HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.HPC.202009091
AGENDA
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
September 9, 2020
4:30 PM,
WEBEX
Go to: www.webex.com Click "Join" at the top right-hand corner
Enter Meeting Number 126 220 3185
Password provided 81611
Click "Join Meeting"
OR
Join by phone
Call: 1-408-418-9388
Meeting number (access code): 126 220 3185
Meeting password: 81611
I.SITE VISIT
II.ROLL CALL 4:30 PM
III.MINUTES
Minutes 8/26/2020
minutes.hpc.20200826.pdf
IV.PUBLIC COMMENTS
V.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS
VI.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
VII.PROJECT MONITORING
VIII.STAFF COMMENTS
IX.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED
X.CALL UP REPORTS
XI.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS
1
2
XII.OLD BUSINESS 4:40 PM
4:40
PM.
303 S. Galena Street - Minor Development, CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO
FEBRUARY 10th, 2021
4:45
PM.
611 West Main Street
Conceptual Major Development, Commercial Design Review, Setback Variations,
Relocation, Growth Management Quota System, Special Review, Transportation and
Parking Management, Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits
611 W. Main_Memo_HPC_9.9.2020.docx
Resolution No. X (Series of 2020)_611 W. Main_09.09.2020.docx
ExhibitA.1_DesignGuidelinesCriteria.docx
ExhibitA.2_DimensionalVariationsCriteria.docx
ExhibitA.3_RelocationCriteria.docx
ExhibitA.4_Growth Management Review Criteria.docx
ExhibitA.5_Special Review_Staff Findings.docx
ExhibitA.6_Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit Staff Findings.docx
ExhibitA.7_Transportation & Parking Management.docx
ExhibitB_Referral Comments.pdf
ExhibitC_Application.pdf
ExhibitD_Affidavit Of Public Notice.pdf
5:45
PM.
616 W. Main S
Change in Use & Special Review
1_616 W Main_Special Review_Change In Use_Memo.docx
2_Resolution No. X, Series of 2020_APPROVING CHANGE IN USE WITH
CONDITIONS.docx
3_Exhibit A.1_Staff Findings & Review Criteria_Change in Use.docx
4_Exhibit A.2_Staff Findings & Review Criteria_Special Review.docx
5_Exhibit B_Application_616 W. Main.pdf
6_Exhibit C_Property Rental Letter.pdf
XIII.NEW BUSINESS 6:45 PM
XIIIA.202 E. Main Street - Extension of Conceptual Approval
202_E_Main_Memo_2020_09_09.pdf
202_E_Main_Resolution_2020_09_09.pdf
202_E_Main_ExhibitA_2020_09_09.pdf
XIV.ADJOURN 7:00 PM
XV.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER
#017
2
3
Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings
1)Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda)
2) Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH)
3) Staff presentation
4) Board questions and clarifications of staff
5) Applicant presentation
6) Board questions and clarifications of applicant
7) Public comments
8)Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments
9) Close public comment portion of bearing
10) Staff rebuttal/clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment
11) Applicant rebuttal/clarification
End of fact finding.
Deliberation by the commission commences.
No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public
12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners.
13) Discussion between commissioners*
14) Motion*
*Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met or not met.
Revised April 2, 2014
3
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 26 2020
Chairperson Greenwood opened the meeting at 4:30 p.m.
Commissioners in attendance: Jeffrey Halferty, Kara Thompson, Roger Moyer, Scott Kendrick,
Sherri Sanzone, Gretchen Greenwood.
Commissioners not in attendance: Bob Blaich,
Staff present:
Amy Simon, Interim Planning Director/Historic Preservation Officer
Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner
Andrea Bryan, Assistant City Attorney
Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Halferty moved to approve the minutes from July 22, 2020,
Mr. Moyer seconded. All in favor. Motion carried 6-0.
Ms. Greenwood moved to approve the minutes from August 12th, 2020. Ms. Greenwood
seconded. All in favor. Motion carried 1-0.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None
CONFLICTS: Ms. Sanzone had to recuse herself.
STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon stated that there is project monitoring going on at the
moment and that she has reached out to the individual board members about their projects. Ms.
Simon said that Ms. Greenwood, Mr. Moyer, and herself had a meeting with Mark Hunt’s team
about a slight alteration of the exterior of the Crystal Palace project. Ms. Simon stated that no
tickets of negative effects have been issued and that two call up notices to the council.
Councilwoman Mullins and Ms. Yoon presented a slide show about the Documentation and
Conservation Modern Movement (DOCOMOMO). Councilwoman Mullins stated that Colorado
has its own chapter and that Aspen played a key role. Councilwoman Mullins and Ms. Yoon
showed several slides that showcasing the pillars of DOCOMOMO and their innovatory from
around the nation. Councilwoman Mullins presented the Colorado submittal to DOCOMOMO
showcasing buildings, artwork installations parks, botanical gardens, I-70. Councilwoman
Mullins showed that the Bayer building in Aspen is listed along with Given Institute. Ms. Yoon
stated that there is a map of Aspen’s of modern architecture inventory on the city’s website. Ms.
Yoon stated that if any HPC members would like to be involved or learn more to reach out to
herself or Councilwoman Mullins.
Ms. Thompson joined the meeting.
OLD BUSINESS: 1020 E. Cooper Avenue– Remand of the Conceptual Major Development
Review. Jamie Brewster Mcleod from Brewster McLeod Architects representing the owners.
4
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 26 2020
Ms. Simon reminded HPC that they approved the conceptual design and demolition of two sheds
that sit on the back of the property, and the relocation of the historic resource with an addition.
Ms. Simon explained that this project was asked to do a restudy from City Council back in
February.
Ms. Mcleod stated that when City Council sent this project back to restudy with their notes
focusing on two items, first being the tree on the eastern lot line and the non-historic fence. Ms.
Mcleod showed renderings of the project's footprint with the tree in place. Ms. Mcleod stated
that the new design has a reduction of two feet on the front gable. Ms. Mcleod further stated that
the new design shows an alignment of the gables for a simplified roofline. She pointed out that
on the eastside elevations, articulations were added to accommodate the tree. This was
accomplished by increasing the connector length by one foot and moving a portion of the new
addition five feet off the setback line. Ms. Mcleod stated that the project updated the roof plan
with no overhang to reduce the appearance of mass. Ms. Mcleod said that the project has reduced
its square footage by 326 square feet and floor area by 70 square feet. Ms. Mcleod stated that the
fence has been reduced in size to 42 inches from the allowed 6-foot height. Ms. Mcleod stated
they are asking for HPC’s approval on conceptual approval.
Mr. Halferty asked the applicant to discuss the reasoning behind the relationship between the
plate height and the historic resource.
Ms. Mcleod stated that the porch that is in the renderings is exciting already with the overhang
and they cannot lower the pitch anymore while complying with code.
Mr. Halferty asked what is the plate height of that pitch.
Ms. Mcleod state it was 6foot 9inchs and 6-foot 8inches was the code minimum.
Ms. Greenwood asked the applicant to discuss the choice of raising the rear roofline by two feet
when HPC did not approve that.
Ms. Mcleod stated that the project shifted in order to keep the tree and to keep the roofline
simplistic they needed to raise the roofline. She explained that if they lowered the roofline then
they would be looking and undulating elevations.
Mr. Kendrick stated that Ms. Mcleod's answer was not sufficient.
Ms. Mcleod in response to Mr. Kendrick stated that in order to shift the project over to the left
and keeping everything inline the rear needed to be elevated.
Mr. Kendrick asked if the line from the front gable could continue to the back without raising it.
Ms. Mcleod reiterated that to keep a clean line when moving to the left the rear had to be
elevated.
5
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 26 2020
STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Simon stated that this project was sent back to HPC by City
Council to reconsider a couple of specific aspects. Ms. Simon referenced to attached City
Council meeting minutes attached to the packet focusing on the tree and fence. Ms. Simon said
that when HPC approved this project to a 4-2 vote, the plane that was presented showed the
removal of the tree. Ms. Simon stated that the tree straddles the common lot line and the
neighbor does not want to see the tree removed and therefore the redesign. Ms. Simon stated that
there have been neighbors concerned about the fence particularly the west side of the fence, she
explained the last owner had a quick claim on this portion of the neighboring property. Ms.
Simon said that there is language in the resolution that will prevent the fence height from being
changed without HPC’s approval. Ms. Simon stated that there was commentary from City
Council about the mass and scale of the project. She further stated that two councilmembers felt
the need for HPC to consider the design guidelines. Ms. Simon explained that the applicant had
to have a redesign in response to the tree. Ms. Simon stated that the input given throughout this
process was a simple design and mass since the historic resource is a small and simple building.
Ms. Simon reminded the board that about 40 square feet of floor area have come out due to the
proposed design, which reduces the floor area bounce that was given. Ms. Simon stated that staff
supports HPC regranting the conceptual demolition and relocation approval. She further stated
that staff believes the applicant has worked hard in addressing these concerns.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Baron Concors representing surrounding neighbors. Mr. Concors
stated that he agrees with Mayor Torre’s comments that this is not about a fence or a tree. He
explained that the neighbors have always wanted to keep the tree and there was no real
discussion about the fence. Mr. Concors stated that the real issue is the new mass and scale of
this project. Mr. Concors said that the new height will affect everyone around this building. He
further stated that the neighbors have reached out numerous times to the owner and architects
and they were met with hostility and even being ignored. Mr. Concors urged HPC to uphold their
own guidelines and make the right decision.
Mike Smith submitted a letter to HPC attached to the minutes. Mr. Smith reiterated that he likes
the project overall however, HPC cannot ignore 10.3 and 10.4 design guidelines.
Bukk Carleton submitted a letter to HPC attached to the minutes. Mr. Carleton stated that the
height of the back addition is not in conformity with the historic resource and the project is
encroaching on the neighboring property. Mr. Carleton raised concerns about is patio fireplace
and fire danger. Mr. Carleton said that the fence is opaque and eighteen inches away from the
neighboring property. Mr. Carleton stated that if HPC does not act accordingly this would
devalue the surrounding properties and end up with lawsuits that will cost everyone tons of
money.
Lue Stover neighbor. Ms. Stover stated they went through a historic remodel and did not find the
process hard and that this project is way too big.
Ross Jacobs stated that this project deviates from historic preservation. Mr. Jacobs stated that his
concerns have been voiced by fellow homeowners.
6
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 26 2020
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Greenwood stated that the problem that continues to
plague this project is the building behind the historic resource that the mass in relations with 10.3
and 10.4 of the guidelines. Ms. Greenwood said that the effect of this project has on the
neighborhood continues to be a problem. Ms. Greenwood explained that the tree issue has been
addressed and now the focus is on the fence and the mass and scale. Ms. Greenwood agreed with
staff that it was vague on what city council was looking for, she summarized each
councilmember's position on this issue.
Mr. Moyer stated that he agrees with staff. Mr. Moyer said he is unclear about this fence issue
what is historic and what is not. Mr. Moyer asked Ms. Simon what kind of fireplace the applicant
was going to use.
Ms. Simon stated that he would need to ask the applicant. She added that whatever type they use
it will need to meet code.
Mr. Moyer stated that this project fits within 10.3 and 10.4.
Ms. Thompson stated that a lot of the public comments are out of HPC’s preview. She further
explained that this situation is even harder because the project is in a multifamily zone. Ms.
Thompson stated that the mass and scale is appropriate, on either side of the resource there are
two-story buildings and if the historic resource was not there, there would be another two-story
building lot line to lot line. Ms. Thompson stated that she agrees with staff and supports moving
forward.
Ms. Greenwood stated that this project was presented back in February and now they are
presenting the same project with minor tweaks when it needed major tweaks. Ms. Greenwood
further stated that this is not a multifamily unit, that the architect has a responsibility to reflect
that in mass and scale. Ms. Greenwood said that it was a mistake to come back to HPC with an
increase of two feet when the City Council expressed concern. Ms. Greenwood stated that the
gable might not be the right form for this project. She further stated that this project seems to be
stalled. She said that this project has caused great anxiety in the neighborhood. Ms. Greenwood
stated that as an architect you can manipulate a roof design correctly you can have that extra
square footage without it being shown. She further explained that the roof pitch in the back could
be reduced to a four and twelve pitch and achieve their goal and give relief to the neighbors. Ms.
Greenwood stated that she has no issue with the fireplace. She warned that sometimes projects
can have too much going on and inturn the project can struggle. Ms. Greenwood stated with the
mass and scale as it is presented, she can not support it, and it is completely contrary to what
City Council said.
Ms. Thompson stated that it is not fair to the applicant to say they have not done a redesign. She
explained that the first iteration that was presented did not restore the historic resource to the
current iteration. Ms. Thompson stated that they have triggered their 40% demo, floor area
reduction, and added a linking element. Ms. Thompson asked if is it possible for the applicant to
delist this property.
Ms. Simon stated that the property owner would have to decide to do that and that the city could
not initiate that. Ms. Simon listed the criteria for the delisting.
7
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 26 2020
Mr. Halferty stated that he has mixed feelings about this project. He said he appreciated Ms.
Thompsons comments about the zone districts. Mr. Halferty stated that of course the back
addition could come down in height and have a better plate height relation. Mr. Halferty said that
there needs to be a better definition with the fence.
Mr. Kendrick stated that he agrees with Mr. Halferty. Mr. Kendrick stated that he is struggling
with the mass and scale when set up next to the historic resource. He said there was a missed
opportunity to come back not addressing the neighbor's concerns and with a roof height that is
two-feet higher.
Mr. Moyer stated that City Council did ask for a reduction in mass and should go back to
restudy. Mr. Moyer warned that if this property was to be delisted something bigger could come
in and build from lot line to lot line.
Ms. Mcleod stated that they have talked to staff multiple times about delisting and the steps that
would need to be taken. She further stated that they have talked to HPC about this issue and HPC
was strongly against the delisting. Ms. Mcleod stated that the fence is a 42 inches and a picket
fence that can be seen through. The fence becomes a solid fence in the back of the property for
some privacy. She said that the fireplace will be a sealed gas unit and fits under the eve of the
historic unit. Ms. Mcleod stated that she feels they have met the guidelines for mass and scale.
She further explained that the back garage roof did get raised to keep the roofline on the same
plane and that staff and HPC agreed that was a good choice at the last meeting. Ms. Mcleod
pointed out that the back lot neighbors have not stated any concerns about the mass or scale. Ms.
Mcleod stated that this project will bring the building back into code, as it stands now the
structure is over the setbacks on multiple sides.
Ms. Thompson asked if a simple adjustment to the roof on the addition would grant the applicant
to move forward.
Ms. Greenwood said it is not just a simple adjustment but more that the project came back two
feet higher. She further said the adjustments did not go far enough.
Mr. Kendrick asked if it was possible to make it a condition for the roof to be lowered two feet.
Ms. Greenwood stated that HPC has already requested that and the applicant came back with a
more complex building and higher roof pitch.
Mr. Moyer stated that City Council has sent the back to HPC to discuss the articulation and
height. Mr. Moyer stated that this project must be continued.
Mr. Kendrick stated that he agrees with Mr. Moyer. He further explained that the architects did
reduce the square footage, however the overall mass and scale was increased.
Ms. Greenwood reminded the board about Mayor Torre’s last comment that one more discussion
with HPC could go a long way.
8
REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUGUST 26 2020
Ms. Simon stated rather than attach a staff and monitor, HPC can make the ridgeline being
lowered a condition for the final.
Ms. Greenwood stated that she would like to see this be continued so new drawings can be made
and neighbor's input can be included to ease some of the anxiety.
Ms. Simon stated that the next meeting they could be on would be October 14th, 2020. Ms.
Simon also suggested September 23rd but warned that this meeting is pretty full.
Ms. Greenwood stated that she would be fine with a September 23rd meeting date.
Mr. Kendrick moved to continue 1020 E. Cooper Avenue– Remand of the Conceptual Major
Development Review to September 23rd, 2020. Mr. Moyer seconded
ROLL CALL: Mr. Halferty; Yes, Ms. Thompson; Yes, Mr. Moyer; Yes, Mr. Kendrick; Yes,
Ms. Greenwood; Yes.
Ms. Greenwood stated that this would Ms. Bryan’s last meeting.
Ms. Bryan thanked everyone on the board and stated that she will miss everyone and truly loved
serving alongside.
9
Page 1 of 11
Memorandum
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM:Kevin Rayes, Planner
Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner
THROUGH:Amy Simon, Interim Planning Director/Historic Preservation Officer
MEETING DATE:September 9, 2020
RE:611 West Main Street –Conceptual Major Development, Commercial
Design Review, Setback Variations, Relocation, Growth Management
Quota System, Special Review, Transportation and Parking Management,
Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits, PUBLIC HEARING
(CONTINUED FROM MAY 27)
APPLICANT /OWNER:
611 West Main Street, LLC
REPRESENTATIVE:
BendonAdams
LOCATION:
Street Address:
611 W. Main
Legal Description:
Lots E, F and G, Block 25,
City and Townsite of
Aspen, County of Pitkin,
State of Colorado
Parcel Identification
Number:
PID#2735-124-48-003
CURRENT ZONING &USE
MU (Mixed-Use),
commercial and residential
space
PROPOSED USE:
Affordable Housing
SUMMARY:
The applicant has requested a Conceptual Major Development
review, Commercial Design review, Relocation of a Designated
Historic Resource, Dimensional Variations, Growth Management,
Certificate of Affordable Housing Credits, Special Review and
Transportation & Parking Management for the restoration of the
subject property and the establishment of seven affordable
housing units.Three of the units will be located in the historic
structure and four units are proposed in a new structure located at
the rear of the property, detached from the historic resource. Staff
recommends approval of the project, subject to the conditions
listed on Page 9 of this memo.
611
Site Locator Map –611 W. Main Street
10
Page 2 of 11
BACKGROUND:
611 West Main Street is a locally designated landmark on a 9,000-sf lot in the Mixed-Use (MU)
zone district and the Main Street Historic District. The current footprint of the historic structure
matches the 1904 Sanborn Map. This historic home has a gambrel roof with decorative wood
shingle posts, wood siding, sandstone foundation, and what appears to be an original wood
picket fence design. Constructed in 1886, this property is associated with locally significant
figures Harry G. Koch and his daughter Dorothy Koch Shaw and Judge William Shaw.
There are records of authorized minor repairs and restoration work on the exterior of the building
completed in 1992, and a shed was demolished in 1997. The property has a history of both
residential and commercial uses but is currently vacant.
REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals:
Commercial Design Review (Section 412)for new development in the Main Street
Historic District.
Major Development (Section 26.415.070.D)to construct a new detached addition towards
the rear of the historic property.
Relocation (Section 26.415.090)to underpin the historic resource while excavating a
crawlspace and repairing the foundation.
Dimensional Variations (Section 26.415.110.C)for front and rear yard setback variations
and a variation reducing the required distance between detached structures.
Growth Management (Section 26.470.050.B) & (Section 26.470.070.4)to develop seven
affordable housing units on the property.
Certificate of Affordable Housing Credits (Section 26.540)to generate Certificates of
Affordable Housing Credit.
Special Review (26.430.040.i)to vary unit sizes and subgrade living area from the
dimensional standards prescribed in the Land Use Code and APCHAs development
Guidelines.
Transportation & Parking Management (26.5151.010)to meet the minimum parking and
Transportation Mitigation standards.
Figure 1 - Sanborn Map, 1904
Figure 2 – 611 W. Main, 2019
11
Page 3 of 11
PROJECT SUMMARY:
The applicant proposes the restoration of the designated historic structure and the establishment
of seven affordable housing units. Three of the units will be internal to the existing historic
structure and four units are proposed in new construction that is located at the rear of the
property and detached from the historic resource. The foundation of the historic resource is
failing. The landmark will be underpinned to repair the foundation and provide a viable crawl
space for mechanical equipment. A setback variance is requested at the rear of the property
and a setback variance is requested between the non-historic addition and the historic resource.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The three-story detached addition is positioned behind the historic resource. Seven on-site
covered parking spaces are proposed on the ground level and four affordable housing units
would occupy the second and third levels of the addition. In response to the HPC comments
provided on May 27th, the revised design proposes a new building form with gable roofs and
vertical fenestration that better relates to the historic resource and the historic district, and a
clear separation between the detached addition and the historic resource. Staff finds that the
revised design meets the Design Guidelines for design compatibility and supports the request
for relocation and setback variations.
The following points go into more detail regarding the proposal for HPC discussion:
1.Growth Management, Special
Review &Certificates of
Affordable Housing Credit – A
total of seven deed-restricted
affordable housing units are
proposed for the site- three in
the historic resource and four in the rear addition. The applicant seeks to establish 14.75
Certificates of Affordable Housing credits, which is commensurate to the mitigation
standards prescribed by APCHA.
Pursuant to Land Use Code
Section 26.540.070, Review
Criteria for establishing an
affordable housing credit, to
determine the number of
certificates of affordable housing
credits awarded to a project, the review standards outlined in Land Use Code Section
26.470.080.d.7.g, General Review, Affordable Housing Mitigation, should be considered.
PROPOSED CERTIFICATES
One-bedroom 2 Units x 1.75 FTEs =3.5
Two-bedroom 5 Units x 2.25 FTEs =11.25
Total Proposed 14.75FTEs
APCHA Standards
Unit Type Mitigation Standard
One-Bedroom 1.75 FTE/Unit
Two-Bedroom 2.25 FTE/Unit
12
Page 4 of 11
Two of the proposed units in the historic resource exceed the minimum size mandated
by APCHA. One unit is slightly less than the minimum size but is well within the twenty
percent reduction permitted via Special Review.
Lastly, the four AH units proposed in the rear addition all exceed the minimum net livable
area required.
Net Livable Area Per AH Unit
Units Beds 1st Level
(sf)
2nd Level
(sf)
3rd Level
(sf)
Total
(sf)
Min. FA
(sf)
Difference
(sf)
1 2 78 617 584 1,280 900 380 above
2 2 78 618 586 1,283 900 383 above
3 2 78 618 584 1,282 900 382 above
4 2 78 617 584 1,280 900 380 above
Land Use Code Section 26.430.040.i, Special Review, Affordable housing unit standards,
sets forth the applicable criteria to consider when an affordable housing unit does not
meet a required standard and a variation is requested. When the minimum thresholds
relating to net livable sq. ft. is not met, HPC may consider alternative amenities that would
contribute to the general livability of a unit and exceed the expectations of APCHA.
Alternatives may include:
Significant storage, such as additional storage outside a unit;
Above average natural light, such as adding more window area than the Building
Code requires; and,
Unit amenities, such as access to outdoor space or private patios.
This application was referred to APCHA for review and recommendation. Community
Development & APCHA staff are highly supportive of this project and acknowledge the
community benefit that seven affordable housing units would bring. It should be
emphasized that these units are very high quality. Almost all units exceed the minimum
size requirements by a significant margin and several valuable amenities are provided on
site, including seven on-site parking spaces (one for each unit, which is well above the
minimum requirement of 60 percent), and plenty of outdoor common area/open space
and access to private patios and porches. Lastly, each unit has 18 sq. ft. of exterior
Net Livable Area Per AH Unit
Units Beds 1st Level
(sf)
2nd Level
(sf)
Total
(sf)
Min.
(sf)
Difference
(sf)
1 landmark 2 424 531 973 900 73 above
2 landmark 1 467 334 819 700 119 above
3 landmark 1 632 X 632 700 68 below
13
Page 5 of 11
1.The 4-bedroom basement below the historic resource is no longer proposed. In the rear addition, the
applicant has reduced the number of units from six to four.
2.The amendments will likely be adopted at the end of 2020 or early 2021.
storage area, except for the smaller unit in the historic addition which is allocated 38 sq.
ft. of exterior storage.Staff finds that a variation from the minimum unit size requirement
for the one affordable unit slightly below the minimum is appropriate and does not
recommend any reduction to the number of FTEs awarded to the project.
It should be noted that in response to the feedback received at the previous HPC hearing,
the applicant has reduced the total number of affordable housing units from nine to
seven.1 As a result, the number of FTEs generated drops from 21 to 14.75. Reducing the
number of FTEs adds a significant financial cost to the project. The Community
Development Department is currently working with City Council to amend several
provisions of the affordable housing land use code section. Some of these changes will
likely benefit this project.2
Figure 4-Private porch and open space associated with the historic
resource: As Viewed from Main Street
Figure 3 -Proposed Parking & Storage Spaces
Parking
Area
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Storage Storage
14
Page 6 of 11
2.Transportation and Parking Management –Pursuant to Land Use Code Section
26.515.060.C, Transportation & Parking Management, one parking space is required for
each AH unit; in this case, seven spaces for seven units. The Mixed-Use Zone District
requires that 60 percent of parking be met on site. In this case, 4.2 on-site spaces are
required. Seven parking spaces, including one van-accessible space along the alleyway
are proposed. The proposed parking mitigation exceeds the parking minimum prescribed
in land use code section 26.515.040, Parking Requirements.Providing one parking space
per unit further contributes to the livability and the quality of these units.
In addition to the on-site parking, the applicant has completed the Transportation Impact
Analysis (TIA) for this project and plans to provide a range of Mobility Measures that
satisfy the requirements of the Engineering and Parking Departments. At this point, the
applicant has indicated that a car-sharing service will be made available to tenants,
bicycle parking will be provided on-site, and other infrastructure improvements will be
made to encourage alternative transportation choices. The TIA is subject to change and
will be assessed at building permit. Staff included a condition in the Resolution prohibiting
Mobility Measures from occupying any of the off-street parking spaces on the property.
Figure 5-Porches and Parking Spaces: As Viewed from the Back of the
Rear Addition
Figure 6-Open Space between the Rear of the Historic Resource and
the Front of the Addition
15
Page 7 of 11
3.Site Planning & Relocation: The property faces Main Street with an alley abutting the
rear. Staff finds the location of the proposed detached addition at the rear of the lot to be
an appropriate location and distance from the historic resource. Relocation review is
triggered to underpin the historic structure for excavation and repair the existing
foundation. The historic structure will remain in its current location and all work on the
foundation must reuse existing sandstone as a veneer to meet Design Guideline 9.5.
Staff supports the request for relocation to repair the historic foundation. One new
lightwell is proposed to provide access to the crawlspace. The visual impacts, including
curb heights, of the lightwells needs to be minimized (HP Design Guideline 9.6).
An accessible ramp is proposed along the east side of the wraparound porch and must
comply with HP Design Guidelines 5.2 & 5.6 related to handrails and porch restoration.
Staff recommends the installation of the accessible ramp along the historic porch be done
in a way that minimizes damage to the historic fabric and is reversible.
Preliminary stormwater mitigation plans were provided for the previous design. Staff
recommends the applicant continue to communicate and work with the Engineering
Department and other relevant City Departments to finalize the stormwater mitigation
plans for compliance.
There are large cottonwood trees surrounding the front of the property and the covered
steps leading to the front entrance is in the front yard setback. Positive open space in the
front yard remains open green space. New landscaping features must not cover or
damage historic building material and meet Design Guidelines 1.10, 1.12 and 1.13. Final
landscaping plans and lighting plans will be reviewed during Final Development Review.
4.Historic Resource – Restoration: Building records indicate no recent significant
building alterations or remodels were done, and exterior details were repaired and
restored under the guidance of historic preservation staff in the 1990s. Any
preservation/restoration conducted as part of this scope of work will require research and
material investigation. The applicant proposes to preserve and seal an existing door to
the rear of the historic resource and add a new door to access a rear unit.
Providing the existing rear door is historic, staff supports the preservation of the opening
and the addition of a new door on the secondary wall which would be compliant with HP
Design Guideline 4.1 & 4.5.
5.New Addition – Form/ Materials/ Fenestration:As a detached addition that
demonstrates a clear separation between the historic structure and the new addition,
Chapter 11 of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines calls for less stringent design
compatibility requirements. New additions, however, still need to relate to the historic
resource in two of the three categories: form, materials and fenestration.
Form:The revised design went from a relatively shallow asymmetric butterfly roof form to
four 10:12 pitched gable roofs. Although the gambrel roof is a very distinct feature found
on the historic resource, an exact replica of this character defining feature would not be
appropriate for the new addition. Staff finds that the proposed gable roof better relates to
the historic resource and other roof forms readily found in the historic district.
Materials:Wood board siding of differing widths is proposed as the main exterior building
material for the detached addition. This choice in building material strongly relates to the
historic resource which is cladded with wood siding.
16
Page 8 of 11
Fenestration:The proposed fenestration design follows a vertical layout that relates to
fenestration found in the district. A respectful relationship of solid building material versus
glazing has been established in the new addition that relates to the historic resource.
Staff finds the new addition achieves design compatibility by relating to form and materials
using compatible roof forms and wood as the main exterior building material.
6.Dimensional Variations –Dimensional variations granted by HPC are site-specific
approvals that assess design compatibility and historic character and patterns. The
criteria for granting variations are specified to features represented in the application.
In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation:
a)Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or
district; and/or
b)Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or
architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic
property or historic district.
The revised addition has a uniform footprint that shows covered parking spaces and
storage on the first level and living space on the second and third levels of the addition.
In order to increase the distance between the historic resource and the new addition, the
applicant proposes to push the massing of the addition to the rear of the property. This
action reduces adverse impacts to the historic resource and keeps the historic house in
its historic location. The request for setback variations are as follows:
5’ rear yard setback reduction, for the proposed addition
Front yard setback variation to memorialize the existing location of the covered
front steps. (Exact dimension is not defined.)
The applicant also requests a variation from the required distance between detached
structures which is established by underlying zoning. The Mixed-Use zone district
requires a 10’ separation between detached structures, and the applicant is requesting a
2’-9” reduction providing a 7’-3” distance between the historic resource and the new
addition when measured from the exterior walls.
Staff supports the request for the front yard setback variation to keep the existing covered
steps in its current location and the rear yard setback variation for the new addition to sit
on the rear property line. Staff also supports the applicant’s request to reduce the distance
required between detached structures because it allows the new addition to remain
detached and the historic house to remain in its current location. (See Exhibit A.3.)
17
Page 9 of 11
DRC REFERRAL COMMENTS:
The application was referred out to other City departments who have requirements that will
significantly affect the permit review. The following is a summary of comments received for the
proposed development. Please see Exhibit B for full comments. All conditions must be resolved
by HPC Final review or will be carried forward into the building permit process.
Engineering Department:
1. Show turning motions into most restrictive parking space along the alley to ensure access
is achievable.
2. New sidewalk and curb and gutter are required for this project. The curb and gutter shall
be poured with minimal impacts to the existing tree roots. Sidewalk shall be COA floating
sidewalk detail at a minimum unless better alternative is found to protect the trees.
3. Access to the Si Johnson Ditch will need to be maintained in the sidewalk, where the
current grate is in the sidewalk.
4. The design with minimal impacts to the ditch is preferred. Earth retention systems,
structures, stormwater treatment, etc. will not be permitted in the ditch easement.
5. If final design requires pipes in the ROW, a permanent encroachment will be required.
Also, adequate separation from the Si Johnson ditch would need to be approved.
6. Some of the BMP options proposed appear to have significant tree impacts. Final location
and excavation depths for the BMPs will need to be approved by the Parks Department
and minimize tree impacts or pay mitigation fees.
7. Drywells are the BMP of last resort, please explore all other solutions before a drywell is
chosen, including green roofs and tree canopy credit.
8. At building permit, show bike parking dimensions comply with Association of Pedestrian
and Bicycle Professionals standards.
9. The existing trash enclosure in the transformer utility easement shall be removed.
Parks Department:
1. This project must adhere to Ordinance 17, Series 2018, WELS, Water Efficient
Landscaping Standards.
2. A tree permit will be required for all tree removals.
3. Tree protection fencing with signage will be required at the driplines of trees and must
be inspected and approved by the Parks Department.
4. No activity is allowed within the TPZ (Tree Protection Zone). There is also no storage of
material or machinery allowed in these areas.
5. A floating sidewalk design will be required by the Parks Department along Main Street.
6. If curb and gutter will be required, curb will need to be poured back against existing
undisturbed soil – NO framing will be allowed.
7. Specific distances for soil disturbance from trunks of individual trees have been
determined by the City Forester and must be adhered to.
Environmental Health
1. Project as proposed meets code requirements of 120 square feet for trash and recycling.
Zoning
1. There are concerns about the height of the proposed addition, particularly on the North
side of the building. With the information provided the North-West corner of this building
(where the elevator tower and the building meet) measures at almost 29’ high; the
underlying Zone District (Mixed Use) has a height maximum of 28’. Please keep this in
mind as the design evolves.
18
Page 10 of 11
APCHA
1. The units shall include a refrigerator/freezer, stove/oven with hood, dishwasher, and
washer/dryer.
2. All bedrooms shall contain a closet.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) approve this application with
the following conditions:
1.) Work closely with all relevant City Departments to finalize the stormwater mitigation plan
prior to Building Permit submission.
2.) Provide final details related to the foundation and the use of existing sandstone as a
veneer to reconstruct the historic condition for Final.
3.) Provide a detailed roof plan calling out all vents, flues, gutters and snow clips for Final.
4.) Provide a site plan that clearly defines utility connections, service boxes, mechanical
equipment and the transformer for Final.
5.) Provide a landscape plan including a list of plant species and planting locations
appropriately distanced from the historic resource for Final.
6.) Provide a lighting plan and cutsheets for proposed light fixtures for Final.
7.) Install an accessible ramp that is reversable, minimally impacts the historic fabric, and
complies with all relevant design guidelines and building code requirements for Final.
8.) Design curb heights around the lightwells to be 6” or less.
9.) The following setback variations for the proposed development are granted:
5’ rear yard setback reduction (5’ to 0’);
Front yard setback variation to memorialize the existing location of the covered
front steps (location as defined on the site plan); and,
A 2’-9” reduction from the minimum required between the historic resource and
the new addition (10’ to 7’-3”).
10.) Provide financial assurance of $30,000 for the relocation of the historic house until the
subgrade construction is complete. The financial security is to be provided with the
building permit application.
11.) A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one
(1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such
an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the
Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole
discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date
for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written
request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date.
19
Page 11 of 11
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution #____, Series of 2020
Exhibit A.1 – Design Guidelines Criteria /Staff Findings
Exhibit A.2 – Dimensional Variations Criteria /Staff Findings
Exhibit A.3 – Relocation/Staff Findings
Exhibit A.4 – Growth Management/Staff Findings
Exhibit A.5 – Special Review/Staff Findings
Exhibit A.6 – Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit/Staff Findings
Exhibit A.7 – Transportation & Parking Management/Staff Findings
Exhibit B – Referral Comments
Exhibit C – Application
Exhibit D – Affidavit of Public Notice
20
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020
Page 1 of 5
RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2020
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
GRANTING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, COMMERCIAL DESIGN
REVIEW, RELOCATION, GROWTH MANAGEMENT, CERTIFICATE OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREDITS, SPECIAL REVIEW, SETBACK VARIATIONS,
TRANSPORTATION & PARKING MANAGEMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED
AT 611 WEST MAIN STREET, LOTS E, F AND G, BLOCK 25, CITY AND TOWNSITE
OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-48-003
WHEREAS,the applicant, 611 West Main Street, LLC, represented by BendonAdams, has
requested HPC approval for Conceptual Major Development, Commercial Design Review,
Growth Management, Certificate of Affordable Housing Credits, Special Review, Setback
Variations, and Transportation & Parking Management for the property located at 611 West Main
Street, Lots E, F and G, Block 25, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado.
As a historic landmark, the site is exempt from Residential Design Standards review; 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 and 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 Commercial Design Guidelines per Section 26.412
of the Municipal Code and City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section
26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC
may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional
information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen
Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property; and
WHEREAS,for approval of Growth Management, the application shall meet the requirements of
Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.470.050.B, General Requirements, and Code Section,
26.470.070.4, Affordable Housing; and
WHEREAS,for approval of Certificatesof Affordable Housing Credits, the application shall meet
the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.540, Certificates of Affordable Housing
Credits; and
WHEREAS,for approval of Special Review, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen
Municipal Code Section 26.430.040.i, Affordable Housing Unit Standards; and
21
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020
Page 2 of 5
WHEREAS,for approval of Setback Variations, the application shall meet the requirements of
Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.C, Setback Variations; and
WHEREAS,for approval of Transportation and Parking Management, the application shall meet
the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.515.010, Transportation & Parking
Management; and
WHEREAS,Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance
with applicable review standards and recommends approval with conditions; and
WHEREAS,HPC reviewed the project on May 27, 2020 and voted to continue the application
for further restudy; and
WHEREAS,on September 9, 2020, HPC reviewed the revised project, considered the application,
the staff memo and public comment, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards
and granted approval with conditions by a vote of X – X (X-X).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, Commercial Design Review, Relocation,
Growth Management, Certificate of Affordable Housing Credits, Special Review, Setback Variations,
and Transportation & Parking Management for 611 W. Main, Lots E, F and G, Block 25, City and
Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado as follows:
Section 1: Conceptual Development, Commercial Design, Relocation & Dimensional Variations.
HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, Commercial Design Review, Relocation and
Dimensional Variations as proposed subject to the following conditions:
1.) Work closely with all relevant City Departments to finalize the stormwater mitigation plan
prior to Building Permit submission.
2.) Provide final details related to the foundation and the use of existing sandstone as a veneer
to reconstruct the historic condition for Final.
3.) Provide a detailed roof plan calling out all vents, flues, gutters and snow clips for Final.
4.) Provide a site plan that clearly defines utility connections, service boxes, mechanical
equipment, and the transformer for Final.
5.) Provide a landscape plan including list of plant species and planting locations appropriately
distanced from the historic resource for Final.
6.) Provide a lighting plan and cutsheets for proposed light fixtures for Final.
7.) Install an accessible ramp that is reversable, minimally impacts the historic fabric, and
complies with all relevant design guidelines and building code requirements for Final.
8.) Design curb heights around the lightwells to be 6” or less.
9.) The following setback variations for the proposed development are granted:
a. 5’ rear yard setback reduction (5’ to 0’);
b. Front yard setback variation to memorialize the existing location of the covered
front steps (location as defined on the site plan); and,
c. A 2’-9” reduction from the minimum required between the historic resource and
the new addition (10’ to 7’-3”).
22
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020
Page 3 of 5
10.) Provide financial assurance of $30,000 for the relocation of the historic house until the
subgrade construction is complete. The financial security is to be provided with the
building permit application.
11.) A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one
(1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such
an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the
Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole
discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date
for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written
request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date.
Section 2: Growth Management, Certificate of Affordable Housing Credits and Special Review.
HPC hereby approves Growth Management, Certificate of Affordable Housing Credits and Special
Review, subject to the following conditions:
1. A total of seven affordable housing units shall be provided on site. The unit types and
dimensions are set forth in the tables below:
REAR ADDITION
(Net Livable sq. ft.)
Units Beds 1st Level
(sf)
2nd Level
(sf)
3rd Level
(sf)
Total
(sf)
1 2 78 617 584 1,280
2 2 78 618 586 1,283
3 2 78 618 584 1,282
4 2 78 617 584 1,280
2. The applicant shall work with APCHA to designate the category of each unit.
3. The category at which credits are generated for each unit shall be commensurate to the
category at which each unit is rented.
HISTORIC RESOURCE
(Net Livable sq. ft.)
Units Beds 1st Level
(sf)
2nd Level
(sf)
Total
(sf)
1 landmark 2 424 531 973
2 landmark 1 467 334 819
3 landmark 1 632 X 632
23
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020
Page 4 of 5
Section 3: Transportation & Parking Management.
HPC hereby approves the Transportation & Parking Management as proposed subject to the
following condition:
1. A total of seven off-street parking spaces will be provided.
2. The final Transportation Impact Analysis and accompanying Mobility Measures will be
finalized at building permit. Mobility Measures shall not obstruct or occupy any of the off-
street parking spaces provided on the property.
3. The TDM measure may be provided for a minimum of one (1) year.
Section 4: Development Application
A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year
of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application
within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development
Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown,
grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for
up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30)
days prior to the expiration date.
Section 5: Material Representations
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development
proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented
before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the
Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same
shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or
an authorized authority.
Section 6: Existing Litigation
This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any
action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as
herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 7: Severability
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed
a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions thereof.
24
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020
Page 5 of 5
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 9th day of September, 2020.
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content:
_________________________________________________________________
Jim True, City Attorney Gretchen Greenwood, Chair
ATTEST:
________________________________________________________
Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk
25
Page 1 of 24
Exhibit A.1
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria
Commercial Design Guidelines Criteria
Staff Findings
NOTE: Staff responses begin on pages 15 & 24 of this exhibit, following the list of
applicable guidelines.
26.415.070.D Major Development. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected,
constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated
historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient
information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved
in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building
permit cannot be submitted without a development order.
3. Conceptual Development Plan Review
b) The procedures for the review of conceptual development plans for major
development projects are as follows:
1) The Community Development Director shall review the application materials
submitted for conceptual or final development plan approval. If they are
determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and
a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice of the hearing
shall be provided pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c.
