The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20020213ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION February 13, 2002 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOON - SITE VISITS - Meet at the first site. 118 E. Cooper 420 E. Main 110 E. Bleeker (view story poles) 5:00 I. Roll call II. Approval of minutes - Dec. 12, 2001 minutes. III. Public Comments IV. Commission member comments V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) VI. Project Monitoring VII. OLD BUSINESS .,:05 A. 950 Matchless Dr. - Conceptual, Partial Demolition, Temporary Relocation, Variances, (continued public hearing from January 23, 2002) /40 41 0 11/ 5:25 B. 110 E. Bleeker - Conceptual, Partial Demolition, Variances, ( continued public hearing from January 23,2002) @â€ž / /0 /4 / coll 4 44 1-7 7-0 VIII. NEW BUSINESS 5:55 A. 513 W. Smuggler - Conceptual, Partial Demolition, On-Site Relocation, Variances, and Lot Split, Public Hearing v_ 0 /1 ki /4/3 +4 606/lfill/c-/0~ 6:40 B. 118 E. Cooper - Conceptual, Partial Demolition, Variances, Public Hearing Ao-'9 - O 4 7:20 C. 420 E. Main - Wireless Communications, Public Hearing Â·00 IX. ELECTION - Chair and Vice-chair 8:05 X. ADJOURN -aROJECT MONITORING Suzannah Reid 414 N. First- POLE 7m and Main 330 Lake Avenue 620 W. Bleeker Historical Society 328 Park Ave. 515 Gillespie 205 S. Third 935 E. Cooper Jeffrey Halferty 414 N. First- POLE 918 W. Hallam/920 W. Hallam 620 W. Bleeker - Historical Society 213 W. Bleeker 200 E. Bleeker 328 Park Ave. - Lane 209 S. Galena 332 W. Main 101 E. Hallam 735 W. Bleeker Gilbert Sanchez 333 W. Bleeker Street 501 W. Main Christiania Lodge 330 Lake Ave. 110 W. Main 200 E. Bleeker 214 E. Hopkins Wagner Park 428 E. Hyman Rally Dupps 501 W. Main Street - Christiania Lodge 129 W. Francis 104 S. Galena- St. Mary's Church 302 E. Hopkins 610 W. Smuggler 232 W. Main - Christmas Inn lanie Roschko Teresa Melville 513 W. Bleeker 515 Gillespie 232 W. Main - Christmas Inn 735 W. Bleeker Neill Hirst 450 S. Galena 101 E. Hallam 205 S. Third 419 E. Cooper 409 E. Hyman Mike Hoffman Paul D'Amato CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: 640 N. Third- expires May 23,2002 135 W. Hopkins- expires September 26,2002 232 W. Main- expires October 24,2002 629 W. Smuggler- expires November 26,2002 233 W. Main- expires November 28,2002 PC Legal Procedures (Submit affidavit of notice for PH - conceptual) Swear In Staff presentation Applicant presentation Board Questions and Clarifications PH opened and closed Board Comments Applicant Comments Motion 1~ A MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director04O FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 950 Matchless Drive- Conceptual Development, Partial Demolition, Temporary Relocation and Variances - Public Hearing DATE: February 13, 2002 SUMMARY: The project involves building an addition to the existing house. The applicant is requesting the 500 sq.ft. FAR bonus and a setback variance, and proposes some restoration work on the historic house. APPLICANT: Alan Becker represented by Kim Raymond Architects. PARCEL ID: 2737 - 074 - 02 - 003. ADDRESS: 950 Matchless Drive, Lot 4A Dunn / Bishop Subdivision Exemption, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 PUD (Medium Density Residential) SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.C.5) are met: B The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant necessaly variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed 1 those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units, and Staff Finding: The proposal is to make an addition on the rear of the house and to vertically lift the house to create a basement underneath the whole building. Alterations proposed for the historic structure are a new window in a stair on the west and restoration of the east faâ„¢le to as close to the original condition as possible. This entails replacing some modern windows with windows of a more historic size, style and proportion and is an enhancement offered as part of an FAR bonus request. The location and size of any windows that are being re-installed must be based on physical evidence of their original appearance found during construction. If there is no evidence left of the previous windows' size, shape or position, the replacement windows must be in keeping with the typical windows of the time and style of the historic house, and a cut sheet from the manufacturer must be approved by the HPC or the monitors. Per design guideline 3.4 - 3.7: 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. o 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. o 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. o 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. 0 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. o Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. o Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. o A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's easing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. 2 0 In terms of the addition, staff commends the project on the relatively small size and sympathetic placement of the addition. At the January 23rd meeting, staff and the HPC indicated concerns with the way the connector meets the back of the old house, and the second story deck area, and there was discussion about the character of the fenestration on the new elements. The architect has amended the plan so that the portion of the connector at the second story is more of a narrow "bridge" that slips under the eaveline at the back of the house. The new deck on the east side has been pulled back off of the old house somewhat, and materials and windows have been refined on the addition. Staff finds that the amendments have improved the project. For final review, staff would like to see some continued study of the deck area, and would be in favor of seeing this problematic element moved onto the east side of the tower. There may be some other way to provide a roof over the one story area of the connector (where the french doors are) that creates a more natural transition to the addition. Staff feels that the project is relatively small and the remaining issues to address at final design are minor enough that the project should be able to advance to that level with the deck restudy as a condition of approval. This standard is met for conceptual review. FAR Bonus This neighborhood "down-zoned" themselves when they annexed into the city. A property of this size would normally be allowed 3420.88 sq.ft. of FAR. Including the the bonus, the applicant is requesting 2954.6 sq.ft. of FAR, 466.28 sq.ft. less FAR than is typical. As the project is well below the FAR allowed for a parcel of this size, and the addition is properly placed in relation to the existing structure and is an 0 appropriate design, staffrecommends the approval of the FAR Bonus request. SetbackVariance The applicant is requesting a combined side yard setback variance of 12' and an east side setback of 5'7" to allow the design as proposed. Because of the sensitive placement of the addition, staffrecommends approval. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, and Staff Finding: The proposal is in line with other efforts to restore and expand historic homes throughout the neighborhood. If the recommendations made above are addressed, then the project will be a successful addition to the neighborhood. This review standard is met. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels, and Staff Finding: The project does not detract from the historic significance of the existing structure. The house was moved to this property but has been well preserved and will not be negatively impacted by the new addition. This review standard is met. 0 3 0 d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Finding: The project can enhance the historic integrity of the home by rehabilitating the fa~ade of the existing structure. Thts review standard is met. PARTIAL DEMOLITION No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all ofthe following standards are met: A. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel. Staff Finding: The partial demolition of a portion of the rear of the existing house is necessary for the connector to the addition, and is therefore recommended by staff. This review standard is met. B. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: (1) Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures 0 located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions, and (2) Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions that are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Staff Finding: Impacts to the existing structure's integrity have been addressed through amendments to the original design. This review standard is met. TEMPORARY RELOCATION The house will be temporarily lifted to build a basement. No approval for temporary relocation shall be granted unless HPC finds that the following standards are met: 1. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-sitting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation. 0 Response: Said report has been provided. 4 2. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security approved by HPC with the engineering department, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. Response: A bond or letter of credit in the amount of $30,000 will be a condition of final approval. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant conceptual development, partial demolition, setback variances and an FAR bonus request with the following conditions: 1. For.fhEA*inw, continue to study the upper floor deck. Consi88mmewing-the =ad@Â¢10*#Ees*Jside-of-ffieto Iemen-and-redesigning-ffieroof-over the 2. HPC approves a 500 square foot FAR bonus (subject to a PUD Amendment approval by City Council), a combined side yard setback variance of 12' and . an east side setback of5'7." RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to approve Resolution # , Series of 2002." Exhibits: A. Staffmemo dated February 13, 2002 B. Application 5 RESOLUTION NO. =6 SERIES OF 2002 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, TEMPORARY RELOCATION AND VARIANCES LOCATED AT 950 MATCHLESS DRIVE, LOT 4A DUNN / BISHOP SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ID #: 2737-074-02-003 WHEREAS, the applicant, Alan Becker, represented by Kim Raymond Architects, has requested Conceptual Development, Partial Demolition, Temporary Relocation and Variances approval for the property located at 950 Matchless Drive, Lot 4A Dunn / Bishop Subdivision Exemption, R-6 PUD zone district; and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the 0 subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and WHEREAS, No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all of the following standards are met: 1. Standard: The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel. 0 2. Standard: The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a) Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions, and b) Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions that are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. WHEREAS, No approval for temporary relocation shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all ofthe following standards are met: 1. Standard: The structure has been demonstrated to be capable ofwithstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-sitting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation. 2. Standard: A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security approved by HPC with the engineering department, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair (ifrequired) ofthe structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated February 13, 2002 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended approval of the project with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on February 13, 2002, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and approved the application with a vote of_to_. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the HPC approves conceptual development, partial demolition, temporary relocation, and variances for the property located at 950 Matchless Drive, Lot 4A Dunn / Bishop Subdivision Exemption, City and Townsite of Aspen, finding that the review standards are met, with the following conditions: 1. For final review, continue to study the upper floor deck. Consider moving the deck to the east side of the tower element and redesigning the roof over the east entry doors. 2. HPC approves a 500 square foot FAR bonus (subject to a PUD Amendment approval by City Council), a combined side yard setback variance of 12' and an east side setback of 5'7." 0 APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 13th day of February, 2002. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 0 0 ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name ALA J 1%>12Â£,~d- 12.j~ 12.63Â»i vEJO~2> 2. Project location 46(3 MIA<Li4 LeigÂ© 12*v /22 Lo T 481 17UNKi/'1615.i--10? SUE>pivisic>,4 6%44212061 (indicate street address, fot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning g -6 14 )D 4. Lot size 77 OP 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number ALA d '1519-kaL 61Â£60 MA1-0,466<66 121*ve, 43;PF.it 415 -I4O 02 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number 61 i-/\ ~/Rypb,JD 4-1Â·Z I.4. 2/\ i L..6 91'. /4% P ta A \, 61Â·209 - 1-29 2 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA / Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot SpliULot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) 1411>ToKIC +/1114 Eli'5 Co-ffAG,12- 9/9 5 501 FL w/ 3132%05> OVAACAVID 6AY,AGE. u./ AN AÂ¥,(-9,/1; - CaAâ‚¬-A 6,2.- 6-11,1 50 PT. ADO (090,5 50 Fl- 601 \t>OF-"1 9. Description of development application A 1-10 12Â£6-7- Al)91110,7 16 -11-hE 1.-11 df.F,5 col--7/4 Ok. I 5 712(3705 EÂ© A Lok)(b l.â€¢4 7 u -111 da A BA';Furleld-f Urli)PlÂ¢. 2%15111-6 71,DICD,14167 10. Have you completed and attached the following? Â£/ Attachment 1- Land use application form ,/ Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form 4 Response to Attachment 3 Response to Attachments 4 and 5 4 1 :A b:/9-4 jors//1, $ I I -.I , .. 0.0 :f..2..3.- 3.7,2 .. ..,. 3"937. 4, 4, . 1 4 I . 9,4 412 I -26 9 J. - .ir.... Â¥ I . .. 1.-h , 4 ArÂ¥Â¥ 1' t' f ~* ~'13 . 1 -- 1 h.-Â·.CA . 0 . '. *Il' - d # '' i .-27 .rn. .3- r.. r. i ~t < . # L. 'bâ€¢10*'/'44 . ., 7 RALL t. _ . 510 f'18~LE j f . .4 4. 3 /9' F : 4.Â» 4,404: 1 1, 4 - 4 f ' p h. .' .9/:--) 7 ..7.14 Â·- ..I A 4.40 /44 .' .V 44.4 4. . L,i ve~V 'ttAPâ€¢Â·r. 42+ ~ 6%,A-Â·+ 1 Â·. 47 4.32â‚¬ . >6*y>Â¥ ~~" - ~ . - I 4 1 2.4 , 9.- 4 i.,AlÂ»Â» 4 t iD .1*,Â£Â·di â‚¬51 Â·g /4-1 + h . 4.9, .-2-â€¢ '5Â· , 4 t. 'f '16 r- .. , i. 9/Â£41,7, 4 , 4 aE< 0 1 2. 2 - 2/:SM#/ . =. 1 #412 4, 4 1 itt'IER F D - .. . 1.- ... Â¥ 4 4 - S -/L .- 4 ') ' 64 1~ 1 . --// 1/.1 0 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: ALAd f>eckâ‚¬,12- Address: (160 f-'\Al'c#41 /65 221 VE.. ASÂ¥'Â£14 Zone district: 2 -U Fo D Lot size: 77094- S ck. Ff. Existing FAR: IS9O 9 - pleosE . AD., 11 6,42 AGE Allowable FAR: 2.48,0 43 + 5 000 115..O f Proposed FAR: 1,95 4.(* Existing net leasable (commercial): Al h Proposed net leasable (commercial): Al#A Existing 9, of site coverage: /890 Proposed % of site coverage: 2 5.990 Existing 56 of open space: rda KFA<)'fEMIÂ£,1-1- Proposed % of open space: Existing maximum height: Principal bldg: 20'- 7 Accesorv bldg: #A'-O Proposed max. height: Principal bldg: 12 L i Accessorv bldg: / 810 Proposec % of demolition: 9.-/090 Existing number of bedrooms: 9,0 (4 51Â£ 1,1 A Dl) Proposect number of bedrooms: â€ž1 11.i-, 1 1 -4. F. 1 1,1 ADO 0 Existing on-site parking spaces: 75 On-site parking spaces required: 45 - 2 ft r Int,u W 6 r APO Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed: Front: 17/40 Front: c D f O Front: 2/Â£/O Rear: '5Â·z / o Reac jeD'-0 Rear: 52'- r, Combined Combined Combined Front/rear: 75 4, Front/rear: 30 6 0 Front/rear: 7 34# 1403. Side: ALo Side: 5(0 Side: 9:0 Side: 1 10 Side: 7 (9 c,01' to,ngÂ¢Â· *Â· pe Side: 2'- 0 Combined Combined Combined Sides: 13iC# Sides: â‚¬ 310 Sides: // '-0 Existing nonconformities or encroachments: Cor-/1724*46,0 5, pE)*;A>6 Fbp Â£1,4.*W,r.<A Du - VABIA IdÂ£ P. c.pA,7-71rn il,1. t.~PO Variatjons requested: 121 0 5 1 DEL %4AJ) c-of,\ alk\Â£.O 4 7 1-0 *Aer 9,1 1,Â£ yAW, 4 1506 4 18400% (HPC hal, the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft., site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage irlfill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-8, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) ZONING 117 102 OWNER: ALAN BECKER ADDRESS: 950 MATCHLESS DRIVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ZONING: R-6 PUD LOT SIZE: 7708 SQUARE FEET ALLOWABLE F.A.R. 2486 SQUARE FEET (+ 500' bonus) EXISTING F.A.R. Existing house 963.0 ADU) 690.8 Garage (250 exempt) 250.00 add'I 250 @.5 125.0 add'I full 71.2 Decks (15%= 373) 200.75 -0- TOTAL 1850.0 PROPOSED F.A.R. House 2067.60 ADU 690.8 Garage (250 exempt) 250.00 add'I 250 @.5 125.0 add'I @ full 71.2 Decks (15%= 373) 315.75 -0- TOTAL 2954.60 SETBACKS: See SITE PLAN, VARIANCE HAS BEEN GRANTED FOR THE COMBINED SIDE YARD SETBACK, PER HPC FOR THE ADU WORKING ON HOUSE VARIANCES 2'0 from lot line on SE side so we need 7'0 side yard variance and a 12' combined side yard variance ON SITE PARKING: Three spaces, two for the house, one for the ADU HEIGHT LIMIT: 25 FEET FOR PRINCPAL BUILDING 21 FEET, FOR AN ADU OPEN SPACE: NO REQUIREMENT SITE COVERAGE: 23.5% PROPOSED (18% EXISTING) Afl 102 BECKER RESIDENCE RENOVATION AND ADDITION The project, located at 950 Matchless Drive, exists of a small miner's cottage and a detached garage with an ADU above. We are proposing a renovation of the cottage along with a modest addition to the rear of the building. S The renovation will include replacing windows that have been changed throughout the history of the building, back to windows of the same style and proportion as the original ones. (note the windows on the South East elevation). During construction, we will be able to determine what type and size of windows that were on the North West side of the original building, and replace those. If we cannot determine the exact window that was originally in the building, we will use windows that will, in our opinion, replicate windows that might have been used. The owner has already spent much time and effort restoring and refinishing the existing wood siding and trim work, bringing it back to it's original state. The addition to the building will include putting a basement under the existing building and adding a two story element to the rear of the building. The only part of the existing building that will be altered, is the wall at the back of the cottage, where the addition will be connected. Both of the corners of the existing building will still be visible, and the roof line of the lower, shed roof will be maintained, keeping the integrity of the original building. COMPLIANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDARDS 1. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels. Response: The proposed development is compatible in general design with the historically designated miner's cottage in that the addition is at the rear of the building, preserving the entire original cottage. There is only a partial demolition of the back wall of the structure that will no longer be visible, as this is where the addition will connect to the existing building. The link between the existing and COMPLIANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDARDS, cont. the new elements is down played and shows a clear distinction between the old and new parts of the project. The roof lines of the addition will resemble the existing roof; as the slope of the main roof, as seen from the street, will be mirrored by the slope of the new roof. All of the new elements are of a small scale to reflect the size of the original building, and the use of materials will respect the heritage of this simple cottage, not overpowering it with expensive or "heavy" veneers. The site plan is compatible with the historic layout of these cottages with "outbuilding" situated at the back of the lot, with the main residence set off the street enough to have a small yard. We are not changing the location of the building, thus keeping the streetscape the same. And the addition is small enough so as to leave a yard and trees between it and the existing garage/ADU. The massing and volume are compatible with the existing house, not over powering it. With the addition, the building is still smaller and shorter than the house to the west, but has enough mass to not look so overwhelmed by it's neighbor. By offsetting the addition from the existing building, and encroaching into the side yard, toward the street (not the neighbor), we are able to leave more of the existing building unaffected and visible from the addition. 2. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The proposed addition reflects the character of the neighborhood by the scale of the new elements. The elements are also a play of shapes that are consistent with the other small houses on the street, by virtue of their proportions being smaller and the shapes simple, not competing for attention. 3. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of the designated historic structure located on the parcel. Response: The proposed addition does not detract from the historic significance of the miner's cottage as the addition leaves the entire building intact. The modest size of the addition, in addition to the fact that we are not moving the building on the site, enhances the significance of the original building and it's site. By not trying to replicate the existing and showing a clear distinction between existing and new, shows a respect for the original structure as a unique entity, worthy of preserving. COMPLIANCE WITH DEVELOPMENT REVIEW STANDARDS, cont. 4. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: The proposed development to this excellent example of a miner's cottage will enhance the architectural character of the building and it's site. The original building will be restored to it's original state, as completely as is possible with current construction practices: repairing the siding and trim work, replacing windows that have been altered over the years, back to the original size and style and repairing the roof and the very disintegrated foundation. The addition will detract from the original character of the building, as we are not changing any of the original building, just hiding a small portion of the back of the original structure with the link to the new construction. Both of the corners of the back of the building will remain visible, as well as a portion of the ridge and the shed roof at the lower level at the back of the building. The integrity of the original structure will remain, unchanged (except for the renovations). oddo 1/9/02 engineering Historic Preservation Commission 130 S. Galena Aspen, Co 81611 Re:Becker Residence, 950 Matchless Drive, Aspen, CO To Whom It May Concern, I have made a preliminary inspection of the home at 950 Matchless Drive in Aspen, to check the integrity of the structure for the purpose of moving it. The plan is to move the building straight up and support it while a new foundation is constructed beneath. When the foundation is completed, we will set the house directly back in the original location. I have found that with the proper bracing and shoring, the building will be capable to withstand the physical impacts of lifting it straight up and setting it back down on a new foundation. I shall advise both the architect and the house mover of any details required for this project. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ODDO ENGINEERING, ING~*\\81!lilive, '451(AD 6 RE Gl","e Â·4*Â·fÂ°~Â·* Robert A. Oddo, P.E. *3>. Principal :*~ssiax'ACY*12# -*'/////0,111111%\\'Â» E-mail: info@oddogws.com 302 Eighth Street, Suite 325 * P.O. Drawer 160 â€¢ Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-1006 + Fax (970) 945-2977 * E-Mail info@oddogws.com 47/mitii"\\0 %4/!mt Vicinity Map ~/2 La ' 12///V// /*1 \ \--A.,4/2.444\\121>M, 2 Alpine Acres Lot 4a < 1 17.V /2.1. 1,27 1 / 0 1 "\43/ 40,0 \/ r N\37-7 / 1 + Lot 5 \ \ * Lot 4b .- Lot 48 ~ - 984 -- -j e. : / 04 // 0/' .\I CÂ¢/ I \ LLot 3 j . f 4 . * -1- p le- 0 1 I r - \ Lot 2 /9/ 1 \ \ 1.046 /4 7 \\ f C ./0 MIDI J 1 1 . . 'r.,2-112 4 e ..t*t. :114*~2019 2.ft,. i:.t~ .,1185.Nai...~â€ž..:23. ''*664 9Â¥4..Ik .. 94 1 NOV-20-2001 TUE 09:25 AM FAX NO. P. 02 < RE: 110 E. BLEEKER STREET CONCENUAL HPC DESIGN REVIEW, PARTIAL PUBLIC NOTICE DEMOLITION, VARIANCES NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN that a publiÂ© hearing will be held on Wed.iesday, December 12, 2001 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 pm before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Gatena St.,Aspen, ta consider an application submitted by Robert Potmnkin requesting conceptual design, partial demolition, and varionce approvals. Thc variancc requested am a 5% site coverage variance and a 500 square foot 12,\R bonus. The property is located al.! 10 E. Blecker Street, and is legally described as Lots L & M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin County Cominunity Development Depmtnent, 130 S. Gplona St,, Aspen, CO (970) 920-5096, amyg@ci.aspen.co.us. 5/Suzannah Rcid, Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Commission ' Published in the Aspen Times on November 24.2001 City o f Aspen Account 0 0 1.rE,31 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce 0hlson, Deputy Planning DirectorJAO FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 110 E. Bleeker Street- Conceptual Development, Partial Demolition, Variance, and Landmark Designation- Continued Public Hearing DATE: February 13, 2002 SUMMARY: The project involves an addition and restoration work on the existing house. The applicant is requesting a 252 sq.ft. FAR bonus. This property is listed on the City's historic inventory, but has not been designated as a landmark. Landmark designation is currently required in order to receive the proposed FAR bonus. Staff has added the landmark criteria to this memo, although depending on the outcome of the City Council's review of the new HP program on February 25th, this step may not be needed since, if the ordinance is approved, all properties on the inventory will become eligible for the benefits. APPLICANT: Robert and Lexie Potamkin, represented by Alstrom Group. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-37-006. ADDRESS: 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lot L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite ofAspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential) LANDMARK DESIGNATION Any structure or site that meets two (2) or more of the following standards may be designated as "H," Historic Overlay District, and/or historic landmark. It is not the intention of the Historic Preservation Commission to landmark insignificant structures or sites. HPC will focus on those, which are unique or have some special value to the community. A. Historical importance. The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. 1 0 Staff Finding: Staff and the applicant are unaware of any historical significance in connection with this site with respect to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Staff finds this standard is not met. B. Architectural importance. Based on the building form, use, or specimen, the structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct, or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type. Staff Finding: th The original house has numerous features that are typical of 19 century residences in Aspen. There are relatively few 19th century brick homes left in Aspen, and based on historic photographs, this was once a fine home. The applicant plans a restoration. Staff finds this standard is met. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Staff Finding: The original designer is unknown, therefore this standard is not met. D. Neighborhood character. The structure or site is a significant component of an 0 historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. Staff Finding: The property is located in the West End neighborhood, which has the highest concentration of historic properties of any neighborhood in Aspen. There are numerous 19th century homes immediately surrounding 110 E. Bleeker, and all of the houses on this block except for the two buildings immediately east of the subject parcel are from the 19th century. Staff finds this standard is met. E. Community character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because Of its relationship in terms Of size, location, and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Staff Finding: The house is representative of the modest scale, style, and character of homes constructed in the late 1800's, which is Aspen's primary period of historic significance. Staff finds this standard is met. 0 2 SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.C.5) are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units, and Staff Finding: The proposal is to make an addition on the west side of the existing house. No alterations are proposed for the historic building other than restoration work, which is an enhancement offered as part of an FAR bonus request. The HPC discussed this project on December 12th and January 234. The architect has continued to make modifications to the design, the most recent of which reduced the height of the addition by 1'7", moved it back l' and reworked the staircase to lower its height and size at the rear of the building. At the January meeting, the HPC continued this project with the following direction: 1. The ad#tioB'must comply with the design guidelines by moving further back from th*ffont faoacle ofthe existing structure. / (13 In order Yor this project to qualify for the FAR bonus, the porch and front window should be restored to original condition. Removal of paint on the masonry is also recommended. / . 3. As part of an overall restoration of the historic character of the property, staff recommends the owner work with the City Parks Department to remove and replace the existing trees on the City right of way with more appropriate trees. The current trees disrupt the relationship between the front of the house and the street. If the owner is in agreement, this will be done at the City's expense. 4. Restudy the staircase to increase the visual separation and to make it more distinct from the historic house. 5. Restudy the ridge height on the new addition to make it lower than the historic house. 3 Staff finds that this direction has been met, (or can be met during construction), except for the first item, which continues to be the sticking point. Again staff finds that each new version of the design improves the project, but notes that now, ironically, the most attention to compatibility has been paid to creating a sympathetic relationship between the new and old construction at the back ofthe site, which is of least concern to HPC. In keeping with the previous evaluations provided by staff, we find that the location of the addition, and the impact that it has on the massing of the historic resource are detrimental to its preservation and that this review standard has not been met. The analysis from earlier memos is as follows: Staffhas stated a strong objection to the design in terms of compliance with the following guideline and the prominence of the addition in relationship to the existing house. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. There was comment in earlier hearings that if a new single family house were built on the west side of 110 E. Bleeker, it would have to be aligned with the front of the historic building, and so any setback on this addition is less competitive with the historic resource. Staff totally disagrees. There is a significant difference between two completelv detached homes, and an attached addition which, if located too far forward on the site, alters one's perception ofthe width and proportions ofthe original structure. In order to meet design guideline standard 10.8 and to complete a truly exemplary project, which this could easily be, the addition must be moved back on the site. It could be shifted back as much as 16 feet without interfering with the parking area. This would require removal of the large spruce and smaller trees already affected by the proposed design. While it is unfortunate to lose the tree, it is not a resource as rare as the historic home. The Parks Department is willing to permit these tree removals with proper mitigation. Staff finds that the design is excellent beyond this one, very important point. FAR Bonus In the process of preparing this memo, staff has located, and provided to the architect, a historic photograph of this house taken sometime in the 19th century. A reconstruction to this design is proposed in the application. In order to rebuild the porch to its original condition, an exterior wall that has been demolished will have to be rebuilt. It is important that proper consideration is taken in 4 the procedure and choice of materials when constructing this wall and porch. The following guidelines are relevant to this work: 5.5 and 2.7. 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. o Use materials that appear similar to the original. o While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. o If the original material is wood clapboard, for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, the amount of exposed lap and finish. In previous reviews of this application, staff overlooked the fact that the porch restoration work is not including a street facing front door, which is critical to the character of the building. This door could be made to be non-functional if necessary, but must be provided as an exterior feature. The photo documentation also shows the original decorative front fagade window, which was removed. It is recommended to restore the window to its original condition, per design guidelines 3.4 and 3.6 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. o If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. o Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. o Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. o Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. Staff further recommends that the owner consider removal of the paint from the brick surface to reveal the underlying material and original character of the home. There are relatively few 19th century brick homes left in Aspen and the renovation of this nicely detailed Victorian would benefit the neighborhood and the community. The HPC should consider the following guideline (2.10). 5 0 2.10 Consider removing later covering materials that have not achieved historic significance. o Once the non-historic siding is removed. revair the original. underlving material. In order for this project to be "exemplary," as is necessary to qualify for the FAR bonus, these restoration actions should be carried out, along with compliance with design review standard 10.8. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, and Staff Finding: The proposal is in line with other efforts to restore and expand historic homes throughout the neighborhood. If the recommendations made above are addressed, then the project will be a successful addition to the neighborhood. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels, and Staff Finding: The project as proposed has the potential to affect the significance of the home by destroying its scale and character due to the prominent location of the addition. d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from or part thereoj the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure Staff Finding: The project could enhance the current state of historic significance ofthe home by restoring the porch area, the front window and brick, to their original condition. With adjustments to the addition as described above, it will not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of the designated historic structure or part thereof. PARTIAL DEMOLITION No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all of the following standards are met: A. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel. Staff Finding: The partial demolition of the existing porch is necessary for restoration and is recommended by staff. The partial demolition of the west wall of the existing house may be necessary to attach the addition, but should be as minimal as possible to allow for a connection of the two structures. Staff continues to be concerned that the 0 6 0 location of the addition causes the demolition of the majority of the west wall of the historic house. B. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: (1) Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions, and (2) Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions that are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Staff Finding: The addition could be connected to the original structure with less impact to the house, by a smaller connector. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the four review standards are not met. Although Staff could support the project if the addition were moved back significantly, that has not been achieved over the course of three public hearings. Staff finds that it is appropriate for HPC to take formal action on the proposal and recommends denial. 0 RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to deny the application for Conceptual Design Review, Partial Demolition, Variances, and Landmark Designation for 110 E. Bleeker Street." Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2002 A. Staffmemo dated February 13, 2002 B. Application 7 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, VARIANCE, AND LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 110 E. BLEEKER STREET, LOT L AND LOT M, BLOCK 65, CITY AND TOWNSITE pF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. -, SERIES OF 2002 WHEREAS, the applicants, Robert and Lexie Potamkin, represented by Sven Altstrom, architect, and Herb Klein of Klein/Zimet, has requested Conceptual Development, Partial Demolition, Variance, and Landmark Designation approval for the property located at 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lot L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite ofAspen, Colorado. The property is currently listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures"; and WHEREAS, Any structure or site that meets two (2) or more of the following standards may be designated as "H," Historic Overlay District, and/or historic landmark. It is not the intention of the Historic Preservation Commission to landmark insignificant structures or sites. HPC will focus on those, which are unique or have some special value to the community. A. Historical importance. The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. B. Architectural importance. Based on the building form, use, or specimen, the structure or site rejlects an architectural style that is unique, distinct, or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character Of Aspen. D. Neighborhood character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. E. Community character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character Of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms Of size, location, and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance; and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units, and 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and WHEREAS, No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all of the following standards are met: A. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance ofthe parcel. B. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: (1) Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions, and (2) Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions that are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure; and 0 WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated February 13, 2002, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended denial of the project finding that the review standards are not met; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on February 13, 2002, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application did not meet the standards, and was not consistent with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and denied the application by a vote of_ to _. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That Conceptual Development, Partial Demolition, Variance, and Landmark Designation for the property located at 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lot L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, is not approved. DENIED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 13th day of February, 2002. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney 0 Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 0 tilir-4 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director 8 FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officed, 2 RE: 513 W. Smuggler Street- Conceptual Development, Variances, Partial Demolition, On-site relocation, and Historic Landmark Lot Split- Public Hearing DATE: February 13, 2002 SUMMARY: The project involves demolishing large additions to the historic house on this site, relocating and restoring it, and building a new addition. The eastern portion of the property is to be split off for future development. APPLICANT: Drew Harman, represented by Harry Teague Architects. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-10-002. ADDRESS: 513 W. Smuggler Street, Lots E, F, and G, Block 27, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential) SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.C.5) are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant necessag variances ajter making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed 1 those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(21 for detached accessory dweUing units, and Staff Finding: In 2001, HPC granted approval to demolish the non-historic construction that surrounds this house and to replace it with a new addition that was approximately 3,000 square feet in size. The building was to be used as a single family residence. The owner has since determined that a lot split with two smaller homes is a more feasible plan and requests HPC approval to move the historic house to the west, restore the porch to its original appearance, reconstruct the east wall of the house, and make a 1,790 square foot addition. A proposal for a residence on the east lot will be brought before HPC in the future. Staff is happy to see the project going in this direction because it more effectively "retrieves" this historic resource, which has been heavily impacted by inappropriate alterations. The proposed addition is smaller than the last approval allowed for, and it is located entirely behind the historic building. HPC held a worksession on this proposal and advised the architect to move the addition back further on the lot to create more separation from the cottage. This has been accomplished by placing the addition right on the rear lot line, which requires a variance. This is exactly the reason that HPC has the authority to approve variances to dimensional requirements- to provide flexibility so that the best preservation of historic buildings can be achieved. The proposal requires a 10 foot rear yard setback variance and a 20 foot combined front and rear yard setback variance. The applicant is also requesting a 500 square foot FAR bonus. The existing HPC policies for awarding the bonus state that it may be appropriate when the subject property is at least 9,000 square feet in size, when the application is for a lot split, and when the design is excellent. The first two criteria are met and staff believes the third criteria, excellent design, to be true, with some areas for discussion. The goal of the lot split program is to create more reasonably sized additions to historic buildings, particularly the miner's cottages. Although the owner is given the ability to determine how the allowable FAR should be allocated between the new parcels, it is generally preferable to HPC to see the majority of the square footage assigned to the new parcel. In this case the FAR is almost equally divided, with about 200 more square feet assigned to the historic house. This results in an addition which is roughly three times the size of the original building, which presents design challenges. The design guidelines which were mentioned at the worksession are: 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. o An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 2 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. o A 1-story connector is preferred. o The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. o The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. The proposal includes a one story connector which is 6' deep, which is less than the standard requests. The front wall of the addition is approximately 50' back from the street, and the ridgeline is 9' over that ofthe historic house. While staff acknowledges that the perspective view that is provided in the application shows that the addition is not overwhelming from head on, the addition as seen from the east and west does dwarf the historic building. One suggestion given at the worksession was to slide the upper floor back and relocate the deck shown on the alley. Another option would be to move the master bedroom suite, or a portion of that area, above the east patio. Because there do appear to be more options to separate the two structures, staff recommends further study. A bit more relief from the impacts of the addition will certainly make this project worthy ofan FARbonus. Staff has no concerns with the design character of the addition, which successfully uses simple forms, materials, and fenestration in a manner which is promoted by the design guidelines. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, and Staff Finding: By creating two detached homes on the site and transferring some of the FAR to a new structure, the historic house can be better preserved and the structures on the site can be consistent with the size of homes that have historically existed in the West End neighborhood. