Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
agenda.hpc.20210414
1 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION April 14, 2021 4:30 PM, WEBEX www.webex.com Enter Meeting Number 182 695 8525 Password provided 81611 Click "Join Meeting" OR Join by phone Call: 1-408-418-9388 Meeting number (access code): 182 695 8525# I.SITE VISIT II.ROLL CALL III.MINUTES III.A.Minutes 2/17/2021 & 3/24/2021 minutes.hpc.20210217(1).pdf minutes.hpc.20210324.pdf IV.PUBLIC COMMENTS V.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS VI.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VII.PROJECT MONITORING VII.A.920 E. Hyman - Project Monitoring Project Monitor.920 E Cooper.20210414.pdf VIII.STAFF COMMENTS IX.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED X.CALL UP REPORTS 1 2 XI.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS XII.OLD BUSINESS XIII.NEW BUSINESS XIII.A.211 W. Hopkins Avenue- Final Major Development 211 W. Hopkins Final Memo.pdf 211 W. Hopkins Final Resolution.pdf Exhibit A_HP Guidelines Criteria.pdf Exhibit B_Application.pdf XIII.B.HPC Awards Selection HPCmemo.pdf XIV.ADJOURN XV.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1)Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clarifications of applicant 7) Public comments 8)Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal/clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 11) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met or not met. Revised April 2, 2014 2 SPECIAL MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17,2021 Chairperson Thompson opened the special meeting at 4:40 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Kara Thompson, Scott Kendrick, Roger Moyer, Jeff Halferty Commissioners not in attendance: Sheri Sanzone Staff present: Amy Simon, Planning Director Kevin Rayes, Planner Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Kendrick moved to approve the minutes; Mr. Halferty seconded. All in favor. PUBLIC COMMENT: None COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Thompson said we need more members. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT: Ms. Sanzone is conflicted with project 1020 E. Cooper. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: Ms. Simon stated that there was a certificate of no negative effect issued for window changes on a non-historic addition in the West end. Ms. Yoon stated that she is reaching out to the monitors directly. OLD BUSINESS: 1020 E. Cooper Avenue- Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Demolition, Growth Management, Certificates of Affordable Housing Credits, Transportation and Parking Management. Applicant representative: Sara Adams with BendonAdams. Ms. Adams stated that her team took the recommendations to heart and have redesigned the project to address HPC concerns. She said that the code asks HPC to wear many hats with this project. She explained that this project is also about supporting city policy and is a code- compliant project following through with the Aspen Area Community Plan and that this code- compliant project is about meeting the intent and the requirements of the residential multi-family zoned area. Ms. Adams stated that the redesign is very responsive to HPC’s concerns of mass and scale, front yard setbacks, and distance between the buildings. She said at the previous meeting she heard a lot of support for affordable housing. Ms. Adams stated that they are asking HPC to use their authority to show that support. She said that this is a fully code-compliant project and if not approved, what project can be. Ms. Adams stated that the redesign shows a reduction in mass and scale, a lowered height of the new addition, a reconfiguration of the units, and increased front yard setback while maintaining the 10’ distance between the buildings. She said that no variances are being asked for on this project. She said that this project is applying for approval under the same zone district that allowed for these neighbor’s projects to be built. This project should not be treated any differently. Ms. Adams showed a side-by-side dimensional comparison from the project that was presented on January 13th to the redesign. She said that the dimensional requirements has no limit on the number of units allowed in the zone district and that's intentional. She explained the neighborhood was designated for high density, because of its proximity to downtown and transportation. Ms. Adams said that the max height allowed is 32’ and the tallest height of the new project is just under 29’. She stated that the new front setback is 6’.6”, exceeding the minimum setback by 1”.6’ while maintaining the 10’ of separation between the resource and the addition. Ms. Adams stated that there are no onsite parking requirements. 3 SPECIAL MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17,2021 She explained that there will be four spaces provided with a full transportation management plan that was developed with the City. Ms. Adams showed an Eastside rendering of the new proposed plan. She stated that in the revision, there is a step back on the 3rd floor by reducing it from a 3- bedroom unit to a two-bedroom unit, that extra room was relocated into the landmark with an addition of a dormer. Ms. Adams added that the dormer was added on a non-historic roof. She showed the Westside rendering that showed a reduction in massing and the adding of the dormer on the non-historic roof. Ms. Adams added that the redesign reads more like a two-story building with the adding of dormers, roof forms, and the top floor receding. Ms. Adams stated 11.6 of the design guidelines. She said that the new addition will relate to the landmark in form, in a L- shaped footprint, and gable roof forms. She added that materials are still being developed but the intent will be wood siding and the windows will be in a similar shape and size to the resource but have a contemporary feel. Ms. Adams stated that in 11.7 of the design guidelines the imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. She showed a rendering of the south face elevation and said that this is a clear building of its own time while highlighting the landmark. She said the added dormer allows the reduction of the third-floor massing. Ms. Adams stated that the area has been zoned RMF since 1975. She showed a Sanborn map that showed the historic development pattern, a range of front yard setback, and stated that the building footprint that is being proposed reinforces the traditional patterns of the neighborhood, perpendicular to the street, and a 6’.5” front setback. Ms. Adams said that they are proposing five units. She explained two units in the landmark and three in the new addition. One of the units 101 is over the size mandated by APCHA and 102 is just under .6sq. ft. under what is required for a three-bedroom. The units in the new addition are 20% allowed reduction they are smaller than the mandated size by APCHA. Ms. Adams said that her team is approaching the housing project as if they were going to be living there. She outlined the amenities of each unit from a private deck or porch, washer, and dryer. She pointed out that the smallest unit will have a front deck and back deck to help compensate for the size reduction. Ms. Adams showed a floor plan for the new proposed project. She showed visuals of the outdoor amenities that included a proposed grill and a storage basket that could be raised and lowered in the carport. Ms. Adams discussed the transportation plan with a map that showed alternative transportation methods that included walking, biking, WeCycle, and RFTA. Ms. Adams showed varying graphs that showed the differing height and FAR ratios of the neighborhood buildings. She pointed out that the proposed project will fall in the middle of height and FAR. She outlined the ongoing communication plan that includes a dedicated project website, FAQ, project email, online meetings, review updates, and public notice. Ms. Adams showed a visual of submitted comments from the community. She pointed out that there were letters submitted with full support from ACRA and Ski Co to no support from surrounding neighbors. She explained that the neighboring properties submitted multiple letters from each unit and a few letters came from 2nd homeowners. Ms. Adams showed a graph of the recent affordable housing projects and how many individuals placed their names in to win. She stated that there is a pretty clear community demand for affordable housing and that this is a code-compliant project. Mr. Defrancia stated that he fully agrees with Ms. Adams's presentation and reiterated that this is a fully code-compliant project. STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Rayes gave a brief recap of the history of the property. He showed the previous design plan and compared the revised design pointing out the addition of the dormer, redesigned mass on the new addition, and the 6’.6” setback of the landmark, and showed 4 SPECIAL MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17,2021 the new floor plan for each level. Mr. Rayes showed the proposed affordable housing credits and explained that two-bedroom– 3 units x 2.25 FTEs = 6.75 FTE’s and three-bedroom- 2 units x 3.00 FTE’s = 6 FTE’s total proposed 12.75 FTE’s. He showed a visual of outside space and amenities that will help alleviate the reduction in net livability. Mr. Rayes stated that staff finds the criteria related to growth management and certificates of affordable housing are met and approval for all 12.75 FTE’s. He said that the zone district requires one parking unit per residential unit within a multifamily development. In the case of this project there are five units, five parking spots. He explained that the applicant will pay cash in lieu for one parking spot. Mr. Rayes reviewed the transpiration plan that included physical distance to downtown and alternative transportation methods. He said that staff finds the transportation and parking mitigation standards have been met. Mr. Rayes said that there has been some concern about the parking plan and the property across the alley parking spot. He explained that the engineering standards call for a 24’ wide driving aisle for a car to make the turn and with a 5ft minimum rear yard setback staff finds that the concerns have been met. Mr. Rayes stated that every project is unique, but staff felt that the balance of historic integrity was consistent with the balance of trying to get affordable housing in town. He said that the staff is in strong support of this project. Mr. Rayes stated that there has been concern about the overcrowding of tenets. He explained that APCHA will be regulating how many people can be in each unit and they will not be overcrowded. He recommended HPC approve conceptual major development relocation, demolition, growth management, transportation and parking management, and certificates of affordable housing credits. Ms. Simon stated staff finds that the design guidelines have been met. She said there are very few miners cottages that will be preserved in town with no addition added to it. This will forever have a detached building behind it. And that in itself is an enormous success. Ms. Simon said that there was a development review committee meeting held in November that involved multiple city agencies to vet the project and give their feedback to the applicant. Mr. Kendrick asked what is the exact purview of HPC. Ms. Simon said that the purview is outlined in the packet and should consist of conceptual major development relocation, demolition, growth management, transportation and parking management, and certificates of affordable housing credits. Mr. Halferty asked what is staff's position on the proposed dormer. Ms. Simon stated that it is a successful way to add to the net livable area without impacting the historic resource. Mr. Moyer asked if electric vehicle outlet installation will be a part of the permit process in the future. Ms. Simon stated that it is a part of the process, that at a certain number of units the project must have an EV source. Mr. Moyer asked if the historic resource will be energy efficient. Ms. Adams stated that it will be. PUBLIC COMMENT: Caroline McDonald read her letter that was submitted to the board in Exhibit A. Lou Stover 106 E. Cooper. Raised concern about mass and scale and the one-way alley. Baron Concors, 1024 E. Cooper Ave.: It’s important to stay grounded in the facts which are 1) the neighborhood opposition has nothing to do with affordable housing, 2) the mass and scale are overwhelming, 3) do those expressing support actually live in the neighborhood?, 4) neighborhood is 5 SPECIAL MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17,2021 already overdeveloped, 5) developer’s FAR and height analysis don’t work because 1020 is a historic property and the others aren’t, 6) the alley is dead-end and one way in and out, will increase problems with cars blocking the alleyThinks this isn’t the right thing for future tenants or current neighborhood and if approved we know the process is broken. Bryan Schroy stated that he agrees with the previous comments, that affordable housing is okay but that mass and scale are issues here and he is concerned about the use of the one-way alley.Chris BryanGarfield and Hecht stated that the applicant has not done enough to reduce the mass and scale. He said they've ignored the various mistakes and the calculations regarding the floor area. They have raised concerns regarding the width of the alley and its sustainability for parking spaces. It doesn't appear that anyone's gone out there to measure the alley to confirm that it is the appropriate width. Mr. Bryan said that 3 of the 5 units still do not meet the minimum size requirements for affordable housing as set forth by APCHA. He stated that there is just not enough livable space. Mr. Bryan raised concern about the number of units and overcrowding. He said there is no neighbor buy-in on the 5-unit project as proposed. Wanting affordable housing does not supersede the charge to adhere to the clear historic guidelines and to acknowledge the sheer mass and scale of this proposal on this already very overdeveloped lot. Mr. Bryan stated that HPC needs to vote to deny this application. David Corbin Aspen Ski Co. He stated that Ski Co is in support of any affordable housing project that is so important to this community. Mr. Corbin said he finds this really remarkable that there is a high level of staff support, and the fact that this project is fully code compliant. He stated If it fits the code, it's not outsized. Diane Wuslich stated she agrees with Baron. She asked if any HOA or residential guidelines have been made. The HOA documents could address the concerns of the neighbors such as number of residents per unit, quiet hours, trash/recycle maintenance, number of cars per resident, pets, etc. At January HPC meeting the developers said this project would not be affordable for them to develop with fewer units which is a double standard since this is an AH project. Additional cars and visitors will make the already dangerous alley and intersection of Cleveland and Hwy 82more risky, and something would need to be done to increase visibility, especially because of the traffic in the alley. . Jerome Simecek stated he is in favor of affordable housing and this project. He said that this project is fully code compliant and if this project is not approved then what project is approvable. Jamie Robinson stated that she owns a few overdeveloped properties in Aspen. She objects to Ski Co’s statement that the neighborhood does not want affordable housing. She said that this project is not compatible with the surrounding buildings and there is no room for parking and the addition. Ms. Robinson stated that things meet code all the time but are not approved because they will not fit. She said that her concern is the needs and number of units. Julie Peters raised concern about the parking this project will bring. Kristi Gilliam stated that out of ten units at 1024 E Cooper four of themrent to employees. She said that this project is too small for how units are being proposed. She said that the grill area that is being shown will have no sun and being falsely represented. Ms. Gilliam stated everyone has to be real about the cannabis situation because kids getting off and young adults getting off from work are going to come home and smoke pot. She explained every now and again, at their complex, they catch someone smoking pot and it goes all the way down the hallway. Ms. Gilliam said that they edited their HOA rules to only allow four people per three bedrooms because of the Ski Co employees that smoke pot all day long and would come in at all hours of the night. She raised concerns about not enough room in the front yard. Ms. Gilliam asked if this will be all 6 SPECIAL MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17,2021 adults no kids or mixed and if mixed would kids be exposed to pot smoke since the windows will be open because of lack of AC. She stated that they asked for this project to be smaller and nothing has changed. J Maytin stated that he chaired HPC for two years and sat on the board for 7. He said that this project is under code. He said no variances are being asked for and the property owner almost has a build by right. He painted a picture of what could be there is a much bigger project with more units. He asked with the single-family home that was presented and not accepted now this project being attacked, what project will be accepted. The lowering of property values has never been a problem. Mr. Maytin stated an easy way to fix parking is to have cash in leu for all spots. He said that the properties that are surrounding the resource make the property look forgotten. He agreed that moving the cabin forward and balancing it with a medium-sized addition would fix the property from enormous structures flanking on both sides. Leisha John stated that she is all for affordable housing but objects to the density of this project. It is unconscionable to have 12 or more people living on this tiny sliver of land. She raised concerns about more cars and more impact on the areaMark 935 E. Cooper; He raised concerns about overcrowding and the number of occupants per room. He has lived at this address for over 30 years. He has tenants that are employees and live on his property affordably. Concerned about excessive density of 1020 based on his experience. He has a 6000sf lot where he has four bedrooms and that would be 9 people if he maximized it. All his tenants have cars and 3 bikes and 3 sets of skis or 2 snowboards. Parking is definitely a huge problem. . Mary Elizabeth Geiger with Garfield and Hecht. Ms. Geiger stated that if this project was only about being code compliant and if that's all that HPC had to look at well then it wouldn't be before HPC. She said HPC should ask if it meets the critical guidelines of mass and scale. Ms. Geiger stated that mass and scale were a major concern at the last hearing for this project and quoted Commissioner’s statements who raised these concerns. She said that the redesign still has not addressed the mass and scale issue. She stated that without the historic resource the developer does not have free rein to develop up to zoningand there would be no discussion about a multifamily building on this site because it's only 4300 sq. ft. Ms. Geiger said that the only reason this in front of HPC is because of the historic resource. Michael Smith, 1012 E. Cooper, #1: Stated that the Commissioners had expressed concern about the size and mass but that the Applicant made only slight changes that removed no bedrooms, reduced floor area by only 3.7% and made the units less livable. Said this review is about HPC compliance and HPC guidelines, specifically 1.1, 1.7, 11.3 and 11.4 and explained how this project fails to meet those guidelines. Stated that neighbors had been consistent in their support of a properly scaled 3-unit project but the developer has been unwilling to limit density. Reminded the Commission that this is a non- conforming lot and this development wouldn’t be allowed without the historic resource which the developer is using to bootstrap into this project without complying with the guidelines. Paulette Koffron said that this project is too big and has concerns about parking. Peter Fornell stated that the project meets the code. He said that the lot itself and the district allow more than they are requesting. A special review would allow this property to have a 1.25 to 1 ratio of floor area lot size and what's more legitimate for our community to be granted additional. Mr. Fornell stated that he thinks that the applicant should be commended on the mass and scale. If this was his project, he would be asking for a lot more. He said that a major priority for City Council is affordable housing and you as a board are appointed by them to have the knowledge to support their goals. Mr. Fornell said in his line of work he has never come across 7 SPECIAL MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17,2021 the argument of affordable housing being too close to free-market homes. He stated that if individuals do not like a land-use code, they need to take that up with City Council, not HPC. Ms. Thompson moved to extend the meeting; Mr. Moyer seconded the motion. All in favor. Motion carried. Philip Jeffreys Ski Co. He stated that he sympathized completely with the neighbors. Change is always very emotional, especially in these crazy times and construction is always jarring but we cannot make decisions of this magnitude on emotion. He said that the setbacks have been met, the resource has been protected, it meets our community goals, meets zoning. Mr. Jeffreys stated diversity is critical to a healthy and sustainable community and we cannot continue to exist as a place if all that gets built in this town is housing for the .1%. He said to keep our community's greater goals in mind when voting. Raymond Stover, 1006 E. Cooper. He echoed his neighbor’s concerns. He also feels that this is a true multi-family neighborhood, and it sounds like companies like SkiCo are going to buy these units for their employees. Mr. Stover said he would rather see families in the units than dormitory lifestyle and have this turned into subsidized housing for a company like Ski Co. He suggested turning it into multi-residential family units since that is what is zoned. Robert Sonderman stated the current white building looks a little rundown. He added to maintain the historic minor's cabin and put in 5 affordable units, which is a win for the neighborhood. Sarah Lasser ACRA. Ms. Lasser stated that ACRA wants to provide positive comments in support of this project on behalf of our broader business community. She said attracting long- term employees is a challenge that local businesses continue to face and believes this additional housing will help support and sustain local business. Stephen Abelman 1012 E Cooper. On behalf of himself and wife, the very minor mass and scale changes were disappointing and made the situation worse considering how many people the developer plans to house in those units along with cars, kids and pets. There should be more outdoor, indoor and parking space for the sake of the residents and their health. This decision should be made based on the welfare of the families and neighborhood, and not on the developers’ profit margin. Due to technical difficulties parts of Mr. Ableman’s comments were inaudible. Tiffany Smith 1012 E. Cooper stated that minor changes don’t address the fact that the Application still doesn’t meet HPC Guidelines 1.1, 1.7, 11.3 and 11.4, which apply to use of lot space and size, height and mass of the addition. City Staff rubber-stamped everything the developers wanted, ignoring difficulties like parking and more traffic in a 1-way, dead-end alley, that this large 5-unit complex will have on the neighborhood. She’s not at all against affordable housing on this lot but is concerned about too much density. Thinks this is a shady deal for the historic resource and existing RMF neighborhood. Asked how many Aspenites will benefit from this project and how many won’t. Ross Jacobs said he echoes the neighbor’s concerns. He stated he would like to see families move in next door. There were written comments submitted to HPC and are attached to Exhibit A. Ms. Adams stated that there's a lot of good info for a Council policy discussion from the neighbors, but that is not why we are here. She said that this project meets the code, adopted policy, Aspen Area Community Plan, under floor area, under height, contextual with the neighborhood, and parking. Ms. Adams said that the Council’s remand was for the tree, fence, and conduct better outreach to the neighborhood. She explained that they cannot reduce the density and keep this a viable affordable housing deed-restricted project. Ms. Adams said that they can limit the occupancy to no more than 1 unrelated adult per bedroom and will voluntarily do that. She said that they will work with APCH on an HOA document. 8 SPECIAL MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17,2021 COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Thompson stated that there is a handful of HPC guidelines to follow and land-use code. She said that there are a lot of great discussion points for Council. Ms. Thompson said that they will need to rely on staff and the Building Department evaluation of this project. Mr. Halferty stated that the applicant has done a good job addressing mass and scale and the addition of the dormer helped with that. The applicant met the concerns that are within HPC purview and complies. Mr. Halferty stated he can support this project. Ms. Thompson stated that she agrees with Mr. Halferty’s statement. She said she appreciates the revisions on the alley. It is a significant improvement to the façade. Ms. Thompson said that she would like to see the dormer lowered a bit, so it does not meet the ridgeline. Mr. Kendrick stated that the redesign is nice but does not address the mass and scale. He explained that the project is still too dense and overwhelms the resource. Mr. Moyer stated he agrees with Mr. Kendrick and said that the mass is too big. Mr. Kendrick said that the idea that this project is code compliant is misleading. He explained that without the historic resource the project would not be allowed, it's a nonconforming lot and very small. He further explained that slapping an HPC designation on it, is not free rein to build to the limits of the code. He stated HPC’s purview is still to protect the historic resource. Mr. Kendrick said that the project just needs more space. Ms. Thompson stated that nearly all projects that HPC looks at in the West End are smaller lots, they're historic. She said is not fair to characterize that this lot is not conforming it conforms to the land-use code. Mr. Halferty stated he agrees that this project conforms to the land-use code and that the purview is to protect the resource and the applicant has done that. Ms. Thompson stated that with no connecting element between the cabin and the new addition, the guidelines need to be applied differently. Mr. Moyer stated that there is another aspect to this project and that is livability. He said that the structure is too large, but the living area is too small. Mr. Moyer stated that if it was three units it would work but five is too big. He said that the structure is too large and cannot support it. Mr. Kendrick asked if the project that was the single-family home was smaller than this project. Ms. Simon stated the single-family home did receive conceptual approval from when it was sent to Council for call up. Council remanded it to HPC for consideration about the preservation of a tree and fence concerns. Ms. Simon stated that during the remand discussion, the applicant withdrew the application and sold the property. Ms. Thompson stated that they were very different application. She pointed out that there was a linking element in the previous project. Mr. Kendrick stated that the new addition is so close to the cabin that one would think there is a linking element. Ms. Thompson disagreed with that statement. Mr. Halferty stated that there is a clear separation between the two. Ms. Thompson stated that in past projects there has been discussion about variation and facades and that they are significant architecturally in making a massive difference. She said that what the applicant has accomplished. Ms. Thompson asked Mr. Kendrick what could be done for his support. Mr. Kendrick stated that realistically fewer units. He further explained that looking at the south elevation of the original proposed plan and the redesign, there is little to no change. 9 SPECIAL MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION FEBRUARY 17,2021 Ms. Thompson said that a 2D rendering is hard to read that is why as an architect the 3D models are better to show the differences. Mr. Moyer said that a two-story addition would be more compatible with the cabin. Mr. Kendrick said that going from a one-story resource to a three-story addition is a bit extreme. He said that the ridgeline of the new addition is the bulk of what is being seen from the street and if that could be lowered. Ms. Thompson asked the board about the relocation of the historic resource. She stated that she is in support of the relocation. Mr. Moyer stated that it is too close to the road. He said HPC needs to look at 1.1, 11.7, 11.3, 11.4 of the design guidelines. Mr. Moyer reiterated that the mass and scale is simply too large. Mr. Halferty stated that he could support the relocation, adding more space between the two structures and letting the historic cabin stand proud and pronounced. Mr. Kendrick stated that he agrees with Mr. Halferty in concept. He explained he would like to see the separation a bit more. HPC was in agreement about the demolition of the non-historic sheds. Ms. Adams stated that they are respectfully requesting a vote for a clear direction for this project. Mr. Halferty moved to approve Resolution #03-2021with added conditions; Ms. Thompson seconded the motion. Mr. Kendrick, No; Mr. Halferty, Yes; Mr. Moyer, No; Ms. Thompson, Yes. 2-2. Motion Denied Ms. Simon stated that the applicant has request direction with the vote so someone will need to change their vote to move this forward or denial. Ms. Johnson explained the procedure of how to move the vote forward. Ms. Thompson stated they need to respect the applicant's wishes in this situation and to achieve action. Ms. Thompson begrudgingly adjusted her vote to a no. Ms. Thompson stated the findings this is moving to deny this because of the mass and scale. She further explained a reduction of a story or a significant reduction in the mass of the 2nd structure. Mr. Moyer and Mr. Kendrick agreed that this project does not meet HPC guidelines. Mr. Kendrick moved to Deny Resolution #03-2021; Mr. Moyer seconded. Mr. Kendrick, Yes; Mr. Halferty, No; Mr. Moyer, Yes; Ms. Thompson, Yes. 3-1 Motion passes for denial. Adjourn all in favor. _________________________ Wes Graham, Deputy Clerk 10 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 10, 2021 Chairperson Thompson opened the meeting at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Kara Thompson, Scott Kendrick, Roger Moyer, Jeff Halferty, Sheri Sanzone Commissioners not in attendance: n/a Staff present: Amy Simon, Planning Director Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Ms. Simon stated that the February 17th minutes will be pulled from approval. Mr. Kendrick moved to approve minutes from February 24th.; Mr. Moyer seconded. All in favor. PUBLIC COMMENT: None COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT: None PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Simon said she will be reaching out to Mr. Moyer, Mr. Halferty, and Ms. Thompson. Ms. Yoon stated she will be reaching out to Ms. Sanzone and Mr. Halferty. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Johnson stated that the appeal for 1020 E Cooper will be set for April 19th via WebEx and will only be based on the record of the previous meetings. Ms. Thompson asked if it would be appropriate if the HPC board could call in. Ms. Johnson yes that would be fine, it is a public meeting, not a public hearing. Ms. Simon stated that they do not anticipate taking public comment. OLD BUSINESS: 227 E. Bleeker-– Final Major Development, Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors. Ms. Raymond stated that she will address each condition that was brought up at the last meeting. Condition #1: Investigating the historic framing for any evidence of historic material and openings. Ms. Raymond said that once they can start demolition her team will be able to investigate if the historic door and see if it was a door or window. She stated that her team will detail out the bay window and restore the closed-in porch to an open front porch. Ms. Raymond said the chimneys will be restored and will work with staff and monitor. Ms. Raymond stated that the parapet that was found shows evidence of being historic and will need further study once able to get into the site. Condition #2 Provide a detailed preservation plan. Ms. Raymond showed visuals of the preservation plan, she added that the plan is six pages with detail. Condition #3 lightwell curb height and other similar features to be 6” or less. She stated that the light wells will be just 6” above grade. Condition #4 approval of setbacks. Ms. Raymond stated that they were approved of the setbacks already. Condition #5 was the approval of the floor area bonus. Condition #6 proposed stormwater mitigation. She said that the biggest change made to this plan for positive drainage was to lift the historic resource. Ms. Raymond explained the back west corner is sinking into the ground and that the new plan is to lift the resource 7 ½” to provide positive drainage. She added that visual adjustment will look the same as it did historically. Condition #7 front walkway shall be 3’. Ms. Raymond stated that the walkway meets the width requirements. Condition #8 A restudy of the roof eave detail on the new addition and the fenestration on the north elevation of the new addition to be more compatible with the historic 11 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 10, 2021 resource. Ms. Raymond said they added more material between the window and skylight and now it is more relatable to the resource. She pointed out the addition of a fascia board also relates to the cabin but is a product of its own time. Condition #9 Replace the glass floor patio adjacent to the historic home. Ms. Raymond said they will replace the glass plans with a material called thermory and will be treated pine to look aged. Condition #10 detailed roof plan showing all proposed vents, flues meters, and downspouts. Ms. Raymond showed a rendering of all the proposed snow gutters. She said that the new vents will be behind the ridgeline of the historic resource. Ms. Raymond stated that one of the original chimney flues will be used for the working chimney and the other will be used for a plumbing vent. Condition #11 detailed planting schedule for landscaping. Ms. Raymond stated that the front yard will be sod with a flower bed next to the resource, but there will be a band of mulch separating all landscaping and the historic resource. She added that as one moves back in the property the plants will get bigger to soften and give texture. Ms. Raymond said that the lilac bushes will be used to screen the transformer and parking that is located at the rear of the lot. Condition #12 restoration details for the historic resource. Ms. Raymond referred to the preservation plan. Condition #13 financial assurance. She said that this is no problem and will be in place. Ms. Raymond gave the history of the plate height of the new addition being lowered and the raising of the historic resource. She added that the new addition is well below the height limit. Ms. Raymond said that a jelly jar will be used for the exterior porch light and meets the dark sky requirements. She reviewed the Fire Department connection plan and placement on the front of the historic resource. Ms. Raymond reviewed the materials that will be used. She said for the front historic resource they will preserve what they can and match with any replacements. She added that on the east side of the linking element, it will be glass and the other side will be cementitious panels. The new additions will be made up of butt joint wood siding, steel sheet bands, glass railing, and a standing seam metal roof. She added that there will be a horizontal louver screen on the back porch for extra privacy. Ms. Thompson asked about the step up to the linking element and the role of the rain garden. Ms. Raymond stated that with the lifting of the historic resource the rain garden was no longer needed. Ms. Sanzone asked about the front yard stormwater mitigation plan for drainage. She said typically there would be a sod lid on the drain and not an exposed grate that is shown. Ms. Raymond said that the drains will have sod lids over them, and nothing will be visible. