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.20210922
1 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 22, 2021 4:30 PM, WEBEX MEETING INSTRUCTIONS TO JOIN ONLINE: Go to www.webex.com and click on "Join a Meeting" Enter Meeting Number: 2556 295 7919 Enter Password: 81611 Click "Join Meeting" -- OR -- JOIN BY PHONE Call: 1-408-418-9388 Enter Meeting Number: 2556 295 7919 Enter Password: 81611 I.SITE VISIT II.ROLL CALL III.MINUTES III.A.DRAFT Meeting Minutes for June 23, 2021 minutes.hpc.20210623_DRAFT.docx III.B.DRAFT Meeting Minutes for July 14, 2021 minutes.hpc.20210714_DRAFT.docx III.C.DRAFT Meeting Minutes for August 11, 2021 minutes.hpc.20210811_DRAFT.docx IV.PUBLIC COMMENTS V.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS VI.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VII.PROJECT MONITORING 1 2 VIII.STAFF COMMENTS IX.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED X.CALL UP REPORTS XI.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS XII.OLD BUSINESS XII.A.135 W. Francis Street - Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING Memo.135 W Francis.20210922.pdf Resolution.135 W Francis.20210922.pdf ExhibitA.1_HPGuidelinesCriteria.pdf ExhibitA.2_RelocationCriteria.pdf ExhibitA.3_SetbackVariationCriteria.pdf ExhibitA.4_FloorAreaBonus.pdf ExhibitB_ReferralComments.pdf ExhibitC.Application.20210922.pdf XIII.NEW BUSINESS 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. 2 3 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met or not met. Revised April 2, 2014 3 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Jeff Halferty, Jodi Surfas, Peter Fornell, Sheri Sanzone, Kara Thompson, and Roger Moyer (4:35 PM). Staff present Amy Simon, Planning Director Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Natalie Feinberg Lopez, Historic Preservation Officer Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Cindy Klob, Records Manager APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Halferty moved to approve the minutes from June 9, 2021. Ms. Thompson seconded. Roll Call: Mr. Halferty; Yes; Ms. Surfas; Yes; Mr. Fornell; Yes; Ms. Sanzone; Abstained; Ms. Thompson; Yes. Motion passed four (4) - zero (0) - one (1). PUBLIC COMMENT None COMMISSIONER COMMENTS None DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Mr. Fornell asked Ms. Johnson if he needed to recuse himself from the meeting in case the applicant purchased affordable housing credits from him. Ms. Johnson asked if the applicant could speak to this. Ms. Kim Raymond stated she does not believe any employee housing mitigation is needed for the project. Ms. Thompson noted Mr. Moyer had joined the meeting. PROJECT MONITORING None STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Simon stated City Council reviewed the 925 King St project. City Council approved the subdivision. However, they did not approve the TDR request. Ms. Simon said she will be sending an informational memo to the board outlining the decision and some background information. 4 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Ms. Simon stated the July 14th meeting will be canceled and the hearing will be continued. NEW BUSINESS 135 W Francis St – Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus, Public Hearing Ms. Thompson asked if public notice had been provided. Ms. Johnson replied public notice had been provided in accordance with the code. Ms. Kim Raymond, Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors, displayed a portion of the Sanborn Map dated 1898 noting the location, front and side porches, rear one-story element and overall size of the structure. She then displayed a picture dated 1963 of the front of the house and a side pointing out the front brick chimney, the windows on the east elevation and the one-story element in the back that was hidden, obstructed or partially removed from the addition done in the 1980s. She next displayed a picture dated 1965 of the west side of the house pointing out the side porch was still on the building, the one-story rear element, the dormer and brick chimney that was hidden in the 1980s addition and other components of the house. She noted the single window next to the bay windows to be restored back to this look. Ms. Raymond displayed pictures of the house from 1970 and 1980. In the 1980 picture she pointed out where the ventilation pipe extended out a window and where the side porch had been removed. She displayed a picture dated 2021 of the house from the front. Next, she displayed a picture of the west side showing the addition from the mid-1980s which completely obstructed the one- story element in the rear of the house. She also pointed out where they added a window next to the single one and the vent moved to the wall next to the window. She then pointed out the two lilac bushes and pine tree they plan to save. The small lilac bush next to the house will not be saved. She displayed a 2021 picture looking at the rear of the house and noted the new addition in the back will be about the same height as the house to the east. Ms. Raymond displayed pictures and noted where the side porch had been previously located. Ms. Raymond then displayed pictures dated 2021 from inside the rear of the home. She pointed out the slope of the ceiling and stated this was part of the original one-story element. Ms. Raymond display a site plan of the existing conditions pointing out the roof of the addition consuming the rear dormer and the existing trees. Ms. Raymond then displayed demo plan of the site stating the percentage of demo area will be 28.29%. 5 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Ms. Raymond displayed the proposed site plan and indicated the trees to be saved including the cottonwoods, lilacs and the pine tree in the southwest corner of the site. She stated she spoke with Mr. Dave Radeck, Open Space Project Technician, regarding the window well near a tree. Ms. Raymond displayed floor plans of the main level and upper level. She stated the plan meets the HPC guideline of using the entire historic portion of the building. The link between the historic and new structures will contain the powder and mud rooms. There will be a glass link between the historic and new structure. She displayed a roof plan stating they will be restoring the gable roof of the single-story element. She stated the connector will have a glass roof that will follow the roof line of the historic element set just inside. The new structure will also have roof deck and it will not be visible from First St and Francis St which she believes meets the guidelines. Ms. Raymond provided elevations of the proposed restauration depicting the existing structure, what will be removed, and what is to be added back including the side porch, dormer window, front and rear chimney, and one-story element. Additional elevations show the connector and new addition. Ms. Raymond displayed renderings of the restored house. From the sidewalk in front of the house you will not be able to see the new addition. From the rear of the house, she pointed out the gable on the new structure running in the same direction as the historic structure and a dormer. Another rendering of the west corner showed the proportion of the historic and new structures which will be the same size above grade. She displayed an east elevation showing the one-story element, the glass link, and how the ridge and dormer on the new structure blocks the rooftop deck. She then displayed another east elevation showing some dimensions of the distance between the peaks of the old and new structures (36 FT 7 IN) and noted the new structure is not quite 5 FT taller than the historic resource. She stated the linking element to be restored will be 11 FT 8 IN in height and with the almost 3 FT wide glass element provides 14 FT 6 IN between the slope of the historic resource and the new addition. Ms. Raymond displayed a west elevation and noted the gable on the new addition will be slightly less steep because the steeper pitches are more Victorian. She then displayed north and south elevations as well a picture of the proposed outdoor lighting. Ms. Raymond then reviewed comments from staff and the referral agencies regarding the unmet items on the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review Criteria included in the agenda packet. Ms. Thompson asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Mr. Halferty asked to look at the proposed site plan and asked if they ever studied moving the resource to the west instead of the east. Ms. Raymond replied no and thought moving it to the east would provide more space for the trees and you would be able to see the house better from Francis St. 6 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Ms. Thompson then turned the floor over to Ms. Sara Yoon. Ms. Yoon reviewed the staff memo noting the hearing was for a conceptual review and displayed a picture of the existing condition of the property. She then reviewed what was included in the application, a description and zoning of the property. She noted there had been a permitted addition from the 1980’s. Shortly after, the property was designated. She also displayed the Sanborn map from 1904 and a picture of the resource before the addition. Ms. Yoon next reviewed the existing and proposed revised site plans. She stated the proposed site plan moves the new structure to the rear of the property. She stated staff did have a question regarding the demolition plan and the applicant provided a revised demolition plan (Exhibit I attached to the HPC Agenda for 6/23/2021) showing the proposed demolition at less than 40% so the nonconforming parking can be retained per the code. Ms. Yoon stated the applicant is proposing to reconstruct the one-story historic element to be used as the connecting element. She added the applicant is also requesting the structure to be moved forward and to the east which puts the new addition more forward of the historic resource when viewed from the N 1st St. She stated Chapter 8 discusses secondary structures and the one-story element possibly buried under the 1980’s addition would be considered an add on as part of the connecting element. This element does not completely adhere to the design guidelines because the dimensions of the one- story element are not compatible with the design guidelines. Additionally, staff finds the site context and alignment of the historic resource aligns with the other historic home located at 135 W Francis St. There is evidence of past land use applications where the resource did not move forward which seemed o be a conscious choice. Staff wants to respect the 10 FT setbacks which was the standard zoning requirement at the time the resource was constructed. Staff would like HPC to discuss this topic and provide direction to the applicant. Ms. Yoon then described the proposed addition located at the rear of the property as having a smaller footprint which is supported. However, the addition is taller than the historic resource and is using a connecting element that is wider than a traditional connector, so it doesn’t fully meet the design guidelines. The roof form of the addition is viewed as a gable roof as viewed from the north and west elevations. She noted if you walk along the alley and circle around to the front, you will see a large portion of the roof being flat to accommodate the roof deck. As a corner lot there are more stringent requirements for the form to highly compatible or to have a strong relationship with the historic resource. Staff recommends the commission discuss the form further to determine if the criteria has been fully met. She added the skylight feature on the patio could be slightly reduced so it doesn’t directly abut the historic resource to better meet guideline 9.6. Ms. Yoon stated supports the request for the 5 FT 2 IN rear yard setback variation. She noted the application requested larger light wells, but the drawings show compliant light wells, so staff 7 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 requested clarification in their memo. Based on the applicant’s presentation, they will not be requesting larger light wells so there is no need for a side yard setback variation. Ms. Yoon stated some aspects of the guidelines for to the floor area bonus request has not yet been met and recommends a restudy of the design. Ms. Yoon stated staff does support the applicant’s effort to remove the confusing non-historic addition and acknowledges the design is heading in the right direction but there a number of elements to be addressed for the application to move forward. Staff is recommending a continuance at this time with staff’s comments along with the comments from the other city agencies outlined in the memo. She displayed a list of the conditions to be met before approving the application and noted they are also in the packet on page 11. She concluded her presentation and asked if there were any questions. Ms. Thompson asked if the structure located on the corner across the street was historic and if it had been moved. Ms. Yoon said she did not have that information, but would retrieve it for 201 W Francis St. Mr. Fornell asked staff to confirm the limitations of the floor area requested. Ms. Yoon confirmed the proposed design requires 140 SF and the applicant is requesting 250 SF. She added the needed SF is verified during the building permit process and anything in excess is forfeited. Mr. Fornell asked if staff believes the applicant has provided information to confirm the existence of the one-story element and if it’s appropriate to be restored. Ms. Yoon stated they received photos of possibilities, but staff wants to understand if there is physical historic material left to weigh the importance of the alignment versus a reconstruction of an element and if the historic alignment is being compromised. The information provided in the application was unclear if there was any historic fabric left for restoration of the one-story element. Staff would like to maintain the historic alignment. Mr. Fornell believes the applicant made an argument showing alignments that have been changed so he feels it’s on staff to prove this has not been allowed historically. Ms. Yoon responded looking at land use case applications submitted prior to this application, it was noted the applications abstained from moving resources forward. If the resource for this application was moved forward, it would place it out of the alignment with neighboring structures. Mr. Fornell stated when he looks at the proposed design, he noticed the flat roof with a deck and a safety fence around it and wanted to know if an above grade setback variance was necessary. Ms. Yoon stated the language should reflect the variance is for above and below grade for a 5 FT reduction because the livable space above the garage is counted as principal space. Ms. Thompson then allowed the applicant’s civil engineer, Justin Yarnell with Yarnell consulting to respond to the comments from the engineering and parks staff. He noted some of the comments will be addressed at the time the building permit is acquired. For stormwater 8 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 management, he stated they are proposing a water quality vault that ties into the existing public system. Ms. Thompson then allowed the homeowners, Ms. Jessica DiPaola and Mr. Mark DiPaola to speak. Ms. DiPaola thanked the commission for considering the project and stated they are excited to have a second home in Aspen. She added they selected Ms. Raymond because she is a local and cares about the history and charm of Aspen as they do. Ms. Thompson then opened for public comment. No one commented so she closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Ms. Thompson then opened for commissioner discussion and asked for opinions of the relocation first. Mr. Moyer does not feel the house should be moved. He added he remains open to the floor area bonus but does not feel the project is top notch exemplary yet. Mr. Halferty doesn’t feel he has heard a good enough argument yet for moving the resource one direction or not. Normally, a resourced is moved to provide a better visual relationship with the avenue or street. Ms. Surfas agrees with Mr. Moyer and Mr. Halferty. She added there may be a case for moving it east with the existing landscaping and to give more space on 1st Ave. Mr. Fornell believes moving the structure toward Francis St will make it more prominent so under certain conditions he doesn’t have a problem with moving the house as they proposed. He is a little concerned with the connecting element and the request for the FAR bonus. He feels they addressed his concerns with the light wells. He is leaning toward allowing the move but is interested in the other commissioner’s opinions. Ms. Sanzone agrees with Mr. Moyer, Mr. Halferty and Ms. Surfas. Ms. Thompson stated she is struggling with the request to move as well because it’s a corner lot and extremely prominent. She believes there is a relationship with the structure across the street that should be preserved. Ms. Thompson stated she is not opposed to it moving to the west but would like to preserve the front alignment. Ms. Sanzone stated she was pleased the applicant highlighted the lilacs located on the eastern property line that were in the old photos and still exist today. She believes more investigation is needed because the lilacs may be on the neighbor’s property and therefore protected and they may be historic. She has not yet heard a compelling reason for moving the structure. Ms. Thompson then asked the commissioners to discuss the rear yard setback variation. She feels if the commissioners ask the house to remain further back, then the addition will need change. She added she would be open to a setback that is less than the proposed 5 FT because it impacts the alley. Mr. Moyer and Mr. Fornell were not opposed to the variance. 9 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Ms. Thompson then moved on to a discussion regarding the guidelines and some of the conditions, especially chapter 10. Ms. Sanzone stated she likes the simplicity of the link and agrees with staff that there needs to be more investigation regarding the one-story element. She understands this will be tough since it requires some demolition to see what’s there, but feels it’s needed for her to be able to support the linking element as proposed for the new addition. She is not opposed to the height of the new addition, noting its vertical orientation, small footprint and favorable relation to the neighboring house. Ms. Surfas stated if they can really prove the one-story element exists, she thinks it would be a nice way with the class to connect the historic resource with the new addition. In regard to the new addition, she agrees with Ms. Sanzone. She added if the windows were more similar to the size and shape of the existing asset, it might help. She does not feel the addition overwhelms the asset. Mr. Halferty also believes there should be more investigation into the one-story element. He believes the alignment will drive a lot concerning the one-story link. He stated the addition seems taller when viewed in the 2D, but he does not feel the indicated 5 FT 6 IN taller height does not seem that bad when perceived from 1 st Ave and the street. He asked about moving the resource towards the two streets to potentially help disguise some of the addition. Mr. Halferty agreed with Mr. Moyer and feels more study is needed before he believes he can grant the requested FAR bonus. Mr. Fornell is satisfied with the massing based on the percentages of the new versus the historic asset is well within the limitations. He wonders if the height of the addition will become a bit more intrusive if it becomes closer. He asked if they need to put a requirement on them that they need to restore the one-story element if it was determined to exist after digging into it more. Mr. Moyer feels the real issue is determining if the one-story element exists or not. If it does, he likes the glass connecting element. He feels if the tower was reduced, and the one-store element is preserved then it will be a very unique and interesting connecting element. He believes the tower could be made to better fit within the guidelines. Regarding Mr. Fornell’s questions, he doesn’t feel the commission need to decide anything until they know if the one-story element is historic or not. Mr. Moyer concurs with staff and their recommendations. Ms. Thompson feels the linking one-story element would be amazing if it is indeed historic. She feels there are many elements of this project that could be worthy of the FAR bonus and she supports figuring out the addition at this time. Ms. Thompson asked the commissioners to comment on the form of the addition. She feels the proportions are a little bit unique on how wide the gable is and how short the resource is. She believes the gable on the addition makes it look tall and skinny. She is open to not seeing a gable roof on the addition and wanted other commissioners to comment. 10 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Mr. Halferty feels because it is challenging because it’s on a corner lot. He is not sure a flat roof would be appropriate, and he is unclear which direction the gable should be running. He believes the commission needs to adhere to the chapter 10 guidelines. Ms. Thompson feels with the limited space on the lot, the ability to make proportions and the form work well is lost and she wanted to open up some flexibility. Ms. Surfas is curious about the snow shedding function of snow from the addition onto the connector. She is open to some flexibility. Mr. Fornell stated he visited the site three times today and he noticed an addition with a flat roof on a historic asset across the alley. He is open to flexibility in the guidelines. Ms. Sanzone stated she would also support flexibility in the roof form. Mr. Moyer also supports some flexibility. Ms. Thompson would like to see a lower roof. Ms. Thompson asked Ms. Raymond if there was anything she needed clarity on. Ms. Raymond displayed a photo of a historic project at 232 E Bleeker St noting it was exactly what was being suggested. She stated the resource was moved forward and to the west. The addition is more modern and does have a flat roof. She noted this lot did have more space. Ms. Raymond asked for more clarification on the context noting the guideline talks about the block, neighborhood and the whole district. She feels restricting the conversation to the just the house next door when interpreting the guideline is very limiting. She stated all but two of the previous applications included moving the resource nine to ten feet. She stated moving this house the requested four feet places it more in line with the brick house across the street. She believes the Sanborn map shows a rhythm when you go down the street. She stated if they can’t move the house forward, then they won’t have room for a garage in the back. She feels because the house next door has already been moved, the context on the block is already lost. Ms. Raymond wanted to clarify they asked for the 140 FAR bonus because if they were going to make the window wells bigger, that would have made the basement account for more. She asked what it would take to have an exemplary restoration if they are restoring the chimney, front porch, dormer, and the complete historic element. Ms. Raymond also asked if they can’t dig into the house to determine how much material is remaining from the one-story element, what do they need to show it’s historic beyond the Sanborn map the photos to prove that it was really there and it was historic. Ms. Raymond thinks it’s awesome there could be some flexibility but asked how flexible. She feels it needs to relate to the gable or be completely different. Ms. Thompson stated for her, the restoration is excellent, and she is not questioning it. Mr. Halferty agreed but reiterated chapter 10 is a very important guideline and there is a lot of variety of what’s happened to additions. 