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels, and Staff Finding: The project will enhance the historic significance of the home by removing some inappropriate alterations that have occurred over the years. d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. 3 Staff Finding: The reconstruction and restoration entailed in this project, based on photographic evidence, does enhance the architectural character and integrity of the house significantly. The addition requires some additional study. PARTIAL DEMOLITION No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all of the following standards are met: A. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel. Staff Finding: The areas proposed to be demolished are recent construction and have negatively affected the original cabin. Their demolition is welcome. B. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: (1) Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions, and (2) Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions that are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Staff Finding: Sanborne maps and photographs have been used to determine the original footprint of the building. The project will be a major improvement to the current structure on the site and all concerns with the new addition are discussed above. ON-SITE RELOCATION No approval for on-site relocation shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all of the following standards are met: A. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation. Staff Finding: The house is to be moved to the west to allow for the lot split, which is a good preservation tool for this site. There are no other historic buildings on this blockface, therefore no historic building patterns will be interrupted by the relocation. Staff finds that this review standard is met. 4 B. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re-siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation. Staff Finding: Said report shall be a condition of approval. C. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security approved by HPC with the engineering department, to insure the safe relocation, preservation, and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation. Staff Finding: The relocation plan and letter of credit shall be conditions of approval. HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT In order to conduct an Historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant shall meet the following requirements of Aspen Land Use Code: Section 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(e), and Section 26.72.010(G). 26.480.030(A)(21 SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS. LOT SPLIT The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where all of the following conditions are met: a) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969; and Staff Finding: The property is part ofthe historic townsite and has not been previously subdivided. b) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.040(A)(1)(c). Staff Finding: This proposal will create two lots, each 4,500 square feet in size. Affordable housing mitigation may be required for the old and new houses. 5 c) The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(C)(1)(a); and Staff Finding: The land has not been subdivided previously. d) A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the o#ice of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100. Staff Finding: The subdivision plat shall be a condition of approval. It must be reviewed by the Planning and Engineering Departments for approval and recordation within 180 days of final land use action. e) Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing ofgood cause. Staff Finding: The subdivision exemption agreement shall be a condition of approval. D In the case where an existing single-family dwelting occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a lot split. Staff Finding: No dwelling units will be demolished as part of this proposal. g) Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single-family home. Staff Finding: The applicants intend to construct a single family house on each lot. 26.480.030(A)(4) SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS. HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT The split of a lot that is a designated historic landmark for the development of one new single-family dwelling. The Historic Landmark Lot Split shall meet the requirements of 6 section 26.88.030(A)(2), section 26.100.050(A)(2)(e), section 26.72.010(G) of this Code, and the following standards: a) The original parcel shall be a minimum of 9,000 square feet in size and be located in the R-6 zone district or a minimum of 13,000 square feet and be located in the R-15A zone district. Staff Finding: The subject parcel is 9,000 square feet and is located in the R-6 zone district. b) The total FAR for both residences shall not exceed the floor area allowed for a duplex on the original parcel The total FAR for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat. Staff Finding: The maximum floor area for a duplex on the fathering parcel is 4,080 square feet, and a 500 square foot bonus is requested. The applicant plans to allot 2,398 square feet to the parcel with the old house and 2,182 square feet to the new home. Bonus FAR for "Accessory Dwelling Units" and garages may also be applied. c) The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district. HPC variances and bonuses are only permitted on the parcel that contains a historic structure. Staff Finding: The applicant has requested a floor area bonus and setback variance for the redevelopment of the historic house. No variances may be awarded to the new lot. 26.470.070(C) GMQS EXEMPTION, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT The construction of each new single-family dwelling on a lot created through review and approval of an Historic Landmark Lot Split shall be exempt from the scoring and competition procedures. The exemption is to be approved by the Community Development Director, but is not to be deducted from the respective annual development allotments or from the development ceilings. Staff Finding: Currently, there are no standards for reviewing exemption requests; the exemption is by right for historic landmark lot splits. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC continue the 513 W. Smuggler Street review because the project is not yet in compliance with the guidelines. 7 RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to continue the 513 W. Smuggler Street application for Conceptual Development, Variances, Partial Demolition, On-site relocation, and Historic Landmark Lot Split to a date certain." Exhibits: A. Staffmemo dated February 13, 2002 B. Application 8 513 WEST SMUGGLER STREET application for hpc conceptual review contents attachment 1 land use application form attachment 2 dimensional requirements form attachment 3 general submission requirements Â· letter of authorization Â· title of authorization Â· vicinity map attachment 4 specific submission requirements: conceptual review, partial demolition, on- site relocation, variance, and historic landmark lot split Â· written description Â· existing site plan/survey Â· proposed site plan Â· floor plans Â· building elevations attachment 5 specific submission requirements: final review NOT APPLICABLE attachment 6 residential design standards , .12 1., ..:Mt.....ILI..:-7:7-T:Pr?.1- T.7 -i,jÂ¢*tÂ·-Â·Â«~ 44-1Â·t.Â·.4&6 . b~ th ' h:. -:PAS ./, :iÂ· Â·1 â€¢tÂ·>t.,7.4/ 241919â€¢... 4 - w.Â· <0.24*0,(~8.:&*MIC ' 9 ~.2.ji~:c ( :t~';. * ' 1 36 . f*21 4,2321 M i---- CLE.5 --3- m -I.- I ./.A:- t..m --- 41> -U,4.- .- :.Eli-223 -Ct-30 - -- , VI~ cabin condition circa 1900 proposed conditions J ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name Ai/MA~, -PE50Â£,/cg-- 2. Project location ~S/3 1,Je=r- ..SM Ui4Lex Srâ€¢-eE-r- : AgEN 60 13.ocK 27 : t-crr& E , F, 61 (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning 12 - G 4. Lot size 90.06' I toD.cD' = 9 DOG 4 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number heew AA.MA J 513 War -9449.EZ 6%arr- 2 AsPE,J 925Â· 6,343 6. Representative's name, address, and phone number /4.==1 -7A,ve-,6chmen 4-12-- Nown+ MILL 672 e-rr : AN>eJ 9 2-5 ' 2155-6 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA ~>C, Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot Split/Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) 4 BEPec,04 imaIDEACE dj NWO - 67(24 ST,-ocr~vmE - AppRox: 3,656 + IN,Â£0*4 560 f Vier,-R:.IAN MINEâ€¢:1 645/4 -1 J -J 9. Description of development application Lar :spirr WrD YWO 45>/00' Lols WeFr- 1-07 : Pâ‚¬MOLLSH A,pprrlod - REELor.gy AAIP 72:GADVA;TE- CABW I - C-ONS-r=OCT =2-1150+ NEKI HezE (5613*caw -0- 1190 + A-moy)- 4DwKOOM, EMr- Lol- 1 CON STgour --223>0+ AleU M-OVSE - 4 DEPEDOMS . 10. Have you completed and attached the following? Attachment 1- Land use application form Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form Response to Attachment 3 Response to Attachments 4 and 5 1 Â®111111 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: DBEk' tbrizMAN Address: .511 \AEs,7- SM,1,14Lâ‚¬% 57'gew-r Zone district: R-6 Lot size: 90.06' 8100.00' = 9006* 10 BE .#u,Pep W-10 02) 469 100 'â€¢4500+ (-613 Existing FAR: Â°' 5.65Â© * Allowable FAR: APTEK LD-r sPL.rr : 4080 Â¢ 6.DMMI,Jec> Proposed FAR: 45'804; co,4-ep: 06 2.35[) wer 60Â·r / 0 2210 ea,r w. Existing net leasable (commercial): AN Proposed net leasable (commercial): NA Existing % of site coverage: % 5061* 0, 4000+ 9Â·r Proposed % of site coverage: 40.19. (Veâ€¢r u,-4 op +5004 urr Existing % of open space: = lot Proposed % of open space: 59. 9 90 Aw dâ€¢Â·r -r) Existing maximum height: Principal bldg: 23'G" Accesorv bldg: NA Proposed max. height: Principal bldg: 2-Co' D Accessory bldg: NA Proposed % of demolition: =23% Existing number of bedrooms: 4 Proposed number of bedrooms: 4 Mp=. 8:iâ€¢cH - tz) 10â€¢03 Existing on-site parking spaces: 3 On-site parking spaces required: 3 Setbacks Existing: Minimum required:(peâ€¢r 1-.ar-sp, r) Proposed: Front: Â£ 13 16" Front: /0' Front: /0' Rear: 4% (3'- G " Rear: /0' (5'4Am.,6 Rear: /2 1 lÂ®'4Am~h;â‚¬) Combined Combined Combined FronUrear: 4-7 Front/rear: 30' Fronurear: 2.2-' Side: 065'6" Aw /09 Side: 5' Side: 5' Side: *5'-600 (Aw /00) Side: 5' Side: 5 Combined Combined Combined Sides: NI' (MIN) 20') Sides: /D' Sides: /0' Existing nonconformities or encroachments: MACO*Fo*.,V[ 140-~ 3373Ae K:G - CoMBRED =F(201'-r ~'267*- - lbâ„¢ 511:'Ed Variations requested: dÂ»,u.weo no~r,/158,Â®se,BAoc - Â·FAW &* Us .0& 5&04 PA..401 ke WAIVER- 6- 3 -23 - (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft., site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R-6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) L - HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS 412 north m111 aspen co 81611 t 970 925 2556 f 970 925 7981 mail@teaguearch.com 513 West Smuggler Street Conceptual Review Application Responses to Attachment 4 written description of proposal This proposal is for a Historic Landmark Lot Split at 513 West Smuggler Street. The existing 90.06' x 100.00' (9606 s.f.) lot would be split into two 45.03' x 100.00' (4503 s.f.) lots. Following the lot split, the proposal includes the relocation and renovation of, and addition to the residence on the new western lot of 513 West Smuggler Street as well as the construction of a new residence on the new eastern lot. The existing structure is an approximately 3,650 square foot, two story residence with four bedrooms and an ADU. The residence is built around an original 560 square foot Victorian miner's cabin. The cabin is on the Smuggler Street elevation, but an addition has distorted the cabin by extruding its east wing into a long element, making it difficult to read the size of the cabin, or to distinguish the cabin from the current addition. The recent additions to the house have little relation to the original cabin. The owner proposes to demolish the existing addition, preserving and renovating only the historic cabin. The cabin is to be relocated to the northwest end of the western lot, set back ten feet from the northern property boundary. The new addition will consist of a 'U' shaped gabled element connected to the back of the original cabin footprint allowing the cabin to retain it's position as the sole element along the street. The proportions of these gabled elements are derived from the Victorian structure-the gable elevations preserve the fourteen foot width of the cabin gables, and will appear similar in scale and proportion to the cabin. The original north elevation and parts of the west elevation are fairly intact and will be restored, but the east facade of the cabin will need to be reconstructed as it does not exist in the current layout. The proposed remodel aims to restore the integrity of the original Victorian cabin. It does this in part by removing additions that confuse the distinction between old and new. Furthermore, the proposed construction is consistent in scale and proportion to the original. However, the new building elements do not attempt to imitate the historic cabin, but rather to complement it. The materials used in the new part of the residence will be subdued in color and texture; details such as roof eaves will be minimal and contemporary, and will contrast with the traditional detailing of the cabin. Our intention is to provide a contemporary backdrop that respects and highlights the historic structure. - HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS 412 north mill aspen co 81611 t 970 925 2556 f 970 925 7981 mail@teaguearch.com 513 W. Smuggler Conceptual Review Application Response to Attachment 6 - Development Review Standards The proposal conforms to the guidelines in Residential Design Standards, Section 26.140.040 of the City of Aspen land use code. The design responds to the following criteria established in the code: A. Site Design. 1. Building orientation. Front fa~ade is parallel to street. 2. Build-to-lines. The front porch is used to meet the 60% standard. 3. Fences. Under 42". B. Building Form. 1. Secondary Mass. ADU/garage provides detaohed secondary mass. C. Parking, Garages, and Carports. 1. Garage accessed off alley. 2. NA D. Building Elements. 1. Entrance and principal window are street-oriented. a. Entry door is less than ten feet behind northernmost wall. b. Covered entry porch is provided. c. Significant window faces street. 2. Connector between cottage and east wing is one-story element. 3. Windows. a. Street facing windows do not span between nine and twelve feet. b. FaGade has no non-orthogonal windows. 4. Lightwells on street facing faGade will be fully recessed. E. Context. 1. Materials. a. Quality of materials will be consistent on all sides of building. b. Materials will be used in ways true to their characteristics. c. No highly reflective exterior materials will be used. 2. Inflection. a. The two-story east wing provides inflection to two story neighboring house on east side. JBN-22-2002 TUE 10:30 AM FAX NO, P. 03 EXHIBIT ~ F-1 1 17 70 01 8- . AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OFPROPERTY: 5-LS M/6-7--610~96â‚¬12- Sr)2:EE-'r- ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Â¥20/u".1 13 , 200_gr STATE OF COLORADO ) County of Pitkin ) 1. gyAN -Sivm- / tÂ·kigÂ¥ -TAÂ¥Â£ /112C #17271 (name, please prinr) being dr representing aft Applicanito the City ot Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public norice requiremencs of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ~.4 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 ~nonce: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the 2.5-day of LAA) W,17 , 20011,to and including the date and [ime of the public Mating. A photograph of the posted native (sign) is artuched hereto. ~ t~- Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from [he Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application, and, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any fuderal agency, state, county, municipal government. school. service* district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current [ax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A cgy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. ~I~ (continued on next page) JAN-22-2002 TUE 10:30 AM FAX NO. P, 04 0 Rezontng or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision o f this Ticle, or whenever the text of this Title is [o be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use reguludon. or otherwise, the requirement ofan accurate survey map or other slifficient legal description oti and tile notice co and lisring of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signatire ~ -1 The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 2% day or Jol/kliceÂ»/\ , 20044 by w,~,242,9.M e- cal-~4.i I- 0%24 # f W.NESA N.Y HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ~ i KENNEY ip# 1%*.My co on expires: 5 ~ -l ~Dous kap'â‚¬. 6~ MÂ¥ Commissi@NE!*9801%?knuub (-Il ATTACHMENTS: ~ COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 0 JAN-22-2002 TUE 10:30 AM FAX NO. P. 02 0 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 513 W. SMUGGLER CONCEPTUAL HPC REVIEW, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, ON-SITE RELOCATION, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, AND VARIANCES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 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 Drew Harman requesting approval for Conceptual Design, Partial Demolition, On-Site Relocation, Historic Landmark Lot Split, and the following variances: a 10 foot rear yard setback variance, a 20 foot combined front and rear yard setback variance, and a 500 square foot FAR bonus. The property is located at 513 W. Smuggler and is described as Lots E-G, Block 27, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5096, amyg@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Suzannah Reid. Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on Jantag 26,2002 City of Aspen Account 0 0 br . 04 4 . 1 7. - 4 4 â‚¬ . 8 . , p . 1. A 1 - 1 4 Â· , I. 4 4 lihi .. .-JAR,42~ *J_ 1 - I Emililillilli PUBLIC NOTICE - IS. I.U.I.-CONCE-UA, ...~ A 0â€¢*TE â€¢,tocanoÂ», â€¢â€¢srop,Â· 4-ce-6- c....0./.I 4/1 I 11 -- ~ 0 1 1 I Â·925EEE= I 11 11, 1 1 ~ 1' Im ........... 4--g . 900 : '4 1 2- 9 .-*-Eah**77 4- 1 Â¢1.1. , . 118,1--. -*#. 1 - , 43 318 FOURTH STREET LTD 609 CORPORATION BASS RAIFIEL I CIO BUSTER FELDOM A COLORADO CORPORATION 606 E HYMAN AIINO BOX 445 PO BOX 1819 ASPEN CO 81611 IltUSTON TX 77001 ASPEN CO 81612 BERLINER ARTHUR S BLAICH ROBERT I CROWN TAPPER PATRICIA C/O WALDEN BLAICH JANET S 5 POLO CLUB DR 750 BATTERY ST #700 319 N FOURTH ST DENVER CO 80209 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94705 ASPEN CO 81611 CUNDILL JOAN REED DIKEOU LUCY SHARP DOREMUS FAMILY LTD PARTNE 432 W FRANCIS ST 25 POLO CLUB CIR 85 GLEN GARRY DR ASPEN CO 81611 DENVER CO 80209 ASPEN CO 81611 FIVE CONTINENTS ASPEN REA EPSTEIN ROBERT FINKLE S MARCUS & SARA F C/O EDWARDS JOSEPH III 5000 PLAZA ON THE LAKE BLVD 117 AABC 502 MAIN ST STE 201 AUSTIN TX 78746 ASPEN CO 81611 CARBONDALE CO 81623 FOX SAM GELL-MANN/MURDOCK PARTNER HALL CHARLES L FOX MARILYN 500 W FRANCIS PO BOX 1819 7701 FORSYTH BLVD STE 600 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 CLAYTON MO 63105 HELZBERG SHIRLEY BUSH TRU ~~MALPERIN ELLEN & BARRY HARMAN ANDREW J QUALIFIED PERSONAL RESIDENCE 420 W FRANCIS ST 563 HOMER AVE TRUST ASPEN CO 81611-1233 PALO ALTO CA 94301 4520 MAIN STE 1050 KANSAS CITY MO 64111 HOFFMAN JOHN L HOFFMASTER THOMAS J HOOK BRADLEY K & PAMELA D 1035 W 57TH ST 437 W SMUGGLER ST 782C N KALAHEO KANSAS CITY MO 64113 ASPEN CO 81611 KAILUA HI 96734 KELLNER GEORGE A IBBOTSON ANNE B ISRAEL CHARLES B KELLNER MARTHA B 505 N 5TH ST 522 W FRANCIS ST 117 E 78TH ST ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611-1235 NEW YORK NY 10021 LEWIS ADAM KIENAST CHRISTIE A KOEHLER DAVID R TRUST C/O KATHLEEN HONOHAN @NATIONAL 406 W SMUGGLER ST 618 W SMUGGLER ST CITY BANK ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 1900 E 9TH ST LOC 2030 CLEVELAND OH 44114 OXLEY JOHN C 50% I1IZLLEN MICHEL NEISSER JUDITH E REVOCABL ATTN BARBARA WALKER ~411 PRESTON RD #730 LB 2 , 132 E DELAWARE APT 6201 1437 S BOULDER AVE #1475 DALLAS TX 75225 CHICAGO IL 60611 4 TULSA OK 74119 PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP POPE WILLIAM H SFP 1996 PERSONAL RESIDEN C/O CHRISTOPHER HEWEIT 540 W SMUGGLER #2 PINE HILL LN MCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 0 OX 2577 ASPEN CO 81611 HOUSTON TX 77019 SILVERMAN JACK E SMALL ALBERT H & SHIRLEY STAPLETON FAMILY LLLP 612 W FRANCIS ST 7116 GLENBROOK RD 1350 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR ASPEN CO 81611 BETHESDA MD 20814 ASPEN CO 81611 THALBERG KATHARINE VERLEGER PHILIP K & MARGA WALTON CAROLYN F 434 W SMUGGLER ST 15 TORREY PINES LN 413 W SMUGGLER ASPEN CO 81611 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 ASPEN CO 81611 WEST SMUGGLER LOT SPLIT L WAX RICHARD A & HILDEGARD WEINGLASS GABRIELE PEPPER C/O LEONARD WEINGLASS 2727 SULPHUR SPRINGS AVE 533 W SMUGGLER PO BOX 11509 ST HELENA CA 94574 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 WHIPPLE RALPH U & LYNNE C 855 GIBSON AVE ASPEN CO 81611 0 , .). Â·Â· r*-,Â·'' "~Zt]V'u;P-.5 Â»...1,?2>7~1Â·24 'fi,4~LE:Â·â‚¬9,~ 4&7 AN-E.'. e tr# -I - - ,-I. 'k'.r .W JU , . 1 - r , - i --''~' . ... 1 - '# ...'Â£'... . 1-11-/4, -S'...:I -~-/ .-- , -1-- ' ' r I - c: -- .-- .#,21(9%~4'Ap,v.v:E,f Lv'*6*-,-~....15':rF:.F :1~rot,9:5-#,~227492..f..,-~2*..4,tifIRE.,4(:Air.-,1-4-â‚¬f--,-Abl'=-1.-61 :i,-0,-, ~1~'.~* , ....Ar. . j Â·,>inifit,-91.. 01.1%,k, p , -- - ,1 - ; I .11 14 #s- . - 1 â„¢: 2 -1.1 6 . <..1. â‚¬. . -- Wi . p . . . 6 4 1 .. , 1, . I . .- ..iA.Z.,b.Â¢f-'.t-1,,,4,Â·wÂ·,f:6401'F-Â·4'33: AU~''l-.401Â©<--5%,4 -t':'Kct-l': 9 .... 1 11 -, .r ..3, 390*NL,laa:Vith.89#12#***~.:~*-*.-:.~~. -1 1- 1 , ; 1 .+117, It,W ., A.1.415:10- ' 0, ~ Jilk -% = - -4~4.2. bs:c|2 lfi;VA~Â·z H:.24. -b ; 11 :11:1: c. i.. S : L. ,..t yr.. 77-*;...EW:<40'P"V,C/.*EFA,M .22 1%:aÂ«, ..4/. A.*â€¢0: 23<41' 0 - . '4.,>~05.:4.':erp,jo~P.frâ€žI);~a.-f -:3-;.-Ul : ..P , 2 a ... - 7 .1 . -41=@pâ€¢i p #f.,Â·.,N..:'-a fÂ»,â€¢â€¢.9,2-0.,m~7/4#M:BAr..f334â€¢Qi>â€¢crap#-g.â€¢if. ' 'Â· diveÂ£ Â· 1 -3422: -2.,li:â‚¬142--49;I'f :3 2 --ls.'32:.*499,3.79 9,4 9.-Aff 91'.#t: 2493~431 7>.O.- 4 - r * nyÂ·- . I - : ,2 1 ' baltrkid:14444.L' . --- Â·Â·* 1,6,:4*~_ '42, - ,~ . . /7, t . ''.9 - i'~ 16-* ,43~6.-'s T.n,1 T I I ....45. 9 . :27.211:2 - te?=45 e I Ref.1;~*774* -,- ~,1 - 1-9 â‚¬ I. I c.-=:=..teâ‚¬2,3. A-in A *.-A1-:4 '-~ .4-- 2 _~.-1 ' ~ 1.41 ..4.- 0,1 , / , 4 * '.I , .4 -Ciza,24/*Â·4Â·4:362 i re= " ..20 .tiYZE*UÂ» 9 W - F . 11 - 9 7 ' I .97777>*.1.4.- .., Â· D ...., '/6 I -r 4:b.3 , ri & - g#-*14#*4974 - - r* . Â·. I ./.40.... * 94 - j.m--C.-- %272# -:.-:.t#,J- 2/ B.I 2.-44'b'r *.NhAY r - -_ ~.17- :- â€¢*'Â·Pat â€¢~7.=fiffg.-**h:. -3 7-464:AL- 4*ix-PR, 11 bk&/745614/MPX#.--'-Â· ty:-7--FIWI- -Â·- .t-f-Fr'+ --- - ,-- -:-.Â·- ~---:- -:~_- -- Â»~229*9.53*~'â‚¬9~4~(33*t --- *p#/1,$/f .fl./.1 -..,. - - rp- -1 2 -1-~-4 11.:.Ir'-,r -2~L V -'.k, 0.â‚¬,/4 - (,i'. -':=41,1-4- 1-,@,2.-WZQ~-*f-t~12.'.- 62--~-r?<i:*,,tbi,#43:~~.121**FrAW#= * k rspvJ. A....4 5 ,-3:'C:;~~054 3% 29~:35- 27:..