The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.HPC.202009231 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 23, 2020 4:30 PM, WEBEX Go to: www.webex.com Click "Join" at the top right-hand corner Enter Meeting Number 126 345 1478 Password provided 81611 Click "Join Meeting" OR Join by phone Call: 1-408-418-9388 Meeting number (access code): 126 345 1478 Meeting password: 81611 I.SITE VISIT I.A.Please visit the project sites on your own. II.ROLL CALL 4:30 PM III.MINUTES III.A.Minutes 9/9/20 minutes.hpc.20200909.pdf IV.PUBLIC COMMENTS V.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS VI.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VII.PROJECT MONITORING VII.A.109 N. Second Project Monitor Review 109 N Second September 2020 Project Monitoring Memo.pdf 1 2 VII.B.541 Race Alley Project Monitor Review 541 Race September 2020 Project Monitoring Memo.pdf VII.C.Project Monitor List PROJECT MONITORING.doc VIII.STAFF COMMENTS IX.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED X.CALL UP REPORTS XI.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS XII.OLD BUSINESS XIII.NEW BUSINESS 5:15 PM XIII.A.820 E. Cooper Avenue - Minor Development Review, PUBLIC HEARING 820_E_Cooper_Memo_2020_09_23.pdf 820_E_Cooper_Resolution_2020_09_23.pdf ExhibitA_DesignGuidelinesCriteria_2020_09_23.pdf ExhibitB_ReferralComments.pdf ExhibitC_Application.pdf XIV.ADJOURN 6:30 PM XV.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER #020-2020 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. 2 3 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 SPETEMBER 9 2020 Chairperson Greenwood opened the meeting at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Gretchen Greenwood, Jeffrey Halferty Roger Moyer, Scott Kendrick, Commissioners not in attendance: Kara Thompson, Bob Blaich, Sheri Sanzone Staff present: Amy Simon, Interim Planning Director/Historic Preservation Officer Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Kevin Rayes, Planner Community Development Jim True, City Attorney Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Halferty motioned to approve the minutes from August 26th. Mr. Moyer seconded. All in Favor, Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: None COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None CONFLICTS: Ms. Thompson, Mr. Kendrick, and Ms. Sanzone have a conflict with this meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: None CALL UPS: None OLD BUSINESS: 303 S. Galena Street - Minor Development. Mr. Halferty motioned to continue this topic to February 10th, 2020. Mr. Moyer seconded. All in Favor, Motion carried. Mr. Kendrick left the meeting. OLD BUSINESS: 611 West Main Street Conceptual Major Development, Commercial Design Review. Sara Adams of BendonAdams will be representing the owner. Ms. Adams stated that this presentation was continued from the May 27th HPC meeting. Ms. Adams said that they are requesting approval for HPC conceptual review, temporary relocation, affordable housing project, growth management, and proposing to restore the historic resource back to residential use. Ms. Adams stated that they are requesting affordable housing credits. Ms. Adams said that after the May 27th meeting her team took the suggestions from the neighbors and commission seriously and produced a full restudy. She said that the massing and roof were too big and that the roof forms needed to relate to the district while highlighting the landmark on the property. Ms. Adams said another concern that was raised was the spacing between the historic landmark and the new addition, and parking concerns from the neighbors. Ms. Adams showed a rendering of the new project that had a reduction of units from 9 to 7 which reduced the FTE’s from 21 to 14.75. Ms. Adams stated that all the units are now above grade and 6 of the units are larger than required. She further explained that one unit is smaller by 30 square feet. 4 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SPETEMBER 9 2020 Ms. Adams said that the distance between the building was 0 feet and now 7 feet 3 inches wall to wall. She said that every unit now has one parking spot, and the project is 100% parked on site. She further stated that the code only calls for 60% parking. Ms. Adams showed renderings of the new floor plan starting with the basement that no longer has units and will be converted to a crawl space and mechanical. Ms. Adams showed the first-floor units and explained the layout of each unit and how it would fit into the landmark and new addition. She pointed out a specific storage unit that is larger than the others and has been assigned to the smaller unit. Ms. Adams showcased the shared bike and ski repair area that also offers extra storage for bikes and skies. Ms. Adams stated that the trash area is fully confined and meets the setback requirements. Ms. Adams pointed out that the open lawn in front of the landmark facing Main Street will be protected. Ms. Adams moved on to the second floor and how they stack the units on top of one another and explained the layout of each unit and how it would fit into the landmark and new addition. Ms. Adams showed a rendering from Main Street and pointed out that the addition cannot be seen from this view and that it fits with the sightline of the landmark. She further explains on a side view the gable roof of the addition is visible along with an ADA ramp. She showed a rendering that focused on the new 7-foot 3-inch space between the landmark and addition that allows foot traffic to pass through. Ms. Adams stated that the gable roof forms on the new addition were appropriate for the district while highlighting the landmark. She further explained that the wood and materials chosen for the new addition was to compliment the landmark. Ms. Adams showed the alley rendering of the new addition and pointed out the trash area being setback 5 feet. Ms. Adams pointed out in a side view rendering that they are requesting two non-historic variations, a rear yard setback of zero feet and the distance between the landmark and addition of 7 feet and 3 inches. Ms. Adams stated that they also have requested a historic variation for the front porch on the landmark to sit in the setback. She explained that they will not move the porch that this is a technicality they must meet. Ms. Adams stated the composition of the units will be five 2 bedrooms and two 1 bedrooms and all the units will be category 4. Ms. Adams stated that they appreciated the neighbor’s participation in the last meeting and for their comments that were echoed by city staff and HPC. She said the majority of the comments were about mass and size, parking, traffic, additional density, and rear setback. Ms. Adams stated that she sent an updated packet for this project to the surrounding neighbors, and only one resident reached back out. In closing Ms. Adams thanked HPC and they look forward to moving this project forward. Mr. Moyer asked if the wood on the new addition was cedar. Ms. Adams stated that they have not landed on a wood species yet, however, at the final review there will be details. Ms. Greenwood asked if the previous setback for the alley was zero. Ms. Adams stated that it was two feet. STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Rayes stated that he will be reviewing the growth management plan, special review, and transportation & parking management. Mr. Rayes said his colleague Ms. Yoon will be reviewing the commercial design review, dimensional variations, and relocations. Mr. Rayes reviewed the history of this lot and the proposed project. Mr. Rayes outlined what each floor would look like with the units and explained how the units would fit into the landmark and new addition. Mr. Rayes stated that within the historic resource there are three units. He explained that two of the units are above the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority’s (APCHA) minimum net livable area and one of the units is slightly bellow. He stated 5 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SPETEMBER 9 2020 that the smaller unit must have a special review and approval to be slightly under the minimum. Mr. Rayes stated that the criteria for having a unit under the minimum threshold can be found in the HPC packet. Mr. Rayes stated that each unit will have 18 square feet of external storage and the slightly smaller unit will have 38 square feet of external storage. He said that this property will offer plenty of outside space for communal use while offering private patios and porches. Another amenity that will be offered Mr. Rayes said will be a washer and dryer with full closets. Mr. Rayes stated that staff finds this project meets all the criteria for special review and recommends the full approval of the 14.75 FTE’s. Mr. Rayes reminded HPC that within the mixed-use zone, 60% of parking must be onsite. He explained that the applicant will be offering seven parking spots for seven units going above and beyond with 100% onsite parking. Mr. Rayes stated that staff finds that this project meets the transportation and parking needs. Ms. Yoon showed a Sanborn map of the historic lot that the applicant was required to maintain. Ms. You stated that the new addition has no connector element to the historic resource, unlike the previous plan that had an element that hungover the resource. Ms. Yoon showed the design guidelines that the staff used concerning the variation findings. She said that staff supports the setback variations to maintain the 7ft 3inch separation. Ms. Yoon discussed guideline 10.6, that the detached addition is a product of its own time. Ms. Yoon explained in the redesign the applicant has come back with a gable roof that relates to the historic district and that it does not mimic the historic resource’s gambrel roof form. Ms. Yoon stated that staff is in support of the use of wood as a material on the new addition rather than metal. She explained that wood relates to the resource more so than metal. Ms. Yoon stated that the redesign hones in on the compatibility. Mr. Rayes stated that staff recommends that HPC approve conceptual major development, commercial design review, setback variations, relocation growth management, special review, Transportation and parking management, and certificates of affordable housing credits. Mr. Rayes pointed out on the HPC resolution section 2: Growth Management, Certificate of Affordable Housing Credits, and Special Review number 2 to strike that language and proposed the revision stating the applicant shall designate the category of each unit, and shall provide APCHA with the required documentation prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Ms. Greenwood asked if the revised resolution was ready for HPC. Mr. Reyes stated that it is not in the packet however can be provided to HPC first thing. Ms. Greenwood stated that this is a great project, and it is relatable. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Ms. Greenwood asked Mr. Reyes and Ms. Yoon if there were any letters sent in. Mr. Reyes stated that he did not receive any public comments. Ms. Greenwood stated that is a great sign and kudos should be given to the applicant and team for working with the neighborhood. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Greenwood stated that the project is very clear and what it is about. She further stated that this is an excellent project. Ms. Greenwood said that this is a great example of when the commission wants the applicant to go back for a restudy and the product comes back better than ever. Ms. Greenwood stated that this project is great for the neighborhood and thanked the applicant. She said the opportunity for an individual to live in a historic building is a special experience. 6 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SPETEMBER 9 2020 Mr. Moyer stated he agrees with staff. Mr. Moyer warned that depending on what the exterior platting is used can be very expensive due to maintenance. He further stated that APCHA should make the homeowners have a maintenance budget. Mr. Moyer said that he has been contacted by many HOAs about this and that there can be hidden costs. due to technical difficulties and poor connection, Mr. Halferty’s statement was inaudible. Mr. Moyer moved to approve Resolution #17-2020. Ms. Greenwood seconded. ROLL CALL: Mr. Halferty, Yes; Mr. Moyer, Yes; Ms. Greenwood, Yes. All in favor, Motion carried 3-0. OLD BUSINESS: 616 W. Main S Change in Use & Special Review. Chris Bendon of BendonAdams representing owner, Jordan Nemirow owner of the property. Mr. Bendon stated that the property has a historic resource located on it and at one time was a residential home then converted to a commercial frame shop in 2004, then changed back to a home without proper steps. Mr. Bendon stated that this application is to convert the historic resource back to a residential dwelling. Mr. Bendon showed that the resource is one of two structures on this property. He showed visuals of the property showing the newer unit that sits in the rear of the property. He reminded HPC that the application only pertains to the historic resource. Mr. Bendon stated that the change of use will fit in perfectly within the mixed zone district. Mr. Bendon said that there was a parking waiver provided to this property when the historic unit was used for commercial use. Mr. Bendon stated that they are presented with the requirement to provide housing mitigation which is specified in the code. He said that the current use is commercial and through the City’s calculations would generate 3.28 FTE and should be exempt from and mitigation. He said that they are reducing their impacts on the neighborhood. Mr. Bendon stated that the second request was regarding parking. He explained that part of the change in use, the code requires two parking spots for the historic unit. Mr. Bendon pointed out that there is a parking pad in the back of the lot that holds an encroachment permit. Mr. Bendon stated that HPC can provide parking waivers if parking results in difficulty and undesirable result or if offsite facilities adequately serve the needs of the development and finally if a waiver would enhance or mitigate an adverse impact to the historic resource or property. He said there will be negative impacts on the property that would come about proving parking on site. Mr. Bendon showed HPC the standards that are in the guidelines that preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches and how that relates to this project. Mr. Bendon told HPC that one of the standards that will be under review is if the transportation needs are being met. He reiterated that moving from a commercial space to a residential home relieves the pressure of transpiration on the neighborhood. Mr. Bendon stated that in the back of the historic recourse one could pack two cars in tandem. He explained the non-historic fence would need to be moved and this scenario is undesirable. Mr. Bendon pointed out that one of The Secretary of the Interior standards talks about avoid adding parking to an open area that detracts from a historic resource. Mr. Bendon stated that they can make the parking work if mandated and that the applicant does not want to pay the $76,000 for offsite parking. He further explained that the neighborhood offers street parking and that the historic resource has been functioning as a residential dwelling for the past 10 years and that the neighborhood is comfortable with street parking. Mr. Bendon stated that HPC has granted a parking waiver for this property in the past, and they are asking for a regrant. 