11 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Regarding the relocation, Ms. Thompson stated since it is a corner lot, she will scrutinize a bit more and will consider the context of the whole neighborhood. She feels the house should stay approximately where it currently is located. Ms. Surfas asked Ms. Raymond to provide the dimensions of the garage. Ms. Raymond responded it will barely fit a car. Ms. Raymond reiterated if the house if moved forward and over, it’s going to be mor prominent on the lot and more in alignment with the large brick house on the other corner. She added the guideline states it should be in a similar location but doesn’t need to be the same. Ms. Yoon noted there is a dilemma on the site because of the reconstruction of the one-story element impacting the location and she doesn’t believe those can be looked at separately. The memo identifies the one-story element based on the Sanborn map, but doesn’t want to limit the amount of guesswork to reconstruct it. Staff’s position is that an investigation needs to happen to identify the types of material and confirm if it is a true restoration. She wants to make sure the applicant is not pushed to restore something based on too much guesswork to preserve and restore the element when it may impact the alignment. Mr. Fornell stated when he thinks of exemplary, he thinks of a historic asset that sits on its own two feet and any attachments start to detract from the original nature of the historic asset. He suggested the applicant may want to pursue an addition that is not connected to the asset. Ms. Thompson stated the applicant always has the ability to not connect the addition with the resource. She added some sites require demo work to figure out the situation. She feels the commission needs to have more information. Mr. Halferty noted it can be inconvenient to the homeowner, but some investigation can reveal what is going on. Ms. Raymond stated the guidelines force them into a linking element. She stated they spoke with Ms. Simon about it and she though it would be a great to use the one-story element as a link. Ms. Raymond added at the time, Ms. Simon did not know the element was buried in the addition. Ms. Raymond feels over the years the guidelines are being interpreted differently. She feels these homes need to be modernized so they are usable. She doesn’t feel having a disconnected addition will be acceptable to the homeowners since their bedrooms will be in the new addition. She has had previous projects where the house was moved over 10 FT, so she is not sure why it is an issue on this particular lot. She is trying to get a garage on the back of the property that fits. She feels moving the house forward keeps it in the rhythm of the street. Ms. Raymond stated previous HPC commissions have allowed restorations of much bigger elements with far less evidence, so she is confused and surprised about the need for proof for this application. She feels the Sanborn map shows the location and size, photographs of it and what appears to be a section of the historic roof viewable from inside the structure. She feels at a loss because this is so different that what I’ve experienced before, and she is not sure where else to go. 12 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Ms. Surfas asked her to show the images again. Ms. Raymond displayed pictures showing the rear element from outside front and side of the home and inside with the possible historic roof line in the ceiling. An elevation of the addition from the 1980’s was also displayed. Mr. Fornell noted he was tolerant of the request to move the historic resource to the north and east. He asked if anyone would be comfortable with moving the asset only north. Ms. Sanzone doesn’t believe anyone doubts the one-story element existed in 1965 and possibly more currently. She believes the commissioners want to know if it is there now and the only evidence is the sloping ceiling. She is looking for evidence that shows enough of it is there so it can be restored and not rebuilt. She feels there are too many questions about what is there and can it be saved. Ms. Thompson added from the image, the fenestration shown doesn’t align with what is shown in the proposed plan. She echoed Ms. Sanzone’s comments. She feels it is a significant element that will drive the location of the addition and the relationship between the structures. Mr. Moyer asked if there is another place for the garage. Ms. Raymond responded it can’t be any further forward, but it could be located on the other side of the addition. Ms. Yoon reminded the commissioners to not get into a design discussion. Ms. Thompson believes the commission needs more information and feels the others agree on a continuation. Mr. Moyer motioned for a continuance. No one seconded this motion. Ms. Raymond stated she is fine with a continuation but requested to ask one more question. She stated not out of disrespect but noted the example of 209 E Bleeker where the whole house was not there, and it was approved to be rebuilt. She asked why the fabric of what was there so critical on the one element and she doesn’t know what they are looking for as evidence. Ms. Thompson asked Ms. Yoon for the type of information typically provided to the commission in similar situations. Ms. Yoon responded there are competing preservation outcomes. There is a historic alignment that is there, and the one-story element shown on the Sanborn map. She added applicants are not required to rebuild things because it’s on the map. Staff and the commission look at what is there for restoration. She stated if the one-story element is to be rebuilt, evidence needs to be provided. Staff and the commission want to work with the applicant to see how this would impact location. She stated typically they do look for materials and investigative probing to show there are bones to reconstruct things. Ms. Thompson added the location of the one-story element is driving the location of everything else on the site. She stated Ms. Yoon and Ms. Feinberg Lopez can provide additional information regarding what proof is being requested. 13 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Ms. Thompson moved to continue the application until July 28, 2021. Ms. Raymond agreed to the date and stated she is still lost on what she needs to do. Mr. Fornell stated he wondered this too. Mr. Halferty seconded the motion. Ms. Thompson feels the commission has provided clear directions and comments. Staff can further guide the applicant. Ms. Thompson moved to extend the meeting until 7:30 PM and was seconded by Mr. Fornell. Mr. Fornell asked if the one-story element does not show to exist today, is an option available for the element to not be recreated and a qualifying element to be created to a new conforming addition based on the guidelines. He wanted to know if the commission could provide guidance for the one-story element to be abandoned in exchange for either a qualifying linking element or a detached structure. Ms. Thompson responded as a standard for all projects, the commission is asking for proof that historic framing exists. Ms. Raymond stated she’s never been asked this before. Ms. Thompson informed her she was not muted. Ms. Thompson stated she understands historic photographs have been used before on projects for restoring front porches or other items that do not dictate how the site planning occurs. This is a unique situation, so the commission does need additional information. Mr. Halferty agreed with Ms. Thompson. Mr. Fornell also agreed with Ms. Thompson. Ms. Thompson asked for other discussion on the motion to continue the hearing. Ms. Sanzone stated she found quite a few discrepancies on the proposed site plan and landscape plan. She also noted there are two different stormwater plans in the application. She stated there is missing information in the survey to provide the grades at the base of the trees proposed to be saved and the graphic representation f the trees to be saved are shown much smaller that their actual size per the survey and aerial photographs. She would also like to see additional information confirming they are proposing to save these landscape features based on the drawings provided. She also commented the civil drawings of a proposed grading show a significant fill being added withing the drip line of the trees, which isn’t allowed because it would compromise the health of the tree. Ms. Thompson requested a roll call for the motion to continue the meeting until 7:30 PM. Roll call: Mr. Halferty, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Sanzone, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes for a total of six – zero (6 – 0). The motion passed. 14 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission June 23, 2021 Ms. Thompson requested clarification regarding if a transformer will be located on the property. Ms. Thompson asked for any other discussion and no one respond with comment. Ms. Thompson requested a roll call for the motion to continue the hearing until July 28, 2021. Roll call: Mr. Halferty, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Sanzone, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes for a total of six – zero (6 – 0). The motion passed. Ms. Thompson thanked the applicant. Ms. Thompson closed the hearing. Ms. Thompson asked staff if a hybrid meeting is possible. Ms. Yoon responded that this may be considered in November once the meetings are in the new City Hall but is not an option for meetings held at the Armory building. Ms. Thompson advocated keeping the hearings virtual but requested an in-person work session in July with the board. Mr. Fornell and Ms. Sanzone agreed. Ms. Yoon will work on organizing a date for a work session. Ms. Thompson moved to adjourn and was seconded by Mr. Moyer. All in favor. The motion passed and the meeting was adjourned. OLD BUSINESS None Cindy Klob, Records Manager 15 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission July 14, 2021 1 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Kara Thompson Commissioners not in attendance: Jeff Halferty, Jodi Surfas, Peter Fornell, Sheri Sanzone, and Roger Moyer Staff present Amy Simon, Planning Director Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Cindy Klob, Records Manager APPROVAL OF MINUTES None PUBLIC COMMENT None COMMISSIONER COMMENTS None DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST None PROJECT MONITORING None STAFF COMMENTS None NEW BUSINESS None OLD BUSINESS 303 S Galena St – Minor Development Ms. Thompson stated staff has requested additional information to be assembled to prepare for a public hearing regarding 303 S. Galena St, so she moved to continue the public hearing to September 8, 2021. 16 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission July 14, 2021 2 Ms. Thompson then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob, Records Manager 17 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission August 11, 2021 1 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) at 4:30 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Jodi Surfas, Peter Fornell, Roger Moyer, Sheri Sanzone, Kara Thompson, and Jeff Halferty (4:32 PM). Staff present Amy Simon, Planning Director Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Natalie Feinberg Lopez, Historic Preservation Officer Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Cindy Klob, Records Manager APPROVAL OF MINUTES None PUBLIC COMMENT None COMMISSIONER COMMENTS None DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Ms. Sanzone stated she has a conflict of interest involving the 930 King St application and will need to recuse herself from the hearing. PROJECT MONITORING Ms. Yoon noted there is one more edit for the list of projects provided in the packet. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Feinberg Lopez thanked Ms. Thompson and Mr. Halferty for handing out the HPC Awards at the recent City Council meeting. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED None OLD BUSINESS None 18 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission August 11, 2021 2 NEW BUSINESS 930 King St – Minor Development Review, Public Hearing Ms. Thompson asked if public notice had been provided. Ms. Johnson replied public notice had been provided in accordance with the code. Ms. Thompson then opened the hearing and turned the floor over to the applicant. Mr. Chris Bendon, BendonAdams, introduced himself and the application to refresh the existing historic landmark and non-historic rear addition to better align with the historic design guidelines. He stated Mr. Richard Wax is the principal for the applicant, 920 King Street LLC. He added Mr. Wheeler Clancy, David Johnston Architects, is attending the hearing to answer any technical questions. Mr. Bendon then described the location of the property resulting from a historic landmark lot split. A remodel occurred in 1999. Lots A and B share a driveway and a 250 SF floor area bonus was granted to the fathering parcel. Mr. Bendon displayed the property as shown on the historic Willits map dated 1893 and a current day map of the neighborhood. He stated the landmark is known as No Problem Joe’s cabin. He stated Joe lived in Aspen for over 40 years and was described as cantankerous and eccentric, but everyone loved him and would respond to requests to repair various things and earned his nickname. He even replaced the City of Aspen’s Neal Street bridge sign with his own sign stating No Problem bridge. The City eventually relented and now the renamed bridge is adjacent to the No Problem Joe trail. He lived in the cabin until his death in 1993. Mr. Bendon displayed the existing and proposed site plans along with a list of the proposed minor changes. He noted the spruce tree between the outbuildings in the back yard which is noted as a condition to the approval has been removed. The application contains no proposed building moves. He described the proposed changes to the entries of the building and the small addition to the non-historic resources for a hallway and landing for the interior stairs. He displayed and described a picture of the front of the historic structure currently and the one with the proposed changes. He also described the two proposed footprint changes on the main level including a 49 SF addition to the west elevation for a bathroom and a 22 SF addition to the east elevation to support the entry into the landmark. He then displayed current and proposed east elevations including a small expansion behind the landmark along with new windows and horizontal wood siding materials which are consistent with the landmark and design guidelines. They are also proposing to change the metal railing on top of the connecting element to a glass railing to have it recede from view. Metal accents are also proposed on the dormer and roof. Mr. Bendon displayed a picture of the front of the landmark as it currently exists and a rendering of the updated version. He also displayed a roof plan and noted a roof cricket is needed on the back side of the landmark. 19 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission August 11, 2021 3 He next displayed the elevations for the existing and proposed changes for the west elevation including the small addition for the bathroom, change in materials, changes to a light well and the rear balcony. He also displayed renderings of the current railing around the light wells and the proposed grates. Mr. Bendon displayed current and proposed elevations and renderings of the rear of the building and noted the grate on the light wells, new balcony, and updated windows. He next displayed a site plan and pointed out the location of the two outbuildings. Each will be stabilized, and the siding will be repaired. He concluded his presentation noting they are amenable to three of staff’s conditions including to work with staff and monitor of the roof material and roof cricket, the railing around the upper deck and the removal of the spruce tree. Ms. Thompson asked if there were any questions for the applicant. Mr. Halferty asked what materials are currently on the roof on the front porch. Mr. Clancy responded it is all wood shake and doesn’t drain well with the low pitch. Mr. Halferty asked if they thought about adding windows or something to the west elevation because it looks like a lot of siding. Mr. Clancy responded they thought about it, but the neighbor’s house is directly across from the driveway. They are happy to explore it further. Mr. Halferty noted it was more of a comment than question and thanked Mr. Clancy for responding. Mr. Fornell asked if the small penetration on the front roof served any purpose or not and could it be moved to the back of the house. Mr. Clancy is not certain of the purpose and is happy to explore moving it to the rear. Ms. Thompson asked if the pitch proposed for the upper-level deck is to create some vertical. Mr. Bendon stated the deck is existing, so the roof cricket is needed to manage the drainage, so it doesn’t drain onto the deck or onto the historic resource. Mr. Halferty stated even though it appears to be tall, he is okay with it since it won’t be viewable from the street. Mr. Clancy stated it was the safest approach to manage the drainage. Mr. Moyer stated the renderings show flowers up against the house and he asked if they will be kept away from the foundation. Mr. Bendon believed it was just a component of the rendering and stated if there is a parameter or condition, they are open to discussing it. Mr. Moyer stated he would bring it back up during the comments portion of the hearing. Ms. Thompson then turned the floor over to staff. Ms. Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner, introduced herself and stated she would review some high points from staff’s memo. She stated the applicant is not seeking any variations and the development requests are related to an existing addition. She provided pictures of the front of the historic landmark in 1991 and 2021. 20 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission August 11, 2021 4 Ms. Yoon then displayed an existing site plan, the applicant’s proposed site plan (as provided in the packet) and staff’s revised site plan. Staff had comments related to the spruce tree located at the rear of the property between the two outbuildings which has been removed and the lighting leading up to the front porch should be minimal as per the guidelines. She stated the applicant responded and staff emailed the response to the HPC commissioners on August 10, 2021 (Exhibit I in agenda packet). Ms. Yoon stated staff does not see a significant change in the mass and scale. She noted the addition from the late 1990’s was reviewed and approved under a different set of design review criteria. She then discussed staff’s review of the materials for the porch roof. The application originally proposed corrugated metal and then revised it to a standing seam metal roof. Staff wants to keep condition 1 to continue to work with the applicant regarding the materials, theme, pitch and profile. Next, she discussed the railing detail. The current railing detail, which was approved under an older set of guidelines, terminates into the historic roof. Because the applicant proposes to change the railing, it is an opportunity to ensure the railing does not impact the historic roof. The current design does not completely encompass the roof. The building department is requiring a railing to go around the entire deck space. Staff wants to keep condition 2 and ask the applicant to study the glass railing, so it doesn’t terminate into the roof and complies with the building code. Staff has reviewed the revised roof plan with the cricket and does not feel it meets the design guidelines because it alters the historic roof. Ms. Yoon then discussed the proposed changes to the exterior. The applicant proposed changing the materiality, but it still closely relates to the historic resource. She noted the form of the exiting addition is not changing. The fenestration is departing from a previously strong relationship with the historic resource, but staff finds guideline 10.6 does allow for this flexibility and supports the proposed changes to the exterior as well as the repairs to the existing outbuildings in the back. Ms. Yoon next reviewed the proposed fence detail provided in the packet update the day prior to the hearing. It specifically relates to the fence going around the front of the historic resource and staff finds it meets the design guidelines. Staff would like to request some edits related to the designs provided in the application update. Condition number 3 details the light fixtures on the front walkway. Staff finds it has been met with the reduction of three lights to one light. Staff also finds the removal the spruce tree has been completed. In summary, staff would like to remove conditions 3, 4 and 7 and continue with conditions 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 as identified in the agenda packet. She asked if there were any questions from the commission. Ms. Thompson asked if there was boiler language to include the drainage perimeter around the foundation. 