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Yoon stated that at the last HPC meeting the board directed the applicant to address specific concerns. She said the main concerns were the height difference between the resource and addition, stormwater mitigation, planting details, roof detail on the new addition to be more compatible with the resource, roof plan showing vents and fuels meters and mechanical equipment, and finally a preservation plan for foundation and chimney. Ms. Yoon stated that the height difference has been addressed, the change of grading has created that height difference between the two structures of 7 ¾”. She said that the roof detail plan is compliant with the historic design guidelines. She added that staff is excited to see the use and preservation of the historic chimneys. Ms. Yoon said that the landscape plan keeps the historic resource as the focal point while the sod is being maintained in the front yard, and all of this is in compliance with the design guidelines. She said that the pavers and patio materials will be pushed to the rear of the lot since this is an internal lot. Ms. Yoon pointed out that the material for the patio will be wood. Ms. Yoon stated that staff will continue to work with the applicant to refine the details of the preservation plan. She said that the concerns about the new addition’s fenestration where the skylight and window seem to be blend into one opening creating the illusion of the addition 12 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 10, 2021 being taller. Ms. Yoon explained that the applicant created a disconnect between the two windows and has met staffs concerns. She added that the new fascia board on the addition relates to the resource while being a product of its own time. Mr. Moyer asked if the city has any policy about chimneys being capped. Ms. Yoon stated that there is no internal policy. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Thompson stated that all of her questions and concerns have been met. Mr. Halferty commended the applicant on the quick response to HPC’s concern. He said he could fully support the project. Mr. Kendrick stated that he agrees with all comments and appreciates the extra effort that went into the redesigns. Ms. Sanzone said that the information that was given this time was great and made the job that much easier to evaluate. Mr. Moyer said well done. Ms. Thompson moved to approve Resolution #06-2021; Mr. Moyer seconded. ROLL CALL: Mr. Kendrick, Yes; Mr. Moyer, Yes; Mr. Halferty; Yes, Ms. Thompson; Yes, Ms. Sanzone; Yes. All in favor. Motion The monitor for this project will be Mr. Halferty. NEW BUSINESS: 423 N. Second Street–Final Major Development Review. Bill Guth and Ro Rockett Design. Mario Nievera landscape architect. Mr. Ro reviewed the location and history of the Queen Anne Victorian. He showed a proposed design of the rotated Victorian placing the historic front door facing Second Street with a one- story linking element and new addition. Mr. Nievera stated that this is a multigenerational home and will be used year-round. He said that the fence that is shown is out of safety for the grandchildren from running into the street. Mr. Nievera stated that the landscape plan is to celebrate the historic resource. He explained the plan is to keep the landscaping low while incorporating some of the historic trees. Mr. Nievera added that there will be privacy elements added around the new structure and family recreation areas while conveying a welcoming feel through strategically placed bushes and not just a hedgerow. Mr. Nievera showed the plant material that will be used in the landscape plan and said there will be a mix of material to create a naturalistic feel against the property and interests shown throughout the year. He said that there will be a gravel trench wrapping around the historic building to ensure the foundation is exposed at all times. Mr. Ro stated that for the front porch restoration plan, his team looked at the neighborhood and other historic homes with open front porches. He said that the proposed porch will have a half-light door, an architectural post with semi-arched brackets, and a simple picket guardrail above an open lattice base. Mr. Ro stated that the fenestration on the new addition will resemble the resource with a taller and slender proportion. Mr. Ro stated that his team looked at the masonry architecture in the West End of Aspen and the importance that it plays. He added that the pairing of brick lends a historic patina to resources. Mr. Ro showed the proposed materials that will be used on the new addition and resource. For the addition, oversized artisan hand cast brick, light gray paving, light wood siding, and window frames. For the Victorian painted wood lap siding, grey metal skirting. Staff Comments: Ms. Simon said that the applicants did a really good job addressing the concerns HPC had with the new addition form, fenestration, and materials. Ms. Simon stated that in the landscaping plan, the plan shows some things easing on to the public right away within the canopy of the street trees. there are a couple of really large cottonwood trees along the property 13 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 10, 2021 that are very important. She added that the city has had a policy against any kind of illusion of privatizing the right of way with planting beds that seem to extend the private property line. Ms. Simon said that additional input from the Parks Department will be needed. She stated that staff is proposing the removal of anything encroaching into the right of way. Ms. Simon pointed out concern about the two maple trees that flank the resource and obstructing views of the resource and a few willows on the pathway leading up to the building that may get larger than one typically will see in the foreground. Ms. Simon stated that the front walkway that is being shown is wider than the suggested in the guidelines of 3’. She said the east side seating area extends pretty far towards the front of the structure and should be reduced so that there's not so much hardscape and more landscape meeting the base of the building. Ms. Simon stated that there are several outdoor living features that are shown on the plan that are not allowed by zoning in yards anywhere between a building wall and a street. She said you are not allowed to have hot tubs, firepits built-in, or anything like that. She explained that they will work with the applicant for appropriate locations. Ms. Simon said there is a generator indicated and more information about that piece of equipment. She stated that staff is recommending a preservation plan, which is provided to some extent in the drawings. Ms. Simon explained that the applicant indicates various efforts they're going to make to restore the front porch, the front door, etc. She raised concerns about the vent, flues, and roof plan placement and if they are in the best location. Ms. Simon said the front porch light fixture needs to be modest and not overly ornate. Ms. Simon stated that staff recommends approval. Ms. Thompson asked if it was the trees in the linking element area causing concern or that they were close to the resource. Ms. Simon said that the staff concern immediately around the resource. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Ms. Thompson said that she generally agrees with staff comments. She said she likes the flow of the landscape past the property line and that it is a very delicate feature. Ms. Thompson stated that she agrees with staff’s comments relating to the proximity of the planting in the eastern patio and giving the resource a bit more breathing room. She said that she was impressed by the fenestration revisions and material revisions. Ms. Sanzone said that she agrees with the comments made by Ms. Thompson. She said that there are historic examples of allowing the planting beds beyond the fence line. Ms. Sanzone stated that this project was well done. Mr. Kendrick stated that this is a fantastic project and supports it moving forward. He said landscaping can be worked out with staff and monitors. Mr. Kendrick said that he has concerns about roof penetrations. Mr. Halferty said that he agrees with all the comments made by the board and staff. He said he could support the project. Mr. Moyer said that he agrees with staff and comments and supports the project. Mr. Guth said that they will be happy to work with staff and monitor on all concerns. Mr. Moyer moved to approve Resolution #07-2021. Mr. Kendrick seconded. ROLL CALL: Mr. Kendrick, Yes; Mr. Moyer, Yes; Mr. Halferty; Yes, Ms. Thompson; Yes, Ms. Sanzone; Yes. All in favor. Motion The monitors will be Ms. Thompson and Ms. Sanzone ADJOURN _________________________ Wes Graham, Deputy Clerk 14 Page 1 of 2 130 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, Planning Director MEETING DATE: April 14, 2021 RE: 920 E. Hyman – Project Monitoring APPLICANT /OWNER: Larian LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Zone 4 Architects LLC LOCATION: Street Address: 920 E. Hyman Avenue Legal Description: Lot N, Block 32, East Aspen Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2737-182-06-005 CURRENT ZONING & USE RMF – Residential Multi-Family; Single-family home PROPOSED ZONING & USE: No change SUMMARY: The subject property contains a one-story miner’s cabin and an existing non-historic addition to the rear of the property. In January 2020, the applicant received HPC approval via HP Resolution #03, Series of 2020 to underpin the historic resource and enlarge the crawlspace to a full basement, and to make minor changes to the exterior building materials and fenestration. The applicant also received setback variations and an approval to sever one TDR from the site. A building permit for the approved scope of work was issued last September. Since the issuance of the permit, revisions impacting the exterior of the existing structure triggered a staff & monitor level review. The proposed exterior changes result in all new fenestration on the non-historic addition. REFERRED TO HPC FOR REVIEW: Staff & monitor determined that the scope of change should be reviewed by the full board because the alterations deviate in scale and proportion from the historic resource and impact all elevations of the non-historic addition. Site Locator Map – 920 E. Hyman Avenue 920 15 Page 2 of 2 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines: 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. 16 April 2, 2021 Historic Preservation Commission c/o Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Re: 920 East Hyman Ave. Window Review To the Historic Preservation Commissioners, Thank you all for taking the time to consider the following Proposed Design amendments to the fenestration of the renovation currently under construction at 920 East Hyman Avenue. History: This project received approval for a Minor Development Review, Relocation, Setback Variances, and the establishment of one Transferable Development Right through Resolution #3, series of 2020, which was recorded in February of 2020. This Resolution allowed for the renovation/restoration of the historic resource, allowed for the addition of a sub-grade level beneath the existing structures, and limited exterior modifications to the non-historic modern addition, which included changes to the fenestration based on the proposed interior plan changes. Perceived Significance of Modifications: Based on language contained in Section 1 of Resolution #3, and subsequent conversations with Amy Simon, it was believed that changes made to fenestration in the non-historic addition were not significant and would be reviewable by Staff and Monitor. When the Proposed Design was presented for review, Sarah informed the team that the degree of changes to the windows on all facades was more extensive than would be possible to review at the Staff and Monitor level, and hence this presentation to the HPC for a follow up review to amend the design. Reasons for changes: The revisions to the design primarily resulted from the discovery of as-built conditions in the non- historic addition, which prompted revisions to the floor plan and thus revisions to the fenestration. While these changes were being made, the Applicant also desired to update the aesthetic of the windows in non-historic addition as presented to further distinguish the non-historic addition. Conformance with Regulations: Zone 4 and the Applicant believe that while the Proposed design changes do represent an aesthetic departure from the previously reviewed design (referred to in this application as the 17 “Permitted” design), they are in keeping with both the intent of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) and Resolution #3 based on the following points outlined below: • The proposed changes to the non-historic addition fenestration do not adversely affect the perception or visual integrity of the historic resource o Section 1 of Resolution #3 approves “making changes to the materials and fenestration on existing structures”, with no other comments regarding the significance of the Existing or Permitted fenestration, other than subsection 5 which seeks to determine the historic significance of the existing stained glass window (which is not applicable to the Proposed Design) o Due to the configuration of the historic resource and neighboring properties, the ability to view and compare the design features of the non-historic addition relative to the historic resource is very limited (when not viewed in architectural elevation) ▪ The east-west gable ridgeline of the historic resource mostly obscures the view of the upper-level fenestration on the south side of the non- historic addition (from Hyman Avenue) ▪ The adjacent residences to the east and west of 920 E Hyman, in conjunction with the landscaping, severely restrict the visibility of the east and west facades of the non-historic addition from Hyman Avenue ▪ A small portion of the historic resource (containing one historic window) is visible from the northeast side of the property (at the alley), while overall views of the east and west facades of the non-historic addition are severely restricted due to the proximity of the adjacent residences • The most contemporary window of the non-historic addition contained on the east side of the Existing/Permitted Design is very close to the visible historic window on the NE corner of the historic resource (see photo), and the Proposed Design modifies the location and configuration of this window to reduce its impact and visual similarity to the historic window • Section 10.6 of the HPDG identifies 3 aspects of design when designing a new addition to a historic structure (form, materials, and fenestration). Two of those elements must strongly relate to the design of the historic resource, while a departure from one of those elements is desired to provide a contemporary design response and to distinguish the addition as a product of its own time. o Forms: The Existing/Permitted massing is a simple rectangular form with a gabled roof. This massing strongly relates to the massing of the historic resource, and is not being changed in the Proposed Design o Materials: The Existing/Permitted/Proposed material palate of the addition strongly relates to the historic resource with the possible exception of the roofing material (which is not visible from any aspect around the property), and is not being changed in the Proposed Design o Fenestration: The fenestration of the non-historic addition has always been the differentiating design element of the three criteria. The Proposed Design seeks to shift the aesthetic of the fenestration to be more visibly different from the historic resource than what was proposed in the Permitted Design, however not in a manner which looks out of place with either the historic resource or character of the non-historic addition itself. • The nature of the Proposed Design changes to the fenestration do not appear to affect or change any of the applicable review criteria contained in either the HPDG or the City of Aspen’s Land Use Code, which were cited in the prior Permitted application, which resulted in a unanimous approval of Resolution #3 by the HPC. Thank you again for your consideration, Dylan M. Johns Zone 4 Architects 18 920 EAST HYMAN AVE 4/1/2021HPC APPLICATION | SCALE: N.T.S. NORTH ELEVATIONS+/-23'-10 7/8"1/3 POINT BTWN RIDGE AND EAVE25'MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT LIMIT+/-20'-1 1/2"12'-6"25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT EXISTING ROOFS AND DORMERS STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE AT GARAGE TO REMAIN, V.I.F. EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO REMAINEXISTING WINDOW TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED 1/3 POINT BETWEEN RIDGE AND EAVE EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES TO BE REPLACED 8 12 8 12 11 12 11 12 B D EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-112'-6" EL. +/- 23'- 10 7/8" EL. +/-98'-1" [7934.88'] EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] EL. +/- 25'- 0" EL. +/-89'-9 3/4" T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. UPPER LEVEL H.B. T.O. SLAB GARAGE T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY T.O. EXIST. F.F. LOWER LEVEL +/-23'-10 7/8"1/3 POINT BTWN RIDGE AND EAVE25'-0"MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT LIMIT+/-20'-1 1/2"+/-8'-9 3/4"+/-1'-11"12'-6"1 A504 25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION BELOW EXISTING ROOFS AND DORMERS STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE AT GARAGE TO REMAIN, V.I.F. EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO REMAIN NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES, RE: SPEC. 1/3 POINT BETWEEN RIDGE AND EAVE C2 8 12 8 12 11 12 11 12 B D EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-89'-3 1/4" EL. +/-112'-6" EL. +/- 23'- 10 7/8" EL. +/-98'-1" [7934.88'] EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] EL. +/- 25'- 0" T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. LOWER LEVEL T.O. UPPER LEVEL H.B. T.O. SLAB GARAGE T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY DATE Date: Scale: Drawn by: REVISIONS Z4A WWW.ZONE4ARCHITECTS.COM 50% PERMIT 12.12.19Z4A PERMIT PRE APP 01.21.20Z4A PERMIT 03.04.20Z4A PERMIT RESPONSE 1 06.22.20Z4A Z:\Shared\Data\_Z4 Projects\1924 920 East Hyman\Model\Archive\2020-06-04 920 E Hyman PERMIT_response 1.plnBY A404 6/19/2020Plotted On: 6/19/2020 AS NOTED PROPOSED ELEVATIONS ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS IS NOT LIABLE OR RESPONSIBLE AT ANY TIME FOR ANY CHANGES TO THESE DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION.c 2017 ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS, LLC. THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR COPIED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND ALL OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED920 EAST HYMAN920 East Hyman AvenueAspen, CO 81611City of Aspen, Pitkin County+/-23'-10 7/8"1/3 POINT BTWN RIDGE AND EAVE25'-0"MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT LIMIT+/-20'-0"+/-8'-10"+/-1'-11"10'-11"1 A504 25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION BELOW EXISTING ROOFS AND DORMERS STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE AT GARAGE TO REMAIN, V.I.F. EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO REMAINEXISTING WINDOW TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES, RE: SPEC. 1/3 POINT BETWEEN RIDGE AND EAVE GAS FIREPLACE VENT TERMINATION CAP 8 12 8 12 11 12 11 12 B D 2 A603 1 A603 3 A603 EL. +/-110'-11" [7947.72'] EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-89'-3" [7926.05'] EL. +/- 23'- 10 7/8" EL. +/-98'-1" [7934.88'] EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] EL. +/- 25'- 0" EL. +/-88'-11" [7925.72'] T.O. PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. LOWER LEVEL H.B. T.O. SLAB GARAGE T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY T.O. LOWER LEVEL (DROPPED SLAB)+/- 13'-5 7/8"1/3 POINT BTWN RIDGE AND EAVE24'-11 31/32"MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT LIMIT+-/26'-9 1/2" +/-6'-7 3/4"+/-20'-1 3/4"10'-9"10'-11"1 A504 25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT MAIN HOUSE BEYOND IS OBLIQUE TO HISTORIC COTTAGE ELEVATION EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC COTTAGE TO REMAIN, TYP. OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION BELOW EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO REMAIN EXISTING PORCH TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN NEW WOOD SHINGLES ON HISTORIC COTTAGE STAINED GLASS WINDOW TO BE REPLACED WITH CLEAR GLASS PENDING HPC STAFF FINDINGS. NEW LIGHT FIXTURES, RE: SPEC. 8 12 8 12 11 12 11 12 12 12 12 12 EL. +/-13'-5 7/8" AEC EL. +/-110'-11" [7947.72'] EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-89'-3" [7926.05'] EL. +/-116'-6" [7953.30'] EL. +/-89'-3" T.O. PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. LOWER LEVEL H.B. H.B. T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL (DROPPED SLAB) EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING -REFER TO TYPICAL WALL ASSEMBLY DETAILS -EXISTING WOOD/COMPOSITE SIDING TO REMAIN -FINAL FINISH COLOR TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. WOOD SHINGLE ROOF -REFER TO TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY DETAILS -G.C. TO VERIFY FINAL LAYOUT WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PURCHASING PRODUCT. -FINAL FINISH COLOR AND LAYOUT TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF -REFER TO TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY DETAILS -G.C. TO VERIFY FINAL SEAM LAYOUT WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PURCHASING PRODUCT. -FINAL FINISH COLOR AND LAYOUT TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION GENERAL NOTES: 1. REFER TO NOTE 'M' ON A000. 2. G.C. TO PROVIDE SAMPLES OF ALL SIDING MATERIALS AND FINISHES FOR APPROVAL BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION - PROPOSED 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED 06/25/2020 06/30/2020 08/06/2020 TF/JH Existing stained glass window is to remain unless findings show it is not historic. Any new information must be confirmed with HP staff before any changes. Check-in with Staff & Monitor on wood shingles. Typically cedar shake shingles are used on historic projects. REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE 08/14/2020 sarahy BY HPC EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION PERMITTED NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 19 920 EAST HYMAN AVE 4/1/2021HPC APPLICATION | SCALE: N.T.S. EAST ELEVATIONS 06 0606 07 07 07 07 07 BUILDING IN OBLIQUE VIEW +/-48'-3 1/4"+/-12'-6"1'-11"2'-5 1/8"2 A503 1 A503 1 A505 25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, TYP. EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING WINDOWS TO REMAIN ON HISTORIC COTTAGE, TYP. EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN OUTLINE OF WINDOW WELL WALL OUTLINE OF NEW EGRESS WINDOW NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE CENTERED OVER EGRESS WELL NEW GUTTER NEW STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF ON NON-HISTORIC ROOF, TYP. B7 B6 B5 B4 B3 EL. +/-13'-5 7/8" 12432a 6 A603 EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-112'-6" EL. +/-100'-0" [7953.30'] EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] EL. 116'-2" T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. UPPER LEVEL T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY E SILL BUILDING IN OBLIQUE VIEW +/-48'-3 1/4"+/-12'-6"25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, TYP. EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE REMOVED EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING WINDOWS TO REMAIN ON HISTORIC COTTAGE, TYP. EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN OUTLINE OF EXISTING EGRESS WINDOW EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE CENTERED OVER EGRESS WELL EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE REMOVED EL. +/-13'-5 7/8" 12432a EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-112'-6" EL. +/-100'-0" [7953.30'] EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. UPPER LEVEL T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY SILL DATE Date: Scale: Drawn by: REVISIONS Z4A WWW.ZONE4ARCHITECTS.COM 50% PERMIT 12.12.19Z4A PERMIT PRE APP 01.21.20Z4A PERMIT 03.04.20Z4A PERMIT RESPONSE 1 06.22.20Z4A Z:\Shared\Data\_Z4 Projects\1924 920 East Hyman\Model\Archive\2020-06-04 920 E Hyman PERMIT_response 1.plnBY A405 6/19/2020Plotted On: 6/19/2020 AS NOTED PROPOSED ELEVATION ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS IS NOT LIABLE OR RESPONSIBLE AT ANY TIME FOR ANY CHANGES TO THESE DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION.c 2017 ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS, LLC. THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR COPIED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND ALL OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED920 EAST HYMAN920 East Hyman AvenueAspen, CO 81611City of Aspen, Pitkin CountyBUILDING IN OBLIQUE VIEW +/-48'-1 1/2"+/-10'-9"+/-10'-11"1'-4"1'-11"2'-0"2'-5 1/8"2 A503 1 A503 1 A505 25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION BELOW EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, TYP. EXISTING WINDOWS TO REMAIN, U.N.O. EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING WINDOWS TO REMAIN ON HISTORIC COTTAGE, TYP. EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN OUTLINE OF WINDOW WELL WALL NEW WINDOWS. TO MATCH EXISTING OUTLINE OF NEW EGRESS WINDOW OUTLINE OF NEW EGRESS WINDOW NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE CENTERED OVER EGRESS WELL NEW GUTTER NEW STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF ON NON-HISTORIC ROOF, TYP. AHU NOT TO EXCEED 30" ABOVE OR BELOW GRADE. APPROX. LOCATION OF EXHAUST LOUVER. RE: MECH. C6 C5 C4 EL. +/-13'-5 7/8" 12432a 2 A603 1 A603 3 A603 6 A603 4 A603 5 A603 EL. +/-110'-11" [7947.72'] EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-89'-3" [7926.05'] EL. +/-100'-0" [7953.30'] EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] EL. +/-92'-2 5/8" EL. +/-89'-3" CENTER EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE OUTLINE OF NEW WINDOW WELL T.O. PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. LOWER LEVEL E EE T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY RE: SURVEY T.O. LOWER LEVEL (DROPPED SLAB) EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING -REFER TO TYPICAL WALL ASSEMBLY DETAILS -EXISTING WOOD/COMPOSITE SIDING TO REMAIN -FINAL FINISH COLOR TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. WOOD SHINGLE ROOF -REFER TO TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY DETAILS -G.C. TO VERIFY FINAL LAYOUT WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PURCHASING PRODUCT. -FINAL FINISH COLOR AND LAYOUT TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF -REFER TO TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY DETAILS -G.C. TO VERIFY FINAL SEAM LAYOUT WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PURCHASING PRODUCT. -FINAL FINISH COLOR AND LAYOUT TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION GENERAL NOTES: 1. REFER TO NOTE 'M' ON A000. 2. G.C. TO PROVIDE SAMPLES OF ALL SIDING MATERIALS AND FINISHES FOR APPROVAL BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED 06/25/2020 06/30/2020 08/06/2020 TF/JH REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE 08/11/2020 sarahy BY HPC PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PERMITTED EAST ELEVATION EXISTING EAST ELEVATION 20 920 EAST HYMAN AVE 4/1/2021HPC APPLICATION | SCALE: N.T.S. SOUTH ELEVATIONS+/- 13'-5 7/8"1/3 POINT BTWN RIDGE AND EAVE25'MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT LIMIT+-/26'-9 1/2" +/-6'-7 3/4"+/-20'-1 3/4"22'-8 1/4"25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT MAIN HOUSE BEYOND IS OBLIQUE TO HISTORIC COTTAGE ELEVATION EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC COTTAGE TO REMAIN, TYP. OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION BEYOND EXISTING EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES TO BE REPLACED EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO REMAIN EXISTING PORCH TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN 8 12 8 12 11 12 11 12 12 12 12 12 EL. +/-13'-5 7/8" AEC EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-112'-6" EL. +/-116'-6" [7953.30'] EL. +/-89'-9 3/4" T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. UPPER LEVEL H.B. H.B. T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE T.O. EXIST. F.F. LOWER LEVEL 07 +/- 13'-5 7/8"1/3 POINT BTWN RIDGE AND EAVE24'-11 31/32"MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT LIMIT+-/26'-9 1/2" +/-6'-7 3/4"+/-20'-1 3/4"10'-8 3/4"12'-6"1 A504 25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT MAIN HOUSE BEYOND IS OBLIQUE TO HISTORIC COTTAGE ELEVATION EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC COTTAGE TO REMAIN, TYP. OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION BEYOND EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO REMAIN EXISTING PORCH TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN NEW WOOD SHINGLES ON HISTORIC COTTAGE STAINED GLASS WINDOW TO BE REPLACED WITH CLEAR GLASS PENDING HPC STAFF FINDINGS. NEW LIGHT FIXTURES, RE: SPEC. 8 12 8 12 11 12 11 12 12 12 12 12 EL. +/-13'-5 7/8" AEC EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-89'-3 1/4" EL. +/-112'-6" EL. +/-116'-6" [7953.30'] T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. LOWER LEVEL T.O. UPPER LEVEL H.B. H.B. T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE DATE Date: Scale: Drawn by: REVISIONS Z4A WWW.ZONE4ARCHITECTS.COM 50% PERMIT 12.12.19Z4A PERMIT PRE APP 01.21.20Z4A PERMIT 03.04.20Z4A PERMIT RESPONSE 1 06.22.20Z4A Z:\Shared\Data\_Z4 Projects\1924 920 East Hyman\Model\Archive\2020-06-04 920 E Hyman PERMIT_response 1.plnBY A404 6/19/2020Plotted On: 6/19/2020 AS NOTED PROPOSED ELEVATIONS ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS IS NOT LIABLE OR RESPONSIBLE AT ANY TIME FOR ANY CHANGES TO THESE DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION.c 2017 ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS, LLC. THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR COPIED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND ALL OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED920 EAST HYMAN920 East Hyman AvenueAspen, CO 81611City of Aspen, Pitkin County+/-23'-10 7/8"1/3 POINT BTWN RIDGE AND EAVE25'-0"MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT LIMIT+/-20'-0"+/-8'-10"+/-1'-11"10'-11"1 A504 25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION BELOW EXISTING ROOFS AND DORMERS STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE AT GARAGE TO REMAIN, V.I.F. EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO REMAINEXISTING WINDOW TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES, RE: SPEC. 1/3 POINT BETWEEN RIDGE AND EAVE GAS FIREPLACE VENT TERMINATION CAP 8 12 8 12 11 12 11 12 B D 2 A603 1 A603 3 A603 EL. +/-110'-11" [7947.72'] EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-89'-3" [7926.05'] EL. +/- 23'- 10 7/8" EL. +/-98'-1" [7934.88'] EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] EL. +/- 25'- 0" EL. +/-88'-11" [7925.72'] T.O. PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. LOWER LEVEL H.B. T.O. SLAB GARAGE T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY T.O. LOWER LEVEL (DROPPED SLAB)+/- 13'-5 7/8"1/3 POINT BTWN RIDGE AND EAVE24'-11 31/32"MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT LIMIT+-/26'-9 1/2" +/-6'-7 3/4"+/-20'-1 3/4"10'-9"10'-11"1 A504 25'-0" HEIGHT LIMIT MAIN HOUSE BEYOND IS OBLIQUE TO HISTORIC COTTAGE ELEVATION EXISTING WINDOWS ON HISTORIC COTTAGE TO REMAIN, TYP. OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION BELOW EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS TO REMAIN EXISTING PORCH TO REMAIN EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN NEW WOOD SHINGLES ON HISTORIC COTTAGE STAINED GLASS WINDOW TO BE REPLACED WITH CLEAR GLASS PENDING HPC STAFF FINDINGS. NEW LIGHT FIXTURES, RE: SPEC. 8 12 8 12 11 12 11 12 12 12 12 12 EL. +/-13'-5 7/8" AEC EL. +/-110'-11" [7947.72'] EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-89'-3" [7926.05'] EL. +/-116'-6" [7953.30'] EL. +/-89'-3" T.O. PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. LOWER LEVEL H.B. H.B. T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL (DROPPED SLAB) EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING -REFER TO TYPICAL WALL ASSEMBLY DETAILS -EXISTING WOOD/COMPOSITE SIDING TO REMAIN -FINAL FINISH COLOR TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. WOOD SHINGLE ROOF -REFER TO TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY DETAILS -G.C. TO VERIFY FINAL LAYOUT WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PURCHASING PRODUCT. -FINAL FINISH COLOR AND LAYOUT TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF -REFER TO TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY DETAILS -G.C. TO VERIFY FINAL SEAM LAYOUT WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PURCHASING PRODUCT. -FINAL FINISH COLOR AND LAYOUT TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION GENERAL NOTES: 1. REFER TO NOTE 'M' ON A000. 