HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.130 S Galena HPC Jurisdiction.0013.2009■
130 S. GALENA ST
0013.2009.ASLU _
HPC Jurisdiction 2735 12 4 46 801
Code Amend. 2737-07-3-31-851
C4 IJ 3
THE CITY OF ASPEN
City of Aspen Community Development Department
CASE NUMBER 0013.2009.ASLU
PARCEL ID NUMBERS 2735 12 4 46 801
PROJECTS ADDRESS 130 S GALENA ST
PLANNER SARA ADAMS
CASE DESCRIPTION HPC JURISDICTION CODE
AMENDMENT
REPRESENTATIVE DOUGLAS PRATTE
DATE OF FINAL ACTION 3/24/09
CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 3.28.13
4-4,6-901
12'Z 3 7 - 01- 3 -3► -85 I p013 . 2009 -AS LC4
File Edit Record Navigate Form Reports Format Tab Help
J J J J J a A L Oa
Main Valuation Custom Fields Actions Fees Parcels Fee Summary. Sub Permits Attachments Routing Status Routing History
G'l
Permit Type iaslu JAspen Land Use
_
Permit it P13,2009.A51LU
Address 1130 S GALENA 5T
AptjSuite I
i
City ASPEN
State CO Zip 81611 �
Permit Information
Master Permit i
Routing Queue 'aslu07 Applied 02f� 2412009
Project.
J Status pe ding Approved i J
Description HPC JURISDICTION - CODE AMENDMENT Issued F
I
Final F_�
Submitted CITY OF ASPEN
Clock Running Days 0 Expires ,0211912010
Owner
Last Name CITY OF ASPEN
First Name CITY HALL 130 5 GALENA ST
-
Phone
ASPEN CO 81611
iv Owner Is Applicant?
Applicant
Last Name CITY OF ASPEN
First Name CITY HALL 130 5 GALENA ST
Phone Cust #
ASPEN CO 81611
28514 J
Lender
Last Name J
First Name
Phone
Permit lenders full address Aspan6
1
rtes �� U, ed - (v_A qrvac A'Oc,�C�,
ORDINANCE No. 33
(Series of 2012)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO
CHAPTER 26.415 — HISTORIC PRESERVATION
OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE
WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen
Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development
Department to explore code amendments related to the applicability of Land Use Code
Chapter 26.415 to properties within a designated Historic District; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the
Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by
City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the
recommendation from the Community Development; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development
Department conducted Public Outreach, including three small group meetings, an Open City Hall
Forum, an on-line survey, and individual letters from members of the public, to gain feedback
from the community on potential code changes to the Commercial Core Historic District; and,
WHEREAS, more than 200 individuals were engaged in the Public Outreach process;
and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 27, 2012, the City Council
approved a Policy Resolution, Resolution 82, Series of 2012, directing staff to process code
amendments related to heights and land uses in the downtown, by a three - two (3 - 2) vote; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the
proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415 — Historic
Preservation; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and
finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26,310.050;
and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for
the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1: 26.415.015 — Applicability, shall be added to Chapter 26.415 follows:
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page I of 7
26.415.015 Applicability.
This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and.
Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including
rights -of -way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415,060,
Section 2: 26.415.020 — Definitions, shall be amended as follows:
26.415.020. Definitions.
The following definitions are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the field of
historic preservation:
Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original
appearance or construction.
Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character
and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue
any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate.
Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the
issuance of a demolition permit for a designated historic property or for a building or structure
located in a designated Historic District.
Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a
certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as
the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship.
Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work will have no detrimental effect on the character -defining features of a designated property
and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further
approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the
specified certificate.
Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic
associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property is
considered significant.
Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic
Landmark Sites and Structures.
Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures,
sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed
on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated
properties, contributing resources, and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries
of a I listoric District pursuant to the Official `Lone District Map.
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 2 of 7
Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns
in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the
Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of
structures and properties in the City of Aspen.
Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location,
setting, design, materials, workmanship and association.
Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservation Commission of
up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in
the implementation of rehabilitation.
Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic
architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property is significant because it was
not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented significance; or
due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer possesses historic
integrity.
Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are
primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or
design movable, but it is associated with a specific setting and environment.
Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it
to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character -defining features.
Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing
location to another location.
Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction.
Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic
property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time.
Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation
of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and
culture.
Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a
building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses
historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure.
Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for
purposes other than creating human shelter.
(Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1)
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 3 of 7
Section 3: 26.415.060 - Effect of designation, shall be amended as follows:
26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District.
A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen
inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual property or located within
the boundaries of a Historic District, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a
development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness
before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall
provide referral comments for major projects to rights -of -way located within the boundaries of a
Historic District.
Section 4: 26.415.070 — Development involving designated historic property, shall be amended
as follows:
26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a
Historic District.
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.
(Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1; Ord. No. 3-2012,
§22 & 23)
Section 5: 26.415.080 - Demolition of designated historic properties, shall be amended as
follows:
26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic
District.
It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have
demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties
designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within
a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards
set forth in this Section.
A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or
properties within a Historic District.
1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a
Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director
by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within
City Council Ord. 933 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 4 of 7
fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal
materials needed for consideration.
2. An application for demolition approval shall include:
a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written
documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an
imminent hazard or
b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the
building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance.
3. - When complete application materials are on, file, a -public hearing before the HPC shall be
scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant
to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal
material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for
approval.
4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the
property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the
standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is
demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria:
a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public
safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely
manner,
b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to
properly maintain the structure,
c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen
or
d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic,
architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and
Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met:
a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District
in which it is located and
-b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of
the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent
designated properties and
c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs
of the area.
5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application
to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request.
6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be
forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 and no demolition
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 5 of 7
permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has
expired.
7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards,
the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic
hardship," as set forth below.
8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the
redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be
approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or
object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic
hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan.
Section 6: 26.415.110 — Benefits, shall be amended as follows:
26.415.110. Benefits.
The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain,
preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable
community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and
programs for designated historic properties and districts.
Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties
are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a
valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the
creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country.
Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have
been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic
Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and
maintaining their property.
Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated
anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both
economically vital and cherished by many.
Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits.
Section 7: 26.415.110.1) - Benefits- Parking, shall be amended as follows.
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 historic 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.
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 6 of 7
Section 8•
The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in
the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
Section 9•
A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 10`h day of December, 2012, at a meeting of
the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall,
Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council
of the City of Aspen on the 26`h day of November, 2012.
Attest:
a, � /,/� " � , -, &t)4
athryn S. ch, City Clerk
/Z-//zaiZ
Michael C. Ireland, Nfayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 101h day of December, 2012.
Attest:
Kathryn S.J00ch, City Clerk Michael L Ireland, Mayor
Approved as to form:
ames R. True, City Attorney
City Council Ord. 933 of2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 7 of 7
0 ) d 33 z0)D_
Ad Name: 8642050A
Customer: Aspen (LEGALS) City of
Your account number: 1013028
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
T21 Avis TIMIS
STATE OF COLORADO,
COUNTY OF PITKIN
I, Jim Morgan, do solemnly swear that I am General
Manager of the ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY, that
the same weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in
part and published in the County of Pitkin, State of
Colorado, and has a general circulation therein; that
said newspaper has been published continuously and
uninterruptedly in said County of Pitkin for a period
of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior
to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or
advertisement.
The Aspen Times is an accepted legal advertising
medium, only for jurisdictions operating under
Colorado's Home Rule provision.
That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was
published in the regular and entire issue of every
number of said daily newspaper for the period of 1
consecutive insertions; and that the first publication
of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper
dated 11/29/2012 and that the last publication of
said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated
11/29/2012.
In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand
this 12/06/2012.
Jim Morgan, Cieneral Manager
Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public
in and for the County of Garfield, State of Colorado
this 12/06/2012.
Mary E. Borkenhagen, Notary Public
��,,, r�r dvl7y Commission expires: September 12, 2015
���`�� BORKENy-'
3�r4; o
tar4,p
_ {
� a t• �/BLIC r a
Q G�,FOF ..........
COIF „�Aj4
LEGAL NOTICE
ORDINANCE #33 2012 PUBLIC HEARING
Ordinance #33. Series of 2012, was adapted an
first reading at the City Council meeting November
26, 2012. This ordinance, If adopted, will approve
a code amendment to clean up langguage stating
that all properties within historic dlstricis shell meet
requirements in Chapter 26.415 Historic Preserva-
tion. The public hearing on this ordinance is
scheduled for December 10, 2012 at 5 PM, City
hall, 130 South Galena.
To see the entire teat, go to the citys legal notice
websile
http:lAvww.asnannitkin.com/
Lecral-Noticas
If you would like a copy FAXed, mailed or e-mailed
to you, Call the city clerk's office, 429-2606.
Published In the Aspen Times Weekly on Novem-
ber 29, 2012. IMA20501
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
a1 , 20 l "L
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
(name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that 1 have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
v/ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof
materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six
(26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in
height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing
and was continuously visible from the _ day of , 20_, to
and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted
notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of
property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A
copy of the o»mers and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(Continued on next page)
Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in
any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision
of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such
revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use
regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and
addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be
waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing on such amendments.
r
Th f regoing " ffidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ?3 day
of
I
, 20L4 by \-TAC4akk;WA) X fl6'4 A/9�/�
PUBLIC NOTICE
RUAmendments to the City of Aspen
Landd Use se Code (Title 26), related to the Historic
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
Preservation Chapter 26.415.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
will be held on Monday, December 10, 2012. to
begin 5:00 before the Aspen City Council,
^ ,
My commission expires: a\1
at p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hell, 130 S. Galena S.
Aspen, to consider a code amendment to Title 26.
the City of Aspen Land Use Code, to the ap-
f 11
Chapter re-
plicability of the Historic Preservationn Chapter
listedto non-landmarked buildings within designat-
ed Historic Districts. For further information.
contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Commu-
Notary Public
nity DevtTaPMU Mepartment. 130 S. Galena St..
Aspen. CO 970.429.2778, (or by email sara.ad-
ams d cityofaspen. com ).
s/Michael Ireland. Mayor
Aspen City Council
Published in the Aspen Times on November 2.
2012.(8613269)
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:
* COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
* PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
* LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED
BY MA EL
* APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council
FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director 66
RE: Code Amendment — Chapter 26.415 Historic Preservation — Second Reading;
of Ordinance # 33, Series of 2012 — public hearing
MEETING
DATE: December 10, 2012
SUMMARY:
The attached Ordinance includes proposed code amendment clarifying the applicability of non -
designated properties within Historic Districts based on Council direction provided as part of the
Policy Resolution passed August 27, 2012. The objective of the proposed code amendment is to
clean up language stating that all properties within the Historic Districts shall meet the requirements
in Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. A redline version of the proposed changes are included
as Exhibit B.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance.
LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES:
This is the second reading on proposed code amendments for Historic Districts. Pursuant to
Land Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code
amendments.
All code amendments are subject to a three -step process. This is the third step in the process:
1. Public Outreach
2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should the pursued
3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments.
BACKGROUND & OVERVIEW:
Questions regarding the applicability of non -designated properties related to Land Use Code
Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation, were raised in 2011 during the Benton Building/Little
Annie's development application (517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue). The applicant challenged
whether non -designated properties are included on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark
Sites and Structures and as such are subject to demolition review by the Historic Preservation
Commission. This discussion pointed out areas in the Code that could be simplified and
clarified.
Staff Memo, 12/10/12
Code Amendment — Historic Districts
Page 1 of 3
A Historic District is a collection of buildings that are related historically or aesthetically by plan
or physical development. Aspen's Historic Districts are comprised of individually designated
properties, properties that contribute to the significance of the Historic District, and properties
that are considered noncontributing resources to the Historic District. These buildings all play a
role in the integrity of the District and all require review by the HPC to ensure consistency with
traditional development patterns.
Since the inception of the Commercial Core Historic District in 1972, all properties within the
District have been subject to design and demolition review by the Historic Preservation
Commission, which is consistent with historic preservation programs throughout the county on
local, state and national levels. There are many examples of HPC exercising its jurisdiction to
review applications for Demolition of structures located within a Historic District, but not
individually designated properties. The most recent reviews include:
435 W. Main (Aspen Jewish Community Center) 2005
434 E. Cooper (Bidwell) 2006
308 E. Hopkins (La Cocina), 2006
508 E. Cooper Avenue (Cooper Street Pier), 2006
420/422 E. Hopkins (Fire Station), 2007
517 E. Hyman (Little Annie's), 2012
521 E. Hyman (Benton Buiding), 2012
Council directed Staff to clarify the language regarding Historic District review concurrent with
changes to the Commercial Core Historic District. The proposed amendment does not change
HPC's jurisdiction; rather it clarifies the Code language to better reflect the applicability of the
Historic Preservation Chapter to non -designated properties within Historic Districts.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT (A REDLINE VERSION IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT B):
Section 1: This is a new section that clarifies the applicability of the Chapter to both
properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and all properties,
including rights of way, within a Historic District.
Section 2: Changes include clarifications to the definitions of the following terms:
contributing resource, designated property, historic district, and noncontributing resource.
Section 3: This section addresses the effect of being designated, which already includes
properties located in historic districts. The proposed change adds Historic District to the
heading for clarity. It also clarifies that major projects involving rights -of -way within
Historic District boundaries require referral comments from HPC, which is consistent with
current practice.
Section 4: This section addresses review process and criteria for development involving
historic properties. The proposed change clarifies that this section applies to properties
Staff Memo, 12/10/12
Code Amendment — Historic Districts
Page 2 of 3
within historic districts. It also clarifies that development involving landscapes on historic
properties or properties within a Historic District is under HPC's purview. Landscapes are
considered part of the property designation and have always been reviewed by Staff or HPC
pursuant to the adopted Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
Section 5: This section addresses review criteria for demolition. The proposed change
clarifies that this section applies to properties within historic districts.
Section 6: This section outlines all incentives available to historic properties. The proposed
change clarifies that the benefits do not apply to non -designated properties within historic
districts.
Section 7: This section cleans up and clarifies the applicable review criteria regarding
parking reductions on landmark properties.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes that the project is consistent with the applicable review standards in the City Land
Use Code. Staff recommends approval of the code amendment.
RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE):
"I move to approve Ordinance No. 33, Series of 2012, approving the proposed Code Amendment
on second reading."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Ordinance # 33, Series of 2012
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A — Review criteria
Exhibit B — Redline version of Code changes.
Staff Memo, 12/10/12
Code Amendment — Historic Districts
Page 3 of 3
Exhibit A: Staff Findings
26.310.050 Amendments to the Land Use Code Standards of review - Adoption.
In reviewing an application to amend the text of this Title, per Section 26.310.020(B)(3), Step
Three — Public Hearing before City Council, the City Council shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this
Title.