21 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission August 11, 2021 5 Ms. Yoon responded there is no boiler language, but a condition can be amended if HPC feels strongly about it. Ms. Surfas asked if staff approves of the metal siding on the bump out on the new addition’s west elevation. Ms. Yoon responded staff feels it is compliant because the majority of the addition would still be wood siding. Ms. Thompson stated this should be a topic for the board to discuss. Mr. Fornell noted he could not find an easement with the property owner with regard to the sidewalk encroachment onto their property. He asked if this should be addressed. Ms. Johnson responded the street right of way (ROW) was set when the city was established. She added you can consistently find throughout city the ROW extends beyond the sidewalk and a ROW was never recorded at the County Clerk’s office. There is little ability of the City to legally require an easement unless it’s tied directly to the needs of the project. And even if the title work indicates the area is privately owned in the ROW, the ROW will eclipse it. Ms. Thompson added this will be part of the Building department’s review. Ms. Johnson responded it is not within the purview of HPC to address ROWs for the project. Ms. Thompson then opened for public comment. No one wanted to comment so she closed the comment portion of the hearing. Ms. Thompson then opened for board discussion. Mr. Moyer feels there were three items overlooked by staff. One was the plants up against the house foundation and moving sprinkler heads moved away from the foundation as well. Another issue is he feels the west wall is a little overbearing and could possibly use a couple of windows. And the third item was moving the roof vent on the south side. He added as long as the railing does not screw into the roof, it could easily be avoided. He has no issue with the design. Mr. Moyer feels it is sensible to have a metal roof of the front porch. Mr. Moyer is not opposed to the front yard fence. He concluded stating he agrees with staff’s comments. Mr. Halferty thanked the applicant for their cohesive application. In regard to the roof, he is okay with some additional study and detailing and for staff to monitor it going forward. For the fenestration, he feels going from the double hung windows to case windows is appropriate. The glass railing is always tricky to detail and he is okay with staff monitoring the architecture of the railing. He understands the challenges of the roof plan and would like to see the roof plan protect the historic resource and have it minimally viewed from the street. Mr. Halferty feels the windows on the west side seem large and would like additional attention regarding the architecture look and feel to be as cohesive as possible. He feels it looks like a blank wall and would like to see some kind of articulation or limited fenestration. He feels the light wells are a 22 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission August 11, 2021 6 better choice than railings. He also appreciates the protection and proposed uses of the outbuildings. He agrees with Mr. Moyer regarding the drainage plan. It would be nice if the roof vents could be moved, but he doesn’t feel it’s that important. He would vote for approval with the remaining conditions from staff’s memo. Ms. Thompson believes the windows on the west wall would be beyond staff monitoring if they are asking for a restudy. Ms. Surfas noted her earlier comment regarding the metal siding. She visited the site and from her review, she believes the windows on the far left were removed because of the location of the kitchen. And potentially the windows on the right do not need to go away. She feels it is a big surface area without punctuation. She has no issue with the railing and believes it is a much nicer application than what’s there now. She noted if the roof material had a matte finish, it would be very hard to see. Mr. Fornell stated he is satisfied with the glazing as presented. Ms. Thompson summarized the board’s comments and noted her comments. 1. Continued study of the details of the porch materials, but metal is acceptable. She agrees with the other board members. 2. Continued study and work with staff of the railing. She agrees it needs more work with staff and monitoring to minimize the impact to the historic framing. 3. Request for at least 8 IN of space between the exterior walls and planting. She agrees with Mr. Moyer. 4. Request for the relocation of the roof vent to be further explored. She agrees with this as well. She commended the applicant on the restoration efforts in the front porch, updated siding and maintaining the outbuildings. She also agrees with the others regarding the west façade. Ms. Yoon suggested the staff and monitor process could address this and there is the option to bring it back to the board for further review if staff was not comfortable with the fenestration change. A condition could be added to clarify this. Mr. Halferty moved to approve the application for 930 King St with conditions 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 and condition 10 that deals with the staff and monitor of the fenestration of façade change on the west elevation on the upper level. Mr. Moyer seconded the motion. Ms. Thompson requested to amend the motion to include the applicant to explore relocating the vent on the front of the historic resource and revise condition 8 to provide for a planting schedule for staff and monitor and require 8 IN of area between the foundation walls and plantings around the historic resource. Mr. Halferty so amended his motion to include Ms. Thompson’s requests. Mr. Moyer seconded. There was no further board discussion. 23 Regular Meeting Historic Preservation Commission August 11, 2021 7 Mr. Clancy asked for time to speak. He asked about the roofing materials and Ms. Feinberg Lopez responded it could be discussed at a later time. Mr. Clancy added the windows had been removed from the west elevation in response to the neighbor requesting they be removed since they do a lot of entertaining on their deck. He added they are open to discussing it further. Ms. Yoon clarified the changes. She asked if a 1 FT border request was acceptable, and Ms. Thompson agreed. Ms. Yoon identified a restudy of the west elevation as a staff and monitor situation review process and the relocation of the existing vent at the front of the historical resource. Ms. Thompson agreed. Ms. Thompson requested a roll call vote. Roll call: Ms. Surfas, yes; Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Halferty, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes for a total of five – zero (5 – 0). The motion passed. Ms. Thompson closed the hearing. Ms. Thompson requested site visits to be included back on the agenda. Ms. Johnson stated they would have to be noticed. Ms. Simon responded they had been removed due to the public health order. She stated they could be included again. Ms. Johnson noted if the board generally supports site visits, they could be reinstated but would need to be reevaluated if public health orders impacted them in the future. Ms. Thompson stated if staff feels there would be benefit for the board to visit the site together on projects, she would be in favor of it. Mr. Halferty agreed. The other board members agreed. Mr. Fornell moved to adjourn and was seconded by Ms. Thompson. All in favor. The motion passed and the meeting was adjourned. Cindy Klob, Records Manager 24 Page 1 of 7 130 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: September 22, 2021 RE: 135 W. Francis Street – Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT /OWNER: Francis Street Holdings LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors LOCATION: Street Address: 135 W. Francis Street Legal Description: Lot A and the West One-Half of Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2735-124-21-001 CURRENT ZONING & USE R-6 (Moderate-Density Residential); Duplex, may not be legally established PROPOSED ZONING & USE: Single family home SUMMARY: The applicant requests approval for Conceptual Major Development to demolish the existing non-historic addition, relocate the historic resource on a new basement foundation and construct a new addition to the rear of the property. Setback variations and a floor area bonus of 60 s.f. are requested for this proposal. As a historically designated landmark, this project is exempt from Residential Design Standards Review (RDS). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with conditions listed on page 6 of this memo for the proposed design. Site Locator Map – 135 W. Francis Street 135 25 Page 2 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com BACKGROUND: 135 W. Francis Street is a 4,500 s.f. corner lot in the R-6 zone district that contains a Victorian era miner’s cabin. This property was designated historic via Ordinance No.77-1981. Shortly after its designation, the current addition was approved and completed in 1984. Building permit files indicate changes occurred to the south elevation of the historic resource around 1969, but more significant changes were made during the 1980s remodel and expansion. Exterior alterations occurred over time, however, according to the 1904 Sanborn map (Figure 2), the home appears to occupy the original location on the site. Currently there is one other historic property to the east that aligns in terms of front yard setback with this property along West Francis Street. REQUEST OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) The Applicant is requesting the following land use approvals: • Major Development (Section 26.415.070.D) to demolish the non-historic addition from the 1980s and construct a new addition to the rear of the property. • Relocation (Section 26.415.090) to lift the historic home and place it on a new basement foundation but maintain the same historic location on the site. • Setback Variation (Section 26.415.110.C) request for the new addition, above and below grade. • Floor Area Bonus (Section 26.415.110.F) request for a 60 s.f. floor area bonus for the proposed design and restoration efforts. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is the final review authority, however, this project is subject to Call-up Notice by City Council. Figure 1 – 135 W. Francis, 2021 Figure 2 – Sanborn Map, 1904 Figure 3 – 135 W. Francis, July 1963 Source: Aspen Historical Society 26 Page 3 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to remove the impactful addition from the 1980s and restore the south elevation of the historic resource. Since the project is a corner lot, three of the four elevations are clearly exposed and visible to the public which makes design compatibility of critical importance. The applicant proposes to maintain the location of the historic home on the lot. The proposed new addition is connected to the historic resource with a 10’ long connecting element. The applicant requests setback variations for the rear and west side yards and a 60 s.f. floor area bonus. STAFF COMMENTS: Following the July 28th HPC hearing, the applicant redesigned the project to address the comments related to relocation and building form. The revised proposal maintains the historic home’s setback relationship to the lot and reduces the length of the connecting element to 10’. The form of the new addition utilizes gable roofs that relate to the historic home. To maintain the original site placement of the resource, rear yard setback variations were slightly increased so the new addition could be appropriately distanced from the resource. Overall, staff finds the revised design meets the Design Guidelines and applicable land use code criteria, but staff recommends HPC further discuss the wing wall architectural detail on the west elevation of the new addition and the overall compatibility of new roof form. Staff recommends HPC further discuss the following topics in more detail. 1. Site Planning & Relocation & Parking: The applicant proposes to lift the historic resource to excavate the basement and create positive drainage once the resource is set on the new foundation. The Design Guidelines support slight changes to the finished grade to address drainage issues, but the applicant must clearly demonstrate the level of change for review (Design Guideline 9.4). If there is evidence of a historic stone foundation it must be restored, otherwise, the new foundation may be a simple concrete finish or a foundation clad with painted metal flashing (Design Guideline 9.5). Lightwells are proposed for the livability of the subgrade space. The lightwell adjacent to the historic home does not abut the foundation as designed. Additional details are required for this light well and it will need to be screened from the street according to Design Guideline 9.6. The stormwater mitigation plan calls for a water quality vault and 8” drain basin grates along the east side of the property. The Design Guidelines require minimal visual impact of elements associated with stormwater mitigation and drainage at the foreground of the resource. In addition, the applicant will need to coordinate with the Parks and Engineering Departments about their comments to site impacts on existing trees. See Exhibit B for more details. This property does not appear to currently have any code compliant parking spaces. According to the code, a single-family residence must provide two code compliant parking spaces (Code Section 26.515.040). If the project does not trigger the 40% demo threshold, the applicant may retain the existing non-conformity related to parking. The proposed design provides for one compliant parking space in the proposed one car garage. 2. Historic Landmark – Restoration: A preservation plan will be required to call out the existing conditions and the proposed restoration of the historic resource. Staff supports the applicant’s proposal to restore important architectural features such as the chimney and the secondary porch with the supporting historic documents as a guide for the restoration. As part of the preservation plan, additional evidence must be provided for the front porch entry that is currently accessed from the side. The 27 Page 4 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com existing non-historic addition constructed in the 80s will be removed and the areas covered by non- historic material will be restored in accordance with the design guidelines. Staff supports the removal of the detrimental non-historic addition and the restoration of historic home guided by historic maps, photos and physical evidence. 3. New Addition – Form, Materials and Fenestration: The proposed new addition is a two-story tall structure behind the historic home along the alley. The height of the new addition closely relates to the height of the historic home and the flat roof form has been replaced with gable roofs where visible from the street. While staff finds the gable roof solution to be more in line with the Design Guidelines, a sizable portion of the proposed roof is a flat roof deck. Staff requests HPC discuss the design of the proposed roof forms in its entirety. The building footprint of the new addition is minimal in size and the proposed material and fenestraion relate to the historic resource. To create articulation in the new addition, the applicant proposes wing walls on the west elevation that project into the side yard setback. Staff requests this detail be discussed in conjuction with the request for the side yard setback. Figure 4 – Proposed West Elevation (along N. 1st Street) from July 28th Figure 5 – Revised West Elevation (along N. 1st Street) 4. Setback Variations & Floor Area Bonus: Setback variations and floor area bonuses are benefits available to historic properties granted by the HPC. They are site-specific approvals that are tied to a design reviewed for compatibility and appropriateness. Setback Variations: The applicant requests a reduction of the 10’ rear yard setback requirement for the livable space above and below grade. The building footprint of the garage encroaches into the rear 28 Page 5 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com yard setback by 2’-8” where 5’-0” is required. This request is directly linked to the historic home staying in its historic location on the lot. The livable space above and below grade require a setback reduction of approximately 7’-4” as designed. The livable space above grade is specifically the deck on top of the garage, which does not create additional mass. Staff supports the requests associated with the rear yard setback because it mitigates adverse impacts to the historic resource. The west side yard setback request is for the extruded wing walls on the new addition. This design element is visible from the west elevation and provides articulation, however, when viewed from the north (front) elevation, it has some visual impact. Staff recommends HPC discuss the appropriateness of this design detail and the request for the side yard setback variation. See ExhibitA.3 for staff findings. Floor Area Bonus: The applicant has pointed out different areas for restoration of the historic resource that include the restoration of a secondary porch as seen in historic photos and the removal of an impactful non-historic addition. A 4,500 s.f. lot is eligible for a maximum of a 250 s.f. bonus, of which the applicant requests 60 s.f of additional floor area for the proposed design. Staff finds the request for a floor area bonus is met with the revised design and the plans for restoration of the historic resource. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The application was referred out to other City departments who have requirements that will significantly affect the permit review. Please see Exhibit B for full comments. Zoning Department: 1. Provide zoning summary sheet and update dimensional requirements form. 2. Review site plan comments and provide clarifying information: dimensions, projections in the setbacks, proposed topography, etc. 3. Confirm floor area calculations on sheets A.1.05-A 1.07. 4. Provide height over topography sheet. 5. Provide demolition calculations. 6. See comments on elevation sheets A.3.01-A.3.04. Parks Department: 1. Move water quality vault to the south to keep excavation away from the cottonwood. 2. Keep all stormwater piping out of driplines of trees, especially the cottonwoods in the NW corner. 3. Move window well in the SE corner to the south side of the house and use a one-sided pour for remaining window well. 4. Air-spading is required in driplines of all trees for curb and gutter and any other driplines that are impacted by activity. 5. Inspection of exposed roots by City Forester will be required before any root cutting can occur. 6. Fence post locations within the driplines of trees will need to be approved by the City Forester. 7. Irrigation of all grass and trees will be required throughout the project. 8. Remove Item 3 in Notes on Page C2. 9. Plan on enclosing most of the front and side yard with a 6' tree protection fence. 10. Carefully remove existing storm inlet and piping within the dripline of cottonwood. 11. Submit for a tree removal permit. 29 Page 6 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com Building Department: 1. Fire sprinklers are required because the fire area exceeds 5,000 s.f. Exterior walls and projects will not need to be fire-rated because they are more than three feet from the property line. 2. Snow stops will be required at all roof pitches that shed onto walking and driving paths and into emergency escape and rescue opening window wells. 3. If edge of the spa is within 18” of the edge of roof deck, the guard around the spa is to be extended an additional 18”. Engineering Department (previous comments that may be applicable): 1. Major Development within the Urban Runoff Management Plan is triggered. The proposed water quality vault must be at least 10’ from the property corners. Infiltration vaults follow the same guidelines as a drywell. Variances may be requested by Engineering. 2. Confirm that the transformer capacity is sufficient for new the proposal. Work with City Electric to determine capacity. 3. Verify if the structure will have a fire suppression system and call out water service line size. 4. Engineering and Parks must examine excavation for the proposed water quality vault. No excavation is allowed within the right-of-way or tree drip lines of large trees. 5. Provide stabilization information for the proposed relocation of the historic resource at building permit. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC continue this application with the following direction: 1.) Continue to work with the relevant City Departments regarding the preliminary stormwater mitigation and drainage plans for the site and clarify the anticipated visual impacts for the plan for Final Review. Minimize visible impacts of stormwater features in the foreground of the historic resource. 2.) Provide detailed roof plan showing the location of gutters, downspouts, snow clips and vents, for Final Review. 3.) Lightwell curb heights to be 6” or less in height. Provide curb height information for lightwell adjacent to the historic resource and appropriate screening will be required. 4.) Provide a detailed Preservation Plan including existing conditions documenting investigation of historic framing and proposed treatment, to be reviewed by staff and monitor prior to building permit submission. Special attention is required for the front entry porch as part of this plan. 5.) A 60 sf floor area bonus is granted for the approved design. 6.) The following setback variation for the proposed addition is granted: • 2’-8” rear yard setback reduction for the proposed garage, as represented in the approved application • 7’-4” rear yard setback reduction for the living spaces on the upper level and below grade, as represented in the approved application • 1’-0” west side yard setback reduction for extruded architectural features on the west elevation of the new addition • 1’-0” combined side yard setback reduction 7.) Provide financial assurances of $30,000 for the relocation of the historic home onto a new basement foundation, to be provided prior to building permit submission. 30 Page 7 of 7 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5197 | cityofaspen.com 8.) 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. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution #____, Series of 2021 Exhibit A.1 – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit A.2 – Relocation Review Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit A.3 – Setback Variations Review Criteria / Staff Findings Exhibit A.4 – Floor Area Bonus / Staff Findings Exhibit B – Referral Comments Exhibit C – Application 31 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2021 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2021 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, RELOCATION, SETBACK VARIATIONS AND A FLOOR AREA BONUS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET, LOT A AND THE WEST ONE-HALF OF LOT B, BLOCK 56, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2735-124-21-001 WHEREAS, the applicant, Francis Street Holdings LLC, represented by Kim Raymond Architects + Interiors, has requested HPC approval for Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and a Floor Area Bonus for the property located at 135 W. Francis Street, Lot A and the West One-Half of Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; 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. As a historic landmark, the site is exempt from Residential Design Standards review. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090, Relocation; and WHEREAS, for approval of Setback Variations, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.C, Setback Variations; and WHEREAS, for approval of Floor Area Bonus, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110.F, Floor Area Bonus; and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with applicable review standards and recommends approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on June 23, 2021, July 28, 2021 and September 22, 2021. HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comment, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of _-_. 32 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2021 Page 2 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus for 135 W. Francis Street, Lot A and the West One-Half of Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO as follows: Section 1: Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and a Floor Area Bonus. HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus as proposed with the following conditions: 1. Continue to work with the relevant City Departments regarding the preliminary stormwater mitigation and drainage plans for the site and clarify the anticipated visual impacts for the plan for Final Review. Minimize visible impacts of stormwater features in the foreground of the historic resource. 