2. G.C. TO PROVIDE SAMPLES OF ALL SIDING MATERIALS AND FINISHES FOR APPROVAL BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION - PROPOSED 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED 06/25/2020 06/30/2020 08/06/2020 TF/JH Existing stained glass window is to remain unless findings show it is not historic. Any new information must be confirmed with HP staff before any changes. Check-in with Staff & Monitor on wood shingles. Typically cedar shake shingles are used on historic projects. REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE 08/14/2020 sarahy BY HPC EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION PERMITTED SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION 21 920 EAST HYMAN AVE 4/1/2021HPC APPLICATION | SCALE: N.T.S. WEST ELEVATIONS 06 07 +/-48'-3 1/4"BUILDING IN OBLIQUE VIEW 12'-6"2 A503 1 A503 EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, TYP. 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION WALL EXISTING HISTORIC SIDING TO REMAIN NEW WINDOWS NEW GUTTER NEW WOOD SHINGLE ON HISTORIC COTTAGE NEW TPO MEMBRANE ON HISTORIC COTTAGE FLAT ROOF. COLOR TO BE DARK GREY. NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE CENTERED OVER EGRESS WELL B2 B1 1 2a 423 2 A603 1 A603 3 A603 EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-112'-6" EL. +/- 23'- 10 7/8" EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] EL. +/-116'-6" [7953.30'] EL. +/- 25'- 0" MEASUREMENT TO 1/3 POINT BETWEEN RIDGE AND EAVE T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. UPPER LEVEL T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE 06 +/-48'-3 1/4"BUILDING IN OBLIQUE VIEW 12'-6"EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, TYP. 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN EXISTING HISTORIC SIDING TO REMAIN 1 2a 423 EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-112'-6" EL. +/- 23'- 10 7/8" EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] EL. +/-116'-6" [7953.30'] EL. +/- 25'- 0" MEASUREMENT TO 1/3 POINT BETWEEN RIDGE AND EAVE T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. UPPER LEVEL T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE DATE Date: Scale: Drawn by: REVISIONS Z4A WWW.ZONE4ARCHITECTS.COM 50% PERMIT 12.12.19Z4A PERMIT PRE APP 01.21.20Z4A PERMIT 03.04.20Z4A PERMIT RESPONSE 1 06.22.20Z4A Z:\Shared\Data\_Z4 Projects\1924 920 East Hyman\Model\Archive\2020-06-04 920 E Hyman PERMIT_response 1.plnBY A406 6/19/2020Plotted On: 6/19/2020 AS NOTED PROPOSED ELEVATION ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS IS NOT LIABLE OR RESPONSIBLE AT ANY TIME FOR ANY CHANGES TO THESE DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION.c 2017 ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS, LLC. THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED OR COPIED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. ZONE 4 ARCHITECTS LLC. SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND ALL OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED920 EAST HYMAN920 East Hyman AvenueAspen, CO 81611City of Aspen, Pitkin County+/-48'-1 1/2"BUILDING IN OBLIQUE VIEW 10'-9"10'-11"2 A503 1 A503 EXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE TO REMAIN, TYP. 25'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION WALL EXISTING LIGHT FIXTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN OUTLINE OF FOUNDATION WALL EXISTING HISTORIC SIDING TO REMAIN NEW WINDOWS NEW GUTTER NEW WINDOW WELL WALL NEW STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF ON NON-HISTORIC ROOFS, TYP. NEW WOOD SHINGLE ON HISTORIC COTTAGE NEW TPO MEMBRANE ON HISTORIC COTTAGE FLAT ROOF. COLOR TO BE DARK GREY. GAS FIREPLACE VENT TERMINATION CAP NEW EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE CENTERED IN EGRESS WELL APPROX. LOCATION OF EXHAUST VENT. RE: MECHANICAL. B2 B1 C1 1 2a 423 2 A603 1 A603 3 A603 2 A603 1 A603 3 A603 EL. +/-110'-11" [7947.72'] EL. +/-100'-0" [7936.80'] EL. +/-89'-3" [7926.05'] EL. +/- 23'- 10 7/8" EL. +/-128'-1 3/16" [7969.40'] EL. +/-116'-6" [7953.30'] EL. +/- 25'- 0" EL. +/-88'-11" [7925.72'] MEASUREMENT TO 1/3 POINT BETWEEN RIDGE AND EAVE T.O. PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL T.O. ENTRY LEVEL T.O. LOWER LEVEL T.O. RIDGE RE: SURVEY T.O. RIDGE COTTAGE T.O. LOWER LEVEL (DROPPED SLAB) EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND HORIZONTAL WOOD SIDING -REFER TO TYPICAL WALL ASSEMBLY DETAILS -EXISTING WOOD/COMPOSITE SIDING TO REMAIN -FINAL FINISH COLOR TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK. WOOD SHINGLE ROOF -REFER TO TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY DETAILS -G.C. TO VERIFY FINAL LAYOUT WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PURCHASING PRODUCT. -FINAL FINISH COLOR AND LAYOUT TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF -REFER TO TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY DETAILS -G.C. TO VERIFY FINAL SEAM LAYOUT WITH ARCHITECT PRIOR TO PURCHASING PRODUCT. -FINAL FINISH COLOR AND LAYOUT TO BE APPROVED BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO INSTALLATION GENERAL NOTES: 1. REFER TO NOTE 'M' ON A000. 2. G.C. TO PROVIDE SAMPLES OF ALL SIDING MATERIALS AND FINISHES FOR APPROVAL BY ARCHITECT AND OWNER PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 WEST ELEVATION PROPOSED 06/25/2020 06/30/2020 08/06/2020 TF/JH REVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE 08/11/2020 sarahy BY HPC PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION PERMITTED WEST ELEVATION EXISTING WEST ELEVATION 22 920 EAST HYMAN AVE 4/1/2021HPC APPLICATION | SCALE: N.T.S. PHOTOGRAPHS 23 920 EAST HYMAN AVE 4/1/2021HPC APPLICATION | SCALE: N.T.S. EXTRA PHOTOGRAPHS 24 Page 1 of 2 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Planning Director MEETING DATE: April 14, 2021 RE: 211 W. Hopkins Avenue–Final Major Development Review, PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT /OWNER: Matt Joblon, 205 S. Detroit Street , Suite 400, Denver, CO 80206, with the consent of property owner Vaughan Capital Partners, LP REPRESENTATIVE: Rowland + Broughton BendonAdams LOCATION: Street Address: 211 W. Hopkins Avenue Legal Description: Lots F and G, Block 53, City and Townsite of Aspen Parcel Identification Number: PID# 273512463003 CURRENT ZONING & USE: Single-family home, R-6: Medium Density Residential PROPOSED ZONING & LAND USE: Two detached homes, R-6: Medium Density Residential SUMMARY: The applicant has offered voluntary AspenModern historic designation of this property, which contains a 1956 Pan Abode home, and has received HPC Conceptual approval, Council designation and benefits for a project which involves restoring the resource, excavating a basement below it, and constructing a detached new home along the alley. This review, final design, is the last step before application for building permit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with conditions. Site Locator Map – 211 W. Hopkins Avenue 211 25 Page 2 of 2 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com BACKGROUND: 211 W. Hopkins is a 6,000 square foot lot located in the R-6 zone district. The site contains a 1956 Pan Abode, which is essentially unaltered. REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals: • Major Development (Section 26.415.070.D) for removal of a non-historic addition, restoration on the Pan Abode and construction of a new structure at the rear of the property. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is the final review authority. STAFF COMMENTS: The focus of Final Major Development review is primarily details of the landscape design, preservation plan, selection of materials and fenestration, and lighting. Staff has minor comments regarding compliance with the design guidelines, which have been translated into conditions of approval in the recommended resolution. Please see Exhibit A for more detail. Conditions of Conceptual approval, and parameters from Council’s approval of this valuable voluntary historic designation are also carried forward into the resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission approve the project with the conditions outlined in the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution #__, Series of 2020 Exhibit A – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria /Staff Findings Exhibit B – Application 26 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2021 Page 1 of 5 RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2021 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION GRANTING FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 211 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, LOTS F AND G, BLOCK 53, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PARCEL ID: 2735-124-63-003 WHEREAS, the applicant, Matt Joblon, 205 S. Detroit Street , Suite 400, Denver, CO 80206, with the consent of property owner Vaughan Capital Partners, LP has requested HPC approval for Final Major Development for the property located at 211 W. Hopkins Avenue, Lots F and G, Block 53, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for Final Major Development review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.4 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Amy Simon, Planning Director, recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, after review of the staff analysis report, the application, evidence presented at the hearing, and public comments on April 14, 2021, HPC found the application to be consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of __ to __. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Section 1: Approvals HPC hereby grants Final Major Development approval for 211 W. Hopkins Avenue with the following conditions: 1. Per Council Ordinance #22, Series of 2020, which designated the property historic under the criteria for AspenModern, the following benefits have been granted for the approved redevelopment of the property Tree Removal Fee Waiver Granting of tree removal permits and waiver of all tree mitigation fees. 27 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2021 Page 2 of 5 Expedited Permit Review The building permit shall be subject to expedited building permit review consistent with the Building Department’s adopted procedure. Floor Area Bonus A floor area bonus of 135 square feet of enclosed space and 19 square feet to be used for larger outdoor decks is approved. Setback Variation A rear yard setback reduction of 2’, allowing the new residential unit to be 8’ from the rear lot line on all floors is approved. 2. During review of Ordinance #22, Series of 2020, the applicant was asked by Council to install an interpretive sign describing the history of the property. The applicant has agreed to do so and represented a design in the final review packet. This sign shall remain in place in perpetuity unless modified by approval of the HPC. Staff must review and approve the content of the sign before fabrication to ensure accuracy. 3. Per HPC Resolution #25, Series of 2020, as part of the approval to relocate the house on the site, the applicant will be required to provide a financial security of $30,000 until the house is set on the new foundation. The financial security is to be provided with the building permit application, along with a detailed description of the house relocation approach. 4. Per HPC Resolution #25, Series of 2020, as part of building permit review, the applicant shall address the following referral comments to the satisfaction of the respective Departments. Parks: The new water line is to be installed under where the front walk is now located to minimize impacts to the spruce and aspen in the front yard. A site visit with the Forester is needed prior to this installation so he can direct the best route for the tree roots. A tree permit must be issued for all removals. This permit will call out specifics for the dripline excavation for the trees at the front of the property. No trees in the right-of-way on West Hopkins are approved to be removed. The impact of the project on the driplines of neighbor’s trees will need to be considered. Some neighboring trees might need to be removed. The applicant will be required to provide the Forester with a letter from the trees’ owners saying they accept the impacts and risks to their trees. The applicant may need to treat impacted trees with growth regulating hormones and trunk injections for bark beetle protection. Engineering: The proposed drywell must be 10’ from the neighboring property. A Geotech or structural engineer must supply a stamped letter stating the drywell within 10’ of the proposed structure and existing cabin foundation will have no adverse effects. 28 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2021 Page 3 of 5 At building permit the project may be required to detach the existing sidewalk and install a new sidewalk with a 5’ landscape buffer between the curb and sidewalk. The neighboring property to the west has a current building permit and may detach their portion of the sidewalk depending on existing tree constraints. If this happens the sidewalk at 211 W shall also be detached. At building permit the project will need to determine the water service line size and configuration for the two buildings. Currently two service lines are proposed per sheet L300. The water service line on the east runs under the dripline of the large spruce tree. The excavation that close to the tree trunk will most likely kill the tree. This needs further vetting. Foundation drywells are proposed in close proximity to the east spruce tree. Excavation cannot take place within the dripline of the tree. It needs to be shown excavation can take place to accommodate the foundation drywells without adversely affecting the tree. 5. Study the front walkway to achieve a more narrow path, and identify a different approach to conceal the lid of the drywell, for review and approval by staff and monitor prior to building permit submittal. 6. Mechanical equipment and amenities that are proposed to sit in the yards will require further vetting at building permit review regarding allowed features in yards. 7. Design the a/c unit on the west side of the Pan Abode to be minimized, for instance by setting it into the ground to the extent possible, for review and approval by staff prior to building permit submittal. 8. All exterior mechanical units are required to operate below the decibel levels established in the City’s noise ordinance when measured from property lines, to be confirmed at building permit. 9. All lightwells must be capped with low profile grates. The curb around the lightwells must also be only the minimum necessary for function; no more than 6” above the surrounding grade. 10. Prior to permit submittal, the applicant must submit cut sheets for the original windows which are to be put back in place once the rear addition is removed, for review and approval by staff. 11. During construction, staff must review and approve any original Pan Abode logs which are proposed to be replaced due to deterioration and staff must also review and approve test patches to study the appropriate technique for stripping the non-historic paint off of the logs. 12. Prior to building permit submittal, provide further information about the roof plan to identify flashing material, the snow stop specification, and the location of all vents, for review and approval by staff. 29 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2021 Page 4 of 5 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 Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 211 W. Hopkins Avenue. 30 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2021 Page 5 of 5 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 14th day of April, 2021. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: _________________________ ___________________________ Katharine Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Kara Thompson, Chair ATTEST: __________________________ Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk 31 Page 1 of 13 Exhibit A Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.070.D Major Development. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. 3. Final Development Plan Review: b) The procedures for the review of final development plans for major development projects are as follows: 1) The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Paragraphs 26.304.060.E.3.a, b and c. 2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. 3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a certificate of appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a development order. 4) Before an application for a building permit can be submitted, a final set of plans reflecting any or all required changes by the HPC or City Council must be on file with the City. Any conditions of approval or outstanding issues which must be addressed in the field or at a later time shall be noted on the plans. 32 Page 2 of 13 33 Page 3 of 13 34 Page 4 of 13 Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines for Final Review: The applicable design guidelines for this Final level of review are listed below. 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. • Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood. • Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful open space visible from the street. 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. • If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it. • Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for driveways on Aspen Victorian properties. 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. • Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a semi-public walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. • Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of the period of significance. • Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks. • The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. • Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than many small unusable areas. • Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building. 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. • When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be reviewed and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal. • Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the historic landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site, reduce 35 Page 5 of 13 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. 1.9 Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis. 1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. • Site furnishings that are added to the historic property should not be intrusive or degrade the integrity of the neighborhood patterns, site, or existing historic landscape. • Consolidating and screening these elements is preferred. 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. • Retaining historic planting beds and landscape features is encouraged. • Protect historically significant vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Removal of damaged, aged, or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. • If a significant tree must be removed, replace it with the same or similar species in coordination with the Parks Department. • The removal of non-historic planting schemes is encouraged. • Consider restoring the original landscape if information is available, including original plant materials. 1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram. • 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. 36 Page 6 of 13 • Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged. 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. 37 Page 7 of 13 • Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed. 1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting. • Landscape and pathway lighting is not permitted in Zone A (refer to diagram) on Aspen Victorian properties unless an exception is approved by HPC based on safety considerations. • Landscape, driveway, and pathway lighting on AspenModern properties is addressed on a case-by-case basis. • Landscape light fixtures should be carefully selected so that they are compatible with the building, yet recognizable as a product of their own time. • Driveway lighting is not permitted on Aspen Victorian properties. • Landscape uplighting is not allowed. 1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution. Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve the character of a property. 1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style. • The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of significance. • A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations. • Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen Victorian landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed on the site. • A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen Victorian properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including transparency, a low height, and a simple design. When this material is used, posts should be simply detailed and not oversized. 1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street. • A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature. • For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the picket. • For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate, proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. • Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. 1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. • A privacy fence should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing on the upper portions of the fence. 38 Page 8 of 13 • A privacy fence should allow the building corners and any important architectural features that are visible from the street to continue to be viewed. • All hedgerows (trees, shrub bushes, etc.) are prohibited in Zones A and B. 1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system. • Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation. • Minimize the visual impact of new parking. • Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically. 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. • Protect established vegetation during any construction. • If any tree or shrub needs to be removed, replace it with the same or similar species. • New planting should be of a species used historically or a similar species. • Maintain and preserve any gardens and/or ornamental planting on the site. • Maintain and preserve any historic landscape elements. 2.1 Preserve original building materials. • Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. • Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. • Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. • Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. • Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that was not historically painted shall not be painted. • If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods. • Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. • If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. • Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. • Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows. 39 Page 9 of 13 • Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them. • Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration glass for the repair. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. • Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate. • Do not change the size of an original window opening. 3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. • If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the sash have divided lights, match that characteristic as well. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. • Changing the window opening is not permitted. • Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past. 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. • A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. • The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic window. • Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the original window to be seen from the public way. • If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub- frames or panning around the perimeter. A storm window should not include muntins unless necessary for structure. Any muntin should be placed to match horizontal or vertical divisions of the historic window. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. • Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. • Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. 40 Page 10 of 13 • If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. • Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. • Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 4.7 Preserve historic hardware. • When new hardware is needed, it must be in scale with the door and appropriate to the style of the building. • On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any modern elements such as entry key pads. 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. • Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and spacing of balusters. • Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate. 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. • Repair only those features that are deteriorated. • Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. • On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. • Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures. • Locate vents on non-street facing facades. • Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. • Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists. 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. • If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. • Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. • Flashing should be tin, lead coated copper, galvanized or painted metal and have a matte, non-reflective finish. 41 Page 11 of 13 • Design flashing, such as drip edges, so that architectural details are not obscured. • A metal roof is inappropriate for an Aspen Victorian primary home but may be appropriate for a secondary structure from that time period. • A metal roof material should have a matte, non-reflective finish and match the original seaming. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. • On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and is not allowed. • Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate. • Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. • New AspenModern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure preservation of the design intent. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. • The size of any lightwell that faces a street should be minimized. • Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining features, such as front porches. • Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a street. • Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” in the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site. 11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time. • Consider these three aspects of a new building; form, materials, and fenestration. A project must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource. • When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site and use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale • When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic resource. 11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. • This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. • Overall, details shall be modest in character. 12.3 Exterior light fixtures should be simple in character. 42 Page 12 of 13 • The design of a new fixture should be appropriate in form, finish, and scale with the structure. • New fixtures should not reflect a different period of history than that of the affected building, or be associated with a different architectural style. • Lighting should be placed in a manner that is consistent with the period of the building, and should not provide a level of illumination that is out of character. • One light adjacent to each entry is appropriate on an Aspen Victorian residential structure. A recessed fixture, surface mounted light, pendant or sconce will be considered if suited to the building type or style. • On commercial structures and AspenModern properties, recessed lights and concealed lights are often most appropriate. 12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage. • Place mechanical equipment on the ground where it can be screened. • Mechanical equipment may only be mounted on a building on an alley façade. • Rooftop mechanical equipment or vents must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, it may be appropriate to provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. Use the smallest, low profile units available for the purpose. • Window air conditioning units are not allowed. • Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Group them in a discrete location. Use pedestals when possible, rather than mounting on a historic building. • Paint mechanical equipment in a neutral color to minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds • In general, mechanical equipment should be vented through the roof, rather than a wall, in a manner that has the least visual impact possible. • Avoid surface mounted conduit on historic structures. 12.6 Signs should not obscure or damage historic building fabric. • Where possible, install a free standing sign that is appropriate in height and width. Consolidate signage for multiple businesses. • Mount signs so that the attachment point can be easily repaired when the sign is replaced. Do not mount signage directly into historic masonry. • Blade signs or hanging signs are generally preferred to wall mounted signs because the number of attachment points may be less. • Signs should be constructed of wood or metal. • Pictographic signs are encouraged because they add visual interest to the street. Staff Findings: The basic concept of this project, preserving the Pan Abode with no addition, and placing all new construction in a detached rear unit is an ideal preservation outcome. 43 Page 13 of 13 At this level of review, final details of the landscape plan are under consideration. Staff finds that the selection and location of plant materials are sympathetic to the resource and maintain a simple setting in the foreground of the property. Staff recommends more study of the front walkway. Currently a flagstone walk leads to the front door. This walkway is fairly informal, with stones set on grade, and appears to be narrower in width than the proposed 5’ path. Staff requests consideration of more narrow path and a different approach to conceal the lid of a drywell that is proposed to sit within the walkway. The drywell lid will be filled with matching stone, but will likely read as an obvious “intrusion” in the surface. There are a few pieces of mechanical equipment and amenities that are proposed to sit in the yards and which will require further vetting at permit review. A spa in the west sideyard may be determined to be partially in the foreground of a structure (the rear unit), which is not permitted. Staff finds the location of a large a/c unit on the east side of the Pan Abode to be somewhat exposed and recommends the unit be at least set into the ground to the extent possible. All exterior mechanical units are required to operate below certain decibel levels when measured from property lines in order to prevent a nuisance to neighbors. The proposed units, including the generator in the rear yard, must meet this standard, to be confirmed at permit. The project includes small lightwells adjacent to the structures. One lightwell on the west side of the Pan Abode is labeled to be surrounded by a guardrail. Low profile grates are typically required. The curb around the lightwells must also be only the minimum necessary for function; no more than 6” above the surrounding grade. The application includes guideline compliant restoration work on the Pan Abode, including removal of a non-original addition and restoration of the rear facade, removing non-historic paint and shutters, and restoring windows. Prior to permit submittal, the applicant must submit cut sheets for the original windows which are to be put back in place once the rear addition is removed. When construction is underway, a site visit with staff will be needed to review any original Pan Abode logs which are proposed to be replaced due to deterioration. Staff must also review test patches to study the appropriate technique for stripping the non-historic paint off of the logs. Further information about the roof plan are needed to identify flashing material, the snow stop specification, and the location of all vents. Regarding the detached new home, the site plan and massing were accepted at Conceptual review and materiality was discussed to some degree. Staff finds the design meets the guidelines. 44 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM March 12, 2021 Historic Preservation Commission and Aspen City Council c/o Aspen City Hall 130 South Galena Street, 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 211 West Hopkins Avenue – Final HP Application Dear HPC and Staff, Please accept this Final Design application for the voluntary AspenModern historic designation project at 211 West Hopkins. This is the final step in the entitlement process for the 211 historic preservation project. In January 2021, City Council approved Ordinance 22-2020 designating 211 West Hopkins to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures in exchange for the following benefits: •Tree removal waiver •Expedited permit review •135sf floor area bonus and 19sf for deck •Rear yard setback variation that reduces the 10’ required setback to 8’ for living space. Ordinance 22-2020 permanently protects and preserves the pan abode located at 211 West Hopkins. Part of the Council discussion centered on the ability to communicate the historic importance of the pan abode to the public. Council directed the applicant to incorporate a sign on the property to explain the historic significance to passerby. Preliminary sign design is included in the landscape plan for HPC review. Figure 1: 211 West Hopkins Avenue, circa 1958. Photograph courtesy Aspen Historical Society. Page 1 of 132 45 Property Background The property is 6,000sf in size and is located in the R-6 Zone District along West Hopkins Avenue. A small Pan Abode home, constructed in 1956, sits centered at the front of the property with two large spruce trees framing the log kit residence. There are surprisingly few alterations to this structure, all of which are reversible: a 1970s Pan Abode style addition is located on the rear (south)elevation, a few windows have been enlarged, shutters were added, and the exterior logs were painted. This is the best example of Pan Abode in Aspen. Figure 2: 211 West Hopkins, circa 1965. Figure 3: 211 West Hopkins, 2020. Page 2 of 132 46 Final Design Review HPC adopted Resolution 25-2020 on November 18th granting conceptual approval, relocation, demolition of the non-historic rear addition, and recommending designation and historic benefits to City Council. There were no conditions of approval to be addressed at Final Design review in Resolution 25-2020. Landscape Plan + Storm Water A simple landscape plan with walkways and fencing is proposed in Exhibit P.2. Storm water is located in the flagstone pathway in front of the pan abode. The flagstone path is proposed to be removed and replaced using the same stones as existing. The two large context defining spruce trees at the front of the property will be protected during construction. At Council’s suggestion, a simple historic marker is proposed along Hopkins Avenue. A potential marker design will be presented to HPC at the final design hearing. Materials There are very limited new materials proposed for the pan abode. Windows along the south (rear) façade are painted wood with profiles that match the existing original windows on the pan abode. Wood shingles are proposed to replace the aged roof, and small snow stops are proposed in the roof in lieu of a gutter and downspouts on the front façade. Any replacement logs will be sourced from the Pan Abode company. Paint is proposed to be removed from the existing logs – test patches will be reviewed onsite with staff and monitor prior to selecting an appropriate restoration method. After the paint is removed, the wood will receive a clear coat to protect it from further decay. Foundation material for the pan abode will match existing – wood planks with natural finish. The existing brick chimney is pulling away from the home currently and is proposed to be dismantled and rebuilt to match existing dimensions after the basement is dug. A small outdoor fire feature is proposed in the rebuilt chimney that is screen from the street by a fence. Existing bricks will be reused where possible and any new bricks will match existing. The new building material palette is limited to natural unpainted wood with metal details and a concrete foundation in order to highlight the simple style and materials of the pan abode. Metal clad windows, wood siding and board formed concrete foundation are proposed. Metal will be a dark bronze throughout the new building. Figure 4: Existing condition of logs and foundation material. Figure 5: Existing chimney on west elevation. Page 3 of 132 47 Lighting A complete lighting plan is proposed. A simple jelly jar style sconce is proposed adjacent to the front door of the pan abode, similar to the light in Figure 1. The new home has a simple light fixture proposed at entrances. Landscape pathway lighting is proposed along the walkway to the new building. Architectural Details The new building has subtle references to the pan abode through architectural details such as the overlapping logs in the gable end and eave overhangs. The horizontal wood siding with vertical details recalls the vertical pan abode seams. 