Land Use Application for Deck Remodel The applicant (229 West Smuggler Street LLC) would like to modify the existing deck and steps on the East side of the Victorian Home at 229 West Smuggler Street. The modification to the deck includes reorienting the steps from the East side of the deck to the North side of the deck. Given the close proximity of the deck and steps to the adjacent property, this change will allow the homeowners to have better access their on-grade patio without disturbing the existing plantings that separate the applicant’s property from the Eastern neighbor’s property. We also feel that the visual perception of the deck will be lessened from West Smuggler Street because the profile of the deck will show the deck straight on rather than showing the deck, steps, and guardrail from the side. The applicant would like also, to raise the existing deck by 5 ½” so that the homeowners will not have to step down onto the deck from the interior of the house, as they currently do. We understand that by raising the deck we exceed section 26.575.020.E.5 of the Land Use Code and so are asking for a variance to be granted by HPC. By raising the deck 5 ½”, we can eliminate the tripping hazard that is further aggravated by adverse weather conditions (especially during winter) for the applicant and their family when using this deck. Because this deck is set back 58’-0” feet from West Smuggler Street and there is ample landscape planting between the street and the deck, we feel the visual impact of raising the deck will be imperceivable. The existing plantings between the deck and the street also help shield the stairs when they are reoriented so there will not be any confusion between the main entry porch and the side yard deck, which we believe aligns with the HPC residential design standards section 26.410.040 in the Land Use Code. To help illustrate this, we have included an existing conditions photo from West Smuggler and the same photo with an accurate representation of the proposed deck overlaid on the photo to show how the change will not create a noticeable visual difference between the existing condition and the proposed design. Finally, the applicant would like to change the decking material from metal grating to Thermory Ash wood decking that matches the entry porch decking on the North side of the house. We contend this material change will create a more cohesive and unified look for the Historic Victorian asset, as opposed the modern metal grate deck that currently exists. The guardrail will be a grey painted steel to match the existing style and character of the guardrail that was approved and currently exists. We ask for a variance to be granted to allow the approval of this deck application to proceed. Please let me know if you have any questions that I can answer to help with this application. Thank you for your time and consideration of this application. Sincerely, Evan A. Barrett, AIA C C Y A R C H I T E C T S 52 Applicant response to criteria for Setback Variation In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or The new decking material shall utilize the same Thermory Ash wood decking and will have the same stain color as the front entry porch of the historic property. The steel substructure shall be painted gray to match the color of the existing siding at the historic property, so that the deck uses the same previously approved HPC materials and design characteristics. The handrail design is to be the same steel design (pickets, top rail and bottom rail) as currently exists and was previously approved by HPC. The decking materials, color, and handrail style all are intended to let the deck blend into the historic property, thereby having the same character and features of the historic property and maintaining the design characteristics of what HPC previously approved. b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. The Applicant contends that the proposed design will enhance the historical significance and the architectural character of the property by creating a more user friendly deck that doesn’t require a full step down from the kitchen interior. This solution also allows the homeowners to have better access their on-grade patio without disturbing the existing plantings / property line that separate the applicant’s property from the adjacent Eastern historic property. Because this deck is set back 58 feet from West Smuggler Street and there is ample landscape planting between the street and the deck, we feel the visual impact of raising the deck will be imperceivable, thereby mitigating any adverse visual impacts to the historic district. 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 229 W. Smuggler Street 5.30.2019 P1 EXTERIOR PHOTO -EXISTING CONDITION 61 229 W. Smuggler Street 5.30.2019 P2 EXTERIOR PHOTO -PROPOSED DESIGN 62 63 64 Page 1 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Memorandum TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner THROUGH: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer MEETING DATE: October 9, 2019 RE: 202 East Main Street – Conceptual Major Development Review, Relocation, Dimensional Variations and Floor Area Bonus, PUBLIC HEARING, Continued from August 28th APPLICANT /OWNER: Rocking Lazy J Properties, LLC Jake Vickery and Della Pegolotti REPRESENTATIVE: Jake Vickery, Architect LOCATION: Street Address: 202 E. Main Street Legal Description: Lot 1, Main Street Victorians Historic Landmark Lot Split Subdivision Exemption, According to the Plat thereof recorded November 9, 2012 in Plat book 100 at Page 92, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2737-073-99-001. CURRENT ZONING & USE MU – Mixed Use (Main Street Historic District) Commercial Use PROPOSED USE: Single-Family Residential SUMMARY: The applicant has requested a Conceptual Major Development review for the demolition of non-historic additions, relocation of the historic building onto a new basement, and the construction of a new rear addition. Dimensional variations related to setbacks and parking, and a 500 sf floor area bonus are requested. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with conditions identified on page 10 of this memo. Site Locator Map – 202 East Main Street 202 65 Page 2 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com BACKGROUND: 202 East Main Street is a designated landmark on a 3,000 square foot lot in the MU zone district. This property contains a one-story miner’s cottage with a non-historic addition to the rear. The house appears to be in its original location according to the historic Sanborn maps. Historic photographs show that much of the original architectural details are intact. There is a small spruce tree in front of the historic resource and two large cottonwood trees towards the front of the property in the public right- of-way. The site slopes down towards the alley by approximately 3’-6”. s Figure 1 – Sanborn Map, 1904 Figure 2 – Historic Photograph, 1890 Image Credit: Aspen Historical Society In 2012, Aspen City Council granted approval for a Historic Lot Split between 202 E. Main and 208 E. Main creating two (2) 3,000 sf parcels (Ordinance #14, Series of 2012). The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) granted approvals for demolition of a storage room that linked the two historic structures together and setback variations for both parcels (Resolution #5, Series of 2012). NOTE: This project will be reviewed under the Land Use Code prior to the historic preservation benefits code amendments approved by City Council on May 13, 2019 because it was submitted and declared complete before the new code language went into effect on June 12, 2019. REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals: • Major Development (Section 26.415.070.D) for demolition of non-historic additions and construction of a new addition towards the rear of the historic building. • Relocation (Section 26.415.090) for the relocation of the historic residence onto a new basement. • Setback Variation (Section 26.415.110.C) for the proposed design including the new addition and lightwells. 66 Page 3 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com • Parking Reduction and Waiver of fees (Section 26.415.110.D) request for a reduction of one (1) parking space and fee waiver. • Floor Area Bonus (Section 26.415.110.F) request for a 500 sf bonus. The HPC is the final review authority, however, this project is subject to Call-up Notice to City Council. The project, once approved, will be granted an Administrative Growth Management Exemption for Change in Use from commercial to residential with no affordable housing mitigation required. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to demolish the existing non-historic addition and construct a new above grade addition to the rear of the historic resource. A full basement is proposed and will require the temporary relocation of the historic structure during excavation. The proposed design changes the use from commercial to a single-family residence, which results in a 20% floor area reduction as required by underlying zoning. The applicant requests setback variations, parking reduction, fee waivers, and a floor area bonus of 500 sf as part of this proposal. Following the August 28, 2019 continuation by HPC the applicant has revised the proposed design for the connecting element and the above grade addition. The revised connecting element is 5’ in length and one-story. The proposed addition relates to the historic resource through building materials and fenestration but deviates in form. A flat roof with a rooftop deck and a green roof is proposed. The revised design proposes a new dormer to the rear of the historic resource that lines up with the existing historic cross gable. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff finds that the revised proposal addresses concerns regarding the connecting element and design compatibility of the proposed addition as it relates to the historic resource. The revised design proposes new fenestration that gestures to the size and proportion of the historic fenestration and utilizes materials are similar to the historic resource. The proposed connecting element is one-story, tucks under the eave of the historic resource and provides a 5’ distance between the historic resource and the proposed new addition. Staff continues to support the applicant’s plan to maintain the historic alignment along Main Street and the plan to pursue preservation/restoration work on the historic resource. Staff recognizes the site constraints presented on this lot due to maintaining this alignment and preserving the large cottonwood trees. Staff supports the request for setback variations with the revised design. Staff supports the applicant’s request for a floor area bonus because it meets the criteria for a bonus. The following points go into more detail regarding the revised proposal for HPC discussion: 1. Site Planning & Relocation: The Sanborn maps indicate the historic house is in its original location. To construct the basement design, the applicant plans to temporarily move the house on site, then onto the new foundation. Ultimately, the historic structure will be placed back in its 67 Page 4 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com original location. The applicant will need to provide structural assessment and financial assurances in order to comply with Design Guideline 9.1. Considering the lot size, the proposed subgrade addition, and the large cottonwood trees near the property, staff finds preliminary plans addressing stormwater mitigation is critical. The applicant has reached out to the relevant City Departments to discuss feasible options to address stormwater mitigation on the site. As part of the solution, a green roof is being proposed on the new addition. The applicant will need to continue working closely with relevant City Departments and staff and monitor for any future design changes. Staff supports the removal of the spruce tree in the front yard of the historic property due to its proximity to the resource. The final grading of the site will need to maintain the historic relationship of how the structure meets the ground while providing positive drainage (Design Guideline 1.8). In order to provide natural light into the subgrade spaces, the applicant proposes two lightwells. Following the previous HPC meeting, the applicant has moved the proposed lightwell that was abutting the historic porch to the west elevation of the historic building. The new location will require a setback variation but is no longer immediately adjacent to the historic porch and main entrance to the Victorian. Staff recommends the applicant work with staff and monitor and the Building Department to discuss the options for a flat grate around the front most lightwell rather than a railing. A rail in this location is visually intrusive. The height of any curb needs to be 6” or less. Figure 3 – Proposed Site Plan (revised) 68 Page 5 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Staff finds the criteria for relocation are met. Staff supports the new location of the front lightwell and the removal of the spruce tree to the front of the property. Staff recommends the applicant continue to work closely with other City Departments related to excavation staying within the property boundaries and obtaining the necessary permission at the time of before any work commences on site. 2. New Addition – Connecting Element & Form/Materials/Fenestration & New Dormer: The proposed addition has a flat roof, but is taller than the historic building and has an above grade floor area is not larger than the historic resource. The transitional space between the old and the new has been revised to a 5’ long one-story connecting element. A new dormer is proposed on the rear of the historic roof. Connecting Element: When a new addition is taller than the historic resource, the guidelines call for a one-story connector with a minimum length of 10 feet that tucks under the eave of the historic building in order to provide a meaningful separation (Guideline 10.9). The revised design is a 5’ long one-story connecting element that is minimal and subordinate to the historic eave. Although it is not the recommended 10’ in length, the constraints on the lot creates a limited area for new development. Staff finds that the proposed connecting element is appropriate because of its minimal impact to the historic resource. It achieves separation between the old and new. According to Design Guideline 10.6, the new addition needs to be recognized as a product of its own time, but visually compatible with the historic resource. In order to promote compatibility, the Design Guidelines requires two of the following characteristics to relate back to the historic resource: form, material and fenestration. Figure 4 – Proposed East Elevation (revised) 69 Page 6 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Figure 5 – Proposed West Elevation (revised) Form: The revised form of the above grade addition is a two-story rectilinear massing located to the rear of the property. A flat roof is proposed with a rooftop deck and green roof for storm water mitigation purposes. The applicant is deviating from form and relating to the historic resource through fenestration and building materials. Guideline 10.11 calls for a compatible roof form for the new addition in relation to the historic resource. Typically, a gable roof is encouraged for an addition to a historic Victorian. In order to balance the request for an adequate connecting element, staff supports the proposed roof form because it does not visually compete with the historic resource and is considerably setback from the front of the property. Figure 6 – Proposed Roof Plan (revised) Materials: The historic miner’s cottage is mostly clad with horizontal clapboard siding and decorative architectural detailing on the front façade and porch. The historic structure sits on a simple brick foundation. The applicant plans to restore the historic brick foundation. The revised addition is clad in horizontal wood siding as the primary building material. Staff supports the use of wood siding material for the new addition 70 Page 7 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Fenestration: The revised fenestration choices on the new addition are based on the proportions and dimensions of the historic fenestration, which is predominantly double-hung windows. The connecting element is mostly glass. Staff finds that the revised design for fenestration relates to the historic resource and meets the Design Guidelines. New Dormer: In this restudy, the applicant introduced a new dormer element on the roof of the historic resource. Visually, it is a seamless continuation of the south facing historic cross gable. There is a large window opening at the northern gable end of the dormer. Design Guideline 7.6 addresses the addition of a new dormer to a historic roof. The proposed dormer is not providing livability to an upper story, as typical with these features, and the mass and scale of the dormer addition is not subordinate to the historic ridgeline. The original massing of the historic cross gable would be altered with this design. The extension of the cross gable causes confusion regarding the form of the historic building and covers a large portion of the historic roof. Staff finds that this dormer addition does not meet the Design Guideline and does not recommend approval. Staff finds that the revised design of the new addition deviates from form but successfully relates to the historic resource through fenestration and materials. Staff finds the proposed 5’ long one-story connecting element achieves the appropriate separation between new and old. Staff does not recommend approval of the proposed dormer addition. 