The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20131211 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 11,2013 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO Site Visits: None 5:00 INTRODUCTION A. Roll call B. Approval of minutes-November 13th C. Public Comments D. Commission member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest(actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring G. Staff comments H.. Certificates of No Negative Effect issued I. Submit public notice for agenda items OLD BUSINESS 5:15 A. 549 Race Alley and Lots 4 and 6 of Fox Crossing Subdivision- Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variance, Parking Waiver and Floor Area Bonus, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING NEW BUSINESS 5.45 A. 434 E. Cooper-Extension of Conceptual Major Development approval 5:50 B. 201 E. Hyman Avenue-Final Major Development, PUBLIC HEARING 6:30 C. 233 W.Hallam-Final Major Development, PUBLIC HEARING WORKESSION A. None 7:10 ADJOURN TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM,NEW BUSINESS Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation(5 minutes) Board questions and clarifications(5 minutes) Applicant presentation(20 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed(5 minutes) HPC discussion(15 minutes) Applicant rebuttal (comments) (5 minutes) Motion(5 minutes) *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. PROJECT MONITORING- Projects in bold are currently under construction. 217 E.Bleeker-Kribs Jay Maytin 518 W. Main-Fornell 320 Lake 435 W.Main-AJCC 400 E.Hyman(Tom Thumb) 204 S.Galena 920 W.Hallam 28 Smuggler Grove Lift One Nora Berko 205 S. Spring-Hills 1102 Waters 332 W.Main 28 Smuggler Grove 1006 E. Cooper. Sallie Golden 400 E.Hyman(Tom Thumb) 305 S.Mill(Above the Salt) 517 E.Hyman(Little Annie's) 206 Lake Jane Hills Aspen Core 605 W.Bleeker 114 Neale Willis Pember 204 S. Galena Aspen Core 514 E.Hyman 624 W.Francis Patrick Segal 204 S.Galena 623 E.Hopkins 701 N.Third 612 W.Main Holden Marolt derrick 624 W.Francis 206 Lake John Whipple 208 E.Main M:\city\planning\hpc project monitoring\PROJECT MONITORING.doc 12/4/2013 Pi MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 549 Race Alley, Lot 5, Fox Crossing Subdivision- Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variance, Parking Waiver And Floor Area Bonus, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING Lots 4 And 6, Fox Crossing Subdivision- Relocation Review, PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 11, 2013 SUMMARY: 549 Race Alley is a 6,016 square foot lot that contains a Victorian home in very naltered k_ �� o l t �, a u �4 ' , _ ate.•,,. but also very deteriorated condition i s= According to Planning Office files, the house has been vacant for t= approximately 50 years, possibly r, longer. This Victorian was one of the few buildings on the property that was assembled to develop the Foxy` A 't Crossing Subdivision beginning approximately 10 years ago. r Construction of new homes on the vacant lots in the subdivision took priority, and the economic downturn left the developer unable to complete r an approved restoration and remodel of this house. Staff required stabilization and protection efforts be undertaken in 2006, due to concerns. with "demolition by neglect." The building was studied and documented by a wood scientist who specializes in historic structures. A temporary roof was built spanning overtop of the house, along with other measures to secure the building. Preservation staff and the Chief Building Official have visited the house several times over the last few years. The property is under contract to a buyer who wishes to lift the Victorian, set it on a new basement, rehabilitate the building and construct an addition. HPC conducted a Conceptual review hearing regarding this proposal on Oct. l Vh and again on Nov. 13`x'. The first hearing was continued for design restudy, and so that a new public notice could be issued regarding building relocations 1 P2 related to this project. The second continuation was for additional restudy of a proposed expansion on the north side of the Victorian, and the manner in which the new connector element attaches to the back of the Victorian. Staff is providing the main floor plans from the previous two meetings, in addition to the drawings submitted for this continued hearing as exhibits to this memo. Staff has been told that this is the only design the applicant will consider. We find that, in the area of the kitchen and connector, the proposal is in conflict with the design guidelines in a manner that should not be supported by HPC and does not meet the criteria for a floor area bonus. We would typically.suggest another continuance, which would have to be to a date in February at the earliest, however given our understanding that HPC is being presented with the only option, we recommend the project be denied. APPLICANT: Lot 5: Race Alley LLC, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects. Lots 4 and 6: Fox Crossing Properties, LLC,represented by Neiley and Alder Attorneys. PARCEL ID: Lot 4: 2737-073-92-004, Lot 5: 2737-073-92-005, Lot 6: 2737-073-92-006. ADDRESS: 549 Race Alley, Lot 5, Fox Crossing Subdivision, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado and Lots 4 and 6,Fox Crossing Subdivision, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6. CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. The relevant design guidelines are attached as "Exhibit A." 2 P3 The applicant has provided site plans, floor plans, elevations and perspective views describing the proposed project on Lot 5. In the previous meeting, staff and the board have discussed the fact that the project includes a connector which distances the largest part of the new construction from the historic building. The connector exceeds the minimum length required by the guidelines. The footprint of the two story portion of the addition is comparable in size to the historic house. The overall form of the addition is simple and relates to the historic building. These aspects of the proposal are successful. Two previous continuances have occurred because of how the new construction affects the northeast corner of the historic house, and the east (rear) fagade. Staff has objected to infilling an original corner of the house, changing the form of the building and destroying more original fabric than is typically allowed. HPC's standard approach to additions to miner's cottages has been to preserve the original building as completely intact as possible, allowing demolition only in the area needed for a reasonable connection. At the last meeting, the architect suggested that an addition that once existed at this corner of the house should be considered historic precedence, allowing a new addition to be put in. Staff is attaching "as-built" drawings of the Victorian from 2004. The lean-to addition was in place at the time. It is evident from the drawings that this was a modest construction, not original to the building. It was considered non-contributing and not worthy or preservation and was allowed to be removed as part of the stabilization of the historic structure that was initiated two years later. Re-establishing new construction in this area should not be considered to be any type of restoration action. If it were acceptable to HPC to allow a small expansion in this corner of the _- building, the guidelines call for the new work to be pulled in from the historic .t _ building corners, tucked under eave lines, or otherwise designed to be an obvious addition, with relatively limited physical - - impact. That is not the case with this proposal. HPC has seen three versions of the kitchen, the latest of which aligns directly with the historic north facing gable end. - r Since the last meeting, there has been a site plan change to the project that also detrimentally affects historic features of the building. The connector element and new addition have remained in the same place, but the applicant has increased the proposed relocation of the Victorian from 5' northward to approximately 10' northward of its current location. This is causing the connector, which has been designed with a flat roof and higher plate height than the Victorian, to cut through the eave lines of the original rear facing gable end (See Section drawings.) A previous version of the project had the connector tucking under the eaves. 3 P4 Based on guidelines 10.3, 10.4 and 10.10, staff does not support demolishing the rear of the Victorian to the extent proposed. The program can be accommodated in the new construction. This unaltered miner's cottage is significant within the collection of Aspen landmarks. New construction should remove as little historic fabric as possible. There is a floor area bonus requested for this project, which would also argue against an addition that removes or affects approximately 25% of the perimeter of the house. Staff finds that these guidelines are not met. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. ❑ A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. ❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. ❑ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. RELOCATION The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. The following standards apply for relocating a historic property as per Section 26.415.090.0 of the Municipal Code: C. Standards for the Relocation of Designated Properties Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 4 - - - - - - - - - P5 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the his_tor_ic, architectural or aesthetic relation_ships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The proposal includes permanently moving the Victorian approximately 10' north of its current location. Because the historic setting of the property has changed greatly, maintaining the Victorian in its exact original location may not be critical. Staff recommended in favor of allowing a 5' relocation as previously proposed, but does not support the 10' relocation in the current application. This pushes the Victorian resource further away from the public park and causes the new construction to be in the foreground of the Victorian on the south. If the project were to go forward, the Victorian would be temporarily stored,partially on Lot 4 of the subdivision, while the basement is excavated on Lot 5. Staff would recommend the typical conditions for temporary storage of a building during active construction. The applicant would provide a $30,000 letter of credit, cashier's check, or other form acceptable to the City Attorney to insure the safe relocation of the house. A relocation plan detailing how and where the building would be stored and protected during construction must be submitted with the building permit application, and the applicant shall include documentation of the existing elevation of the home and the relationship of the foundation to grade in the building permit application. For the redevelopment of the Victorian to take place, HPC would also be asked to approve mothballing the two log cabins on Lot 6, until the remodel of those buildings (HPC Resolution #5, Series of 2009) moves forward at some undetermined date. These buildings would both be raised onto beams, supported by cribbing. It is unknown whether the cabins will be moved with their existing floor system intact or not. The applicant represents that the cabins will be kept watertight and inspected periodically. Staff has been concerned with the length of time that the cabins on Lot 6 might be"moth-balled." Work on the Victorian has been delayed 8 years since the Fox Crossing project was approved. In order to avoid potential deterioration issues, potential vandalism/attractive nuisance issues, or 5 P6 potential negative visual impacts on the neighborhood that may result from long-term storage of these cabins, staff would recommend a larger financial security for their safe relocation, repair and preservation. The application for a permit to relocate one or both of the cabins would need to include a letter of credit, cashier's check, or other form acceptable to the City Attorney in an amount that is approximately twice as much as would be required to construct a slab on grade foundation onto which the two cabins may be set down on Lot 6. Should the HPC approved redevelopment plan not be initiated through the issuance of a building permit within three years from the date that the log cabin relocation permit is issued, City Council would annually review the effect of the building storage and determine whether or not to employ the funds to build the slab and set the buildings on it. Staff and the City Attorney's office have discussed this financial guarantee with the attorney for Fox Crossing LLC, the owner of Lots 4 and 6 and the log cabins. If an HPC Conceptual approval is granted, staff would like to work with Fox Crossing LLC to finalize the specifics of the guarantee. The City is currently holding approximately $180,000 in performance guarantee money for the larger improvements to the subdivision, most of which are completed. It is possible that those funds could be rolled into the HPC requirement. FAR BONUS In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a.. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. Staff Response: The allowable floor area for the project is 2,772 square feet, per the Subdivision approval. The applicant is requesting a 500 square foot floor area bonus, which would be applied to the remodel, along with 2,022 square feet of the base allowable floor area. The remaining 750 square feet of base allowable floor area is proposed to be converted into 3 TDRs and sold, if approved by City Council. The Victorian house is in very poor repair and will require special effort to restore the original features. Staff would be generally supportive of the applicant's bonus request, given that they are inheriting a long overdue restoration problem. However, staff cannot support the bonus due to the demolition proposed as part of the kitchen expansion and connector. Even if HPC were to 6 P7 make a finding that the.guidelines had been adequately met by the proposal, staff does not find that the project meets the high standards that have been required for bonus projects in terms of restoration and limited demolition impacts on the historic resource. SETBACK VARIANCES In granting a variance,the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Response: This area of the R-6 zone district has a greater sideyard setback requirement than the West End, where most R-6 lots are located. The minimum sideyard here is 10' on each side, 20' combined. The proposal encroaches into the north sideyard by 5', and does not meet the combined requirements by 5'. Staff finds that setback variances in this case can help mitigate adverse impacts on the historic structure. PARKING VARIANCE Properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures may provide fewer on- site parking spaces than required if the standard below, found at Section 26.415.110.0 of the Municipal Code, is met. 1. The parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. Staff Response: The applicant is required to provide two on-site spaces. One space is proposed in the garage. The second space was originally proposed to be waived, however, the applicant has since decided to create an uncovered parking spot on the property, along the south sideyard. No variance is needed. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS The project does not comply with Residential Design Standards related to "Street-Oriented Entrance." Street oriented entrance and principal window. All single-family homes and duplexes, except as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.13.4 shall have a street-oriented entrance and a street facing principal window. a) The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front- most wall of the building. . 7 P8 b) A covered entry porch of fifty(50) or more square feet,with a minimum depth of six (6) feet, shall be part of the front facade. Entry porches and canopies shall not be more than one (1) story in height. All Residential Design Standard Variances, Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410.020(D)(2)must: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Response: In HPC's view, the front of the house is the front of the original building. Since this facade does not face a street now, application of the Residential Design Standards is challenging. The location of the original front door and the design of the original front porch should not be changed to meet these guidelines for new construction. Staff would recommend a waiver. The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC deny the application, finding that the Conceptual review guidelines, Relocation guidelines, and Floor Area Bonus criteria are not met. Exhibits: A. Relevant Guidelines B. October 91h floor plan C. November 13th floor plan D. November 13t1'minutes E. 2004 "as-built"drawings showing lean-to addition in northeast corner F. Application 8 P9 Exhibit A, Conceptual Guidelines,549 Race Alley 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. ❑ Do not alter the angle of a historic roof..Instead, maintain the perceived line and orientation of the roof as seen from the street. ❑ Retain and repair roof detailing. 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. ❑ In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. ❑ It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative. ❑ Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. ❑ A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. ❑ Before a building is moved,.a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a new foundation,utilities, and.to restore the house. ❑ The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for new construction. ❑ In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. ❑ It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. ❑ It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. • A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. • An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. • An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. • An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design anew addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define'a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. ❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 9 NO 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building,set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. • A 1-story connector is preferred. • The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. ❑ The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. • Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. • Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. ❑. Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. ❑ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. ❑ For example, loss or. alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10 0G c F- U W v` STNR V KITCHEN W GeAAGE DINING ROOM - - z L _ z U LIVING ROOM o w a I � U — PNTR ENTRY FAMILY fl00M P.R., I OUTOOOOVING – FRONTt PORCH � POO RM, MURoom PORCH \ Lij I z W -------------------------- L____________—_____——________I Q }}f W c W ¢2 W T Z Q c0 C GMWING: MAIN LEVEL PLAN SEA c�µG 1 io 1/8 1'-G" 1534 SF 369 SF(GARAGE) JOfi NO.17119 e— SNEETNG. HER R A2.1 �.+� t 1, N STAIR -� MASTER T FIAT BEDROOM CLOS. ROOF MASTER BATH DECK Q C A UPPER LEVEL PLAN STAIR GREAT/FAMILY I KITCHEN DINING GARAGE ROOM m B-FAST E ENTRY NOOK MUD ROOM n ®o MAIN LEVEL PLAN CHARLES CUNNIFFE 1/8" ARCHITECTS ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2013 Chairperson, Jay Maytin, called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were Willis Pember, Nora Berko and Jim DeFrancia. Absent were Jane Hills, John Whipple, Sallie Golden and Patrick Sagal. Staff present: Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Nora disclosed that Derek Skalko has worked with her on other projects but she has no financial involvement in the 201 E. Hyman project. Minutes: Jay made the motion to approve the minutes of Oct. 9th and Oct. 23th; second by Jim. All in favor, motion carried. 549 Race Alley and Lots 4 and 6 of Fox Crossing Subdivision — Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variances, Parking Waiver and Floor Area Bonus, cont'd public hearing. Debbie said the affidavit of posting is in order and the applicant can proceed. Amy said we have two applicants. One is dealing with lot 5, the remodel of the Victorian house and another applicant is the owner of lots 4 and 6 where some buildings will be relocated. Lot 5 has the Victorian house and it is the original home site. It is probably the most authentic, unchanged miner's cottage in town. No one has lived in it for 50 years. It is very deteriorated. There is a potential purchaser who would like to pick the house up, move it about five feet from its current location and build a new foundation, new addition and restore the house. Staff is in support of the relocation request and the five foot north side yard setback variance that is requested for the addition. This part of town has much bigger side yard setbacks than other similar lots in town and we feel it is acceptable. Staff is also in support of a residential design standard variance that is needed. The house address is on Race Alley but the front door faces downhill of that and we wouldn't want the building to be modified to meet a standard that isn't necessarily appropriate for this site. One parking space will be in the garage and one uncovered space. HPC needs to discuss the specifics of the proposed addition and the FAR bonus. The project has a one story connector that 1 P 1 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2013 attaches to the back of the Victorian house. The connector in this project is actually longer than the minimum required. There is no deck proposed on top of it. The new construction is nicely separated from the old. The two story part meets the design guidelines. The only thing on the table for debate is that the applicant proposes to expand the kitchen which is in the miner's cottage on the side of the house. Staff recommends to continue the design review because that is resulting in approximately 25% of the perimeter wall of the Victorian to be removed or overtaken by new construction. This is a very unaltered building. Usually UPC is firm that a certain amount of new construction will be accepted but the historic resource is somewhat hands off. Staff cannot allow the kitchen expansion. It is a lot of damage for not a lot of gain from our perspective. There is a step in the house between the miner's cottage and the link so it doesn't completely appear that the flow between the units is substantially improved by punching out the wall of the Victorian. They are also requesting a 500 square foot bonus which is warranted considering the restoration work that is needed on this building. We understand that the applicant will have to put a lot of time and money in the restoration. Amy said HPC needs to discuss how they feel about the proposed expansion into the Victorian and then I'll do a presentation about the relocation concerns. There is an historic resource sitting on this lot and it needs to' move next door. Jay said if for some reason this project doesn't get approved it might be appropriate to force the current owner to bring the building into a better state of repair. Jay asked about the FAR on the property. Amy said it is 2722 square feet and the applicant is asking to use 2022 of that plus a 500 square foot floor area bonus to build the proposed project. They want to take 750 of what is not used and turn it into 3 TDR's with city council. Charles Cunniffee & Associates Karen Woods, architect Charles said in the last couple of weeks we have done some background research. This project was approved in 2004 with a much more major addition to it than what we are proposing now. Where we are proposing the kitchen addition to the existing structure would actually be within the 2 P15 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2013 confines of what was once there before. For some reason that portion of the house was removed. The two doors that are boarded up are actually interior doors which now go to the outside because part of the house that was once there has disappeared. Where we are proposing to put the kitchen really isn't an addition it is more of a replacement of what was once there. In a way we are bringing it more intact historically to allow the kitchen to return in a form where part of the building once was which is essentially the bunk .room and bathroom that were there. The primary reason for us needing to . have the kitchen placement approved is for the proposed buyer. They cannot find a way to have the house function without the kitchen. It would be more of an historic context if we replace the wall that was removed rather than leaving the void in the house. Our current proposal is showing a kitchen element but we feel strongly that the kitchen element should return to the historic form of the building. The house-is quite small and the ceilings are low: Karen stated the link now is mostly glass and we have changed some massing issues that were recommended at the last meeting. The secondary form is not repetitive of the historic form. Amy said the images that they are showing, the lean-to is not original to the house. It was stripped off sometime recently. We must have not considered it valuable otherwise it would have been stabilized. John Morton said he is excited about the project. The old house is only 700 square feet but enough space to move around and function as a family. We need the kitchen and if it wasn't there it would take away the functionality of the space. You run from the kitchen into a hall into a great room. We appreciate the historic nature of the project and this house has been sitting empty for 50 years. Many of the neighbors we have talked to thanked us for taking this project on. Hopefully we can find a solution. Amy said the proposal in the packet, the kitchen is still within the perimeter of the original building. We don't have any floor plans or elevations of the proposal tonight. Jay said we can approve what is in the packet or we can approve what they are presenting or we can continue the project. 3 P 1 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2013 Nora said she is uncomfortable trying to resolve something when we haven't had staff input that this newly discovered old building is really part of what is on the record. Jim said staff is recommending continuation. Jim asked the applicant if they are willing to continue and restudy. Charles said they feel it is the right solution and they would like it approved. We would prefer that the board consider that the kitchen would project further out but since you do not have those elevations we aren't asking you to approve that tonight. We would like to be able to move forward. Amy said when you look at the drawings that is not the way an addition would have happened in the Victorian period. It is not the right shape and we obviously allowed it to be removed from the building considering it insignificant. What stands on the ground right now is the most historic resource. Willis asked about the square footage of the great room? Charles said it is 700 and without the kitchen around 500 square feet. Willis asked if the level change is necessary in the design. Charles said they could consider it shifting back. If you allow any effects to happen on an historic structure it should be at the least noticeable part or at the back. This occurs in the most inconspicuous part on the back north east corner. Jim said if the addition was original Charles would work in the confines of that addition. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. John Bush, neighbor who lives across the street. Jon said he met the original owner from 1888. She was elderly and in 1972 he met her Mrs. Moutch. The addition came off because the roof was caving in. The siding on the addition was deteriorating as the siding on the rest of the house which would indicate that it was put on pretty early, not to long after the house was built. My main concern is that it should be restored, put on as it was. It was quite low. When you came to the back, the north wall it was not very high and it attached to the roof. It should be authentic. It was veiy funky from the 4 P17 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2013 beginning and probably not well built. I wouldn't oppose it and it would look like a lean-to addition from the mining era. Raife Bass said he has sold lots on Fox Crossing. The house is in rough condition and in needs of help. The Mortons are the first family to take on the project. Having someone who wants to be part of the community and restore the house is an asset to our community. Rick Neiley said he represents Fox Crossing LLC the current owner of the balance of the Fox Crossing project including this lot. The modification is in the most inconspicuous portion of the property and we have another development lot immediate to the north of this which is going to have a single family private residence on it which will block the view of this portion of the structure from any aspect of the public. The main view is from Fox Meadow Park. My client has owned this property for two years and this is a great opportunity and we urge you to approve it. Chairperson, Jay Maytin closed the public comments. Jay identified the issues: Bonus of 500 square feet North east corner of the historic house Jim said he appreciates the need to make the space more livable. The house has been a challenge and no one has taken it on. It is interesting that there is a lot that will block the views of that section which impacts what the public is looking at. At one time there was something there. I am inclined to be supportive of the project. Nora said it is a wonderful building and she is glad someone is interested in taking it on. I am not ready to make any decision until I've seen that the applicant and staff have gotten together. If there was something there it should be restored. The bonus is also tied to that. I would recommend continuation. Willis applauded the effort to take on this house and