Staff Findings:
The proposed code amendment is consistent with the Land Use Code. The amendment proposes
to clarify the HPC's jurisdiction over properties located within designated Historic Districts.
These changes are consistent with city policy and the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion
to be met.
B. Whether the proposed amendment achieves the policy, community goal, or objective
cited as reasons for the code amendment or achieves other public policy objectives.
Staff Findings:
The stated reason for the code amendment is to clarify HPC's jurisdiction over properties located
within Historic Districts in order to ensure that all development within Districts is consistent with
the historic pattern established downtown.
The AACP calls for code amendments that "ensure that City codes support the historic integrity
of designated structures and ensure compatibility with the surrounding context in terms of site
coverage, mass, scale, height and form." (Historic Preservation Chapter Part II.1.) Clarifying
HPC purview over all properties within Historic Districts in an effort to protect contributing and
designated buildings within Districts furthers this goal.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
C. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment are compatible with the
community character of the City and in harmony with the public interest and the
purpose and intent of this Title.
Staff Findings:
The intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure that all properties within Historic Districts are
reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission to protect the integrity of the Districts. Staff
finds that this is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Historic Preservation Chapter of the
Land Use Code and is in harmony with the public interest.
Exhibit A
Historic Districts — Second Reading
12.10.2012
Page 1 of 1
Exhibit B — Redline changes to 26.415, Historic Preservation
Section 1
26.415.015 Applicability.
This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and
Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including
rights -of -way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415.060.
Section 2:
26.415.020. Definitions.
The following definitions are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the field of
historic preservation:
Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original
appearance or construction.
Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character
and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue
any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate.
Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the
issuance of a demolition permit for a designated historic property or for a building or structure
located in a designated Hhistoric dDistrict.
Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a
certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as
the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship.
Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work will have no detrimental effect on the character -defining features of a designated property
and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further
approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the
specified certificate.
Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic
associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property of
distFiet-is considered significant.
Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic
Landmark Sites and Structures.
Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures,
sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed
on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated
properties, contributing resources, and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries
of a Historic District pursuant to the Official Zone District Map.
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, Second Reading
12.10.2012
Page 1 of 5
Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns
in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the
Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of
structures and properties in the City of Aspen.
Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location,
setting, design, materials, workmanship and association.
Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservation Commission of
up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in
the implementation of rehabilitation.
Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic
architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property t is significant
because it was not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented
significance; or due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer
possesses historic integrity.
Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are
primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or
design movable, but it is associated with a specific setting and environment.
Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it
to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character -defining features.
Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing
location to another location.
Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction.
Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic
property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time.
Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation
of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture; engineering, archaeology and
culture.
Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a
building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses
historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure.
Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for
purposes other than creating human shelter.
(Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 28 -2010, § 1)
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, Second Reading
12.10.2012
Page 2 of 5
Section 3:
26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District.
A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen
Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual building -property or
located within the boundaries of n an hHistoric dDistrict, unless determined exempt, requires the
approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of
appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the
City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights -of -way located within the
boundaries of a Historic District.
Section 4:
26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a
Historic District.
No building1-of-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 dDistrict 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.
(Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1; Ord. No. 3-2012, §22 &
23)
Section 5:
26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic
District.
It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have
demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties
designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within
a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards
set forth in this Section.
A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or
properties within a Historic District.
1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a
Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director
by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within
fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal
materials needed for consideration.
2. An application for demolition approval shall include:
a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written
documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an
imminent hazard or
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, Second Reading
12.10.2012
Page 3 of 5
b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the
building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance.
3. When complete application materials are on file, a public hearing before the HPC shall be
scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant
to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal
material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for
approval.
4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the
property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the
standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is
demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria:
a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public
safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely
manner,
b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to
properly maintain the structure,
c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen
or
d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic,
architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and
Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met:
a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or hHistoric
dDistrict in which it is located and
b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of
the hHistoric dDistrict or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent
designated properties and
c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs
of the area.
5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application
to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request.
6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be
forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 and no demolition
permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has
expired.
7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards,
the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic
hardship," as set forth below.
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, Second Reading
12.10.2012
Page 4 of 5
8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the
redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be
approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or
object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic
hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan.
Section 6:
26.415.110. Benefits.
The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain,
preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable
community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and
programs for designated historic properties and districts.
Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties
are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a
valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the
creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country.
Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have
been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic
Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and
maintaining their property.
Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated
anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both
economically vital and cherished by many.
All pr-epet4ies listed on the Aspen inventer-y of Histor-ie Landfnafk Site and Only
designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits.
Section 7:
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 historic properties may receive waivers of payment -in -lieu fees for
parking reductions.
In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, Tthe 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. Ref t Chapter- 26.515 ferr
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, Second Reading
12.10.2012
Page 5 of 5
ORDINANCE No. 33
(Series of 2012)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO
CHAPTER 26.415 — HISTORIC PRESERVATION
OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE
WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen
Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development
Department to explore code amendments related to the applicability of Land Use Code
Chapter 26.415 to properties within a designated Historic District; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the
Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by
City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the
recommendation from the Community Development; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development
Department conducted Public Outreach, including three small group meetings, an Open City Hall
Forum, an on-line survey, and individual letters from members of the public, to gain feedback
from the community on potential code changes to the Commercial Core Historic District; and,
WHEREAS, more than 200 individuals were engaged in the Public Outreach process;
and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 27, 2012, the City Council
approved a Policy Resolution, Resolution 82, Series of 2012, directing staff to process code
amendments related to heights and land uses in the downtown, by a three - two (3 - 2) vote; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the
proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415 — Historic
Preservation; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and
finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050;
and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for
the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1: 26.415.015 — Applicability, shall be added to Chapter 26.415 follows:
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 1 of 7
26.415.015 Applicability.
This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and
Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including
rights -of -way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415.060.
Section 2: 26.415.020 — Definitions, shall be amended as follows:
26.415.020. Definitions.
The following definitions are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the Held of
historic preservation:
Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original
appearance or construction.
Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character
and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue
any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate.
Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the
issuance of a demolition permit for a designated Historic property or for a building or structure
located in a designated Historic District.
Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a
certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as
the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship.
Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work will have no detrimental effect on the character -defining features of a designated property
and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further
approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the
specified certificate.
Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic
associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property is
considered significant.
Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic
Landmark Sites and Structures.
Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures,
sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed
on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated
properties, contributing resources, and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries
of a Historic District pursuant to the Official Zone District Map.
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 2 of 7
Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns
in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the
Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of
structures and properties in the City of Aspen.
Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location,
setting, design, materials, workmanship and association.
Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservation Commission of
up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in
the implementation of rehabilitation.
Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic
architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property is significant because it was
not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented significance; or
due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer possesses historic
integrity.
Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are
primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or
design movable, but it is associated with a specific setting and environment.
Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it
to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character -defining features.
Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing
location to another location.
Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction.
Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic
property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time.
Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation
of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and
culture.
Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a
building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses
historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure.
Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for
purposes other than creating human shelter.
(Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 28 -2010, § 1)
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 3 of 7
Section 3: 26.415.060 - Effect of designation, shall be amended as follows:
26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District.
A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen
Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual property or located within
the boundaries of a Historic District, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a
development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness
before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall
provide referral comments for major projects to rights -of -way located within the boundaries of a
Historic District.
Section 4: 26.415.070 — Development ins olving designated historic property, shall be amended
as follows:
26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a
Historic District.
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.
(Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord. No. 28 -2010, § 1; Ord. No. 3-2012,
§22 & 23)
Section 5: 26.415.080 - Demolition ol' designated historic properties, shall be amended as
follows:
26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic
District.
It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have
demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties
designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within
a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards
set forth in this Section.
A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or
properties within a Historic District.
1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a
Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director
by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 4 of 7
fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal
materials needed for consideration.
2. An application for demolition approval shall include:
a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written
documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an
imminent hazard or
b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the
building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance.
3. When complete application materials are on file, a public hearing before the HPC shall be
scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant
to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal
material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for
approval.
4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the
property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the
standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is
demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria:
a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public
safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely
manner,
b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to
properly maintain the structure,
c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen
or
d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic,
architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and
Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met:
a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District
in which it is located and
b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of
the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent
designated properties and
c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs
of the area.
5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application
to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request.
6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be
forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 and no demolition
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 5 of 7
permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has
expired.
7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards,
the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic
hardship," as set forth below.
8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the
redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be
approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or
object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic
hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan.
Section 6: 26.415.110 — Benefits, shall be amended as follows:
26.415.110. Benefits.
The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain,
preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable
community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and
programs for designated historic properties and districts.
Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties
are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a
valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the
creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country.
Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have
been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic
Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and
maintaining their property.
Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated
anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both
economically vital and cherished by many.
Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits.
Section 7: 26.415.110.13— Benefits- Parking, shall be amended as follows.
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 historic 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.
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 6 of 7
Section 8•
The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in
the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
Section 9•
A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 10`h day of December, 2012, at a meeting of
the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall,
Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council
of the City of Aspen on the 26`h day of November, 2012.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
James R. True, City Attorney
day of , 2012.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
City Council Ord. #33 of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 7 of 7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council
FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner 9*A-
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
RE: Code Amendment — Chapter 26.415 Historic Preservation — First Reading of
Ordinance #L??, Series of 2012 - Second Reading is scheduled for December 10,
2012.
MEETING
DATE: November 26, 2012
SUMMARY:
The attached Ordinance includes proposed code amendment clarifying the applicability of non -
designated properties within Historic Districts based on Council direction provided as part of the
Policy Resolution passed August 27, 2012. The objective of the proposed code amendment is to
clean up language stating that all properties within the Historic Districts shall meet the requirements
in Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. A redline version of the proposed changes are included
as Exhibit B.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance.
LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES:
This is the 1" reading on proposed code amendments for Historic Districts. Pursuant to Land
Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code amendments.
All code amendments are subject to a three -step process. This is the third step in the process:
1. Public Outreach
2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should the pursued
3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments.
BACKGROUND & OVERVIEW:
Questions regarding the applicability of non -designated properties related to Land Use Code
Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation, were raised in 2011 during the Benton Building/Little
Annie's development application (517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue). The applicant challenged
whether non -designated properties are included on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark
Sites and Structures and as such are subject to demolition review by the Historic Preservation
Commission. This discussion pointed out areas in the Code that could be simplified and
clarified.
A Historic District is a collection of buildings that are related historically or aesthetically by plan
or physical development. Aspen's Historic Districts are comprised of individually designated
properties, properties that contribute to the significance of the Historic District, and properties
that are considered noncontributing resources to the Historic District. These buildings all play a
role in the integrity of the District and all require review by the HPC to ensure consistency with
traditional development patterns.
Since the inception of the Commercial Core Historic District in 1972, all properties within the
District have been subject to design and demolition review by the Historic Preservation
Commission, which is consistent with historic preservation programs throughout the county on
local, state and national levels. There are many examples of HPC exercising its jurisdiction to
review applications for Demolition of structures located within a Historic District, but not
individually designated properties. The most recent reviews include:
435 W. Main (Aspen Jewish Community Center) 2005
434 E. Cooper (Bidwell) 2006
308 E. Hopkins (La Cocina), 2006
508 E. Cooper Avenue (Cooper Street Pier), 2006
420/422 E. Hopkins (Fire Station), 2007
517 E. Hyman (Little Annie's), 2012
521 E. Hyman (Benton Buiding), 2012
Council directed Staff to clarify the language regarding Historic District review concurrent with
changes to the Commercial Core Historic District. The proposed amendment does not change
HPC's jurisdiction; rather it clarifies the Code language to better reflect the applicability of the
Historic Preservation Chapter to non -designated properties within Historic Districts.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT (A REDLINE VERSION IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT B):
Section 1: This is a new section that clarifies the applicability of the Chapter to both
properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and all properties,
including rights of way, within a Historic District.
Section 2: Changes include clarifications to the definitions of the following terms:
contributing resource, designated property, historic district, and noncontributing resource.
Section 3: This section addresses the effect of being designated, which already includes
properties located in historic districts. The proposed change adds Historic District to the
heading for clarity. It also clarifies that major projects involving rights -of -way within
Historic District boundaries require referral comments from HPC, which is consistent with
current practice.
Section 4: This section addresses review process and criteria for development involving
historic properties. The proposed change clarifies that this section applies to properties,
within historic districts. It also clarifies that development involving landscapes on historic
properties or properties within a Historic District is under HPC's purview. Landscapes are
considered part of the property designation and have always been reviewed by Staff or HPC
pursuant to the adopted Historic Preservation Design Guidelines,
Section 5: This section addresses review criteria for demolition. The proposed change
clarifies that this section applies to properties within historic districts.
Section 6: This section outlines all incentives available to historic properties. The proposed
change clarifies that the benefits do not apply to non -designated properties within historic
districts.
Section 7: This section cleans up and clarifies the applicable review criteria regarding
parking reductions on landmark properties.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes that the project is consistent with the applicable review standards in the City Land
Use Code. Staff recommends approval of the code amendment.
RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE):
"I move to approve Ordinance No._, Series of 2012, approving the proposed Code Amendment
on first reading."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Ordinance #_, Series of 2012
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A — Review criteria
Exhibit B — Redline version of Code changes.
ORDINANCE No.
(Series of 2012)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO
THE FOLLOWING CHAPTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE:
26.415 — HISTORIC PRESERVATION
WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen
Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development
Department to explore code amendments related to the applicability of Land Use Code
Chapter 26.415 to properties within a designated Historic District; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the
Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by
City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the
recommendation from the Community Development; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development
Department conducted Public Outreach, including three small group meetings, an Open City Hall
Forum, an on-line survey, and individual letters from members of the public, to gain feedback
from the community on potential code changes to the Commercial Core Historic District; and,
WHEREAS, the more than 200 individuals were engaged in the Public Outreach
process; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 27, 2012, the City Council
approved a Policy Resolution, Resolution 82, Series of 2012, directing staff to process code
amendments related to heights and land uses in the downtown, by a three - two (3 - 2) vote; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the
proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415 — Historic
Preservation; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and
finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050;
and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for
the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1: 26.415.015 — Applicability, shall be added to Chapter 26.415 follows:
City Council Ord #_ of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 1 of 7
26.415.015 Applicability.
This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and
Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including
rights -of -way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415.060.
Section 2: 26.415.020 — Definitions, shall be amended as follows:
26.415.020. Definitions.
The following definitions are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the field of
historic preservation:
Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original
appearance or construction.
Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character
and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue
any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate.
Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the
issuance of a demolition permit for a designated historic property or for a building or structure
located in a designated Historic District.
Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a
certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as
the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship.
Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work will have no detrimental effect on the character -defining features of a designated property
and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further
approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the
specified certificate.
Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic
associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property is
considered significant.
Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic
Landmark Sites and Structures.
Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures,
sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed
on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated
properties, contributing resources, and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries
of a Historic District pursuant to the Official Zone District Map.
City Council Ord #_ of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 2of7
Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns
in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the
Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of
structures and properties in the City of Aspen.
Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location,
setting, design, materials, workmanship and association.
Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservatiox Commission of
up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in
the implementation of rehabilitation.
Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic
architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property is significant because it was
not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented significance; or
due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer possesses historic
integrity.
Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are
primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or
design movable, but it is associated with a specific setting and environment.
Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it
to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character -defining features.
Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing
location to another location.
Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction.
Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic
property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time.
Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation
of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and
culture.
Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a
building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses
historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure.
Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for
purposes other than creating human shelter.
(Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 28 -2010, § 1)
Section 3: 26.415,060 - Effect of designation, shall be amended as follows:
City Council Ord #_ of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 3 of 7
26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District.
A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen
Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual property or located within
the boundaries of a Historic District, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a
development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness
before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall
provide referral comments for major projects to rights -of -way located within the boundaries of a
Historic District.
Section 4: 26.415.070 — Development involving designated historic property, shall be amended
as follows:
26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a
Historic District.
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.
1. (Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1; Ord. No. 3-2012,
§22 & 23)
Section 5: 26.415.080 - Demolition of designated historic properties, shall be amended as
follows:
26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic
District.
It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have
demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties
designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within
a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards
set forth in this Section.
A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or
properties within a Historic District.
1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a
Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director
by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within
fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal
materials needed for consideration.
City Council Ord #_ of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 4of7
2. An application for demolition approval shall include:
a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written
documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an
imminent hazard or
b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the
building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance.
3. When complete application materials are on file, a public hearing before the HPC shall be
scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant
to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal
material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for
approval.
4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the
property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the
standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is
demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria:
a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public
safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely
manner,
b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to
properly maintain the structure,
c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen
or
d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic,
architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and
Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met:
a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District
in which it is located and
b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of
the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent
designated properties and
c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs
of the area.
5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application
to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request.
6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be
forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26,415.120 and no demolition
permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has
expired.
City Council Ord #_ of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 5 of 7
7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards,
the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic
hardship," as set forth below.
8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the
redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be
approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or
object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic
hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan.
Section 6: 26.415.110 — Benefits, shall be amended as follows:
26.415.110. Benefits.
The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain,
preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable
community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and
programs for designated historic properties and districts.
Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties
are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a
valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the
creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country.
Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have
been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic
Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and
maintaining their property.
Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated
anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both
economically vital and cherished by many.
Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits.
Section 7: 26.415.110.13— Benefits- Parking, shall be amended as follows.
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 historic 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.
City Council Ord #_ of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 6 of 7
Section 8•
The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in
the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
Section 9•
A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 10'h day of December, 2012, at a meeting of
the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall,
Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall
be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council
of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2012.
(signatures on following page]
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of , 2012.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
City Council Ord #_ of 2012
Historic Districts Code Amendments
Page 7 of 7
Exhibit A: Staff Findings
26.310.050 Amendments to the Land Use Code Standards of review - Adoption.
In reviewing an application to amend the text of this Title, per Section 26.310.020(B)(3), Step
Three — Public Hearing before City Council, the City Council shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this
Title.
Staff Findings:
The proposed code amendment is consistent with the Land Use Code. The amendment proposes
to clarify the HPC's jurisdiction over properties located within designated Historic Districts.
These changes are consistent with city policy and the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion
to be met.
B. Whether the proposed amendment achieves the policy, community goal, or objective
cited as reasons for the code amendment or achieves other public police objectives.
Staff Findings:
The stated reason for the code amendment is to clarify HPC's jurisdiction over properties located
within Historic Districts in order to ensure that all development within Districts is consistent with
the historic pattern established downtown.
The AACP calls for code amendments that "ensure that City codes support the historic integrity
of designated structures and ensure compatibility with the surrounding context in terms of site
coverage, mass, scale, height and form." (Historic Preservation Chapter Part II. I.) Clarifying
HPC purview over all properties within Historic Districts in an effort to protect contributing and
designated buildings within Districts furthers this goal.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
C. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment are compatible with the
community character of the City and in harmony with the public interest and the
purpose and intent of this Title.
Staff Findings:
The intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure that all properties within Historic Districts are
reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission to protect the integrity of the Districts. Staff
finds that this is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Historic Preservation Chapter of the
Land Use Code and is in harmony with the public interest.
Exhibit A
Historic Districts — First Reading
11.26.2012
Page 1 of 1
Exhibit B — Redline changes to 26.415, Historic Preservation
26.415.015 Applicability.
This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and
Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including
rights -of -way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415.060.
26.415.020. Definitions.
The following definitions are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the field of
historic preservation:
Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original
appearance or construction.
Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character
and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue
any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate.
Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the
issuance of a demolition permit for a designated historic property or for a building or structure
located in a designated Hhistoric dDistrict.
Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a
certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as
the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship.
Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed
work will have no detrimental effect on the character -defining features of a designated property
and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further
approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the
specified certificate.
Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic
associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property of
distr-ietis considered significant.
Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic
Landmark Sites and Structures.
Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures,
sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed
on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated
properties, contributing resources, and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries
of a Historic District pursuant to the Official Zone District Man.
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, First Reading
11.26.2012
Page 1 of 5
Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns
in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the
Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of
structures and properties in the City of Aspen.
Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location,
setting, design, materials, workmanship and association.
Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservation Commission of
up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in
the implementation of rehabilitation.
Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic
architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property ef distriet is significant
because it was not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented
significance; or due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer
possesses historic integrity.
Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are
primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or
design movable, but it is associated with a specific setting and environment.
Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it
to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character -defining features.
Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing
location to another location.
Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction.
Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic
property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time.
Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation
of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and
culture.
Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a
building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses
historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure.
Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for
purposes other than creating human shelter.
(Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1)
26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District.
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, First Reading
11.26.2012
Page 2 of 5
A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen
Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual building -property -or
located within the boundaries oftt an hHistoric dDistrict, unless determined exempt, requires the
approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of
appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the
City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights -of -way located within the
boundaries of a Historic District.
26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a
Historic District.
No building,-er-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 dDistrict 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.
(Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1; Ord. No. 3-2012, §22 &
23)
26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic
District.
It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have
demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties
designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within
a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards
set forth in this Section.
A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or
properties within a Historic District.
1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a
Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director
by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within
fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal
materials needed for consideration.
2. An application for demolition approval shall include:
a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written
documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an
imminent hazard or
b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the
building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance.
3. When complete application materials are on file, a public hearing before the HPC shall be
scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, First Reading
11.26.2012
Page 3 of 5
to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal
material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for
approval.
4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the
property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the
standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is
demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria:
a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public
safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely
manner,
b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to
properly maintain the structure,
c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen
or
d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic,
architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and
Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met:
a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or hHistoric
dDistrict in which it is located and
b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of
the hHistoric dDistrict or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent
designated properties and
c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs
of the area.
5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application
to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request.
6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be
forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 and no demolition
permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has
expired.
7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards,
the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic
hardship," as set forth below.
8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the
redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be
approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or
object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic
hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan.
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, First Reading
11.26.2012
Page 4 of 5
26.415.110. Benefits.
The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain,
preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable
community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and
programs for designated historic properties and districts.
Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties
are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a
valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the
creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country.
Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have
been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic
Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and
maintaining their property.
Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated
anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both
economically vital and cherished by many.
All pfoperties listed en the Aspen inventefy of 14ister-ie Landfnar-k Site and Only
designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits.
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 historic properties may receive waivers of payment -in -lieu fees for parking
reductions.
In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, Tthe 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. Refer to Chapter- 26.515 fef
Exhibit B — redline version
Historic Districts, First Reading
11.26.2012
Page 5 of 5
Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning April 21, 2009
was a 5 foot setback on the 222 E Hallam property. Garrow said they were trying
to make this PUD as consistent with the R-6 Zone District. Staff doesn't support
any specific setbacks other than combined 15 with a minimum of 5 on each side
for future development or addition.
Weiss said that it was not spelled out that the property was getting an additional
633 square feet and the map was not current. Weiss stated that he did not want to
see a structure within 5 foot of that setback; he wanted a 15 foot setback.
Mike Wampler voiced concern over the size of the house in the PUD; they
currently have 3,233 square feet and want an increase to 3,866 square feet.
Wampler said he did not want to see the house expanded.
Weiss asked the distance from the current existing house to the top of slope.
Rawley replied the rear of the garage was 60 feet from the top of slope and the rear
setback would be 31 feet from the property line. Clauson said there was no intent
to deceive and the application clearly states that the gain of the applicant is 633
square feet of floor area. Clauson said the trail ran along almost the entire back
portion of the property and the Parks Department likes to have a proper easement
for any trails with an additional amount of width for maintenance work. Clauson
said that a 5 foot setback from the top of slope would be acceptable.
Gibbs said that if the setback were 10 feet from top of slope he would be willing to
allow the side yard setbacks as proposed.
MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to approve Resolution 007-09approving the PUD,
rezoning and removing the SPA for 222 E Hallam with the following changes in
conditions from 10 feet from the top of slope or 42 feet from the rear property line;
seconded by Mike Wampler. Roll call: Gibbs, yes; Wampler, no; Weiss, yes;
Erspamer, yes; APPROVED 3-1.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CODE AMENDMENT - HISTORIC DISTRICTS — HPC PURVIEW IN THE
RIGHT OF WAY
LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing. Sara Adams provided Special Counsel
with the approval of public notice. Adams explained there were 2 historic districts
in town: the Main Street and Commercial Core that were established in the mid
1970's. Adams looked into the review process for decisions in the right of way in
these historic districts and realized that it was not that clear.
V/
i
Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning April 21, 2009
Adams described a historic district was a pattern of development, a collection of
buildings, something that is continuous so when you visit this place you get a sense
of what it was like back in that era; you are looking for a cohesive whole for the
most part. Adams said the first 2 sections of the proposed code amendment clarify
the language and do not expand the boundaries but include the spaces between the
blocks and lots that were listed in the 1970s. HPC has about 4 levels of review for
landmarks or development in a historic district: exempt development that don't
have an impact on the historic character of the district; certificate of no negative
effect, which is a staff approval that will change the appearance of something but
not negatively; minor development review, which is a one step review; the major
development, which is a conceptual and final review. Adams asked the other city
departments (Parks, Engineering, Parking, Streets, Water, Utilities) affected by
these code amendments for a check list of work performed in these right of ways to
make the review process fair. HPC approved this code language change
unanimously (6-0) and Planning & Zoning is asked to make a recommendation to
City Council. Adams said all the standards of review for the code amendment are
met especially the AACP that says "we must continue building on what we have
by authentically preserving historic structures and creating thoughtful new
buildings that encourage and shape that feeling of historical continuity" and
consistent with our broader community goals" and to "work to improve HPC
review process."
MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to extend the meeting by 10 minutes; Stan Gibbs
seconded; all in favor, Approved.
MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve Resolution 008-09 to include the back
half of the Jerome (down Bleeker to Monarch and the east side of Mill, curb to
curb); Mike Wampler seconded. Roll call: Weiss, yes; Gibbs, yes; Wampler, yes;
Myrin, yes; Erspamer, yes; all in favor, Approved 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CODE AMENDMENT HPC DESIGN CALL-UP
LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing.
MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to continue the public hearing for the HPC design
call up to June 16, 2009; seconded by Mike Wampler. All in favor, Approved.
Adjourn 7:10 pm.
#ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPFRTY:
Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
licsr� r�� l 2 sT�—L j, 200
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
1, ! C l�t� ptn S GC�'[ (name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof
materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six
(26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in I
height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing
and v,7as continuously visible from the _ day of , 200_, to
and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted
notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of
property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A
copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt
requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to
the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of
development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those
on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that
create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas,
and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement.
Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in
any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision
of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such
revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use
regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and
addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be
waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days
prior to the public hearing on such amendments.
Signa e
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ( day
of 200, by ��-y1� GQIn�.1��
At
v
Or,
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My commission expires:
Notary Public
'Mist
eekly Y F
O
i LAU
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: MEYE
• COPYOFTHEPUBLICATION �•'•••...
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) OF
• LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIESWMMD
BY MAIL
• APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-I03.3
FfA
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and "Zoning Commission
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
FROM: Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner 94-C
RE: Historic Districts code amendment/ HPC purview in the right of way
DATE: April 21, 2009
HPC's purview over changes in the right of ways of Aspen's two historic districts was
questioned recently during the proposed improvements to the Main Street corridor. Staff
analyzed the Code and the designation ordinances for the Main Street (1976) and Commercial
Core Historic Districts (1974) and discovered that not only is the review process for changes to
Historic District right of ways confusing and unclear, but the defined boundaries of the Historic
Districts are inaccurate.
One of the Historic Preservation goals listed in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan is to
"work to improve the Historic Preservation Commission review process." The Community
Development Director has initiated this code amendment to correct past clerical errors in the
ordinances designating the Main Street and Commercial Core Historic Districts and to clarify
review processes for development within the designated Historic District right of ways.
The Historic Preservation Commission found that the review criteria were met and unanimously
supported the proposed amendment during their regular April 8, 2009 meeting. The Land Use
Code does not require a recommendation from the HPC for amendments to the Code; however,
Staff determined that HPC need to provide feedback because the proposed amendments directly
involve HPC's jurisdiction.
BACKGROUND
As defined in code section 26.415.020, Historic Districts are "a collection,
concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or
objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical
development." The first Historic District in the United States was
created in Charleston, South Carolina in 1931. Patterns of
architecture, repetition of historic uses and/or concentration of
development are important tangible and understandable pieces of
our history that create a sense of place for present and more
importantly future generations. The majority of historic districts
around the county have defined boundaries that encompass
properties containing buildings that contribute to a sense of place
and specific period of significance important to a town's history.
The image to the left illustrates the boundaries of Charleston's
historic district, which includes all property, right of ways and
public domain within the defined boundaries.
RO W HDmemopz.doc
Page - 1 - of 3
Aspen's ordinances designating the historic districts describe lots and blocks in the area, but are
unclear as to how the adjacent public spaces are to be treated. Mapping of the districts over the
years has indicated that the blocks and the streets within them are part of the district but
clarification is needed to ensure a cohesive, uninterrupted district that portrays Aspen's history
(please see Exhibit B for maps.)
