HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20130410 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
APRIL 10, 2013
CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM
130 S. GALENA
ASPEN, COLORADO
Please visit the sites on your own
5:00. INTRODUCTION
A. Roll call
B. Approval of minutes(February 27th, March 13'H)
C. Public Comments
D. Commission member comments
E. Disclosure of conflict of interest(actual and apparent)
F. Project Monitoring
G. Staff comments
H. Certificates of No Negative Effect issued
I• Submit public notice for agenda items
OLD BUSINESS
5:10 A. 701 N. Third Street- Conceptual Major Development, Setback Variance
PUBLIC HEARING
NEW BUSINESS
6:00 A. 435 E. Main Street-Final Major Development, PUBLIC HEARING
6:45 B. 1006 E. Cooper Avenue-Final Major Development and Variances,
PUBLIC HEARING
WORKESSION
A. None
7:30 ADJOURN
TYPICAL PRO CEING-1 HOUR 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA
ED
ITEM NEW BUSINESS
Provide proof of legal notice(affidavit of notice for PH)
Staff presentation(5 minutes)
Board questions and clarifications(5 minutes)
Applicant presentation(20 minutes)
Board questions and clarifications(5 minutes)
Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes)
Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed(5 minutes)
HPC discussion(15 minutes)
Applicant rebuttal(comments) (5 minutes)
Motion(5 minutes)
*Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met.
No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least
four (4) members being present. No meeting which agenda l rtemsto uorum shall be a date certain. All t
shall conduct any business other than to conti nue the event.less than
actions shall require the concurring vote of a the loission then present and voting.
three (3) concurring votes of the members of
PROJECT MONITORING- Projects in bold are currently under construction.
Ann Mullins 217 E.Bleeker-Kribs
205 S. Spring-Hills
Fox Crossing
Red Butte Cemetery
Boomerang
604 W.Main
Lift One
316 E.Hopkins
AspenCore
623 E.Hopkins
Jay Maytin 518 W.Main-Fornell
Red Butte Cemetery
320 Lake
435 W.Main-AJCC
920 W.Hallam
28 Smuggler Grove
Lift One
400 E.Hyman(Tom Thumb)
204 S. Galena
Nora Berko 1102 Waters
332.W.Main
28 Smuggler Grove
Jamie Brewster McLeod 518 W.Main-Fornell
205 S. Spring-Hills
302 E.Hopkins-Hillstone Restaurants
1102 Waters
Sallie Golden 400 E.Hyman(Tom Thumb)
Jane Hills 320 W.Hallam Street
Willis Pember 508 E. Cooper
Hotel Jerome
202/208 E.Main
AspenCore
Patrick Segal 623 E.Hopkins
204 S. Galena
M:\city\planning\hpc project monitoring\PROJECT MONITORING.doc
4/4/2013
P1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: 701 N. Third Street- Conceptual Major Development and Setback Variance,
Public Hearing continued from Feb. 20th
DATE: April 10, 2013
SUMMARY: 701 N. Third Street is a landmark
designated 5,000 square foot lot that contains a remodeled
f r;
Victorian era home. The property owner requests HPC - . ' ` '---f
�i.
approval to add a second floor to an existing one story '
addition. A portion of the proposed addition re uires a t
rear yard setback variance.
.
11 f
APPLICANT: G. Steve Whipple, 701 North Third Street,
LLC, represented by Alan Richman Planning Services. � �
ADDRESS: 701 N. Third Street, the south half of Lot 7 and all of Lot 8, Block 100, Hallam Lake
Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen.
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-1.1-005.
ZONING: R-6.
CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff
reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance
with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is
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 of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. 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.
Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual
Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. 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
1
P2
the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan
unless agreed to by the applicant.
Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale,Amassing and proportions of a
proposal. The relevant design guidelines are attached as Exhibit
There are numerous aspects of the existing nt structure
that these features are not benng changed, they do
Residential Design Standards. To t he ex
not need to be brought into compliance
retroactively.
t
it appears that this home would have
originally had the features typical of most t
cross gabled Aspen miners cottage, C
represented in the photo to the right; a house Y
on Main Street.
According to HPC records, by 1980, the _ r
xt
subject house had been modified with a wrap
around porch and a rear addition. By the early
1990s, the open porch was enclosed. See
photos of 701 N. Third, below.
ITMJ
}+ 1 t
............
..........
t
r,
The proposal-before HPC is a second floor master bedroom addition along the western end of the
property. No historic construction will be directly affected. No restoration work on the historic
resource is proposed.
The proposal involves an addition of approximately 790 square feet, which will take the property
near the maximum floor area of 2,960 square feet. The addition sits on top of existing
construction that already encroaches into the required rear yard setback, along the north lot line.
A variance is requested in order to extend the encroachment to the second floor level.
2
P3
The owner is not requesting a floor area bonus, which is typically an opportunity for HPC to require
restoration work. Staff and HPC can only encourage actions such as removal of the street facing
skylights,and recreation of the front porch.
This neighborhood is an enclave of long-term residents and homes which are generally below the
allowed height and square footage. Numerous letters were received at the first hearing on
February 20th, expressing concern with the impact of the project. Except for the setback
variance, the project is within the allowed dimensional requirements, and is actually a few feet
lower than the allowed height. The upper floor plate height of 7' is sympathetic to the context.
It appears that the project may affect the success of the solar panels located on the property to the
north, another landmarked site. Land use regulations do not protect solar access or viewplanes
from private property, however any accommodation of the neighbors' concerns, and the use of
the solar panels is recommended.
In general; HPC guidelines allow for a two story addition to be constructed at the rear of a
miner's cottage. In this case, the project is not starting from scratch, but working around the
placement and character of some existing construction.
At the last meeting, HPC requested that there be no new development, including upper floor deck
space, within 10' of the rear of the historic miner's cottage. The applicant was asked to eliminate
a proposed masonry chimney,stack on the upper floor deck, and was encouraged to provide at
least a 5' rear yard setback (north) for the new construction. All of these amendments have been
accomplished. The applicant has also revised some window concepts, in preparation for Final
review.
As stated, the proposal provides a 5' setback from the north property line, but since this is
technically defined as the rear yard, 10' is required. A 5' reduction is requested. In granting a
variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance:
a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district;
and/or
b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural
character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic
district.
Staff finds that the variance meets the review criteria. The-placement of the new construction as
far behind the historic resource as possible is appropriate. The application includes modeling
that demonstrates how little visibility the addition will have from Third Street. On the Pearl
Court fagade, the new upper floor successfully adopts similar roof pitches and proportions related
to the Victorian.
Staff finds that the revised proposal meets the applicable design guidelines.
3
P4
The HPC may:
• approve the application,
• approve the application with conditions,
disapprove the application, or
• continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant Conceptual Major Development
and a setback variance with the following conditions:
1. HPC grants a rear yard setback reduction of 5.'
2. 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.
Exhibits:
Resolution#_,.Series of 2013
A. Relevant Guidelines
B. February 20, 2013 minutes
C. Application
Exhibit A
10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the
primary building is maintained.
Li new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the
primary building is inappropriate.
❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is
inappropriate.
❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style
should be avoided.
❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate.
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining
visually compatible with these earlier features.
❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or
a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be
considered to help define a change from old to new construction.
10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred.
4
P5
10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back
substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic
building.
❑ A 1-story connector is preferred.
• The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary
building.
• The connector also should be proportional to the primary building.
10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the
visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character
to remain prominent.
❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate.
❑ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not
alter the exterior mass of a building.
❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in. order to allow the original proportions and
character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is
recommended.
10.9 Roof forms should.be similar to those of the historic building.
❑ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate.
❑ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs
10.10 Design an addition to a historic.structure such that it will not destroy or obscure
historically important architectural features.
❑ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be
avoided.
5
P6
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
GRANTING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND VARIANCE APPROVAL
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 701 N.THIRD STREET,THE SOUTH HALF OF
LOT 7 AND ALL OF LOT 8,BLOCK 100,HALLAM LAKE ADDITION, CITY AND
TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO
RESOLUTION #_, SERIES OF 2013
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-11-005
WHEREAS, the applicant, G. Steve Whipple, 701 North Third Street, LLC, represented by Alan
Richman Planning Services, requested HPC Conceptual Major Development and Variance
approval for the property located at 701 N. Third Street, the south half of Lot 7 and all of Lot 8,
Block 100, Hallam Lake Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application,
a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's
conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section
26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC
may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain
additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHEREAS,the HPC may approve setback variances according to Section 26.415.110.C.1.a,
Variances. In granting a variance,the HPC must make a finding that such a variance:
a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district;
and/or
b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural
character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic
district; and
WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HPC dated April 10, 2013, performed an
analysis of the application based on the standards and recommended approval with conditions;
and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting one porila a� 2013,blict comments, and found the proposal
considered the application, the staff m p
consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of_to_.
701 N. Third Street
HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2013
Page 1 of 2
P7
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby grants Conceptual Major Development and Variance approval for the property
located at 701 N. Third Street with the following conditions:
1. HPC grants a rear yard setback reduction of 5.'
2. 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.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of April,
2013.
Ann Mullins, Chair
Approved as to Form:
Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney
ATTEST:
Kathy Strickland,Chief Deputy Clerk
701 N. Third Street
HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2013
Page 2 of 2
P8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 20, 2012
Chairperson, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Commissioners in attendance: Willis Pember, Jay Maytin, Sallie Golden
Patrick Sagal and Jane Hills. Nora Berko and Jamie.McLeod were absent.
Staff present:
Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
Kathy.Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk
701 N. Third Street— Conceptual Major Development, Setback
Variance— Public Hearing
Debbie reviewed the public notice and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I
Amy said the property is landmarked and in the West End and is 5,000
square feet. There is an existing historic house on the lot that has had some
alterations in the past. The proposal is to add on a little less than an 800
square foot addition for a second floor master bedroom toward the back of
the house and that would take the property to the maximum floor area that is
allowed for the site. There is also a requested setback variance. In the
1980's a wrap around porch was added and then infilled and windows were
added. There were a lot of changes and some of the original character of the
house has diminished. Skylights were also added. None of the alterations
are proposed to be affected. This is a proposal to add a second floor on top
of the existing construction. Staff is concerned about the space between the
proposed second floor addition and the back of the historic house is planned
to become a roof top deck. Normally this would be the area that UPC would
like to see a connector or a separation or break between the new and old
construction. Our recommendation is to restudy the deck area as it comes
very close to the back of the historic resource. Staff recommends that the
deck is minimized so that it doesn't come any closer than ten feet to the
historic resource. The proposed addition sits into a setback requirement on
the north property line and it is a ten foot requirement and they are
proposing 4.2 feet. The applicant is requesting a 5.8 reduction in the rear
yard for the master bedroom. Staff feels this should be restudied due to
objections from neighbors and impacts to adjoining properties. You can
only grant the variance because you feel it does something to benefit the
historic resource, the neighborhood and achieve better preservation. This is
a hard argument to make in this particular circumstance. Staff is
recommending a restudy of the second floor addition. At final review level
1
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P9
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 20, 2012
there are a few things such as windows that could be discussed in order to
improve the historic structure.
Alan Richman, Planning Services
Steve Whipple, owner
Steve said we have tried to keep the integrity of what is there and not disturb
it. This is a corner lot of Pearl Court and Third Street.
Alan Richman said this is a curious situation and how you measure the
setbacks on this property. One would think that the front would be on Third
Street and the entry of the house is on Third Street. Third Street is the main
thoroughfare in the area. Pearl Court is a side street and it is a narrow street.
It has houses on both sides of it. The only entry from Pearl Court is through
the garage. The dimensional standard was changed recently and the code
now says you designate the longest block frontage which is Pearl Court as
the front yard measuring point to measure setbacks. That provision makes
no sense for this piece of property. It is a code error. In 2008 the code said
you could choose which was the front and side yard and the Craig's chose
3rd Street as the front and the common property line which is the side yard
has a five foot setback. The Whipples are 4.2 from the property line. They
are virtually mirror images of each other. Today's code makes us ask for the
5.8 variance and in reality it is less than one foot. We are trying to make a
balance as to where the square footage can go and we feel this addition is
masked away from the front side and we feel the location is appropriate.
Steve Whipple said the proposed addition is 789 square feet. The ten foot
space between the old and new is not deck. I am not married to the deck I
was trying to hide the chimney. The addition can be 29 feet high to the peak
and we are four feet under. We are a little higher than the neighboring roof
by 1.4 feet.
Alan said they read the neighbors letters and understand and respect their
comments. This is not in the historic district and our theme has been do not
harm the historic resource. We understand some of the houses on Pearl
Court are one and two stories. The zoning in the area allows for a height of
25 feet. While those houses today are small there is nothing stopping any of
those owner from proposing to expand their homes.
2
P10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
_MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 20, 2012
Steve said the Craig's have a solar collector that would be affected during
the year.
Jane said the applicant has done a good job looking at all the issues on Pearl
Court and Third Street. The solar collector is a concern to the neighbor.
Alan said on a corner property you actually have two fronts. Our property
fronts on Pearl and Third and the Craig's fronts on Pearl and Gillespie. It is
measured by the longest length of the property.
Jay asked what the current FAR is on the property. Alan said the current is
2,17.0 and the allowable is 2,960 square feet.
John Whipple said they are asking for 789.8 square feet which will bring us
within two feet of the maximum.
Sallie said they aren't tearing anything down to reach their maximum height.
Patrick said there are two fireplaces on the deck but are not connected to the
historic resource.
Amy pointed that there is no indication that the property was moved to the
site.
Debbie asked for any additional photographs to be submitted as exhibits.
Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public comment section of the agenda
item.
Jim Curtis, owner of 411 Pearl Court directly south of 701. I also have
permission to speak for James and Hinley Peterson who live at 406 Pearl and
David and Susie Pines who live at 401 Pearl Court. We are not opposed to
some form of an addition. We would very much welcome Mr. Whipple as a
neighbor. We feel the proposed addition does not fully comply with the
FTC guidelines. It is a little bit too tall, bulky and massive. In Chapter 10 it
states that the addition should be subordinate to the main building. We
would like to see a slightly lighter and softer touch. I give the owners a huge
amount of credit; from Third Street you do not see much of it. The
Petersons said their height is 28 feet. We suggest story polls so we can truly
see the impact of this and we would like to do a site visit with the Whipple's
3
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P 11
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 20, 2012
and HPC. I would be glad to assist in any way possible with the story polls.
Our objective is not to stop something, it is to make it better with the
guidelines.
Loyle Grand— resides diagonally across the street from the proposed
addition. We are only concerned about the appearance of this from Third
Street. Pearl Court is the standard walking route for people going to the
music tent. With the proposed deck there is no clear separation between the
two places. Clearly the addition overwhelms the existing house. With the
deck railing it looks all like one structure. The height of the windows makes
an obtrusion into Pearl Court and distractive to the historic structure.