7 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SPETEMBER 9 2020 Mr. Nemirow stated that he is the property owner and that this matter is extremely important to him and his family. Mr. Nemirow said that he and his wife live and work in Aspen year-round while raising their two children. He said they consider themselves apart of the ever-dwindling community of the West End. Mr. Nemirow stated that he and his family take great pride in being a part of the victorian homeowner community in this community. Mr. Nemirow stated that he would like to tie up loose ends from the previous owner. Mr. Nemirow said that he is not a developer nor will any development happen with the change in use and parking request. Mr. Nemirow explained the history of the property and stated that no alterations would happen to either unit in the future and is seeking HPC approval to convert the historic resource back to a residential dwelling. Mr. Nemirow stated that his second request is the approval of a parking waiver. He said that the property could support parking if HPC feels the need. Mr. Nemirow stated that he is not in a position to write a check for offsite parking. Mr. Nemirow said that requiring 4 parking spots on this property is unnecessary. Mr. Nemirow stated that he has been shifting away from his dependence on his car and that this property lends itself to that. He explained that the property is walkable to town and sits on all transpiration lines. He said with more parking, cars will follow, and with limited parking, one will use alternative means to get to town. Mr. Nemirow stated that he purchased the historic resource in 2014 with no parking available on site. He further explained that he has not needed it. Mr. Nemirow stated that in 2004 a special review was conducted and a parking wavier was granted with support from City staff. He said the parking allotted to the non-historic unit fulfills the needs and no additional parking is needed. Mr. Nemirow outlined that HPC may waive cash in lieu or offsite parking requirements. Mr. Nemirow stated that if parking onsite is forced, that this will take the one outside space that both units enjoy and share. Mr. Nemirow reiterated his points of unnecessary parking on site. Mr. Nemirow stated that adding parking to the property would displace snow removal and garbage. Mr. Nemirow said that staffs concerns of increased density will call for more parking. He explained that there is no increase in density since he and his family have lived there for years. Mr. Nemirow reiterated and reviewed the design guideline 1.26. Mr. Nemirow reminded HPC that they hold the power to waive parking guidelines for this property. Mr. Moyer asked if parking was added and the fence had to be moved, where would the trash go. Mr. Bendon stated that the trash would be moved closer to the historic unit and off the alley. STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Rayes stated that the applicant is here to request a change in use and special review for parking. Mr. Rayes said that the two units that sit on the property, unit B is located in the back and currently approved to be a signal family dwelling and unit A the historic resource is located at the front of the property is currently approved as commercial use. He pointed out that neither unit has parking assonated with it on the property. Mr. Rayes went through the history of the historic property. Mr. Rayes stated that to bring the historic resource to a legal standing signal family home there are a few approvals that will need to happen. He explained the first would be dimensional variance which was granted by the Board of Adjustments resolution #03-2020. He further explained the next approval would be the granting of a change of use followed by the mitigation of parking. Mr. Rayes stated through staff's review it became clear that the second unit would need to be brought up to code as well in reference to parking. Mr. Rayes outlined the approvals needed for unit B to be brought up to code. He stated that a change in usage which was done through APCHA and second a special review for parking. Mr. Rayes stated that this process started with the historic unit for a change of use but parking on 8 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SPETEMBER 9 2020 a signal parcel as intricately linked as this one, staff is having a thought time separating the issues. He further stated that if HPC does not address parking for both congruently that this could lead to complications down the road. Mr. Rayes sited the parking code stating that a unit needs a parking spot per bedroom or two parking spots per dwelling. He said that there are two dwellings on the parcel. Mr. Rayes stated that the historic unit will need and can fit two park spaces with adjustments to the fence. He said that unit B does not have room for two parking spots on-site, and cash in lieu would be sufficient to bring unit B to code. Mr. Rayes reviewed his main points that four parking spots are needed, two located behind the historic resource, and cash in lieu for unit B‘s parking. Mr. Rayes stated that the transportation and mobility of the residence of the project have not been met. Mr. Rayes stated that the property has double the density than any other property in the neighborhood and that it is reasonable to say that there will be more traffic. He moved on to the next criterion stating that an on-site mitigation solution meeting the requirements and guidelines is practically difficult or results in an undesirable devilment scenario. Mr. Rayes said that staff realizes that unit B physically can not provide parking in this case, cash in lieu is acceptable. Mr. Rayes said that the surrounding neighborhood can offer parking for unit B however unit A can house two parking spots. Mr. Rayes stated that the parking for unit A complies with the land-use code. Mr. Rayes summarized staff position of four parking units provide, two for unit A and cash in lieu of unit B’s parking. He said that staff is recommending providing .14 FTEs for the mitigation for change of use. Mr. Rayes stated staff approves the change of use. Mr. Rayes stated that staff recommends HPC adopt the attached resolution to approve a change in use to convert unit A from a commercial to residential use and recommends that the HPC 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. Ms. Greenwood asked what is the physical description of a parking space. She further asked what size should it be, if pavers were ok. Ms. Greenwood stated as an architect the terms being used are pretty loose goosy. Mr. Rayes stated that he is uncertain about the surface materials. He said he does know that there are requirements on dimensions that are 8.5 feet wide by 18 feet long. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Greenwood stated that HPC is a volunteer board and that allows the board to bring commonsense to a situation where the land-use regulations are inconsistent. Ms. Greenwood pointed out that HPC just approved a one parking spot per two- bedroom unit across the street. She said that she has a problem with a little project like this being forced to have four parking spots. Ms. Greenwood stated that there is an easy solution and that is listening to the homeowner they know the property and home patterns on the property. Ms. Greenwood stated that she does not agree with staff’s analysis that the City does not offer enough transportation options. Ms. Greenwood said that this is not a quick fix. She further explained that once you introduce parking into a neighborhood one will deal with concrete, drainage, engineering, dry wells, and so much more. Ms. Greenwood stated the applicant can move the fence over and claim the new space as parking. Ms. Greenwood reiterated that she finds it wrong for the City to require four parking spaces when they are completely ok with the employee units across the street only requiring one per unit. She stated that it is not fair that past 9 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION SPETEMBER 9 2020 transgressions form APCHA and the City approval process and then years later ask for $7,600 for their mistake. Ms. Greenwood stated that she is not in favor of this resolution as it stands. Mr. Halferty stated that Ms. Greenwood’s comments hit the nail on the head. Mr. Halferty said that he is not in support of the staff’s resolution. He further said that the applicant made a strong and convincing case on transportation solutions. Mr. Halferty stated the land-use code is dated and should be revised. Mr. Halferty stated the change in the use of the historic resource is nice and should be approved. Ms. Greenwood stated that the neighbors must be supportive of the change in use since there is no public input. Mr. Moyer stated that he was on HPC when unit B was approved as an ADU. He said that he does not agree with staff. Mr. Moyer said that he approves the change in use and HPC should grant the variance in parking. Mr. Moyer stated that it is unconscionable to force someone to pay $76,000 for two parking spaces. Ms. Greenwood said $7,600. Mr. Bendon stated it was $76,000 Ms. Greenwood stated that staff must revisit this fee. Ms. Greenwood stated that the board was in agreement of not in favor of 1 and 2 under section 1 in the resolution. Mr. Moyer stated yes. Mr. Halferty stated yes. Mr. Halferty moved to approve Resolution #18-2020. Mr. Moyer seconded. ROLL CALL: Mr. Halferty, Yes; Mr. Moyer, Yes; Ms. Greenwood, Yes. All in favor, Motion carried 3-0. NEW BUSINESS: 202 E. Main Street - Extension of Conceptual Approval. Ms. Yoon stated that this is a pretty straight forward issue. Ms. Yoon gave a brief history of this project. She said that this landmark came before HPC twice for a conceptual hearing and received approval. Ms. Yoon stated that the project was passed by Resolution #018-2019 and was not called up by the council. Ms. Yoon reminded HPC that a development has one year from the date of conceptual review to submit a final review application. Ms. Yoon stated that within the code there is a one time use of a six-month extension upon HPC’s approval. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Greenwood stated she has no problem extending. Mr. Moyer stated he is ok with the extension. Mr. Halferty stated he approves of this. Mr. Moyer moved to approve Resolution #19-2020. Mr. Halferty seconded. ROLL CALL: Mr. Halferty, Yes; Mr. Moyer, Yes; Ms. Greenwood, Yes. All in favor, Motion carried 3-0. ADJOURN: All in favor, Motion carried 3-0. 10 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: Amy Simon, Interim Planning Director/Historic Preservation Officer MEETING DATE: September 23, 2020 RE: 109 N. Second Street (formerly known as 300 W. Main Street) BACKGROUND: 109 N. Second is a landmarked property containing a log cabin built in 1944. An HPC approved project on the property is underway and an opportunity to expose a historic window covered by a recently removed addition has been identified. The window in question is somewhat smaller than adjacent historic windows. This is a historic condition as demonstrated by physical and photographic evidence. The owner would like to install a larger window in this location, which is being referred to HPC after not being approved by staff and project monitor, Roger Moyer. Attached are images describing the condition and the applicant’s proposal. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – 109 N. Second window images 11 ANNABELLE CABINGarage Window Restoration29 JULY 2020Original Window Opening - Slit Window Original Window Opening - Portion covered by Existing Garage12 ANNABELLE CABINGarage Window Restoration29 JULY 2020Option 1: Replace window at the original sizeHistoric Photograph13 ANNABELLE CABINGarage Window Restoration29 JULY 2020Option 2: Replace window, enlarge opening to match size and design of adjacent window14 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: Amy Simon, Interim Planning Director/Historic Preservation Officer MEETING DATE: September 23, 2020 RE: 541 Race Alley BACKGROUND: 541 Race Alley is a landmarked property containing two cabins built in 1964. An HPC approved project on the property is nearing completion but a change to the plan for venting fireplaces is being referred to HPC, after not being approved by staff and monitor, Jeff Halferty. Attached are images showing the approved plan to install exposed flue pipes on the rear of the cabins, along with alternatives, one of which has been constructed without prior review. The architect has indicated that the approved design cannot be constructed due to the specifications of the selected fireplaces and will describe the proposals to HPC. Staff and monitor have felt that simple flues are the most appropriate and in keeping with the modest character of these cabins, seen from the back in the pre-construction photo at right. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – Venting alternatives 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 C:\Users\EASYPD~1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 8\@BCL@840F6099\@BCL@840F6099.doc 9/18/2020 HPC PROJECT MONITORS-projects in bold are under construction Bob Blaich 209 E. Bleeker 300 E. Hyman, Crystal Palace Gretchen Greenwood 411 E. Hyman 300 E. Hyman, Crystal Palace 101 W. Main, Molly Gibson Lodge 201 E. Main 834 W. Hallam 420 E. Hyman 517 E. Hopkins Jeff Halferty 232 E. Main 541 Race Alley 208 E. Main 517 E. Hopkins 533 W. Hallam 110 W. Main, Hotel Aspen 105 E. Hallam Roger Moyer 223 E. Hallam 300 W. Main 105 E. Hallam Scott Kendrick 517 E. Hopkins 419 E. Hyman 302 E. Hopkins 304 E. Hopkins 210 W. Main 320 E. Hyman Aspen Institute- Boettcher/Bayer Museum Sheri Sanzone 549 Race Alley 110 W. Main, Hotel Aspen 125 W. Main Aspen Institute- Boettcher/Bayer Museum Kara Thompson 931 Gibson 201 E. Main 333 W. Bleeker Need to assign: 414-422 E. Cooper 422-434 E. Cooper 305-307 S. Mill 227 E. Main 210 S. First 23 Page 1 of 4 130 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 23, 2020 RE: 820 East Cooper Avenue – Minor Development Review PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT /OWNER: Lauren E. Bullard REPRESENTATIVE: Zone 4 Architects, LLC LOCATION: Street Address: 820 E. Cooper Avenue Legal Description: Lot P, Block 111, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2737-182-28-005 CURRENT ZONING & USE RMF (Residential Multi- Family); Single-family home PROPOSED ZONING & USE: No change SUMMARY: The applicant requests approval for Minor Development review to add a small addition to the rear of the historic property, restore historic features, and make landscaping changes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff supports the project and recommends approval with conditions listed on page 4 of this memo. Site Locator Map – 820 E. Cooper Avenue 820 24 Page 2 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com BACKGROUND: 820 East Cooper is a 3,000 sf lot in the RMF zone district. The historic resource is a one- story miner’s cabin with a loft. In 1996 HPC approved a new addition to the historic structure that was never built. In 2012, HPC granted the demolition of a non- historic shed structure along the alley. The property was recently acquired by the current applicant who has been working with staff to remove the non-historic wrap around deck that covered the base of the historic resource, restore the historic windows, and remove the blue metal roof and replace it with the asphalt shingle roof. REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC): The Applicant is requesting the following approval: • Minor Development (Section 26.415.070.C) o add a small addition to the rear, restore historic features and make landscaping changes. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is the final review authority. The scope of this application is not subject to Notice of Call-Up at City Council. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to enlarge an existing non-historic addition to the rear of the historic structure by adding approximately 46 sf of floor area. As part of the scope of work, the altered front door of the historic resource will be restored to historic proportions and landscaping changes including pervious brick pavers and tree removal are proposed. No historic preservation benefits or incentives are requested for this proposal. STAFF COMMENTS: The proposed addition to the rear of the property is an enlargement of a non-historic addition that improves the usability of this space without compromising the historic fabric and having minimal visual impact. The proposed addition utilizes a pitched roof form the relates to the historic resource and fenestration with dimensions that keep in character with the historic resource. The proposed material is asphalt shingles, matching what is in place on the historic resource, and a vertical application of Trespa siding which deviates from the historic resource. Staff finds that all relevant Design Guidelines in Chapter 10 are met. Staff supports the proposed addition and restoration plan of the historic front door opening using historic photographs and the existing framing as a reference. (See Figure 2.) Figure 1 – 820 E. Cooper, 2020 25 Page 3 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Staff recommends HPC further discuss elements of the proposed landscape plan in detail to provide more direction for the applicant: Landscaping Changes: Following the removal of the wooden deck that wrapped around the entire footprint of the building, the applicant proposes to stabilize the surrounding grade with various landscaping improvements including the use of permeable brick pavers, sod, and perennial beds. The permeable brick pavers will be used to create a perpendicular walkway from the street to the front door of the historic resource which meets Design Guideline 1.6; however, staff finds the pavers proposed along the foundation of the front façade to be out of character and does not meet Design Guideline 1.12. Staff recommends the pavers be limited to the walkway and entry leading up to the front door and either sod or plantings along the front façade. Any proposed plantings must not cover or screen the historic resource from view. No changes are proposed to the existing fence with this proposal. The applicant proposes to restore sod in front of the historic resource and maintain the sod located towards the rear of the property. The gravel areas identified along the rear of the property appears to be associated with the two on-site parking spaces required for the property that must remain. The applicant is currently working with the Parks Department on the removal of the tree located in the front yard of the property. Staff recommends the applicant continue discussion with all relevant City Departments regarding tree impact/mitigation and stormwater needs for the site. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The application was referred out to other City Departments who have requirements that will significantly affect the permit review. Please see Exhibit B for full comments. Engineering Department: 1. Applicant needs to show the disturbance area is under 1,000 sf or provide a full drainage plan and report from a registered engineer. The use of pervious pavers will meet the stormwater requirements. Parks Department: 1. Amenable to the removal of the conifer in the front yard and planting of a maple tree out in the city ROW. Figure 2 – 820 E. Cooper Ave., 1980 26 Page 4 of 4 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) approve this application with the following conditions: 1.) Continue to work with the Engineering Department regarding the disturbance area calculations and stormwater requirements. 2.) Continue to work with the Parks Department regarding tree removal and required mitigation. 3.) Replace the proposed brick pavers along the front façade with sod or plantings that meet Design Guideline 1.12 & 1.13, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor prior to Building Permit submission. 4.) Provided details of the permeable brick pavers, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor prior to installation. 5.) Provide a cut sheets of the new front door and transom to fit restored opening, and the installation of new siding to close any gaps need to match and integrate with the existing historic siding. 6.) Exposed concrete or painted mental flashing is appropriate for the new foundation under the proposed addition. 7.) The site must continue to provide for the required two on-site parking spaces. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution #____, Series of 2020 Exhibit A – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit B – Referral Comments Exhibit C – Application 27 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2020 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 820 EAST COOPER AVENUE, LOT P, BLOCK 111, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-182-28-005 WHEREAS, the applicant, Lauren E. Bullard, represented by Zone 4 Architects, LLC, has requested HPC approval for Minor Development for the property located at 820 East Cooper Avenue, Lot P, Block 111, City and Townsite of Aspen, 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 Minor Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.C 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, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with applicable review standards and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on September 23rd, 2020. HPC 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 _ - _. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby approves Minor Development for 820 East Cooper Avenue, Lot P, Block 111, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO as follows: Section 1: Minor Development Review HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development as proposed with the following conditions: 1. Continue to work with the Engineering Department regarding the disturbance area calculations and stormwater requirements. 2. Continue to work with the Parks Department regarding tree removal and required mitigation. 3. Replace the proposed brick pavers along the front façade with sod or plantings that meet Design Guideline 1.12 & 1.13, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor prior to Building Permit submission. 28 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020 Page 2 of 3 4. Provided details of the permeable brick pavers, to be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor prior to installation. 5. Provide a cut sheets of the new front door and transom to fit restored opening, and the installation of new siding to close any gaps need to match and integrate with the existing historic siding. 6. Exposed concrete or painted mental flashing is appropriate for the new foundation under the proposed addition. 7. The site must continue to provide for the required two on-site parking spaces. Section 2: 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 3: 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 4: 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. Section 5: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use 29 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2020 Page 3 of 3 Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 820 E. Cooper Avenue Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 23rd day of September, 2020. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: ______________________________ ______________________________ James R. True, City Attorney Gretchen Greenwood, Chair ATTEST: ______________________________ Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk 30 Page 1 of 7 Exhibit A Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings NOTE: Staff responses begin on page 7 of this exhibit, following the list of applicable guidelines. 26.415.070.C Minor Development 1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for minor development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a minor development. Minor development work includes: a) Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the floor area of the structure is two hundred and fifty (250) square feet or less or b) Alterations to a building façade, windows, doors, roof planes or material, exterior wall materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the work does not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or c) Erection or installation of a combination or multiples of awning, canopies, mechanical equipment, fencing, signs, accessory features and other attachments to designated properties such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect or d) Alterations that are made to non-historic portions of a designated historic property that do not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or e) The erection of street furniture, signs, public art and other visible improvements within designated historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect. The Community Development Director may determine that an application for work on a designated historic property involving multiple categories of minor development may result in the cumulative impact such that it is considered a major development. In such cases, the applicant shall apply for a major development review in accordance with Subsection 26.415.07.D. 31 Page 2 of 7 Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines: 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. Chapter 1: Site Planning & Landscape Design MET NOT MET 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. 1.12 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. Chapter 4: Rehabilitation - Doors MET NOT MET 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. 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. Chapter 9: New Construction - Excavation, Building Relocation & Foundations MET NOT MET 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. Chapter 10: New Construction - Building Additions MET NOT MET 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. MET MET CONDITION CONDITION CONDITION MET CONDITION MET MET MET MET MET MET Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review Criteria for 820 E. Cooper The applicant is requesting Minor Development review for this project. The proposed design must meet applicable Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. MET CONDITION MET 32 Page 3 of 7 • 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. 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. 33 Page 4 of 7 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. 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. 4.4 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. 34 Page 5 of 7 • 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. 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. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. • A new addition must be compatible with the historic character of the primary building. • An addition must be subordinate, deferential, modest, and secondary in comparison to the architectural character of the primary building. • An addition that imitates the primary building’s historic style is not allowed. For example, a new faux Victorian detailed addition is inappropriate on an Aspen Victorian home. • An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. • Proposals on corner lots require particular attention to creating compatibility. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. • The historic resource must be visually dominant on the site and must be distinguishable against the addition. • The total above grade floor area of an addition may be no more than 100% of the above grade floor area of the original historic resource. All other above grade development must be completely detached. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: o The proposed addition is all one story o The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource o The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource o The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically o The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the street 35 Page 6 of 7 o There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed o The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or o The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. • An addition shall be distinguishable from the historic building and still be visually compatible with historic features. • A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material, or a modern interpretation of a historic style are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from historic construction to new construction. • Do not reference historic styles that have no basis in Aspen. • Consider these three aspects of an addition; form, materials, and fenestration. An addition 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. • Note that on a corner lot, departing from the form of the historic resource may not be allowed. • There is a spectrum of appropriate solutions to distinguishing new from old portions of a development. Some resources of particularly high significance or integrity may not be the right instance for a contrasting addition. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. • An addition that is lower than, or similar to the height of the primary building, is preferred. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. • Locating an addition at the front of a primary building is inappropriate. • Additions to the side of a primary building are handled on a case-by-case basis and are approved based on site specific constraints that restrict rear additions. • Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. • A simple roof form that does not compete with the historic building is appropriate. • On Aspen Victorian properties, a flat roof may only be used on an addition to a gable roofed structure if the addition is entirely one story in height, or if the flat roofed areas are limited, but the addition is primarily a pitched roof. 36 Page 7 of 7 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. • Loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices, and eavelines must be avoided. Staff Finding: The applicable sections of the design guidelines are as follows: site planning, doors, foundations, and new additions. Design Guidelines 1.8 addresses stormwater mitigation. Engineering has provided comments that the amount of site disturbance may trigger stormwater requirements for the site with the direction that pervious pavers may be used to address these concerns. The applicant will need to continue working with all relevant City Departments, specifically Engineering and Parks to ensure all requirements are met for this site. Staff recommends the applicant provide visuals of the proposed pavers for review and approval by staff and monitor prior to its installation. Design Guidelines 1.12 focuses on the site context of historic structures. Areas that were not historically covered with hard surfaces should maintain the historic condition of sod or plantings. The proposed brick pavers along the foundation of the historic home would not be appropriate. Staff recommends this area be restored to sod or plantings that do not cover the historic resource. In addition, the site must provide for two on-site parking spaces as required by the land use code. Design Guidelines 4.2 & 4.4 concerns the restoration of historic doors and openings. Currently, the dimensions of the historic front door and transom do not match historic configurations. The restoration of this opening may require additional siding that must be woven in with the historic siding. Staff supports the restoration of this important feature and recommends the cut sheets for the new door and transom be provided for staff and monitor review and approval. Design Guidelines 9.5 focuses on the details for a new foundation. The historic house is on a slab on grade foundation with a small subgrade level to the rear that houses mechanical equipment. A new foundation is proposed for the enlarged addition and exposed concrete or painted mental flashing is considered appropriate. In summary, staff recommends approval with conditions listed in the memo and draft resolution. 37 Exhibit B – Referral Comments HP Project: 820 E. Cooper Avenue Engineering Department Comment: Hailey Guglielmo, hailey.guglielmo@cityofaspen.com 1. The project appears to be right at the 1,000 sf threshold for a major Engineering plan and report. At building permit the applicant will need to either show the disturbance area is under 1,000 sf or provide a full drainage plan and report from a registered engineer. The use of pervious pavers will meet the stormwater requirements if a major engineering review is required. Parks Department Comment: David Radeck, david.radeck@cityofaspen.com 1. Parks is amenable to the removal of the conifer in the front yard and planting of a maple tree out in the city ROW. (Email confirmation received September 8, 2020.) 38 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.) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 820 E Cooper Ave Aspen, CO 81611 273718228005 432a East Hyman Ave Aspen CO 81611 Zone 4 Architects, LLC / Colleen Loughlin 970.429.8470 colleen@zone4architects.com 820 East Cooper Ave. X X 820 E Cooper Ave Aspen, CO 81611 820 East Cooper Ave. 970.987.4633 lauren.bullard@gmail.com The proposal adds approximately 46 s.f. to an existing non-historic room. There will be new Trespa siding, new door and 2 windows, as well as a new roof. The new roof will have a material to match the historic resource. The front door will return to its historic condition and be made smaller by approximately 4". The existing historic residence has an existing non-historic addition which contains a mudroom. The existing historic resource is to remain and has an exterior wood deck. 39 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 X X X X 40 41 42 43 ALTA Commitment For Title Insurance AUTHORIZED AGENT: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS AVE. 3 RD FLOOR ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970-925-1766-PHONE 970-925-6527-FAX 877-217-3158-TOLL FREE E-MAIL ADDRESS: TITLE MATTERS: CLOSING MATTERS: Nola Warnecke (nola@sopris.net) TJ Davis - (tjd@sopris.net) Joy Higens - (joy@sopris.net) Issued By Home Office: 875 Concourse Parkway South, Suite 200 Maitland, FL 32751 Telephone (407) 629-5842 44 ALTA Commitment Form (6-17-06) COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE ISSUED BY WESTCOR LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Westcor Land Title Insurance Company, a California Corporation,("Company"), for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedule A and B and to the Conditions of this Commitment. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company. All liability and obligations under this Commitment shall cease and terminate within six (6) months after the Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, WESTCOR LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY has caused its corporate name and seal to be hereunto affixed and these presents to be signed in facsimile under authority of its by-laws on the date shown in Schedule A. Issued By: WESTCOR LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned: Authorized Signature CO 1045 * * Pitkin County Title, Inc. 601 E. Hopkins #3 Aspen, CO 81611 45 CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS 1. The term "mortgage", when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed or other security instrument. 2. If the Proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the Proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien or encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named Proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and Stipulations and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the Proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the Proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. 5. The policy to be issued contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is $2,000,000.00 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. You may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org. 46 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: August 3, 2020 at 8:00 AM Case No. PCT25546W 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy-(8/1/2016) Amount$ Premium$ Proposed Insured: Rate: (b) ALTA Loan Policy-(8/1/2016) Amount$ 200,000.00 Premium$ 760.00 Proposed Insured: Rate: Standard ALPINE BANK, A COLORADO BANKING CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND/OR ASSIGNS (c) ALTA Loan Policy-(8/1/2016) Amount$ Premium$ Proposed Insured: Rate: 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: LAUREN E. BULLARD 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: LOT P, BLOCK 111, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Schedule A-PG.1 601 E. HOPKINS, ASPEN, CO. 81611 This Commitment is invalid 970-925-1766 Phone/970-925-6527 Fax unless the Insuring 877-217-3158 Toll Free Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. AUTHORIZED AGENT Countersigned: 47 SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to-wit: 1. Deed of Trust from : LAUREN E. BULLARD to the Public Trustee of the County of PITKIN for the use of : THE LENDER TO BE INSURED HEREUNDER to secure : $200,000.00 48 SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are 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 the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City of Aspen recorded March 6, 1888 in Book 59 at Page 372 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". 8. Reservations of mineral rights as set forth in deed recorded May 19, 1891 in Book 93 at Page 56. 9. Exceptions and reservations as set forth in the Act authorizing the issuance of the Patent for the City and Townsite of Aspen recorded March 1, 1897 in Book 139 at Page 216. 10. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Ordinance No. 51, Series of 1995 by Aspen City Council recorded May 15, 1996 as Reception No. 392716. 11. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission recorded October 9, 2012 as Reception No. 592926 as Resolution No. 22, Series of 2012. 49 ENDORSEMENT SCHEDULE FOR LENDERS POLICY FILE NO: PCT25546W BORROWER: LAUREN E. BULLARD The following endorsements will be issued in connection with the Policy to be issued hereunder as referenced above: Form: $ Form: $ Form: $ Form: $ Form: $ Upon compliance with the requirements set forth below, the following exceptions will be deleted from the final policy. The fee for deleting exceptions 1 thru 3 is $55.00 A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against any defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters known by Seller and Buyer. The Company hereby reserves the right to make additional requirements as may be deemed necessary in the event information regarding defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or the like are discovered. The fee for deleting exception 4 is $10.00 for Residential Property and $25.00 for Commercial Property. Exception Number 5 is automatically deleted upon recordation of the documents called for on the requirement page of this commitment. Exception Number 6 will be amended to read: Taxes for the current year not yet due or payable, upon evidence satisfactory that the Taxes for the prior year(s) have been paid. NOTE: A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanic's and materialmens liens, executed by the seller and any additional parties deemed necessary by the Company. The company hereby reserves the right to make additional requirements as may be deemed necessary in the event additional facts regarding development, construction or other building or work are disclosed to the company that may fall within any lien period as defined in the Statues of the State of Colorado, and may result in additional premiums and/or fees for such coverage and any additional requirements deemed necessary by the Company. The Company hereby reserves the right to deny any of the above coverage's at its sole discretion. 50 PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Disclosures Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS EXCEPTION WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED HEREUNDER) 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 will refuse to record or file any document that does not conform to the requirements of this section. Pursuant to C.R.S. 30-10-406(3)(a). The company will not issue its policy or policies of title insurance contemplated by this commitment until it has been provided a Certificate of Taxes due or other equivalent documentation from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer's authorized agent: or until the Proposed Insured has notified or instructed the company in writing to the contrary. Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122. No person or entity that provides closing and settlement services for a real estate transaction shall disburse funds as a part of such services until those funds have been received and are available for immediate withdrawals as a matter of right. Pursuant to C.R.S. 38-35-125(2). The Company hereby notifies the proposed buyer in the current transaction that there may be recorded evidence that the mineral estate, or portion thereof, has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate. If so, there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in the oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the subject property. Such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-123. If this transaction includes a sale of property and the sales price exceeds $100,000.00, the seller must comply with the disclosure/withholding requirements of said section. (Nonresident withholding) Pursuant to C.R.S. 39-22-604.5. Notice is hereby given that: The subject property may be located in a special taxing district. A Certificate of Taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer's authorized agent. 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. Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122. Notice is hereby given that: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulation 8-1-2; "Gap Protection" -When this Company conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing the legal documents resulting from the transaction, the Company shall be responsible for all matters which appear on the record prior to such time or recording or filing; and "Mechanic's Lien Protection" - If you are the buyer of a single family residence, you may request mechanic's lien coverage to be issued on your policy of Insurance. If the property being purchased has not been the subject of construction, improvements or repairs in the last six months prior to the date of this commitment, the requirements will be payment of the appropriate premium and the completion of an Affidavit and Indemnity by the seller. If the property being purchased was constructed, improved or repaired within six months prior to the date of this commitment the requirements may involve disclosure of certain financial information, payment of premiums, and indemnity, among others. The general requirements stated above are subject to revision and approval by the Company. Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122. Notice is hereby given that an ALTA Closing Protection Letter is available, upon request, to certain parties to the transaction as noted in the title commitment. Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulation 8-1-3. Nothing herein contained will be deemed to obligate the Company to provide any of the coverages referred to herein unless the above conditions are fully satisfied NOTE: The policy(s) of insurance may contain a clause permitting arbitration of claims at the request of either the Insured or the Company. Upon request, the Company will provide a copy of this clause and the accompanying arbitration rules prior to the closing of the transaction. NOTICE REGARDING CONSTRUCTION FINANCING: If it is not disclosed to the company that the loan to be insured hereunder is in fact a construction loan, any coverage given under the final policy regarding mechanic or materialmen's liens shall be deemed void and of no effect. 51 Pitkin County Title, Inc. Privacy Policy We collect nonpublic information about you from the following sources: • Information we receive from you, such as your name, address, telephone number, or social security number; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliates, or others. We receive this information from your lender, attorney, real estate broker, etc.; and Information from public records We do not disclose any nonpublic personal information about our customers or former customers to anyone, except as permitted by law. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information to provide the products or services requested by you or your lender. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that company with appropriate federal and state regulations. 52 Notice of Privacy Policy of Westcor Land Title Insurance Company Westcor Land Title Insurance Company ("WLTIC") values its customers and is committed to protecting the privacy of personal information. In keeping with that philosophy, we have developed a Privacy Policy, set out below, that will ensure the continued protection of your nonpublic personal information and inform you about the measures WLTIC takes to safeguard that information. Who is Covered We provide our Privacy Policy to each customer when they purchase an WLTIC title insurance policy. Generally, this means that the Privacy Policy is provided to the customer at the closing of the real estate transaction. Information Collected In the normal course of business and to provide the necessary services to our customers, we may obtain nonpublic personal information directly from the customer, from customer-related transactions, or from third parties such as our title insurance agents, lenders, appraisers, surveyors or other similar entities. Access to Information Access to all nonpublic personal information is limited to those employees who have a need to know in order to perform their jobs. These employees include, but are not limited to, those in departments such as legal, underwriting, claims administration and accounting. Information Sharing Generally, WLTIC does not share nonpublic personal information that it collects with anyone other than its policy issuing agents as needed to complete the real estate settlement services and issue its title insurance policy as requested by the consumer. WLTIC may share nonpublic personal information as permitted by law with entities with whom WLTIC has a joint marketing agreement. Entities with whom WLTIC has a joint marketing agreement have agreed to protect the privacy of our customer's nonpublic personal information by utilizing similar precautions and security measures as WLTIC uses to protect this information and to use the information for lawful purposes. WLTIC, however, may share information as required by law in response to a subpoena, to a government regulatory agency or to prevent fraud. Information Security WLTIC, at all times, strives to maintain the confidentiality and integrity of the personal information in its possession and has instituted measures to guard against its unauthorized access. We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards in compliance with federal standards to protect that information. The WLTIC Privacy Policy can also be found on WLTIC's website at www.wltic.com. 53 54 PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. 601 E. HOPKINS, THIRD FLOOR ASPEN, CO 81611 970-925-1766/970-925-6527 FAX TOLL FREE 877-217-3158 WIRING INSTRUCTIONS FOR ALL TRANSACTIONS REGARDING THE CLOSING OF THIS FILE ARE AS FOLLOWS: ALPINE BANK-ASPEN 600 E. HOPKINS AVE. ASPEN, CO. 81611 ABA ROUTING NO. 102103407 FOR CREDIT TO: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., ESCROW ACCOUNT ACCOUNT NO. 8910 354 425 REFERENCE:PCT25546W/LAUREN E. BULLARD 55 August 12, 2020 HAND DELIVERY Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 820 East Cooper Ave. Pre-Application Summary Dear Sarah: On behalf of CWG Holdings, LLC (Applicant), Zone 4 Architects would like to present an application to consider a Minor Development Review for the purposes of remodeling an existing home located at 820 East Cooper Avenue. The property is currently a landmarked historic site. In this application, the Applicant is proposing to replace the existing front door and enlarge the existing non-historic addition towards the rear of the property. There will be a new light fixture on the front façade of the home in accordance with HPC Design Guidelines that will also meet COA Dark sky requirements. Additionally, there are proposed landscape changes that do not affect the architecture of the existing structure. The existing deck is removed and the existing concrete walk in the rear yard is proposed to be removed. The applicant has coordinated their design efforts with the City Forester, and proposes to remove tree #14 on the survey to accomplish two HPC design guidelines. First, the walkway will be realigned to its original historic perpendicular alignment off the public sidewalk to the front door. Secondly, a stately tree will be added in the ROW to replace the removal of the existing tree. The applicant intends to plant either a Sienna Glen or Marmo Freeman Maple as recommended by the Aspen Street Tree List. The historical resource will be highlighted by this vegetation change, and will add to the historic fabric of its neighborhood. As seen in the Landscape Plan diagram: • the east side yard will have small diameter decorative river cobble; • the north (rear) walkway is shifting its alignment and will be porous brick pavers; • porous brick pavers will be used as hardscape in the rear yard, wrap around the west side yard to connect to the front (south) entry; • existing parking gravel is to remain; • grass for planting, trees, shrubs, and flowers will infill the new hardscape zones Per the pre-application summary, this application is subject to the following provisions of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Individual responses to these sections will follow. ▪ 26.304: Common Development Review Procedures 56 ▪ 26.415.070.C: Development