~ -LifeÂ·fr~.,lu-1~r.(D: 1% . vz --&4 .- ~Â· Â·Â·+ - proposed circa 1900 smuggler street residencE r . ... ./. 1 4.-00. , 4.,W \ - alley block 27 7 A--- _ _-_= ti -Ii- _ 6-111>W 4/ -3 1 -1. 1 1130 -- - 1 ~ 1.-jiR 27 9 4 9 ~ 0 4.1 ~ V r- 4 + -' .' '*p .4 ;4 â€¢,|f 'â€¢ :' * + Â· 1, r F TA -71\ 1.-fÂ« - / 1 - .. 1 -:.......%14*i-*L-dÂ·12Â£ friir+- CE:&115 f 1/-1 7 -21-4-42 I.I./ -L- -_ --4 1 | 1 11 - 1 1 7 1 1,111111111111-4.7,1 11 t- J 11 11 - 4- 1 1 1 1 1 -rÂ«- I --P - , 1 11 1 ! lilli 7- ils); 1- AA.4 6 --1,- T- =W . 6 11 Â£ 9 q f Â·r 1 .1, & c -:14 ; . 461 - 1 -Cri 5/'AFT,FIN. 111 .z " "Â· .Â·,+1 ,'M;*934 -1-j- ir-1 - I ~:-~ ~ dip- metifff##~ft#MFZ Â·4Â·.i--' 44 4Â¥.Pt Â·h!-1.,.. _ s:=: Â· .Â·< ~:Ap k.1 Â·.Â·Â·. 2JgÂ·JA 1 11/ 1 1 ?t~ ffli i.[} fl f i~311#li~# A 41 -1 = .tÂ·@ I;t iÂ·kt t<~t itÂ¢-ti-'i 30Â«fÂ¢9-: \ 1 . 1- - 4~1 .L i 1%77*32 7-}flt..,C"...i-6----- : . 14:$.:~3t.13-6-%49.-21*4-- L 94 1 1. 11--0 ./ \11 -Â·tit~*{34Â·-4**itii---- i -%88 4-- I .W .' 644%/ .: 4. : t.-:?.1 :'ri 7: P-Â·,ipe,y"PÂ·; .:0:19Â·4:;-7 1 . , Â« *Â»fÂ«-fitop _ * 4 >3 ..4% I f 4 0Â«9-4 --I 1 0 7- Â» 3419Â° 1 west smuggler street 1, 1 b 4 1 0, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION mi' 8% smuggler street residence 3 -1 4 imt m 4 513 west smuggler street :3 m iii# 1 #81 3 0 asDen colorado AF~ 0 C -Fir/-29 LE :hiv=1 L00Â¥ â€¢12/ ueid aus ARCHI HARR ... ...2 1 b _I_ 1 --- ..Ii- ---- 41/ / --- - alley block 27 1 I 17/ 10\ N / 1%- 'b' 1 / 9 ri_ '-r-irl I -4- 1 .-I -- ./ , i 1 41 J 1 1 1 1 1 1/1 1 11.1 / 1 11 â€ž1. 1 -"la i- 1. r 1 111 1 11. - M.t'-r r ,,1 11 1 1 t '1 '''I i 1,1 1 11- 1 1,1- 11. 1 11 4- 11 '1 11~Â· 11 |-1.' Â·1_lf .1 1 1 I lili 1 11 1 , 7Â·1 , 11 1- --11 ! 1 ' 1 - 1 1 1 11. lilli-!-4- i,-1 11-.4 lilli 111' 1}- .1 4-1.1111 I 'll t' till #11 11 0 1 lillil 1 119'1711 1 L 11. P 1(Ar q 1 111 -1 111 /0 1 T i 11, Â· 1 1 1,1 11 lilli 1 - 1- | ~'---h~ ;tful " 64 245.imp 16 JIll} {411111-- 2~1 - 1-1 An'- 747 1 /3 1 11%9-,7 ,-61- lilli -1,7-â€ž lit 17-MI,!-I 0 - - ----AL -ILI..=ag-34â‚¬2= 1 /. 03 11 'C'.'' -f~ / 1 / /21 N L_/ N o -- 3 Â»2 103 1 1 -+ 94 1 d \ U Z--f\/9 - U Z.-J- west smuggler street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION it 32 Â» -1 Z 8 9 FI'l 18 Z - 1=ir t-1 R li'' 6,136Â·:1 smuggler street residence I jin g ' F.: 1.1. 1.11|1161 111: 11, 1 - iii ~10;* IR# 4 7 513 west smuggler street 232 m .UNLI Agnen rnIormrin 'Rf 2 0 200Â¥ Bul!:s& s EAGU .. - - 11/ re:11 I F * ~~~.~ M '-.zrl gfiI~L-221 ki~I[Zidil . i.iN...1, Â·Â· illsÂ·/2/ 1 b# . A /498Â¢4 4 * **i ~ I - 1 .- Ft â‚¬ ~ 441 13% ..1 l 2 :111 j.:~ f 11 1 1 '4. 1 1â‚¬'1 tty:i / 1 Â·t.k' 1 L t.-Â¢*67Â·~A f -. .~. Â«39~ â€¢ k -7,0.43'22Â¢9 / 44..2 A--44 - 1 -0 =d 74,72 0 4 kipÂ©321 1 i ' ;*t 1 14.131 1 r E 191 : -2.14 * i k.~f . 11 4 nic/1 ~43* Pa 1 1 - h" -r7 197 2 14 0 El u' N rt- ' rr-: i,, 14 4,1 1 1 1-47 1 11. Â«' f\\-\7 M '. Lf 1 1. .. Al ' I / 01. -77/ 'li~ -- -4%4 / 1 Â· / 171*/ ~ * 1 17-*h 1 1 1 Jifl *.6, * r ' / W V' . 220 , "r itt**3 i {i L..59':'4 Il tÂ·--1143:~1 1 F- '.1. 1 2 l A .~.4.r-Â·'l~~ / ~11>11Â»r , tUtu / / 1 l , . 95%1Â¥t north 701 StrGet CAJ yl'. ':â€ž *.' ....0 7, . 24.{ llc--2. 04*~ ' LN>3.9 1 I b PÂ»*P I FRE:k I .111111-1 2 1 1 *k /2 / wigm '.9 tit,164 , t:.:' 1 R i -lijiy *Il rÂ»Czl i f---~--~ 1 1 - 441=- 1 / r,f l 1 7 - 11 ., 4 'li ..1 1 1 --r--2 . 4 Â· gi /-/-7 - 1 2,3 i i - '111, t Abn.,I ~, E--1 8 1 '45. 4' r.Â·IL-1. i t:6*ipil, 1 idd k 44.2 I 'a ' , f 1-.3~>J~.â€¢4': Xi., ; ~ I' - + - I 1 I 12 - . ; Lpitrat:,],4 11 1 I 1, f --- ,Â»44.-1 r.11 b L..22%[ 11 . . E=Ze -1 0Â· e.'Wc/ Â· Fl .1, 1 1 0- m --UZZE ' 1. j /,D 7 1 e Â¢11 11 Il I ..4 - ~ .4-4 7 11'11, h e ; It 49*1 1 /'/'.:4 e -1 1 1 - --1-*727 Quit 1 - 4. :Â·Â·.â‚¬..2 ,-, k 6.-=--- . 2,1, 4 4 %2 ~ - j / j . .*-- -----1- - 1 \Ct> / ho45</7& 0 1]1,1 i -RA * -0 E- -/9 6; Â·'â‚¬71 r- 1 14,3.-1 / BW - / Li*i % t ' , i.Â»'..., e n 1,4 -P 1 ~ /4*;4 A---4.4 26 , / *61 0/.h 1 r &,--1 \ 3 -424 1 1 12 r....3 1 2 1 - I I - 11 1 lt-nÂ»=,12-L_ I M il r:tr. 9 th - amerm ' Â· Â· / / 4.Â·/ 11.1--4 1 1 14! I 1 1 5-1 , V.Mot rÂ·' L>Â·44,0 . :Â·.% 0. / 4464 f f A I. fDTh-J i 7 /4-0 , r n. 2>h / / - - . <9 L â€¢7 , Â« 1 - 5% 11 11 ~yar,i :\ l P:9. 51 I n-- r. ..IN Ary.m L 1 Fg'\ 1 Â» Log 42.42 1/ 1 74* /7. '06.-2, + -44Â·,1 : + -::..* *&...5 1 1 -- - -1 r d 4 '2. 1...... 0 4 4.3~*Â»1 ' ' Â· I#' ' ---1 --...f ; ..... I. '# , \ 1 C==t -1, Qi *.Â·5 ~-- north 50 street I -3, p Ly %:-7-- / / 1 , 4/4 t.4 2 Â·.A' 7 / *4. 4-,<d--3 1 ' . i. I 11.... *4/6 - ~,X, , 70Â·144 Â·-,L / 1 //3543-1 1 1 I W: Â· h / 1- KEN / -%*JY =M. . 'k- 1 1 , - - Ul HJ 1 Â· 621 1 1' 24.4.61 der./// 41'21' 1 111 1 + 4*11 1 -Â·tr. r . tÂ·. 1 I-.Â£/-'' lilli 1 -1 Of/ ..1 1 .Nll j N i.Â·1 9 1 1 1 - la:'A.:1 1 Â£,921 1 1 Fnm * 1/ 1 r.0 Q 1- 1 N... 21 , 11!i 1 1 141, 9 1 9%*J , 1 1 -1 4 * Â· Ilk 0 + (1' ' 1'*41 1 ~Â»,~ 5 1.1. 1 1 V - " 9- j . list'll. i : 2,1. e r 1 . 1. '-Il 1 . 4 . 4:4 u r - -1 1 1 1 . , - 1 14 .Lt=:47/ j Q \44 11'1 1 -E 1 1 lf.woÂ·1 Dll i $ ff; -0-- 1 1.1 :.9,/ - S 0 0%57- 1 / 1 Fty?-1 1 1 1F*iki Â·:i I j *-L h -' /,f <I / 96,230.4 / 400 l''LA E. 1. . 1 / 11 1 â€¢ Rym 193Â«lgil 1.,qp 1 1 94Â·k -1 1-Â« 4.+1 1 '.1-2. 1,11 . , 9 9 ... i 1 1 + bilw 1:92Â» 1 r b.1. /lili L_11 --' AA.Ef "-' 1 r r,_ i.1 - 9 â‚¬-. ' .Â·AhÂ·.-â‚¬Â·96, r-i ,-.L'.-Ilt> 14-I ti ','If tiiAi 1 / e #A / 19Â»j' I j reTE:Pa 13 h.Â·/la_, '0,91. 1,7,4 .lf 't Ff : . 7.1 1 0,2.//-, 1 'Â·0%916+ 1'. 1,--.-'...--4.-,iÂ¢kwi Ul-60â‚¬.1-7 1:U*Yl I i 1 1 1. 41 -1 1 #J C pl--7 / / 64:99. I 193 j UPÂ»CL 11 23*31= 1 ' 7 . 1'.f,fÂ·i'yâ€žÂ£ 4 I, 1 1 9-2-Â·-241 -/ 1 1 68<91.1.4#i Il ril 1 JAVile#*=31 f710 jp , J , b . .01 _r-h j '' . )~t i mÂ«k#:h c , , .~ .' I 11 1 -17 1 1-11 / 13Â»i h /7/ r. 425 1 t L , Y-t .9,4 It I I.'r. A--Â·-Â·~ 1.f:''f '1 / / - - . f?,121 f .17 13.2.1 A=:>-463'>:77 / 11/011} f 4-~ f - i ;531 -=21 1 Â£Â·9*.3,1 1 1 1 1 <301 27-J / , h 11 -1 - -17 It 4%490Â¢ / 1 1 421#1 --7 - 1 1 * ' Ii-.4~5-:.1 . 1 1 1 M 'bÂ£:1 [ 1 4. itÂ·.h// / .....1,4 1 fÂ»1 - '~ - north 2nd street . '1, 1 / IRÂ» - -7--r-- / 9-Â·iIA Et\ ASI .0, A~ ~~ 1 :14 . , *Â·\ 19Â·'P Lab , CfY.-4.rt:~3171 / )- . 'r 1,4 +21 Vil . Ir...~.,P e Â«4 r . W :1 4Â©>u A 0 llÂ«N A '91Â¥ 1 F ft *St ; 1 -- / 1 ...../ 1 '. â‚¬.4 ; ...h. 1 - - :Â· d . , -~r-- D 1,J:,3.4- I p .1 14 % 4 r litt d v:L f \\\UNi~, 44Â·1 Ill '4 i c , 9 4 .. .... 1 . 1 " 1.4,573.6/1.Fe# ' fe. 4,11. t- Â·... tNE.* ...If dr. 21 . 1..~....\ .1 Af:.3./ r *4, 16 Â· , 5 -- 1- 1 + . 9.7 VE[,1, v , 1.- 1 4 i Â· ' 11Â· U.AÂ· 11Â»9 . Re--/ 2 , . ...t...1 '2:Â·1 - |, 1 I --1 1 . 1 1. 0 1 0 iIi '944 - 1' f 't ti -4 - 114 , 111 -1. 3. 1 1-1 m 1 11,1 j Li, 11 '4 2 1 1-' 11 ' /7 9 7.,â€¢1 Â·. 'hit -11-1.1.;,~ , 1,; 1 91*.iÂ· ic. f. 4 , 9 LF NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION '+6 i. '21,0,Â· ' i 1 -- G . .3 Â» 1 9 g smuggler street residence i 180 Â» 5 Z 1 6 1 7 1 380 7 513 west smuggler street $9 m aspen colorado : -1 09 -- leens Jel66nlus Smu er Street -- North s Â£00Â¥ sauaos jee4s Il<)to TEAGU 70 12525,58 Fâ€¢Xg7O925 7 HARR existing historic door to be TEAGU existing roof line to be restored, ARCHITECT relocated to front door. 7 - add diverter over entry. JUE-, 402 N MILL ST ASPEN Coell original roof edge conditjon 970 ~26 2668 FAX 970 925 71 Â»-trk==ArcucesÂ«*F~J#f~/P~~U/'48,4~:%~44~-~24~~~~~~~~~-,~~6-~,-,~-~~,~~~ -21,,~~ -s ~~~, to be replicated. it4*4423_13yaÂ¢33*3.1283%503-Â·:,titt:~ e,ds~ng roofto be replaced ,~21- 19,*u. original brackets to be replicated. pvÂ· t~><*In<*343%4**Â·19Â»4*f:*MfiltiÂ¢f~*.p*14.vr:Â·.I& - rp~ .;12 l-~Â«rÂ¥***Â·Â·r-1Â·*1-yj~.:Air original back addition no longer - 4 th Â·"t.44 C41*924*fÂ¢%&Â·AÂ· ; -- 'Â· ~-Â· with flat seam metal roof to /Fj?fager' . ;'461?63Jffiggrig 4.J.li-firs#/bagii'ibidi,2462..: -1- imitate original tar paper roof. 2.21 114,~ exists, will not be reproduced. - -- < /: -fi--~ : original roof line to -~/Im///*/.==/.,2/=*i. 1,44 original columns to be replicated. Â· ~ DEL be restored. original windows to be replicated. ---C--Els= original shingles to <+~ 4943*LE+1...,t .4.. - - be retained. original comer condition 4#YA , " - dzE:==96 LLY view of existing miners cottage double hung window to - --- with non-original additions to south. to be recreated. j Â£ ' t===7 - -- k .AG â€¢ .4. p &= 9-: - - F= be restored. - ----- - additional second entrance to be restored as fixed door/window. :L '-b.~ 14,/~~.; :Â· eÂ©,p:2:SM:2.--- ~ - .b ~ . ~22-5 e. stone steps to be restored to - -6. ...IN. original location. new brick chimney similar to original photo of original miner's cottage 91 red sand stone foundation to .~ ~, * in slightly different location. EP..7 42% existing light fixture to be replaced -- - - be recreated in new location. ~ with more appropriate fixture. Y~~n-I~~I'l%I-.'CA~W:1- 1.1.u//VL - I t:G-==~ -r--tu~ =110.11.1111 *Ad .5. 34:11"4% existing non-original additions to be removed. existing windows to be ' 1''?1 ih~~ 4i # *' 4 .3.z# 4,4 -+-fi|. 4 E - --- existing eaves to be restored replaced with windows 1-01 3 rt .4 1Â· 'rÂ»L back to original proportions. ; p of original proportions. view of existing miner's cottage - t[ 4* k .6.9 1 with non-original additions to west. existing roof to be replaced with - ' :Â· . original shingles to existing porch condition flat seam metal roof to imitate . , . be retained. original tar paper roof. .1 Lf - 4.4 H - : existing windows to be replaced with .941*4 windows of original proportions. - fake mulliorIs to be rernoved, 21Â·411,Ify -Â· t,.7--., -*-" .4- - Se .Ni./Bil -,-- . 0 .-3 =FF, t,14;W~~27MM62 râ‚¬ ..I-&*<:1. 2-- 4 to be replaced with double Fi,"1-4,3. 1"kililry 1 ' .gl ...22'ime-~&91'/'--0 M-. Ill I w existing brackets to be replaced hung window as per original. i~-~DER ~ t~ k 2 with replications of originals. 0 4 - oâ€¢.0..0, - 1-=:r-- 2 ?-4:14.1.Flizi./.* . . 41103 1,.ceon./b/,/v ir:'Â·- - - existing square columns to be '44' 51*.1 existing siding to be #Rj*.*.ru ' replaced with replications of , ' retained, replaced only 94 . 9T {1 4.-4.4 - 1 turned originals. where necessary. elmson-oraisting mine/sco~ge 0107 existing balustrade to original height off grade with non-original additions to east. b = . 2 be removed. to be maintaned. existing existing porch condition conditions existing front elevation of original miner's cottage - p "modern" door to be replaced with - -- red sand stone foundation ta- - no scale historic door now used in back. be recreated in new location. A004 eouepise.1 jeefis iei66nuus 513 west smuggler street opeJoioo uedse HARR TEAGU ARCHITEC1 412 lilli ASPEN CO 0 070~52566 FAX /70 926, 59Â»*2Â»>333~2999% 5 3<499'9439%39Â»3<Â»0Â«Â»*>Â©MAN#WeeÂ»Â»9054'434'4:43<991, I ./ .50 X/Â«\ . ' ' / , <3/<Â« r/<01' Â«/Â«/e<4/4/Â«/,3/Â«,4/,>,eAS#,rive'N<,~9<3<<2'<ty X, x/ Â»<39\<3<43/ r/ \</ r/Â©/ r/ r/Â«/*/â‚¬</ \/ r/,r/<V *Â«Â»Â»Â»Â»4944Â»9Â»Â»Â»Â»Â»49Â»Â»Â»49Â»~ 0 / 9><S \ \.45Â«<12 /\<>x>< 1Â«2200 2 Â«~Â«46Â»Â»x'Â»Â»~c~#,#~j"*~1Wgt#521421*.C#%.~dZIff~~14$$*F#2424220*48~* 9 4 MAR#44444#R#*5244444'6424 7 1\3*% AM# #, r ~:4<gAv#gRâ€ž99<9~74<52444#495*#,f*&44 1*9090~444,1 4A4,4444444+A<#4 f~~ >Â«tfÂ»%Â«Â«4â‚¬fÂ«43Â«6>~44<9Â»~Â» Â»~*Â«~9Â«Â»4~4Â«44~*Â»4 Â«44/9/V\/4\Â«Â«\Â«44Â»Â»tÂ»%~ Â¤2Â«4444Â»494Â»~ ~Â»Â»Â«Â«Â»Â»Â»>~Â»Â»91Â»Â»Â»Â»Â«titÂ«*Â«fÂ»Â¢Â»Â»ttÂ»*taÂ«Â»Â» oÂ»-44,**24*~ *9434*ktk~ 4%Â»t};%5;%5464644â€ž0Â»49 f Â»6364Â»494**44$*4YABM,,â€ž44*42-496 '0$46 -1-------.il------9-----------i~- - -1 -*- - -, f.- *5%4%%/f5*,*40*94%>9*49<sek,A0~,fd>4~' <'MN /Â»42449\>/441//444/ / %Â»fwir\ 1 ~~ 79Â»<t>Â»4~39%>Â»44*Â«ttittÂ»*~~~~~~* . i,> Aty '1/X/950*~,%21, media room /44&,402(29 : 99 1%79~49<4449*44Â»~Â«*Evt ki E ~,Il'Â»9*45~Â«Â»taÂ«ti~*~ - 1 :EI %%3~5~49/94 0/Â»/Â»\0/Â»Â» 10Â»44444:*YVkfW##T+44*AM.Â»Â«Â»4Â»00Â»41\4~ Â»80*44*Â»Â»44****4 1-1-'= =i.= 1 . 7=k.#*WZYS:*RIP+"-B-*-A~~~61-4-~71'.44*itr/~1/72---.f~Mit#"m*PE;OMM/$M##in"MAW"M*In:"Ski$*6Gh#RI#%"m"*408*04"*1'"9$~ 594*36<54>9559*>ty\Â»Ay%p~ky,y Â»t>k<%>44 4>1,1 2, laundry room I I L-L ~ 4 ~3> ~~ 24;~6>~ t<~3>5%~<*44%>;{40)24 .12 L-1 //-11 +:r- 7-23Â§Â»491-[-__f-_------__266____--____-____ 2 Â£~*Agf,64*44$~w2~W~")1942ill<#A#.6*.ril*STk~*E;A'%~~,<tk~ ..0 L t / 434%44 0 0 :i .00,;A<~4446~294~~â€ž <5>vQAL ./&1/ / V t ) A:)* \ 00*609.Â»t~*t ,~ ,6,#~â€ž,,~,1*40,~~,1,#i,144,40*/,0â€ž','~'â€ž~,04~0~9,4< <*2 0) O 0 Â»60Â«**20*44%Y*.~~712%~44476*630~*44\ 04Â»\, \Â«44,Â«,0,4 10 (D 1 i 4%93>00Â«5>095>95356%>4*~**Â§~*><>/Â«kâ‚¬<ARA**46 ' 1, ''C f ' 4- '' mechanical/storag 1 .1 4/ 0> f f* . ***t*%%42Â»Â»4Â»*4Â«49Â«Â»Â»923*r~Â«*@99 1 ZE 1 L-J == w -8 1 - , e / %&*&zaa&Â¢00*5&0Bk*&3~\/93Â¢~AÂ»90\\Vt . K \ 4. \ \ ../ \ c }%*%?*53Â«Â»9Â»4Â«jt>44%Â«6~,~~444*t ~ ~, , L~1O tj~ L iÂ»Â»Â»449Â»Â»4Â«4Â«Â»44* #**EitÂ»UftÂ»44Â«Â»55359%~4~Â» / . 0 \ O 42. 04 . bathroom % Â»Â»*A,#404***~~~'~~~~~<-~~~~-~~~~~~~~ 0100\Â» *4<1*%4*6240.*24~22*d,*gaid#*tk=~r*;4awB.9**412~ 1 0-E Â» 44/\/ 44/ 1 pia &41*Pt*(%%%3:3~%***14~50*J<*203444*44*420*;r.'SJ&,bAX4kâ€ž.4 **2Â»24Â«Â»92%42%34%Â«24*~~ ~ ~~ ~/ U Â¢93Â«i>f>~Â«Â«44~962*~ 1%54~4~~,1*e~~./Â»Â»fÂ«Â«Â»4Â»4fftfA14%1~~,v~4~,~~~. 1.woon " i /144*k a] PA\ 1 ~ /412<*449**r#,4~4,14*244*#4,),44*<4,,<4494%44Â»2Â»2~0 Â«/ 6< Â«44 - 9 J,P . 1 . I & L.~<:9- \43 .,/3 <14 V \ \02 \ \> p /3 \/ \\4 -7,$1 , r <'1 4 > ,14~*4,4,4~21~44<24 0,I,7,4,1,1412 1,I,e<' f#VWAv,4&~A,b~*j<$24 t>\ 1 1 4 L \ / / <> 02 / 4 /~41 ~<5~~<5'Â·<:~42â‚¬5'~4~441 * * m 94Â»244â‚¬*4411*~44*MI#A<~64Â»Â»Â»tÂ«Â» Â° 1 09~Â»:#~~<>916$#%3---- t:/. 1 est bedrocin : 0 4, ./. /0 ty \. 64<~ft%~ . >Â»05*00 AN,22 \65Â« \/\04<A\.Â« , 7/// h / h , 1 , / *. AA-RA**4**b...7,.T ,.4446*445444*44 49Â» /4>f 33 +14\ 1,+1 -1 gu - 4 3*A$* 3~&4%*~,4*..W,WA,Â«aaÂ» aÂ»/4/ 4vbpw*v ]%#%%4Â§05#*9%AA 4 9 \0\ / / / . 1 A p ****;'Â»Â»V~L~~><~Â§><**>.~pc<~~22 ~3>4>/\4>Â» e / <>44 t. /0/4 ' 3Â»%' \ 2 44\ 4 -%-- \/ \ 4,40 4,//#4490)<R 11 Â»10Â»Â«940â‚¬,Â»44Â»9~40-4299<2234Â»444 .... Â».4-1- 4 1 *AKÂ« 94>Â«MO/<>Xy*<%/\/tA / 1 ~ lili-- t t I. '. 1 \/\,/\/V\/â‚¬<>0,4<4 / \ / /\<\SOO/0/\\4<44><04Â«~ & f'' 0 91 . \47>Â·999>/ \ *Â»474*0 l. -----ir----.1 . ' 3Â»3Â«Â»ffitÂ»4%1193#Mi~*Sssimimamee~Mirief~%%Mjfzfj/%#ag~m 4343Â»fÂ«10*ftÂ©~424'94%44Â«24f>3344%22%*%*3*03*8*==*39*49%4434:~~44:**645*ga0**Â»Â»**~ w 4~44 44.. />aÂ»~Â«445*5,4.,A.,MY#F<*3$15**99&4#,442*~S.*~tric***brf#*4*** ...illizill#~2 Â§~I*~~4~4Â«reÂ»~46*~Â»a~~Â»~Â»~7Â»Â»Â»Â»~2Â»e~Â«Â§49Â»Â«Â«Â©~~~4Â»Â»~eaÂ»Â»~492Â»Â»Â»19%9~6Â©Â»~6Â»99Â«Â»9Â»~Â«~2~Â»~6Â»~Â«Â»Â«*Â«~4~Â»94Â»~Â«Â»~44Â«Â»~0~Â«0Â»4 0 . A .yxy:./*/4/AllÂ»%0Â»:,AP 34%02>*4>oy* 14*MAW#%*11 i= Â»~a,Â»Â»0804.092,:625,434:613441Â«~3<~,64 43Â»Â«494Â»424&~4*~~7~2~.$MQh: ~~...1.>~0~. 12:4:4~04%Â»3*13Â»4Â»4Â« 4*/ ai ~~ Â«22Â«Â»Â»432Â»924Â»4Â«9Â«29*~Â»99%~~n h,c wor-.- 021202 40=,Ogpo...f,~ 0 0 0 Q: 0 U. prâ‚¬jâ€¢Ct /1/ 010 . 6- 1 0 :o wer ievei floor plan - 1 -a- i - 154'â€¢1'-0- Ai00 eoueP!SeJ e1is 1eiBBnlUS 513 west smu \ / Al/41 --- lock 27 \ 0 ., 1 -1 i , ..1 1 \ . i / 4 -4 1 4 \ - ==--1/ immfcap.zulr"N :r..1&,1~4.~~ad*Â·11':+44Â· 7--9-\29 N . 45 i ji [i < Mt 1 1 ii- 1 1 \ 119 1 \ 1 i i :93- I <4, Â» f 1 t / 1 191- --------t=r=~LEZEEE~k~ 1-1 2 1' / 1 / L / 1-1 V-7 , / t ( 1 - i . 1 1 4% 3 i 5 fi 1, 0 t 1 -= ./3.1 f . , _LJ :. A 5 1 . ' . IXIIA-4 1.11 # .: 4}10 i \ 1 -- 1 2 -re f -1. t. ..F~ ~ m -/1. M. 3.3 m J 11 ,) 1 9.3 :- ....!-j. --=---1-,-.- 1 lt~â‚¬1 - p. ~:b ~ ~. 0% 1 . 04 9.17 --- 0-__-~ - W u--u_zny r- - f --Â·-----Cli) 11 : !! 0 e v Â· i~Â· ~ Â· ~1 2 Â· 61 -- Af~1~~~---\\.3 4 ~1411/ 1 .-I 4 491 Â£51 9.-O. 4 4 '4 \ 1/ - west smuggler street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION mi' E 3 -1 I O M & 4 smuggler street residence 1 -1" ~ RE. il I m, 1-" H i -- 2 0 513 west smuggler street 3 Iii I 2 3 9 14&1 asoen colorado 0 C â€ž # - +<*+**--r *4-1--' 19'-r 21'-3" ~ fence line peleoot,u ARCHITEC1 412 M ILL ST ASPEN 008 lock 27 . 0 1 1, 1 l 1 1 1 - 1 , 1.0,/4 1 IE 3 1 1 *43*2 1 , - -0%% 1 1 5 li 1 0 1 44:.1 Tji 11 fii j 1 . 1 -92 :- HEd (Il i "G . â‚¬0 i... 4 d. 1 1 1 1 .*1 4, 1 h 1 l 11 - i rul---71 / CEE:* 43 Si , , a 441~ I vi 11 1 1.-------11 1 1 f .1 LA\ ~ otn[Â©36 , -- O Kg 11 2 10 1 1 - -- tilIJ,irif*fa~2,4.4.~ilia '6-- -1- -- -:- ti-2 0 4 :fÂ»90&944>9 1 4,+2Â»t.14â‚¬9 *4%#ME-- -41Â·n"*PIA v; 119Â· T t, .Â·â€¢'71Â·,=282'i.tz 'Â·Â·~Â·id,~*Ral# 2221Â·2.trldlts)411 - lit.5 1 8202*t*.k - f.. 4.k'*8*- AERRipNRI L rig.im ragr.1 Wit 1, - ~ 1 - :,?**411-30011 -6*i9~ -A.kf I .1 N 1 1, t.f*Rak }3 0% %9,4 4 9.1%.Id >IF**iN#1-+12=k ~ |ip~iMBM#lf; 1*t~*,-tLM:.. 4.1,~..ti'~~ 'Â·.04' )1 Nl'..~~Â· ~~NifF=-_uti El#ti}$ f- .3.39 9 ~2 % 9. Â·(; t r -4 g.,4 & . .~g42~l-441+ .'63.-Â· â€¢ 1- 1 I lil~~~ 1 t.l~.j?Â¢4%Â· i.ER# 91'Kip#VE.*~LLI- 4 Plifi-,2.152 fIENE@.4 1%. 0 +1-bÂ· A ,-~97Â·i, ' Mt,iÂ· - i ., ; 1 -i 1~112Â£*:1:/. -4 4,A-*2~BY '-41**,Fi#'0.- .C'futi 4 Â·Ii..--. 4.trl-L-~4L-,I rkÂ·o P Â¢'Mfflt #Â· 018[ftji 3Â·,ffi:4 41~,1, 4-Pr 5 mi -13+711 -- W PI--14,%Â¢1-[illbpile,32, 1)Fil 8*3*1!** ff'Â»:, 4**4.4% 4'45 -4Â·9 it# FY F~#.Mr 9111 '' 9 1 1 IlÂ·:itjl.Â·bf~ Eg=34Â·4Â·Â·?1*%1.jÂ¥Â·;A:OF+B#21 1 K; 9 25 f,Â·i ~-9; 44. c.9 - 412*Ili~Â·11'*:*#~62 L-L-4-- --,-+-~IfEI-c- , .-.0 "~r&C~,A,3 L kil l -L~1-1 L 1 1 2 .4 -' 1-4.Â«f?-129*16 - -fÂ»--1-t > t 1 1 1 .111 40 i 1 1 1 . 1 1 -9/4744 1 A Y LE ' 7' â€¢ 9.-0. 21--11- 1--A = f Ul\\ ~ N -1 f j 4 - 99 LA 1 + 44 west smuggler street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION =31 4/1 130 10, omÂ» 1 1.1 a G.,1 . 7 L'.'711* smuggler street residence ~ al S Â»-= 513 west smuggler street 01 1Â§ 2 0 2 asoen colorado - Il .~ ---lill---I---I----I.---Ill- 412 M HARR 11 1 h , ) 44 ,Â·.(* (Ii) (f) 4-~ TEA G U . /- K I A j 1--T- 1 12-0, :' ---0 :il 14'-0= ~ } ARCHITEC1 ..1 'l, ;-- - .~ *___,97-91-1.14'-21____-_____~ 1 1 4.2 2.- 1 3 1 4122.6.1-ST ASPEN Col I t If 6.-. L- 1 124'-7- 970 BS 260 FA)(97'D.26 / hi 5:6~:2 :'.:ize <0 1 L. .----- ri - - I / 1 / ~44*00Â§64 1, ==--W-I= 1 r.4 4 ' , 1 , P*:&0: :44,9 1 A L- 1, f--3=14 - 4-4414-3-2-422- + U .1 --:~'- :,rr<.t:lie 44.:.,1Â»,3,6Â£1~l:i'. f- 2E~ 'U-- ---1 , | 1-2-2.- ..LI -2-EEZE--1 '-,1- Â· Â«yr u -_26.40 7-_ fv =LUCJ= IT-1-21-1- f -- - I. 2-11, 141 :.57 1 5 -' - ~-~ =- . ~~ ,=t---t---t----t-ur~-r~:3*~*~#6 4344 7-- 411 = cabin) ez'- . 'vine, 5<*B:>Â·: -> 2*3>14 .19, /11 h._-_ Hi , 1 -4 -i +-= **97939*?9996*Nmto l /-tiN- 744'- 1 3/11 V 9-32=-- :111 .... â€¢09- 1 1 <-Z#*3:*Iitax-- Lit--2 ~4 ~ 11Â¥i' lin I elev 111 1 1--- - - - 6- /11.1-r 1 Ir - 1---1 1 1 1 E-- :ts--10, ild ~i il lt--l Jittkx- lilli' 1 -11 ~ 1,1- -- - . too of 01* (c-n) -* L.---Â·*-Lut--1 -= 1 ' i,11-11Â«.[-221 J ,-1 Il ,'' '11-1 lili V low-6- 1- 11 1- -- 1 1 12 2--- 311 - 1, ir 11-- 1 11 - ir- ' ' rt-9 -17 --Â·-4 INE----1 r - -_~Ltif---1 |I L===-u~ 1 i -111--1 -- ~L --2 11 , -----21:4 -, ~, ~-'",â‚¬ 4,-4 -â€¢ 1 ,- i â€¢ +vo #48Â£-im Â£1[-r~I~/-2-jk_c-~-'~'~391ill" 1 --r' r'E lilli H _I~ip'jppilf #5249 - -- 1 11 11 11 1 ~ 11 ~ ~~ ~----- - 1-- 1 - -------------41 Li-1-- 2~= 4--__-*#*. - --9=:~ - 7 low -- A- 222-2 .--19-=2494-9312JEL-LLLA - i - i Jn- 1 -- --JZZ- - 1 --- --C - & - - 0155:=43#944%14#Rj#*~stil#Wh:.2:2144#1AIAIL/li#~T#SPI* -- -"---L----- - -- - - <*re*k4*f$##~#%2&$%4*4~~~&~4~~~~J~~T~~~~44~ Â»Â»49Â»13149*44.,4,044/ .>ye V:>\7 v<%3> 4,220 944Â»1/924Â»*fatilimimimm -I 1 \ Â· Â· 414*44*40*&.e#.#P#*.We~>**pe>ek**40*36***84*004Â¥9.~ >9:341542Â§92*~ikal'*Bc~. xyÂ¥-" 11 E- Â«Â«Â«Â«liÂ»Â»Â»Â»Â«Â«Â«Â«4Â«4~ perspective of north elevadon from middle of smuggler street , f~> north elevation 0 w 14'-0' 19'-7 14'-7 6'-0. 21'-3- E--9" G F E D C B A 1 1 1 11 - 1 1 1- t 1- k P-:4.0 . -46.1420 + +C.L-Lan'1.4344-4 4*11 54.41.1 Â£34 1 1 1 17-119 1> *S :2 7 -6 7 2 -'.1 41 -4= 'a'Q. - .2 4 Ji . 1 . = ~4 -j 'Er--2 4.--6 [ Â·=14Â·42 '- 1 â€ž 6 top Of Plaâ€¢ 41_1- 116'-r 7 I -------- 1 1 --- ) 0 - 115-7- 0 4.- 42 :L 1 -- 1 -1- J 1 Im . .1- I 1--4441119 1 r. 110'-1' f ' r-1_ r 4 EFEFiNEE, I*8 - ' -2 5 1 - - _ _ i lop of plge (cibin) :/Â· --:Ild/Â·â‚¬.- M~"=pt IL V 108'-e U#- I ....ilÂ·.U ~ -* *~J ~ ~-6 1| ~~-*1 ~F-51 .~ 1111 *- i t.-a=- 1 t-â‚¬Â»1 2 4,1 81 f j 1 1 .// I \/: ~ 03 H 1 | | 111.11 1 71 6 1 . 1--.,--14-1 1.-IL'l--1 242 901 a - 01.09.01 ....'n..... ' W 11 i U. 0 lin 11 ele' I - - - - | 11 | ../. .IL=--JI 2-_1 6 - 0 - D a: - 02.1103 --- ----_ _ik!!_#RM_ 00 100-0- 7 1000-0 2 - 0- ' 0 - ~*i/~Â»/14Â«0/ \ 40 , \/,44,Â»<>'<44"44' CA - 2494Â«Â«93949*tÂ«ffflf*64Â»Â»40Â«fitÂ»>Â»~Â»Â«+Â«44Â»9 \ \ \,2 . b . . 4 ..1*51 i.uNA /84*jvo<.4,p<4* ~4FS#S> /4 " - )3<vÂ·* thy*yth.,/ 44 /479>\/<32 /\/0*#74'.y' <$43* 0 - 2Â»4Â«4449994/141~ / , ..vit.SALÂ«*'4*Â»9Â«435.3:,SyÂ«*24>Â« ii*#25+Aq,Al'fl<.4,<I, 4,6 +4> \ 14 ==------Im *'."-**44Â»44%*0.0.**46/44.- ~2 - i,42,0,&*y , 0 =L---2 1 elevations 944 r Â«Â«tÂ»32Â«Â«Â«Â«4:4449>Â»Â»0,44 Â»LÂ«Â»Â»'49.4,47**8*82~ north & east A \.\ \-1 '41/1 p.yx/lyÂ»,0Â»xÂ»902Â»Â»Â»Â»,0)0-54'x/A/*Ah . 4 4,Â«<41*xy*~;cyÂ»tyÂ»Â»,eysÂ»>916Â«4446*~R,40Â«4' 1/4- - 1'-0- â‚¬> east elevation A200 eouep=-2,*4 4 HARR 1 2 3 4 5 TEAGU ARCHITEC1 41211 MLIST ASPEN Coe 1 1 1-1 1 1 -1 -- 1- 4 a ..9 4'e 1-2 2, 1 7 124'-r 97{}C52560 F~(970926 - 111 -41 1-1 '0 --21'19.--{ 90- 1 4 9 :~ 1 + ' Â· ''I Â·Â·fi-~ .1 0 F 7-1 ' - '.44:.711 ' I - I il 'I --6 ,-;, 41 1. 111/ 1 4,49 1 4 Iop of plabe 1 1- 10/12 1 -e--1 - - & lin Il elev 1 119-1- ,@3:4.44.~::~.4540.yS.A~:564; 4 1 2:4 If : En Ex 11 1 - Br, 11 elev 4Â«~44/449Â«4>4Â«494%%462#-46%4- Â«Â«45 , low 441â‚¬44%49Â»94Â«ftfftÂ«titÂ«Â«Â» 444Â»4Â«4~ <%&(AS*%42$&46993%2000*eÂ«\+0<802>/ V43003%2><3RZZ34~~*%**5<*19<&0*20 *Â»4Â»Â«44#4$2&4<z~%*kR*#12~1~**I~AB%&44*VT**~~ 1/ /~Â·0<0<4*x>64<:4444.44 3 /' 4*40#0041224*44 4,~,~~.14*j*;-4--14, 4*wRE<**2094*4*40*~4&%5##tfl544:*-*66464*249:96 190, 3~4%~*>~it><'/ 0/ Â»Â«Â»Â»Â»>*Â«4Â»4414Â»>Â«Â«4tfâ‚¬Â»t~ Â·(~> south elevation . 6'-9 21'-3" â‚¬-0~ 11'-0- 19'-0. 1 7-0. 91-0. B C DEF G A 1 . 1 1 1 1 4-' I I, l l. 4 . - -T- - L.f, 9 317 -= .lit 11 -- / -- , r Â·ft ?2Â·Â· IV ?dÂ·.21 ' 7 124-7- 1- 1 i i - --1--4 - / li= 1 L- 2- Â¥ ?t' 1: -- -,4.-1- ...6 -r . 11 - - -1.4 1714-1 1 1 1 1.... 2. -431 1, 1 1 1 1 = 1 1 r- 0 1 1 1 1 1 -1 1 12 1 - ------- rldge bolgbt.(c~*112-__- 1 I t .w 1157 7 - 9- -Â¥--% -6 -4* .- 1-/ I- - A- I ~- . ; P~ 2144-=- i li-6.41 7--1.- T f. -1 -SL .--f A-1-- -119.-i;flf-7-1- -AS: i 32-[UNitflthlit-13Â©43-Â·2.f. fix----* o i 't [t jey-1-146 1319414'y-f-Â»-3 - ~ -- -1-+' k--1-:.d-=1.FÂ£-i -- Â·P Ir-- 1-Z ct=L--20-,;1- 1.2 1 -L--A- 1 . linll elev -M- .214=#U=44--11--9-,1-=. -11.--8---4--feN-:irelIAN=----la i , rirr-râ„¢ i - 110'-1' , grmA+32"m,72 r.7- . 7 ~LE il,- 3--- = ---1 -1-- ,-i-D= -=--D.7 .A- 2 -r a. -- - j L. FXÂ»~' 121 :! ~ 11 p 1 :11 - Jf-Epa T 91 242 -! 6 4, - I - 133=17--ttl.-3 it# 1 q 8 *41 i> 1* 1r , I 4 M r. 11 11 l'1111 1 < 11 1,1 11 11 !111|1 li li 8 38 2 li- 01.09.01 ht,C â€¢./'ll.* --1 1 r RE : 11 U 11111 1 li ll i -R 1 1- 1 1 i ~ - 02-1103 4â€¢ ="///- lin S ele, 0 1 - 0,"dev 107-7 11 107-0~ 7 74 Â»Â»Â» X 9,29'*~'*. 2- 9'9-<%3Â«45$4ie<787Â«,~:,2>'4%6>9~><*19>'~:4w * 40#p4,bo**w#kNLy&~49923*; p <3Â« O - 424,49..134*44Â»kÂ»Â»4*fÂ»4119Â»441144Â»44444~~91Â«tftÂ»94~Â»fffâ‚¬ffettfattiffit o - Â»49640 0~212<~*~ ~ ~~~,lyÂ»67Â»4,Â»>3~44Â»Â»6~Â«Â»4Â»2 9, 4.4.44.Â»hy~~,~ ~ - tati~ 6%39~4244\44 2 52:----------~~ 0 - Â»3.aaÂ«Â»aÂ©x>/>/5*4*Â»oeD,:42*8?%kgpyAy)Â»Â»96Â»Â»Â»Â»Â»Â»i>h.~~~%<~:%%53*%%%5SÂ¢kÂ¢*Â»%*tki#*>A,*~~Â»9**A , ZAA/WARV~#10~i/VA~.%'0,%~~~/~~.~.~~4+WL k elevations ~44â‚¬*'4242,12 south & west -- 4- I 1 1- ._47 <*> west elevation 1/4'=1'-07 a#.I~, 1 AZU-1 ~ eouep!.sei Jeef J s .ieififinius ~ ~ ~~ leells Jai66nuls JseAA Â£ Lg opeloioo uease NOHOnkll ... 9 1 9 1 1 1 1 4 \ .~ 6-- -- -- * C 4 4 - . .E'/i,i:10'4/':ri:.'' 1 CLOSET -1 Â· - - 1 WINE CELLAR I 1 , 1,9,â€¢4/ ./ ~ I ' F ' I 1 tri$.