Guideline 10.9 states that the roof should be similar in structure and
appearance and compatible with the existing roofs. Personally we would be
happy to have someone living there permanently in the house.
Michael Craig representing Carol Craig who lives at 707 N. Third. My
Mother won an award for her house. She did a careful and quality project
for the Town of Aspen and for the neighborhood. Everyone in the area
could expand their house and that is allowed. All the new addition, at great
expense, is sub-grade on my Mother's house. That addition is very low key
and she set a standard. The supplemental solar heating was added. Any
movement to the south of the setback is going to affect how many more feet
of the solar panels will be blocked. We would like that variance stay at ten
feet. Maybe there can be an addition that is something more in character
with the neighborhood.
Chairperson, Ann Mullins closed the public comment section of the agenda
item.
Issues:
Ten foot connector and should there be activity on top of it.
Setback variance
Scale, massing and proportion of the addition.
Jay said the front yard of this house is on Third Street and that should be
preserved. The side yard which is on Pearl Court is still a prominent fagade
and the applicant has to deal with that. On mass and scale on the Third
Street side there isn't a lot of change. On the Pearl Court side there is quite a
lot. The problem with this project is mass and scale and it is the lack of
subordinance to the historic structure. A lot of the neighbors accomplished
4
P12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 20, 2012
this by building sub-grade. How do you put 800 feet on this lot. I'm not
sure you put it all on top. I feel the project will gain approval eventually. I
just don't think it is ready right now because of the mass and scale of the
back part of the house. The railing makes it look like a story and a half and
the chimney is an issue. A flat two story wall is very massive. You can
change mass by changing the materials. I am for solar and green and in
favor of continuation to see if we can resolve the issues.
Sallie also said the railing takes away from the connector. The chimney
needs restudied because it takes away from the historic resource. Mass and
scale of the new addition is a concern. This could be a great project but
there is something not clicking with the historic resource and the mass and
scale. Maybe revisit the guidelines. The addition is lacking the delicacy to
the historic resource.
Willis said if it looks and feels like a connector then maybe it can be a
connector. It is 25 feet to the ridge and is not as tall as it could be. The
addition is not tall. There has been a lot of discussion about Tightness, the
windows and the lines. The applicant should reflect on the statements made
by the neighbors. I appreciate the spirit of subordination. The connector is
doing its job. An 8 foot variance would work and that could be a
compromise.
Jane said the railing is very deceptive. I feel the architecture needs some
work. One of the hard things is that this is a corner property. I don't think
this is a big house and the drawings are deceptive.' This house is like a patch
work quilt. I feel it is compatible with the neighborhood. I would like to see
a compromise on the setback. It is difficult for this commission when there
are no guidelines for corner properties. With a little more restudy this can be
a sensational project.
Patrick recommended continuance and look at sub-grade and study mass and
scale. Possibly the fireplace could be moved and turned into gas. I also
recommend site polls and the setback should be ten feet from the house all
the way around.
Ann said she is reiterating-most of what the board stated. On the connector I
feel strongly that there should be no activity on it. It weakens its function as
a connector once the top of it becomes another living space. 1 would support
a five foot variance rather than the 4.2 which would give a little relief with
5
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P13
MINUTES FEBRUARY 20, 2012
the solar. I also feel the project should be restudied. Story polls are a great
idea.
Alan said the majority of the commission supports a five foot setback.
Three members, Patrick, Jay and Sallie commented about mass and scale. It
is not our direction to go sub-grade and pick the house up. If you pick it up
you lose the addition entirely.
Sallie said she is not in favor of sub-grade and is recommending that scale
and mass be restudied.
Alan said we can work with that but the applicant's plan did not include sub-
grade.
Ann said she would like to see a streetscape context of the block and also the
vegetation plan.
Steve Whipple said the addition is 8 feet above the roof. He is willing to
work with the architecture. I am kinda locked in with the 25 foot height and
I am at a 7 foot plate heights.
Ann said she did not hear any objections to the height. We also had
agreement on the five foot variance.
Willis said the mass maybe ok but the scale not. It is tricky. The volume is
perfectly fine. Possibly look at different dormers.
Ann commented that the design needs to be a little more subordinate to the
historic resource.
MOTION: Patrick moved to continue 701 N. Third Street until April 10 to
restudy mass and scale; second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 6:00 p.m.
Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
6
April 10,2013 EZI
Amy Guthrie and Historic Preservation Commission
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re:Application for Historic Addition to 701 North Third Street
Dear Amy and HPC,
We appreciate the efforts of Mr.Whipple and Mr. Richman to more closely follow suggestions
from you and the HPC and make revisions to their application for the addition to the historic residence
located at 701 North Third Street.
We request that the HPC correct the March 20,2013 meeting minutes where near the bottom
of page 3 it is recorded,"The Petersons said their height is 28 feet".We were out of town for that
meeting and prior to the meeting,we communicated to Jim Curtis,our neighbor who attended,that our
house plans showed the top of our roof ridgeline to be 20 feet.After returning to town,we measured
the actual height on site with Jim and found it to be 21'-6"above grade.This correction is important as
the height of the proposed addition has been compared to the height of our house at 406 Pearl Court.
When reading Amy's April 10,2013 Memo to the HPC,it appears the HPC may consider
recommending a 5 foot setback variance instead of the 10 foot setback required by code on the north
property line. If approved,this would be a generous concession to the proposed addition by allowing all
of the square footage of the addition to be located on the second floor which is obviously more visible
to the public.If the HPC elects to grant this variance,we request that the HPC establish a 10 foot setback
on the west property line as a condition of such approval as shown on the attached site plan.
Upon review of the revised plan for the addition submitted by Mr. Richman with his March 27,
2013 letter we note the highest roof line has been reduced by only one foot from 25 feet to 24 feet. We
are aware that the code allows for a higher roof ridge,however,we request the HPC consider roof
height of the two houses adjacent to the proposed addition,406 Pearl Court and Carol Craig's historic
house.Both have roof ridge heights of 21'-6"above grade and other houses on Pearl Court have roof
heights less than 20 feet.We urge the HPC to require the highest roof ridge over the master bedroom
be lowered to the height of the roof ridge over the study area as shown on the attached south elevation.
This slight adjustment would help make the proposed addition more compatible with adjacent houses in
the neighborhood.
ames and Hensley Peterson
PO Box 1714
Aspen,.CO 81612
(two attachments included:site plan and south elevation)
ILAN
Y72Eidfs!!`TNM'MCMtYR/APbiFS�'F.PRA+11�#M+aFhPe�i:?.r^/`.arii-rM.!�2rA9Fah4 .• ` �
Request HPC'fix 10'-0"setback on west property' n -
as a condition of approving 5'-0"setback variance.on
ndrth property line
72"Fence
56 Fences
10.5' ::1 ;•,: ;:::i::::::{::::':. :.::•:�•:•::;'•:i::::s:^::'
.
....
....
tr: K
� N. r.
- s:
f :1::
f
: ,..
: '�.:.n.fir.:.... i
t. ::SE'. .. ..
'
ExlsttnD ..
woes ';fir. ......i::: :':rt:'
56"'Pena
Planter { .
14� 7ri F �
nc
t Fxlsung
"w �dsUnA:. Fxtattng Flogsto .Walk
,Ddve
Ap
72"
4
' E7(tS _LLC dab (jk
Trash
. Enclosure
PEA'
t�l07:E i:>LrA0
-SITE
III Eno]
■.CI MIN k 1 .;__ _ll �bm�0� Io�Om ROSiI 1•ob R j
............
� � til � 1
filll�l lllll l�Ill 11111lllll�I�ii�lElEl�li�lllEil�llllllllllllll�llllll
..........
• t �
P15
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: 435 W. Main Street, Aspen Jewish Community Center- Final Major
Development-Public Hearing
DATE: April 10, 2013
SUMMARY: The Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen (AJCC) requests Final Major
Development review for a proposed parsonage on the eastern half of their property at 435 W.
Main Street. The AJCC site is a designated landmark within the Main.Street Historic District.
The parsonage replaces earlier approvals for a social hall that was intended to supplement the
special function space available in the main sanctuary structure. AJCC has determined that being
able to have the Rabbi and family live on site and receive the congregation in a smaller setting is
a higher priority need.
The complex has been in the land use review process since 2004 and includes a sanctuary,
preschool, and administrative building on the west portion of the lot and preservation of 6
historic 1940s era tourist cabins along the alley and Third Street, to be used as affordable housing
and lodging for visitors related to church events and programming. Construction of the project
was initiated in June 2012, but slowed as the opportunity opened up to create a parsonage. The
new parsonage received HPC Conceptual in August 2012, then proceeded to the Planning and
Zoning Commission and City Council for Essential Public Facility Review/GMQS Exemption
and Subdivision. The applicant would like to complete all construction work at once.
HPC granted Conceptual approval, a parking reduction, and a front yard setback variance with
three conditions; that the site plan/placement of the parsonage be as was represented to the board
in a restudy last August, the roof over the dining room (now labeled living room) is to be
restudied for Final, and the front door of the parsonage must face Main Street.
Staff finds that design guidelines are met. Final approval is recommended with conditions.
APPLICANT: The Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen, represented by Arthur Chabon,
architect and Alan Richman Planning Services.
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-81-100.
ADDRESS: 435 W. Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 38, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado.
1
P16
ZONING: MU, Mixed Use.
CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW
The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff
reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance
with the design guidelines and other applicable. Land Use Code Sections. This report is
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 of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. 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.
Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual
Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual
Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the
envelope of the structures) 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.
Staff Response: Final review focuses on landscape plan, lighting, fenestration, and selection
of new materials. The relevant design guidelines include the HPC guidelines for new
development on a landmark lot, and the Main Street District guidelines found in the Commercial,
Lodging and Historic Districts design document. They are attached as "Exhibit A."
Staff appreciates the concept of the parsonage as a free standing, residential scaled structure that
provides more open space on the site than the previous social hall design achieved. The building
has a steeply pitched, cross gable roof and a prominent porch, all of which tie it to the Victorian
era mansions located one block to the east. These nearby structures are some of the largest
Queen Ann style buildings that survive in Aspen. The simplicity of the material palette and
detailing relate well to the small cabins on the AJCC site.
There are some plan and form changes since Conceptual review. The floor plan has been
amended, with the garage stall now placed on the west side of the building instead of the east.
Because the driveway needs to slip between two of the historic cabins,the parsonage is now 3'6"
closer to the historic cabins along Third Street than it was in the approved site plan. HPC must
determine if amendment is needed. Staff finds the separation between the buildings to be
adequate.
The architect has redesigned the front door so that it faces Main Street, rather than Third. A
dormer has been added to the long roof slope over the living room to break up the plane.
Staff finds that the project meets the design guidelines. The applicant has not provided a lighting
plan. This must be presented for review at the HPC hearing.
2
P17
The UPC may:
• approve the application,
• . approve the application with conditions,
• disapprove the application, or
• continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant Final approval as designed.
Exhibits:
Resolution#_, Series of 2013
A. Relevant guidelines
B. August 15, 2012 minutes
C. Application
"Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for 435 W. Main Street,Final Major
Development"
1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a
rehabilitation project.
❑ This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding
along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the
"private" spaces beyond.
❑ Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering
walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree.
❑ Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style.
Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles.
1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic
structures.
❑ The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod,
and not covered with paving, for example.
1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context
of the site.
❑ Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact
of mature growth.
❑ Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent.
❑ Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials.
11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street.
❑ The building should be arranged parallel to the lot.lines, maintaining the traditional grid
pattern of the site.
3
P18
11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by
using a front porch.
❑ The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry.
❑ A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally.
❑ In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street;
nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to
the street.
11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally.
❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish.
11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale.
• Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are
encouraged.
• Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged.
11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic
property.
❑ These include windows, doors and porches.
❑ Overall, details should be modest in character.
11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings.
❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are
especially discouraged on historic sites.
14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that
used traditionally.
be-
Li The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must
approved by the HPC.
❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence.
14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting.
❑ Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be
permitted.
❑ Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures.
❑ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by
controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night.
❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light.
❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of
buildings.
❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area.
14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way.
• Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create
a negative visual impact.
• Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual
impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible
with those of the building itself.
• Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges.
❑ A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does
not create a negative visual impact.
4
P19
❑ Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or
alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller
satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant
building facades or highly visible roof planes.
❑ Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their
appearance by blending with their backgrounds.
5
P20
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
GRANTING FINAL.MAJOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 435 W.MAIN STREET,LOTS A-I,BLOCK 38, CITY AND TOWNSITE
OF ASPEN,COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO._, SERIES OF 2013
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-81-100
WHEREAS, the applicant, Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen, represented by Arthur
Chabon Architect and Alan Richman Planning Services, has requested Final Major Development
approval for the property located at 435 W. Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 38, City and Townsite
of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the-procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff
analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance
with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2
and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, ,
disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information
necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated April 10, 2013, performed an analysis of the
application based on the standards, found that the review standards were met and recommended
approval; and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on April 10, 2013, the Historic Preservation Commission
considered the application, found the application was consistent with the review standards and
approved the application with conditions by a vote of_to_.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby approves Final Major Development as proposed. Vested Rights are established
as follows:
The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development
plan vested for a period of three (3)years from the date of issuance of a development
order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights.Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the
P21
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews
necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk
shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a
site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this
Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development
plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years,
pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado
Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 435 W. Main Street,
Lots A-I, Block 38, City and Townsite of Aspen.
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews
and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or
the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this
approval.
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial
review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin
to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required
under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the
Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Horne Rule Charter.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of April,
2013.
Approved as to content:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Ann Mullins, Chair
Approved as to Form:
Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney
ATTEST:
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
P22
City of Aspen
Main Street Historic District
Final Review Design Graidefines
-rhe following design guidelines shall apply at the final review stage.
Building Design &Articulation
Entries are clearly defined on most structures in
the neighborhood. Porches, porticos and stoops
are elements that icall define entries. These
tYp� Y
4 features add a one-story element to the fronts of
�:. buildings,helping to establish a uniform sense of
human scale along the block. They are essential
elements of the neighborhood that should be
<. maintained. Other architectural details also
contribute to the character of the street, adding
Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those
seen traditionally on Main Street. visual interest for pedestrians. Their continued
use is strongly encouraged.
Architectural features
• The Main Street District has developed into
a mixture of commercial and residential
forms.
• The Main Street District is composed of
varying architectural styles reflecting the
development phases of Aspen.
• The historic mining era is responsible forthe
majority of small miner's cottages and larger
high-style homes, although considerable
infill has occurred due to the ski industry.
• Infill buildings include samples of Chalet
style and Rustic style buildings.
• Residential buildings are primarily
vernacular designs,with highlights of Queen
Anne buildings.