2. Provide detailed roof plan showing the location of gutters, downspouts, snow clips and vents, for Final Review. 3. Lightwell curb heights to be 6” or less in height. Provide curb height information for lightwell adjacent to the historic resource and appropriate screening will be required. 4. Provide a detailed Preservation Plan including existing conditions documenting investigation of historic framing and proposed treatment, to be reviewed by staff and monitor prior to building permit submission. Special attention is required for the front entry porch as part of this plan. 5. A 60 s.f. floor area bonus is granted for the approved design. All calculations will be confirmed during building permit review. Bonus floor area not used for this project will be forfeited and must be earned through a future request. 6. The following setback variation for the proposed addition is granted: • 2’-8” rear yard setback reduction for the proposed garage, as represented in the approved application • 7’-4” rear yard setback reduction for the living spaces on the upper level and below grade, as represented in the approved application • 1’-0” west side yard setback reduction for extruded architectural features on the west elevation of the new addition • 1’-0” combined side yard setback reduction 7. Provide financial assurances of $30,000 for the relocation of the historic home onto a new basement foundation, to be provided prior to building permit submission. 8. 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 representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation 33 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2021 Page 3 of 3 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 22nd day of September, 2021. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: ________________________________ ________________________________ Katharine Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Kara Thompson, Chair ATTEST: ________________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager 34 Page 1 of 14 Exhibit A.1 Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings NOTE: Staff responses begin on page 13 of this exhibit, following the list of applicable guidelines. 26.415.070.D Major Development. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. 3. Conceptual Development Plan Review b) The procedures for the review of conceptual development plans for major development projects are as follows: 1) The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for conceptual or final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. 2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. 3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. 4) A resolution of the HPC action shall be forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 - Appeals, notice to City Council, and call-up. No applications for Final Development Plan shall be accepted by the City and no associated permits shall be issued until the City Council takes action as described in said section. 35 Page 2 of 14 Chapter 1: Site Planning & Landscape Design MET NOT MET 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. 1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. 1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. Chapter 2: Rehabilitation - Building Materials MET NOT MET 2.1 Preserve original building materials. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. 2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. 2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. 2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material. Chapter 3: Rehabilitation - Windows MET NOT MET 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. 3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. MET MET MET MET CONDITION MET MET CONDITION Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review Criteria for 135 W. Francis Street The applicant is requesting Conceptual Major Development review for restoring the historic resource and a new above grade addition. The proposed design must meet applicable Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. MET MET MET MET CONDITION CONDITION MET MET MET MET MET MET MET MET MET 36 Page 3 of 14 Chapter 4: Rehabilitation - Doors MET NOT MET 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. 4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the building. 4.7 Preserve historic hardware. Chapter 5: Rehabilitation - Porches & Balconies MET NOT MET 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details. 5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate. 5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail. Chapter 6: Rehabilitation - Architectural Details MET NOT MET 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. 6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts. Chapter 7: Rehabilitation - Roofs MET NOT MET 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. 7.9 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. 7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible. Chapter 9: New Construction - Excavation, Building Relocation & Foundations MET NOT MET 9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. MET MET MET MET MET MET MET CONDITION CONDITION MET MET CONDITION MET MET MET MET MET MET MET CONDITION MET CONDITION CONDITION MET CONDITION 37 Page 4 of 14 Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines: 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. • Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood. • Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful open space visible from the street. 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. When HPC input is requested, the following bullet points may be applicable. • Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining historic ancillary buildings or constructing new ones. • Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add landscape. • Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged. • Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas. • Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged on a case by case basis. 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. • If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. Chapter 10: New Construction - Building Additions MET NOT MET 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features.MET MET MET MET MET CONDITION MET MET CONDITION CONDITION CONDITION 38 Page 5 of 14 • Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for driveways on Aspen Victorian properties. 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. • Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a semi- public walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. • Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of the period of significance. • Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks. • The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. • Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than many small unusable areas. • Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building. 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. • When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be reviewed and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal. • Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the historic landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site, reduce the generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the ground. Stormwater facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should have minimal visual impact when viewed from the public right of way. • Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements. 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. 39 Page 6 of 14 1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. 1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. • An analysis of the historic landscape and an assessment of the current condition of the landscape should be done before the beginning of any project. • The key features of the historic landscape and its overall design intent must be preserved. 1.27 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. 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. 40 Page 7 of 14 • Any material that covers historic materials may also trap moisture between the two layers. This will cause accelerated deterioration to the historic material which may go unnoticed. 2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material. • Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material. 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. • Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows. • Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them. • Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration glass for the repair. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. • Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate. • Do not change the size of an original window opening. 3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. • If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the sash have divided lights, match that characteristic as well. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. • Changing the window opening is not permitted. • Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past. 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. • A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. • The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. • Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. • Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. • If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. • Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible. 41 Page 8 of 14 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. 4.7 Preserve historic hardware. • When new hardware is needed, it must be in scale with the door and appropriate to the style of the building. • On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any modern elements such as entry key pads. 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. • Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and spacing of balusters. • Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details. • Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate. 5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate. • Reopening an enclosed porch or balcony is appropriate. 5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail. • Match original materials. • When reconstructing an original porch or balcony without historic photographs, use dimensions and characteristics found on comparable buildings. Keep style and form simple with minimal, if any, decorative elements. 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. 42 Page 9 of 14 • 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. • Using ornate materials on a building or adding new conjectural detailing for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. • Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen from the street. • Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing. • Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. • Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource. • AspenModern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key character defining features of the architectural style. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. • Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures. • Locate vents on non-street facing facades. 43 Page 10 of 14 • Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. • Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists. 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. • 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. 9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. • In general, on-site relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. • In a district, where numerous adjacent historic structures may exist, the way that buildings were placed on the site historically, and the open yards visible from the street are characteristics that should be respected in new development. • Provide a figure ground study of the surrounding parcels to demonstrate the effects of a building relocation. • In some cases, the historic significance of the structure, the context of the site, the construction technique, and the architectural style may make on-site relocation too impactful to be appropriate. It must be demonstrated that on-site relocation is the best preservation alternative in order for approval to be granted. 44 Page 11 of 14 • If relocation would result in the need to reconstruct a substantial area of the original exterior surface of the building above grade, it is not an appropriate preservation option. 9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. • It must face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. In general, a forward movement, rather than a lateral movement is preferred. HPC will consider setback variations where appropriate. • A primary structure may not be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. • Be aware of potential restrictions against locating buildings too close to mature trees. Consult with the City Forester early in the design process. Do not relocate a building so that it becomes obscured by trees. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. • Raising the finished floor of the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable if needed to address drainage issues. A substantial change in position relative to grade is inappropriate. • Avoid making design decisions that require code related alterations which could have been avoided. In particular, consider how the relationship to grade could result in non-historic guardrails, etc. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. • On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and is not allowed. • Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate. • Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. • New AspenModern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure preservation of the design intent. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. • The size of any lightwell that faces a street should be minimized. • Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining features, such as front porches. • Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a street. • Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” in the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site. 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. • The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the HPC. • During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door and 45 Page 12 of 14 window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration. • The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process. Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis and may require special conditions of approval. • A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. • For Aspen Victorian properties, HPC generally relies on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps to determine which portions of a building are historically significant and must be preserved. • HPC may insist on the removal of non-historic construction that is considered to be detrimental to the historic resource in any case when preservation benefits or variations are being approved. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. • A new addition must be compatible with the historic character of the primary building. • An addition must be subordinate, deferential, modest, and secondary in comparison to the architectural character of the primary building. • An addition that imitates the primary building’s historic style is not allowed. For example, a new faux Victorian detailed addition is inappropriate on an Aspen Victorian home. • An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. • Proposals on corner lots require particular attention to creating compatibility. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. • The historic resource must be visually dominant on the site and must be distinguishable against the addition. • The total above grade floor area of an addition may be no more than 100% of the above grade floor area of the original historic resource. All other above grade development must be completely detached. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: o The proposed addition is all one story o The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource o The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource o The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically o The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the street o There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed o The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or o The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. 46 Page 13 of 14 • An addition shall be distinguishable from the historic building and still be visually compatible with historic features. • A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material, or a modern interpretation of a historic style are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from historic construction to new construction. • Do not reference historic styles that have no basis in Aspen. • Consider these three aspects of an addition; form, materials, and fenestration. An addition must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • Note that on a corner lot, departing from the form of the historic resource may not be allowed. • There is a spectrum of appropriate solutions to distinguishing new from old portions of a development. Some resources of particularly high significance or integrity may not be the right instance for a contrasting addition. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. • An addition that is lower than, or similar to the height of the primary building, is preferred. 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. • Locating an addition at the front of a primary building is inappropriate. • Additions to the side of a primary building are handled on a case-by-case basis and are approved based on site specific constraints that restrict rear additions. • Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. • A simple roof form that does not compete with the historic building is appropriate. • On Aspen Victorian properties, a flat roof may only be used on an addition to a gable roofed structure if the addition is entirely one story in height, or if the flat roofed areas are limited, but the addition is primarily a pitched roof. 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. • Loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices, and eavelines must be avoided. Staff Finding: The applicable sections of the design guidelines are as follows: site planning, building materials, windows, doors, roofs, porches, and building additions. Design Guidelines 1.8, 1.11 and 1.27 address topics related to site planning and landscape design. There are mature trees surrounding this property. The applicant will need to coordinate with the Parks Department on tree protection, root disturbance and mitigation. Preliminary stormwater mitigation plans were submitted with this application and staff supports the provision of positive drainage on the site but will need to review the exact changes in grade to determine its appropriateness. Any plans for excavation must comply with the requirements of both the Engineering and the Parks Department. Stormwater mitigation features must also have minimal 47 Page 14 of 14 visual impact on the site, particularly if it is proposed in the foreground of the resource. Staff requires this information be provided at Final Review. The landscape plan will also be reviewed in more detail during the Final Review. Design Guideline Chapters 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are related to the preservation plan and need to include thorough research and documentation of physical historic evidence and its condition. Restoration is proposed as part of the scope of work as it relates to the request for a floor area bonus. In specific, staff finds the side entrance to the front porch to be unusual and recommends additional study of the framing to understand if it is a historic condition or an alteration. Please see Exhibit A.4 Floor Area Bonus Criteria and Staff Findings for more details regarding the restoration and preservation plan request. All preservation and restoration efforts must be based on historic documentation and/or physical historic evidence. Design Guidelines 1.23, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6 and 9.7 speak to excavation and foundation details for the historic resource. Re-grading the site is generally not allowed but slight changes to the finished floor to address drainage issues is supported. When the historic resource is placed on a new foundation, it is important that the new foundation be a simple concrete finish, or a foundation covered with a painted flashing. If there is evidence of a historic stone foundation, this detail must be restored as part of the project. There is one lightwell that is being proposed adjacent to the historic resource. As designed, this lightwell is street-facing but does not abut the building foundation. If it is properly screened from view, this lightwell is allowed. Staff recommends this be addressed with the landscape plan for Final Review. Design Guidelines 10.11 speaks to the design of the roof form of the new addition. The guidelines ask for a simple roof form that does not compete with the historic resource. When viewed from the street-facing facades, the gable forms show compatibility but there is a large portion of this roof that is a flat roof top deck. Staff recommends additional discussion regarding this feature to determine the level of design compatibility. Staff finds the revised proposal meets the Design Guidelines but recommends HPC discuss the proposed roof form in more detail. 48 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A.2 Relocation Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.090.C Relocation: Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. 26.415.090.C - Relocation. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards:MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or N/A 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or .N/A 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or N/A 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and MET DITION Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met:MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation;CONDITION 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and N/A 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. CONDITION Review Criteria for 135 W. Francis Street The applicant is planning to lift the historic home and place it back in its historic location on the site. The relocated historic resource is proposed to sit on a new basement foundation. Summary of Review Criteria for Relocation Request 49 Page 2 of 2 Staff Finding: The applicant proposes to excavate a large subgrade living space under the historic resource which will require the historic home to be lifted. The revised design proposes to place the historic home back in its historic location on the site apart from making sure the home is parallel to the existing property lines. The revised design preserves the surroundings of the historic home and meets the relevant Design Guidelines related to site planning. The plan to create positive drainage around the historic resource is supported with the understanding that raising the finished floor of the building slightly is acceptable for positive drainage. Unless there is evidence of a historic masonry foundation, the new foundation is to be a simple concrete finish or a foundation clad with painted metal flashing. All excavation related activities must adhere to the guidelines provided by other City Departments related to tree drip line disturbances. The relocation of the home must be performed by a contractor with experience in moving historic homes and sufficient reports from an engineer must be submitted ensuring the structure will be able to withstand the physical impacts of the move. A financial assurance in the amount of $30,000 will be required when submitting for the building permit. Staff finds the relocation criteria is met. 50 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit A.3 Setback Variations Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.110.C Variations: Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variations of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Finding: The revised design locates the new addition towards the rear of the property while the historic resource remains in its historic location. Maintaining the historic site placement of the home was considered a significant feature that needed to be preserved. For this reason, the new addition is closer to the alley to provide an adequate distance between the old and new construction. This design requires the massing of the new addition to encroach into the rear yard setback. The footprint of the garage requires 2’-8” reduction while the below grade living space 2. In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation:MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a.) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b.) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. MET Review Criteria for 135 W. Francis Street HPC may grant dimensional variations of the Land Use Code to allow for development in the side, rear and front setbbacks. The applicant is requesting Setback Variations for the rear yard setback and the west side yard setback. MET Summary of Review Criteria for Setback Variation Request 26.415.110.C - Variation. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be requried by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 51 Page 2 of 2 and the living space on top of the garage require a 7’-4” reduction. The needed rear yard setback variations are as follows: • 7-4” reduction of the rear yard setback for the living spaces on the upper level and below grade • 2’–8” reduction of the rear yard setback for the garage The design of the new addition includes wing walls that extend into the side yard setback by approximately 1’-0.” Staff finds that this feature does not directly pose any adverse impacts to the historic resource and provides needed articulation to the mass of the new addition on the West elevation but would like to open this item up for discussion since it also creates a visual impact when viewed from the front of the property. The request for a west side yard setback variation is as follows: • 1’-0” reduction of the west side yard setback for the architectural feature on the new addition • 1’-0” reduction of the combined side yard setback The requested setback variations help maintain the building patterns of the surrounding areas and mitigate adverse impacts to the historic resource. Staff finds the criteria are met for the rear yard setback variation request and recommends HPC discuss the west side yard setback variation request. 52 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit A.4 Floor Area Bonus Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.110.F Floor Area Bonus: 1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. The potential bonus is determined by net lot area such that a 3,000-5,999 square foot lot is eligible for a maximum of a two hundred fifty (250) square foot floor area bonus, a 6,000-8,999 square foot lot is eligible for a maximum of a three hundred seventy five (375) square foot floor area bonus and a 9,000 square foot or larger lot is eligible for a maximum of a 500 square foot floor area bonus. Floor area bonuses are cumulative. More than one bonus may be approved up to the maximum amount allowed for the lot. If a property is subdivided, the maximum bonus will be based on the original lot size, though the bonus may be allocated amongst the newly created parcels to the extent permitted. On any lot where a historic property is permitted a duplex density while a non-historic property is not, the increased allowable floor area that results from the density will be deducted from the maximum bonus that the property may receive. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that the project meets all of the following criteria: a) The historic building is the key element of the property, and the primary entry into the structure, and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; and b) If applicable, historically significant site and landscape features from the period of significance of the historic building are preserved; and the applicant is undertaking multiple significant restoration actions, including but not limited to, re-opening an enclosed porch, re-installing doors and windows in original openings that have been enclosed, removing paint or other nonoriginal finishes, or removing elements which are covering original materials or features; and c) The project retains a historic outbuilding, if one is present, as a free standing structure above grade; and d) The applicant is electing a preservation outcome that is a high priority for HPC, including but not limited to, creating at least two detached structures on the site, limiting the amount of above grade square footage added directly to a historic resource to no more than twice the above grade square footage of the historic resource, limiting the height of an addition to a historic resource to the height of the resource or lower, or demolishing and replacing a significantly incompatible non-historic addition to a historic resource with an addition that meets current guidelines. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. 53 Page 2 of 3 3. The decision to grant a floor area bonus for major development projects will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Subsection 26.415.070.D. 4. Floor area bonuses are only available for single-family, duplex or 100% affordable housing development. A property shall receive no more than 500 square feet total. The award of a bonus is project specific. At such time that more than 40% of an addition to a historic resource that was constructed as part of a project which previously received a floor area bonus is demolished, the bonus may be retained only if the proposed redevelopment is found to meet the requirements of this Section. 5. Separate from the floor area bonus described above, on a lot that contains a historic resource, HPC may exempt wall exposed by a light well that is larger than the minimum required for egress from the calculation of subgrade floor area only if the light well is internalized such that it is entirely recessed behind the vertical plane established by the portion of the building façade(s) closest to any street(s), the light well is screened from view from the street by building walls or fences, and any addition that is made to the affected resource simultaneous or after the construction of the light well is entirely one story. LOT SIZE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA BONUS REQUESTED FLOOR AREA BONUS 4,500 SF 250 SF 60 SF To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that the project meets all of the following criteria: MET NOT MET DOES NOT APPLY a) The historic building is the key element of the property, and the primary entry into the structure, and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; and b) If applicable, historically significant site and landscape features from the period of significance of the historic building are preserved; and the applicant is undertaking multiple significant restoration actions, including but not limited to, re-opening an enclosed porch, re-installing doors and windows in original openings that have been enclosed, removing paint or other nonoriginal finishes, or removing elements which are covering original materials or features; and c) The project retains a historic outbuilding, if one is present, as a free standing structure above grade; and N/A d) The applicant is electing a preservation outcome that is a high priority for HPC, including but not limited to, creating at least two detached structures on the site, limiting the amount of above grade square footage added directly to a historic resource to no more than twice the above grade square footage of the historic resource, limiting the height of an addition to a historic resource to the height of the resource or lower, or demolishing and replacing a significantly incompatible non-historic addition to a historic resource with an addition that meets current guidelines. MET MET MET Review Criteria for 135 W. Francis Street The applicant is requesting for a 60 sf Floor Area Bonus for restoration efforts that include the removal of a detrimental addition and the reconstruction of historic building features, such as the secondary porch and rear dormer. Summary of Review Criteria for Floor Area Bonus Request 26.415.110.F - Floor Area Bonus. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. The potential bonus is determined by net lot area such that a 3,000-5,999 square foot lot is eligible for a maximum of a two hundred fifty (250) square foot floor area bonus, a 6,000-8,999 square foot lot is eligible for a maximum of a three hundred seventy five (375) square foot floor area bonus and a 9,000 square foot or larger lot is eligible for a maximum of a 500 square foot floor area bonus. Floor area bonuses are cumulative. 54 Page 3 of 3 Staff Finding: A 4,500 s.f. landmark lot is eligible for up to a 250 s.f. floor area bonus, and the applicant requests for 60 s.f. of additional floor area for this application. When this property was remodeled in the 1980s, an addition was added to the historic resource with a continuous roofline that extended from the historic resource. This has created a confusing condition making it difficult to distinguish the historic resource from the addition when viewed from North 1st Street. During this remodel a one-story historic addition located to the east side of the property was either removed or significantly altered. The applicant proposes to remove the inappropriate addition and restore the rear of the historic resource using historic documentation. Staff supports the removal of the non-historic addition. One of the criteria for a bonus includes the restoration and preservation of important historical features and the removal of non-original finishes covering historic fabric. The restoration of the secondary porch and the chimney have been called out as features for restoration work. Staff requires a preservation plan outlining all of the proposed preservation work be accompanied by thorough research and documentation. As part of the scope for restoration, staff recommends additional research be done on the front porch entry. The plans indicate a side entry to the front door which is unusual and needs to be clarified. If it is determined through the research that there in not enough documentation or physical evidence for the features, it would not be seen as a restoration and reconstruction would not be appropriate. Floor area bonuses are specifically awarded to a design that is reviewed and approved by HPC. While a certain level of leeway for calculation error is acceptable to “pad” the bonus, it is important that the applicant request only that which is needed for the design. Additionally, if any portion of the bonus remains unused, this amount will be forfeited as stated in the resolution for approval. Please revise the floor area bonus request to just want is needed for the execution of the design. Staff finds that the criteria for a floor area bonus is met with the revised design. 55 Exhibit B - Referral Comments HP Project: 135 W. Francis Street Parks Department Comments: Dave Radeck, david.radeck@cityofaspen.com 1. Move water quality vault to the south to keep excavation away from the cottonwood. 2. Keep all stormwater piping out of driplines of trees, especially the cottonwoods in the NW corner. 3. Move window well in the SE corner to the south side of the house and use a one sided pour for remaining window well. 4. Air-spading is required in driplines of all trees for curb and gutter and any other driplines that are impacted by activity. 5. Inspection of exposed roots by City Forester will be required before any root cutting can occur. 6. Fence post locations within the driplines of trees will need to be approved by the City Forester. 7. Irrigation of all grass and trees will be required throughout the project. 8. Remove Item 3 in Notes on Page C2. 9. Plan on enclosing most of the front and side yard with a 6' tree protection fence. 10. Carefully remove existing storm inlet and piping within the dripline of cottonwood. 11. Submit for a tree removal permit. Building Department Comments: Bonnie Muhigirwa, bonnie.muhigirwa@cityofaspen.com 1. Fire sprinklers will be required because the fire area exceeds 5,000 sq ft. With fire sprinklers, the exterior walls and projections will not need to fire- rated because they are more than three feet from the property line. 2. Snow stops will be required at all roof pitches that shed onto walking and driving paths and into emergency escape and rescue opening window wells (Ordinance 40, 2016). 3. The edge of the spa appears to be within 18” of the edge of the roof deck. This will require the guard around the spa to be extended an additional 18” (https://www.cityofaspen.com/DocumentCenter/View/6202/Hot-Tub-and- Spa-Safety-Railings) 56 Engineering Department Comments: Hailey Guglielmo, hailey.guglielmo@cityofaspen.com 1. Applicant will be required to follow the requirements of a major development within the Urban Runoff Management Plan. The conceptual HPC plan shows the installation of a water quality vault to account for stormwater requirements. The plans show an infiltration vault to accommodate the WQCV within 10’ of two property lines. Infiltration vaults must follow the same guidelines as drywells. Drywells must be 10' from property corners. If there are no alternatives a variance is required to allow an infiltration vault within 10' of the property lines. The variance shall address proper separation from the hydrant so as not to cause freezing issues. 2. The plans show a transformer across the alley. Does this transformer serve the property and does the existing transformer have capacity for the increased use? Will this property require a new transformer? Work with the City Electric Department to determine available capacity. A Load Calc Form will be required at time of building permit. 3. The conceptual plans show a new water service line. At building permit also show abandonment of the existing line. Verify if the structure will have a fire suppression system and call out water service line size. If a 2” is requested provide a memo from the fire suppression company stating a smaller line size will not provide adequate flows. 4. Excavation for the proposed water quality vault must be examined with the Engineering and Parks Departments. No excavation will be allowed within the ROW or the tree drip lines of the large trees in the vicinity. 5. Application calls out the historic building to be relocated for excavation. What is the proposed system for stabilization? At building permit, provide excavation and stabilization plans. Include information on how the structure will be supported. 57 MEMORANDUM TO: Sarah Yoon FROM: Sophie Varga, Zoning Enforcement Officer DATE: 09/16/2021 RE: 135 W Francis – LPA 21-016 Please see the residential zoning checklist for a list of what should be shown on the zoning summary sheet, site plans, demolition calculations, floor area calculations, roof plans, and elevations. The checklist can be found here: https://www.cityofaspen.com/280/Documents-and-Permits. Examples of the sheets can also be found on this page. 1. Please update Attachment 3 to the Land Use Packet, Dimensional Requirements Form, to accurately represent the proposed varied setbacks. 2. Please provide a zoning summary sheet. Please provide a table showing the Net Lot Area calculation. 3. Site Plans – Plan Sheets: A.1.01, A.1.02 a. Existing: show roofline/roof eaves. b. Proposed: i. Show roofline/roof eaves ii. The outline of the addition is unclear. Please increase the weight of the lines showing the addition. iii. The topographic lines shown on the proposed site plan are those of the natural grade. The proposed topography should be shown on the proposed site plan. iv. Dimension any proposed projections into the setback. The land use application requests a variance for egress wells in the setback. Please be sure to dimension those. 4. Floor Area Calculations – Plan Sheets: A.1.05 - A.1.07. a. Existing: i. It appears that a sheet of existing FA Calculations is missing. Subgrade wall exposure and the table is missing. ii. Lower level: the entry way counts towards the deck allotment. The stairs to the basement also count towards deck. iii. Main level: show the exterior porches and decks. If it is exempt space, note why - the covered West entry steps are exempt per the front porch exemption, the back deck is exempt because it is within 6” of grade (I believe), etc. Please provide photos of the southern deck. iv. Upper level: 1. No method of entry is shown for the North or South sides of the space. How do you get up to these spaces? Please show the stairs and count any landings towards floor area. 58 2. Provide a dimensioned section specific to the floor area sheet showing what areas have thirty vertical inches or less between the finished floor level and the finished ceiling. b. Proposed: sheet A.1.07 is also provided as sheet A.1.03. I believe A.1.03 is an error; please only provide one of these sheets. i. Main Level: The stairs adjacent to the garage are not shaded. Please confirm they are counted towards floor area. ii. Upper Level: Provide a dimensioned section specific to the floor area sheet showing what areas have thirty vertical inches or less between the finished floor level and the finished ceiling. iii. Rooftop Deck Level: The top-most interior level of the vertical circulation (stairs) is exempt from floor area calculations. 5. Please provide a height over topography sheet. 6. Please provide demolition calculations. 7. Elevations – Plan Sheets: A.3.01- A.3.04 a. Please show natural and finished grade. b. Please see zoning checklist for other requirements. c. The garage door appears partially subgrade. d. If the pitch of the southern portion of the historic structure is 8:12 or greater the chimney may not extend above the highest ridge of the structure by more than required by adopted building codes or as otherwise approved by the Chief Building Official to accommodate safe venting (26.575.020.F(4)a) This memorandum summarizes major items. Zoning would request to review the updated plans prior to floor area benefits being granted. A variety of other requirements may be necessary for building permit submittal and zoning review. 59 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, 2020 City Use: Fees Due: $ Received $ Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Property Phone No.: Owner (“I”): Email: Address of Billing Property: Address: (Subject of (send bills here) application) I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No., Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $ flat fee for $ flat fee for $ flat fee for $ flat fee for For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $ deposit for hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: Phillip Supino, AICP Community Development Director Name: Title: 60 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, 2020 City Use: Fees Due: $ Received $ Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Property Phone No.: Owner (“I”): Email: Address of Billing Property: Address: (Subject of (send bills here) application) I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No., Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $ flat fee for $ flat fee for $ flat fee for $ flat fee for For Deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for no-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render and application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $ deposit for hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: Phillip Supino, AICP Community Development Director Name: Title: 61 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, 2020 ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application PROJECT: APPLICANT: Name: Address: Phone #: Fax#: E-mail: REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: Fax#: E-mail: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Name: Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) Historic Designation Certificate of No Negative Effect Certificate of Appropriateness Minor Historic Development Major Historic Development Conceptual Historic Development Final Historic Development Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) Demolition (total demolition) Substantial Amendment Historic Landmark Lot Split 62 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, 2020 General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration? Does the work you are planning include interior work, including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration? Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time? In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places Property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits? If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in Conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.) If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use: Rehabilitation Loan Fund Dimensional Variances Tax Credits Increased Density Conservation Easement Program Waiver of Park Dedication Fees Conditional Uses Historic Landmark Lot Split 63 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, 2020 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): 64 65 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Sarah Yoon, sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com DATE: January 6, 2021 PROJECT LOCATION: 135 W. Francis REQUEST: Major Development, Relocation, and Setback Variations DESCRIPTION: 135 W. Francis is a Victorian landmark structure on a 4,500 sf corner lot. This property is in the R-6 residential zone district. The historic Sanborn map reveals the original building footprint was altered when the existing non-historic addition was added. Building records indicate an addition was constructed as part of a remodel in the early 1980s. The applicant proposes to remove the non-historic addition and construct a new above grade addition that meets the current Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. If the proposed design requires the historic resource to be underpinned for excavating a subgrade addition, relocation criteria will be triggered as part of the review process. Additionally, as a historically designated landmark property the applicant may request for historic preservation benefits (Section 26.415.110). HPC review for Major Development, Relocation, and Setback Variations are anticipated. Major Development is a two-step process, requiring the approval of Conceptual Design and a Final Design. Conceptual Design review will consider mass, scale and site plan. At this meeting, HPC will consider any benefits requested by the applicant. Following Conceptual, staff will inform City Council of the HPC decision, allowing them the opportunity to uphold HPC’s decision or to “Call Up” aspects of the approval for further discussion. This is a standard practice for all significant projects. Following the Notice of Call Up, HPC will conduct Final Design review to consider landscape, lighting and materials. 