211 West Hopkins is the best example of Pan Abode construction in Aspen which represents the pre-manufactured building movement following World War II that contributed to the development of Aspen’s international ski and tourism industries. We are very excited about this project and its contributions to the AspenModern program and the community. Thank you for reviewing this application. Please reach out if you need additional information to complete your review. Sincerely, Sara Adams, AICP Figure 6: 211 West Hopkins Ave Rendering showing restored pan abode, new construction at the rear of the property, and the proposed historic sign. Page 4 of 132 48 Exhibits A – HPC Final Design Review Criteria B - HPC Resolution 25-2020 C – City Council Ordinance 22-2020 D - Pre application summary E – Agreement to Pay F – Land Use application G – HOA form H – Authorization to represent I – Authorization to submit J – Proof of ownership K – Vicinity Map L – Mailing List M – Streetscape context images N – Stamped survey O – Residential Design Standards for new home P - Drawing set 1.Drawing Set 2.Landscape Set 3.Civil drawings and letter 4.Lighting Plans 5.Material Palette Q - Rendering Page 5 of 132 49 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria Exhibit A – Final HP Review 26.415.060.A Approvals Required. Any development involving properties designated on the aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual property or located within the boundaries of a Historic District, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights of way located within the boundaries of a Historic District. Response: Applicable Design Guidelines are addressed below: Streetscape 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. •Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood. •Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful open space visible from the street. Response – The buildings reinforce the traditional grid pattern of the neighborhood. The open space around and in front of the cabin is preserved. 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. When HPC input is requested, the following bullet points may be applicable. •Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining historic ancillary buildings or constructing new ones. •Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add landscape. •Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged. •Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas. •Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged on a case by case basis. Response – No change to streets or alleys is proposed, and there is no ditch on the property. 1.3 Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the original development of the site. •Do not introduce new curb cuts on streets. •Non-historic driveways accessed from the street should be removed if they can be relocated to the alley. Response – n/a. Page 6 of 132 50 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. •If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it. •Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for driveways on Aspen Victorian properties. Response – n/a. The alley will provide vehicular access to the property. 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. •Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a semi-public walkway, to a semiprivate entry feature, to private spaces. Response – The historic hierarchy of spaces is unchanged in the proposal. Simple walkways and fencing distinguish between public, semi-public, and private spaces. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. •Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of the period of significance. •Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example, on an Aspen Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks. •The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property. Response – The simple existing stone walkway to the entrance of the pan abode is maintained in the proposal. In contrast to the perpendicular walkway to the pan abode, a concrete walkway is proposed along the east side yard to access the new detached building. The walkway is floating to protect tree roots and has a slight angle to offer a different experience to the pan abode’s entrance. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. •Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than many small unusable areas. •Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building. Response – The existing open space in front and at the sides of the pan abode is maintained. Meaningful open space is provided between the two buildings, and on the roof of the new residence. 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, Page 7 of 132 51 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria reduce the generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the ground. Stormwater facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should have minimal visual impact when viewed from the public right of way. •Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements. Response – A storm water plan and narrative are provided in the application. Drainage is directed away from the structures. A drywell is proposed beneath the rebuilt sandstone walkway – this location avoids the tree root protection zone, and the pathway easily hides the drywell lid. 1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. •Site furnishings that are added to the historic property should not be intrusive or degrade the integrity of the neighborhood patterns, site, or existing historic landscape. •Consolidating and screening these elements is preferred. Response – Built in features are not proposed in front of the pan abode. 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. •Retaining historic planting beds and landscape features is encouraged. •Protect historically significant vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Removal of damaged, aged, or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. •If a significant tree must be removed, replace it with the same or similar species in coordination with the Parks Department. •The removal of non-historic planting schemes is encouraged. •Consider restoring the original landscape if information is available, including original plant materials. Response – The large spruce trees on either side of the pan abode are preserved and protected. Figure 1: Civil drawings showing drainage and dry well location. Page 8 of 132 52 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria 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 over textured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes. •In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod, and low shrubs are often appropriate. •Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the property, in Zone C. •Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited patio where appropriate. •Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building must be honored. •In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to over plant either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before the property was divided. •Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged. Response – The landscape plan honors the existing simple landscape at the front of the pan abode and maintains open side yards for porosity. A concrete walkway is proposed from Hopkins Avenue to access the new residence. Plantings in the east side yard create a soft transition on property from the historic pan abode with traditional sod and flagstone pathway in Zone A to the new building with perennials, shrubs, and a concrete walkway in Zone B and C. 1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. •Low plantings and ground covers are preferred. •Do not place trees, shrubs, or hedgerows in locations that will obscure, damage, or block significant architectural features or views to the building. Hedgerows are not allowed as fences. •Consider mature canopy size when planting new trees adjacent to historic resources. Planting trees too close to a landmark may result in building deteriorate or blocked views and is inappropriate. •Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed. Response – New plantings will not block the historic structure as shown in the accurate rendering below. Page 9 of 132 53 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria 1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting. •Landscape and pathway lighting is not permitted in Zone A (refer to diagram) on Aspen Victorian properties unless an exception is approved by HPC based on safety considerations. •Landscape, driveway, and pathway lighting on AspenModern properties is addressed on a case-by-case basis. •Landscape light fixtures should be carefully selected so that they are compatible with the building, yet recognizable as a product of their own time. •Driveway lighting is not permitted on Aspen Victorian properties. •Landscape uplighting is not allowed. Response – Pathway lighting is proposed along the pathway to the new building, see Figure 3. No pathway lighting is proposed leading to the historic pan abode. There is no landscape lighting or uplighting proposed. Figure 2: Rendering showing the proposed planting and walkway to the new house. The east façade of the pan abode is clearly visible – all plantings are less than 24” in height. Page 10 of 132 54 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria Figure 3: Pathway lighting proposed near the new building. 1.15 Preserve original fences. •Fences which are considered part of the historic significance of a site should not be moved, removed, or inappropriately altered. •Replace only those portions of a historic fence that are deteriorated beyond repair. •Replacement elements must match the existing. Response – n/a. 1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence. Response – n/a. 1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution. •Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve the character of a property. Response – A fence is not proposed in the front yard. 1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style. •The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of significance. •A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations. Page 11 of 132 55 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria •Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen Victorian landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed on the site. •A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen Victorian properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including transparency, a low height, and a simple design. When this material is used, posts should be simply detailed and not oversized. Response – Three fence types are proposed for the property – all fences are wood, but slightly differ in height, direction of boards, and transparency. Fence styles and locations are found in exhibit P.2 and below for easy refence. Fence Type 1: Located around the new building and along the east property line. Fence Type 2: Located in west side yard facing Hopkins. This fence is 30” and transparent to allow views to the west elevation of the pan abode. Fence Type 3: Located behind the pan abode and along portion of the west property line Page 12 of 132 56 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria 1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street. •A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature. •For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the picket. •For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate, proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. •Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. Response – The new fence design is simple and does not detract from the pan abode. Page 13 of 132 57 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria 1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. •A privacy fence should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing on the upper portions of the fence. •A privacy fence should allow the building corners and any important architectural features that are visible from the street to continue to be viewed. •All hedgerows (trees, shrub bushes, etc.) are prohibited in Zones A and B. Response – Fence types 1 and 3 are privacy fences that are 6 feet in height. These are specifically located away from the pan abode to not block views of important architectural features. Fence type 2 located between the pan abode and the new building is a gate that is 6 feet in height to provide privacy between the two buildings. A view from the Hopkins sidewalk below shows that the privacy fence does not block views of the pan abode. 1.21 Preserve original retaining walls •Replace only those portions that are deteriorated beyond repair. Any replacement materials should match the original in color, texture, size and finish. •Painting or covering a historic masonry retaining wall or covering is not allowed. •Increasing the height of a retaining wall is inappropriate. Response – n/a. Figure 4: Rendering of east elevation as viewed from Hopkins Avenue. Page 14 of 132 58 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria 1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized. •All wall materials, including veneer and mortar, will be reviewed on a case by case basis and should be compatible with the palette used on the historic structure. Response – n/a. 1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Response – Regrading will be limited and will comply with Parks requirements for tree protection. 1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. •An analysis of the historic landscape and an assessment of the current condition of the landscape should be done before the beginning of any project. •The key features of the historic landscape and its overall design intent must be preserved. Response – n/a. 1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built features. •Do not add features that damage the integrity of the historic landscape. •Maintain the existing pattern of setbacks and siting of structures. •Maintain the historic relationship of the built landscape to natural features on the site. •All additions to these landscapes must be clearly identifiable as recent work. •New artwork must be subordinate to the designed landscape in terms of placement, height, material, and overall appearance. Place new art away from significant landscape features. •Avoid installing utility trenches in cultural landscapes if possible. Response – n/a. 1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system. •Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation. •Minimize the visual impact of new parking. •Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically. Response – n/a. 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. •Protect established vegetation during any construction. •If any tree or shrub needs to be removed, replace it with the same or similar species. •New planting should be of a species used historically or a similar species. •Maintain and preserve any gardens and/or ornamental planting on the site. Page 15 of 132 59 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria •Maintain and preserve any historic landscape elements. Response – n/a. Restoration Materials 2.1 Preserve original building materials. •Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. •Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. •Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. •Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. •Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that was not historically painted shall not be painted. •If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods. •Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. •If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. •Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. 2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. •Original building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic materials. 2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. •Regardless of their character, new materials obscure the original, historically significant material. •Any material that covers historic materials may also trap moisture between the two layers. This will cause accelerated deterioration to the historic material which may go unnoticed. Page 16 of 132 60 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria 2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material. •Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material. Response – The south elevation 1970s addition will be removed and restored to match the 1965s photograph. Areas of the pan abode are deteriorated from normal wear and tear. Existing material will be restored and replaced if necessary (potentially using the demolished 1970s material or sourcing new cedar logs from the pan abode company), with staff and monitor review in the field. Paint is to be removed from the logs. The method of paint removal will be tested in the field for staff and monitor review prior to application on the entire structure. Figure 7: Proposed south elevation of the restored pan abode. Figures 5 & 6: 1965 photograph of south elevation (top) compared to current condition (bottom). Page 17 of 132 61 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria Windows 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. •Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows. •Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them. •Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration glass for the repair. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. •Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate. •Do not change the size of an original window opening. 3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. •If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the sash has divided lights, match that characteristic as well. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. •Changing the window opening is not permitted. •Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past. 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. •A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. •The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal. 3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed. •Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear or secondary walls. •New windows should be similar in scale to the historic openings on the building, but should in some way be distinguishable as new, through the use of somewhat different detailing, etc. •Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a façade. •Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character defining façade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic window. Page 18 of 132 62 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria •Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the original window to be seen from the public way. •If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub- frames or panning around the perimeter. A storm window should not include muntins unless necessary for structure. Any muntin should be placed to match horizontal or vertical divisions of the historic window. Response – Historic windows will be repaired as needed. Windows on the south elevation will be restored to match the 1965 photograph above. Profiles will match existing and all windows in the pan abode will be wood. Doors 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. •Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. •Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. •If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. •Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. •Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the building. •A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. •A historic door or screen door from a similar building also may be considered. •Simple paneled doors were typical for Aspen Victorian properties. •Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed. •Place new doors in any proposed addition rather than altering the historic resource. •Greater flexibility in installing a door in a new location may be considered on rear or secondary walls. Page 19 of 132 63 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria •A new door in a new location should be similar in scale and style to historic openings on the building and should be a product of its own time. •Preserve the historic ratio of openings to solid wall on a façade. Significantly increasing the openings on a character defining façade negatively affects the integrity of a structure. 4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. •Match the material, frame design, character, and color of the primary door. •Simple features that do not detract from the historic entry door are appropriate for a new storm door. •New screen doors should be in character with the primary door. 4.7 Preserve historic hardware. •When new hardware is needed, it must be in scale with the door and appropriate to the style of the building. •On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any modern elements such as entry keypads. Response – The existing pan abode doors are proposed to remain and to be repaired as needed. Porch 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. •Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and spacing of balusters. •Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details. •Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate. 5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate. •Reopening an enclosed porch or balcony is appropriate. 5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail. •Match original materials. •When reconstructing an original porch or balcony without historic photographs, use dimensions and characteristics found on comparable buildings. Keep style and form simple with minimal, if any, decorative elements. 5.5 If new steps are to be added, construct them out of the same primary materials used on the original, and design them to be in scale with the porch or balcony •Steps should be located in the original location. Page 20 of 132 64 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria •Step width should relate to the scale of entry doors, spacing between posts, depth of deck, etc. •Brick, red sandstone, grey concrete, or wood are appropriate materials for steps. 5.6 Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly where visible from the street. •If handrails or guardrails are needed according to building code, keep their design simple in character and different from the historic detailing on the porch or balcony. Response – The original front porch/entry is proposed to remain and be repaired as needed. Architectural Details 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. •Repair only those features that are deteriorated. •Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. •On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. •Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. •Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. •If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. •The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building’s heritage. •When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. 6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts. •Where scars on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to related buildings. Page 21 of 132 65 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria •Using ornate materials on a building or adding new conjectural detailing for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. Response – Architectural details are proposed to be repaired and/or replaced using the 1970s addition and/or material from the pan abode company for review by staff and monitor in the field. Roof 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. •Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen from the street. •Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing. •Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. •Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource. •AspenModern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key character defining features of the architectural style. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. •Skylights and solar panels are generally not allowed on a historic structure. These elements may be appropriate on an addition. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. •Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures. •Locate vents on non-street facing facades. •Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. •Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists. 7.6 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. •A new dormer is not appropriate on a primary, character defining façade. •A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building. •The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic building. •While dormers improve the livability of upper floor spaces where low plate heights exist, they also complicate the roof and may not be appropriate on very simple structures. •Dormers are not generally not permitted on AspenModern properties since they are not characteristics of these building styles. Page 22 of 132 66 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. •Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities and use a color that is similar to that seen historically. 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. •If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. •Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. •Flashing should be tin, lead coated copper, galvanized or painted metal and have a matte, non- reflective finish. •Design flashing, such as drip edges, so that architectural details are not obscured. •A metal roof is inappropriate for an Aspen Victorian primary home but may be appropriate for a secondary structure from that time period. •A metal roof material should have a matte, non-reflective finish and match the original seaming. 7.9 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. •Adding ornamental cresting, for example, where there is no evidence that it existed, creates a false impression of the building’s original appearance, and is inappropriate. 7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible. •Downspouts should be placed in locations that are not visible from the street if possible, or in locations that do not obscure architectural detailing on the building. •The material used for the gutters should be in character with the style of the building. Response – The pan abode roof will be replaced with wood shingle to match existing. The original pan abode chimney is pulling away from the cabin and will be documented, dismantled, and rebuilt after the basement is completed. A fire feature is proposed on the exterior of the chimney – this alteration will clearly indicate that the chimney has been rebuilt, is not visible from the street, and will allow the existing bricks that are removed for the opening to be reused in the reconstruction of the chimney if needed. All venting is proposed to be consolidated on the south side of the pan abode gable, and within the chimneys of the new building where possible. Gutters and downspouts are not proposed on the pan abode to avoid covering the character defining overlapping logs at building corners. Small snow clips are proposed on the pan abode to mitigate snow shed without a big visual impact. Page 23 of 132 67 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria Gutters and downspouts are proposed for the new building – gutters are half round metal to match the dark bronze finish on the rest of the building. Snow fencing is proposed on the standing seam metal roof of the new building and will match the roof finish. New Detached Home 11.1 Orient the new building to the street. •Aspen Victorian buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern. •AspenModern alignments shall be handled case-by-case. •Generally, do not set the new structure forward of the historic resource. Alignment of their front setbacks is preferred. An exception may be made on a corner lot or where a recessed siting for the new structure is a better preservation outcome. Response - The new building is oriented parallel to the lot lines to maintain the traditional grid and to relate to the pan abode. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. •The front porch shall be functional, and used as the means of access to the front door. •A new porch must be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. Response – A front porch is proposed to define the entry into the new building. A walkway is proposed from Hopkins that reinforces the entrance. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings on a parcel. •Subdivide larger masses into smaller “modules” that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. •Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic resource. Response – The new building is divided into smaller modules to relate to the size and style of the pan abode. The proportions of the new building reflect the shallow pitch and the picture windows found in the pan abode. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. •The primary plane of the front shall not appear taller than the historic structure. Response – The primary plane of the new building is similarly scaled to the historic building in the breakdown of massing. The new building is taller than the one story historic structure; however, the front porch is lower in height. 11.5 The intent of the historic landmark lot split is to remove most of the development potential from the historic resource and place it in the new structure(s). Page 24 of 132 68 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria •This should be kept in mind when determining how floor area will be allocated between structures proposed as part of a lot split. Response – While this is not a lot split project, the majority of the floor area is allocated to the detached new building at the rear of the property. 11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time. •Consider these three aspects of a new building: form, materials, and fenestration. A project must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. •When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource. •When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site and use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale •When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic resource. Response – The new structure is consistent with form and primary materials, and diverts from the pan abode in the fenestration category. The primary form reflects the pan abode’s proportions, roof pitch and fenestration style. The secondary form of the new building is a steeper gable roof to break up massing. Horizontal wood siding is proposed on the second floors to reinforce the wood pan abode. Board formed concrete foundation and dark bronze metal accents are proposed. A standing seam metal roof is proposed, and chimneys are board formed concrete. These materials are similar to the rustic style of the pan abode but distinguish the new building as contemporary. The windows of the new building along the alley and first floor have a similar vocabulary to the pan abode, but are products of their own time. Dark bronze aluminum clad windows are proposed on the new building. Figure 8: Proposed material palette for the new building. Page 25 of 132 69 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria 11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. •This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. •Overall, details shall be modest in character. Response -The new building reflects on the pan abode but is a clearly a product of its own time. The details are simple and subordinate to the pan abode and highlight important architectural characteristics of the historic cabin. Details of the rainscreen and the intersection of the two gable forms are found in exhibit P.1 sheet A0.70. Accessibility, architectural lighting, mechanical equipment, service areas, and signage 12.1 Address accessibility compliance requirements while preserving character defining features of historic buildings and districts. •All new construction must comply completely with the International Building Code (IBC) for accessibility. Special provisions for historic buildings exist in the law that allow some flexibility when designing solutions which meet accessibility standards. Response – n/a. 12.2 Original light fixtures must be maintained. When there is evidence as to the appearance of original fixtures that are no longer present, a replication is appropriate. Figure 9: Rendering of north elevation showing materials and the relationship between new and old construction. Page 26 of 132 70 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria Response – The 1958 color photograph shows a jelly jar sconce next to the front door of the pan abode. The fixture is no longer present; however, a new simple jelly jar is proposed as part of the lighting plan in exhibit P.4. 