7.16 Use building components that are
similar in size and shape to those of the
Victorian era residences seen traditionally on
Main Street.
• These include windows, doors and
porches.
• Overall, details should be modest in
character.
Commercial,Lodging and Historic District
P age 136 a�E . . Design Objectives acrd Guidelines
P23
City of Aspen Main Street Historic District
7.17 The imitation of older historic styles is
discouraged. =
• This blurs the distinction between old and
new buildings. °
• Highly complex and ornately detailed '` .
revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's �, A
history are especially discouraged.
Windows & Doors
The similarity of window and door size and
location contributes to a sense of visual continuity
along the street. In order to maintain this sense
of visual continuity, a new building should
maintain the basic window and door proportions Maintain the scale and proportion of window and door size and
and placement patterns seen traditionally in the location along Main Street.
district.
7.18 The retail entrance should be at the
sidewalk level:
• All entrances shall be ADA compliant.
• On sloping sites the retail frontage should
be as close to a level entrance as possible.
7.19 Incorporate an airlock entry into the
plan for all new structures.
• An airlock entry that projects forward of
the primary fagade at the sidewalk edge is
inappropriate.
• Adding temporary entries during the winter
season detracts from the character of the
historic district.
• Using a temporary vinyl or fabric"airlock"
to provide protection from winter weather
is not permitted.
Commercial,Lodging and Historic District
Design Objectives and Guidelines a page 237.
P24
City of
,4spen
Main Street Historic District
Architectural Materials
The existing palette of building materials within
�* the Main Street Historic District is an essential
part of the sense of evolution of the area and its
current character. Primarily wood and masonry
define the majority of the area and express both
human scale, structure, detail and a sense of
historical continuity. These materials have been
used in recent lodge development within the
area.
The predominant use of wood siding is another
important feature in the district. Building
materials of new structures and additions to
Wood is one of the most common building materials along Main existing structures should contribute to this visual
Street.
continuity of the neighborhood by reflecting t e
scale and texture of traditional materials. While
new materials may be considered, they should
appear similar to those seen traditionally to
establish a sense of visual continuity.
Materials
Historically, masonry and wood buildings
characterized the district.
", • Stucco and manufactured logs are seen
V among the infill buildings from the early
� !! ski-era.
Use materials on the exterior fagade of 7.20 Use building materials that are similar
buildings that convey a human scale. to those used historically.
• When selecting materials,reflect the simple
and modest character of historic materials
and their placement.
Roofing Materials
7.21 Use roofing materials that are similar in
appearance to those seen historically.
Commercial,Lodging and Historic District
page 138 G7 Design Objectives and Guidelines.
P25
City of Aspen Main Street Historic District
Paving & Landscaping
Certain settings and buildings within the city are
associated with the quality of design and materials
in paving and/or landscaping.It is important that
this be recognized and retained where it exists,is
of historic relevance, or otherwise successful, ,.
The site and setting of all development shall
be enhanced by design of both paving and
landscaping within any proposal. Proposed .
enhancements within the public right of way r
shall form part of a comprehensive improvement Landscaping should create a buffer between the street and
sidewalk.
proposal for the street or area, and approval will
be required.
Landscape design features
• Some historic houses still retain their front
yard original fence patterns that create a
distinct residential character. These fences
are low and transparent in nature.
• Landscaping is dominated by shade trees
along the right-of-way, although lilacs are
common plantings adjacent to houses.
7.22 Landscaping and paving should have the
following characteristics:
• Enhance the street scene
• Integrate the development with its setting
• Reflect the quality of the architectural
materials
7.23 Landscaping should create a buffer
between the street and sidewalk.
Commercial,Lodging and Historic District a � page 133
Design Objectives and Guidelines
1
P26
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF AUGUST 15,2 12
Chairperson, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Commissioners in attendance: Nora Berko, Willis Pember, Jay Maytin,
Jamie McLeod, Patrick Segal and Sallie Golden. Jane'Hills was absent.
Staff present:
Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Jamie moved to approve the minutes of August 81h second by Patrick. All in
favor motion carried. Ann abstained because she was absent at the meeting.
435 W. Main— Conceptual Major Development, Special Review for
Parking, Setback Variances—Public Hearing
Public notice— Exhibit I
Deborah Quinn said the public notice requirements are complete except for
the mailing list and it will be supplemented into the records.
Amy said last week HPC discussed architectural changes to the sanctuary
building at the west end of the property and those were approved and they
are moving through the building permit process. The social hall will not be
built but they intend to build a parsonage for the Rabi and his family. This is
a major development two step review and it also has to go to P&Z and
council. The social hall spanned across 3/4 length of the block with
continuous construction. The parsonage has an immediate advantage
because of its detached structure. There is a lot to be said having the open
space created around it. It is a taller building than the social hall was and the
height is being placed next to the historic cabins. Staff has a few issues with
the design guidelines: One is the proximity to the historic cabins and can
there be any more breathing room and can the parsonage building move a
little closer to the sanctuary building. In this immediate block there are
some of the biggest Victorian mansions that are left in town. This building
will have some context to support its size but the Victorian buildings look to
be approximately 35 feet wide and this building has a width of 50 feet. The
building is set back but it seems wider than the historic buildings and staff
has concerns about that. UPC needs to address parking and there are not
regulations; it is case by case. The applicant is proposing one parking space
in a garage. The Rabi and his family will be in a live work situation so we
feel there is no need to provide more than they have requested. They are
1
P27
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF AUGUST 15 2012
asking for a setback variance to keep the parsonage five feet from the front
lot line. That is closer to the street than most of the houses in the block so - - - - - -
that might not be considered appropriate; however the sanctuary and the
historic cabins are only a foot or two off the front property line so there is a
reason to continue keeping the construction closer to Main Street. As a
point of discussion whether the proposed garage should be integrated with
the house or whether there should be some way to accommodate parking
with a structure on the alley or uncovered parking. Staff is recommending
continuance.
Ann said there are five issues:
Proximity to the cabins
Width of the parsonage
Parking
Setback
Garage
Alan Richman, representing the applicant. We will do this in three pieces;
introduction of Rabi Mintz; Arthur Chabon will address the design issues
and I will conclude specifically focusing on the design guidelines.
Rabi Mintz said for the success of the organization and the services we offer
to the community and for the community itself it will have a big impact to
.have the two buildings side by side. It is not just really a home it is part of
the Jewish center that will be next door. It is a great importance to my .
growing family and for the success of what we do. My wife and I spent a lot
of time with Arthur designing this and we made every effort to eliminate any
extra space. We made every effort to maximize the space for the community
and our family. The size of the parsonage was dictated by the size of my
family and capacity of events that we want to hold in the parsonage. It is
important for us to move forward in a timely manner and it is important to
do this simultaneously with the construction that will happen next door. We
hope to leave here tonight with a vote in favor of the parsonage and allowing
us to go forward.
Leba Mintz said this is an emotional issue because it is our home. We live
1.2 miles from the center and every Saturday we walk to the center and if
there are storms sometimes my children don't even go to the services due to
inclement weather. It will make a big difference being next door to the
2
P28
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF AUGUST 15, 2012
center. We have made this home as simple as possible. I ask you to not
drag this on and hopefully it can go forward. .
Arthur Chabon, architect—Elevations—Exhibit II
Arthur said there are three primary issues: One is the overall length of the
building parallel to Main Street. Proximity of the parsonage on Third Street
blocks the views of the cabins and the issue that the parking should not be
brought so far to the center of the lot.
Site plan: Arthur said there are two site plans A and B. The basic strategy
was to nestle the parsonage in the L that is defined by the cabins on the-alley
and cabins on Third Street. As required by the guidelines the main entrance
is off Main Street and you enter on a porch which runs parallel to Third St.
and then you enter the foyer, living room, dining room, kitchen, mud room
and garage.
On the Main Street entrance there is a smaller gable and the south elevation
a pair of gables and at the west a larger gable to relate to the sanctuary itself.
There is a gable over the garage, kitchen and mudroom. The gables are all
centered exactly between the cabins. When looking through the cabins they
create focal points. We deliberately did not copy the slopes of the cabins
leaving a more dynamic dialogue between old and new. The parsonage is
much smaller on the site than other properties that you see.
Arthur went over Victorian houses with different facades dimensions within
the vicinity. Our fayade is 27 feet and the overall is 53 feet but the element
that brings you to 53 feet is 12 feet back.
Cabins:
Arthur said the social hall as approved obscured the three cabins completely.
In moving the parsonage inward option B we lose the diagonal view of the
cabins. The repetition of the cabins and the space and shadows between the
cabins in a way subordinate the parsonage. From the Main Street side they
are preserved and enhanced.
Parking:
Arthur said we have to be ten feet away from the adjacent property and the.
guidelines require the parking to be off the alley. The options are extremely
limited and parking has to be accessed between the cabins. We also want to
limit the amount of driveway into the property. There is no better proposal
3
P29
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF AUGUST 15, 2012
for the parking than what we have. We feel our scheme is consistent with
the general scale of Main Street and keeping the parsonage closer to the
cabins further enhances the historic resource.
Alan Richman said the parsonage brings many benefits to the project and it
serves critical functions for the congregation and it provides a home for the
leaders of the congregation and it creates a free standing residential structure
that creates more of an open feel on Main Street as compared to the social
hall that which stretched all across Main Street. The relationship between
the parsonage and the cabins has been addressed by the guidelines. Your
guideline 7..12 says .a new.structure should step down in scale. In terms.of.
the location of the parsonage and staff's comment to move it to the west we
think that there are three significant benefits to the location of the parsonage
where it is. It opens up the views from Main Street to the cabins along the
alley. By keeping the parsonage close to the cabins we create a playground
in the middle of the property which is right next to the pre-school and it is
big enough to be usable by the pre-school. If you move it over it cuts into
the open space. It also breaks the mass along Main Street into distinct
building forms because it keeps the parsonage far away enough from the
community center that you actually read them as two separate masses.
In the staff report one of reasons to move it west is guideline 7.5 which reads
respect the historic settlement patterns. It talks about consideration of
building setbacks and entry orientation and open space. We have oriented it .
to Main Street and keeping the building close to the cabins you create the
open space in the middle of the site. The question is the setback. The
pattern on our block is not like others. We have a 26 foot primary gable and
a cross gable that is set back 12 feet from the primary facade and is
subordinate to the primary facade. By the nature of the cabins being behind
the building the only way we can accommodate the program the
congregation needs is to begin to have the subordinate elements.
Alan-said they are clearly proposing to access the garage from the alley. We
can't place the garage on the alley because we have cabins across the alley.
In terms of floor area we are way below. The total build out with the six
cabins and the two buildings-is about 17,00-0 square feet: We are 3,000
.square feet below the public and 10,000 square feet below what is allowed
on the property.
4
P30
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION - - - - - - - - -
MINUTES OF AUGUST 15, 2012
Patrick asked if it was thought of to flip the project so the parking would be
accessed from Third Street. Visually it would be best to see the cabins
coming from the west.
Arthur said 7 years ago we did propose relocating the cabins and UPC
determined that the cabins should not be moved.
Jay inquired about the use of the cabins.
Alan said the three along Main Street are deeded as affordable housing.
The three along the alley are deed restricted for lodging far guests associated
with the community center.
Willis asked about the square footage of the parsonage as compared to the
social hall.
Allen said the parsonage is approximately 700 feet smaller than the social
hall.
Nora said we all worked hard to keep the program low with the social hall
and is there any way to get the parsonage into that program.
Rabi Mintz said we tried that and it could work if we got bigger but then you
would have less of a view of the cabins.
Alan said with rearrangement you could have a one story more spread out
building. We went with the vertical building because that is the pattern you
see on Main Street.
Chair-person, Ann Mullins opened the public comments. There were no
public comments. The public.comment portion of the agenda item was
closed.
Ann stated the issues:
Proximity of the new building to the cabins.
Width of the new building
Parking
The requested 5 foot setback
Garage entry
Entrance to the new building
5
P31
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF AUGUST 15 2012
Patrick said in flipping the plan and putting the parsonage on the alley you
would get a view plane of all the cabins and it would benefit the community
and the Rabi. The reason why the cabins are where they are is because of
the massing to the west.
Amy said the proposal by Patrick would have to be a new public notice. The
location and setting of the cabins is an important significance and that is part
of why it was not.brought forward.
Ann and Jay said they would not agree to support moving the cabins.
Jamie said she would have to review the past meetings before making any
decisions.
Willis pointed out that the applicant has not requested the change and it was
important that the cabins remain in their original location.
Sallie said she would consider it if the applicant requests it.
Proximity to the cabins:
Jay said typically we don't nestle things toward the historic structure. Jay
said he supports option B so that there is more breathing room around the
cabins. I have no problem with the overall width. I do have an issue with
the roof over the dining room because it creates more mass. I have no issue
with the parking or setback variance or the garage. I don't support the front
door entry. The chimney creates more mass and a heaviness as it comes to
the ground but that can be discussed at final.
Jamie said she can support Option B. Along Main Street there aren't a lot of
windows and other Victorians have windows that open up to Main Street.
The building also seems a little top heavy with the mass of the roof. How
are you nodding or stepping down to the cabins in the back of the alley? I
also support what Jay said that the front door needs to face Main Street to
give it the presence of the entry. I am also OK with the five foot variance.
Sallie said she likes breaking the two buildings up and having the little
cabins between the spaces. There is more breathing room. The entrance is
fine and the garage and variance are OK also. The building does seem a
little top heavy. I can support Option A.
6
P32
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF AUGUST 15, 2012
Willis said Option A has the best site plan. Site lines enhance the reading of
the resources which is what the site plan is about here. The parking and
garage are not a issue. I am also fine with the entry and the width of the
building has extensively been researched. I am fine with the front door
because it is read from both Main Street and P Street. Where the door is
located is not critical because it is not likely to be read at all. The entry is
clearly marked as a one story element.
Nora said she feels the building is too close to the cabins and doesn't honor
the cabins enough. This is now a house and not a social hall so I cannot
support the setback variance. It has a front door and should also have some
front space. The garage is OK.
Ann said the entrance needs to be restudied and come off Main Street. The
door looks more like a back door rather than a front door (guideline 7.9) I
cannot support the setback. Guideline 7.14 talks about stepping the building
down to the historic resources. The garage and parking are fine. By moving
the residence to the west it reinforces the historic use of the cabins which
was a motor court accessed off Main Street.
Patrick said he can support Option B. Since it is a residence my
recommendation would be to move the chimney around the corner and put
windows on the front and take the overhang off. The front door and
windows should be on Main Street.
Response to comments:
Arthur said the front door is clearly articulated off Main Street. Whether it
is perpendicular or parallel is not significant. That said it is an easy plan
change. The Rabi specifically requested an entrance off the side street. You
can't stop in front of the building on Main Street because there is a bus stop
there. The reality is that you will enter from the alley and side street. We
consciously did not put a lot of glass on Main Street because there are
bedroom there. There are a lot of buildings on Main Street that are 12 to 15
feet apart.