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. RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: Section Number Section Title 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.070.D Historic Preservation – Major Development 26.415.090 Relocation of Designated Historic Properties 26.415.110 Historic Preservation – Benefits 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential (R-6) For your convenience – links to the Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below: Land Use Application Land Use Code Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review by: Staff for completeness and recommendations HPC for decisions City Council for notice of the HPC Conceptual decision 66 Public Hearing: Yes, at Conceptual and Final Neighborhood Outreach: No Referrals: 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. Planning Fees: $1,950 for 6 billable hours of staff time. (Additional/ lesser hours will be billed/ refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.) This fee will be due at Conceptual and Final submittal. Referral Agencies Fee: $0. Total Deposit: $1,950. APPLICATION CHECKLIST: Below is a list of submittal requirements for HPC Conceptual and Final reviews. At each review step, please email the entire application as one pdf to sarah.yoon@cityofaspen.com. The fee will be requested after the application is determined to be complete. Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement. Pre-application Conference Summary (this document). Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application. Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. HOA Compliance form (Attached). List of adjacent property owners for both properties within 300’ for public hearing. An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. A written description of the proposal (scope of work) and written explanation of how the proposed development and any requests for variations or benefits complies with the review standards and design guidelines relevant to the application. A proposed site plan. 67 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. 68 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; 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. Form 5030000 (1-31-17)Page 1 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Commitment COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued By FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 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,First American Title Insurance Company, a Colorado 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 six months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. First American Title Insurance Company If this jacket was created electronically, it constitutes an original document. 69 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; 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. Form 5030000 (1-31-17)Page 2 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS (a) "Knowledge" or "Known": Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records. (b) "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. (c) "Mortgage": A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. (d) "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. (e) "Proposed Insured": Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) "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. (g) "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. (h) "Title": The estate or interest described in Schedule A. 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, this 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: (a) the Notice; (b) the Commitment to Issue Policy; (c) the Commitment Conditions; (d) Schedule A; (e) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; (f) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and (g) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. 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 (a) 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: (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. (b) 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. (c) 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. 70 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; 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. Form 5030000 (1-31-17)Page 3 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) (d) 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. (e) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any. (f) 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. (g) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy. 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT (a) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment. (b) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. (c) 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. (d) 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. (e) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company. (f) 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. 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. 71 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; 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. Form 5033708-A (4-9-18)Page 4 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule A ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule A Transaction Identification Data for reference only: Issuing Agent: Winter VanAlstine Issuing Office: Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC Issuing Office's ALTA® Registry ID: 1019587 Loan ID No.: Commitment No.: 20004632 Issuing Office File No.: 20004632 Property Address: 135 West Francis Street, Aspen, CO 81611 SCHEDULE A 1. Commitment Date: November 6, 2020 at 07:45 AM 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount Premium A. ALTA Owners Policy (06/17/06)$6,000,000.00 $10,270.00 Proposed Insured: Koufax LLC, a Colorado limited liability company Certificate of Taxes Due $25.00 Endorsements: CO-110.1 (Delete 1, 2, 3, 4)$75.00 Additional Charges:$0 B. ALTA Loan Policy (06/17/06)$2,880,000.00 $150.00 Proposed Insured: FirstBank, its successors and/or assigns as their interests may appear Endorsements: CO-100 (Comprehensive Improved Land)$50.00 CO-110.1 (Delete 1, 2, 3, 4)$25.00 Additional Charges:$0 Total $10,595.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is Fee simple. 4. The Title is, at the Commitment Date, vested in: Fabry Family Trust 72 SCHEDULE A (Continued) This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; 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. Form 5033708-A (4-9-18)Page 5 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule A 5. The land referred to in the Commitment is described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO For informational purposes only, the property address is: 135 West Francis Street, Aspen, CO 81611. Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC By: Winter VanAlstine Authorized Officer or Agent FOR INFORMATION PURPOSED OR SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COMMITMENT, CONTACT: Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC, 715 West Main Street, Suite 202, Aspen, CO 81611, Phone: 970 925-7328, Fax: 970 925-7348. 73 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; 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. Form 5030008-BI&BII (5-18-17)Page 6 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule BI & BII ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII Commitment No: 20004632 SCHEDULE B, PART I Requirements All of the following Requirements must be met: 1. The 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. 2. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. 3. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. 4. 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. 5. Payment of all taxes and assessments now due and payable as shown on a certificate of taxes due from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent. 6. Evidence that all assessments for common expenses, if any, have been paid. 7. Final Affidavit and Agreement executed by Owners and/or Purchasers must be provided to the Company 8. Special Warranty Deed must be sufficient to convey the fee simple estate or interest in the land described or referred to herein, from the Fabry Family Trust, to Koufax LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, the proposed insured, Schedule A, item 2A. NOTE: C.R.S. Section 38-35-109(2) requires that a notation of the purchaser's legal address, (not necessarily the same as the property address) be included on the face of the Deed to be recorded. 9. Full disclosure from Seller, of any monetary liens and open Deeds of Trust of record. If you have any knowledge of an outstanding obligation secured by the subject property, you must contact us immediately for further review prior to closing. 10. Deed of Trust from Koufax LLC, a Colorado limited liability company to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County for the benefit of FirstBank to secure an indebtedness in the principal sum of $2,880,000.00. 11. A true and correct copy of the Trust Agreement which creates the Fabry Family Trust, providing, among other things, the designation of the trustee(s) and specification of the trustee(s) powers under that trust. 74 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII (Cont.) Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 7 of 16 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado 12. Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of Fabry Family Trust, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172 and C.R.S. Section 38-30-108.5. 13. A copy of the properly signed and executed Operating Agreement if written, for Koufax LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to be submitted to the Company for review. 14. Certificate of Good Standing from the Colorado Secretary of State for Koufax LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. 15. Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of Koufax LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172. 16. Receipt by the Company of the appropriate Lease Affidavit indemnifying the Company against any existing leases or tenancies, and any and all parties claiming by, through or under said lessees. 17. Improvement Survey Plat sufficient in form, content and certification acceptable to the Company. Exception will be taken to adverse matters disclosed thereby. 18. This Title Commitment is subject to underwriter approval. 75 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; 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. Form 5030008-BI&BII (5-18-17)Page 8 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule BI & BII ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII (Cont.) Commitment No.: 20004632 SCHEDULE B, PART II Exceptions THIS COMMITMENT DOES NOT REPUBLISH ANY COVENANT, CONDITION, RESTRICTION, OR LIMITATION CONTAINED IN ANY DOCUMENT REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SPECIFIC COVENANT, CONDITION, RESTRICTION, OR LIMITATION VIOLATES STATE OR FEDERAL LAW BASED ON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, HANDICAP, FAMILIAL STATUS, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN. The Policy will not insure against loss or damage resulting from the terms and provisions of any lease or easement identified in Schedule A, and will include the following Exceptions unless cleared to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the Public Records, but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the Public Records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct land survey and inspection of the Land would disclose, and which are not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown in the Public Records. 5. Any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter that appears for the first time in the Public Records or is created, attaches, or is disclosed between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements are met. Note: Exception number 5. will be removed from the policy provided the Company conducts the closing and settlement service for the transaction identified in the commitment 6. Any and all unpaid taxes, assessments and unredeemed tax sales. 7. Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. 8. Any water rights, claims of title to water, in, on or under the Land. 9. Taxes and assessments for the year 2020, and subsequent years, a lien not yet due or payable. 76 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII (Cont.) Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 9 of 16 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado 10. Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Act authorizing the issuance of the Patent for the City and Townsite of Aspen, recorded March 1, 1897, in Book 139 at Page 216 as Reception No. 060156. 11. Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under Ordinance No. 6 (series of 1959, An Ordinance Accepting a Map Entitled "Official Map of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, State of Colorado," as the Official Map of the City of Aspen: Providing for Dedication of all Streets and Alleys, Except Such Streets and Alleys Heretofore Vacated; And Providing for the Filing of Said Map, Field Notes, and Supplemental Plats with the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County, dated November 2, 1959, and recorded December 18, 1959, in Book 189 at Page 354 as Reception No. 109043; and any and all notes, easements and recitals as disclosed on the Willets Map recorded November 12, 1969 in Plat Book 4 at Page 27 as Reception No. 137902. 12. Any existing leases or tenancies, and any and all parties claiming by, through or under said lessees. NOTE: Upon receipt of a Lease Affidavit from Seller, this exception will not appear on the final title policy. 77 Form 5000000-EX (7-1-14)Page 10 of 16 Exhibit A ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Exhibit A File No.: 20004632 The Land referred to herein below is situated in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and is described as follows: Lot A and the West One-half of Lot B, Block 56, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. 78 Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 11 of 16 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to C.R.S. 30-10-406(3)(a) all documents received for recording or filing in the Clerk and Recorder’s office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one-half of an inch. The Clerk and Recorder will refuse to record or file any document that does not conform to the requirements of this section. NOTE: If this transaction includes a sale of the property and the price exceeds $100,000.00, the seller must comply with the disclosure/withholding provisions of C.R.S. 39-22-604.5 (Nonresident withholding). NOTE: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that “Every title insurance company shall be responsible to the proposed insured(s) subject to the terms and conditions of the title commitment, other than the effective date of the title commitment, for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title insurance company, or its agent, conducts the closing and settlement service that is in conjunction with its issuance of an owner’s policy of title insurance and is responsible for the recording and filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed. Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, the company will not issue its owner’s policy or owner’s policies of title insurance contemplated by this commitment until it has been provided a Certificate of Taxes due or other equivalent documentation from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer’s authorized agent; or until the Proposed Insured has notified or instructed the company in writing to the contrary. The subject property may be located in a special taxing district. A Certificate of Taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer’s authorized agent. Information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner’s policy commitments containing a mineral severance instrument exception, or exceptions, in Schedule B, Section 2. A. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and B. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner’s permission. NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2, 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: A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B. 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. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic’s and material-men’s liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of the 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. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. 79 Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 12 of 16 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado NOTE: Pursuant to C.R.S. 38-35-125(2) no person or entity that provides closing and settlement services for a real estate transaction shall disburse funds as a part of such services until those funds have been received and are available for immediate withdrawal as a matter of right. NOTE: C.R.S. 39-14-102 requires that a real property transfer declaration accompany any conveyance document presented for recordation in the State of Colorado. Said declaration shall be completed and signed by either the grantor or grantee. 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 an ALTA Closing Protection Letter which may, upon request, be provided to certain parties to the transaction identified in the commitment. Nothing herein contained will be deemed to obligate the company to provide any of the coverages referred to herein unless the above conditions are fully satisfied. 80 TELEPHONE 970 925-7328 FACSIMILE 970 925-7348 ATTORNEYS TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY OF ASPEN, LLC 715 West Main Street, Suite 202 Aspen, CO 81611 Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V. of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through it affiliates, from sharing non-public personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC. We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: Information we receive from you, such as on application or other forms. Information about your transactions we secure from out files, or from our affiliates or others. Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customer to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. 81 82 83 84 Francis Street Holdings, LLC 135 W Francis Street Aspen, CO 81611 February 4, 2021 To Whom It May Concern: This letter authorizes Kim Raymond and her team of architects at Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors to represent Francis Street Holdings, LLC through the HPC review and permitting process. Kim can be found at 418 E Cooper Street, Suite 201, Aspen, CO 81611. The office number is 970-925-2252. kim@krai.us. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Respectfully, Francis Street Holdings, LLC by Mark DiPaola, manager 85 86 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: 273512421001 on 02/12/2021 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com 87 201 WEST SMUGGLER LLC HOUSTON , TX 77056 2121 SAGE RD #333 LEWIS TOBY D TRUST LYNDHURST, OH 441243773 5150 THREE VILLAGE DR #1E CMML PROPERTIES LLC NEW YORK, NY 10022 120 E 56TH ST #320 234 W HALLAM/302 N 2ND ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 234 W HALLAM AVE BARNHART PAUL F JR HOUSTON, TX 77056 2121 SAGE RD #333 ARGON LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 533 E HOPKINS AVE 3RD FL LEMKIN TODD & KASEY TRUST LOS ANGELES, CA 90077 10771 BELLAGIO RD 111 WEST FRANCIS LLC GREENWICH, CT 06831 28 ROCK RIDGE AVE 100 W FRANCIS LLC COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 3595 ANCHORAGE WY DILLON DEE E MISSION HILLS, KS 66208 5910 OAKWOOD RD HENRY FREDERICK B TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 100 W HALLAM ST 210 WEST FRANCIS LLC NAPLES, FL 34102 255 13TH AVE S #202 KAPLAN NATHALIE 2020 QPRT NEW YORK, NY 10022 600 MADISON AVE 16TH FLR FREEDMAN RYAN D WAYNE, PA 19087 PO BOX 638 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 130 S GALENA ST 212 WEST FRANCIS LLC NAPLES, FL 34102 255 13TH AVE SOUTH #202 WINTON CHARLES & BARBARA REV TRUST BERKELEY, CA 94705 2949 AVALON AVE LEWIS JONATHAN D TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 414 N FIRST ST 234 W HALLAM LLC SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94118 207 MAPLE ST CONTINENTAL HOTEL HOLDINGS LLC NEW YORK, NY 10010 15 E 26TH ST #602 HANSON LUCY C PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 1775 FIR ST 308 NORTH FIRST LLC FLORHAM PARK, NJ 07932 325 COLUMBIA TURNPIKE #202 MINTY ASPEN LLC BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 9777 WILSHIRE BLVD #500 FAMILLIE ALPENHAUS LLC MILWAUKEE, WI 53202 1509 N PROSPECT AVE BEASPEN LLC SAN PEDRO GARZA GARCIA NL 66260 MEXICO, AVE LAZARO CARDENAS 2400 A43 GOLD BARBARA R REV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 229 W HALLAM ST ERWIN GREGORY D 2016 REV TRUST DAVENPORT, IA 52801 102 S HARRISON ST #200 VICENZI GEORGE A TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 2238 ANISSIMOVA-FREEDMAN ANGELINA WAYNE, PA 19087 PO BOX 638 WEST TRUST SANTA BARBARA, CA 93105 1674 LAS CANOAS RD 88 LAMB KARYN 2020 QPRT NEW YORK, NY 10022 600 MADISON AVE 16TH FLR VIBA LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 13 JAMMB LLC EL DORADO HILLS , CA 95762 PO BOX 5560 BRADY WILLIAM JB III LAFAYETTE, CA 94549 1038 SUNRISE RIDGE DR 234 WEST FRANCIS LLC NEW YORK, NY 10174 405 LEXINGTON AVE BRUNDIGE CHELSEA C SNOWMASS, CO 81654 1755 SNOWMASS CREEK RD GERSCHEL EDOUARD 2020 QPRT NEW YORK, NY 10022 600 MADISON AVE 16TH FLR HALLAM PINES CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 220-224 W HALLAM ST 89 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO VICINITY MAP 135 W. FRANCIS STREET PARCEL: 273512421001 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Subdivision: Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Block: 56 Lot A AND: - Lot: W 1/2 OF LOT B VICINITY MAP 90 91 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 September 1st, 2021 Sarah Yoon Historic Preservation Officer City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S Galena Street, 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 RE: 135 W. Francis Street Parcel ID: 273512421001 Dear Sarah, Thank you for your time yesterday with Natalie to discuss our current design for HPC approval for the restoration, renovation and addition to the home located on 135 W Francis Street. This property is in the R-6 zone district, on a corner lot. We have spent countless hours re-working the design, so as to meet the needs of our clients, to be more in line with the Historic Preservation Guidelines and to follow the suggestions of staff and the members of the Commission. This home is in good shape, with much of the historic detailing still intact. There is an addition at the rear of the home, creating a duplex, which will be removed. The home will be completely restored to its original appearance with the use of historic photos; replacing a small porch on the northwest side. For this project we are proposing a modest addition to the rear and full basement. We look forward to working with you and the Historic Preservation Commission on the restoration of this beautiful home. I will give a summary of the design elements that have been addressed first, and what we have changed. After that all the facts and code related items will follow. DESIGN SUMMARY 1. The home will remain in the historic location on the site. In doing this, the addition to the historic has shifted south along First Street. 