2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes
the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable
Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with
relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to
continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons
for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff
analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the
project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the
application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to
approve or deny.
4) A resolution of the HPC action shall be forwarded to the City Council in
accordance with Section 26.415.120 - Appeals, notice to City Council, and
call-up. No applications for Final Development Plan shall be accepted by the
City and no associated permits shall be issued until the City Council takes
action as described in said section.
26
Page 2 of 24
Chapter 1: Site Planning & Landscape Design MET NOT MET
1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block,
neighborhood or district.
1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches.
1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual
impact.
1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces.
1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential
projects.
1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site.
1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process.
1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could interfere
with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate.
1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees
and shrubs.
1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram.
1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic
structures are inappropriate.
1.15 Preserve original fences.
1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will
be reviewed on a case by case basis.
1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations.
1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its
built features.
1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system.
1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site.
Chapter 2: Rehabilitation - Building Materials MET NOT MET
2.1 Preserve original building materials.
2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically.
2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary
surfaces.
2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials.
2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate.
Chapter 3: Rehabilitation - Windows MET NOT MET
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall.
3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
MET
MET
MET
MET
CONDITION
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review Criteria for 611 W. Main Street
The applicant is requesting a Conceptual Major Development reivew for the construction of a new detached addition.
The proposed design must meet applicable Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
CONDITION
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
CONDITION
CONDITION
MET
MET
MET
27
Page 3 of 24
3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original.
3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original
window.
Chapter 4: Rehabilitation - Doors MET NOT MET
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening.
4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic
appearance.
4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the
original door or a door associated with the style of the building.
4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed.
4.7 Preserve historic hardware.
Chapter 5: Rehabilitation - Porches & Balconies MET NOT MET
5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony.
5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details.
5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate.
5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail.
5.6 Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly where
visible from the street.
Chapter 6: Rehabilitation - Architectural Details MET NOT MET
6.1 Preserve significant architectural features.
6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that
minimize damage to the original material.
6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced.
6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original
designs.
6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts.
Chapter 7: Rehabilitation - Roofs MET NOT MET
7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof.
7.2 Preserve the original eave depth.
7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color.
7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional.
7.7 Preserve original roof materials.
7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the
original.
7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible.
CONDITION
MET
MET
MET
MET
CONDITION
MET
MET
CONDITION
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
CONDITION
MET
MET
MET
CONDITION
MET
MET
MET
MET
28
Page 4 of 24
Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines:
1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block,
neighborhood or district.
Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood.
Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is
typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful
open space visible from the street.
1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches.
When HPC input is requested, the following bullet points may be applicable.
Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining historic
ancillary buildings or constructing new ones.
Chapter 8: Rehabilitation - Secondary Structures MET NOT MET
8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved.
8.3 Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not in
keeping with its original character as a utilitarian structure.
8.5 Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary.
8.6 Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings.
Chapter 9: New Construction - Excavation, Building Relocation & Foundations MET NOT MET
9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in
place may help to preserve the historic fabric.
9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation.
9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells.
9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in
moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such
buildings.
Chapter 10: New Construction - Building Additions MET NOT MET
10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right.
10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed.
Chapter 11: New Buildings on Landmarked Properties MET NOT MET
11.1 Orient the new building to the street.
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings
on a parcel.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time.
11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
MET
MET
CONDITION
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
CONDITION
CONDITION
MET
MET
29
Page 5 of 24
Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add
landscape.
Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged.
Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas.
Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged on a
case by case basis.
1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes
its visual impact.
If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it.
Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for
driveways on Aspen Victorian properties.
1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces.
Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a semi-
public walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces.
1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on
residential projects.
Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of
the period of significance.
Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install
them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen
Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick
or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks.
The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties.
A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property.
1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site.
Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than
many small unusable areas.
Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building.
1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process.
When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better
integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least
a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be reviewed
and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal.
Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the historic
landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site, reduce the
generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the ground. Stormwater
facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should have minimal visual impact when
viewed from the public right of way.
Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements.
30
Page 6 of 24
1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could
interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate.
Site furnishings that are added to the historic property should not be intrusive or degrade the
integrity of the neighborhood patterns, site, or existing historic landscape.
Consolidating and screening these elements is preferred.
1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly
landmark trees and shrubs.
Retaining historic planting beds and landscape features is encouraged.
Protect historically significant vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Removal of
damaged, aged, or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department.
If a significant tree must be removed, replace it with the same or similar species in coordination
with the Parks Department.
The removal of non-historic planting schemes is encouraged.
Consider restoring the original landscape if information is available, including original plant
materials.
1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram on next page.
Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not overplant a site, or install a landscape which is
overtextured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In
Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes.
In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod,
and low shrubs are often appropriate.
Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more
contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the property,
in Zone C.
Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited patio
where appropriate.
Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the
landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building must
be honored.
In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to over
plant either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before the
property was divided.
Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged.
31
Page 7 of 24
1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views
of historic structures are inappropriate.
Low plantings and ground covers are preferred.
Do not place trees, shrubs, or hedgerows in locations that will obscure, damage, or block
significant architectural features or views to the building. Hedgerows are not allowed as fences.
Consider mature canopy size when planting new trees adjacent to historic resources. Planting
trees too close to a landmark may result in building deteriorate or blocked views and is
inappropriate.
Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed.
1.15 Preserve original fences.
Fences which are considered part of the historic significance of a site should not be moved,
removed, or inappropriately altered.
Replace only those portions of a historic fence that are deteriorated beyond repair.
32
Page 8 of 24
Replacement elements must match the existing.
1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed
and will be reviewed on a case by case basis.
1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations.
An analysis of the historic landscape and an assessment of the current condition of the landscape
should be done before the beginning of any project.
The key features of the historic landscape and its overall design intent must be preserved.
1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape
and its built features.
Do not add features that damage the integrity of the historic landscape.
Maintain the existing pattern of setbacks and siting of structures.
Maintain the historic relationship of the built landscape to natural features on the site.
All additions to these landscapes must be clearly identifiable as recent work.
New artwork must be subordinate to the designed landscape in terms of placement, height,
material, and overall appearance. Place new art away from significant landscape features.
Avoid installing utility trenches in cultural landscapes if possible.
1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system.
Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation.
Minimize the visual impact of new parking.
Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically.
1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site.
Protect established vegetation during any construction.
If any tree or shrub needs to be removed, replace it with the same or similar species.
New planting should be of a species used historically or a similar species.
Maintain and preserve any gardens and/or ornamental planting on the site.
Maintain and preserve any historic landscape elements.
2.1 Preserve original building materials.
Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place.
Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments,
steps and foundations, should be preserved.
Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place.
Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity.
Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the
weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy.
33
Page 9 of 24
2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically.
Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone
that was not historically painted shall not be painted.
If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time,
consider removing it, using appropriate methods.
Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building.
2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials
on primary surfaces.
If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood
as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish.
Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those
should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement
of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent.
2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials.
Original building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic
materials.
2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate.
Regardless of their character, new materials obscure the original, historically significant material.
Any material that covers historic materials may also trap moisture between the two layers. This
will cause accelerated deterioration to the historic material which may go unnoticed.
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills,
heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows.
Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them.
Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration
glass for the repair.
3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building
wall.
Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate.
Do not change the size of an original window opening.
3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the sash
have divided lights, match that characteristic as well.
3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original.
34
Page 10 of 24
3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
Changing the window opening is not permitted.
Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past.
3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of
the original window.
A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to
the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only
measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window
from the surrounding plane of the wall.
The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal.
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door
frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking
sidelights.
Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances.
If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the
door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position.
Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible.
4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening.
Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height.
4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general
historic appearance.
4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar
to the original door or a door associated with the style of the building.
A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement.
A historic door or screen door from a similar building also may be considered.
Simple paneled doors were typical for Aspen Victorian properties.
Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic
evidence can support their use.
4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed.
Place new doors in any proposed addition rather than altering the historic resource.
Greater flexibility in installing a door in a new location may be considered on rear or secondary
walls.
A new door in a new location should be similar in scale and style to historic openings on the
building and should be a product of its own time.
35
Page 11 of 24
Preserve the historic ratio of openings to solid wall on a façade. Significantly increasing the
openings on a character defining façade negatively affects the integrity of a structure.
4.7 Preserve historic hardware.
When new hardware is needed, it must be in scale with the door and appropriate to the style of
the building.
On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any modern elements such as entry key pads.
5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony.
Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and
spacing of balusters.
Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate.
5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details.
Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate.
5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate.
Reopening an enclosed porch or balcony is appropriate.
5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail.
Match original materials.
When reconstructing an original porch or balcony without historic photographs, use dimensions
and characteristics found on comparable buildings. Keep style and form simple with minimal, if
any, decorative elements.
5.6 Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly
where visible from the street.
If handrails or guardrails are needed according to building code, keep their design simple in
character and different from the historic detailing on the porch or balcony.
6.1 Preserve significant architectural features.
Repair only those features that are deteriorated.
Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized
preservation methods whenever possible.
On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve
the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily
deteriorated material.
6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods
that minimize damage to the original material.
Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing
the disassembled material in its original configuration.
36
Page 12 of 24
6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced.
Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features.
If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be
wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish.
6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based
on original designs.
The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a
misrepresentation of the building’s heritage.
When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop
a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar
scale, proportion and material.
6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts.
Where scars on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical
or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to
related buildings.
Using ornate materials on a building or adding new conjectural detailing for which there is no
documentation is inappropriate.
7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof.
Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen from
the street.
Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing.
Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration.
7.2 Preserve the original eave depth.
Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource.
AspenModern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key
character defining features of the architectural style.
7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color.
Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures.
Locate vents on non-street facing facades.
Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible.
7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional.
Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists.
7.7 Preserve original roof materials.
37
Page 13 of 24
Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is necessary,
use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities and use a
color that is similar to that seen historically.
7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar
to the original.
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.
Flashing should be tin, lead coated copper, galvanized or painted metal and have a matte, non-
reflective finish.
Design flashing, such as drip edges, so that architectural details are not obscured.
A metal roof is inappropriate for an Aspen Victorian primary home but may be appropriate for a
secondary structure from that time period.
A metal roof material should have a matte, non-reflective finish and match the original seaming.
7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent
possible.
Downspouts should be placed in locations that are not visible from the street if possible, or in
locations that do not obscure architectural detailing on the building.
The material used for the gutters should be in character with the style of the building.
8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be
preserved.
When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These include
its materials, roof form, windows, doors, and architectural details.
If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. The
determination of significance is based on documentation of the construction date of the outbuilding
and/or physical inspection. A secondary structure that is related to the period of significance of the
primary structure will likely require preservation.
8.3 Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not
in keeping with its original character as a utilitarian structure.
Most secondary structures are basic rectangular solids, with simple finishes and no
ornamentation.
8.5 Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary.
8.6 Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings.
If an original carriage door exists, and can be made to function for automobile use, this is preferred.
38
Page 14 of 24
9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure
remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric.
This activity will require the same level of documentation, structural assessment, and posting of
financial assurances as a building relocation.
9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic
foundation.
On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a
miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and is
not allowed.
Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate.
Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone
salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut of
the stone and design of the mortar joints.
New AspenModern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure preservation
of the design intent.
9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells.
The size of any lightwell that faces a street should be minimized.
Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining features,
such as front porches.
Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a
street.
Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” in the
landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site.
9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who
specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in
successfully relocating such buildings.
The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the HPC.
During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect
existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door and
window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural
details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration.
The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process.
Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis
and may require special conditions of approval.
A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen.
10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right.
10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed.
For Aspen Victorian properties, HPC generally relies on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps to
determine which portions of a building are historically significant and must be preserved.
39
Page 15 of 24
HPC may insist on the removal of non-historic construction that is considered to be detrimental to the
historic resource in any case when preservation benefits or variations are being approved.
11.1 Orient the new building to the street.
Aspen Victorian buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional
grid pattern.
AspenModern alignments shall be handled case-by-case.
Generally, do not set the new structure forward of the historic resource. Alignment of their front
setbacks is preferred. An exception may be made on a corner lot or where a recessed siting for
the new structure is a better preservation outcome.
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic
buildings on a parcel.
Subdivide larger masses into smaller “modules” that are similar in size to the historic buildings on
the original site.
Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic resource.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
The primary plane of the front shall not appear taller than the historic structure.
11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time.
Consider these three aspects of a new building; form, materials, and fenestration. A project must
relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic
resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response.
When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource.
When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those
used historically on the site and use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of
human scale
When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size and shape
to those of the historic resource.
11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings.
Overall, details shall be modest in character.
Staff Finding:
The applicable sections of the design guidelines are as follows: site planning, building materials,
windows, doors, roofs, porches, and new detached buildings. All relevant Design Guidelines in
Chapter 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 related to the preservation plan need to be reviewed in detail as part
of the permit submittal for further historic evidence and/or investigative demolition in order to
ensure no historic fabric is being removed. This will be a condition of Final approval.
40
Page 16 of 24
Design Guidelines 1.8 relates to on-site stormwater management. The applicant has engaged a
civil engineering to review the on-site conditions and provided a preliminary plan with the previous
design. Staff recommends that applicant continue to work with relevant City Departments to
finalize a stormwater mitigation plan that meets all requirements and provides the lest visual
impact to the historic resource.
Design Guidelines 4.1 & 4.5 speaks to the treatment of historic doors and new doors on the
historic resource. The covered porch to the rear of the property currently has a door that is
potential a historic opening. There is greater flexibility for installing a new door to a rear or
secondary wall, and the applicant has offered a solution to keep the existing door sealed to
preserve the opening. If the existing door to the rear is historic, staff recommends the applicant
preserve the door in accordance to Design Guideline 4.1 and supports the installation of the new
door to be a product of its own time.
Design Guideline 5.2 & 5.6 addresses the preservation of historic porches and balconies. The
historic house has a wraparound porch along the north and east elevations. The covered entry
steps lead to the front (north) portion of the porch and the ADA accessible ramp is proposed to
the east side of the property. This accessible entry is required by building code and integrated
into the existing porch feature. The location of the ramp is visible from Main Street but done in a
sensitive manner that respects existing character of the historic resource while providing equal
opportunity for all to enter through the front door. Details regarding the handrails and ramp
material needs to be address for Final Review. Staff finds the proposed location for the ADA
accessible ramp to be appropriate but recommends the accessible ramp be installed in a way that
minimizes damage to the historic fabric and is reversible.
Design Guideline 9.5 & 9.6 refers to the guidelines dealing with relocation and new foundation
details. The applicant proposes underpin the historic resource to repair/replace the existing
historic foundation and excavate a crawlspace. The historic resource will remain in the same
location and no changes to grade are proposed. The applicant will be required to provide structural
and financial assurances, and the new work on the foundation must appear similar in design and
materials to the historic foundation. The proposed lightwells for the subgrade crawlspace must
not interfere with character defining features and have minimized curb heights of 6” or less.
Design Guideline 11.4 calls for the design of the front elevation of the new structure to be similar
in scale to the historic resource and lower in appearance. The front elevation of the new addition
is taller than the historic resource but does not read as a primary mass because it is recessed
behind the historic resource. The applicant also points out the grade changes between the front
and rear of the property which contributes to the difference in height. Staff finds that the proposed
design maintains the historic resource as the primary structure on the lot and the subdivided
massing of the addition into multiple roof forms help break up the appearance of scale.
In summary, staff recommends approval with conditions as outlined in the draft resolution and
staff memo.
41
Page 17 of 24
26.412.060 Commercial Design Review. Except as outlined below, this Section applies to all
commercial, lodging and mixed-used development within the City requiring a building permit. All
development shall be reviewed pursuant to the Character Area in which it is located. The
Community Development Director shall assign an appropriate Character Area to properties
subject to Commercial Design Review that are not located within a defined Character Area.
Review Criteria.An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with
conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria:
A. Guidelines and Standards
1. The Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines
are met as determined by the appropriate Commission. The Standards and
Guidelines include design review criteria that are to be used to determine whether
the application is appropriate.
2. All applicable standards in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design
Standards and Guidelines shall be met unless granted a Variation pursuant to
Section 26.412.040.D, Variations.
3. Not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the
guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. The applicable Commission must:
a) determine that a sufficient number of the relevant guidelines are adequately
met in order to approve a project proposal;
b) weigh the applicable guidelines with the practicality of the measure.
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: General - Site Planning and Streetscape MET NOT MET
1.1 All projects shall provide a context study.
1.2 All projects shall respond to the traditional street grid.
1.3 Landscape elements (both hardscape and softscape) should complement the surrounding context, support
the street scene, and enhance the architecture of the building.
1.4 Where there is open space on a site, reinforce the traditional transition from public space, to semi-public
space to private space.
1.6 When a building facade is set back, define the property line. Review the context of the block when
selecting an appropriate technique. Examples include:
• A fence which is low in height and mostly transparent so as to maintain openness along the street.
• Landscaping, though it may not block views of the architecture or a Pedestrian Amenity space. Hedgerows
over 42 inches are prohibited.
• Benches or other street furniture.
MET
MET
Review Criteria for 611 W. Main Street
The applicant is requesting a Conceptual Major Develoment Reivew for detached addition.
Since it is located in the Main Street Historic District, the design must meet applicable design standards and guidelines.
MET
MET
CONDITION
42
Page 18 of 24
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: General - Alleyways MET NOT MET
1.7 Develop alley facades to create visual interest.
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: General - Parking MET NOT MET
1.9 Minimize the visual impacts of parking.
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: General - Building Mass, Height, and Scale MET NOT MET
1.10 A new building should appear similar in scale and proportion with buildings on the block.
1.11 A minimum building height difference of 2 feet from immediately adjacent buildings is required.
1.12 On lots larger than 6,000 square feet, break up building mass into smaller modules.
1.13 Development adjacent to a historic landmark should respond to the historic resource.
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: General - Roofscape MET NOT MET
1.18 The roofscape should be designed with the same attention as the elevations of the building.
1.19 Use materials that complement the design of the building facade.
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: General - Materials and Details MET NOT MET
1.22 Complete and accurate identification of materials is required.
1.23 Building materials shall have these features:
• Convey the quality and range of materials found in the current block context or seen historically in the
Character Area.
• Convey pedestrian scale.
• Enhance visual interest through texture, application, and/or dimension.
• Be non-reflective. Shiny or glossy materials are not appropriate as a primary material.
• Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen’s climate.
• A material with an integral color shall be a neutral color. Some variation is allowed for secondary materials.
1.24 Introducing a new material, material application, or material finish to the existing streetscape may be
approved by HPC or P&Z if the following criteria are met:
• Innovative building design.
• Creative material application that positively contributes to the streetscape.
• Environmentally sustainable building practice.
• Proven durability.
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: General - Lighting, Serice and Mechancial Areas MET NOT MET
1.26 The design of light fixtures should be appropriate to the form, materials, scale, and style of the building.
1.27 Trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located along an alleyway where one exists, and screened
from view with a fence of door.
1.28 Design trash and recycle areas thoughtfully and within the style of the building, with the goal of enhancing
pedestrian and commercial uses along alleys.
1.29 Delivery areas shall be located along an alleyway where one exists.
1.30 Mechanical equipment, ducts, and vents shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or co-
located on the roof.
1.31 Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes.CONDITION
1.32 Transformer location and size are dictated by City and utility company standards and codes.
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
CONDITION
MET
MET
CONDITION
CONDITION
43
Page 19 of 24
Relevant Commercial Design Guidelines:
1.1 All projects shall provide a context study.
The study should include the relationship to adjacent structures and streets through photographs,
streetscape elevations, historic maps, etc.
1.2 All projects shall respond to the traditional street grid.
A building shall be oriented parallel to the street unless uncharacteristic of the area. Refer to
specific chapters for more information.
Buildings on corners shall be parallel to both streets.
1.3 Landscape elements (both hardscape and softscape) should complement the
surrounding context, support the street scene, and enhance the architecture of the
building.
This applies to landscape located both on-site and in the public right-of-way.
High quality and durable materials should be used.
Early in the design process, consider stormwater best management practices as an integral part
of the landscape design process.
1.4 Where there is open space on a site, reinforce the traditional transition from public
space, to semi-public space to private space.
This may be achieved through a fence, a defined walkway, a front porch element, covered
walkway, or landscape.
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: Main Street Historic District - Building Placement MET NOT MET
3.1 Orient a new building or addition to the street.
3.2 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time.
3.3 The imitation of older historic styles blurs the distinction between old and new buildings and is discouraged.
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: Main Street Historic District - Building Proportion,
Scale, Height and Width MET NOT MET
3.4 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings in the district.
3.5 Roof forms should be in character with surrounding historic buildings.
3.6 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to historic buildings in the district.
3.8 Design an addition to be to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
3.9 When planning an addition to the building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street.
Commercial Design Standards/Guidelines: Main Street Historic District - Details & Materials MET NOT MET
3.10 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the Victorian-era residences seen
traditionally on Main Street.
3.11 Architectural details should reinforce the historic context of the block.
3.12 Primary materials should be wood or brick.
3.13 Secondary materials should relate to the historic context.MET
3.14 Use roofing materials that are similar in appearance to those seen historically.
MET
CONDITION
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
MET
44
Page 20 of 24
1.6 When a building facade is set back, define the property line. Review the context of
the block when selecting an appropriate technique. Examples include:
A fence which is low in height and mostly transparent so as to maintain openness along the street.
Landscaping, though it may not block views of the architecture or a Pedestrian Amenity space.
Hedgerows over 42 inches are prohibited.
Benches or other street furniture.
1.7 Develop alley facades to create visual interest.
Use varied building setbacks and/or changes in material to reduce perceived scale.
1.9 Minimize the visual impacts of parking.
All on-site parking shall be accessed off an alley where one is available.
Break up the massing of the alley facade, especially when garage doors are present.
Consider the potential for future retail use accessed from alleys and the desire to create a safe and
attractive environment for cars and people.
If no alley access exists, access should be from the shortest block length.
Screen surface parking and avoid locating it at the front of a building. Landscaping and fences are
recommended.
Consider a paving material change to define surface parking areas and to create visual interest.
Design any street-facing entry to underground parking to reduce visibility. Use high quality materials
for doors and ramps and integrate the parking area into the architecture.
1.10 A new building should appear similar in scale and proportion with buildings on the
block.
1.11 A minimum building height difference of 2 feet from immediately adjacent buildings
is required.
The height difference shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide.
The height difference should reflect the range and variation in building height in the block.
This may be achieved through the use of a cornice, parapet or other architectural articulation.
1.12 On lots larger than 6,000 square feet, break up building mass into smaller modules.
A street level front setback to accommodate Pedestrian Amenity in accordance with the Pedestrian
Amenity Guidelines may be an appropriate method to break up building mass.
Building setbacks, height variation, changes of material, and architectural details may be
appropriate techniques to vertically divide a building into modules.
1.13 Development adjacent to a historic landmark should respond to the historic
resource.
A new building should not obscure historic features of the landmark.
A new large building should avoid negative impacts on historic resources by stepping down in scale
toward a smaller landmark.
Consider these three aspects of a new building adjacent to a landmark: form, materials and
fenestration.
When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource.
45
Page 21 of 24
When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those
used historically on the site, and use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of
pedestrian scale.
When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size, shape, and
proportion to those of the historic resource.
1.18 The roofscape should be designed with the same attention as the elevations of the
building.
Consolidate mechanical equipment, including solar panels, and screen from view.
Locate mechanical equipment toward the alley, or rear of a building if there is no alley access.
Use varied roof forms or parapet heights to break up the roof plane mass and add visual interest.
1.19 Use materials that complement the design of the building facade.
Minimize the visual impact of elevator shafts and stairway corridors through material selection and
placement of elements.
Provide drawings that identify the palette of materials, specifications for the materials, and location
on the proposed building as part of the application.
Physical material samples shall be presented to the review body. An onsite mock-up prior to
installation may be required.
1.22 Complete and accurate identification of materials is required.
Provide drawings that identify the palette of materials, specifications for the materials,
and location on the proposed building as part of the application.
Physical material samples shall be presented to the review body. An onsite mock-up prior
to installation may be required.
1.23 Building materials shall have these features:
Convey the quality and range of materials found in the current block context or seen historically in
the Character Area.
Convey pedestrian scale.
Enhance visual interest through texture, application, and/or dimension.
Be non-reflective. Shiny or glossy materials are not appropriate as a primary material.
Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen’s climate.
A material with an integral color shall be a neutral color. Some variation is allowed for secondary
materials.
1.24 Introducing a new material, material application, or material finish to the existing
streetscape may be approved by HPC or P&Z if the following criteria are met:
Innovative building design.
Creative material application that positively contributes to the streetscape.
Environmentally sustainable building practice.
Proven durability.
1.26 The design of light fixtures should be appropriate to the form, materials, scale, and
style of the building.
46
Page 22 of 24
1.27 Trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located along an alleyway where one
exists, and screened from view with a fence or door.
Screening fences shall be 6 feet high from grade (unless prohibited by the Land Use Code), shall
be of sound construction, and shall be no less than 90% opaque, unless otherwise varied based
on a recommendation from the Environmental Health Department.
1.28 Design trash and recycle areas thoughtfully and within the style of the building, with
the goal of enhancing pedestrian and commercial uses along alleys.
1.29 Delivery areas shall be located along an alleyway where one exists.
Shared facilities are highly encouraged.
1.30 Mechanical equipment, ducts, and vents shall be accommodated internally within
the building and/or co-located on the roof.
Screen rooftop mechanical equipment and venting with a low fence or recess behind a parapet wall
to minimize visual impacts.
1.31 Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes.
Group and discreetly locate these features.
Use screening and materials that compliment the architecture.
1.32 Transformer location and size are dictated by City and utility company standards
and codes.
Place a transformer on an alley where possible.
Provide screening for any non-alley location.
3.1 Orient a new building or addition to the street.
All buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern.
Generally, do not set a structure forward of any historic resources within the block. Alignment of
front setbacks is preferred. An exception may be made on a corner lot.
3.2 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time.
Consider these three aspects of a new building; form, materials, and fenestration. A project should
relate strongly to the historic district in at least two of these elements. Departing from one of these
categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response.
o When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic district.
o When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish
to those used historically in the district and use building materials that contribute to a
traditional sense of human scale.
o When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size
and shape to those in the historic district.
3.3 The imitation of older historic styles blurs the distinction between old and new
buildings and is discouraged.
Overall, details should be modest in character.
47
Page 23 of 24
3.4 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic
buildings in the district.
Subdivide larger masses into smaller modules that are similar in size to the historic buildings in the
historic district.
Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic district.
Use secondary structures to break up mass of buildings. These are most appropriately located
along alleyways.
3.5 Roof forms should be in character with surrounding historic buildings.
Roof forms should be simple.
If applicable, gable ends should be oriented toward the street.
Carefully consider roof eaves, orientation of ridgelines, roof pitch, dormers, and other features as
a way to either create compatibility or differentiate a new building or addition.
3.6 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to historic buildings in the district.
The primary plane of the front elevation should not appear taller than historic structures.
3.7 Clearly define the primary entrance to a new building with a front porch or similar
feature.
The front porch should be functional, and used as the means of access to the front door.
A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally.
3.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
An addition that is lower, or similar in height to the existing building, is preferred.
3.9 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic
alignments on the street.
Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings may align at approximately the same height.
An addition should not be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered or
obscured.
Detach building mass along alleyways, similar to the pattern of traditional shed development.
3.10 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the Victorian-
era residences seen traditionally on Main Street.
These include windows, doors, and porches.
Overall, details should be modest in character.
3.11 Architectural details should reinforce the historic context of the block.
Consider how detailing can be used to create relationships between new and old buildings while
still allowing for current architectural expression.
Consider scale, location, and purpose of historic detailing to inform new designs.
It is inappropriate to imitate historic details.
3.12 Primary materials should be wood or brick.
Alternate primary materials may be considered on a case-by-case basis depending on the
historic context of the block.
48
Page 24 of 24
3.13 Secondary materials should relate to the historic context.
More variety is acceptable for secondary materials if a relationship to the historic palette can be
demonstrated.
Stone should be limited to the foundation.
3.14 Use roofing materials that are similar in appearance to those seen historically.
Staff Findings: The applicable sections of the commercial design guidelines are as follows:
General (site planning and streetscape, alleyways, parking, building mass, height, scale,
roofscape, materials and details, lighting, service and mechanical areas) and Main Street Historic
District (building placement, details and materials).
Staff finds Design Guideline 1.30, 1.31 & 1.32 regarding mechanical equipment, utility
connections and transformers. The proposed design shows increased residential usage in the
form of seven affordable housing units. New mechanical equipment and upgrades to utility
connections and the transformer are expected. Staff recommends the applicant provide additional
details and locations for these upgrades to ensure locations and clearances needed are met.
Working with additional City Departments is recommended.
Design Guideline 3.14 speaks to appropriate roofing material in the Main Street Historic District.
The applicant proposes to use a membrane standing seam roofing material with a snow fence
along the edges of the roof. When looking at the overall design of the addition, it relates to form
and fenestration found on the historic resource and in the historic district. Membrane roofing
material is found on new structures in the Main Street Historic District and is considered
appropriate for the detached addition in the district.
In summary, staff finds the proposed design meets all relevant design criteria for new structures
in the Main Street Historic District and recommends approval with conditions listed in the draft
resolution and staff memo.
49
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit A.2
Setback Variations Criteria
Staff Findings
26.415.110.C: Variations:
Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create
development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what
would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards.
1. The HPC may grant variations of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow:
a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks;
b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between
buildings;
c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage;
d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic
properties.
2. In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation:
a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or
b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural
character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic
district.
Staff Finding:
This historic property along Main Street has a strong visual presence with large cottonwood trees
located towards the front of the lot. The proposed design maintains the historic location and visible
green space as seen from Main Street while concentrating the new development towards the rear
of the lot. Covered parking for all seven units will be accessed from the alley, and living space is
concentrated on the second and third floors of the proposed addition. The applicant seeks a 5’
reduction of the rear yard setback so the new addition will sit on the rear property line. Parking
studies indicate proper clearances and access can be achieved for this location. The placement
2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance:MET NOT MET DOES NOT
APPLY
a.) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or
b.) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural
character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district.
MET
Review Criteria for 611 W. Main Street
As a historically designated property, HPC may grant dimensional variations of the Land Use Code to allow for development in the side, rear and front
setbbacks and the distance required between detached structures. The applicant is requesting Setback Variations for the detached addition and a
dimensional variation for the distance between the new construction and the historic resource.
MET
Summary of Review Criteria for Setback Variation Request
26.415.110.C - Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create
development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be requried by the
underlying zoning's dimensional standards.
50
Page 2 of 2
of the new addition to the rear of the lot provides a larger distance between the historic resource
and the detached new addition, which was a condition for restudy expressed by HPC at the
previous hearing. Since this proposal triggers relocation, the applicant also requests a front yard
setback variation to memorialize the location of the entry steps that currently sit in the front yard
setback.
Lastly, the applicant requests a dimensional variation for the minimum distance required between
detached structures on a single lot. The Mixed-Use (MU) zone district requires a 10’ distance
between structures. The proposed addition is 7’-3” from the historic resource when measured
from the exterior walls and 5’-3” when measured from the eaves. The applicant is requesting for
a 2’-9” reduction for the placement of the new addition.
Staff finds that the request for the rear and front yard setback variations both meet the criteria
because they mitigate adverse impacts to the historic resource and provide adequate space for
activities in the alley. Staff finds the request to reduce the distance between the historic resource
and the revised addition meets the criteria and creates a physical and visual separation that helps
preserve the historic structure.
51
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit A.3
Relocation Criteria
Staff Findings
26.415.090.C: Relocation:
Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the
following standards:
1. It is considered a noncontributing 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 historic, architectural
or aesthetic relationships 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;
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.
26.415.090.C - Relocation. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is
determined that it meets any one of the following standards:MET NOT MET DOES NOT
APPLY
1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect
the character of the historic district; or N/A
2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located
and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or .N/A
3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or N/A
4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the
character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the
integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural
or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and
Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met:MET NOT MET DOES NOT
APPLY
1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the
physical impacts of relocation;CONDITION
2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and N/A
3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and
preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial
security.
CONDITION
MET
Review Criteria for 611 W. Main Street
The applicant is requesting temporary relocation of the
historic resource to excavate put on a new foundation.
Summary of Review Criteria for Relocation Request
52
Page 2 of 2
Staff Finding:
According to the historic Sanborn Maps, the historic house is in its original location. The applicant
plans to underpin the historic home to make necessary repairs/replacement of existing foundation
that is in poor condition and excavate a crawlspace underneath. The historic resource will remain
in its current location on the lot. Underpinning the historic building triggers Relocation criteria and
must comply with Design Guidelines 9.1 by providing the appropriate structural assessment and
financial assurances. No changes to historic grade conditions are proposed and the new
foundation details must appear similar in design and materials to historic conditions to meet
Design Guideline 9.5. Staff finds all relevant criteria for relocation are met with this proposal.
53
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit A.4
Growth Management Review Criteria
Staff Findings
26.470.080, General Review Standards
All development applications for growth management review shall comply with the following standards:MET NOT MET
DOES
NOT
APPLY
Sufficient Allotments. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to
Subsection 26.470.040(b). Applications for multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.110(a) shall be required to meet this
standard for the growth management years from which the allotments are requested.
MET
Development Conformance. The proposed development conforms to the requirements and limitations of this Title, of the zone district or a site
specific development plan, any adopted regulatory master plan, as well as any previous approvals, including the Conceptual Historic Preservation
Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Planned Development - Project Review approval, as applicable.
MET NOT MET
Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project.
Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy
and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services.
MET
Affordable Housing Mitigation.
(1) For commercial development, sixty-five percent (65%) of the employees generated by the additional commercial net leasable space, according to
Section 26.470.050(b), Employee generation rates, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing.
(2) For lodge development, sixty-five percent (65%) of the employees generated by the additional lodge pillows, according to Section 26.470.050(b),
Employee generation rates, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. For the redevelopment or expansion of existing lodge uses,
see section 26.470.100(h).
(3) For the redevelopment of existing commercial net leasable space that did not previously mitigate (see Section 26.470.070(e)), the mitigation
requirements for affordable housing shall be phased at fifteen percent (15%) beginning in 2017, and by three percent (3%) each year thereafter until
sixty-five percent (65%) is reached.
N/A
Unless otherwise exempted in this Chapter, when a change in use between development categories is proposed, the employee mitigation shall be
based on the use the development is converting to. For instance, if a commercial space is being converted to lodge units, the mitigation shall be based
on the requirements for lodge space.
N/A
For free-market residential development, affordable housing net livable area shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the
additional free-market residential net livable area.
N/A
For essential public facility development, mitigation shall be determined based on Section 26.470.110(d).N/A
Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including
residential occupied (RO).MET
Review Criteria for 611 W. Main Street
The HPC may approve, approve with conditions or deny and application for Growth Management Review based on the review criteria applicable to the specific type
of development.
For all affordable housing units that are being provided as mitigation pursuant to this Chapter or for the creation of a Certificate of Affordable Housing
Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540, or for any other reason:
a.The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended.
b.Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of methods outlined in this Chapter, including newly built units, buy down units,
certificates of affordable housing credit, or cash-in-lieu.
c.Affordable housing that is in the form of newly built units or buy-down units shall be located on the same parcel as the proposed development or
located off-site within the City limits. Units outside the City limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Section
26.470.110(b). When off-site units within City limits are proposed, all requisite approvals shall be obtained prior to approval of the growth management
application.
d.Affordable housing mitigation in the form of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, shall be extinguished pursuant to
Section 26.540.120, Extinguishment and Re-Issuance of a Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.050(f), Employee/Square Footage
Conversion.
e.If the total mitigation requirement for a project is less than .25 FTEs, a cash-in-lieu payment may be made by right. If the total mitigation requirement
for a project is .25 or more FTEs, a cash-in-lieu payment shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Section 26.470.110(c).
f.Affordable housing units shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100(d), Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as
defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category
designation.
g.Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above
natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430.
MET
54
Page 2 of 2
Staff Findings:
This application requests seven affordable housing allotments. According to Land Use Code
Section 26.470.030.D, no annual limit applies to affordable housing. The property is in the Mixed
Use (MU) zone district; a neighborhood of a mix of commercial, residential and mixed-use
buildings. The proposed affordable housing units are consistent with the residential uses in the
western area of Main Street. The applicant will work with APCHA to deed restrict each unit at the
category deemed appropriate by the applicant.
Regarding the availability of adequate infrastructure for the project, this application was referred
to the Utilities Department for Review. An existing transformer straddles the east property line.
Additional public infrastructure may be necessary to serve the development. Utilities is confident
that the site can accommodate any needed improvements and the applicant has indicated that
the site will comply with all requirements related to utility infrastructure.
Staff finds that the review criteria for Growth Management are met.
55
Page 1 of 1
Exhibit A.5
Special Review
Staff Findings
26.430.040.i, Special Review, Affordable housing unit standards
Staff Findings:
The minimum size requirements are not only met but exceeded by six of the seven units. One unit
in the historic resource is slightly below the minimum size mandated by APCHA but is well within
the twenty percent reduction permitted by Special Review. Community Development & APCHA
staff support this project and acknowledge the significant community benefit that seven AH units
would bring. The high level of quality of these units cannot be overstated. In addition to spacious
floor plans, tenants will have access to additional exterior storage (approximately 18 sq. ft. per
unit and 36 sq. ft. for the undersized unit), seven on-site parking spaces (one for each unit, which
is well above the minimum requirement of 60 percent), and plenty of outdoor common area/open
space and access to private patios and porches. Staff finds that these amenities contribute to the
general livability of the development and a variation from the minimum unit size requirement for
the one unit is appropriate.
It should be noted that in response to the feedback received at the previous HPC hearing, the
applicant has reduced the total number of affordable housing units from nine to seven. The 4-
bedroom basement below the historic resource is no longer proposed. In the rear addition, the
applicant has reduced the number of units from six to four. As a result, the number of FTEs
generated drops from 21 to 14.75. Reducing the number of FTEs adds a significant financial cost
to the project. The applicant hopes to take advantage of the potential code amendments related
to affordable housing which may provide additional financial relief.
Whenever a Special Review is conducted to reduce the required percentage that the finished floor
level of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, a
recommendation from the Housing Board shall be obtained and all of the following criteria shall be
met. The criteria below address only the affordable housing units that require a variation from the
standard.
MET NOT MET
DOES
NOT
APPLY
The proposed affordable housing units are designed in a manner that is compatible with the character
of the neighborhood.MET
The proposed amount that the affordable housing units are below natural or finished grade, whichever
is more restrictive, is an appropriate response to unique site constraints, such as topography.MET NOT MET
The proposed affordable housing units are designed in such a manner which exceeds the expectations
of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, and promotes the unit's general livability by
demonstrating compliance with as many of the following conditions as possible:
a.Significant storage, such as additional storage outside a unit.
b.Above average natural light, such as adding more window area than the Building Code requires.
c.Net livable unit sizes exceed minimum requirement.
d.Unit amenities, such as access to outdoor space or private patios.
MET
Review Criteria for 611 W. Main Street
56
Page 1 of 1
APCHA Standards
Unit Type Mitigation Standard
One-Bedroom 1.75 FTE/Unit
Two-Bedroom 2.25 FTE/Unit
Exhibit A.6
Certificates of Affordable Housing Review Criteria
Staff Findings
26.540.070, Review Criteria for establishing an affordable housing credit.
Staff Findings:
The minimum size requirements are not only met but exceeded by six of the seven units. Special
Review is required for one unit within the historic resource. This unit would be one bedroom and
a total of 632 sq. ft. in size- 68 sq. ft. below the minimum required (APCHA prescribes a minimum
of 700 sq. ft. for a one-bedroom AH unit). Pending approval of Special Review regarding this unit,
staff finds that the criteria for Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit are met. Granting 14.75
FTEs is appropriate.
It should be noted that in response to the feedback received at the previous HPC hearing, the
applicant has reduced the total number of affordable housing units from nine to seven. The 4-
bedroom basement below the historic resource is no longer proposed. In the rear addition, the
applicant has reduced the number of units from six to four. As a result, the number of FTEs
generated drops from 21 to 14.75. Reducing the number of FTEs imposes a significant financial
cost to the project. In response to the reduction in FTEs, the applicant hopes to take advantage
of the potential code amendments for affordable housing at some point in the future.
An Affordable Housing Credit may be established by the HPC if all of the
following criteria are met. The proposed units do not need to be constructed
prior to this review.
MET NOT MET
DOES
NOT
APPLY
The proposed affordable housing unit(s) comply with the review standards of
Section 26.470.070.4(a-d).MET
The affordable housing unit(s) are not an obligation of a Development Order
and are not otherwise required by this Title to mitigate the impacts of
development.