Alan said they will look at the requirement for the playground so that state
standards are met.
Willis said you need to look at the site lines. This is not just a house it is a
parsonage and a synagogue. It is a parsonage that is attached to a particular
7
P33
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF AUGUST 15, 2012
organization. Submitting the sanctuary and parsonage separately makes it
difficult to read wholly and holistically. The reality is that you will enter off
Third Street.
Nora suggested we continue the meeting to a date certain.
MOTION: Patrick made the motion to continue to restudy the setback and
restudy of moving the house west closer to the sanctuary. Restudy the front
Main Street fagade which includes the chimney, door, windows, and fagade
overhang. Motion died for lack of a second.
MOTION: Jay moved to approve resolution #20 for 435 W. Main Option B
with restudy of the roof line over the dining room and that the front door
faces Main Street. Motion second by Ann.
Amended motion: Willis amended the motion to approve Option A, second
by Sallie. Vote on amendment only. Patrick, no; Jamie, no, Jay, no; Ann,
no; Nora, no; Willis, yes; Sallie, yes. Motion failed 5-2.
Vote on entire motion with the conditions in staff memo.
Patrick, yes; Jamie, no; Jay, yes; Ann, yes; Nora, no;Willis, yes; Sallie, no.
Motion carried'4-3
135 E. Cooper Ave. work session — no minutes
Deborah Quinn, assistant city attorney said a work session is not a recorded
public meeting and it is basically getting opinions of members of the board
on a proposal that you place in front of them. There can be no approvals and
the applicant cannot rely on anything that is said by the commission as a
whole or by any individual commissioner. There is nothing that can be
stated up front that you can rely formally on. Certainly you are trying to get
impressions and input and you need to understand that work sessions are not
for making final determinations.
MOTION: Ann moved to adjourn; second by Jay. All in favor, motion
carried.
Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
8
�r
FE_1XH1B1TTJ-
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE COD
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
-�r, W. Wd �,) ,Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBL C HEARING DATE:
t, lD D,��SD►4�1 f_2 20�
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
I, 1-A-5,"A� ` (name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen(15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
Posting of notice. By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof
materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six
(26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in
height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing
and was continuously visible from the,-day of , 20]- to
and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted
notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of
property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A
copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
(Continued on next page)
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.
Signk4e
5f
The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this Zl day
of , 200 Z&, by �JA U L 2 VQ X r
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 435 W.MAIN STREET,ASPEN JEWISH
COMMUNITY CENTER-FINAL MAJOR
DEVELOPMENT WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
�
1
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing
will be held on Wednesday,April 10,2013,at a
special meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m.before the ^
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission,Council My commission expires: 4 0(01
Chambers,City Hall,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,to
consider an application submitted by Jewish Re-
source Center Chabad of Aspen,435 W.Main
Street,Aspen,CO,81611,represented by Alan
Richman Planning Services and Arthur Chabon Ar-
chitects. The subject property is legally described Oil
as 435 W.Main Street,Lots A-I,Block 38,City and otary Public ••
Townsite of Aspen,Parcel ID#2735-124-81-100, ����.••'• ••.�/�
and the request is for Final Major Development de-
sign review of a proposed parsonage to be con-
structed on the eastern portion of the site. For
further information,contact Amy Guthrie at the City i JI�C � ••j
of Aspen Community Development Department,
130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO,(970)429.2758, LOT �
amy.guthrie @cityofaspen.com.
a/Ann Mullins,Chair s�•�• •f•Q•�
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission •.'•••«..•••'•�
Publish in The Aspen Times on March 21.2013, ATTACHMENTS AS APPLIC :67 C
.'UBLICATION
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
• LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED
BY MAIL
• APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
'3 S Q",%k v,.&•- S ,Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
2013
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin n )
I, � ��'""''� (name, please print)
being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally
certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
JPosting 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 post d at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing
on the ca. day of VVvkIL� , 20 , to and including the date and time
of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community
Development Department, which contains the information described in Section
26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to
the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage
prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the
property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of
property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they
appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A
copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto.
Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach,
summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as
required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the
neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and
a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
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, SPAs or PUDs that
create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially
Planned Areas, 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.
Signature
The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged,,�efo;e me this 5 day
of A'D»L , 2013, by X33 '" �(..((�
_ WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
CAITLIN STROTHER DOYLE
NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: 20t(,
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY ID 20124057288
L
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPT.4,2016
( ;m X�J
Notary Public
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:
• COPYOFTHEPUBLICATION
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN
• LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BY MAIL
• APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 435 W. MAIN STREET, ASPEN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER- FINAL MAJOR
DEVELOPMENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 10, 2013,
at a special meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission,
Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by
Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen, 435 W. Main Street, Aspen, CO, 81611, represented by
Alan Richman Planning Services and Arthur Chabon Architects. The subject property is legally
described as 435 W. Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 38, City and Townsite of Aspen, Parcel ID#
2735-124-81-100, and the request is for Final Major Development design review of a proposed
parsonage to be constructed on the eastern portion of the site. For further information, contact
Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen,
CO, (970)429.2758, amy.guthrie @cityofaspen.com.
s/Ann Mullins,Chair
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on March 21,2013
City of Aspen Account
Easy Peel® Labels i ♦ Bend along line to AVERY® 51600
Use Avery®Template 51600 j Feed Paper expose Pop-up EdgeTM Q 1
320 W MAIN LLC 331 W BLEEKER LLC 501 WEST MAIN LLC
2020 CALAMOS CT 2727 ALLEN PKY STE 1400 532 E HOPKINS AVE
NAPERVILLE, IL 60563 HOUSTON,TX 77019 ASPEN, CO 81611-1818
ALLAN ANDREW S ALPINE BANK ASPEN FAMILY HOLDINGS LLC
154 MARION ST ATTN ERIN WIENCEK 137 WESTVIEW DR
DENVER, CO 80218 PO BOX 10000 ASPEN, CO 81611
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602
ASPEN FSP ABR LLC ASPEN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ASPEN MESA STORE LLC
11921 FREEDOM DR#950 A COLO NON PROFIT CORPORATION C/O ASPEN BLUE SKY HOLDINGS LLC
RESTON, VA 20190 311 W MAIN ST PO BOX 8238
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC INC BAILEY RYAN TANNER MCKENZIE TRST BLOCKER LAURA G
617 E COOPER AVE 50% PO BOX 9213
ASPEN, CO 81611 BAKER& HOSTETLER LLP ASPEN, CO 81612
303 E 17TH AVE#1100
DENVER, CO 80203
BOOKBINDER FISHDANCE& DELANEY BRAFMAN STUART& LOTTA BEA TRST BRIEN ALICE
LLC 5630 WISCONSIN AVE#401 110 NEALE AVE
164 LITTLE PARK RD CHEVY CHASE, MD 20815 ASPEN, CO 81611
GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81503
BROOKS NORMAN A& LESLEE S BROWDE DAVID A CARINTHIA CORP
16311 VENTURA BLVD#690 604 QUAKER RD 45 E LUPINE DR
ENCINO, CA 91436 CHAPPAQUA, NY 10514 ASPEN, CO 81611
CARTER RICHARD P CHAMBERS PETE CHRISTIANA ASPEN CONDOMINIUM
PO BOX 2932 PO BOX 220 OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC
TELLURIDE, CO 81435 CABIN JOHN, MD 20818 678 COUNTY RD 127
GLENWOOD SRPINGS, CO 81601
CHRISTIANA UNIT D101 LLC CITY OF ASPEN CLEANER EXPRESS
795 LAKEVIEW DR ATTN FINANCE DEPT 435 E MAIN ST
MIAMI BEACH, FL 33140 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611
ASPEN, CO 81611
CLICK JANE COCHENER CAROLINE A TRUST#5 COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA
333 W MAIN ST#2A 7309 EAST 21 ST ST#120 PO BOX 1927
ASPEN, CO 81611 WICHITA, KS 67206 CARSON CITY, NV 89702
CORONA VANESSA LOPEZ CORTALE ITA CRETE ASSOCIATES LP
PO BOX 3670 205 S MILL ST#112 1630 LOCUST ST#200
ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
Etiquettes faciles a peter i A Repliez a la hachure afin de wvvw.avery.com
Sens de
Utilisez le gabarit AVERY"51600 j chargement reveler le rebord Pop-upmc 1-800-GO-AVERY 1
Easy Peel®Labels i ♦ o Bend along line to Q AVERY® 51600
Use Avery®Template 51600 Feed Paper - expose Pop-up Edge"" � 1
CRETE ASSOCIATES LP CROWLEY SUE MITCHELL REV TRUST DAHL W ROBERT& LESLIE A
PO BOX 1524 409 S GREENWOOD AVE 83 PECKSLAND RD
BRYN MAWR, PA 19010 COLUMBIA, MO 65203 GREENWICH,CT 06831
DESTINATION RESORT MGMT INC DILLON RAY IV DRATCH KATE TYCHER 2012 TRUST
PO BOX B2 PO BOX 10543 ROSELAND PROPERTY CO/ BARBARA
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81612 MASCERA
233 CANOE BROOK RD
SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078
EMERICK SHELLEY W FARR CHARLOTTE FAT CITY HOLDINGS LLC
2449 5TH ST 306 MCCORMICK AVE 402 MIDLAND PARK PL
BOULDER, CO 80304 CAPITOLA, CA 95010 ASPEN, CO 81611
FINE FREDRIC N &SONDRA FISERV ISS& CO FRANKEL KATHY TRUST
412 MARINER DR FBO ROBERTA N LOWENSTEIN PO BOX 33
JUPITER, FL 33477 PO BOX 741626 UNION PIER, MI 49129
BOYNTON BEACK, FL 33474
FRIAS PROPERTIES OF ASPEN LLC GANT CONDO ASSC GARMISCH LODGING LLC
730 E DURANT 610 S WESTEND ST 110 W MAIN ST
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 816112142 ASPEN, CO 81611
GILDENHORN MICHAEL S 50% GOLDENBERG STEPHEN R& CHERYL J GOLDMAN DIANNE L
5008 BALTON RD 430 W HOPKINS AVE PO BOX 518
BETHESDA, MD 20816 ASPEN, CO 81611 FAIRFIELD, CT 06824
GUNNING JANINE L GUNNING RALPH H & H PROPERTIES LLLP
PO BOX 11705 PO BOX 11912 807 W MORSE BLVD STE 101
ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 WINTER PARK, FL 32789-3725
HAVENS THERESA A HAYMAN JULES ALAN HOWELL DANIEL B& MARY H
PO BOX 1890 9238 POTOMAC SCHOOL DR 3701 PALMA CEIA CT
CARBONDALE, CO 81623 POTOMAC, MD 20854 TAMPA, FL 33629
HUCKABEE CHRISTOPHER M HUDGENS ROBYN HY-MOUNTAIN TRANSPORTATION INC
4521 S HULEN 3220 401 W BLEEKER ST 111 C AABC
FORT WORTH,TX 76109 ASPEN, CO 816111225 ASPEN, CO 81611
JACOBY FAMILY LP JOHNSTON FAMILY TRUST KARP MICHAEL
1402 DUVAL DR 2018 PHALAROPE 1630 LOCUST ST#200
GODFREY, IL 62035 COSTA MESA, CA 92626 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103
Eticluettes faciles a peter A Repliez a la hachure afin de www.avery.com
Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®5160® chSens de
ent reveler le rebord Pop-upmc � 1-800-GO-AVERY 1
Easy Peel®Labels i ♦ Bend along line to i a AVERY® 5160®
Use Avery®Template 51600 j Feed Paper �� expose Pop-up EdgeTM 1
KASPAR THERESA D KENDIG ROBERT&SUE KIRVIDA KATHY L REV TRUST
PO BOX 1637 PO BOX 4649 PO BOX 518
ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 LINDSTROM, MN 55045
LEVY ROBERT I LORENTZEN AMY L MACDONALD BETTE S TRUST
2099 NW PINE TREE WY 26 GREENVIEW WAY 15 BLACKMER RD
STUART, FL 34994 MONTCLAIR, NJ 070432532 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110
I
MARTEN RANDOLPH MCCARTY DANIEL L MITTEL EUROPA PROPERTIES LLC
129 MARTEN ST PO BOX 4051 PO BOX 3678
MONDOVI,WI 54755 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612
MOLLER DIANE T MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC MURPHY JULIANNE RUTH &WILLIAM
1710 MIRA VISTA AVE PO BOX 5109 REES
SANTA BARBARA, CA 93103 ASPEN, CO 81612 9833 SHORELINE
LONGMONT, CO 80504
NAVIAS CRAIG& ESTHER TRUST NEWTON BARBARA NORTH AND SOUTH ASPEN LLC
PO BOX 4390 PO BOX 9410 200 S ASPEN ST
ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611
NORTHWAY LLC PERRY EMILY V PRICE DOUGLAS
106 S MILL ST#202 700 12TH AVE S UNIT 807 PO BOX 220
ASPEN, CO 81611 NASHVILLE, TN 372033372 CABIN JOHN, MD 20818
QUINN CHRISTINE RAINBOW CONNECTION PROPERTIES RICKEL DAVID
333 W BLEEKER ST LLC 275 GOLDENROD DR
ASPEN, CO 81611 4475 NORTH OCEAN BLVD#43A LANDSDALE, PA 19446
DELRAY BEACH, FL 33483
RISCOR INC ROSENTHAL DIANNE SAND CANYON CORP
2651 N HARWOOD ST#580 PO BOX 10043 501 W MAIN ST
DALLAS,TX 75201-1576 ASPEN, CO 81612-7311 ASPEN, CO 81611
SCHALL FAMILY TRUST 8/31/1998 SCOTT MARY HUGH SCRUGGS DAVID C&PHYLLIS R
3841 HAYVENHURST DR RUSSELL SCOTT III &CO LLC 365 RIVERBLUFF PL
ENCINO, CA 91436 5420 S QUEBEC ST#200 MEMPHIS,TN 38103
GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111
SEAL MARK SHEEHAN WILLIAM J SHERWIN ENTERPRISES LLC
PO BOX 9213 SHEEHAN NANCY E C/O JENNIFER SHERWIN
ASPEN, CO 81612 10 GOLF VIEW LN 1714 VISTA ST
FRANKFORT, IL 60423 DURHAM, NC 27701
Etiquettes faciles a peler i A Repliez a la hachure afin de wvvw.avery.com
Utilisez le abarit AVERY®5160® Sens de reveler le rebord Po u Mc 1-800-GO-AVERY
9 j chargement p" p j j
Easy Peel® Labels i ♦ Bend along ine to n
Use Avery®Template 51600 Feed Paper expose Pop-up AVERY 5160
p EdgeT"' V ® 1
SILVERSTEIN PHILIP SLTM LLC SMITH ANDREW C& DONNA G
SILVERSTEIN ROSALYN 106 S MILL ST#202 3622 SPRINGBROOK ST
25 KNOLLS CRESCENT ASPEN, CO 81611 DALLAS,TX 75205
BRONX, NY 10463
SNYDER GARY STASPEN LLP STUART DANIEL S&TAMARA B
8324 BROODSIDE RD 1180 PEACHTREE ST NE PO BOX 3274
ELKINS PARK, PA 19027 ATLANTA, GA 303093521 ASPEN, CO 81612
TAD PROPERTIES LLC TEMPKINS HARRY&VIVIAN TOLER MELANIE S TRUST
PO BOX 9978 605 LINCOLN RD#301 6400 S CLIPPINGER DR
ASPEN, CO 81612 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139 CINCINNATI, OH 45243
TOMS CONDO LLC TORNARE RENE &SYLVIA TUCKER LUCY LEA
C/O BRANDT FEIGENBAUM PC 308 W HOPKINS AVE PO BOX 1480
132 MIDLAND AVE#4 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611
BASALT, CO 81621
TWIN COASTS LTD TYCHER DANA 2012 TRUST ULLR CONDO LLC
433 PLAZA REAL#275 ROSELAND PROPERTY CO/BARBARA 6450 AVENIDA CRESTA
BOCA RATON, FL 33432 MASCERA LA JOLLA, CA 92037
233 CANOE BROOK RD
SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078
ULLR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION VERNER DANIEL A& MERYLE WAGNER HOLDINGS CORP LLC
600 E HOPKINS#304 2577 NW 59TH ST C/O BILL POSS
ASPEN, CO 81611 BOCA RATON, FL 33496 605 E MAIN ST
ASPEN, CO 81611
WARBLE ERIC WENDT ROBERT E II WERLIN LAURA B TRUST
0124 SPRING PL 350 MT HOLYOKE AVE 2279 PINE ST
EDWARDS, CO 81632 PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94115
WHIPPLE JOHN TAGGART WINER CAROL G 50% YOUNG PAUL III FAMILY TRUST
121 S GALENA ST 6740 SELKIRK DR 413 W HOPKINS AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611 BETHESDA, MD 20817 ASPEN, CO 816111603
Etiquettes faciles a peler ; A Repliez a la hachure afin de ; www.avery.com i
Sens de
Utilisez le gabarlt AVERY@ 51600 chargement reveler le rebord Pop-upm' 1-800-GO-AVERY j
n
F
r
� r —
a R{
N
S
„
,,. :,._......,, 3 ���'. "�✓� ���'-,„" rya �; ,.,- -.---�----�^'--�..-'
milli
Main St-Aspen,
i this pr rtv �
n , sts Final Majo r�J�
eatclesian re,,/
,
,
,w
Y
. w
- - •- „' �pfi yip .� .