12.3 Exterior light fixtures should be simple in character. •The design of a new fixture should be appropriate in form, finish, and scale with the structure. •New fixtures should not reflect a different period of history than that of the affected building, or be associated with a different architectural style. •Lighting should be placed in a manner that is consistent with the period of the building, and should not provide a level of illumination that is out of character. •One light adjacent to each entry is appropriate on an Aspen Victorian residential structure. A recessed fixture, surface mounted light, pendant or sconce will be considered if suited to the building type or style. •On commercial structures and AspenModern properties, recessed lights and concealed lights are often most appropriate. Figures 10 & 11: 1958 photo detail of light fixture and proposed fixture at right. Page 27 of 132 71 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria Response – Light fixtures proposed for the new building are simple and located near entries or pathways as shown in exhibit P.4. 12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage. •Place mechanical equipment on the ground where it can be screened. •Mechanical equipment may only be mounted on a building on an alley façade. •Rooftop mechanical equipment or vents must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, it may be appropriate to provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. Use the smallest, low profile units available for the purpose. •Window air conditioning units are not allowed. •Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Group them in a discrete location. Use pedestals when possible, rather than mounting on a historic building. •Paint mechanical equipment in a neutral color to minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds •In general, mechanical equipment should be vented through the roof, rather than a wall, in a manner that has the least visual impact possible. •Avoid surface mounted conduit on historic structures. Response – Mechanical equipment is located away from street facing facades and screened, and is located along the alleyway where possible. As noted above, all venting is consolidated on the south portion of the pan abode gable and through the chimneys of the new building where possible. A wildlife trash enclosure is proposed along the alleyway. 12.5 Awnings must be functional. •An awning must project at least 3 feet, and not more than 5 feet from the building façade. •An awning may only be installed at a door or window and must fit within the limits of the door or window opening. •Awnings are inappropriate on AspenModern properties unless historic evidence shows otherwise. Response – n/a. 12.6 Signs should not obscure or damage historic building fabric. •Where possible, install a free standing sign that is appropriate in height and width. Consolidate signage for multiple businesses. •Mount signs so that the attachment point can be easily repaired when the sign is replaced. Do not mount signage directly into historic masonry. •Blade signs or hanging signs are generally preferred to wall mounted signs because the number of attachment points may be less. Page 28 of 132 72 Exhibit A Final HP Review Criteria •Signs should be constructed of wood or metal. •Pictographic signs are encouraged because they add visual interest to the street. Response – A historic marker is proposed by the front walkway to the pan abode. The sign is located at the edge of the new sidewalk along Hopkins Avenue to allow pedestrians to view the sign. The idea is for the sign to identify the property as part of AspenModern, the date of construction, the pan abode style, and to include a QR code that links to the AspenModern website/pan abode style page for more information. The marker is proposed to be metal to avoid deterioration with a wood stand. 12.7 Sign lighting must be subtle and concealed. •Pin mounted letters with halo lighting will not be approved on Aspen Victorian buildings. •The size of a fixture used to light a sign must be minimized. The light must be directed towards the sign. If possible, integrate the lights into the sign bracket. Response – n/a 12.8 Locate signs to be subordinate to the building design. •Signs should be located on the first floor of buildings, primarily. •Signs should not obscure historic building details. Response – the sign is small and located near the sidewalk. 12.9 Preserve historic signs. Response – The “Alm Haus” sign is proposed to remain in the original location on the front porch. Figures 12 & 13: Site plan showing proposed location of sign and rendering of front elevation with sign design. Page 29 of 132 73 RESOLUTION #25, SERIES OF 2020 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION GRANTING ASPENMODERN HISTORIC DESIGNATION, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW INCLUDING RELOCATION, AND VARIATIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 211 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, LOTS F AND G, BLOCK 53, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PARCEL ID: 2735-124-63-003 WHEREAS, the applicant, Matt Joblon, 205 S. Detroit Street , Suite 400, Denver, CO 80206, with the consent of property owner Vaughan Capital Partners, LP has requested HPC approval for AspenModern Historic Designation, Conceptual Major Development, Relocation and Variations for the property located at 211 W. Hopkins A venue, Lots F and G, Block 53, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, the AspenModem designation process is described at Section 26.415.025 and Section 26.415.030 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional infonnation necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, for approval of Setback Variations, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.11 0.C, Setback Variations; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on October 28, 2020, considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and continued the proposal for restudy. On November 18, 2020, the conunission found the revised application to be consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of 5 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: I IIIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIIII IIII II I Ill 1111111111111111111111111111 RECEPTION#: 672888, R: $23.00, D: $0.00 DOC CODE: RESOLUTION Pg 1 of 3, 01/25/2021 at 02:18:26 PM Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO HPC Resolution #25, Se1ies of 2020 Page 1 of 3 Page 30 of 132 74 Section 1: Approvals 1. HPC hereby recommends Council approval of historic designation for 211 W. Hopkins A venue and approval of the proposed redevelopment, Option 4 for the design of the new structure on the alley as presented at the November l gth meeting, under the terms of AspenModem negotiation for designation as foJlows: •Granting of tree removal permits and waiver of all tree mitigation fees generated by the approved development. •Expedited building permit review consistent with the Building Department's adopted procedure. •A floor area bonus of 13 5 square feet of enclosed space and 19 square feet to be used for larger outdoor decks. •A rear yard setback reduction of 2', allowing the new residential unit to be 8' from the rear lot line on all floors. 2. As part of the approval to relocate the house on the site, the applicant will be required to provide a financial security of $30,000 until the house is set on the new foundation. The financial security is to be provided with the building permit application, along with a detailed description of the house relocation approach. 3. As part of building permit review, the applicant shall address the following refe rral comments to the satisfaction of the respective Departments. Parks: The new water line is to be installed under where the front walk is now located to minimize impacts to the spruce and aspen in the front yard. A site visit with the Forester is needed prior to this installation so he can direct the best route for the tree roots. A tree pennit must be issued for all removals. This pennit will call out specifics for the drip line excavation for the trees at the front of the property. No trees in the right-of-way on West Hopkins are approved to be removed. The impact of the project on the driplines of neighbor's trees will need to be considered. Some neighboring trees might need to be removed. The applicant will be required to provide the Forester with a letter from the trees' owners saying they accept the impacts and risks to their trees. The applicant may need to treat impacted trees with growth regulating hormones and trunk injections for bark beetle protection. Engineering: The proposed drywell must be l O' from the neighboring property. A Geotech or structural engineer must supply a stamped letter stating the drywell within IO' of the proposed structure and existing cabin foundation will have no adverse effects. At building permit the project may be required to detach the existing sidewalk and install a new sidewalk with a 5' landscape buffer between the curb and sidewalk. The neighboring property to the west has a current building permit and may detach their portion of the sidewalk depending on existing tree constraints. If this happens the sidewalk at 211 W shall also be detached. HPC Resolution #25. Series of 2020 Page 2 of 3 Page 31 of 132 75 At building permit the project will need to determine the water service line size and configuration for the two buildings. Currently two service lines are proposed per sheet L300. The water service line on the east runs under the dripline of the large spruce tree. The excavation that close to the tree trunk will most likely kill the tree. This needs further vetting. Foundation drywells are proposed in close proximity to the east spruce tree. Excavation cannot take place within the dripl:ne of the tree. It needs to be shown excavation can take place to accommodate the foundation drywells without adversely affecting the tree . • 4.A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Material Representations All material representa t i ons 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. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 18th day of November, 2020. ATTEST: Wes Graham, Deputy City Clerk Appr.9-Y.ee, as to s-0-n nt: ----\ r:::::::.---::;, L 7£-- Gretchen Greenwood. Ctier ---- HPC Resolution #25, Series of 2020 Page 3 of 3 Page 32 of 132 76 ORDINANCE #022 (Series of 2020) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING ASPENMODERN HISTORIC LANDMARK NEGOTIATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE, LOTS F AND G, BLOCK S3, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2735-124-63-003 WHEREAS, the applicant, Matt Joblon, 205 S. Detroit Street, Suite 400, Denver, CO 80206, with the consent of property owner Vaughan Capital Partners, LP has requested approval for AspenModem Historic Designation for the property located at 211 W. Hopkins A venue, Lots F and G, Block 53, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the AspenModem designation process is described at Section 26.415.025 and Section 26.415.030 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the application, which was deemed to be complete on October 2, 2020, initiated a 90-day period of negotiation that may be extended if no agreement has been reached before expiration. Since the review process could not be completed within 90 days, City Council, through Resolution #104, Series of 2020, granted a 30-day extension of the negotiation period, from December 31, 2020 to January 30, 2021; and WHEREAS, Municipal Code Section 26.415.025.C(l)(b) states that, during the negotiation period, "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting;" and WHEREAS, the property owner and representatives met with the Historic Preservation Commission on October 28, 2020 and November 18, 2020; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on November 18, 2020, the HPC considered the designation and proposed development, and found that 211 W. Hopkins A venue is a "best" example of AspenModem era architecture. HPC recommended City Council approval of preservation benefits by a 5 to O vote; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025.C(l)(d), states that, during the negotiation period, "council may negotiate directly with the property owner or may choose to direct the Community Development Director, or other City staff 1;1.s necessary, to negotiate with the property owner to reach a mutually acceptable agreement for the designation of the property"; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025.C(l)d establishes that "as part of the mutually acceptable agreement, the City Council may, at its sole discretion, approve any land use entitlement or fee waiver permitted by the Municipal Code and may award any approval that is assigned to another Board or Commission, including variations;" and Ordinance #022, Series of 2020 211 W. Hopkins Avenue, AspenModem designation Page 1 of 4 Page 33 of 132 77 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department performed an analysis of the application for Landmark Designation and found that the review standards are met; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Historic Landmark Designation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby finds that 211 W. Hopkins Avenue, Lots F and G, Block 53, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado meets the criteria for landmark designation as an AspenModem historic resource. Upon the effective date of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall record with the real estate records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County, a certified copy of this ordinance. The location of the historic landmark property designated by this ordinance shall be indicated on the official maps of the City that are maintained by the Community Development Department. Section 2: Aspen Modern Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves the following benefits for the approved redevelopment of the property associated with this historic designation. Tree Removal Fee Waiver Granting of tree removal permits and waiver of all tree mitigation fees. Expedited Permit Review The building permit shall be subject to expedited building permit review consistent with the Building Department's adopted procedure. Floor Area Bonus A floor area bonus of 13 5 square feet of enclosed space and 19 square feet to be used for larger outdoor decks is approved. Setback Variation A rear yard setback reduction of 2', allowing the new residential unit to be 8' from the rear lot line on all floors is approved. Ordinance #022, Series of 2020 211 W. Hopkins Avenue, AspenModem designation Page 2 of 4 Page 34 of 132 78 Section 3: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan and a vested property right attaching to and running with the Subject Property and shall confer upon the Applicant the right to undertake and complete the site specific development plan and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan including any approved amendments thereto. The vesting period of these vested property rights shall be for three (3) years which shall not begin to run until the date of the publications required to be made as set forth below. 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§ 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 by the Historic Preservation Commission,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 Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights. Pursuant to § 26.304.070(A), Development Orders, such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right,valid for a period of three(3)years,pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 211 W. Hopkins Avenue, Lots F and G, Block 53, City and Townsite of Aspen,Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the Development Order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this Ordinance of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this Ordinance. The vested rights granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. The period of time permitted by law to exercise the right of referendum to refer to the electorate this Section of this Ordinance granting vested rights; or, to seek judicial review of the grant of vested rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as set forth above. The rights of referendum described herein shall be no greater than those set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 4: 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 Historic Preservation Commission or 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 an authorized entity. Ordinance#022, Series of 2020 211 W. Hopkins Avenue, AspenModern designation Page 3 of 4 Page 35 of 132 79 Section 5: Litigation This ordinance 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 6: Severability If any section,subsection, sentence,clause,phrase,or portion of this ordinance 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 7: Public Hearing A duly noticed public hearing on this Ordinance was held on the 12a,day of January,2021 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED,READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law,by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 8th day of December,2020. FINALLY,adopted,passed, and approved by a_to_vote on this 12th day of January, 2021. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: James R.True,City Attorney Torre,Mayor Attest: Nicole Henning,City Clerk Ordinance#022, Series of 2020 211 W. Hopkins Avenue, AspenModern designation Page 4 of 4 Page 36 of 132 80 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Amy Simon, amy.simon@cityofaspen.com DATE: August 31, 2020 PROPERTY: 211 W. Hopkins Avenue REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams, sara@bendonadams.com REQUEST: Historic Designation, Major Development DESCRIPTION: 211 W. Hopkins is a 6,000 square foot lot zoned R-6. It is developed with a Pan Abode home built in 1956 which makes the property eligible for voluntary historic designation through the City’s AspenModern program. This designation process allows for the negotiation of site-specific benefits to be awarded by City Council in response to the owner’s commitment to historic preservation. It is staff’s understanding the applicant’s approach will be to preserve the Pan Abode, with the possible removal of a non-original addition, and to construct a detached second dwelling unit on the site. The second unit is an option only available to landmarks. Variations and waivers may be requested related to setbacks, parking, affordable housing and other requirements. There are numerous trees on the property which need to be preserved or issued tree removal permits through the Parks Department. The first review step will be a hearing with HPC, who will provide a recommendation to City Council on the appropriateness of landmark designation and the benefits package. At this hearing, HPC will also conduct Conceptual review of the redevelopment plan. 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. Following approval, staff will provide Council with Notice of Call-Up of the HPC design determinations and will provide HPC’s recommendation on designation and benefits. Council will respond to the Call-Up Notice and will make the final determination on the designation and benefits. The Municipal Code provides that the Council review is to be accomplished within 90 days of application submission, unless the City and applicant agree to a longer timeframe. The applicant may withdraw from the process at any time until a designation ordinance is passed. Following Council, HPC will conduct Final Design review to consider landscape, lighting and materials. This review is not required to happen within the 90 day negotiation timeframe. Below are links to the Land Use Application form and Land Use Code for your convenience: Historic Preservation Land Use Application Land Use Code Land Use Code Section(s) Page 37 of 132 81 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.410 Residential Design Standards (new unit only) 26.415.025.C Identification of Historic Properties 26.415.030 Designation of historic properties 26.415.070.D Historic Preservation – Major Development 26.415.090 Relocation 26.415.110 Benefits 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Review by: Staff for completeness and recommendations HPC for recommendations on designation and benefits, and decisions on Major Development and Relocation review Council for decisions on designation and benefits Public Hearing: Yes, at HPC and Council Planning Fees: Planning Staff hours related to review of Historic designation are exempt from land use fees. Staff will seek referral comments from the Building Department, Zoning, Engineering and Parks regarding any relevant code requirements or considerations. There will be no Development Review Committee meeting or referral fees. A $1,950 deposit for 6 billable hours of staff time will be due at Conceptual and Final submittal. (Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.) To apply, email the following information in a single pdf to amy.simon@cityofaspen.com: Completed Land Use Application. An 8 1/2” x 11” vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 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. A site improvement survey (no older than a year from submittal) including topography and vegetation and the high-water line and 100 year flood plain (flood hazard area) showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor by licensed in the State of Colorado. HOA Compliance form. Page 38 of 132 82 List of adjacent property owners within 300’ for public hearing. A written description of the proposal and an explanation of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. A map indicating the boundaries of the historic designation. Historic property description, including narrative text, photographs and/or other graphic materials that document its physical characteristics. Written description of historic preservation benefits which the property owner request be awarded at the time of designation, and relationship to Section 26.415.010, Purpose and Intent of the historic preservation program. A proposed site plan. Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing, scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations. Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the designated historic property including photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location and extent of proposed work. For Conceptual, the following items will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above: Graphics identifying preliminary selection of primary exterior building materials. A preliminary stormwater design. For Final Review, the following items will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above: Drawings of the street facing facades must be provided at ¼” scale. Final selection of all exterior materials, and samples or clearly illustrated photographs. Samples are preferred for the presentation to HPC. A lighting plan and landscape plan, including any visible stormwater mitigation features. 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. Page 39 of 132 83 Page 40 of 13284 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.) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 211 West Hopkins Avenue - AspenModern 211 West Hopkins Avenue, Lots F and G, Block 53, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO 81611 2735-124-63-003 Matt Joblon and Vaughan Capital Partners LP 205 Detroit St. Suite 400, Denver, CO 80206 508-344-2557 matt@bmcinv.com BendonAdams and Rowland + Broughton 300 S. Spring Street, #202, Aspen, CO, 81611 and 500 West Main Street, Aspen, CO 81611 925-2855 and 544-9006 sara@bendonadams.com + john@rowlandbroughton.com Page 41 of 132 85 City of Aspen Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Packet City of Aspen|130 S. Galena Street.| (970) 920 5090 Historic Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: March 2016 ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form (Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.) Project: Applicant: Project Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________ Number of residential units: Existing:__________Proposed:_________________ Proposed % of demolition: __________ DIMENSIONS: (write N/A where no requirement exists in the zone district) Floor Area: Height Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Principal Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Accessory Bldg.: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Front/Rear: Indicate N, S, E, W Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Distance between buildings: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): ______________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Page 42 of 132 86 Page 43 of 13287 Page 44 of 13288 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM September 10, 2020 Phillip Supino, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: 211 West Hopkins Avenue; Aspen, CO. Mr. Supino: Please accept this letter authorizing Matt Joblon and BendonAdams to represent our ownership interests in 211 West Hopkins and act on our behalf on matters reasonably associated in securing land use approvals for the property. If there are any questions about the foregoing or if I can assist, please do not hesitate to contact me. Property – 211 West Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description – Lots F and G, Block 53, City and Townsite of Aspen Parcel ID – 2735-124-63-003 Owner – Vaughan Capital Partners LP Kind Regards, VAUGHAN CAPITAL PTNRS LP PO BOX 390 HEBRON IL 60034 Charles S. Vaughan 09/10/2020 Nicole Rowean 09/11/2020 Howard A. Vaughan 09/16/2020 Page 45 of 132 89 Land Title Guarantee Company Customer Distribution PREVENT FRAUD - Please remember to call a member of our closing team when initiating a wire transfer or providing wiring instructions. Order Number:Q62011752 Date: 09/08/2020 Property Address:211 W HOPKINS AVE, ASPEN, CO 81611 PLEASE CONTACT YOUR CLOSER OR CLOSER'S ASSISTANT FOR WIRE TRANSFER INSTRUCTIONS For Closing Assistance Closing Processor For Title Assistance Melissa J. Jones 533 E HOPKINS #102 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 925-1678 (Work) (303) 393-4941 (Work Fax) mejones@ltgc.com Contact License: CO450818 Company License: CO44565 Marc Obadia 533 E HOPKINS #102 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 925-1678 (Work) (800) 318-8202 (Work Fax) mobadia@ltgc.com Company License: CO44565 Land Title Roaring Fork Valley Title Team 533 E HOPKINS #102 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 927-0405 (Work) (970) 925-0610 (Work Fax) valleyresponse@ltgc.com Buyer/Borrower MATT JOBLON Delivered via: Electronic Mail Seller/Buyer Agent CHRISTIE`S INTERNATIONAL REAL ESTATE ASPEN SNOWMASS LLC Attention: NICK LINCOLN 510 E HYMAN AVE #21 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 544-5800 (Work) (970) 544-8185 (Work Fax) nick@christiesaspenre.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail Seller/Owner VAUGHAN CAPITAL PARTNERS LP Attention: Charles S. Vaughan Delivered via: Electronic Mail Buyer/Borrower Erin Fetter Attention: ERIN FETTER 510 E HYMAN AVE #21 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 544-5800 (Work) (970) 544-8185 (Work Fax) erin@christiesaspenre.com Delivered via: Electronic Mail Page 46 of 132 90 Land Title Guarantee Company Estimate of Title Fees Order Number:Q62011752 Date: 09/08/2020 Property Address:211 W HOPKINS AVE, ASPEN, CO 81611 Parties:MATT JOBLON VAUGHAN CAPITAL PARTNERS L.P., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Visit Land Title's Website at www.ltgc.com for directions to any of our offices. Estimate of Title insurance Fees "ALTA" Owner's Policy 06-17-06 $10,402.00 Deletion of Standard Exception(s)$75.00 Tax Certificate $26.00 Total $10,503.00 If Land Title Guarantee Company will be closing this transaction, the fees listed above will be collected at closing. Thank you for your order! Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These documents, such as covenants conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and use of the property. You may wish to engage legal assistance in order to fully understand and be aware of the implications of the effect of these documents on your property. Chain of Title Documents: Pitkin county recorded 07/02/1965 under reception no. 121094 at book 213 page 528 Pitkin county recorded 01/16/1997 under reception no. 400963 Pitkin county recorded 07/25/2008 under reception no. 551440 Pitkin county recorded 01/05/2010 under reception no. 565887 Page 47 of 132 91 Copyright 2006-2020 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Property Address: 211 W HOPKINS AVE, ASPEN, CO 81611 1. Effective Date: 08/21/2020 at 5:00 P.M. 2. Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured: "ALTA" Owner's Policy 06-17-06 Proposed Insured: MATT JOBLON $6,000,000.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: A FEE SIMPLE 4. Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: VAUGHAN CAPITAL PARTNERS L.P., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 5. The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: LOTS F AND G, BLOCK 53, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:Q62011752 Page 48 of 132 92 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: Q62011752 All of the following Requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. 1. EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN TRANSFER TAX HAVE BEEN SATISFIED. 2. FURNISH A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND ALL AMENDMENTS THERETO, FOR THE PARTNERSHIP NAMED BELOW, FILED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE; PARTNERSHIP NAME: VAUGHAN CAPITAL PARTNERS L.P., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 3. A FULL COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT AND ANY AND ALL AMENDMENTS THERETO FOR VAUGHAN CAPITAL PARTNERS L.P., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP MUST BE FURNISHED TO LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY. NOTE: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS MAY BE NECESSARY UPON REVIEW OF THIS DOCUMENT. 4. DULY EXECUTED AND ACKNOWLEDGED STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY SETTING FORTH THE NAME OF VAUGHAN CAPITAL PARTNERS L.P., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AS A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP. THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST STATE UNDER WHICH LAWS THE ENTITY WAS CREATED, THE MAILING ADDRESS OF THE ENTITY, AND THE NAME AND POSITION OF THE PERSON(S) AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE INSTRUMENTS CONVEYING, ENCUMBERING, OR OTHERWISE AFFECTING TITLE TO REAL PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF THE ENTITY AND OTHERWISE COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 38-30-172, CRS. NOTE: THE STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY MUST BE RECORDED WITH THE CLERK AND RECORDER. 5. SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED FROM VAUGHAN CAPITAL PARTNERS L.P., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP TO MATT JOBLON CONVEYING SUBJECT PROPERTY. Page 49 of 132 93 REQUIREMENTS TO DELETE THE PRE-PRINTED EXCEPTIONS IN THE OWNER'S POLICY TO BE ISSUED A. UPON RECEIPT BY THE COMPANY OF A SATISFACTORY FINAL AFFIDAVIT AND AGREEMENT FROM THE SELLER AND PROPOSED INSURED, ITEMS 1-4 OF THE PRE-PRINTED EXCEPTIONS WILL BE DELETED. ANY ADVERSE MATTERS DISCLOSED BY THE FINAL AFFIDAVIT AND AGREEMENT WILL BE ADDED AS EXCEPTIONS. B. IF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE CONDUCTS THE CLOSING OF THE CONTEMPLATED TRANSACTIONS AND RECORDS THE DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, ITEM NO. 5 OF THE PRE-PRINTED EXCEPTIONS WILL BE DELETED. C. UPON RECEIPT OF PROOF OF PAYMENT OF ALL PRIOR YEARS' TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS, ITEM NO. 6 OF THE PRE-PRINTED EXCEPTIONS WILL BE AMENDED TO READ: TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS FOR THE YEAR 2020 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: Q62011752 All of the following Requirements must be met: Page 50 of 132 94 This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8. RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE DEED FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN RECORDED NOVEMBER 02, 1887 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 75, 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. 9. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE, NO. 21, SERIES OF 2009 RECORDED DECEMBER 4, 2009 AS RECEPTION NO. 565020. 10. TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ASPEN, NO. 19, SERIES OF 2017 RECORDED AUGUST 9, 2017 AS RECEPTION NO. 640553. 11. CLAIMS OF RIGHT, TITLE AND/OR INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY BETWEEN THE BOUNDARY LINE AND THE FENCE AS DEPICTED ON THE SURVEY PREPARED BY ROCKY MOUNTAIN SURVEYING, JOB NO. 17586 WHETHER SAID CLAIMS ARISE BY ABANDONMENT, ADVERSE POSSESSION OR OTHER MEANS. SAID DOCUMENT STORE AS OUR ESI 36115478 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: Q62011752 Page 51 of 132 95 LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A) A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property). (B) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. (C) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. (A) No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. (B) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. (C) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. (E) Page 52 of 132 96 Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and (A) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. (B) Page 53 of 132 97 JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY OF LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY, LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY OF SUMMIT COUNTY LAND TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based transaction management system; your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others; a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non-affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction. We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. Page 54 of 132 98 Commitment For Title Insurance Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Corporation NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. . COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: 4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. “Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(a) “Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (b) “Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law.(c) “Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (d) “Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(e) “Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) “Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (g) “Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A.