involving designated historic property, or property within a _________________historic district, Certificate of Appropriateness for a minor development ▪ 26.470: Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) ▪ 26.575.020: Measuring Setbacks ▪ 26.710.090: Residential Multi-Family (RMF) Responses to Review Criteria: ▪ 26.304: Common Development Review Procedures ▪ Pre-application conference between the applicant and Amy Simon, of the Community Development Department, occurred to discuss the project scope and goals. ▪ The applicant intends to comply with all requirements under section 26.304 including the following: • Application fees will be paid upon submittal of each step of the application; • Compliance with the City of Aspen Charter and the Land Use Code; • Application will undergo review of applicable Decision-making bodies ▪ 26.415.070.C: Development involving designated historic property, or property within a historic district, Certificate of Appropriateness for a minor development 1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for minor development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a minor development. Minor development work includes: a) Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the floor area of the structure is two hundred and fifty (250) square feet or less or; ▪ 26.415.070.C.1.a: The proposed project will increase the floor area by approximately 77 s.f. b) Alterations to a building façade, windows, doors, roof planes or material, exterior wall materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the work does not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or; ▪ 26.415.070.C.1.b: The front door will be restored to the historic width of 32”, minimizing the size of the existing front door. The door trim will match the character of the existing historic window trim. c) Erection or installation of a combination or multiples of awning, canopies, mechanical equipment, fencing, signs, accessory features and other attachments to designated properties such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect or; ▪ 26.415.070.C.1.c: No awnings, canopies, mechanical equipment, fencing, signs, or accessory features and other attachments to the designated property are proposed. d) Alterations that are made to non-historic portions of a designated historic property that do not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect; ▪ 26.415.070.C.1.d: The non-historic addition on the rear of the house will be expanded by approximately 77 s.f. with new windows which does not qualify the proposal from a certificate of no negative effect. e) The erection of street furniture, signs, public art and other visible improvements within designated historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect. ▪ 26.415.070.C.1.e: No street furniture, signs, public art and other visible improvements are proposed. 2. An application for minor development shall include the following: a) The general application information required in Section 26.304.030. ▪ 26.415.070.C.2.a: The application will comply with code section 26.304.030. b) Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the proposed work and its relationship to the designated historic buildings, structures, sites and features within its vicinity. ▪ 26.415.070.C.2.b: The application includes ¼”:1’-0” elevations and plans depicting its relationship to the designated historic house. c) An accurate representation of all building materials and finishes to be used in the 57 development. ▪ 26.415.070.C.2.c: Elevations and renderings depict the exterior materials and finishes to be used. The existing finish materials are not proposed to change from the existing condition. The existing siding and trim is proposed to be repainted. The expanded non-historic addition will have vertical Trespa siding with roof finish material to match the historic roof. d) Photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location, extent and design of proposed work. ▪ 26.415.070.C.2.d: Photograph exhibits show the lot for redevelopment as well as the surrounding neighborhood context. A site plan and vicinity map locate the property in the larger context of downtown Aspen. e) Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential design standards or a written request for a variance from any standard that is not being met. ▪ 26.415.070.C.2.e: The proposed development is not changing or modifying any of the existing exterior except for the requested Entry door change and the window replacements at the addition, which is located on a non-street facing facade. Due to the nature of the work, this application is exempt from RDS per code section 26.410.010.C.4. ▪ 26.470: Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Sec. 26.470.010.-Purpose The purposes of this Chapter are to: (a) implement the goals and policies for the City and the Aspen Area Community Plan; (b) ensure that new growth occurs in an orderly and efficient manner in the City; (c) ensure sufficient public facilities are present to accommodate new growth and development; (d) ensure that new growth and development is designed and constructed to maintain the character and ambia nce of the City; (e) ensure the presence of an adequate supply of affordable housing, businesses and events that serve the local, permanent community and the area's tourist base; (f) ensure that growth does not overextend the community's ability to provide support services, including employee housing, traffic control and parking; and (g) ensure that the resulting employees generated and impacts created by development and redevelopment are mitigated by said development and redevelopment. ▪ The application complies with the purposes of Sec. 26.470.010. Sec. 26.470.020.-Terminology ▪ Not applicable. Sec. 26.470.030.-Applicability and prohibitions This Chapter shall apply to all development in the City unless exempted in section 26.470.070, Exempt Development . (a)Number of development applications. No more than one (1) application for growth management allotments on any one (1) parcel shall be considered concurrently. To submit a new application, any active growth management application for the same property must be vacated. ▪ The application only has one development application in consideration. ▪ Sub-sections (b)-(i) are not applicable and the text is omitted for clarity of the application. Sec. 26.470.040.-Allotment Procedures ▪ Not applicable. Code section text is omitted for clarity of the application. Sec. 26.470.050.-Calculations ▪ Sub-sections (a)-(d) are not applicable and the text is omitted for clarity of the application. (e)Employee housing fee -in-lieu payment. Whenever a project provides employee housing via a fee-in-lieu payment, in part or in total, the amount of the payment shall be based upon the following (fee-in-lieu is only allowed for Categories 1 —4, Categories 5—7 is calculated only for use in the Housing Certificates Program): ▪ The proposed addition generates approximately 0.012 employees (77s.f. x 0.16 employees generated/1,000 s.f.). This cash-in-lieu value is approximately $4,111.19 (0.012 x $342,599) 58 ▪ Sub-sections (f)-(g) are not applicable and the text is omitted for clarity of the application. Sec. 26.470.060.-Procedures for Review A development application for growth management shall be reviewed pursuant to the following procedures and standards and the Common Development Review Procedures set forth at Chapter 26.304. According to the type of allotments requested, the following steps are necessary. A development proposal may fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and meet. An application for growth management may be submitted to the Community Development Director on any date of the year. (a)Administrative Applications. The Community Development Director shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the applica tion, based on the applicable standards of review in Section 26.470.090, Administrative applications. ▪ Not applicable. (b)Planning and Zoning Commission Applications. The Planning and Zoning Commission, during a duly noticed public hearing, shall review a recommendation from the Community Development Director and shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application, based on the standards of review in Section 26.470.100, Planning and Zoning Commission Applica tions, and Section 26.470.080 , General Review Standards. This requires a one -step process as follows: ▪ This application is subject to a hearing before the HPC Commission due to the request to increase the existing floor area. The proposed minor development is an existing detached residential dwelling which is entitled to 100% of the allowable FAR of an equivalent sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. This property is entitled to 2,400 square feet of FAR. Step One - Public Hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission. ▪ Not applicable. Step One - Public Hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission. Step Two - Public Hearing before City Council ▪ Not applicable. Sec. 26.470.070.-Exempt Development The following types of development shall be exempt from the provisions of this Chapter. Development exempt from growth management shall not be considered exempt from other chapters of the Land Use Code. Where applicable, exemptions are cumulative. (a)Remodeling or redevelopment of existing single -family and duplex residential development. The remodeling or redevelopment of existing single -family and duplex residential properties shall be exempt from growth management provided that no additional Floor Area is added to the property. When an expansion of Floor Area occurs, see Section 26.470.060, subsections (a) and (b). Existing, prior to demolition, Floor Area shall be documented by the City Zoning Officer prior to demolition. ▪ The proposed minor development proposes to increase the existing floor area. ▪ Sub-sections (b),(d)-(j) are not applicable and the text is omitted for clarity of the application. (c)Remodeling or expansion of existing multi-family residential development. The remodeling of existing multi -family residential dwellings shall be exempt from growth management provided that no additional Floor Area is added to the property and provided demolition of a unit or structure does n ot occur. When an expansion of Floor Area occurs, see Section 26.470.060, subsection (b). When demolition occurs, s ee Paragraph 26.470.070(e), Remodeling of existing commercial development. (Also see definition of demolition, Section 26.104.100.) ▪ The proposed minor development proposes to increase the existing floor area. Sec. 26.470.080.-General Review Standards • Sub-sections (a,c) are not applicable and the text is omitted for clarity of the application (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 59 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. ▪ The proposed development complies with the limitations, zone district, and previous approvals. ▪ Sub-sections (d) Affordable Housing Mitigation is not applicable and the text is omitted for clarity of the application. Sec. 26.470.090.-Administrative applications The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director, pursuant to Section 26.470.060, Procedures for Review, and the criteria described below. Except as noted, all administrative gro wth management approvals shall not be deducted from the annual development allotments. All approvals apply cumulatively. ▪ Rolled into the minor review for the HPC application.26.470.090.3.c. is used for calculating the GMQS fee. (3)Affordable housing mitiga tion requirements for the types of free -market residential development described above shall be as follows. The applicant shall have four (4) options: c.Providing a fee-in-lieu payment or extinguishing a Certificate of Affordable Housing Credit in a full-time-equivalent (FTE) amount based on the following schedule: Affordable housing mitigation must be provided at a Category 2 (or lower) rate. Certificates must be extinguished pursuant to the procedures of Chapter 26.540, Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit. Fee -in-lieu rates shall be those stated in Section 26.470.100—Calculations; Employee Generation and Mitigation, in effect on the date of application acceptance. Providing a fee -in-lieu payment in excess of .10 FTE shall require City Council approval, pursuant to Section 26.470.110 (c). Sec. 26.470.100.-Planning and Zoning Commission applications ▪ Sub-sections 26.470.100 are not applicable and the text is omitted for clarity of the application. Sec. 26.470.110.-City Council Applications The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council, 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, all City Council growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective annual development allotments. ▪ Not applicable. (all sub-sections; text is omitted for clarity of the application) Sec. 26.470.120.-Yearly Growth Management accounting procedures ▪ Not applicable. Sec. 26.470.130.-Application contents Applications for growth management shall include the following: (a)The general application information required in Common development review procedures, Chapter 26.304. (b)A site-improvement survey meeting the requirements of Title 29, Engineering Design Standards. ▪ The application has a certified survey meeting the requirements set forth by the City of Aspen’s Engineering Department. (c)A description of the project and the number and type of the requested growth management allotments. ▪ The project is a historically designated miner’s cottage on a 3,000 s.f. lot in the RMF zone. The applicant seeks to replace the front door and enlarge the existing non- historic addition at the back of the lot. The project generates approximately 0.012 FTE’s. (d)A detailed description and site plan of the proposed development, including proposed land uses, densities, natural features, traffic and pedestrian circulation, off-street parking, open space areas, infrastructure improvements, site drainage and any associated off -site improvements. ▪ Not applicable. The existing site will not affect any public areas, parking, natural features, traffic, densities, or land uses. 60 (e)A description of the proposed affordable housing and how it provides adequate mitigation for the project and conforms to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. ▪ Not applicable. (f)A statement specifying the public facilities that will be needed to accommodate the proposed development, proposed infrastructure improvements and the specific assurances that will be made to ensure that the public facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed development. ▪ Not applicable. (g)A written response to each of the review criteria for the particular review requested. ▪ Answers to the applicable code sections are included in this document. (h)Copies of required approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Historic Preservation Commission and the City Council, as necessary. ( Ord. No. 23-2017 ; Ord. No. 12-2019 ) Sec. 26.470.140.-Reconstruction limitations ▪ Subsections a, c-e are not applicable. Text omitted for clarity. (b)Applicants shall verify existing conditions prior to demolition with the City Zoning Officer in order to document reconstruction rights. ▪ The general contractor will verify existing conditions prior to demolition. Sec. 26.470.150.-Amendment of a growth management development order ▪ Not applicable. (all sub-sections below) Sec. 26.470.160.