2. The link has been shortened to 10’, framing to framing. 3. To achieve the program needs of the family, the link is now a bit wider. The rear of the home still has over 8’ of original wall exposed. The new link is further to the west than the current addition, so a better portion of the corner will be restored; the east corner is still visible also. 92 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 4. The west wall of the addition has been broken, by pushing a section of it to the east to break up the plan of this facade. We are also adding an architectural detail at this break to emphasis the two plans and add some dimension to the wall. This detailing helps the addition be more compatible with the historic resource by echoing the main house’s volume. 5. We have gone back to a main gable facing West, with two dormers. This is very similar to the rhythm of the historic roof; the new orientation being the same as the historic. 6. Beyond the compatibility of the roof lines, these new gables completely screen the roof deck from both Francis and First streets. With these changes, we believe we have produced a design that is in line with all of the Historic Guidelines, the direction from staff and from the members of the Commission. We are excited to have landed on a design that meets everyone’s needs. RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS SECTION 26.304 1. Please see attached letter of authorization from Mark DiPaola, the manager of Francis Street Holdings, LLC; granting Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors, authority to act on their behalf throughout this process. 2. Please see the attached Vicinity Map with a legal description and directions to the property. 3. Please see the attached Title Insurance, Schedule A & B for proof of ownership. 4. Please see attached Site Plan 5. Please see the current survey of the property located at 135 W. Francis St. 6. Please also find attached all the forms for this Land Use Application. 7. Please see below, the description and summary of all requested information pertaining to the Land Use Code sections in regard to the proposed development. Additionally, please find a copy of the Pre-application Conference Summary sheet, attached at the end of this packet of information. This application package includes all requested documents as outlined by Sarah Yoon in the letter dated 1.26.21. SECTION 26.310.60 We provided the posting and mailing to all the property owners within the 300’ radius of this parcel. The posting and mailing will happen at least 15 days prior to the hearing. The list of property owners is attached. (These things happened prior to our first meeting with the HPC.) 93 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 SECTION 26.415.070D Historic Preservation – Major Development Certificate of Appropriateness for major development 1. This project is a major development as we are altering/repairing more than three elements of the historic building; and expanding the building by more than 250 sq. ft. 2. We will be presenting to just the HPC with this application. 3.a This application for Conceptual Review will include the following: 1. General application information and forms 2. Site plan and survey, showing existing and proposed conditions. 3. Scaled drawings showing the structure; existing and proposed, with the addition; massing, height, scale, etc; floor and roof plans and elevations. Preliminary civil drawings and landscape plans. 4. Primary materials; samples and/or photos at final review 5. Supplemental material to show context surrounding the historic resource: photos and 3D computer model. 6. Confirmation that the proposed building meets the RDS; per Section 26.410. The proposed building is a nice historic Victorian. By virtue of the size and location, and the fact that it is being restored to its original appearance, it meets the RDS by strict compliance with all standards or by flexible “intent”. 4. Final development review: All procedures for this section shall be followed and addressed. Photos of materials will be presented at the virtual meeting. Physical samples can be given upon request. SECTION 26.415.090 Relocation of Designated Historic Properties This application is proposing to re-locate the historic resource only by lifting it up nearly 12” to create positive drainage from the building. The new grading being done to achieve the drainage will give the front porch the same relationship to grade as is determined from historic photos. It can be seen that the home has ‘sunk’ into the yard a bit over the years. The home will be pulled up enough to have the original two steps to the front porch with the same relationship to grade. We are proposing the addition of a full basement under the resource and the new addition. SECTION 26.415.110 Historic Preservation – Benefits Section 26.415.110.C Variations Variations. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. This project is seeking the following variations from the HPC, as provided for in this section. C.1.a Development in the side, rear or front setbacks: 94 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 a. We are seeking setback variations for the rear yard setback. - Below Grade Living Space: we are proposing aligning the foundation under the garage, so need a variance for 5’-2 1/4” in one section (between gridline 0.5 and 3.5) and directly under garage a variance of 7’-4” (between gridlines 3.5 and 7) - Deck Above The Garage: Part of it is the roof which extends the width of the addition on the south side, we are requesting a setback variance of 5’- 0”. Thus the rear yard setback will be 5’- 0” instead of 10’ for this exterior space. There is also an architectural detail that is in this setback. This will require a 10” setback, but not for living space. - Above Grade Interior Living Space: is within the 10’- 0” rear yard setback. This below grade area will not be visible to the public and will not add additional impact to the neighbors or community. - Garage Footprint Setback: Since the historic resource is not moving, we need to extend the garage into the rear setback for 30” (from original request) so we can have a working single space garage. Making the setback from the property line 2’-8”. - West Side Yard: Side yard 1’-0” setback on the west side. There is no living space in this request, but an architectural detail to help the new addition have some depth to break up the plan facing First Street. This detail is an extension of the gable roof, bringing small walls all the way to the ground. There will be no impact to anyone with this setback, just a more interesting facade facing the street. To grant a variation the HPC must find that the proposed development is similar in pattern, features and character of the historic property and/or Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Our proposal is to renovate and restore this beautiful home to its original appearance by removing the large, two story addition at the rear, which effectively caused the removal of the original small, single story element of the home. Sadly, this feature is lost now. The historic photos also show a second small porch near the front of the building which we will rebuild. This porch had a side door, which will be reconstructed. The photos we have 95 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 show the door from both the interior and the exterior, so we can be very precise in our efforts. A preservation plan will be submitted to the City prior to building permit submission. The fenestration that is proposed for the new construction will be very complimentary to the Victorian, in that the windows will have mostly tall and narrow proportions and the slope of the gables are similar to the main, two story gable of the historic. Thus the new addition will be displaying a similar pattern and character as the historic home. To receive the floor area bonus, please consider the following ways this projects meets the criteria for being granted the bonus. a. The historic home remains the key element of the property and the historic front porch and entry are the proposed entry for the new home, using the original home as the primary public space. The new addition is set behind the historic, maintaining the visual integrity of the historic home. b. The proposal includes making multiple significant restoration efforts by 1. removing the non-historic addition 2. reconstructing the missing small dormer and the brick chimneys 3. reconstructing the now missing porch on the NW side of the home c. There is no existing outbuilding on this property. d. As noted, we are demolishing a significant addition and reconstructing a significant historic element. We are also keeping the above grade addition to less than twice the sq. ft. size of the historic home. For all these reasons, we believe that this project meets the criteria to receive the setback variances for the rear yard setback and the allowable floor area bonus of 250 Sq. Ft. The exact variations and bonus requested are as follows: 1. Rear yard setback of 10’-0” at the basement is reduced to a 5’-0” setback. Also, the roof deck above the garage which extends as an overhang at the upper level is 5’-0” from the rear property line; a variation of the same 5’-0”. 2. We would like to extend an architectural detail into the west side yard by 12”. The 60 sq. ft. of an available bonus for an exceptional renovation is requested. SECTION 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements The proposed development meets all of the requirements and restrictions of the calculations and measurements section of this code; except for the variances that are being sought with this application for the rear and side yard setback. Please see the attached Site plan, floor plans, elevations and FAR calculations. SECTION 26.710.040 R-6 Medium Density Residential Zone District The R-6 zone district allows for 2820 Sq. Ft. on a 4500 Sq. Ft. lot; with a bonus option of an additional 250 Sq. Ft from HPC approvals for outstanding renovation efforts. 96 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 The building is below the required 25’ Height limit and has the required 4500 Sq. Ft. of lot area; and is exempt from the pedestrian amenity. The proposed building complies with all other requirements and restrictions for R-6. Historic Preservation Guidelines Chapter 1 : Site Planning and Landscape Design We are respecting the context of the neighborhood with the front of the home staying oriented towards Francis Street, and leaving a large open yard along the west side, as this is a corner lot. There are no historic ditches or other elements to take into consideration on this lot. The garage will be on the alley with a concrete driveway. The front walkway will be a simple concrete walk, that runs straight to the front porch, it will be 3’ wide. The front yard will be open with minimal landscaping of flower beds at the front, and then adding a bit more layering to the plantings towards the rear of the lot. Please see Landscape Plan by Connect One. The storm water retention will not be visible from the front of the house. It is intended that the entire system will be completely ‘invisible’. Please see Civil drawings from Justin Yarnell. The hierarchy of spaces will be preserved as the walkway from public to semi-private porch to inside the home is not changing. We will be adding a new, simple concrete walk that is perpendicular to the street and front porch. The open space around the building is being maintained, the large front yard will blend into the side yards. The western side yard is open to First Street, the result being an expansive front and side yard. There are a couple of large trees near the property line on the northwest corner. It is our desire to save all of the trees and the larger lilac bushes that are in the west yard. Guideline 1.12 We are proposing a very limited patio behind the main, two story section of the home. This small patio will be at grade and be alongside the single story element. 1.12 / 1.13 The landscaping is very simple and will not block the view of the historic resource. Plantings will be in the appropriate zones as outlined here. See Landscape Plan by Connect One. Site Lighting We will not introduce landscape lighting or pathway lighting. The proposed home will have a light on the front porch and at the rear near the garage overhead door and people doors on the addition. The front porch light is very appropriate for this style and quality of Victorian home. Please see attached cut sheet for the two types of lights. 97 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 Site Fencing We have not seen any photos of an historic fence on this property. At this time, the owners would like to build a fence to create a small yard for their young children and a private patio. This fence will be around just the yard that is adjacent to the addition of the home, with no connection to the historic resource. Retaining Walls There will be no retaining walls on this project. Chapter 2: Building Materials This two story Victorian is the typical horizontal wood siding with decorative trim and casing. We will restore all of the wood material. It is in pretty good shape now, so the repair and repaint will be “standard” preservation work. There will be no “new” materials introduced on the historic resource. Currently, there aren’t any materials that are non-historic that need to be removed to expose historic siding. We are removing a large addition to the rear of the building. Chapter 3: Windows We will retain, repair and reconstruct all of the historic windows. Some have already been replaced through the years. We will find windows for these instances that will be as close as possible to the existing windows; with all of the same details. We found an amazing craftsman on our last renovation project to restore the historic windows and doors.... he will be called upon again to work on this project. It is our aim to make this home look just like it did when it was first built. Chapter 4: Doors We will treat the historic doors in the same manner as the windows. Any original doors will be completely restored and repainted. We have photos that can help us determine if the existing doors are historic or not. If they are not, we will locate doors that are as close as possible to the originals from a source we have of historic doors reclaimed from other Victorians. The same craftsman mentioned above will do this work. The original hardware will be used if at all possible, or be replaced with replicas that will be hard to determine as not historic. All detailing of casing, trim, etc will be restored or rebuilt. Chapter 5: Porches and Balconies The existing porch on this building is the original. We will restore and repaint the porch with all the trim and historic detailing. We will also rebuild a small side porch that we can see in old photos. Having the existing detailing to copy will make this aspect of the project 98 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 match the historic exactly. We will use the photos to verify if any elements are missing, so we can replace them also. Chapter 6: Architectural Details Most of the trim and Victorian detailing that exists today is well preserved. This will make it easy to restore with sanding and paint. The details will also be used as templates for the sections of the re-built porch to match the historic perfectly. The historic photos will also guide our restoration work. Chapter 7: Roofs The shingle roof on the historic will be assessed when we start construction. If the waterproofing or sheathing is failing, we will repair and replace shingles. The roof has to function first of all. The new or replacement shingles will match the historic. There will only be snow guards added if needed for safety... and they will be minimal in size and the color will blend to make them virtually disappear. We can see from photos that a small dormer facing south was removed at some point. We are planning on replacing this dormer. It appears to match the existing dormer on the front facade; so we will use that as our model to rebuild the lost one. There will be no changes made to any of the historic roofs beyond repairs. Chapter 8: Secondary Structures There are no secondary structures on this property. Chapter 9: Excavation, Building Relocation and Foundations We are proposing to move the historic structure on the site during construction, so we can put a full basement under it. As mentioned in the Site Plan section, we are proposing to move the house back to it’s original current location on the lot, save squaring it up with the property lines. The only difference, as mentioned, is that it will be at a higher elevation when set back down on the foundation, to create positive drainage. We will take good care of the structure during the preparation and moving of the home. It will be moved by Bill Bailey and his son. Chapter 10: Building Additions New Additions 10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. The addition to this Victorian home is compatible in form, using a similar slope roof pitch as is found on the main gable of the historic building. The detailing on the addition is very minimal, being modest and deferential to the more ornate details of the Victorian. 99 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 The modest addition has a footprint that is approximately half the size of the Victorian, making it subordinate in size also. The linking element fits nicely under the eave of the historic roof, and will be sided with metal to make a clear distinction of new from historic. Both rear corners of the historic resource will be clearly visible around this link. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. The historic Victorian is the focus of the property, being visibly dominant from both Francis Street and First Street, with no visual obstructions as the addition is completely behind the entire Victorian home. The height of the addition is also compatible, being two stories, like the Victorian. The new gable is a similar slope as the dominant, two story gable of the historic building. This project complies with more than 2 of the requirements for allowing the addition to a historic resource to be larger than 100% of the size of the resource, even though the above grade space is smaller than the historic home. 1. The home is visually dominant on the lot, front and center on the lot from the Francis Avenue and First Street views, and is distinguishable against the addition. The materials of the historic home will be restored to the original wood siding and detailing; the new wood and metal siding will be more modern and more simple in detail...compatible, not competing for attention. 2. The foot print of the addition is much smaller in relation to the size of the existing home and is sensitive to its scale and proportions. The foot print of the historic home is 1,004 sq. ft.; including the front and side porch it is 1147 sq. ft. The foot print of the addition is 695 sq. ft; 59% of the size of the footprint of the historic home. The proposed roof is a similar pitch as the main gable of the historic home. 3. The interior of the historic resource is fully utilized; the entry door is remaining the entry to the house; the home will contain the public spaces for this new home. The proposed home uses the same number of usable floors in the Victorian as were used in the historic home (2). 4. We are demolishing a large addition that was added around the 1980’s to the rear of the house. 10.5 On a corner lot, no portion of an addition to a one story historic resource may be more than one story tall, directly behind that resource, unless completely detached above grade by a distance of at least 10 feet. The proposed addition to this home meets three of the criteria set forth to allow a two story addition to the historic home. 1. The connector element is a single story. 100 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 2. The footprint of the addition is almost half the size of the footprint of the Victorian, and is sensitive in scale to the historic resource. 3. The proposal involves the demolition of a non-historic addition. 4. The Victorian interior is fully utilized with the new plan; both stories. 5. Perhaps most obvious, the historic resource is two stories. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. 1. Being in a corner lot, the form of the addition does not depart from the historic resource. 10.8 Design and addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. 1. The addition in similar to the height of the primary building. 10.12 Design and addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. 1. The addition does not interfere with any of the historic resource architectural details. The whole resource is displayed without compromising any original detailing. In summary, we believe we have met all of the requirements of the Historic Preservation Guidelines, RDS and building and zoning codes. We are taking very significant restoration steps to bring this beautiful home back to its original beauty. In our efforts to design a home that will welcome a new family to Aspen, we appreciate the opportunity to work with the HPC to restore this home for the enjoyment of the community and help preserve our history. And in return, we are grateful to gain the requested variances to make this a very successful project for all. We look forward to working with the HPC on the restoration of this project. Thank you for your consideration and approval. Respectfully yours, Kim Raymond Kim Raymond AIA Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors 101 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A 0.1 9/2/21 GENERAL INFORMATION DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 CONTRACTOR - - STRUCTURAL ENGINEER - - CIVIL ENGINEER - - MECHANICAL ENGINEER - - 13 4 2 1 A7.1 LOCATION KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. 