3. Dimensional Variations: As a historically designated landmark, certain preservation benefits may be granted by HPC. As mentioned above, this application was submitted and deemed complete before the code amendments to the Historic Preservation Benefits went into effect, therefore, is subject to the old code. Setback Variations: With this project, the applicant requests additional setback variations for the project: • 2’ setback reduction on the west and east sideyard above and below grade, for the addition • 5’ setback reduction on the east sideyard above and below grade, for historic house and basement • 2’ setback reduction on the west sideyard above and below grade, for the historic house and basement • Up to a 5’ west sideyard setback reduction for the lightwells In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or 71 Page 8 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Parking Reductions & Fee Waivers: Underlying zoning requires two parking spaces for single-family residence. Due to the site configuration and the location of the historic resource, the applicant proposes one on-site parking spot and a potential compact car parking space, both accessed from the alley. A compact car parking space would not meet the code requirements, therefore, a parking reduction of one space is requested. According to Section 26.415.110.D, HPC may approve the reduction of parking upon a finding that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designed historic property. As a designated property under the old code, exemptions for growth management and impact fees are available. The revised design includes a rear loggia that functions as the entry to the compact car parking space. The applicant’s design intent for the loggia is to break up the mass and scale of the addition and respond to the context of the ally. A restudy of this feature may provide the extra space needed to accommodate for a full parking space, and staff recommends restudy. Staff supports the request for setback variations since it is a result of maintaining the historic location of the historic house which enhances the historic significance of the property. Staff recommends restudy of the loggia to the rear of the proposed addition in order to provide for an adequately sized parking space. 4. Floor Area Bonus: The applicant is requesting a floor area bonus to the amount of 500 sf. The proposal mentions undertaking any necessary restoration/preservation work. Following is the criteria for awarding a floor area bonus for this application (Section 415.110.F) 1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; 72 Page 9 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. Staff recognizes that with the change in use from commercial to residential, the property is subject to a considerable floor area reduction. A single-family home is limited to 1,920 sf, whereas a commercial property could be 3,000 sf. Staff finds that all of the applicable criteria for a floor area bonus are met with the revised design. The applicant provided a preservation plan to restore significant details related to the fenestration, foundation, and the historic chimney. Staff recommends the applicant work closely with staff and monitor on preservation details and supports the awarding of a floor area bonus. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The application was referred out to other City departments who have requirements that will significantly affect the permit review. The following is a summary of comments received. See Exhibit C for details. Engineering Department: 1. The applicant will need to provide a conceptual level information regarding stormwater treatment and how onsite runoff will be captured and treated prior to HPC approval. 2. Excavation stabilization may require agreements with neighboring properties which must be submitted at the time of building permit. Micropile walls cannot impact neighboring properties. 3. Work with Parks and Engineering Departments to determine the best alignment for a new water service line that minimizes impact to the street trees. 4. Public improvements to the sidewalk and a new curb and gutter will be required. Parks Department: 1. Clarifications for the tree removal request is needed. 2. Details regarding the proposed excavation need to be reviewed and approved by the City Forester. 3. Survey information about the size of the cottonwood trees need to be verified. 4. Public improvements such as sidewalks must be floating and no excavation is permitted in the dripline of the existing Cottonwood trees. All excavation work will require discussion with the City Forester. 5. Location for new waterline requires discussion with Parks and Engineering. 73 Page 10 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Building Department: 1. The historic building and parts of the proposed new addition along the East and West property lines must comply with fire separation and fire rating requirements. Please see Building comments for specific details (Exhibit B). 2. Emergency escape and rescue windows adjacent to walkways require guards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the HPC approve this application with the following conditions: 1.) Restudy of the proposed loggia on the rear of the new addition in order to provide an adequately sized parking space. 2.) Remove the proposed new dormer on the historic resource. 3.) Design curb heights around the lightwells to be 6” or less, and work with the Building Department and staff to discuss a flat grate option around the lightwells. 4.) The following variations are approved: • 2’ setback reduction on the west and east sideyard above and below grade, for the addition • 5’ setback reduction on the east sideyard above and below grade, for historic house and basement • 2’ setback reduction on the west sideyard above and below grade, for the historic house and basement • Up to a 5’ west sideyard setback reduction for the lightwells 5.) Continue to discuss the design of the storm water mitigation system with all relevant City Departments for compliance. Final design to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor before building permit. 6.) Work closely with staff and monitor regarding the preservation plan and identifying areas for additional documentation and investigative demolition, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 7.) Provide necessary agreements from neighboring properties for site excavation stabilization prior to submission of Building permit. 8.) Provide details of the relocation plan, outlined by a structural engineer and housemover, at Final. The applicant will be required to provide a financial security of $30,000 until the house is set on the new foundation. The financial security is to be provided with the building permit application. 9.) A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. 74 Page 11 of 11 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com ATTACHMENTS: Resolution #____, Series of 2019 Exhibit A.1 – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria /Staff Findings Exhibit A.2 – Dimensional Variations Review Criteria /Staff Findings Exhibit A.3 – Relocation/Staff Findings Exhibit A.4 – Floor Area Bonus/Staff Findings Exhibit B – Referral Comments Exhibit C – Application 75 HPC Resolution #___, Series of 2019 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2019 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, RELOCATION, SETBACK VARIATION, AND FLOOR AREA BONUS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 202 EAST MAIN STREET, LOT 1, MAIN STREET VICTORIANS HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED NOVEMBER 9, 2012 IN PLAT BOOK 100 AT PAGE 92, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-073-99-001 WHEREAS, the applicant, Rocking Lazy J Properties, LLC, represented by Jake Vickery, has requested HPC approval for Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations, and Floor Area Bonus for the property located at 202 East Main Street, Lot 1, Main Street Victorians Historic Landmark Lot Split Subdivision Exemption According to the Plat thereof recorded November 9, 2012 in Plat Book 100 at Page 92, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, for approval of Setback Variations, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.C, Setback Variations; and WHEREAS, for approval of Floor Area Bonus, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.F, Floor Area Bonus; and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable review standards and recommends approval with conditions; and 76 HPC Resolution #___, Series of 2019 Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on August 28, 2019 and October 9, 2019. HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of __ to __. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations, and Floor Area Bonus for 202 E. Main Street, Lot 1, Main Street Victorians Historic Landmark Lot Split Subdivision Exemption, according to the Plat thereof recorded November 9, 2012 in Plat Book 100 at Page 92, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO as follows: Section 1: Conceptual Major Development Review, Relocation, Setback Variations, and Floor Area Bonus. HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, and Setback Variations, and a Floor Area Bonus as proposed with the with the following conditions: 1.) Restudy the proposed loggia on the rear of the new addition in order to provide an adequately sized parking space. 2.) Remove the proposed new dormer on the historic resource. 3.) Design curb heights around the lightwells to be 6” or less, and work with the Building Department and staff to discuss a flat grate option around the lightwells. 4.) The following variations are approved: • 2’ setback reduction on the west and east sideyard above and below grade, for the addition • 5’ setback reduction on the east sideyard above and below grade, for historic house and basement • 2’ setback reduction on the west sideyard above and below grade, for the historic house and basement • Up to a 5’ west sideyard setback reduction for the lightwells 5.) Continue to discuss the design of the storm water mitigation system with all relevant City Departments for compliance. Final design to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor before building permit. 6.) Work closely with staff and monitor regarding the preservation plan and identifying areas for additional documentation and investigative demolition, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 7.) Provide necessary agreements from neighboring properties for site excavation stabilization prior to submission of Building permit. 8.) Provide details of the relocation plan, outlined by a structural engineer and housemover, at Final. The applicant will be required to provide a financial security of $30,000 until the house is set on the new foundation. The financial security is to be provided with the building permit application. 9.) A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such 77 HPC Resolution #___, Series of 2019 Page 3 of 3 an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 3: Existing Litigation This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the ____ day of ____________, 2019. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney Gretchen Greenwood, Chair ATTEST: _________________________________________________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk 78 Page 1 of 13 Exhibit A.1 Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings NOTE: Staff responses begin on page 12-13 of this exhibit, following the list of applicable guidelines. 26.415.070.D Major Development. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. 3. Conceptual Development Plan Review b) The procedures for the review of conceptual development plans for major development projects are as follows: 1) The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for conceptual or final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. 2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. 3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. 4) A resolution of the HPC action shall be forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 - Appeals, notice to City Council, and call-up. No applications for Final Development Plan shall be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued until the City Council takes action as described in said section. 79 Page 2 of 13 Chapter 1: Site Planning & Landscape Design MET NOT MET 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. 1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram. 1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. Chapter 2: Rehabilitation - Building Materials MET NOT MET 2.1 Preserve original building materials. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. Chapter 3: Rehabilitation - Windows MET NOT MET 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. 3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. Chapter 4: Rehabilitation - Doors MET NOT MET 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. Chapter 5: Rehabilitation - Porches & Balconies MET NOT MET 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. CONDITION CONDITION CONDITION CONDITION MET MET MET MET CONDITION CONDITION Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review Criteria for 202 E. Main Street The applicant is requesting a Conceptual Major Development review approval for relocating the historic resource onto a new basement, and the construction of a new above grade addition. The proposed design must meet all applicable Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. MET MET MET MET CONDITION MET MET MET CONDITION CONDITION MET MET 80 Page 3 of 13 Chapter 6: Rehabilitation - Architectural Details MET NOT MET 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. Chapter 7: Rehabilitation - Roofs MET NOT MET 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. 7.6 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character.NOT MET Chapter 9: New Construction - Excavation, Building Relocation & Foundations MET NOT MET 9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. Chapter 10: New Construction - Building Additions MET NOT MET 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. 10.7 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. 10.9 If the addition is taller than a historic building, set it back from significant façades and use a “connector” to link it to the historic building. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. Chapter 12: Accessibility, Lighting, Mech. Equipment, Services Areas & Signs MET NOT MET 12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage. MET MET CONDITION CONDITION MET CONDITION CONDITION MET CONDITION MET MET CONDITION CONDITION MET MET CONDITION MET MET MET MET MET CONDITION 81 Page 4 of 13 Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines: 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. • Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood. • Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful open space visible from the street. 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. When HPC input is requested, the following bullet points may be applicable. • Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining historic ancillary buildings or constructing new ones. • Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add landscape. • Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged. • Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas. • Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged on a case by case basis. 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. • If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it. • Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for driveways on Aspen Victorian properties. 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. • Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a semi-public walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. • Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of the period of significance. • Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks. • The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. • Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than many small unusable areas. • Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building. 82 Page 5 of 13 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. • When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be reviewed and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal. • Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the historic landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site, reduce the generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the ground. Stormwater facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should have minimal visual impact when viewed from the public right of way. • Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements. 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. • Retaining historic planting beds and landscape features is encouraged. • Protect historically significant vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Removal of damaged, aged, or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. • If a significant tree must be removed, replace it with the same or similar species in coordination with the Parks Department. • The removal of non-historic planting schemes is encouraged. • Consider restoring the original landscape if information is available, including original plant materials. 