it is a wonderful proposition to turn this into a family home. After the different discussions and the histories of the additions etc. I'm not sure what I am approving. If you are restoring it, it would be based on documentation and photographs. We also haven't seen any drawings. I feel it should be restudied and come 5 P18 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2013 back with a solid proposal. It is restoration or it is not restoration. I believe certain additions can be captured and embellished. If you look at the connection you might not need a level change. The width of the link is almost the same width of the historic volume and maybe those could be aligned that the opening could be much larger. There are creative ways to engage that connective piece. Jay said a bonus is warranted for taking on this restoration. I would offer the 500 square foot bonus for a restoration but this is not a restoration. I agree with the continuation because we need to see drawings etc. The bonus is not warranted if you are altering the historic context or walls or touching the connector to it. The bonus is not warranted if you are altering 20% of the historic fabric even though there was something there in the past. Inherently I have an issue with giving a bonus that you don't need. You don't need the square foot bonus to do your project. It seems like it is a finance tool and I am willing to work with the applicant on this because it is complicated but I don't see 500 square feet appropriate on this project as a bonus. I am in support of the project and a solution. Willis said he would support the FAR bonus because they are doing a good restoration. Jim echoed a continuance because it is not clear what it is we are approving. Nora said she would support part of the bonus. I need to see the project that I am voting for. Willis said he still doesn't understand why there has to be a level difference between the historic house and the connector. It could be opened up in ways that do not require the bump out that would respect modern living. It could be made to seem 30% larger just by how the articulation of the addition is attached to the back of the historic resource. If they are set on having it in the proposed location then maybe we can approve it. Jim commented that he has no issue with the steps. Jay said he doesn't feel there is enough support to pass this tonight. If we continue this it would be for a restudy of the connection between.the proposed addition and the existing. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P 1 9 MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 13, 2013 Karen asked if the restudy is without any kitchen addition. The board said a kitchen addition could occur. Charles pointed out that there is always some level of disturbance to the historic structure must to make it work. We are only asking to touch the part that was disturbed. MOTION: Jim moved to continue 549 Race Alley until December 111h; second.by Nora. All in favor, motion carried. Willis said in the restudy you should include options that don't disturb the wall in question. 201 E. Hyman — Conceptual Major Development, Demolition, On-Site Relocation and Variances, Pubic Hearing Debbie said there was a glitch in the notice and it has been re-noticed for this evening. Exhibit I. Amy said this is a corner lot zoned mixed use;-however the applicant in this particular case is proposing a single family residence use which is a significantly lower square footage. It is an 8,000 square foot lot and it contains a very high quality and nicely designed Victorian era home that sits in the front corner of the lot. There is also an out building along the alley. The house is 1883 and has an important family history. The applicant is proposing to remove non-historic 1990's additions on the house and strip back to the original building. They propose to pick up the historic house, dig a basement and put it back down. They would also like to move the shed somewhat because it sits partially in the alley off the private property. They would like to pick it up and move it toward Aspen Street on the corner which is traditional in town. They would like to build an addition to the house which would be linked to the Victorian house through a connector which is a one story small linking hallway that leads to a two story addition that is right up against the Limelight. It is pushed as far away from the historic resource as possible and it has a very simple form with a gable roof. There are setback variances requested for the historic house just to allow it to stay in the same location as it is now. The applicant is requesting a variance on the Aspen Street side for a new light well and variances are requested for the out building on the alley to be right up to the alley which is 7 'I'63M 1, In cl) 0 C1 II 21 0 zM1 m rrI ................................................ ........................................... ........................ u I'111 br ....................... In �0 Z II 2 bm ................................................ > O z ...........................—.............. w GRIFFITH HOUSE ................................ .............................. ........................................... ........................ u I'111 br ....................... IOTA P.C. NOPMTPFT m r. GRIFFITH HOUSE m I I 43 GRIFFITH PROPERTY O z LOT - HISTORIC RENOVATION/ADDITION z 566 -1h M111 1"' ASPE(q,COLORAD0 261611 I'll, 020.0116 ITT 9 0 78 2 IOTA P.C. NOPMTPFT P2.1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams,SeniorPlatm RE: 434 East Cooper Street- Extension of Conceptual Major Development approval DATE: December 11, 2013 SUMMARY: 434 East Cooper Street received HPC Conceptual approval for a remodel on December 12, 2012. All applicants have one year from the date of Conceptual to submit a Final review application. The applicant is not prepared to submit for Final within the next two weeks. A six month extension of the HPC approval is requested. Section 26.415.070.D.3.c.3 of the Municipal Code states: Unless otherwise specified in the resolution granting conceptual development plan approval, a development application for a final development plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a conceptual development plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the conceptual development plan. The Community Development Director may grant an extension of this limitation if the delay has been caused by the application requiring additional reviews or similar delays that could not have been reasonably predicted by the applicant. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a conceptual development plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30)days prior to the expiration date. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant a 6 month extension of Conceptual approval to allow the applicant to further develop the proposal. The new deadline to submit a final application would be June 12, 2014. Attachments: HPC Resolution# , Series of 2013 A. Letter requesting extension, dated November 12, 2013 B.. HPC Resolution#33, Series of 2012 P22 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION GRANTING A SIX MONTH EXTENSION OF THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR A PROJECT AT434 EAST COOPER AVENUE,LOTS Q,R,AND S,BLOCK 89, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION#_, SERIES OF 2013 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-16-011. WHEREAS, on November 12, 2013, 434 East Cooper Avenue, LLC, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, requested a six month extension of the Conceptual design approval granted by the Historic Preservation Commission through Resolution#33, Series of 2012. According to Section 26.415.070.D.3.c.3, of the Municipal Code, application for a finial development plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a conceptual development plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the conceptual development plan; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070.D.3.c.3, of the Municipal Code allows the Historic Preservation Commission, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, to grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a conceptual development plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date.; and WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report to HPC dated December 11, 2013, recommended that a one-time extension be granted; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on December 11, 2013, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the request and granted a six month extension to the deadline to submit a final development application by a vote of NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby extends the deadline to file a final development application related to Resolution#33,.Series of 2012 from December 12, 2013 to June 12, 2014. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 11th day of December, 2013. Jay Maytin, Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 434 E.Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Extension HPC Resolution# ,Series of 2013 P23 HAAS LAND PLANNING , LLC November 12, 2013 Historic Preservation Commission c/o Sara Adams,Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen,Colorado 81611 RE: Conceptual Development Plan Extension Request for 434 East Cooper Avenue, Aspen Dear HPC and Sara: Please consider this letter a request for a six-month extension to the HPC Conceptual Development Plan approval for 434 East Cooper Avenue. The HPC voted to grant Conceptual Approval for the redevelopment of the subject property pursuant to Resolution #33,Series of 2012. Condition#6 of the Resolution states that, A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1)year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty(3 0) days prior to the expiration date. It is respectfully requested that the HPC grant this one-time extension of six (6) months for the submittal of a Final Development Plan for the property. Very truly yours, Haas Land Planning,LLC Mitc Haas • 420 E. MAIN STREET, SUITE B-10 • ASPEN, COLORADO • 8161 1 • PHONE: (970) 925-7819 • FAX: (970) 925-7395 P24 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL),COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARD REVIEW (CONCEPTUAL),AND VIEWPLANE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 434 EAST COOPER AVENUE,LOTS Q,R,AND S,BLOCK 89,CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,COLORADO RESOLUTION it 33,SERIES OF 2012 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-16-011. WHEREAS, the applicant, 434 East Cooper Avenue, LLC with consent from the owner Bert Bidwell Investments Corporation, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Charles Cunniffe Architects, has requested Major Development (Conceptual), Conceptual Commercial Design Standard Review, and Viewplane Reviews the property located at 434 East Cooper Avenue, Lots Q, R, and S Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, 434 East Cooper Avenue is located within the Commercial Core Historic District; and WHEREAS, 434 East Cooper Avenue received Demolition approval by the Historic Preservation Commission on May 24,2006 via Resolution number 14, Series of 2006; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or.structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review,the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Commercial Design Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines per Section 26.412.040.A.2, Commercial Design Standards Review Procedure, of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and RECEPTION#: 595907,01108/2013 at 434 East Cooper Avenue 09:18:55 AM, HPC Resolution# 33, Series of 2012 1 OF 3, R $21.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Page 1 of 3 Janice K.Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO P25 WHEREAS, pursuant to 26.435.050.C., Mountain Viewplane Review Standards, of the Land Use Code, no development shall be permitted within a mountain view plane unless the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. 1. No mountain view plane is infringed upon,except as provided below. When any mountain view plane projects at such an angle so as to reduce the maximum allowable building height otherwise provided for in this Title, development shall proceed according to the provisions of Chapter 26.445 as a Planned Unit Development so as to provide for maximum flexibility in building design with special consideration to bulk and height, open space and pedestrian space and similarly to permit variations in lot area, lot width, yard and building height requirements and view plane height limitations. The Planning and Zoning Commission, after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Department, may exempt a development from being processed as a Planned Unit Development when the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the proposed development has a minimal effect on the view plane. When any proposed development infringes upon a designated view plane, but is located in front of another development which already blocks the same view plane, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether or not the propbsed development will further infringe upon the view plane and the likelihood that redevelopment of the adjacent structure will occur to re-open the view plane. In the event the proposed development does not further infringe upon the view plane and re-redevelopment to reopen the view plane cannot be anticipated,the Planning and Zoning Commission shall exempt the development from the requirements of this Section; and WHEREAS,during the December 12, 2012 meeting the applicant demonstrated compliance with Land Use Code Section 26.304.035 Neighborhood Outreach; and WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report to HPC dated December 12, 2012 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards,found that the review standards had not been met and recommended continuation of the hearing to restudy the mass; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on December 12, 2012, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application during a duly noticed public hearing,the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of five to zero (5 - 0). NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Conceptual Commercial Design Standard Review, and Viewplane Review for the property located at 434 East Cooper Avenue, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 434 East Cooper Avenue_ HPC Resolution#33, Series of 2012 Page 2 of 3 P26 1. Conceptual approval is granted as presented in the application. 2. The applicant shall restudy the parapet/cornice in greater detail for Final Review. 3. Off-site public amenity improvements to the Pedestrian Malls is approved in accordance with Land Use Code Section 26.575.030.C(2) Off-site provision of publcic amenity and is subject to review and approval by the Parks Department. The improvements shall equal or exceed the value of the cash in lieu payment of$67,500. 