MET NOT MET
PROPOSED CERTIFICATES
One-bedroom 2 Units x 1.75
FTEs
3.5
Two-bedroom 5 Units x 2.25
FTEs
11.25
Total Proposed 14.75FTEs
57
Page 1 of 2
Exhibit A.7
Transportation & Parking Management
Staff Findings
26.515.060.C, Transportation & Parking Management
Staff Findings:
Pursuant to the Land Use Code, 60 percent of the parking requirement is required within the MU
Zone District, or 4.2 spaces must be met on site. The applicant is meeting 100 percent of the
parking requirement by providing seven on-site spaces, including one van accessible space. All
parking will be accessed through the alleyway at the rear of the property.
In addition to the on-site parking, the applicant has completed the Transportation Impact Analysis
(TIA) for this project and plans to provide a range of Mobility Measures to satisfy the requirements
of the Engineering and Parking Departments. At this point, the applicant has indicated that a car-
sharing service will be made available to tenants, for one year. Although the TIA generally requires
mobility measures to be provided for the life of the project, Engineering, Transportation and
Community Development all agree that providing a TDM for one year meets the applicability of
this project. Engineering and Transportation have submitted a joint letter supporting this mobility
measure for one year. Additionally, bicycle parking will be provided on-site, and other
infrastructure improvements will be made to encourage alternative transportation choices. The
TIA is subject to change and will be assessed at building permit. Staff included a condition in the
Resolution prohibiting Mobility Measures from occupying any of the off-street parking spaces on
the property.
Staff finds that this application meets the minimum parking and TIA requirements for the property.
All development and redevelopment projects are required to submit a Mobility Plan, which
shall include and describe a project’s mitigations for TIA and Parking Requirements. The
Engineering, Transportation, and Community Development Department staff shall determine
whether the project conforms to this Chapter requirements using the following standards:MET NOT MET
DOES NOT
APPLY
Project TIA and the resulting mitigation program meets requirements for exempt, minor or
major project categories as outlined in the TIA Guidelines.MET
Project provides full mitigation for the Parking Requirements pursuant to Section 26.515.050.MET NOT MET
The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district.MET
If existing development is expanded, additional Parking Requirements shall be provided for
that increment of the expansion.N/A
If existing development is redeveloped, on-site parking deficits may not be maintained unless
all parking, or at least 20 spaces are provided as Public Parking.N/A
Review Criteria for 611 W. Main Street
26.515.060.C - Transportation & Parking Management Review Criteria
58
Page 2 of 2
59
Strengthening Community Through Workforce Housing
611 W. Main Affordable Housing Project Page 1
LAND USE REFERRAL MEMO
TO: Kevin Rayes, Planner, City of Aspen Community Development Dept.
FROM: Mike Kosdrosky, Executive Director
DATE: June 29, 2020
RE: 611 West Main Street (Revised Application)
PROJECT:
The applicant for 611 West Main Street seeks approval for an affordable workforce housing
project using the City of Aspen’s Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit program.
PROPOSAL:
The applicant revised the original proposal by reducing the number of affordable workforce
housing units from nine to seven. The property remains a 100% affordable workforce housing
rental project.
DISCUSSION:
Six of the seven units are larger than APCHA’s minimum square foot recommendations, except
for Unit 3, located in the landmark, which is approximately 651 square feet, or almost 49 square
feet (7%) below the 700 square foot recommended minimum for a one-bedroom unit under
APCHA.1 However, under previous “Employee Housing Guidelines” an applicant could request
1 APCHA’s minimum square foot (SF) standards for new affordable workforce housing are recommendations only.
They are not mandatory.
Exhibit B- Referall Comments
60
611 W. Main Affordable Housing Project Page 2
up to a 20% reduction in minimum square footage for consideration of additional livability,
storage, and amenities, including location and site design.2
Based on the applicant’s revised submittal, the project is 100% parked without the need for off-
street parking. Along with seven covered onsite parking spaces, the project offers seven
external storage units, a bike/ski repair room, and a trash enclosure along the alley.
Estimated Housing Credit Values
The applicant requests the use of the Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits for the project.
The City’s Land Use Code requires the following mitigation by unit type:
Unit Type Mitigation Standard
Dormitory 1.00 FTE/Unit
Studio 1.25 FTE/Unit
One-Bedroom 1.75 FTE/Unit
Two-Bedroom 2.25 FTE/Unit
Three-Bedroom 3.00 FTE/Unit
The seven units would establish the following number of Full-Time Equivalents (FTE’s):
One-bedroom: 2 units X 1.75/Unit = 3.50 FTE’s
Two-bedroom: 5 units X 2.25/Unit = 11.25 FTE’s
TOTAL = 14.75 FTE’s
Applicant’s Request for Category 2 Credits at a Category 4 Deed Restricted Designation
Under Section 26.540 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, Certificates of Affordable Housing
Credit, a credit can be established for Category 4 or lower units (i.e. at any Category with
established cash-in-lieu rates). In this case, the applicant requests the establishment of 14.75
FTE’s at Category 2 credits but at a Category 4 deed restriction (Cat 4 household
income/maximum rent). However, this is not possible under the City’s Land Use Regulations,
according to the Community Development Department.
Moving forward, APCHA would like to see policy improvements made to Section 26.540 of the
Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit program. Any policy/administrative changes should
allow the program to 1) create more competition in the planning and development of housing
credits and 2) allow more flexibility and incentives for developers to plan, build, and profit from
affordable workforce housing serving all target income levels. Because of the documented
shortage of new affordable workforce housing, APCHA encourages the City to make policy
improvements to the existing Housing Credits program a high priority.
2 APCHA’s “Employee Housing Guidelines” were renamed “APCHA Regulations” in May 2020. This will require the
City to update its Land Use Code to reflect the name change and any references to it.
Exhibit B- Referall Comments
61
611 W. Main Affordable Housing Project Page 3
Current APCHA Rental Inventory Supply
There are 1382 rental units under APCHA’s regulatory jurisdiction (Figure 1). As the Greater
Roaring Fork Regional Housing Study of 2019 noted, there is a significant housing deficit in the
Aspen/Snowmass area (subregion) for households making between 60% and 160% of Area
Median Income (AMI), often called the “missing middle.” With respect to APCHA’s existing
rental inventory, there are few rental options for households with an income level over 130% of
Pitkin County AMI.
Figure 1: Rental Units by Category/Area Median Income (AMI) Served
Option to Convert Units to Ownership from Rental
The applicant proposes a rental project, but also wants the option to convert it to for-sale
ownership in the future, if necessary.
From a policy perspective, APCHA prefers that this project remain rental in perpetuity given the
need for more affordable workforce rental housing. However, should the applicant want to
convert the project from rental to ownership in the future for any reason, APCHA recommends:
•Formal approval by the City and APCHA prior to conversion from rental to ownership;
•Selling each unit individually through the APCHA’s sales and lottery process;
•Creating an HOA with governing documents under the Colorado Common Interest
Ownership Act (CCIOA); and
•A capital reserve study and seed fund in accordance with APCHA’s published policies and
regulations.
Exhibit B- Referall Comments
62
611 W. Main Affordable Housing Project Page 4
These recommendations are intended to maintain affordability, reduce the risk of passing on
the potential cost of deferred maintenance onto future owners, and ensure that potential
future buyers into the project will have access to conventional financing terms.
PROJECT RECOMMENDATION:
APCHA strongly supports the 611 W. Main Street affordable workforce housing project under the
Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit program. The project’s location, onsite amenities, and
bedroom sizes are excellent overall and better than most affordable housing projects reviewed.
Furthermore, the project could provide much needed rental inventory for the upper-moderate to
medium-income households currently underserved in the community.
Additionally, APCHA asks the City of Aspen to consider the following:
•Establish the right to 14.75 FTEs of Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit at the same
category as the units are deed restricted at.
•Make policy revisions to the Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit program a high
priority with the goals of 1) creating more competition in the planning and development
of housing credits and 2) allowing developers more flexibility and incentives to plan,
build, and profit from affordable workforce housing across all target income levels
served by APCHA.
•Require that any units built include a refrigerator/freezer, stove/oven with hood,
dishwasher, and washer/dryer.
•Require that all bedrooms have a closet.
•Require that the historic “landmark” structure be brought up to the standards stated in
Part III, Section 6.B. of the APCHA Regulations.
•Require minimum occupancy for all deed restricted rental units.
•Require APCHA to provide the deed restriction to be signed and recorded prior to
Certificate of Occupancy (CO). The deed restriction shall include all language pertinent
to maintain the project within APCHA’s inventory in perpetuity.
•If applicant or owner(s) of project chooses to convert the rental units to for-sale ownership
units at a future date, it must provide the City and/or APCHA a ninety (90) day Right of First
Refusal to purchase the units at the deed-restricted price.
•If applicant or owner(s) of project requests to convert project from rental to for-sale
ownership, they must go through the City’s land use review process and APCHA’s land use
referral process.
Exhibit B- Referall Comments
63
DRC Comments – 611 W. Main Street
6/24/2020
Engineering – PJ Murray and Carly McGowan
TIA
- Application calls for Car-to-Go membership to be provided to residents for the first
year. Per the Code, membership shall be provided in perpetuity.
Conceptual Drainage Report
- The proposed project has been modified slightly (from 9 units to 7, from basement to
no basement, etc). Update the drainage narrative to reflect the changes.
- Detention will only be required if runoff cannot be routed to the City’s system,
otherwise detention is not required for existing or new impervious area.
Conceptual Drainage Plan
- Sheet A1.03 shows pervious pavers in the covered parking area. Pavers under a
covered area do not provide a stormwater treatment benefit unless impervious area is
routed to the subbase. Clarify design intent in final drainage report submitted at
building permit.
- If final design requires pipes in the ROW, a permanent encroachment will be required.
Also, adequate separation from the Si Johnson ditch would need to be approved.
- Some of the BMP options proposed appear to have significant tree impacts. Final
location and excavation depths for the BMPs will need to be approved by the Parks
Department and minimize tree impacts or pay mitigation fees. A BMP with the least
impact to trees will be preferred.
- Drywells are the BMP of last resort, please explore all other solutions before a drywell
is chosen, including green roofs and tree canopy credit.
- At building permit, show bike parking dimensions comply with Association of
Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals standards.
- The existing trash enclosure in the transformer utility easement shall be removed.
- Call out dimensions for the transformer easement. If current easement dimension
requirements are not met, the easement will need to be updated, 3’ to sides and rear
and 10’ to front.
- Provide turning motions for a pickup or 4Runner type vehicle.
- New sidewalk and curb and gutter are required for this project. The curb and gutter
shall be poured with minimal impacts to the existing tree roots. Sidewalk shall be COA
floating sidewalk detail at a minimum unless better alternative is found to protect the
trees.
- Access to the Si Johnson Ditch will need to be maintained in the sidewalk, where the
current grate is in the sidewalk.
- Show the Si Johnson Ditch on the planset. If only a prescriptive easement exists, the
easement shall be formalized for the section that falls on this private property.
Easement dimensions are 10’ to either side of the ditch from centerline.
- The design with minimal impacts to the ditch is preferred. Earth retention systems,
structures, stormwater treatment, etc. will not be permitted in the ditch easement.
Exhibit B- Referall Comments
64
Aspen San. District
Service is contingent upon compliance with the District’s rules, regulations, and
specifications, which are on file at the District office.
ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure that clear water connections
(roof, foundation, perimeter, patio drains) are not connected to the sanitary sewer
system.
On-site utility plans require approval by ACSD.
Oil and Sand separators are required for parking garages and vehicle maintenance
establishments.
Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells.
Elevator shafts drains must flow thru o/s interceptor
Old service lines must be excavated and abandoned at the main sanitary sewer line
according to specific ACSD requirements and prior to soil stabilization. Soil nails are not
allowed in ROW.
Below grade development may require installation of a pumping system. Above grade
development shall flow by gravity.
One tap is allowed for each building. Shared service line agreements may be required
where more than one unit is served by a single service line.
Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or right of ways.
Landscaping plans will require approval by ACSD where soft and hard landscaping may
impact public ROW or easements to be dedicated to the district.
All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. Peg in our office
can develop an estimate for this project once detailed plans have been made available to
the district.
Where additional development would produce flows that would exceed the planned
reserve capacity of the existing system (collection system and or treatment system) an
additional proportionate fee will be assessed to eliminate the downstream collection
system or treatment capacity constraint. Additional proportionate fees would be
collected over time from all development in the area of concern in order to fund the
improvements needed.
Where additional development would produce flows that would overwhelm the planned
capacity of the existing collection system and or treatment facility, the development will
be assessed fees to cover the costs of replacing the entire portion of the system that
would be overwhelmed. The District would fund the costs of constructing reserve
capacity in the area of concern (only for the material cost difference for larger line).
Exhibit B- Referall Comments
65
Glycol heating and snow melt systems must be designed to prohibit and discharge of
glycol to any portion of the public and private sanitary sewer system. The glycol storage
areas must have approved containment facilities.
The district will be able to respond with more specific comments and requirements once
detailed building and utility plans are available.
Parks – David Radeck
Parks and WELS comments:
1. This project must adhere to Ordinance 17, Series 2018, WELS, Water Efficient
Landscaping Standards.
2. A tree permit will be required for all tree removals.
3. Tree protection fencing with signage will be required at the driplines of trees and
must be inspected and approved by the Parks Department.
4. No activity is allowed within the TPZ (Tree Protection Zone). There is also no storage of
material or machinery allowed in these areas.
5. A floating sidewalk design will be required by the Parks Department along Main
Street.
6. If curb and gutter will be required, curb will need to be poured back against existing
undisturbed soil – NO framing will be allowed.
7. Specific distances for soil disturbance from trunks of individual trees have been
determined by the City Forester and must be adhered to.
Environmental Health – Liz Chapman
Project as proposed meets code requirements of 120 square feet for trash and recycling.
Exhibit B- Referall Comments
66
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
August 28, 2020
Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
130 So. Galena St.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: 611 West Main Street - Conceptual HP, Relocation, Affordable Housing Credits, and GMQS
Dear HPC and Community Development staff,
Please accept our revised application for Conceptual Major Development, Relocation (for underpinning
only), Affordable Housing Credits, and Growth Management for the landmark located at 611 West Main
Street. We have gone back to the drawing board to address the City and Board comments provided on
May 27, 2020.
Revision Overview
The number of units is reduced from 9 units to 7 units, and the floor area is below the maximum allowed
in the Mixed Use zone district. The units are well over the minimum size (a range of 55sf – 383sf larger
than required) dictated by the Housing Guidelines with the exception of one unit in the landmark that is
671 sf when the requirement is 700 sf. The smaller unit in the landmark is located in the historic addition
and has a private front porch, extra exterior storage and outdoor amenity space. The unit is only 29sf
smaller than required, which seems to be a reasonable trade-off to avoid a non-historic addition to the
landmark. All of the units have a private entrance, exterior storage, and an assigned parking space where
the Land Use Code requires only 60% of the units be parked onsite.
Figure 1 (left): proposed revision; Figure 2 (right) May 27, 2020 proposal
67
611 West Main
HPC Conceptual Review/ GMQS Review
Background
The subject property is a contributing building within the Main Street Historic District. It was designated
in 1995 (Ordinance 34-1995) and is one of the few Dutch Colonial Revival style residential buildings within
Aspen. A character defining feature of this style is the gambrel roof.
The property was constructed in 1886 for Harry G. Koch, owner of Koch lumber yard. Koch also owned
two other homes in the same block as 611 W. Main. It is in its original location and is largely unaltered –
even the historic fence remains (with repairs over the years). A small addition was added to the west
elevation between 1890 and 1893 during the period of significance. The addition is considered historic
and is proposed to remain.
Proposal
The landmark is proposed to be converted to a 100% affordable housing rental project with 3 housing
units in the landmark. A basement is not financially viable considering the reduction in housing units and
is no longer proposed as livable space. A crawl space to house mechanical, and a window well for access
to the mechanical room, is proposed. The foundation is failing – the landmark needs to be underpinned
to repair the foundation and provide a viable crawl space for mechanical equipment.
A detached 3 story building is proposed along the alley to provide 4 deed restricted housing units. The
voluntary rental units are proposed to be designated all Category 4 and housing credit certificates are
requested. The original proposal was for 21 FTEs and the revised proposal is for 14.75 FTEs.
Figure 3: 1890 Sanborn Map Figure 4: 1893 Sanborn Map showing west addition.
68
611 West Main
HPC Conceptual Review/ GMQS Review
Table 1: Proposed Units
units beds ground 2nd 3rd exterior
storage
size min.
size
smallest
allowed
delta deck stacked ftes cat.
1
landmark
2 424 531 x 18 973 900 720 73.48 y y 2.25 4
2
landmark
1 467 334 x 18 820 700 560 119.6 y y 1.75 4
3
landmark
1 633 x x 38 671 700 560 -29.16 y n 1.75 4
4 2 79 617 585 18 1,299 900 720 398.78 n y 2.25 4
5 2 79 619 586 18 1,302 900 720 401.79 n y 2.25 4
6 2 79 619 584 18 1,300 900 720 399.78 n y 2.25 4
7 2 79 617 585 18 1,299 900 720 398.79 n y 2.25 4
total 12 1839 2806 585 146 7,663 14.75
The proposed overall floor area is 8,765 sf which is below the maximum of up to 11,250 sf for affordable
housing projects at 1.25:1 through Special Review. Seven covered onsite parking spaces, seven storage
units, a bike/ski repair room, and a trash enclosure that meets City size requirements are provided along
the alley. The project proposes to use the existing transformer that sits partially on the property – service
and capacity has been preliminarily verified by City Electric.
Only one unit in the historic building is slightly less
than the minimum size mandated by APCHA but it
is all well within the permissible 20% reduction
that is subject to approval by the APCHA Board.
The unit, shown in Figure 5, is 632.84 sf of net
livable space, 670.84 sf including exterior storage,
where 700 sf is required. The unit is very livable
with ample closet space, a washer/dryer, full
kitchen and generous bathroom. An extra-large
storage unit, a private deck/front porch, shared
outdoor space, and a covered parking space are
proposed.
Setback variations are requested for the rear yard
and distance between buildings. The second and
third floors of the new building are at the 0’ lot
line, and the ground level is open carport (5’ is
required). A rear yard setback pushes the
development toward the alley and away from the
landmark. The distance between buildings has
been significantly increased from the May 27th
application and is 7’3” measured wall to wall, and
about 5’ 3” measured to the eaves (10’ is
required).
Figure 5: Detail of proposed 1-bedroom unit (landmark #3) that is slightly smaller than the
minimum, but is well within the allowed 20% reduction of unit size.
69
611 West Main
HPC Conceptual Review/ GMQS Review
We look forward to walking HPC through the design process and to answer any questions. Please contact
me if you would like more information to complete your review. sara@bendonadams.com or 970-925-
2855.
Kind Regards,
Sara Adams, AICP
Principal
BendonAdams, LLC
Attachments [revised August 28, 2020]:
1 - Conceptual HP Design Guidelines.
2 – Relocation to underpin landmark and repair/replace foundation.
3 – Growth Management and Establishment of Affordable Housing Credits.
4 – Setback variance for distance between buildings and rear yard.
5 – Parking and Transportation.
6 – Special Review for Affordable Housing Units. Request withdrawn.
7 – Vicinity map.
8 - Land Use application.
9 - Signed fee agreement.
10 - Pre-application summary.
11 - Proof of ownership.
12 – Authorization to represent.
13 – HOA form.
14 - List of owners within 300’.
15 – Stamped survey
16 – Renderings.
17 – Materials
18 – Drainage letter.
19 - Drawing set.
70
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review
26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a historic
district. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired,
relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic
District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development
Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application
for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order.
b) The procedures for the review of conceptual development plans for major development
projects are as follows:
(1) The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for
conceptual or final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete, the
applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled.
Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c.
(2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's
conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report
will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a
recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons
for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the
evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic
Preservation Design Guidelines.
Response: Applicable Design Guidelines are addressed below:
Streetscape
1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood
or district.
• Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood.
• Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is
typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful
open space visible from the street.
Response – The proposed landmark remains in its original location. The proposed new building is
significantly setback on the site and faces Main Street. The large character defining side and front yards
around the historic building are maintained in the proposal.
1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches.
When HPC input is requested, the following bullet points may be applicable.
• Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining
historic ancillary buildings or constructing new ones.
• Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add
landscape.
71
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
• Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged.
• Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas.
• Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged
on a case by case basis.
Response – No changes are proposed in the right of way unless required by Engineering and Parks
Departments. The sidewalk in front of this property, running along Main Street, is not the typical
concrete sidewalk and is expected to remain unless otherwise directed by Engineering and Parks
Departments.
1.3 Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the
original development of the site.
• Do not introduce new curb cuts on streets.
• Non-historic driveways accessed from the street should be removed if they can be relocated
to the alley.
Response – n/a.
1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual
impact.
• If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it.
• Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for
driveways on Aspen Victorian properties.
Response – All vehicular access is proposed off the alley.
1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces.
• Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a
semi-public walkway, to a semiprivate entry feature, to private spaces.
Response – The existing fence and direct walkway from sidewalk into the historic building is proposed
to remain. Access to the rear building is proposed from the alley.
1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential
projects.
• Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical
of the period of significance.
• Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install
them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example, on an Aspen
Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete,
brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks.
• The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential
properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property.
Response – A simple walkway perpendicular from the street to the front porch is proposed to remain.
The width of the walkway is about 4 feet from Main Street to the front entry.
72
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site.
• Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather
than many small unusable areas.
• Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building.
Response – Ample open space is proposed around the historic building as shown on the site plan. The front
and side yards are preserved around the landmark to support the historic building.
1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process.
• When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better
integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at
least a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be
reviewed and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal.
• Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the
historic landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site,
reduce the generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the
ground. Stormwater facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should have
minimal visual impact when viewed from the public right of way.
• Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements.
Response – Storm water design is considered as part of the new site as is positive drainage away from
the landmark. There is a large amount of permeable undeveloped open space proposed around the
landmark.
1.9 Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis.
Response – n/a.
1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could interfere
with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate.
• Site furnishings that are added to the historic property should not be intrusive or degrade the
integrity of the neighborhood patterns, site, or existing historic landscape.
• Consolidating and screening these elements is preferred.
Response – An outdoor area with grill and seating is proposed in the east side yard behind the landmark.
This area will be more developed for review as part of the Final Design application.
1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees
and shrubs.
• Retaining historic planting beds and landscape features is encouraged.
• Protect historically significant vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Removal of
damaged, aged, or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department.
• If a significant tree must be removed, replace it with the same or similar species in coordination
with the Parks Department.
73
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
• The removal of non-historic planting schemes is encouraged.
• Consider restoring the original landscape if information is available, including original plant
materials.
Response – Only a few trees are proposed to be removed, as noted on the site plan and coordinated with
the Parks Department.
1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram.
• Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not overplant a site, or install a landscape which is
overtextured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A.
In Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar
attributes.
• In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height,
sod, and low shrubs are often appropriate.
• Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more
contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the
property, in Zone C.
• Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited
patio where appropriate.
• Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the
landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building
must be honored.
• In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to
over plant either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before
the property was divided.
• Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged.
Response – Simple landscaping is proposed around the historic structures and will be more developed for
Final Review. Existing trees on the site are preserved where possible.
1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic
structures are inappropriate.
• Low plantings and ground covers are preferred.
• Do not place trees, shrubs, or hedgerows in locations that will obscure, damage, or block
significant architectural features or views to the building. Hedgerows are not allowed as
fences.
• Consider mature canopy size when planting new trees adjacent to historic resources. Planting
trees too close to a landmark may result in building deteriorate or blocked views and is
inappropriate.
• Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed.
Response – Low plants and ground cover, and some low shrubs will be used around the landmark to not
obscure historic characteristics and to avoid accelerating deterioration of historic material.
1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting.
74
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
• Landscape and pathway lighting are not permitted in Zone A (refer to diagram) on Aspen
Victorian properties unless an exception is approved by HPC based on safety considerations.
• Landscape, driveway, and pathway lighting on AspenModern properties is addressed on a
case-by-case basis.
• Landscape light fixtures should be carefully selected so that they are compatible with the
building, yet recognizable as a product of their own time.
• Driveway lighting is not permitted on Aspen Victorian properties.
• Landscape uplighting is not allowed.
Response – Landscape lighting is not proposed at this time.
1.15 Preserve original fences.
• Fences which are considered part of the historic significance of a site should not be moved,
removed, or inappropriately altered.
• Replace only those portions of a historic fence that are deteriorated beyond repair.
• Replacement elements must match the existing.
Response – The existing fence is proposed to remain and be repaired as needed.
1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence.
Response – n/a.
1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution.
• Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve
the character of a property.
Response – n/a.
1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type
and style.
• The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of
significance.
• A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations.
• Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen
Victorian landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed on the
site.
• A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen
Victorian properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including
transparency, a low height, and a simple design. When this material is used, posts should be
simply detailed and not oversized.
Response – n/a.
1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street.
75
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
• A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature.
• For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the
picket.
• For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate,
proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
• Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment.
Response – n/a.
1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important
features of a designated building.
• A privacy fence 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.
• A privacy fence should allow the building corners and any important architectural features that
are visible from the street to continue to be viewed.
• All hedgerows (trees, shrub bushes, etc.) are prohibited in Zones A and B.
Response – n/a.
1.21 Preserve original retaining walls
• Replace only those portions that are deteriorated beyond repair. Any replacement materials
should match the original in color, texture, size and finish.
• Painting or covering a historic masonry retaining wall or covering is not allowed.
• Increasing the height of a retaining wall is inappropriate.
Response – n/a.
1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized.
• All wall materials, including veneer and mortar, will be reviewed on a case by case basis and
should be compatible with the palette used on the historic structure.
Response – n/a.
1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be
reviewed on a case by case basis.
Response – The site is not proposed to be regraded. The historic relationship of the building to grade is
proposed to be restored based on historic photographs of the building on Main Street.
1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations.
• An analysis of the historic landscape and an assessment of the current condition of the
landscape should be done before the beginning of any project.
• The key features of the historic landscape and its overall design intent must be preserved.
76
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
Response – No changes are proposed in the right of way along Main Street, which has a significant
pattern of cottonwood trees lining the street.
1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built
features.
• Do not add features that damage the integrity of the historic landscape.
• Maintain the existing pattern of setbacks and siting of structures.
• Maintain the historic relationship of the built landscape to natural features on the site.
• All additions to these landscapes must be clearly identifiable as recent work.
• New artwork must be subordinate to the designed landscape in terms of placement, height,
material, and overall appearance. Place new art away from significant landscape features.
• Avoid installing utility trenches in cultural landscapes if possible.
Response –The location of the landmark is not proposed to change.
1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system.
• Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation.
• Minimize the visual impact of new parking.
• Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically.
Response – Parking is located off the alley.
1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site.
• Protect established vegetation during any construction.
• If any tree or shrub needs to be removed, replace it with the same or similar species.
• New planting should be of a species used historically or a similar species.
• Maintain and preserve any gardens and/or ornamental planting on the site.
• Maintain and preserve any historic landscape elements.
Response – Existing trees are preserved and protected in this proposal where possible.
Restoration
Materials
2.1 Preserve original building materials.
• Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place.
• Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments,
steps and foundations, should be preserved.
• Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place.
Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity.
77
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
• Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the
weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy.
2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically.
• Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone
that was not historically painted shall not be painted.
• If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent
time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods.
• Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the
building.
2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary
surfaces.
• If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be
wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish.
• Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those
should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the
replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent.
2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials.
• Original building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic
materials.
2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate.
• Regardless of their character, new materials obscure the original, historically significant
material.
• Any material that covers historic materials may also trap moisture between the two layers.
This will cause accelerated deterioration to the historic material which may go unnoticed.
2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material.
• Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material.
Response – Original material with integrity will be restored or repaired. Any replacement materials will
match the original as described in Guideline 2.3. Original building materials will not be covered. The
preservation plan will be further refined for Final Design review.
Windows
3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window.
• Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions,
sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows.
• Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them.
78
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
• Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration
glass for the repair.
3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall.
• Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate.
• Do not change the size of an original window opening.
3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design.
• If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the
sash has divided lights, match that characteristic as well.
3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original.
3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening.
• Changing the window opening is not permitted.
• Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past.
3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original
window.
• A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back
to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually
only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual
window from the surrounding plane of the wall.
• The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal.
3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed.
• Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear or secondary walls.
• New windows should be similar in scale to the historic openings on the building, but should in
some way be distinguishable as new, through the use of somewhat different detailing, etc.
• Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a façade.
• Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character defining façade will negatively affect
the integrity of a structure.
3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than 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. A storm window should not include muntins unless
79
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
necessary for structure. Any muntin should be placed to match horizontal or vertical divisions
of the historic window.
Response – Original windows will be repaired and refinished as needed and determined in the field. Any
windows that need to be altered to meet egress requirements for the housing units will be identified for
review during Final Review.
Doors
4.1 Preserve historically significant doors.
• Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door,
door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and
flanking sidelights.
• Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances.
• If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that
the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic
position.
• Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible.
4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening.
• Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height.
4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic
appearance.
4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original
door or a door associated with the style of the building.
• A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement.
• A historic door or screen door from a similar building also may be considered.
• Simple paneled doors were typical for Aspen Victorian properties.
• Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic
evidence can support their use.
4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed.
• Place new doors in any proposed addition rather than altering the historic resource.
• Greater flexibility in installing a door in a new location may be considered on rear or secondary
walls.
• A new door in a new location should be similar in scale and style to historic openings on the
building and should be a product of its own time.
• Preserve the historic ratio of openings to solid wall on a façade. Significantly increasing the
openings on a character defining façade negatively affects the integrity of a structure.
80
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of replacing a historic
entry door.
• Match the material, frame design, character, and color of the primary door.
• Simple features that do not detract from the historic entry door are appropriate for a new
storm door.
• New screen doors should be in character with the primary door.
4.7 Preserve historic hardware.
• When new hardware is needed, it must be
in scale with the door and appropriate to
the style of the building.
• On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any
modern elements such as entry keypads.
Response – Original primary door openings will be
preserved on the street facing and side facades. Two
of the three housing units located in the historic
building use existing doors. The rear unit in the
landmark relocates the door as shown at right. The
door is located on the rear of the landmark and is not
visible to the public. Relocating the door provides a
more efficient layout for this accessible unit and
meets required ADA clearances. If preferred by HPC,
we are open to keeping the existing door in its current
location but making it inoperable.
Porch
5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony.
• Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material
and spacing of balusters.
• Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate.
5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details.
• Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate.
5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate.
• Reopening an enclosed porch or balcony is appropriate.
5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail.
Figure 1: Demolition plan for rear unit showing existing door and
proposed door location.
81
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
• Match original materials.
• When reconstructing an original porch or balcony without historic photographs, use
dimensions and characteristics found on comparable buildings. Keep style and form simple
with minimal, if any, decorative elements.
5.5 If new steps are to be added, construct them out of the same primary materials used on the
original, and design them to be in scale with the porch or balcony
• Steps should be located in the original location.
• Step width should relate to the scale of entry doors, spacing between posts, depth of deck, etc.
• Brick, red sandstone, grey concrete, or wood are appropriate materials for steps.
5.6 Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly where
visible from the street.
• If handrails or guardrails are needed according to building code, keep their design simple in
character and different from the historic detailing on the porch or balcony.
Response – The prominent wrap around porch is a character defining feature of this property and is
proposed to remain and to be preserved/repaired as needed. Handrails are not proposed at this time as
they would interrupt the reading of this significant architectural feature. An accessible ramp is proposed
to the east of the historic porch. Railings are proposed to be simple and minimal to not distract from the
historic porch. A ramp is proposed to the back porch to access the accessible rear unit in the landmark.
Architectural Details
6.1 Preserve significant architectural features.
• Repair only those features that are deteriorated.
• Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized
preservation methods whenever possible.
• On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to
preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain
heavily deteriorated material.
6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize
damage to the original material.
• Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of
replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration.
6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced.
• Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features.
• If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be
wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish.
82
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original
designs.
• The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a
misrepresentation of the building’s heritage.
• When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence,
develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and
maintains similar scale, proportion and material.
6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts.
• Where scars on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other
physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in
character to related buildings.
• Using ornate materials on a building or adding new conjectural detailing for which there is no
documentation is inappropriate.
Response – Architectural details will be repaired as needed.
Roof
7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof.
• Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen
from the street.
• Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing.
• Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration.
7.2 Preserve the original eave depth.
• Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource.
• AspenModern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key
character defining features of the architectural style.
7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices.
• Skylights and solar panels are generally not allowed on a historic structure. These elements
may be appropriate on an addition.
7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color.
• Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures.
• Locate vents on non-street facing facades.
• Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible.
7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional.
• Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists.
83
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
7.6 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character.
• A new dormer is not appropriate on a primary, character defining façade.
• A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline
and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building.
• The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic
building.
• While dormers improve the livability of upper floor spaces where low plate heights exist, they
also complicate the roof and may not be appropriate on very simple structures.
• Dormers are not generally not permitted on AspenModern properties since they are not
characteristics of these building styles.
7.7 Preserve original roof materials.
• Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is
necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities
and use a color that is similar to that seen historically.
7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original.
• 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.
• Flashing should be tin, lead coated copper, galvanized or painted metal and have a matte, non-
reflective finish.
• Design flashing, such as drip edges, so that architectural details are not obscured.
• A metal roof is inappropriate for an Aspen Victorian primary home but may be appropriate for
a secondary structure from that time period.
• A metal roof material should have a matte, non-reflective finish and match the original
seaming.
7.9 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof.
• Adding ornamental cresting, for example, where there is no evidence that it existed, creates a
false impression of the building’s original appearance, and is inappropriate.
7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible.
• Downspouts should be placed in locations that are not visible from the street if possible, or in
locations that do not obscure architectural detailing on the building.
• The material used for the gutters should be in character with the style of the building.
84
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
Secondary Historic Addition
8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved.
• When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These
include its materials, roof form, windows, doors, and architectural details.
• If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. The
determination of significance is based on documentation of the construction date of the
outbuilding and/or physical inspection. A secondary structure that is related to the period of
significance of the primary structure will likely require preservation.
Response – The roof is proposed to be replaced as required with similar cedar shake material that is fire
rated and is a natural color, similar to the original.
Figure 2: Photograph of building dated 1992.
8.2 Preserve a historic secondary building as a detached structure.
• Any proposal to attach a secondary structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
• The position and orientation of the structure
• should be maintained except when HPC finds that an alternative is the best preservation
option.
85
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
• Some AspenModern properties incorporated garages and carports into the architecture. This
pattern should be maintained.
8.3 Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not in keeping
with its original character as a utilitarian structure.
• Most secondary structures are basic rectangular solids, with simple finishes and no
ornamentation.
8.4 When adding on to a secondary structure, distinguish the addition as new construction and
minimize removal of historic fabric.
• Additions to a secondary structure must be smaller in footprint than the original building and
lower in height. Maintaining the overall mass and scale is particularly important.
• Do not alter the original roof form.
• An addition must be inset from the corners of the wall to which it attaches.
8.5 Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary.
8.6 Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings.
• If an original carriage door exists, and can be made to function for automobile use, this is
preferred.
8.7 If a new garage door is added, it must be compatible with the character of the historic structure.
• The materials and detailing should be simple.
8.8 Adaptation of an obsolete secondary structure to a functional use is encouraged.
• The reuse of any secondary structure should be sensitive so that its character is not lost.
10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right.
10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed.
• For Aspen Victorian properties, HPC generally relies on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps to
determine which portions of a building are historically significant and must be preserved.
• HPC may insist on the removal of non-historic construction that is considered to be detrimental
to the historic resource in any case when preservation benefits or variations are being
approved.
Response – The secondary historic addition first appears on the 1893 Sanborn Map and is considered to
be part of the period of significance of the property. It is proposed to be preserved and converted into
a housing unit.
86
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
New Building
Building Placement
11.1 Orient the new building to the street.
• AspenVictorian buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the
traditional grid pattern.
• AspenModern alignments shall be handled case by case.
• Generally, do not set the new structure forward of the historic resource. Alignment of their
front setbacks is preferred. An exception may be made on a corner lot or where a recessed
siting for the new structure is a better preservation outcome.
Response – The new building is located behind the landmark and along the alley. It is parallel to the lots
lines which is consistent with the traditional grid pattern.
Mass and Scale
11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front
porch.
• The front porch shall be functional, and used as the means of access to the front door.
• A new porch must be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally.
Response - The historic front porch is proposed to remain and will be the entrance to one of the proposed
housing units.
11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings on
a parcel.
• Subdivide larger masses into smaller “modules” that are similar in size to the historic buildings
on the original site.
• Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic resource.
Response – The new building has been completely redesigned to a gable roof structure with four
repeating gables behind the landmark. The gable form is prominent along Main Street and is typical to
residential Victorian era buildings. The repeating gables reduce the overall size of the new building in
comparison to the large horizontal mass of the landmark.
87
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building.
• The primary plane of the front shall not appear taller than the historic structure.
Response – The front elevation is taller than the historic building. There is a grade change between the
alley and Main Street that results in the addition sitting taller than the landmark, while both structures
are the similar height – 27’9” (landmark) and 27’10 ¼” (new building). The design team has tried to
minimize height while maximizing the number of housing units and meeting parking requirements
onsite. HPC is asked to balance affordable housing units and historic preservation in this application.
Both community goals are important, and it is challenging to meet all design guidelines while providing
much needed housing units walking distance to downtown.
11.5 The intent of the historic landmark lot split is to remove most of the development potential from
the historic resource and place it in the new structure.
• This should be kept in mind when determining how floor area will be allocated between
structures proposed as part of a lot split.
Figure 3 (top): proposed north elevation facing landmark and Main Street. Figure 4 (bottom): original proposal from May 27, 2020 hearing.
88
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
Main Street Historic District Guidelines
Response – A historic lot split is not proposed on this property; however, a new detached building is
proposed that removes almost all development pressure from the landmark into the new construction.
No additions are proposed to the landmark, only one lightwell to access the crawl space and mechanical
area, and accessible ramps are proposed as required by Building Code.
11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its own time.
• Consider these three aspects of a new building; form, materials, and fenestration. A project
must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from
the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary
design response.
• When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource.
• When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to
those used historically on the site and use building materials that contribute to a traditional
sense of human scale.
• When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size and
shape to those of the historic resource.
Response – The new building relates to building forms along Main Street. The materials and fenestration
are still being developed. Windows are all vertically oriented to reference the historic windows in the
landmark. The primary exterior material for the new building is wood (see A2.04).
11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged.
• This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings.
• Overall, details shall be modest in character.
Response – The new building is clearly a product of its own time while simultaneously supporting and
highlighting the historic landmark. Details are subtle in nature and materials are durable to limit capital
expenses for the residents.
3.1 Orient a new building or addition to the street.
• All buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern.
• Generally, do not set a structure forward of any historic resources within the block. Alignment
of front setbacks is preferred. An exception may be made on a corner lot.
Response – The new building is parallel to lot lines and maintains the traditional grid pattern.
3.2 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its own time.
• Consider these three aspects of a new building: form, materials, and fenestration. A project
should relate strongly to the historic district in at least two of these elements. Departing from
one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response.
89
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
o When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic
district.
o When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and
finish to those used historically in the district and use building materials that contribute
to a traditional sense of human scale.
o When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size
and shape to those in the historic district.
Response – See discussion on previous page, Guideline 11.6.
3.3 The imitation of older historic styles blurs the distinction between old and new buildings and is
discouraged.
• Overall, details should be modest in character.
Response – See discussion on previous page, Guideline 11.7.
3.4 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings in
the district.
• Subdivide larger masses into smaller modules that are similar in size to the historic buildings in
the historic district.
• Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic district.
• Use secondary structures to break up mass of buildings. These are most appropriately located
along alleyways.
Response – See discussion on previous page, Guideline 11.3. The proposed new building is located along
the alleyway and is broken up by the repeating gable roof forms.
3.5 Roof forms should be in character with surrounding historic buildings.
• Roof forms should be simple.
• If applicable, gable ends should be oriented toward the street.
• Carefully consider roof eaves, orientation of ridgelines, roof pitch, dormers, and other features
as a way to either create compatibility or differentiate a new building or addition.
Response – The new building has repeating gable roofs that are oriented toward the street. The
landmark is a gambrel roof form, which is unique to the Main Street Historic District. The gable roof
form blends into the context of the overall neighborhood and highlights the importance and uniqueness
of the landmark’s Dutch Colonial style.
3.6 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to historic buildings in the district
• The primary plane of the front elevation should not appear taller than historic structures.
Response – The front elevation of the new building is behind the landmark but about 7’ measured wall
to wall (not including the historic eaves). The property has a significant grade change from Main Street
to the alley – the landmark and the new building are similar height, but the higher grade at the alley
makes the new building appear taller.
90
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
3.7 Clearly define the primary entrance to a new building with a front porch or similar feature.
• The front porch should be functional, and used as the means of access to the front door.
• A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally.
Response – See discussion on previous page, Guideline 11.2.
3.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building.
• An addition that is lower, or similar in height to the existing building is preferred.