1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram. • Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not overplant a site, or install a landscape which is overtextured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes. • In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod, and low shrubs are often appropriate. • Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the property, in Zone C. • Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited patio where appropriate. • Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building must be honored. • In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to over plant either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before the property was divided. • Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged. 1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. 83 Page 6 of 13 • Protect established vegetation during any construction. • If any tree or shrub needs to be removed, replace it with the same or similar species. • New planting should be of a species used historically or a similar species. • Maintain and preserve any gardens and/or ornamental planting on the site. Maintain and preserve any historic landscape elements. 2.1 Preserve original building materials. • Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. • Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. • Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. • Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. • Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that was not historically painted shall not be painted. • If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods. • Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. • If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. • Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. • Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows. • Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them. • Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration glass for the repair. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. • Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate. • Do not change the size of an original window opening. 3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. 84 Page 7 of 13 • If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the sash have divided lights, match that characteristic as well. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. • Changing the window opening is not permitted. • Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past. 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. • A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. • The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. • Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. • Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. • If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. • Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible. 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. • Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and spacing of balusters. • Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate. 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. • Repair only those features that are deteriorated. • Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. • On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. 85 Page 8 of 13 • Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. • If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. • The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building’s heritage. • When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. • Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen from the street. • Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing. • Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. • Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource. • AspenModern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key character defining features of the architectural style. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. • Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures. • Locate vents on non-street facing facades. • Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. • Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists. 7.6 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. • A new dormer is not appropriate on a primary, character defining façade. • A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building. • The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic building. • While dormers improve the livability of upper floor spaces where low plate heights exist, they also complicate the roof and may not be appropriate on very simple structures. 86 Page 9 of 13 • Dormers are not generally not permitted on AspenModern properties since they are not characteristics of these building styles. 9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric. • This activity will require the same level of documentation, structural assessment, and posting of financial assurances as a building relocation. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. • Raising the finished floor of the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable if needed to address drainage issues. A substantial change in position relative to grade is inappropriate. • Avoid making design decisions that require code related alterations which could have been avoided. In particular, consider how the relationship to grade could result in non-historic guardrails, etc. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. • The size of any lightwell that faces a street should be minimized. • Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining features, such as front porches. • Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a street. • Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” in the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site. 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. • The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the HPC. • During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door and window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration. • The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process. Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis and may require special conditions of approval. • A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. • For Aspen Victorian properties, HPC generally relies on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps to determine which portions of a building are historically significant and must be preserved. • HPC may insist on the removal of non-historic construction that is considered to be detrimental to the historic resource in any case when preservation benefits or variations are being approved. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. 87 Page 10 of 13 • A new addition must be compatible with the historic character of the primary building. • An addition must be subordinate, deferential, modest, and secondary in comparison to the architectural character of the primary building. • An addition that imitates the primary building’s historic style is not allowed. For example, a new faux Victorian detailed addition is inappropriate on an Aspen Victorian home. • An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. • Proposals on corner lots require particular attention to creating compatibility. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. • The historic resource must be visually dominant on the site and must be distinguishable against the addition. • The total above grade floor area of an addition may be no more than 100% of the above grade floor area of the original historic resource. All other above grade development must be completely detached. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: o The proposed addition is all one story o The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource o The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource o The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically o The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the street o There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed o The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or o The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. • An addition shall be distinguishable from the historic building and still be visually compatible with historic features. • A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material, or a modern interpretation of a historic style are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from historic construction to new construction. • Do not reference historic styles that have no basis in Aspen. • Consider these three aspects of an addition; form, materials, and fenestration. An addition must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • Note that on a corner lot, departing from the form of the historic resource may not be allowed. • There is a spectrum of appropriate solutions to distinguishing new from old portions of a development. Some resources of particularly high significance or integrity may not be the right instance for a contrasting addition. 10.7 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street. 88 Page 11 of 13 • Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings may align at approximately the same height. An addition can not be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered or obscured. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. • An addition that is lower than, or similar to the height of the primary building, is preferred. 10.9 If the addition is taller than a historic building, set it back from significant façades and use a “connector” to link it to the historic building. • Only a one-story connector is allowed. • Usable space, including decks, is not allowed on top of connectors unless the connector has limited visibility and the deck is shielded with a solid parapet wall. • In all cases, the connector must attach to the historic resource underneath the eave. • The connector shall be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. • Minimize the width of the connector. Ideally, it is no more than a passage between the historic resource and addition. The connector must reveal the original building corners. The connector may not be as wide as the historic resource. • Any street-facing doors installed in the connector must be minimized in height and width and accessed by a secondary pathway. See guideline 4.1 for further information. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. • Locating an addition at the front of a primary building is inappropriate. • Additions to the side of a primary building are handled on a case-by-case basis and are approved based on site specific constraints that restrict rear additions. • Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. • A simple roof form that does not compete with the historic building is appropriate. • On Aspen Victorian properties, a flat roof may only be used on an addition to a gable roofed structure if the addition is entirely one story in height, or if the flat roofed areas are limited, but the addition is primarily a pitched roof. 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. • Loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices, and eavelines must be avoided. 12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage. • Place mechanical equipment on the ground where it can be screened. 89 Page 12 of 13 • Mechanical equipment may only be mounted on a building on an alley façade. • Rooftop mechanical equipment or vents must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, it may be appropriate to provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. Use the smallest, low profile units available for the purpose. • Window air conditioning units are not allowed. • Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Group them in a discrete location. Use pedestals when possible, rather than mounting on a historic building. • Paint mechanical equipment in a neutral color to minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds • In general, mechanical equipment should be vented through the roof, rather than a wall, in a manner that has the least visual impact possible. • Avoid surface mounted conduit on historic structures. Staff Finding: The applicable sections of the design guidelines are as follows: site planning, relocation, building materials, windows, doors, roofs, porches, building additions, and service areas. All relevant Design Guidelines in Chapter 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 related to the preservation plan needs to be reviewed with staff and monitor for further historic evidence and/or investigative demolition in order to ensure no historic fabric is being removed. Restoration of historic features must match existing historic detail. All preservation work needs to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. Staff finds Design Guideline 1.8 regarding stormwater mitigation requires continued discussion with all relevant City Departments. Engineering and Parks have specific requirements that need to be met. This guideline requires the design of the stormwater mitigation system to provide positive drainage away from the historic buildings and minimize the visual impact of any associated features, such as drywells. The applicant has met with Engineering to discuss options for storm water mitigation and a green roof has been proposed. A final storm water mitigation plan needs to be reviewed and approved by all relevant City Departments and staff and monitor. Staff finds Design Guideline 7.6 relates to the addition of a new dormer to the historic roof. The guideline highlights the importance of mass and scale of the new dormer and the importance of appropriate placement and proportions. Often, a dormer is introduced to the historic building to improve livability on the upper floors of a gable roof. The proposed new dormer is located to the rear of the historic resource but is considered significant in scale as it extends to the midway point of the historic lean to roof. The gable end has a large window opening that is also out of character. The extended appearance of the historic cross gable also creates a confusing roof condition that covers and removes existing historic material. Staff recommends the removal of this new feature to prevent alterations to the original roof form. Staff finds Design Guideline 9.6 relates to the visual impact of lightwells and their overall location. The applicant proposes two lightwells to provide daylight into the subgrade areas of the house. Both 90 Page 13 of 13 lightwells are significant in size. The revised design locates the lightwell that was previously proposed on the east elevation to the west elevation and no longer abuts the historic porch. Staff finds this new location to be more appropriate. The Building Department provided comments related to railings for the proposed lightwells. The applicant and staff and monitor will work with the Building Department to find a solution that does not result in elements that would obstruct the view of the historic resource. Design Guideline 10.4 calls for the historic resource to be the focus and main entry for the property. The main entrance is proposed on Main Street and the loggia to the functions as the entry to a parking space. The historic resource is perceived as the visually dominant structure on the site with one main entrance from Main Street. The total above grade floor area of the new addition less than the historic resource and the revised design provides an adequate separation through a connecting element that creates a distance between the old and new. Design Guideline 10.6 concerns the design of the new addition to be compatible with the historic resource by considering form, materials, and fenestration. Staff finds that the revised design deviates from the historic form of the Victorian but relates to the fenestration and materials of the historic resource. Since two of the three characteristics relate to the historic resource, staff finds that this Design Guideline is met. Design Guideline 10.9 provides requirements for situations where the new above grade addition is taller than the historic resource. As a one-story historic resource on a 3,000 sf lot, it is important that the new addition does not overshadow the historic resource through mass and scale. The revised design proposes a new one-story connecting element that is 5’ long and tucks under the historic eave of the lean-to historic addition. Although the proposed length is half the length recommended, staff finds that the existing site constraints related to drip lines and the need to preserve the historic alignment limits the length of the connecting element. Design Guideline 10.11 addresses the roof form of the new addition. These forms must be simple and compatible with the historic resource. The revised addition proposes a flat roof for the entire above grade addition and the connecting element. Typically, a gable roof is considered the most compatible solution for an addition to a Victorian; however, this site requires a balance of design choices and staff finds the need for a connecting element of higher importance and the applicant’s design has achieved design compatibility by relate to the historic materials and fenestration of the historic resource. In summary, staff recommends approval of the revised design with the listed conditions found in the staff memo and resolution. 91 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A.2 Dimensional Variations Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.110.C: Variances: Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Finding: The applicant is requesting for setback variations on the west and east side yards of the property for the proposed design. The historic resource is currently in the setback and will be temporarily relocated but placed back into its current location on a new foundation. The proposed lightwells and the new addition will require setback variations. As a 3,000 sf lot located between two properties and a historic alignment to maintain, there is a limited area of buildable space. Staff finds the granting of setback variations helps mitigate any adverse impacts towards the historic resource and supports the granting of the setback variation. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance:MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a.) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b.) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. MET Review Criteria for 202 East Main Street As a historically designated property, HPC may grant dimensional variations of the Land Use Code to allow for development in the side, rear and front setbbacks. The applicant is requesting Setback Variations for the proposed design. MET Summary of Review Criteria for Setback Variation Request 26.415.110.C - Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be requried by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 92 Page 2 of 2 26.415.110.D: Parking: Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions. In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, the parking reduction and waiver of payment- in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. Staff Finding: The proposal requires two parking spaces for a single-family residence. The proposed design provides for one parking space and one potential compact car parking space. The proposed compact car parking space would not meet the parking requirement for two spaces, therefore, would require a parking reduction of one space. Staff finds a redesign of the proposed loggia to the rear of the addition may allow for an adequately sized parking space and recommends restudy. In addition to the review criteria in Section 26.515, the parking reduction and waiver of payment-in- lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by HPC that:MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designeated historic proerty, an adjoining designated property or a historic district.NOT MET Review Criteria for 202 East Main Street As a historically designated property, HPC may grant parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees if designated properties are unable to contain the number of required parking spaces. Summary of Review Criteria for Parking Variation Request 26.415.110.D - Parking. Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the nubmer of on-site spaces requird by the underlying zoning. 93 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A.3 Relocation Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.090.C: Relocation: Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. 26.415.090.C - Relocation. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards:MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or N/A 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or .N/A 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or N/A 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met:MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation;CONDITION 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security.CONDITION MET MET Review Criteria for 202 East Main Street The applicant is requesting for Conceptual Major Development review approval and relocation of the historic building onto a new basement. Summary of Review Criteria for Relocation Request 94 Page 2 of 2 Staff Finding: According to the historic Sanborn Map from 1904, it appears that the historic miner’s cottage is in its original location. The applicant’s plan for temporary relocation is for the purpose of building a new basement. The proposed work for relocation and excavation must comply with Design Guideline 9.1 by providing structural assessment and financial assurances. Additional comments have been provided by other relevant City Departments regarding the excavation process that the applicant will need to address prior to Building permit submittal. Staff finds all the relevant review criteria for relocation are met with conditions. 95 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A.4 Floor Area Bonus Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.110.F: Floor Area Bonus: 1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its 26.415.110.F - Floor Area Bonus. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grand up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or N/A h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained.N/A MET MET MET MET MET MET Review Criteria for 202 East Main Street The applicant is requesting for Conceptual Major Development review approval and a 500 sf floor area bonus. Summary of Review Criteria for Floor Area Bonus Request 96 Page 2 of 2 ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. 3. The decision to grant a floor area bonus for major development projects will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Subsection 26.415.070.D. The floor area bonus may also be approved as part of a Historic Landmark Lot Split Review. 4. Floor area bonuses are cumulative. A property shall receive no more than 500 square feet total. Staff Finding: This project is subject to the code language before the Historic Preservation Benefits code amendments. HPC may grant up to 500 sf floor area bonus. Of the eight criteria listed, two are not applicable, and staff finds that the applicant meets the remaining six criteria for awarding a floor area bonus. The applicant is taking a 480 sf reduction for building a residential building in the MU zone district due to underlying zoning requirements. Staff supports the request for a floor area bonus with the revised addition and connection element finding the expansion is sympathetic to the site conditions and has minimal visual impact towards the historic resource. 97 From:Nick Thompson To:Sarah Yoon; Amy Simon; Ben Carlsen; Bob Narracci; Bonnie Muhigirwa; David Coon; David Radeck; Denis Murray; Hailey Guglielmo; Jack Danneberg; Jim Pomeroy; Mike Horvath; PJ Murray; Trish Aragon Subject:RE: HPC Referral Project: 202 E. Main Street Date:Friday, June 21, 2019 4:58:44 PM Attachments:image009.png image010.png image011.png image012.png image003.png Hi Sara, Here are comments from building: 1. Historic portion East property line fire separation distance of 3’-5” complies with IRC (change in use to single family) if fire sprinklers are installed. (2015 IRC R302.1) 2. Historic portion West property line fire separation distance of 1’-0” requires 1 hour rated wall and no windows or eave overhangs allowed. The existing condition is similar but with a few more inches of clearance on the West (but then less on the East) (2015 IRC R302.1). However, 2015 IEBC 1205.3 allows the existing historic exterior wall and opening situation to remain due to a change of occupancy to an equal hazard category. The applicant must submit a report per 2015 IEBC 1201.2. 3. The new addition is 3’ from the East and West property lines. This requires either a fire sprinkler or 1 hour fire rated wall with windows no more than 25% of wall area and 1 hour fire rated eave overhangs no closer than 2’ to the property lines (2015 IRC R302.1). Applicant should verify with the Parks department that a fire sprinkler line can feasibly be installed. 4. Emergency escape and rescue opening window wells have grates and appear to be adjacent to walkways- requiring guards per City policy. Nick Thompson Plans Examiner Community Development 130 S Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 p: 970.429.2757 c: 970.456.5165 www.cityofaspen.com www.aspencommunityvoice.com Notice and Disclaimer: EXHIBIT B - REFERRAL COMMENTS 98 From:Hailey Guglielmo To:Sarah Yoon Subject:RE: HPC Referral Project: 202 E. Main Street Date:Thursday, June 27, 2019 4:22:55 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image003.png image004.png image005.png Sarah, Engineering comments are as follows: 1.Stormwater - The application makes no reference to how onsite runoff will be captured and treated for water quality. The proposed plan does not leave much room for stormwater treatment. Prior to HPC approval the applicant shall provide information on a conceptual level of how rainwater will be treated. 2.Excavation Stabilization - The proposed excavation stabilization plan is very constrained. If any work or layback is proposed to be done on neighboring properties, an agreement between the property owners must be submitted to the City along with the building permit. Micropile walls cannot have any impact on neighboring properties. 3.Water service line – at building permit, the applicant shall work with the Parks and Engineering Departments to determine the best alignment of the new water service line. Any plan shall minimize impacts to the street trees. The application mentioned removing the tree in the front yard so it is my understanding there will be no onsite utility tree conflicts. 4.Public improvements – at the time of building permit a 6’ sidewalk will be required. The sidewalk shall follow the COA “floating sidewalk” detail to avoid tree roots. New curb and gutter will be required. A one sided pour on the back will be required to protect the existing tree roots. A 2’ asphalt t-top patch will be required. Thanks, Hailey Guglielmo, PE Development Engineer Engineering Department 201 N Mill St. Ste 203 Aspen, CO 81611 p: 970.429.2751 www.cityofaspen.com 99 From:Hailey Guglielmo To:Sarah Yoon; Amy Simon Cc:jakevickery@comcast.net Subject:202 E Main St Date:Wednesday, August 28, 2019 10:54:32 AM Attachments:image001.png Hi Sarah and Amy, I met with Jake Vickery and Roger Neal with High Country Engineering to talk through stormwater options for 202 E Main St. We discussed four potential options for the current proposed structure. I feel confident HCE can work through each option and arrive at a stormwater design that works for the current HPC proposal and meets Engineering standards. Let me know if you have any questions or if HPC needs further information. Thanks. Hailey Guglielmo, PE Development Engineer Engineering Department 201 N Mill St. Ste 203 Aspen, CO 81611 p: 970.429.2751 www.cityofaspen.com 100 From:David Radeck To:Sarah Yoon; Amy Simon; Ben Carlsen; Bob Narracci; Bonnie Muhigirwa; David Coon; Denis Murray; Hailey Guglielmo; Jack Danneberg; Jim Pomeroy; Mike Horvath; Nick Thompson; PJ Murray; Trish Aragon Subject:RE: HPC Referral Project: 202 E. Main Street Date:Thursday, June 20, 2019 5:00:08 PM Attachments:image001.png image012.png image013.png image014.png image015.png Hi Sarah, Parks comments: On page 19, applicant is asking for a removal of the front tree. As there are two trees in the front yard, 1 deciduous and 1 coniferous, we need to know which they are inquiring about. What are the limits of excavation in front yard? This will require discussion with the City Forester to see how close to the cottonwood trunks they can disturb. On pages 5 & 30, Waiver request for Parks Dedication fees will need approval of Manager of Parks. DBH on cottonwood trees are the same on both surveys, one dated 9/24/2012 and the other dated 3/21/2019. Will need to verify sizes. If ENG is requiring sidewalk to be replaced it must be of a floating design and no excavation can occur within the driplines of the existing cottonwoods. Any activity in the front yard will require discussion with the City Forester as it is entirely within the driplines of the cottonwoods. This includes staging of house while the basement is being dug. The waterline for both 202 and 208 W Main is in between the 2 cottonwoods and a discussion will need to be had between ENG and Parks to determine the best location for the new waterline. Dave David Radeck Project Technician Parks Department 585 Cemetery Lane Aspen, CO 81611 p: 970.429.2025 c: 970.274.2175 f: 970.920.5128 www.cityofaspen.com 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 202 E Main StAspen, CO 81611970.309.7722Parcel # - R021796Vickery / PegolottiPrinted On: 2/14/2019 10:53:38 Sheet: CHD Job #: 18-0081 13404 221st ST EGraham, WA 98338Jared Baehmer, OwnerPh: 253.777.2362202 E Main StN 30'-0 1/4"S75° 9' 11"E100' S14° 50' 49"W30'-0 1/4"N75° 9' 11"W100' N14° 50' 49"E 30'-0 1/4"S75° 9' 11"E100' S14° 50' 49"W30'-0 1/4"N75° 9' 11"W100' N14° 50' 49"E1'4'3'2'3'2'3'-5"1'-7"10'1'4'5' Site Plan - Proposed Walkway on Adjacent Property 1'0 6'2'8'4'10' GRAPHIC SCALE: Setback Line Property Line 7900.0 Setback Line 7899.0 7898.0 7897.0 New Light Well w/ Operable Grate Light Well 10" Spruce Trash Enclosure Covered Porch Proposed 2' Side Yard Variance Proposed 2' Side Yard Variance Variance for Existing House Variance for Existing House Existing Historic House Proposed New Addition Existing Grade Interpolated Grade Key Perimeter Micro Piles Shown on Foundation Plan. Notes Hard Surface Adjacent Building Adjacent Building Adjacent Light Well Scale: 1/8 in = 1 ft 7901.0 7901.0 2.5' Dia Cottonwood 2.5' Dia Cottonwood 7899.0 7900.0 Proposed Site Plan A3.0 Porous Paving vickeryarchitecture & planning202 east main street aspen colorado 81611970 309-7722 jakevoickery@comcast.netDate: 5.28.19 Proposed side yard variation for egress / light well New proposed sideyard variation for relocated egress / light well Proposed new connector Existing additional setback preserved 202 East Main 9.24.19 shown in yellow 115 202 East Main Street Application for Major Development 9.16.19 Description of Restudy The following are responses to the Staff Recommendations in the August 28, 2019 memo for this application: A copy of the recommendations is below: Corresponding applicate responses: 1. The design of the addition has been revised so that the primary materials and fenestration characteristics strongly relate to those of the historic resource. Form is the selected differentiating characteristic. The form of the addition is simple. The height of the addition is only 3’ higher than the ridge of the resource and the addition is set back substantially behind this ridge. The addition is not visible from Main Street. The resource remains the visually dominant element of the property. The use of the flat roof reduces overall height and permits a potential green roof (sustainable design) and to control storm water run-off. 2. A one story connecting element has been added to the design. It joins the resource under eave of the resource. The connector is 5’ long instead of 10’ but accomplishes the desired outcome and is proportionate to the lot size. An important factor in consideration of this reduced length is the 3’4” of increased front yard which preserves historical alignment with the adjacent resources. This added setback also protects the root systems of the two large cottonwood trees in the adjacent Main Street right of way. 3. The light / egress well for the front basement bedroom (required by code) has been relocated to the less sensitive and least visible west side of the resource. The lightwell is now separated significantly 116 from the character defining features of the resource. This egress / light well will require and additional side yard variance. 4. Storm water management of this design has been reviewed by the City Engineer and our Civil Engineering consultant and several options exist to meet these requirements. A green roof is one of these options and has been integrated in the restudy. 5. A draft preservation plan has been developed and will be provided. 6. The garage has been reconfigured to permit a second, albeit extremely tight, parking space. The door at the “loggia” is now a garage door. The loggia no longer provides an alternative “entrance” to the house but just a secondary protected opening to access standard alley services such as trash. The “loggia” recess serves to break up the rear form of the addition. 7. The City Forester from the Parks Department has visited the site and made recommendations. The two large cottonwoods in the adjacent Main Street right of way will be fully protected and no construction is proposed under their driplines as indicated on the survey. The 10” spruce in the front yard will be removed as is supported by staff. 8. Excavation and earth stabilization will occur on site by the use of micropyles engineered to retain and protect adjoining properties. If required, agreements with adjoining property owners will be provided prior to submission of building permit. Additional explanation of the restudy is provided on the two PDF’s named “Restudy - West (and East) Elevation Diagrams with notes 9.13.19”. 