4. The trash/utility area is approved as presented with the following conditions: a. A detailed mechanical plan shall be submitted for Final Review. b. Trash/alley access for all of the retail spaces shall be demonstrated and reviewed at Final Review. 5. The proposal is determined to have a minimal impact on the viewplane due to the existing development that already blocks the viewplane and is hereby exempt from being processed as a PUD in accordance with Section 26.435.050.C.1. Any mechanical equipment placed within the viewplane shall comply with Section 26.435.050,which may require a new viewplane review. 6. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan, The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for tip to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty(30) days prior to the expiration date. Ann Mullins,Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn,Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Stric and, �hi"�DL e eputy Clerk 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Resolution# 33, Series of 2012 Page 3 of 3 P27 s MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 201 E. Hyman Avenue-Final Major Development- Public Hearing DATE: December 11, 2013 SUMMARY: 201 E. Hyman Avenue is an 8,000 square foot lot that contains a Victorian home and an outbuilding. The property owner proposes to demolish all non-historic construction on the site, to lift the house for basement excavation, to make an addition to the house, and to move the outbuilding on the site. HPC granted Conceptual approval, Demolition, On-site Relocation and Variance approval on November 13tH Staff finds that the proposed project is very sensitively designed to allow the historic house and outbuilding to be the highlights of the property. Because this is a larger site than many of the miner's cottages sit on, there is ample open space around the building. The proposed new construction is simple in form and detailing. There are however minor areas of restudy and clarification needed to comply with Final review guidelines, so staff recommends the application be continued. APPLICANT: 201 EH Investments LLC, represented by Guerin Glass Architects and 1 Friday Design Collaborative. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-73-001. ADDRESS: 201 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots A, B and the west 2/3`a of Lot C, Block 76, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: MU, Mixed Use. FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Final level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve 1 P28 with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Staff Response: Final review focuses on landscape plan, lighting, fenestration, and selection of new materials. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." The applicant has provided plans, elevations and renderings describing the project. Changes since Conceptual approval include: • A skylight, flush with grade has been added over the large lightwell at the center of the site. In mid-November, the applicant requested a height variance from City Council in order to allow this lightwell adjacent to two story elements of the project, but the variance was denied. The skylight eliminates the requirement to measure building height from the basement level. • Both chimneys on the two story addition will be placed along the Limelight side of the property, away from the Victorian. • A hot tub has been added near the pool. • A planter and gate have been added adjacent to the two story addition. • A lightwell along the east side of the Victorian has been moved, so that it is not directly below an unused historic doorway. This was a condition of Conceptual approval. Staff supports these updates, finding that they do not conflict with the guidelines and are either improvements to the preservation of the historic structure, or have no negative impact. Other changes to the proposal include: • The north facing roof eave at the connector has been increased in depth, and a notch has been created along to east side of the Victorian. A notch was required'condition of the Conceptual approval. • Although not represented in the drawings, the applicant has verbally indicated that they request approval to replace all of the windows in the historic structures, with matching new units. Staff has concerns with these changes, as well as the following topics related to the details of the Final design; clarification on new building materials, replication of the existing building foundations, and lack of specificity regarding outdoor lighting and the landscape plan. Beginning with the eave on the connector, the HPC Conceptual approval required that the applicant restudy the east fagade of the Victorian related to the connector. Staff's concern was that the roof eave of the connector cut into the historic gable end in a manner that will destroy some historic siding and encroaches on that original and very visible wall. For Final, this has 2 P29 been restudied to create a small notch in the roof eave, so that it doesn't not actually intersect the east wall of the Victorian. The notch, which measures 6" in width, is too small to alleviate staff's opinion that the connector visually overlaps with, and interferes with the east side of the resource. We recommend restudy to limit the overhang in this area to just the vicinity of the north facing doorway in this part of the new construction. This doorway, to meet design guideline 4.1, should be a secondary entry into the house in any case, so that it doesn't compete with the historic building. Regarding the applicant's proposal to replace all of the historic windows in the house and outbuilding, staff finds that the guidelines_are not met. Historic windows can be made more energy eff cient through routine maintenance of glazing putty, insulation of the weight pockets, if any, weatherstripping, and the addition of a storm window on the inside or outside of the building. Staff recommends HPC deny this request. Guidelines for HPC to consider include: 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. • Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions,sills, heads,jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows. • Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit. • Preserve the original glass, when feasible. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a historic window. ❑ Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the original window to be seen from the public way. ❑ If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub-frames or panning around the perimeter. On the topic of proposed materials, the applicant must provide samples or photo representations of the proposed metal windows, metal screen, metal roofs, chimney caps and flashing for HPC review. The application notes that existing materials on the historic structures will be repaired or replaced as necessary. Site inspection by staff will be required prior to any replacement. The applicant must clarify the material for the new foundations under the historic resources and HPC must determine whether the foundation of the historic house should be veneered with the existing foundation stone, or an approved substitute. The application does not include any information on outdoor lighting. This is sometimes a topic that is addressed as a condition of approval for staff and monitor review, once an accurate plan is developed, however the full board should have some role in approving the lighting concept. The renderings indicate proposed landscaping, however, no plants are specified. The planters along the perimeter of the property may not have vegetation taller than 42" according to the Residential Design Standards, as follows: 3 P30 26.410.040.A.3 Residential design standards. 3. Fences. Fences,hedgerows and planter boxes shall not be more than forty-two (42) inches high, measured from natural grade, in all areas forward of the front facade of the house. Man-made berms are prohibited in the front yard setback. A detailed landscape plan which complies with this height restriction is needed. The project should not create a wall along the street, even if it is done with plants. The landscape plan must also demonstrate that the Hyman Avenue facing doorway into the connector will not be presented as the primary entrance into the house. The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC continue the application to a date certain, for (1) restudy of the eave at the connector, (2) deletion of the request to replace the historic windows, (3) provision of samples or photo representations of the proposed metal windows, metal screen, metal roofs, chimney caps and flashing„ (4) clarification of the material for the new foundations under the historic resources, (5) provision of an outdoor lighting plan and cut sheets, and (6) provision of a detailed landscape plan which complies with the Residential Design Standards, and which demonstrate that the Hyman Avenue facing doorway into the connector will not be presented as the primary entrance into the house. Exhibits: A. Application Exhibit A 1.2 A new -replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original. • Any fence which is visible from a public right-of-way must be built of wood or wrought iron. Wire fences also may be considered. • A wood picket fence is an appropriate replacement in most locations. A simple wire or metal fence, similar to traditional "wrought iron," also may be considered. • Chain link is prohibited and solid "stockade" fences are only allowed in side and rear yards. 4 P31 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views into the yard from the street. ❑ A fence that defines a front yard is usually low to the ground and "transparent" in nature. ❑ On residential properties, a fence which is located forward of the front building facade may not be taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see the City of Aspen's "Residential Design Standards".) ❑ A privacy fence may be used in back yards and along alleys, but not forward of the .front facade of a building. ❑ Note that using no fencing at all is often the best approach. ❑ Contemporary interpretations of traditional fences should be compatible with the historic context. 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally. ❑ Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. ❑ This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding .along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. ❑ Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. ❑ Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. ❑ The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. ❑ Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. ❑ If a tree must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. ❑ Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. ❑ Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. ❑ Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. 5 P32- ❑ Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. ❑ Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. ❑ It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. ❑ Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. ❑ Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads,jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows. ❑ Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit. ❑• Preserve the original glass, when feasible. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a historic window. • Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the original window to be seen from the public way. • If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub- frames or panning around the perimeter. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. ❑ Maintain features important to the character.of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. • Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. • If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. ❑ If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. ❑ On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a modest miner's cottage is discouraged because it would be out of character. ❑ Where a stone foundation was used historically, and is to be replaced, the replacement should be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. ❑ A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. 6 P33 ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. ❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. ❑ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. ❑ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. • The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. • All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. ❑ Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. ❑ Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. ❑ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. ❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light. ❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. ❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. ❑ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. ❑ Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. 7 P34 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. ❑ When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with commercial and multifamily developments. ❑ This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks. ❑ Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists. 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. ❑ Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. ❑ Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. ❑ Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges. ❑ A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. ❑ Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant building facades or highly visible roof planes. ❑ Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds. 8 35 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission . FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: 233 W. Hallam Street-Final Major Development, public hearing DATE: December 11, 2013 SUMMARY: The subject property is a 9,700 square feet lot that contains a heavily altered 1886 historic landmark with a large non-historic addition. The property is located on the corner of Hallam and Second Streets. The applicant proposes to remove the non-historic addition, to restore the landmark including relocation to its original location, and to construct a new detached single family residence and garage. The applicant received Conceptual Major Development review approval, Relocation and Demolition approvals, a 500 square feet FAR Bonus, Residential Design Standard Variances for the historic home and a Setback Variance for the historic home. Staff recommends that UPC grant final Major Development approval with conditions. APPLICANT: Solomon and Elizabeth Kumin, represented by DHR Architecture and Haas Land Planning. PARCEL ID:2735-124-35-001 ADDRESS: 233 West Hallam Street, Lots A, B and C, and the West 6.64 feet of Lot d, Block 50, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6, Medium Density Residential, Historic Landmark MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) Major Development review is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual . Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. 1 233 W.Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P36 Conditions from Conceptual Review: The Resolution granting conceptual approval included a few conditions to be addressed in the Final Major Development application: 1. Conditions of approval for Final Review: a. Continue to refine the restoration plan for the Victorian, particularly window proportions. Staff Response: Staff recommends that Staff and Monitor work with the applicant to review and approve appropriately scaled window proportions for the restoration of the Victorian. Staff has been unable to find any historic photographs of 233 to guide the restoration; however luckily 233 is one of three similar residences in the block. The photograph below is 229 W. Hallam. Staff proposes to use the proportions shown below to guide the restoration. For example, the large double hung is much taller than that proposed in the application. In addition there is decorative molding above the entry door of the Victorian. These issues are typically handled at the building permit level. I Ti r.�wywx+u The applicant proposes fish scale shingles in the gable end. .A proposed section of the restored dormers are found on Sheet A3.4 of the application. Staff finds this condition to be met with the condition that the windows are handled by Staff and Monitor. b. Specify the foundation profile, material, and style for the historic home for review at Final Review. Staff Response: The applicant proposes a brick veneer foundation and a small cap. Brick is a typical foundation material for this style home. A section of the foundation wall is proposed on sheet A3.4. Staff finds the condition to be met. 2 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P37 c. Restudy the lightwell on the west side of the Victorian to either recess it further from the street, break it up into smaller lightwells, or detail in a way that minimizes the visual impact of the feature. Staff Response: The applicant has broken up the large lightwell on the west elevation into two smaller lightwells. Staff finds the condition to be met. d. Provide floor plans to demonstrate that Hallam is the primary entrance point into both homes for review during Final Review. Staff Response: The applicant shows a front entry porch and prominent walkway accessed off of Hallam Street. The large entry way off of Second Street is labeled as a secondary access/side door. Landscape: A landscape plan is included in the application as Sheet L1.0. The proposed landscape plan is simple and meets the design guidelines outlined below. The applicant proposes a straight flagstone walkway to the historic home pending a tree removal permit from the Parks Department for the blue spruce. An alternate walkway is proposed in case the permit is not approved as permitted in Guideline 1.9 below. A staggered flagstone walkway is proposed for the new home. A 42" high wood fence is proposed between the two structures. Staff recommends a larger setback from the front facade of the home to meet Guideline 1.5 below. Staff recommends that Staff and Monitor review and approve the setback and the design of the wood fence. 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street-facing facade. ❑ This setback should be significant enough to provide a sense of open space between homes. 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible with the historic context. ❑ A side yard fence is usually taller than its front yard counterpart. It also is less transparent. A side yard fence may reach heights taller than front yard fences (up to six feet), but should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. ❑ Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. ❑ Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing, on the upper portions of the fence. 3 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P38 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. • This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. • Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. ❑ Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. ❑ The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. Materials: Historic Home: A mentioned above the historic home is proposed to be restored to its original appearance based on photographs of the adjacent buildings. The materials are largely wood- traditional clapboard siding, fish scale shingles in the gable end, and an asphalt shingle roof. A brick foundation is proposed. 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. ❑ If the original material is wood clapboard, for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, the amount of exposed lap and finish. ❑ Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. ❑ Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. • If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. • Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. ❑ If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non-reflective finish. New Home: A mix of wood, stone and metal are proposed for the new home. Staff finds that the proposed materials are appropriate for the project and compliment the historic home while distinguishing the new residence as a product of its own time. Staff proposes that Staff and Monitor review and approve material samples for the brick, cedar shingles, and the stone. A cedar shake roof is proposed and a standing seam copper metal roof is proposed over the entry ways and porches. In Aspen's climate copper develops a rusty patina after a year or so in the elements. It was used for the rear addition to 214 E. Bleeker Street (next to the Community 4 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P39 Church) successfully. Staff recommends that the copper be untreated to allow it to oxidize and develop a dark brown patina. A stone chimney with copper details and stone foundation are also proposed for the new home. Staff finds that the design guidelines below are met. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute.to a traditional sense of human scale. ❑ Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. Windows: Historic Home: As mentioned above Staff recommends that Staff and Monitor work with the applicant to determine appropriate window opening sizes and profiles for the historic home. The proposed front bay window appears too short in comparison to the photograph on page 2 of the staff memo. All of the windows in the historic home are proposed to be wood double hung. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. ❑ Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. ❑ Consider reopening,and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. ❑ A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. New home: The new home has mainly vertical oriented steel windows that are two over two. Staff is supportive of the steel windows as they differentiate the new and historic buildings. 5 233 W.Hallam—Final Review Staff.Memo 12/11/13 P40 11.9 Use building components that are similar in .size and shape to those of the historic property. ❑ These include windows, doors and porches. ❑ Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. Details: The architectural details proposed for the new home are fairly simple. A metal guard rail is proposed for the second floor Juliette balcony. Wood brackets are proposed for the porch elements on both street facing facades. Staff recommends that the front door of the historic home be revised to remove the divided lights for review by Staff and monitor. A lighting plan is included on Sheet A1.1 and light fixtures are proposed in the application. Staff recommends that the number of light fixtures on the new home be significantly reduced, specifically along the side porch. Light fixture `A' is appropriate for the new home, however it should only be installed on either side of the entryways and along the garage. Staff is not supportive of light fixture `B' and does not recommend approval of light fixtures along the east elevation of the home. The lighting plan for the historic home is appropriate — fixtures are proposed adjacent to entryways. Staff finds that the proposed light fixture `C' is not appropriate for the character of the historic home and recommends approval of a more appropriate light fixture by Staff and monitor. Design Guidelines are below: 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. ❑ Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. ❑ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. ❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 233 W.Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P41 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. ❑ Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. ❑ Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. ❑ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. ❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light. ❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. ❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example,do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. ❑ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. ❑ Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant Final Major Development approval for the project proposed at 233 West Hallam Street with the following conditions: 1. Items for Staff and Monitor review and approval: a. Shift the fence back from Hallam Street toward the alley to create a clear distinction between the two homes. b. Provide an elevation of the fence design. c. A material mock up shall be provided on site prior to purchase and installation of materials: brick foundation, stone, asphalt shingles, cedar shake shingles, standing seam copper, fish scale shingles. d. The window proportions of the front bay window shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. e. The light fixture for the historic home shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. f. Front door of the historic home shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. 2. The standing seam copper shall be untreated to allow a patina to develop. 3. The front entry to the home shall be accessed off of Hallam Street. 7 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P42 4. The lighting plan for the new home shall only allow fixtures adjacent to the entry doors. Exhibits: A. Relevant HPC Guidelines B. Application Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines, Final Review 8 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P43 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street- facing facade. ❑ This setback should be significant enough to provide a sense of open space between homes. 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible with the historic context. • A side yard fence is usually taller than its front yard counterpart. It also is less transparent. A side yard fence may reach heights taller than front yard fences (up to six feet), but should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. • Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. ❑ Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing, on the upper portions of the fence. 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. ❑ This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. ❑ Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. ❑ Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. ❑ The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site,particularly landmark trees and shrubs. ❑- Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. Li If a tree must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project. 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs. ❑ Retaining historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways is encouraged. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. ❑ Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. ❑ Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. ❑ Do not cover grassy areas with gravel,rock or paving materials. 9 233 W.Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P44 ❑ 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. • Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. • Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. • It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. ❑ Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. ❑ Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. ❑ If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. ❑ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. ❑ Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. ❑ Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. ❑ -A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the.window's casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. • A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. • A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. • Simple paneled doors were typical. 10 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P45 ❑ Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. ❑ Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. ❑ If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. ❑ Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. ❑ If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte,non-reflective finish.. 7.10 If it is to be used, a metal roof should be applied and detailed in a manner that is compatible and does not detract from the historic appearance of the building. ❑ A metal roof material should have an earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. ❑ A metal roof with a lead-like patina also is an acceptable alternative. ❑ Seams should be of a low profile. ❑ A roof assembly with a high profile seam or thick edge is inappropriate. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. ❑ Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. ❑ These include windows, doors and porches. ❑ Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. ❑ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. ❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. ❑ Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. ❑ Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. 11 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P46 ❑ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light. by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. ❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light. ❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. ❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. • Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. • Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. 12 233 W.Hallam—Final Review Staff Memo 12/11/13 P47 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 233 WEST HALLAM STREET, LOTS A,B AND C, AND THE WEST 6.64 FEET OF LOT D,BLOCK 50, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION # , SERIES OF 2013 PARCEL ID: #2735-124-35-001 WHEREAS, Solomon and Elizabeth Kumin, represented by DHR Architecture and Haas Land Planning, have requested Final Major Development for their property at 233 West Hallam Street, Lots A, B and C, and the West 6.64 feet of Lot d, Block 50, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS,the property is a designated landmark; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.4.