Response – See discussion on previous page, Guideline 11.3.
3.9 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the
street.
• Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings may align at approximately the same
height .
• An addition should not be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered or
obscured.
• Detach building mass along alleyways, similar to the pattern of traditional shed development.
Response – See discussion on previous page, Guideline 11.2. The new building is detached and located
along the alley.
3.10 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the Victorian-era
residences seen traditionally on Main Street.
• These include windows, doors and porches.
• Overall details should be modest in character.
Response – Building components are similar to those found along Main Street in the Victorian era
residences.
3.11 Architectural details should reinforce the historic context of the block.
• Consider how detailing can be used to create relationships between new and old buildings while
still allowing for current architectural expression.
• Consider scale, location, and purpose of historic detailing to inform new designs.
• It is inappropriate to imitate historic details.
Response – Architectural details are being developed and will relate to the historic buildings along Main
Street and the landmark at 611. The location and style of the new building reinforces the traditional
gable forms along Main Street.
3.12 Primary materials should be wood or brick.
• Alternate primary materials may be considered on a case by case basis depending on the historic
context of the block.
Response – The proposed material for the new building is wood.
91
Exhibit 1
Conceptual Design Review (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
3.13 Secondary materials should relate to the historic context.
• More variety is acceptable for secondary materials if a relationship to the historic palette can
be demonstrated.
• Stone should be limited to the foundation.
Response – Secondary material is concrete found on the ground level parking area that relate to the
utilitarian materials found on historic alley structures and also is a low maintenance material for the
housing units.
3.14 Use roofing materials that are similar in appearance to those seen historically.
Response – A metal roof is proposed that is similar to the material historically found on alley buildings.
92
Exhibit 2
Relocation
611 West Main St. (8.28.2020)
Exhibit 2
Relocation
26.415.090. Relocation of designated historic properties.
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.
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:
1. It is considered a noncontributing 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 historic,
architectural or aesthetic relationships 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;
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.
Response – The historic landmark is proposed to be stabilized with underpinning to replace the failing
foundation. A crawl space for mechanical equipment is proposed with a small window well on the west
façade to provide access to the crawl space. The new foundation will provide structural stability ensuring
the future of the landmark.
9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in
place may help to preserve the historic fabric.
• This activity will require the same level of documentation, structural assessment, and posting of
financial assurances as a building relocation.
93
Exhibit 2
Relocation
611 West Main St. (8.28.2020)
Response – Underpinning in place to stabilize the building while the foundation is repaired is proposed.
9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
• In general, on-site relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those
in a historic district.
• In a district, where numerous adjacent historic structures may exist, the way that buildings were
placed on the site historically, and the open yards visible from the street are characteristics that
should be respected in new development.
• Provide a figure ground study of the surrounding parcels to demonstrate the effects of a building
relocation.
• In some cases, the historic significance of the structure, the context of the site, the construction
technique, and the architectural style may make on-site relocation too impactful to be
appropriate. It must be demonstrated that on-site relocation is the best preservation alternative
in order for approval to be granted.
• If relocation would result in the need to reconstruct a substantial area of the original exterior
surface of the building above grade, it is not an appropriate preservation option.
Response – n/a.
9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation.
• It must face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. In general, a forward
movement, rather than a lateral movement is preferred. HPC will consider setback variations
where appropriate.
• A primary structure may not be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in
front of it.
• Be aware of potential restrictions against locating buildings too close to mature trees. Consult with
the City Forester early in the design process. Do not relocate a building so that it becomes
obscured by trees.
Response – The structure will be in its original location.
9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade.
• Raising the finished floor of the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable if needed
to address drainage issues. A substantial change in position relative to grade is inappropriate.
• Avoid making design decisions that require code related alterations which could have been avoided.
In particular, consider how the relationship to grade could result in non-historic guardrails, etc.
Response – The structure will maintain the same relationship to grade as existing. Grade will be
documented prior to relocation to ensure an accurate final grade.
9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation.
94
Exhibit 2
Relocation
611 West Main St. (8.28.2020)
• On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a
miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and
is not allowed.
• Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate.
• Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone
salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut
of the stone and design of the mortar joints.
• New AspenModern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure preservation
of the design intent.
Response – The new foundation will match the existing stone apron.
9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells.
• The size of any lightwell that faces a street should be minimized.
• Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining
features, such as front porches.
• Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a
street.
• Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” in
the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site.
Response – Only one lightwell is proposed to access the crawl space for maintenance.
9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in
moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such
buildings.
• The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the
HPC.
• During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect
existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door and
window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural
details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration.
• The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process.
Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis
and may require special conditions of approval.
• A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen.
Response – The underpinning specifics will be provided at building permit.
9.8 Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged.
95
Exhibit 2
Relocation
611 West Main St. (8.28.2020)
• Permanently relocating a structure from where it was built to a new site is only allowed for
special circumstances, where it is demonstrated to be the only preservation alternative.
Response – n/a.
96
Exhibit 3
Growth Management Review + Affordable Housing Credits (8.28.2020)
611 W. Main St.
Exhibit 3
Growth Management
Establishment of Housing Credits
Growth Management
26.470.050.B General Requirements: All development applications for growth management review
shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with conditions
or deny and application for growth management review based on the following generally applicable
criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of development:
1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed
development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi-year allotments, pursuant
to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet this standard.
Response - This application requests 7 affordable housing allotments. According to Land Use Code Section
26.470.030.D, no annual limit applies to affordable housing.
2. The proposed development is compatible with land uses in the surrounding area, as well as
with any applicable adopted regulatory master plan.
Response - The neighborhood is a mix of commercial, residential and mixed use buildings. The proposed
affordable housing units are consistent with the residential uses in the western section of Main Street.
3. The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone district.
Response - The development conforms to the Mixed Use Zone District.
4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission
approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the Planned Development – Project
Review approval, as applicable.
Response - Conceptual HPC review is requested as part of this application.
5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees generated by
the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection 26.470.100.A, Employee
generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of affordable housing. The employee generation
mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at Category
4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant
may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation. If an applicant chooses to use
a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate
shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the
Certificate.
Response - Not applicable.
97
Exhibit 3
Growth Management Review + Affordable Housing Credits (8.28.2020)
611 W. Main St.
6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above natural or
finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%)
of the additional free-market residential net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or above
natural or finished grade, whichever is higher.
Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, and be
restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as
amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation.
Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be
deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied. If an applicant chooses to
use a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit as mitigation, pursuant to Chapter 26.540, such Certificate
shall be extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.540.90 Criteria for Administrative Extinguishment of the
Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.100 Employee/Square Footage Conversion.
Response - Not applicable.
7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or such additional
demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project. Public infrastructure
includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities,
drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit services.
Response - The property is already developed, and a transformer straddles the east property line.
Additional public infrastructure will be upgraded as needed by the applicant.
26.470.070.4 Affordable housing. The development of affordable housing deed-restricted in accordance
with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines shall be approved, approved with
conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the following criteria:
a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. A
recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be required for this standard.
The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority may choose to hold a public hearing with the Board of
Directors.
Response - The proposed units comply with the APCHA Guidelines as shown below:
98
Exhibit 3
Growth Management Review + Affordable Housing Credits (8.28.2020)
611 W. Main St.
Table 1: Proposed Affordable Housing Units (net livable area)
units beds ground 2nd 3rd exterior
storage size min.
size
smallest
allowed delta deck stacked ftes cat.
1
landmark 2 424.14 531.34 x 18 973.48 900 720 73.48 y y 2.25 4
2
landmark 1 467.23 334.37 x 18 819.60 700 560 119.6 y y 1.75 4
3
landmark 1 632.84 x x 38 670.84 700 560 -29.16 y n 1.75 4
4 2 78.82 617.04 584.92 18 1,298.78 900 720 398.78 n y 2.25 4
5 2 78.82 618.76 586.21 18 1,301.79 900 720 401.79 n y 2.25 4
6 2 78.82 618.75 584.21 18 1,299.78 900 720 399.78 n y 2.25 4
7 2 78.82 617.04 584.93 18 1,298.79 900 720 398.79 n y 2.25 4
total 12 1839.5 2805.96 584.93 144 7,663.06 14.75
Each unit has assigned storage in the carport and interior laundry room. A bike/ski repair room is
proposed in the carport and bike racks are located on property. A common outside area is proposed.
Most of the units are well over the minimum size allowed; however, one unit(#3 above) the landmark
is just shy of the minimum size for a 1-bedroom. A reduction is requested for this unit.
Criteria to grant a reduction to the minimum net livable square footage is addressed below.
Permitted Adjustments to Net Minimum Livable Square Footage
The approval of the city or county of Net Minimum Livable square footage of affordable
housing units for construction or conversion must be obtained prior to the issuance of a
building permit. Any adjustment is subject to the approval of the city or county.
1. Permitted Reduction of Square Footage
Net Minimum Livable Square Footage may be reduced by the city or county based on the
specific criteria identified below, and if the permit applicant sufficiently demonstrates that
construction requires accommodation for physical conditions of the property or in
consideration of design for livability, common storage, amenities, location and site design,
including but not limited to provisions for the following:
• Significant storage space located outside the unit;
Response – An extra-large storage unit in the carport is provided for the unit.
99
Exhibit 3
Growth Management Review + Affordable Housing Credits (8.28.2020)
611 W. Main St.
• Above average natural light, i.e. more windows than required by code;
Response – The unit has above average natural light.
• Efficient, flexible layout with limited hall and staircase space;
Response – The unit that requires a slight reduction in size is a single story and minimizes
circulation spaces.
• Availability of site amenities, such as pool or proximity to park or open space;
Response – The project is located within close walking distance to Paepcke Park, the Yellow Brick
playground and downtown Aspen. Open space is provided onsite in the side yards. The project is
on Main Street near a RFTA bus stop.
• Unit location within the development, i.e. above ground location versus ground level or
below ground; and/or
Response – The unit is located on the ground level.
• Possibility that project can achieve higher density of deed restricted units with a
reduction variance.
Response – The project is able to achieve a higher density of units with a reduction in unit size.
b. Affordable housing required for mitigation purposes shall be in the form of actual newly built units
or buy-down units. Off-site units shall be provided within the City limits. Units outside the City limits
may be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.2. If the mitigation
requirement is less than one (1) full unit, a fee-in-lieu payment may be accepted by the Planning and
Zoning Commission upon a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. If the
mitigation requirement is one (1) or more units, a fee-in-lieu payment shall require City Council
approval, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.3. A Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit may be used
to satisfy mitigation requirements by approval of the Community Development Department Director,
pursuant to Section 26.540.080 Extinguishment of the Certificate. Required affordable housing may be
provided through a mix of these methods.
Response - The proposed deed restricted units are not required for mitigation purposes.
c. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more
of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This
dimensional requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430.
Response – All units are above grade.
100
Exhibit 3
Growth Management Review + Affordable Housing Credits (8.28.2020)
611 W. Main St.
d. The proposed units shall be deed-restricted as "for sale" units and transferred to qualified purchasers
according to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. The owner may be entitled to
select the first purchasers, subject to the aforementioned qualifications, with approval from the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The deed restriction shall authorize the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority or the City to own the unit and rent it to qualified renters as defined in the Affordable
Housing Guidelines established by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended. The
proposed units may be rental units, including but not limited to rental units owned by an employer or
nonprofit organization, if a legal instrument in a form acceptable to the City Attorney ensures
permanent affordability of the units. The City encourages affordable housing units required for lodge
development to be rental units associated with the lodge operation and contributing to the long-term
viability of the lodge. Units owned by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, the City of Aspen,
Pitkin County or other similar governmental or quasi-municipal agency shall not be subject to this
mandatory "for sale" provision.
Response - The applicant proposes a 100% rental project with the ability to convert to for-sale in the future.
The units are proposed to be Category 4.
e. Non-Mitigation Affordable Housing. Affordable housing units that are not required for mitigation,
but meet the requirements of Section 26.470.070.4(a-d). The owner of such non-mitigation affordable
housing is eligible to receive a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540.
Response - The affordable housing units are all voluntary units which are eligible for affordable housing
credits, addressed below.
26.470.070.5 Demolition or redevelopment of multi-family housing. The City's neighborhoods have
traditionally been comprised of a mix of housing types, including those affordable by its working
residents. However, because of Aspen's attractiveness as a resort environment and because of the
physical constraints of the upper Roaring Fork Valley, there is constant pressure for the redevelopment
of dwellings currently providing resident housing for tourist and second-home use. Such
redevelopment results in the displacement of individuals and families who are an integral part of the
Aspen work force. Given the extremely high cost of and demand for market-rate housing, resident
housing opportunities for displaced working residents, which are now minimal, will continue to
decrease.
Preservation of the housing inventory and provision of dispersed housing opportunities in Aspen have
been long-standing planning goals of the community. Achievement of these goals will serve to promote
a socially and economically balanced community, limit the number of individuals who face a long and
sometimes dangerous commute on State Highway 82, reduce the air pollution effects of commuting
and prevent exclusion of working residents from the City's neighborhoods.
The Aspen Area Community Plan established a goal that affordable housing for working residents be
provided by both the public and private sectors. The City and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority have provided affordable housing both within and adjacent to the City limits. The private
sector has also provided affordable housing. Nevertheless, as a result of the replacement of resident
housing with second homes and tourist accommodations and the steady increase in the size of the
workforce required to assure the continued viability of Aspen area businesses and the City's tourist-
based economy, the City has found it necessary, in concert with other regulations, to adopt limitations
101
Exhibit 3
Growth Management Review + Affordable Housing Credits (8.28.2020)
611 W. Main St.
on the combining, demolition or conversion of existing multi-family housing in order to minimize the
displacement of working residents, to ensure that the private sector maintains its role in the provision
of resident housing and to prevent a housing shortfall from occurring.
The combining, demolition, conversion or redevelopment of multi-family housing shall be approved,
approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on compliance with
the following requirements (see definition of demolition.):
1. Requirements for combining, demolishing, converting or redeveloping free-market multi-family
housing units: Only one (1) of the following two (2) options is required to be met when
combining, demolishing, converting or redeveloping a free-market multi-family residential
property. To ensure the continued vitality of the community and a critical mass of local working
residents, no net loss of density (total number of units) between the existing development and
proposed development shall be allowed.
a. One-hundred-percent replacement. In the event of the demolition of free-market multi-
family housing, the applicant shall have the option to construct replacement housing
consisting of no less than one hundred percent (100%) of the number of units, bedrooms and
net livable area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed-restricted as resident
occupied affordable housing, pursuant to the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category
designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Subsection 4, Affordable
housing, of this Section.
When this one-hundred-percent standard is accomplished, the remaining development on
the site may be free-market residential development with no additional affordable housing
mitigation required as long as there is no increase in the number of free-market residential
units on the parcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number originally on the parcel
shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.3, Expansion of free-market residential
units within a multi-family or mixed-use development.
b. Fifty-percent replacement. In the event of the demolition of free-market multi-family housing
and replacement of less than one hundred percent (100%) of the number of previous units,
bedrooms or net livable area as described above, the applicant shall be required to construct
affordable housing consisting of no less than fifty percent (50%) of the number of units,
bedrooms and the net livable area demolished. The replacement units shall be deed-
restricted as Category 4 housing, pursuant to the guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category
designation. Each replacement unit shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4,
Affordable housing.
When this fifty-percent standard is accomplished, the remaining development on the site may
be free-market residential development as long as additional affordable housing mitigation is
provided pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.3, Expansion of free-market residential units
within a multi-family or mixed-use project, and there is no increase in the number of free-
market residential units on the parcel. Free-market units in excess of the total number
originally on the parcel shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.7, New free-
market residential units within a multi-family or mixed-use project.
102
Exhibit 3
Growth Management Review + Affordable Housing Credits (8.28.2020)
611 W. Main St.
c. One-hundred percent affordable housing replacement. When one-hundred-percent of the
free-market multi-family housing units are demolished and are solely replaced with deed-
restricted affordable housing units on a site that are not required for mitigation purposes,
including any net additional dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.470.070.4, Affordable
Housing; all of the units in the redevelopment are eligible for a Certificate of Affordable
Housing Credit, pursuant to Section 26.540 Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit. Any
remaining unused free market residential development rights shall be vacated.
Response – The applicant proposes to provide 7 deed restricted affordable housing units. Certificates
of Affordable Housing Credit are addressed below.
Change in use
26.470.100.A Change in use. A change in use of an existing property, structure or portions of an existing
structure between the development categories identified in Section 26.470.020 (irrespective of direction),
for which a certificate of occupancy has been issued and which is intended to be reused, shall be approved,
approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission based on the general
requirements outlined in Section 26.470.080. No more than one free market residential unit may be
created through the change in use.
Response – A change in use from mixed use to multi-family residential 100% affordable housing is
proposed. Compliance with part 26.470.080 is provided above and no free market residential units are
proposed.
Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit
The project proposes 7 deed restricted Category 4 units, which equals 14.75 credits as calculated in Table
1 above. Housing credits equal to 14.75FTEs at Category 2 are requested.
26.540.070 Review criteria for establishing an affordable housing credit. An Affordable Housing Credit
may be established by the Planning and Zoning Commission if all of the following criteria are met. The
proposed units do not need to be constructed prior to this review.
A. The proposed affordable housing unit(s) comply with the review standards of Section 26.470.070.4(a-
d).
Response –These standards are addressed above.
B. The affordable housing unit(s) are not an obligation of a Development Order and are not otherwise
required by this Title to mitigate the impacts of development.
Response – The proposed units are not affected by a Development Order and are not committed to satisfy
mitigation requirements for any other development.
103
Exhibit 4
Setback Variation (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
Exhibit 4
Setback Variations
26.415.110. Benefits.
The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve
and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets
is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic
properties and districts.
Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an
important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community
asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package
of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country.
Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been
legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation
Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their
property.
Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else
in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished
by many.
Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits.
C. Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to
create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than
what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards.
1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow:
a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks;
b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings;
c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage;
d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic
properties.
2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance:
a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or
b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural
character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic
district.
Response – Setback variations for front yard, distance between buildings and rear yards are requested.
Reducing the distance between buildings from the required 10 feet to 7’3” feet (measured from face of
104
Exhibit 4
Setback Variation (8.28.2020)
611 West Main St.
wall to face of wall) allows a detached building behind the landmark and mitigates the necessity of altering
the exterior of the landmark. Reducing the rear yard setback from 5 feet to 0 feet on the second and third
floors only, pushes the new building away from the landmark.
The variation request avoids altering the historic resource. The generous side yards are maintained in the
proposal and all new development is pushed to the rear of the property, away from the landmark and from
the historic Main Street corridor.
The existing entry steps are in the original location, which sits within the front setback. A variation for the
historic condition is requested.
Figure 1: Front yard variation for historic condition: porch steps in original location. 10 ft. front setback 105
Exhibit 5
Parking/Transportation
611 West Main Street
Exhibit 5
Transportation
Transportation and Parking Management
26.515.060.C. Review Criteria. All development and redevelopment projects are required to submit a
Mobility Plan, which shall include and describe a project’s mitigations for TIA and Parking Requirements.
The Engineering, Transportation, and Community Development Department staff shall determine whether
the project conforms to this Chapter requirements using the following standards:
1. Project TIA and the resulting mitigation program meets requirements for exempt, minor or
major project categories as outlined in the TIA Guidelines.
Response – A completed TIA is attached.
2. Project provides full mitigation for the Parking Requirements pursuant to Section 26.515.050.
Response – The Land Use Code requires mitigation for 7 parking spaces – 1 space per unit.
In the Mixed Use Zone District 60% of the parking requirement, or 4.2 spaces, must be met
onsite. The remainder may be through up to 1 TIA measure or cash in lieu. The project is
able to provide 7 parking spaces, including 1 van accessible space, along the alleyway
which exceeds Code requirements for onsite parking.
3. If existing development is expanded, additional Parking Requirements shall be provided for
that increment of the expansion.
Response – n/a.
4. If existing development is redeveloped, on-site parking deficits may not be maintained unless
all parking, or at least 20 spaces are provided as Public Parking.
Response – n/a.
106
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
APPLICANT CONTACT
INFORMATION:
NAME, COMPANY,
ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL
Peak Hour Max Trips Generated MMLOS TDM Total Trips Mitigated
AM 0.8 5 0.03 5.03 0.00
There are limited MMLOS options for this site. We are open to discussing any applicable options you have for this property.
TDM
The project proposes onsite amenities. Describe the combination of amenities below. Providing a combination of creative onsite amenities
reduces the need for SOV trips throughout the day. Services within the development that will reduce the need for auto trips include grocery,
restaurant, recreation rental, dry cleaning, child care, bicycle repair stations, etc. A combination of amenities is required.
A bike repair shed is proposed onsite in the carport to encourage bike use and to discourage car use.
Project Description
In the space below provide a description of the proposed project.
Conversion of an existing landmark to 3 deed restricted AH units. A new building with 4 deed restricted units is proposed along the alley. 7
surface parking spaces are proposed. There are two 1-bedroom and five 2-bedroom units.
MMLOS
Include any additional information that pertains to the MMLOS plan in the space provided below.
Sara Adams
BendonAdams
300 S. Spring St., #202, Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-2855
sara@bendonadams.com
Summary and Narrative:
Narrative:
7/8/2020
611 West Main AH
611 West Main Street
Trip Generation
SUMMARY
Trip Mitigation NET TRIPS TO BE
MITIGATED
Click on the "Generate Narrative" Button to the right.
Respond to each of the prompts in the space provided.
Each response should cover the following:
1. Explain the selected measure.
2. Call out where the measure is located.
3. Demonstrate how the selected measure is appropriate to enhance the project site
and reduce traffic impacts.
4. Explain the Enforcement and Financing Plan for the selected measure.
5. Explain the scheduling and implementation responsibility of the mitigation measure.
6. Attach any additional information and a site map to the narrative report.
107
Provide an overview of the scheduling and implementation responsibility for the proposed transportation mitigation measures.
The car-share commitment will most likely be in place simultaneous with occupancy of the units.
Monitoring and Reporting
Provide a monitoring and reporting plan. Refer to page 17 in the Transportation Analysis Guidelines for a list of monitoring plan
requirements. Components of a Monitoring and Reporting Plan should include (1) Assessment of compliance with guidelines, (2) Results and
effectiveness of implemented measures, (3) Identification of additional strategies, and (4) Surveys and other supporting data.
The city may audit the development to ensure compliance with the commitments contained herein.
Bicycle Parking
Enforcement and Financing
Provide an overview of the Enforcement and Financing plan for the proposed transportation mitigation measures.
The enforcement and financing plan will be available for review by the City upon request.
Scheduling and Implementation Responsibility of Mitigation Measures
MMLOS Site Plan Requirements
Include the following on a site plan. Clearly call out and label each measure. Attach the site plan to the TIA submittal.
Slopes Between Back of Curb and Sidewalk
2% Slope at Pedestrian Driveway Crossings
Pedestrian Directness Factor (See callout number 9 on the MMLOS sheet for an example)
A carshare membership to car-to-go will be provided to each unit for the first year.
Provide details for the proposed bike share program participation. Bike sharing provides access to a fleet of bicycles for short trips, thus
reducing SOV travel. The successful project will provide memberships to the existing WE-cycle program. Include details on how many WE-
cycle memberships will be purchased and whether these will be made available to guests, employees, or both.
n/a. Wecycle is free now.
Include any additional information that pertains to the TDM plan in the space provided below.
we are open to other TDM options that you see as appropriate for an AH development on Main Street.
Provide details in the space provided for the proposed carshare participation. Carshare programs have been linked to increased use of
alternative transportation modes and reduced SOV trips. The successful project will provide access to Aspen’s CAR TO GO carshare program.
Trip reduction potential will depend on the level to which the development participates. Car share memberships can be provided to all
employees or residents of new developments.
108
= input= calculation
DATE:
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
APPLICANT CONTACT
INFORMATION:
NAME, COMPANY,
ADDRESS, PHONE, EMAIL
Minor
Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total
Commercial (sf)-1672.0 sf -2.62 -1.18 -3.80 -2.77 -4.15 -6.92
Free-Market Housing (Units)-1 Units -0.19 -0.48 -0.67 -0.46 -0.36 -0.82
Affordable Housing (Units)7 Units 2.52 2.73 5.25 3.43 2.80 6.23
Lodging (Units)0 Units 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Essential Public Facility (sf)0.0 sf 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
-0.29 1.08 0.78 0.20 -1.71 -1.51
Land Use Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting Trip Rate %Entering %Exiting
Commercial 2.27 0.69 0.31 4.14 0.4 0.6
Free-Market Housing 0.67 0.29 0.71 0.82 0.56 0.44
Affordable Housing 0.75 0.48 0.52 0.89 0.55 0.45
Lodging 0.25 0.57 0.43 0.31 0.52 0.48
Essential Public Facility 0.86 0.62 0.38 1.66 0.4 0.6
AM Peak Average PM Peak Average
Trips Generated
AM Peak-Hour PM Peak-Hour
TOTAL NEW TRIPS
ASSUMPTIONS
ASPEN TRIP GENERATION
Is this a major or minor project?
611 West Main Street
611 West Main AH
Net New
Units/Square Feet of
the Proposed ProjectProposed Land Use
*For mixed-use (at least two of the established land uses) sites, a 4% reduction for AM Peak-Hour and a 14% reduction for PM Peak-Hour is applied to
the trip generation.
Sara Adams
BendonAdams
300 S. Spring St., #202, Aspen, CO 81611
970-925-2855
sara@bendonadams.com
Trip Generation
7/8/2020
Instructions:
IMPORTANT: Turn on Macros: In order for code to run correctly the security settings need to be altered. Click "File"
and then click "Excel Options." In the "Trust Center"category, click "Trust Center Settings", and then click the "Macro
Settings"category. Beneath "Macro Settings" select "Enable all Macros."
Sheet 1. Trip Generation: Enter the project's square footage and/or unit counts under Proposed Land Use. The
numbers should reflect the net change in land use between existing and proposed conditions. If a landuse is to be
reduced put a negative number of units or square feet.
Sheet 2. MMLOS: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable under each of the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections.Points are
only awarded for proposed (not existing) and confirmed aspects of the project.
Sheet 3. TDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project.
Sheet 4. Summary and Narrative: Review the summary of the project's mitigated trips and provide a narrative which
explains the measures selected for the project. Click on "Generate Narrative" and individually explain each measure
that was chosen and how it enhances the site or mitigates vehicle traffic. Ensure each selected measure make sense for
Minor Development -Inside the Roundabout Major Development -Outside the Roundabout
Helpful Hints:
1. Refer to the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines for information on the use of this tool.
2. Refer to TIA Frequently Asked Questions for a quick overview.
2. Hover over red corner tags for additional information on individual measures.
3. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will not
receive credit for measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the context
of project location and future use.
Transportation Impact Analysis
TIA Frequently Asked Questions
109
= input
= calculation
5
Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points
1
Does the project propose a detached sidewalk where an attached
sidewalk currently exists? Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer
meet standard minimum widths?
No 0
2 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width greater than the standard
minimum width?No 0
3 Does the project propose a landscape buffer greater than the
standard minimum width?NA 0
0
4
Does the project propose a detached sidewalk on an adjacent block?
Does the proposed sidewalk and buffer meet standard minimum
widths?
No 0
5 Is the proposed effective sidewalk width on an adjacent block
greater than the standard minimum width?No 0
6 Is the proposed landscape buffer on an adjacent block greater than
the standard minimum width?No 0
0
7 Are slopes between back of curb and sidewalk equal to or less than
5%?Yes 0
8 Are curbs equal to (or less than) 6 inches?Yes 0
9
Is new large-scale landscaping proposed that improves the pedestrian
experience? Properties within the Core do not have ample area to
provide the level of landscaping required to receive credit in this
category.
No 0
10 Does the project propose an improved crosswalk? This measure must
get City approval before receiving credit. No 0
0
11 Are existing driveways removed from the street?No 0
12 Is pedestrian and/or vehicle visibility unchanged by new structure or
column?Yes 0
13 Is the grade (where pedestrians cross) on cross-slope of driveway 2%
or less?Yes 0
14
Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian access points from
the ROW? This includes improvements to ADA ramps or creating new
access points which prevent pedestrians from crossing a street.
No 0
15 Does the project propose enhanced pedestrian or bicyclist interaction
with vehicles at driveway areas?No 0
0
16 Is the project's pedestrian directness factor less than 1.5?Yes 0
17
Does the project propose new improvements which reduce the
pedestrian directness factor to less than 1.2? A site which has an
existing pedestrian directness factor less than 1.2 cannot receive
credit in this category.
No 0
18 Is the project proposing an off site improvement that results in a
pedestrian directness factor below 1.2?* No 0
19 Are traffic calming features proposed that are part of an approved
plan (speed humps, rapid flash)?*No 0
0
20
Are additional minor improvements proposed which benefit the
pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen
staff?
No 0
21
Are additional major improvements proposed which benefit the
pedestrian experience and have been agreed upon with City of Aspen
staff?
No 0
0
0Pedestrian Total*
MMLOS Input Page
Subtotal
SubtotalSidewalk Condition on Adjacent BlocksSidewalk Condition on Project FrontageSubtotal
Instructions: Answer Yes, No, or Not Applicable to each measure under the Pedestrian, Bike and Transit sections.
Subtotal
Subtotal
PedestriansSubtotalAdditional Proposed ImprovementsTOTAL NUMBER OF TRIPS MITIGATED:Pedestrian RoutesTraffic Calming and Pedestrian NetworkDriveways, Parking, and Access Considerations110
Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points
22 Is a new bicycle path being implemented with City approved design?No 0
23 Do new bike paths allow access without crossing a street or driveway?No 0
24 Is there proposed landscaping, striping, or signage improvements to
an existing bicycle path?No 0
25 Does the project propose additional minor bicycle improvements
which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?No 0
26 Does the project propose additional major bicycle improvements
which have been agreed upon with City of Aspen staff?No 0
0
Bicycle Parking27 Is the project providing bicycle parking?Yes 5
5
5
Category Sub.Measure Number Question Answer Points
28 Is seating/bench proposed?No 0
29 Is a trash receptacle proposed?No 0
30 Is transit system information (signage) proposed?No 0
31 Is shelter/shade proposed?No 0
32 Is enhanced pedestrian-scale lighting proposed?No 0
33 Is real-time transit information proposed?No 0
34 Is bicycle parking/storage proposed specifically for bus stop use?No 0
35 Are ADA improvements proposed?No 0
0
36 Is a bus pull-out proposed at an existing stop?No 0
37 Is relocation of a bus stop to improve transit accessibility or roadway
operations proposed?No 0
38 Is a new bus stop proposed (with minimum of two basic amenities)?No 0
0
0
Bicycles Total*
Transit Total*BicyclesModifications to Existing Bicycle PathsTransitBasic AmenitiesSubtotal
Subtotal
Enhanced AmenitiesSubtotal
Subtotal
111
Category Measure
Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT
Reductions
Will an onsite ammenities strategy be implemented?Yes
Which onsite ammenities will be implemented?Retail Servicing
Will a shared shuttle service strategy be implemented?No
What is the degree of implementation?
What is the company size?
What percentage of customers are eligible?
3 Nonmotorized Zones Will a nonmotorized zones strategy be implemented?0.00%
3.00%
Category Measure
Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT
Reductions
Will a network expansion stragtegy be implemented?
What is the percentage increase of transit network coverage?
What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips?
Will a service frequency/speed strategy be implemented?
What is the percentage reduction in headways (increase in frequency)?
What is the existing transit mode share as a % of total daily trips?
What is the level of implementation?
Will a transit access improvement strategy be implemented?
What is the extent of access improvements?
7 Intercept Lot Will an intercept lot strategy be implemented?0.00%
0.00%
Category Measure
Number Sub. Question Answer Strategy VMT
Reductions
Will there be participation in TOP?Yes
What percentage of employees are eligible?100%
Is a transit fare subsidy strategy implemented?
What percentage of employees are eligible?
What is the amount of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent)?
Is an employee parking cash-out strategy being implemented?
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a workplace parking pricing strategy implemented?
What is the daily parking charge?
What percentage of employees are subject to priced parking?
Is a compressed work weeks strategy implemented?
What percentage of employees are participating?
What is the workweek schedule?
Is an employer sponsered shuttle program implemented?
What is the employer size?
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a carpool matching strategy implemented?
What percentage of employees are eligble?
Is carshare participation being implemented?Yes
How many employee memberships have been purchased?<100
What percentage of employees are eligble?100%
Is participation in the bikeshare program WE-cycle being implemented?
How many memberships have been purchased?
What percentage of employees/guests are eligble?
Is an end of trip facilities strategy being implemented?
What is the degree of implementation?
What is the employer size?
Is a self-funded emergency ride home strategy being implemented?
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a carpool/vanpool priority parking strategy being implemented?
What is the employer size?
What number of parking spots are available for the program?
Is a private employer shuttle strategy being implemented?
What is the employer size?
What percentage of employees are eligible?
Is a trip reduction marketing/incentive program implemented?
What percentage of employees/guests are eligible?
1.29%
3.00%
4.25%
1. 22% work trips represents a mixed-used site (SF Bay Area Travel Survey). See Assumptions Tab for more detail.
Maximum Reduction Allowed in CategoryTransit System Improvements Strategies1
2
4
5
6
8
9
10
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
4.00%
Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category
Maximum Reduction Allowed in Category
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
2.00%
Bikeshare Program
0.00%
TDM Input Page
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%Commute Trip Reduction Programs StrategiesOnsite Servicing
Shared Shuttle Service
Neighborhood/Site Enhancements Strategies3.00%
0.00%
Network Expansion
Service Frequency/Speed
Transit Access Improvement
Participation in TOP
Transit Fare Subsidy
Employee Parking Cash-Out
Workplace Parking Pricing
Compressed Work Weeks
Employer Sponsored Vanpool
Carpool Matching
Carshare Program
Self-funded Emergency Ride Home
Carpool/Vanpool Priority Parking
Private Employer Shuttle
Trip Reduction Marketing/Incentive
Program
End of Trip Facilities
Cross Category Maximum Reduction, Neighborhood and Transit
Global Maximum VMT Reductions
11
12
13
14
15
21
16
17
18
19
20
Instructions TDM: Choose the mitigation measures that are appropriate for your project. Proposed TDM or
MMLOS measures should be new and/or an improvement of existing conditions. A project will not receive credit for
measures already in place. Proposed TDM or MMLOS measures should also make sense in the context of project
location and future use.
112
105
111
701
700
627
633
630
634
705
511 509
519517
605
611
617
513
616
608
503
518
518
518
505
507
501
616
616
612
604
630
634
520
513
517
120
702706
611 West Main Street - vicinity map
Historic Sites
Historic Districts
Parcel Boundary
7/18/2019, 10:12:13 AM 0 0.01 0.020.01 mi
0 0.02 0.040.01 km
1:1,128
CityofAspenGIS; City of Aspen Community Development | The CityofAspen GIS Department presents the information on this website as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information is accurate. The CityofAspen GIS Department 113
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application
PROJECT:
Name:
Location:
(Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property)
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED)___________________________________________________________
Applicant:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:_______________________________________________
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: _______________________Fax#:___________________E-mail:________________________________________________
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
Historic Designation
Certificate of No Negative Effect
Certificate of Appropriateness
-Minor Historic Development
-Major Historic Development
-Conceptual Historic Development
-Final Historic Development
-Substantial Amendment
Relocation (temporary, on
or off-site)
Demolition (total demolition)
Historic Landmark Lot Split
EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
611 West Main Street
Lots E, F, and G, Block 25, City and Townsite of Colorado
2735-124-48-003
611 West Main Street LLC
2001 N. Halsted St., #304, Chicago, IL 60614
312-479-2050 mhunt@mdevco.com
BendonAdams
300 S. Spring St., #202, Aspen CO 81611
925-2855 sara@bendonadams.com
Landmark property within the Main Street Historic District.
100% affordable housing project.
114
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
General Information
Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This
information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that
may be involved.
YES NO
Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions,
new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration?
Does the work you are planning include interior work, including remodeling,
rehabilitation, or restoration?
Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time?
In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative
Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places
Property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits?
If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in
Conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed
on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential
properties are not.)
If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for
Historical Preservation?
Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use:
Rehabilitation Loan Fund Conservation Easement Program Dimensional Variances
Increased Density Historic Landmark Lot Split Waiver of Park Dedication Fees
Conditional Uses Tax Credits
Exemption from Growth Management Quota System
115
City of Aspen Community Development Department
Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet
City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016
ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form
(Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.)
Project:
Applicant:
Project
Location:
Zone District:
Lot Size:
Lot Area:
(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:__________Proposed:_________________
Proposed % of demolition: __________
DIMENSIONS: (write N/A where no requirement exists in the zone district)
Floor Area:
Height
Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Principal Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
Accessory Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________
On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
% Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Front/Rear:
Indicate N, S, E, W Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Distance between
buildings:
Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________
Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued:
_____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________
Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
611 West Main Street
BendonAdams
611 West Main Street
MU - mixed use, Main Street Historic District
9,0009,000
116
117
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
DATE: December 20, 2018
PLANNER: Mike Kraemer, 920.2741
PROJECT NAME AND ADDRESS: 611 West Main Street
PARCEL ID# 273512448003
REPRESENTATIVE: Brian Beazley, 925-3444
DESCRIPTION:
The property at 611 West Main Street is a designated historic
property that is located within the Mixed Use (MU) Zone
District. The property contains an historic Victorian residence
that is currently in commercial use. (See 1904 Sanborn map,
lot highlighted in red, right). An historic fence also exists on
the property. The property is approximately 9,000 square feet
in size.
The applicant proposes a change in use to the property to
100% affordable housing through an interior remodel of the
existing historic building. The existing historic building would
contain 2 - 2 bedroom units and 1-1 bedroom unit. In addition,
the applicant also proposes construction of a 3-story structure
housing 6 - 2 bedroom units in a multi-family configuration
located south of the existing historic building. This building
would ideally not be attached to the historic structure. The
purpose of conversion of the property to affordable housing is
to establish Housing Credits. The property is located within
the Main Street Historic District and is afforded a 1.1:1 FAR for affordable housing specific
developments. A 1.25:1 FAR may be attained through Special Review approval.
Any alterations to the historic structure on the site, and any new construction, require a two-step design
review approval. Conceptual Review focuses on site design, height, scale, massing and proportions of
the proposed work. If the applicant proposes to excavate below the historic structure, HPC will apply
Relocation criteria requiring protection of the historic structure. HPC may consider variations to setbacks
and parking requested as Historic Preservation benefits. Final review addresses landscape, lighting,
fenestration and selection of building materials.
Currently, the on-site parking available to the property is located to the south of the historic structure.
The applicant has indicated that the new multi-family building south of the historic structure will include
parking underneath the living units to satisfy the Land Use Code parking requirements. The minimum
requirement is one space per unit. At least one onsite space would likely need to be accessible and
approximately twice the width of a standard parking space. In addition, the alley frontage will need to
include adequate trash and recycling storage and utilities.
Historic structure
footprint
118
Prior to the preparation of a recommendation to HPC, staff will refer the application to other City
Departments for comments and proposed conditions of approval. The applicant will be required to prepare
a Transportation Impact Analysis for Engineering Review.
Following are the relevant sections of the Municipal Code and details on how to move forward.
RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS:
Section Number Section Title
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures
26.410.040 Residential Design Standards Multi-Family
26.415.070.D Historic Preservation – Major Development
26.415.090 Relocation
26.415.110 Historic Preservation – Benefits
26.430 *Special Review – if project exceeds 1:1 floor area
26.470.080 General Review Standards: Affordable Housing
26.470.100.D Affordable Housing
26.515 Transportation and Parking Management
26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements
26.610 Impact Fees
26.620 School Land Dedication
26.710.180 Mixed Use (MU) Zone District
12.10.050 Space Required for Multi-Family Developments
For your convenience – links to the Land Use Code and HPC Application are below:
Land Use Code HPC Application
Historic Preservation Guidelines Commercial Design Standards Book
REVIEW BY:
• Staff for completeness of application, and recommendations.
REQUIRED LAND USE REVIEW(S):
Step 1: HPC Conceptual Major Development, Residential Design Standard Review, Special Review (if
needed), Historic Preservation Variations (if applicable), Transportation and Parking
Management, Trash and Recycling Storage. The applicant may include GMQS review for
Establishment of Affordable Housing Credits in this step if desired. Following Conceptual, HPC
will inform City Council of their decision, allowing them the opportunity to “Call-Up” any aspects
of the approval that they find require additional HPC review. This is a standard practice for all
significant projects reviewed by HPC.
Step 2: HPC Final Major Development
119
PUBLIC HEARING:
• Yes, at each review step
NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH:
• Yes, at Conceptual Review
PLANNING FEES: $3,250 deposit for ten (10) hours of staff time, at Conceptual/GMQS application
$1,950 deposit for six (6) hours of staff time at Final Review submittal.