(h) the Notice;(a) the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b) the Commitment Conditions;(c) Schedule A;(d) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g) The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: (a) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (b) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. (c) The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (d) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e) Page 55 of 132 99 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory. Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Senior Vice President This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Land Title Insurance Corporation. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (f) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy.(g) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment.(b) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (c) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (d) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f) Page 56 of 132 100 323 311 311 323 323 311 323 323 331 311 323 311 311333 333 333 333 333 311 311 311 311 311 311 301 301 301 301 301 311 233 311 311 233 311 233 200 311 311 311 124 124 124 124 124 124 124 218 300 322 312322 326 315 324 324 325 301 315 334 312 333 303 222 204204 204211 222 233 233 233 233 233 124 233 233 222 233 233 222 205 233 233 222 233 233 233 233 124 127 127 211 116 232 204 232 221 210 214 124 232 300 124 232 216 134 232 212 124 237 232 234 200 308 232 232 211 127 232 232 124 205 232 135 120 232 235 R/MF R-15 R-6 W HY M A N A V E S 1ST STS 2ND STS 2ND STS 1ST STN 2ND STS 1ST STS 2ND STS 2ND STS 3RD ST211 West Hopkins Vicinity Map Historic Sites Historic Districts Parcels Zoning AH Affordable Housing R/MF Residential/Multi-Family R-6 Medium Density Residential R-15 Moderate Density Residential MU Mixed Use P Park PUB Public Roads Zoomed In 9/3/2020, 5:40:18 AM 0 0.01 0.030.01 mi 0 0.03 0.060.01 km 1:1,479 Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS Pitkin County | Page 57 of 132 101 Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273512463003 on 03/03/2021 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com Page 58 of 132 102 HITE ANGELA R FAMILY TRUST WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 PO BOX 155 MULLINS MARGARET ANN ASPEN, CO 81611 216 W HYMAN AVE INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST TRAGGIS ELIZABETH G NEW LONDON, CT 06320 PO BOX 284 ASPEN A CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 308 W HOPKINS AVE BIELINSKI JUDITH R TRUST GLENVIEW, IL 60026 2121 TROWBRIDGE CT CHISHOLM HEATHER M ASPEN, CO 81611 205 W MAIN ST EDGEWATER PROPERTIES LLC OMAHA, NE 68022 18081 BURT ST SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE BACON SHIRLEY LIV TRUST MIAMI, FL 33133 3 GROVE ISLE DR # 1608 SWISS CHALET/KITZBUHEL PARTNERSHIP ASPEN, CO 81611 333 E DURANT AVE WEST HOPKINS LLC LOS ANGELES, CA 90071 400 S HOPE ST, STE 1000 108 HYMAN LLC MIAMI, FL 33133 3500 N BAY HOMES DR MELTON DAVID ASPEN, CO 81611 135 W MAIN ST #A 211 WEST MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 323 W MAIN ST INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST FRANK VALERIE EXEMPT TRUST U/W PORTLAND, OR 972013544 1500 SW 11TH AVE #1504 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST ALBANO DUPLEX CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 121 W HYMAN AVE WINKELMAN WENDY L ASPEN, CO 81611 108 W HYMAN AVE #8 SEIDER FAMILY TRUST MALIBU, CA 90265 26642 LATIGO SHORE DR INVENTRIX LLC CHICAGO, IL 60606-5096 227 MONROE WARSHAW MARTIN R TRUST 1 ANN ARBOR, MI 48105-2585 1058 SCOTT PL CHRISTENSEN ROBERT M & CANDICE L ASPEN, CO 81611 1240 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR BRENNAN SHAWN TIFFANY MILL VALLEY, CA 94941 408 TENNESSEE GLEN WY CORBETT RICHARD J & JILLIAN F ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 7955 235 W HOPKINS B LLC BOCA RATON, FL 33432 250 S OCEAN BLVD # 14A SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST ANLUJO CAPITAL INC ROAD TOWN TORTOLA BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS VG 1110, WOODBOURNE HALL POB 3162 Page 59 of 132 103 GROVER FREDRICK W & PAULA J ST PETERSBURG, FL 337043717 725 BRIGHTWATERG BLVD NE SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE EDGEWATER PROPERTIES LLC OMAHA, NE 68022 18081 BURT ST CONNOR WILLIAM E II TRUST RENO, NV 89502 990 S ROCK BLVD #F JACOBSON SUZAN & JAY ASPEN, CO 81611 108 W HYMAN #7 SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE DHM FAMILY TRST ATLANTA, GA 30309 2288 PEACHTREE RD, NW #12 STRAUCH ELAINE B GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 4327 S YOSEMITE CT POOL ALEXANDRA M DENVER, CO 80206 1650 FILLMORE ST #1304 DIMITRIUS RALLI TRUST PASADENA, CA 91103 535 FREMONT DR FRANK EDMUND H EXEMPT TRUST PORTLAND, OR 972013544 1500 SW 11TH AVE #1504 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 1248 BIELINSKI ROBERT A JR HOUSTON, TX 77018 523 WEST 34TH ST SHADOW MOUNTAIN DUPLEX CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA W HOPKINS AVE TIEMANN CAROLYN ASPEN, CO 81611 124 W HYMAN AVE #2D NAUGHTON ANN N COLORADO SPRINGS, CO 80906 36 BROADMOOR AVE WILLIAMS ROBERT A REV TRUST ENCINO, CA 91436 16255 VENTURA BLVD #800 BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 HAYMAX LODGING LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 101 W MAIN ST BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 COLES DAVID SEP A TRUST CULVER CITY, CA 90232 4223 DUQUESNE AVE SAND KATHERINE M ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 51 212 WEST HOPKINS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 212 W HOPKINS AVE JLR QPRT TRUST CORAL GABLES, FL 33156 355 MARQUESA DR MCBEE LISA A SANTA ANA, CA 92705 2306 KEEGAN WY Page 60 of 132 104 STEVENSON KAREN H ASPEN, CO 81611 205 W MAIN ST HARPER MARILYN HILL & HILL ASPEN, CO 81612-7952 PO BOX 7952 SONNENBERG FAMILY TRUST BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 350 S BEVERLY DR # 300 135 HOPKINS LTD AUSTIN, TX 78738 12400 HWY 71 W #350-371 SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE YONCE SUSAN GREENWICH, CT 068313721 81 ROUND HILL RD SMITH MARKELL LEIGHTON CHICAGO, IL 60657 645A W SURF ST # A2 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST COLES PETER SEP A TRUST MASSACHUSETTS, MA 02138 20 PRESCOTT ST #41 SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST GILDENHORN MICHAEL S BETHESDA, MD 20816 5008 BALTON RD COTTONWOODS CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 124 W HYMAN AVE HYMAN STREET CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 719 W HYMAN AVE HITE HENRY HARRIS REVOC TRUST WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 PO BOX 155 COHEN ALIX O & CRAIG S ROCKVILLE CENTRE, NY 11570 5 BUCKINGHAM RD MAYER KEVIN ASPEN, CO 81611 222 W HOPKINS AVE #2 BERGHOFF MICHAEL R TRUST INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46236 9112 WALNUT GROVE DR INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST SHADOW MOUNTAIN LODGE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA W HOPKINS AVE CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST HOLTZMAN L BART & PATRICIA G SAINT LOUIS, MO 63124 9741 LITZSINGER RD HAYMAX LODGING LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 605 W MAIN ST #2 SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE SHOAF THOMAS L DALLAS, TX 752053021 4224 BEVERLY DR ROSS PAULINE ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9969 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST WEIGAND FAMILY LLC WICHITA, KS 67202 150 N MARKET ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY ASPEN, CO 81611 210 E HYMAN AVE #202 Page 61 of 132 105 MARTIN SCOTT M ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 51 GOLDSMITH HENRY JOSH PIKESVILLE, MD 21208 7902 BRYNMOR CT #504 INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 ASPEN TOWNHOUSE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 12384 ASPEN TOWNHOMES 3 LLC BASALT, CO 81621 1796 E SOPRIS CREEK RD THOMAS GAIL HICKS REV TRUST BEDFORD, VA 24523-1508 1242 HAMPTON RDG INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST TARPLEY GERALD W JR & SUSAN ANN ARBOR, MI 48105 2255 PLACID WY HAERTER JONATHAN J & BETHANY S SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 PO BOX 6447 HAPPY PLACE VH2 LLC WESTPORT, CT 06880 52 LYONS PLAINS RD BERGHOFF KRISTIN TRUST INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46236 9112 WALNUT GROVE DR BRENNAN SAMANTHA SCOTT MILL VALLEY, CA 94941 408 TENNESSEE GLEN WY FCB LLC SNOWMASS, CO 816549102 525 SHIELD O RD SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE MORGAN DONALD ATLANTA, GA 30309 2288 PEACHTREE RD, NW #12 BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED INC BOCA RATON, FL 33431 4960 CONFERENCE WY N #100 WEIGAND FAMILY LLC WICHITA, KS 67202 150 N MARKET KOCH TOWNHOMES CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA W HYMAN AVE KOENIG RAYMOND J NEW LONDON, CT 06320 PO BOX 284 SALTER CLAUDE C ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 5000 SHIELD JULIET E ASPEN, CO 81611 221 N STARWOOD DR BOWMAN AL MOUNT DORA, FL 32757 700 HELEN ST SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST GUNN ROBERT W FAMILY TRST MARBLEHEAD, MA 01945 409 OCEAN AVE ZITELLI MARK C ASPEN, CO 81611 414 N 1ST ST MARTIN SCOTT M ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 51 POOL JUDY F M DENVER, CO 802113829 3038 ZUNI ST WEST SIDE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 234 W HOPKINS AVE Page 62 of 132 106 DEAN FAMILY LTD PTSHP LLP BOULDER, CO 80301 590 DELLWOOD AVE LAMPTON PATRICIA M TRUST ASHEVILLE, NC 28814 PO BOX 18013 BOURKEY888 LLC SINGAPORE 436853, 16 THIAM SIEW AVE JES 2002 GRANTOR TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 221 N STARWOOD DR GARET CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 400 E MAIN ST #2 HALCYON ENTERPRISES LLC PRINCETON, NJ 08540 78 LOVERS LN SHADOW MTN HOMEOWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 W HYMAN AVE INNSBRUCK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 233 W MAIN ST SAND KATHERINE M ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 51 ASPEN UPTOWN LLC SNYDER, OK 73566 PO BOX 348 WINER CAROL G BETHESDA , MD 20817 6740 SELKIRK DR Page 63 of 132 107 Neighborhood Uses 1 - 234 West Hopkins, 3 units 2 - 222 West Hopkins, 6 units, AspenVictorian 3 - 212 West Hopkins, single family, AspenVictorian 4 - 200 West Hopkins, single family, AspenVictorian 5 - 205 West Hopkins, single family, AspenVictorian 6 - 211 West Hopkins, proposed 2 detached units, AspenModern 7 - 221 West Hopkins, single family 8 - 235 and 237 West Hopkins, duplex 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 78 Page 64 of 132 108 Page 65 of 132 109 Residential Design Standards Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist Standard Complies Alternative Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes B.1.Articulation of Building Mass (Non-flexible) B.2.Building Orientation (Flexible) B.3.Build-to Requirement (Flexible) B.4.One Story Element (Flexible) C.1.Garage Access (Non-flexible) C.2.Garage Placement (Non-flexible) C.3.Garage Dimensions (Flexible) Instructions: Please fill out the checklist below, marking whether the proposed design complies with the applicable standard as written or is requesting Alternative Compliance (only permitted for Flexible standards). Also include the sheet #(s) demonstrating the applicable standard. If a standard does not apply, please mark N/A and include in the Notes section why it does not apply. If Alternative Compliance is requested for a Flexible standard, include in the Notes section how the proposed design meets the intent of the standard(s). Additional sheets/graphics may be attached. Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review. Address: Parcel ID: Zone District/PD: Representative: Email: Phone: Page 1 of 2Page 66 of 132 110 Standard Complies Alternative Compliance N/A Sheet #(s)/Notes C.4.Garage Door Design (Flexible) D.1.Entry Connection (Non-flexible) D.2.Door Height (Flexible) D.3.Entry Porch (Flexible) E.1.Principle Window (Flexible) E.2.Window Placement (Flexible) E.3.Nonorthogonal Window Limit (Flexible) E.4.Lightwell/Stairwell Location (Flexible) E.5.Materials (Flexible) Residential Design Standards Administrative Compliance Review Applicant Checklist Disclaimer: This application is only valid for the attached design. If any element of the design subject to Residential Design Standards changes prior to or during building permit review, the applicant shall be required to apply for a new Administrative Compliance Review. Page 2 of 2Page 67 of 132 111 DN A A 1 1 4 4 B B C C D D 22 3 3PROPERTY LINE10'-0" FRONT SETBACK5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE8'-0" REAR SETBACK5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK SIDEWALKNEW FENCE RE:LANDSCAPE (E) FLAGSTONE SALVAGED AND RESET IN NEW WALKWAY SNOW MELT AT SIDE YARD AND GARAGE APRON RE:MECH DWGS GATE RE:LANDSCAPE TRANSFORMER EGRESS LIGHT WELL BELOW 2'-0" SETBACK REDUCTION GRANTED BY CITY COUNCIL 8' - 0"82' - 0"10' - 0" 100' - 0" NEW HOUSE RE:LANDSCAPE SNOWMELT BELOW WALKWAY RE:MECH DWGS5' - 0"50' - 0"5' - 0"60' - 0"COVERED PORCHEGRESS LIGHT WELL BELOW A/C A/C WILDLIFE TRASH/RECYCLING ENCLOSURES TR R C METERS + UTILITIES NEW FENCE RE:LANDSCAPE BOLLARD LIGHTING RE:LIGHTING DWGSALLEY BLOCK 5320'-0" R.O.W.WEST HOPKINS AVENUE75'-0" R.O.W.EXISTING CABIN SPA RE:LANDSCAPE DWGS EAVE ABOVEEAVE ABOVEFLAGSTONE WALK CANOPY ABOVE CANOPY ABOVECOVERED PORCHTRUE NORTH PLAN NORTH GATE RE:LANDSCAPE CONCRETE PAD DOWNSPOUT CHIMNEY DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT LINE OF DRYWELL BELOW RE:CIVIL TRENCH DRAIN RE:CIVIL TRENCH DRAIN BELOW RE:CIVIL A/C GENERATOR 10' - 10 5/8"5 7/8"10'-0" CABIN SETBACK10' - 0" 1' - 1 1/2" 6' - 5 7/8" EQUIPMENT YARD COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:04 AM1/8" = 1'-0" A0.0122037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED SITE PLAN03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 68 of 132 112 PROPOSED BASEMENT LEVEL EXPOSED WALL CALCULATIONS (SF)WALL LABELTOTAL AREAMAIN LEVEL GROSS FLOOR AREA GARAGE GROSS FLOOR AREAGARAGE FLOOR AREA EXEMPTIONMAIN LEVEL COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA500 - 250 - 125 =TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONSBASEMENT FLOOR AREALEVEL 2 FLOOR AREADECK/PORCH AREA CALCULATIONSTOTAL DECK/PORCH AREACABIN GAS BBQPROPOSED AREA CONSTRAINTS (SF)LOT AREAMAX ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA MAX ALLOWABLE DECK AREA 6,0003,61554015% * 3,600FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONSLEVEL 2 DECK - COVERED TERRACE1243360.83461.35461.35360.83TOTAL (SF)1,644.36% OF EXPOSED WALL (EXPOSED/TOTAL)2.76%BASEMENT LEVEL FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS (SF)BASEMENT GROSS FLOOR AREA BASEMENT WALL COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA 1,743840 * 3.90% =UPPER LEVEL GROSS FLOOR AREAUPPER LEVEL COUNTABLE FLOOR AREAGARAGE COUNTABLE FLOOR AREAROOF DECK3,600 + 15 HPC BONUSLEVEL 1 FLOOR AREA (ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE 26.575.020.d.7, 26.575.020-2)ROOF FLOOR AREA19 SF ALLOWANCE GRANTED; 540 + 19 = 559 ALLOWABLE5229.29678265.83229.29265.831,2295002501,3545592546,0003,61554029300045.3245.323.9%48.111,3951,39512519.34019.340CABINN/AEXPOSED AREA TOTAL AREA EXPOSED AREATOTAL WALL AREA (HOUSE + CABIN)N/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/A990.2438.68% OF EXPOSED WALL (HOUSE + CABIN)2,634.603.2%HOUSECABINHOUSE84032.811,743 * 2.76% =TOTAL BASEMENT GROSS FLOOR AREA (HOUSE + CABIN)80.92PROPOSED LEVEL 1 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS (SF)CABINHOUSETOTAL PROPOSED LEVEL 1 COUNTABLE FLOOR AREA (HOUSE + CABIN)827N/AN/AN/A8272,210PROPOSED LEVEL 2 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS (SF)CABINHOUSEN/AN/A12N/AN/A48.1132.811,354827TOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA126 SF ALLOWANCE GRANTED3,615 + 126 = 3,741 ALLOWABLE1,395842,881.11859.81N/AN/ATOTAL PROPOSED FLOOR AREA (HOUSE + CABIN)3,740.92N/ACOPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:04 AM12" = 1'-0" A0.0222037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 03/25/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R1 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 69 of 132 113 UP UP DN DN UPDN DN LOWER LEVEL AREA 1743 GSF 48.11CSF EGRESS LIGHTWELL LOWER LEVEL AREA 840GSF 32.81 CSF 2 1 4 3 EGRESS LIGHTWELL EGRESS LIGHTWELL 6 8 7 5 1229 SF MAIN LEVEL AREA GARAGE AREA 500 GSF 125 CSF 827 SF CABIN OPEN TO ABOVE AND BELOW EXEMPT FRONT PORCH -WITHIN 30" OF FINISHED GRADE -OPEN ON TWO SIDES FIREPLACE EGRESS LIGHTWELL (BELOW) EGRESS LIGHTWELL (BELOW) EGRESS LIGHTWELL (BELOW) FRONT PORCH WITHIN 30" OF FINISHED GRADE IS EXEMPT FROM FAR CALCULATIONS -IT IS ALSO OPEN ON THREE SIDES EXEMPT COVERED PATIO -WITHIN 30" OF FINISHED GRADE -COVERING LESS THAN 4'-0" DEEP 13 SF CABIN GAS BBQ 254 SF COVERED TERRACE 1395 SF UPPER LEVEL AREA FLAT ENTRY ROOF BELOW OPEN TO BELOW 293 SF ROOF DECK ROOF LEVEL INT. AREA 84 SF OPEN TO BELOW NON-USABLE ATTIC SPACE 1182 SF EXISTING CABIN COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:09 AM1/16" = 1'-0" A0.0322037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 FLOOR AREA DIAGRAMS SCALE:1/16" = 1'-0" 1 PROPOSED BASEMENT SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" 2 PROPOSED LEVEL 1 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" 3 PROPOSED LEVEL 2 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" 4 PROPOSED ROOF SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" 5 EXISTING LEVEL 1 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 03/25/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R1 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 70 of 132 114 EXPOSED WALL WALL BELOW GRADE SUBGRADE CALCULATIONS LEGEND 25' - 7 1/2"8' - 11 3/8"229.29SF 19.34SF 3' - 0"6' - 5 3/8"2' - 6"265.83SF 29' - 8 1/2"8' - 11 3/8"25' - 7 1/2"8' - 11 3/8"229.29SF 19.34SF 3' - 0"6' - 5 3/8"2' - 6"265.83SF 29' - 8 1/2"8' - 11 3/8"360.83SF 35' - 10 3/4"10' - 0 5/8"461.35SF 45' - 10 3/4"10' - 0 5/8"360.83SF22.66 SF 22.66SF2' - 6"7' - 6 5/8"3' - 0"3' - 0" 35' - 10 3/4"10' - 0 5/8"461.35SF 45' - 10 3/4"10' - 0 5/8"COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:10 AM3/32" = 1'-0" A0.0422037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 SUBGRADE WALL ELEVATIONS SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 1 SUBGRADE ELEVATION - WALL 5 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 2 SUBGRADE ELEVATION - WALL 6 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 3 SUBGRADE ELEVATION - WALL 7 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 4 SUBGRADE ELEVATION - WALL 8 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 5 SUBGRADE ELEVATION - WALL 1 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 6 SUBGRADE ELEVATION - WALL 2 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 7 SUBGRADE ELEVATION - WALL 3 SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 8 SUBGRADE ELEVATION - WALL 4 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 71 of 132 115 W/DDWUP UP A A 1 1 4 4 B B C C D D 22 3 3WET BAR BUNKS ABOVE 3' X 3' EGRESS LIGHTWELL SETBACK OPEN TO ABOVE CHIMNEY FOUNDATION 3' X 3' EGRESS LIGHTWELL 3' X 3' EGRESS LIGHTWELL 010 MEDIA 011 GUEST SUITE #3012 BATH 014 BATH 013 GUEST SUITE #4 017 LNDRY018 MECH 015 FITNESS 016 SAUNA STORAGE FIREPLACE; TV ABOVE DRINK RAIL006 BEDROOM 001 FLEX SPACE 003 BEDROOM6' - 0"48' - 0"6' - 0"8' - 6"37' - 6"54' - 0" 27' - 8 1/4"31' - 9 1/4"0.31°12' - 1 3/4"14' - 4 1/2" WATER METER CLOSET 8'-0" REAR SETBACKALLEY BLOCK 53WEST HOPKINS AVENUEPROPERTY LINE10'-0" FRONT SETBACKPROPERTY LINETRUE NORTH PLAN NORTH 001002 004 003 PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE 5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK 5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK 002 LOCK-OFF STORAGE 0.31°007 MECH 005 BATHROOM 004 BATHROOM FIREPLACE; TV ABOVECOPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:11 AM1/8" = 1'-0" A0.2122037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 72 of 132 116 DW DN A A 1 1 4 4 B B C C D D 22 3 36' - 0"48' - 0"6' - 0"OPEN TO ABOVE AND BELOW FENCE AND GATE11' - 0"CABIN GARDEN TERRACE 8' - 6"37' - 6"54' - 0"FENCE AND GATET REF CLOSET OPEN TO BELOW3' - 0"VAULT5' - 0"3' - 0"VAULT 5' - 0" 4' - 0"3' - 0" CONCRETE PAD 3' - 0" 115 GUEST SUITE #2 (GEMMA) 117 GUEST SUITE #1 (LOLA) 116 GUEST BATH 112 POWDER 114 MUD 118 GUEST BATH 111 OFFICE 110 ENTRY 113 GARAGE METERS + UTILITIES FENCE AND GATE DOWNSPOUT BASEMENT FIREPLACE VENT TR R C 27' - 8 1/4"31' - 9 1/4"0.31°0.31°12' - 1 3/4"14' - 4 1/2" 107 KITCHEN 101 LIVING ROOM STAIR 104 MAIN BED 106 BATHROOM101 100 109 102 108 11' - 9 35/256" RE-USE EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS TO RE-BUILD CHIMNEY, MATCH EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS WHERE REQ'D 6' - 0"1' - 11 1/2"A/C PROPERTY LINE10'-0" FRONT SETBACKPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE8'-0" REAR SETBACK5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK SIDEWALKSNOW MELT AT SIDE YARD AND GARAGE APRON RE:MECH GATE RE:LANDSCAPE TRANSFORMER 2'-0" SETBACK REDUCTION GRANTED BY CITY COUNCIL RE:LANDSCAPE SNOWMELT BELOW WALKWAY RE:MECH COVERED PORCHEGRESS LIGHT WELL BELOW WILDLIFE TRASH/RECYCLING ENCLOSURES NEW FENCE RE:LANDSCAPE BOLLARD LIGHTING RE:LIGHTING DWGSALLEY BLOCK 5320'-0" R.O.W.WEST HOPKINS AVENUE75'-0" R.O.W.SPA RE:LANDSCAPE DWGS EAVE ABOVEFLAGSTONE WALK CANOPY ABOVE LINE OF CANOPY ABOVE GATE RE:LANDSCAPE TRUE NORTH PLAN NORTH EGRESS LIGHTWELL BELOW EGRESS LIGHTWELL BELOW FENCE RE:LANDSCAPE 103104105 106 107 5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK EAVE ABOVEDOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT COVERED PORCHTRENCH DRAIN RE:CIVIL NEW INDOOR/OUTDOOR GAS FIREPLACE INSERT + NEW LINER GATE RE:LANDSCAPE BBQ A/C A/C 111 110 10' - 10 5/8"5 7/8"10'-0" CABIN SETBACK10' - 0" 1' - 1 1/2"7 5/8"GENERATOR 6' - 5 7/8"COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:13 AM1/8" = 1'-0" A0.2222037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED LEVEL 1 PLAN ` 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 03/25/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R1 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 73 of 132 117 W/DDW UP A A 1 1 4 4 B B C C D D 22 3 3 BALLAST FLAT ROOF ABOVE ENTRYOPEN TO BELOWOPEN TO BELOW WOOD LOG SCREEN, ALTERNATING CORNER 203 MAIN BED 204 MAIN CLOSET 205 MAIN BATH 201 KITCHEN 202 LIVING ROOM 206 COVERED TERRACE STAIR BBQINDEPENDENT SLIDE CHIMNEY COVERED ENTRY NEW WOOD SHAKE SHINGLES NEW WOOD SHAKE SHINGLES 3:12 3:12 208 206 204 203 201 200 108 210 209 7:126' - 0"48' - 0"6' - 0"8' - 6"37' - 6"54' - 0" 27' - 8 1/4"31' - 9 1/4"0.31°0.31°12' - 1 3/4"14' - 4 1/2" RE-USE EXISTING BRICKS TO RE-BUILD CHIMNEY, MATCH EXISTING BRICKS WHERE REQ'D 202 211 PROPERTY LINE10'-0" FRONT SETBACKPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE8'-0" REAR SETBACK5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK ALLEY BLOCK 5320'-0" R.O.W.WEST HOPKINS AVENUE75'-0" R.O.W.TRUE NORTH PLAN NORTHEAVE ABOVEEAVE ABOVE5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK TR 10'-0" CABIN SETBACK7 5/8"1' - 2 1/2"3:123:12COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:14 AM1/8" = 1'-0" A0.2322037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED LEVEL 2 PLAN03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 74 of 132 118 DW DN A A 1 1 4 4 B B C C D D 22 3 3 CHIMNEY OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW CHIMNEY CHIMNEY ROOF DECK SPA BALLAST ROOF OVER ENTRY STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF BALLAST ROOF RD RDGAS FIREPIT3:12 3:12 CRICKET NEW WOOD SHAKE SHINGLES NEW WOOD SHAKE SHINGLES 3:12 3:126' - 0"48' - 0"6' - 0"8' - 6"37' - 6"54' - 0" 27' - 8 1/4"31' - 9 1/4"0.31°0.31°12' - 1 3/4"14' - 4 1/2" WOOD LOG SCREEN, ALTERNATING CORNER RE-USE EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS TO RE-BUILD CHIMNEY, MATCH EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS WHERE REQ'D 3' - 4" PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE8'-0" REAR SETBACK5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK ALLEY BLOCK 5320'-0" R.O.W.WEST HOPKINS AVENUE75'-0" R.O.W.TRUE NORTH PLAN NORTH 5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK PROPERTY LINE10'-0" FRONT SETBACKCOVERED ENTRYCRICKET 3:123:12COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:15 AM1/8" = 1'-0" A0.2422037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED ROOF DECK PLAN03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 75 of 132 119 DW A A 1 1 4 4 B B C C D D 22 3 3 CHIMNEY CHIMNEY CHIMNEY ROOF DECK SPA BALLAST ROOF OVER ENTRY NEW WOOD SHAKE SHINGLES STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF BALLAST ROOF RD RD 8:12CRICKET AVALANCHE SNOW FENCE, MATCH ROOF COLOR TYP 3:12 3:12 8:12STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF NEW WOOD SHAKE SHINGLES 3:12 3:126' - 0"48' - 0"6' - 0"AVALANCHE SNOW FENCE, TYP RE-USE EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS TO RE-BUILD CHIMNEY, MATCH EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS WHERE REQ'DCONSOLIDATE ROOF PENETRATIONS IN CHIMNEY ENCLOSURES CONSOLIDATE ROOF PENETRATIONS AT REAR PROPERTY LINE10'-0" FRONT SETBACK8'-0" REAR SETBACKCRICKET TRUE NORTH PLAN NORTH10'-0" FRONT SETBACKPROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK 5'-0" SIDE YARD SETBACK AVALANCHE SNOW CLIPSALLEY BLOCK 5320'-0" R.O.W.WEST HOPKINS AVENUE75'-0" R.O.W.GAS FIREPIT8' - 6"37' - 6"54' - 0" 27' - 8 1/4"31' - 9 1/4"0.31°0.31°12' - 1 3/4"14' - 4 1/2"3:123:12COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:15 AM1/8" = 1'-0" A0.2522037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED ROOF PLAN03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 76 of 132 120 LEVEL 1 100' -0" T.O. PLY LEVEL 2 109' -3" T.O. PLY ROOF LEVEL 121' -0" T.O. FINISH 14 PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEEAST NEIGHBOR SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY WEST NEIGHBOR SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY 11' - 9"9' - 3"21' - 0"COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:17 AM3/32" = 1'-0" A0.4022037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED STREET ELEVATION 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 77 of 132 121 LEVEL 1 100' -0" T.O. PLY 14 PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEREFURBISH (E) WINDOWS; PAINT TO MATCH NEW HOUSE WINDOW FRAME 10' - 11 5/8"SETBACK LINESETBACK LINEWORK WITH HPC STAFF AND MONITOR TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE METHOD TO REMOVE PAINT FROM LOGS. PERFORM TEST PATCH IN FIELD FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. RE-USE EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS TO RE-BUILD CHIMNEY, MATCH EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS WHERE REQ'D WALL SCONCE RE:LIGHTING DWGS NEW CEDAR SHINGLES A/C 8 12 8 12 AVALANCHE SNOW CLIPS EXISTING HISTORIC CABIN (E) DOOR TO REMAIN COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:19 AM1/4" = 1'-0" A0.4122037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION - CABIN 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 78 of 132 122 LEVEL 1 100' -0" T.O. PLY LEVEL 2 109' -3" T.O. PLY 14 T.O. ROOF TERRACE 119' -4 3/8" . COVERED FRONT ENTRYPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE48' - 0" METAL PANEL, TYP FIREPLACE VENT; COLOR TO MATCH OTHER METALS FENCE AND GATE RE:LANDSCAPE DWGS AVALANCHE SNOW FENCE; MATCH ROOF COLOR OPERABLE WINDOW, TYP RE:WINDOW TYPE SHEET PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GRADE, DASHEDSETBACK LINESETBACK LINE101 203 100 7'-0" DOORPTD. STEEL CHANNEL FASCIA @ ENTRY SOLID WOOD SOFFIT W/ EXPOSED EDGES BELOW FASCIA 2X6 WOOF FASCIA TRIM W/ METAL FINISH; OVER 2X WOOD FASCIA, TYP METAL HALF ROUND GUTTERS, MATCH ROOF COLOR, TYP 4X2 SOLID WOOD SCREEN SYSTEM SUSPENDED OVER ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS, PROVIDE METAL CLIP SYSTEM; (COLOR TO MATCH WINDOWS) SOLID WOOD SOFFIT W/ EXPOSED EDGES BELOW FASCIA WALL SCONCE LIGHT FIXTURE; RE: LIGHTING DWG FENCE AND GATE RE:LANDSCAPE DWGS WOOD TRIM; 3/4" PROUD OF ADJACENT SIDING, TYP 3" WIDE WOOD SIDING, TYP 6" WIDE WOOD SIDING, TYP HALF-ROUND PTD METAL GUTTER AND SQUARE DOWNSPOUT; MATCH METAL ROOF COLOR, TYP CHIMNEY; BOARD FORMED CONCRETE FINISH W/PTD METAL RAINGUARD 25' HEIGHT LIMIT ABOVE EXISTING GRADE (MOST RESTRICTIVE) 124' - 8 7/8" 1/3 POINT FROM EAVE TO RIDGE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW AND DOORS, TYPICAL WOOD CAP W/ METAL FLASHING, TYPICAL METAL FLASHING CAP, TYPICAL BOARD-FORMED CONCRETE BASE, TYPICAL METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF FINISH, TYP 12" SPACING SHED ROOF W/ TYP STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF, WOOD SOFFIT AND FASCIA AVALANCHE SNOW FENCE; MATCH ROOF COLOR, TYP BUILDING HEIGHT @ 8:12 PITCH 200 5' - 0"5' - 0" 202 PTD STEEL ANGLE TRIM 102 MID ROOF POINT 10' - 1 3/8"9' - 3"ABOVE GRADE9' - 6 1/4"STEEL RAIN CHAIN A0.70 2 PTD STEEL COLUMN RE:STRUCT DOWNSPOUT 8 12 8 12 DOWNDRAFT VENT COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:19 AM1/4" = 1'-0" A0.4222037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION - NEW HOUSE 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 79 of 132 123 LEVEL 1 100' -0" T.O. PLY LEVEL 2 109' -3" T.O. PLY A B T.O. ROOF TERRACE 119' -4 3/8" . ALLEY PROPERTY LINE25' HEIGHT LIMIT ABOVE EXISTING GRADE (MOST RESTRICTIVE)10' - 1 3/8"9' - 3"METERS/ DISCONNECT BBQ VENT RE:MECHANICAL; COLOR TO MATCH OTHER METALS LAUNDRY VENT RE:MECHANICAL, COLOR TO MATCH OTHER METALS GATE; FENCE SHOWN DASHED RE:LANDSCAPE TRANSFORMER 201 109SETBACK BUILDING HEIGHT @ 8:12 PITCH (1/3 POINT FROM EAVE TO RIDGE) 124' - 8 7/8" PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GRADE, DASHED SQUARE PTD METAL DOWNSPOUT, TYP AVALANCHE SNOW FENCE, MATCH ROOF COLOR 3" WIDE WOOD SIDING, TYP 6" WIDE WOOD SIDING, TYP METAL HALF-ROUND GUTTER MATCH METAL ROOF COLOR, TYP METAL FLASHING CAP, TYPICAL BOARD-FORMED CONCRETE BASE, TYPICAL METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF FINISH, TYP; 12" SPACING ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD CORNER, TYP ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS AND DOORS, TYP PTD STEEL COLUMN 4X2 SOLID WOOD SCREEN SYSTEM SUSPENDED OVER ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS, PROVIDE METAL CLIP SYSTEM; (COLOR TO MATCH WINDOWS) PTD. STEEL CHANNEL FASCIA @ ENTRY SOLID WOOD SOFFIT W/ EXPOSED EDGES BELOW FASCIA ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOW AND DOORS, TYP PTD STEEL COLUMN, TYP RE:STRUC WOOD GUARDRAIL PER CODE, TYP 8' - 0" METAL COPING, TYP METAL COPING, TYP 1/3 ROOF POINT PTD STEEL ANGLE TRIM, TYP 37' - 6" 107 3 12 A/C STEEL RAIN CHAIN COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:20 AM1/4" = 1'-0" A0.4322037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION - NEW HOUSE 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 80 of 132 124 LEVEL 1 100' -0" T.O. PLY B PROPERTY LINEEXISTING PAN ABODE HOPKINS AVENUE PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING GRADE, DASHED 201 109 10'-0" FRONT SETBACKMETAL EGRESS LIGHT WELL COVER, OPERABLE PER CODE METAL LADDER PER IRC R310.2.3.1 10' - 0" EGRESS LIGHT WELL PER IRC R310.2 25' HEIGHT LIMIT ABOVE EXISTING GRADE (MOST RESTRICTIVE) 003 REFURBISH (E) WINDOWS; PAINT TO MATCH NEW HOUSE WINDOW FRAME WORK WITH HPC STAFF AND MONITOR TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE METHOD TO REMOVE PAINT FROM LOGS. PERFORM TEST PATCH IN FIELD FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. 3 12 A/C 10' - 0"CABIN BASEMENT. 90' -0" T.O. SLAB AVALANCHE SNOW CLIPS, TYP LINE OF FENCE, DASHED RE:LANDSCAPE COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:21 AM1/4" = 1'-0" A0.4422037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION - CABIN 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 81 of 132 125 LEVEL 1 100' -0" T.O. PLY LEVEL 2 109' -3" T.O. PLY 1 4 T.O. ROOF TERRACE 119' -4 3/8" . ALLEY 10' - 1 3/8"9' - 3"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEFENCE AND GATE RE:LANDSCAPE TYP FENCE AND GATE RE: LANDSCAPE TRANSFORMER PROPOSED GRADE 25' HEIGHT LIMIT ABOVE EXISTING GRADE (MOST RESTRICTIVE) BUILDING HEIGHT @ 8:12 PITCH 24' - 8 7/8"8 12 AIR CONDENSING UNITSEXISTING GRADE, DASHED 209 210 SQUARE METAL DOWNSPOUT, TYP ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD CORNER, TYP AVALANCHE SNOW FENCE, MATCH ROOF COLOR, TYP WOOD TRIM; 3/4" PROUD OF ADJACENT SIDING, TYP 3" WIDE WOOD SIDING, TYP 6" WIDE WOOD SIDING, TYP METAL HALF-ROUND GUTTER; MATCH METAL ROOF COLOR, TYP CHIMNEY; BOARD FORMED CONCRETE FINISH W/PTD METAL RAINGUARD WOOD CAP W/ METAL FLASHING, TYPICAL METAL FLASHING CAP, TYPICAL BOARD-FORMED CONCRETE BASE, TYPICAL METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF FINISH, TYP, 12" SPACING 7' - 8"WOOD GUARDRAIL PER CODE, TYP PTD. STEEL COLUMN RE: STRUC 1/3 POINT FROM EAVE TO RIDGE 124' - 8 7/8" WALL SCONCE LIGHT FIXTURE; RE: LIGHTING DWG METAL COPING, TYP METAL COPING, TYP SETBACK LINESETBACK LINE5' - 0"5' - 0" 106 PTD STEEL ANGLE TRIM, TYP 211 PTD METAL PANEL, TYP PTD STEEL ANGLE TRIM, TYP 48' - 0" 18'-0" WOOD GARAGE DOOR, PTD 212 8 12 TOP OF FENCE SHOWN DASHED; RE:LANDSCAPE DWGS FOR EXTENT WOOD GUARDRAIL; EXTEND MIN 18" ABOVE SPA GENERATOR MAX. 30"COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:22 AM1/4" = 1'-0" A0.4522037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION - NEW HOUSE 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 82 of 132 126 LEVEL 1 100' -0" T.O. PLY 1 4 NEW WINDOW TO MATCH HISTORIC IN PROFILE AND MATERIALITY FENCE RE: LANDSCAPE, TYP PROPOSED GRADE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEGATE RE:LANDSCAPE WALL SCONCE RE:LIGHTING DWGS NEW CEDAR SHINGES EXISTING GRADE, DASHED EXISTING CABIN SETBACK LINESETBACK LINE5' - 0"5' - 0" PATH RE: LANDSCAPE DECK RE: LANDSCAPE FENCE RE: LANDSCAPE, TYP WORK WITH HPC STAFF AND MONITOR TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE METHOD TO REMOVE PAINT FROM LOGS. PERFORM TEST PATCH IN FIELD FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. (E) DOOR TO REMAIN REFURBISH (E) WINDOWS; PAINT TO MATCH NEW HOUSE WINDOW FRAME RE-USE EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS TO RE-BUILD CHIMNEY, MATCH EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS WHERE REQ'D PATCH (E) OPENING WITH SALVAGED LOGS FROM ADDITION DEMO PATCH A/C AVALANCHE SNOW CLIPS, TYP 10' - 11 5/8"CABIN BASEMENT. 