t ,.r✓_ a s' d �, i � �x�4'' P'uC il �r !I !i �' •,s;'�"'� �?„„.,T, -x... _ t',rn`
,
EXHIBIT
Ms.Meta Barton �C�l nJn�` gee)
4475 N Ocean Blvd Apt 43A
Delray Beach,FL 33483 RECEIVED
APR 8 2013
i-fOJ U}, 1A6p U 00-0-, CITY OF ASPEN
CQMMUNP DEVELOPMENT
L'GrPL4 + vct)::!�3 P)�s�k ca 09') -�n 010-
R� : �r�� � �rn�► cl��.onvn��
Eli 4&) 111j. s in
,(') ,00 �.
XdA i
va��
�e PA m i ' G rr4U Cc�1nv�aJ eY �r p v A64 f
1 r ' 3zCw S 1'1
�--
�
' .
�- ^A c�clAi C' -
AI
o-p Jam,
,� A)Aof\fi' cJ- PA P-S cv fF r cans d
RSPB}N:N U%.'
-
RBt��-ESTATE: ; ~
COMPANY ti
QUIET CoMFUlff
•Ttt� .
III
1
�A?t
OMPU�, #2
SCOTT COND nium is
this garden whether you+re inside
m in the winter, lexes. rounds
Cool in the summer and
est residentiaCO�
situated in one of Aspe tlo yo 11 enjoy the beautifully landscal
s on the private-pa y
or dining. , views.
and surprising
205 SOUTIi MILL STABBT
ASPeN,COLORADO 81611
TBLIIPH0N1a 970 920.2006
PACS+MILB 970 925-3531
W W W.ASPBNBXPBRTS:COh+
n
LEGAL DESC
RIp'pION: Unit 2, Scott Building Subdivision, a Condominium
BEDROOMS: 2
BATHS: 2
SQUARE FEET: 1007
ZONING: ~R6
PRICE: $395,000 -
TERMS: Cash
YEAR BUILT: 1973
HEAT: Baseboard/Hot Water
Ir1TERIOR FEATURES: ♦ Generous Spaces
♦ Entry Foyer
♦ Common Laundry
♦ Fireplace
♦ Beautiful Landscaping
EXTERIOR FEATiJRFS ♦ Off-Street Parking (2) f u
♦ Private Patio
♦ Heated Walkway
ASSOCIATION DUES:
$1,300 quarter
ROOF: Rubber Membrane
PROPERTY TAXES:
$1,414.62 (1996)
PAILS #: 31885
LISTING AGENT: Greg Baker
Subject to errors, omissions, prior sale and withdrawal without notice
Note:U6 information eootained bell,,while provided by reliable sources,is not guaranteed.
P35
a
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
THRU: Amy Guthrie,Historic Preservation Officer
FROM: Justin Barker, Planner
RE: 1006 E. Cooper Avenue- Final Major Development and Variance, Public
Hearing
DATE: April 10, 2013
SUMMARY: ,1006 E. Cooper Avenue is a 4,372 square foot lot that currently contains a
remodeled Victorian home and an outbuilding. The property owner has received HPC
Conceptual approval to demolish all non-historic construction on the site, move the house to the
east and construct a new addition. Final review approval is needed.
HPC is also asked to address two variances not covered at Conceptual. The amount of
demolition proposed is over 40%, causing the project to be considered new development,
triggering the Residential Design Standards Secondary Mass requirement. The applicant is
requesting a variance from this requirement. Additionally, the applicant is requesting a 160
square foot floor area bonus.
Staff recommends approval with conditions.
APPLICANT: BMD Aspen LLC,represented by 1 Friday Design Collaborative.
PARCEL ID:2737-182-32-004.
ADDRESS: 1006 E. Cooper Avenue, Lot L and the West 10' of Lot M, Block 34, City and
Townsite of Aspen.
ZONING: RMF,Residential Multi-Family.
MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL)
The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Final level, is as follows. Staff reviews
the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the
design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is 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 of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve
1
P36
with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to
make a decision to approve or deny.
Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual
Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. 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) andlor 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.
Staff Response: Final review focuses on landscape plan, lighting, fenestration, and selection
of new materials. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as"Exhibit A."
Overall staff supports the proposal and finds it to be consistent with the relevant guidelines. The
demolition and new construction help define the historic structure without overpowering it.
One of the conditions for approval at Conceptual (minutes attached'as Exhibit B) was to provide
further information about the design and history of the chimney on the west side of the historic
house. Through further study and site investigation, the applicant believes the chimney was
likely original, serving as the primary heating and cooking source for the historic house. The
stack sizing has been revised within the drawings to more accurately reflect the correct
dimensions. The applicant was also required to restudy the link between the new and old
construction, making it a full 10 feet long. This has been accomplished.
Secondary Mass Requirement
The proposal includes demolition of over 40% of the existing structures, causing the project to be
considered new construction from a zoning perspective. The Residential Design Standards
require all new single-family structures to locate at least ten percent (10%) of their total square
footage in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building or linked to it by a
subordinate linking element. An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design
Standards shall demonstrate and the deciding board shall find that the variance, if granted would:
a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which.
the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the
context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of
the proposed development with adjacent structures,the immediate neighborhood
setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is
warranted; or
b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints.
The intent of the standard is to respect the scale of Aspen's historical homes by creating new
homes which are similar in massing. If this was simply an addition being added onto the back of
the historic house,the secondary mass would not be required. The applicant could leave the non-
historic additions on the house to avoid this requirement, but is choosing to restore the historic
house to an accurate form by removing all non-historic elements. Staff believes that the proposal
2
P37
meets the intent of the standard by preserving the scale and improving the definition of the
historic house. A variance from the secondary mass standard is recommended.
Floor Area Bonus
As part of the Conceptual review, HPC was in support.of providing a Floor Area Bonus that
would become necessary as part of the revised/lengthened connector link. The revised plans
include the 10' connector required as a Conceptual condition of approval. The review criteria for
HPC in determining approval for floor area bonus is Land Use Code Section 26.415.110.17. Floor
area bonus:
1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of
allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the
bonus, it must be demonstrated that:
a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines;
b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a
manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building;
c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance;
d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic
building's form,materials or openings;
e) The construction materials are of the highest quality;
f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building;
g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or
h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained.
2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole
discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and
its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate
multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor
area.
Staff believes that granting a floor area bonus would allows the project to satisfy the condition
from Conceptual to the minimum extent. There is also substantial restoration work involved in
this project that revives the importance and integrity of the historic structure. Staff recommends
granting a 160 square foot floor area bonus.
Landscaping
There are minimal landscaping.changes proposed. The existing poured concrete entry path will
be replaced with flagstone pavers aligned with the entry of the relocated house. On the west side
of the historic house and connector will be an-at grade patio using the same pavers as the front
entry path. A 42"cedar lattice fence and spruce shrubs are proposed to partially screen the patio
from Cooper.Avenue. Only one existing tree is planned for removal on the north end of the lot.
The Parks.Department has stated the tree is below the size that requires a permit. Staff finds the
proposed landscaping to be minimal and consistent with the guidelines.
3
P38
The applicant proposes to replace the existing fences on the property with a new unified metal
fence. The twisted wire fence along the south and west property lines is an ornamental fence
type from the early 1900s. The fence could potentially use some restoration work, but is
considered historic and should remain in place.
Fenestration
At Conceptual, it was mentioned that the history of existing and proposed windows and doors on
the Victorian need to be clarified. The upper floor window that is on the front of the house now,
and shown on the proposed drawings, does not appear in the 1980 photo below. Also, one of the
windows on the east facade is currently horizontal and in the 2000 photo below, but proposed as
vertical to match the other east facade window.
i c ;
'.a
■r= = -
Mw
.y
1006 E. Cooper—1980 1006 E. Cooper-2000.
The historic house will already be undergoing significant alteration by removing the additions.
All siding will be replaced, allowing a view of original framing during construction. Both of
these windows, as well as the double hung at the porch, appear to be non-historic. Review in the
field is needed to confirm all window alterations to comply with the following guidelines:
3.2 Preserve the position,number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall.
❑ Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate,as is adding a
new window opening.This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-
to-void is a character-defining feature.
❑ Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls.
❑ Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive
a larger window on primary facades.
3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
❑ If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-hung, or at a
minimum, appear to be so.Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes.
❑ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades.
3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
❑ Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger
window is inappropriate.
❑ Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered.
4
P39
Lighting
The only proposed lighting for the project will be puck-style lighting located in the ceiling area
of the historic porch and walkout areas for the master bedroom and dining areas. These are
downcast light fixtures that will have minimal impact. No landscape lighting has been proposed.
Staff has no issues with the proposed lighting.
Mechanical
Most of the exterior mechanical equipment is currently located on the rear addition and is not
visible from the street. A finalized mechanical plan has not been provided yet. In order to
maintain a low visual impact, no mechanical equipment should be attached to the historic house
unless it is on the north wall and necessary to the function of the building.
Materials
The applicant has proposed new siding to match existing conditions. Currently, the historic
house contains vertical siding under the porch and large clapboard siding around the rest of the
house,which are most likely not original. The plans indicate that the front porch columns will be
custom milled painted wood columns. It is unclear if this is all of the posts or just the left one.
The middle and right posts appear to be in good condition and should not be replaced. More
information is needed on the siding and posts.
Horizontal wood siding is proposed for the one-story portions of the new addition. This will be
similar to the existing horizontal siding on the historical house, but will be flush instead of
lapped to differentiate from the historical house. The one-story portions of the new addition and
the historic house are intended to be painted with matching colors.
The two-story mass is proposed using a solar material wrap that will read similar to traditional
board and batten vertical siding. The width will be approximately 6"and will be a darker color,
due to solar heat gain efficiencies. Staff finds the proposed materials for the new construction to
be acceptable for the proposal and are consistent with the guidelines.
The HPC may:
• approve the application,
• approve the application with conditions,
• disapprove the application, or
• continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny.
5
P40
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with the following conditions:
1. A 7' reduction in the rear yard setback requirement was approved at Conceptual Review.
2. At building permit, provide a $30,000 letter of credit or cashier's check to insure the safe
relocation of the Victorian building, as well as a plan for protection of the building from a
housemover or structural engineer.
3. HPC grants a variance from the Secondary Mass requirement of the Residential Design
Standards.
4. HPC grants an FAR bonus of 160 square feet.
5. The twisted wire fence shall remain in place.
6. Remove the upper story window on the front fagade.
7. The horizontal east fagade window shall be removed or made vertical based on historic
evidence found during construction.
8. No mechanical equipment may be placed on the front or sides of the historic structure.
9. Provide more information about the historic structure siding and front porch posts.
10. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development
plan vested for a period of three (3)years from the date of issuance of a development
order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews
necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance,the City Clerk
shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a
site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this
Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development
plan, and the creation of a vested property right,valid for a period of three (3) years,
pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado
Revised Statutes,pertaining to the following described property: 1006 E. Cooper Avenue,
Lot L and the West 10' of Lot M,Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of
Pitkin, State of Colorado.
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews
and approvals required by this approval of the general rules,regulations and ordinances or
the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this
approval.
6
P41
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial
review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin
to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required
under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the
Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter.
Exhibits:
A. Relevant Guidelines
B. HPC Meeting Minutes—September 12, 2012
C. Application
Exhibit A
Fences
1.1 Preserve original fences.
❑ Replace only those portions that are deteriorated beyond repair. Replacement elements should match
the existing fence.
1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original.
❑ Any fence which is visible from a public right-of-way must be built of wood or wrought iron. Wire
fences also may be considered.
❑ A wood picket fence is an appropriate replacement in most locations. A simple wire or metal fence,
similar to traditional "wrought iron,"also may be considered.
❑ Chain link is prohibited and solid "stockade" fences are only allowed in side and rear yards.
1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views into the yard
from the street.
❑ A fence that defines a front yard is usually low to the ground and "transparent" in nature.