REFERRAL FEES: Engineering - $325
APCHA - $975
Environmental Health - $975
Parks - $975
TOTAL DEPOSIT: $6,500 at Conceptual/GMQS Review and $1,950 at Final Review (additional/lesser
planning hours are billed/refunded at a rate of $325/hour; additional engineering hours over deposit are
billed at a rate of $325/hour).
APPLICATION CHECKLIST – These items should first be submitted in a paper copy.
Below is a list of submittal requirements for both HPC Conceptual and Final reviews. For Conceptual
review, all items other than those noted as Final review will need to be submitted. Final review will require
all items listed below.
A written description of the proposal (scope of work) and written explanation of how the
proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development
application and relevant land use approvals associated with the property.
Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.
A Mobility Plan, meeting the requirements of Chapter 26.515 of the Aspen Municipal
Code. Documentation showing the proposal meets all Transportation Mitigation Requirements
as outlined in the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines and Mitigation Tool, available
online at: https://www.cityofaspen.com/documentcenter/view/1781 A copy of the tool showing
trips generated and the chosen mitigation measures should be included with the application.
Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).
Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur,
consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an
ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado,
listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements,
contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for
the Development Application.
120
Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states
the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of
the applicant.
HOA Compliance form (Attached to Application)
List of adjacent property owners for both properties within 300’ for public hearing.
An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status,
certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado.
Written consent to the application from the property owner.
Proposed Site Plan.
Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their form, including their
height, massing, scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations.
(Please provide graphics identifying preliminary selection of primary exterior building materials
for Conceptual application, as outlined in Land Use Code Section 26.415.070.D.3
Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding both
properties including photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location
and extent of proposed work.
Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:
Total deposit for review of the application.
A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format.
For Final Review, the following items will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above:
Drawings of the street facing facades must be provided at ¼” scale.
Final selection of all exterior materials, and samples or clearly illustrated photographs. Samples
are preferred for the presentation to HPC.
Lighting plan and landscape plan.
Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:
121
Total deposit for review of the application.
A digital PDF copy of the complete application packet by email to
sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com.
12 sets of all graphics printed at 11x17
Disclaimer:
The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based
on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or
may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right.
122
50422681.1
730 East Durant Avenue, Second Floor, Aspen, Colorado 81611-1557
Telephone: 970.925.6300 Fax: 970.925.1181 www.shermanhoward.com
Curtis B. Sanders
Sherman & Howard L.L.C.
Direct Dial Number: 970.300.0114
E-mail: csanders@shermanhoward.com
July 19, 2019
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: 611 West Main Street, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company; Certificate of
Ownership
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am an attorney licensed by the State of Colorado to practice law.
This letter shall confirm and certify that 611 West Main Street, LLC, a Colorado limited
liability company, is the owner of certain improved real property located at 611 West Main
Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611, and legally described as follows (the "Subject Property"):
Lots E, F and G, Block 25, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of
Colorado.
The Subject Property is subject to the following matters of record:
1. Reservations and exceptions as contained in Deeds from the City of Aspen recorded
November 19, 1887 in Book 59 at Page 99 as Reception No. 21195 and recorded February 17,
1888 in Book 59 at Page 362 as Reception No. 22657.
2. Ordinance Designating as an Historic district all those Properties Abutting (on the
North and South) Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets, and all of Paepcke Park,
within the City of Aspen as set forth in instrument recorded December 9, 1976 in Book 321 at
Page 51 as Reception No. 189906.
3. Statement of Exemption from the Definition of Subdivision as set forth in instrument
recorded April 4, 1978 in Book 345 at Page 628 as Reception No. 202949.
123
2
4. Agreement by and between William Wesson, Mike Otte, Lynne Levinson and Dan
Levinson as set forth in instrument recorded November 12, 1981 in Book 417 at Page 287 as
Reception No. 237076.
5. Easement Agreement as set forth in instrument recorded August 8, 1990 in Book 626
at Page 800 as Reception No. 325089.
6. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in the Deed of Trust,
Assignment of Leases and Rents and Security Agreement dated as of March 18, 2019 between
611 West Main Street, LLC as Trustor and Loancore Capital Credit REIT LLC as Beneficiary,
recorded March 18, 2019 as Reception 654643.
7. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in the Assignment of Leases
and Rents dated as of March 18, 2019 between 611 West Main Street, LLC as Assignor and
Loancore Capital Credit REIT LLC as Assignee, recorded March 18, 2019 as Reception 654644.
8. UCC Financing Statement recorded March 18, 2019 as Reception 654644.
9. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in the Assignment of Deed of
Trust, Assignment of Leases and Rents and Security Agreement dated as of March 27, 2019
between Loancore Capital Credit REIT LLC, as Assignor and LCC Warehouse I LLC, as
Assignee, recorded March 29, 2019 as Reception 654910.
10. Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in the Assignment of
Assignment of Leases and Rents dated as of March 27, 2019 between Loancore Capital Credit
REIT LLC, as assignor and LCC Warehouse I LLC, as assignee, recorded March 29, 2019 as
Reception 654911.
11. Amendment to UCC Financing Statement recorded March 29, 2019 as Reception
654912.
This letter shall further confirm that as the owner of the Subject Property, 611 West Main
Street, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, has the right and authority to file and pursue
land use applications, variance requests, and other requests with the City of Aspen with respect
to the Subject Property.
Sincerely,
Curtis B. Sanders
124
125
126
Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius
Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web
site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to
ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic
system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral
estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County
does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners.
Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning
the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this
site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and
reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the
user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and
liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or
data obtained on this web site.
This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be
printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to
page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the
margins such that they no longer line up on the labels
sheet. Print actual size.
From Parcel: 273512448003 on 04/27/2020
Instructions:
Disclaimer:
http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com
127
ALPINE BANK
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
501 MAIN ASPEN LLC
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49503
ALDRICH PL #200 OTTAWA AVE NW
SCHWARTZ RACHEL K & MARK
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 483042603
1061 COUNTRY CLUB RD
THROM DOUGLAS H
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST
ASPEN MAIN STREET II LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
ALPINE BANK ASPEN
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
WASHBURN SERENE MARIE V
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #205
JEROME OFFICE ASPEN CO LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
EYDENBERG JOHN D & DARIN W
NEW YORK, NY 10029
1212 FIFTH AVE #16N
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
LENIO IRREV TRUST
ROME, NY 13440
737 W BLOOMFIELD ST
LORD KAREN & COURTNEY
MIAMI BEACH, FL 331403401
2301 N MERIDIAN AVE
KURKULIS PATSY & PAUL R
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #201
MCCOY CARLTON
ST HELENA , CA 94574
500 TAPLIN RD
PITKIN COUNTY
ASPEN, CO 81611
530 E MAIN ST #301
FORNELL CLARITY ELISE
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN #B-206
MENENDEZ NASRIN N REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8036
SCHULMAN WILLIAM PAUL
CHARLEVOIX, MI 49720
301 MERCER BLVD
BLEEKER STREET LLC
CORAL GABLES, FL 33156
5299 HAMMOCK DR
ASPEN MAIN STREET II LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
BRAISTED DAVID
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11442
POTTS LEAH S
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #102
DAGGS JAMES K
BASALT, CO 81621
350 MARKET ST #311
JEROME OFFICE ASPEN CO LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
PERRY IAN MICHAEL
ASPEN, CO 81611
426 E HYMAN AVE
JAS CAPITAL LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #E
SAMUEL JOSHUA MOSES
DILLON, CO 80435
PO BOX 756
WAGNER HOLDINGS CORP LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 E MAIN ST
604 WEST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
604 W MAIN ST
128
COLLINS NANCY
SAINT PETERSBURG, FL 33703
1874 OREGON AVE
WARBLE ERIC
ASPEN, CO 816128271
PO BOX 8271
LITTLE VICTORIAN CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
PO BOX 3149
HAYMAX HOTELS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
LHG HOLDING LLC
LOS ANGELES, CA 90049
11777 SAN VICENTE BLVD 9TH FL
WINGSTONE TOY COMPANY LLC
VENTURA, CA 93993
4572 TELEPHONE RD #912
GOLDEN ALEXANDRA SEP PROP TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST PH B
NIX ROBERT JR
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 3694
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
TOMS CONDO LLC
ERWINNA , PA 18920
6 SHULL FARM RD
DAMORE MATTHEW
ASPEN, CO 81611
634 W MAIN ST #3
PEARSON MARK M & LEES M
ASPEN, CO 81611
702 W MAIN ST
ASPEN FAMILY HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
137 WESTVIEW DR
CHRISTIANA A105 LLC
MENLO PARK, CA 94026
PO BOX 4132
HISPATEL CORP
MIAMI, FL 331364119
700 NW 1ST AVE #1700
FORNELL CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST
HY-MOUNTAIN TRANSPORT INC
ASPEN, CO 81611
214 B AABC
SHADOW MOUNTAIN OFFICES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
BATES JESSICA TRUST
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93405
394 LEMON ST #2
GANT CONDO ASSC
ASPEN, CO 816112142
610 S WESTEND ST
MARSHALL ELLEN M & THOMAS M REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
300 RIVERSIDE AVE
BARBER EDGAR F
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9678
SGSG ASPEN CONDO LLC
DENVER, CO 80237
8100 E UNION AVE #2303
DUNKELBERG AMBER & KEVIN
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
PO BOX 5804
501 WEST MAIN LLC
ASPEN, CO 816111818
532 E HOPKINS AVE
KATZMAN LORI ANN
CHARLEVOIX, MI 49720
301 MERCER BLVD
STARFORD PROPERTIES NV
MIAMI, FL 331364119
700 NW 1ST AVE #1700
HORNE CHRISTOPHER & BRANDI
AUSTIN, TX 78746
5214 BUCKMAN MTN RD
01037H TRUST
BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210
715 N SIERRA DR
FELER LAURIE & CLAUDIO
CARBONDALE, CO 81623
550 FOX RUN
129
BLANCHARD NATALIE M
ASPEN, CO 81611
720 W HOPKINS #B
MARSHALL TRACEY CAUSEY LIV TRUST
AUSTIN, TX 78746
3107 WESTLAKE DR
DEANE LANDON
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 508
HAISFIELD MICHAEL D & LISA Y
ASPEN, CO 81611
616 W HOPKINS
GANT CONDO ASSOC INC
ASPEN, CO 816112142
610 S WESTEND ST
CARROLL MEREDITH & ARTHUR
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #210
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
HAYMAX HOTELS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
616 W MAIN ST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
612 W MAIN ST
MENENDEZ NASRIN N REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8036
JAS CAPITAL LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #E
TODD SHANE
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 2654
SKANDIA TOWNHOUSES CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
720 W HOPKINS AVE
SMITH ANDREW C & DONNA G
DALLAS, TX 75205
3622 SPRINGBROOK ST
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
SANDERS BARBARA
ASPEN, CO 81611
634 W MAIN ST #8
ERICKSON A RONALD
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #211
PEDRO STEVEN D MD PA TRUST
FORT WORTH, TX 76132
7833 OAKMONT BLVD
LHG HOLDING LLC
LOS ANGELES, CA 90049
11777 SAN VICENTE BLVD 9TH FL
WERLIN LAURA B TRUST
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94115
2279 PINE ST
MEYER MARY ANNE
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11238
AMAYA JOSE ANTONIO & BLANCA E ARGUETA
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #103
JAS CAPITAL LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #E
KENDRICK SCOTT
ASPEN, CO 81611
700 W HOPKINS AVE #5
UMBA ENTERPRISE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #103
RUFUS CAMI CAMI LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
1280 UTE AVE #7
HOPKINS & FOURTH LLC
CHICAGO, IL 60614
2001 N HALSTED ST #304
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
LEADINGHAM CAROLINE
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #A-102
REECE MARK
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #A-102
130
SILVERLODE INVESTORS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN #201
617 MAIN ST PROF BLDG CONDO
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST
BRYAN SHEILAH
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 976
MADSEN MARTHA W
ASPEN, CO 81611
608 W HOPKINS AVE APT 9
616.5 W MAIN ST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
612 W MAIN ST
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
REID SUZANNAH V K
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 10443
SACKS CAROL
HOUSTON, TX 77207
4545 POST OAK PL #100
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
TAYLOR JOHN W
COCOA BEACH, FL 329312329
37 W POINT DR
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
HARRIS ANGELA
ASPEN, CO 816111618
518 W MAIN ST #C107
SMB CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MIAN ST
ANGELOV DIMTAR S & DANIEL D
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #209
WENDT ROBERT E II
PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272
350 MT HOLYOKE AVE
ALLEN DOUGLAS P
BOULDER, CO 803012254
3096 EDISON CT
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
MENENDEZ LUIS A REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8036
DENBY SAMUEL ROBERT
WASHINGTON, DC 20016
4861 INDIAN LN NW
715 WEST MAIN CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
715 W MAIN ST
HAVANDJIAN GASTON MATIAS
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #B205
JEMAR PARTNERS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
701 W MAIN ST
ASPEN MAIN STREET II LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
EYXEFC2 LLC
ARVADA, CO 80002
7310 W 52ND AVE #A129
ONEIL BRIAN & SUZANNE
TAVERNIER, FL 33070
PO BOX 199
FRANSEN ERIN M & GREGORY H
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS UNIT 206
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
LITTLE AJAX CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE
PHILLIPS SHAUN E
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #8105
SHADOW MOUNTAIN OFFICES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
131
ASPEN MAIN ST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
LONE EAGLE TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
634 W MAIN ST #1
WESTCHESTER INVESTMENTS INC
MIAMI, FL 331364119
700 NW 1ST AVE #1700
CLEANER EXPRESS
ASPEN, CO 81611
435 E MAIN ST
TUCKER LUCY LEA
ASPEN, CO 81611
PO BOX 1480
CITY OF ASPEN
ASPEN, CO 81611
130 S GALENA ST
STEVENSON ADAM
ASPEN, CO 81611
627 W MAIN ST
BRYAN SHEILAH JUDITH
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 976
ALLEN DOUGLAS P
BOULDER, CO 803012254
3096 EDISON CT
WEIEN J ROBERT
ASPEN, CO 81611
709 W MAIN ST
ASPEN MAIN ST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
JULES ASPEN LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
625 E HYMAN AVE #201
CHRISTOPHER MARIDEE LIV TRUST
SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260-4327
13571 N 92ND WY
LINDAUER REBECCA F
AUSTIN, TX 78703
1115 ELM ST
MAUPIN KENNETH
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #C-207
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
CHOD ASHLEY B
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 4022
VOSS NATALIE
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #204
HESSIAN ASPEN LLC
WINTER PARK, FL 327894881
1470 GENE ST #B
DJORDJEVIC VLADAN
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9566
FRIAS PROPERTIES OF ASPEN
ASPEN, CO 81611
730 E DURANT
FRIAS PROPERTIES OF ASPEN
ASPEN, CO 81611
730 E DURANT
616 WEST MAIN CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
616 W MAIN ST
BONETTI MARYSUE
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 569
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
DAGGS JAMES K
BASALT, CO 81621
350 MARKET ST #311
FERGUS ELIZABETH REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 1515
OBX TO ASPEN LLC
FORT COLLINS, CO 80526
4251 MORNING GLORY RD
LHG HOLDING LLC
LOS ANGELES, CA 90049
11777 SAN VICENTE BLVD 9TH FL
ALPINE BANK
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
132
DAGGS JAMES K
BASALT, CO 81621
350 MARKET ST #311
CHRISTIANA UNIT D101 LLC
ASPEN , CO 81612
PO BOX 4937
GOLDSTEIN MARC
HOUSTON, TX 77027
4545 POST OAK PL #100
MEYER OLVIN
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11238
PEDRO STEVEN & JERRI REAL ESTATE LLC
FORT WORTH, TX 76132
7833 OAKMONT BLVD
RUFUS CAMI CAMI LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
1280 UTE AVE #7
WENDLING NAN JEAN
ASPEN, CO 816129747
PO BOX 10745
DAY JEROD
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #B203
ULLR HOMEOWNERS ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
520 W MAIN ST
TOLK GAYLA LYNN
ASPEN, CO 81611
117 N SIXTH ST
SHADOW MOUNTAIN OFFICES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
WEST ALFRED JR & LORALEE
VANTURA, CA 93993
4572 TELEPHONE RD #912
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
PROMISE LAND LLC
ENGLEWOOD, CO 801114628
6412 S QUEBEC ST
CUMMINS RICHARD
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #B
COYOTE PEAK LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
706 W MAIN ST
7TH & MAIN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
719 W MAIN ST
UMBA ENTERPRISE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #103
604 WEST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
604 W MAIN ST
GOLDEN ALEXANDRA SEP PROP TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST PH B
MENENDEZ LUIS A REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8036
NECHADEIM REALTY LLC
NEW YORK, NY 10019
680 FIFTH AVE 7TH FL
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
ALPINE BANK ASPEN
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
LANG JACQUELINE
COTTESLOE WESTERN AUSTRALIA 6011,
15 WENTWORTH ST
SHEA LAYNE & MICHAEL
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #202
MCGUIRE JENNIFER ERIN
ASPEN, CO 81611
501 E DEAN ST
JAS CAPITAL LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #E
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
REID SUZANNAH V K
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 10443
133
MCCLURE MARY
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #207
SHADOW MTN CORP
MIAMI, FL 331364119
700 NW 1ST AVE #1700
NEMIROW JORDAN
ASPEN, CO 81611
612 W MAIN ST
SCHALL FAMILY TRUST
ENCINO, CA 91436
3841 HAYVENHURST DR
MARSHALL ALISON & JOSHUA
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #212
UMBA ENTERPRISE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #103
ULLR HOMEOWNERS ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
520 W MAIN ST
WELLES PETER S & SONDRA T
CARBONDALE, CO 81623
5343 CR 100
ASPEN MAIN STREET II LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
ALPINE BANK
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
NALEZNY C GERARD & PENNIE
FORT COLLINS, CO 80526
4251 MORNING GLORY RD
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
P & L PROPERTIES LLC
GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501
101 S 3RD ST #360
BLACK BENJAMIN F & ALICE M
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #208
PROMISE LAND LLC
ENGLEWOOD, CO 801114628
6412 S QUEBEC ST
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
RODRIGUEZ JOANN
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #00A
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
FAVORITE PRATHUAN
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9566
RUSSO NICK A
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 4743
700 WEST HOPKINS CONDO
ASPEN, CO 81611
700 W HOPKINS AVE
STERTZER ELIANE C
NEW YORK, NY 10065
160 E 65TH ST #23E
HUERGO DELFINA
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #A101
UMBA ENTERPRISE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #103
GOLDSTONE JONNA A
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE # 203
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 8/27/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Thursday, August 27, 2020 11:39 AMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A2.04
PROPOSED MATERIALS
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
owned by and are the property of David
Johnston Architects, PC and developed for use
and in conjunction with the specified project.
None of the ideas, designs, arrangements or
plans shall be used by or disclosed for any
purpose whatsoever without the written
authorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
CEDAR SHINGLE
EXAMPLE AT IN-SET DECKS
POLISHED CONCRETE BLACK
EXAMPLE AT MAIN LEVEL STORAGE AREAS, TRASH AREA & BIKE ROOM
CONCRETE COLUMNS
EXAMPLE AT MAIN LEVEL
POROUS PAVERS
EXAMPLE AT ALLEY PARKING AREA
MEMBRANE ROOF WITH APPLIED RIBS
EXAMPLE AT ROOFS
STEEL & CABLE RAILINGS WITH WOOD TOP RAIL
EXAMPLE CIRCULATION DECKS & EXTERIOR STAIRS
PROPOSED LAY-UP OF BLOCK MASONRY
PROPOSED LAY-UP OF BLOCK MASONRY
WHITE WASHED WOOD SIDING BOARDSNATURAL VERTICAL WOOD SLATS
149
611 W Main Street-Drainage Letter HPC Application July 22, 2019
5 02 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970)704-0311• Fax (970)704-0313
S O PRIS E N GINEERING • L LC c ivil consultants
DJ Architects
c/o Collin Frank
119 S. Spring Street, Ste 203
Aspen, CO 81611
collin@djarchitects.com
RE: 611 W. Main Street-Conceptual Drainage Mitigation Requirements & Recommendations
Sopris Engineering, LLC Job No. 19176
Dear Collin,
Sopris Engineering, LLC (SE) has prepared this letter to summarize stormwater mitigation requirements and recommendations
in support of the potential redevelopment of 611 W. Main Street located in Aspen, CO.
It is our understanding that the project is seeking approval from HPC in support of an affordable housing project on the subject
property. This letter is specific to stormwater requirements and stormwater mitigation options/recommendations for the project
team to further evaluate as the design progresses towards Building Permit Application. Exhibit A has been provided as an
attachment for illustrative support of this document.
Background & Existing Conditions
The subject property is located at 611 W. Main Street in Aspen, CO (Parcel ID#273512448003) and according to Pitkin County
Assessor’s webpage the existing building was constructed in 1900 with an effective year built of 1980. The existing structure
was originally constructed as a single family residence but more recently has been used as a medical office with an upstairs
apartment.
Based on our review of the existing conditions survey and site visit the property consists of an existing two story wood frame
house with a building footprint at ground elevation of approximately 1,675 sf. Existing ground cover includes gravel parking
along the south side of the property, wooden ramp along the east side of the existing residence and intermittent lawn area.
The total impervious area has been estimated at 4,670+/- sf which includes the existing residence. Grades and drainage
patterns generally slope southwest to the northeast across the site with an average slope of approximately 2.5%+/-. Existing
gutters and a downspout were observed at the southeast portion of the residence with the downspout discharging to the
surface and adjacent to the building. No other stormwater improvements were observed during our site visit or indicated on the
existing conditions survey.
According to Figure 3.1 of the City’s Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP) the underlying soils likely consist of Type B
Soils which have moderate infiltration rates. This will be confirmed once geotechnical exploration work has been performed.
The subject property falls within Zone X as identified on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Panel #08097C0203C, effective
date June 4, 1987. Zone X includes areas determined to be outside the 500-year flood plain.
An existing electric and communications utility easement (Rec. # 325089) is located at the southeast corner of the property
and accommodates portions of an existing transformer. An existing shed is also encroaching on the subject property at the
southeast corner. An existing ditch lateral (likely Si Johnson Ditch) runs along the north side of the property and under an
existing rubber sidewalk, both of which are located completely within the City’s ROW.
The subject property falls within Drainage System 3 as described within the City’s Surface Drainage Master Plan (SDMP),
dated November 2001 prepared by WRC Engineering, Inc. Drainage System 3 currently consists of street curb and gutter,
roadside ditches and a network of storm sewer pipes to include an 18” RCP lateral storm pipe that extends to the northwest
corner of Main Street & 5th Street which is approximately 70-ft from the northeast corner of the subject property. The main
interceptor pipe for this system terminates within Jennie Adair wetland water quality treatment area next to Puppy Smith Street
exhibit 18
150
SE Project #. 19176: 611 W Main Street Drainage Mitigation Letter 7/22/2019
Page 2
502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970)704 -0311• Fax (970 )704 -0313
S OPRIS E NGINEERING • LLC civil consultants
and the start of the Rio Grande Trail. Stormwater is then routed to the Roaring Fork River. Based on the capacity analysis
described within the SDMP, Drainage System 3 is undersized; however this previous study was based on National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 2 rainfall data which included a period of record from 1948-1973 (roughly 25
years). NOAA has since released new hydrology rainfall records for the Aspen area. The new NOAA Atlas 14 provides data
for this area through 2010 which is 40 more years of rainfall record that wasn’t previously available. The new data shows
approximately a 30% reduction in one hour rainfall depths than what was used in the SDMP and therefore there is likely more
capacity within Drainage System 3 than what was previously considered.
Lastly, according to Figure 7.1a of the City’s URMP the subject property falls outside Aspen Mountain’s mudflow zone,
however it should be noted that the City is in the process of updating mudflow studies and regulations which may influence any
potential mudflow requirements for the subject property.
Proposed Development, Stormwater Requirements and Stormwater Mitigation Options
It is our understanding that the project will include a remodel of the existing residence and an expansion to accommodate a
total of 9 affordable housing units. Additional improvements include adding a basement, formalized parking along the south
side of the property, various walkways, individual storage closets, bicycle racks and landscaping.
Based on the proposed improvements the project will be classified as a “Major Project” as identified within the City’s URMP.
Based on the location of the subject property the stormwater mitigation requirements will include water quality treatment for all
exposed impervious areas. Onsite stormwater detention will only be required for any additional impervious areas since the
subject property falls within an area that is served by the City’s storm sewer system.
Per our review of the conceptual site plan the amount of impervious area, excluding any potential green roofs and/or
permeable pavers which will be further evaluated as the project progresses, has been estimated to be 5,660 sf which equates
to a total impervious area lot coverage of 63% and a slight increase in impervious area of approximately 1,000 sf as compared
to existing conditions.
Water Quality Treatment: Based on the estimated total impervious area the required water quality treatment volume will be 57
cf. This estimate does not include any potential opportunities for integrating permeable pavers, green roofs, disconnecting
directly connected impervious areas or taking credit for the existing tree canopies; all of which will be further evaluated as the
project design progresses.
Based on the existing site topography and proposed site development there are several viable options for providing the
required water quality treatment volume to include bioretention cells, permeable pavers, sand filter beds and dry wells; all of
which are further described below:
Bio-retention Cells are depressed landscaping areas designed to capture and filter and/or infiltrate the water quality
capture volume from a contributing drainage basin. The soil matrix and plantings remove pollutants through a variety
of physical, biological and chemical treatment process. Bioretention cells are potential water quality treatment
facilities for this project. There are appear to be several potential locations for integrating bioretention on the subject
property but the most efficient locations would be along the northern portion of the site as illustrated on Exhibit A.
Permeable Pavers are a type of BMP comprised of a layer of concrete pavers separated by joints filled with small
stones. Water enters the joints between solid concrete pavers and flows through an open graded base; i.e. crushed
stone layers with no small or fine particles. The void spaces among the crushed stones store water and infiltrate it
back into the soil subgrade. Permeable pavers help reduce the overall impervious areas and also provide an
opportunity to treat stormwater runoff from adjacent impervious areas. If draining impervious areas onto permeable
pavers is desired the ratio of impervious areas to permeable pavers shall be limited to a 2:1 ratio (two units of
impervious areas for each unit of permeable pavers). Potential locations for permeable pavers include the proposed
151
SE Project #. 19176: 611 W Main Street Drainage Mitigation Letter 7/22/2019
Page 3
502 Main Street • Suite A3 • Carbondale, CO 81623 • (970)704 -0311• Fax (970 )704 -0313
S OPRIS E NGINEERING • LLC civil consultants
at surface walkways as well as the parking area. It should be noted that permeable pavers that fall within 10-ft of any
structure will likely require an underdrain system which will need to be routed to the City’s storm system that
terminates at the northwest corner of Main Street and 5th Street or into a proposed dry well.
Sand Filter Cell are similar to bioretention cells except that the filter media is made of up of sand and they can serve
as detention facilities. The surface treatment can also be treated with decorative stones over the sand if zeroscape
landscaping is desired. Potential locations for a sand filter cell are the proposed rock garden areas identified on the
conceptual site plan and noted on Exhibit A.
Dry Wells are a BMPs that incorporates manhole structures with perforated barrels at the deeper depths. Washed
screened rock is installed around the exterior of the perforated sections. When sub-soils are capable of moderate to
high infiltration rates, dry wells are considered to be a viable BMP. They dramatically reduce the increased runoff and
volume of stormwater generated from surrounding impervious areas and promote infiltration; thereby improving the
water quality of stormwater runoff. The required water quality capture volume for a dry well shall be 150% of the
design water quality capture volume as outlined within Chapter 8 of the City’s URMP. Per the City’s URMP dry wells
shall not be located within 10-ft of any structure or 10-ft from a property line. Based on these criteria there is only one
potential location for a dry well as illustrated on Exhibit A; unless a variance request is pursued.
Stormwater Detention: If the proposed impervious area exceeds the amount that currently exists onsite then stormwater
detention will need to be integrated in with the overall stormwater mitigation design to ensure post development peak runoff
rates do not exceed existing peak runoff rates. Onsite stormwater detention options include Sand Filter Cells and/or a Dry
Well as described above. Either of these options could easily accommodate the detention required for the anticipated increase
of impervious areas.
Conclusion
Based on our evaluation of the existing site conditions and proposed development the project has several viable options for
providing water quality and stormwater detention volumes on the subject property. The design of all onsite stormwater
mitigation infrastructure and water quality treatment facilities to include type, location and size will be further analyzed as the
project design progresses with final designs being provided with any future building permit application.
If you have any questions or need any additional information please don’t hesitate contacting our office.
Sincerely,
SOPRIS ENGINEERING, LLC
Jesse K Swann, PE
Project Manager
Encl: Exhibit A: Existing Conditions & Stormwater Mitigation Options
152
611 W. MAIN STREET
TWO STORY EXISTING
RESIDENCE
1,675 sq. ft. AT GROUND LEVEL
AREA=9,000 sq. ft. (0.2066 ac.)
MAIN STREET
(100-FT ROW)
ALLEY
617 MAIN STREET
PROFESSIONAL
CONDOMINIUMS
617 MAIN STREET
SMB CONDOMINIUMS
SMALL SECTION OF
GUTTER & DOWNSPOUT
BASED ON SITE VISIT
EXISTING STORM DRAIN INLET IS LOCATED
AT NORTHWEST CORNER OF MAIN
STREET/5TH STREET INTERSECTION WHICH IS
APPROXIMATELY 70-FT FROM NORTHEAST
CORNER OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
UP14RISER(6 23/32" ) 13TREADS(11" )
1 2 3 4 5 6 7LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
PROPOSED LIGHT WELL W/
GRATE (TYP)
STORAGE
CLOSET
(TYP)
PROPOSED SIDEWALK
(SURFACE TREATMENT TBD)
PROPOSED PARKING
(SURFACE TREATMENT TBD)
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
BIKE RACK
EXTERIOR
STAIRS
PROPOSED ROCK & BOULDER
SCAPE-POTENTIAL LOCATION FOR A
SAND FILTER CELL (TBD)PROPERTY LINELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
(HATCHED AREA REPRESENTS
ROOF AREA) (TYP)PROPERTY LINEALLEY
MAIN STREET
POTENTIAL DRY WELL LOCATION
FOR WATER QUALITY,
STORMWATER DETENTION
AND/OR POINT OF TERMINATION
FOR ONSITE STORM
PIPES/UNDERDRAINS
(NOTE: DRY WELL TO BE LOCATED
10-FT FROM PL & STRUCTURES)
PROPOSED ROCK & BOULDER
GARDEN-POTENTIAL LOCATION FOR
A SAND FILTER CELL (TBD)
PROPOSED WALKWAY
(SURFACE TREATMENT TBD)
EXISTING STORM DRAIN INLET IS LOCATED AT
NORTHWEST CORNER OF MAIN STREET/5TH STREET
INTERSECTION WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 70-FT
FROM NORTHEAST CORNER OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
(POTENTIAL POINT OF CONNECTION FOR ONSITE
STORM DRAIN PIPES)
POTENTIAL LOCATION FOR
BIORETENTION CELLS
SHED
EX.
XRMR
OPRIS ES NGINEERING, LLC.
CIVIL CONSULTANTS
19176JOB NO.
DATE:07-22-2019
502 MAIN STREET
CARBONDALE, CO 81623
(970) 704-0311
FAX: (970)-704-0313
DESIGNED BY
DRAWN BY
CHECKED BY
DATE REVISION
EXHIBIT A
DRAWING NO.G:\2019\19176-611 W MAIN\CIVIL\CIVIL DWGS\DE\19176-DRAINAGE.DWG - Jul 22, 2019 - 6:38amNORTH611 W. MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO1 inch = ft.
( IN FEET )
GRAPHIC SCALE
010 10 20
10
405 EXHIBIT A: EXISTING CONDITIONS &PROPOSED DRAINAGE MITIGATION OPTIONSEXISTING CONDITIONS STORMWATER MITIGATION OPTIONS
NOTE:
THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL OR ILLUSTRATIVE IN NATURE WITH THE INTENT TO
DEMONSTRATE OPTIONS FOR COMPLYING WITH THE CITY'S STORMWATER
MITIGATION REGULATIONS. PRECISE INFORMATION SHALL BE PROVIDED AS
PART OF THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION.
HALF SIZED FOR ATTACHMENT TO REPORT
153
1C 154
2
611 W. MAIN ST. AFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO
611 W. MAIN ST. AFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO
155
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:51 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
3
PROJECT OVERVIEW
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
COVER SHEET
ZONING
SITE PLANS
FLOOR PLANS
ROOF PLANS
ELEVATIONS
1
2
3
Z1.01
Z1.02
Z1.03
Z1.04
Z1.05
A1.01
A1.02
A1.03
A1.04
A1.05
A1.06
A1.07
A1.08
A1.09
A1.10
A1.11
A1.12
A2.01
A2.02
A2.03
A2.04
A2.05
HP-1
HP-2
HP-3
TOP SHEET
COVER SHEET
PROJECT OVERVIEW
FAR EXISTING
FAR PROPOSED
FAR PROPOSED
NLA PROPOSED
NLA PROPOSED
SITE CONTEXT
SITE PLAN | EXISTING | 3/16"
SITE PLAN | PROPOSED | 3/16"
SITE PLAN | LANSCAPE PROPOSED | 3/16"
EXISTING LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN | DEMOLITION
EXISTING MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN | DEMOLITION
EXISTING SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN | DEMOLITION
CRAWL SPACE FLOOR PLAN | PROPOSED
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN | PROPOSED
SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN | PROPOSED
THIRD LEVEL FLOOR PLAN | PROPOSED
ROOF PLAN
ELEVATIONS
ELEVATIONS
ELEVATIONS
PROPOSED MATERIALS
PROPOSED RENDERINGS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION ELEVATIONS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION ELEVATIONS
HISTORIC PRESERVATION EXISTING PHOTOS
PROJECT SITE
033
LBB
5.1
A
REFERENCE GRID LINE
SPOT ELEVATION
WINDOW MARK
DOOR MARK
ROOM NUMBER
DRAWING REVISION
ASSEMBLY DETAIL CUT
SECTION CUT
EXTERIOR ELEVATION
DETAIL CALLOUT
SECTION DETAIL CALLOUT
INTERIOR ELEVATION
ROOM
100
F11
1
T. O. RIDGEBEAM123'-6 1/2"
4.4
1
1
7.1
1
7.1
8.1
1
2
3
4
SYMBOL LEGEND
MATERIAL LEGEND
GYPSUM WALLBOARD
RAW FRAMING
WOOD BLOCKING
ROCK - NONCOMPACTED FILL
CONCRETE
STONE
FRAME WALL
BRICK
PLYWOOD
BATT INSULATION
FINISHED WOOD
RIGID INSULATION
8
OWNER
M. Development
2001 N. Halsted St.
#99
Chicago, IL 60614
P: 312.850.1680
ARCHITECT
David Johnston Architects
119 South Spring St.
Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.925.3444
F: 970.920.2186
collin@djarchitects.com
PLANNER
Bendon Adams
300 South Spring St.
Suite 202
Aspen, CO 81611
P: 970.925.2855
chris@bendonadams.com
CIVIL ENGINEER
Sopris Engineering, LLC
502 Main St.
Suite A-3
Carbondale, CO 81623
P: 970.704.0311
ynichol@spopriseng.com
LOCATION 611 W. MAIN ST. ...........................................................................................PARCEL ID# 273512448003 ...........................................................................................ZONE MU ........................................................................................................................OCCUPANCY GROUP R .................................................................................................CONSTRUCTION Type V-B ..............................................................................................EXISTING NET LEASABLE 9,000 S.F. EXISTING .............................................................PROPOSED FLOOR AREA 8,154 S.F. ............................................................................NET LEASABLE S.F. .......................................................................................................PUBLIC AMENITIES SPACE ...........................................................................................MAX FLOOR AREA RATIO 1:1 .........................................................................................HEIGHT LIMITATION 28 FT ..............................................................................................FRONT YARD SETBACK 0 FT .........................................................................................SIDE YARD SETBACK 0 FT .............................................................................................REAR YARD SETBACK 0 FT ............................................................................................GROUND SNOW LOAD 100 PSF ....................................................................................WIND SPEED 89 MPH EXPOSURE CAT B ......................................................................SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY C .....................................................................................WEATHERING SEVERE ...................................................................................................FORST LINE DEPTH 36” .................................................................................................WINTER DESIGN TEMP -15 DEG F .................................................................................ICE SHIELD REQUIREMENT YES, 6’ UP FROM EAVE .....................................................FLOOD HAZARDS FEMA MAP 6/4/1987 .........................................................................AIR FREEZING INDEX 1964 .............................................................................................MEAN ANNUAL TEMP 40 DEG F....................................................................................
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES
1. The Contract Documents shall consist of the general notes and the architectural, mechanical, and structural drawings. All future
additional specifications, details, drawings, clarifications, or changes shall, in turn, become part of these documents. Work indicated
or reasonably implied in any one of the documents shall be supplied as though fully covered in all. Any discrepancy between any
parts of the drawings shall be reported to the Architect immediately for clarification.
2. David Johnston Architects, PC., waves any and all liability for problems which arise from failure to follow the design intent of the
plans. Contractor to obtain and/or request guidance of David Johnston Architects, PC., with respect to any errors, omissions,
inconsistencies, or conflicts which may be discovered or alleged.
3. The Plans and Specifications are the property of the Architect and are not to be used without the permission of same.
4. All work shall comply with all state and local codes, ordinances, rules, regulations and laws of building officials or authorities having
jurisdiction. All work shall be performed to the highest standards or craftsmanship by journeymen of the appropriate trades.
5. The Contract Documents represent the finished structure. They do not indicate the method of construction. The Contractor shall
provide all measures necessary to protect the structure during construction. Observation visits to the site by the Structural Engineer
or Architect shall not include inspection of the above items nor will the architect or structural engineer be responsible for the
contractor's means, methods, techniques, sequences for procedure of construction, or the safety precautions and the techniques,
sequences for procedure of construction, or the safety precautions and the programs incident thereto. The Contractor shall be
responsible for all Federal and OSHA regulations.
6. THE DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE SCALED. Written dimensions are to be used. If there is a discrepancy in dimensions, the Architect
should be notified for clarification. All dimensions on the drawings shall be verified against the existing conditions. All dimensions
are to rough framing or face of concrete unless noted otherwise.
7. These documents are intended to include all labor, materials, equipment, and services required to complete all work described herein.
It is the responsibility of the Contractor to bring to the attention of the Architect any conditions which will not permit construction
according to the intentions of these documents.
8. The Building Inspector shall be notified by the Contractor when there is need of an inspection as required by the I.R.C., or by any local
code or ordinance.
9. LOT STAKED: The Contractor shall arrange for the building to be located and staked after demolition or site clearing, to be approved
by the Architect. The Contractor shall review the lot staking and verify, to the best of his ability, its accuracy. The Contractor shall
also check the grade where it meets the building to evaluate the consistency with the drawings during excavation. Work to be done
by a certified surveyor.
10. RECORD DRAWINGS: Contractor to maintain a complete set of blue/black-line prints of contract drawings and shop drawings for
record mark-up purposes throughout the Contract time. Mark-up drawings during course of the work to show changes and actual
installation conditions, sufficient to form a complete record for Owner's purposes. Give particular attention to work which will be
concealed and difficult to measure and record at a later date, and work which may require servicing or replacement during life of
project. Require entities marking prints, to sign and date each mark-up. Bind prints into manageable sets, with durable paper cover,
appropriately labeled.
11. SOILS AND CONCRETE: The General Contractor shall arrange for a visual site inspection at the completion of excavation by a soils
engineer, and the required concrete testing prior to any foundation work.
12. Property lines, utilities and topography shown is representative of information taken from a survey. Notify Architect of any
discrepancy or variation between the Drawings and actual site conditions.