117 202 East Main St. TOTAL FAR CALCULATION - PROPOSED 6.7.19 Above Grade Ground 1344 includes 118 garage Upper 633 deducts 92 stair Total Above Grade 1977 57 over 1920 Below Grade Basement Calculation 218 Subtotal FAR w/o decks 2195 space Decks Roof deck with stair 176 288 exempt Loggia 49 used to be 80 Total Decks add 225 TOTAL FAR 2420 Allowable 1920 500 2420 w/ full bonus Basement FAR Calculation Total Basement Wall Surface North South East West Total 291 258 481 482 414 413 291 258 895 895 2339 58 49 0 0 0 0 0 58 49 0 0 107 2446 Total Basement Wall Surface Exposed North South East West Total 41 34 43 81 sidewalls lightwells 0 18 36 29 triangles 41 52 79 110 282 Calculation 2446 282 0.1153 11.53% 1884 11.53%217.23 218 WORKSHEET 1330 164 665 1995 75 2213 101 80 181 2394 unchanged ABOVE GRADE SQUARE FOOTAGE FLOOR AREA resource 945 addition 665+221= 886 NET(less)59 garage 539 FAR= 164 Revised 10.3.19 90 * * * * included in the 474 "bonus" for larger egress / light wells and additional decks 218 118 202 E Main StAspen, CO 81611970.309.7722Parcel # - R021796Vickery / PegolottiPrinted On: 2/14/2019 10:53:38 Sheet: CHD Job #: 18-0081 13404 221st ST EGraham, WA 98338Jared Baehmer, OwnerPh: 253.777.2362202 E Main StN 30'-0 1/4"S75° 9' 11"E100' S14° 50' 49"W30'-0 1/4"N75° 9' 11"W100' N14° 50' 49"E 30'-0 1/4"S75° 9' 11"E100' S14° 50' 49"W30'-0 1/4"N75° 9' 11"W100' N14° 50' 49"E1'4'3'2'3'2'3'-5"1'-7"10'1'4'5' Site Plan - Proposed Walkway on Adjacent Property 1'0 6'2'8'4'10' GRAPHIC SCALE: Setback Line Property Line 7900.0 Setback Line 7899.0 7898.0 7897.0 New Light Well w/ Operable Grate Light Well 10" Spruce Trash Enclosure Covered Porch Proposed 2' Side Yard Variance Proposed 2' Side Yard Variance Variance for Existing House Variance for Existing House Existing Historic House Proposed New Addition Existing Grade Interpolated Grade Key Perimeter Micro Piles Shown on Foundation Plan. Notes Hard Surface Adjacent Building Adjacent Building Adjacent Light Well Scale: 1/8 in = 1 ft 7901.0 7901.0 2.5' Dia Cottonwood 2.5' Dia Cottonwood 7899.0 7900.0 Proposed Site Plan A3.0 Porous Paving vickeryarchitecture & planning202 east main street aspen colorado 81611970 309-7722 jakevoickery@comcast.netDate: 5.28.19 add to garage Proposed New Addition New Cross Gable New Connector5'-0" RESTUDY 9.16.19 119 202 E Main StAspen, CO 81611970.309.7722Parcel # - R021796Vickery / PegolottiPrinted On: 2/14/2019 10:53:38 Sheet: CHD Job #: 18-0081 13404 221st ST EGraham, WA 98338Jared Baehmer, OwnerPh: 253.777.2362202 E Main StShower Shower ShowerDryer Washer W HFurnFurnW19 - 5050 PIC W09 - 4050 XO W23 - 4050 DC 30682680 26802880 26803080 508050803080368050805080 36802680 5080W22 - 3050 SC UP UP 9'-2"7'-8"27'-2"2'-7"12'-3 3/16"15'-9 13/16"5'-9"1'-4" 81'-9"3'20'-5"4'-10"28'-3"2'-6"24'26'2'-1"2'2'-8"22'-7 3/4"15'-1 1/4"28'16' 81'-9"10"5'3'-8"4'-11"4'-0 1/2"6'-3 1/2"6'-8"2'-7"18'-9"2'-7"10'-5"6'-8"2'-8"6'-8 1/2"4'-9"7'-6"2'-3"5'2'-10"11'-9"2'-8 1/2"7'-10 1/2"2'-9"BEDROOM 3 / FAMILY ROOM%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% BEDROOM 2%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% BEDROOM 1%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% DISPLAY%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% DISPLAY%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% DISPLAY%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Foundation Plan - 202 E Main Proposed Scale: 1/8 in = 1 ft 1'0 6'2'8'4'10' GRAPHIC SCALE: DISPLAY%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% MECH ROOM%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Mech Room 12'-0" x 7'-3" Bedroom 1 15'-7" x 15'-3" 239 sq ft %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% DISPLAY%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Bedroom 2 19'-7" x 12'-8" 210 sq ft Bedroom 3 / Family Room 15'-9" x 21'-2" 333 sq ft BEDROOM 3 / FAMILY ROOM%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Property Line %HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% BEDROOM 3 / FAMILY ROOM%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Light Well Egress Light Well 4 A3.6.4 4 A3.6.4 7 A3.6.5 7 A3.6.5 8 A3.6.5 8 A3.6.5 5 A3.6.4 5 A3.6.4 2 A3.6.2 2 A3.6.2 9 A3.6.5 9 A3.6.5 1 A3.6.1 1 A3.6.1 6 A3.6.4 6 A3.6.4 3 A3.6.3 3 A3.6.3 Proposed BSMT Plan A3.1vickeryarchitecture & planning202 east main street aspen colorado 81611970 309-7722 jakevoickery@comcast.netProposed Lower Floor Plan Date: 5.28.19 Proposed Lower Floor Plan2668UP UP 0 : 12 0 : 12 6'-8 1/2"2'-6"5'-5 1/2"4'-0"10'-0"4'-0"DN UP new hyphen door to bedroom 3 repositioned space move to other side UPUP 0 : 12 10' UP DN RESTUDY 9.16.19 120 202 E Main StAspen, CO 81611970.309.7722Parcel # - R021796Vickery / PegolottiPrinted On: 2/14/2019 10:53:38 Sheet: CHD Job #: 18-0081 13404 221st ST EGraham, WA 98338Jared Baehmer, OwnerPh: 253.777.2362202 E Main St D01 - 2868 W17 - 2810 PIC D02 - 2868 W18 - 2810 PIC W01 - 5040 XO W03 - 2020 PIC W04 - 2666 SH W05 - 2666 SH W10 - 2056 SH D04 - 3068 D03 - 8076 W28 - 2630 DH W07 - 2630 DH W06 - 2666 SH W20 - 2666 SH W02 - 41066 DH 10080 OHD Metal (Non-Insulated)266824682668W24 - 5050 PIC 4068UP UP 12 : 12 12 : 12 2 : 12 3 : 12 12 : 12 12 : 12 6 : 12 10 : 12 10 : 12 10 : 12 30'-0 1/4"S75° 9' 11"E100' S14° 50' 49"W30'-0 1/4"N75° 9' 11"W100' N14° 50' 49"E 30'-0 1/4"S75° 9' 11"E100' S14° 50' 49"W30'-0 1/4"N75° 9' 11"W100' N14° 50' 49"E 8 : 12 8 : 12 0 : 12 0 : 12 0 : 12 12 : 12 19'-2"2'-6"3'-5"2'-6"3' 1'5'5'-1"2'-8"2'-3"3'2'-6"3'-5"2'-6"3'-9"5'7'-10"2'-7" 1'16'30'-7"5'-2 3/4"6'-5 1/2"23'-5 3/4" 82'-9"4"4'-10 1/2"4"4'-5 1/4"5'-6 1/2"4'-5 1/4"6'2'-2"25'-7"3'14'-5"8'-2"5'-4"2'10'2'1'8'1'14'10'26'2'-8"2'2'-8"7'-4"7'-3 1/4"5'2' 8'15'-5 3/4"11'-8 1/4"2'-7"28'16'1' 82'-9" 8' 8'8'5'-4"1'12'-6"5'-2"7'-9 1/2"9'-0 1/2"8'-9"6'-8 1/2"2'-6"5'-5 1/2"7'-3 1/2"3'-5 1/2"2'-7"7'-2" 1st Floor Plan - 202 E Main Proposed Scale: 1/8 in = 1 ft DECK%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% 1'0 6'2'8'4'10' GRAPHIC SCALE: Property Line LOGGIA%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Garage 22'-6" x 23'-0" 437 sq ft Loggia 4'-11" x 9'-11" 49 sq ft Dining Area 27'-5" x 14'-4" 406 sq ft Living Area 15'-10" x 13'-5" 212 sq ft Kitchen 17'-2" x 10'-3" 177 sq ft Trash Enclosure Property Line Wall AboveWall AboveEntry 7'-1" x 8'-2" 66 sq ft Restore Historical Window Remove Non Historical Windows & Restore Building Corner 4 A3.6.4 4 A3.6.4 7 A3.6.5 7 A3.6.5 8 A3.6.5 8 A3.6.5 5 A3.6.4 5 A3.6.4 2 A3.6.2 2 A3.6.2 9 A3.6.5 9 A3.6.5 1 A3.6.1 1 A3.6.1 6 A3.6.4 6 A3.6.4 3 A3.6.3 3 A3.6.3 Proposed Ground Plan A3.2vickeryarchitecture & planning202 east main street aspen colorado 81611970 309-7722 jakevoickery@comcast.netProposed Ground Floor Plan Date: 5.28.19 Proposed Ground Floor Plan4'-0"10'-0"4'-0"DN UP add to garage door to garage add to garage UPUP 0 : 12 10' New Cross Gable above New Connector UP DN RESTUDY 9.16.19 121 202 E Main StAspen, CO 81611970.309.7722Parcel # - R021796Vickery / PegolottiPrinted On: 2/14/2019 10:53:39 Sheet: CHD Job #: 18-0081 13404 221st ST EGraham, WA 98338Jared Baehmer, OwnerPh: 253.777.2362202 E Main StDN Shower tub W12 - 6016 PIC W08 - 4050 PIC W26 - 6016 PIC W15 - 6016 PIC W16 - 6016 PIC 2668 2668 W13 - 4050 PIC W29 - 6016 PIC W27 - 6016 PIC W25 - 4050 PIC W11 - 6016 PIC W14 - 4050 PIC W21 - 7616 PIC 3068 3068 UP9'-10 3/4"4'-11 1/4"4'-9"4'-5"24'24'27'-10"7'-4" 35'-2" 14'-9 3/4"9'-7 1/2"5'-3 1/2"8'-6 1/2"11'-1 3/4"2'-10 1/4"5'-7"4'-5"10'4'4'-2 3/4"1'6'2'-9 1/4"3'-9 1/4"6'-2 3/4"4'-2 3/4"1'6'5'-4 1/2"6'1'4'-2 3/4" 7'-4" 2nd Floor Plan - 202 E Main Proposed Scale: 1/8 in = 1 ft 1'0 6'2'8'4'10' GRAPHIC SCALE: BONUS ROOM%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS%BONUS ROOM%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% OPEN BELOW%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% MASTER BATH%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Property Line Master Bedroom 12'-10" x 13'-2" 169 sq ft Master Bath 13'-0" x 9'-5" 122 sq ft Master Closet 9'-1" x 9'-5" 86 sq ft OFFICE AREA%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Office Area 14'-0" x 13'-2" 173 sq ft Existing Roof See Roof Plan New Roof UP MASTER BEDROOM%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Roof Deck Above 4 A3.6.4 4 A3.6.4 7 A3.6.5 7 A3.6.5 8 A3.6.5 8 A3.6.5 5 A3.6.4 5 A3.6.4 2 A3.6.2 2 A3.6.2 9 A3.6.5 9 A3.6.5 1 A3.6.1 1 A3.6.1 6 A3.6.4 6 A3.6.4 3 A3.6.3 3 A3.6.3 Proposed Upper Plan A3.3vickeryarchitecture & planning202 east main street aspen colorado 81611970 309-7722 jakevoickery@comcast.net2668UP 0 : 12 6'-8 1/2"2'-6"5'-5 1/2"4'-0"'-0"4'-0"UP door to deck up to deck New Connector Roof Restored roof overhang connector roof adjoins below New Partial Cross Gable DN Lower roof overhang RESTUDY 9.16.19 122 202 E Main StAspen, CO 81611970.309.7722Parcel # - R021796Vickery / PegolottiPrinted On: 2/14/2019 10:53:39 Sheet: CHD Job #: 18-0081 13404 221st ST EGraham, WA 98338Jared Baehmer, OwnerPh: 253.777.2362202 E Main St12 : 12 12 : 12 2 : 12 3 : 12 12 : 12 12 : 12 6 : 12 10 : 12 10 : 12 10 : 12 30'-0 1/4"S75° 9' 11"E100' S14° 50' 49"W30'-0 1/4"N75° 9' 11"W100' N14° 50' 49"E 30'-0 1/4"S75° 9' 11"E100' S14° 50' 49"W30'-0 1/4"N75° 9' 11"W100' N14° 50' 49"E 8 : 12 8 : 12 0 : 12 0 : 12 0 : 12 12 : 12 Overframing Area 1st Floor Roof Framing Plan - 202 E Main Proposed Scale: 1/8 in = 1 ft 1'0 6'2'8'4'10' GRAPHIC SCALE: DN 76 SQ FT DECK%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% 3rd Floor Plan - 202 E Main Proposed LIVING AREA%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% OPEN BELOW%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% Deck 22'-4" x 19'-10" 395 sq ft Property Line 7 A3.6.5 7 A3.6.5 8 A3.6.5 8 A3.6.5 2 A3.6.2 9 A3.6.5 9 A3.6.5 1 A3.6.1 6 A3.6.4 6 A3.6.4 3 A3.6.3 Proposed Roof Plan A3.4 402 sf Proposed Roof Plan Date: 5.28.19vickeryarchitecture & planning202 east main street aspen colorado 81611970 309-7722 jakevoickery@comcast.net green roof roof deck restored roof overhang DN lower roof overhang UPUP 0 : 12 10' RESTUDY 9.16.19 W1 W21 - 7616 PIC 306 BONUS ROOM%HEIGHTS, GET GLOBALS% New 6'-8 1/2"2'-6"' new cross gable 123 202 E Main StAspen, CO 81611970.309.7722Parcel # - R021796Vickery / PegolottiPrinted On: 2/14/2019 10:53:40 Sheet: CHD Job #: 18-0081 13404 221st ST EGraham, WA 98338Jared Baehmer, OwnerPh: 253.777.2362202 E Main StEast Elevation A - 202 E Main Proposed Scale: 1/8 in = 1 ft Proposed Elevations A3.5.1 13'-11"vickeryarchitecture & planning202 east main street aspen colorado 81611970 309-7722 jakevoickery@comcast.net11'-0"450 sf Proposed East Elevation Proposed East Elevation Proposed West Elevation Date: 5.28.19 302 sf 13'-11" 66 sf New 2' step back in form Egress / light well relocated to west side of resource NEW ADDITIONCONNECTORHISTORIC RESOURCE RESTUDY 9.16.19 124 202 E Main StAspen, CO 81611970.309.7722Parcel # - R021796Vickery / PegolottiPrinted On: 2/14/2019 10:53:46 Sheet: CHD Job #: 18-0081 13404 221st ST EGraham, WA 98338Jared Baehmer, OwnerPh: 253.777.2362202 E Main StWest Elevation C - 202 E Main Proposed Scale: 1/8 in = 1 ft Proposed Elevations A3.5.2 FAR Calculation Worksheetvickeryarchitecture & planning202 east main street aspen colorado 81611970 309-7722 jakevoickery@comcast.net81 sf Proposed West Elevation Date: 5.28.19 81 sf Proposed West Elevation 65 sf3'-3" 5'-0" NEW ADDITION HISTORIC RESOURCECONNECTOR New Cross Gable 13'-4" Front Property Line 10'-0" Required minimum front yard Crawl Space25'-0"- 202 E Main t Relocated Egress / Light well RESTUDY 9.16.19 125 202 E Main StAspen, CO 81611970.309.7722Parcel # - R021796Vickery / PegolottiPrinted On: 2/14/2019 10:53:47 Sheet: CHD Job #: 18-0081 13404 221st ST EGraham, WA 98338Jared Baehmer, OwnerPh: 253.777.2362202 E Main StSouth Elevation B - 202 E Main Proposed Scale: 1/8 in = 1 ft Proposed Elevations A3.5.3 291 sf 258 sf Proposed South Elevation (Main Street)Proposed North Elevation (Alley) Proposed North & South Elevationsvickeryarchitecture & planning202 east main street aspen colorado 81611970 309-7722 jakevoickery@comcast.netDate: 5.28.19 RESTUDY 9.16.19 126 127 128 All significant character defining historic features are located in the front section of the resource and will be 100% restored to highest standards: 1. Front facade and gable 2. Bay Window 3. Front porch 4. Double front doors with transom windows 5. Chimney 6. Double hung side windows 7. Small side window 8. All existing historical siding and trim Preservation Plan - South Elevation Solid green indicates disturbed areas Rendered areas are preserved and restored 1 1 2 1 47 5 8 66 NOTES 1. Historical front yard alignment preserved 2. Historical grade relationship preserved 3. Historical cottonwood trees preserved and protected KEY 202 East Main 9.24.19 129 Solid green indicates disturbed areas Rendered areas are preserved and restored disturbed area in northwest corner to be rehabilitated non historic window to be removed and replaced with siding to match existing historic window to be relocated back to original location original location on double hung historic window non historic window to be removed and replaced with pair od double hung windows similar construction to historical windows existing chimney to be restored per photographic documentation existing salvageable brick to be reused in new foundation Preservation Plan - East Elevation 202 East Main 9.24.19 130 solid green indicates disturbed areas existing salvageable brick to be reused in new foundation existing chimney to be restored per photographic documentation Preservation Plan - South Elevation twin double hung windows will remain and be restored to best standards Solid green indicates disturbed areas Rendered areas are preserved and restored 202 East Main 9.24.19 131 Solid green indicates disturbed areas Rendered areas are preserved and restored existing chimney to be restored per photographic documentation disturbed northwest corner to be rehabilitated and corner expressed by recess in new connector non historic window to be removed and replaced with siding to match existing destroyed eave to be restored to match existing rear wall has been removed this area Preservation Plan - North Elevation new interpolated grade line at rear wall 202 East Main 9.24.19 132 Roof deck Roof deck - Green roof stair Green roof NEW Connector NEW cross dormer NEW relocated egress - light well Existing brick chimney Recess for expressed corner New lower floor overhang NEW step back in rear form SITE-ROOF PLAN 202 East Main Revised 9.28.19 Preserved 13'-4" front yard setback - landscaped to protect trees NEW Removed 10" spruce tree egress - light well Porous paving surface Porous paving surface Roof deck Peremeter parapet wall for green roof Positive site drainage Egress - light well 133 South Elevation –Main Street Restudy 9.15.19 134 East Elevation Restudy 9.15.19 135 North Elevation Alley Restudy 9.15.19 136 East Elevation Restudy 9.15.19 137 Northeast resource roof & dormer partial 9.17.19 138 Northwest addition partial at connector -9.17.19 139 Northwest resource partial at connector -9.17.19 140 Site & roof plan -9.15.19 141 Southeast partial at connector - 9.17.19 142 Southwest addition partial at connector -9.17.19 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 Memorandum TO: FROM: THROUGH: MEETING DATE: RE:314 W. Main Street APPLICANT /OWNER: REPRESENTATIVE: LOCATION: Lot B, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN STREET, according to the Final Plat recorded September 3, 2003 in Plat Book 66 at Page 32 CURRENT ZONING & USE PROPOSED USE: SUMMARY: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 314 164 BACKGROUND: REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) • • • 165 The scope of this project is not subject to Call Up Notice to City Council. PROJECT SUMMARY: 166 167 STAFF COMMENTS: Staff supports the request to waive one of the on-site parking requirements. Staff prefers a parking configuration that promotes the prominence of the historic resource, the character of the site, and does not have cars parked forward of the structure. Additionally, the Parks Department is not supportive of a parking configuration that would require the removal of two trees. Due to Community Development and the Parks department’s preference to not locate the second space on site, staff also supports the Commission waiving the cash-in-lieu fee associated with the second required space. The applicant could provide the code required number of parking spaces on site, however, staff has expressed a preference to preserve the character of the historic resource and trees on site rather than provide two full parking spaces. The AC unit that is proposed to be relocated to the north of the structure will be required to comply with setback requirements in the land use code. Any damage to the historic materials where the existing duct enters the structure must be limited. Materials used to patch existing holes must be consistent with existing siding. The new mechanical configuration must minimize surface mounted ducts and conduit. Review and approval of these details by staff and monitor will be required. Staff is supportive of the alteration to the site wall, as well. Staff feels that if materials are repurposed to match the existing design of the site wall, or new materials are consistent with the existing site wall, improving pedestrian access to the site is beneficial. Staff recommends a condition be included in the resolution that the materials be repurposed, when practical, to ensure the design and materials are consistent. RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: 168 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019 Page 1 of 4 169 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019 Page 2 of 4 170 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019 Page 3 of 4 171 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2019 Page 4 of 4 172 173 174 Exhibit C Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings NOTE: Staff responses begin on page 2 of this exhibit, following the list of applicable guidelines. Historic Preservation Design Guidelines 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. • 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. • • 175 Exhibit C Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings • 1.21 Preserve original retaining walls • • • 1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. • • 1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system. • • • Staff finds Design Guideline 1.5 to be met. The proposed alteration to the site wall would provide a more established connection from the public sidewalk to the walkway that provides pedestrian access to the structure. Staff finds Design Guideline 1.6 to be met. A sandstone walkway currently exis ts, however a site wall disrupts the pedestrian path from the public sidewalk to the residence. The existing walkway is a linear path between the entry and the street. The proposed cut in the sidewalk, and pathway width is proposed to be 36”. All materials used will be either repurposed from the existing site wall or will be required to match the site wall and existing pathway. 