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to.obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report to HPC dated December 11, 2013, performed an analysis of the application, found that the review criteria are met and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on December 11, 2013, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the review standards and granted approval, with conditions, by a vote of NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC hereby grants Final Major Development for the property located at 233 W. Hallam Street, as shown in Exhibit A to the Resolution, with the following conditions: 1. Items for Staff and Monitor review and approval: 1. Shift the fence back from Hallam Street toward the alley to create a clear distinction between the two homes. 2. Provide an elevation of the fence design. 233 W. Hallam HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2013 Page 1 of 3 P48 3. A material mock up shall be provided on site prior to purchase and installation of materials: brick foundation, stone, asphalt shingles, cedar shake shingles, standing seam copper, fish scale shingles. 4. The window proportions of the front bay window shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. 5. The light fixture for the historic home shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. 6. Front door of the historic home shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. 2. The standing seam copper shall be untreated to allow a patina to develop. 3. The front entry to the home shall be accessed off of Hallam Street. 4. The lighting plan for the new home shall only allow fixtures adjacent to the entry doors. 5. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes,pertaining to the following described property: 233 West Hallam Street, Lots A, B and C, and the West 6.64 feet of Lot D, Block 50, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules,regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required 233 W. Hallam HPC Resolution# , Series of 2013 Page 2of3 P49 under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at a regular meeting on the 11th day of December, 2013. Jay Maytin,Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn,Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Exhibit A: Approved plans 233 W. Hallam HPC Resolution# , Series of 2013 Page 3 of 3 P50 Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines, Final Review 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street- facing facade. ❑ This setback should be significant enough to provide a sense of open space between homes. 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible with the historic context. • A side yard fence is usually taller than its front yard counterpart. It also is less transparent. A side yard fence may reach heights taller than front yard fences (up to six feet), but should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. • Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. • Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing, on the upper portions of the fence. 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. ❑ This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. ❑ Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. ❑ Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. ❑ The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site,particularly landmark trees and shrubs.- ❑ Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. ❑ If a tree must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project. 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs. ❑ Retaining historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways is encouraged. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. ❑ Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. ❑ Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. ❑ Do not cover grassy areas with gravel,rock or paving materials. ❑ 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. 1 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Exhibit a 12/11/13 P51 ❑ Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. ❑ Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. ❑ It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. ❑ Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. ❑ Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. ❑ If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double-hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. ❑ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. ❑ Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. ❑ Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. ❑ A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. ❑ A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. ❑ A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. ❑ Simple paneled doors were typical. ❑ Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. 2 233 W.Hallam—Final Review Exhibit a 12/11/13 P52 ❑ Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. ❑ If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. ❑ Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. ❑ If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non-reflective finish. 7.10 If it is to be used, a metal roof should be applied and detailed in a manner that is compatible and does not detract from the historic appearance of the building. ❑ A metal roof material should have an earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. • A metal roof with a lead-like patina also is an acceptable alternative. • Seams should be of a low profile. • A roof assembly with a high profile seam or thick edge is inappropriate. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. ❑ Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. ❑ These include windows, doors and porches. ❑ Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. • This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. • Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. ❑ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. ❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. • Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. • Shield lighting associated with service areas,parking lots and parking structures. • Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. ❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light. ❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. ❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 3 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Exhibit a 12/11/13 P53 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. ❑ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. ❑ . Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights-of-way. 4 233 W. Hallam—Final Review Exhibit a 12/11/13 P54 ATTACHMENT 2 -Historic Preservation Land Use Application PROJECT: Name: Ul.1r l V1 Location: (Indicate street address,lot&block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID# (REQUIRED) APPLICANT: Name: L�J{ 1A lfl Address: Phone#: j°` — Fax#: E-mail: VkN fie. �DlM REPRESENTATIVE: Name: M L i 4L ( - Address: 3= 6 VIA 6VZLk— , r, DInmr4 lQ Q Phone#: Fax#: E-mail; U, ry� c--tr�,c�{ l l'PE OF APPLICATION: ( lease check all that apply): !� l fie ❑ Historic Designation Relocation(temporary,on ❑ Certificate of No Negative Effect ❑ or off-site) `: Certificate of Appropriateness ❑ Demolition(total ❑ -Minor Historic Development demolition) K -Major Historic Development ❑ Historic Landmark Lot Spli ❑ -Conceptual Historic Development -Final Historic Development -Substantial Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description,of existing buildings,uses,previous approvals, is NOV 0.8 2013 PROPOSAL: (description of groposed buildin s,uses,modifications,etc.) CITY OF ASPEN - r DRIP1 T Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements,Updated:May 29,2007 i t ' P55 233 Hallam Existing Conditions Currently the site is home to one structure that has been heavily modified throughout the years and placed on the north westerly portion of the lot. It is a rambling composition of loosely tacked on volumes that surround the historic asset.One can identify the original home if looking closely at the core two story structure.it has been used as a single family home for the duration of its lifetime. 233 Proposal We propose to restore the historic asset to it's original location and elegance.We will work with The Historic Preservation Officer to place the windows,openings and details where we believe they once were.After the moving of the historical asset to it's original location next to its two sisters,we will build another single family residence that will be separate from the historical asset.The new home will have the same rhythm and massing as the historic homes along the South side of Hallam as well as relate to the homes facing onto 2nd street. Because we are going to such a great effort to restore and re-establish the rhythm of the lot and block, we would like to request the 500 square foot FAR bonus. We believe that by bringing back what has almost been completely masked over and restoring it to it's original aesthetic and location at great expense to the owner,we have complied with the desires of the Historic Preservation Committees requirements for this award. We are in compliance with the residential design standards and are not asking for any other variances in this proposal. 100CFI NOV 0 8 Ln13 ITY''f OF ASPEN P56 General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. 771is information will help us review your plans and if necessary, coordinate with other agencies duct may be involved YES NO ❑ Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions,new construction,remodeling,rehabilitation or restoration? J ❑ Does the work you are planning include interior work; including remodeling, f rehabilitation, or restoration? ❑ X Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time? ❑ In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits? ❑ ❑ If yes,are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits ill conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.) ❑ ❑ If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use: ❑Rehabilitation Loan Fund ❑Conservation Easement Program XDimensional Variances ❑ Increased Density ❑Historic Landmark Lot Split ❑Waiver of Park Dedication Fees ❑ Conditional Uses ❑Exemption from Growth Management Quota System ❑ Tax Credits F C NOV 0 8 z13 CITY OF A60f_-N Aspen( Land Use Application Requirements,Updated:May 29,2007 P57 ATTACHMENT 3- Dimensional Requirements Form (item#10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.) Project: V_Umlo Q6S�D5tJL1r Applicant: MAP7E �jAe',Aoos_f Q,?_ QGt t°r�:z-cttQ.� Project Location: MALLAf4 5-r. Zone District: � tFDit�ty� ►�Er�Srt'Y �� 1D&�.3f1At^ Lot Size: Lot Area: �q (For the purposes of calculating Floor Area,Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark,easements,and steep slopes.Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: Proposed.- Number of residential units: Existing: j Proposed. ,2 Number of bedrooms: Existing: Proposed.- Proposed%of demolition: DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone district) Floor Area: Existing: Allowable: 1 ZO Proposed: 4,(1— (JOP sS PG Height 500 A 150Nsg 1 J m r r u +firmerprrl--B.i Existing_ A Allowable:_ Proposed.• y5 lk.--arL 3 GSsn Existing: 1 ��)j- f�u Allowable: Z5 Proposed- �f On-Site parking: Existing: Required. 4 —proposed-- 4 %Site coverage: Existing: A•o(o Required: 3 '9 Proposed.• %Open Space: Existing: Required: !mil A Proposed; Front Setback: Existing: r ; g �� Required: (Z3 Proposed.- Ca} aoiTOa,o�ti t�•t(13E+..>}lc�EJ � g `? q I Rear Setback: Exisn :. Required., 10' Proposed: �O Combined Front/Rear: Indicate N, S,E,W Existing: 59�-°o �Required. )101 Proposed: Side Setback: Ws,,-c Existing: IS -5 Required.• 10 r Proposed I 1 Side Setback: gA5-, +t- ExiExisting: 41 -fp,i Required.' 1 O' Proposed.'_ Combined Sides: Existing: Required: WA Proposed: t t u Distance between Existing: N A Required. Proposed.• X$- 1 buildings: Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: Variations requested(identify the exact variances needed): Jggq � v+✓ Auo 4srg/�csr {,,� ERE pr_oa tS u ice+✓ !�t"LLmfNG6 3'-0„ NOV 0 S c 13 Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, yd A' CM 7,t4 i"OMMUNITY DE VELOPMENI P58 DHR A R C II I T E C T U R E 233 West Hallam Street- Condominiumization Option F.A.R. CALCULATIONS PROPERTY DATA lot size 9692.00 allowable F.A.R.(4120for2 dwellings+500forNPCbonus) 4620.00 maximum allowable site coverage(persection 26.710.040) 37.69% FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS proposed Basement: linear ft.of bsmt wall 424.63 window well areas(32'-0"total width of egress wells @ 3'-0"A.F.F.&6'-0"exposed walls) 192.00 basement wall area exposed(9'-0"bsmt ceilings and only window wells are exposed) 5.02% Total basement square footage 4032.00 Basement square footage counted towards F.A.R. 202.57 First Floor: Historic House:Assuming that all 780 SF existing is to remain Total First Floor square footage 772.00 First Floor square footage counted towards F.A.R. 772.00 New House: Total First Floor square footage 1822.00 Total First Floor square footage counted towards F.A.R. 1822.00 First Floor Total: 2594.00 Second Floor: Historic House:This is based on the design. It can be as low as 0 or as high as the historic 711 sf Total Second Floor square footage 332.00 Second Floor square footage counted towards F.A.R. 332.00 New House: Total Second Floor square footage 1421.00 Second Floor square footage counted towards F.A.R. 1421.00 Second Floor Total: 1753.00 Garage: Garage square footage counted towards F.A.R.(total firstfloorSFminus 1st250SFin garage is 445.00 exempt,2nd 250SFis counted at50 91.) 70.00 Total: TOTAL FAR for entire property 4619.57 TOTAL FAR remaining(4620 is allowable) ri 0.43 TOTAL ACTUAL SQUARE FOOTAGE for entire property 8824.00 TOTAL LOT COVERAGE NO ® $ [n�� 26.76% ('I fY OF ASPEN++ T 1. �e Ail j" rC1f �L+f tF7 ) �9 er•gf� ...; c.~`� , r .<n .err.. ;, �. �• �� '.: � - ,;{�• V!!bra r?c IRK ir IIF OF .-t+;• w 81e�knr S' • •`_•.v�� '�fy , •' ��•��.-1Z' Z :.�� y�.; .' ... `,`Id.�# 3,,►:;}�� .'i �. �a i '' _ tr z � � �.!A'''� • *2 •f'�r"1ll�.`�� i_�,r � ��r �?-•-.....;� `Stc�,,..•g •."•r• p, n AvQ ' `r , �, Vii,:4 �+� '�.. it t a P,_epcke 4,,Vy, ._ ,'pt C�a GU r.'• i,� .► ! !� ' � gyp`'✓ c�lih • P60 Y7 ALBRIGHT &ASSOCIATES September 24, 2013 City of Aspen-Building Department 130 S Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Kumin Residence 233 W Hallam Aspen, CO To Whom It May Concern: This letter is to inform you that Albright&Associates, Inc. has been retained by DHR Architecture to provide structural engineering design services for the stabilization and preparation for relocation of the historic structure at the above referenced property. We anticipate being involved through the demolition, design, and construction phases of the process. An agent of DER Architecture is to provide documentation of our findings and recommendations to the building department for review prior to construction. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact me for additional information. Sincerely, °Jack L Albright, I Principal 13030 L1 NOV 08 '2013 F A'f P1 7 Albright&Associates,INC 970.927.4363 offfCe 970.927.3039 fQx 402 Park Ave., Unit E Basalt,CO 81621 www.albright-associates.com P61 Bill Bailey BAILEY HOUSE MOVERS LICENSED.!\SL7R-D•BONDED Wrn.G.BAILEY 3149 B 11,1 Grand Junction,CO 815-03 1 970-434-9763 20 1-3 /r 10A Lv c&A Zj e4fel W7— r /l/caz W -124 770 41 110/� t.A) r A 11 A-C 5 15 7 Curie, A 6 NOV 0 9 jj- O CAI 36 Cl-no 0 Ol x S soy D x . t. IJ IXE soil C'4 CD CL CARMEL B3331 EXTERIOR WALL SCONCE <S> Hand-Worked Wrought Iron Opal White Glass Graphite Finish 10"W 14.25"H 11.757 9.75"TCD 1-60W Cand Base P=Projection,TCD=Top to Center Dimension TROY LIGHTING Est.1963 14508 Nelson Avenue,City of Industry,CA,USA(91744) Phone:626-336-4511 Fax:626-330-4266 www.troy-lighting.com P64 ut, 377.762.2323 1 log in I register I welcome guest circa check stock L I G H`i'I N G' y search website simplybritlian# r�__ _� - lights designers trade international ordering information contact us shopping cart(0) wall lights v peiharn oval light item#TOB2209 I designer Thomas O'Brien OVERVIEW ALTERNATE VIEW � a Height:111/2" Width:6 1/4" Extension:3 3/4" i y Wattage:1-60 Watt Type A Socket:Keyless Note:Item is for indoor and outdoor use. 1 Item is UL listed for wet location with metal part UP. i t price $336.00 finish Polished Nickel S v glass White Glassi v quantity Share view ordering information view return policy free standard shipping within the continental United States Please contact us to arrange expedited shipping,if necessary contact us about us 6201:1 circa iishifng.sll righls ,—d. f (01.1 y OF ✓ V Q5 circa877.762.2323 1 log in I register I welcome guest ci +ca check stock 11 Cs H T I N G i search website - simpiybili iant lights designers trade international ordering information contact us shopping cart(0) wall lights Ojai large sconce item#66!2072 I designer Barbara Barry OVERVIEW CHECK STOCK Height:17 3/4" Width:8" Extension:10" _{ Backplate:4"Square 1j1 Wattage:1-60 Watt Type A Socket:Keyless I price $798.00 finish I Bronze glass Frosted Glass; quantity 1` F..? .i •2L: view ordering information Share view return policy free standard shipping within the continental United States Please contact us to arrange expedited shipping,if necessary contact us about us c:nl3 circa IicLti�a,all tits rescrced. J i m-. 4 0 13 r I � LEGEND AND NOTES V.S. SURVEY FOOT I••10' CITY MONUMENT 11959 OFFICIAL CITY OF ASPEN SURVEY) 0 FOUND OR SET SURVEY MONUMENT RE-BAR WITH CAP AS DESCRIBED 0 IO 20 ONE FOOT CONTOURS TITLE INFORMATION PITKIN COUNTY TITLE. INC. CASE N0. P 2 DATED MAY 4.4. 2012 012 ❑ UTILITY BOX CITY OF ASPEN �2ee, Iy-P® WATER VALVE GPS MONUMENT NO. 9 '9 TREE CALIPER DRIPLINE AND TYPE ID-DECIDUOUS. F-CONIFERI p R-15 ZONING ses.> S �!(�� SETBACKS:TBD 2 CITY OF ASPEN THIS PROPERTY IS SITUATED IN ZONE 'X' (AREAS DETERMINED TO BE OUTSIDE 500-YEAR ^yam GPS MONUMENT NO. 8 FLOOD PLAIN) AS SHOWN ON FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP PREPARED BY F.E.M.A.. FOR S/e �]ee,. 14.38 N 0 •` DATE: JUNE 4.C098AAD0. Co LOO TY-PANEL NUMBER 0809700203 C. EFFECTIVE Jy lee,. o'D NRe S 79•p5,24 W 7 � THIS Pq OPERTY LIES ENTIRELY OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUDFLOW HAZARD AREA AS DEFINED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN, PROJECT NUMBER 1963. i tt FIGURE ES-I5. 7 MENT. HORIZONTAL CONTROL M 7883.96 I? E e ® a'° V I C I N I T Y MAP 7914.3 s Po 97 .I8 S 1509'II.f 2 zs'°°L Oyu coot.KK 16995 �F ] Iz L ° BASIS OF ARING /ss,.i vEOU BE78'EEN IC ;5947. 7803.9 CITY 5 RE&W COD 141 1 10 yT ca 'I' / ^ - 2 STORY HOUSE / / N15•0g'Ir-W ® UL n / / ^� °_.� / CERTIFICATION TO: ° n of PINSPANINGTON CE / / n PITKIN COUNTY TITLE. INC. AIR ESTATE OF ESTHER BENNINGHOF DL / THE UNDERSIGNED STATES THAT THE PROPERTY DESCgIBED HEREON WAS FIELD SURVEYED DURING 2012 AND I ACCURATE z BASED ON THE FIELD EVIDENCE AS SHOWN. AND THAT THERE ARE NO DISCREPANCIES OF RECORD. BOUNDARY LINE CONFLICTS. ENCROACHMENTS. EASEMENTS OR flIGHTS OF WAY IN FIELD EVIDENCE OR KNOWN TO ME. g EXCEPT AS HEREON SNOWN. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WI TN NO ABOVEGROUND / / a z{ / APPURTENANCES. AND DOCUMENTS OF RECORD NOT SUPPLIED TO THE SURVEYOR ARE EXCEPTED. THIS SURVEY IS VOID UNLESS WET STAMPED 2201:D DL ' WITH THE SEAL OF THE SURVEYOR BELOW. / / DATED: PATIO 78,94 D 791/91411'.. 15.O9II. / JOHN M.HOWORTH P.L.S. 25947 E Bo ?;off'° GARAGE TOPOGRAPHIC PAVED ea .e 2,.i / NN. F PARKING / ` / S9°L ; / IMPROVEMENT SURVEY 7902.5 2.20' OF PAVED ]]f�� / AIRSPACE PINNINGTON COMMON BOUNDARY LINE DESCRIBED BELOW. BLOCK 50. CITY AND NOT SET PARKING / l / 1t,J/ PINNINGTON / LOTS A.B.0 AND THAT PORTION OF LOT p LYING WEST OF THE'BENNI NGHOFF/ / PAYED W 2.20' TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO. P 7899.0 ARKING / / LESS AND EXCEPT: / THAT PORTION OF THE AIRSPACE BETWEEN THE ELEVATIONS OF 7899 FEET / AND 7902.5 FEET LYING WEST OF BEAN EAST COMMON l0 4 / BOUNDARY LINE- (DESCRIBED BELOW(AND EAST OF THE LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:DL G 00°L �i /2 BENNINGHOFF PINNINGiON BEGINNING AT A POINT FROM WHENCE THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF DL opL RiP BLOCK 50. CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. PITKIN COUNTY COLORADO. s'o (CITY MONUMENT IN PLACE) BEARS N 14.50 49 E 10.02 FEET AND li PROPERTY HOUSE N]5'09'1 I'W 97.I8 FEET: e N •O9 Il' THENCE N 75.09'Il'W 2.20 FEET: ill ]e,., W 9) THENCE S 14'S 0'49'W 35.10 FEET: / THENCE 5 75'009 11'E 2.20 FEET: 20 R.O, ® 14111 BEARING 69 S BASED ON THE FOUND CITY MONUMENTS FOR THE NORTH BOUNDARY 788 / OF SAID BLOCK 50. N 75.09'11'W.S °/A1C1 ELEVATION ARE BASED ON THE BENCHMARK ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PITKIN COUNTY COURT HOUSE HAVING AN ELEVATION OF 7906.802 FEET. N.G.V.D. OF 1929. ,ees.o 'BENNINGHOFF/PINNINGTON COMMON BOUNDARY LINE' 7883.9 GRADE A LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PROPERTY LINE AT PROPERTY LINE NORTH AND BEGINNING AT A POINT FROM WHENCE THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 50. PI NNINGTON RESIDENCE SOUTH OF PINNINGTON RESIDENCE CITY AND TOWNS(TE OF ASPEN. PITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO (CITY MONUMENT IN PLACE( BEARS N]5.09'Il'W 97.18 FEET: SOUTH ELEVATION THENCE 5 14.50'49'W 10.22 FEET: (11.22' CORRECTED DISTANCE) THENCE N]5.09'11'W 0.80 FEET: THENCE S 14.50'49'W 32.60 FEET: SCALE I'•5' THENCE S 75'09'1 I-E 0.80 FEET: THENCE S 14.50'49'W 56.18 FEET TO THE POINT TERMINATION ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT D OF SAID BLOCK 50. BEARINGS BASED ON THE FOUND CITY MONUMENTS FOR THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF SAID BLOCK 50.N 75.09'11'W. • I ' - CITY OF ASPEN E COUNTY OF PITKIN - STATE OF COLORADO CONTAINING: 9.692 SF•/-AT GRADE (.,.•° 1 PREPARED BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS. INC. 210 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 PHONE/FAX (303) 925-3816 TicD:M DEFECT aLAW YOU MIT Mx'TxxANY LE OETR.IN N°NCED HO ErTle11YWl♦TEN YEARS FROM THE P T EvFD TFINND ISiiiES?A EO THE ese01ei,L Tx DATE JOB M;EA YOU ' ' ETME 12/12 242400 I, c+�.x uoo:ommow.z.ecoa-ra.cm:z-or�+aer-sue:.r:rm..m l` 1 Step EXHIBIT back at the corner,' lu W ( -_ GARAG 1 /� --- DECK DGK / AEG � ENTRY 101-0 I WALL FOUNDATION 5 BE E O O / / / - O PARKING - OUTLINE OF EX15TING � p SPACE VICTORIAN HOUSE LOCATION N801°20'00'^ 270_' 2. Keep the placement of the Victorian in the location of the previous application (only shifting North about 5' to help center it on the lot) -J7R nn � / 1 J� " i I H rid/ south link elevation --- 3. Change flat roof to low sloped shed roof that tucks under existing Victorian eaves EXHIBIT OOF C3r-`fnkP LNK "OF- I i l I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I Ij i I I I jj j I I I I I I I EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CO ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: � l� d y m ,Aspen, CO SCHE ULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: We STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, Z CL ► I ►7 (name,please print) being or representing an A plicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that 1 have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the_day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (3 00) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. i Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this.;a4ay of Nwoe kw: , 2013,by Z+1 0L4 'l. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 201 E.HYMAN AVENUE-FINAL MAJOR VY IT V ESS M S A V J AND OFFICIAL SEAL DEVELOPMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday,December 11,2013,at regular meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m.before the A My commission expires: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission,in Coun- cil Chambers,City Hall,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen. HPC will consider an application submitted by 201 EH Investments the P.O.Box located Aspen, E. 81612,owner of the property located 3 2of of Hyman Avenue,Lots A,B and the west 2/3rd of Lot #2 Block 76,City and applicant of Aspen,PID Notary Public #2735-124-73-001. The applicant requests HPC Public ' Final approval for a project that involves demolish- ing non-historic portions of the existing house and outbuilding,relocating the outbuilding on the site, temporarily lifting the historic house for a new basement,and constructing a new addition. For further information,contact Amy Simon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO,(970)429-2758, amy.simon @ cityofaspen.com. shay Maytin chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission A CHMENTS AS APPLICABLE * 21,2013. 51) the [97251Times Weekly on Novem- ber ATION * PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) * LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED j BY MAIL * APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 i i I AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: �26i ir_�, 14;'y;V41� , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E)of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) / days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. n Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on the Wttay of NckX�'ir'713r—Q , 20 C3, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested,to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty(30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAs or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature They foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this V/ day of NO S q-, 6- � w, 20 , by NC,vsTt' 'y Goru:zat< ,._ WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL Agustin Gonzalez Notary Public My commissireires: J a --3 O—,,;t O! 6 State of Colorado Notary ID 20084043073 My Commission Expires December 30,2016 Notary ublic ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 201 E.HYMAN AVENUE-FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, December 11, 2013, at a regular meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, in Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen. UPC will consider an application submitted by 201 EH Investments LLC, P.O. Box 7928,Aspen,CO 81612,owner of the property located at 201 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots A, B and the west 2/3d of Lot C, Block 76, City and Townsite of Aspen, PID #2735-124-73-001. The applicant requests HPC Final approval for a project that involves demolishing non-historic portions of the existing house and outbuilding, relocating the outbuilding on the site, temporarily lifting the historic house for a new basement, and constructing a new addition. For further information, contact Amy Simon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St.,Aspen, CO, (970)429-2758, amy.simon @cityofaspen.com. s/Jay Maytin Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on November 21,2013 City of Aspen Account r }t iw pra# �c . s V II� Wed:,DW.11, 3 Council Cr fl wiU con lud Final by 201 l=H In of#118 - fihe r, ' � awotves dem4litioe of areas,ba8ement g cup-situ reioeaiican of an xcsvati�n___ _----. --— --n L .V itdi and eonserud on of an 'on. or f utter infor ation contact____ n annin t. 970-429-2758. 1 ; F p { + i r � t t +�3 l F 1000 EAST HOPKINS LLC 306 S GARMISCH TOWNHOMES CONDO AJAX KABIN LLC 215 S MONARCH SUITE 104 C/O WRW&CO 25 BROAD ST APT TSF ASPEN, CO 81611 16130 VENTURA BLVD#320 NEW YORK, NY 10004 ENCINO, CA 91436 ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTH ATTERBURY ANDREW L&PRENTICE PO BOX 1248 0.01% GWYN A ASPEN, CO 81612 530 E MAIN ST#001 2001 SHAWNEE MISSION PKY ASPEN, CO 81611 SHAWNEE MISSION, KS 66205 BARNES JACK&BONITA BARRETT STEVEN R BERNSTEIN JEREMY M PROFIT 125 E HYMAN AVE 2A C/O JP WEIGAND&SONS INC SHARING PLAN ASPEN, CO 81611 150 N MARKET 610 NORTH ST WICHITA, KS 67202 ASPEN, CO 81611 BLOEMINK BARBARA BOGIN ROBERT M BOND ANN 210 E HYMAN AVE#5 4280 S MEADOW BROOK LN 210 E HYMAN#6 ASPEN, CO 81611 EVERGREEN, CO 80439 ASPEN, CO 81611 BRAYMAN WALTER W&PATRICIA BRINING ROBERT BROADSCOPE PTY LTD 844 ROCKWELL LN 215 S MONARCH ST STE 203 CATLOW TRUST KANSAS CITY, MO 64112-2363 ASPEN, CO 81611 223 RIVERTON DR SHELLEY AUSTRALIA 6148, BROWN SHANE&KRISTINE BUSH ALAN DAVID CALLAHAN PATRICIA 3334 LA CIENEGA PL 0046 HEATHER LN 0184 MOUNTAIN LAUREL DR LOS ANGELES, CA 900163117 ASPEN, CO 81611-3342 ASPEN, CO 81611 CARRIGAN RICHARD A JR CASA KESS LLC CAYTON ANDREA TRUST 25526 WILLIAMS RD PO BOX 3121 2379 EARLS CT WARRENVILLE, IL 60555 ASPEN, CO 81612 LOS ANGELES, CA 90077 CHALET LISL PARTNERSHIP LTD CHRISPAT ASPEN LLC CITY OF ASPEN 100 E HYMAN AVE 1107 5TH AVE#35 ATTN FINANCE DEPT ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10128 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 CLARK FAMILY TRUST CLARKS ASPEN LLC CLAUSEN FAMILY TRUST NO 1 PO BOX 362 818 SOUTH MAIN ST C/O GUNDY MGMT CO ASPEN, CO 81612 BLANDING, UT 84511 PO BOX 47 MORRIS, IL 60450 COHEN JACK DAVID COHN PETER L COOPER TWO LLC 5 WOODLAND CT PO BOX 2138 950 HILL RD SAYVILLE, NY 11782 ASPEN, CO 81612 WINNETKA, IL 60093 CRETE ASSOCIATES LP CRYSTAL PALACE ACQUSITIONS LLC DALTON CHARLES 0 IRREV TRUST 50% PO BOX 1524 2100 E MAPLE RD, STE 200 1031 S CALDWELL ST#200 BRYN MAWR, PA 19010 BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009 CHARLOTTE, NC 28203 DAVIDSON DONALD W DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED DB ASPEN HOLDINGS LLC 864 CEMETERY LN 215 S MONARCH#104 3400 N CAUSEWAY BLVD ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 METAIRIE, LA 70002 DE SOTO LINDA JANE LIV TRUST DOLLE NORMA L REV TRUST DUNN DAVID&POLLY 1209 MANHATTAN AVE#130 1103 HERITAGE DR 611 S UPPER BROADWAY MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 CORPUS CHRISTI, TX 78401 DUNTON KAY L TRUST DUPLEX INVESTMENTS LLC 50% ELLIOTT ELYSE A TRUST 210 E HYMAN AVE#7 10601 N PENNSYLVANIA AVE 610 NORTH ST ASPEN, CO 816112012 OKLAHOMA CITY,OK 73120 ASPEN, CO 81611 FEDER HAROLD L&ZETTA F FREDRICK LARRY D FTG ASPEN LLC 985 CASCADE AVE ROBERTS JANET A 6735 TELEGRAPH RD#110 BOULDER, CO 80302-7550 215 S MONARCH ST#6101 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 48301-3141 ASPEN, CO 81611 FUQUA ALVAH D JR&DIANNE L FYRWALD JON ERIK&GUDRUN