Staff met with the following departments to discuss work that is typically done in the right of
ways to help figure out appropriate and realistic review processes for different types of
development: Parks, Engineering, Parking, Streets, Water and Utilities.
PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS: Staff proposes adoption of code amendments that establish a
better process for work that should qualify as exempt, administrative review or HPC review.
The following narrative is to provide P&Z background on the amendments included in the
attached resolution.
Sections 1 and 2: These sections propose amended language to the existing Ordinances
(number 49, series of 1974 and number 60 series of 1976) that designated the Main Street
and Commercial Core Historic Districts. There were a few clerical errors that need to be
corrected, and more importantly the boundaries of the district are defined such that they
include all areas between the alleyways to the north and south of Main Street for the
Main Street Historic District and between Mill Street, Durant Street, Hunter Street and
the north alleyway behind Main Street for the Commercial Core Historic District. It was
always assumed that the Historic Districts were a contiguous area with a defined exterior
border that included all areas within, both public and private. This amendment clearly
defines the boundaries as illustrated in Exhibit A to the proposed Resolution.
Section 3: The proposed amendment to Section 3 proposes to include objects and landscapes
among the items that are under HPC's purview.
Section 4: Section 4 proposes development in the right of ways that does not require review by
the Historic Preservation Commission. Any work that has no permanent and/or adverse
impact on the historic character of the district is exempt; for example: temporary signage,
seasonal lighting and regular repairs.
Section 5: Administrative approvals are currently granted through a Certificate of No Negative
Effect. Section 5 proposes that any work that will have a minimal impact on the historic
district b approved administratively; for example, the installation of some street furniture,
solar panels, replacement of ditches or streetscapes that are minimal in nature.
Section 6: Section 6 proposes language that would qualify for a minor review at the HPC. This
is a one step review process that involves a public hearing. Basically, any work in the
right of ways of historic districts of a magnitude that does not meet the criteria for an
administrative approval qualifies as a Minor Development review.
Section 7: Section 7 proposes that any work that has a significant impact on the historic district,
for example a master plan, qualifies for a Major Development review at the HPC, which
includes a two step process and public hearings.
ROWHDmemopz.doc
Page -2-of3
NEXT STEPS: The Planning and Zoning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council.
First and Second Readings of the proposed code amendments are not currently scheduled at
Council.
REQUEST OF THE P & Z: Planning and Zoning is asked to make a recommendation to the City
Council regarding the proposed code amendments in the attached draft resolution.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Planning and Zoning recommend approval
of the proposed code amendments.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution # 0A , Series of 2009
Exhibit A — Section 26.310.040 Standards of Review
Exhibit B — Maps of Historic Districts
Exhibit C — "What is a Historic District" chapter of the Guide to Nominating Historic Districts,
published by the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Colorado Historical
Society, 2006.
ROWHDmemopz.doc
Page -3-of3
RESOLUTION No.$
(Series of 2009)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION,
ASPEN, COLORADO, DETERMINING THAT AMENDMENTS TO ASPEN CITY
COUNCIL ORDINANCE NUMBERED 49, SERIES OF 1974 AND ORINDANCE
NUMBERED 60 SERIES OF 1976 MEET THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF
REVIEW, AND DETERMINING THAT THE FOLLOWING CHAPTERS AND
SECTIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE MEET APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF REVIEW:
26.415.070 - DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING DESIGNATED HISTORIC
PROPERTY; 26.415.070.A - EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT; 26.415.070.13 -
CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT; 26.415.070.0 - CERTIFICAET OF
APPROPRIATENESS FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT; 26.415.070.D -
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT.
WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.210 and 26.310 of the City of
Aspen Land Use Code, the Director of the Community Development Department
initiated amendments to Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 and Ordinance
numbered 60, Series of 1976 related to the boundaries of the Commercial Core and
Main Street Historic Districts; and initiated amendments to the Land Use Code related
to the Historic Preservation Commission's (HPC) purview in the right of ways within
designated historic districts; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the official zone
district map and to amend text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and
recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or denial by the Community
Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public
hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing and considering these
recommendations; and,
WHEREAS, Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 defined the Commercial
Core Historic District as "all of lots 80, 81, 82, 93, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, and the
south half of blocks 79, 86 and 92 of the City and Original Townsite of Aspen; and the
south half of Block 19 East Aspen Addition to the City of Aspen," which did not include
the right of ways; and,
WHEREAS, Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 defined the Main Street
Historic District as " all of those properties abutting (on the north and south) Main Street
between Monarch and Seventh Streets, and all of Paepcke Park within the City of Aspen,
Colorado: which area is more particularly described as lots K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R and S
of blocks 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66, 73; lots A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H and J of Blocks 19,
25, 31, 38, 45, 52, 59, 74; and all of Block 67 of the Original Aspen Townsite," which
did not include the right of ways; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval
of the proposed amendments to the Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49 Series of
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 1 of 12
1974 and Ordinance numbered 60 Series of 1976, and has recommended approval of the
proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415.070 —
Development Involving Designated Historic Property; 26.415.070.A - Exempt
Development; 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of No Negative Effect; 26.415.070.0 —
Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development; 26.415.070.D — Certificate of
Appropriateness for Major Development; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.415.020-
Definitions, the definition of a historic district is "a collection, concentration, linkage or
continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by
plan or physical development," which, in part, necessitates the inclusion of the right of
ways within the established boundaries to be a cohesive historic district; and,
WHEREAS, the amendments proposed herein are consistent with the Aspen
Area Community Plan which, in part, calls to "work to improve the Historic Preservation
Commission (HPQ review process" and to "ensure that the rules and regulations
regarding development and historic preservation in our community create projects that
are consistent with our broader community goals;" and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 21, 2009, the
Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that City Council approve amendments
to Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49 Series of 1974 and Ordinance numbered
60 Series of 1976; and approve amendment to the text of Sections 26.415.070 —
Development Involving Designated Historic Property; 26.415.070.A - Exempt
Development; 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of No Negative Effect; 26.415.070.0 —
Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development; 26.415.070.D — Certificate of
Appropriateness for Major Development as described herein, by a vote; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the
amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310 and that the
approval of the amendments is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution
furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
WHEREAS, the amendments to the Land Use Code are delineated as follows:
Text unaffected is black and in standard print and looks like this. Text being added -to-the-
code is blue with underline and looks like this.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 that defines the
boundaries of the Commercial Core Historic District is hereby amended to include the
right of ways within the existing outlying historic district boundaries and to correct
existing clerical errors.
Ordinance 49, Series of 1974. Section 1.
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 2 of 12
Deleted: Text being removed is red
with strikethrough and looks like this.
That the following described property located within Pitkin County, Colorado, be
and herby is placed within an H, Historic Overlay District and designated an historic site:
11 of locks 80, 81, 82, 93, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, and lots K, L, M, N, O, ----
,kt - -------------------------------------------------------- --
P, O, R, S f blocks 79 86, and lots K, L, M, N, O, P. , R of block 92 of the
p- z- - 0 - - - -- — --- — ----- --- - - - —
City and Original Townsite of Aspen together with all sidewalks, allevways -
streets or public area of any nature within or immediately adjacent to the above
mentioned propertie§------ -----------------
All as is set forth in the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
Further that the Official Zoning District Map of the City of Aspen is further_amended by__
the designation of the above -described areas as an H, Historic Overlay District.
Section 2: Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 that defines the
boundaries of the Main Street Historic District is hereby amended to include the right of
ways within the existing outlying historic district boundaries and to correct clerical
errors.
Ordinance 60, Series of 1976. Section 1.
That Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets is determined to have
historic significance and that Main Street, the sidewalks adjacent thereto and the
following described property located in Pitkin County, Colorado, be designated as an H
historic Overlay District pursuant to the provisions of Article IX of Chapter 24 of the
Aspen Municipal Code
Deleted: A
Deleted: lots
Deleted: the south half
Deleted: and
Deleted: ; and the south half of lock 19
East Aspen Addition to the City of Aspen
Deleted:.
Deleted: , dated April 7, 1967, as
amendcd
Deleted: prece
Deleted: e
Deleted: ding
All of lots K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R and S of blocks 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66, Deleted:
73 of the Original Aspen Townsite; and_
All of lots_A, B, C,_D, E, F,_G, H and _lof Blocks 19, 25, 31,_38, 45,_52, 59z_74 of Deleted: A
the Original Aspen Townsite: and,- __ ___ _ ___-_- ______ Deleted: 1
all of Block 67 of the Original Aspen Townsite and Deleted` .
'------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ ------ Deleted: A
The side streets between the above -described blocks within one-half block of
Main Street.
All as is set forth in the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
Further that the Official Zoning District Map of the City of Aspen is further amended by
the designation of the above -described areas as an H, Historic Overlay District.
Section 3: Section 26.415.070 — Development involving designated historic property,
which section describes the procedure for designated historic property, shall be amended
as follows:
Sec. 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property.
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 3 of 12
No buildin structure tem ora structure, obiect, or landscape shall be erected, - Deleted: or
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. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted
without a development order.
Section 4: Section 26.415.070.A — Exempt development, which section defines
development that is exempt from staff or HPC review be amended as follows:
Section 26.415.070.A. Exempt development.
1. Selected activities are exempted from the development review
procedures including interior remodeling, paint color selection, exterior
repainting or replastering similar to the existing finish or routine maintenance
such as caulking, replacement of fasteners, repair of window glazing or other
such minimally intrusive work.
2. Selected activities within a designated historic district right of way are
exempted from the development review procedures including regularpair,
cleaning, snow removal, installation of utilities not visible within the historic
district, seasonal lighting, temporary s4mage, or other such minimally intrusive
work.
J. If there is any_question if a work activity qualifies as exempt, the
Community Development Director shall make the determination as to its
eligibility.
Section 5: Section 26.415.070.B — Certificate of No Negative Effect, which section
defines development that qualifies for administrative review and approval shall be
amended as follows:
Section 26.415.070.B. Certificate of no negative effect.
1. An application for a certificate of no negative effect may be made to the
Community Development Director for approval of work that has no adverse
effect on the physical appearance or character -defining features of a designated
property or historic district. An application for a certificate of no effect may be
approved by the Community Development Director with no further review if it
meets the requirements set forth in the following Subsection 26.415.070.B.2:
2. The Community Development Director shall issue a development order
based upon a certificate of no negative effect within fourteen (14) days after
receipt of a complete application if:
a. It is determined that the activity is an eligible work item and meets
the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines; and,
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 4 of 12
Deleted: 2
b. Any modifications to the proposed work requested by the
Community Development Director are agreed to by the owner/applicant;
and,
c. The proposed work will not diminish, eliminate or adversely affect
the significant historic and/or architectural character of the subject
property or Historic District in which it is located.
3. An application for a certificate of no negative effect shall include the
following:
a. The general application information required in Section 26.304.030.
b. Elevations or drawings of the proposed work.
c. Photographs, building material samples and other exhibits, as
needed, to accurately depict location, extent and design of proposed work.
d. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential
design standards.
4. The following work shall be considered for a Certificate of No Negative
Effect:
a. Replacement or repair of architectural features which creates no
change to the exterior physical appearance of the building or structure.
b. Replacement or repair of architectural features that restores the
building or structure to its historic appearance.
c. Installation of awnings or similar attachments provided no
significant feature is damaged, removed or obscured by the installation.
d. Fencing that has no adverse effect on the historic or architectural
character of the property or historic district.
e. Mechanical equipment or accessory features that have no impact on Deleted: or
the character -defining features of the building, structure or historic district.
f. Signs which have no effect on the character -defining features of the
historic property or historic district.
g. Alterations to noncontributing buildings within historic districts that
have no adverse effect on its historic or architectural character.
h. Alterations to no more than two (2) elements of nonprimary fagades
of a designated building.
i. Installation of site improvements, such as walkways, patios, pools or
hot tubs, or similar significant features.
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 5 of 12
J. Repair or replacement of ditches, streetscape and/or landscaping
such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character of the historic
district.
k. Installation of street furniture (i.e. benches, playgrounds, trashcans,
bike racks) such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character.of
the historic district.
1. Installation of general roadway signage, visible mechanical
equipment or utilities (i.e. solar panels) such that there is minimal impact
on the historic character of the historic district.
5. The development order and associated certificate of no negative effect
shall expire and become null and void after three (3) years from the date of
issuance by the Community Development Director unless a building permit is
issued within that time.
6. In the event that the Community Development Director determines that
the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect is not appropriate, the owner
may apply for a certificate of appropriateness from the HPC.
Section 6: Section 26.415.070.0 — Certificate of appropriateness for minor development,
which section defines development that qualifies for a one step review and public hearing
before the HPC shall be amended as follows:
Section 26.415.070.C. Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development.
1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of
appropriateness for minor development shall begin with a determination by the
Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a
minor development. Minor development work includes:
a. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the
floor area of the structure is two hundred and fifty (250) square feet or less
or
b. Alterations to a building fagade, windows, doors, roof planes or
material, exterior wall materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony
or ornamental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the
work does not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or
c. Erection or installation of a combination or multiples of awning,
canopies, mechanical equipment, fencing, signs, accessory features and
other attachments to designated properties or within a historic district such
that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate
of no negative effect or
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 6 of 12
d. Alterations that are made to nonhistoric portions of a designated
historic property or historic district that do not qualify for a certificate of
no negative effect or
e. The erection of street furniture, signs, public art, bus stow and other
visible improvements within designated historic districts of a magnitude or
in numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the Deleted:
issuance of a certificate of no negative effector
f. Installation of new safety improvement§,to right of way within the _ Deleted:
historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative
impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative
effect.
The Community Development Director may determine that an
application for work on a designated historic property or within a
designated historic district involving multiple categories of minor
development may result in the cumulative impact such that it is considered
a major development. In such cases, the applicant shall apply for a major
development review in accordance with Subsection 26.415.07.D.
2. An application for minor development shall include the following:
a. The general application information required in Section 26.304.030.
b. Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the proposed work and its
relationship to the designated historic buildings, structures, sites and
features within its vicinity.
c. An accurate representation of all building materials and finishes to
be used in the development.
d. Photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict
location, extent and design of proposed work.
e. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410,
Residential design standards or a written request for a variance from any
standard that is not being met.
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
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 7 of 12
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.
Section 7: Section 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of appropriateness for major development,
which section defines development that qualifies for a two step review (conceptual and
final) and two public hearings (conceptual and final) before the HPC shall be amended as
follows:
Section 26.415.070.D. Certificate of appropriateness for major development.