❑ On residential properties, a fence which is located forward of the front building facade may not be
taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see the City.of Aspen's "Residential
Design Standards".)
❑ A privacy fence may be used in back yards and along alleys, but not forward of the front facade of a
building.
❑ Note that using no fencing at all is often the best approach.
❑ Contemporary interpretations of traditional fences should be compatible with the historic context.
1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally.
❑ Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment.
1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street-facing
facade.
❑ This setback should be significant enough to provide a sense of open space between homes.
1.6. Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible
with the historic context.
❑ A side yard fence is usually taller than its front yard counterpart. It also is less transparent. A side
yard fence may reach heights taller than front yard fences (up to six feet), but should incorporate
transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts.
❑ Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of
a solid plank fence when seen head on.
❑ Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing, on the upper portions of the fence.
7
P42
Walkways
1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a
rehabilitation project.
❑ This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a
"semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces
beyond.
❑ Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways
are discouraged,except where it is needed to avoid a tree.
❑ Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete,wood
or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles.
Private Yard
1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic
structures.
❑ The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not
covered with paving,for example.
1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site,particularly landmark trees and shrubs.
❑ Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged
or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department.
❑ If a tree must be removed as.part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a large
enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project.
1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs.
❑ Retaining historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways is encouraged.
1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the
site.
Li Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of
mature growth.
❑ Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent.
❑ Do not cover grassy areas with gravel,rock or paving materials.
Treatment of Windows
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
❑ Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills,
heads,jambs,moldings, operation and groupings of windows.
❑ Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them,whenever conditions permit.
❑ Preserve the original glass,when feasible.
3.2 Preserve the position,number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall.
❑ Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding
a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of
solid-to-void is a character-defining feature.
c3 Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls.
❑ Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive
a larger window on primary facades.
Replacement Windows
3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade.
❑ Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively affect the
integrity of a structure.
3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its.design.
8
P43
❑ If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-hung, or at a
minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes.
❑ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades.
3.5 In a replacement window,use materials that appear similar to the original.
❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades.
However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will
match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish.
3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
❑ Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger
window is inappropriate.
❑ Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered.
Preserving Building Locations and Foundations
9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation.
❑ On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a
modest miner's cottage is discouraged because it would be out of character.
❑ Where a stone foundation was used historically, and is to be replaced, the replacement should be
similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints.
New Additions
10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time.
❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building,while also remaining visually
compatible with these earlier features.
❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a
differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to
help define a change from old to new construction.
10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of
the primary building.
❑ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials.
Color
14.3 Keep color schemes simple.
❑ Using one base color for the building is preferred.
❑ Using only one or two accent colors is also encouraged, except where precedent exists for using more
than two colors with some architectural styles.
14.4 Coordinating the entire building in one color scheme is usually more successful than working
with a variety of palettes.
❑ Using the color scheme to establish a sense of overall composition for the building is strongly
encouraged.
14.5 Develop a color scheme for the entire building front that coordinates all the facade elements.
❑ Choose a base color that will link the entire building face together. For a commercial building, it can
tie signs, ornamentation, awnings and entrances together. On residences, it can function similarly. It
can also help your building relate better to others in the district.
❑ The complexity of the accent colors should be appropriate to the architectural style of the building.
❑ Doors may be painted a bright accent color, or they may be left a natural wood finish. Historically,
many of the doors would have simply had a stain applied.
❑ Window sashes are also an excellent opportunity for accent color.
❑ Brilliant luminescent or"day-glo"colors are not appropriate.
Lighting
9
P44
14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used
traditionally.
❑ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by
the HPC.
❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence.
14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting.
❑ Unshielded,high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted.
❑ Shield lighting associated with service areas,parking lots and parking structures.
L3 Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling
the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night.
❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light.
❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of
buildings.
❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures.For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area.
14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building.
❑ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light
onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights
which direct light-only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged.
❑ Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the
property or into public rights-of-way.
On-going Maintenance of Historic Properties
14.9 Use the gentlest means possible to clean the surface of materials and features.
❑ Perform a test patch (in an inconspicuous place) to make sure the cleaning method will not damage
the surface. Many procedures can have an unanticipated negative effect upon building materials and
result in accelerated deterioration or a loss of character.
❑ Harsh cleaning methods, such as sandblasting, can damage the historic materials, make them
vulnerable to moisture, accelerate deterioration and change their appearance. Such procedures are
inappropriate.
❑ If cleaning is necessary, a low pressure water wash is preferred. Chemical cleaning may be
considered if a test patch is first conducted to determine safety.
❑ Also see technical rehabilitation literature published by the National Park Service and available
through the Aspen Community Development Department.
14.10 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing4n, consolidating or
otherwise reinforcing the material.
❑ Avoid the removal of damaged materials that can be repaired.
❑ Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be
considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be used.
14.11 Plan repainting carefully.
❑ Note that frequent repainting of trim materials may cause a buildup of paint layers that obscures
architectural details. When this occurs, consider stripping paint layers to retrieve details. However, if
stripping is necessary, use the gentlest means possible, being careful not to damage architectural
details and finishes.
❑ Remember good preparation is key to successful repainting but also the buildup of old paint is an
important historic record of the building. The removal of old paint, by the gentlest means possible,
should be undertaken only if necessary to the success of the repainting.Remember that old paint is of
very good quality and is enviable in today's painting world.
❑ Old paint may contain lead. Precautions should be taken when sanding or scraping is necessary.
14.12 Provide a weather-protective finish to wood surfaces.
❑ The rustic bare-wood look is not a part of the heritage of the historic districts or individual landmark
properties.
10
P45
❑ Painted surfaces are most appropriate. Stains may be accepted in combination with materials that
give a well-finished appearance.Use water seal to preserve the porch deck.
❑. Rustic finishes will not be approved.
Mechanical Equipment&Service Areas
14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street.
❑ When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with commercial and
multifamily developments.
❑ This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks.
❑ Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists.
14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way.
❑ Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a
negative visual impact.
❑. Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact.
Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of
the building itself.
o . Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges.
❑ A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not
create a negative visual impact.
❑ Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or alley. Also
minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller satellite dishes and
mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant building facades or highly
visible roof planes.
❑ Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their
appearance by blending with their backgrounds.
14.16 Locate standpipes, meters and other service equipment such that they will not damage
historic facade materials.
❑ Cutting channels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric and is
inappropriate. Do not locate equipment on the front facade.
❑ If a channel must be cut, either locate it on a secondary facade,or place it low on the wall.
11
P46
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION IANCE APPROVAL OR )
GRANTING FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1006 E. COOPER AVENUE,LOT L AND THE WEST
10' OF LOT M,BLOCK 34, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN,
STATE OF COLORADO
RESOLUTION#_, SERIES OF 2013
PARCEL ID: 2737-182-32-004
WHEREAS, the applicant, BMD Aspen LLC, represented by 1 Friday Design Collaborative,
requested HPC Final Major Development and Variance approval for the property located at 1006
E. Cooper Avenue, Lot L and the West 10' of Lot M,Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure
shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a
designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted
to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures
established for their review;" and
WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review,the HPC must review the application, a staff
analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance
with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2
and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve,
disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information
necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHEREAS,the HPC may approve variances to the Residential Design Standard Variances
according to Section 26.410.020.D.2. HPC must make a finding that a variance:
a. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in
which the development is proposed and purpose of the particular standard. In
evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider
the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate
neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to
determine if the exception is warranted; or,
b. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints;
and
WHEREAS,the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable .
floor area for projects involving designated historic properties according to Section 26.415.110.F,
Floor Area Bonus. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that:
a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines;
1006 E. Cooper Avenue
HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2013
Page 1 of 3
P47
b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is
incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building;
c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance;
d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic
building's form, materials or openings;
e. The construction materials are of the highest quality;
f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building;
g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or
h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained.
Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole
discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project
and its ability,to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices; and,
WHEREAS, Justin Barker, in his staff report to HPC dated April 10, 2013, performed an
analysis of the application based on the standards and recommended approval with conditions;
and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on April 10, 2013, the Historic Preservation Commission
considered the' application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal
consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of to
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby grants Final Major Development and Variance approval for the property
located at 1006 E. Cooper Avenue with the following conditions:
1. A 7' reduction in the rear yard setback requirement was approved at Conceptual Review.
2. At building permit, provide a $30,000 letter of credit or cashier's check to insure the safe
relocation of the Victorian building, as well as a plan for protection of the building from a
housemover or structural engineer.
3. HPC grants a variance from the Secondary Mass requirement of the Residential Design
Standards.
4. HPC grants an FAR bonus of 160 square feet.
5. The twisted wire fence shall remain in place.
6. Remove the upper story window on the front fagade.
7. The horizontal east facade window shall be removed or made vertical based on historic
evidence found during construction.
8. No mechanical equipment may be placed on the front or sides of the historic structure.
9. Provide more information about the historic structure siding and front porch posts.
10. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development
plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development
order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this
approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise
exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be
recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development
1006 E. Cooper Avenue
HPC Resolution# Series of 2013
Page 2 of 3
P48
order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the
development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits).
Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in
the creation of a vested property right.
No later than fourteen(14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews
necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk
shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a
site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this
Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development
plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3)years,
pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado
Revised Statutes;pertaining to the following described property: 1006 E. Cooper
Avenue,Lot L and the West 10' of Lot M,Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen,
County of Pitkin, State of Colorado.
Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews
and approvals required by this approval of the general rules,regulations and ordinances or
the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this
approval.
The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial
review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin
to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required
under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the
Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of April,
2013.
Ann Mullins,Chair
Approved as to Form:
Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney
ATTEST:
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
1006 E. Cooper Avenue
HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2013
Page 3 of 3
L4
4
�9
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12.2012
Chairperson, Ann Mullins called the meeting to order at 5:00 P.M.
Commissioners in attendance: Nora Berko, Willis Pember, Jay Maytin,
Jamie McLeod, Patrick Segal, Sallie Golden and Jane Hills.
Staff present:
Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk
MOTION: Jay moved to approve the minutes of August 15th second by
Nora. All in favor, motion carried.
Public comments: Bill Wiener, 701 Gibson. It is important to preserve the
character of this community. The height issue is now before the public
because of what went on with council and the 28 feet. When we put extra
height on a building we are putting extra volume on it also. There are
circumstances that where a building needs to be taller than 28 feet. To do
that they need to mitigate. It is time to start looking at volume and that is
mass and it is changing the character. There is a formula that I can work on.
You would get setbacks that create urban feel with 1 ittle gardens.
Jay said our guidelines indicate no setbacks.
Bill said the character of this community has been little gardens, flowers and
a piece of sculpture and variety around town. This is not that kind of large
city where we need everything to the property line. Bill said he will do a
volume analysis.
1006 E. Cooper Ave. Conceptual Major Development, Demolition and
Variances, Public Hearing
Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney said the public notice is appropriate
and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I.
Amy said the parcel is 4, 372 square feet. It is in the RMF zone on E.
Cooper. There is a Victorian house on the site that has several additions to
it. The proposal is to strip back to the original miner's cottage with a gable
end facing Cooper Ave. One issue bringing the house back to the original is
that they will be crossing the threshold of demolishing more than 40% of the
structure and once you do that your project is considered new construction.
1
P50
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12,2012
They lose their right for the maximum FAR that they could have had if they
kept the additions and just added on. They will take an FAR penalty of 20%
on what they can build out. The proposal is within the 80% allowance 2,192
square feet and they are not currently asking for the FAR bonus. There has
been some discussion about TDR's but that is not on the table tonight. They
are requesting to demolish the shed in the back and we have no basis to think
it has historical significance. There is a request to move the Victorian
slightly on the site to allow for it to be free standing and up toward the front
of the property.. Right now it is slightly sequed on the property and there has
been some suggestion that it has been moved in the past. In terms of the
relocation there will be a lawn area all around the house. There is a
connector that hooks to an addition in the back. One of the concerns is that
the connector is 8 feet long rather than 10 feet long. The concern is
consistency and is it providing the separation that is really.needed. Staff
recommends ETC hold firm to the 10 foot requirement. The addition has a
simple gable end and is two stories tall and set well back. Part of the
addition is one story. It represents a quiet back drop behind the miner's
cottage which makes it successful. They are asking for a five foot variance
along the back depending how the connector discussion goes.
Patrick inquired about the sheds. Derek said there is a tuff shed from 1998
to 2000,the rear structure and the main house.
Staff is recommending that the connector extend by two feet and in order to
fit the whole project on the site they either need to move forward or back.
Jamie went over the issues to review: demolition of more than 40%; demo
of the non-historic shed and the tuff shed. Moving the Victorian and the
connector piece and the five foot variance for living space above the garage.
Derek Skalko, architect
Adam Gillespie, owner
Derek said there is the main cabin with several additions to it in the periods
of 1937 -194.2 and 1964-1969. In the rear there is a chicken coop. In the
neighborhood we have an historic house, a large condominium and an
apartment complex. It is a very diverse mix and not like the West End. The .
Moore family owned the house and it was moved once and possibly twice.
Originally the properly went back and west. Then the house was shifted in
the 60's when a foundation was added to it and it was shifted 6 degrees. The
2
P51
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12 2012
foundation is construction from the 60's or 70's. The chicken barn was
added in the 40's with a flat roof. In the 90's the tuff shed was added, an
awning and a new bathroom.
Derek presented colored elevations as to when the additions occurred. There
will be reconstruction of the west wall of the building. The addition that is
to be removed is impeding any kind of development. In our proposal we
also have a perpetual easement of 121 square feet that further reduces our
FAR by 18 square feet on the lot. The proposal is to move the building over
five feet which we feel is more historically accurate and also five feet
forward. We are creating a lot of open space around the property and
pushing most of the massing to the rear of the property. The structure is a
two story structure and the height of the condo building next door is 38 feet.
We could extend the building another two feet but would need a variance.
The existing shed is 7.5 feet off the property line. We have kept all our light
wells away from the side neighboring setback. We are not trying to
maximumize the square footage of the property. We have already taken a
20% reduction in FAR and we have a perpetual easement and a program that
works. With the extension of the breezeway we may ask for a bonus to
make sure we can achieve the FAR. If there is a way to do a TDR and use
that for some other parcel we would entertain that. The FAR bonus if given
would be for the project proposed and it wouldn't be for further
development on the site. We are keeping the scale within the context of the
miner's cottage. We want a clear definition of old and new and a simplistic
design.
Patrick said in the alley 20 years ago there were numerous chicken coops all
along that alley. The 6 degrees is probably a declamation error and they used
a magnetic north rather than a true north and forgot to compensate for that.
The mass to the rear is a good fit. The front yards are a character of Aspen
of that time.
Derek said there is a chimney inside but we have done no demolition at this
point and we aren't sure if it can be used as an indoor/outdoor application
for a fireplace.