176 Exhibit C Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings Staff finds Design Guideline 1.21 to be met. The proposed alteration only eliminates a approximately 36” section of the site wall which helps to improve pedestrian connection with the street. The proposed section to be removed is the minimum needed to accommodate improved pedestrian access and to improve the pedestrian connection with the structure as viewed from the street. All replacement materials will either be repurposed from the original wall or will match the existing materials. Staff finds Design Guideline 1.24 to be met. The site wall is a significant feature that contributes to the landscaping and site design of the property. The wall alteration is considered a minimal and reasonable alteration and doesn’t have a significant negative impact on the character of the historic resource. The proposed parking space is located in an appropriate area at the rear of the site. Staff finds Design Guideline 1.26 to be met. The proposed alteration improves pedestrian access to the site. No vehicular access exists or is proposed from main street, the vehicular access to the site is from the alley. Staff feels this is appropriate separation of vehicular and pedestrian access and preserves the historic circulation. 177 327 W. Bleeker Street Aspen, CO 81611 September 26, 2019 Garrett Larimer City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: 314 W. Main Street Change in Use – HPC Minor Development, Special Review – Parking Dear Garrett: We (Melanie and Bill Toler) are the property owners and occupants of 327 W. Bleeker Street and share the alley with the property located at 314 West Main Street. We would like to register several concerns and objections to the request for Change in Use and accompanying requests for waiving residential parking requirements and cash-in-lieu fees made by the owners of 314 W. Main Street, with the public hearing scheduled for October 9, 2019 at 4:30pm. Parking – Request for Waiving Residential Parking Requirements We can support the property owner’s request to only require one full sized off-street parking space (8.5’ x 18’) if and only if the following conditions are required and enforced by the approving Decision Making Body (HPC): 1. The outside air conditioning unit is actually relocated to the location marked in the application and is fully situated within the property boundary of Parcel 2735-124-41-011. The application indicates the air conditioning unit will be relocated to the north side of the property near the northwest corner of the property and no variances to City Code are requested or granted. See photo on following page. 2. Steel posts are to be installed to protect the air conditioning unit from being accidentally struck by snow plows, garbage trucks, passenger vehicles and service vehicles utilizing the alley. Such posts (2 of them) are currently installed to protect the air conditioning unit in its present location on the west side of the building. Obviously, if the air conditioning unit is accidentally struck, it will release environmentally harmful gases into the atmosphere. Photos are provided on the following page to illustrate the beatings that utility boxes and other items located in the alley take due to the heavy vehicle traffic/garbage trucks and major amounts of snow removal that occurs due to the fact that all the mixed-use properties located on the north side of the 300 block of West Main are uncovered surface parking (i.e., no garages except one small property). 3. The land located on the north side (rear of the building) will not be used for parking any motorized vehicles for short-term or overnight parking. This illegal, non-conforming “parking pad” is currently being continuously used by the current occupants of the property at 314 W. Main Street to park one of the two large vehicles they own. This piece of land is only 6.6’ wide and does not meet the City’s requirement that a residential parking space be at least 8.5’ wide. Almost all vehicles parked here encroach 2.5’-3.5’ into the alley right of way and cause substantial passage problems during the winter months after city and private snow plows push snow onto private property and the alley’s rights of way. See photos on the following page. 178 Similar protective posts to be installed in new location of AC Unit New location of existing AC unit (north side of property near northwest corner) New AC Location Example of damage caused by plows and vehicle traffic in alley (utility boxes located directly across from 314 W Main St). Persons or vehicles responsible for damages are not known but not having a properly sized parking space at 314 W. Main Street has contributed to the problems. 179 Current Situation: Occupants of 314 W. Main Street parking their two vehicles daily and overnight in inadequate parking spaces (outside of City Code); both vehicles encroach onto adjacent property or alley right of way. Situation exacerbated in winter as garbage trucks have trouble navigating the alley. Many times they have to drive on property owned by 327 and 323 West Bleeker due to out of code parking by occupants of 314 W. Main Street. 180 Request to Waive Cash-in-lieu Fees for Not Providing Two Residential Off-Street Parking Spaces We object to this waiver request and strongly urge the Decision Making Body (HPC) to deny this request from the owner of the property located at 314 W. Main Street. City Council updated the LAND USE CODE CHAPTER 26.515, TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING MANAGEMENT on May 20, 2019 via Ordnance 13, 2019. Section 26.515.090 Paragraph B.2 clearly states that Cash-in-lieu payments for parking are to be used for the construction of a public parking facility, transportation and mobility improvements, including vehicles or station improvements, transportation demand management facilities or programs, shared automobiles or programs and similar transportation or mobility-related facilities or programs as determined appropriate by the City. The City adopted this code and allowed for cash-in-lieu fees precisely for this type of situation. There are Aspen trees (not as protected by Parks Department as much as Cottonwoods and historical spruce) and other factors that caused the owner of 314 W. Main Street to not apply to build two parking spaces as required by code for 3 bedroom single-family residences. The owner of 314 W. Main Street did not present any compelling arguments to receive a waiver of cash-in-lieu fees in their application to the City. We venture to suggest that no property owner in the City of Aspen rejoices when they have to pay mitigation and cash-in-lieu fees, but all of us do because we understand that the fees were imposed to off- set the costs associated with development or additional expenses the City would have to bear. The City has acknowledged multiple times that parking is a major issue and funds are needed to address this important issue. Hence, the property owner of 314 W. Main Street should pay her cash-in-lieu parking fees if the HPC approves her Change of Use application with conditions. Additional Comments It should be noted that the owner of 314 W. Main Street has not established a good track record of complying with the spirit of the law and actual regulations governing historical properties in the City of Aspen. The City “red-tagged” the current owner for not consulting with the HPC before installing new windows and frames that did not completely conform to HPC standards for historical properties. Hence, this a another reason why we urge the HPC to be very specific with the owner of 314 W. Main Street on any conditions they may apply to the conditional approval of the Change of Use application. Change of Use from Mixed-Use to Single-Family Residential During prior and recent discussions with City Planning Staff they have indicated that it is the desire of the City to maintain a mixed-use zoning for properties located along Main Street. If HPC approves the Change of Use application as presented by 314 W. Main Street, this will be the only property on the north side of the 300 block of West Main not to be zoned as Mixed -Use. Currently, all the properties on the north side of the 300 block of West Main are designated Mixed-Use. The adjacent property located at 320 W. Main Street appealed its Change of Use application on September 9, 2019. Their application for change from Mixed-Use to Residential was denied. While the reason for disapproval was not related to parking, the fact that these two properties are adjacent to each other and share a common sidewalk dictated by City ordinance adopted in 2002 creates optics that are very difficult to understand and do not appear to be consistent. When the original historic property was split into 314 W. Main and 320 W. Main Street by City of Aspen Ordinance 14, 2002 on May 13, 2002, the property at 320 W. Main Street was classified as single-family residential and the property at 314 W. Main Street was classified as Mixed-Use with the ground level floor for commercial use and the upper floor for residential use. The applicant for Change of Use for 314 W. Main Street has openly acknowledged that the property is now a three-bedroom residential-only property but the proper building permits were never secured by 181 current or past owners. It seems it would be in the best interest of preserving these two historical properties if the HPC kept their designated use the same, either Mixed-Use or Residential. Since both owners of 314 and 320 W. Main Street want their properties to be designated single-family residential, we would support such a decision by the HPC, especially since that was the original use of the two structures when they were built in 1886. We express our thanks and appreciation to Garrett Larimer and several other City of Aspen employees in the Engineering and Parking Departments for openly and courteously answering our questions as we worked to understand the important details of the Change of Use application presented by the owner of 314 West Main Street. We strongly urge the HPC to consider our suggestions, concerns and objections expressed in this document as they determine the merits of this Change of Use application for 314 W. Main Street. Sincerely, Melanie Toler Bill Toler 327 W. Bleeker Street Aspen, CO 81611 182 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM May 13, 2019 Updated July 31, 2019 Mr. Garrett Larimer Community Development Department City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 314 West Main Street – Change-in-Use Mr. Larimer: Please accept this application for a Change- in-Use of a Historic Landmark to allow for the conversion of an existing commercial space at 314 W. Main St. to residential. This Growth Management administrative application is submitted pursuant to Section 26.470.090.D, exempting the change from affordable housing mitigation. The 314 building is a carriage house associated with Smith Elisha House at 320 W. Main St. A lot split was approved via Ordinance 14, 2002, separating ownership of the two parcels. A lot split plat was filed with the Pitkin County Clerk in 2003 as reception no. 487835. The 314 building, at the time of the lot split application, was represented as having commercial office use on the ground floor with residential use above. 314 W. Main Street The property is legally described as Lot B, Historic Landmark Lot Split at 320 W. Main Street, according to the final plat recorded September 3, 2003, in plat book 66, page 32. The property is owned by 314 West Main LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company. Wendi Sturgis is the Manager for 314 and has authorized BendonAdams to submit this application. The intent of this application is to formalize use of this building as a single-family residence. Floor Area calculations confirm the building is below the maximum Floor Area for a single-family home. 183 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM The Mixed-Use Zone District allowance for a home is 80% of the R-6 Zone District, yielding an allowable Floor Area of 2,256 sf. The existing building contains approximate 1,807 sf of Floor Area measured to City of Aspen standards. No businesses occupy the ground floor and no displacement will occur. The home will contain 3 bedrooms. Parking for the home is proposed as one space to the west of the building along the alley. The photo to the right shows the approximate location of the proposed parking. The property received HPC and City Council waiver of parking in 2002. (Please refer to attached Ordinance 14-2002.) The 2002 approval allowed the building to have just the one parking space. The change-in-use to a residence requires two parking spaces, apparently voiding the previous approval. The applicant is requesting the HPC renew the parking waiver for the second space. A second space is not desired by the applicant but can be accommodated on the parcel. The diagram to the right shows how two spaces could be accommodated, meeting all code requirements. The second space would require removal of a few trees and would be much more visible from Main Street. It is expected that the City Parks Department would not favor the tree removals. The applicant understands from City staff that a full waiver can be granted by the HPC, waiving both the physical parking space requirement and the cash-in-lieu fee. Response to review criteria and the necessary documents for a complete application are attached. Please let us know if there are additional items needed for your review or if we can assist with a site visit. Kind Regards, Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams LLC Attachments: 1. Response to Review Criteria 2. Application Form 3. Pre-Application Summary 4. Agreement to Pay 5. HOA Form 6. Authorization 7. Proof of Ownership 8. Vicinity Map 9. Survey & Existing Plans 10. Ord. 14-2002 184 Exhibit 1 Review Criteria 26.470.090.D. Change in use of historic landmark sites and structures. The change of use between the development categories identified in Section 26.470.020, of a property, structure or portion of a structure designated as an historic landmark shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director if no more than one (1) free-market residence is created. No employee mitigation shall be required. If more than one (1) free-market residence is created, the additional units shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.G. The change in amount of development and number of units shall not be added or deducted from the respective annual development allotments. Response: This application proposes the conversion of an historic landmark from commercial use to residential use. The ground level of 314 West Main Street is, according to City records, commercial space. Approximately 644 sf of net leasable exists. It appears the space was used as a commercial office. There is not currently a commercial tenant. The upstairs is currently being used as a residence, which aligns with City records. The intent of this application is to formalize use of the property as a single-family home. The conversion of this space will not create more than one free-market residence. The conversion of this space does not represent a conflict with allowable dimensions of the zone district. The 4,500 sf property is allowed 2,256 square feet of Floor Area for a single-family home. This represents 80% of the R-6 schedule for an R-6 single-family home. Floor Area estimates show the property currently contains approximately 1,807 sf of Floor Area, significantly below the maximum allowance. This floor area estimate is based on available drawings and is not field verified. No physical improvements proposed in connection with this application. There are a few exterior changes occurring that fall under a valid building permit and the building will be repainted soon. Any future changes will be submitted according to City requirements. 185 Exhibit 1 Review Criteria Parking Table 26.515-1 – Parking Impact Requirement Calculations (partial table) Note #4, Table 26.515-2 4. For properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, a waiver of the Parking Requirement may be approved, pursuant to Chapter 26.430, Special Review, and according to the review criteria set forth below. 26.515.080 Special Review Standards Whenever the transportation, mobility, and parking impacts of a proposed development are subject to special review, an application shall be processed as a special review in accordance with the common development review procedures set forth in Chapter 26.304 and be evaluated according to the following standards. Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission. If the project requires review by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Community Development Director has authorized consolidation pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B, the Historic Preservation Commission shall approve, approve with conditions or disapprove the special review application. A special review for establishing, varying or waiving transportation, mobility, or off-street parking requirements may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on its conformance with all of the following criteria: 1. The transportation, mobility, and off-street parking needs of the residents, customers, guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, the projected traffic generation of the project, any shared parking opportunities, expected schedule of parking demands, the projected impacts on the on-street parking of the neighborhood, the proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees. Response: The parking arrangement for this property, functioning as a mixed-use building (residential over commercial) has worked appropriately over the past few 186 Exhibit 1 Review Criteria decades. The one, full legal space accessed off the alley is occasionally supplemented by a substandard width space parallel to the alleyway. The photo to the right shows the single, legal space accessed head-in from the alley. The photo below shows a pick-up truck parked in the substandard space along the alley. This second space does not qualify as a proper parking space as it is only approximately 6-feet wide. The expected parking needs are similar or less than the commercial operation. The residential use will not generate customer parking and the owner prefers the single space rather than developing a second tandem space, which would require tree removals. The diagram shown in response to criterion #2, below, shows how a second space could be developed on the property. This second space would require one or two tree removals. 