1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for
major development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development
Director that the proposed project constitutes a major development. A major
development includes one or more of the following activities:
a. The construction of a new structure within a historic district; and/or
b. Alterations to more than three (3) elements of a building fagade
including its windows, doors, roof planes or materials, exterior wall
material, dormers, porches, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim;
and/or
c. The expansion of a building increasing the floor area by more than
two hundred and fifty (250) square feet; and/or
d. Any new development that has not been determined to be minor
development.
2. The procedures for the review of major development projects include a
two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a conceptual development
plan and then a final development plan. If a major development project
involves additional City Land Use approvals, the Community Development
Director may consolidate or modify the review process accordingly, pursuant
to Subsection 26.304.060.B.
3. Conceptual development plan review.
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 8 of 12
a. An application for a conceptual development plan shall include the
following:
(1) The general application information required in Section
26.304.030.
(2) A site plan and survey showing property boundaries, the
location and orientation of existing and proposed improvements
and predominant site characteristics.
(3) Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or
addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing,
scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all
elevations.
(4) Preliminary selection of primary building materials to be
used in construction represented by samples and/or photographs.
(5) Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of
the context surrounding the designated historic property or
historic district including at least one (1) of the following:
diagrams, maps, photographs, models or streetscape elevations.
(6) Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter
26.410, Residential design standards or a written request for a
variance from any standard that is not being met.
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.
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 9 of 12
(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.
c. The effect of approval of a conceptual development plan is as
follows:
(1) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall not
constitute final approval of a major development project or
permission to proceed with the development. Such authorization
shall only constitute authorization to proceed with the preparation
of an application for a final development plan.
(2) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall be
binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the
envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the
conceptual plan application including its height, scale, massing
and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the
proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the
final development plan unless agreed to by the applicant. If the
applicant chooses to makes substantial amendments to the
conceptual design after it has been approved, a new conceptual
development plan hearing shall be required.
(3) Unless otherwise specified in the resolution granting
conceptual development plan approval, 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.
4. Final development plan review.
a. An application for a final development plan shall include:
(1) The general application information required in Section
26.304.030.
(2) Final drawings of all proposed structures(s) and/or
addition(s) included as part of the development at 1/4" = 1.0'
scale.
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 10 of 12
3) An accurate representation of all major building materials
to be used in the development, depicted through samples or
photographs.
(4) A statement, including narrative text or graphics,
indicating how the final development plan conforms to
representations made or stipulations placed as a condition of the
approval of the conceptual development plan.
b. The procedures for the review of final development plans for major
development projects are as follows:
(1) The Community Development Director shall review the
application materials submitted for 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 Paragraphs 26.304.060.E.3.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. If
the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a certificate of
appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall
issue a development order.
(4) A resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the
City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.130 and no
permit will be issued for construction of the project until the
thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has expired.
(5) Before an application for a building permit can be
submitted, a final set of plans reflecting any or all required
changes by the HPC or City Council must be on file with the
City. Any conditions of approval or outstanding issues which
must be addressed in the field or at a later time shall be noted on
the plans.
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 11 of 12
Section 8•
A public hearing on the Resolution was held on the 21' day of April, 2009, at 4:30
p.m. in the Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days
prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of
general circulation within the City of Aspen.
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2009.
Attest:
Jackie, Lothian, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
James R. True, Special Counsel
LJ Erspamer, Chair
PZ proposed code amendment
Page 12 of 12
Exhibit A
Standamds of Review
Historic Districts Code Amendment
Sec. 26.310.040. Standards of review.
In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the Official
Zone District Map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall
consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this
Title.
Staff Response: The proposed amendments are not in conflict with any applicable
portions of this Title; rather they meet the purpose of Land Use Code Chapter
26.415 Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites
and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District, which is to
"promote the public health, safety and welfare through the protection,
enhancement and preservation of those properties, areas and sites, which represent
the distinctive elements of Aspen's cultural, educational, social, economic,
political and architectural history." Furthermore, the amendment reflects the
common practice of review that has been in place for years.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Response: The Historic Preservation chapter of the 2000 Aspen Area
Community Plan (AACP) states that "we must continue to build on what we have
by authentically preserving historic structures and creating thoughtful new
buildings that encourage and shape that feeling of historical continuity."
Cohesive historic districts that include right of ways and public areas within its
boundaries are paramount to a preserving historic continuity and a defined sense
of place.
One of the policies in the AACP is to "ensure that the rules and regulations
regarding development and historic preservation in our community create projects
that are consistent with our broader community goals." The AACP seeks to
"work to improve the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) review process."
Clarifying the boundaries of Aspen's two Historic Districts and HPC's purview
over certain actions within the Districts will improve the efficiency of the review
process and will ensure compatibility of new projects in the right of way with the
character defining features of the Districts.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and
land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Response: The proposed amendments are compatible with surrounding zone
districts and land uses. It will maintain the character defining features of Aspen's
Page 1 of 3
Exhibit A
Standards of Review
Historic Districts Code Amendment
Historic District by clarifying the review process for specific additions and
alterations within the right of ways of Historic Districts.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety.
Staff Response: No traffic will be generated with the proposed amendments.
Road safety within the Historic Districts is imperative for the community to be
able to enjoy and experience the period of significance that is preserved along
Main Street and in the downtown Core. The proposed code amendment requires a
written recommendation from the Colorado Department of Transportation for
Major Development applications that involve Highway 82. Further, national
safety regulations regarding road safety, accessibility, etc. are not compromised
by this code amendment. HPC will be charged to work with other departments to
find a compatible solution that meets national standards and historic preservation
goals.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on
public facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
exceed the capacity of such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation
facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency
medical facilities.
Staff Response: The proposed amendment will not impact public facilities.
Relevant departments have been consulted regarding the proposed amendments
(i.e. Engineering, Parks, Streets, Water, Utilities, Parking.)
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly
adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Response: The proposed amendment will not result in significantly adverse
impact on the natural environment.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community
character in the City.
Staff Response: The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the
community character in Aspen and seeks to maintain a defined sense of place
within the local Historic Districts by clearly outlining the process for alterations
and addition within the right of way in Historic Districts.
Page 2 of 3
Exhibit A
Standards of Review
Historic Districts Code Amendment
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the
surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment.
Staff Response: The recent Main Street corridor project brought the question of
HPC's purview in the right of ways of Historic Districts to the forefront. Staff
analyzed the code and historic district ordinances and discovered that not only
was the review process unclear, but the boundaries of the two Historic Districts
were inaccurate.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and
whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title.
Staff Response: The proposed amendment supports the purpose and intent of the
Land Use Code in that it will "recognize, protect and promote the retention and
continued utility of the historic buildings and districts in the City" and it will
"retain the historic, architectural and cultural resource attractions that support
tourism and the economic welfare of the community."
Staff finds that all of the Standards of review are met.
Page 3 of 3
Historic Parcels in Downtown Core
it A
7'7
!WAR,
&
250 125 0 250 Soo 750 1.000
Feet
Legend N
- Historic DistrIC Boundary
F---7
Historic Parcels VU�L
Main Street Historic Parcels
r
ysl #ft
10
J.
i �/�'��• {r ; �.�- ' � I I Oar ��_
0 250 500 1, 000 1, 500 2, 000
Legend Feet
f' Main St. Boundary=N� V�S� S
MainSt. Hist. Parcels- *
What i s n W- sto ri c
A historic district possesses a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites,
buildings, structures, or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical
development.
Concentration, Linkage, & Continuity of Features
A district derives its importance from being a unified entity, even though it is often composed of a
wide variety of resources. The identity of a district results from the interrelationship of its resources,
which convey a visual sense of the overall historic environment or form an arrangement of
historically or functionally related properties. For example, a district can reflect one principal
activity, such as a mill or a ranch, or it can encompass several interrelated activities, such as an
area that includes industrial, residential, or commercial buildings, sites, structures, or objects.
Significance
A district must be significant, as well as being an identifiable entity. It must be important for
historical, architectural, archeological, engineering, or cultural values. Districts are often significant
for more than one reason. For example, a business district may be significant for its commercial
history as well as its architecture.
Types of Features
A district can comprise both features that lack individual distinction and individually distinctive
features that serve as focal points. It may even be considered eligible if all of the components lack
individual distinction, provided that the grouping achieves significance as a whole within its historic
context. In either case, the majority of the components that add to the district's historic character,
even if they are individually undistinguished, must possess integrity, as must the district as a
whole.
A district can contain buildings, structures, sites, objects, or open spaces that do not contribute to
the significance of the district. The number of noncontributing properties a district can contain yet
still convey its sense of time and place and historical development depends on how these
properties affect the district's integrity.
Guide to Nominating Historic Districts
The most numerous types of National Register historic districts are those for residential and
commercial properties. A good way to learn about what constitutes a National Register historic
district is to read one or more district nominations. Recently listed districts provide the best
examples of current standards for a complete and well -documented nomination. Copies of all
National Register district nominations may be obtained from the Office of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation.
See the section on Special District Types for information on other National Register district types.
Examples of National Register residential and commercial districts
Residential neighborhoods Year Listed
➢ Park Hill, Denver ................... ..... ....;..................................................................
2004
➢ Sherman Street Historic District, Denver ............................................. ....................2004
➢ Louviers, Louviers.....................................................................................................1999
➢ Reno Park Addition, Arvada..............................................................................1999
➢ Stocke-Walter Addition, Arvada.........................................................................1999
➢ Arapahoe Acres, Englewood....................................................................................1998
➢ Boulder Crescent Place Historic District, Colorado Springs...................................1987
➢ Sherman Street Historic Residential District, Fort Morgan......................................1987
➢ West Side Historic District, Longmont......................................................................1987
➢ East Side Historic District, Longmont.......................................................................1986
➢ North Weber Street-Wahsatch Avenue Residential District, Colorado Springs .....
1985
➢ North 7'h St. Historic Residential District, Grand Junction..................................1984
➢ East Third Avenue Historic Residential District, Durango..................................1984
➢ Twelfth Street Historic Residential District, Golden...........................................1983
➢ North End Historic District, Colorado Springs....................................................1982
➢ San Juan Avenue Historic District, La Junta......................................................1980
➢ Laurel School Historic District, Fort Collins........................................................1980
➢ Pitkin Place Historic District, Pueblo..................................................................1978
➢ Auraria 9`h Street Historic District, Denver.........................................................1973
Commercial districts
➢ Littleton Main Street, Littleton ....................... .....1998
................................................
➢ Arvada Downtown, Arvada................................................................................1998
➢ Monte Vista Downtown Historic District, Monte Vista........................................1991
➢ Idaho Springs Downtown Commercial District, Idaho Springs ..........................1984
➢ Salida Downtown Historic District, Salida..........................................................1984
➢ Canon City Downtown Historic District, Canon City..........................................1983
➢ Ouray Historic District, Ouray............................................................................1983
➢ Old Colorado City Historic Commercial District.................................................1982
➢ Union Avenue Historic Commercial District, Pueblo..........................................1982
➢ Boulder Downtown Historic District, Boulder.....................................................1980
➢ Durango Main Avenue Historic District, Durango..............................................1980
➢ Old Town Historic District, Fort Collins..............................................................1978
➢ Corazon de Trinidad District, Trinidad...............................................................1973
National Register of Historic Places in Colorado
3
c.
Combination districts
➢ Eldora Historic District, Eldora.......................................................................... 1989
➢ Gold Hill Historic District, Gold Hill.................................................................... 1989
➢ Redstone Historic District, Redstone................................................................ 1989
➢ Cokedale Historic District, Cokedale................................................................. 1985
➢ Victor Downtown Historic District, Victor........................................................... 1985
➢ Breckenridge Historic District, Breckenridge..................................................... 1980
➢ Lake City Historic District, Lake City................................................................. 1978
(amended and revised in 2005)
➢ Plaza de San Luis de la Culebra Historic District, San Luis .............................. 1978
➢ Morrison Historic District, Morrison................................................................... 1976
➢ Crested Butte Historic District, Crested Butte ................................................... 1974
➢ North Fork*Historic District, Jefferson County ................................................... 1974
Sherman Street Historic District, Denver
4 Guide to Nominating Historic Districts
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
_�Fj,OCTS��t L7 , Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
1, 4 ` " `� '�E) C C_- ' (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:
�ubZiCati071 of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof
materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six
(26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in
height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing
and was continuously visible from the _ day of , 200_, to
and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted
notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of
property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A
copy of the owners and gover7zrnental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt
requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to
the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of
development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those
on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that
create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas,
and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement.
Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in
any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision
of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such
revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use
regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other
sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and
addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be
waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public
inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (1 S) days
prior to the public hearing on such amendments.
ignature
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowled ed before me this 73 day
of til , 200�, by
4
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My co ssion expires: (� �� l CCU b
Notary Public
�<4i �,F;Y P(�9
' LAURA
PF
MEYER
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: `�q •�
• COPY OFTHEPUBLICATION
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN "' ":rnmission Cores 0811012010
• LIST OF THE OWNERSAND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
• APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3
PBLI N TICE
RE: CITY'�41TIATED AMENDMENTS TO
CHAPTER 26.•w. OF THE LAND USE CODE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
will be held on Wednesday April 8, 2009, at a
meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen
Historic Preservation Commission, Council
Chambers, Citv Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to
consider a Community Development Department
initiated ordinance regarding historic districts
through an amendment to Chapter 26.415
"Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of
Historic Landmark Sites and Structures or
Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District".
For further information, contact Sara Adams at the
City of Aspen Community Developpment
Deppartment, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO. (970)
429.2778. saraafi' asoen.co us
�/ Wirhael Rottman Chair
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
Published in The Aspen Times Weekly on March
22,2009, (3160803)
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF APRIL 8,200
Michael said he is comfortable with staff and monitor reviewing the
landscape plan. In terms of the residential design variances the window size
is broken up by the railing on the balcony.
Jay and Nora thanked the owners for compromising the roof height.
Sarah said a looser grouping of conifers would be well suited for the context
of the neighborhood.
MOTION.- Brian moved to approve Resolution #II for 1291 Riverside Drive
Lot B of Lot 20 of 1295 Riverside Drive Subdivision as drafted by staff with
the condition that the residential design standard is approved; motion
second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried 6-0. Roll call vote: Brian, yes;
Ann, yes; Nora, yes; Jay, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes.
Brian — monitor on the project.
Wheeler Opera House addition — work session with Planning & Zoning
— no minutes
Planning and Zoning members present: Stan Gibbs, L. J. Erspamer, Michael
Wampler
Code amendments — HPC jurisdiction in rights -of -ways
Code amendment DeNovo review by Council on appeals of HPC
decisions
Sara said staff feels the purview over changes in the right of ways in the
historic districts could be clearer. The Community Development
Department thought the best way to address it was to do a code amendment
clarifying the language. The code amendment would clarify the boundaries
of the historic district and the second thing would be to clarify the review
process so that everyone in the City is on the same page as to what is exempt
and what goes to HPC. Our overall goal is to ensure a cohesive
uninterrupted historic district that really conveys a sense of space of the
defined significant time periods that we have for the two historic districts.