Amy said they have no onsite parking right now and they could maintain
that legally. They are offering to ad one parking space.
3
P52
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12,2 12
Willis asked when the gable was added to the chicken coop? Derek said he
thinks it happened around 2002 or could have happened in the late 90's.
Willis asked what advantage did you achieve by demolishing more than 40%
of the structure? Derek said from a square footage point we hurt ourselves.
For our program we didn't have to use all of the square footage that an R6
lot would entail or grant us. The building size is 15 x 20. We want to work
with what is truly representative of the building in 1890.
Nora asked aesthetically what does it do by bringing the building forward
two feet. Derek said theoretically we could move forward 10 feet. The
applicant has concerns about having some space in the front yard so people
aren't looking in the windows.
Adam Gillespie said the property and neighboring properties are set back
and we wanted to keep it in context with what the neighborhood was and it
is a benefit to the property and the landscaping.
Chairperson, Ann Mullins opened the public comments. There were no
public comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was
closed.
Ann stated the issues:
Demolition and on-site relocation
Length of connector
Five foot variance for the building on the alley
FAR bonus
Jamie said she accepts everything except the five yard setback. The concern
is too.much two story on the alley.
Patrick said the idea fits with the character of the neighborhood. The
massing stepping down in the back is appropriate. Whether we do the five
foot variance or the eight foot connector is not a huge concern.
Jay said he is in agreement with everything including the bonus. Out of the
bonus I would give you the square footage that you need in order to make
the project work. I also feel the connector should be ten feet and pushed
back. The chimney should be restudied as it is big and bulky and
represented as brick.
4
P53
ASPEN-HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION - _ _ -
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 12 2012
Nora thanked the.applicant for doing a project that gets you the program that
you want without a lot of variances and square footage.
Jane said she likes the entire project and the applicant should be commended
for his appreciation in doing the project. I would like to be the monitor on
this project. The project is an outstanding attribute to that neighborhood.
Willis said he supports the project and the requests.
Sallie also said she supports the demolition and relocation. A longer length
would be acceptable and I support the FAR bonus which could be used to
get more length. The chimney should be restudied.
Ann said she would like to see what can be pulled away from the alley. The
connector should be extended to ten feet but I don't want to see the house
move forward because then it would be out of sink on either side. I am also
in support of the FAR bonus if needed.
Derek said all of the two story massing in contextual form is keeping it to
the back. There is a fireplace in the building and it will be restudied.
Willis said he like the chimney the way it is drawn out.
MOTION: Jay moved to approve the plan as proposed, resolution 21,with a
restudy of the chimney and a ten foot connector using the rear setback to
make up for the two feet. (7 foot variance) The demolition and relocation are
also approved. Motion second by Patrick.
Amy said you need to provide a ten foot setback and they are providing five
and now they are going to provide 3.
Roll call: Patrick, yes; Jay, yes; Willis, yes; Sallie, yes. Nora, no; Jamie, no;
Ann, no. Motion carried 4-3. Nora, Ann and Jamie did not want to see the
building go into the setback. They liked the building in its current location.
Derek clarified that the massing is to be taken toward the alley two feet and
we have a ten foot connector.
5
EXHIBIT
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
j�& P= . t/_Z/)G2L ,Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
&f2 L_ I 0 W 4r�D K)t�S DAV S9M 20J
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 I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060
(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner:
Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
Posting of notice.-. By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof
materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six
(26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in
height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing
and:was_oco#i nuously visible from the day of� 20t,3 ,, 20 , to
and inchiding 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)
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.
Si e
The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before e this 21 day
of 20A_�, by t-_ YA) l4• f
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 1006 E.COOPER AVENUE-FINAL MAJOR
DEVELOPMENT AND VARIANCES
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
will be hell on Wednesday,April 10,2013,at a
meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m.before the Aspen
Historic Preservation Commission,Council Cham-
bers,City Hall,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,to con-
sider an application submitted by BMD Aspen LLC, My commission expires:
Go Adam Gillespie,100 Elk Run Drive,Suite 129,
Basalt,CO,81621,represented by 1 Friday De-
sign Collaborative. The subject property is legally 1
described as 1006 E.Cooper Avenue,Lot L and
the West 10'of Lot M,Block 34,City and Townsite
of Aspen,PID#2737-182-32-004. The applicant -,-'
requests Final design approval. The proposal in- Lary Public
ubhc
cludes a request for a 160 square foot floor area
bonus and a variance from the Residential Design P; .,•t..' -
Guidelines Secondary Mass requirement.For fur-
ther information,contact Justin Barker at the City of
Aspen Community Development Department,130 �� ••t
S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO,(970)429.2797, ~< ,ACi
Justin.barkerOcityofaspen.com. �.O�,PN i Q
s/Ann Mullins,Chair t Q
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission r Q
[7311 in The Aspen Times on March 21,2013. ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE• �TgTE o p
• COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN)
• LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED
BY MAIL
• APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3
,
y
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060(E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
ICDC=> SST , Aspen, CO
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE:
wt`T�►.�� �Y 1 ,g wee t L 10-774 9201-3
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
County of Pitkin )
an;�7 cCnC;e72
(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:
X Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official
paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15)
days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto.
X Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the
Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof
materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six
(26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in
height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15)days prior to the public hearing
on the;?�_rqay of VVya-r-a-:" , 20!3, to and including the date and time
of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto.
X 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.
Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach,
summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as
required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the
neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and
a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto.
(continued on next page)
r
z
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, SPAs or PUDs that
create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially
Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement.
N�A Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any
way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this
Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be
made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or
otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal
description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of
real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the
proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning
agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing
on such amendments.
Signature
The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this ZVday
of r"A<C�A , 2013 , by Sk a i iLo
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
K. BURKE
NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: JU /U - /G
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY ID#20084033914
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCTOBER 16,2016
Notary Public
ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:
• COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIG1)
• LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED
BYMAIL
• APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE
AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24--65.5-103.3
t
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: 1006 E.COOPER AVENUE-FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND VARIANCES
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 10, 2013,
at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council
Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by BMD
Aspen LLC, c/o Adam Gillespie, 100 Elk Run Drive, Suite 129, Basalt, CO, 81621,represented by
1 Friday Design Collaborative. The subject property is legally described as 1006 E. Cooper
Avenue, Lot L and the West 10' of Lot M, Block 34, City and Townsite of Aspen, PID #2737-
182-32-004. The applicant requests Final design approval. The proposal includes a request for a
160 square foot floor area bonus and a variance from the Residential Design Guidelines
Secondary Mass requirement. For further information, contact Justin Barker at the City of Aspen
Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2797,
Justin.barker @cityofaspen.com.
s/Ann Mullins,Chair
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on March 21,2013
City of Aspen Account
26 EAU CLAIRE LLC 306 ASSOCIATES LLC ABEL FAMILY LIV TRUST
452 WALNUT ST PO BOX 7067 523 CRAGMONT AVE
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70118 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48302 BERKELEY, CA 94708
AC ONE LLC APPEL JAMES R REVOCABLE TRUST ASPEN EAST CONDO ASSOC
PO BOX 3417 40 SPRINGFIELD CT COMMON AREA
LITTLE ROCK,AR 72203 GLENDALE, MO 63122 980 E HYMAN AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
ASPENEYES LLC BARASH JAMES ROBERT&BETTEANNE BASALT RIVERVIEW LTD
PO BOX 270357 50 W CHEYENNE MTN BLVD 300-117 CENTRE POINTE DR
HOUSTON,TX 77277-2369 COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80906 OTTAWA ONTARIO
CANADA K2G5X3,
BAYLEY CAROL A BELLINSON JAMES TRUST BELSHER ELIZABETH S TRUST
950 E DURANT AVE#2 BELLINSON CAROLYN TRUST 4919 E GRANDVIEW LN
ASPEN, CO 81611 370 E MAPLE RD STE 200 PHOENIX,AZ 85018
BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009
BERNI SHAEL MORGAN BGC III IRREVOCABLE 2011 TRUST 50% BIENENSTOCK SAMUEL J&LAUREN B
22 FROST RD 21 TECHNOLOGY DR#6 30800 TELEGRAPH RD#2925
GREENWICH,CT 06830 WEST LEBANON, NH 03784 BINGHAM FARMS, MI 48025
BLAZEK CAROLINE J BOUSTEAD DOUGLAS BROUGHTON SARAH M
1901 RESEARCH BLVD STE 220 PO BOX 186 ROWLAND JOHN
ROCKVILLE, MD 20850 149 ADIRONACK RD PO BOX 552
ADIRONDACK, NY 12808 ASPEN,CO 81612
BROWN MATTHEW L BUCHHEIT GERALD A CADY VICKI REV TRST
PO BOX 10129 6210 OLD LAKE SHORE RD 223 E PINE MEADOW CT
ASPEN, CO 81612-7315 LAKE VIEW, NY 14085 ANDOVER, KS 67002
CALAMOS JOHN P CAREW 11 LLC 50% CAREW LLC 50%
CAM FAMILY OFFICE 100 GALLERIA OFFICE CENTRE#427 100 GALLERIA OFFICENTRE#427
2020 CALAMOS CT STE#200 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 SOUTHFIELD,MI 48034
NAPERVILLE, IL 60563-2793
CHADVALE REALTY INC CHATEAU BLANC HOA CHATEAU EAU CLAIRE CONDO ASSOC
PO BOX 11976 901 E HYMAN AVE 730 E DURANT AV
ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611
CHATEAU RF 22 LLC CHATEAU ROARING FORK CONDO CHATEAU ROARING FORK LLC
350 NORTH LASALLE ST#800 ASSOC 8000 WALTON PKWY#100
CHICAGO, IL 60654 FRIAS PROPERTIES NEW ALBANY,OH 43054
730 E DURANT
ASPEN, CO 81611
CHECK RICHARD CITY OF ASPEN COATES NELIGH C JR
2309 S VALLEY RD ATTN FINANCE DEPT 212 E LUPINE DR