2. An on-site mitigation solution meeting the requirements and guidelines is practically difficult or results in an undesirable development scenario. Response: A second parking space could be developed in tandem to the first. The space would require removal of a few trees and the vehicle in the second space would project forward of the street-facing façade of the building. This development scenario is undesirable to the landowner and is an undesirable outcome from a historic preservation standpoint. We also expect the tree removal will be undesirable to the City Parks Department. 3. Existing or planned on-site or off-site facilities adequately serve the needs of the development, including the availability of street parking. Response: The property has long functioned with the single, legal space. Street parking is available in the immediate area and the residence will continue to qualify for a zone parking permit. The single parking space will adequately serve the needs of this property. 187 November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LAND USE APPLICATION Project Name and Address:_________________________________________________________________________ Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) _____________________________ APPLICANT: Name: ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone #: ___________________________ email: __________________________________ REPRESENTIVATIVE: Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Address:________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone#: _____________________________ email:___________________________________ Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions Review: Administrative or Board Review Have you included the following?FEES DUE: $ ______________ Pre-Application Conference Summary Signed Fee Agreement HOA Compliance form All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary Required Land Use Review(s): Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields: Net Leasable square footage _________ Lodge Pillows______ Free Market dwelling units ______ Affordable Housing dwelling units_____ Essential Public Facility square footage ________ Change in use of an existing historic landmark structure. No physical improvements proposed. 314 West Main LLC; Wendi Sturgis, Manager BendonAdams (existing) GMQS Change-in-Use Exhibit 2 188 City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO  Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration?  Does the work you are planning include interior work, including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration?  Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time?  In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places Property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits?  If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in Conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.)  If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use:  Rehabilitation Loan Fund  Conservation Easement Program  Dimensional Variances  Increased Density  Historic Landmark Lot Split  Waiver of Park Dedication Fees  Conditional Uses  Tax Credits  Exemption from Growth Management Quota System 189 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY DATE: April 15, 2019 PLANNER: Amy Simon, amy.simon@cityofaspen.com PROJECT ADDRESS: 314 W. Main Street CONTACT: Jennifer Newman, Hansen Construction, jnewman@hansenhomecare.com DESCRIPTION: The owner of 314 W. Main would like to install a storage shed within the required building setback at the rear of the site, and would like to hang an air conditioning unit from the side of the historic structure, also projecting into the setbacks. A request for Minor design approval and setback reductions on a landmarked property is reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. This review is a one-step hearing, meaning that all details of the proposal will be presented to HPC in one application. Staff will review the project and make a recommendation to HPC, based on the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and land use code. HPC will make a decision to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. As part of this review, the property owner will be required to address an apparent zoning enforcement issue. The approved use for this structure, according to the last land use approval granted to this site in 2003, is a mixed use building, with commercial space on the ground floor and living space above. No approval has been granted to convert the building entirely to residential use, but a number of statements have been made to the Planning Office that suggest the structure is functioning as a single-family home. The property owner must either use the building according to land use approvals, including submitting evidence of active business licenses issued to current occupants of the commercial space, or apply for an Administrative Growth Management approval to convert the building to a single-family home. This change in use will reduce the amount of floor area that can be developed on the site in the future. Below are links to relevant documents and a list of information needed to submit an application. RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: Section Number Section Title 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.070.C Development involving designated historic property or property within a historic district, Certificate of Appropriateness for a minor development 26.415.110.C Variances 26.470.090.D Change in use of historic landmark sites and structures 26.575.020.E Measuring Setbacks 26.710.180 Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District Exhibit 3 190 For your convenience – links to the Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below: Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Historic Preservation Land Use Application Packet Land Use Code REVIEW BY: • Staff for Complete Application and Change in Use review • Historic Preservation Commission for Minor review and Variations PUBLIC HEARING: Yes PLANNING FEES: $1,300 Deposit for 4 hours of staff time (additional/lesser hours will be billed/refunded at a rate of $325/hr. A one-time flat fee of $325 will be charged for the Administrative Change in Use review.) REFERRAL FEES: No, however staff will seek referral comments from the Building Department, Zoning and Parks regarding any relevant code requirements or considerations. TOTAL DEPOSIT: $1,300 APPLICATION CHECKLIST – These items should first be submitted in a paper copy.  Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.  Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).  Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.  Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.  HOA Compliance form (attached below.)  A site plan and survey showing property boundaries, the location and orientation of existing and proposed improvements, proximity to any preserved view planes, and predominant site characteristics. 191  A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property.  Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the existing and proposed development.  An accurate representation of all building materials and finishes to be used in the development.  Photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location, extend and design of proposed work. Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the applicant/applicant’s representative will receive an e-mail requesting submission of an electronic copy of the complete application and the deposit. Once the deposit is received, the case will be assigned to a planner and the land use review will begin. During review of the case, additional items may be requested. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 192 Exhibit 4 193 Exhibit 5 194 Exhibit 6 195 November 16, 2018 Wendi Sturgis 314 W. Main St. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: LEVY/314 W. MAIN PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS, 3rd Floor ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970-925-1766 I 970-925-6527 FAX LOT B, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT PCT25302 Pitkin County Title, Inc. is pleased to provide you with the owners policy along with the following endorsements relative to the above mentioned file: Endorsement Form 110.1 Please review the policy in its entirety. We at Pitkin County Title, Inc. believe in providing you, our customer, with a quality product which will serve your needs. In the event you do find a discrepancy, or if you have any questions or comments regarding your final policy, please contact us and we will gladly handle any request you may have as efficiently and quickly as possible. We have assigned the above number to your records to assure prompt processing of future title orders involving the property. If you sell or obtain a loan on this property within 5 years, ask your broker or agent to contact our office to ensure re-issue rates which may be available to you. Thank you very much for giving Pitkin County Title, Inc. the opportunity to serve you. Sincerely, Nola Warnecke Enclosures: Exhibit 7 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 Exhibit 8 314 West Main Street – Vicinity Map 210 R S 14°50'49" W100.00'S 75°09'11" E 45.00'S 14°50'49" W100.00'N 75°09'11" W 45.00' LOT B 314 & 318 W. MAIN 4,500 SQ. FT. +/- 0.103 AC. +/- SET NO. 5 REBAR & 1.25" PLASTIC CAP, L.S. 28643 FOUND NO. 5 REBAR & 1.25" PLASTIC CAP, L.S. 16842 FOUND 'X' SCRIBED IN CONCRETE FOUND NO. 5 REBAR & 1.25" PLASTIC CAP 1' WITNESS CORNER, L.S. 28643 MULTI-LEVEL WOOD FRAME STRUCTURE CONCRETE SURFACE FLAGSTONE WALKWAYEXIST ING BU I LD ING EXISTING BUILDINGRETAINING WALLRETAINING WALL (SEE NOTE NO. 7)GRAVEL SURFACE CONCRETE SIDEWALK 6.6' 10.3' RETAINING WALL CURB CONCRETE PAD W/AIR CONDITIONING UNIT ROCK WALL 34.4'24.4'34.4'24.4' 9" DIA., 12' DRIP 13.5" DIA., 16' DRIP 10.5" DIA., 18' DRIP 8" DIA., 18' DRIP 2 8" DIA., 18' DRIP 8" DIA., 18' DRIP 8" DIA., 18' DRIP 6" DIA., 10' DRIP 9" DIA., 12' DRIP 7" DIA., 14' DRIP 7" DIA., 14' DRIP 7" DIA., 14' DRIP 7895789678957893 78957898 7897 7896 8" DIA., 10' DRIP SITE LOT 1 BLEEKER STREET PARTNERS HISTORIC LANDMARK REC. NO. 477131 LOT 2 BLEEKER STREET PARTNERS HISTORIC LANDMARK REC. NO. 477131 LOT 1 RUTH WHYTE LOT SPLIT SUB. EXEMPTION PLAT REC. NO. 489619 332 WEST MAIN STREET SUB. REC. NO. 567884 LOT AHISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN STREETREC. NO. 487835LOTS Q - S REC. NO. 517194 LOTS H & I REC. NO. 523993 LOT 2 RUTH WHYTE LOT SPLIT SUB. EXEMPTION PLAT REC. NO. 489619 LOT M & EAST HALF LOT L REC. NO. 290608 LOT B (314 W. MAIN STREET)HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN STREETREC. NO. 487835(SUBJECT PROPERTY)ALLEY 20.39' RIGHT-OF-WAY MAIN ST. 100 ' RIGHT-OF-WAYTHIRD STREET 75.38' RIGHT-OF-WAYSECOND STREET 75.62' RIGHT-OF-WAYSET NO. 5 REBAR & 1.25" PLASTIC CAP, L.S. 28643 FOUND NO. 5 REBAR & 1.25" PLASTIC CAP, L.S. 16842 FOUND 'X' SCRIBED IN CONCRETE FOUND NO. 5 REBAR & 1.25" PLASTIC CAP 1' WITNESS CORNER, L.S. 28643 FOUND REBAR & CAP, ILLEGIBLE FOUND NO. 5 REBAR & 1.25" PLASTIC CAP L.S. 9164 FOUND REBAR & 1.25" PLASTIC CAP, ILLEGIBLE FOUND NO. 5 REBAR, NO CAP S 75°09'11" E BASIS OF BEARING BLOCK 44S89° 16' 0 8 " W 1263.84' S50 ° 5 5 ' 3 9 " E 907 . 1 6 ' CITY OF ASPEN GPS CONTROL MONUMENT (GPS-7) AT THE INTERSECTION OF 6TH STREET & HOPKINS AVE.CITY OF ASPEN GPS CONTROL MONUMENT (GPS-6) AT THE INTERSECTION OF GARMISCH STREET & HOPKINS AVE. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I, GEOFFREY R. KELLER, HEREBY CERTIFY TO: 314 W MAIN STREET, LLC THAT THIS IS AN “IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT” AS DEFINED BY C.R.S. § 38-51-102(9), AND THAT IT IS A MONUMENTED LAND SURVEY SHOWING THE CURRENT LOCATION OF ALL STRUCTURES, WATER COURSES, WATER FEATURES AND/OR BODIES OF WATER, ROADS, VISIBLE UTILITIES, FENCES, OR WALLS SITUATED ON THE DESCRIBED PARCEL AND WITHIN FIVE FEET OF ALL BOUNDARIES OF SUCH PARCEL, ANY CONFLICTING BOUNDARY EVIDENCE OR VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, AND ALL EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY OF A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE NATURE THAT ARE VISIBLE, OR APPARENT, OR OF RECORD AND UNDERGROUND UTILITIES DESCRIBED IN PITKIN COUNTY TITLE INC'S TITLE INSURANCE CASE NO. PCT25302W2, OR OTHER SOURCES AS SPECIFIED ON THE IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT. ______________________________________ GEOFFREY R. KELLER L.S. #37997 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LOT B, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN STREET, ACCORDING TO THE FINAL PLAT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2003 IN PLAT BOOK 66 AT PAGE 32. CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT/TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP OF: SHEET 1 OF 1 UNIT B, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN ST. A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN BLOCK 44, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 85 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO NOTES 1) DATE OF FIELD WORK: APRIL 26 & 27, 2011. UPDATED SEPTEMBER 11 - 12, 2018 AND MAY 11, 2019. 2) DATE OF PREPARATION: APRIL, 2011. UPDATED SEPTEMBER, 2018 AND MAY, 2019. 3) BASIS OF BEARING: A BEARING OF N 75°09'11" W FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 44, MONUMENTED BY A FOUND NO. 5 REBAR AND ILLEGIBLE CAP AND THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT B, MONUMENTED BY A FOUND 'X' SCRIBED IN THE CONCRETE. 4) BASIS OF SURVEY: THE PLAT OF HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN STREET RECORDED SEPTEMBER 3, 2003 AS RECEPTION NO. 487835, THE RUTH WHYTE LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION PLAT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 AS RECEPTION NO. 489619, THE 1959 OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PREPARED BY G.E. BUCHANAN, THE PLAT OF THE BLEEKER STREET PARTNERS HISTORIC LANDMARK RECORDED JANUARY 10, 2003, VARIOUS DOCUMENTS OF RECORD, AND THE FOUND MONUMENTS, AS SHOWN. 5)THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC (SE) TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD. FOR ALL INFORMATION REGARDING EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY AND/OR TITLE OF RECORD, SE RELIED UPON THE ABOVE SAID PLATS DESCRIBED IN NOTE 4 AND THE TITLE REPORT PREPARED BY PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. AS CASE NO. PCT25302W2 WITH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2018. 6) ACCESS FOR MAINTENANCE ON LOTS Q, R & S DESCRIBED IN QUIT CLAIM DEEDS RECORDED AS REC. NOS. 435152, 495845, 505486 AND 517193. 7) ACCORDING TO THE QUIT CLAIM DEEDS RECORDED AS REC. NOS. 435152, 495845, 505486 AND 517193, "BLOCK 44, LOTS N, O & P AND BLOCK 44, LOTS Q, R & S PROPERTY LINE IS DEFINED BY THE EASTERN MOST FACE OF THE EXISTING CARRIAGE HOUSE RETAINING WALL (AUGUST 1999) FOR BLOCK 44, LOT P, AND THE SURVEYED LOT BOUNDARY SOUTH AS RECORDED BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC., DATED 9/7/90 FOR BLOCK 44, LOTS N, O & P." SAID SURVEY WAS NOT REFERENCED IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED TITLE WORK, NOR WAS IT FOUND ON THE PITKIN COUNTY CLERK & RECORDER'S WEBSITE. THE PLAT USED FOR THE TITLE DESCRIPTION WAS RECORDED IN 2003. 8) BASIS OF ELEVATION: THE 2009 CITY OF ASPEN CONTROL DATUM, WHICH IS BASED ON AN ELEVATION OF 7720.88' (NAVD 1988) ON THE NGS STATION "S-159". THIS ESTABLISHED A SITE BENCHMARK ELEVATION OF 7899.0' ON THE WITNESS CORNER FOR THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT B, SHOWN HEREON. CONTOUR INTERVAL IS ONE (1) FOOT. 9) PITKIN COUNTY PARCEL NO. 273512441010. 10)ACCORDING TO THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP NUMBER 08097C0203C (JUNE 4, 1987) THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN A FLOOD ZONE. 11) SAID DESCRIBED PROPERTY IS IN A SLOPE PERCENTAGE CATEGORY OF 0-20% (OR LESS), ACCORDING TO THE PERCENT SLOPE MAP, PREPARED JULY 1, 2009 BY ASPEN PITKIN GIS. 12) SAID DESCRIBED PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN THE MUD FLOW ZONES, ACCORDING TO THE 2014 CITY OF ASPEN URBAN RUNOFF MANAGEMENT PLAN (FIGURE 7.1a) AND OUTSIDE THE POTENTIAL GEOLOGICAL HAZARD ZONES, ACCORDING TO THE 2001 CITY OF ASPEN MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN (FIGURE ES-5). NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. SOPRIS ENGINEERING - LLC CIVIL CONSULTANTS 502 MAIN STREET, SUITE A3 CARBONDALE, COLORADO 81623 (970) 704-0311 SOPRISENG@SOPRISENG.COM GRK 19117 5/10/2019 G:\2019\19117 320 Main\SURVEY\Survey DWGs\Working Base Dwgs\19117 11076 ISP.dwg VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1" = 2000' ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER ELECTRIC METER TELEPHONE PEDESTAL CATV PEDESTAL WOODEN FENCE GAS METER EXISTING CONDITIONS LEGEND 1 inch = ft. ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE 010 10 20 10 405 SCALE: 1" = 20' BLOCK 44 CONTROL MAP WATER VALVE LIGHT POLE ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER BOLLARD Exhibit 9 211 212 314 WEST MAIN aspen | colorado existing plans & elevations 213 314 WEST MAIN aspen | colorado proposed plans & elevations 214 Floor area estimates based on available information. Field verification is recommended. Interior layouts based on available information and may or may not be an accurate representation of permitted improvements. 215 Page: 1 of 4 09/05/2002 09: 1 ll:t ILVIA DAVIS PlTKTN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00 ORDINANCE NO. 14 Series of 2002) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, TO GRANT APPROVAL FOR A suBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR AN HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT 320 W. MAIN STREET, LOTS N, O, AND P, BLOCK 44, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PARCEL ID#: 2735- 124-41-005 WHEREAS, pursuanttoSections26.480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section 26.470.070(C), andSection26.415.010(D) of the Municipal Code, a Historic Landmark Lot Split is a subdivision exemption subject to review and approval by City Council after obtaining a recommendation from the Historic preservation Commission ( hereinafter HPC); and WHEREAS, the applicants, Scott and Mary Caroline McDonald, owners of 320 W. Main Street, Lots N, O, and P, BlOck 44, Cityand ToWnSite Of' Aspen, have requested approval tosplit a 9,000 square foot parcel into twolots of 4,500 square feet each; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has reviewed the application and recommends approval of the Historic Landmark Lot SPlit; and WltEREAS, the HPC reviewed the request for the historic lot split at a properly noticed public hearing on May 8, 2002, and reviewed a setback variance request at a public hearing on June 12, 2002, and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the subdivision exemption under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered those recommendations made by the Community Development Department, and the Historic Preservation Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and WltEREAS, the City Council finds that the Historic Landmark Lot Split meets or exceeds all applicable development standards of the above referenced Municipal Code sections; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare.NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF Exhibit 10 216 Page: 2 of' 4 09105/2002 09: 1 lA ILVIA D~VIS PYTKIN COUNTY CO R 2~..00 D 0.00 Section 1 ~ Pursuant to Sections 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section 26.470.070(C), and Section 26.415.010(D) of the Municipal Code, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified herein, the City Council finds as follows in r~gard to the subdivision exemption: 1. The applicant's submission is complete and sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approval; and 2. The subdivision exemption is consistent with the purposes of subdivision as outlined in Section 26.480 of the Municipal Code, which purposes include: assist in the orderly and efficient development of the City; ensure the proper distribution of development; encourage the well-planned subdivision of land by establisking standards for the design of a subdivision; improve land records and survey monuments by establishing standards for surveys and plats; coordinate the construction of public facilities with the need for public facilities; safeguard the interests of the public and the subdivider and provide consumer protection for the purchaser; acquire and ensure the maintenance of public open spaces and parks,provide procedures so that development encourages the preservation of important and unique natural or scenic features, including but not limited to mature trees or indigenous vegetation, bluff, hillsides, or similar geologic features, or edges of rivers and other bodies of water, and, promote the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the City of Aspen.Section 2 Pursuant to the findings set forth in Section 1, above, the City Council does hereby grant an Historic Landmark Lot Split subdivision exemption for 320 W. Main Street with the following conditions:1. The HPC has approved a 500 square foot FAR bonus, for the purpose of allowing the existing structures to remain in place. The bonus is not being awarded to allow any expansion on the property. This condition shall be noted on the plat.2. In order to qualify for the bonus, the applicant must meet "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guideline2.2." A plan for repair and repainting of the Smith-Elisha house must be submitted to HPC staff by July 31, 2002, and the work must be completed by December 31, 2002. The City will require a financial security be posted by the applicant to ensure that this condition is met.3. The HPC has waived any of the required parking that cannot be contained on the site in the form of legal sized spaces. This condition shall be noted on the plat.4. The HPC has granted a 3 foot sideyard setback variance along the east side ofthe Smith-E1/sha House. As a condition of the variance, which was partially justifiedby the owner's desire to have the two new lots share an existing 217 ILVIA DAVIS P;TKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 O 0.00 determined that as lung as the historic caniagc house remains the o~y sa- ucture on the east half of Lot 0 and all of Lot ?, Block 44, City andTov~site of Aspen,said building shall be accessed from the street via the shared sidewalk which runs down the east side of the adjacent Smith- Elisha house. No new sidewalk can be created from Main Street to the carriage house unless approved by the HPC. This condition shall be noted on the plat.5. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (I 80) days of final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall:a. Meet the requirements of Section26.480 of the Aspen Municipal Code;b. Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be prohibited from further subdivision and any development of the lots will comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application;c. Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the lots will conform to the dimensional requirements of the Office zone district,except the variances approved by the HPC.4. The FAR on the two lots created by this lot split shall be based on the use of the buildings. At this time the Smith-Elisha house is intended to be a residence and the carriage house is mixed-use. The maximum FAR for each lot may be affected by applicable lotarea reductions (i.e., slopes, access easements, etc.). The applicant shall verify with the City Zoning Officer the total allowable FAR on each lot, taking into account any and all applicable lot area reductions. The property shall be subdivided into two parcels, Lots A andB, each 4,500 square feet in size. This condition shall be noted on the plat.5. The site is located on Main Street, where pedestrian improvements are an important goal. The applicant must verify that the existing sidewalk, curb, and gutter in front of the property meet the requirements of the City Engineering Department, or rectify any inadequacies Pd0r to filing the plat.6. Part of the historic significance of this property lies in the fact that this is a significant residence with a large carriage house on the site. These two structures are strongly associated architecturally and establish a strong historic context on the site. The HPC will review any future development on the property, however,as a condition of approval of this lot split, a fence shall not be allowed to be constructed between the two newly create lots, which would separate them visually from each other. This shall be noted on the plat.Section 3 This Ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or 218 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 ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5 A public hearing on the Ordinance was held On the 24th day of June, 2002, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 13th day of May, 2002.. t ~ · H~en ~Kali~ Kl'~'e~ud, Mayor City Clerk adopted, passed and approved this 2002. City Clerk Approved as to form: John 1~. Worcester City Attorney 219 314 w mainstone wall changeaspen | coloradoExhibit 11existingproposedopening approx. 36" wideuse existing top stone for walking surface resize existing top stone for reuse220 221 222 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March, 2016 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5050 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: _____________________________________________________, Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: _____________________________________________, 20______. STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, ____________________________________________________ (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: _______ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official Paper or paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. _______ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof Materials, which was not less than twenty two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) Inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the _______ day of ______________________, 20____, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto: _______ Mailing of notice. By mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E) (2) of The Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S mail to all owners of property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. ________ Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) 314 West Main Street October 9 19 Chris Bendon 13 September 19 223 224 225 226 227 Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273512441704 on 09/12/2019 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com 228 JACOBY FAMILY LP VERO BEACH, FL 32960 700 20TH ST RICKEL DAVID LANDSDALE, PA 19446 275 GOLDENROD DR TATE ELIZABETH & CHARLES SAINT GEORGE, UT 84790 1967 PINNACLE CIR SCOTT BUILDING CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 400 W HOPKINS AVE CROWLEY SUE MITCHELL REV TRUST DUBLIN, OH 43017 6000 RIVERSIDE DR #A366 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST ASPEN A CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 308 W HOPKINS AVE TOLER MELANIE S TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 11512 VANCE STEPHEN M 2017 TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 625 E MAIN ST #102B264 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 433 W BLEEKER LLC CHICAGO, IL 60654 300 N LASALLE #5600 420 W MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 424 PARK CIR #TH5 COMMUNITY BUILDINGS COLORADO LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 400 E MAIN ST #2 233 WEST BLEEKER LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 400 E MAIN ST #2 JEWISH RESOURCE CENTER CHABAD OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81612 435 W MAIN ST TAD PROPERTIES LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9978 WHALEN JOSHUA L & KATHRYN M DENVER, CO 80207 2256 ASH ST INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST BROWDE KRISTEN PRATA CHAPPAQUA, NY 10514 604 QUAKER RD JOHNSTON FAMILY TRUST COSTA MESA, CA 92626 2018 PHALAROPE INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST A & H LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 332 W MAIN ST # 101 (A) MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 TAD PROPERTIES LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9978 420 W MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 424 PARK CIR #TH5 SHEEHAN WILLIAM J & NANCY E FRANKFORT, IL 60423 10 GOLF VIEW LN BOND RICHARD CAREY NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 320 JULIA ST COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA CARSON CITY, NV 89702 PO BOX 1927 GUNNING JANINE L ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 11705 229 AML 103 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 ELKINS LESLIE KEITH TRUST HOUSTON, TX 77002 1001 FANNIN #700 ROSENTHAL DIANNE ASPEN, CO 81612-7311 PO BOX 10043 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST 420 W MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 424 PARK CIR #TH5 KARP MICHAEL PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 1630 LOCUST ST #200 COMMUNITY BUILDINGS COLORADO LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 400 E MAIN ST #2 EDGEWATER PROPERTIES LLC OMAHA, NE 68022 18081 BURT ST MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN MEDICAL CENTER CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA W MAIN ST HERRON APARTMENTS CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 333 W MAIN ST BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 SNYDER GARY ELKINS PARK, PA 19027 8324 BROODSIDE RD CARINTHIA CORP ASPEN, CO 81611 45 E LUPINE DR GIERTZ JAMES R & TAMARA J KIAWAH ISLAND, SC 29455 144 FLYWAY DR ASPEN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ASPEN, CO 81611 311 W MAIN ST MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 CLICK JANE ASPEN, CO 81611 333 W MAIN ST #2A INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST ALLAN ANDREW S DENVER, CO 80218 154 MARION ST TWIN COASTS LTD BOCA RATON, FL 33432 433 PLAZA REAL #275 330 WEST BLEEKER ST LLC WASHINGTON, DC 20007 1000 POTOMAC ST NW #102 ASPEN CONDOS ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 311 W MAIN ST BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 CHOOKASZIAN DENNIS WILMETTE, IL 60091 1100 MICHIGAN AVE BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 STUART DANIEL S & TAMARA B ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 3274 230 HEINEMAN S MARLENE DALLAS, TX 753810323 PO BOX 810323 CRETE ASSOCIATES LP BRYN MAWR, PA 19010 1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B FOOTHILLS CHAPEL LLC DENVER, CO 80235 6226 W JEFFERSON AVE LEVY ROBERT I STUART, FL 34994 2099 NW PINE TREE WY 320 W BLEEKER LLC AUSTIN, TX 78703 1717 W 6TH ST # 470 CRETE ASSOCIATES LP BRYN MAWR, PA 19010 1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B TEMPKINS HARRY & VIVIAN MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139 605 LINCOLN RD #301 LAMBERT HENRY M NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 320 JULIA ST MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 BLOCKER LAURA G ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9213 TAD PROPERTIES LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9978 SEVEN SEAS INVESTMENT LLC WILMETTE, IL 60091 1120 MICHIGAN AVE MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST FISCHER SISTIE ASPEN, CO 81611 442 W BLEEKER CRETE ASSOCIATES LP BRYN MAWR, PA 19010 1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 420 W MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 424 PARK CIR #TH5 TAD PROPERTIES LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9978 3RD & MAIN CONDO ASSOCIATION ASPEN, CO 81611 332 W MAIN ST GILDENHORN MICHAEL S BETHESDA, MD 20816 5008 BALTON RD DOUBLE D CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 300 W BLEEKER ST SHADOWVIEW CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 320 W HOPKINS AVE PIONEER PARTNERS LTD ASPEN, CO 81611 617 W MAIN ST #1B NANOOK RIDGE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 324 W HOPKINS AVE #B 420 W MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 424 PARK CIR #TH5 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 SEAL MARK ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9213 VALLIERE SHARRON W STOWE, VT 05672 237 MAPLE ST 231 AML 309 LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST JOSEPH RUSSELL C & ELISE E HOUSTON, TX 77019 3682 WILLOWICK RD NORTHWAY CONDO OWNERS ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 420 W MAIN ST BRAFMAN STUART & LOTTA BEA TRST CHEVY CHASE, MD 20815 5630 WISCONSIN AVE #401 TWIN COASTS LTD BOCA RATON, FL 33432 433 PLAZA REAL #275 ASPEN HOUSE LLC CHICAGO, IL 60601 225 N COLUMBUS DR #100 TAD PROPERTIES LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9978 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST 420 W MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 424 PARK CIR #TH5 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 RAINBOW CONNECTION PROPERTIES LLC MORRISON, CO 80465 151 SUMMER ST #771 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 BLEVINS J RONALD & PHYLLIS ASPEN, CO 81611 310 W BLEEKER ST MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 TAD PROPERTIES LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9978 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST BLEEKER & 3RD LLC DALLAS, TX 75219 PO BOX 195457 BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 CRETE ASSOCIATES LP BRYN MAWR, PA 19010 1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B TAD PROPERTIES LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9978 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 GUNNING RALPH ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 11912 CONNERFAMILY LLC PALISADE, CO 81526 PO BOX 38 232 NEWTON BARBARA ASPEN, CO 816111602 322 W HOPKINS AVE DH ASE LLC WILMINGTON, DE 19808 2711 CENTERVILLE RD # 400 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 KARBANK 430 LLC MISSION, KS 66205 2000 SHAWNEE MISSION PKWY #400 331 W BLEEKER LLC HOUSTON, TX 77019 2727 ALLEN PKY #1400 JACOBY FAMILY LP VERO BEACH, FL 32960 700 20TH ST CRETE ASSOCIATES LP BRYN MAWR, PA 19010 1062 E LANCASTER AVE #30B SILVERSTEIN PHILIP & ROSALYN BRONX, NY 10463 25 KNOLLS CRESCENT APT 81 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST WINER CAROL G BETHESDA , MD 20817 6740 SELKIRK DR 314 WEST MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 314 W MAIN ST 233