-Appeals ▪ Not applicable. Text omitted for clarity of application. ▪ 26.575.020: Calculations and Measurements (c)Measuring Net Lot Area. A property's development rights are derived from Net Lot Area. This is a number that accounts for the presence of steep slopes, easements, areas under water, and similar features of a property. The method for calculating a parcel's Net Lot Area is as follows: (d)Measuring Floor Area. In measuring floor areas for floor area ratio and allowable floor area, the following applies: (1)General. Floor area shall be attributed to the lot or parcel upon which it is developed. In measuring a building for the purposes of calculati ng floor area ratio and allowable floor area, there shall be included all areas within the surrounding exterior walls of the building. When measuring from the exterior walls, the measurement shall be taken from the exterior face of framing, exterior face of structural block, exterior face of straw bale, or similar exterior surface of the nominal structure excluding sheathing, vapor barrier, weatherproofing membrane, exterior - mounted insulation systems, and excluding all exterior veneer and surface treatment s such as stone, stucco, bricks, shingles, clapboards or other similar exterior veneer treatments. ▪ The area calculations are measured from outside face of exterior framing. (2)Vertical circulation. When calculating vertical circulation, the circulation element shall be counted as follows: a.For stairs and elevators, the area of the feature shall be projected down and counted on the lower of the two (2) levels connected by the element and not counted as Floor Area on the top - most interior floor served by the element. ▪ The area calculations include the stairs on the lower-most floor levels, and exempt that area from the upper-most floor. ▪ Subsections b-c are not applicable. Text omitted for clarity. (3)Attic Space and Crawl Space. Unfinished and uninhabitable space between the ceiling joists and roof rafters of a structure or between the ground and floor framing which is accessible only as a matter of necessity is exempt from the calculation of Floor Area as described below. Drop ceilings are not included in the height measurement for crawl spaces. ▪ Crawl spaces that meet the following are exempt from Floor Area calculations: a.Five (5) feet six (6) inches or less in height measured between the hard floor structure and floor framing; and b.Accessible only through an interior floor hatch, exterior access panel, or similar feature; and c.Are the minimum height and size reasonably neces sary for the mechanical equipment. ▪ The existing slab-on-grade space below the existing main floor is exempt from floor area calculations as it meets all three of these requirements and doesn’t house any mechanical equipment. 61 ▪ Attic space that is convenientl y accessible and is either habitable or can be made habitable shall be counted in the calculation of Floor Area. ▪ Areas of an attic level with thirty (30) vertical inches or less between the finished floor level and the finished ceiling shall be exempt, regardless of how that space is accessed or used. ▪ The existing lofted upper level has areas on both the east and west which meet this code section. The existing ceiling slopes at a pitch where the finish floor meets the ceiling at floor level. The area calculations reflect the reduction in floor area calculations. (4)Decks, Balconies, Loggias, Gazebos, Trellis, Exterior Stairways, and non -Street-facing porches. ▪ The existing front patio is to remain and is under the allowable 15% on the site. ▪ Subsections 4.c-f, 5-15 are not applicable. Text omitted for clarity. (e)Measuring Setbacks. (2)Determining Front, Rear, and Side Yards. ▪ Refer to Survey with setbacks. (3)Determining required setbacks adjacent to streets or rights -of-way. ▪ Refer to Survey with setbacks. ▪ Subsections (4), (5.a-o) are not applicable. Text is omitted for clarity. p.Fences and hedges less than forty -two (42) inches in height, as measured from finished grade, are permitted in all required yard setbacks. Fences and hedges up to six (6) feet in height, as measured from finished grade, are permitted only in areas entirely reces sed behind the vertical plane established by the portion of the building facade which is closest to the Street. This restriction applies on all Street-facing facades of a parcel. ▪ Existing fencing is to remain. ▪ Subsections (5.q-t) are not applicable. Text is omitted for clarity. (f)Measuring Building Heights. ▪ Subsections (F.2.a,d,f-h) are not applicable. Text is omitted for clarity. (1)For properties in the Commercial Core (CC), Commercial (C1), Commercial Lodge (CL), Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Service Commercial Industrial (SCI) Zone Districts, the height of the building shall be the maximum distance between the ground and the highest point of the roof top, roof ridge, parapet, or top -most portion of the structure. See Subsection (3), below, for measurement method. (2)For properties in all other Zone Districts, the height of the building shall be measured according to the pitch of the roof as follows. See Subsection (3), below, for measurement method. b. Roofs with a pitch from 3:12 to 7:12 . The height of a building with a roof pitch from 3:12 to 7:12 shall be measured from the ground to the point of the roof vertically halfway between the eave point and the ridge. There shall be no limit on the height of the ridge. ▪ The lower roof height calculations are derived by measuring to the midpoint between the eave and ridge. c. Roofs with a pitch greater than 7:12 . The height of a building with a roof pitch greater than 7:12 shall be measured from the ground to the point of the roof vertically one -third (⅓) of the distance up from the eave point to the ridge. There shall be no limit on the height of the ridge. ▪ The primary roof height calculations are derived by measuring to the 1/3 point located between the eave and ridge. e. For "shed" roofs with a single -pitch, the methodology for measuring shall be the same as described above according to the slope of the roof and by using the highest point of the roof as the ridge. ▪ The shed roof height calculations are derived by measuring to the midpoint between the eave and ridge. ▪ Not applicable. (4)Allowed Exceptions to Height Limitations. a. Chimneys, flues, and similar venting apparatus. ▪ There are no chimneys, flues, or vents exceeding the allowable height limit proposed. ▪ Sub-section b-m are not applicable. g) Measuring Site coverage. (h)Measurement of Demolition . The City Zoning Officer shall determine if a building is intended to be or has been demolished by applying the following process of calculation: 62 ▪ The application includes wall and fenestration demolition drawings and calculations. The proposed development does not trigger demolition over 50% of the interior of the building or 40% of exterior surfaces. ▪ Section j-l are not applicable. Text is omitted for clarity of the application. ▪ 26.710.090: Residential Multi-Family B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Residential Multi-Family (RMF) Zone District: ▪ 26.710.090.B.1: The proposed application is permitted as of right in the RMF Zone District as a detached residential dwelling. C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Residential Multi-Family (RMF) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: ▪ 26.710.090.C: This is not applicable to the application. D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Residential Multi-Family (RMF) Zone District: 1. Minimum Gross Lot Area (square feet): six thousand (6,000). For lots created by Paragraph 26.480.030.A.4, Historic landmark lot split: three thousand (3,000). ▪ 26.710.090.D.1: The historic landmark lot is 3,000 s.f. +/-. 2. Minimum Net Lot Area per dwelling unit (square feet): a. Detached residential dwelling: four thousand five hundred (4,500). For historic landmark properties: three thousand (3,000). ▪ 26.710.090.D.2.a.: The historic landmark lot is 3,000 s.f. +/- with a detached residential dwelling. b. Duplex dwelling unit: four thousand five hundred (4,500). For historic landmark properties: three thousand (3,000). c. Multi-family dwellings: No requirement. d. Bed and breakfast: No requirement. 3. Minimum lot width (feet): sixty (60). For lots created by Paragraph 26.480.030.A.4, Historic landmark lot split: thirty (30). ▪ 26.710.090.D.3.: Refer to the Survey which shows the lot is 30’-0” in width pursuant to 26.480.030.A.4. 4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): a. Detached residential and duplex dwellings: Same as R-6 Zone District. ▪ 26.710.090.D.4.a.: Refer to the Survey which shows a front yard setback of 10’-9 1/2” which meets R-6 Zone District requirements for principal buildings. b. Multi-family: five (5). 5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): a. Detached residential and duplex dwellings: same as R-6 Zone District. ▪ 26.710.090.D.5.a.: Refer to the Survey which shows an east side yard setback of 5’- 0” which meets R-6 Zone District requirements for principal buildings. The survey shows an existing non-conforming west side yard setback of 4’-6”. b. Multi-family: five (5). 6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): a. Detached residential and duplex dwellings: same as R-6 Zone District. ▪ 26.710.090.D.6.a.: Refer to the Survey which shows a rear yard setback exceeding 5’-0” which meets R-6 Zone District requirements. b. Multi-family: five (5). 7. Maximum height (according to density) (feet): a. Detached residential and duplex dwellings: same as R-6 Zone District. ▪ 26.710.090.D.7.a.: The existing and proposed development meet the requirements of the maximum height limit of 25’-0”. Reference elevation drawings in submittal package. b. Multi-family – parcel density less than one (1) unit per one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet of Gross Lot Area: twenty-five (25). c. Multi-family – parcel density equal to or greater than one (1) unit per one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet of Gross Lot Area: thirty-two (32). 8. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot (feet): a. Detached residential and duplex dwellings: same as R-6 Zone District. 63 ▪ 26.710.090.D.8.a.: This is not applicable to the lot as there is only one building. b. Multi-family: No requirement. (Building and Fire Codes may apply.) 9. Pedestrian amenity space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030. ▪ 26.710.090.D.9.: The adjacent parcels are multi-family developments and don’t have business operations adjacent to/on the same parcel as the outdoor space. The existing public right-of-way is not proposed to be altered. 10. Floor area ratio (FAR). This Paragraph applies to each type of use according to density and applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of record: a. Existing detached residential and duplex dwellings: one hundred percent (100%) of the allowable floor area of an equivalent-sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. (See Section 26.710.040, R-6 Zone District.) City historic transferable development rights shall not permit additional floor area for detached residential and duplex dwellings. ▪ 26.710.090.D.10.a.: The proposed minor development is an existing detached residential dwelling which is entitled to 100% of the allowable FAR of an equivalent sized lot located in the R-6 Zone District. This lot is entitled to 2,400 square feet of FAR. ▪ Sub-section 10.b-e, 11.a.1-3 are not applicable. Thank you for your consideration, Dylan Johns Zone 4 Architects Cc: File Applicant 64 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY DATE: February 20, 2020 PLANNER: Sarah Yoon, 920.5144 PROJECT NAME AND ADDRESS: 820 E. Cooper – Minor Development Review REPRESENTATIVE: Lauren Bullard, 970.987.4633, lauren.bullard@gmail.com DESCRIPTION: 820 E. Cooper is a historically designated miner’s cottage on a 3,000 sq. ft. lot in the RMF zone district. The existing footprint reveals that non-historic additions were added to the rear of the historic resource over time. The applicant wishes to replace the existing front door and enlarge the existing non-historic addition towards the rear of the property by approximately 24 sq. ft. It appears that the original dimensions of the front door has been widened and additional trim was added around the historic transom window to compensate for alterations made to the door opening. Staff supports the request to replace the existing non-historic door with an appropriate door if the original opening and surrounding trim details are restored. Restoration work is eligible for an administrative Certificate of No Negative Effect, however, if the applicant wishes to keep the non-historic dimensions of the front door, the proposal will need to be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) for approval. The request to increase existing floor area by 24 sq. ft. qualifies for a Minor Review process that will need full HPC review. It is important to note that any increase in floor area will require growth management mitigation. Mitigation for approximately 24 sq. ft. of new floor area generates 0.003 full-time equivalent employees (24 sq. ft. x 0.16 employees generated/1,000 sq. ft), which equals a cash-in-lieu value of approximately $1,027.80 using the following calculation: 0.003 x $342,599 (cash-in-lieu rate for Category 2 affordable housing). See Section 26.470 for additional information. If the applicant decides to pursue the increase in floor area and the door change simultaneously, the administrative review for restoration will be combined with the one-step Minor Review process for HPC review. HPC will use the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the Land Use Code Sections that are applicable to this project to assist with their determinations. This property is exempt from Residential Design Standard Review (RDS). RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: Section Number Section Title 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.070.C Historic Preservation – Minor Development 26.470 Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.090 Residential Multi-family (RMF) For your convenience – links to the Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below: Land Use Application Land Use Code Historic Preservation Design Guidelines REVIEW BY: • Staff for completion and recommendations • Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) for decision 65 REQUIRED LAND USE REVIEW(S): • Minor Development Review PUBLIC HEARING: • Yes, at HPC Minor Review hearing NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH: • No PLANNING FEES: $1,300 deposit for four (4) hours of staff time REFERRAL FEES: No TOTAL DEPOSIT: $1,300 (additional/lesser planning hours are billed/refunded at a rate of $325/hour). APPLICATION CHECKLIST – Submit digital copy of the application to the planner listed on this preapplication.  Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.  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.  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).  An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.  A written description of the proposal (scope of work) and written explanation of how the proposed work complies with the relevant Historic Preservation Guidelines and any other relevant land use code.  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 primary exterior building materials.)  Photographs and other exhibits and/or cutsheets, as needed, to accurately depict restoration/preservation work. Once the application is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted:  Total deposit amount for application review. 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. 66 820 EAST COOPER AVE MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW HPC APPLICATION 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0 67 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION VICINITY MAP EAST CO O P E R A V E .S. ORIGINIAL ST.S. W. END ST.EAST DU R A N T A V E . EAST HY M A N A V E . EAST HO P K I N S A V E .S. CLEVELAND ST.N S W E 68 LOT P LOT Q COO P E R A V E N U E ALLE Y - B L O C K 1 1 1 LOT O LOT N LOT R 1 - STORY FRAME HOUSE LOT M ±2,999 S.F. LOT H LOT G LOT F LOT E LOT D LOT C 6.87.02.63.710.5 20.20.9 27.820.5 37.4N31°25'41"E465.84'S05°02'20"E353.41'3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 2 17935793679367936 7936 7938 7938 793 8 7938793 7 BYNO.DATEBYPROJECT NO.OR 534 - 06700 IN METRO DENVERUNDERGROUND MEMBER UTILITIESEXCAVATE FOR THE MARKING OFBEFORE YOU DIG, GRADE, ORCALL 2-BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE1-800-922-1987CENTER OF COLORADOCALL UTILITY NOTIFICATIONREVISIONHIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC.PHONE 970 945-8676 - FA; 970 945-2555ZZZ.KFHQJ.FRPdrawn by:checked by:date:file:1517 BLAKE AVENUE, STE 101, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 816012201614 1 OF 1LAUREN BULLARDASPEN, COLORADOIMPROVEMENT-TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYLOT P - BLOCK 111CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADOWJNBAB3.12.202201614.DWG1 3.17.20ADD TREES AND TOPOWJNLOT P, BLOCK 111 CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE 84 WEST CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO IMPROVEMENT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PLAT VICINITY MAP LEGEND PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: NOTES 1. DATE OF SURVEY: FEBRUARY 17 & 20, 2012 AND FEBRUARY 24, 2020 AT THE TIME OF THIS FIELD SURVEY THERE WAS 2'-3' FEET OF SNOW ON THE GROUND IN 2012 AND 1'-2' IN 2020.. 