A.F.F. ABOVE FINISH FLOOR
ADJ. ADJUSTABLE ALT. ALTERNATE A.B. ANCHOR BOLTS
& AND ARCH. ARCHITECTURAL
@ AT BM. BEAM BM. PKT. BEAM POCKET
BRG. BEARING BLK’G. BLOCKING BOT. BOTTOM
B.F. BOTTOM OF FOOTING BLDG. BUILDING
B.O. BY OWNER CAB. CABINET CLG. CEILING
CL. CENTER LINE C.T. CERAMIC TILE CLR. CLEAR
COL. COLUMN CONC. CONCRETE
CONN. CONNECTION CONT. CONTINUOUS DTL. DETAILS
DBL. DOUBLE DWL. DOWEL E.W. EACH WAY
ELEV. ELEVATION EXIST’G EXISTING
EXT. EXTERIOR FLR. FLOOR FTG. FOOTING
FND. FOUNDATION GA. GAUGE G.L. GLU-LAM
G.W.B. GYPSUM WALL BOARD HT. HEIGHT
HK. HOOK
HORIZ. HORIZONTAL
INFO. INFORMATION INSUL. INSULATION JST. JOIST
L.L. LIVE LOAD LONGINT. LONGITUDINAL
N.I.C. NOT IN CONTRACT O.C. ON CENTER OPP. OPPOSITE
O/ OVER PTD. PAINTED PERF. PERFORATED
PL. PLATE PLY. PLYWOOD
PROP. LINE PROPERTY LINE REINF. REINFORCEMENT RDWD. REDWOOD
REQ’D. REQUIRED RESIL. RESILENT REV. REVISED
S.M. SHEET METAL SIM. SIMILAR
S.F. SQUARE FEET STD. STANDARD STL. STEEL
STDS. STUDS THK. THICK TLT. TOILET
T.F. TOP OF FOOTING T.P. TOP OF PLATE
T.L. TOP OF LEDGE T.W. TOP OF WALL TOT. TOTAL
T.B. TOWEL BAR TRANSV. TRANSVERSE TYP. TYPICAL
U.N.O. UNLESS NOTED UTHERWISE V.I.F. VERIFY IN FIELD
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT INDEX
PROJECT DIRECTORY
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION NOTES
ABBREVIATIONS
611 W. MAIN ST. AFFORDBALE HOUSING
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20VICINITY MAP
156
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:51 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
Z1.01
FAR EXISTING
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.15'-11/4"14'-23/4"13'-83/4"3'-0"18'-83/4"3'-0"11'-63/4"1'-113/4"9'-71/4"9'-111/4"9'-113/4"8'-41/2"3'-0"18'-73/4"3'-0"
3'-10"
24'-03/4"53/4"
3'-5"16'-13/4"4'-71/2"32'-21/2"8'-11/4"6'-0"13'-2"4'-71/2"5'-91/2"7'-111/2"7'-5"1'-51/2"4'-0"4'-11/4"13'-9"5'-01/4"8'-11/4"10'-21/2"1'-8"5'-3"1'-8"16'-5"2'-113/4"7'-6"5'-31/2"SCALE:A - 1
PAGE NO.
DRAWINGS BY:
TRUE DIMENSIONS
P.O. BOX 10431
ASPEN, CO 81612
970-618-8351
EMAIL:
ASPENTRUEDIMENSIONS@COMCAST.NET
WWW.ASPENTRUEDIMENSIONS.COM
PROJECT:
NOTES:
3/16" = 1'
DATE REVISED
PROJECT
DATE MEASURED
10/03/2017
FAR CALCULATION
MAIN & UPPER LEVELS
611 WEST MAIN STREET
ASPEN, CO 81611
10/05/2017
DRAWING REQUEST BY:
THUNDERBOWL ARCHITECTS
300 S. SPRINGS ST. #201
ASPEN, CO 81611
1 EXISTING MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA
SCALE: 3/16"-1'2 EXISTING UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA
SCALE: 3/16"-1'
EXTERIOR AREA1,672 SQUARE FEET
LEGEND
Gross floor area calculated to exterior face
of both 2"x 4" & 2"x 6"exterior stud
walls
Stairs - 37 sq. ft. exempt
Deck/Patio below 30" - 526 sq. ft. exemptEXTERIOR AREA951 SQUARE FEET
Ceilings below 5'-6" - 151 sq. ft. exempt
Stairs 37 sq. ft. exempt15'-11/4"14'-23/4"13'-83/4"3'-0"18'-83/4"3'-0"11'-63/4"1'-113/4"9'-71/4"9'-111/4"9'-113/4"8'-41/2"3'-0"18'-73/4"3'-0"3'-10"24'-03/4"53/4"3'-5"16'-13/4"4'-71/2"32'-21/2"8'-11/4"6'-0"13'-2"4'-71/2"5'-91/2"7'-111/2"7'-5"1'-51/2"4'-0"4'-11/4"13'-9"5'-01/4"8'-11/4"10'-21/2"1'-8"5'-3"1'-8"16'-5"2'-113/4"7'-6"5'-31/2"SCALE:A - 1PAGE NO.DRAWINGS BY:TRUE DIMENSIONSP.O. BOX 10431ASPEN, CO 81612970-618-8351EMAIL:ASPENTRUEDIMENSIONS@COMCAST.NETWWW.ASPENTRUEDIMENSIONS.COMPROJECT:NOTES:3/16" = 1'DATE REVISEDPROJECTDATE MEASURED10/03/2017FAR CALCULATIONMAIN & UPPER LEVELS611 WEST MAIN STREETASPEN, CO 8161110/05/2017DRAWING REQUEST BY:THUNDERBOWL ARCHITECTS300 S. SPRINGS ST. #201ASPEN, CO 816111EXISTING MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREASCALE: 3/16"-1'2EXISTING UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREASCALE: 3/16"-1'EXTERIOR AREA1,672 SQUARE FEETLEGENDGross floor area calculated to exterior faceof both 2"x 4" & 2"x 6"exterior studwallsStairs - 37 sq. ft. exemptDeck/Patio below 30" - 526 sq. ft. exemptEXTERIOR AREA951 SQUARE FEETCeilings below 5'-6" - 151 sq. ft. exemptStairs 37 sq. ft. exempt15'-11/4"14'-23/4"13'-83/4"3'-0"18'-83/4"3'-0"11'-63/4"1'-113/4"9'-71/4"9'-111/4"9'-113/4"8'-41/2"3'-0"18'-73/4"3'-0"3'-10"24'-03/4"53/4"3'-5"16'-13/4"4'-71/2"32'-21/2"8'-11/4"6'-0"13'-2"4'-71/2"5'-91/2"7'-111/2"7'-5"1'-51/2"4'-0"4'-11/4"13'-9"5'-01/4"8'-11/4"10'-21/2"1'-8"5'-3"1'-8"16'-5"2'-113/4"7'-6"5'-31/2"SCALE:A - 1PAGE NO.DRAWINGS BY:TRUE DIMENSIONSP.O. BOX 10431ASPEN, CO 81612970-618-8351EMAIL:ASPENTRUEDIMENSIONS@COMCAST.NETWWW.ASPENTRUEDIMENSIONS.COMPROJECT:NOTES:3/16" = 1'DATE REVISEDPROJECTDATE MEASURED10/03/2017FAR CALCULATIONMAIN & UPPER LEVELS611 WEST MAIN STREETASPEN, CO 8161110/05/2017DRAWING REQUEST BY:THUNDERBOWL ARCHITECTS300 S. SPRINGS ST. #201ASPEN, CO 816111EXISTING MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREASCALE: 3/16"-1'2EXISTING UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREASCALE: 3/16"-1'EXTERIOR AREA1,672 SQUARE FEETLEGENDGross floor area calculated to exterior faceof both 2"x 4" & 2"x 6"exterior studwallsStairs - 37 sq. ft. exemptDeck/Patio below 30" - 526 sq. ft. exemptEXTERIOR AREA951 SQUARE FEETCeilings below 5'-6" - 151 sq. ft. exemptStairs 37 sq. ft. exempt157
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 8/31/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Monday, August 31, 2020 1:27 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
Z1.02
FAR PROPOSED
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
owned by and are the property of David
Johnston Architects, PC and developed for use
and in conjunction with the specified project.
None of the ideas, designs, arrangements or
plans shall be used by or disclosed for any
pur p ose w hatso eve r without the wr i t t en
authorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.46.61 sq ft5'-6"
2"5'-4"8'-83/4"5'-6"5'-6"5'-6"86.77 sq ft
110.27 sq ft193.71 sq ft
154.23 sq ft75.79 sq ft 88.43 sq ft204.86 sq ft85.78 sq ftPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
999.84 SF TOTAL BELOW GRADE WALL AREA
-46.61 SF TOTAL EXPOSED BELOW GRADE WALL AREA
953.23 SF TOTAL BURIED BELOW GRADE WALL AREA
95% BURIED
5% EXPOSED
UP
UPUPUPUPUPPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVEACTIVITY ENVELOPEACTIVITY ENVELOPESI JOHNSON DITCH CL
CAR PORT
1,318.51 sq ft
CA:0.13 sq ft
ADDITIONAL CARPORT
532.95 sq ft
CA:0.53 sq ft
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
STORAGE
100.18 sq ft
TRASH AREA
120.07 sq ft
DECK
508.54 sq ft
CA:0.51 sq ft
DECK
40.78 sq ft
CA:0.04 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
461.91 sq ft
1 BED AH UNIT
691.79 sq ft
1 BED AH UNIT
518.06 sq ft
BIKE & SKI ROOM
88.88 sq ft
STORAGE
100.18 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
105.15 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
105.15 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
105.15 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
105.15 sq ft
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"-1 CRAWL SPACE AREA PLAN PROPOSED
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL AREA PLAN PROPOSED
0 4'8'16'
158
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 8/31/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Monday, August 31, 2020 1:27 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
Z1.03
FAR PROPOSED
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
owned by and are the property of David
Johnston Architects, PC and developed for use
and in conjunction with the specified project.
None of the ideas, designs, arrangements or
plans shall be used by or disclosed for any
pur p ose w hatso eve r without the wr i t t en
authorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
DNDN DN DNPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINEUPUP UPUPBELOW 5'-6"
BELOW 5'-6"
BELOW 5'-6"
BELOW 5'-6"
EXISTING ROOF BELOW
2 BED AH UNIT
664.72 sq ft
1 BED AH UNIT
365.42 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
667.78 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
667.78 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
664.72 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
569.30 sq ft
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
DN DN DNDN
EXISTING ROOF
EXISTING ROOF BELOW
2 BED AH UNIT
665.06 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
666.67 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
666.67 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT
665.34 sq ft
USE LEVEL TOTAL AREA FLOOR AREA
MAIN LEVEL 1,209.85 1,209.85
SECOND LEVEL 365.42 365.42
MAIN LEVEL 882.51 882.51
SECOND LEVEL 3,234.30 3,234.30
THIRD LEVEL 2,663.74 2,663.74
MAIN LEVEL 88.88 88.88
MAIN LEVEL 1,851.46 0
MAIN LEVEL 40.78 ADDITIONAL 508.54 EXEMPT AS RAMP AND
HISTORIC FRONT PORCH 0
MAIN LEVEL 200.36 200.36
MAIN LEVEL 120.07 120.07
11,165.91 S.F. 8,765.13
TRASH AREA
CAR PORT (EXEMPTION: 250 S.F. PER UNIT. 9 x 250 S.F. = 2,250 S.F.)
DECK (EXEMPTION: 9,000 S.F. x 15% = 1,350 S.F.)
STORAGE
1 BED AH UNIT
2 BED AH UNIT
BIKE & SKI ROOM
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 SECOND LEVEL AREA PLAN PROPOSED
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 THIRD LEVEL AREA PLAN PROPOSED
0 4'8'16'
159
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 8/31/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Monday, August 31, 2020 1:27 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
Z1.04
NLA PROPOSED
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
owned by and are the property of David
Johnston Architects, PC and developed for use
and in conjunction with the specified project.
None of the ideas, designs, arrangements or
plans shall be used by or disclosed for any
pur p ose w hatso eve r without the wr i t t en
authorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
UP
UPUPUPUPUPDW
DWDW
RGRG
RG
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVEACTIVITY ENVELOPEACTIVITY ENVELOPESI JOHNSON DITCH CL
D/WREF REF
REF
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
2 BED AH UNIT #1
424.14 sq ft
1 BED AH UNIT #3
632.84 sq ft
1 BED AH UNIT #2
467.23 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #4
78.82 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #5
78.82 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #6
78.82 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #7
78.82 sq ft
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"-1 CRAWL SPACE NLA PLAN PROPOSED
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL NLA PLAN PROPOSED
0 4'8'16'
160
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 8/31/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Monday, August 31, 2020 1:27 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
Z1.05
NLA PROPOSED
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
owned by and are the property of David
Johnston Architects, PC and developed for use
and in conjunction with the specified project.
None of the ideas, designs, arrangements or
plans shall be used by or disclosed for any
pur p ose w hatso eve r without the wr i t t en
authorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
DNDN DN DNDWDWDWDWRGRGRGRGPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINED/WUPUPUPUPREFREFREFREF2 BED AH UNIT #1
531.34 sq ft
1 BED AH UNIT #2
334.37 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #4
617.04 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #5
618.76 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #7
617.04 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #6
618.75 sq ftPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
DN DN DNDN
2 BED AH UNIT #4
584.92 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #5
586.21 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #7
584.93 sq ft
2 BED AH UNIT #6
584.55 sq ft
NET LEASABLE SCHEDULE
FLOOR
MAIN LEVEL
SECOND LEVEL
THIRD LEVEL
1 BED AH UNIT #2
1 BED AH UNIT #3
2 BED AH UNIT #1
2 BED AH UNIT #4
2 BED AH UNIT #5
2 BED AH UNIT #6
2 BED AH UNIT #7
1 BED AH UNIT #2
2 BED AH UNIT #1
2 BED AH UNIT #4
2 BED AH UNIT #5
2 BED AH UNIT #6
2 BED AH UNIT #7
2 BED AH UNIT #4
2 BED AH UNIT #5
2 BED AH UNIT #6
2 BED AH UNIT #7
AREA
467.23
632.84
424.14
78.82
78.82
78.82
78.82
334.37
531.34
617.04
618.76
618.75
617.04
584.92
586.21
584.55
584.93
7,517.40 sq ft
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 SECOND LEVEL NLA PLAN PROPOSED
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 THIRD LEVEL NLA PLAN PROPOSED
0 4'8'16'
161
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:51 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.01
SITE CONTEXT
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
611 W. MAIN ST. (PROJECT SITE)
STREET VIEW (LOOKING SOUTH)
STREET VIEW (LOOKING NORTH)
162
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:51 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.02
SITE PLAN | EXISTING |
3/16"
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.14'-95/8"16'-31/8"
3'-0"3'-0"10'-0"3'-0"7'-31/8"PROPERTY LINEM A I N S T R E E T
Block 25
(100' WIDTH)S 75°9'11" E 90.00'S 14°50'49" W 100.00'S 14°50'49" W 100.00'N 75°9'11" W 90.00'
32.3'3.4'0.6'24.3'16.8'16.2'35.2'
5.1'7.8'7.9'14.0'28.1'611 W. MAIN ST.
TWO STORY FRAMED HOUSE COVERED PORCH BELOW
GRAVEL PARKING
SHED 5.3'7.8'
CELLAR DOOR
8.0' OVERHANG
WOODEN RAMPCOVERED
PORCH
T
T = Phone Pedestal
= Electric Transformer
GM
EM = Electric Meter
= Gas Meter
= Fence
AC = Air Condition Unit
Legend
GM
1.0'x7.5'
CANTILEVER
EM
x
= Fence Post
T
EB
= Electric Transformer
E = Electric Pedestal
EB
E
T
T
= Grate
9,000 S.F. 0.21 AC.
Electric and Communications Utility
Easement per Rec. No. 325089 S 14°50'49" W 14.00'S 75°9'11" E 4.00'N 14°50'49" E 14.00'S 75°9'11" E 4.00'
Easement per Rec. No. 407496
Detail
Curb/Gutter
P.O.B.
Easement per Rec. No. 325089
BUILDING 1,675. S.F.
AT GROUND LEVEL
COVERED PORCH BELOW
5.0' OVERHANG
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINEACTIVITY ENVELOPEACTIVITY ENVELOPE78
3
0
783078307829782878287828
7829
SI JOHNSON DITCH CL
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 SITE PLAN | EXISTING | 3/16"
0 4'8'12'
7930'-6" = ARCH 100'-0"
N
163
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:51 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.03
SITE PLAN | PROPOSED
| 3/16"
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.12345678910111213141516UP
12345678910111213141516UP2122232425
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 UP13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")2122232425
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 UP13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")2122232425
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33UP13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")2122232425
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33UP13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")14'-95/8"16'-31/8"
3'-0"3'-0"10'-0"3'-0"7'-31/8"EXPOSED AGRAGATE CONCRETE SIDEWALK.FLUSH TRANSITION FROM PARKING.
ACCESSIBLE PERVIOUSPAVER WALK
LIGHT WELL W/ GRATING
EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN
EXISTING HEDGE TO REMAIN
BICYCLE RACKPROPERTY LINEM A I N S T R E E T
Block 25
(100' WIDTH)S 75°9'11" E 90.00'S 14°50'49" W 100.00'S 14°50'49" W 100.00'N 75°9'11" W 90.00'
0.6'
611 W. MAIN ST.
TWO STORY FRAMED HOUSE COVERED PORCH BELOW
SHED 5.3'7.8'
8.0' OVERHANG
COVERED
PORCH
T
T = Phone Pedestal
= Electric Transformer
GM
EM = Electric Meter
= Gas Meter
= Fence
AC = Air Condition Unit
Legend
GM
1.0'x7.5'
CANTILEVER
EM
x
= Fence Post
T
EB
= Electric Transformer
E = Electric Pedestal
EB
E
T
T
= Grate
9,000 S.F. 0.21 AC.
Electric and Communications Utility
Easement per Rec. No. 325089 S 14°50'49" W 14.00'S 75°9'11" E 4.00'N 14°50'49" E 14.00'S 75°9'11" E 4.00'
Easement per Rec. No. 407496
Detail
Curb/Gutter
P.O.B.
Easement per Rec. No. 325089
BUILDING 1,675. S.F.
AT GROUND LEVEL
COVERED PORCH BELOW
5.0' OVERHANG
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVEACTIVITY ENVELOPEACTIVITY ENVELOPE78
3
0
783078307829782878287828
7829
SI JOHNSON DITCH CL
TRASH ENCLOSURE
102
CAR PORT
100
BIKE REPAIR & SKI ROOM
105
1 BED UNIT
106
1 BED UNIT
107
2 BED UNIT
108
COVERED DECK
109
PERVIOUS PAVER PARKING AREA
STEEL PARKING BOLLARD
EXISTING HEDGE TO REMAIN
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
ACCESSIBLE
RAMP
OUTDOOR GRILL & DINING
110
STORAGE CLS.
101
STORAGE CLS.
102
STORAGE CLS.
103
STORAGE CLS.
104
STORAGE CLS.
105
STORAGE CLS.
106
STORAGE CLS.
107
STORAGE CLS.
108
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 SITE PLAN | PROPOSED | 3/16"
0 4'8'12'
7930'-6" = ARCH 100'-0"
N
164
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 1:31 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.04
SITE PLAN | LANSCAPE
PROPOSED | 3/16"
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.12345678910111213141516UP
12345678910111213141516UP2122232425
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 UP13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")2122232425
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33 UP13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")2122232425
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33UP13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")2122232425
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33UP13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")
EXPOSED AGGREGATE CONCRETE SIDEWALK.FLUSH TRANSITION FROM PARKING.
ROCK & BOULDER SCAPE
ACCESSIBLE PERVIOUS
PAVER WALK
BICYCLE RACK
LIGHT WELL W/ GRATING
LIGHT WELL W/ GRATING
EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN
ROCK & BOULDER SCAPE
EXISTING HEDGE TO REMAIN
EXISTING HEDGE TO REMAIN
PERENNIAL BED
PERENNIAL BEDPERENNIAL BED
BOX WOOD SHRUB
LOW PLANTS &
GROUNDCOVER
BOX WOOD SHRUB
LOW PLANTS &
GROUNDCOVER
LAWN
LAWN
LAWN
ROCK & BOULDER SCAPE
ACCESSIBLE PERVIOUSPAVER WALK
ROCK & BOULDER SCAPEPROPERTY LINEGMEM
T
EB
T PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVEACTIVITY ENVELOPEACTIVITY ENVELOPE78
3
0
783078307829782878287828
7829
SI JOHNSON DITCH CL
PERVIOUS PAVER PARKING AREA
STEEL PARKING BOLLARD
GRILL AREA W/
STONE COUNTER
ACCESSIBLERAMP
ACCESSIBLE PERVIOUSPAVER WALK
ACCESSIBLE PERVIOUSPAVER WALK
ACCESSIBLE PERVIOUS
PAVER WALK
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 LANDSCAPE PLAN | PROPOSED | 3/16"
0 4'8'12'
7930'-6" = ARCH 100'-0"
N
165
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:51 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.05
EXISTING LOWER
LEVEL FLOOR PLAN |
DEMOLITION
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
PARTIAL BASEMENT FOUNDATION TO BE REPLACED
DIRT FOUNDATION TO BE REPLACED
EXISTING HOME TO BE LIFTED. NEW BASEMENTTO BE EXCAVATED. NEW FOUNDATIONS BUILT.PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE1A2.01
1
A2.02
2A2.01
2
A2.02
1
A2.03
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 LOWER LEVEL DEMOLITION
0 4'8'12'
166
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:51 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.06
EXISTING MAIN LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN |
DEMOLITION
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
GRAVEL PARKING AREA TO BE REMOVED
VEGETATION TO BE REMOVED
TREE TO REMOVED
TRANSFORMER TO REMAIN, UPGRADE AS REQ.
INTERIOR WALLS & FINISHES TO BE REMOVED
INTERIOR FIXTURES TO BE REMOVED
INTERIOR FLOOR TO REPLACED(FINISH & STRUCTURE)
RAMP TO BE REMOVED. REPLACEDWITH HARDSCAPE.
TREE TO REMOVED
CELLAR DOORS TO BE REMOVED
UTILITIES RELOCATED AS REQ.
FIREPLACES TO BE REMOVED. CHIMNEYSAT ROOF TO REMAIN.PROPERTY LINEGMEM
T
EB
T PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINEACTIVITY ENVELOPEACTIVITY ENVELOPESI JOHNSON DITCH CL
1A2.01
1
A2.02
2A2.01
2
A2.02
1
A2.03
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL DEMOLITION
0 4'8'12'
167
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:51 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.07
EXISTING SECOND
LEVEL FLOOR PLAN |
DEMOLITION
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
INTERIOR WALLS & FINISHES TO BE REMOVED
INTERIOR FIXTURES TO BE REMOVED
INTERIOR FLOOR TO REPLACED(FINISH & STRUCTURE)
FIREPLACES TO BE REMOVED. CHIMNEYSAT ROOF TO REMAIN.PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE1A2.01
1
A2.02
2A2.01
2
A2.02
1
A2.03
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 SECOND LEVEL DEMOLITION
0 4'8'12'
168
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:51 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.08
CRAWL SPACE FLOOR
PLAN | PROPOSED
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
VENT WELL
1A2.01
1
A2.02
2A2.01
2
A2.02
1
A2.03
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 CRAWL SPACE PROPOSED
0 4'8'12'
169
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 8/27/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Thursday, August 27, 2020 11:39 AMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.09
MAIN LEVEL FLOOR
PLAN | PROPOSED
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
owned by and are the property of David
Johnston Architects, PC and developed for use
and in conjunction with the specified project.
None of the ideas, designs, arrangements or
plans shall be used by or disclosed for any
purpose whatsoever without the written
authorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
UP
UPUP13RISER(7 25/64")
12TREADS(11")UP13RISER(7 25/64")
12TREADS(11")UP13RISER(7 25/64")
12TREADS(11")UP13RISER(7 25/64")
12TREADS(11")
DW
DWDW
RGRG
RG
EXPOSED AGRAGATE CONCRETE SIDEWALK.
FLUSH TRANSITION FROM PARKING.
BICYCLE RACK
ACCESSIBLE PERVIOUS
PAVER WALK
ACCESSIBLE PERVIOUS
PAVER WALK
ACCESSIBLE PERVIOUS
PAVER WALK
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVEACTIVITY ENVELOPEACTIVITY ENVELOPESI JOHNSON DITCH CL
TRASH ENCLOSURE
102
CAR PORT
100
BIKE REPAIR & SKI ROOM
105
1 BED UNIT
106
1 BED UNIT
107
2 BED UNIT
108
COVERED DECK
109
D/WREF REF
DRWREF
1A2.01
1
A2.02
2A2.01
2
A2.02
1
A2.03
PERVIOUS PAVER PARKING AREA
STEEL PARKING BOLLARD
BATHROOM
BEDROOM
CL.
CL.LIVINGDINING
DINING
LIVING CL.
CL.
KITCHEN
STAIR
LINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVELINE OF STRUCTURE ABOVE
ACTIVITY ENVELOPE
LIVING
CL.
ACCESSIBLE
RAMP
LAUNDRY
CL.DINING
POWDER ROOM
LAUNDRY
KITCHENENTRY
UTILITY
CL
ENTRY
UTILITY
CL
ENTRY
UTILITY
CL
ENTRY
UTILITY
CL
KITCHEN
OUTDOOR GRILL & DINING
110
STORAGE CLS.
101
STORAGE CLS.
102
STORAGE CLS.
103
STORAGE CLS.
104
STORAGE CLS.
105
STORAGE CLS.
107
STORAGE CLS.
108
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL PROPOSED
0 4'8'12'
170
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:52 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.10
SECOND LEVEL FLOOR
PLAN | PROPOSED
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
DN13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")DN13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")DN13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")DN13RISER(7 25/64")12TREADS(11")DWDWDWDWRGRGRGRGPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
EXISTING ROOF BELOW
PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
1 BED UNIT
107
2 BED UNIT
202
2 BED UNIT
201
2 BED UNIT
204
2 BED UNIT
203D/WUP17RISER(7 9/64")16TREADS(11")UP17RISER(7 9/64")16TREADS(11")UP17RISER(7 9/64")16TREADS(11")UP17RISER(7 9/64")16TREADS(11")REFREFREFREF1A2.01
1
A2.02
2A2.01
2
A2.02
1
A2.03
BATHROOM
BATHROOM
BEDROOM
BEDROOM BEDROOM
CL.
CL.
STORAGE
STORAGESTORAGE
STORAGE
KITCHEN
PANTRY
CL
LIVING ROOM
DINING ROOM
CL
KITCHEN
PANTRY
CL
LIVING ROOM
DINING ROOM
CL
KITCHEN
PANTRY
CL
LIVING ROOM
DINING ROOM
CL
KITCHEN
PANTRY
CL
LIVING ROOM
DINING ROOM
CL
LAUNDRY
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 SECOND LEVEL PROPOSED
0 4'8'12'
171
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:52 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.11
THIRD LEVEL FLOOR
PLAN | PROPOSED
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING ROOF
DN17RISER(7 9/64")16TREADS(11")DN17RISER(7 9/64")16TREADS(11")DN17RISER(7 9/64")16TREADS(11")DN17RISER(7 9/64")16TREADS(11")DR W DR W DRWDRW
1A2.01
1
A2.02
2A2.01
2
A2.02
1
A2.03
BEDROOM
BATHROOM
LAUNDRY BATHROOM
BEDROOMCL
STAIR HALL
BEDROOM
BATHROOM
LAUNDRY BATHROOM
BEDROOMCL
STAIR HALL
BEDROOM
CL
BATHROOM
LAUNDRYBATHROOM
BEDROOM CL
STAIR HALL
BEDROOM
BATHROOM
LAUNDRYBATHROOM
BEDROOM CL
STAIR HALL
CLCLCL
SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 THIRD LEVEL PROPOSED
0 4'8'12'
172
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:52 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A1.12
ROOF PLAN
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.5'-33/4"STANDING SEAM MEMBRANE ROOF WITH BALLAST SNOW FENCEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
PROPERTY LINEACTIVITY ENVELOPEACTIVITY ENVELOPEACTIVITY ENVELOPE
J
A3.07
K
1A2.01
1
A2.02
2A2.01
2
A2.02
1
A2.03
CEDAR SHINGLE ROOFTO BE REPLACED AS REQ.
CEDAR SHINGLE ROOFTO BE REPLACED AS REQ.
EXISTING ROOF BELOW
EXISTING ROOF BELOW
1:1210 : 1210 : 1210 : 1210 : 121:121:121:121:121:1210 : 1210 : 1210 : 1210 : 12SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 ROOF PLAN
0 4'8'12'
173
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/17/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Wednesday, June 17, 2020 10:23 AMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A2.01
ELEVATIONS
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"
PROPOSED NEW STRUCTURE BEYOND
3"27'-21/2"EXISTING SHINGLES TOBE REPLACED AS REQ.NATURAL SEALED FINISH.
CEDAR SHAKE ROOF TO REPLCED AS REQ.WITH NEW NATURAL COLOR AND FIRE COATING.
ENVELOPE WINDOWS &DOORS TO BE REPAIREDAND REFINISHED ASREQUIRED.
CLAP BOARD SIDING TO BE STRIPPED& REPAINTED. COLOR T.B.D. REPLACE ASREQ.
CHIMNEYS TO REMAIN. REPAIRED AS REQ.
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN
EXISTING SIDING, FASCIAS TRIM &OTHER WOOD ENVELOPE COMPONENTSTO BE REPAIRED/ REPLACED AS REQ.NEW PAINT. COLOR T.B.D.
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"27'-101/4"27'-103/4"WOOD SLAT RAIN SCREEN.VERTICAL ORIENTATION.COLOR PENDING APPROVEDMOCK-UP BY HPC.
WOOD BOARD SIDING.COLOR PENDING APPROVEDMOCK-UP BY HPC.
POURED CONCRETE COLUMNS
POLISHED FACE CONCRETE BLOCK
WOOD SOFFIT BOARDS IN DECKS, ROOFSOFFITS & CARPORTS
SPANDREL GLASS
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 NORTH ELEVATION
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 SOUTH ELEVATION
0 2'4'8'
174
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/17/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Wednesday, June 17, 2020 10:23 AMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A2.02
ELEVATIONS
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.27'-83/4"27'-113/4"WOOD SLAT RAIN SCREEN.VERTICAL ORIENTATION.COLOR PENDING APPROVEDMOCK-UP BY HPC.
WOOD BOARD SIDING.COLOR PENDING APPROVEDMOCK-UP BY HPC.
POURED CONCRETE COLUMNS
POLISHED FACE CONCRETE BLOCK
WOOD SOFFIT BOARDS IN DECKS, ROOFSOFFITS & CARPORTS
SNOW FENCE
STANDING SEAM
27'-9"EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN.REPAIR AS REQ.
EXISTING SHINGLES TOBE REPLACED AS REQ.NATURAL SEALED FINISH.
CEDAR SHAKE ROOF TO REPLCED AS REQ.WITH NEW NATURAL COLOR AND FIRE COATING.
ENVELOPE WINDOWS &DOORS TO BE REPAIREDAND REFINISHED ASREQUIRED.
CLAP BOARD SIDING TO BE STRIPPED& REPAINTED. COLOR T.B.D. REPLACE ASREQ.
CHIMNEYS TO REMAIN. REPAIRED AS REQ.
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN
EXISTING SIDING, FASCIAS TRIM &OTHER WOOD ENVELOPE COMPONENTSTO BE REPAIRED/ REPLACED AS REQ.NEW PAINT. COLOR T.B.D.
STONE APRON TO REMAIN &REPAIRED AS REQ.
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"27'-9"WOOD SLAT RAIN SCREEN.VERTICAL ORIENTATION.COLOR PENDING APPROVEDMOCK-UP BY HPC.
WOOD BOARD SIDING.COLOR PENDING APPROVEDMOCK-UP BY HPC.
POURED CONCRETE COLUMNS
WOOD SOFFIT BOARDS IN DECKS, ROOFSOFFITS & CARPORTS
SNOW FENCE
STANDING SEAM
26'-81/2"EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN.REPAIR AS REQ.
EXISTING SHINGLES TOBE REPLACED AS REQ.NATURAL SEALED FINISH.
CEDAR SHAKE ROOF TO REPLCED AS REQ.WITH NEW NATURAL COLOR AND FIRE COATING.
ENVELOPE WINDOWS &DOORS TO BE REPAIREDAND REFINISHED ASREQUIRED.
CLAP BOARD SIDING TO BE STRIPPED& REPAINTED. COLOR T.B.D. REPLACE ASREQ.
CHIMNEYS TO REMAIN. REPAIRED AS REQ.
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN
EXISTING SIDING, FASCIAS TRIM &OTHER WOOD ENVELOPE COMPONENTSTO BE REPAIRED/ REPLACED AS REQ.NEW PAINT. COLOR T.B.D.
STONE APRON TO REMAIN &REPAIRED AS REQ.
POLISHED FACE CONCRETE BLOCK
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION
0 2'4'8'
175
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/17/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Wednesday, June 17, 2020 10:23 AMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A2.03
ELEVATIONS
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"27'-111/4"SNOW FENCE
STANDING SEAM
WOOD SLAT RAIN SCREEN.VERTICAL ORIENTATION.COLOR PENDING APPROVEDMOCK-UP BY HPC.
WOOD BOARD SIDING.COLOR PENDING APPROVEDMOCK-UP BY HPC.
POLISHED FACE CONCRETE BLOCK
WOOD SOFFIT BOARDS IN DECKS, ROOFSOFFITS & CARPORTS
SPANDREL GLASS
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 AUXILIARY ELEVATION
0 2'4'8'
176
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 8/27/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Thursday, August 27, 2020 11:39 AMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A2.04
PROPOSED MATERIALS
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
owned by and are the property of David
Johnston Architects, PC and developed for use
and in conjunction with the specified project.
None of the ideas, designs, arrangements or
plans shall be used by or disclosed for any
purpose whatsoever without the written
authorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
CEDAR SHINGLE
EXAMPLE AT IN-SET DECKS
POLISHED CONCRETE BLACK
EXAMPLE AT MAIN LEVEL STORAGE AREAS, TRASH AREA & BIKE ROOM
CONCRETE COLUMNS
EXAMPLE AT MAIN LEVEL
POROUS PAVERS
EXAMPLE AT ALLEY PARKING AREA
MEMBRANE ROOF WITH APPLIED RIBS
EXAMPLE AT ROOFS
STEEL & CABLE RAILINGS WITH WOOD TOP RAIL
EXAMPLE CIRCULATION DECKS & EXTERIOR STAIRS
PROPOSED LAY-UP OF BLOCK MASONRY
PROPOSED LAY-UP OF BLOCK MASONRY
WHITE WASHED WOOD SIDING BOARDSNATURAL VERTICAL WOOD SLATS
177
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 8/10/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.2.pln Monday, August 10, 2020 9:57 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
A2.05
PROPOSED
RENDERINGS
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plans
indicated or represented by this drawing are
owned by and are the property of David
Johnston Architects, PC and developed for use
and in conjunction with the specified project.
None of the ideas, designs, arrangements or
plans shall be used by or disclosed for any
purpose whatsoever without the written
authorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
178
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:53 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
HP-1
HISTORIC
PRESERVATION
ELEVATIONS
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"3"27'-21/2"EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN.REPAIR AS REQ.
EXISTING SHINGLES TOBE REPLACED AS REQ.NATURAL SEALED FINISH.
CEDAR SHAKE ROOF TO REPLCED AS REQ.WITH NEW NATURAL COLOR AND FIRE COATING.
ENVELOPE WINDOWS &DOORS TO BE REPAIREDAND REFINISHED ASREQUIRED.
CLAP BOARD SIDING TO BE STRIPPED& REPAINTED. COLOR T.B.D. REPLACE ASREQ.
CHIMNEYS TO REMAIN. REPAIRED AS REQ.
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN
EXISTING SIDING, FASCIAS TRIM &OTHER WOOD ENVELOPE COMPONENTSTO BE REPAIRED/ REPLACED AS REQ.NEW PAINT. COLOR T.B.D.
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"
CEDAR SHAKE ROOF TO REPLCED AS REQ.WITH NEW NATURAL COLOR AND FIRE COATING.
ENVELOPE WINDOWS &DOORS TO BE REPAIREDAND REFINISHED ASREQUIRED.
CLAP BOARD SIDING TO BE STRIPPED& REPAINTED. COLOR T.B.D. REPLACE ASREQ.
EXISTING SIDING, FASCIAS TRIM &OTHER WOOD ENVELOPE COMPONENTSTO BE REPAIRED/ REPLACED AS REQ.NEW PAINT. COLOR T.B.D.
NEW UNIT DOOR IN STYLE OF EXISTING DOORS
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 NORTH ELEVATION: HP PLAN
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 SOUTH ELEVATION: HP PLAN
0 2'4'8'
179
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:53 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
HP-2
HISTORIC
PRESERVATION
ELEVATIONS
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.27'-9"EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN.REPAIR AS REQ.
EXISTING SHINGLES TOBE REPLACED AS REQ.NATURAL SEALED FINISH.
CEDAR SHAKE ROOF TO REPLCED AS REQ.WITH NEW NATURAL COLOR AND FIRE COATING.
ENVELOPE WINDOWS &DOORS TO BE REPAIREDAND REFINISHED ASREQUIRED.
CLAP BOARD SIDING TO BE STRIPPED& REPAINTED. COLOR T.B.D. REPLACE ASREQ.
CHIMNEYS TO REMAIN. REPAIRED AS REQ.
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN
EXISTING SIDING, FASCIAS TRIM &OTHER WOOD ENVELOPE COMPONENTSTO BE REPAIRED/ REPLACED AS REQ.NEW PAINT. COLOR T.B.D.
STONE APRON TO REMAIN &REPAIRED AS REQ.
MAIN LEVEL
100'-0"
SECOND LEVEL
108'-0"
THIRD LEVEL
118'-13/8"26'-81/2"EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN.REPAIR AS REQ.
EXISTING SHINGLES TOBE REPLACED AS REQ.NATURAL SEALED FINISH.
CEDAR SHAKE ROOF TO REPLCED AS REQ.WITH NEW NATURAL COLOR AND FIRE COATING.
ENVELOPE WINDOWS &DOORS TO BE REPAIREDAND REFINISHED ASREQUIRED.
CLAP BOARD SIDING TO BE STRIPPED& REPAINTED. COLOR T.B.D. REPLACE ASREQ.
CHIMNEYS TO REMAIN. REPAIRED AS REQ.
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN
EXISTING SIDING, FASCIAS TRIM &OTHER WOOD ENVELOPE COMPONENTSTO BE REPAIRED/ REPLACED AS REQ.NEW PAINT. COLOR T.B.D.
STONE APRON TO REMAIN &REPAIRED AS REQ.
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION: HP PLAN
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 WEST ELEVATION: HP PLAN
0 2'4'8'
180
DRAWING ISSUE
DRAWN BY:
PROJECT No:1907
CPF
HPC APPLICATION 6/11/20
/Users/collinfrank/Desktop/611 Main St_2.0_B.1.pln Thursday, June 11, 2020 5:53 PMAFFORDBALE HOUSING | ASPEN CO611 W. MAIN ST.119 South Spring St. | Suite 203
Aspen, CO 81611
T 970-925-3444
www.djarchitects.com
HP-3
HISTORIC
PRESERVATION
EXISTING PHOTOS
All ideas, designs, arrangements and plansindicated or represented by this drawing areowned by and are the property of DavidJohnston Architects, PC and developed for useand in conjunction with the specified project.None of the ideas, designs, arrangements orplans shall be used by or disclosed for anypurpose whatsoever without the writtenauthorization of David Johnston Architects, PC.
Sheet No.
EXISTING PROPERTYNORTHEXISTING PROPERTYNORTHEXISTING PROPERTYSOUTH
DOCUMENTING DETAILSPORCH COLUMNDOCUMENTING DETAILSPORCH & QUEEN ANNE RETURNDOCUMENTING DETAILSREAR COVERED PORCHDOCUMENTING DETAILSWEST ANNEXDOCUMENTING DETAILSREAR WINDOWS
DOCUMENTING DETAILSFRONT COVERED PORCH WINDOWS DOCUMENTING DETAILSFRONT WALK & GABLE DOCUMENTING DETAILSPLATES OF REAR ADDITIONS DOCUMENTING DETAILSBAY WINDOW DOCUMENTING DETAILSSOFFIT DETAILS
EXISTING PROPERTYNORTH
181
182
183
184
185
PUBLIC NOTICE
Date:
Time:
Place:
Purpose:
186
611 west main street
611 West Main Street is proposed to be
converted to a 100% affordable housing
rental project with 3 housing units in
the landmark and 6 housing units in
a detached building at the rear. The
landmark is proposed to be restored with
minimal exterior changes.
7 parking spaces and 9 external storage
units are proposed beneath the new
deatched building along the alley. The
units range between 1-bedroom and
2-bedroom units in the new building,
and 3-bedroom and 4-bedroom units in
the landmark. Two units in the landmark
request Special Review for the proposed
location above and below grade.
Affordable housing credits are requested
for the voluntary deed restricted units. A
mix of Category 3 and 4 is proposed.
The landmark is proposed to be picked
up to dig a full basement and placed back
in its original location. A setback variation
for the front entry is requested to legalize
the original location of this feature.
Proposed Units
187
188
189
190
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
130 S. Galena Street,
Aspen, CO 81611
p: (970) 920.5000
f: (970) 920.5197
www.aspenpitkin.com
611 West Main Street
Project Location: 611 West Main Street
Land Use Reviews: Conceptual HP Review, Variations, Special Review,
Relocation, Growth Management, Parking,
Affordable Housing Credit Certificates, and related reviews
Decision Making Body: Historic Preservation Commission
Hearing Date: May 27, 2020, 4:30pm
Hearing Location: City Hall, Council Chambers;
130 S. Galena St; Aspen, CO 81611
Project Description: The Applicant proposes restoration of a designated local landmark and the
development of nine affordable housing units. The historic resource will be placed onto a new
basement structure in its current (original) location. Three of the units will be located in the exist-
ing landmark and six units are proposed in a new detached structure at the rear of the property.