90' -0" T.O. SLAB 10' - 0"BBQ 111110 COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:23 AM1/4" = 1'-0" A0.4622037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION - CABIN 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 83 of 132 127 LEVEL 1 100' -0" T.O. PLY LEVEL 2 109' -3" T.O. PLY AB T.O. ROOF TERRACE 119' -4 3/8" . ALLEY 9' - 3"10' - 1 3/8"PROPERTY LINE25' HEIGHT LIMIT ABOVE EXISTING GRADE (MOST RESTRICTIVE) FENCE + GATE RE:LANDSCAPE AVALANCHE SNOW FENCE, MATCH ROOF COLOR ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD CORNER, TYP TRANSLUCENT GLASS, TYP PROPOSED GRADE FENCE + GATE RE:LANDSCAPE EXISTING GRADE SHOWN DASHED 3 12 3 12 208 METAL HALF-ROUND GUTTER MATCH METAL ROOF COLOR, TYP METAL STANDING SEAM ROOF FINISH, TYP; 12" SPACING METAL PANEL SQUARE PTD METAL DOWNSPOUT, TYP 204 206205 104103 001 0 105 PTD STEEL ANGLE TRIM @ WALL OPENINGS, TYP METAL PANEL7' - 7 3/4"SETBACK8' - 0" METAL EGRESS LIGHT WELL COVER, OPERABLE PER CODE METAL LADDER PER IRC R310.2.3.1 EGRESS LIGHT WELL PER IRC R310.2 122' - 4"MID-POINT FROM EAVE TO RIDGE BUILDING HEIGHT @ 3:12 PITCH BUILDING HEIGHT22' - 7 1/2"CHIMNEY; BOARD FORMED CONCRETE FINISH W/PTD METAL RAINGUARD METAL FLASHING CAP, TYP BOARD-FORMED CONCRETE BASE, TYP 6" WIDE WOOD SIDING, TYP 3" WIDE WOOD SIDING, TYP WOOD CAP W/ METAL FLASHING, TYPICAL 37' - 6" 2X6 WOOF FASCIA TRIM W/ METAL FINISH; OVER 2X WOOD FASCIA, TYP COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:24 AM1/4" = 1'-0" A0.4722037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION - NEW HOUSE 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 84 of 132 128 B PROPERTY LINEEXISTING CABIN PROPOSED GRADE FENCE + GATE RE:LANDSCAPE EXISTING GRADE SHOWN DASHED 25' HEIGHT LIMIT ABOVE EXISTING GRADE (MOST RESTRICTIVE)10'-0" FRONT SETBACKFENCE; RE:LANDSCAPE METAL EGRESS LIGHT WELL COVER, OPERABLE PER CODE METAL LADDER PER IRC R310.2.3.1 EGRESS LIGHT WELL PER IRC R310.2 004 RE-USE EXISTING BRICKS TO RE- BUILD CHIMNEY, MATCH EXISTING BRICKS WHERE REQ'D WORK WITH HPC STAFF AND MONITOR TO DETERMINE APPROPRIATE METHOD TO REMOVE PAINT FROM LOGS. PERFORM TEST PATCH IN FIELD FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL. REFURBISH (E) WINDOWS; PAINT TO MATCH NEW HOUSE WINDOW FRAME AVALANCHE SNOW CLIPS, TYP HOPKINS AVE 3 12 INDOOR/OUTDOOR FIREPLACE; TRIM TO MATCH OTHER METALS BBQ COPYRIGHT 2021 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_HOUSE_CENTRAL_A21_jennifer.ramsey.rvt4/6/2021 10:32:26 AM1/4" = 1'-0" A0.4822037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION - CABIN 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION 03/25/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R1 04/05/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION R2 Page 85 of 132 129 landscape architectarchitect matt and alissa joblon 205 detroit st, suite 400 denver, co 80206 t 508.344.2557 client bluegreen matt moritz 300 south spring st. suite 202 aspen, colorado 81611 t 970 429 7499 f 970 429 9499 general contractor civil engineer/surveyor sheet index landscape drawings context map hpc submission 211 w hopkins aspenfinal hpc 03/08/2021rowland+broughton jennifer ramsey 500 w main st aspen,co 81611 t 970.429.8703 schlumberger sherer construction jake rankin 309k aabc aspen, co 81611 t 970.925.8360 high country engineer roger neal 1517 blake ave, suite 101 glenwood springs, co 81601 t 970.945.8676 mep imeg - colorado springs ken urbanek 7600 e orchard rd, suite 250-s greenwood village, co 81611 t 303.795.6077 structural engineer kla - colorado bret mcelvain 805 14th st. golden, co 80401 t 303.384.9910 land planner bendonadams sara adams 300 south spring st. suite 202 aspen, co 81611 t 970.925.2855 client name/title date north owner reviewed and approved L000 L100 L200 L400 L401 L800 L001 cover layout plan plant list planting plan details notes tree mitigation plan L002 notes L300 materials plan L000 03/08/2021 hpc submissionbluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen L301 fencing plan cover Page 86 of 132 130 L001 03/08/2021 hpc submission SCOPE OF WORK CONTROL OF WORK LEGAL RELATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PUBLIC EARTHWORK EROSION AND DUST CONTROL LAYOUT AND CONTROL OF MATERIALS 1. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL WORK BY THE SUBCONTRACTORS. 2. WATERPROOFING OF SUBGRADE AND OTHER ARCHITECTURAL SPACES BELOW AND/OR ADJACENT TO IMPROVEMENTS DESIGNED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IS TO BE ADEQUATELY DESIGNED AND DETAILED BY OTHERS TO PERMANENTLY REPEL ALL WATER SOURCES INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO: PRECIPITATION, SNOW MELT, SURFACE RUNOFF, SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE, GROUND WATER, IRRIGATION, ROOF RUNOFF, GROUND WATER AND PLUMBING LEAKS. 3. STRUCTURAL DESIGN TO SUPPORT IMPROVEMENTS DESIGNED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND LOCATED ABOVE, BELOW AND/OR ADJACENT TO SUBGRADE AND OTHER ARCHITECTURAL SPACES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER. THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN SHOULD BE ADEQUATELY DESIGNED TO SUPPORT ALL POSSIBLE LOADS INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO: BACKFILL, COMPACTION, PLANTINGS, HARDSCAPE, RETAINING AND FREESTANDING SITE WALLS AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS/EQUIPMENT/ACTIVITY. 4. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR DOCUMENTED WORK FOR WHICH CONSTRUCTION SERVICES WERE NOT PERFORMED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL CONDITIONS AT JOB SITE AND NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND GENERAL CONTRACTOR OF DIMENSIONAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS OR DISCREPANCIES BEFORE BEGINNING ANY WORK. 2. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPROPRIATE AGENCIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES, LINES AND STRUCTURES PRIOR TO EXCAVATION OR TRENCHING. DAMAGE SHALL BE REPAIRED BY THE CONTRACTOR AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR UTILITIES OR STRUCTURES NOT SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE DRAWING SET. THE CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY THE EXACT LOCATION OF UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL USE EXTREME CAUTION WHEN WORKING OVER OR NEAR EXISTING GAS AND ELECTRICAL LINES. 3. 'CONTRACT DOCUMENTS' INCLUDE THE LANDSCAPE DRAWING SET, LANDSCAPE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS MANUAL AND LANDSCAPE LASIS. 4. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT HAS PROVIDED DESIGN INTENT BUT DOES NOT DEFINE THE APPROPRIATE CONSTRUCTION MEANS, METHODS, TECHNIQUES, SEQUENCES UTILIZED OR SAFETY PRECAUTIONS. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S FAILURE TO CARRY OUT THE WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 5. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO VERIFY ALL QUANTITIES. IN CASE OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, GRAPHICALLY SHOWN MATERIAL QUANTITIES SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE. 6. A SYSTEM OF DIAGRAMMATIC SYMBOLS, HATCHES AND NOTATIONS IS USED IN THESE DRAWINGS. REVIEW NOTATIONS CAREFULLY AND REQUEST CLARIFICATION FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT REGARDING ANY UNCLEAR NOTATION OR DISCREPANCY PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. 7. PROVIDE SLEEVES AS REQUIRED FOR DRAINAGE, IRRIGATION AND ELECTRICAL LINES. IRRIGATION AND ELECTRICAL SLEEVES AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE SYSTEMS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO PAVING AND LANDSCAPE WORK. UTILITY SLEEVES ARE REQUIRED IN ALL PLANT BEDS ISOLATED BY PAVEMENT OR ANY OTHER STRUCTURES. 8. SPECIAL CONSIDERATION IS GIVEN TO THE DESIGN AND INTENDED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ARCHITECTURE, PLANTING AREAS AND PAVING SYSTEMS. PAVEMENT JOINTING, PAVERS, STONE, FINISHES AND GRADES HAVE BEEN STRICTLY COORDINATED DURING THE DESIGN PROCESS. CONSTRUCTION OF THESE SYSTEMS MUST BE STRICTLY COORDINATED. NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 9. CONTACT THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IN THE EVENT OF ANY CONFLICTS IN GEOTECHNICAL REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS AND LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS OR OTHER CONSULTANT DRAWINGS. 10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE PLACEMENT OF FLATWORK PENETRATIONS TO ENSURE COORDINATION OF SURFACE FIXTURES, SUCH AS DRAINS AND LIGHTS. NOTIFY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION OF FLATWORK. 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS TO VERIFY FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS. NOTIFY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE MECHANICAL DRAWINGS TO VERIFY DRAIN LOCATIONS OVER STRUCTURE. NOTIFY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE CIVIL ENGINEERING DRAWINGS TO VERIFY UTILITY AND OTHER DRAIN LOCATIONS. NOTIFY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 14. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS TO KEEP ALL ITEMS DESIGNED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR IMPLEMENTATION IN PROPER WORKING ORDER THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. 1. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. ALL CONTRACTORS MUST COMPLY WITH PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONS AND GOVERNING BODIES/AGENCIES RULES AND REGULATIONS AND LAND USE APPROVAL CONDITIONS AT ALL TIMES. 2. WORK PERFORMED WITHOUT APPROVAL OF LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONS AND GOVERNING BODIES/AGENCIES AND/OR NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS IS SUBJECT TO REMOVAL AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. 3. ALL CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIALS NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONS AND GOVERNING BODIES/AGENCIES STANDARDS. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES NECESSARY TO PROTECT EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS FROM DAMAGE AND ANY SUCH IMPROVEMENTS AND STRUCTURES DAMAGED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE REPAIRED OR RECONSTRUCTED SATISFACTORY TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. 5. ALL BARRICADING AND TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES OR METHODS USED DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONS AND GOVERNING BODIES/AGENCIES STANDARDS. PROVIDE ADEQUATE TIME FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE ABOVE JURISDICTIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 1. THESE NOTES SUPPLEMENT THE CIVIL ENGINEERING DOCUMENT SET. NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND CIVIL ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. 2. LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE SHOWN ON PLANS AND CROSS-SECTIONS SHALL BE CLEARLY MARKED AND DESIGNATED ON-SITE PRIOR TO ANY EARTHWORK. 3. THE PROJECT LIMIT OF CONSTRUCTION AND ALL EXISTING VEGETATION TO REMAIN IS TO BE CLEARLY DEFINED BY STURDY, WEATHERPROOF FENCING AT A MINIMUM OF FOUR (4) FOOT HEIGHT. 4. EXISTING TREES TO BE PRESERVED SHALL BEAR SAME RELATIONSHIP TO FINISHED GRADE AS THEY BEAR TO PRE-CONSTRUCTION GRADE. 5. EXISTING TREES & VEGETATION TO BE PRESERVED SHALL BE PROTECTED WITH STURDY, WEATHERPROOF FENCING AT A MINIMUM FOUR (4) FOOT HEIGHT INSTALLED NO CLOSER TO THE TREE TRUNK THAN ITS DRIPLINE. THIS FENCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN WORKING ORDER DURING ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION. MAINTAIN TREE PROTECTION ZONES FREE OF WEEDS AND TRASH. 6. NO WORK SHALL BE CONDUCTED WITHIN THE DRIPLINE, UNLESS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. ALL WORK APPROVED WITHIN THE DRIPLINE SHALL BE COMPLETED BY HAND. PROTECT ROOT SYSTEMS FROM PONDING, EROSION OR EXCESSIVE WETTING. 7. SOIL ANALYSIS MUST BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED SOIL-TESTING LABORATORY ON IMPORTED OR MANUFACTURED TOPSOIL. A WRITTEN ANALYSIS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. THIS REPORT MUST STATE PERCENTAGES OF ORGANIC MATTER; GRADATION OF SAND, SILT, AND CLAY CONTENT; CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY; NATURE OF DELETERIOUS MATERIAL; PH; AND MINERAL AND PLANT NUTRIENT CONTENT OF THE SOIL. 8. IMPORTED TOPSOIL IS TO BE OBTAINED FROM NATURALLY WELL-DRAINED CONSTRUCTION OR MINING SITES WHERE TOPSOIL OCCURS AT LEAST 4 INCHES DEEP. DO NOT OBTAIN FROM AGRICULTURAL LAND, BOGS OR MARSHES. 9. PROPOSED ELEVATIONS INDICATED ON DRAWINGS ARE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DIRECT ROUGH GRADE WORK TO ALLOW FOR SUFFICIENT TOPSOIL AND OTHER FINISHED CONDITIONS AS DESCRIBED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 10. ALL FINISHED GRADES SHALL MEET AND BLEND SMOOTHLY WITH EXISTING GRADES AT THE PROJECT LIMIT. 11. ALL FINISHED GRADES SHALL BE WITHOUT LOW SPOTS OR POCKETS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SET FLOW LINES ACCURATELY AND PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF TWO (2) PERCENT OR MAXIMUM OF FIFTY (50) PERCENT, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 12. ALL FINISHED GRADES SHALL PRESENT SMOOTH TRANSITIONS BETWEEN TOES AND TOPS OF SLOPES. 13. THE MAXIMUM SLOPE OF SOD TO BE 33% IN AREAS DESIGNATED AS " LAWN," UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 14. ALL MANHOLES, VALVE BOXES, UTILITY BOXES AND PEDESTALS, AND OTHER APPURTENANCES SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO FINISH GRADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONS AND GOVERNING BODIES/AGENCIES OR UTILITY RULES AND REGULATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 15. DEFINITION OF COMPACTION: PROCTOR DRY DENSITY. 16. SOIL COMPACTION BENEATH PAVEMENTS, STEPS, WALLS AND LIGHT FOUNDATIONS SHALL BE 95% PROCTOR DENSITY MINIMUM, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 17. GRADING AND EXCAVATION WORK SHALL BE COMPLETED DURING DRY AND NON-FREEZING WEATHER CONDITIONS. 18. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL FOR REUSE ON-SITE. SOIL SHALL BE SCREENED TO REMOVE ROCKS AND BOULDERS. 19. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REUSE ANY STRUCTURAL SOIL FOUND ON SITE. 20. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM ALL STRUCTURES. 21. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN TEMPORARY DRAINAGE DEVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION. 22. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL CONTROL POINTS, FINISH FLOOR ELEVATIONS AND PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATIONS WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO FORMWORK INSTALLATION. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL 1. VEHICLES, EQUIPMENT, AND/OR MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE PARKED OR STORED IN AREAS OF EXISTING VEGETATION, INCLUDING WITHIN THE DRIPLINE OF EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN. 2. LANDSCAPE MATERIALS TO BE STORED UNDER SECURED TARPS OR SHEETING TO PROTECT AGAINST WIND, RAIN AND SNOW DAMAGE. 3. CONSTRUCTION WASTE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PLANT MATERIAL, BUILDING MATERIALS, DEMOLISHED MATERIALS, PACKAGING, LEFTOVER PAINT AND CONCRETE SLURRY, SHOULD BE PROPERLY REUSED, RECYCLED, DISPOSED OF LEGALLY OFF-SITE OR IN DESIGNATED WASH-OUT AREAS DETERMINED BY THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. 4. RECYCLING AND TRASH BINS TO BE PROVIDED ON SITE. SEPARATE BINS FOR CARDBOARD, CO-MINGLED, AND OTHER RECYCLABLE/REUSABLE MATERIALS IDENTIFIED BY THE LOCAL JURISDICTION SHALL BE MAINTAINED. ALL BINS TO BE WILDLIFE-PROOF. 5. ON-SITE FUEL STORAGE FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT IS DISCOURAGED. CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT USED ON SITE TO BE CHECKED REGULARLY TO ASSURE CONTAMINATION CONCERNS FROM OILS AND GREASES ARE ELIMINATED. NO TOXIC MATERIALS SHALL BE STORED ON-SITE. 1. LAY OUT AND VERIFY DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IS TO REVIEW AND APPROVE ALL LAYOUTS CONTAINED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 2. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS. DO NOT SCALE DIMENSIONS FROM REDUCED DRAWINGS. 3. DIMENSIONS REFERRED TO AS "EQUAL" INDICATE SPACING WHICH IS EQUIDISTANT MEASURED TO THE CENTERLINES. 4. MEASUREMENTS ARE TO THE FINISHED FACE OF BUILDINGS, WALLS OR OTHER FIXED SITE IMPROVEMENTS. DIMENSIONS TO CENTERLINES ARE IDENTIFIED AS SUCH. 5. INSTALL INTERSECTING ELEMENTS AT 90-DEGREE ANGLES, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. MAINTAIN HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT OF ADJACENT ELEMENTS AS INDICATED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A FULL-SCALE MOCKUP OF ALL PAVING SYSTEMS AND RECEIVE APPROVAL FROM THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BEFORE BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION. 7. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE FLATWORK MEETS VERTICAL STRUCTURES, SUCH AS WALLS, CURBS, STEPS, AND OTHER HARDSCAPE ELEMENTS. EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL ALSO BE PROVIDED AT MATERIAL CHANGES. EXPANSION JOINT MATERIALS/METHODS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 8. CONTROL JOINTS SHOULD BE SPACED NO GREATER THAN TEN (10) LINEAR FEET MAXIMUM, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. EXPANSION JOINTS SHOULD BE SPACED NO GREATER THAN FORTY (40) LINEAR FEET MAXIMUM, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ADVISE ON OTHER JOINTS AS NEEDED TO MINIMIZE CRACKING. THIS INFORMATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 9. ALL STEPS SHALL HAVE FOURTEEN (14) INCH TREADS AND SIX (6) INCH RISERS, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 10. HOLD TOP OF WALLS & FENCES AND ALL SITE FURNISHINGS LEVEL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT INSTALL WORK LOCATED ON TOP OF ARCHITECTURAL STRUCTURES WITHOUT FIRST REVIEWING ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. 12. SAMPLES OF SPECIFIED MATERIALS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO PROCUREMENT. 1. THESE NOTES SUPPLEMENT THE CIVIL ENGINEERING DOCUMENT SET. NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND CIVIL ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. 2. PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY DISTURBANCE, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN ALL SESC MEASURES AS SHOWN ON THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS AND AS REQUIRED BY ANY GOVERNING AGENCIES. 3. ALL SESC MEASURES TO BE MAINTAINED DAILY. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREVENT SOIL LOSS TO WIND AND WATER EROSION. 5. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO CONDUCT ALL EXCAVATION, FILLING, GRADING, AND CLEANUP OPERATIONS IN A MANNER SUCH THAT SEDIMENT GENERATED BY WIND OR WATER IS NOT DISCHARGED INTO ANY STORM SEWER, DRAINAGE DITCH, RIVER, LAKE, AIR OR UNDERGROUND UTILITY SYSTEM. 6. WATER FROM TRENCHES AND OTHER EXCAVATION TO BE PUMPED INTO A FILTRATION BAG TO REMOVE SEDIMENTS FROM THE WATER. 7. NORTH AMERICAN GREEN SC-150 OR EQUIVALENT EROSION CONTROL FABRIC IS REQUIRED ON ALL DISTURBED SLOPES GREATER THAN 33% UNTIL PROJECT AREA IS REVEGETATED PER THE PLANTING PLAN. 8. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ONSITE WATERING TO REDUCE FUGITIVE DUST LEAVING THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION. 9. SOIL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES TO BE PROVIDED FOR ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED DRAINAGE STRUCTURES WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS. 10. CONSTRUCTION STAGING AND PHASING SHALL OCCUR, WHERE APPLICABLE, TO MINIMIZE SOIL DISTURBANCE TIME, THEREBY REDUCING THE OPPORTUNITY FOR SOIL EROSION. 11. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPs) SHALL BE ADJUSTED AS NEEDED TO MEET ANY OTHER UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS. 12. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR MUST INSTALL A MUD TRACKING PAD/WASHING PAD AT THE CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES TO MINIMIZE MUD DETACHMENT FROM TRUCK TIRES. 1-1/2 INCH SCREENED ROCK TO BE PLACED ON MIRAFI 140-N FILTER FABRIC. ADDITIONAL CLEAN GRAVEL TO BE ADDED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION AS NEEDED. 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ABIDE BY CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH BY LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONS AND OTHER GOVERNING BODIES/AGENCIES. 14. IF SITE WORK IS DELAYED DUE TO ANY CIRCUMSTANCE; THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT PREPARED PLANT BEDS FROM EROSION.bluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen notes Page 87 of 132 131 L002 03/08/2021 hpc submission SEEDING/ FERTILIZER/ SOIL CONDITIONER/ SODDING PLANTING AND TRANSPLANTING 1. PLANT MATERIAL IS TO BE HEALTHY SPECIMENS FREE FROM DISEASE OR DAMAGE, AND IS TO BE MAINTAINED IN EXCELLENT CONDITION WHILE ON THE JOBSITE. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT SHALL INSPECT PLANT MATERIAL UPON ARRIVAL TO JOBSITE AND WILL REJECT PLANT MATERIAL THAT DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARDS DESCRIBED WITHIN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 2. LANDSCAPE MATERIALS TO BE STORED UNDER SECURED TARPS OR SHEETING TO PROTECT AGAINST WIND, RAIN AND SNOW DAMAGE. 3. STOCKPILED PLANT MATERIAL TO BE PLACED IN THE SHADE AND PROPERLY HAND-WATERED UNTIL PLANTED. 4. THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WILL PERIODICALLY INSPECT PLANT MATERIAL STOCKPILED AND/OR PLANTED ON SITE DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. PLANT MATERIAL NOT MEETING THE STANDARDS CONTAINED WITHIN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPLACED AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. 5. PROVIDE MATCHING SIZES AND FORMS FOR EACH PLANT OF THE SAME SPECIES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. 6. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO VERIFY ALL QUANTITIES. IN CASE OF DISCREPANCIES, GRAPHICALLY SHOWN QUANTITIES SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE. 7. ALL MATERIALS USED SHALL CONFORM TO THE GUIDELINES ESTABLISHED BY THE CURRENT AMERICAN STANDARDS FOR NURSERY STOCK, PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN. 8. ALL TREES MUST BE SOURCED FROM A REGION COMPARABLE IN CLIMATE TO THE HIGH ROCKIES (I.E. WY,ID, CO, UT, MT) 9. TREES TO BE HEALTHY, FREE OF DISEASE AND PESTS, AND SINGLE-STEMMED UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 10. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLED PLUMB AND PER THE SPECIFICATIONS CONTAINED WITHIN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. ANY NECESSARY STAKING AND/OR OTHER SUPPORTS MATERIALS/METHODS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PRUNE EXISTING AND/OR NEW TREES ONLY PER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT DIRECTION. 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE THE LOCATIONS OF ALL TREES AND B&B SHRUBS FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 13. ALL ROOT-WRAPPING MATERIALS THAT ARE NOT BIO-DEGRADABLE SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE ROOT BALL. ROOT BALLS SHALL BE FREE OF WEEDS. 14. SPECIFIED PLANT MATERIAL SIZES SHALL BE CONSIDERED MINIMUM SIZES. 15. FINISH GRADE OF PLANTING BEDS SHALL BE ONE (1) INCH BELOW ADJACENT FLATWORK UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. 16. ALL VEGETATION PROPOSED FOR INSTALLATION OUTSIDE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE TO BE NATIVE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PLANTING PROPOSED TO OCCUR OUTSIDE THE BUILDING ENVELOPE IS FOR RESTORATION PURPOSES ONLY OR IS SPECIFIC TO UTILITIES RESTORATION. 17. SIX (6) INCH TOPSOIL SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL LAWN, TURF, AND NATIVE PLANTING ZONES. EIGHTEEN (18) INCH PLANT MIX SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL PERENNIAL PLANTING BEDS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 1. ALL NEWLY REGRADED OR OTHERWISE DISTURBED SLOPES ARE TO BE REVEGETATED. 2. MINIMUM SIX (6) INCHES OF TOPSOIL TO BE PLACED IN AREAS TO RECEIVE SEED, TURF AND NATIVE PLANTING. TOPSOIL TO BE GOOD CLEAN ORGANIC SOIL (FREE OF WEEDS AND ROCKS). 3. SEED MIXTURES AND FERTILIZER SHALL BE APPLIED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GOVERNING JURISDICTIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 4. ALL SEED MUST BE CERTIFIED WEED FREE. NO SEED CAN CONTAIN ANY SPECIES ON THE CITY, COUNTY OR STATE NOXIOUS WEED LISTS. SEED MIX SUPPLY SHALL HAVE THE CERTIFIED SEED (BLUE TAG) OR SOURCE IDENTIFIED SEED (YELLOW TAG) ATTACHED. ONLY SEED WITH A COMPLETE ANALYSIS LABEL ON THE BAG AND A CURRENT GERMINATION TEST CONDUCTED BY AN ACCREDITED LABORATORY WILL BE ACCEPTED. 5. SEEDING SHALL OCCUR IN THE EARLY SPRING AND LATE FALL. SEEDING SHALL NOT BE PERFORMED WHEN THE GROUND IS FROZEN. FOR WARM SEASON SPECIES, SEEDING IN LATE SPRING OR EARLY SUMMER IS MORE LIKELY TO ACCOMPANY TEMPERATURES WARM ENOUGH TO SUPPORT GERMINATION. SEED THE SITE AS SOON AS FINAL GRADING AND TOPSOIL PLACEMENT HAVE OCCURRED TO MINIMIZE EROSION AND WEED ESTABLISHMENT ON THE PROJECT. DURING PERIODS OF TIME WHEN SEEDING CANNOT BE ACCOMPLISHED, SOILS SHALL NOT REMAIN UNPROTECTED. 6. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, HAND BROADCAST OF SEED SHALL BE USED ON ALL SLOPES, INCLUDING THOSE THAT ARE STEEP (GREATER THAN 33%), EXTREMELY ROCKY, REMOTE OR INACCESSIBLE. SEED RATE WILL VARY PER SEED MIXTURE SPECIFIED. BROADCAST SEEDING REQUIRES DOUBLE OR TRIPLE THE SEEDING RATE OF DRILL SEEDING, AND CALIBRATION OF SEEDING RATES IS LESS PRECISE THAN WITH DRILL SEEDING. SOILS TO BE RAKED OR HARROWED TO ELIMINATE CRUSTING BEFORE ACCEPTING BROADCAST SEED. CARE SHALL BE TAKEN TO ENSURE UNIFORM COVERAGE (EVEN SEED APPLICATION RATES) OVER THE AREA. SEEDING SHALL NOT OCCUR DURING WINDY WEATHER. 7. HAND RAKE SEED INTO TOPSOIL NO MORE THAN 3/4 INCH DEEP TO COVER. SOIL / SEED CONTACT IS CRITICAL FOR GROWTH. 8. DRILL SEEDING, WHEN INDICATED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, MAY OCCUR ON SLOPES OF 33% OR FLATTER BUT NOT IN AREAS OF EXTREMELY ROCKY SOILS. SEED TO A DEPTH OF 1/4 TO 1/2 INCH. DRILL TUBE SPACING SHOULD BE SIX (6) TO SEVEN (7) INCHES. SEEDING SHOULD BE CONDUCTED ALONG THE CONTOUR OF THE SLOPE TO AVOID EROSION FROM WATER FLOWING DOWN DRILL FURROWS. SEEDING RATE INDICATED IN THE DRAWINGS IS CONSIDERED A MINIMUM RATE. 9. HYDROSEEDING, WHEN INDICATED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, SHALL BE SPRAYED ON A ROUGHENED SLOPE USING A HYDROSEEDING MACHINE AND SHALL BE USED TO REACH AREAS THAT ARE INACCESSIBLE BY BROADCAST METHODS. USE SHALL BE LIMITED TO STEEP (GREATER THAN 33%), INACCESSIBLE SLOPES IN AREAS WITH ADEQUATE AND DEPENDABLE MOISTURE DURING THE GROWING SEASON. HYDROMULCHING MUST OCCUR AS A SEPARATE PROCESS AFTER HYDROSEEDING. DO NOT MIX SEED AND MULCH TOGETHER IN ONE WATER APPLICATION PROCESS AS THIS WILL PREVENT SEEDS FROM COMING INTO CONTACT WITH THE SOIL. 10. SEEDED AREAS SHALL BE MAINTAINED FREE OF WEEDS TO ALLOW THE DESIRED VEGETATION TO THRIVE WITHOUT THE CROWDING TENDENCIES OF AGGRESSIVE WEEDS. 11. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHOULD RECEIVE AN ORGANIC FERTILIZER IN LIMITED APPLICATION FOLLOWING INSTALLATION. TYPE AND APPLICATION RATE AND METHOD OF APPLICATION TO BE SPECIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. 12. EXCESS FERTILIZER SHALL BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY OFF-SITE. IT SHALL NOT BE DISPOSED OF IN STORM DRAINS AND/OR DRYWELLS. SOIL AMENDMENT CRITERIA AND PREPARATION IRRIGATION 1. TOPSOIL OF GRASSES (INCLUDING TURF), SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, AND ANNUALS SHALL BE A SANDY LOAM TO A DEPTH OF AT LEAST 6 INCHES (6") CONTAINING AT LEAST 5 PERCENT (5%) ORGANIC MATTER BY VOLUME. TOPSOIL TO BE GOOD CLEAN ORGANIC SOIL (FREE OF WEEDS AND ROCKS). 2.TREE SOIL SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3 FEET (3'). BOTH TOPSOIL AND SUBSOIL LAYERS SHALL BE SANDY LOAM. THE TOP SOIL SHALL BE AT LEAST 6 INCHES (6") AND HAVE 5 PERCENT (5%) ORGANIC MATTER BY WEIGHT AND SUBSOIL SHALL HAVE AT LEAST ONE TO THREE PERCENT (1 - 3%) ORGANIC MATTER BY WEIGHT. 3. A MINIMUM OF FOUR (4) CUBIC YARDS OF ORGANIC MATTER SOIL AMENDMENT PER ONE‐THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF LANDSCAPED AREA SHALL BE REQUIRED AS NECESSARY TO MEET THE 5 PERCENT (5%) ORGANIC MATTER SPECIFICATION. 4. SOIL AMENDMENT ORGANIC MATTER SHALL CONSIST OF EITHER CLASS I AND CLASS II COMPOST. 5. AMENDMENT SHALL BE TILLED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF SIX INCHES (6"). 6. SITE SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN TWO‐TENTHS OF A FOOT (2/10TH') OF THE GRADING PLAN. 7. SITE SHALL BE FREE OF ROCKS AND DEBRIS OVER ONE INCH (1") DIAMETER IN SIZE. ROCKS AND DEBRIS 0.5 INCH (0.5") TO ONE INCH (1") SHALL NOT EXCEED 5 PERCENT (5%) BY VOLUME AND GRAVEL 0.6 INCH (0.6") TO 1.25 INCHES (1.25") SHALL NOT EXCEED 5 PERCENT (5%) BY VOLUME. PARTICLES SUCH AS CONCRETE, BRICK, GLASS, METAL, WOOD OR PLASTIC GREATER THAN ONE INCH (1") SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED. THE TOTAL VOLUME OF THESE MATERIALS SMALLER THAN ONE INCH (1") SHALL NOT EXCEED 5 PERCENT (5%). 8. SITE SHALL BE FREE OF DIRT CLODS OVER THREE‐QUARTER INCH (3/4") DIAMETER IN SIZE. DRYLAND SEED AREAS MAY CONTAIN DIRT CLODS UP TO TWO INCH (2") DIAMETER IN SIZE. 9. STOCKPILING - STRIPPING AND STOCKPILING OF INDIGENOUS SOIL (TOPSOIL) SHALL BE REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION (EXCEPT AS WAIVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN). THE REPLACEMENT OF THIS SOIL, PLUS ADDITIONAL SOIL AMENDMENTS, ARE CRITICAL TO SUCCESSFUL PLANT MATERIAL ESTABLISHMENT, ONGOING HEALTH, AND EFFICIENT USE OF WATER THROUGH THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT. 10. THE SOIL SHALL HAVE NO HERBICIDES, HEAVY METALS, BIOLOGICAL TOXINS OR HYDROCARBONS THAT IMPACT PLANT GROWTH OR EXCEED THE EPA'S STANDARDS FOR SOIL CONTAMINANT. 1. REFERENCE IRRIGATION SHEETS IR100 - IR103 FOR IRRIGATION PLAN AND DETAILS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION IS INCLUDED IN NOTES BELOW. 2. ALL NEW TREES AND SHRUBS TO RECEIVE DRIP-TYPE IRRIGATION. 3. ALL REVEGETATED AREAS TO RECEIVE SPRAY-TYPE IRRIGATION FOR FIRST TWO GROWING SEASONS MINIMUM. 4. ALL PERENNIAL BEDS TO RECEIVE SPRAY-TYPE IRRIGATION. 5. ALL SPRAY-TYPE IRRIGATION TO BE DIRECTED AWAY FROM STRUCTURES. 6. INSTALL SPRAY HEADS ALONG SIDEWALKS ON POP-UP RISERS. 7. LOCATE HEADS SO THEY ARE PROTECTED FROM TRAVEL AND DO NOT CAUSE WATER TO FALL ON PAVERS, MASONRY OR OTHER ARCHITECTURAL SURFACES. 8. ADJUST HEAD LOCATION IF SPRAY IS DETRIMENTAL TO OR BLOCKED BY TREE, SHRUB OR STRUCTURE, MAINTAINING EVEN COVERAGE OF PLANTING AREAS. 9. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS TO COORDINATE SIZE AND LOCATION OF SLAB PENETRATIONS FOR IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT WITH THE MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS. 10. INSTALL MAIN LINES TO SLOPE AT 1% MINIMUM TO MANUAL DRAIN VALVES LOCATED AT LOW POINTS OF THE MAIN SYSTEM. 11. INSTALL 3/4 INCH POLYETHYLENE LATERAL LINES TO SLOPE AT 1% MINIMUM TO AUTOMATIC DRAIN VALVES LOCATED AT LOW POINTS OF LATERAL SYSTEMS. 12. TRENCHES TO BE OF SUFFICIENT DEPTH TO PROVIDE 18 INCHES OF COVER OVER LATERAL LINES. SLEEVED LINES SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM COVER OF 24 INCHES. TRENCHES ARE TO BE BACKFILLED WITH MATERIAL FREE OF ROCKS GREATER THAN 3/4 INCH IN DIAMETER. 13. INSTALL BACKFLOW PREVENTER(S) IN COORDINATION WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. BACKFLOW PREVENTERS SHALL BE INSTALLED PLUMB AND SQUARE WITH ADJACENT PAVEMENT EDGES OR STRUCTURES. COLOR, BLACK. 14. CONTROL VALVE BOX AND HEAD BOX LOCATIONS TO BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. COLOR, BLACK. 15. THE FINAL LOCATION AND EXACT POSITIONING OF THE CONTROL STATION SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE OWNER'S AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR GENERAL CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 16. VALVE BOXES SHALL BE INSTALLED FLUSH WITH FINISH GRADE. ALIGN VALVE BOXES WITH ADJACENT PAVEMENT EDGES OR STRUCTURES. VALVE BOXES TO BE PLACED A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES FROM AND PARALLEL TO CURBS AND WALKS. GROUPED VALVES TO BE EQUALLY SPACED AND PARALLEL. CONCEAL ALL BOXES IN PLANTING BEDS WHERE POSSIBLE AND COVER WITH MULCH. VALVE BOXES SHALL BE INTEGRAL PLASTIC WITH BOLT DOWN LID; COLOR, BLACK. 17. CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN A SET OF "AS-BUILT" DRAWINGS THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION AND DELIVER THESE DRAWINGS TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. 18. EXCAVATIONS TO BE BACKFILLED TO PROCTOR DRY DENSITY, MINIMUM. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR SETTLED TRENCHES FOR ONE YEAR AFTER COMPLETION OF WORK. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL WARRANT THAT THE SYSTEM WILL REMAIN FREE FROM DEFECTS IN MATERIAL AND WORKMANSHIP FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER COMPLETION OF WORK. 19. EXERCISE EXTREME CARE IN EXCAVATING AND WORKING NEAR EXISTING UTILITIES AND IN EXISTING TREE ROOT ZONES. THE CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY THE LOCATION AND CONDITION OF ALL UTILITIES AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGE TO UTILITIES. DAMAGE CAUSED BY OR DURING THE PERFORMANCE OF WORK IS TO BE REPAIRED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. FIELD ADJUST SPRINKLER LOCATIONS SO AS TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH UTILITIES (FIRE HYDRANTS, TRANSFORMERS, ETC). 20. FLUSH AND ADJUST SPRINKLER HEADS FOR OPTIMUM PERFORMANCE. THIS SHALL INCLUDE THROTTLING THE FLOW CONTROL AT EACH VALVE TO OBTAIN THE OPTIMUM OPERATING PRESSURE FOR EACH SYSTEM. 21. IRRIGATION SYSTEM ARE TO BE COMPLETELY DRAINED ANNUALLY TO PROTECT PIPES FROM BURSTING PRIOR TO FREEZING TEMPERATURES. 22. PROVIDE CONDUIT/SLEEVES AS REQUIRED FOR IRRIGATION LINES THROUGH PAVEMENT AND OTHER HARDSCAPE ELEMENTS. COORDINATE INSTALLATION OF WORK TO ENSURE ALL ISOLATED PLANTING AREAS RECEIVE ACCESS TO THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM. MULCHING DESCRIPTION/ DETAIL SPECIFICATION DRAINS AND GRATES DECKING/ FENCING CONCRETE FLATWORK DRIVEWAY FLATWORK MASTER FINISH SCHEDULE UNDYED CONCRETE; SAND FINISH POURED IN PLACE CONCRETE CEDAR WOOD ACO POLYMER PRODUCTS K100S SERIES SLOT DRAIN, OTHERS TBD SPA BULLFROG M8 IN CINDER-SOLITUDE WITH BRUSHED STRAINLESS STEEL GREY TRIM 1. ORGANIC MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AT ONE (1) CUBIC YARD PER EIGHTY (80) SQUARE FEET AT A DEPTH OF FOUR (4) INCHES, AND AS APPROPRIATE TO EACH SPECIES. IT SHALL BE APPLIED TO THE SOIL SURFACE, NOT AGAINST THE PLANT STEM OR HIGH AGAINST THE BASE OF TRUNKS TO MINIMIZE DISEASE. ORGANIC MULCH MATERIAL INCLUDES BARK AND WOOD CHIPS. AVOID MULCH CONSISTING OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS SUCH AS PALLETS. MULCHING SHOULD BE REPEATED ANNUALLY DURING THE AUTUMN TO A FOUR (4) INCH DEPTH. 2. INORGANIC MULCH INCLUDES ROCK, GRAVEL, OR PEBBLES. ROCK MULCH SHALL HAEV A MINIMUM DEPTH OF TWO (2) INCHES. 3. MULCH OR PLANTING BED DRESSING SHALL BE PLACED IN ALL PLANTING AREAS AS SPECIFIED. 4. THE SITE MUST BE MULCHED WITH WEED-FREE MULCH (HAY OR HYDROMULCH) AFTER SEEDING. 5. HYDROMULCH MUST BE APPLIED SEPARATELY FOLLOWING SEED APPLICATION. DO NOT OVERSPRAY AS THIS MAY RESULT IN EROSION. AN ORGANIC TACKIFIER SHALL BE ADDED TO THE SLURRY TO ENHANCE THE DURABILITY OF THE APPLIED MULCH COVER. APPLY AT A RATE OF 3,000 LBS PER ACRE (3360 KG/HA). ADD AN ORGANIC-BASED TACKIFIER AT THE RATE OF 150 LBS PER ACRE TO PREVENT EROSION. 6. HAY MULCH MUST BE WEED-FREE. HAY TO BE “CRIMPED” INTO THE SOIL SURFACE BY HAND ON STEEP SLOPES. ON FLAT SURFACES A MODIFIED DISC PLOW MAY BE UTILIZED TO DRIVE THE HAY STEMS INTO THE SOIL TO REDUCE SURFACE WIND SPEEDS AND SOIL DESICCATION. APPLY AT THE RATE OF 3,000 TO 4,000 LBS PER ACRE (3360-4480 KG/HA). ADD AN ORGANIC-BASED TACKIFIER AT THE RATE OF 150 LBS PER ACRE TO PREVENT EROSION. 