BERWYN, PA 19312 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611
ASPEN, CO 81611
COFLIN DAVID L&MAXON PATRICIA A COHEN FAMILY NOMINEE TRUST COOPER TURTLE LLC
PO BOX 11973 50 STONEHENGE RD 350 N LASALLE ST#800
ASPEN, CO 81612 PITTSFIELD, MA 012018421 CHICAGO, IL 60654
COOPER-TACHE CHRISTEN CRAFT HAROLD D CRAWFORD DON D
1001 EAST HYMAN 17240 LECHLADE WY PO BOX U3
ASPEN, CO 81611_ - - -- - - DALLAS, TX 75252 ASPEN, CO 81612 - - -
CURTIS ALICE 80% DI LORENZO MICHAEL DOLGINOW SCOTT 50%
7457 GRANVILLE DR 30 EVERETT AVE 203 S CLEVELAND ST
TAMARAC, FL 33321 WINCHESTER, MA 01890-3524 ASPEN, CO 81611
DORAN MICHAEL H ASP TEST TRST DORNEMANN MICHAEL EHRMAN JOSEPH S 1998 TRUST
4280 GUNNIN RD 390 LAKE AVE 170 MARION AVE
NORCROSS,GA 30092 GREENWICH, CT 06830 LAKE FOREST, IL 600452962
ENCLAVE PHASE I &II CONDO ASSOC EUBANK CONDO ASSOC FIRESTONE CHARLES M&PATTIE P
COMMON AREA COMMON AREA BRADLEY L
B N
360 WOOD RD 1022 E HYMAN AVE 3704 3704 B CHASE, N 20815
SNOWMASS VILLAGE,CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611
FISHER ELIZABETH B 99% FISHER JAMES B 1% FISHER WINSTON&JESSICA
216 STOUTENBURGH LN 2709 ST ANDREWS CT 299 PARK AVE 42ND FL
PITTSFORD, NY 14534 JAMESTOWN, NC 27282 NEW YORK, NY 10171
FLANIGAN MICKIE FOLLIN KATHERINE C FOUR FORKS LLC
247 E. CHESTNUT 4416 GERALD PL 422 N WARSON RD
CHICAGO, IL 60611 NASHVILLE,TN 37205 ST LOUIS, MO 63124
FRANDSON GRAHAM FREDERICK W D JR FULLER CHRISTOPHER&LADY
13830 CHANDLER BLVD 605 E ROBINSON ST STE 500 947 E COOPER AVE
VAN NUYS, CA 914015814 ORLANDO, FL 32801 ASPEN, CO 81611
GALLOP PARK LLC GILBERT LAUREL E GILLIAM KRISTI
PO BOX 473 1301 WAZEE ST#2E 1024 E COOPER#8
BEND,OR 97709 DENVER, CO 80204-5812 ASPEN, CO 81611
GLEASON FRANK J JR GML ASPEN PROPERTY LLC GOLDSTEIN BARRY J
235 OVERLAND DR 3815 LISBON ST#203 950 S CHERRY#320
SIDNEY,OH 45365 FT WORTH,TX 76107 DENVER, CO 80246
GORMAN THOMAS G&LINDSAY C GRANTHAM CHARLES EDWARD GRASSL JOHN&JOSEFA
144 OLD GREEN BAY RD 5849 LEASE LN 10 W MOUNT PARK RD
WINNETKA, IL 60093 RALEIGH, NC 27617 TORONTO ONTARIO
CANADA M9P1 R5,
GREENBERG STEVEN A&SHARON M GREENE BENJAMIN GREENE/ROARING FORK LP
810 DEAN AVE 601 MULBERRY PL UNIT 4E 701 CASTLE CREEK DR
HIGHLAND PARK, IL 60035 HIGHLAND PARK, IL 60035 ASPEN, CO 81611
GREGORY GWEN L - GSS RIVERSIDE 10 LLC - - - - - -GUTNICK ERIC I LIVING TRUST
410 LEXINGTON DR PO BOX 3377 HANDELIN MARY M LIVING TRUST
LAKE FOREST, IL 60045 BASALT, CO 81621 16299 PEARSON LN
FORT BRAGG, CA 95437
HANDZUS MICHAL HANN SANG E DR&ANN K HART STEPHAN H
123 29TH ST 555 MAYFLOWER RD HOLLAND&HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW
HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 LAKE FOREST, IL 60045 PO BOX 8749
DENVER, CO 802018749
HATHAWAY CARYL ANN HEAD FAMILY TRUST HENRY CASADY M
1901 RESEARCH BLVD STE 220 3306LAKELAND CRESCENT 525 W HALLAM ST
BURLINGTON ONTARIO
ROCKVILLE, MD 20850 CANADA 7N ONTARIO CO 81611
HERMAN J MAURICE TRUST HEYMAN GERALDINE L HICKS LESLIE
222 LAKEVIEW AVE#160-270 PO BOX 4724 PO BOX 8225
W PALM BEACH, FL 33401 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612
HOFFMAN JOAN&JOHN HORWITZ LEONARD REV TRUST HUTCHINSON KATHLEEN D
1645 N VINE ST#403 310 W 49TH ST #1005 4311 LIVINGSTON AV
LOS ANGELES,CA 90028 KANSAS CITY, MO 64112 DALLAS, TX 75205
HYMAN AVENUE VICTORIAN CONDO INDEPENDENCE CONDO ASSOC IRREVOCABLE TRUST UTA 12/19/86 50%
ASSOC COMMON AREA 21 TECHNOLOGY DR#6
COMMON AREA 922 E COOPER AVE WEST LEBANON, NH 03784
990 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN,CO 81611
ASPEN, CO 81611
JACOBSON RICHARD&SUSAN 50% JACOBSON ROBERT 50% JDG LLC
924 E COOPER AVE 12 LAKESIDE DR 1233 W MOUNT ROYAL AV
ASPEN, CO 81611 CLARKS SUMMIT, PA 18411 BALTIMORE, MD 21217
JOHNSTON DAVID KEITH JONES ANN A JPS NEVADA TRUST
418 E COOPER#206 1200 CHEROKEE#407 1701 NO GREEN VALLEY PKWY#4A
ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80204 HENDERSON, NV 89074
KAHN SANFORD&LINDY KANIPE J STEPHEN KANTOR MITCHELL A&NANCY L
6717 VANDERBILT KANIPE PATRICIA B 7 SHADOW LN
HOUSTON,TX 77005 1015 E HYMAN AVE #3 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48302
ASPEN, CO 81611
KAPLAN LOIS SUSAN KARASIK CHARLES KARNES CHRISTINE M
9055 FAIR OAKS CRESCENT BOX 00794325 2309 S VALLEY RD
ST LOUIS, MO 63117 SIOUX FALLS, SD 57186 BERWYN, PA 19312
KARTIGANER ESTHER KASHNIG WILLIAM KOFFRON ROBERT&PAULETTE
150 W END AVE APT 27M 720 E HYMAN AVE STE 301 28009 HICKORY DR
NEW YORK, NY 10023 ASPEN, CO 81611 FARMINGTON HILLS,MI 48331
KOVAL BARBARA TRUST KRENTZ MICHAEL KEITH KUESSNER AMY
555 E DURANT 901 E HYMAN#11 MARTIN TERRY
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2033 724 GAYLORD ST
DENVER, CO 802063719
KUMMINGS FAMILY TRUST L&E PROPERTIES LTD LAUGHLIN JAMES R
165 N ANITA AVE C/O RUTH LEVISOHN 4032 LINDEN AVE
LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 3701 S NARCISSUS WAY WESTERN SPRINGS, IL 60558
DENVER, CO 80237
LEO RICHARD A LERNER JAY R&BOBETTE S LITTLE JEWEL CONDO ASSOC
15 ASHBURY TER 10855 W DODGE RD#270 COMMON AREA
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94117 OMAHA, NE 68154 1004 E DURANT AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
LITZENBERGER DREW&VIRGINIA 50% LITZENBERGER JOHN 50% LUM SUSAN
125 HOWLAND RD 125 HOWLAND RD PO BOX 1571
ASHEVILLE, NC 28804 ASHEVILLE, NC 28804 ASPEN, CO 81612
LUNDQUIST MARGARET B TRUST MARKEL DAVID F MARTIN MONICA A
880 N LAKE SHORE DR APT 26AB C/O MDI INC 301 E 79TH ST#35P
CHICAGO, IL 60611 PO BOX 1149 NEW YORK, NY 10021
SKIPPACK, PA 19474
MARZIO FRANCES MCCORMICK MURIEL E MCCUTCHIN TRACY L
101 WESTCOTT#1702 PO BOX 3515 5710 BENT OAK PL
HOUSTON,TX 77007 ASPEN, CO 81612 DALLAS,TX 75248
MCDONOUGH JOELLE MCGAFFEY FAMILY&CO NO C LLC MCMILLAN DONNA M
1007 E HYMAN AVE#7 2465 NOB HILL AVE NORTH 425 CAMILLE CIR UNIT 17
ASPEN, CO 81611 SEATTLE,WA 98109 SAN JOSE,CA 95134
MCPHEE RODERICK F 1985 TRUST 50% MCPHEE SHARON S 1985 TRUST 50% MEAD GEORGE
4389 MALTA ST#463 4389 MALTA ST#463 550 THIRD ST SO
HONOLULU, HI 96821 HONOLULU, HI 96821-1173 WISCONSIN RAPIDS,WI 54404
MEYERSTEIN FAMILY TRUST MICHAELS LEE&PAUL MILANO MARY J&MICHELANGELO A
C/O STEWART REAL ESTATE 3429 UNIVERSITY BLVD 315 RICHMOND RD
115 BOOMERANG RD STE 5103 DALLAS,TX 75205 KENILWORTH, IL 60043
ASPEN, CO 81611
MOLNY CONDO ASSOC MOODY ROSS R MORK HALBERT L FAMILY TRUST
COMMON AREA 210 LAVACA#3704 77 ASPEN WAY
1020 E HYMAN AVE AUSTIN,TX 78701 ROLLING HILLS,CA 90274
ASPEN, CO 81611
MULLENS JOAN F MURPHY KATHLEEN A MURPHY RICHARD P&MARY K
PO BOX 2940 62 WALNUT AVE 6720 DAVENPORT ST
COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80901 ATHERTON,CA 94027 OMAHA, NE 68132
MURRAY JOYCE K NAGER DEBBIE TRUST NARK-WILSON JANIS A
PO BOX 352 11712 OVERBROOK RD 1039 E COOPER#5
ASPEN, CO 81612 LEAWOOD, KS 66211 ASPEN, CO 81611-4117
NEDLIN MARNY B&JOSEPH J NEUMAN MICHAEL NOMURA SHUNRO TRUST
1012 E COOPER AVE#4 EAGLE HOUSE C/O SUE MCNANUS
ASPEN, CO 81611 140 GROSVENOR RD 1111 CRYSTAL LN
LONDON SW1 V3JS ENGLAND, EL CAJON, CA 92020
NOORI ABDUL RASOL&MANDANA NORMAN JEFFREY L&ANNA M NORTHROCK HOLDINGS LLC
330 MILBURN 9 GREAT ELM CT UNIT 22 MIZZENTOP
CARBONDALE,CO 81623 POTOMAC,MD 20854 MIZZENTOP DR
WARWICK WK 06 BERMUDA,
OCONNELL CATHERINE M OCONNELL PHILIP J&NANDINI OLSON PETER W&CANDICE
PO BOX 1362 29 DOLPHIN DR CARPENTER
ASPEN, CO 81612 TREASURE ISLAND, FL 33706 975 MEMORIAL DR#205
CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138
ONE RIVER RI LLC OZIER FAMILY COLORADO LP PACK R MICHAEL
3 POYDRAS ST#14A 2896 WRANGLERS RETREAT 5005 TEXAS ST STE 305
NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 WICHITA FALLS,TX 76310 SAN DIEGO,CA 92108
PARADIGM PARTNERS PARGITER SALLY J PAUL RICHARD
1536 WYNKOOP ST#100 943 E COOPER#C 537 N NEVILLE ST#5A
DENVER, CO 80202 ASPEN, CO 81611 PITTSBURGH, PA 15213-2770
PAUL SUZANNE O QPRT PETERS JULIE PETITIE ROCHE CONDO ASSOC
537 N NEVILLE ST#5A PO BOX 1643 COMMON AREA
PITTSBURGH, PA 15213 ASPEN, CO 81611 926 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
PEVNY HANA PH 006 LLC PIERCE ANNTA M
PO BOX 10749 555 E DURANT ST#3J PO BOX 3202
ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612
POLICARO DOMINIC FRANK POLICARO FRANCO G PONDROM CYRENA N&LEE G
1004 E DURANT#3 1004 E DURANT AVE#2 210 PRINCETON AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 MADISON,WI 53705
PORTER CATHERINE T PORTER FRANCES H PORTNOY GERALD A
FULLER JAMES T 111 33970 MEADOW LN 222 2ND ST SE#701
3616 FULTON ST NW CHAGRIN FALLS, OH 44022 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 554145138
WASHINGTON, DC 20007
PRUSAK ROBERT TRUST B 90% PYRENEES TOWNHOMES CONDO
PRUSAK ROBERT S 10% ASSOC 27111 RACE STREET
142 TOPSTONE RD COMMON AREA DENVER, CO 80205
WEST REDDING,CT 06896-1817 914 E COOPER AVE
ASPEN, CO 81611
RICHMAN KIMBERLY DAWN ROBERTS MARION S&BOB RUSHNECK GARY
15 ASHBURY TERRACE PO BOX 161120 29 LANGDON GROVE
SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94117 AUSTIN,TX 78716-1120 CARMEL, NY 10512
RUSHNECK RONALD JR RUSHNECK SUSAN RUSINEK MICHAEL L
29 LONGDON GROVE 29 LANGDON CROVE 826 SAVANNAH AVE
CARMEL, NY 10512 CARMEL, NY 10512 PITTSBURGH, PA 15221
SACK FAMILY TRUST SCHAFER WIDO LIV TRUST SCHONWALD ALEXANDER
6829 QUEENFERRY CIR 2020 SAN VICENTE BLVD 3200 S KINGSHIGHWAY
BOCA RATON, FL 33496 SANTA MONICA,CA 90402 ST LOUIS, MO 63139
SCHOONHOVEN CALVIN R&ARLENE M SCHRAGER PHILLIP G&TERRI L SECOND LIFE LLC
330 CORDOVA#354 3217 S 101 ST ST 3337 N MILLER RD#108
PASADENA, CA 91101 OMAHA, NE 68127 SCOTTSDALE,AZ 85251
SHERMAN RUTH ANN TRUST SILVERSTREAM TOWNHOMES CONDO SKIPSEY CHARLES 1&ELEANOR M
4032 LINDEN AVE ASSOC O ASPEN PROPERTY MGMT PO BOX 2045
C/
WESTERN SPRINGS, IL 60558 C/ BOX EN PROPERTY SANTA FE,CA 92067
ASPEN, CO 81612
SMILIOS PENNY WHITE SMITH MICHAEL B&TIFFANY S SONDERMAN LINDA 20%
1007 E HYMAN AVE#2 6134 WILLERS WAY 23287 BLUE WATER CIR#A 507
ASPEN, CO 81611 HOUSTON,TX 77057 BOCA RATON, FL 33433
SOVA ANTOINETTE SPRINGER BARBARA STEEL JOAN E TRUST
2179 COACH WAY PO BOX 9940 161 E CHICAGO AVE#60N4
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48302 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60611-6690
SUMNER VERONICA SUSI SAMUEL&MARILEE E SYLVESTER JAMES W
1006 E COOPER AVE 7806 CHARNEY LN 758 FREEDOM PLAINS RD
ASPEN, CO 81611 BOCA RATON, FL 33496 POUGHKEEPSIE, NY 12603
TACHE MARK C TAT TRUST TCDC HOLDINGS INC
1001 E HYMAN PO BOX 7813 C/O T M HIGGINS L&G, STE 2400
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 2345 GRAND BLVD
KANSAS CITY, MO 64108
TEDDLIE FAMILY TRUST TEN SIXTEEN EAST HYMAN TENG NANCY H TRUSTEE
5736 STONEGATE RD COMMON AREA 400E 8TH ST
DALLAS, TX 75209 1016 E HYMAN AVE HINSDALE, IL 60521
ASPEN, CO 81611
THOMPSON ARTHUR A JR&HASSELINE THOMPSON JOHN M&KAREN L TRUST THREE BEES LLC
E 40% 9843 SAGAMORE RD 103 HARBOUR LN
7200 COMMODORE DR LEAWOOD, KS 66206 BAY SHORE, NY 11706
TUSCALOOSA,AL 35406
TRAVIS SHELBY J TRT OF COLORADO LLC 60% TYE MARK M TRUST
208 E 28TH ST-APT 2G 7200 COMMODORE DR PO BOX 8992
NEW YORK, NY 10016 TUSCALOOSA,AL 35406 ASPEN, CO 81612
VAN BILDERBEEK BERNARD H VAN DEUSEN CONDO ASSOC VANHEES GIORGIO JOANNE&ARNOLD
13526 MONTEIGNE LN COMMON AREA 95 HORATIO ST#9K
CYPRESS,TX 774294848 1006 E HYMAN AVE NEW YORK, NY 10014
ASPEN, CO 81611
VELEZ-ROSARIO F EVELYN VENRICK FRED C WALKER GEORGE M
425-17 CAMILE CIRCLE PO BOX 1362 2461 SHANNON RD
SAN JOSE, CA 95134 ASPEN, CO 81612 NORTHBROOK, IL 60062
WEAVER WENDY WILLMANN WEIL LORNE WERNING JOHN&ASSOC LLC
PO BOX 2477 750 LEXINGTON AVE UNIFORM DEVOPMENTS 117
ASPEN, CO 81612 NEW YORK, NY 10022 CENTRE POINTE DR#300
OTTAWA ONTARIO CANADA K2G5X3,
WHITE JALEH WICHMAN CHARLES R&JEANNE R WILLINGHAM VIRGINIA
152 E DURANT AVE PO BOX 656 3914 HAZEL LANE
ASPEN, CO 81611-1737 HONOLULU, HI 96809 GREENSBORO, NC 27408
WILMERDING PATSY 50% WISE PEGGY S QUALIFIED PERS QUAL WOGAN JAQUELINE T
203 S CLEVELAND ST TRUST 1401 TOWER RD PO BOX 158
ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612
WINNETKA, IL 60093
WOOD JEFFREY R&SHANA B WOOD MARTHA L WYLY CHERYL R MARITAL TRUST
1616 S VOSS #150 5806 RUE BOURBON 300 CRESCENT CT STE 1000
HOUSTON,TX 77057 SAN ANTONIO,TX 78240 DALLAS,TX 75201
XAMASS ASPEN REAL ESTATE LLC YOST JOHN C YOUNG MOLLY H RE TRUST
100 W RIVER CENTER BLVD#1 B 1601 B WEST 9TH STREET 9038 COUNTY ROAD 13
COVINGTON, KY 41011 AUSTIN,TX 78703 DEL NORTE,CO 81132
YPSI ANN ASSOCIATES
39577 WOODWARD AVE#300
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48304
r
I
4 PUBLIC NOTICE
Date: Wednesday,April 10.2013
Ti m e: s 00 p.m.
Pace:City Hall,130 S.Galena
Street,Aspen
Purpose:
HPC will review Final Major
Development for this property.The
applicant is BMD Aspen LLC,c/o
Adam Gillespie,100 Elk Run Dr„Ste.
129,Basalt.CO,81621 Final design
approval is requested for the
construction of a new rear addition.
For further information contact Aspen
Planning Dept.at 970 429.2797
r '