Special review is requested for two affordable housing units in the landmark.
Legal Description: 611 West Main Street; Legally Described as Lots E, F, and G, Block 25, City and
Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado.
Parcel ID: 2735-124-48-003
Applicant: 611 West Main Street, LLC, 2001 N. Halsted #304, Chicago, IL 60614
More Information: For further information related to the project, contact Kevin Rayes at the City
of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, 970.429.2797, kev-
in.rayes@cityofaspen.com 191
300 South Spring Street
Aspen CO 81611
970.925.2855
bendonadams.com
192
Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius
Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web
site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to
ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic
system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral
estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County
does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners.
Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning
the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this
site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and
reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the
user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and
liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or
data obtained on this web site.
This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be
printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to
page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the
margins such that they no longer line up on the labels
sheet. Print actual size.
From Parcel: 273512448003 on 04/27/2020
Instructions:
Disclaimer:
http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com
193
ALPINE BANK
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
501 MAIN ASPEN LLC
GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49503
ALDRICH PL #200 OTTAWA AVE NW
SCHWARTZ RACHEL K & MARK
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 483042603
1061 COUNTRY CLUB RD
THROM DOUGLAS H
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST
ASPEN MAIN STREET II LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
ALPINE BANK ASPEN
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
WASHBURN SERENE MARIE V
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #205
JEROME OFFICE ASPEN CO LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
EYDENBERG JOHN D & DARIN W
NEW YORK, NY 10029
1212 FIFTH AVE #16N
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
LENIO IRREV TRUST
ROME, NY 13440
737 W BLOOMFIELD ST
LORD KAREN & COURTNEY
MIAMI BEACH, FL 331403401
2301 N MERIDIAN AVE
KURKULIS PATSY & PAUL R
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #201
MCCOY CARLTON
ST HELENA , CA 94574
500 TAPLIN RD
PITKIN COUNTY
ASPEN, CO 81611
530 E MAIN ST #301
FORNELL CLARITY ELISE
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN #B-206
MENENDEZ NASRIN N REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8036
SCHULMAN WILLIAM PAUL
CHARLEVOIX, MI 49720
301 MERCER BLVD
BLEEKER STREET LLC
CORAL GABLES, FL 33156
5299 HAMMOCK DR
ASPEN MAIN STREET II LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
BRAISTED DAVID
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11442
POTTS LEAH S
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #102
DAGGS JAMES K
BASALT, CO 81621
350 MARKET ST #311
JEROME OFFICE ASPEN CO LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
PERRY IAN MICHAEL
ASPEN, CO 81611
426 E HYMAN AVE
JAS CAPITAL LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #E
SAMUEL JOSHUA MOSES
DILLON, CO 80435
PO BOX 756
WAGNER HOLDINGS CORP LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 E MAIN ST
604 WEST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
604 W MAIN ST
194
COLLINS NANCY
SAINT PETERSBURG, FL 33703
1874 OREGON AVE
WARBLE ERIC
ASPEN, CO 816128271
PO BOX 8271
LITTLE VICTORIAN CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
PO BOX 3149
HAYMAX HOTELS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
LHG HOLDING LLC
LOS ANGELES, CA 90049
11777 SAN VICENTE BLVD 9TH FL
WINGSTONE TOY COMPANY LLC
VENTURA, CA 93993
4572 TELEPHONE RD #912
GOLDEN ALEXANDRA SEP PROP TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST PH B
NIX ROBERT JR
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 3694
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
TOMS CONDO LLC
ERWINNA , PA 18920
6 SHULL FARM RD
DAMORE MATTHEW
ASPEN, CO 81611
634 W MAIN ST #3
PEARSON MARK M & LEES M
ASPEN, CO 81611
702 W MAIN ST
ASPEN FAMILY HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
137 WESTVIEW DR
CHRISTIANA A105 LLC
MENLO PARK, CA 94026
PO BOX 4132
HISPATEL CORP
MIAMI, FL 331364119
700 NW 1ST AVE #1700
FORNELL CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST
HY-MOUNTAIN TRANSPORT INC
ASPEN, CO 81611
214 B AABC
SHADOW MOUNTAIN OFFICES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
BATES JESSICA TRUST
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93405
394 LEMON ST #2
GANT CONDO ASSC
ASPEN, CO 816112142
610 S WESTEND ST
MARSHALL ELLEN M & THOMAS M REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
300 RIVERSIDE AVE
BARBER EDGAR F
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9678
SGSG ASPEN CONDO LLC
DENVER, CO 80237
8100 E UNION AVE #2303
DUNKELBERG AMBER & KEVIN
SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615
PO BOX 5804
501 WEST MAIN LLC
ASPEN, CO 816111818
532 E HOPKINS AVE
KATZMAN LORI ANN
CHARLEVOIX, MI 49720
301 MERCER BLVD
STARFORD PROPERTIES NV
MIAMI, FL 331364119
700 NW 1ST AVE #1700
HORNE CHRISTOPHER & BRANDI
AUSTIN, TX 78746
5214 BUCKMAN MTN RD
01037H TRUST
BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90210
715 N SIERRA DR
FELER LAURIE & CLAUDIO
CARBONDALE, CO 81623
550 FOX RUN
195
BLANCHARD NATALIE M
ASPEN, CO 81611
720 W HOPKINS #B
MARSHALL TRACEY CAUSEY LIV TRUST
AUSTIN, TX 78746
3107 WESTLAKE DR
DEANE LANDON
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 508
HAISFIELD MICHAEL D & LISA Y
ASPEN, CO 81611
616 W HOPKINS
GANT CONDO ASSOC INC
ASPEN, CO 816112142
610 S WESTEND ST
CARROLL MEREDITH & ARTHUR
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #210
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
HAYMAX HOTELS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
616 W MAIN ST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
612 W MAIN ST
MENENDEZ NASRIN N REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8036
JAS CAPITAL LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #E
TODD SHANE
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 2654
SKANDIA TOWNHOUSES CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
720 W HOPKINS AVE
SMITH ANDREW C & DONNA G
DALLAS, TX 75205
3622 SPRINGBROOK ST
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
SANDERS BARBARA
ASPEN, CO 81611
634 W MAIN ST #8
ERICKSON A RONALD
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #211
PEDRO STEVEN D MD PA TRUST
FORT WORTH, TX 76132
7833 OAKMONT BLVD
LHG HOLDING LLC
LOS ANGELES, CA 90049
11777 SAN VICENTE BLVD 9TH FL
WERLIN LAURA B TRUST
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94115
2279 PINE ST
MEYER MARY ANNE
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11238
AMAYA JOSE ANTONIO & BLANCA E ARGUETA
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #103
JAS CAPITAL LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #E
KENDRICK SCOTT
ASPEN, CO 81611
700 W HOPKINS AVE #5
UMBA ENTERPRISE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #103
RUFUS CAMI CAMI LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
1280 UTE AVE #7
HOPKINS & FOURTH LLC
CHICAGO, IL 60614
2001 N HALSTED ST #304
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
LEADINGHAM CAROLINE
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #A-102
REECE MARK
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #A-102
196
SILVERLODE INVESTORS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN #201
617 MAIN ST PROF BLDG CONDO
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST
BRYAN SHEILAH
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 976
MADSEN MARTHA W
ASPEN, CO 81611
608 W HOPKINS AVE APT 9
616.5 W MAIN ST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
612 W MAIN ST
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
REID SUZANNAH V K
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 10443
SACKS CAROL
HOUSTON, TX 77207
4545 POST OAK PL #100
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
TAYLOR JOHN W
COCOA BEACH, FL 329312329
37 W POINT DR
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
HARRIS ANGELA
ASPEN, CO 816111618
518 W MAIN ST #C107
SMB CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MIAN ST
ANGELOV DIMTAR S & DANIEL D
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #209
WENDT ROBERT E II
PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272
350 MT HOLYOKE AVE
ALLEN DOUGLAS P
BOULDER, CO 803012254
3096 EDISON CT
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
MENENDEZ LUIS A REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8036
DENBY SAMUEL ROBERT
WASHINGTON, DC 20016
4861 INDIAN LN NW
715 WEST MAIN CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
715 W MAIN ST
HAVANDJIAN GASTON MATIAS
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #B205
JEMAR PARTNERS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
701 W MAIN ST
ASPEN MAIN STREET II LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
EYXEFC2 LLC
ARVADA, CO 80002
7310 W 52ND AVE #A129
ONEIL BRIAN & SUZANNE
TAVERNIER, FL 33070
PO BOX 199
FRANSEN ERIN M & GREGORY H
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS UNIT 206
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
LITTLE AJAX CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE
PHILLIPS SHAUN E
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #8105
SHADOW MOUNTAIN OFFICES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
197
ASPEN MAIN ST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
LONE EAGLE TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
634 W MAIN ST #1
WESTCHESTER INVESTMENTS INC
MIAMI, FL 331364119
700 NW 1ST AVE #1700
CLEANER EXPRESS
ASPEN, CO 81611
435 E MAIN ST
TUCKER LUCY LEA
ASPEN, CO 81611
PO BOX 1480
CITY OF ASPEN
ASPEN, CO 81611
130 S GALENA ST
STEVENSON ADAM
ASPEN, CO 81611
627 W MAIN ST
BRYAN SHEILAH JUDITH
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 976
ALLEN DOUGLAS P
BOULDER, CO 803012254
3096 EDISON CT
WEIEN J ROBERT
ASPEN, CO 81611
709 W MAIN ST
ASPEN MAIN ST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
JULES ASPEN LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
625 E HYMAN AVE #201
CHRISTOPHER MARIDEE LIV TRUST
SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85260-4327
13571 N 92ND WY
LINDAUER REBECCA F
AUSTIN, TX 78703
1115 ELM ST
MAUPIN KENNETH
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #C-207
GARMISCH LODGING LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #2
CHOD ASHLEY B
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 4022
VOSS NATALIE
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #204
HESSIAN ASPEN LLC
WINTER PARK, FL 327894881
1470 GENE ST #B
DJORDJEVIC VLADAN
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9566
FRIAS PROPERTIES OF ASPEN
ASPEN, CO 81611
730 E DURANT
FRIAS PROPERTIES OF ASPEN
ASPEN, CO 81611
730 E DURANT
616 WEST MAIN CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
616 W MAIN ST
BONETTI MARYSUE
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 569
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
DAGGS JAMES K
BASALT, CO 81621
350 MARKET ST #311
FERGUS ELIZABETH REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 1515
OBX TO ASPEN LLC
FORT COLLINS, CO 80526
4251 MORNING GLORY RD
LHG HOLDING LLC
LOS ANGELES, CA 90049
11777 SAN VICENTE BLVD 9TH FL
ALPINE BANK
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
198
DAGGS JAMES K
BASALT, CO 81621
350 MARKET ST #311
CHRISTIANA UNIT D101 LLC
ASPEN , CO 81612
PO BOX 4937
GOLDSTEIN MARC
HOUSTON, TX 77027
4545 POST OAK PL #100
MEYER OLVIN
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 11238
PEDRO STEVEN & JERRI REAL ESTATE LLC
FORT WORTH, TX 76132
7833 OAKMONT BLVD
RUFUS CAMI CAMI LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
1280 UTE AVE #7
WENDLING NAN JEAN
ASPEN, CO 816129747
PO BOX 10745
DAY JEROD
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #B203
ULLR HOMEOWNERS ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
520 W MAIN ST
TOLK GAYLA LYNN
ASPEN, CO 81611
117 N SIXTH ST
SHADOW MOUNTAIN OFFICES LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
WEST ALFRED JR & LORALEE
VANTURA, CA 93993
4572 TELEPHONE RD #912
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
PROMISE LAND LLC
ENGLEWOOD, CO 801114628
6412 S QUEBEC ST
CUMMINS RICHARD
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #B
COYOTE PEAK LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
706 W MAIN ST
7TH & MAIN AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ASPEN, CO 81611
COMMON AREA
719 W MAIN ST
UMBA ENTERPRISE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #103
604 WEST LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
604 W MAIN ST
GOLDEN ALEXANDRA SEP PROP TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST PH B
MENENDEZ LUIS A REV TRUST
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 8036
NECHADEIM REALTY LLC
NEW YORK, NY 10019
680 FIFTH AVE 7TH FL
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
ALPINE BANK ASPEN
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
LANG JACQUELINE
COTTESLOE WESTERN AUSTRALIA 6011,
15 WENTWORTH ST
SHEA LAYNE & MICHAEL
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #202
MCGUIRE JENNIFER ERIN
ASPEN, CO 81611
501 E DEAN ST
JAS CAPITAL LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 W MAIN ST #E
ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
617 E COOPER
REID SUZANNAH V K
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 10443
199
MCCLURE MARY
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #207
SHADOW MTN CORP
MIAMI, FL 331364119
700 NW 1ST AVE #1700
NEMIROW JORDAN
ASPEN, CO 81611
612 W MAIN ST
SCHALL FAMILY TRUST
ENCINO, CA 91436
3841 HAYVENHURST DR
MARSHALL ALISON & JOSHUA
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #212
UMBA ENTERPRISE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #103
ULLR HOMEOWNERS ASSOC
ASPEN, CO 81611
520 W MAIN ST
WELLES PETER S & SONDRA T
CARBONDALE, CO 81623
5343 CR 100
ASPEN MAIN STREET II LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #201
ALPINE BANK
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601
2200 GRAND AVE
NALEZNY C GERARD & PENNIE
FORT COLLINS, CO 80526
4251 MORNING GLORY RD
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
P & L PROPERTIES LLC
GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501
101 S 3RD ST #360
BLACK BENJAMIN F & ALICE M
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE #208
PROMISE LAND LLC
ENGLEWOOD, CO 801114628
6412 S QUEBEC ST
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
RODRIGUEZ JOANN
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #00A
TELAMON HOLDINGS LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
715 W MAIN ST #204
FAVORITE PRATHUAN
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 9566
RUSSO NICK A
ASPEN, CO 81612
PO BOX 4743
700 WEST HOPKINS CONDO
ASPEN, CO 81611
700 W HOPKINS AVE
STERTZER ELIANE C
NEW YORK, NY 10065
160 E 65TH ST #23E
HUERGO DELFINA
ASPEN, CO 81611
518 W MAIN ST #A101
UMBA ENTERPRISE LLC
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W MAIN ST #103
GOLDSTONE JONNA A
ASPEN, CO 81611
605 W HOPKINS AVE # 203
200
Page 1 of 5
MEMORANDUM
TO:Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM:Kevin Rayes, Planner
THRU:Amy Simon, Interim Planning Director/Historic Preservation Officer
MEETING DATE:September 9,2020
RE:616 W. Main Street-Change in Use & Special Review, PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICANT/OWNER:
616 W Main St LLC
REPRESENTATIVE:
Chris Bendon, BendonAdams
LOCATION:
Street Address:
616 W. Main Street, Unit A
Legal Description:
616 W Main St., Unit A., Unit A, 616 West
Main Condominiums, according to the
condominium map of the 616 West Main
Condominiums recorded October 6, 2005
under Reception No. 515825 and as defined
and described in the condominium
declaration recorded October 19, 2005 as
Reception No. 516418, County of Pitkin,
State of Colorado.
Parcel Identification Number:
Parcel ID # 2735-124-44-009
LOT SIZE:
3,000 Square Feet (0.069 acres)
CURRENT ZONING &USE:
Historic Landmark Site within the
Mixed Use (MU)Zone District;
Unit A (Front): Commercial Use (Subject
Property)
Unit B (Rear):Free-Market Residential Unit
PROPOSED USE:
Unit A (Front): Free-Market Residential
Unit B (Rear):Free-Market Residential
SUMMARY:
The applicant proposes to convert 616 W. Main
Unit A from a commercial space to a free-market
single-family dwelling and requests approval for
Growth Management/Change in Use and an
exemption from the parking requirements via
Special Review.
Staff recommends approval for a Change in Use
subject to the conditions listed on page 5 of this
memo.Staff does not support exemption from the
parking requirements.
Site Locator Map-616 W. Main Street
616 W.
Main St.
201
Page 2 of 5
BACKGROUND:
616 W. Main is a 3,000 sq. ft. historic designated property located in the Mixed Use (MU) zone
district. The parcel is condominiumized into two units. Unit A is located at the front of the lot and
contains a Victorian era home and Unit B is located at the rear (See Figure 3) and contains a
Victorian era barn. Unit A is approved for commercial use and Unit B is approved as a free-
market residence.
Records indicate that both structures on this parcel were moved to this site from the opposite
side of Main Street at an unknown date. In the 1990s, the barn structure was converted to a
deed restricted ADU. While zoning only allows one residence on a lot of this size, ADUs are not
counted as units of density, therefore this was an allowed use. In 2004, a Change in Use approval
was granted to convert the front structure to commercial use. The outbuilding remained an ADU
for some time, then converted to free-market residential, which was permissible because the ADU
was voluntarily created and one free-market home was allowed on the site. With the front building
in commercial use, the rear building took the allotment for one free-market unit on the site. For
years the subject property functioned with a commercial space in the front (Unit A) and a
residential use in the rear (Unit B).
In 2019, the Planning Office reached out to
the applicant regarding the apparent use
of Unit A as a residence, which was a
zoning violation. The applicant was asked
to cease the residential use or pursue land
use approvals to legalize it. In May 2020
the applicant elected to ask the Board of
Adjustment, rather than HPC, to review the
request for a dimensional variance from
the minimum lot area requirements of the
Mixed-Use (MU) zone district to convert
Unit A to a residential use. The request
was approved via Resolution No. 3, Series
of 2020, enabling two, instead of one
single-family residences on a lot of 3,000
sq. ft. Finalizing this conversion requires
two additional approvals which are not
within the authority of BOA and are
therefore being presented to HPC.
REQUEST OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC):
The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals:
Change in Use (Chapter 26.470.100.a) to convert Unit A from a commercial to a residential use
(The Historic Preservation Commission is the final review authority).
Special Review (Chapter 26.515.080) to grant a two-space parking waiver, allowing for on-
street parking (The Historic Preservation Commission is the final review authority).
Please note that the attached land use application addresses the variance that has been decided
by BOA. HPC will not be providing any further evaluation of this topic.
Figure 2:616 W. Main- Front View
202
Page 3 of 5
PROJECT SUMMARY:
As noted previously, in 2019 Planning staff took action
to resolve a zoning violation on this site due to the
apparent use of Unit A as a residence. (Exhibit C).
The owner wishes to legally use the building as a
residence,creating two free-market single-family
dwellings on the lot. The applicant requests a Change
in Use to convert Unit A from a commercial to a
residential use. Additionally, the applicant seeks Special
Review to waive the parking required to use Unit A as a
residence. The applicant believes that because Unit A
functioned as a single-family dwelling at one time,
converting it back to a residential use complies with the
requirements of the MU zone district.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The following land use reviews are considered as part of this application:
1.Change in Use-
The criteria for a Change in Use are set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.470.080,
General Review Standards (in Exhibit A.1). Much of the criteria speak to the affordable
housing mitigation required. The affordable housing mitigation rate is based on new free-
market residential floor area as prescribed in Land Use Code Section 26.470.090.a, Single-
Family and Duplex Residential Development or Expansion. Pursuant to this section,
residential uses generate 0.16 FTEs per 1,000 sq. ft. of residential Floor Area. Unit A
contains 912 sq. ft. of FA, which translates to a required mitigation rate of 0.15 FTEs.
912 / 1,000 x 0.16 = 0.15 FTEs
The applicant must mitigate by extinguishing a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit at
the Category 2 Rate. The approximate cost to the applicant to provide this mitigation
according to the City’s tracking of Affordable Housing Certificates is $51,000.
2. Special Review-
Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.515.060.C, Transportation & Parking
Management,two parking units are required per dwelling unit. Converting Unit A to a
residential use requires mitigation for two parking units.
Additionally, it has come to staff’s attention during the evaluation of this application that
parking mitigation was never addressed when Unit B was converted to a residential use.
The owner of the property at the time approached APCHA to remove the deed restriction
on Unit B and did not follow through with Community Development to pursue the
necessary Change in Use process currently being applied to Unit A.
Just as with Unit A, two parking units are needed to bring Unit B into compliance. Staff
acknowledges that this application was submitted regarding Unit A. However, parking
compliance of two residential dwellings on a single lot is fundamentally linked and must
be addressed concurrently. There appears to be a relationship with the ownership of Unit
A and Unit B so coordinating parking mitigation for both units is appropriate under this
review.
616 W. Main, Unit A
Approved for
commercial use
616 ½ W. Main, Unit B
Approved as a single-
family dwelling
Figure 3:Existing Site
203
Page 4 of 5
In summary, a total of four parking units are required for this parcel (two parking units for
Unit A and two parking units for Unit B).
The applicant seeks a four-space waiver of both the need to park on the site and the need
to provide cash-in-lieu payment of $38,000 per space, which may be granted by HPC via
Special Review if the standards set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.515.080, Special
Review Standards and Section 26.415.100.D., Historic Preservation Benefits are met
(Exhibit A.2).
To grant a waiver, HPC is to consider the following:
Is on-site parking mitigation practically difficult or will it result in an undesirable
scenario?
Will existing or planned on-site or off-site facilities adequately serve the needs of
the development including the availability of parking?
Will a waiver 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 finds the criteria not met for a full waiver. Staff has determined that the extra density
allowance granted for this parcel by the Board of Adjustment will lead to additional parking
and transportation impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Granting a waiver to allow
off-site parking may exacerbate existing parking challenges in Aspen and burden the
neighborhood instead of the subject parcel, with the impact. Staff believes that two parking
spaces could be reasonably provided onsite in a stacked condition, as depicted in Figures
4 and 5, below.
Land Use Code Section 26.515.070.e,Detached and duplex residential dwelling parking,
allows tandem parking for single-family and duplex development. “Off-street parking
provided for detached residential dwellings and duplex dwellings is not required to have
unobstructed access of emergency apparatus to the property or to structures located on
the property. This allows for ‘stacking’ of vehicles where a vehicle is parked directly behind
another.” The parking spaces would be accessed via the rear alley of the property, behind
the historic house (which complies with the parking requirements for this property). To
achieve this configuration, an existing non-historic fence that appears to have been
Figure 4:Proposed Parking
Configuration
Figure 5:Proposed Parking Location
204
Page 5 of 5
constructed a few feet “inboard” of the east lot line would need to be removed or relocated.
Staff finds that removal of this fence would not generate an undesirable scenario nor would
it be practically difficult for the homeowner to achieve. Additionally, all parking would be
recessed behind the historic resource, minimizing any adverse impact to the historic
integrity of the dwelling as viewed from Main Street.
Please note that the applicant will be required to amend the condominium plat for the
property through an administrative review after this HPC process because the stacked
parking would sit on land currently assigned to Unit B, rather than Unit A.
There does not appear to be sufficient room to provide the remaining two parking spaces
that the code requires to be in the form of on-site parking, therefore staff finds that these
parking units should be mitigated via cash-in-lieu payment of $38,000 each.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends HPC adopt the attached resolution to approve a Change in Use to convert
Unit A from a commercial to a residential use. However, staff recommends that the Historic
Preservation Commission deny the Special Review request for a parking exemption and require
two on-site parking spaces to mitigate the parking associated with Unit A. Cash-in-lieu for two
parking units should be provided to meet the mitigation required for Unit B. The owner has
received a dimensional variance from the Board of Adjustment to allow two-single family
dwellings on a 3,000 sq. ft. lot. (The land use code requires a minimum of 3,000 sq. ft. per dwelling
on a residential lot). The additional density granted to this lot will lead to greater transportation
impacts relative to the surrounding properties. These impacts should be minimized by meeting
all parking requirements.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution #__, Series of 2020
Exhibit A.1 –Change in Use Staff Findings & Review Criteria
Exhibit A.2 –Special Review Staff Findings & Review Criteria
Exhibit B –Application
Exhibit C –Vacation Rental Letter
205
HPC Resolution #___, Series of 2020
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO. XX, SERIES OF 2020
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC)
APPROVING A CHANGE IN USE BUT DENYING SPECIAL REVIEW FOR PARKING
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 616 WEST MAIN STREET, UNIT A, CITY AND
TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO
Parcel ID No:2735-124-44-009
WHEREAS,the Community Development Department received an application for 616
West Main Street, Unit A, (the Application) from 616 W Main St LLC (Applicant), represented
by Chris Bendon, Bendon Adams, for the following land use review approvals:
Dimensional Variance: pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.314;
Change in Use: pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470.100;
Special Review: pursuant to Chapter 26.515.080; and
WHEREAS,the subject property is a historic landmark, zoned Mixed Use (MU) and is
improved with two structures- Unit A at the front and Unit B at the rear; and,
WHEREAS, all code citation references are to the City of Aspen Land Use Code in effect
on the day the application was deemed complete – February 21, 2020, as applicable to this Project;
and,
WHEREAS, prior to this review the Board of Adjustment approved a request for a
Dimensional Variance allowing two free-market residences on this property via Resolution No. 3,
Series of 2020 at a duly noticed public hearing on May 7, 2020; and,
WHEREAS,the City Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) continued this application
for Change in Use and Special Review on August 12, 2020; and,
WHEREAS,the City Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed this application
for Change in Use and Special Review at a duly noticed public hearing September 9, 2020; and,
WHEREAS,during the duly noticed public hearing on September 9, 2020, the Aspen
Historic Preservation Commission approved Resolution No. X, Series of 2020 by a __ to ___vote
(X-X), granting approval for a Change in Use but denying Special Review, as identified herein.
NOW,THEREFORE BEIT RESOLVED:
Section 1:
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Historic Preservation Commission hereby approves a Change in Use to convert Unit A from a
commercial use to a residential dwelling with the following conditions:
1. Two on-site parking spaces will be provided in the configuration depicted in Exhibit A,
attached to this resolution, as mitigation for Unit A.
2. Cash-in-lieu will be provided for two parking Units as mitigation for Unit B.
206
HPC Resolution #___, Series of 2020
Page 2 of 3
3. The applicant shall file for approval of a condominium plat amendment within 180 days
of this approval.
By requiring the provision of two on-site parking spaces and cash-in-lieu for two parking units,
the HPC is hereby denying the request to reduce parking via Special Review.
Section 2:
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development
proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented
before the Community Development Department and the Board of Adjustment Commission, are
hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as
if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority.
Section 3:
This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any
action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as
herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 4:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed
a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions thereof.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 9th day of September
2020.
Approved as to Form:Approved as to Content:
_______________________________________________________
Jim True, City Attorney Gretchen Greenwood, Chair
ATTEST:
__________________________
Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk
207
HPC Resolution #___, Series of 2020
Page 3 of 3
Exhibit A- Required on Site Parking Configuration
Required on-site parking
mitigation for Unit A. Each
parking space will comply
with current dimensional
standards of the Engineering
Department.
208
Exhibit A.1
Change in Use Review Criteria
Staff Findings
26.470.100, Change in Use &
26.470.080, General Review Standards
Review Criteria for 616 W. Main Street
The HPC may approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for a Change in Use based on
the following standards
MET NOT MET DOES NOT
APPLY
Sufficient Allotments: Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the proposed
development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.040.B. Applications for multi-year development allotment,
pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.110.A shall be required to meet this standard for the growth management years
from which the allotments are requested.
MET NOT MET
Development Conformance. The proposed development conforms to the requirements and limitations of this
Title, of the zone district or a site specific development plan, any adopted regulatory master plan, as well as
any previous approvals, including the Conceptual Historic Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual
Commercial Design Review approval and the Planned Development - Project Review approval, as applicable.
MET
Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed development shall upgrade public infrastructure and
facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. Public
infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy and communication
utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, parking and road and transit
services.
MET
Affordable Housing Mitigation.
For commercial development, sixty-five percent (65%) of the employees generated by the additional
commercial net leasable space, according to Section 26.470.050(b), Employee generation rates, shall be
mitigated through the provision of affordable housing.
For lodge development, sixty-five percent (65%) of the employees generated by the additional lodge pillows,
according to Section 26.470.050(b), Employee generation rates, shall be mitigated through the provision of
affordable housing. For the redevelopment or expansion of existing lodge uses, see section 26.470.100(h).
For the redevelopment of existing commercial net leasable space that did not previously mitigate (see Section
26.470.070(e)), the mitigation requirements for affordable housing shall be phased at fifteen percent (15%)
beginning in 2017, and by three percent (3%) each year thereafter until sixty-five percent (65%) is reached,
[Chart not shown].
N/A
Unless otherwise exempted, when a change in use between development categories is proposed, the
employee mitigation shall be based on the use the development is converting to. For instance, if a commercial
space is being converted to lodge units, the mitigation shall be based on the requirements for lodge space,
outlined in Subsection (2). Conversely, if lodge units are being converted to commercial space, the mitigation
shall be based on the requirements for commercial space, outlined in Subsections (1) and (3).
MET
For free-market residential development, affordable housing net livable area shall be provided in an amount
equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area.N/A
For essential public facility development, mitigation shall be determined based on Section 26.470.110(d).N/A
Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-
restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied (RO).N/A
For all affordable housing units that are being provided as mitigation pursuant to this Chapter or for the
creation of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540, or for any other reason:
a.The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, as amended.
b.Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of methods outlined in this Chapter, including
newly built units, buy down units, certificates of affordable housing credit, or cash-in-lieu.
c.Affordable housing that is in the form of newly built units or buy-down units shall be located on the same
parcel as the proposed development or located off-site within the City limits. Units outside the City limits may
be accepted as mitigation by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.110(b). When off-site units within
City limits are proposed, all requisite approvals shall be obtained prior to approval of the growth management
application.
d.Affordable housing mitigation in the form of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit, pursuant to Chapter
26.540, shall be extinguished pursuant to Section 26.540.120, Extinguishment and Re-Issuance of a
Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section 26.470.050(f), Employee/Square Footage Conversion.
e.If the total mitigation requirement for a project is less than .25 FTEs, a cash-in-lieu payment may be made by
right. If the total mitigation requirement for a project is .25 or more FTEs, a cash-in-lieu payment shall require
City Council approval, pursuant to Section 26.470.110(c).
f.Affordable housing units shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100(d), Affordable housing, and be
restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as
amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation.
g.Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the
unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. This dimensional
requirement may be varied through Special Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430.
N/A
209
Staff Findings:
The Change in Use of this structure will be treated like the development of a new single-
family home in the context of Growth Management review. Thus far in 2020, there are
enough allotments available to accommodate this application. The affordable housing
mitigation rate is based on new free-market residential floor area as prescribed in Land
Use Code Section 26.470.090.a, Single-Family and Duplex Residential Development or
Expansion. Pursuant to this section, residential uses generate 0.16 FTEs per 1,000 sq. ft.
of residential Floor Area. Unit A contains 912 sq. ft. of FA, which translates to a required
mitigation rate of 0.15 FTEs.
912 / 1,000 x 0.16 = 0.15 FTEs
The applicant must mitigate by extinguishing a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit at
the Category 2 Rate. The applicant has indicated that they have Category 4 certificates
in hand. The code provides a technique to convert between categories, a process which
will be handled by staff.
With regards to development conformance, the Land Use Code requires the change in
use to conform to the requirements of the Mixed-Use zone district as well as any previous
approvals. The Board of Adjustment granted a dimensional variance from the minimum
lot size requirement for a designated property to accommodate two single-family
dwellings (reducing the requirement on this particular lot from 3,000 sq. ft. per dwelling to
1,500 sq. ft. per dwelling). The proposed Change in Use complies with the approvals
provided in the BOA variance, however, changing Unit A from a commercial to a
residential use requires a minimum of two on-site parking spaces (there is currently no
on-site parking serving this dwelling) and the applicant requests an exemption. Staff does
not support this request, which is more fully addressed in Exhibit A.2.
Pending the resolution of the parking requirement, Staff finds that the General Review
Standard criteria for a Change in Use are met and recommends approval.
210
Exhibit A.2
Special Review Criteria
Staff Findings
26.515.080, Special Review Standards
Staff Findings:
Two of the standards related to Special Review are concerned with transportation and
parking impacts to the surrounding neighborhood. To approve a parking waiver, existing
or planned on-site or off-site facilities must adequately serve the needs of the
development, including the availability of street parking. Additionally, the criteria consider
whether an on-site mitigation solution to meet the minimum parking requirements would
be practically difficult or would result in an undesirable development scenario.
In May 2020, against the recommendation of the Community Development Department,
the Board of Adjustment granted a dimensional variance for Unit A to convert back to a
residence from a commercial use (Resolution No. 3, Series of 2020). This approval
involved a reduction of the minimum lot size required per dwelling unit, which doubled the
development rights of this property from underlying zoning that applies to all similarly
situated properties. The added density of allowing a second dwelling on a lot of 3,000 sq.
ft. will lead to additional transportation and parking impacts on the surrounding
neighborhood. No off-street parking is currently allocated to Unit A. There appears to be
enough space at the rear of the lot to provide two “stacked” parking spaces and staff finds
that the property should absorb its development impacts and not displace them into the
neighborhood. The parking would be accessed via the rear alley, which complies with
the requirements of this zone district. All parking would be recessed behind the street-
Review Criteria for 616 W. Main
The HPC may approve, approve with conditions or deny a
request to vary, or waive transportation, mobility, or off-
street parking requirements via Special Review based on
the following standards
MET NOT MET DOES NOT
APPLY
An on-site mitigation solution meeting the requirements and
guidelines is practically difficult or results in an undesirable
development scenario.
NOT MET
Existing or planned on-site or off-site facilities adequately serve
the needs of the development, including the availability of street
parking.
NOT MET
The transportation, mobility, and off-street parking needs of the
residents, customers, guests and employees of the project have
been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, the
projected traffic generation of the project, any shared parking
opportunities, expected schedule of parking demands, the
projected impacts on the on-street parking of the neighborhood,
the proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area and
any special services, such as vans, provided for residents,
guests and employees.
NOT MET
211
facing historic resource and would minimally impact the historic integrity of the resource
as viewed from Main Street.
Additionally, it has come to staff’s attention that parking mitigation was never addressed
when Unit B was converted to a free market residential use in about 2005. Two additional
parking units are needed to bring Unit B into compliance. Staff acknowledges that this
application was submitted regarding Unit A. However, parking compliance of two
residential dwellings on a single lot is fundamentally linked and must be addressed
concurrently. There also appears to be a relationship with the ownership of Unit A and
Unit B so coordinating parking mitigation for both units is appropriate under this review.
In summary, a total of four parking units are required for this parcel (two parking units for
Unit A and two parking units for Unit B). The land use code states that all single-family
homes must provide their parking on-site. Because the site is landmark designated, HPC
may apply criteria for parking waivers found in Chapter 26.415 in the description of
historic preservation benefits.
26.415.110. D.Parking. On-site parking reductions are permitted for designated
historic properties unable to contain the number of parking spaces required by the
underlying zoning due to the existence of a historic resource. In these circumstances,
alternative mitigation in the form of cash-in-lieu, pursuant to Chapter 26.515, may be
accepted by HPC for commercial development. HPC may waive cash-in-lieu for
residential development.
In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, the parking reduction and waiver
of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance
or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a
designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district.
The relevant Historic Preservation Design Guideline, which staff finds will be met by two
on-site parking spaces for this project, is:
1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system.
Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation.
Minimize the visual impact of new parking.
Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically.
Staff finds that on-site parking mitigation for two parking spaces must be provided
to minimize the transportation and parking impacts to the surrounding
neighborhood and that the remaining two spaces may be mitigated by cash-in-lieu.
Alternatively, HPC could:
waive the requirement to provide one or both of the on-site spaces, but require
cash-in-lieu mitigation of $38,000 for any space that is not provided.
waive the requirement to provide one or both of the on-site spaces, and waive the
cash-in-lieu mitigation of $38,000 for any space that is not provided.
212
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
January 29, 2020
Ms. Jennifer Phelan, AICP
Deputy Planning Director
City of Aspen
130 So. Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 616 West Main Street
Variance for Minimum Lot Size
Change-in-Use to Residential
Special Review for Parking Waiver
Ms. Phelan:
Please accept this application for a variance to
the minimum lot size requirements to enable
two single-family residences on a lot of 3,000
square feet; a change-in-use of the property
from commercial to residential; and, special
review for a parking waiver.
This property in an anomaly in the Mixed Use
(MU) Zone District with its small, 3,000sf size
and historic use as a residence. The applicant
is seeking an “official” return to residential use
after being used as a residence since 1891.
As provided in the attached pre-application conference summary, the application requests
review by the Board of Adjustment regarding the variance for minimum lot size and a
subsequent review by the Historic Preservation Commission regarding the change-in-use
request and a special review request to waive the parking requirement.
The application is submitted on behalf of the owner of Unit A – 616 W Main St LLC,
managed by Jordan Nemirow. BendonAdams is authorized by 616 to submit this
application.
The 616 property has long been used as a residence. Other than a brief time as a frame
shop, 616 has been used continuously as a home. The property was converted back to
a residence after the frame shop use ceased in approximately 2008. Although the Land
Use Code at the time allowed for a simple administrative change-in-use with no housing
Exhibit B- Application
213
616 W. Main St.
Page 2
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
mitigation required, the official paperwork was never filed with the City. The property was
sold to the current owner as a residence and all materials surrounding the sale spoke to
the property being residential. The applicant used this property as his personal residence
and raised his first daughter in the home. The property continues in its residential use
supporting both long- and short-term occupancies.
The property is part of the Original Townsite and has a right to develop by virtue of being
a legally-establish lot of record prior to the inception of subdivision and growth
management legislation.
The reversion to residential should represent a net decrease in employee generation.
Generation rates stated in the City of Aspen Land Use Code for commercial development
state 3.6 FTEs generated per 1,000sf while residential development generates only .16
FTEs per 1,000sf. So, converting the structure back to residential represents a net
decrease in impact according to the City’s analysis. To the extent impact mitigation must
be provided, the applicant requests the mitigation be roughly proportional to the
measurable impact.
Property
The property was originally platted as Lot N, Block 24,
City and Townsite of Aspen. The property has been
condominiumized and is officially known as 616 West
Main Condominiums.
Two structures on the property exist. Unit A, the 616
building is along the “front” of the property, along Main
Street, and the subject of this application. Unit B, 616½
West Main is located along the alleyway and is used as
a residence
Zoning
According to the City of Aspen Zone District Map, the
property is zoned Mixed Use (MU). The MU Zone
allows for single-family and duplex development. The
MU Zone specifically allows for “two detached single-
family residences,” which is the outcome sought by this
application.
Exhibit B- Application
214
616 W. Main St.
Page 3
300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611
970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM
The property has long been used as a
residence and disallowing and discontinuing
this use represents a significant hardship
upon the owner.
The map to the right shows
the property’s zoning.
Literal enforcement of the MU Zone’s minimum lot size eliminates any potential for this
property to be used as a residence – its historic and ongoing use. The home is modest in
size and “fits” with the character of West Main Street. The proposed use is an allowed
use and is the minimum necessary to make for reasonable use of the property as a
residence and to avoid a hardship on the owner.
We believe the Board of Adjustment’s approval of the minimum lot size is well within the
spirit and intent of the City’s Land Use Code as well as necessary to avoid an
unreasonable hardship upon the landowner. Approval is defensible from a standard-of-
review standpoint and would be a responsible action of the Board.
The change-in-use and special review requests are within the Historic Preservation
Commission’s purview and this application is responsive to the standards of review.
Allowing this home to revert back to its historic use and historic parking pattern would be
in keeping with the character of Main Street.
We look forward to your review and an opportunity to discuss this request with the Board
of Adjustment and the Historic Preservation Commission. Please let us know if we can
provide additional information or if we can respond to your input in any way.
Kind Regards,
Chris Bendon, AICP
BendonAdams LLC
Attachments:
1. Response to Review Criteria
2. Application Form
3. Authorization to Represent
4. Statement of Authority
5. Proof of Ownership
6. Agreement to Pay
7. HOA Form
8. Pre-Application Summary
9. Vicinity Map
10. Site Improvement Survey
11. Net Livable Report
Exhibit B- Application
215
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 1
Section 26.314.040.A – In order to authorize a variance from the dimensional requirements of
Title 26, the appropriate decision-making body shall make a finding that the following three (3)
circumstances exist:
1. The grant of variance will be generally consistent with the
purposes, goals, objectives and policies of this Title and the
Municipal Code.
Response – Title 26 of the Municipal Code (known as the Land Use Code)
provides zoning limitations and development standards for properties in the
City of Aspen. The purpose of Title 26, stated in 26.104.020 includes the
analysis of various development factors “and the legitimate rights and
reasonable expectations of property owners.”
The 616 property is an historically designated property originally developed as a residence and
has been used as a residence throughout the majority of its existence. The property was used
as a commercial frame shop for a limited time starting in 2004. The structure was then converted
back to a residence in approximately 2008. Although the process to revert back to a residence
was administrative at the time with no mitigation requirements, no such official request was
made.
The property was purchased by the current owner as a residence. That was the use at the time
of purchase and as represented by the seller. The building has been used as a residence by
this owner since 2014.