7. FINE GRADE MULCH WITH INTEGRATED SOIL CONDITIONER SHALL BE USED IN AREAS PROXIMATE TO ARCHITECTURAL STRUCTURES TO RETURN NUTRIENTS TO THE SOIL, REDUCE MAINTENANCE AND MINIMIZE EVAPORATION. MINI-NUGGET TYPE DECORATIVE BARK MULCH MAY BE USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH SOIL CONDITIONER WHEN SPECIFIED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. MAXIMUM MINIMUM MISCELLANEOUS NOT IN CONTRACT NOMINAL NOT TO SCALE ON CENTER OPPOSITE POINT OF BEGINNING POINT OF CURVATURE PEDESTRIAN PERFORATED PROPERTY LINE POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PAVEMENT QUANTITY RADIUS REFERENCE REVISION, REVISED RIGHT OF WAY SQUARE FOOT (FEET) SIMILAR SPECIFICATIONS SQUARE STATION STANDARD TO BE DECIDED TOP OF CURB THICK TOPOGRAPHY TOP OF PAVEMENT/PAVER TOP OF RAMP TOP OF STEP TOP OF WALL TYPICAL VARIES VEHICULAR VERIFY IN FIELD WIDTH WITH WITHOUT WEIGHT YARD (YARDS) MAX MIN MISC NIC NOM NTS OC OPP POB POC PED PERF PL PVC PVMT QTY R RE REV ROW SF SIM SPECS SQ STA STD TBD TC THK TOPO TP TR TS TW TYP VAR VEH VIF W W/ W/O WT YD ARCHITECTURE AVERAGE BALLED AND BURLAPPED BOTTOM OF CURB BOTTOM OF WALL CALIPER CUBIC FOOT (FEET) CAST IN PLACE CONTROL JOINT CENTERLINE CONCRETE CONTINUOUS CUBIC DEGREE DEMOLISH, DEMOLITION DIAMETER DETAIL DRAWING EACH EXPANSION JOINT ELEVATION ENGINEER EQUAL EQUIPMENT EXISTING EXPOSED FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION FINISHED GRADE FINISH FLOW LINE FOOT (FEET) GAUGE GENERAL CONTRACTOR HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE HORIZONTAL HIGH POINT HEIGHT INCH (INCHES) IRRIGATION JOINT LENGTH LOW POINT LIGHT ARCH AVG B&B BC BW CAL CF CIP CJ CL CONC CONT CU DEG DEMO DIA DTL DWG EA EJ EL ENG EQ EQUIP EXIST EXP FFE FG FIN FL FT GA GC HDPE HORIZ HP HT (H) IN IRR JT L LP LT SITEWORK ABBREVIATIONS bluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen STONE FLATWORK EXISTING FLAGSTONE TO MATCH. AGGREGATE TYPE 1: 38" - 12" ROUNDED DARK GRAY PEBBLES, TYPE 2: 3"-6" ROUNDED DARK GRAY RIVER COBBLE notes Page 88 of 132 132 PROPERTY BOUNDARYEXISTING 5' SETBACKSIDEW A L K WEST H O P K I N S A V E N U E EXISTI N G 1 0 ' S E T B A C K EXISTING 5' SETBACKEXISTI N G 1 0 ' S E T B A C K ALLEY B L O C K 5 3 PROPO S E D 8 ' S E T B A C K PROPO S E D 1 0 ' S E T B A C K 1 2 34 6 7 8 5 10 11 12 TREE REMOVAL SUMMARY EX. CONIFER TO BE REMOVED SYMBOL TYPE SIZE QTY. EX. DECIDUOUS TREE TO BE REMOVED 4"-18" CAL. 6"-12" CAL. TOTAL MITIGATION VALUE FOR REMOVED TREES: NOTES: 1. TREES REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW RESIDENCE AND/OR IN RESPONSE TO POOR HEALTH. 2. FOR PRESERVATION OF EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN, REFER TO PLANTING PLAN (LA 200). 3. REFER TO PLANTING PLAN (LA200) FOR MITIGATION. 4. EXISTING TREE(S) TYPE, LOCATION, SIZE AND CALIPER BY OTHERS; REFER TO SURVEY. 5.ALL EXISTING TREES TO BE REMOVED ARE REPRESENTED HERE, INCLUDING THOSE NOT MEETING THE 4"/6" CALIPER STANDARD (I.E. NOT REQUIRING MITIGATION). TREE MITIGATION SUMMARY TOTAL MITIGATION VALUE OF PROPOSED NATIVE TREES (REFER TO PLANTING PLAN): TOTAL MITIGATION VALUE FOR REMOVED TREES: 4 8 LEGEND TOTAL REMAINING: EX. DECIDUOUS TO REMAIN EX. CONIFER TO REMAIN VARIOUS VARIOUS 5 7 $54,942 $2,780 $54,942 $52,162 LEGEND TREE PROTECTION FENCE EXISTING SETBACK LINE PROPERTY BOUNDARY TREE PROTECTION ZONE PROPOSED SETBACK LINE L100 03/08/2021 hpc submissionbluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen TREE #SPECIES DIAMETER (IN.) 1 2 CONIFER 14 TREE TABLE MAXIMUM MITIGATION VALUE $6462 3 4 CONIFER DECIDUOUS 8 12 $2110 $5087 5 6 CONIFER DECIDUOUS 12 12 $4748 $5087 CONIFER 14 $6462 7 CONIFER 9 $2671 8 CONIFER 12 $4748 1 L100 TREE PROTECTION FENCE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" NOTE: 1. ADDITIONAL PROTECTION OUTSIDE AT TREE DRIP LINE MAY BE REQUIRED (EX. 12 IN. OF MULCH). 2. FENCE MAY BE CONTINUOUS TO PROTECT MULTIPLE TREES 3. MAINTAIN FENCE THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION. 4. REFER TO LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL JURISDICTIONS AND GOVERNING BODIES/AGENCIES FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING TREE(S) TO REMAIN CHAINLINK FENCING TO BE PROVIDED AND MAINTAINED AT TREE DRIP LINE EXISTING GRADE TO REMAIN NO DISTURBANCE WITHIN TREE DRIPLINE TREE DRIP LINETREE DRIP LINE9 10 12 $4748 11 12 11 9 $3989 $2861 13 $5970 CONIFER CONIFER DECIDUOUS DECIDUOUS PROPOSED RESIDENCE FOOTPRINT PROPOSED HISTORIC RESIDENCE FOOTPRINT - REMOVAL OF NON-HISTORIC ADDITION EXISTING RESIDENCE FOOTPRINT 0 4 8 scale north tree mitigation plan Page 89 of 132 133 QQKSETBACK LINE LEGEND PROPERTY LINE HARDSCAPE L200 03/08/2021 hpc submissionbluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen 28'-0"8'-0"85'-6"10-11"6'-8"3'-3"3'-3"29'-9"14'-7"9'-10"3'-6" TYP 3'-6 " TYP 3'-0" TYP3'-0"TYP9"13'-2"6'-0"1'-10" 18'-3"9"1'-0"31'-10"11'-3"6'-2"1'-6"5'-9"5'-6"6'-2"12'-4"11'-11"4'-4"23'-5"5'-9" 5'-0" TYP 5'-6" 1'-6" TYP 1'-0"TYP8'-0"8'-0"4'-9"5'-10"40'-5" ALIGN GATE TO EDGE OF WINDOW ALIGN GATE TO ARCH REVEAL VARYING LENGTHS OF CONCRETE PAVERS 1'-0"TYP0 4 8 scale north layout plan WIDTH TO MATCH EXISTING 7'-0" 21'-10"7'-0"24'-1"15'-6"Page 90 of 132 134 QQKPROPERTY BOUNDARYSIDEW A L K WEST H O P K I N S A V E N U E ALLEY B L O C K 5 3 PROPO S E D 8 ' S E T B A C KS1S1L2L2 L2S1S1S1S1S1S1L2L2L2L2L1L1S1S1S1S1L2L2L2L2SETBACK LINE LEGEND PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPOSED FENCE CONCRETE PAVING GRAVEL MAINTENANCE EDGE WOOD DECKING IRREGULAR SANDSTONE PAVING STONE PAVING PLANTING RE L400 L300 03/08/2021 hpc submittalbluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen CONCRETE PAVING SNOWMELTED CONCRETE WALKWAY MAINTENANCE EDGE SANDSTONE WALKWAY WITH PLANTED JOINTS 6' FENCE SEE FENCING PLAN L301 CONCRETE PAVING SLIDING GATE CONCRETE PAVERS 6' FENCE SEE FENCING PLAN L301 SPA - NO MORE THAN 30" ABOVE OR BELOW FINISHED GRADE. EXISTING TREES TRENCH DRAIN RE CIVIL HARDSCAPE DRAIN PLANTING RE L400 GATE 6' FENCE SEE FENCING PLAN L301 6' FENCE SEE FENCING PLAN L301 SNOWMELTED CONCRETE BANDS 30" FENCE SEE FENCING PLAN L301 SANDSTONE PAVERS STEP TRANSFORMER BEAR PROOF TRASH ENCLOSURE PROPOSED UTILITY LOCATION PLANTING RE L400 DECK 6" FLOATING SIDEWALK RE 7/L800 UTILITY ENCLOSURE 6' HT 0 4 8 scale north materials plan BOLLARD LIGHT RE LIGHTING HISTORIC MARKER - RE 8/L800 MAILBOX CONDENSING UNITS RE MEP GENERATOR RE MEP WINDOW WELL GUARDRAIL BBQ CONDENSING UNIT RE MEP Page 91 of 132 135 QQKPROPERTY BOUNDARYSIDEW A L K WEST H O P K I N S A V E N U E ALLEY B L O C K 5 3 PROPO S E D 8 ' S E T B A C K SETBACK LINE LEGEND PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPOSED FENCE CONCRETE PAVING GRAVEL MAINTENANCE EDGE WOOD DECKING IRREGULAR SANDSTONE PAVING STONE PAVING PLANTING RE L400 L301 03/08/2021 hpc submission 0 4 8 scale north bluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen FENCE TYPE 1 - 6' HT - RE 1/L801 FENCE TYPE 1 - 6' HT - RE 1/L801 FENCE TYPE 1 - 6' HT - RE 1/L801 FENCE TYPE 2 - 30" HT - RE 2/L801 FENCE TYPE 3 - 6' HT - RE 3/L801 FENCE TYPE 3 - 6' HT - RE 3/L801 GATE TYPE 1 - 6' HT - RE 4/L801 GATE TYPE 1 - 6' HT - RE 4/L801 GATE TYPE 1 - 6' HT - RE 4/L801 FENCE TYPE 1 - 6' HT - RE 1/L801 GATE TYPE 2 - 6' HT - RE 5/L801 TRANSITION FROM FENCE TYPE 2 TO FENCE TYPE 3 FENCE TYPE 1 - 6' HT - RE 1/L801 fencing plan Page 92 of 132 136 LEGEND PER PLAN3B&B SPACING CORNUS ALBA 'SIBIRICA'Ca RED TWIG DOGWOOD SHRUBS TREES ABBR. EXISTING TREES QUANTITYSIZEBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESYMBOL NOTES 1. TRANSITIONS BETWEEN PERENNIAL MIXES WILL BE SOFT TRANSITION ZONES. PERENNAILS GROUND COVER SOD *ALL PERENNIALS 24" OR UNDER 30-36" HEIGHT PER PLAN485 GALPINUS MUGHO 'WHITE BUD'Ra WHITE BUD DWARF MUGHO PINE 24-36" PER PLAN6B&BPOPULUS TREMULOIDESAmQUAKING ASPEN MULTI STEM N/A PER PLAN25"POPULUS TREMULOIDESQaQUAKING ASPEN N/A 897 SF 1240 SF PER PLAN15"POPULUS TREMULA 'ERECTA'Qa COLUMNAR SWEDISH ASPEN N/A L400 03/08/2021 hpc submissionbluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen plant list Page 93 of 132 137 QQKPROPERTY BOUNDARYSIDEW A L K WEST H O P K I N S A V E N U E ALLEY B L O C K 5 3 PROPO S E D 8 ' S E T B A C KS1S1L2L2 L2S1S1S1S1S1S1L2L2L2L2L1L1S1S1S1S1L2L2L2L2LEGEND PER PLAN3B&B SPACING CORNUS ALBA 'SIBIRICA'Ca RED TWIG DOGWOOD SHRUBS TREES ABBR. EXISTING TREES QUANTITYSIZEBOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESYMBOL NOTES 1. TRANSITIONS BETWEEN PERENNIAL MIXES WILL BE SOFT TRANSITION ZONES. PERENNAILS GROUND COVER SOD *ALL PERENNIALS 24" OR UNDER 30-36" HEIGHT PER PLAN485 GALPINUS MUGHO 'WHITE BUD'Ra WHITE BUD DWARF MUGHO PINE 24-36" PER PLAN6B&BPOPULUS TREMULOIDESAmQUAKING ASPEN MULTI STEM N/A PER PLAN25"POPULUS TREMULOIDESQaQUAKING ASPEN N/A 897 SF 1240 SF PER PLAN15"POPULUS TREMULA 'ERECTA'Qa COLUMNAR SWEDISH ASPEN N/A L401 03/08/2021 hpc submissionbluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen 0 4 8 scale north planting plan Page 94 of 132 138 L800 03/08/2021 final hpcbluegreen300 south spring street l suite 202 l aspen, colorado 81611 l t 970 429 7499 l f 970 429 9499www.bluegreenaspen.com211 w hopkins l aspen, coloradopan abodedate l issue PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION © copyright bluegreen SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" FENCE TYPE 1 - TYP. L800 1 2X2 METAL POST IMBEDDED IN CONCRETE BASE AND PAINTED TO ARCH ENTRYHIDDEN FASTERNERS TYP.2X2 BOARDS, INTERIOR SIDE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ARCH ENTRY, TYP.5'-0" ELEVATIONSECTION 2X2 BOARDS, ON INTERIOR SIDE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ADDITION, TYP. 2X2 METAL POST IMBEDDED IN CONCRETE BASE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ARCH ENTRY 6'-0"INTERIOR OF PROPERTY EXTERIOR OF PROPERTY 2" TYP1"TYP4X2 BOARDS, ON INTERIOR SIDE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ADDITION, TYP.4"TYPSCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" FENCE TYPE 2 - TYP. L800 2 4X4 NOMINAL POST IMBEDDED IN CONCRETE BASE AND PAINTED TO ARCH ENTRY 1X4 BOARDS, ON EXTERIOR SIDE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ARCH ENTRY, TYP. 5'-0" ELEVATIONSECTION 1X4 BOARDS, OFFSET ON EXTERIOR SIDE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ADDITION, TYP. 4X4 NOMINAL POST IMBEDDED IN CONCRETE BASE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ARCH ENTRY2'-6"1X2 NOMINAL POST ATTACHED HORIZONTALLY TO POST 2" SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" FENCE TYPE 3 - TYP. L800 3 4X4 NOMINAL POST IMBEDDED IN CONCRETE BASE AND PAINTED TO ARCH ENTRY1X4 BOARDS, BOTH SIDES AND PAINTED TO MATCH ARCH ENTRY, TYP.5'-0" ELEVATIONSECTION 1X4 BOARDS, OFFSET ON BOTH SIDES AND PAINTED TO MATCH ADDITION, TYP. 4X4 NOMINAL POST IMBEDDED IN CONCRETE BASE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ARCH ENTRY 6'-0"1X2 NOMINAL POST ATTACHED HORIZONTALLY TO POST SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" GATE TYPE 1 - TYP. L800 4 3'-31 2"3'-4"6'-0" MAX HEIGHTADJACENT ARCHITECTURE2X2 METAL POST IMBEDDED IN CONCRETE BASE AND PAINTED TO ARCH ENTRY 2X2 METAL POST IMBEDDED IN CONCRETE BASE AND PAINTED TO ARCH ENTRY LOCKING GATE HARDWARE, DARK BRONZE FINISH SPRING-LOADED HEAVY DUTY GATE HINGE, DARK BRONZE FINISH, TYP. 1" 2X2 BOARDS, ON INTERIOR SIDE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ADDITION, TYP. 4X2 BOARDS, ON INTERIOR SIDE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ADDITION, TYP. SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" GATE TYPE 2 - TYP. L800 5 3'-0"VARIES LOCKING GATE HARDWARE, DARK BRONZE FINISH SPRING-LOADED HEAVY DUTY GATE HINGE, DARK BRONZE FINISH, TYP. 1X4 BOARDS, BOTH SIDES AND PAINTED TO MATCH ARCH ENTRY, TYP. 1X4 BOARDS, OFFSET ON BOTH SIDES AND PAINTED TO MATCH ARCH ENTRY, TYP. 4X4 NOMINAL POST IMBEDDED IN CONCRETE BASE AND PAINTED TO MATCH ARCH ENTRY 6'-0"1X2 NOMINAL POST ATTACHED HORIZONTALLY TO POST 6 L800 SANDSTONE PAVER SAND SET SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 18"-24" 12 " - 1 8 " SOD JOINT 2"-4" MAX. SANDSTONE PAVER 1" THICK SAND SETTING BED 4" CRUSHED ROCK BASE GEOTEXTILE FABRIC EXISTING SUBGRADE VARIES 2"-4" MAX.PLAN SECTION VARY SIZES OF SANDSTONE AS SHOWN SOD JOINT CUT SANDSTONE TO BE FLUSH WITH LANDSCAPE EDGER STEEL EDGING WITH ROLLED TOP, 14 GAUGE. TOP OF EDGING TO BE 1/2" ABOVE FINISH GRADE NOTES: 1. PERIMETER TO CONSIST OF CUT STONE AND LANDSCAPE EDGE FRAME 2. FIELD TO CONSIST OF IRREGULAR PAVERS OF VARYING SIZES 3. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO APPROVE LAYOUT 4. CAREFULLY REMOVE EXISTING PAVERS TO SAFE LOCATION ON SITE, MAKING SURE NOT TO BREAK UNTIL REINSTALL construction details 7 L800 SIDEWALK-FLOATING (FOR DEVELOPMENT NEAR TREES) SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 5'-0"6"4" EPOXY COATED GREASED SMOOTH DOWELS 12" ON CENTER. 2' MIN. LENGTH CENTERED ON JOINT SIDEWALK PLAN VIEW SIDEWALK CROSS SECTION CONCRETE SIDEWALK 4" EPOXY COATED GREASED SMOOTH DOWELS 12" ON CENTER. 2' MIN. LENGTH CENTERED ON JOINT 4" COMPACTED GRANULAR MATERIAL. ADJUST THICKNESS AS REQUIRED TO MISS ROOTS EXISTING SOIL. HAND OR AIR SPADE EXCAVATION 8 L800 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" HISTORIC MARKER SECTIONELEVATION 8X8 WESTERN RED CEDAR POST FINISH TO MATCH HISTORIC PAN ABODE 42" MIN2'-0"16" SONOTUBE CONCRETE FOOTING 2'-0"6X8 OFF WHITE PLASTIC PLAQUE WITH B&W PHOTO 211 w hopkins historic pan abode built in 1956 HISTORIC IMAGE QR CODE 12"8" ASPENMODERNLOGO Page 95 of 132 139 Page 96 of 132 140 Page 97 of 132 141 Page 98 of 132 142 Page 99 of 132 143 Page 100 of 132 144 Page 101 of 132 145 Page 102 of 132 146 Page 103 of 132 147 Page 104 of 132 148 Page 105 of 132 149 Page 106 of 132 150 Page 107 of 132 151 Page 108 of 132 152 Page 109 of 132 153 Page 110 of 132 154 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE75' R-O-WAlley -- BLOCK 5320' R-O-WCOA GPS-3COA GPS-6TRENCH DRAINTO DRYWELLPROPOSEDRESIDENCEEXISTING PANABODE CABINAREA INLETS(TYP.)ROOF DRAINS TODRYWELL VIABURIED PIPING4" STORM PIPETO DRYWELL(TYP.)DIRECT RAISEDWALKWAY DRAINAGETO AREA INLETS4'Ø, 10' DEEP DRYWELLWITH CONCEALEDACCESS LID(FLAGSTONE TRAY)WQCV: 139.1 CFFLAGSTONE PATH TOREMAIN AS HISTORICTRENCH DRAINBENEATH DECKTO DRYWELLOVERFLOW TOOVERTOP DRYWELLAND ENTER CITYSTORM INLETORFREVIEWBYNO.DATEPROJECT NO.REVISIONHIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. PHONE (970) 945-8676 - FAX (970) 945-2555 www.hceng.com drawn by: checked by: date: file: 1517 BLAKE AVENUE, STE 101, GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 COLORADO 811CALL BEFOREYOU DIGUtility NotificationCenter of Colorado2211011.00GR-01C.1.002ROWLAND & BROUGHTON CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE HPC SUBMITTAL -GRADING, DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN LL RDN 3/12/21 GR-01.dwgPage 111 of 132155 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0 .1 0.3 0.1 0.6 9.6 2.5 0.7 0.6 0.9 5.1 4.1 0.9 0.7 1.9 6.4 2.5 1.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 7.8 2.3 0.6 0.9 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 9.4 2.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 7.7 3.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 1.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 5.4 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.6 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.4 0.4 0.3 0.9 1.3 0.4 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.5 1.1 1.0 0.9 1.2 0.2 7.6 0.4 0.8 1.3 0.3 0.2 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Calculation Summary Label CalcType Units Avg Max Min Avg/Min Max/Min CalcPts_1 Illuminance Fc 0.80 9.6 0.0 N.A. N.A. A 1 4 B C D E 2 2.7 3 2.5 S1 S1 L2 L3 L2 S1 S1 S1 S1 S1 S1 L2 L2 L2 L3 L1 L1 S1 S1 S1 S1 MH = 3'MH = 3'MH = 3'MH = 3' MH = 3' L2 MH = 8' MH = 3' MH = 3' MH = 3' MH = 7' MH = 8' MH = 3' MH = 8' MH = 8' MH = 8' MH = 8' MH = 3'MH = 3' MH = 3' MH = 3' MH = 3' MH = 3' MH = 7' MH = 8.5' S1 S1 S1 S1 MH = 3' rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Consultants: Issuances and Revisions: COPYRIGHT 2020 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONC:\Revit Local Files\ET21_21001159.00_Pan Abode_C_Tammy.L.Dyce.rvt3/11/2021 10:53:11 AM1/4" = 1'-0" E1.0 22037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN 7600 E. ORCHARD ROAD, SUITE 250-S GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111-2539 303.796.6000 www.imegcorp.com REFERENCE SCALE IN INCHES 0 1 2 3 PROJECT # IMEG CORP RESERVES PROPRIETARY RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHTS, TO THIS DRAWING AND THE DATA SHOWN THEREON. SAID DRAWING AND/OR DATA ARE THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY OF IMEG CORP AND SHALL NOT BE USED OR REPRODUCED FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN APPROVAL AND PARTICIPATION OF IMEG CORP. © 2021 IMEG CORP. 7600 ORCHARD ROAD, SUITE 250-S GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111-2539 303.796.6000 FAX: 303.796.6099 www.imegcorp.com 21001159.00 N O R HT 1/4" = 1'-0" ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN1 Page 112 of 132 156 rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Consultants: Issuances and Revisions: COPYRIGHT 2020 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONC:\Revit Local Files\ET21_21001159.00_Pan Abode_C_Tammy.L.Dyce.rvt3/11/2021 10:53:11 AME5.0 22037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 ELECTRICAL SCHEDULES 7600 E. ORCHARD ROAD, SUITE 250-S GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111-2539 303.796.6000 www.imegcorp.com REFERENCE SCALE IN INCHES 0 1 2 3 PROJECT # IMEG CORP RESERVES PROPRIETARY RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHTS, TO THIS DRAWING AND THE DATA SHOWN THEREON. SAID DRAWING AND/OR DATA ARE THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY OF IMEG CORP AND SHALL NOT BE USED OR REPRODUCED FOR ANY OTHER PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN APPROVAL AND PARTICIPATION OF IMEG CORP. © 2021 IMEG CORP. 7600 ORCHARD ROAD, SUITE 250-S GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111-2539 303.796.6000 FAX: 303.796.6099 www.imegcorp.com 21001159.00 REFER TO SPECIFICATION SECTIONS LIGHTING 26 51 00 AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING EQUIPMENT 26 52 00 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND REQUIREMENTS. INTERIOR CORRELATED COLOR TEMPERATURE 2700K, COLOR RENDERING INDEX (CRI) AT OR ABOVE 90, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. EXTERIOR CORRELATED COLOR TEMPERATURE 2700K, COLOR RENDERING INDEX (CRI) AT OR ABOVE 80, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. CATALOG NUMBER SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE AND MATERIAL SHALL NOT BE ORDERED BY MANUFACTURER AND CATALOG NUMBER ONLY. THE COMPLETE DESCRIPTION AND THE SPECIFICATION SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CATALOG NUMBER TO DETERMINE THE EXACT MATERIAL AND ACCESSORIES TO BE ORDERED. THE FIRST MANUFACTURER LISTED IS THE BASIS OF DESIGN. VERIFY AND COORDINATE ALL CEILING TYPES WITH LUMINAIRE MOUNTING AND TRIM REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF THE LUMINAIRE ORDER. CONFIRM ALL COLORS AND FINISHES OF ALL LUMINAIRE COMPONENTS WITH ARCHITECT AND INTERIOR DESIGNER PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF THE LUMINAIRE ORDER. UNLESS INDICATED ON LIGHTING PLANS OR BELOW, REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL AND INTERIOR DESIGN ELEVATIONS, SECTIONS AND DETAILS FOR ALL SUSPENDED AND WALL MOUNTED LUMINAIRE MOUNTING HEIGHTS. DMX - DIGITAL MULTIPLEX EM - EMERGENCY BATTERY ML - MULTI-LEVEL SWITCHING O - OTHER (SEE DESCRIPTION) DALI - DIGITAL ADDRESSABLE ELV - ELECTRONIC LOW VOLTAGE LINE - LINE VOLTAGE DIMMING REM - REMOTE 0-10V - 0-10V DIMMING EB - ELECTRONIC HL - HIGH/LOW (100%/50%) STEP DIM MV - MULTI-VOLTAGE ELECTRONIC (TYPE) DRIVER: PL - POLE O - OTHER (SEE DESCRIPTION)DLED - DYNAMIC TUNABLE LED WLED - WARM DIM LED P - PERIMETER W L - WALL OLED - ORGANIC LED RLED - RETROFIT LED FR - FLANGED RECESSED UC - UNDER CABINET TLED - TUBULAR LED LAMP RGBA - COLOR CHANGING + AMBER CV - COVE SU - SURFACE LED - LIGHT EMITTING DIODE RGBW - COLOR CHANGING + WHITE CL - CEILING SURFACE SP - SUSPENDED (TYPE) LED RGB - COLOR CHANGING LED (MTG) MOUNTING:RE - RECESSED (WATT) PER: FIX - FIXTURE, FT - FOOT, LAMP CFSA - COLOR-FINISH SELECTION BY ARCHITECT [DESIGN SPECIFIC BLANKS] PAF - PAINT AFTER FABRICATION WW - WALL WASH K - KSH12 .125" ACRYLIC O - OTHER (SEE DESCRIPTION) FINISH:VW D - VERY WIDE G - TEMPERED GLASS SS - SEMI-SPECULAR CLEAR RS - REGRESSED STEEL V - ANSI/IES TYPE 5 DISTRIBUTION WD - WIDE F - FROSTED ACRYLIC R - HIGH IMPACT DR ACRYLIC RA - REGRESSED ALUMINUM IV - ANSI/IES TYPE 4 DISTRIBUTION MD - MEDIUM C - CLEAR ALZAK P - POLYCARBONATE FS - FLAT STEEL III - ANSI/IES TYPE 3 DISTRIBUTION SP - SPOT B - BAFFLE/LOUVER N - NONE FA - FLAT ALUMINUM II - ANSI/IES TYPE 2 DISTRIBUTION NSP - VERY NARROW SPOT A - .125" ACRYLIC M - MATTE DIFFUSE CLEAR (DESC) DOOR:DISTRIBUTION:BEAMWIDTH:(L/L) LENS/LOUVER:K19 - KSH19 .156" ACRYLIC LED LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE ITEM DESCRIPTION L/L MTG DIMENSIONS WATT LED DRIVER APPROVED MANUFACTURERL W H DIA. ANSI WATT S PER TYPE QTY ABSOLUTE LUMENS (MIN)VOLTS TYPE L1 SQUARE DOWNLIGHT, 65DEG BEAM, BLACK BEZEL AND BLACK TRIM. WARM DIM 3000K TO 1800K RE 6 13/64" 3" 12 W FIX LED 1 715 LUMENS 120 V 0-10V TECH ENTRA 3" LED EN3S L2 DOWNLIGHT, WALLWASH OPTIC, ALUMINUM HOUSING, SILICONE GASKET, CLEAR GLASS LENS. BRONZE POWDERCOAT FINISH. WL 4 3/4" 5 1/8" 5 1/2" 9 W FIX LED 1 421 LUMENS 120 V 0-10V BEGA 24 370 L3 DECORATIVE JELLY JAR, STEEL HOUSING, OIL RUBBED BRONZE FINISH, GLASS JAR - FINISH INTERIOR WITH HIGH TEMP WHITE PAINT. WL 5 3/4" 4 1/2" 7 1/2" 6 W FIX LED 1 5.5A19/LED/92 7/120V/D 120 V 0-10V WESTINGHOUSE 6688200, SATCO S11320 S1 BOLLARD MOUNTED DOWNLIGHT, DIE CAST MARINE GRADE ALUMINUM ALLOY HOUSING, WET LOCATIONS LISTED. BRONZE FINISH PL 6 1/4" 6 1/4" 3'-1 1/4" 12 W FIX LED 1 1386 LUMENS 120 V 0-10V BEGA 84 238 Page 113 of 132 157 COPYRIGHT 2020 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_CENTRAL_A21_NEW_jennifer.ramsey.rvt3/11/2021 4:45:40 PMA0.8022037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 MATERIAL SAMPLE BOARD EXISTING CABIN 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION NEW CEDAR WOOD SHAKE SHINGLES AVALANCHE CLIP COLOR: DARK BRONZE EXISTING 'CLASSIC' TIMBER PAN ABODE SYSTEM RESTORE LOGS TO ORIGINAL 'HISTORIC' CONDITION MASONRY CHIMNEY RESTORE CHIMNEY WITH EXISTING MASONRY BRICKS; MATCH EXISTING WHERE NEW MASONRY BRICKS ARE REQUIRED EXISTING WINDOWS COLOR: PAINT DARK BRONZE NEW WINDOWS WHERE OCCUR COLOR: DARK BRONZE EXISTING CONDITION PHOTO Page 114 of 132 158 COPYRIGHT 2020 ROWLAND + BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGNTHE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO.SCALE: SHEET TITLE: PROJECT NO:File Path:Plot Date:rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design 500 w. main st. aspen, co 81611 970.544.9006 1830 blake st. denver, co 80202 303.308.1373 Issuances and Revisions:C:\Users\jramsey\Documents\22037.00_PAN ABODE_CENTRAL_A21_NEW_jennifer.ramsey.rvt3/11/2021 4:45:40 PMA0.8122037.00 PAN ABODE 211 W. HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 MATERIAL SAMPLE BOARD NEW HOUSE 03/12/2021 HPC FINAL SUBMISSION STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF FINISH COLOR: DARK BRONZE ALUMINUM CLAD WOOD WINDOWS AND DOORS COLOR: DARK BRONZE ORNAMENTAL METAL STRUCTURAL STEEL SUPPORTS, METAL PANELS, COPING, METAL CAPS, FASCIA, DOORS, GUTTERS ETC (SEE ELEVATIONS FOR LOCATIONS) COLOR: DARK BRONZE CEDAR WOOD SIDING (SEE ELEVATIONS FOR SIZES) COLOR: NATURAL FINISH BOARD-FORMED CONCRETE + CHIMNEY ENCLOSURE (SEE ELEVATIONS FOR LOCATIONS) COLOR: NATURAL CONCRETE FINISH GUARDRAIL + WOOD SCREEN SOLID WOOD PER ELEVATIONS MATCH SIDING FINISH Page 115 of 132 159 HANDSPLIT AND RESAWN Shakes This high quality shake features a rough split face and sawn back. Popular on traditional, ranch, vacation homes, or non-residential structures designed to blend with the natural and/or rustic surroundings. Beautiful • Durable • Insulative • Wind Resistant Withstands Thermal Shock • Impact Resistant • Light Weight Watkins Sawmills Ltd. Beauty & Quality… Naturally By Page 116 of 132 160 NUMBER 1 GRADE Description: Lengths 18-inch, thickness 1/2" (medium) and 3/4" (heavy) minimums; length 24-inch, thickness 3/8", 1/2" (medium) and 3/4" (heavy) minimums. Width 4" minimum and 14" maximum. Clear heartwood; 20% maximum flat grain. Roof Exposure: 8-inch shakes - 7 1/2" maximum; 24-inch medium and heavy shakes - 10" maximum; 24-inch (3/8") shakes - 7 1/2" maximum (5" per UBC). Wall Exposure: Single course: 8" for 18-inch shake; 10 1/2" for 24-inch shake. Double Course: 14" for 18-inch shake; 18" for 24-inch shake. Recommended Use: For walls and roofs on 4:12 pitch and steeper where high quality appearance and performance is desired. PREMIUM GRADE Description: Lengths 18-inch and 24-inch; width 4" minimum, thickness 1/2" (medium) and 3/4" (heavy). Clear heartwood; 100% edge grain; no defects Roof Exposure: 7½" for 18-inch shake; 10" for 24-inch shake. Wall Exposure: Single course: 8" for 18-inch shake; 10 1/2" for 24-inch shake. Double Course: 14" for 18-inch shake; 18" for 24-inch shake. Recommended Use: For walls and roofs 4:12 pitch and steeper and where a premium quality product is needed or desired. The 100% edge grain requirement exceeds the national industry standard. • Class A, B & C fire rating may be obtained by specifying Certi-Guard permanent fire retardant Certi-Split Handsplit and Resawn shakes. • Certi-Last treated shakes are available for added longevity. Contact the treatment company for treatment warranty information, accessory product requirements (including recommended fastener types) and application details for treated cedar material. • Historical Projects: Watkins Sawmills Ltd. offers straight split/barn shake, and tapersplit products for historic accuracy. Ask your supplier for more details. Check CSSB technical manual for specific installation details. • Products are manufactured and graded in accordance with UBC Standards No. 15-3 and/or CSA 0118.1. • This is only a product description necessary for selection of materials and grades. For a new roof construction manual and/or wall manual please contact: PO Box 3280, Mission, British Columbia V2V 4J4 Telephone: (604) 462-7116 • Fax: (604) 462-7162 Email: Sales@watkinsawmills.com Toll Free: 1-800-663-8301 PO Box 314, Sumas, WA USA 98295 Telephone: (604) 462-7116 • Fax: (604) 462-7162 Email: Sales@watkinsawmills.com Toll Free: 1-800-663-8301 Watkins Sawmills Ltd. HANDSPLIT AND RESAWN Shakes CCA Page 117 of 132 161 Page 118 of 132 162 Page 119 of 132 163 Page 120 of 132 164 Page 121 of 132 165 Page 122 of 132 166 Page 123 of 132 167 Page 124 of 132 168 Page 125 of 132 169 Montana Timber Products Face Coverage and Profile Specifications Species: Cedar Standard Profile Face Reveal Face+Reveal T&G 3/8" Tongue 4"2 7/8"NA NA 6"4 7/8 NA NA 8" 6 5/8"NA NA 10"8 5/8 NA NA 12"10 5/8 NA NA Shiplap 1/2" Lap 4"2 3/4"NA NA 6"4 3/4"NA NA 8"6 1/2"NA NA 10"8 1/2"NA NA 12"10 1/2"NA NA Ch. Rustic 1 1/2"" Lap, 1/2" Lap 4"Custom Custom Custom 6"3 3/4"1"4 3/4" 8"5 1/2"1"6 1/2" 10"7 1/2"1"8 1/2" 12"9 1/2"1"10 1/2" Sq. Edge Lap 1" Lap total 4"2 1/2"NA NA 6"4 1/2"NA NA 8"6 1/8"NA NA 10"8 1/8 "NA NA 12"10 1/8 "NA NA Square Edge no profile 4"3 1/2"NA NA 6"5 1/2"NA NA 8"7 1/8"NA NA 10"9 1/8 "NA NA 12"11 1/8 "NA NA Page 126 of 132 170 SPECIFICATION SHEET - siding & trim Manufacturer Montana Timber Products Product(s) ranchwood™, no equal Aquafir™, no equal Charwood™, no equal Product Applications Exterior or Interior siding, trim, soffit, fascia, fencing, other vertical installation Coating Product Seal-Once™ - 2 face coats on exposed surfaces, 1 coat on back side Tint added per specified color selection Limited Warranty 10 years for water ingress vertical; 5 years for water ingress horizontal DIMENSIONAL SPECIFICATIONS Species Douglass Fir Cedar Grade (standard) #2 & Better Select Tight Knot (STK) Grade (optional) Clear Vertical Grain (CVG) Clear Vertical Grain (CVG), A Btr (optional) Clear Mixed Grain (CMG) Clear Mixed Grain (CMG), C Btr Moisture Content (MC) Kiln Dried (KD) to less than 15% Kiln Dried (KD) to less than 15% Nominal Width Within ¼” of full width Within ½” of full width Nominal Thickness ¾” & 1- ¾” thick ¾” & 1- ½” thick Lengths Random Length 8’-20’ Random Length 8’-16’ Net Sizing Custom Net Sizing Available Custom Net Sizing Available Profiles All available All available Textures All available All available 3605 Arthur Street Caldwell, Idaho 83646 406-215-4961 Page 127 of 132 171 BOARD FORM CONCRlffE -------------..-------, IO-!J!Prol..W b-:0-. .... .-«•-1-"- 7'• --,,.----\ ...... «t ■!ii A *""'"A-""•..- •-, ,._ ., • .,..,.., .• ,_,<r. __ "'" .. "C·><-·ho·t<1.,,,.1!"•-.:-: -----•■1 -..... , .• , .- ::t".-...-.-,:o-.- d ... .-,•·.- »r-. •-,,_,..-, ...._,..,_,.. ..... _ .... _ ... !¥'fir,, .. ""-,....., , ..... v -•w-•c.o-, .. -.... -r...,,_ ...,._,.._ .... '" f'!l:oc,1,:crc-.-.0 ....,... ... -....... ......,._,,.._'""''_.,.. ...... _. ......... _ ..... ........ _ .. ,.,_.., ....... .,,... _ _,_,,-.. ..... __ ... _... ........,._Pi,w!,fu,,,:,.=«-o,d •-............ ,....,, __ .. __ .. ..... ,- - u,o,o,,.,;.,,10 .. ..-.,.-.- IOC'M' ... -W.to,,_._,.. .,.,.. IOF':lQuUfVtHP\.U. ,01tMOf;C NfOl>l,••UIO!, <Au. t.n.A1{7ll),J90-99,MOS1lll'All vs,. t • -COM -.. ua_,,...,_,_,.,.,,._,...,_ .. _..,,.,.._,_..,.....,._.,_.. -h-.lO<...C.-,.-.-.-.c,"'°'1,-.-..:.-tl,-.._ r..,,_ _ _..-.._.,_..., ........ -..101-to._,_ ... "'Cl •f i•f",;.t ... ,_ 9't'l-':I'""""' r ..... 7'«-.<: -.,,,,.,,u,..,rlw.11>.!..-.. -• • . ..,,:.Q._.,.....H••-tr,-,r:..-"-<t tw k!'h'..t. .,,.. .. 'If - ,,,,.1 .. h • -W -.1-,,;1- _...tio,t,_...=,,,,....,.__, ... ,,_'-.;,<l<'..,...e,..._.-,q,•r,i •'1""""""7'10 _...., .. •IO')-) '"9!1>'"1",..._•""-;lop;-- _____ ,._......,.,._,_,._f/lo ... _ .. ,_ ... n o.-.. ,.. .... --•-=-- Lo!U"-- --... -_..... ,.: .... ;,-f:P",tH,tl/h - · -.,,,.,...x,'!. ... ..... -... !fl• '""•• ·•"V....e,,1.t• • .. «0•111""o4! .... . , _____ ................... - IIW'tMl".f-11,NN-•tr" ... "'111'" Nli"II 1-.. ,.....-J_. .................. ,.. ,·•·- .,.e-,i.e -• .. .:,O,C.'.d .... ...... <.#11, • r • ...-::...-.c:."ot -#"'1':l l"..;_-oi:. --t·1--:,..,.,-.- - •= ,,...:,,:,• .. , ;..-..:·· ... 1-v...,,...,- -.-... -.;,,,. .... "-.-•j = ::::: ::;:::=:!-· =-+t--- _,..,,.., ·••1;" 1-· 1 ............... Q-' .. .-....... ">""' .... ,,,or,.,.._ ..... _.,.c.,...,..-h.,, .. ., ..... ,.u,,n,.•:,... • ,..,. ..... """' .......... ....,.., .. w Page 128 of 132 172 Page 129 of 132 173 Page 130 of 132 174 Page 131 of 132 175 Page 132 of 132 176 Page 1 of 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Planning Director RE: 2019-2020 HPC Awards Selection DATE: April 14, 2021 SUMMARY: Since 1990, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission has celebrated local historic preservation successes by presenting awards to individuals, companies, and projects demonstrating excellence in preservation. HPC awards were not held in 2020. The board discussed candidates but did not finalize selections, and there was a desire to put off the presentation until it could be done in person. May is the typical time that awards occur because it is nationally recognized as “Preservation Month.” In-person presentation is still not an option, but staff recommends the board proceed. Eligible projects received Final Inspection or Certificate of Occupancy between April 2019 and April 2021. Staff proposes the awards be presented virtually at City Council on May 17th. Descriptions of the established categories are below, along with a list of eligible projects. Staff will show images and short movies of the projects at the meeting for HPC’s reference. Only projects that were relatively significant in scope and which have no outstanding enforcement issues are being presented for HPC consideration. There is no limit on the number of awards that may be presented. Within the last few years, HPC identified a point system that could be used for reference in determining which projects to recognize. Staff is not providing any scoring. The award selections are left to the board. 177 Page 2 of 3 NEW CONSTRUCTION ON A LANDMARK PROPERTY, ELIGIBLE PROJECT: None NEW CONSTRUCTION WITHIN A HISTORIC DISTRICT, ELIGIBLE PROJECTS: 534 E. Cooper Avenue 210 W. Main Street MAXIMUM OF 25 POINTS: o The quality and compatibility of design (including landscape), workmanship, and materials within the historic district (0-5 points) o Sensitivity to the adjacent buildings’ historic and architectural character (0-5 points) o The impact of the project on the surrounding neighborhood/community (0-5 points) o An outstanding example of creative work within the HPC DesignGuidelines (0-5 points) o Contribution or enhancement to the interpretation of the historic resource or Aspen history (0-5 points) RESTORATION/REHABILITATION, ELIGIBLE PROJECTS: 301 E. Hyman Avenue 124 W. Hallam Street 602 E. Hyman Avenue 541 Race Alley 223 E. Hallam Street 506 E. Main Street MAXIMUM OF 40 POINTS: o The quality and compatibility of design (including landscape) and workmanship with the historic resource (0-5 points) o The quality of new materials and restoration of historic material in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (0-5 points) o Sensitivity to the building’s historic and architectural character (0-5 points) o The impact of the project on the surrounding neighborhood/community (0-5 points) o An outstanding example of creative work within the HPC design guidelines (0-5 points) o An outstanding investment of time and money in restoring a building and landscape to it’s historic appearance (0-5 points) o Adaptive use of a historic building that enhances the interpretation of the historic resource (0-5 points) o Contribution or enhancement to the interpretation of the historic resource or Aspen history (0-5 points) 178 Page 3 of 3 THE “EXTRA EFFORT” AWARD This award is for an individual or group that has taken extra steps to preserve a historic resource. Potential Recipient: ? MAXIMUM OF 25 POINTS: o The participants’ dedication to look at creative options in an effort to find the best solution for the project (0-5 points) o The participants’ willingness to volunteer designation of a property or to sacrifice some aspect of a property’s development rights (0-5 points) o The quality of design (including landscape), workmanship, and materials (0-5 points) o Sensitivity to the district’s or building’s historic and architectural character (0-5 points) o The impact of the project on the surrounding neighborhood/community (0-5 points) THE ELIZABETH PAEPCKE AWARD This award is for an individual or group that has been a long-time preservation leader, demonstrating commitment to historic preservation or for an individual or group who has led an outstanding one-time preservation effort that has had a clear impact on Aspen. Potential Recipient: ? MAXIMUM OF 20 POINTS: o The overall quality (craftsmanship, design, landscape, programming) of their work (0-5 points) o The innovative interpretation and enhancement of Aspen’s heritage through their work (0-5 points) o Their dedication to preserving Aspen’s heritage (0-5 points) o Contribution of their work to the Aspen community (0-5 points) THE WELTON ANDERSON AWARD This award is for an individual or firm that has contributed to Aspen’s built environment through outstanding new design over a sustained period of time, or through one particularly important project. Potential Recipient: ? MAXIMUM OF 20 POINTS: o The overall quality (craftsmanship, design, landscape) of their work (0-5 points) o Sensitivity to context (0-5 points) o The innovative interpretation and enhancement of Aspen’s heritage through their work (0-5 points) o Contribution of their work to the Aspen community (0-5 points) 179