Many meetings were arranged with the Parks, Parking, Engineering, Water,
Utilities etc. and they all have seen the proposed amendments and all seem
to be supportive.
3
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF APRIL 8 2009
Boundaries:
Sara said the first part clears up the 1970's language. In all the research
done historic districts are one cohesive district. We aren't adding any
properties we are just clarifying that HPC has jurisdiction as to what
happens between the parameters identified.
Brian asked if the historic district would go out to the center of the right-of-
way. It would be better if it spanned across the street. Sara said the map can
be changed. HPC suggested a map be attached to the ordinance as an
exhibit.
Amy said we need to discuss what the outside boundaries are of these
districts such as alleys.
Jim True said in the historic district it is different, we did not include the
alleyways behind. Sara said it was defined within one half block of Main
Street which would terminate at the end of the parcel.
Amy asked why in the core it goes halfway into the surrounding right-of-
way.
Chris said the street is the formal public street and you could do a street
furniture design.
Sara said for Main Street the district is a half block off Main Street into the
side street so it doesn't include the alley, it terminates at the end of the
parcel.
Brian said maybe there are issues that might come up in the future such as
alley life etc. Maybe we should include the alleys on Main Street.
Michael said he feels Main Street should include the alleys. There are
structures that extend up to the alley.
Jay inquired about the past if UPC was ever interested in the alleys.
Ann said alleys contribute to the character of historic resources.
4
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF APRIL 8 2009
Brian said maybe in future proposals from Engineering or Streets they might
want to pave the alleys and we as a commission might not want to see that.
HPC unanimously requested that alleys be added in the historic boundaries.
Sara said the rest of the code amendment talks about the review processes.
We will follow the existing types of review that HPC already has and then
we would add subsections for within the right-of-way.
Section #3 was amended to add object or landscape.
Ann requested that temporary structures be added to the language.
HPC members all agreed.
Section #4 new paragraph added indicating what is exempt from review by
staff or HPC.
Section 45 is for Certificate of no negative effect. Three sections are added.
j. Alterations of ditches, streetscape and/or landscaping such that there is a
minimal impact on the historic character of the historic district.
k. Installation of street furniture (i.e. benches, playgrounds, trash cans, bike
racks) such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character of the
historic district.
1. Installation of general roadway signage not including safety signage
required by MUTCD, installation of visible mechanical equipment or
utilities (i.e. solar panels) such that there is minimal impact of the historic
character of the historic district.
Section 6 minor development. Section f added. Installation of new safety
improvements to right of way within the historic district of a magnitude or
ion numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance
of a certificate of no negative effect. Sara said basically there are tiers of
reviews.
Michael inquired if the code amendment captured all of the things that might
happen in the right of way. Sara said all of the departments gave her lists of
everything that they do in the right-of-way.
Section 7 major development. Sara pointed out that major development is
anything that doesn't qualify as minor development. The main street corridor
would be considered major. Section (7) added. A proposal involving State
owned or controlled property requires a written consent from the Colo. Dept.
of Transportation. Main Street is a state highway.
5
11
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF APRIL 8.2009
Jay asked if CDOT wanted to make major changes would they come before
the HPC.
Jim True, Special Counsel said theoretically the state highway would be the
applicant and if they came before the HPC requesting median strips for a
safety issue and HPC said no we would have somewhat of a dilemma.
Chances are they would have the power to go ahead and do it when it
involves a safety issue but in general the State would defer to local
governments.
Sara said in general HPC made two changes; to include alleys in the Main
Street Historic District and to add the term temporary structure to Section 3.
Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. There were no
public comments. The public hearing section of the agenda item was closed.
MOTION: Ann made the motion to accept the changes proposed by HPC as
Sara has documented; second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried.
De Novo Review by Council on Appeals of HPC Decision.
Sara said this code amendment has to deal with the call up procedures that
we currently have. Right now City Council can call up design decisions by
HPC or P&Z such as major development and commercial design review.
Right now when it is called up it is based on the record. They would be
looking for a finding as to whether the review board denied due process,
exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. Council directed staff to
propose a code amendment that would change the type of review that
council can use when they call up a design project. They want to change it
to be a content based review which we call a De Novo review. De Novo
means basically that you would start from the beginning; such as what is the
height, what type of windows etc. They would not be just looking at
whether or not the correct proceeding was followed in the hearing. Boulder
and Telluride use this system. On one hand it provides another layer of
checks and balances but on the other hand the Community Development
staff feels it creates just another level of uncertainty to applicants such as is
my project going to get called up and will I have to change all the work that
I did with HPC already. We are concerned how that conflicts with the goals
C7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
FROM: Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner
IZE: Historic Districts code amendment/ HPC purview in the right of way
DATE: April 8, 2009
HPC's purview over changes in the right of ways of Aspen's two historic districts was
questioned recently during the proposed improvements to the Main Street corridor. Staff
analyzed the Code and the designation ordinances for the Main Street (1976) and Commercial
Core Historic Districts (1974) and discovered that not only is the review process for changes to
Historic District right of ways confusing and unclear, but the defined boundaries of the Historic
Districts are inaccurate.
One of the Historic Preservation goals listed in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan is to
"work to improve the Historic Preservation Commission review process." The Community
Development Director has initiated this code amendment to correct past clerical errors in the
ordinances designating the Main Street and Commercial Core Historic Districts and to clarify
review processes for development within the designated Historic District right of ways.
BACKGROUND: As defined in code section 26.415.020, Historic Districts are "a collection,
concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or
aesthetically by plan or physical development." The first Historic District in the United States
was created in Charleston, South Carolina in 1931. Patterns of architecture, repetition of historic
uses and/or concentration of development are important tangible and understandable pieces of
our history that create a sense of place for present and more
Exhibit B for maps.)
importantly future generations. The majority of historic districts
around the county have defined boundaries that encompass
properties containing buildings that contribute to a sense of place
and specific period of significance important to a town's history.
The image to the left illustrates the boundaries of Charleston's
historic district, which includes all property, right of ways and
public domain within the defined boundaries.
Aspen's ordinances designating the historic districts describe lots
and blocks in the area, but are unclear as to how the adjacent public
spaces are to be treated. Mapping of the districts over the years has
indicated that the blocks and the streets within them are part of the
district but clarification is needed to ensure a cohesive,
uninterrupted district that portrays Aspen's history (please see
ROWHDmemoHPC.doc
Page - 1 - of 3
Staff met with the following departments to discuss work that is typically done in the right of
ways to help figure out appropriate and realistic review processes for different types of
development: Parks, Engineering, Parking, Streets, Water and Utilities.
PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS: Staff proposes adoption of code amendments that establish a
better process for work that should qualify as exempt, administrative review or HPC review.
The following narrative is to provide HPC background on the amendments included in the
attached resolution.
Sections 1 and 2: These sections propose amended language to the existing Ordinances
(number 49, series of 1974 and number 60 series of 1976) that designated the Main Street
and Commercial Core Historic Districts. There were a few clerical errors that need to be
corrected, and more importantly the boundaries of the district are defined such that they
include all areas between the alleyways to the north and south of Main Street for the
Main Street Historic District and between Mill Street, Durant Street, Hunter Street and
the north alleyway behind Main Street for the Commercial Core Historic District. It was
always assumed that the Historic Districts were a contiguous area with a defined exterior
border that included all areas within, both public and private. This amendment clearly
defines the boundaries as illustrated in Exhibit A to the proposed Resolution.
Section 3: The proposed amendment to Section 3 proposes to include objects and landscapes
among the items that are under HPC's purview.
Section 4: Section 4 proposes development in the right of ways that does not require review by
the Historic Preservation Commission. Any work that has no permanent and/or adverse
impact on the historic character of the district is exempt; for example: temporary signage,
seasonal lighting and regular repairs.
Section 5: Administrative approvals are currently granted through a Certificate of No Negative
Effect. Section 5 proposes that any work that will have a minimal impact on the historic
district b approved administratively; for example, the installation of some street furniture,
solar panels, replacement of ditches or streetscapes that are minimal in nature.
Section 6: Section 6 proposes language that would qualify for a minor review at the HPC. This
is a one step review process that involves a public hearing. Basically, any work in the
right of ways of historic districts of a magnitude that does not meet the criteria for an
administrative approval qualifies as a Minor Development review. A written referral
from CDOT is proposed as an additional application requirement for work involving
State Highway 82.
Section 7: Section 7 proposes that any work that has a significant impact on the historic district,
for example a master plan, qualifies for a Major Development review at the HPC, which
includes a two step process and public hearings. Similar to a Minor Development
application, a written referral from CDOT is included as a requirement for work
involving State Highway 82.
ROWHDmemoHPC.doc
Page -2-of3
NEXT STEPS: Staff is scheduled to present the proposed code amendments to the Planning and
Zoning Commission on April 21, 2009. The Planning and Zoning Commission makes a
recommendation to City Council. First and Second Readings of the proposed code amendments
are scheduled for May 11 `h and May 26`h respectively.
The Land Use Code does not require a recommendation from the HPC for amendments to the
Code; however, Staff determined that HPC need to provide feedback because the proposed
amendments directly involve HPC's jurisdiction.
REQUEST OF THE HPC: HPC is asked to make a recommendation to the Planning and Zoning
Commission and City Council regarding the proposed code amendments in the attached draft
resolution.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC recommend approval of the proposed
code amendments.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution # , Series of 2009
Exhibit A — Section 26.310.040 Standards of Review
Exhibit B — Maps of Historic Districts
Exhibit C — "What is a Historic District" chapter of the Guide to Nominating Historic Districts,
published by the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Colorado Historical
Society, 2006.
ROWHDmemoHPC.doc
Page - 3 - of 3
I
RESOLUTION No.
(Series of 2009)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION,
ASPEN, COLORADO, DETERMINING THAT AMENDMENTS TO ASPEN CITY
COUNCIL ORDINANCE NUMBERED 49, SERIES OF 1974 AND ORINDANCE
NUMBERED 60 SERIES OF 1976 MEET THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF
REVIEW, AND DETERMINING THAT THE FOLLOWING CHAPTERS AND
SECTIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE MEET APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF REVIEW:
26.415.070 - DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING DESIGNATED HISTORIC
PROPERTY; 26.415.070.A - EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT; 26.415.070.B -
CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT; 26.415.070.0 - CERTIFICAET OF
APPROPRIATENESS FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT; 26.415.070.D -
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT.
WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.210 and 26.310 of the City of
Aspen Land Use Code, the Director of the Community Development Department
initiated amendments to Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 and Ordinance
numbered 60, Series of 1976 related to the boundaries of the Commercial Core and
Main Street Historic Districts; and initiated amendments to the Land Use Code related
to the Historic Preservation Commission's (HPC) purview in the right of ways within
designated historic districts; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the official zone
district map and to amend text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and
recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or denial by the Community
Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public
hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing and considering these
recommendations; and,
WHEREAS, Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 defined the Commercial
Core Historic District as "all of lots 80, 81, 82, 93, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, and the
south half of blocks 79, 86 and 92 of the City and Original Townsite of Aspen; and the
south half of Block 19 East Aspen Addition to the City of Aspen," which did not include
the right of ways; and,
WHEREAS, Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 defined the Main Street
Historic District as " all of those properties abutting (on the north and south) Main Street
between Monarch and Seventh Streets, and all of Paepcke Park within the City of Aspen,
Colorado: which area is more particularly described as lots K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R and S
of blocks 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66, 73; lots A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H and J of Blocks 19,
25, 31, 38, 45, 52, 59, 74; and all of Block 67 of the Original Aspen Townsite," which
did not include the right of ways; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval
of the proposed amendments to the Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49 Series of
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page I of 12
1974 and Ordinance numbered 60 Series of 1976, and has recommended approval of the
proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415.070 —
Development Involving Designated Historic Property; 26.415.070.A - Exempt
Development; 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of No Negative Effect; 26.415.070.0 —
Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development; 26.415.070.1) — Certificate of
Appropriateness for Major Development; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.415.020-
Definitions, the definition of a historic district is "a collection, concentration, linkage or
continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by
plan or physical development," which, in part, necessitates the inclusion of the right of
ways within the established boundaries to be a cohesive historic district; and,
WHEREAS, the amendments proposed herein are consistent with the Aspen
Area Community Plan which, in part, calls to "work to improve the Historic Preservation
Commission (HPC) review process" and to "ensure that the rules and regulations
regarding development and historic preservation in our community create projects that
are consistent with our broader community goals;" and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 8, 2009, the Historic
Preservation Commission recommended that City Council approve amendments to Aspen
City Council Ordinance numbered 49 Series of 1974 and Ordinance numbered 60 Series
of 1976; and approve amendment to the text of Sections 26.415.070 — Development
Involving Designated Historic Property; 26.415.070.A - Exempt Development;
26.415.070.13 — Certificate of No Negative Effect; 26.415.070.0 — Certificate of
Appropriateness for Minor Development; 26.415.070.1) — Certificate of Appropriateness
for Major Development as described herein, by a vote; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that the
amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310 and that the
approval of the amendments is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that this Resolution
furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
WHEREAS, the amendments to the Land Use Code are delineated as follows:
Text unaffected is black and in standard print and looks like this. Text being added to the
code is blue with underline and looks like this.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION as follows:
Section 1: Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 that defines the
boundaries of the Commercial Core Historic District is hereby amended to include the
right of ways within the existing outlying historic district boundaries and to correct
existing clerical errors.
Ordinance 49, Series of 1974. Section 1.
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 2 of 12
That the following described property located within Pitkin County, Colorado, be
and herby is placed within an H, Historic Overlay District and designated an historic site:
A11 of locks 80 81, 82, 93, 87, 88 89,_90,_93, 94, 95,_96, and lots K,L, M, N, O ---_- Deleted: A
--��
P, O, R, S,pf blocks 79, 86 and 92 of the City and Original Townsite of Aspen Deleted: lots
--------------------------------------------- - - -
together with all sidewalks, alleyways, streets or public area of any nature within Deleted: the south half
or immediatelyaadjacent to the above mentioned propertie§,, ---_ - ----- Deleted:: and the south half of lock 19
�De�leted
n to the City of Aspen
All as is set forth in the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
Further that the Official Zoning District Map of the City of Aspen is further amended by - Deleted: , dated April 7, 1967, as
the designation of the above.described areas,asan H, Historic Overlay District_
amended
----------------------------------
Deleted: prece
Deleted: e
Section 2: Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 that defines the Deleted` dins
boundaries of the Main Street Historic District is hereby amended to include the right of
ways within the existing outlying historic district boundaries and to correct clerical
errors.