- -1=== ELECTRICAL L PANEL < -1 //lk 4\ / /4. BEDROOM #1 W .tk V -â‚¬) MECHANICAL \ 1 1 ROOM i 1 . F - LADDER -~ - L.r-- -4 iiI --- ; WINDOW ' / 0----- \ , 1 WELL . f 1 UNEN \ /7\ PROPOSED ~-_-_ _- --CLOSET \ / PROPOSED /7\ - -- -'----- ----lilli'- - -- - -I - 1-9--- - 20-/- -- - 2 JL,--1 - 21 - _ __ _ - _ _ - _ __ _~D U EXISTING --- 7 i , . 11 EXISTING V | 4 *wer \ , (0 to 6 . <up *--/ 1 - J co 1 L---------1 0 BATH # 1 -/ ' 41 11 t. . /lili n I / lili I F _ _ _ _ _~| *T.O. FINISH FLOOR UL- ~ - 1 4 FF- 3 /' U | 100'-2" - LL) 1 4% 1 ceiling:8'-0" BATH #2 | . . kh 1 toi 1 b 1 -C- 1 \ 3 + LADDER ---~\ ~ ..,-ll.:1 1 r 11 It l 1 4 g DARK ROOM ~ WINDOW 1 1 11 ' WELL e BEDROOM #2 U 1 0 1 - In 71 - 1 M LINE OF i' PORCH ABOVE - r. -/f . - i 4 1 1 N | CLOSET 4, 1 1 1 1____.1 11 . --- 1- --- -- --- --- - -- - fl U. I --<D - - - .-Ii-- Â·Â· 4 0 d 1 1 - 1 31'-1" 1 1 1 11 4 6 /5-3 LOWER LEVEL <FLu SCALE: 1/4"=1 SCALE: NTS KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS BECKER RESIDENCE u FLOOR PLAN 412 N MILL ASPEN COLORADO 950 MATCHLESS DRIVE DATE: ASPEN, COLORADO PHONE/FAX 970.925.2252 e-mail: trayniondeaspeulnfo.com 2.4.02 .z./1 2-,t' 1 .2/i E-.8 - Jul 0-,2 .ZE/62 1-,5 26'-4 1/4., 22'-21/r .9-.22 ..9/1 9-,8 .zE/51 L-, L L â€ž:Ent E-,9 .. 9 7 11==z===41 1[ -- -- -it L=r......==r_==-72.=2=1 Ii-- -- 20 --------J L --*.- -- -- --- - --1 T L_ -r- 1 1! 1 1 1, T PANTRY/LAUNDRY ~ I / 3 -9--1Â¥--- L=rn--=...7.4 9 EL'\ND 9 FRIDGE 7- KITCHEN 1 4 T.O. KITCHEN FLOOR ' ZZ11---EEJ~~&EEEIT--Cl [1~ 7 100'-0. MUD ROOM i 000 T - :-N -- mr-Lm==1=.rm# I IC-0-7-n_-zic...i:_ 17 t' I E I - -7 1 i , Â¢ 7 1 110 -4, cl 1 4 .6| ... - ----- 2~ POWDER 1 PR)POSED Cl PROPOSED ur-Â·EXISTING 4 J: '. EXISTING-0 W. f 1 r- I eli y, 10 \ , ABOVE ' | 1 LANDING ~ L 1- I i OPEN TO ~ - t,] / . ~ -' 1 ----- ABOVE ' h / W 1 1 . .1 Â£ 1. 1 , 1 / \ l 1 / l DINING ROOM i 0 - 1.-- 1 /2 wall ~ ~ ~ | 7 LP 7.- 16 RISERS l | @7 1/4" \ LOW WALL ~ DN F 1 9 RISERS @ N 71/4"1 1 i 1 Â¢ T.0013?TING FLOOR LIVING ROOM QEN ; 1 0 rl\. 1 \\ 1\ 1 \ 1 ' 11 t=..r=.-.---n.11 ' â€¢M r.11 1 -- SI[Â·E VENT ' E 1| TOR FIREPLACE : .lt, ROOK SHE_F PORCH | iL DN 1 11 1 1 4 6 66 n--. MAIN LEVEL 1 1 1 7 CCAL[. 1 ~'4" - 1 ' i SCALE: NTS KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS BECKER RESIDENCE u FLOOR PLAN 412 N lilli ASFEN COLORADO 150 MATCHLESS DRIVE DATE: ASPEN, COLORADO PHONE/FAX 970925.2252 2.4.02 e-mail: krayn,Dod*aipellb,fo.com 25'-6 1./40 22'-51/2' ,,2/1 5-,8 ec 1 L-.21, A ... 7,7 T 1 1 1 1 1 1 A ~ - - - - - - Los-~ IF==Â·*mi 0 E- - 1 1 1, / '' 4 / 1 \ \ / 1 1-7 1 1%\ ----- MA~TER BATHROOM i , , / / //- 1 g.giEI 1 I / " / 1, 1 ./ 1 , I / 1 . . / / JACUZI 't~ hj' i / 1< 11JB !~ Â· t \, % I . .- 1 X U I \ f ~ 1 /27 TEMP. - p .1 , / 9 * 4 " ,4--Â·GLAM I // ~ 4 - 1 ; , MASTER BEDRpOM L 1- j H 1 , - \ 1 , / T Lir I.Ill ' / r-----------7 i , / I BENCH /\ 1 , 1 , , 1% , \ 1 1 / t . i "0 1 \ 9- ~ Â·" [~> 0 ~ --Â·.. IT.O. FINISH FLOOR | - 1 , / IN U '2 1 0 1 1 41 '' 1 \\ 11 1 , i. //36{1 6 1 1 1.P 01-21' 1 \1 , 1 1.U .- h .1, I \ , I . ./1 / ~ -~ DN i 1/ / 1 U.I 1 i' --. ------------- -r- -----------.--------1---- 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 1 lit 1 7 1 1 1 2 2 1 Ill ' DECK I - iÂ¥! 1 /2 -- --7 - i 1 1 1 " 0 1 71 C1 PROPOSED --1---------- a- L . PROPOSED -1 : -U: -M=-49;~7=25%=153*-----2.mai~=~27= 9723-~ST N --(i) 3-EXISTiNG- - ~ i 1 4 EXISTING . UP Z k \\JÂ» 22 + 7'-51/4' V y. 1 5 I EL LANDING * OPEN TO 5 OPEN TO EXISTING SHED | BELOW - DN BELOW ROOF BELOW V - l CLOSET ~ _ , , . V. 0 I -1 I Wh I N i L_-11 11 / UNEN 4 =1; ICL \FURR WALL f f 2/2//05 ----[---43---CD---- - 8 / 1 R ' 11 - FURR WALL , . i - ___CUT 1'4" / CEILING HEIGHT 5,4, m "~T.Ob'23!,SH FLOOR _ -_ -: -~ GUEST BATH - 1 - 4 CEIUNG HEIGHT | : Iii. 5'-10" 0--7 1 11 1 GUEST BEDROGM k -/ SIDE VENT FOR FIREPLACE 1- I 1 1 1 SHED ROOF 8ELOW 1 1 1 FURR WALL OUT 1'-0" i RECESS SHELVES | 2 -imp_WALL _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ --<3) --- 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t\ 4 4 6 66 C. -i)\ UPPER LEVEL 4,2.27 SCALE: 1/4"=1' SCALE: NTS KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS BECKER RESIDENCE . FLOOR PLAN 412 N MILL ASPEN COLORADO 150 MATCHLESS DRIVE DATE: ASPEN, COLORADO PEFONVFAX 970.915.2252 e-mul: krayolond@aspent,fo.com 2.4.02 .2/l 5 '0-.61 t.' CZ=====--=22~~~=~Zi.- ' .Zil Â£ .2,4 E' ... 1 1\ \ 1 1 1 11 1 1 /> 1 1 1; 11 n 1 11 H it If 1 Tr 11 1 / 1,; 1 1 / A 11 /1/ li i \ i \ / 11 lit / 'It, 9 F ~JU.=J_, --1.-I_- I_LEI] W , / | 1 i ./.Ii.-1 1 11 P 11 11 i 11 11 Xi ri 1 1 11 ' -_ILE=-T=-r--+IE -'--2-2-*Clf=-=j] 4 ff- 19 ll i 11: rcof at "link" .9 shed roof line of exterior below at ---iÂ· wall below .- porch !1 li I .-1 / 11 -1 -12= 1 E ROOF DECK f _ki I- ELL -1.3- ~2.*. 32.- L -.3-2--LE--=iÂ·..r i! ! 1 1 :I existing ' A i shed roof i below at new ~ I ' dining rm j 1-- --- -- I.-- '--Il il I 11 1 / -- .-- - - ----- --- -- - ------- -- 1 , 1 9 1 i 'Â·Â·---- = ---Â·.1- 7,-* li I :1 11 li i i !! j/ \ 1 ij , 1 1.-234 1 11 /1, .. A ' 11 li 11 / 11 1 1 11 / 1 1 1-t~- 111 11 1 11 , 1~ 11 f.-1 2.4 --68 ~ii~1 1 11 ,\. 11~ ~~ ~ $'.4..tri . 11 11 & M ' 1 1 11 11 l 1 1 ' shed roof 11 1 below at Ne'' porch 1.-11.221-2113-1772-UI--aE-41*33[22- I J_ 22 2.2 -22 --31 4, 11 1 '4 j <1-~ ROOF PLAN 1 42.3/ SCALE 1/4"=1'-0" SCALE: NTS Â¤KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS BECKER RESIDENCE ROOF PLAN 412 N lilli ASPEN COLORADO 1 50 MATCHLESS DRIVE I DATE: ASPEN, COLORADO ~ PHONE/FAX 970.925.3252 2.4.02 e-mill: kraymonde'aspell}JA.com \ 4. VERTICAL WOOD SIDING f -- -23-7--KI- '/fi-lfl--'.0.- -, :. FF,79 2----~.1-72-- 7-4 45 2-f ---r.'T---:il-2*29 ---~----VAZ.-f 2- --2.-f i- f-- - 12-- -,_-- . ,__- 11 .- 1 MASTER BEDROOM \\- f f. 1 T.O. PLATE 117'-10" 4- .-111.Ilili tity- i MASTER BATHROOM 31 I r--3 1 53 T.0. PLATE 117'-4 " | .. -O h g ./ J.- -O . I.. *TE me Z ... ILLF 1 - -w*W == mi 1 9 1 1 I . \ g rl Il X 1 65.2-21-2 2 t ---\ li 1 \V -=Ff:p MASTER BEDROOM <4 1 T.O. PLY 110'-2" '/ 4" VERTICAL - 9---Â»lee..xee,geet-pÂ·--,.. ..--. .- ~*9"-~-%Â·~-VU~~=~A-W-VuA.A..a,.E 1 WOOD SIDING - .. 1 1 1 11 0 2 1 1 1- I 3721' S 1 1 .1/1 1 1 2'.r-Â·--1 U -...1 1 :1 1 KEEP EXISTING 1 --- -- I ~ I - ~ - .--,- WINDOWS & DOORS -- 1 1 _ i Â©.4 1 --1...1 i-t 1.-3 ---- J 1 + 1 i 0 i LIVING ROOM L._] L..1 Â· Â· 1 UVING ROOM 1 T.O. PLY 101'-6" 1 -- - --- T.0. PLY 101'-6" ~ Ill ' 6" CONCRETE , 61- --- WINDOW WELL LOWER LEVEL 1 1 ./A T.0. SLAB 90'-0" i -- 4-- ~37 SOUTH ELEVATION 453.1/ SCALE: 1/4"=V . -- I .. ap - - LU 3 4 *22/ 8 Md 61331IH0YV ONOINA luoiÂ·uj'Fladge ZSZZ SZ6 980100 'N3dSV :31Â¥0 4 331430IS3H ~13>1338 3AINa SS31Hlt.VW OS L ~MISTING NEW ) | MASTER BEDROON@ -L 0 O - 18. Â· ' T.O. PLATE 1- 7'-12 ~-' < 1 23 F ' 1--7 . , A i I 06 10 2 2 -2 . 16 . 34 -= 4 i./ i !\ 1 b li 1 9 1 - r/7 i i GUEST BEDROOM ~-1 T.O. PLY. 110'-2 " - - <0-% lilli 1 '.il i i ' MASTER BEDROOM ,-~ T.0. PLY 1;'0'-2" 9-' 2 E!5XXXXXE.i 1-1 1 4 , 1 1 1 1;.=====711 LU 1 1 F.,111 lai 0 1 i i.p. ~ 1 liLli ' ' L- Z LU L--2.--1 ~ , Â· , , I j? \ 1 - ~ DEN/ENTRY / 4 ~ - - T.O. PLY 101'-6 " Kn CHEN 1 /' 1 \ 1 T n A Y 1 na'-n" - , - \ / RESTORE OR]GINAL / FRENCH DOOR 1 STYLE WINDOW T : ' W/ SIDELITES , WINDOW ,-Â« WELL - 1 4/2/ : 3 1 1 1 LOWER LEVEL r. . -- .- . --I. -$9. 1 .*i -I-- --1 --.- --- T.O SLAB un' n. /21 i EAST ELEVATION \+3,1/~ SCALE: 1/4"=1' Â£ e .. O - 5 E 23 1 -'- -47 0 EW g d 61331 IHOVV peililifo.corn Z5ZZ 6 0.-6 XV:U ORd O0VM01O3 'NadSV 3AIHC] 9531H)140{ 06 L aIS3Z1413>1338 -4 SNOI1VA31 NEW EXISTING~ < . / - - 12 ,/- 1 4.i ----5.-- -\ i 1 77-J / r --2 9[330 .4-\2:%~ ..->. \4 1 \ Nkb..L --1. \1 \ 1. li / \ \ If i L_. 1 Ul I fli--7---1 J ... \ /23 11/ \1/ / #04>49-TS-jitt-99!i 2 s ~~ MASTER BATHROOM 11 1 [L---2 j I M ASPHALT SHINGLE: ...7 1~'' T.O. PLATE 117'-4" V h ARCHITECT L 30 --0 (==l- V~T I --rm A . 3 92 Iii ' lilli ~Lt-] ~ g - 0 3 ig f HORIZONTAL i!f 1 -----. + WOOD SIDING ~ i i 4 1 2 - Z S i: . I i h. 12 2 11! i i I [441----- i Â¤ , ~ GUEST BEDROOM 11 T C. PLY 110' 2" MASTER BATHROOM 1 __ _ _ T.O. PLY 110'-2" ,- EXISTING WOOD 1 SIDING 1,11 1 i i 1 r -----* P=== i 1 \1'.1~ 1 ..1 i COLUMNS 1 11, F L-JL- | 1, 1 / Ij :1 1 1 I It L--- 1 1:, 6 1 '1 4 '.1 1 N:. 11 i 1 UJ 111 Ll_ 1 1 0 VERTICAL WOOD SIDING \ nIVING R(gbE 03.0. PLY 0*-61' ~ KJTCHEN./ MUD ROOM TO Pl Y lon'-0" 1 U LU LOWER LEVEL ~ T.O. SLAB 90'-0' /71 WEST ELEVATION <4&311), SCALE: 1/4"=160" - 03 Â¤N ~' ,6 0Lb XYL,RNOH,1 1~5 L SlN :3-IVOS SNOUVA373 /:77\ /-1-_1.4.12\ / OrÂ« 40964 4-__Â»-~__1.-1_r~ i 1 1 i / 1 11 1 i-~R----74--~1-7-FO+T~~-f~~-~r~fib-7-_41--c-_~~~-1 j.3..~_..~_.-1_.3...-Ll___-l li--..-;--7-~--21-.L--r-Â·- :--1-i ;~ MASTER BEDROOM ~ 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 !1 ; 1; 1 1-7'-4 TY-7-4=3 4---~FcABL-,LLFtrsri,Al-2<â€ž5-7237: MASTER BATHROOM 1 - $ T.O. PLATE 117'-10" *LI-114 11 11 0 i T.O. PLATE 117'-4" '~ - -O 11----7 : ' '1 2 32 1 1 1 11.'' 1 W +E li I -- 1 !/ 11 1 . ! 4-2--1 HORIZONTAL 4 1/ir.,ir, ciruble . *.S, - Â¥Â¥LUL; .iU'.U 1! .! 1 ----1 ,~ MASTER BEDROOM MASTER BATHROOM i ~ T.0. PLY 110'- 2" T.O. PLY 110'-2" ~Â·~ 1 VERTICAL Â· WOOD SIDING . 11 --- - EXISTiNG 1 1 - - -< HORIZONTAL H -- --------Â· - - --1 1.. ! 2-- - -- - - ---- 11=1=DI .: WOOD SIDING 11 1 1 11 -- -- . -- ------ 111 /, ' '' 12==-1 --------1--1 --- ~A KITCHEN/LAUNDRY --- - - -- PANTRY/LAUNDRY '-'' T.O. PLY 100'-O" | T.O. PLY 100'-0" ~ : LOWER LEVEL T.0. SLAB 90'-0" ~ ---=Â·~ NORTH ELEVATION ~ / 1 Â· z 1 .0 CA 3.1/ SCALE: 1/4"=1 ' -- g F r .- mai NE W LU ON G1031 IHJVV ONOPIA SlN 31VOS ZEZE &26'Ott XViaNC>Ad 00Â¥80103 'N3dSV r.01Â·01,%1*!se,@poota.'[Ei,{ :IFEU;-2 33N301S3H k13>1338 3AIWC] SS31H]1Â¥W OS L . ALSTROM GROUP P. C. ECOLOGICAL ARCHITECTURE post office box 551 aspen, colorado 81612 usmail 432 twining flats road woody creek, colorado 81656 fedex 970 925 1745 tel. 970 925 4576 fax. 1 February, 2002 REVISED TEXT Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Comm unity Development / City of Aspen 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 REVISED CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT APPUCATION / PROPOSED FAR POTAMKIN RESIDENCE 110 EAST BLEEKER / ASPEN, COLORADO Attached are REVISED building elevations and floor plans following the HPC meeting input of 23 January 2002. The plan revisions have pushed the building back further from the historic fagade, and reduced the originally required bonus request. We are now asking for approximatelv 1/2 of the 500 sq. ft. bonus ! NEW FAR TOTAL upper level new FAR 645.00 sq. ft. upper level exist FAR 811.00 sq. ft. TOTAL THIS LEVEL 1,456.00 sq. ft. main level new FAR 866.00 sq. ft. main level exist FAR 1,271.00 sq. ft. (less porch restoration)-(108.00) sq. ft. < 2,029.OQsq. t. Total Proposed FAR 3,485.00 sq. ft. Requires bonus of only 245.00 sq. ft. Please note that we have again - significantly reduced the size of the main stair. The main stair is now more directly incorporated into the addition(s) and much smaller in all dimensions, induding height. The master bedroom balcony is now m uch sm aller than the previous upper level porch. Height Reductions - the main ridae of the addition has been reduced 1 ft. 7 inches. The upper floor plan is now one 7 inch riser down from the existing residence reducing the consequent main ridge height ofthe addition. The upper level plate height has been reduced to 6ft 6inches also contributing to an overall height reduction. The main level floor plan is level with the histodc residence main floor plan. The building is now 15 feet behind the existing main historic facade; and the upper level balconv and is 10 feet behind the line of the original building, the amount recommended for the setback of additions in HPC guidelines. PLEASE NOTE ! - the distance 15 feet when added to the 16ft 4 in setback of the original building provide a setback from the front propeny line of 31 ft 4 in. to the main addition fa,ade - which is a setbackof more than the original lot width; which in this case is less than 30 feet due to the placement of the historic house. 0 POTAM KIN RESIDENCE HPC REVISED CONCEPTUAL DESIGN MEMO 1 FEB 2002 P2 DESIGN COMMENTS / BUILDING ELEVATIONS SOUTH ELEVATION - BLEEKER STREET 1. Addition is reduced in height and fenestration pattern remains following favorable commentary from the last meeting. Existing dormers (beyond) are shown. WEST ELEVATION - SIDE VIEW TOWARD NEIGHBOR 1. The number of window opening have been reduced partly due to reduced plate height at upper level. 2. New addition reduced height shows up in height of historic residence (beyond) now more visible. 3. New addition placement 15 feet behind existing historic fa,ade shows up in m ore exposure of side view of historic house. NORTH ELEVATION - ALLEY VIEW 1. Stair has flat roof with sloping roof shown in building section. This revision has reduced height of stair / connector which now has a partial Rat roof as does the upper level hallway and a portion of the main level addition. 2. Stair and rear addition are now doser in scale to remaining "non-historic" additions / laundry room - m udroom. The scale at the alley has been pulled down while the eave of the historic house remains unbroken now and above the new stairway roof. 0 Sincerely, j. - Sven Erik Alstrom AIA 0 52<ls-7 eÂ»*0*5 -O QEVA N . 8% - F' N 6Â»1433, 8,>41 6-T' N,2 Room AlÂ», Fioo,([ 8,2.0 Nj -ID F22\4Â«IN ,--1 1 L. - , Ezzl â‚¬ X V]\ A / aL:1_11-\ Neer+Bof \*' r. i C>OSE- 1 - / 9 1 25>0 94>~74, yjÂ» 5 447'Fl 1 1 Vf 67 - 1 , KIA' 1 1 1- --4*22*64 2 <~*fito<*52 * 2064; 1--a~-, s I I * - \ 0 1 ----- A 42:.. SEDROOVT ILA Fl r.11 0 0 0 1 >41 i / 1 1.. .. . 02* 4=114.-14 LIP'E R ~251 V E /4 +14 14Â·Â· j HAL-D -4 1 4.Â»Â», A 1 1 E--~~-: 00 3 4 VII E 1 1 / %4/ 111 U 4< cl Â¢ o UÂ« Nel/4 0~AR We,O -m 1 (E) DEN 1 / ( 03 CuDS E- EX ST, FÂ»B.. 811,O Ill = 1 AL-7 11 Rcibe p~- --1 Â«,AS-EF,- 4i (55 404 4 -TO-Â» / 55:PROOVT 11 ~--- p,NiNDOIN 70 93'VAI~L- 1/-10 . - 1 1 (C 3% S-Ne -r",5 LEVED li 4-5*w 0 34* MT, -IF 503â‚¬00~ + - 3,4-Ce INY -1[\ 4 +54 1% d. 101- 01 orsca~ 1 1 ~ ~ 7020 REND\*-TON lf) N OFT,4 1.eL 011 e i --7 ~ ~ ~ ECOLOGICAL ALSTROM GROUP 7 ----]i ARCHITECTURE 4--- - - POB 551 ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 . 1-ErÂ» Itt MI UFFET< LEVED 432 TWINING 71Â»N FLATS ROAD WOODY CREEK, COLORADO 970/ 925 1745 TEL 970/ 925 4576 FAX POTAMKIN RESIDENCE 110 EAST BLEEKER ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 date: 1 FEB 2002 drawing no: HPC CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT 2 N Ee-sor -@AR+05 NX, 51-7 21Â«Me,Â«05 11) B EÂ»FAIN el-011 . -- U_-9946 -27- 1 ' 5)< r 67-Â· DESK---~ 0 \ 4 - 91 1 570**5 / < CLÂ·Â·0627 / T O 11 , 1-| NEW . 1-A u N DRY I - 1 *-51 VUD~Â©MI' -r 1 k-hs 1 1391 10#Sc< EE~_ N e lapÂ·-180, , 0 OIl Ij 1 4- 14 00 3 i*4 < 8471-k ~ - \-17 f_ - z ll LM. (53 AL 1<.Â·-trâ‚¬N 0 55 39Â©0191 1 ' F/Â« 71 L,V FCiOON/T 6 --0, 64, LE U U J -~ \ ahs t#7-DIANGE NEN =AR. 647*, 0 4 7 023 r><isT =AR 1/271 1, O -Ir-a=~M- (p/SS c:IAL#j - to 20 . 0 DNIN@ 1~Jtlj 1-1+15 LEVEL- 40*7.0 54. FT. f ~ Ne 0 1 1 1 1 - PÂ¢RCÂ¤ 1 OALCONY ' T * LE) tim 45- 11 ; 6-i VING : .....;tz=4 * ~ RCE)91 0 4, - 1 585-950 4 Z PORCH N ORL-TI--t lai-eli PLÂ©' 0 / 701 9 AL5TROM GROUP ECOLOGICAL ARCHITECTURE 1 1 ASPEN. COLORADO POB 551 Mal hi 6 85426 81612 1 PDAN FLATS ROAD 432 TWINING WOODY CREEK, COLORADO 1/4 11=11.011 970/925 1745 TEL 970/ 925 4576 FAX NESTDAED POTAMKIN 1/NIN Del,N RESIDENCE 110 EAST BLEEKER . ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 date: 1 FEB 2002 drawingno: HPC CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT 1 - 3-T'- 011 mi ... 7 _0 9 aI â‚¬z E- 1- 0 m =101 ro k 3/ 2 . 0 0- 1- 11 9\\\- t-It Fi-1 1 10 -1- - 6 70 01 01 0 if 0 -1- 1 --* irr-Ul- 3--11 m - 27 1 11 1 - '' - \ 1-11 - . .1 1 1 49-1 . r. 0 1 - AFFOÂ« Ul 652 Mt t ~0 61 , En--1 ig 0- E t[ 3% 1 4 fil am = li - "3 U 0 15*' 1 9 b 7 1 1. ir - t-11 / lAil IF--1 71- . / 5%2 El[ 4 -_ 2 -C-3 8 79 161-1 9 103 - 1-12-4 PE 4{Aill 0-gill >Cm lf>j L U R,2/ li)~I (11 EME:X]-0 8 En *271 4 00 > -O >m > 01 -0 0 9 2222%EME@*8% m I r- Ul b--i ( ~ . Ul + A O or- m Z %>102>H 2! > m Ch Ul m o g Mr, Â¤ r-,1 7< 0 50 m -H 177 u C N1Â»104 0 ~ O-~ - UCTDN ZOOZ 633 I N 12Â»6 g 1N3Wd013A30 1Â¥nldi)NO) )d H :ou BuLMIZip :alep DN3GIS3 00Â¥30100 N r-OSTTA I B. 2.SEND (SEE -SECTIOÂ© -*0971 Ne i--*SPOBIC -1 - - --HED-0-be 6 5 EYON Dh .RES-TOFâ‚¬E -fil- -IX[_52=64 ,FA#v - -- . ....11- - , -3.Ck a UTTO R! C -70 F FRENÂ«!AIN 547 1/4 INDO Al =-7-FEE- F) NISN+ED --- -191E>-IrÂ»,L- BOO F= ..p--0 j -1 ?1 Al.STROM GROUP 24,Â« *1 -1 - _ , - . -- PC B 551 i 1 11 EdOLOGICAL I ARCHITECTURE 1 1 - i. x~* ASPEN, COLORADO : Â·11 lillill' 1 1- 1 111 1 1 k-- F -- 1 i' 11-1 ,! lili 1 81612 1 I li ti 4j2 TWINING 1 1 11 1 lIZE_41 11 1 ';i -F~~=r,: , - [1 1 N 1 1 ..:111 : 1 :; 1 Fl~ATS ROAD -- WDODY CREEK, 11/ lili 2 '. N i 1 filili It ill'jil ' - 40-u i h- CdLORADO I + Pt I MIl / ;11 - ! 1 Iii i i I ' .: 1 1 ' i ii i 1 1 1 1 1 ' lili i !11 970/ 925 1745 TEL -W - 1 - 970/ 925 4576 FAX POTAMKIN 110 EA5T BLEEKER RESIDENCE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 _- 1/\le 53- ELEFNATION . date: -_37-81[ -4 - 11 .1-0 11 1 FEB 2002 drawing no: H PC CON CEPTU AL DEVELOPMENT 4 t I i i f . - _tog WEA . _ 1 5573-NED 1- -MEAT s D of= % 8-1 N E P.4 -_H>,N-t~NAC.-f/ ~(SL_o NED-_---RÂ¢-0~ 00 Rh<ER. 1 1 -RE+4 - ROE)M â‚¬ z BENDNED Fo 971<DIN OF STA I R 1 i- ' let 1.15- 1 L , 11 li 9X --1 1L'\ ri 1, 1- ./yx . . - - 1~ <-i FA A--r ALSTROM GROUP i ;i, 1. Tixi<k - - i71 1 -Reo F (538 93>5 9181Nt ECOLOGICAL - 1,11 ~ 06-RA82 -____~1 - 9,0 1 11 li , il il' 1%3 . -9 ARCHITECTURE 39-------6-*- 11 _L .1. L -h ~3 4,- ~i- r 1 1 1 ~~1 till 1 -lill!1 1 POB 551 3-0 BS,op~oUND 17 ASPEN, COLORADO Â·1 4 1, 1. 1 1 r 1 +0--' 81612 ' r 'r /1 432 TWI MING !; -t 1 - Â· 44 ' Â· 1 : FLATS R OA D 7 0.-OF 1 1.1 H WOODY CREEK, 1 --- 1 2 1 1 . ~, 1.- 1 L COLORADO 970/ 925 4576 FAX , 970/ 925 1745 TEL Ir-1 -11 1 11 101- CD 11 7.U : E XTâ‚¬ I,rÂ» DD 1 N 6 -0 1 / POTAMKIN A 1 RESIDENCE d> -1-330 9 EMAI N . - 110 EAST BLEEKER It/' , 1 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 FOR-T-4 13 6.29-6330>]_- f,62-0Â·45%'' S~DE.j date: 1 FEB 2002 drawing no: HPC CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT 5 1 1 - I --% PriSTDR 10 /IPDRMER .TO-BEK/AIN _ k41STD B IC ' BENDNED ~ - - RE-67-DRE 644~ f fl Hit-TOR i c - /1 -- I V T ber' ININEX)2\,1 0 1 â‚¬0 -1 - 4/ 1 + - - _r 2-1-2- - Â»-4- ,-4 -0 - *-574;._Fr-+ 1 / 1 .f= I -r- ~ i r - # , , f #14* i E>< 1 5-7 ' E- A tz-4 , rn (}14] 37-09 1 C j BMI 6 K , __65_53-ION -ThÂ«U *CAN\1 0 1Â».IR 11Â© 2, 510,25 65 FA _(501\ICEFTL141-Â· IEWELÂ· DFIÂ«ENT REVISED I 955 '20 01 22+USTRoh/FeRO u F -ss LIAN 200 2-0 91 0.- 81 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director,JAP FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 118 E. Cooper Avenue, Little Red Ski Haus-Conceptual Development, Partial Demolition and Variances, Public Hearing DATE: February 13, 2002 SUMMARY: This house, built c. 1885, is a designated landmark. It was converted to use as a lodge in the 1960's. The proposed project involves an interior remodel which enlarges and improves the existing lodge rooms and adds new facilities, including a dining room, more on-site parking, and employee housing. Small new additions are proposed on the rear and east sides of the structure, along with a new handicapped accessible entry path and some restoration work. The Planning and Zoning Commission will review this project to rezone the property to LP (Lodge Preservation) and to allow for the expansion of the lodge. APPLICANT: Little Red Ski Haus LLC, represented by Gibson/Darr Architects. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-71-005 ADDRESS: 118 E. Cooper Avenue, Lot O and the west half of Lot P, Block 69, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: RMF (Residential Multi-Family). SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.C.5) are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic 1 landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units, and Staff Finding: This building has been altered fairly significantly during its history as a lodge. The two story addition at the back was built in 1964. In 1968 the owners began a series of projects which altered and enlarged the front porch, and eventually removed and replaced the original columns and trim, clapboard siding, and windows. The picture below was taken in 1980. By this time, an addition had been made that filled in part of the historic front porch (where the entry door is), extended the entry area towards the east (where the sliding glass doors can be seen), and created a wider porch that wrapped across the front and east side of the structure. This picture is useful because the original porch columns and brackets were still in place and can be reproduced, which is part of the applicant's proposal. A 84 1 . 9 1 .4,-.Aiigall'* 1-1 7 'e --- . -1 &% ' 1 .91'~-- - zo-~.---749 fi --~tz 1-1 Â» .â€¢ -,r: 6 / ././ t . .u'll-.- T '174/ â€¢Â·I r; I 2 - 1.* 41Â£0 1 -4& 6 - 4 r . 4 . 2. - 1 1 2 . . P AAÂ¢.1 t A f '1Â¢ 4 ,#2.-' 1 7 / '4 , 1 1 r )44 1/ 1 1 (-1 Mo 1 -f, 9 1 , 4,60.1"f,~ -Â» ..P' 4 2 The next picture, taken in 1991, shows the building as it appears today, with all of the original porch materials removed, and a balustrade added. *1 .i=law....it '. ... 4 . 9 -4 0 V 4 'F - .Â¢ I .2 - . A - t. N- -1 .1 lili .1 2 1' ' 1,0 . 00 1/,4 1,7 11 f , *1,6 'I 9. 1. .. , 6,7/ I ' Â·t& The applicant plans to 1) demolish the additions that were made under the original front porch, 2) cut back the porch roof to its original location along the south side (over the entry door), 3) reduce the overhang on the east side (but still maintain a roof wrapping along the east side of the building, which is not historically accurate), 4) restore the appearance and location of the original porch columns, and 5) install new porch columns on the east side of the porch, matching those on the historic part. The balustrade will be removed as an effect of these changes, and there is additional remodeling proposed at the porch for an accessible entry ramp. For clarification of the porch issues, the illustrations below compare the front of the house in the Sanborne map and the plans included in this application. f u n 1 3 L , 11 , 1-: ' r j W E U=, O 1 . . 0 6 00 tz-, 1904 2002 0 Staff applauds the applicant for removing the additions under the porch and for making an effort to reverse the inappropriate alterations that have been made to the front of the building. The comments that follow are aimed at taking this restoration effort as far as possible to retrieve the original character of this house. There are relatively few two story 19th century frame houses left in Aspen and this one originally had some very nice detailing. While some of the newer construction at the front is to be removed, the applicant does not propose to cut the porch deck back to its original depth because they are excavating a basement out to the existing deck line and need to have a "roof' over the lower level. Staff recommends that the non-historic porch deck should be removed and that an at grade patio or other solution be found to protect the basement. Paving around the base of the building would not generally be considered ideal, but would be an improvement to the out of scale porch. The existing porch deck is also being retained to provide the 36" pathway required for wheelchair travel into the building. (The code actually requires 44", but the Building Department has indicated that there is flexibility on this point.) With regard to the accessible entry, the applicable design guidelines are as follows: 14.1 These standards should not prevent or inhibit compliance with accessibility laws. o All new construction should comply completely with the Americans with 0 Disabilities Act (ADA). Owners of historic properties should comply to the fullest extent possible, while also preserving the integrity of the character-defining features of their buildings. Special provisions for historic buildings exist in the law that allow some alternatives in meeting the ADA standards. 