2. THE ASSUMED BASIS OF BEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY IS A BEARING OF S14°30'49"E ALONG THE WESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN "A" (A FOUND 1" BRASS PLUG) AND "B" (A FOUND 1" BRASS PLUG) AS SHOWN HEREON. 3. THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A TITLE SEARCH BY THIS SURVEYOR OF THE BOUNDARY SHOWN AND DESCRIBED HEREON TO DETERMINE: A) OWNERSHIP OF THE TRACT OF LAND B) COMPATIBILITY OF THIS DESCRIPTION WITH THOSE OF ADJOINERS C) RIGHTS-OF-WAY, EASEMENTS AND ENCUMBRANCES OF RECORD AFFECTING THIS PARCEL. 4. THIS PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, COVENANTS AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR IN PLACE AND EXCEPTIONS TO TITLE SHOWN IN THE TITLE COMMITMENT PREPARED BY PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC., DATED MARCH 5, 2012 (CASE NUMBER PCT23376W4). 5. THE CLIENT DID NOT REQUEST ANY ADDITIONAL EASEMENTS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND/OR IMPROVEMENTS BE RESEARCHED OR SHOWN ON THIS PLAT. 6. THIS SURVEY IS BASED ON THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PREPARED BY G.E. BUCHANAN DATED: NOVEMBER 16, 1959, CITY OF ASPEN - GPS CONTROL MONUMENTATION 2009 MAP PREPARED BY THOMAS S. MARCIN DATED: DECEMBER 2, 2009, A BUILDING PERMIT SURVEY PREPARED BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC., DATED JANUARY OF 1995 AND CORNERS FOUND IN PLACE AS SHOWN. 7. ALL DIMENSIONS AND COURSES ARE AS MEASURED IN THE FIELD UNLESS DENOTED IN PARENTHESES, WHICH DENOTE THE BOUNDARIES OF RECORD ON THE ORIGINAL PLAT OF THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PITKIN COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO. 6. ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED ON NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88) REFERENCED FROM NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY (NGS) BENCHMARK STATION S 159 HAVING A PUBLISHED ELEVATION OF 7720.88. 7. CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS 1 FOOT. 8. BUILDING MEASUREMENTS ARE AT LOWEST PRACTICABLE POINT ON VENEER. 9. ANY PERSON WHO KNOWINGLY REMOVES, ALTERS OR DEFACES ANY PUBLIC LAND SURVEY MONUMENT OR LAND BOUNDARY MONUMENT OR ACCESSORY COMMITS A CLASS TWO (2) MISDEMEANOR PURSUANT TO SECTION 18-4-508 OF THE COLORADO REVISED STATUTES. 10. NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED ON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT, MAY ANY ACTION BASED ON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. 11. NOTICE: THIS PLAT AND THE INFORMATION SHOWN HEREON MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY ADDITIONAL OR EXTENDED PURPOSE BEYOND THAT FOR WHICH IT WAS INTENDED AND MAY NOT BE USED BY ANY PARTIES OTHER THAN THOSE TO WHICH IT IS CERTIFIED. THIS DOCUMENT AND THE WORK IT REPRESENTS IS THE PROPERTY OF HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. NO PART OF THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE STORED, REPRODUCED, DISTRIBUTED OR USED TO PREPARE DERIVATIVE PRODUCTS WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION. AN ORIGINAL SEAL AND ORIGINAL SIGNATURE IS REQUIRED TO VALIDATE THIS DOCUMENT AND IS EXCLUSIVE TO HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. AND THE OWNER(S) OF RECORD AS OF THIS DATE, OF THE BOUNDARY DELINEATED HEREON AND THE SUBJECT OF THE SURVEY. THIS PLAT IS RESTRICTED TO THE INTENT OF TITLE 38, ARTICLE 50, §101, 5 (a) AND (b) C.R.S. SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION I, BILL W.A. BAKER, A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF COLORADO (#23875) DO BY THESE PRESENTS CERTIFY THAT THE DRAWING SHOWN HEREON, WITH NOTES ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF, REPRESENTS A MONUMENTED LAND SURVEY MADE UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION AND BELIEF, AN ACCURATE DEPICTION OF SAID SURVEY IS RENDERED BY THIS PLAT. THIS SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF PRACTICE, IS NOT A GUARANTY OR WARRANTY, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED. THIS SURVEY PLAT COMPLIES WITH TITLE 38-51-102, COLORADO REVISED STATUTES. BILL W.A. BAKER, COLORADO PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR #23875 CERTIFIED FEDERAL SURVEYOR #1699 LAND SURVEY PLAT DEPOSIT CLERK AND RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE THIS LAND SURVEY PLAT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED FOR DEPOSIT IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO THIS ____ DAY OF __________, 2019, PLAT BOOK _____, PAGE ______, AS RECEPTION NO.________________. TITLE 38, ARTICLE 50, §101 C.R.S. (5)(a) PLATS SHALL BE DEPOSITED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF RECORDING INFORMATION ON SURVEYING MONUMENTATION IN ORDER TO PROVIDE SURVEY DATA FOR SUBSEQUENT LAND SURVEYS AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED TO AFFECT, IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER, THE DESCRIPTION OF A SUBDIVISION, LINE, OR CORNER CONTAINED IN THE OFFICIAL PLATS AND FIELD NOTES FILED AND OF RECORD OR TO SUBDIVIDE BOUNDARY. (b) NO PLAT DEPOSITED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION SHALL CONSTITUTE NOTICE PURSUANT TO SECTION 38-35-109 CRS. IN THE EVENT THIS SURVEY CANNOT BE DEPOSITED, THIS IS YOUR NOTICE THAT THIS IS NOT A RECORDABLE DOCUMENT. ______________________________________ CLERK AND RECORDER BY:____________________________________ DEPUTY TREE TYPE SIZE DRIP TREE CHART 69 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION 10'-10 3/8"FRONT YARD SETBACK+/-5'-4"41'-1 3/4"W 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 3 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE LOT P 5'-0"4'-5 57/64" EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING WOOD PATIO TO BE REMOVED, TYP. EXISTING GATE AND FENCE TO REMAIN EXISTING RAILROAD TIE WALL EXISTING PLANTER BED TO REMAIN EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN EXISTING WALK TO BE REMOVED EXISTING RAILROAD TIE WALL EXISTING LAWN TO REMAIN EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN, TYP. EXISTING WOOD DECK TO BE REMOVED, TYP. 4 3/4:12 SLOPE 8:12 SLOPE COOPER AVENUE GE 1 - STORYFRAME HOUSE 820 E. COOPER AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611GG TREE LAWN ±2,999 S.F. B WSO LOT O LOT Q A PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PARKING WOOD PATIO PLANTER UP PAVED ALLEY WINDOW WELLWINDOW WELLSIDEWALK 7938 79387937 7938 7936 7936 7937N truenorth S W E EXISTING GATE AND FENCE TO REMAIN EXISTING SITE PLAN | SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" 70 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION 10'-10 3/8"FRONT YARD SETBACK+/-5'-4"+/-36'-8 5/8"W 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 3 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE LOT P 5'-0"4'-5 57/64" EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING WOOD PATIO TO BE REMOVED, TYP. EXISTING GATE AND FENCE TO REMAIN EXISTING RAILROAD TIE WALL EXISTING PLANTER BED TO REMAIN EXISTING FENCE TO REMAIN EXISTING RAILROAD TIE WALL EXISTING LAWN TO REMAIN EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN, TYP. COOPER AVENUE GE 1 - STORYFRAME HOUSE 820 E. COOPER AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611GG TREE LAWN ±2,999 S.F. B WSO LOT O LOT Q A PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE PARKING PLANTER PAVED ALLEY WINDOW WELLWINDOW WELLSIDEWALK 7938 79387937 7938 7936 7936 79377 1/2:12 SLOPE 8:12 SLOPE N truenorth S W E EXISTING GATE AND FENCE TO REMAIN PROPOSED SITE PLAN | SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0" 71 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION 222 sq ft 891 sq ft GE 191 sq ft A B C D 134 sq ft AREAS BELOW 5'-6" IN HEIGHT ARE EXEMPT +/-6'-8 3/4"88 sq ft EL. +/-92'-6 1/2" [7929.64'] EL. +/-99'-3 1/4" [7936.37'] T.O. LOWER LEVELWALL A B.O. STRUCTURE 68 sq ft WALL B 88 sq ft WALL C 68 sq ft WALL D BURIED WALL ELEVATIONS DECK AREA FLOOR AREA OVERHANG AREA EXPOSED WALL SURFACE AREAGARAGE AREA BURRIED WALL AREA AREA LEGEND Floor Area Calculations Allowable Floor Area 2,400.00 No easements have been calculated for reductions in Net Lot Area. Existing Lower Level Wall Calculations Wall Label Total Wall Area (Sq.Ft.) Exposed Wall Area (Sq.Ft.) A 88 0 B 68 0 C 88 0 D 68 0 Overall Wall Areas (Sq.Ft.)312.00 Exposed Wall Areas (Sq.Ft.)0.00 % of Exposed Wall (Exposed/Total)0.00% Existing Lower Level Floor Area Calculations Lower Level Gross Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)134.00 Lower Level Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 134.00 x 0% = 0 Existing Main Level Floor Area Calculations Main Level Gross Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)891.00 Main Level Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)891.00 Existing Garage Area Calculations Garage at Main Level 0.00 (Actual Area) Garage Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Existing Loft Level Floor Area Calculations Loft Level Gross Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)328.00 Loft Level Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)198.00 Existing Deck/Porch Floor Area Calculations Deck/Porch Gross Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)222.00 360 Exempt (2,400 X %15 = 360) Deck/Porch Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Total Existing Floor Area Calculations Lower Level Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Main Level Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)891.00 Garage Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Loft Level Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)198.00 Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Total 1,089.00 1,311 s.f. below allowable FAR -1,311.00 Section 26.575.020.d.3 - areas of an attic level with 30" vertical or less between finished floor level and the finished ceiling shall be exempt. A B C D 134 sq ft AREAS BELOW 5'-6" IN HEIGHT ARE EXEMPT AREAS BELOW 5'-6" IN HEIGHT ARE EXEMPT 46 sq ft 891 sq ft GE 191 sq ft +/-6'-8 3/4"88 sq ft EL. +/-92'-6 1/2" [7929.64'] EL. +/-99'-3 1/4" [7936.37'] T.O. LOWER LEVELWALL A B.O. STRUCTURE 68 sq ft WALL B 88 sq ft WALL C 68 sq ft WALL D BURIED WALL ELEVATIONS Floor Area Calculations Allowable Floor Area 2,400.00 Proposed Lower Level Wall Calculations Wall Label Total Wall Area (Sq.Ft.) Exposed Wall Area (Sq.Ft.) A 88 0 B 68 0 C 88 0 D 68 0 Overall Wall Areas (Sq.Ft.)312.00 Exposed Wall Areas (Sq.Ft.)0.00 % of Exposed Wall (Exposed/Total)0.00% Proposed Lower Level Floor Area Calculations Lower Level Gross Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)134.00 Lower Level Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 134.00 x 0% = 0 Proposed Main Level Floor Area Calculations Main Level Gross Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)937.00 Main Level Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)937.00 Proposed Garage Area Calculations Garage at Main Level 0.00 (Actual Area) Garage Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Proposed Loft Level Floor Area Calculations Loft Level Gross Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)328.00 Loft Level Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)198.00 Proposed Deck/Porch Floor Area Calculations Deck/Porch Gross Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 360 Exempt (2,400 X %15 = 360) Deck/Porch Countable Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Total Proposed Floor Area Calculations Lower Level Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Main Level Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)937.00 Garage Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Loft Level Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)198.00 Deck/Porch Floor Area (Sq.Ft.)0.00 Total 1,135.00 1,265 s.f. below allowable FAR -1,265.00 Section 26.575.020.d.3 - areas of an attic level with 30" vertical or less between finished floor level and the finished ceiling shall be exempt. SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 EXIST. FIRST FLOOR AREA SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 EXIST. SECOND FLOOR AREA SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 EXIST. LOWER LEVEL AREA SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"4 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL FAR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"5 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL FAR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"6 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL FAR AREA CALCULATIONS | SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 72 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION NORTH SOUTH EAST EAST NORTH WEST WEST NORTH SOUTH EAST WEST GE WSO A NORTH SOUTH EASTWEST EXISTING WALL AREA - TO REMAIN (INCLUDES FENESTRATION AREA) WALL AREA - DEMOLISHED FENESTRATION AREA FENESTRATION AREA LEGEND 16 sq ft 21 sq ft 16 sq ft 267 sq ft EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] T.O. MAIN LEVEL 256 sq ft 150 sq ft 13 sq ft7 sq ft11 sq ft EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] T.O. MAIN LEVEL 88 sq ft 35 sq ft 46 sq ft 53 sq ft 80 sq ft 5 sq ft 7 sq ft 53 sq ft EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10']T.O. MAIN LEVEL 342 sq ft 55 sq ft 26 sq ft 10 sq ft 13 sq ft 11 sq ft 6 sq ft EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10']T.O. MAIN LEVEL Demolition Calculations Wall Demolition Wall Label Individual Wall Area (Sq.Ft.) Fenestration Area (Sq.Ft.)Area of Wall to be Removed (Sq.Ft.) NORTH 267.00 47.00 53.00 EAST 423.00 40.00 0.00 SOUTH 267.00 53.00 0.00 WEST 406.00 31.00 0.00 Wall Surface Total (Sq.Ft.)1,363.00 Fenestration Area (Sq.Ft.)171.00 Area Used for Demo Calculations (Sq.Ft.)1,192.00 Wall Surface Area to be Removed (Sq.Ft.)53.00 Demolition Totals Wall + Roof Area Used for Demo Calcs (Sq.Ft.)2,260.00 Wall + Roof Surface Area to be Removed (Sq.Ft.)111.00 Total (Demo/Exist. Ext)4.91% SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 LOWER LEVEL WALL KEY PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 MAIN LEVEL WALL KEY PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 UPPER LEVEL WALL KEY PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"5 SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"6 WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"7 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"8 EAST ELEVATION DEMOLITION CALCULATIONS 73 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION Demolition Calculations - Ratio Method Roof Demolition Roof Label Surface Area of Roof Plane (Sq.Ft.) Surface Area of Roof to be Removed (Sq.Ft.) A 337.00 0.00 B 337.00 0.00 C 130.00 0.00 D 36.00 36.00 E 22.00 22.00 F 59.00 0.00 G 147.00 0.00 Roof Surface Total (Sq.Ft.) 1,068.00 Roof Surface Area to be Removed (Sq.Ft.)58.00 Demolition Totals Roof + Wall Area Used for Demo Calcs (Sq.Ft.)2,260.00 Roof + Wall Surface Area to be Removed (Sq.Ft.)111.00 Total (Demo/Exist. Ext)4.91% 130 sq ft 147 sq ft 59 sq ft 22 sq ft 36 sq ft 337 sq ft 337 sq ft AB D C E F G NOTE: EXPLODED VIEW FOR CALCULATION PURPOSES ONLY LOT Q 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 3 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE LOT P 4 3/4:12 SLOPE 8:12 SLOPE EXISTING ROOF AREA - TO REMAIN ROOF AREA - DEMOLISHED ROOF DEMOLITION LEGEND SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 ROOF KEY PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 ROOF PLAN REFERENCE DEMOLITION CALCULATIONS 74 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION +/-20'-6"+/-7 3/4" +/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-48'-0 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-20'-6" +/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-48'-0 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-3'-2"+/-2'-10"+/-2'-8 1/4"+/-3'-1 1/2"+/-2'-8 1/4"+/-2'-10"+/-3'-2" 03A1112 02A1112 01A1112 04A1112 EXISTING WINDOWS AND DOOR ON NON-HISTORIC WALLS TO BE REMOVED, TYP. EXISTING FRONT DECK TO BE REMOVED, TYP. AREA NORTH OF GRID C IS EXISTING NON- HISTORIC ADDITION WALL NORTH OF GRID C IS EXISTING NON- HISTORIC ADDITION 0 0 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 D D C C B B A A EXISTING STAIRS (ACCESSIBLE VIA HATCH) TO LOWER LEVEL TO REMAIN. EXISTING FLOOR HATCH TO REMAIN. EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN,TYP. DASHED LINE REPRESENTS ROOF ABOVE EXISTING HISTORIC RESOURCE (TO