L GEORGIEFF KATHERINE TRUSTEE 446 LAKE SHORE DR 126 EAST HICKORY ST 11 TOPPING LN SUNSET BEACH, NC 28468 HINSDALE, IL 60521 ST LOUIS, MO 63131 GIEFER PATRICK GLISMANN JOHN P GOODING RICHARD L 204 SARATOGA VEIN CT PO BOX 4999 4800 S HOLLY ST CASTLE PINE, CO 80108 ASPEN, CO 81612 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111 GOOLSBY BRYAN L&MICHELLE L GORDON BRIAN S GRAND SLAM HOLDINGS LLC 6722 WAGGONER 26985 CRESTWOOD C/O CARL B LINNECKE CPA PC DALLAS, TX 75230 FRANKLIN, MI 48025 215 S MONARCH ST#101 ASPEN, CO 81611 GSS MONARCH LLC GUBSER NICHOLAS J GUNION JOHN F PO BOX 3377 PO BOX 870 1004 MARINA CIR BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81612 DAVIS, CA 95616 GUTNER KENNETH H REV TRUST HART GEORGE DAVID&SARAH C HERRON SANDRA A PO BOX 11001 PO BOX 5491 119 E COOPER AVE APT 19 ASPEN, CO 81612 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611-1761 HOLYOAKE LAURENCE M&COX HONE THOMAS A&CAROL A HOSKIN REEDE HEATHER J 130 E WAYNE ST PO BOX 2478 555 E DURANT#4A CELINA,OH 45822 BASALT, CO 81621-2478 ASPEN, CO 81611 IFTNFS LLC JACARANDA ASPEN LLC JACKSON BISQUE 0115 GLEN EAGLES DR PO BOX 11980 PO BOX 9064 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 JACOBSON FAMILY TRUST JCS GARMISCH LLC JMS LLC 2168 SANTA MARGARITA DR PO BOX 11636 0115 GLEN EAGLES DR FALLBROOK, CA 92028 ALEXANDRIA, LA 71315 ASPEN, CO 81611 JOHNSON PETER C&SANDRA K JONES MICHAEL C KAISER HARRIS FAMILY TRUST 51 OVERLOOK DR PO BOX 7966 12942 CHALON RD ASPEN, CO 81611-1008 ASPEN, CO 81612 LOS ANGELES, CA 90049 KAMINER NINA KAUFMAN STEVEN TRUST&HARLOW KEBER VINCENT M III 25 BROAD ST/TSF VIRGINIA TRUST 1301 WAZEE#2E NEW YORK, NY 10004 0554 ESCALANTE DENVER, CO 80204 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 KEITH JOHN III KELLY GARY KIRIANOFF PATRICIA TRUST PO BOX 4783 PO BOX 12356 PO BOX 1749 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 KNAPP MICHAEL LARKIN FRED C SPOUSAL TRUST LARRABEE DONALD C JR 1001 MEDICAL PK STE 213 ONE COVE LN 1417 POTTER DR STE 105 GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49546 BOW MAR, CO 80123 COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80909 LEATHERMAN ROBERT D LEDINGHAM DAVID CHARLES 16% LIMELITE REDEVELOPMENT LLC PO BOX 11930 124 E COOPER ST CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 C/O GENERAL MANAGEMENT 1201 GALAPAGO ST#101 DENVER, CO 80204 LOFINO MICHAEL D LORING PETER&ELIZABETH S LUBIN SHAFIGHEH 3255 SEAJAY DR LORING WOLCOTT&COOLIDGE OFFICE PO BOX 3748 DAYTON,OH 45430 230 CONGRESS ST ASPEN, CO 81612 BOSTON, MA 02110 MACDONALD VALERIE MEEKER RICHARD J AND ALLISON D MESSNER CHRISTIAN PO BOX 1681 0752 MEADOWOOD DR 119 E COOPER AVE#21 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 MOP LLC MORRONGIELLO LYDIA A NELSON ARLENE 5348 VEGAS DR 1178 HICKORY WY 119 E COOPER ST#6 LAS VEGAS, NV 89108 ERIE, CO 805167994 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEWMAN KERRY J&RICKI R NORRIS JOAN NORTH&SOUTH ASPEN LLC 617 PRINCE DR PO BOX 12358 200 S ASPEN ST NEWBURGH, IN 47630 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 OBRIEN MAUREEN OFM HOLDINGS LP ORR ROBERT L 1370 MAIN ST PO BOX 541208 2700 G ROAD#12A CARBONDALE, CO 81623 DALLAS, TX 75354 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81506 PARK CENTRAL CONDO ASSOC PARKER RICHARD C&KAREN S PAY ERIC GEOFFREY 215 S MONARCH ST STE 203 3029 BAKER MEADOW SE 119 E COOPER AVE APT 12 ASPEN, CO 81611 ATLANTA,GA 30339 ASPEN, CO 81611-1772 PAY-ASE PROPERTIES LLC PENTHOUSE ONE&TWO LLC PEONY LLC 2200 ROSS AVE#3838 PO BOX 11980 121 BARRANCA AVE DALLAS, TX 75201 ASPEN, CO 81611 SANTA BARBARA,CA 93109 PERREAULT GEORGE C TRUST PITNER N KATHRYN POPKIN PHILIP G 7336 CAPTAIN KIDD AVE PO BOX 11930 PO BOX 7956 SARASOTA, FL 34231-5442 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 PRASAD REV TRUST PRODINGER IRMA PROSPECTOR FRACTIONAL OWNERS 3776 W 3700 N PO BOX 1245 ASSOC DARLINGTON, ID 83255 ASPEN, CO 81612 301 E HYMAN AVE#108 ASPEN, CO 81611 PURVIS ROBERT K TRUST RACZAK JOSEPH S&JANET L RASMUSSEN DAVID L&RITA M PO BOX 3089 0234 LIGHT HILL RD PO BOX 120262 ASPEN, CO 81612 SNOWMASS, CO 81654 ARLINGTON,TX 76012 RIVOLI INVESTMENTS LLC RLC ASPEN LLC ROMER MARCY&FRANK L 533 E HOPKINS AVE 3RD FLR 12500 PARK POTOMAC AVE#207N 10204 E SHERI LN ASPEN, CO 81611 POTOMAC, MD 20854 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111 ROSENFELD EUGENE S&MAXINE M ROSSI ELAYNE R TRUST RUMSEY DANIEL W TRST PO BOX 7961 1325 PACIFIC HIGHWAY#1902 10601 WILSHIRE BLVD#20 EAST ASPEN, CO 81612 SAN DIEGO,CA 92101 LOS ANGELES,CA 90024 SB PAD HOLDINGS III LLC SCULL JAMES E SHAW ROBERT W 6262 S ROUTE 83#200 PO BOX 2051 5720 LOCKE AV WILLOWBROOK, IL 60527 ASPEN, CO 81612 FORT WORTH, TX 76107 SHENNAN MELISSA A SIMPSON JANET MARIE SIX STONES LLC 822 LANE LORRAINE 233 E COOPER AVE#205 PO BOX 626 LAKE FOREST, IL 60045-1643 ASPEN, CO 81611 PEBBLE BEACH, CA 93953 SMITH FRANK FORD JR&KATHARINE STETSON WILLIS J JR&SALLY W STITT ELIZABETH WILES IRREV TRUST LINDSAY 23 SLEEPY HOLLOW DR 1450 SILVERKING DR 2506 STRATFORD DR NEWTOWN SQUARE, PA 19073 ASPEN, CO 81611 AUSTIN,TX 78746 SULLIVAN JOHN B TRUST SUNNY SNOW LTD TOMLINSON JAMES 1300 E REUSCH RD PACE KENT STACEY ELIZABETH, IL 61028 308 TORCIDO DR 100 E COOPER AVE#2 SAN ANTONIO,TX 782095645 ASPEN, CO 81611 TRENTLY TRUST TRUE JAMES R VANOVER STEFANIE KAI C/O WRW CO PO BOX 2864 333 NE MIZNER BLVD TN-4 16130 VENTURA BLVD#320 ASPEN, CO 81612 BOCA RATON, FL 33432 ENCINO, CA 91436 VORTEX INVESTMENTS LLC 50% WALSH WILLIAM LLOYD WEINGLASS LEONARD 3336 EAST 32ND ST#217 120 WEST THIRD ST SUITE#400 PO BOX 11509 TULSA, OK 74135 FORT WORTH, TX 76102 ASPEN, CO 81612 WHITE JALEH WHITMAN WENDALIN WHITMAN WENDALIN 152 E DURANT AVE 210 E HYMAN AVE#101 PO BOX 472 ASPEN, CO 81611-1737 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 WICHMANN VICTORIA WILTGEN JOHN&KATIE HONE WINFIELD ARMS CONDO ASSOC 119 E COOPER ST#4 130 E WAYNE ST 600 E HOPKINS AVE#203 ASPEN, CO 81611 CELINA,OH 45822 ASPEN, CO 81611 WOLOFSKY MOIRA WOLPERT BILL H&WOLPERT JUDE YOUNG BARBARA A PO BOX 1026 2280 KOHLER DR 210 E HYMAN AVE#9 PALM BEACH, FL 33480 BOULDER, CO 80305 ASPEN, CO 81611 exHiBrr _ AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE COD AD S OF PROPERTY: 3 1A125 �- H a kCc.Xr-� ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: V)e ne_, ci&4 - 2e 11 , 2013 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, Z i (name,please print) being or representing an kpplicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that 1 have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: 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(``.5) { days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the 'Q Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials,which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26)inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the_day of , 20_,to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described'in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeased no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the o A,ners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. 'I (Continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment.- Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be . waived. However,the proposed zoning map.shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this a.111fay of Q Aju AQ Qg� , 20L3 by 7..AR t�.�o� M 1 i'1► PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 233 W.HALLAM STREET-FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL.SEAL NOTICE IS H7.9'_'i BY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held odnesday,December 11,2013,at - a meeting to n at 5:00 p.m.before the Aspen Historic Pre atron Commission,in Council Chambers, +ity Hall,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen. - My commission expires: - HP will ccAsider an application subrpitted by DHR al i It Architects,on behalf of owners Solomon and Eliz- Kumin,72 Cummings Point Rd.,Stamford, CT 0 CT 06902. The applicant requests Final Major De- velopment approval to relocate,partially demolish and restore the historic home located at 233 W. Hallam and construct a new detached single family Notary Public - residence. The property is legally described as Lots A,B and C,and the west 6.64 feet of Lot D, Block 50.City and Townsite of Aspen,PID# - 2735-124-35-001.For further information,contact - - Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community De- vCeloDpment De�partm0en)130 S2Gaalen ZS.Asp6en, sara.adams O cityofaspen.com. dJsy Maytin Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission - * Published 2shed in the Aspen Times Weekly on Novem. "HMENTS AS APPLICABLE: * PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) * LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED BY MAIL * APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ' 3� a , as 10161 Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: bda t L 41 20 (J�l STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin D ) / .-a J 1,�d, J ��s1 J 2 t �s Z'll��ah✓►1 y1 (name,please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. x Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Sai�notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on the Z2"day of 1 OLV r&pr , 20 l3 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. >( Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the` Community Development Department, which contains the information described.i .Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Al A Neighborhood O reac Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and att-- e , was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section .304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outrea su mary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any docu ntation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) -A^/ Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAS or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. (iiiature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this\k day of 20 1 _), by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL BARBARA J D'AUTRECHY NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO My commission expires: NOTARY 10#20074042687 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 11.2017 - 1 otary Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 233 W.HALLAM STREET-FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, December 11, 2013, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, in Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen. HPC will consider an application submitted by DHR Architects, on behalf of owners Solomon and Elizabeth Kumin, 72 Cummings Point Rd., Stamford, CT 06902. The applicant requests Final Major Development approval to relocate, partially demolish and restore the historic home located at 233 W. Hallam and construct a new detached single family residence. The property is legally described as Lots A, B and C, and the west 6.64 feet of Lot D, Block 50, City and Townsite of Aspen, PID # 2735-124-35-001. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St.,Aspen, CO, (970)429-2778, sara.adams @cityofaspen.com. s/Jav Maytin Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on November 21, 2013 City of Aspen Account RECEIVED 112013 'W CITY LAITY DEVELOPMENT Easy Peel®Labels i ♦ Bend along line to a AVERY@ 51600 Use Avery®Template 51600 Feed Paper expose Pop-up Edge TM j 1 201 WEST HALLAM HOLDINGS LLC 212 N SECOND ST LLC 323 W HALLAM LLC 10% 500 S DIXIE HWY#201 509 GUI SAN DO DE AVILA#201 201 N MILL ST#203 CORAL GABLES, FL 33146 TAMPA, FL 33613 ASPEN, CO 81611 330 WEST BLEEKER STREET LLC ARGON LLC ASPEN DRAGONFLY PARTNERS II LLC PO BOX 2028 533 E HOPKINS AVE 3RD FL 405 PARK AVE 6TH FL ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10022 BERMAN RONALD REV TRUST BLANK JEFFREY C TRST 2 FBO 40% BLANK JEFFREY C TRST 3 FBO 50% 27 N WACKER DR#518 201 N MILL ST#203 JOHNSON&REPUCCI LLP CHICAGO, IL 60606 ASPEN, CO 81611 2521 BROADWAY STE A BOULDER, CO 80304 BLEVINS J RONALD&PHYLLIS M BRADLEY EDWARD W&JANIE G CITY OF ASPEN 310 W BLEEKER ST 3002 S LIPSCOMB ATTN FINANCE DEPT ASPEN, CO 81611 AMARILLO,TX 79109 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 DEWOLF MARGARET LEE TRUST 81% DH ASE LLC DILLON DEE E 223 W BLEEKER ST 2711 CENTERVILLE RD#400 1044 ROOKWOOD DR ASPEN, CO 81611 WILMINGTON, DE 19808 CINCINNATI, OH 45208 DOUBLE D CONDO ASSOC ELKINS LESLIE KEITH TRUST GLICKMAN ADAM 300 W BLEEKER ST 1001 FANNIN#700 PO BOX 1207 ASPEN, CO 81611 HOUSTON,TX 77002 ASPEN, CO 81612 GUNGOLL CARL E EXPLORATION LLC HOUSTON TRUST CO JOSEPH RUSSELL C&ELISE E 6 NE 63RD ST#300 1001 FANNIN#700 3257 INWOOD DR OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73105 HOUSTON,TX 77002 HOUSTON,TX 77019 KETTELKAMP GRETTA M KINNEY STEPHEN J&SUSAN M DEWOLF FAMILY TRUST 19% 3408 MORRIS AVE 136 E MICHIGAN AVE#1201 223 W BLEEKER ST PUEBLO, CO 81008 KALAMAZOO, MI 49007 ASPEN, CO 81611 M D W ENTERPRISES INC MELVIN JAMES R JR&ISABEL MOORE DIANE 233 W BLEEKER ST 304 W HALLAM AVE 303 W FRANCIS ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 MULKEY DAVID A&LAURA NATHAN REVOCABLE TRUST DTJ LEGACY PROPERTIES LLC 2860 AUGUSTA DR 718 N LINDEN DR 202 WEST 19TH ST LAS VEGAS, NV 89109 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210 EL DORADO,AR 71730 1 � I€tiquettes faciles a peter ; A Repliez a la hachure afin de; vuww.averycom ; ® , Sens de TM 1-800-GO-AVERY ' 11+i1;m In nnh=A+AVFRV rirn _I-____.- .a reveler le rebo Pop-up J Easy Peel®Labels i ♦ Bend along line to Q AVERY®51600 ; Use Avery®Template 51600 j Feed Paper expose Pop-up EdgeTm PEARLSTONE ESTHER S PESIKOFF DAVID&SARAH POTVIN FAMILY TRUST PO BOX 8750 1811 NORTH BLVD 320 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81612 HOUSTON,TX 77098 ASPEN, CO 81611 PAUL F. BARNHART JR. SAX JOEL SEWELL CARL&PEGGY 2121 SAGE RD#333 303 W FRANCIS ST 3860 W NORTHWEST HWY#102 HOUSTON,TX 77056 ASPEN, CO 81611 DALLAS,TX 75220 SKILOFT LLC STEVENS BRUCE 95.75% STILWELL REED&CLAIRE 11 GREENWAY PLAZA#2000 214 W BLEEKER ST 191 UNIVERSITY BLVD#714 HOUSTON,TX 77046 ASPEN, CO 81611 DENVER, CO 80206 TOLER MELANIE S TRUST TYROL APARTMENTS LLC VIBA LLC 6400 S CLIPPINGER DR 200 W MAIN ST PASEO AL A DE M EREL S CINCINNATI, OH 45243 ASPEN, CO 81611 05127M MEXICO DE MORELOS 05127 MEXICO DF, VICENZI GEORGE A TRUST WELLS JONATHAN R&JANE I WEST HALLAM LLC PO BOX 2238 15 E 26TH ST 2901 SW 149 AVE STE 400 ASPEN, CO 81612 NEW YORK, NY 10010 MIRAMAR, FL 33027 WEST PHILLIP N&SUSAN J TRUSTEES WHIPPLE RALPH U&LYNNE C STEVENS LESLEY 4.25% 1674 LAS CANOAS RD 24 MIDDLE DR 214 W BLEEKER ST SANTA BARBARA, CA 93105 PLANDOME, NY 11030-1415 ASPEN, CO 81611 Etiquettes faciles a peler ; Repliez a la hachure afin de; vvww.avery com Utilisez le aabarit AVERY@ 51600 1 chSns de reveler le rebord Pop upT'" 1 1-800-GO-AVERY 1 RUB IC O T I C E Date; 'Wed., December 11, 2013 Time: 5pm Place: Council Chambers. Aspen City.Ha11,130 S. Galena Stt Purpose: HPC Fs asked.ta review Final Major Development application to restore the historic t,ome & bu,,Id a new_ detached residence, The applicants • . are Salomon ana Elizabetr, Kumin, 72 Cummings point Rd., Stamford CT represented by DHR Architects. For more ntormation p!--ease contact Aspen Ptannin - 9 Office - �U sara.adaTs cityo