The “purpose” of the Mixed-Use Zone District recognizes the historic residential use of properties
along Main Street. Below is the Purpose statement for the MU Zone District.
Exhibit B- Application
216
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 2
The purposes statement finishes with the sentence “standalone residential uses are permitted on
properties as a reflection of the historic residential nature of the zone district.” Allowing this
property to continue as a standalone residence is entirely in keeping with the purpose of the MU
Zone District and the history of the property.
The property is zoned for single-family and duplex development. The property has been used as
a residence for 125 of its 129-year life. Prior to the frame shop, the property was used as a
residence since 1891. The 3,000 square foot lot size has never been an issue. The owner has
a legitimate and reasonable expectation to be able to continue to use the property as a residence.
A variance to the required lot size to enable the continued use as a home is consistent with the
purpose of the MU Zone District.
2. The grant of variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable
use of the parcel, building or structure.
Response – The continued use of this property as a residence is requested as a reasonable use
of the property. The application is the minimum necessary to allow for the continued use as a
residence and will not enable additional development beyond the current allowance. Two homes
are permitted on parcels in the MU Zone District. The variance to the minimum lot size would
extend this allowance to this property, which is 3,000 square feet.
The home is very modest in size. The 616 home is 915 square feet of Floor Area with an interior
net livable measurement of 832 square feet. Surrounding homes are much larger, including
homes in the West End neighborhood that are 5 and 6 times the size. This variance request to
the minimum lot size is the minimum necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property as a
single-family home.
Exhibit B- Application
217
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 3
3. Literal interpretation and enforcement of the terms and provisions of this Title would
deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other parcels in the same zone
district and would cause the applicant unnecessary hardship, as distinguished from mere
inconvenience. In determining whether an applicant's rights would be deprived, the Board
shall consider whether either of the following conditions apply:
a) There are special conditions and circumstances which are unique to the parcel,
building or structure, which are not applicable to other parcels, structures or
buildings in the same zone district and which do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
b) Granting the variance will not confer upon the applicant any special privilege
denied by the terms of this Title and the Municipal Code to other parcels,
buildings or structures, in the same zone district.
Response – The property is very unique in that it still reflects the Original Townsite platting of 30’
x 100’ lots. The City has downzoned and forced aggregation of parcels and most parcels now
consist of two, three, or four Townsite lots. Single Townsite lots are very rare. This parcel is a
holdover from the zoning changes and forced aggregation of parcels. This unique circumstance
requires a unique approach.
Other aspects of the property’s zoning could be adjusted. Development in a setback could be
avoided or even corrected (assuming HPC approvals). The property size is entirely outside the
control of the owner, not the result of the landowner’s actions, and impossible to correct.
Granting of this variance would provide no special privileges to this owner that are not already
enjoyed by similar parcels in the MU Zone including this property today. Residential use is
common along Main Street and the property has been used as a residence since 1891, other than
a short span as a frame shop.
Being able to continue to use the property as a residence, as it has been used for decades, is not
an unreasonable request. The residence “fits” with the character of Main Street and aligns with
the purposes of the MU Zone District.
Exhibit B- Application
218
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 4
Parking
Response – The site currently has no parking
provided for either building. Prior to being a
frame shop, the residence had no on-site
parking. A Special Review in 2004 granted a
waiver of the parking with support from City staff.
Staff at the time commented on the availability of
parking in the neighborhood and the negative
aesthetic effects of having parking in the
backyard.
According to Table 26.515-1, up to 2 spaces are
required to accommodate the conversion back
to a residence.
Table 26.515-1 – Parking Impact
Requirement Calculations
Section 26.515.050 provides a range of options for meeting the City’s parking requirements. On-
Site parking, cash-in-lieu, and off-site parking options are detailed and vary by location, as
described in Table 26.515-2.
Table 26.515-2 – Parking
Requirements by Zone District
Note #4 of Table 26.515-2 allows flexibility for
Historically designated properties. “For
properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of
Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, a
waiver of the Parking Requirement may be
approved, pursuant to Chapter 26.430, Special
Review, and according to the review criteria set
forth below.”
This application seeks a two-space parking
waiver upon review by the Historic Preservation
Commission. The criteria for this waiver are
addressed below.
Exhibit B- Application
219
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 5
Section 26.515.070.E allows tandem parking for single-
family and duplex development. “Off-street parking
provided for detached residential dwellings and duplex
dwellings is not required to have unobstructed access to a
street or alley, but shall not block access of emergency
apparatus to the property or to structures located on the
property. This allows for "stacking" of vehicles where a
vehicle is parked directly behind another.”
In the event the waiver is not granted by HPC, the
applicant will install two tandem spaces in the rear of the
property. This is not a desirable scenario. Removal of a
fence (non-historic) would be needed and the spaces
would consume the only useable outdoor space the
residents currently enjoy.
The diagram to the right depicts how the
two tandem spaces would be situated. The
picture shows the existing fence that would
be removed to accommodate parking.
Exhibit B- Application
220
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 6
26.515.080. Special Review Standards.
Whenever the transportation, mobility, and parking impacts of a proposed development are
subject to special review, an application shall be processed as a special review in accordance
with the common development review procedures set forth in Chapter 26.304 and be evaluated
according to the following standards. Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
If the project requires review by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Community
Development Director has authorized consolidation pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B, the
Historic Preservation Commission shall approve, approve with conditions or disapprove the
special review application.
A special review for establishing, varying or waiving transportation, mobility, or off-street parking
requirements may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on its conformance
with all of the following criteria:
1. The transportation, mobility, and off-street parking needs of the residents, customers, guests
and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel,
the projected traffic generation of the project, any shared parking opportunities, expected
schedule of parking demands, the projected impacts on the on-street parking of the
neighborhood, the proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area and any special
services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees.
Response – The property has long operated with two residences and no on-site
parking. The carriage house (Unit B) was developed in the mid-1990s and has
operated successfully with no on-site parking for the past 25 years. The 616 house
(Unit A) has always operated with no on-site parking, both as a residence and as
a commercial unit.
Residents do park in available street parking and capacity exists to continue this
practice. The property is ideally situated for relying on transit with roughly 800
buses per day with service on the Castle Maroon, Cemetery Lane, Burlingame,
Highlands, Snowmass, and valley-wide routes. The cross-town shuttle is also two
blocks from the property. The property is served by a WeCycle station on 4th Street
and another on 8th Street. The property is served by the free (to use) ‘Downtowner’
shuttle service. Pedestrian infrastructure is complete in the area. The property is
substantially served by transit.
2. An on-site mitigation solution meeting the requirements and guidelines is practically difficult
or results in an undesirable development scenario.
Response – The Land Use Code is very clear that the HPC has the ability to
“waive” the parking requirement. The parking can be physically installed on the
property. Removal of a fence would be required and the one area for outdoor use
by the residents would be consumed by cars. This is unnecessary and
undesirable. The residents have adequate street parking and access the abundant
transit options. The current occupants, for example, do not own a car. Having
cars occupy the one outdoor area the two residential units enjoy is an undesirable
scenario.
Exhibit B- Application
221
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 7
3. Existing or planned on-site or off-site facilities adequately serve the needs of the development,
including the availability of street parking.
Response – Existing facilities are
adequate to serve the needs of this
residence. Continuing to use the
property for a residence will have no
additional impact on the availability of
parking in the neighborhood. Street
parking is typically available, except
for times during special events – 4th
of July, X-Games, etc. when parking
throughout town is a challenge.
The pictures to the right show
parking availability on 5th
Street and 6th Street just north
of Main Street.
Exhibit B- Application
222
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 8
26.470.080 General Review Standards
All Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council applications for growth management
review shall comply with the following standards.
A. Sufficient Allotments: Sufficient growth management allotments are available to
accommodate the proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.040.B. Applications for
multi-year development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.110.A shall be required to meet
this standard for the growth management years from which the allotments are requested.
Response – The 2020 Growth Management “year” began January 1st and there
does not appear to be other allotment request pending.
B. Development Conformance: The proposed development conforms to the requirements and
limitations of this Title, of the zone district or a site specific development plan, any adopted
regulatory master plan, as well as any previous approvals, including the Conceptual Historic
Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and the
Planned Development – Project Review approval, as applicable.
Response – A variance request regarding lot size and a request to waive parking
are both included in this application. All other aspects of the property are in
compliance with the MU Zoning, including pre-existing conditions.
C. Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed development shall upgrade public
infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs
of the developer. Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage
treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid
waste disposal, parking and road and transit services.
Response – The property is currently served with a full complement of public
infrastructure and facilities and no additional development is proposed with this
change-in-use application. No utility deficiencies are known.
D. Affordable Housing Mitigation.
1) For commercial development, sixty-five percent (65%) of the employees generated by the
additional commercial net leasable space, according to Section 26.470.050.B, Employee
generation rates, shall be mitigated through the provision of affordable housing.
2) For lodge development, sixty-five percent (65%) of the employees generated by the additional
lodge pillows, according to Section 26.470.050.B, Employee generation rates, shall be mitigated
through the provision of affordable housing. For the redevelopment or expansion of existing lodge
uses, see section 26.470.100.H.
Exhibit B- Application
223
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 9
3) For the redevelopment of existing commercial net leasable space that did not previously
mitigate (see Section 26.470.070.F), the mitigation requirements for affordable housing shall be
phased at 15% beginning in 2017, and by 3% each year thereafter until 65% is reached, as
follows: [chart not shown]
Response to 1-3 – Not applicable. No commercial or lodging component is
proposed.
4) Unless otherwise exempted in this chapter, when a change in use between development
categories is proposed, the employee mitigation shall be based on the use the development is
converting to. For instance, if a commercial space is being converted to lodge units, the mitigation
shall be based on the requirements for lodge space, outlined in subsection 2, above. Conversely,
if lodge units are being converted to commercial space, the mitigation shall be based on the
requirements for commercial space, outlined in subsections 1 and 3, above.
Response – The 616 building is being converted from commercial to residential.
There is a net decrease in the number of employees generated by the residential
use as compared with the commercial use. The commercial generation is
approximately 4 FTEs. (832 sf net leasable x 3.6/1000 = 3 FTEs). The application
represents a net decrease in employee generation. Without prejudicing an
argument that a net decrease in employee generation should not require additional
mitigation, the residential mitigation calculation is provided below.
5) For free-market residential development, affordable housing net livable area shall be provided
in an amount equal to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net
livable area.
Response – The Floor Area of the 616 building is 912 sf with a net livable
measurement of 832 sf. 30% equals a requirement to provide 249.6 sf of
affordable housing. Using the City’s conversion rate of one FTE per 400 sf of net
livable area, stated in Section 26.470.050.F, this requirement translates to .63
FTEs.
832 x 30% = 249.6
249.6 / 400 = .624
However, this 30% factor does not appear to be proportional to the actual
employee generation impacts of residential use. The City of Aspen commissioned
a study of employee generation of residential use. Based on the study performed
by RRC Associates in 2015, employee generation of residential use is .16 FTEs
per 1,000sf of residential Floor Area. Using the residential rate, this home
generates .15 FTEs.
912/1,000 x 0.16 = 0.1459
Moreover, the assessment of any affordable housing impact fee on this change-in-
use does not appear to be related to an actual impact to the community. The
Exhibit B- Application
224
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 10
commercial space currently generates employees. Using the City’s employee
generation rates stated in Section 26.470.050 of the Land Use Code, 3.6 full time
equivalent employees are generated per 1,000 square feet of net leasable area.
This 832 square foot space generates 3 employees (832/1000 x 3.6 = 2.995). The
conversion from commercial to residential therefore represents a lessening of
employee generation, and a lessening of impacts on the community, by 2.38 to
2.85 employees. This lowering of employee generation lowers the necessity for
affordable housing in the community and should therefore be exempt from
providing additional mitigation and be exempt from paying an impact fee.
The application is responsive to the criteria for this change-in-use. The applicant
reserves its right to pursue an outright exemption to the affordable housing impact
fee based on the fact presented above.
6) For essential public facility development, mitigation shall be determined based on Section
26.470.110.D.
Response to 1-3 – Not applicable. No public facilities are proposed.
7) For all affordable housing units that are being provided as mitigation pursuant to this chapter
or for the creation of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit pursuant to Chapter 26.540, or for
any other reason:
a. The proposed units comply with the Guidelines of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority, as amended.
Response – Not applicable. No affordable housing units are proposed.
b. Required affordable housing may be provided through a mix of methods outlined in this
chapter, including newly built units, buy down units, certificates of affordable housing
credit, or cash-in-lieu.
Response – The required housing mitigation will be provided through the
provision of affordable housing credits.
c. Affordable housing that is in the form of newly built units or buy-down units shall be
located on the same parcel as the proposed development or located off-site within the
City limits. Units outside the City limits may be accepted as mitigation by the City
Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.110.B. When off-site units within City limits are
proposed, all requisite approvals shall be obtained prior to approval of the growth
management application.
Response – Not applicable. No affordable housing units are proposed.
Exhibit B- Application
225
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 11
d. Affordable housing mitigation in the form of a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit,
pursuant to Chapter 26.540, shall be extinguished pursuant to Section 26.540.120,
Extinguishment and Re-Issuance of a Certificate, utilizing the calculations in Section
26.470.050.F, Employee/Square Footage Conversion.
Response – A Certificate of Affordable Housing for Category 4 FTEs will
be provided. Section 26.470.090 states the employee generation for
residential use. Based on the City-commissioned study prepared by RRC
Associates, dated March 4, 2015, the 915sf home generates .15
employees.
e. If the total mitigation requirement for a project is less than .25 FTEs, a cash-in-lieu
payment may be made by right. If the total mitigation requirement for a project is .25 or
more FTEs, a cash-in-lieu payment shall require City Council approval, pursuant to
Section 26.470.110.C.
Response – The applicant is not requesting a cash-in-lieu payment.
f. Affordable housing units shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.100.D,
Affordable housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide
mitigation units at a lower category designation.
Response – A Certificate of Affordable Housing at a Category 4 FTEs will
be provided.
f. Each unit provided shall be designed such that the finished floor level of fifty percent
(50%) or more of the unit's net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade,
whichever is higher. This dimensional requirement may be varied through Special
Review, Pursuant to Chapter 26.430.
Response – Not applicable. No affordable housing units are proposed.
8) Affordable housing units that are being provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may
be deed-restricted at any level of affordability, including residential occupied (RO).
Response – Not applicable. No affordable housing units are proposed.
Exhibit B- Application
226
Exhibit 1
Review Criteria
page 12
26.470.100 Planning and Zoning Commission applications. The following types of
development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning
Commission, pursuant to Section 26.470.060, Procedures for review, and the criteria for each
type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications shall
comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.080. Except as noted, the following types
of growth management approvals shall be deducted from the annual development allotments.
Approvals apply cumulatively.
A. Change in use. A change in use of an existing property, structure or portions of an existing
structure between the development categories identified in Section 26.470.020 (irrespective
of direction), for which a certificate of occupancy has been issued and which is intended to be
reused, shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Planning and Zoning
Commission based on the general requirements outlined in Section 26.470.080. No more than
one (1) free-market residential unit may be created through the change-in-use.
Response – The application is requesting a change-in-use from commercial to
residential. Only one free-market unit would be created. The general
requirements of 26.470.080 are addressed above.
Exhibit B- Application
227
November 2017 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
LAND USE APPLICATION
Project Name and Address:_________________________________________________________________________
Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) _____________________________
APPLICANT:
Name: ______________________________________________________________________________________________
Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Phone #: ___________________________ email: __________________________________
REPRESENTIVATIVE:
Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________
Address:________________________________________________________________________________________________
Phone#: _____________________________ email:___________________________________
Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions
Review: Administrative or Board Review
Have you included the following?FEES DUE: $ ______________
Pre-Application Conference Summary
Signed Fee Agreement
HOA Compliance form
All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary
Required Land Use Review(s):
Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields:
Net Leasable square footage _________ Lodge Pillows______ Free Market dwelling units ______
Affordable Housing dwelling units_____ Essential Public Facility square footage ________
616 W. Main Street
2735-124-44-009
616 W Main St LLC, a Colorado limited liability company
612 W. Main St.; Aspen, CO 81611
970.948.7297 jordanaspen1@gmail.com
BendonAdams
300 So. Spring Street #202; Asp[en, CO 81611
970.925.2855 Chris@BendonAdams.com
Reversion to residential use of an existing Victorian home.
na na 1
0 na
x
x
x
x
4,225
Exhibit 2Exhibit B- Application
228
Exhibit 3
Exhibit B- Application
229
REPORT Page 1 of 2 Rev. 12/01/2012
Document must be filed electronically.
Paper documents are not accepted.
Fees & forms are subject to change.
For more information or to print copies
of filed documents, visit www.sos.state.co.us.
ABOVE SPACE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Periodic Report
filed pursuant to §7-90-301, et seq. and §7-90-501 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S)
ID number: ______________
Entity name: ______________________________________________________
Jurisdiction under the law of which the
entity was formed or registered: ______________________________________________________
1. Principal office street address: ______________________________________________________
(Street name and number)
______________________________________________________
__________________________ _____ ____________________
(City) (State) (Postal/Zip Code)
_______________________ ______________
(Province – if applicable) (Country – if not US)
2. Principal office mailing address: ______________________________________________________
(if different from above) (Street name and number or Post Office Box information)
______________________________________________________
__________________________ _____ ____________________
(City) (State) (Postal/Zip Code)
_______________________ ______________
(Province – if applicable) (Country – if not US)
3. Registered agent name: (if an individual) ____________________ ______________ ______________ _____
(Last) (First) (Middle) (Suffix)
or (if a business organization) ______________________________________________________
4. The person identified above as registered agent has consented to being so appointed.
5. Registered agent street address: ______________________________________________________
(Street name and number)
______________________________________________________
__________________________ CO ____________________
(City) (State) (Postal/Zip Code)
6. Registered agent mailing address: ______________________________________________________
(if different from above) (Street name and number or Post Office Box information)
______________________________________________________
__________________________ _____ ____________________
(City) (State) (Postal/Zip Code)
_______________________ ______________
(Province – if applicable) (Country – if not US)
20141420717
616 W Main St LLC
Colorado
612 w main st
aspen CO 81611
United States
Nemirow Jordan
612 W Main st
Aspen 81611
Colorado Secretary of State
Date and Time: 05/23/2019 01:23 PM
ID Number: 20141420717
Document number: 20191426377
Amount Paid: $10.00
Exhibit 4Exhibit B- Application
230
REPORT Page 2 of 2 Rev. 12/01/2012
Notice:
Causing this document to be delivered to the secretary of state for filing shall constitute the affirmation or
acknowledgment of each individual causing such delivery, under penalties of perjury, that the document is the
individual's act and deed, or that the individual in good faith believes the document is the act and deed of the
person on whose behalf the individual is causing the document to be delivered for filing, taken in conformity
with the requirements of part 3 of article 90 of title 7, C.R.S., the constituent documents, and the organic
statutes, and that the individual in good faith believes the facts stated in the document are true and the
document complies with the requirements of that Part, the constituent documents, and the organic statutes.
This perjury notice applies to each individual who causes this document to be delivered to the secretary of
state, whether or not such individual is named in the document as one who has caused it to be delivered.
7. Name(s) and address(es) of the
individual(s) causing the document
to be delivered for filing: ____________________ ______________ ______________ _____
(Last) (First) (Middle) (Suffix)
______________________________________________________
(Street name and number or Post Office Box information)
______________________________________________________
__________________________ ____ ______________________
(City) (State) (Postal/Zip Code)
_______________________ ______________
(Province – if applicable) (Country – if not US)
(The document need not state the true name and address of more than one individual. However, if you wish to state the name and address
of any additional individuals causing the document to be delivered for filing, mark this box and include an attachment stating the
name and address of such individuals.)
Disclaimer:
This form, and any related instructions, are not intended to provide legal, business or tax advice, and are
offered as a public service without representation or warranty. While this form is believed to satisfy minimum
legal requirements as of its revision date, compliance with applicable law, as the same may be amended from
time to time, remains the responsibility of the user of this form. Questions should be addressed to the user’s
attorney.
nemirow jordan
612 w main st
aspen CO 81611
United States
Exhibit B- Application
231
Land Title Guarantee Company
Customer Distribution
PREVENT FRAUD - Please remember to call a member of our closing team when
initiating a wire transfer or providing wiring instructions.
Order Number:ABS62010900 Date: 12/17/2019
Property Address:616 WEST MAIN STREET, #A, ASPEN, CO 81611
PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CLOSER OR CLOSER'S ASSISTANT FOR WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS
For Closing Assistance Closing Associate Closing Processor
Kimberly Parham
533 E HOPKINS #102
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 925-1678 (Work)
(303) 393-4870 (Work Fax)
kparham@ltgc.com
Contact License: CO414945
Company License: CO44565
Melissa Rivera
533 E HOPKINS #102
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 925-1678 (Work)
(800) 318-8202 (Work Fax)
mrivera@ltgc.com
Contact License: CO571649
Company License: CO44565
Marc Obadia
533 E HOPKINS #102
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 925-1678 (Work)
(800) 318-8202 (Work Fax)
mobadia@ltgc.com
Company License: CO44565
For Title Assistance
Melissa Schroder
5975 GREENWOOD PLAZA BLVD
GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111
(303) 270-0438 (Work)
mschroder@ltgc.com
Seller/Owner
616 W MAIN ST
Attention: JORDAN NEMIROW
Delivered via: Delivered by Attorney
Builder
BENDONADAMS
Attention: CHRIS BENDON
300 S SPRING STREET
ASPEN, CO 81611
(970) 925-2855 (Work)
chris@bendonadams.com
Delivered via: Electronic Mail
Exhibit 5Exhibit B- Application
232
Land Title Guarantee Company
Estimate of Title Fees
Order Number:ABS62010900 Date: 12/17/2019
Property Address:616 WEST MAIN STREET, #A, ASPEN, CO 81611
Parties:A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED
616 W MAIN ST LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY
Visit Land Title's Website at www.ltgc.com for directions to any of our offices.
Estimate of Title insurance Fees
"TBD" Commitment $217.00
Total $217.00
If Land Title Guarantee Company will be closing this transaction, the fees listed above will be collected at
closing.
Thank you for your order!
Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These documents, such as covenants
conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and use of the property. You may wish to engage legal
assistance in order to fully understand and be aware of the implications of the effect of these documents on your
property.
Chain of Title Documents:
Pitkin county recorded 12/27/2017 under reception no. 644063
Plat Map(s):
Pitkin county recorded 10/06/2005 under reception no. 515825 at book 75 page
31
Exhibit B- Application
233
Copyright 2006-2019 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing
as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the
American Land Title Association.
Property Address:
616 WEST MAIN STREET, #A, ASPEN, CO 81611
1.Effective Date:
12/06/2019 at 5:00 P.M.
2.Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured:
"TBD" Commitment
Proposed Insured:
A BUYER TO BE DETERMINED
$0.00
3.The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is:
A Fee Simple
4.Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in:
616 W MAIN ST LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
5.The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows:
UNIT A, 616 WEST MAIN CONDOMINIUMS, ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM MAP OF THE 616 WEST
MAIN CONDOMINIUMS RECORDED OCTOBER 6, 2005 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 515825 AND AS DEFINED
AND DESCRIBED IN THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED OCTOBER 19, 2005 AS RECEPTION
NO. 516418, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO.
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule A
Order Number:ABS62010900
Exhibit B- Application
234
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule B, Part I
(Requirements)
Order Number: ABS62010900
All of the following Requirements must be met:
This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this
Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company
may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions.
Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured.
Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company.
Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or
both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records.
1.RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED DECEMBER 26, 2017 FROM JORDAN NEMIROW TO THE PUBLIC
TRUSTEE OF PITKIN COUNTY FOR THE USE OF VALERIE E. AND SAMUEL B. NEMIROW LIVING TRUST
TO SECURE THE SUM OF $501,000.00 RECORDED DECEMBER 27, 2017, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 644065.
2.RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED OCTOBER 15, 2018 FROM 616 W MAIN ST LLC, A COLORADO
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF PITKIN COUNTY FOR THE USE OF THE
VALERIE E. AND SAMUEL B. NEMIROW LIVING TRUST TO SECURE THE SUM OF $501,000.00 RECORDED
OCTOBER 29, 2018, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 651572.
3.A FULL COPY OF THE FULLY EXECUTED OPERATING AGREEMENT AND ANY AND ALL AMENDMENTS
THERETO FOR 616 W MAIN ST LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY MUST BE FURNISHED
TO LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY. SAID AGREEMENT MUST DISCLOSE WHO MAY CONVEY,
ACQUIRE, ENCUMBER, LEASE OR OTHERWISE DEAL WITH INTERESTS IN REAL PROPERTY FOR SAID
ENTITY.
NOTE: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS MAY BE NECESSARY UPON REVIEW OF THIS DOCUMENTATION.
4.DULY EXECUTED AND ACKNOWLEDGED STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY SETTING FORTH THE NAME OF
616 W MAIN ST LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY
MUST STATE UNDER WHICH LAWS THE ENTITY WAS CREATED, THE MAILING ADDRESS OF THE
ENTITY, AND THE NAME AND POSITION OF THE PERSON(S) AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE INSTRUMENTS
CONVEYING, ENCUMBERING, OR OTHERWISE AFFECTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF
THE ENTITY AND OTHERWISE COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 38-30-172, CRS.
NOTE: THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST BE RECORDED WITH THE CLERK AND RECORDER.
5.WARRANTY DEED FROM 616 W MAIN ST LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO A BUYER
TO BE DETERMINED CONVEYING SUBJECT PROPERTY.
NOTE: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS OR EXCEPTIONS MAY BE NECESSARY WHEN THE BUYERS
NAMES ARE ADDED TO THIS COMMITMENT. COVERAGES AND/OR CHARGES REFLECTED HEREIN, IF
ANY, ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE UPON RECEIPT OF THE CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE
AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO.
Exhibit B- Application
235
This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any
document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction,
or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender
identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin.
1.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be
ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land.
2.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records.
3.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that
would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public
Records.
4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by
law and not shown by the Public Records.
5.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the
public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed
insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment.
6.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that
levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public
agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown
by the records of such agency or by the Public Records.
7.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the
issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water.
8.EXISTING LEASES AND TENANCIES, IF ANY.
9.RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE DEED FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN
RECORDED MARCH 19, 1889 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 546, PROVIDING AS FOLLOWS: THAT NO TITLE
SHALL BE HEREBY ACQUIRED TO ANY MINE OF GOLD, SILVER, CINNABAR OR COPPER OR TO ANY
VALID MINING CLAIM OR POSSESSION HELD UNDER EXISTING LAWS.
10.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, NO. 60, SERIES OF 1976 RECORDED DECEMBER 9, 1976 IN BOOK 321 AT PAGE 51.
11.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION RECORDED
MARCH 23, 1979 IN BOOK 365 AT PAGE 289.
12.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN AGREEMENT RECORDED
RECORDED JULY 13, 1995 IN BOOK 787 AT PAGE 51 AND QUIT CLAIM DEED GIVEN IN CONNECTION
WITH THE ABOVE AGREEMENT RECORDED JULY 13, 1995 IN BOOK 787 AT PAGE 56 AND QUIT CLAIM
DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 10, 1999 AS RECEPTION NO. 435369.
13.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION, NO. 53, SERIES OF 1999 RECORDED DECEMBER 16, 1999 AS
RECEPTION NO. 438641.
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule B, Part II
(Exceptions)
Order Number: ABS62010900
Exhibit B- Application
236
14.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATION OF RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC
PRESERVATION COMMISSION, NO. 49, SERIES OF 2000 RECORDED DECEMBER 14, 2000 AS
RECEPTION NO. 449673.
15.EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY AND ALL MATTERS AS SHOWN ON THE SURVEY RECORDED
NOVEMBER 19, 1996 IN PLAT BOOK 40 AT PAGE 96 AND SURVEY RECORDED AUGUST 9, 1999 IN PLAT
BOOK 50 AT PAGE 76.
16.EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE PLAT
OF 616 WEST MAIN CONDOMINIUMS RECORDED OCTOBER 06, 2005 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 515825,
IN PLAT BOOK 75 AT PAGE 31.
17.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN ENCROACHMENT
AGREEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 11, 2005 AS RECEPTION NO. 516051.
18.THOSE PROVISIONS, COVENANTS AND CONDITIONS, EASEMENTS, AND RESTRICTIONS, WHICH ARE
A BURDEN TO THE CONDOMINIUM UNIT DESCRIBED IN SCHEDULE A, AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT
RECORDED OCTOBER 19, 2005, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 516418.
ALTA COMMITMENT
Old Republic National Title Insurance Company
Schedule B, Part II
(Exceptions)
Order Number: ABS62010900
Exhibit B- Application
237
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY
DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that:
Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the
clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least
one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that,
the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or
filing information at the top margin of the document.
Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters
which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for
recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title
Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal
documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy
when issued.
Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of
Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following
conditions:
No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or
agreed to pay.
The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A)
A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in
which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides
written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real
property).
(B)
The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of
County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor.
(C)
The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a
condominium or townhouse unit.
(A)
No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land
described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months.
(B)
The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and
material-men's liens.
(C)
The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D)
If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within
six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include:
disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the
contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company,
and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the
Company.
(E)
Exhibit B- Application
238
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given:
This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface
estate, in Schedule B-2.
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or
information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may
include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance
company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for
the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award
payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of
Regulatory Agencies.
Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing
protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction.
That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the
surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other
minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and
(A)
That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's
permission.
(B)
Exhibit B- Application
239
JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY OF
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY,
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY OF SUMMIT COUNTY
LAND TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND
OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance
Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company.
We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state
privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence
is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized
access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information").
In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from:
applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based
transaction management system;
your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others;
a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction;
and
The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from
our affiliates and non-affiliates.
Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows:
We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in
order to provide products and services to you.
We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the
course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to
provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction.
We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your
Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion.
Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action.
We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal
Information.
WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT
IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW.
Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We
may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for
example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your
Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is
needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you.
Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy
policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration
Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction
thereof.
Exhibit B- Application
240
Commitment For Title Insurance
Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Corporation
NOTICE
IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE
POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS
COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT.
THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER
REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING
ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND
CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED.
THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE
CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. .
COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY
Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance
Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is
effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the
specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met
within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end.
COMMITMENT CONDITIONS
1. DEFINITIONS
2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Comitment terminates
and the Company’s liability and obligation end.
3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without:
4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND
The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or
other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The
Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment.
5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY
i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements;
ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or
iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment.
“Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(a)
“Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any
property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues,
alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy.
(b)
“Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law.(c)
“Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company
pursuant to this Commitment.
(d)
“Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(e)
“Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this
Commitment.
(f)
“Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters
relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge.
(g)
“Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A.(h)
the Notice;(a)
the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b)
the Commitment Conditions;(c)
Schedule A;(d)
Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e)
Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f)
a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g)
The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the
Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed
Insured’s good faith reliance to:
(a)
The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the
matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing.
(b)
The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the
Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured.
(c)
The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment
Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount.
(d)
The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e)
Exhibit B- Application
241
6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT
7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT
The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the
Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services.
8. PRO-FORMA POLICY
The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma
policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure.
9. ARBITRATION
The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of
either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at
http://www.alta.org/arbitration.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown
in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory.
Issued by:
Land Title Guarantee Company
3033 East First Avenue Suite 600
Denver, Colorado 80206
303-321-1880
Senior Vice President
This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Land Title Insurance Corporation. This Commitment is not valid without the
Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and
a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.
Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.
The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are
prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association.
In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements
have been met to the satisfaction of the Company.
(f)
In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy.(g)
Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a)
Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment.(b)
Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject
matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral,
express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment.
(c)
The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the
terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy.
(d)
Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e)
When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f)
Exhibit B- Application
242
Exhibit 6Exhibit B- Application
243
Exhibit 7Exhibit B- Application
244
Exhibit 9
616 West Main Street – Vicinity Map
Exhibit B- Application
245
N 14°50'49" E100.00N 14°50'49" E100.00N 75
°
0
9
'
1
1
"
W
30.0
0
S 75
°
0
9
'
1
1
"
E
30.0
0
(13.
4
0
'
)
(12.5
0
'
)
(4.1'
)(3.5)PORC
H
(
L
C
E
)
UNIT A
LCE A STAIRS LCE BPORCHLCE BCON
C
R
E
T
E
W
A
L
K
BAC
K
O
F
C
U
R
B
LCE A
LCE B
WW
PORC
H
0.7' OVERHANG
O
M
100.
0
0
'
R
.
O
.
W
.
R
E
C
O
R
D
WES
T
M
A
I
N
S
T
R
E
E
T
SIREN
CONC PAD
UNIT B
BOARD WALKBOARD WALKWOOD DECK
LCE B
ROOF ENCROACHES
CON
C
R
E
T
E
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
CONC. WALK LCE BGM
GMALLE
Y
B
L
O
C
K
2
4
UNP
A
V
E
D
20.3
9
'
P
U
B
L
I
C
R
.
O
.
W
.
CITY MONUMENT SE CORNER
BLOCK 24
CITY MONUMENT SW CORNER
BLOCK 24 HORIZONTAL CONTROL 43.612.0
5.912.3
8.00.2
23.712.0
6.012.126.314.3
14.3 26.3#4 REBAR WITH 1"
RED PLASTIC CAP
LS 16129 ENCROACHMENT SEE
RECEPTION NO. 516051
#4 REBAR WITH 1"
RED PLASTIC CAP
LS 16129
3.0' WALK EASEMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF UNIT A PLAT BK 75 PG
31 RECEPTION NO. 515825
SEE ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT BK 787, PG 51
AND BK 787, PG 56
MAGNAIL WITH 1.5"
ALUMINUM DISC LS 16129
MAGNAIL WITH 1.5"
ALUMINUM DISC LS 16129
WALK EASEMENT FOR
THE BENEFIT OF UNIT B
PLAT BK 75 PG 31
RECEPTION NO. 515825
X
X
XXXXXXXXX
X
X
XXXXX
X
X
X
X
XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX
X
X (2.6')UNIT BOUNDARY LINE
UNIT BOUNDARY LINE
UU
CONC. WALK BUILDING LINE(47.6')IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT
UNIT B, 616 WEST MAIN CONDOMINIUMS
CITY OF ASPEN
PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
MICHAEL P. LAFFERTY PLS. # 37972
DATE:
3) THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY THIS SURVEYOR. NO TITLE
INFORMATION FURNISHED FOR THE PREPARATION OF THIS SURVEY.
NOTES
1" = 10'
O 5 10 20
I, MICHAEL P. LAFFERTY, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP ACCURATELY DEPICTS AN
IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT PERFORMED UNDER MY SUPERVISION ON 01/2020 OF THE
ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL OF LAND. THE LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF ALL
IMPROVEMENTS, EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN EVIDENCE OR KNOWN TO ME AND
ENCROACHMENTS BY OR ON THESE PREMISES ARE ACCURATELY SHOWN.
1) LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
UNIT B, 616 WEST MAIN CONDOMINIUMS, ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM MAP OF THE 616 WEST
MAIN CONDOMINIUMS RECORDED OCTOBER 6, 2005 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 515825 AND AS DEFINED
AND DESCRIBED IN THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED OCTOBER 19, 2005 AS RECEPTION
NO. 516418.
CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO.
CONTAINING 0.069 ACRES +/- (3,000 SQ. FT. +/-)
2) BASIS OF BEARING:
A BEARING OF N75°09'11"W BETWEEN A FOUND ORIGINAL CITY MONUMENT PIPE WITH 1"
CAP AT THE S.E. CORNER OF BLOCK 24 AND A FOUND ORIGINAL CITY MONUMENT PIPE
WITH 1" CAP AT THE S.W. CORNER OF BLOCK 24
4) UNIT OF MEASUREMENT FOR THIS SURVEY IS THE U.S. SURVEY FOOT.
LEGEND
INDICATES FOUND MONUMENT AS DESCRIBED.
FENCE LINE
GM GAS METER
GENERAL COMMON ELEMENTGCE
LCE LIMITED COMMON ELEMENT
NOTICE: According to Colorado law you must commence any legal action based
upon any defect in this survey within three years after you first discover such defect.
In no event may any action based upon any defect in this survey be commenced more
than ten years from the date of the certification shown hereon.
DATE SURVEYED: 01/2020
REVISED:
FILE NO: 200101
CLIENT: NEMIROW
UTILITY PEDESTALSU
COLO R A D O L ICE
N
SEDMICHA E L P LA
F
F
ERTYPROFESSI
O
NAL L A N D S URVEYOR37972
1-10-20
5) POSTED ADDRESS IS 616 WEST MAIN ST.
6) SNOW ON GROUND AT TIME OF SURVEY.
Exhibit 10
Exhibit B- Application
246
Phone: 970-618-8351
Fax: 970-925-2498
Email: AspenTrueDimensions@comcast.net
True Dimensions
P.O. Box 10431
Certificate dated: January 23, 2020
TRUE DIMENSIONS
by: Leslie Miller
CERTIFICATE OF MEASUREMENT
Property: 616 West Main St.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
The undersigned hereby certifies that we have measured the property described above,
on January 23, 2020 and our findings are as follows:
Finished Heated Livable Area: 832 square feet (ANSI)
The above findings have been calculated in accordance to the guidelines for the American National
Standards Institute (ANSI), applicable to the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. The
on-site/as built calculation for finished square footage is for a condominium residence. The square footage
total has been calculated with interior wall dimensions only, which are heated, sheet rocked, and which are
considered finished space.
True Dimensions has exercised its best efforts to perform an on-site/as built measurement of the
property as accurately as possible. It is understood however that there can be some uncertainty with respect to
the accuracy of any square footage measurement due to variations in finished surfaces as well as interior and
exterior wall construction, as well as other factors.
Exhibit 11Exhibit B- Application
247
Exhibit B- Application
248
Exhibit C- Property Rental Letter
249
Page 1 of 1
130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com
Memorandum
TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission
FROM: Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner
THROUGH: Amy Simon, Interim Planning Director/Historic Preservation Officer
MEETING DATE: September 9, 2020
RE: 202 East Main Street – Extension of Conceptual Major Development
approval
SUMMARY: 202 E. Main Street received HPC Conceptual approval on October 9, 2019 for a
new rear addition to the historic home. The application was not called up by City Council during
the December 10, 2019 hearing.
All applicants have one year from the date of Conceptual review to submit a Final review
application. 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 RECOMMEDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant a six-month extension of
Conceptual approval to allow the applicant to further develop the proposal. The new deadline to
submit a final application would be April 9, 2021.
ATTACHMENTS:
HPC Resolution #____, Series of 2020
Exhibit A – Letter requesting extension, dated August 14, 2020
250
202 East Main Street
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
GRANTING A SIX MONTH EXTENSION OF THE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR
A PROJECT AT 202 EAST MAIN STREET, LOT 1, MAIN STREET VICTORIANS
HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION, ACCORDING TO
THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED NOVEMBER 9, 2012 IN PLAT BOOK 100 AT
PAGE 92, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO
RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2020
PARCEL ID: 2737-073-99-001
WHEREAS, on August 14, 2020, Rocking Lazy J Properties LLC, owner of 202 E. Main Street,
Lot 1, Main Street Victorians Historic Landmark Lot Split Subdivision Exemption, according to
the plat thereof recorded November 9, 2012 in Plat Book 100 at Page 92, City and Townsite of
Aspen, Colorado, requested a six month extension of the Conceptual design approval granted by
the Historic Preservation Commission through Resolution #18, Series of 2019. According to
Section 26.415.070.D.3.c.3, of the Municipal Code, 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; 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, Sarah Yoon, in her staff report to HPC dated September 9, 2020, recommended
that a one-time extension be granted; and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on September 9, 2020, the Historic Preservation
Commission considered the request and granted a six month extension to the deadline to submit
a final development application. The vote of the members was __ to __.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That HPC hereby extends the deadline to file a final development application related to
Resolution #18, Series of 2019 from October 9, 2020 to April 9, 2021.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 9th day of September,
2020.
____________________________
Gretchen Greenwood, Chair
Approved as to Form:
___________________________________
James R. True, City Attorney
251
202 East Main Street
HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020
ATTEST:
________________________________
Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk
252
EXHIBIT A – LETTER REQUESTING EXTENSION
From: jake vickery <jakevickery@comcast.net>
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 12:06 PM
To: Amy Simon <amy.simon@cityofaspen.com>
Subject: Extension of HPC approval for 202 East Main
Hi Amy and Sarah,
I would like to apply for the 6 month extension for the approval of 202 East Main. The approval
document (copy attached) indicates the approval date is October 2, 2019. It appears I would
have to apply for the 6 month extension by September 1, 2020. Do I need to fill out a land use
application for this? I would like to verify these dates and start the process.
Thanks,
Jake
Jake Vickery
202 East Main St.
Aspen, C) 81611
970 309-7722
jakevickery@ comcast.net
253