REMAIN) NON-HISTORIC EXISTING MUDROOM/LAUNDRY UP DN GE WSO A 48'-0 1/2"48'-0 1/2"03A1112 02A1112 01A1112 04A1112 +/-20'-6" +/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-20'-6" +/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"EXISTING STAIRS (ACCESSIBLE VIA HATCH) TO MAIN LEVEL TO REMAIN. EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLS TO REMAIN, TYP. OUTLINE OF EXISTING FOOTERS ABOVE TO REMAIN. G.C. TO VERIFY IN FIELD. EXISTING MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO REMAINEXISTING LOWER LEVEL (TO REMAIN) EXISTING SLAB ON GRADE (TO REMAIN) UP 0 0 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 D D C C B B A A SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING MAIN LEVEL PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING LOWER LEVEL PLAN EXISTING FLOOR PLANS | SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 75 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION 03A1112 02A1112 01A1112 04A1112 +/- 20'-6" +/- 10'-6 1/4"+/- 2'-7 1/2"+/- 6'-8 1/2"+/- 48'-0 1/2"+/- 48'-0 1/2"+/- 20'-6" +/- 1'-0"+/- 1'-0"+/- 10 1/2"+/- 10 1/2"+/- 11 1/4"+/- 10"+/- 9 1/2"+/- 1'-2 1/4"+/- 1'-2 1/4"+/- 1'-0 1/2"+/- 10 1/2"+/- 1'-2 1/4"+/- 1'-2 1/4"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-3'-8 1/2"9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 3 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE LOT P 0 0 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 D D C C B B A A+/- 28'-2 1/4"+/-16'-1 3/4"+/- 28'-2 1/4"+/- 9'-2 3/4"+/- 6'-11"+/- 1'-0"+/- 10 1/2"EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, TYP. EXISTING FLUE TO REMAIN. G.C. TO V.I.F. DASHED LINES REPRESENT WALLS BELOW, TYP. 4 3/4:12 SLOPE 8:12 SLOPE 03A1112 02A1112 01A1112 04A1112 +/-20'-6" +/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-48'-0 1/2"+/-20'-6"+/-48'-0 1/2"+/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"EXISTING HISTORIC RESOURCE (TO REMAIN) DN OPEN TO BELOW 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 3 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 0 0 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 D D C C B B A A OUTLINE OF UPPER ROOF DASHED FOR REFERENCE EXISTING FLUE TO REMAIN. G.C. TO V.I.F. SLOPED CEILING MEETS EXTERIOR WALL AT F.F. SLOPED CEILING MEETS EXTERIOR WALL AT F.F. EXISTING STAIRS TO REMAIN EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, TYP. DASHED LINES REPRESENT WALLS BELOW, TYP. 4 3/4:12 SLOPE 8:12 SLOPE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING ROOF PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING LOFT LEVEL EXISTING PLANS | SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 76 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION E E NEW FOUNDATION WALL PER STRUCTURAL 04A1113 03A1113 02A1113 01A1113 +/-20'-6" +/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-20'-6" +/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-4'-4 1/4"+/-4'-4 1/4"+/-52'-4 3/4"+/-52'-4 3/4"EXISTING STAIRS (ACCESSIBLE VIA HATCH) TO MAIN LEVEL TO REMAIN. EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLS TO REMAIN, TYP. OUTLINE OF EXISTING FOOTERS ABOVE TO REMAIN. G.C. TO VERIFY IN FIELD. EXISTING MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO REMAINEXISTING LOWER LEVEL (TO REMAIN) EXISTING SLAB ON GRADE (TO REMAIN) UP 0 0 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 D D C C B B A A100A A1 A2 100B DRWE E +/-20'-6"+/-7 3/4" +/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-20'-6" +/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2"+/-52'-4 3/4"+/-4'-4 1/4"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-4'-4 1/4"+/-52'-4 3/4"5 1/2"9'-7 1/4"5 1/2" 4'-11 1/2"4'-7 3/4"+/-3'-8 1/2"EXIST.4'-4 1/4"+/-5 1/2" +/-19'-7"+/-5 1/2" +/-2'-8 1/2"+/-2'-10"+/-2'-10 1/4"2'-9 1/2"R.O.+/-2'-10 1/4"+/-2'-10"+/-2'-8 1/2" 04A1113 03A1113 02A1113 01A1113 NEW ENTRY DOOR TO RETURN TO HISTORIC WIDTH OF 32". CENTER ON EXISTING DOOR ROUGH OPENING. EXISTING FRONT DECK TO BE REMOVED, TYP. WALL NORTH OF GRID D IS PROPOSED EXPANSION TO EXISTING NON- HISTORIC ADDITION AREA NORTH OF GRID D IS PROPOSED EXPANSION TO EXISTING NON- HISTORIC ADDITION INTERIOR ELECTRICAL PANEL ACCESS TO BE RELOCATED ON WALL IN MUDROOM. G.C. TO CONFIRM CLEARANCES PER CODE . UNDER-COUNTER WASHER AND DRYER 0 0 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 D D C C B B A A 2'-2 1/4" 6'-3 5/8" 1'-6 7/8"+/-5 1/2"+/-7'-7 1/4"5 1/2"+/-2'-0"+/-9'-9 1/2"+/-5 1/2"+/-7'-7 1/4"5 1/2"EXISTING STAIRS (ACCESSIBLE VIA HATCH) TO LOWER LEVEL TO REMAIN. EXISTING FLOOR HATCH TO REMAIN. EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN,TYP. DASHED LINE REPRESENTS ROOF ABOVE MUDROOM EXISTING HISTORIC RESOURCE (TO REMAIN) UP DN GE A CL CL CL CL CL DN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN | SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" NOTE: THE PORTION OF RESIDENCE BEHIND WHITE FILL REPRESENTS THE HISTORIC COTTAGE NOT AFFECTED BY THIS APPLICATION. 77 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION E E 04A1113 03A1113 02A1113 01A1113 +/- 20'-6" +/- 10'-6 1/4"+/- 2'-7 1/2"+/- 6'-8 1/2"+/- 48'-0 1/2"+/- 48'-0 1/2"+/- 20'-6" +/- 1'-0"+/- 1'-0"+/- 10 1/2"+/- 10 1/2"+/- 11 1/4"+/- 10"+/- 9 1/2"+/- 1'-2 1/4"+/- 1'-0 1/2"+/- 10 1/2"+/- 1'-2 1/4"+/-4'-4 1/4"+/-4'-4 1/4"1'-0"1'-0"+/-8'-0 3/4"+/-8'-0 3/4"9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE 3 1/4:12 SLOPE 9 1/4:12 SLOPE LOT P 0 0 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 D D C C B B A A+/- 28'-2 1/4"+/-16'-1 3/4"+/- 28'-2 1/4"+/- 9'-2 3/4"+/- 6'-11"+/- 1'-0"+/- 10 1/2"EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, TYP. EXISTING FLUE TO REMAIN. G.C. TO V.I.F. DASHED LINES REPRESENT WALLS BELOW, TYP. NEW ROOF OVER ADDITION. FINISH TO MATCH HISTORIC RESOURCE. CENTER RIDGE OVER DOOR BELOW 7 1/2:12 SLOPE 8:12 SLOPE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED ROOF PLAN PROPOSED PLANS | SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" NOTE: THE PORTION OF RESIDENCE BEHIND WHITE FILL REPRESENTS THE HISTORIC COTTAGE NOT AFFECTED BY THIS APPLICATION. 78 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION +/-7'-5 1/2"+/- 7'-1"+/- 10'-10 1/2"+/-20'-6" +/-6'-8 1/2"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-10'-6 1/4" +/-7 3/4" 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] EL. +/-107'-1" [7944.18'] EL. +/-117'-11 1/2" [7955.06'] EL. +/-92'-5" [7929.52'] EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. EXISTING DOOR AND WINDOWS TO BE REMOVED EXISTING NORTH WALL TO BE REMOVED APPROX. EXISTING FOUNDATION. G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO VERIFY THE SUITABILITY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. APPROX. EXISTING SLAB ON GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING WOOD DECK TO BE REMOVED, TYP. 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT EXISTING STEP TO BE REMOVED, TYP. T.O. MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLATE MUDROOM T.O. PRIMARY RIDGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL CL HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN PREVIOUS ADDITION TO HISTORIC RESOURCE +/-7'-5 1/2"+/-9'-5 1/4"+/-8'-6 1/4"+/-17'-11 1/2"+/-48'-0 1/2" +/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2" A A B B C C D D EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] EL. +/-107'-1" [7944.18'] EL. +/-117'-11 1/2" [7955.06'] EL. +/-92'-5" [7929.52'] EL. +/-109'-5 1/4" [7946.54'] EXISTING ROOF OVER MUDROOM TO BE REMOVED EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING TO REMAIN ON HISTORIC RESOURCE EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. APPROX. EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLS. G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO VERIFY THE SUITABILITY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. EXISTING WINDOW TO BE REMOVED EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING TO BE REMOVED ON MUDROOM 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT T.O. MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLATE MUDROOM T.O. PRIMARY RIDGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL T.O. LOFT LEVEL +/-7'-7"+/-9'-5 1/4"+/-8'-6 1/4"+/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2" +/-20'-6" 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] EL. +/-107'-1" [7944.18'] EL. +/-117'-11 1/2" [7955.06'] EL. +/-92'-5" [7929.52'] EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING TO REMAIN ON HISTORIC RESOURCE. REPAIR/REPLACE TRIM+SIDING PER MONITOR AS NECESSARY. EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. EXISTING FRONT DOOR TO BE REPLACED WITH NARROWER FRONT DOOR W/ TRANSOM WINDOW EXISTING EXTERIOR LIGHT TO REMAIN 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT T.O. MAIN LEVEL T.O. PRIMARY RIDGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL T.O. LOFT LEVEL +/-48'-0 1/2"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-6'-11"+/-37'-5"+/-7'-5 1/2"+/-9'-5 1/4"+/-8'-6 1/4"+/-17'-11 1/2"PREVIOUS ADDITION TOHISTORIC RESOURCE HISTORIC RESOURCE D D C C B B A A EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] EL. +/-109'-5 1/4" [7946.54'] EL. +/-117'-11 1/2" [7955.06'] EL. +/-92'-5" [7929.52'] EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING TO REMAIN ON HISTORIC RESOURCE EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. APPROX. EXISTING FOOTERS TO BE VERIFIED BY G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER OUTLINE OF APPROX. EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLS. G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO VERIFY THE SUITABILITY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING ON EXISTING MUDROOM TO BE REPLACED EXISTING ROOF OVER MUDROOM TO BE REMOVED EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT T.O. MAIN LEVEL T.O. LOFT LEVEL T.O. PRIMARY RIDGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"01 EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"02 EXISTING EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"03 EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"04 EXISTING WEST ELEVATION EXISTING ELEVATIONS | SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" NOTE: PORTION OF RESIDENCE BEHIND WHITE FILL REPRESENTS THE HISTORIC COTTAGE NOT AFFECTED BY THIS APPLICATION. 79 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION +/-7'-5 1/2"+/- 7'-1"+/- 10'-10 1/2"+/-20'-6" +/-6'-8 1/2"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-10'-6 1/4" +/-7 3/4" 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] EL. +/-107'-1" [7944.18'] EL. +/-117'-11 1/2" [7955.06'] EL. +/-92'-5" [7929.52'] EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. APPROX. EXISTING FOUNDATION. G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO VERIFY THE SUITABILITY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. APPROX. EXISTING SLAB ON GRADE TO REMAIN NEW STEEL DOOR W/ HALF LITE NEW WINDOWS TO BE CONFIRMED BY OWNER NEW VERTICAL TRESPA SIDING AT ADDITION . FINAL COLOR TO BE CONFIRMED BY OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT 6" FLAT SEAM METAL @ SILL 2 NEW STEPS UP TO ENTRY. G.C. TO VERIFY EXIST. GRADE IN FIELD. EXIST. GRADE TO REMAIN UNDER REMOVED DECK. NEW ROOF RIDGE TO BE CENTERED ON DOOR T.O. MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLATE MUDROOM T.O. PRIMARY RIDGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL CL 8 12 7 1/212 HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN PREVIOUS ADDITION TO HISTORIC RESOURCE +/-7'-5 1/2"+/-9'-5 1/4"+/-8'-6 1/4"+/-17'-11 1/2"+/-37'-5"+/-6'-11"+/-3'-8 1/2"+/-4'-4 1/4" PROPOSED ADDITION +/-52'-4 3/4" A A B B C C D D E E EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] EL. +/-107'-1" [7944.18'] EL. +/-117'-11 1/2" [7955.06'] EL. +/-92'-5" [7929.52'] EL. +/-109'-5 1/4" [7946.54'] EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING TO REMAIN ON HISTORIC RESOURCE EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. APPROX. EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLS. G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO VERIFY THE SUITABILITY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. NEW VERTICAL TRESPA SIDING ON ADDITION 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT 6" FLAT SEAM METAL @ SILL G.C. TO VERIFY GRADE IN FIELD ONCE DECK IS REMOVED. EXIST. GRADE TO REMAIN. NEW FOUNDATION WALL PER G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER STEPS BEYOND T.O. MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLATE MUDROOM T.O. PRIMARY RIDGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL T.O. LOFT LEVEL +/-3'-8 1/2"+/-6'-11"+/-37'-5"+/-7'-5 1/2"+/-9'-5 1/4"+/-8'-6 1/4"+/-17'-11 1/2"PREVIOUS ADDITION TOHISTORIC RESOURCE HISTORIC RESOURCE +/-4'-4 1/4"PROPOSED ADDITION +/-52'-4 3/4" E E D D C C B B A A EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] EL. +/-109'-5 1/4" [7946.54'] EL. +/-117'-11 1/2" [7955.06'] EL. +/-92'-5" [7929.52'] EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING TO REMAIN ON HISTORIC RESOURCE EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. APPROX. EXISTING FOOTERS TO BE VERIFIED BY G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER OUTLINE OF APPROX. EXISTING FOUNDATION WALLS. G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO VERIFY THE SUITABILITY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION. EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. NEW VERTICAL TRESPA SIDING NEW ROOF STRUCTURE W/ METAL ROOF FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING HISTORIC RESOURCE 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT 6" FLAT SEAM METAL @ SILL NEW FOUNDATION WALL PER G.C. AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEER G.C. TO VERIFY EXIST. GRADE IN FIELD. EXIST. GRADE TO REMAIN UNDER REMOVED DECK. STEPS BEYOND T.O. MAIN LEVEL T.O. LOFT LEVEL T.O. PRIMARY RIDGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL +/-7'-7"+/-9'-5 1/4"+/-8'-6 1/4"+/-7 3/4"+/-10'-6 1/4"+/-2'-7 1/2"+/-6'-8 1/2" +/-20'-6" 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 EL. +/-100'-0" [7937.10'] EL. +/-107'-1" [7944.18'] EL. +/-117'-11 1/2" [7955.06'] EL. +/-92'-5" [7929.52'] EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING TO REMAIN ON HISTORIC RESOURCE. REPAIR/REPLACE TRIM+SIDING PER MONITOR AS NECESSARY. EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC RESOURCE TO REMAIN, TYP. EXISTING EXTERIOR LIGHT TO REMAIN NEW NARROWER FRONT DOOR W/ TRANSOM. TRIM TO MATCH HISTORIC 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT T.O. MAIN LEVEL T.O. PRIMARY RIDGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL T.O. LOFT LEVEL SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"01 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"02 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"04 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"03 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED ELEVATIONS | SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" NOTE: PORTION OF RESIDENCE BEHIND WHITE FILL REPRESENTS THE HISTORIC COTTAGE NOT AFFECTED BY THIS APPLICATION. 80 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION DRWGE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL DIAGRAM PROPOSED PLAN DIAGRAM | SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" PROPOSED ADDITION LEGEND: 81 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION PROPOSED MATERIALS | NOT TO SCALE 1. TRESPA TROPICAL IPE | VERTICAL WOOD SIDING 2. ASHPALT SHINGLE DARK GREY | EXISTING AND PROPOSED ROOF FINISH 1 2 1 2 1 1 82 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION EXISTING SITE PHOTOS 83 8 2 0 C O O P E R R E S I D E N C E 0 7 . 1 4 . 2 0 2 0HPC APPLICATION EXISTING SITE PHOTOS 84 85 820 E Cooper Ave Planting Schedule Planting Area 1 (Southwest corner of lot. See attached photo #1.) • Existing lilac bushes. Planting Area 2 (Southeast corner of lot. See attached photo #2.) • Something similar in scale to Planting Area 1. Our first choice would be two Annabelle (or similar soft-stemmed) hydrangea plants. Planting Area 3 (on sides of front walkway) • Annual flowers Planting Area 4 (Northwest corner of lot. See attached photo #3.) • Existing shrubs numbered on drawing o 1: Lilac o 2: Lilac o 3: Lilac o 4: Rose o 5: Rose o 6: Unknown shrub o 7: Unknown shrub • Existing tulips under and between all shrubs • Would like to add o Perennial plants that may include: poppies, spiked speedwell, English lavender, coneflowers, etc. Planting Area 5 • Existing trees o Choke Cherry o Conifer 86 Planting Area #1 Planting Area #2 Planting Area #4 87