Ordinance 60, Series of 1976. Section 1.
That Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets is determined to have
historic significance and that Main Street, the sidewalks adjacent thereto and the
following described property located in Pitkin County, Colorado, be designated as an H
historic Overlay District pursuant to the provisions of Article IX of Chapter 24 of the
Aspen Municipal Code
All of lots K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R and S of blocks 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66, - Deleted'
73 of the Original Aspen Townsite; andt_______________________________________________________________
41 of lots A, B, C, D, E, F G, H and o-f Blocks 19, 25,_31, 38, 45,_52, 59,_74 of ;---- Deleted: A
the , and Original Aspen Townsite,---------------------------------------------- Deleted: l
`g
11 of Block 67 of the Original As en Townsite, and - Deleted' .
-----p-----------------_�--------------------------------------------- Deleted: A
The side streets between the above -described blocks within one-half block of
Main Street.
All as is set forth in the map attached hereto as Exhibit `B".
Further that the Official Zoning District Map of the City of Aspen is further amended by
the designation of the above -described areas as an H, Historic Overlay District.
Section 3: Section 26.415.070 — Development involving designated historic property,
which section describes the procedure for designated historic property, shall be amended
as follows:
Sec. 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property.
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 3 of 12
No building structure, object, or landscape_shall be erected, constructed, enlarged_,____--- Deleted: or
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. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a
development order.
Section 4: Section 26.415.070.A — Exempt development, which section defines
development that is exempt from staff or HPC review be amended as follows:
Section 26.415.070.A. Exempt development.
1. Selected activities are exempted from the development review
procedures including interior remodeling, paint color selection, exterior
repainting or replastering similar to the existing finish or routine maintenance
such as caulking, replacement of fasteners, repair of window glazing or other
such minimally intrusive work.
2. Selected activities within a designated historic district right of way are
exempted from the development review procedures including regular repair,
cleaning, snow removal, installation of utilities not visible within the historic
district, seasonal lighting, temporary signage, or other such minimally intrusive
work.
a: If there is any question if a_ work activity qualifies as exempt, theI Deleted: z
Community Development Director shall make the determination as to its
eligibility.
Section 5: Section 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of No Negative Effect, which section
defines development that qualifies for administrative review and approval shall be
amended as follows:
Section 26.415.070.B. Certificate of no negative effect.
1. An application for a certificate of no negative effect may be made to the
Community Development Director for approval of work that has no adverse
effect on the physical appearance or character -defining features of a designated
property or historic district. An application for a certificate of no effect may be
approved by the Community Development Director with no further review if it
meets the requirements set forth in the following Subsection 26.415.070.B.2:
2. The -Community Development Director shall issue a development order
based upon a certificate of no negative effect within fourteen (14) days after
receipt of a complete application if -
a. It is determined that the activity is an eligible work item and meets
the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines; and,
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 4 of 12
M
b. Any modifications to the proposed work requested by the
Community Development Director are agreed to by the owner/applicant;
and,
c. The proposed work will not diminish, eliminate or adversely affect
the significant historic and/or architectural character of the subject
property or Historic District in which it is located.
3. An application for a certificate of no negative effect shall include the
following:
a. The general application information required in Section 26.304.030.
b. Elevations or drawings of the proposed work.
c. Photographs, building material samples and other exhibits, as
needed, to accurately depict location, extent and design of proposed work.
d. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential
design standards. '
4. The following work shall be considered for a Certificate of No Negative
Effect:
a. Replacement or repair of architectural features which creates no
change to the exterior physical appearance of the building or structure.
b. Replacement or repair of architectural features that restores the
building or structure to its historic appearance.
c. Installation of awnings or similar attachments provided no
significant feature is damaged, removed or obscured by the installation.
d. Fencing that has no adverse effect on the historic or architectural
character of the property or historic district.
e. Mechanical equipment or accessory features that have no impact on Deleted: or
the character -defining features of the build in structure or historic district.
f. Signs which have no effect on the character -defining features of the
historic property or historic district.
g. Alterations to noncontributing buildings within historic districts that
have no adverse effect on its historic or architectural character.
h. Alterations to no more than two (2) elements of nonprimary fagades
of a designated building.
i. Installation of site improvements, such as walkways, patios, pools or
hot tubs, or similar significant features.
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 5 of 12
i. Alterations of ditches, streetscape and/or landscaping such that
there is a minimal impact on the historic character of the historic district. �AJn%J
k. Installation of street furniture (i.e. benches, playgrounds, trashcans, 11u
bike racks) such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character of i
the historic district.
character of the historic district.
5. The development order and associated certificate of no negative effec ` 1
shall expire and become null and void after three (3) years from the date of
issuance by the Community Development Director unless a building permit is
issued within that time.
6. In the event that the Community Development Director determines that
the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect is not appropriate, the owner
may apply for a certificate of appropriateness from the HPC.
Section 6: Section 26.415.070.0 — Certificate of appropriateness for minor development,
which section defines development that qualifies for a one step review and public hearing
before the HPC shall be amended as follows:
Section 26.415.070.C. Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development.
1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of
appropriateness for minor development shall begin with a determination by the
Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a
minor development. Minor development work includes:
a. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the
floor area of the structure is two hundred and fifty (250) square feet or less
or
b. Alterations to a building facade, windows, doors, roof planes or
material, exterior wall materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony
or ornamental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the
work does not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or
c. Erection or installation of a combination or multiples of awning,
canopies, mechanical equipment, fencing, signs, accessory features and
other attachments to designated properties or within a historic district such
that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate
of no negative effect or
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 6 of 12
d. Alterations that are made to nonhistoric portions of a designated
historic property or historic district that do not qualify for a certificate of
no negative effect or
e. The erection of street furniture, signs, public art, bus stops and other
visible improvements within designated historic districts of a magnitude or
in numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the Deleted:
issuance of a certificate of no negative effect - --
f. Installation of new safety improvement%to right of way within the_ _ Deleted:
historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative
impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative
effect.
The Community Development Director may determine that an
application for work on a designated historic property or within a
designated historic district involving multiple categories of minor
development may result in the cumulative impact such that it is considered
a major development. In such cases, the applicant shall apply for a major
development review in accordance with Subsection 26.415.07.D.
2. An application for minor development shall include the following:
a. The general application information required in Section 26.304.030.
b. Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the proposed work and its
relationship to the designated historic buildings, structures, sites and
features within its vicinity.
c. An accurate representation of all building materials and finishes to
be used in the development.
d. Photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict
location, extent and design of proposed work.
e. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410,
Residential design standards or a written request for a variance from any
standard that is not being met.
f. A proposal involving state owned or controlled property requires a Deleted: recommendation
written consent from the Color o Department of Transportation.
3. The proceduresyfo e review of minor vd6 elopment projects all aa�""
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.
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 7 of 12
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.
Section 7: Section 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of appropriateness for major development,
which section defines development that qualifies for a two step review (conceptual and
final) and two public hearings (conceptual and final) before the HPC shall be amended as
follows:
Section 26.415.070.D. Certificate of appropriateness for major development.
1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for
major development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development
Director that the proposed project constitutes a major development. A major
development includes one or more of the following activities:
a. The construction of a new structure within a historic district; and/or
b. Alterations to more than three (3) elements of a building fagade
including its windows, doors, roof planes or materials, exterior wall
material, dormers, porches, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim;
and/or
c. The expansion of a building increasing the floor area by more than
two hundred and fifty (250) square feet; and/or
d. Any new development that has not been determined to be minor
development.
2. The procedures for the review of major development projects include a
two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a conceptual development
plan and then a final development plan. If a major development project
involves additional City Land Use approvals, the Community Development
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 8 of 12
Director may consolidate or modify the review process accordingly, pursuant
to Subsection 26.304.060.B.
3. Conceptual development plan review.
a. An application for a conceptual development plan shall include the
following:
(1) The general application information required in Section
26.304.030.
(2) A site plan and survey showing property boundaries, the
location and orientation of existing and proposed improvements
and predominant site characteristics.
(3) Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or
addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing,
scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all
elevations.
(4) Preliminary selection of primary building materials to be
used in construction represented by samples and/or photographs.
(5) Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of
the context surrounding the designated historic property or
historic district including at least one (1) of the following:
diagrams, maps, photographs, models or streetscape elevations.
(6) Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter
26.410, Residential design standards or a written request for a
variance from any standard that is not being met.
(7) A proposal involving State owned or controlled property
requires a written consent from the Colorado Department of
Transportation.
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
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 9 of 12 -
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.
c. The effect of approval of a conceptual development plan is as
follows:
(1) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall not
constitute final approval of a major development project or
permission to proceed with the development. Such authorization
shall only constitute authorization to proceed with the preparation
of an application for a final development plan.
(2) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall be
binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the
envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the
conceptual plan application including its height, scale, massing
and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the
proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the
final development plan unless agreed to by the applicant. If the
applicant chooses to makes substantial amendments to the
conceptual design after it has been approved, a new conceptual
development plan hearing shall be required.
(3) Unless otherwise specified in the resolution granting
conceptual development plan approval, 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.
4. Final development plan review.
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 10 of 12
a. An application for a final development plan shall include:
(1) The general application information required in Section
26.304.030.
(2) Final drawings of all proposed structures(s) and/or
addition(s) included as part of the development at 1/4" = 1.0'
scale.
3) An accurate representation of all major building materials
to be used in the development, depicted through samples or
photographs.
(4) A statement, including narrative text or graphics,
indicating how the final development plan conforms to
representations made or stipulations placed as a condition of the
approval of the conceptual development plan.
b. The procedures for the review of final development plans for major
development projects are as follows:
(1) The Community Development Director shall review the
application materials submitted for 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 Paragraphs 26.304.060.E.3.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. If
the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a certificate of
appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall
issue a development order.
(4) A resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the
City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.130 and no
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 11 of 12
permit will be issued for construction of the project until the
thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has expired.
(5) Before an application for a building permit can be
submitted, a final set of plans reflecting any or all required
changes by the HPC or City Council must be on file with the
City. Any conditions of approval or outstanding issues which
must be addressed in the field or at a later time shall be noted on
the plans.
Section 8:
A public hearing on the Resolution was held on the 8t' day of April, 2009, at 5:00
p.m. in the Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days
prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of
general circulation within the City of Aspen.
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2009.
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
James IL True, Special Counsel
Michael Hoffman, Chair
HPC jurisdiction code amendment
Page 12 of 12
Page 1 of 2
Chris Bendon
From: Sara Adams
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 10:23 AM
To: Chris Bendon
Subject: FW: right of way draft language
From: Brian Flynn
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 4:08 PM
To: Sara Adams
Subject: RE: right of way draft language
Stephen and I went through your edits (in blue) in detail. We both like what you wrote and appreciate
that you let us review the document. We are good to go, let me know if there is anything else.
Brian Flynn
Open Space and Special Projects Manager
(P)970-429-2035
(F)970-920-5128
1
PARKS & RECREATION 4SPEN
From: Sara Adams
Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 12:32 PM
To: Tricia Aragon; Tyler Christoff; Brian Flynn; Jeff Woods; Stephen Ellsperman; John Hines; Phil Overeynder;
Jerry Nye
Subject: right of way draft language
Hi all,
I attached a DRAFT of the right of way review process code amendment for some exciting reading over the
weekend. This is a work in progress. It will be reviewed by HPC, P and Z and City Council starting in the
beginning of April. Please let me know if there are any major red flags in the procedural stuff.
You will probably notice that I need to clarify the boundaries of the two historic districts. In my research I noticed
that the legal descriptions in the 1970s Ordinances were inconsistent with the Historic Districts. (fun!)
I am looking for any feedback (good or bad) regarding the procedural stuff. I tried to be fair and encompass
everyone's goals. Thanks for sending me your checklists; they definitely helped get the ball rolling. Please give
me a call if you want to sit down and go over the proposed changes with me
Best,
Sara
7/ 15/2009
Page 2 of 2
Sara Adams I Historic Preservation Planner
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena St.1 Aspen, CO 81611
t: (970) 429.2778
f: (970) 920.5439
www.aspenpitkin.com
www.aspenhistoricpreservation.com
7/15/2009
General Aspects located in all ROWS in HD
nrhorioidlim-
Tree Planting NK.�/��1�(�f
2. Tree Trimming�,�
Tree Removal '° i �7 F 1 KUyf, JA44�\/_
4. Tree Maintenance: fertilization, insect & disease control, watering
Raw Water System:
1. Modifications and improvements to the ditch system �W
J
2. General Maintenance: cleaning, clearing for flows and closing and redirecting flows
Irrigation Systems:
1. Installation
2. General Maintenance: repairs , nd upgrades
Noxious Vegetation:
1. Control and removal
Site Specific aspects in HD (includes everything above)
Downtown Pedestrian Mall
1. Snow Storage
2. Snow removal
3. Bench maintenance n
4. Bench replacement/installation
5. Floral arrangements
6. Trash can/recycling maintenance
7. Trash can/recycling installation
8. Fountain maintenance A
g. Brick maintenance �� �1/
10. Bike Racks
11. Playgrounds
*A#V�
12. Bathroom mainte ce
13. Signs tb�r�'� ,
14. Art managemen %
15. Art
�l�o,,ca�tio
I Mall light mamten ce
18. Lighting Fixtures
19. Seasonal Lighting
Neighborhood Parks in HDs (includes everything in the General Aspects list)
1. Turf maintenance: fertilization, insect & disease control, watering, mowing, and
trimming.
Main Street (includes everything in the General Aspects list)
1. Installation of approved special event street flags
2. Seasonal/Holiday lighting and decorations
Page 1 of 2
Sara Adams
From: John Hines
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 11:52 AM
To: Sara Adams
Cc: Phil Overeynder
Subject: RE: HPC purview in historic districts
Sara,
After conferring with Phil, we came up with these tasks.
Exempt Development:
Below ground: Installation of underground utilities
Above ground: transformer placement, raw water ditch maintenance and headgate placement.
Street light maintenance, street light pole replacement, and banner hanging.
Issues to be addressed:
Renewable energy utility installation i.e. geothermal, geo-exchange, hydrogen fuel cell
installation in replacement of generators or batteries for back-up power supply.