14.2 Generally, a solution that is independent from the historic building and does not alter its historic characteristics is encouraged. This is a complex project given the existing building conditions and different floor levels between the front and back structures. The requirements for ADA compliance must be fully addressed. It is staff' s opinion however that demolition of the non- historic porch deck would meet the HPC's restoration goals and opens up new options for the location of an appropriate entry ramp. The entire area of porch on the east side of the house could be removed and replaced by modest ramp tucked into that corner. The ramp needs to gain only 9 !4" in elevation to get to the door, where a small platform and entry canopy could be provided without creating the effect of a wraparound porch. Staff feels strongly that this concept must be pursued and that the HPC should not allow the perpetuation of the porch alterations by allowing the ramp as proposed. One other concern with the proposed accessible pathway is the curving ramp to the building which violates the following design guideline: 0 4 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. o 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. o 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. o 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. Consideration should also be given to whether or not the fountain element shown in the front of the house provides an appropriate historic context for the building, since this kind of feature would not have existed historically. In regard to the proposed replacement porch posts, the architect had only a muddy copy of an old photo to work with when preparing plans for HPC review. The photo included in this memo gives better information about the style of the historic porch elements. The new materials for the porch should match what is shown in the photo. If the non-historic porch piece on the east must be retained, those posts should be very simple in design to distinguish themselves as an alteration to the original building. The following design guideline is relevant for the restoration of the front porch: 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. o Use materials that appear similar to the original. o While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. o Where no evidence of the appearance of the historic porch exists, a new porch may be considered that is similar in character to those found on comparable buildings. Keep the style and form simple. Also, avoid applying decorative elements that are not known to have been used on the house or others like it. o When constructing a new porch, its depth should be in scale with the building. o The scale of porch columns also should be similar to that of the trimwork. o The height of the railing and the spacing of balusters should appear similar to those used historically as well. Apart from the front porch issues, there are also minor additions proposed for this building. One addition is located on the east side of the historic building. It is a bathroom addition on the second level, supported by columns. This piece provides cover for a new staircase which serves as egress from the basement. The addition is roughly 8' x 6' and is located 25' back from the front of the historic house. Staff is not concerned with the size or location of this addition, but recommends that the architect restudy the roof shape to have less impact on the historic gable end (to allow more of the gable end to be visible and not interfere with the historic eaveline) and to use a simpler column which is more appropriate to the style of the house. The guidelines of concern are: 5 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. o An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. o An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. o 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. o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. o 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. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. o Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. o Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. o For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. The other area of the building being affected by new additions is the back portion, which was built in 1964 and is considered non-contributing the historic significance of the property. An existing carport and lean-to are to be replaced with a new carport, two lodging units and a deck. The following setback variances are required: a 3.5 foot west sideyard setback variance, a 4.5 foot east sideyard setback variance, and a 9.85 foot rearyard setback variance. Staff supports these variances because they allow for new construction to be focused at the back of the site and allow for a reasonable expansion of the lodge. Because this property will be rezoned to Lodge Preservation/PUD, the Planning and Zoning Commission has the ability to vary all dimensional requirements, so the HPC's discussion of this issue may be most appropriately handled by making a recommendation that P&2: allow the variances. The HPC should be aware of two other aspects of this project that involve temporary or permanent alterations to the site. There is a proposed change in grade along the east 6 0 side of the building to bring a ramp down to the one accessible lodge room. This will expose a taller foundation wall along the side of the historic house. The applicant also proposes to exacavate a basement under the old house without lifting up the building. This being the case, the relocation review standards are not applicable, but the board will be interested in the treatment of the foundation and may want to require certain assurances that the building will not be negatively effected. The existing foundation is concrete. In summary, staff finds that this review standard is not currently met, but can be with a revised plan for the front porch and ramp area, and minor modifications to the small addition on the east side of the historic house. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, and t Staff Finding: The surrounding neighborhood contains a mix of old and new homes, and a wide variety of architectural styles. This house is one of three large 19th century homes in the immediate area and the property will continue to contribute to the historic character ofthe street through this project. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels, and Staff Finding: The significance of the property as a modestly sized 19~h century home 0 was affected when it was converted to a lodge and expanded, however, small lodges are also part of the evolution and history of Aspen. This standard is met. d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Finding: The integrity of the building has been previously compromised. The project as proposed improves that situation to some degree, but staff recommends that it must be taken further for all aspects of the design to meet the review standards. PARTIAL DEMOLITION No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds all ofthe following standards are met: 1. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parceL Staff Finding: The applicant proposes to demolish non-historic construction at the front 0 porch and on the 1964 addition. Staff finds this to be appropriate. 7 2. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions, and b. Impacts on the architectural character or integrity Of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions that are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. Staff Finding: The demolition has not negative impacts on the existing historical structure. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the first review standard is not met and recommends HPC continue the hearing on conceptual development, partial demolition and variances with the following direction: 1. Examine the possibility of demolishing the non-historic porch decking and using the space gained to place the accessible ramp on the east side of the building. Study an at grade patio or other means of capping the below grade space. 2. Use the 1980 photograph, or earlier documentation, to guide the restoration of the porch columns and woodwork. 3. Restudy the roofshape and columns on the bathroom addition. Allow as much of the historic gable end and eaveline to remain in place as possible. RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to continue the application to March 13, 2002." Exhibits: A. Staffmemo dated February 13, 2002 B. Application 8 , EXHIBIT L i -0 ) -0 - AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OFPROPERTY: 1/R ELL 5-1- Cooper A Ve , , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Fe,6 2 u ...1 13 , 2002 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, Beverly Flore (name, please print) being or representiAg an Applicant to the City o f Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper o f 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 o f notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made o f suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from th<6*day of Fk6 n o.tr / , 200 2_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photdgraph 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 ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application, and, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service* district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that ownsÂ· property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses o f 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 o f the public hearing. A copy ofthe owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (contimied on next page) , 0 Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the o fficial ning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental ras part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of thi ' ' eis to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this ' e and enactment o f a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the r irement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal descripti oti and the notice to and listing o f names and addresses of owners real property in the area o f the proposed change shall be waived. Ho er, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection ~ e planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior t e public hearing on such amendments. i i -- -O 91=? 1 1 S ignature ~A 1 1 The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 7 day of k e br~,46 , 2001, by ,jefi,9 A;\ 5#404 00' WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL f *0.Â· , *of ~Â¢A My commission expires: My Commission Expires 9/27/2003 ~ .a: C 20 -Â· fy; .\1SSÂ£ 5 11\5 Lof / 6 7 Notary Public $450 ~*,4 94,5Bmiat0' ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 0 Page 1 of 1 nl PUBLIC NOTICE DATE_ze 2 - lili --4 . --~ AmPOSE_--#, il~ ./.-4943' f.#Aill.:-I..-2 -yr A-- r ~ 1 4. -.A.I 34 , 1 /,1 * 01#WARMV@:9)jF:JPO 317492 72 *.e.*pner'. 4, . PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 118 E. COOPER AVENUE- CONCEPTUAL HPC DESIGN REVIEW, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, VARIANCES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, February 13, 2002 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 Little Red Ski Haus, LLC, requesting conceptual design, partial demolition, and variance approvals. The following variances are requested for an addition/remodel at the back ofthe property: a 3.5 foot west sideyard setback variance, a 4.5 foot east sideyard setback variance, a 9.85 foot rearyard setback variance. The property is located at 118 E. Cooper Avenue, and is legally described as Lot O and the west half of Lot P, Block 69, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5096, amyg@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Suzannah Reid, Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on January 26,2002 City of Aspen Account ~CHALET LISL PARTNERSHIP LTD WINKELMAN WENDY L BEVERS ROCHELLE C REAL ESTATE 100 E HYMAN AVE 108 W HYMAN AVE #8 TRUST AEZEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 8701 BLUFFSTONE CV APT 1104 AUSTIN,TX 78759-7820 /PERREAULT GEORGE C CREIE ASSOCIATES LP BEVERS ROCHELLE C REAL ESTATE 7336 CAPTAIN KIDD AVE C/O UNIVERSITY CITY HOUSING CO TRUST SARASOTA,EL 34231-5442 PO BOX 1524 BRYNMAWR,PA 19010 8701 BLUFFSTONE CV APT 1104 AUSTIN,TX 78759-7820 / PERREAULT GEORGE C IVES THEODORA H LIPTON DONN H & MARILYN G 7336 CAPTAIN KIDD AVE 1874 SPINDRIFT DR TRUSTEES SARASOTA,FL 34231-5442 LA JOLLA,CA 92037 LIPTON DOUGLAS GREGG&RANDALL CO TRUSTEES 1600 WOODSON RD ST LOUIS,MO 63114 <TANGUAY MICHAEL LAWRENCE GUCKENHAUS & CO WHITMAN WENDALIN 319 AABC STE G 6 E 43RD ST 210 E HYMAN AVE #101 ASPEN,CO 81611-3516 NEW YORK,NY 10017 ASPEN,CO 81611 LAW GLENN EUGENE RENO ASPEN PROPERTIES LLC BRALVER RICHARD PO BOX 2537 210 E HYMAN AVE #202 PO BOX 10605 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 ,~~ON CHARLES O & SUSNNA C RASMUSSEN DAVID L & RITA M RK LAND & CATTLE CO LLC I-# OCEAN BLVD 2907 LUCERN CT C/O RON KANAN MRTLE BEACH,SC 29577 ARLINGTON,TX 76012 PO BOX 649 ASPEN,CO 81612 * LAW GLENN EUGENE MACDONALD VALERIE DAVIS BRUCE L PO BOX 2537 PO BOX 1681 PO BOX 8851 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612-8851 DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING ASSOCIATES SCHIFFER SPENCER F BARNES JACK & BONITA 3900 S WADSWORTH #250 985 CEMETERY LN 125 WEST HYMAN - 2A LAKEWOOD,CO 80235 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 HALE TERRY L W/ STERN MURRAY ELIZABETH JACKSON KATHIE 104 W COOPER AVE #3 PO BOX 10459 P O BOX 1667 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 SOLANA BEACH,CA 92075-7667 HABTMAN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP RUTLEDGE WILLIAM O IV HEALY JOSEPH E 305 S ASPEN #2 104 W COOPER AVE APT 4 ~ FELICITY ST ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611-1764 /rMOOLA,IN 46703 GLISMANN JOHN P NORRIS JOAN 1999 REV TRUST CHICAGO SNOWFLAKE INVESTMENT PO BOX 4999 3334 E COAST HWY PMB 145 GROUP INC AMEN,CO 81612 CORONA DEL MAR,CA 92625 C/O SHELL PROPERTIES CORP 40 SKOK]E BLVD - STE 350 NORTHBROOK,IL 60062 SARICK SHEREEN CLAIRE GOLDMAN SHERYL LYNN BRALVER BETrY SUSANNE 95 BARBER GREEN ROAD 520 E COOPER ST STE 210 PO BOX 11571 APT 305 DON MILLS,ONTARIO ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 CANAD MORGAN LUCINDA P STARR INC A NEVADA TIERNEY MICHAEL P & ANNE 100 E COOPER #10 CORPORATION PO BOX 2391 ASPEN,CO 81611 PO BOX 11980 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 LARKIN FRED C KESSELRING ROBERT D BABCOCK MARJORIE TRUSTEE LARKIN LUCETTA M 100 E COOPER AVE #12 2161 KALIA RD #412 ONE COVE LN LnTLETON,CO 80123 ASPEN,CO 81611 HONOLULU,HI 96815 STUNDA STEVEN R SIRKIN ALAN & ALICIA LEI)INGHAM LARRY 45% 515 5TH ST 3500 S BAY HOMES DR 124 E COOPER AVE ANNAPOLIS,MD 21403 MIAMI,FL 33133 ASPEN,CO 81611 /kONE AMY HAYDEN DOLLE NORMA BECK GLENNIS GEORGE IMIERS RD 124 E COOPER AVE 2928 SNOWMASS CREEK RD SmrrH,NV 89430 ASPEN,CO 81611 SNOWMASS,CO 81654 KEALY MARGE A/K/A KNAPP MICHAEL DEWIND JODETTE L KEALY MARGARET 137 PEARL ST 100 E COOPER AVE #3 150 E HARTSDALE AVE APT 4D GRAND RAPIDS,MI 49503-2808 ASPEN,CO 81611 HARTSDALE,NY 10530-3527 SCHEUER KIM PRODINGER IRMA THALBERG KATHARINE 100 E COOPER #2 PO BOX 1245 C/O EXPLORE BOOKSELLERS ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 221 E MAIN ASPEN,CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN SHENNAN MELISSA A BRAYMAN WALTER W & PATRICIA 130 S GALENA ST 2036 N BISSELL ST JT ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO,IL 60614 5530 FAIRWAY SHAWNEE MISSION,KS 66205 SaILL JAMES E CLASEN NORMAN E & LAURA B LAMAN WILLIAM H AND E MARGRIT ~~X 2051 PO BOX 1155 2301 CALLE LOS ALTOS GIN,CO 81612 BASALT,CO 81621 TLICSONAZ 85718 LADD EDWIN V JR & WILMA C FYRWALD JON ERIK & GUDRUN L COHEN FRANK R 51 GREAT MEADOW LN 915 CECIL ROAD 335 DETROIT ST #504 AMON,CT 06001-4549 WILMINGTON,DE 19807 DENVER,CO 80206 ANDERSEN PAUL EGON LIMELITE INC CLAUSEN FAMILY TRUST NO 1 488 CASTLE CREEK Ill) A COLORADO CORPORATION C/O HYNDS JOHN W TRUSTEE ASPEN,CO 816 ] 1-3110 228 E COOPER AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 PO BOX 685 MORRIS,IL 60450 DOLLE NORMA CLARK ANDREA SULLIVAN JOHN B 124 E COOPER AVE P O BOX 6452 SULLVAN JUNE A ASPEN,CO 81611 CHICAGO,IL 60680-6452 PO BOX 367 SAVANNA,IL 61074-0367 STROH GEORGE C SAUNDERS-WHITE CAROL REV NEWMAN KERRY J & RICKI R 8525 SKYLAND DR TRUST 617 PRINCE DR NIWOT,CO 80503 PO BOX 8100 NEWBURGH,IN 47630 ASPEN,CO 81612 SHAW ROBERT W GUTNER KENNETH H REVOCABLE ZAUNER HEINZ JURGEN PO BOX 121157 TRUST C/O BARBARA ELIAS FORT WORTH,TX 76121 GUTNER KENNETH H TRUSTEE 0451 STAGECOACH LANE PO BOX 11001 ASPEN,CO 81612 CARBONDALE,CO 81623 A~EIGAN RICHARD A JR LEATHERMAN ROBERT D CARRUTHERS MARILYN PO BOX 11930 101 E COOPER #301 ME AND WILSON ROADS ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 BALAVIA,IL 60510 SUMMIT VIEW INC JACOBSON FAMILY TRUST TYLER BERIT G & TYLER CHARLES E 248 WASHINGTON ST 2168 SANTA MARGARITA DR 101 E COOPER AVE #302 TOMS RIVER,NJ 08754 FALLBROOK,CA 92028 ASPEN,CO 81611 BOGIN ROBERT M & KIMBERLY B KEITH JOHN lII HOUGH HAZEL C 17 APPLE LN 300 PUPPY SMITH ST #205-230 1 BEACH DR APT#1002 CALIFON,NJ 07830 ASPEN,CO 81611 ST PETERSBURG,FL 33701 CALLAHAN PATRICIA MACALPINE KENDRA M 1991 TRUST GILBERT CHARLENE B 0184 MOUNTAIN LAUREL DR 101 E COOPER AVE - APT 201 P O BOX 35 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611-1758 CARBONDALE,CO 81623-0035 KAUFMAN STEVEN B TRUST JOBE MARCIA GEORGIEFF KATHERINE TRUSTEE OF ~RGINIA HARLOW P O BOX M-3 THE 16:#SCALAN'IE CARBONDALE,CO ASPEN,CO 81612 KATHERINE GEORGIEFF &TMS-8770 REVOCABLE LIVING TRS #11 TOPPING LN ST LOUIS,MO 63131 WHITE JALEH NOONAN ELIZABETH A TRUST KING RICHARD & LAUREN 960 E DURANT #7 C/O AUSTINE NOONAN STITT 1017 N ROXBURY DR ASPEN,CO 81611-2024 TRUSTEE BEVERLY HILLS,CA 90210-3021 1450 SILVER KING DR ASPEN,CO 51611 CURRAN CHRISTINA H COLEMAN ISAIAH POPKIN PHILIP G CO MR. & MRS. R.W.E. NEILSON PO BOX 11239 PO BOX 7956 DUKES HOUSE SANDY LANE ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 BLAZEFIELD HARROGATE,HG3 5DT UK CROCKETT RUFUS BINSTOCK ABBE I HERRON SANDRA PO BOX 3837 FLAT2 119 E COOPER ST #19 ASPEN,CO 81612 2 EGERTON PLACE LONDON ASPEN,CO 81611 ENGLAND,UK SW32EF RUMSEY DANIEL W OTT JOHN GUBSER NICHOLAS J 1018 4TH STREET - #103 P O BOX 1004 PO BOX 870 SANTA MONICA,CA 90403-6127 BENSALEM,PA 19020-5004 ASPEN,CO 81612 DEW1ND JODETTE L WEINGLASS LEONARD FENZL SUSAN I 19 E COOPER - APT 12 PO BOX 11509 119 E COOPER AVE UNIT 11 ASPEN,CO 81611-1772 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN.CO 81611 /~N DOUGLAS P LIMELITE INC BOVINO FAMILY INVESTMENTS LLC LAICOOPER AVE STE 230 228 E COOPER 2201 S OCEAN BLVD APT 2803 ~PEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 HOLLYWOOD,FL 33019 MILLER R GREG LEBBY ERIN LONE EAGLE TIUJST PO BOX 4577 PO BOX 1352 PO BOX 3550 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 VANOVER STEFANIE KAI LIMELITE INC FUQUA ALVAH D JR & DIANNE L PO BOX 3394 PAAS LEROY G 446 LAKE SHORE DR ASPEN,CO 81612 228 E COOPER AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 SUNSET BEACH,NC 28468 BRUMDER PHILIP G & ASMUTH WICHMANN VICTORIA PRODINGER IRMA ANTHONY 119 E COOPER AVE #4 PO BOX 1245 QUARLES & BRADY C/O ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 41 1 E WISCONSIN AVE STE 2500 MILWAUKEE,WI 53202 WLSON ARLENE BLACKWELL CLARENCE A & ANNE ALH HOLDING COOPER ST #6 H COMPANY/INVERNESS LODGE INC 4,CO 81611 PO BOX 3180 435 W MAIN ST - ANNAPOLIS,MD 21403 ASPEN,CO 81611 SHENK ROBERT D SHENK JAMES R UHLFELDER FAMILY INVESTMENTS 0304 HWY 133 TRUSTEE OF SHENK TRUST RLLP CARBONDALE,CO 81623 0304 HWY 133 CARBONDALE,CO 633 N 4TH ST 81623 ASPEN,CO 81611 GINSBURG ANNE C & ROBERT B PINES LODGE DEVELOPMENT LLC HEIM WILLIAM D 17309 WHITE HAVEN DR 960 E DURANT AVE #7 124 E DURANT AVE APT 1 BOCA RATON,FL 33496 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611-1769 KIRSCHNER CAROLE J ROSE JON E TAYLOR HARVEY C 300 PUPPY SMITH #203 PMB 278 ROSE RITA L W 301 N 9430 HWY E ASPEN,CO 81611 303 MAGNOLIA LAKE DR HARTLAND,WI 53029 LONGWOOD,FL 32779 SEVERY CHARLES L 70.39% ALYEMENI MOHAMMED & ALICE 30 DEXTER ST 819 LINWOOD RD DENVER,CO 80220 MOORESVILLE,NC 28115 0 0 Jan 28 02 05:23p GIBSON/BARR 312.467.9792 P.3 ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. Project name L trri e Eec> s =1 41.LIA E e*NA:rce..1 2. Project location i t 6.- t~Mir C.a,eÂ·g: AVâ€¢&â€¢Wâ€¢ .spg.1 , r.e. t L,e,Â·r te' 4 66<r 4ALâ€¢: 6%1# t.Â·r 'FI,..8 (indicate street address, lot and block number or metes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning B / vi p ~ 4. Lot size 4 4' . too t 5. Applicanfs name, address and phone number owip nâ€¢Â£ 41, Nudard,16 a:XJâ€¢t, 5046 rA'.BL62 - 2./.e JI u Â£. 1,0 ArA~ 4 7-EL. 616/5. 4Â», 0 *EDÂ¢> 6. Representative's rpme, address, and phone numbere,K L â€¢:patz, Gâ€¢850â€¢~ tcuKK .bea~,â„¢dr~KE + cijgl:n.1* 1'20 61.- 111 180,9 11% '402. 4~71. 41 'to. 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA / Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Final HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD Minor HPC Stream Margin Final PUD / Relocation HPC Subdivision TexVMap Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption / Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot SpliVLot Une Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals qranlpd to the property) e.fiur,.tre W. 1,0-1 <Ir., 4% J.jrr t.ex..4 r.1*Kâ€¢,tn,%1 Â°reâ€¢.â€¢,n JA. dic>EK A TLM FCAA:.1 US.e Lie.-|St Â· 9. Description ofdevelopment appl'Eation le..47, An,f 1 ARMIAA*#'40Â¢ 11~E Mu<Â¥111 6; 1,50,0 -3 A I r~ . e\.1rr- Â·p==kit-rry Â· --SEM- 6. 10. Have you completed and attached the following? / Attachment 1 - Land use application form 4 Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form / Response to Attachment 3 Response to Attachments 4 and 5 llllllll Jan 29 02 11:25a GIBSON/DARR 312.467.9792 P.2 0 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: L-Cr-ru;, Rec, â‚¬6Â£A *~ALL r . L. L. C. Address: LIA &:Act-r <-aÂ¢>PeKV AUf t Aâ‚¬FIA 4 <-29. Zone district A 1 w le Lot size: A â‚¬2. tat, i 4 605 9.r. Existing FAR: 1.14. -Gilk,bleÂ¥ ~ Allowable FAR: 1.- O 1 l M CÂ¢:4Â· + 1 Proposed FAR: 1.*6<. Existing net leasable (commercial): 661/ â‚¬.7. -1 Proposed net leasable (commercial):EiZEE-AEÂ©11-0,4602 6.F Existing % of site coverage: TTZ;4- 90,Â·Mal & FURI.lt.t/ AO. 1. Proposed % of site coverage: \32291- Gerâ€¢. 4 er ..13 j $,4.1. Existing % of open space: - LHâ€¢AlÂ· 1 Al,1 -l 460./. Proposed % of open space: #li 1- Existing maximum height Principal bldg: 44 rr. Accesorv bldg: .1/A Proposed max. height: Principal bldg: 4 9.7. Accessorv bldg: 3 ~A. Proposed % of demolition: 7 0 4 10,4 hlb.UE ar MISreet 8.04 . Existing number of bedrooms: ,] /A -414 .4 at T#*L. Proposed number of bedrooms: * IL. Existing on-site parking spaces: 0.3, Â·6744.M Â¢6Â·.e,Post O . 