Solar panels (PV and thermal) installation-,
John L. Hines
Renewable Energy Utilities Manager
City of Aspen
970-429-1999
johnhi@ci.aspen.co.us
From: Sara Adams
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 9:12 AM
To: Tyler Christoff; Tricia Aragon; Stephen Ellsperman; Brian Flynn; Jeff Woods; John Hines
Subject: HPC purview in historic districts
Importance: High
Hi all,
I attached a recap of the February 23rd meeting. Please send me your lists of tasks that you typically do in the
right of way so that I can figure out which "bucket/ review" the task will fall into. I want to make sure that the
review process (if any) for specific tasks is clear AND I want to make sure that you are not over -burdened with
another review step if it isn't absolutely necessary. If you could send your list to me by March 11 th (Wednesday)
that would be awesome!
Thanks!!
sara
Sara Adams I Historic Preservation Planner
City of Aspen
3/9/2009
Page 2 of 2
130 S. Galena St.1 Aspen, CO 81611
t: (970) 429,2778
f: (970) 920.5439
www.aspenpitkin.com
www.asp T_historicp_reservation.com
3/9/2009
Page 1 of' 1
Sara Adams
From:
Amy Guthrie
Sent:
Monday, March 09, 2009 11:58 AM
To:
Sara Adams
Subject: landscape code amendment
When you work on this code amendment, let's not forget that outside agencies, like CDOT or RFTA, might
propose work in the HD that we don't want to lose purview over. For instance, RFTA is working on new bus
stops over the next few years. I don't think they are proposing these in the City at the moment, but they would
be new structures with kiosks, electronic display signs, etc.
Amy Guthrie
City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(p) 970-429-2758 (f) 970-920-5439
www.aspenpitkin.com
3/9/2009
Page 1 of 1
Sara Adams
From: Tyler Christoff
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 1Z00 PM
To: Sara Adams
Cc: Tricia Aragon
Subject: FW: HPC review of ROW improvements
Sara,
Below are the Engineering Departments comments. Please let me know if we can be of further assistance.
HPC reviewe-d ROW improvements
-Major geometric/alignment changes to curb and gutter or sidewalk (HPC's review scope would be limited
to, materials, finishes, fit with general aesthetic)
-Finishes of retaining walls or other structures in ROW (not sure of a specific example, I'm sure it will
come up at some point)
-Way-finding signage (previously selected by HPC)
-Changes to existing ditches (any realignment, piping of, etc)
HPC exempt ROW improvements
-Pavement restoration (patching or resurfacing projects)
-Utility work in the ROW (installation of new, maintenance of old, emergency repairs)
-General roadway signage (stop signs, school signs, etc -- must meet MUTCD standards)
-Pavement markings (striping, ped crossing, etc)
-Installation of new drainage infrastructure (new inlets, piping, maintenance and replacement of existing) /
-Minor grade changes (for positive drainage or sight distance requirements)�j�� l
-Installation of crossings or ADA ramps
-New pedestrian safety improvements (spee umps, shcanes, bulb outs)
-Changes to lane width, turning movements, traffic patterns
-Re -Replacement or maintenance or sidewalk or curb and gutter I
�� IM
Tyler A. Christoff
Project Manager
Engineering/Asset Management Department
City of Aspen
tylerc@ci.aspen.co.us
(970) 544-3143
3/9/2009
Page I of' I
Sara Adams
From: Jerry Nye
Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 T42 AM
To: Sara Adams
Sara: Street department work performed in right of way wou d include all of these: I will list as many as I can
and you can use what you need. �(f7��%�XLning,
Sign Maintenance and installing signs,ddrainage ditch cleaning, gravel
installing and grading of gravel. Snow removal and snow storing, storm drain and dry well maintenance. Roto
milling asphalt and repaving with asphalt.
Jerry L. Nye
Superintendent of
Street Dept.
Fleet Manager.
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena
Aspen Co.81611
Office 970 920 5133
Fax 970 920 5178
3/9/2009
Recap of February 23, 2009 meeting with: AG, JW, CB, TC, SE, BF, SA:
DRAFT language and clear definitions for the following "buckets" of review:
1. Master Plan/Program/ Major Project
■ Probably a worksession with HPC
■ Some sort of review by the full HPC board and maybe Council has final authority?
2. Minor Changes
■ Changes are inconsistent with the character of the HD but not big enough to be a
major project.
■ One HPC review, HPC has final authority with Council appeal?
3. Administrative approval
■ Generally consistent with character of HD but does have a higher degree of impact
than maintenance/ day to day stuff
■ Trash cans, street signs, mailbox locations...
4. Exempt development
■ Maintenance/ day to day stuff, non -permanent, easily reversible, consistent with
the HD....
■ Light bulb replacement, planting a flower bed, tree removal that doesn't change
the HD character (i.e. removing 1 or 2 trees rather than removing all of the trees
on Main Street)......
Stuff to address:
■ Appeal process- internal? City Council?
■ Other Board Reviews/ recommendations (i.e. Open Space & Trails)
■ Joint reviews?
■ Federal Regulations
■ ADA
■ Safety requirements
■ In the future develop design guidelines specific to this type of development to add
another layer of understanding about what HPC thinks is appropriate
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
ORDINANCE NO. '� L
(Series of 1974)
AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING THE COMMERCIAL CORE OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, MORE PARTICULARLY BLOCKS 80,81, 82,
83, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, AND THE SOUTH
HALF OF BLOCKS 79, 86, 92 OF THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE
AND SOUTH HALF OF BLOCK 19 OF THE EAST ASPEN ADDITION
THERETO,AS AN H, HISTORIC DISTRICT
WHEREAS, The Aspen Historic Preservation Committee
has studied the commercial core of the City of Aspen and
such investigation demonstrates, and the Committee has
concluded, that the commercial core of the City has character,
interest and value as a part of the development, heritage
and cultural characteristics of the City; exemplifies the
cultural, political, economic, social and historical
heritage of the community; includes many structures which
portray the environment of a group of people in an era of
history characterized by a distinctive architectural style;
and which structures, in addition, contain elements of
design, detail, material and craftsmanship representing a
significant architectural style; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has found that designa-
tion of the commercial core as an historic district will
promote the health, safety and welfare of the present and
future inhabitants of the community,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
That the following described property located
within Pitkin County, Colorado, be and hereby is placed
within an H, Historic Overlay District and designated an
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
b
historic site:
All of lot 80, 81, 82, 8 87, 88, 89,
90, 93, 95, 96, and a south half
of blocks 79, 86 and 92 of the City and
� As en• and the south
�ast Aspen Addition to omi` ' Av
i „ n
11���the City of A n; UUIIyyVV11
and further that the Zoning District Map of the City of Aspen,
dated April 7, 1967, as amended, is further amended by the
designation of the preceeding as an H, historic Overlay
District.
Section 2
If any provisions of this ordinance, or applications
thereof, shall be declared invalid, such invalidity shall
not affect any other provisions or applications, and for
this purpose the provisions and applications of this
ordinance are declared to be severable.
Section 3
A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held
on 11L :-e-- cam <_,v 173 , 1974, at 5:00 p.m. in
the City Council Chambers,City Hall, Aspen, Colorado,
fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing there shall have
been published notice of the same in a newspaper of general
circulation of the City.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published all as
provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen,
Colorado, at its regular meeting held
1974.
ATTEST:
Stacy tandley III
/
/ c;-r1 z 4�,.-,cam if ', , -r
Kathryn 9. Hauter
City Clerk
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
ros . C. r..o.c.n .. ... �.
FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this
day of "i( c„—, %� , 1974.
ATTEST:
Sta(Stfandley III C
,�`�/�` l/ i
Kathryn S. Hauter
City Clerk
STATE OF COLORADO ) CERTIFICATE
) ss
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
I, Kathryn S. Hauter, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado,
do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ordinance was
introduced, read in full, and passed on first
reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Aspen on December 9 , 1974 and publish-
ed in the Aspen Times a weekly newspaper of general circul-
ation, published in the City of Aspen, Colorado, in its
issue of December 12 , 197 4 , and was finally adopted
and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council on -
December 23
Ordinance No. 49
provided by law.
197 4 , and ordered published as
Series of 197 4 of said City, as
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and
the seal of said City of Aspen, Colorado, this 24
da of December 197 4
Y _
Kathryn S Hauter, City Clerk
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
ORDINANCE NO. 6
(Series of 1976)
AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING AS AN I:ISTORIC DISTRICT
ALL OF THOSE PROPERTIES ABUTTING (ON THE NORTH
AND SOUTH) MAIN STREET BETWEEN MONARCH AND
SEVENTH STREETS, AND ALL OF PAEPCKE PARK, WITHIN
THE CITY OF ASPEN: WHICH AREA IS MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS LOTS K, L, M, N, O, P, 0, R AND S
OF BLOCKS 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66, 73;
LOTS A, B, C, D, E, r, G, H AND J OF BLOCKS 19,
25, 31, 38, 45, 32, 59, 74; AND ALL OF BLOCK 67
OF THE ORIGINAL ASPEN TOWNSITE
WHEREAS, Article IX of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Muni-
cipal Code establishes procedures for the designation, within
the City of Aspen, of historic districts when such areas meet
the criteria for and purposes of historic designation, and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
(P and Z) and Aspen Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) have
been presented with evidence supportive of the designation
of the following areas of the city as historic
all of those properties abutting
(on the north and south) Main Street
between Monarch and Seventh Streets,
and all of Paepcke Park within the
City of Aspen, Colorado,
which proposed district has been denominated the "lain Street
Historic District", and
'TEREAS, the HPC has, in its resolution dated July 13,
1976, reported that its preliminary investigation of the Main
Street Historic District has shown that Main Street
(a) has character, interest and value as part
of the development, heritage and cultural charac-
teristics of the city;
(b) exemplifies the cultural, political, economic,
social and historical heritage of the community;
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
(c) includes many structures which portray
the environment of a group of people in an era
characterized by distinctive architectural styles;
and
(d) contains structures which, in addition, con-
tain elements of design, detail, material, and
craftsmanship representing significant architectural
styles, and
WHEREAS, on receipt of the HPC resolution the P and Z,
at its meeting held July 20, 1976, did give preliminary approval
to the proposed designation and set a joint HPC and P and Z
public hearing on the matter for August 17, 1976, and
WHEREAS, the announced joint public hearing was con-
ducted and subsequent thereto the HPC reaffirmed its findings
itemized in its Resolution dated July 13, 1976, and the P and Z,
in a Resolution dated August 24, 1976, recommended establishment
of the Main Street Historic District, finding it compatible
with the Aspen Area General Plan, and, in addition, that
(a) The Main Street Historic District will
enhance a recently stated policy of the P and Z
to preserve historic buildings and sites within
the City;
(b) The Main Street Historic District will also
reinforce another recently stated policy of
the Commission,.that is, by insuring the
retention of historic buildings the district
will strengthen the city's economic base by
enhancing the tourist experience;
(c) The Main Street District will complement the
recently enacted (then pending) amendments to the
-2-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
IMR • C XOUR[L [. 4 [ L.
O - Office District and insure that new
developments are visually compatible with Main
Street's historic appearance, and
(d) The Main Street Historic District will comple-
ment the residential districts north and south
of Main Street and offer a comfortable transition
between the more intense activities on Main
Street and the adjacent residential districts,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to pursue the HPC
and P and Z recommendations and complete the designation process,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
Section 1
That Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets
is determined to have historic significance and that the
following described property located in Pitkin County, Colorado,
be designated as an H Historic Overlay District pursuant to
the provisions of Article IX of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code
All of Lots K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R and S
of Blocks 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66 and
73 of the Original Aspen Townsite.
All of Lots A, 3, C,.D, E, F, G, I1 and J of
Blocks 19, 25, 31, 38, 45, 52, 59 and of
the Original Aspen Townsite.
All of Block 67 of the Original Aspen Townsite. bp*
xvSection 2
If any provision of this ordinance or the application
thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications
-3-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid
provision or application, and to this end the provisions of
this ordinance are declared to be severable.
Section 3
That a public hearing on this ordinance be held on
Z2,,4�% 1976, at 5: 0 0 P.M. in
the City Council Chambers, City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen
(15) days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be
published once in a newspaper of general circulation within
the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided
by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado,
at its regular meeting held at the City of Aspen on the ','w'�
day of ���� ' 1976.
,. •� Jam.-`
lam`
tacy to dley III
Mayor
ATTEST:
ztka::��j "'It/
Kathryn W :tauter
City Clerk
FINALLY adopted, passed and approved on the
day of �tJzJ 1976.
Stacy Standley III
Mayor
ATTEST: )�
Kathryn 7. :Iauter
City Clerk
-4 -
WIN,
4,
N
Af
At I%t
0 60 12G
i-P L w
a
000".- 'his .1111.wing/unagis is a graphical representation
K. of he features depicted and is not a leg I
e i4 representation. The accuracy may change
- rw
depending on the enlargerrient or reduction.
R Copyright 2009 Aspen/Pftkjn GI S
it
It
S V#
A,
-7
m
4d
Ft I#Wif*
A IP
. 4�
77—
NIS,
A
__ 19
N
E Aw
ra 41A
416
A
4 OP
17- 59
_All
H P7
je.,
z,-
�.,327
4
40"',
'AT
4 41
FF /7
Wf/ '2
r le- A, AN4 10
sr
q6.
'.4a
kw,
:';1: 4(
�, W�r,
j KAI
4F
7.
Anw 4
H
Oh
4 417, _54
pm
FA
ALI
,W.r
Ke
JF
A ;Ada;
4,
-A,
7A
X
lb, F
fA 11
Pill,
V7
XXT . . . . . .
V,
fk
Ilk
lowli qft
X �7k iN
_66 1
-Wk 24"
" k"W-evc
-le
91,
K
� U4
5
4,
N
Af
At I%t
0 60 12G
i-P L w
a
000".- 'his .1111.wing/unagis is a graphical representation
K. of he features depicted and is not a leg I
e i4 representation. The accuracy may change
- rw
depending on the enlargerrient or reduction.
R Copyright 2009 Aspen/Pftkjn GI S
it
It
S V#
A,
-7
m
4d
Ft I#Wif*
A IP
. 4�
77—
NIS,
A
__ 19
N
E Aw
ra 41A
416
A
4 OP
17- 59
_All
H P7
je.,
z,-
�.,327
4
40"',
'AT
4 41
FF /7
Wf/ '2
r le- A, AN4 10
sr
q6.
'.4a
kw,
:';1: 4(
�, W�r,
j KAI
4F
7.
Anw 4
H
Oh
4 417, _54
pm
FA
ALI
,W.r
Ke
JF
A ;Ada;
4,
-A,
7A
X
lb, F
fA 11
Pill,
V7
XXT . . . . . .
V,
fk
Ilk
lowli qft
X �7k iN
_66 1
-Wk 24"
" k"W-evc
-le
91,
K
� U4
5
S
'0,
IMP' "INE1,71AN
olrnolo -, 0,
will
Na 1,
0
m
0 0 0 46 6 0 0 0