0 On-site parking spaces required: 0 (A Setbacks Existing: Minimum required: Proposed: Front: u .ft' Front 2>.0. Front: B.,5 ' 6225-WQRear: 0.0' Rear: ia. 01 Rear: 1.14. Combined Combined Combined Fron#rear: Front/rear: 8.dÂ£ Fronurear: 116. vi' Side: Side: D.O. Side: 5.90, Side: Side: Side: 0.16/ Combined Combined Combined Sides: Sides: 09 Jâ€¢ Â· Sides: 1.0 Existing nonconforrgities or encroachments: .....IL 4 1* S ~ =* 16Ar> bjeAE a.,4.4 647. Variations requesteil: Ap,Â¢L ttle,K *ater'â€¢aL~/ Irmâ€¢ t.,S/:.. 6&r A 61*Er 4.jok 1.0-0 -dah<*1 â€¢44 Â¢36*fL Y,Mo 32.,-4,4.. (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft, site coverage variance up to 5%, height variations under the 0 Jan 28 02 05:25p GIBSON/DARR 312.467.9792 p. 10 GIBSON / DARR . Architecture + Consulting 116 West Illinois Street Suite 5E Chicago. Illinois 60610 21 January 2002 Ms. Amy Guthrie, Historic Officer City of Aspen Planning Department Fax: 970.920.5439 Re: Little Red Ski Haus 118 East Cooper Avenue Aspen, Colorado Dear Amy: We are forwarding to you herein, per our meeting last week, the project description for the above noted project. I will be in my office Tuesday morning. Please let me know if anything needs to be added, revised, etc. Existing Building: The oldest portion of the existing building is a two-story wood frame structure, with a partial basement, that was built in 1888. It comprises roughly the front (south) half of the total building. Architectural features of the original building, that are still wholly or partially intact, include a covered porch at the front of the building, a rounded bay at the east side of the front fagade, wood bevel siding on all exposed sides, and decorative shingles and diagonal siding at the front fagade. The original porch has been modified extensively. The east half of the front porch roof has been extended +/- 5 feet to the south and has also been carried around to the east side of the house. Also, two additions have been added to the original house at the first floor. A vestibule was added to the front entry and a one-room office was added at the east side. Both additions are visible from Cooper Street. The newer portion of the building consists of a three-story (including basement) wood frame structure north of the original house. This portion of the building is significantly different in character from the original. The rooflines are higher, the roof slope is flatter, and the windows are of different types and sizes. The finish floor of the basement level is +/-one foot below grade at the rear yard. Phone: 312.467.9790 Fax: 312. 467.9792 Jan 28 02 05:25p GIBSON/DARR 312.467.9792 p. 11 21 January 2002 Page 2 Ms. Amy Guthrie SCOPE DESCRIPTION Proposed Renovation: The design scheme that is being contemplated proposes to make the following revisions to the existing building: 1. Modifying, to reduce their scale, the porch roof additions. At the front side the porch will be brought back to its original footprint. At the east side, the porch roof depth will be reduced +/- 4 feet. 2. Adding a ramp, for handicap accessibility, at the southwest corner of the building. 3. Removing the entry and office additions made to the original house. Also, removing approximately 100 square feet at the southeast corner of the newer portion of the existing building. 4. Providing a new basement entry well, for handicap accessibility, along the east side of the original house. 5. At the north side of the new building to remove, and rebuild, the existing one- story addition and carport structure. A new carport will be rebuilt along the entire width of the site at the alley. A new lodging room will be constructed above at each of the second and third floors. The roof of the carport, at the area not being covered by the room addition, will include a deck and hot tub 6. Along the east side of the existing building grade will be reduced, as needed to ramp down for handicap accessibility, to the basement floor level of the new portion. 7. Interior renovation of the entire building for use as a lodge facility. 8. Excavation below the original house to enlarge the existing partial basement to a full basement. This portion of the building will be used as a dining room for the lodge facility. 9. Variances required: At the north end of the site, variances will be required for encroachment of the front and side yards a. At the northwest corner, the lodge room addition (second and third floors) and the carport addition will encroach 3.50 feet into the 5 feet deep side yard, and 9.85 feet into the ten feet deep rear yard. - b. At the northeast corner, the carport/deck addition will encroach 4.50 feet into the 5 feet deep side yard, and 9.85 feet into the 10 feet deep rear yard. Sincerely, Carl Darr Phone: 312.467.9790 Fax: 312. 467.9792 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: ADDENDUM- 118 E. Cooper Avenue, Little Red Ski Haus-Conceptual Development, Partial Demolition and Variances, Public Hearing DATE: February 13, 2002 SUMMARY: Based on the recommendations made by staff, the applicant has submitted some options for the treatment of the front of this building and the accessible ramp. Three versions are shown in plan and elevation. Staff finds that option A-2.3 and A-4.3 bring the project into compliance with the design guidelines. The original porch is fully restored, the foreground of the house will be predominantly grass, the ramp is tucked into the front corner of the house. Because having a stone patio around the base of the house is not the most desirable design, it seems best to have the ramp take up some of this surface and not have it be another object in the landscape. Staff recommends that the project be granted conceptual approval with the following conditions: 1. Use the 1980 photograph, or earlier documentation, to guide the restoration ofthe porch columns and woodwork. 2. Restudy the roofshape and columns on the bathroom addition. Allow as much of the historic gable end and eaveline to remain in place as possible. 01 Al 0 1 1_.1 C- MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Christina Amato, Historic Preservation Intern RE: 420 E. Main Street- Wireless Telecommunications Review DATE: February 13, 2002 SUMMARY: BroadBandWest, LLC installed a 29' tall broadband wireless internet antenna on the roof of the US Bank Building at 420 E. Main Street without gaining proper approvals from the city. They are requesting approval to keep the antenna at its current location, which is within the Commercial Core Historic District, and are asking for a variance from the maximum height limit. BBW is a high-speed digital broadband server who provides internet, mobile data and soon mobile video service to private and public customers, including the Aspen/ Pitkin County Public Safety Council. The applicant states that the antenna needs to stay at its current location, on top of the US Bank Building, because of the City's telecommunication infrastructure. BBW is currently entered into a long-term contract with Qwest who controls the necessary high quality and high volume fiber optics lines between Aspen and Denver that BBW requires for its service. The applicant represents that the US Bank Building is the best location to receive the bandwidth necessary to provide this high-speed service. It was also the easiest location to retrofit Qwest's fiber optic cables because most of the equipment already existed in the building, as it used to be the central office for US West. The antenna is 29' in height because it needs to be able to receive this signal from over the cover of the Jerome Hotel. The City adopted regulations in regard to wireless communications in 1998. Because the antenna is in the Commercial Core Historic District, HPC reviews the application with standards specific to this kind of equipment. APPLICANT: BroadBandWest, LLC (BBW), represented by E. Michael Hoffman, Attorney at Law. LOCATION: 420 E Main Street, Lots N-O, Block 37, City and Townsite ofAspen. Section 26.575.130.F, Wireless Telecommunication Services Facilities and Equipment Review Standards. The following standards are designed to foster the 1 0 City's safety and aesthetic interests without imposing unreasonable limitations on wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment. 1. Setbacks. At a minimum, all wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment shall comply with the minimum setback requirements of the underlying zone district; if the following requirements are more restrictive than those of the underlying zone district, the more restrictive standard shall apply. a. All facilities shall be located at least fifty (50) feet from any property lines, except when roof-mounted (above the eave line of a building). Flat-roof mounted facilities visible from ground level within one- hundred (100) feet of said property shall be concealed to the extent possible within a compatible architectural element, such as a chimney or ventilation pipe, or behind architectural skirting of the type generally used to conceal HVAC equipment Pitched-roof mounted facilities shall always be concealed within a compatible architectural element, such as chimneys or ventilation pipes. b. Monopole towers shall be set back from any residentially zoned properties a distance of at least three (3) times the monopole's height O.e., a sixty (60) foot setback would be required for a twenty GO) foot monopole), and the setback from any public road, as measured from the right-of-way line, shall be at least equal to the height of the monopole. c. No wireless communication facility may be established within one- hundred (100) feet of any existing, legally established wireless communication facility except when located on the same building or structure. d. No portion of any antenna array shall extend beyond the property lines or into any front yard area. Guy wires shall not be anchored within any front yard areas but may be attached to the building. Response: The antenna is located on a flat roof and does not interfere with any other communication facility. Although the antenna is visible from the ground level within one hundred feet of its current location, the applicant does not propose to put up screening as they feel it would draw even more attention to the current structure. Because the antenna is not screened from view, staff finds that this standard is not met. 2. Heiziht. Wireless telecommunication services facilities and/or equipment shall not exceed thirty-five (35) feet in height or the maximum permissible height of the given zone district, whichever is more restrictive. In addition: 0 2 a. Whenever a wireless telecommunication services antenna is attached to a building roof, the antenna and support system for panel antennas shall not exceed five (5) feet above the highest portion of that roof, including parapet walls, and the antenna and support system for whip antennas shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet above the highest portion of that roof, including parapet walls. b. If the building itself exceeds the height limitations of the zone, and such excess height was legally established (i. e., granted a variance, approved by PUD, etc.), then the combined height of the building and antenna shall not exceed the maximum height allowed by such approval unless determined by the Community Development Director to be suitably camouflaged. c. If the building is constructed at or above the zone district's height limit, or if combined height of the building and the antenna would exceed the applicable height limit, the additional height of the antenna must be reviewed pursuant to the process and standards (in addition to the standards of this Section) of conditional use review, Section 26.425.010, unless determined by the Community Development Director to be suitably camouflaged (in which case an administrative approval may be granted). d. Support and/or switching equipment shall be located inside the building, unless it can be fully screened from view as provided in the "Screening" standards (26.475.130(F)(5)) below. Response: The height restriction in the Commercial Core zone district is 40'. The US Bank building is 20' in height and has no parapet walls on the roof of the building. The antenna's 29' height is fully visible on top of the roof. The antenna exceeds the maximum height allowance in the Commercial Core by 9', and is 14' over the more restrictive 35' height limit stated in this review standard. The applicant is requesting a variance from this requirement, which will be addressed through the conditional use standards later in this memo. In an effort to comply with the regulations, the applicant proposes painting the antenna with a non-reflective "camouflage" paint to help blend it with its surroundings, because lowering or screening the antenna would interfere with its primary transmission functions. BBW is asking the HPC, as a designate to the Community Development Director, to find the proposed camouflage suitable enough to deal with the height issue so conditional review is not necessary. The Community Development Director has found that not to be the case. Likewise, staff has not found this standard to be met. 3. Architectural Compatibilitv. Whether manned or unmanned, wireless telecommunication services facilities shall be consistent with the architectural style of the surrounding architectural environment 3 (planned or existing) considering exterior materials, roof form, scale mass, color, texture and character. In addition: a. If such facility is accessory to an existing use, the facility shall be constructed out of materials that are equal to or of better quality than the materials of the principal use. b. Wireless telecommunication services equipment shall be of the same color as the building or structure to which or on which such equipment is mounted, or as required by the appropriate decision- making authority (Community Development Director, Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, or City Council, as applicable). c. Whenever wireless telecommunication services equipment is mounted to the wall of a building or structure, the equipment shall be mounted in a configuration designed to blend with and be architecturally integrated into a building or other concealing structure, be as flush to the wall as technically possible, and shall not project above the wall on which it is mounted. d. Monopole support buildings, which house cellular switching devices and/or other equipment related to the use, operation or maintenance of the subject monopole, must be designed to match the architecture of adjacent buildings. If no recent and/or reasonable architectural theme is present, the Community Development Director may require a particular design that is deemed to be suitable to the subject location. e. All utilities associated with wireless communication facilities or equipment shall be underground (also see "Screening" below). Response: The existing tower has not been designed to relate to the US Bank Building. The applicant does propose to paint the unit, but staff finds that mitigation is not adequate to meet the review standards. 4. Compatibilitv With the Natural Environment. Wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment shall be compatible with the surrounding natural environment considering land forms, topography, and other natural features, and shall not dominate the landscape or present a dominant silhouette on a ridge line. In addition: a. If a location at or near a mountain ridge line is selected, the applicant shall provide computerized, three dimensional, visual simulations of the facility or equipment and other appropriate graphics to demonstrate the visual impact on the view of the affected ridge(s) or 4 ridge line(s); an 8040 Greenline Review, pursuant to the provisions of Section 26.435.030, may also be required. b. Site disturbances shall be minimized, and existing vegetation shall be preserved or improved to the extent possible, unless it can be demonstrated that such disturbance to vegetation and topography results in less visual impact to the surrounding area. c. Surrounding view planes shall be preserved to the extent possible. d. All wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment shall comply with the Federal Communication Commission's regulations concerning maximum radio frequency and electromagnetic frequency emissions. Response: The tower does not impact a ridgeline and does not cause any site disturbance. It is not within a designated view plane. The tower is in compliance with the FCC regulations. Staff finds that this standard is met. 5. ScreeninE. Roof and ground mounted wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment, including accessory equipment, shall be screened from adjacent and nearby public rights-of-way and public or private properties by paint color selection, parapet walls, screen walls, fencing, landscaping, and/or berming in a manner compatible with the building's and/or surrounding environment's design, color, materials, texture, land forms and/or topography, as appropriate or applicable. In addition: a. Whenever possible, if monopoles are necessary for the support of antennas, they shall be located near existing utility poles, trees, or other similar objects; consist of colors and materials that best blend with their background; and, have no individual antennas or climbing spikes on the pole other than those approved by the appropriate decision-making authority (Community Development Director, Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, or City Council, as applicable). b. For ground mounted facilities, landscaping may be required to achieve a total screening effect at the base of such facilities or equipment in order to screen the mechanical characteristics; a heavy emphasis on coniferous plants for year-round screening may be required. Landscaping shall be of a type and variety capable of growing within one (1) year to a landscape screen which satisfactorily obscures the visibility of the facility. 5 c. Unless otherwise expressly approved, all cables for a facility shall be fully concealed from view underground or inside of the screening or monopole structure supporting the antennas; any cables that cannot be buried or otherwise hidden from view shall be painted to match the color of the building or other existing structure. d. Chain link fencing shall be unacceptable to screen facilities, support structures, or accessory and related equipment (including HVAC or mechanical equipment present on support buildings); fencing material, if used, shall be six (6) feet in height or less and shall consist of wood, masonry, stucco, stone or other acceptable materials that are opaque. e. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the facility shall comply with all additional measures deemed necessary to mitigate the visual impact of the facility. Also, in lieu of these screening standards, the Community Development Director may allow use of an alternate detailed plan and specifications for landscape and screening, including plantings, fences, walls, sign and structural applications, manufactured devices and other features designed to screen, camouflage and buffer antennas, poles and accessory uses. For example, the antenna and supporting structure or monopole may be of such design and treated with an architectural material so that it is camouflaged to resemble a tree with a single trunk and branches on its upper part. The plan should accomplish the same degree of screening achieved by meeting the standards outlined above. Response: The antenna sits on a rooftop with no parapet walls. While the proposed paint for the antenna will partially minimize its visual impact on the streetscape, no other actions have been proposed to deal with the visual impact of its height. Staff finds that this standard is not met. 6. LightinE and Signage. In addition to other applicable sections of the code regulating signage or outdoor lighting, the following standards shall apply to wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment: a. The light source for security lighting shall feature down-directional, sharp cut-off luminaries to direct, control, screen or shade in such a manner as to ensure that there is no spillage of illumination off-site. b. Light fixtures, whether free-standing or tower-mounted, shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in height as measured from finished grade. c. The display of any sign or advertising device other than public safety warnings, certifications or other required seals on any wireless communication device or structure is prohibited. 6 d. The telephone number(s) to contact in an emergency shall be posted on each facility in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 26.510 of the Aspen Municipal Code. Response: There will not be any lighting related to the antennas. The telephone number(s) to contact in an emergency shall be posted on the facility as required in Chapter 26.510 ofthe Aspen Municipal Code. Staff finds that this standard is met. 7. Access Wavs. In addition to ingress and egress requirements of the Building Code, access to and from wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment shall be regulated as follows: a. No wireless communication device or facility shall be located in a required parking, maneuvering or vehicle/pedestrian circulation area such that it interferes with, or in any way impairs, the intent or functionality of the original design. b. The facility must be secured from access by the general public but access for emergency services must be ensured. Access roads must be capable of supporting all potential emergency response vehicles and equipment c. The proposed easement(s) for ingress and egress and for electrical and telephone shall be recorded at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior to the issuance of building permits. Response: The antenna does not interfere with the pedestrian or vehicular circulation. The public will not be able to access the antenna. Said easement for access by utility companies is a required condition of approval. Staff finds that this standard is met. Conditional Use Review Standards. When considering a Development Application for a Conditional Use, the Commission shall consider whether all of the following standards are met. The application must include a written response to each of these review standards. These standards must be met to approve the height ofthe antenna. A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the Zone District in which it is proposed to be located; and Response: The increase in communication and therefore security, although not directly addressed in terms of telecommunication in the AACP, is in keeping with the AACP standards and overall plan. The applicant also argues that the presence of BBW as a telecommunications competitor will promote a diverse and healthy economic base for the local and resort community, through providing a choice in servers. This, and the fact that 7 0 BBW is owned by Aspen locals, "encouraging local ownership of business," also contributes to the AACP plan. Staff finds that BBW to be in compliance with the AACP goals although, finds the antenna does not comply with the purpose and intent ofthe Wireless Telecommunication Services Facilities and Equipment Ordinance, section 26.575.130 A. 1., 2. and 5. ofthe land use code: Christopher Porcello, their project engineer, recommended this antenna be located at least 25' from the parapet wall ofthe building. Currently it sits only 10' from the edge ofthe 1. Preserve the character and aesthetic of areas which are in close proximity to wireless telecommunication service facilities and equipment by visual, aesthetic and safety impacts of such facilities through careful design, siting and screening; 2. Protect the health safety and welfare ofperson's living or working in the area surrounding such wireless telecommunication service facilities and equipment from possible adverse environment effects (within the confines of the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996) related to the placement, construction or modifications of such facilities; 5. Encourage the joint use and clustering of antenna sites and structures, when practical, to help reduce the number of such facilities which may be required in the future to service the needs of customers and thus avert unnecessary proliferation of facilities on private and public property; building, and if there should be some failure of the 29' structure, causing it to fall, it 0 could fall offthe roof onto the sidewalk, injuring pedestrians. Staffbelieves that although the city could benefit from the additional services of BBW, there are other possible locations for this facility. There are many other antennas co- located more discreetly, on taller buildings, allowing the antennas to be shorter and less visible. Staff finds that this standard is not met. B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development; and Response: The antenna is located in Aspen's Commercial Core Area which is the district generally preferred by the wireless telecommunication standards. Staff finds this standard is met. C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and 0 Response: This neighborhood is regulated by the HPC in order to protect certain visual qualities and historic character. It is therefore especially important to minimize the 8 intrusiveness ofmodern equipment through careful site selection and screening. The size of the antenna does not minimize adverse effects on the street, pedestrian or vehicular impacts. If it were located on a taller building, the antenna would be shorter and less intrusive on any visual impacts. BBW proposes that they be located on this building because of the presence of US West infrastructure, but the design of the building prevents them from meeting the review standards. Therefore, staff does not believe the placement ofthe antenna, for the purpose of utilizing US West's previous infrastructure, justifies the height ofthe structure, especially when there are other taller locations in town where the antenna could be placed, allowing the antenna to be shorter and therefore in compliance with the height standards. Staff finds this standard is not met. D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools; and Response: NA E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; and Response: NA F. The proposed conditional use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and by all other applicable requirements of this chapter. Response: The applicant does not meet the Wireless Telecommunication Standards as discussed above, and does not meet the following Design Guideline 14.15: 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. o Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. o 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 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. o Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds. Staff finds this standard is not met. 9 ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the application as submitted. â€¢ Approve the application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) â€¢ Deny approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION AND RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends that HPC deny the application for the antenna at 420 E. Main Street finding that the review standards are not met. Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2002. A. Staffmemo dated February 13, 2002. B. Application. 10 0 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW LOCATED AT 420 E. MAIN STREET, LOTS N-0, BLOCK 37, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-073-22-014 RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2002 WHEREAS, the applicant, Broadband West LLC, represented by E. Michael Hoffman, Attorney at Law, has requested Wireless Telecommunication Review and Conditional Use Review approval for a 29' antenna located on top of the US Bank Building, 420 E. Main St., Lots N-O, Block 37, within the City and Townsite of Aspen. The property is located in the "Commercial Core Historic District," and WHEREAS, all Wireless Telecommunication development must meet Section 26.575.130.F, of the Wireless Telecommunication Services Facilities and Equipment Review Standards of the Aspen Land Use Code. 77:efollowing standard, are designed to foster the City's safety and aesthetic interests without imposing unreasonable limitations on wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment. 1. Standard: Setbacks. At a minimum, all wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment shall comply with the minimum setback requirements of the underlying zone district; if the following requirements are more restrictive than those of the underlying zone district, the more restrictive standard shall apply. a. All facilities shall be located at least fifty (50) feet from any property lines, except when roof-mounted (above the eave line of a building). Flat-roof mounted facilities visible from ground level within one-hundred (100) feet of said property shall be concealed to the extent possible within a compatible architectural element, such as a chimney or ventilation pipe, or behind architectural skirting of the type generally used to conceal HVAC equipment. Pitched-roof mounted facilities shall always be concealed within a compatible architectural element, such as chimneys or ventilation pipes. b. Monopole towers shall be set back from any residentially zoned properties a distance of at least three (3) times the monopole's height (i.e., a sixty (60) foot setback would be required for a twenty (20) foot monopole), and the setback from any public road, as measured from the right-of-way line, shall be at least equal to the height of the monopole. 0 c. No wireless communication facility may be established within one- hundred (100) feet of any existing, legally established wireless communication facility except when located on the same building or structure. d. No portion of any antenna array shall extend beyond the property lines or into any front yard area. Guy wires shall not be anchored within any front yard area, but may be attached to the building. 2. Standard: Heifht. Wireless telecommunication services facilities an(For equipment shall not exceed thirty-five (35) feet in height or the maximum permissible height of the given zone district, whichever is more restrictive. In addition: a. Whenever a wireless telecommunication services antenna is attached to a building roof, the antenna and support system for panel antennas shall not exceed five (5) feet above the highest portion of that roof, including parapet walls, and the antenna and support system for whip antennas shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet above the highest portion of that roof, including parapet walls. b. If the building itself exceeds the height limitations of the zone, and such excess height was legally established (i.e., granted a variance, approved by PUD, etc.), then the combined height of the building and antenna shall not exceed the maximum height allowed by such approval unless determined by the Community Development Director to be suitably camouflaged. c. Ifthe building is constructed at or above the zone district's height limit, or if combined height of the building and the antenna would exceed the applicable height limit, the additional height of the antenna must be reviewed pursuant to the process and standards (in addition to the standards of this Section) of conditional use review, Section 26.425.010, unless determined by the Community Development Director to be suitably camouflaged (in which case an administrative approval may be granted). d. Support and/or switching equipment shall be located inside the building, unless it can be fully screened from view as provided in the "Screening" standards (26.475.130(F)(5)) below. 3. Standard: Architectural Compatibility. Whether manned or unmanned, wireless telecommunication services facilities shall be consistent with the architectural style of the surrounding architectural environment (planned or existing) considering exterior materials, roof form, scale, mass, color, texture and character. In addition: a. If such facility is accessory to an existing use, the facility shall be constructed out of materials that are equal to or of better quality than the materials of the principal use. b. Wireless telecommunication services equipment shall be of the same color as the building or structure to which or on which such equipment is mounted, or as required by the appropriate decision-making authority (Community Development Director, Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, or City Council, as applicable). c. Whenever wireless telecommunication services equipment is mounted to the wall of a building or structure, the equipment shall be mounted in a configuration designed to blend with and be architecturally integrated into a building or other concealing structure, be as flush to the wall as technically possible, and shall not project above the wall on which it is mounted. d. Monopole support buildings, which house cellular switching devices and/or other equipment related to the use, operation or maintenance of the subject monopole, must be designed to match the architecture of adjacent buildings. If no recent and/or reasonable architectural theme is present, the Community Development Director may require a particular design that is deemed to be suitable to the subject location. e. All utilities associated with wireless communication facilities or equipment shall be underground (also see "Screening" below). 4. Standard: Compatibility With the Natural Environment. Wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment shall be compatible with the surrounding natural environment considering land forms, topography, and other natural features, and shall not dominate the landscape or present a dominant silhouette on a ridge line. In addition: a. If a location at or near a mountain ridge line is selected, the applicant shall provide computerized, three dimensional, visual simulations of the facility or equipment and other appropriate graphics to demonstrate the visual impact on the view of the affected ridge(s) or ridge line(s); an 8040 Greenline Review, pursuant to the provisions of Section 26.435.030, may also be required. b. Site disturbances shall be minimized, and existing vegetation shall be preserved or improved to the extent possible, unless it can be demonstrated that such disturbance to vegetation and topography results in less visual impact to the surrounding area. c. Surrounding view planes shall be preserved to the extent possible. d. All wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment shall comply with the Federal Communication Commission's regulations concerning maximum radio frequency and electromagnetic frequency emissions. 5. Standard: Screening. Roof and ground mounted wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment, including accessory equipment, shall be screened from adjacent and nearby public rights-of-way and public or private properties by paint color selection, parapet walls, screen walls, fencing, landscaping, and/or berming in a manner compatible with the building's and/or surrounding environment's design, color, materials, texture, land forms and/or topography, as appropriate or applicable. In addition: a. Whenever possible, if monopoles are necessary for the support of antennas, they shall be located near existing utility poles, trees, or other similar objects; consist of colors and materials that best blend with their background; and, have no individual antennas or climbing spikes on the pole other than those approved by the appropriate decision-making authority (Community Development Director, Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, or City Council, as applicable). b. For ground mounted facilities, landscaping may be required to achieve a total screening effect at the base of such facilities or equipment in order to screen the mechanical characteristics; a heavy emphasis on coniferous plants for year-round screening may be required. Landscaping shall be of a type and variety capable of growing within one (1) year to a landscape screen which satisfactorily obscures the visibility of the facility. c. Unless otherwise expressly approved, all cables for a facility shall be fully concealed from view underground or inside of the screening or monopole structure supporting the antennas; any cables that cannot be buried or otherwise hidden from view shall be painted to match the color of the building or other existing structure. d. Chain link fencing shall be unacceptable to screen facilities, support structures, or accessory and related equipment (including HVAC or mechanical equipment present on support buildings); fencing material, if used, shall be six (6) feet in height or less and shall consist of wood, masonry, stucco, stone or other acceptable materials that are opaque. e. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the facility shall comply with all additional measures deemed necessary to mitigate the visual impact of the facility. Also, in lieu of these screening standards, the Community Development Director may allow use of an alternate detailed plan and specifications for landscape and screening, including plantings, fences, walls, sign and structural applications, manufactured devices and other features designed to screen, camouflage and buffer antennas, poles and accessory uses. For example, the antenna and supporting structure or monopole may be of such design and treated with an architectural material so that it is camouflaged to resemble a tree with a single trunk and branches on its upper part. The plan should accomplish the same degree of screening achieved by meeting the standards outlined above. 6. Standard: Lightinsr and Signaze. In addition to other applicable sections of the code regulating signage or outdoor lighting, the following standards shall apply to wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment: a. The light source for security lighting shall feature down-directional, sharp cut-off luminaries to direct, control, screen or shade in such a manner as to ensure that there is no spillage of illumination off-site. b. Light fixtures, whether free-standing or tower-mounted, shall not exceed twelve (12) feet in height as measured from finished grade. c. The display of any sign or advertising device other than public safety warnings, certifications or other required seals on any wireless communication device or structure is prohibited. d. The telephone number(s) to contact in an emergency shall be posted on each facility in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 26.510 of the Aspen Municipal Code. 7. Standard: Access Ways. In addition to ingress and egress requirements of the Building Code, access to and from wireless telecommunication services facilities and equipment shall be regulated as follows: a. No wireless communication device or facility shall be located in a required parking, maneuvering or vehicle/pedestrian circulation area such that it interferes with, or in any way impairs, the intent or functionality of the original design. b. The facility must be secured from access by the general public but access for emergency services must be ensured. Access roads must be capable of supporting all potential emergency response vehicles and equipment. 0 d. The proposed easement(s) for ingress and egress and for electrical and telephone shall be recorded at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior to the issuance ofbuilding pennits. WHEREAS, all applications for Wireless Telecommunication Review which exceeds the maximum height limit ofthe zone district must meet section 26.425.10, of the Aspen Land Use Code. A. Standard: The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the Zone District in which it is proposed to be located; and B. Standard: The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development; and C. Standard: The location, size, design and operating characteristics ofthe proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and D. Standard: There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools; and E. Standard: The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; and F. Standard: The proposed conditional use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and by all other applicable requirements of this chapter. WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer, and Christina Amato, Historic Preservation intern, in their staffreport dated February 13, 2002, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the application does not meet the required standards, and recommended denial of the project; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on February 13, 2002, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, did not find the application to meet the standards, as put forth in the staff report, or to be consistent with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines or Land Use Code" and denied the application by a vote of to 0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That Wireless Telecommunication Review and Conditional Use Review is denied for the antenna located on top of the US Bank Building, 420 E Main St, Lots N-O, Block 37, City and Townsite ofAspen, as presented February 13, 2002. DENIED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 13th day of February, 2002. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 0 Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 0 EXHIBIT County of Pitkin ) AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSU ) SS. TO ASPEN LANI) USE REGULATIONS State of Colorado ) SECTION 26.304.060(ED I, Cher Rae Brammer, being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following manner: By mailing ofnotice, a copy ofwhich is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners ofproperty within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the 24th day of January, 2002 (which is 19 days prior to the public hearing date ofFebruary 13th). Signature Sign*0*ie me*24#r*â‚¬1-3002, by C Lfilnz*~~:~ U ' - WITNESS M~ ~ Ollend ABVION ~ My commissi~~~ C 'U- Notary Public fAY 00**t u " 4 Â«p,/, s.. 2(/fid< PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 420 E. MAIN STREET WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACII,1TY REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW NOTICE IS HERF,BY GIVEN that a public hearing will bc held on Wednesday, February 13, 2002, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen IÂ·Iistoric Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Broadband West LLC requesting approval to install a telecommunication antenna at 420 E. Main Street and a conditional use review to exceed the allowable height limit. The property is described as Lots N-O, Block 37, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Amy Guthric at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 920-5096, amyg@ci.aspen.co.us. S & A EQUWMENT COMPANY BANK OF ASPEN ARCHDIOCESE OF DENVER SAINT SCOTT LARSON GENERAL PARTNER C/O AUTAX INC MARYS POLOX 910 PO BOX 2798 1300 S STEELE ST I~~IKEE WI 53072 LITTLETON CO 80161 DENVER CO 80210 201 NORTH MILL ASSOCIATES LLC 50% ALH HOLDING COMPANY INC ASPEN FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT KRABACHER FAMILY TRUST 50% 435 W MAIN ST 420 E HOPKINS AVE 201 N MILL ST STE 201 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 CENTRE OF ASPEN LLC 54.6248989% BANKERS MORTGAGE INC CITY OF ASPEN C/O FLEISHER CO 420 E MAIN ST 130 S GALENA ST 200 E MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 EVERHART-NELSON SYSTEMS COMMUNITY BANKS OF COLORADO GODIVA HOLDINGS LLC ANALYSTS LTD 210 N MILL ST 435 E MAIN ST 117 ATLANTIC AVE STE 215 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 HOLTZ ABEL & FANA HOOPER TROY HOTEL JEROME ASSOCIATES LP C/O FLEISHER COMPY ATTN: D VOLTMER 134 S 7TH ST 330 E MAIN ST 200 E MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 JEROME OFFICE ASPEN COMPANY LLC KLEIN HERBERT S & MARSHA L 5,!IGALENA ST 201 N MILL ST STE 106 201 N MILL ST #203 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 M & W ASSOCIATES PITKIN COUNTY WELLS FARGO BANK WESTNA A COLORADO GENERAL PARTNERSHIP 530 E MAIN ST STE 302 119 S MILL ST 205 S MILL ST ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 YOUNG DONALD L 434 EAST MAIN LLC BERGMAN CARL R & CATHERINE M 617 W MAIN ST 314 S GALENA ST #200 PO BOX 1365 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611-1818 ASPEN CO 81612 DRACO INC GALENA PLAZA LLC LARSON KARL G A COLORADO CORPORATION MEYER LOWELL C/O LARSON M MADELEINE PO BOX 8904 PO BOX 1247 P O BOX 8207 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81612 MOUNTAIN STATES COMMUNICATIONS NEWLON LLC ~~STREET DEVELOPMENT INC INC C/O DANFORTH '~ 8904 PO BOX E PO BOX 1863 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81612 KREVOY BRADLEY R SCHAINUCK LEWIS 1 1401 OCEAN AVE #301 5750 DOWNEY AVE STE 206 S MONICA CA 90401 LAKEWOOD CA 90712-1468 _ 420 U1&1#*.1 -.L . .. J- t-- gr IZIL-r . . lit, I Th#//. 3% 1- Â· 6% '/22/ 12*4* â‚¬19: 4 4,4.~ .. PUBLIC NOTICE ONESD AY. rk *'frinfEBRUAR) -".E 5 00 2 A LITY HA.t PLACE SAEZBO_' Eâ‚¬ .TH i -/ 200 E. IA JIICI IIONS 4A A'r 42 E ki# 5 T*r7- *'1011,L ./ â‚¬ 1 .IEVÂ· , Â· .,C 20 â€¢/ "L 3-32- STATE OF COLORADO } AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING PURSUANT } SS. TO PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE County ofPitkin } CODE SECTION 4-90 I, Scott Young, being or representing an Applicant to the Pitkin County Community Development Department, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 4-90 ofthe Pitkin County Land Use Code inthe following manner: By posting a sign in'a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the 29th day of January, 2002, to the 13th day ofFebruary, 2002. (Must be posted for at least fifteen (15) full days before the hearing date). A photograph ofthe posted sign is attached hereto. Signed before me this 29th day of January, 2002, by \1- .*130 04 911*tic--(ip/-*1 L--/ C U (Attach photograph here) ~Â»L WITNESS MY HAND A My Commission expirpt UB..-j 10120 e. BRAUA, 00:.. KOTARY 15)Â·.PUBLIC . -4442F co\N #mmi.,â€¢0 ......