802 EAST COOPER AVE #4 ASPEN, CO 81611 970-925-2252 ARCHITECT DIPAOLA RESIDENCE ABBREVIATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND VICINITY MAP PROJECT TEAMAPPLICABLE CODES PROJECT DATA SHEET INDEX (CONTINUED) SHEET INDEXSYMBOL LEGEND Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Block: 120 Lot: F & G PARCEL ID NUMBER: ZONING: LOT SIZE: BLDG USE: OCC. GROUP: CONST. TYPE: CLIMATE ZONE: FIRE SPRINKLERS: LAND USE CATEGORY: TOWNSHIP: RANGE: SECTION: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PLT. S.T.D.SLOPE TO DRAIN A A.B. A.F.F. A.F.G. A/C ABC ABS ABV. ACB ACOU. ACT ADD. AG AHU AL. or ALUM. ALT. ANL ASPH. AVG AWG B.M. B.N. B.O. B.O.F. B.U. B/C BD. BLDG BLK. BLKG. BM. BR BRG. BRZ C.A.P. C.D. C.I.P. C.J. C.O. C.T. CAB CAM. CCTV CEM. CER CFM CH CKT. BKR. CL or C.L. CLG. CLKG. CLO. CLR. CMU CNTRD. COL. COMB. CONC. CONST. CONT. CONTR. CU d D.F. D.G. D.S. D/W DBL. DEMO DIA. or Ø DIAG. DIM. DL DN. DR E.A. E.F. E.J. E.N. E.W. EA. EL ELECT. ELEV. EMC EMT ENT EQ. EQUIP. EST. EVAP. EWC EXC EXH. EXIST. or E EXT. F.A. F.C. F.C.O. F.D. F.E. F.N. F.O. F.S. F/G FAB. FACP FDC FDN. FHC FIN. FL FLG. FLUOR. FP FTG. FURN. G.I. GA. GALV. GAR. GFCI GFI GL GLB GM GM GRC GYP. GYP. BD. H.B. H.C. H.M. H/C HDBD. HDW HGT. HOR. HTR HVAC HW HYD. I.C. I.D. I.F. ID IG IMC IMPG INCL. INSUL. INT. J-BOX JCT JT. K-D KD KO L.E.D. L.FT. LAM LAT. LAV LD. LIN. LINO. LT. LTG. LVL M.B. M.H. M.I. M.O. MAR. MAS. MAT'L MAX. MECH. MED. MFG. MFR. MIN. MISC. MOD MTL. MUL N.I.C. N.T.S. NCM NFC NLR. NO. NOM. O.C. O.D. O.H. O.I. O.R. OAI OH OPNG. OPPO. P.C. P.L. P.LAM. P.O.C. PERP. or PH or Ø PL. PLAS. PLUMB. PLYWD. PORC. PERF. PREFAB. PSF PSI PTN. PVC PWR. Q.T. QTY. R R.D.L. R.D.O. R.O. R.O.W. or R/W REF REF. REINF. REQ'D. RET. REV. RM RMV. S.C. S.D. S.O.V. S/L S/S SC SCHED. SECT. SES SH SHT'G. SIM. SPA. SPECS SPKR. SQ. FT. SQ. IN. STC STD. STL. SUSP. SW SYM SYS. T & G T.B. T.M.B. T.O. T.O.B. T.O.C. T.O.F. T.O.J. T.O.M. T.O.S. T.O.W. T.S. T.V. TEL. TH. THD. THK. THRU TLT. TRANS. TYP. UNF. UR V.B. V.I.F. VA VERT. WC WDW WCT WP WT. W/ W/O WD. W.I. YD. AMPERES ANCHOR BOLT ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR ABOVE FINISHED GRADE AIR CONDITIONING AGGREGATE BASE COURSE ACRYLONITRILE-BUTADIENE-STYRENE ABOVE ASBESTOS-CEMENT BOARD ACOUSTIC ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE ADDITION or ADDENDUM ABOVE GRADE AIR HANDLER UNIT ALUMINUM ALTERNATE ANNEALED ASPHALT AVERAGE AMERICAN WIRE GAUGE ANGLE BENCH MARK BOUNDARY NAILING BOTTOM OF BOTTOM OF FOOTING BUILT UP BACK OF CURB BOARD BUILDING BLOCK BLOCKING BEAM BRASS BEARING BRONZE CONCRETE ASBESTOS PIPE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS CAST IN PLACE CONTROL JOINT CLEAN OUT CERAMIC TILE CABINET CAMBER CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION CEMENT CERAMIC CUBIC FEET PER MINUTE CHANNEL CIRCUIT BREAKER CENTERLINE CEILING CAULKING CLOSET CLEAR CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CENTERED COLUMN COMBINATION CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION CONTINUOUS CONTRACTOR COPPER PENNY DRINKING FOUNTAIN DECOMPOSED GRANITE DOWN SPOUT DISHWASHER DOUBLE DEMOLITION DIAMETER DIAGONAL DIMENSION DEAD LOAD DOWN DOOR EXPANSION ANCHOR EXHAUST FAN EXPANSION JOINT END NAILING EACH WAY EACH ELEVATION "ELECTRIC, ELECTRICAL" ELEVATOR ELECTRICAL METALLIC CONDUIT ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING ELECTRICAL NON-METALLIC TUBING EQUAL EQUIPMENT ESTIMATE EVAPORATIVE COOLER ELECTRIC DRINKING COOLER EXCAVATE EXHAUST EXISTING EXTERIOR FIRE ALARM FAN COIL FLOOR CLEAN OUT FLOOR DRAIN FIRE EXTINGUISHER FIELD NAILING FACE OF FLOOR SINK FIBERGLASS FABRICATE FIRE ALARM CONTROL PANEL FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FOUNDATION FIRE HOSE CABINET FINISH FLOOR FLOORING FLUORESCENT FIRE PROOF FOOTING FURNISH GALVANIZED IRON GAUGE GALVANIZED GARAGE GROUND FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER GROUND FAULT INTERRUPTER GLASS GLUE LAMINATED BEAM GRADE MARK GATE VALVE GALVANIZED RIGID TUBING GYPSUM GYPSUM BOARD HOSE BIBB HOLLOW CORE HOLLOW METAL HANDICAPPED HARDBOARD HARDWARE HEIGHT HORIZONTAL HEATER HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING HOT WATER HYDRAULIC INTERCOM OUTLET INSIDE DIAMETER INSIDE FACE IDENTIFICATION ISOLATED GROUND INTERMEDIATE METALLIC CONDUIT IMPREGNATED INCLUDE, INCLUSIVE INSULATION INTERIOR JUNCTION BOX JUNCTION JOINT KNOCK DOWN KILN DRIED KNOCK OUT LIGHT EMITTING DIODE LINEAR FEET LAMINATE LATERAL LAVATORY LEAD LINEAR LINOLEUM LIGHT LIGHTING LAMINATED VENEER LUMBER MACHINE BOLT MANHOLE MALLEABLE IRON MASONRY OPENING MARBLE MASONRY MATERIAL MAXIMUM MECHANICAL MEDIUM MANUFACTURING MANUFACTURER MINIMUM MISCELLANEOUS MODULAR METAL MULLION NOT IN CONTRACT NOT TO SCALE NON-CORROSIVE METAL NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NAILER NUMBER NOMINAL ON CENTER OUTSIDE DIAMETER OVER HANG ORNAMENTAL IRON OUTSIDE RADIUS OUTSIDE AIR INTAKE OVER HEAD OPENING OPPOSITE PRECAST CONCRETE PROPERTY LINE PLASTIC LAMINATE POINT OF CONNECTION PERPENDICULAR PHASE PLASTER PLATE PLASTIC PLUMBING PLYWOOD PORCELAIN PERFORATED PREFABRICATED POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH PARTITION POLYVINYLCLORIDE POWER QUARRY TILE QUANTITY RADIUS ROOF DRAIN LEADER ROOF DRAIN OVERFLOW ROUGH OPENING RIGHT OF WAY REFRIGERATOR REFERENCE REINFORCED REQUIRED RETURN REVISION ROOM REMOVE SOLID CORE SMOKE DETECTOR SHUT OFF VALVE SKYLIGHT STAINLESS STEEL SELF CLOSING SCHEDULE SECTION SERVICE ENTRANCE SECTION SHEET SHEATHING SIMILAR SPACE SPECIFICATIONS SPEAKER SQUARE FEET SQUARE INCHES SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS STANDARD STEEL SUSPENDED SWITCH SYMMETRICAL SYSTEM TONGUE AND GROOVE THROUGH BOLT TELEPHONE MOUNTING BOARD TOP OF TOP OF BEAM TOP OF CURB TOP OF FOOTING TOP OF JOIST TOP OF MASONRY TOP OF SLAB TOP OF WALL TUBE STEEL TELEVISION OUTLET TELEPHONE THRESHOLD THREADED THICK THROUGH TOILET TRANSFORMER TYPICAL UNFINISHED URINAL VAPOR BARRIER VERIFY IN FIELD VOLT AMPERE VERTICAL WATER CLOSET WINDOW WAINSCOT WEATHER PROOF WEIGHT WITH WITHOUT WOOD WROUGHT IRON YARD VCT VINYL COMPOSITION TILE JOISTJST. ALL CODES REFERENCED ARE TO BE USED AS AMENDED BY THE STATE OF COLORADO AND LOCAL JURISDICTION. NOTE: CODES BELOW ARE APPLICABLE ONLY IN AREAS. BECAUSE THE SCOPE OF WORK IS LESS THAN 40%, THE PROJECT IS NOT SUBJECT TO UPDATE TO CURRENT CODE -2015 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE -2015 INTERNATION MECHANICAL CODE -2015 INTERNATIONAL PLUMBING CODE -2015 INTERNATIONAL FUEL & GAS CODE -2015 IECC (INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE) - PITKIN COUNTY EFFICIENT BUILDING CODE -2014 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE FINISH WOOD WOOD STUD BLOCKING STEEL STEEL STUD FRAMED WALL BATT INSULATION PLYWOOD CONCRETE STONE CMU SAND GRAVEL GWB COMPACTED SOIL SPRAY-FOAM INSULATION RIGID INSULATION GRID LINE BREAK LINE MATCH LINE REVISION A-701 ELEVATION MARKER SECTION MARKER DETAIL CUT DETAIL 1 A-501 ELEVATION D01 W01 ROOM NAME 101 INTERIOR ELEVATION MARKER ELEVATION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SECTION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER DETAIL NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SHEET NUMBER ELEVATION NUMBER SPOT ELEVATION DOOR MARK WINDOW MARK ROOM NAME AND NUMBER 1 A-301 1 A-201 11 MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA: - - SQ FT ALLOWABLE DECK (15% OF MAX FLOOR AREA): - - SQ FT FRONT SETBACK: 10'-0" SIDE SETBACKS: 5'-0" REAR SETBACK: 10'-0" MAXIMUM HEIGHT (PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE) (FT.): 25'-0" 135 W. FRANCIS STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 102 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.01 9/2/21 EXISTING: SITE PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E17'-2"14'-4"1°PROPERTY LINEGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTNORTH 1ST STREET 75.45 ROW EDGE OF PAVEMENT 5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 103 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.02 9/2/21 PROPOSED: SITE PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/2112345 BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.12A 3.45'-2 3/4"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"47'-1 1/2"4'-4"10'-0" 2'-5 1/2"5'-0"1'-10"31'-0"2'-2"5'-0"14'-4"7'-2"DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUTDOWNSPOUT PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTEDGE OF PAVEMENT788678877888788710' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.5DOWNSPOUT FENCE NN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 104 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.05 9/2/21 EXISTING FAR CALCULATIONS DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 RG FRGF WDR2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 1'-0"2'-2 3/4"1'-0"5'-0"2 A 3.1 GAS METER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE 1,612 sq ft 122 sq ft 2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 2 A 3.18"8"2'-4"5'MASTER BEDROOM BEDROOM HALL BATH OPEN TO BELOW LOFT 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE 515 sq ft 129 sq ft SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING MAIN LEVEL FAR SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3 EXISTING UPPER LEVEL FAR 105 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.06 9/2/21 PROPOSED FAR CALCULATIO NS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 7 5 4 3.5 3 2 1 0 318 sq ft 32 sq ft1. 5. H G F E D C B A 896 sq ft 2.23 sq ft23 sq ft 0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 7 350 sq ft 3. A B C D E F G H 518 sq ft328 sq ft 4.6.22 sq ft 22 sq ft W/DW/D2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 1 2 3 6 5 4 2 A 3.1 2,876 sq ft SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 FAR ELEVATION - NORTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 FAR ELEVATION - EAST SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 FAR ELEVATION - SOUTH SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"4 FAR ELEVATION - WEST SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL FAR 106 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.07 9/2/21 PROPOSED FAR CALCULATIONS DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 81 sq ftF 2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 2 A 3.1 1,540 sq ft 376 sq ft 121 sq ft 22 sq ft 2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 2 A 3.1 DNUP(INTO BEDROOM)627 sq ft 169 sq ft 433 sq ft 2A 3.12A 3.12 A 3.1 2 A 3.1 DN ROOF TOP DECK 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE 244 sq ft 84 sq ft SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL FAR SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL FAR SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"4 PROPOSED ROOFTOP DECK FAR 107 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.02 9/2/21 EXISTING MAIN LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21RGFRGFWDRF123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E17'-2"4'-4"10'-0"ENTRYENTRYPORCHPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEDININGROOMLIVINGROOMBEDROOMKITCHENLAUNDRYBATHROOMKITCHENLIVING/DININGBEDROOMBATHROOMWOOD DECKGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTEDGE OF PAVEMENTWOODENTRYN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 108 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.03 9/2/21 EXISTING UPPER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E1MASTERBEDROOM BEDROOM HALLBATHOPENTO BELOWLOFT5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 109 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.04 9/2/21 EXISTING ROOF PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E1PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 110 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.05 9/2/21 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.3W/DW/D12345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.511 1/2"14'-11"5 1/2"13'-8 1/2"11 1/2"11 1/2" 15'-7 1/4" 5 1/2" 10'-0"3 1/2"6'-0"5 1/2"12'-1"5 1/2"5'-11"6'-0"11 1/2"3 1/2"24'-2"11 1/2"34'-6 1/2"84'-7 1/4"3 1/2"9'-11 1/2"7'-3 3/4"5 1/2"1'-9 3/4"12'-9 1/2"6'-10"31'-0"7'-2"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"11 1/2"1'-3 1/4"13'-11 1/2"3 1/2"5'-9"3 1/2"13'-3"5 1/2"9'-1 1/4"3 1/2" 12'-5"3 1/2"12'-6 3/4"3 1/2"5'-5 1/2"5 1/2"9'-0"11 1/2"2"2 3/4"11 1/2"14'-1 3/8"3 1/2"5'-3 5/8"5 1/2"12'-5 1/2"11 1/2"2 3/4"5 1/2"3'-9"6'-1 3/4"3 1/2"6'-0 1/4"8'-11"3 1/2"3'-6 3/4"3 1/2"8'-10"5 1/2"1'-4 3/4"5'-2" 3 1/2" 10'-1 3/4" 6'-0" 3 1/2"3 1/2"2'-0"4'-10 1/4"3 1/2"10'-4 1/4"6'-0 1/2"3 1/2"8'-7"5 1/2"3'-5 1/2"10" 3'-0"10"8'-8 1/8"8'-5"10"3'-0"10" 5'-7 5/8"10"3'-0" 10"1'-11 1/4" 10"3'-0" 10"10"3'-0"3'-3 1/2"1'-11 1/4"16'-11"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"5'-0" 2'-4"2A 3.12A 3.12A 3.1GUEST MASTER BATHGUEST MASTERBEDROOMGUEST MASTERCLOSETGYMLAUNDRYKID'S PLAY ROOMMECHANICALWETBARUPTHEATREBATH 2CLOSET 2BATH 3BATH 4BEDROOM 2BEDROOM 3BEDROOM 4(BUNK ROOMELECTRICALCLOSET / THEATEREQUIPMENTTVCLOSET 4CLOSET 3LINENPOWDEROWNER'SCLOSETBENCHBENCH1A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.43.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 111 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.06 9/2/21 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.3F12345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.15 1/2" 5 1/2"10'-0"4'-0"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"11'-4"5 1/2"5'-3 1/2"5 1/2"5'-6 1/2"5 1/2"14'-2 1/4"2'-0"3'-2"3'-0"3'-6 7/8"13'-6 1/8"2'-6"2'-0" 18'-0 1/8"6 1/8"5'-2 7/8"7'-11 1/8"6'-1"3'-8 5/8"9'-10 3/4"11'-8 3/8"3'-0"3'-0"4'-0" 5'-5 1/2" 17'-5 1/4"5 1/2" 6'-11 1/2"17'-10 3/4" 8'-8 5/8" 2'-0 5/8" 16'-0 1/8" 5 1/2"5 1/2"2'-6 1/2"5 1/2"3'-6 1/2"2'-9 1/4"2'-5 1/2"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"25'-10 1/2"10'-0 1/2"5'-11 5/8"5'-3"4'-4"10'-0"8'-4 1/2"5 1/2"17'-8 1/2"5 1/2"1'-0"5 1/2"21'-1 1/2"3 1/2"4'-0"5 1/2"9'-7"5 1/2"5'-6 1/8"5 1/2"3'-3 1/2"1'-11 1/4"1'-10"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"2'-2"5'-0"5'-0"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"16'-11"1'-0"2'-2 3/4"1'-0"5'-0"5 1/2"9'-4 1/8"5 1/2"5'-7 7/8"5 1/2"5 1/2"6'-5 1/2" 20'-9 1/2"5 1/2"13'-10 7/8"3 1/2"2'-3 1/8"5 1/2"16'-8 1/2"5 1/2"T.O.PLY100'-0"T.O.PLY 99'-4 1/2"-9 3/4"T.O.FF: 7887.51' (100'-2 1/4"T.O.PLY:7887.32' (100'-0")T.O.PLY 99'-4 1/2"1A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.4GAS METERPANTRYUPDNENTRYENTRYPORCHKITCHENOVENSWARMINGDWR & MWSINKRANGESINKHISTORICPORCH TO BEREBUILTPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPATIOCLOSETSTEP"SCREEN"LIVINGROOMDININGROOMBEDROOM 1BATH 1GARAGECLOSETDRESSERUPPANTRYBENCHSTEPELECT. METERTELEPHONECATVMUD ROOMPOWDERROOMCLOSETSAND CUBBIESFIREPLACEWINE CABINETTV10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.55 1/2"4A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 112 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.07 9/2/21 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.51A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.35 1/2"21'-7 3/4"5'-5 1/4"5 1/2"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"12'-11 3/8" 5 1/2" 2'-1 1/4" 5 1/2" 5 1/2"9'-6 1/8"5'-1 1/2" 4'-9 1/8"5 1/2"3'-8 5/8"6 1/8"9'-7 1/2"5 1/2"6'-8 7/8"5 1/2"5'-2 3/4"16'-11"4'-11 3/4" 5 1/2" 10'-6 1/4" 5 1/2"9'-5 3/4"3 1/2"7'-8"5 1/2"5 1/2"32'-7 1/2"5 1/2"1'-2 1/4"12'-10 3/8"10'-0"11 1/2"5 1/2" 6'-5 1/2" 5 1/2"1'-0"15'-0"5 1/2"3'-10 1/4"5 1/2"12'-10 1/4"5 1/2"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"5 1/2"5 1/2"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"12'-4 3/4"5 1/2"10'-0"5 1/2"5 1/2"16'-5 1/2"3 1/2"3'-6 3/4"5 1/2"12'-10 1/4"5'-0"1'-10"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"2'-2"5'-0"2'-9 1/4"2'-5 1/2"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"25'-10 1/2"10'-0 1/2"5'-11 5/8"5'-3"4'-4"10'-0" 8" 8" 2'-4"5'-0"GUEST MASTER BEDROOMGUEST MASTER BATHFIREPLACE AND TV IN CABINETRYCLOSETWCDNSTEAMSHOWERDECKCONNECTINGGLASS LINK BELOWMASTERBEDROOMMASTERBATHDNUP(INTO BEDROOM)WCSTEAMSHOWERMASTERCLOSETLINENBENCH5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 113 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.08 9/2/21 PROPOSED: ROOFTOP DECK DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.51A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.35'-2 3/4"16'-11"1'-10"7'-5"18'-4 1/4" 1'-4 3/4"9'-2 7/8"7'-2 5/8"6 1/8"7'-4"17'-7 1/2"10'-8 3/4"6'-4"7'-4 1/8"6'-9 1/4"15'-5 5/8"2'-3"4'-6 3/8"5'-4 1/8"5'-4 1/8"2'-10 3/4"5'-9 7/8"5'-9 7/8"6'-11 1/8"4'-4 1/8"4'-4 1/8"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"DNROOF TOPDECK5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 114 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.09 9/2/21 PROPOSED ROOF PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.11A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.45'-2 3/4"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"47'-1 1/2"4'-4"10'-0" 2'-5 1/2"5'-0"1'-10"31'-0"2'-2"5'-0"14'-4"7'-2"DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUTDOWNSPOUT PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3DOWNSPOUT FENCE NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 115 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.3.01 9/2/21 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: NORTH & EAST DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 5 4 3 2 16 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONE D C B A T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING: ELEVATION NORTH SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING: ELEVATION EAST 116 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.3.02 9/2/21 EXISTING ELEVATIONS: SOUTH & WEST DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 A B C D E T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" = 7889.31' T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION1 2 3 4 5 6 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' -11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 EXISTING: ELEVATION WEST SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 EXISTING: ELEVATION SOUTH 117 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.3.03 9/2/21 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: NORTH & EAST DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 5 4 3 2 173.5 060.5 25'-0"9'-4 1/2"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONE D C BHG AIF 3'-0" GAS METER T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY ROOF TOP LEVEL 119' - 8"ELECT. METERTELEPHONECATVT.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION7 3.5 00.5 25'-0"9'-7"9'-8 1/2"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED: ELEVATION NORTH SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 PROPOSED: ELEVATION EAST SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 PROPOSED: ELEVATION NORTH 2 118 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUAL 1" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.3.04 9/2/21 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: SOUTH & WEST DATE www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252DI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 8161101/21/21 02/12/21 A B C D E H I T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 119' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" = 7889.31' T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONF G 0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' -11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 119' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 119' - 8" MUD ROOMPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 PROPOSED: ELEVATION WEST SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED: ELEVATION SOUTH SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 PROPOSED: ELEVATION SOUTH 2 119 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.01 9/2/21 EXISTING BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 1 2 3 4 5 6 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION1 2 3 4 5 6 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION1 2 3 4 5 6 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EXISTING: SECTION 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 EXISTING: SECTION 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 EXISTING: SECTION 3 120 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.02 9/2/21 EXISTING BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 A B C D E T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKE D C B A T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 EXISTING: SECTION 6 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 EXISTING: SECTION 5 121 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.04 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 1 2 3 4 5 6 10'-8 5/8"5'-2 1/8"5'-9"9'-5"15'-0"25'-0"KITCHEN ENTRY T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" GUEST MASTER BEDROOM THEATRE T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 86' - 4" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" LAUNDRYKID'S PLAY ROOM LIVING ROOM T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 BUILDING SECTION 1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 BUILDING SECTION 2 122 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.05 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 15'-0"25'-0"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" BATH 2 MECHANICAL MUD ROOM T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" CLOSET 2 T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8"HISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 6 70.5 T.O.SLAB MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' -11 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" HALLBEDROOM 2 BATH 4 BATH 1 GARAGE MASTER CLOSET STAIRS SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 BUILDING SECTION 3 4 BUILDING SECTION 4 123 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.06 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 H G F E D C B AI 7 1/2"15'-0"25'-0"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" MASTER BATHROOM GARAGE MUD ROOM LIVING ROOM GUEST MASTER BATH GUEST MASTER BATH GUEST MASTER BEDROOM GUEST MASTER CLOSETLAUNDRY MECHANICALBATH 4 BEDROOM 4 (BUNK ROOM T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 15'-0"25'-0"8'-8"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' -11 1/2" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" CLOSET 3BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM 4 (BUNK ROOM BEDROOM 1 GARAGE MASTER BEDROOM MASTER BATHROOM ROOFTOP DECK T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 BUILDING SECTION 6 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 BUILDING SECTION 5 124 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.07 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 A B C D E G HF I 15'-0"25'-0"9'-4"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 85' - 6" BATH 2 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 3POWDEROWNER'S CLOSET BEDROOM 1BATH 1 MASTER BEDROOM BATH 3 MASTER CLOSET DINING ROOM THEATER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONA B C D E F G H I 15'-0"9'-6 7/8"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 85' - 6" MASTER BEDROOM CLOSETBEDROOM 1KITCHEN THEATER FAMILY ROOM LINEN BEDROOM 3BATH 2 BATH 3 MASTER CLOSET BEDROOM 2 T.O.SPRING POINT 118' - 5 1/2" LIVING ROOM GUEST MASTER BEDROOMHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"8 BUILDING SECTION 8 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"7 BUILDING SECTION 7 125 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 0.0 9/2/21 3D VIEWS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5 CORNER VIEW 4 EAST VIEW 3 WEST VIEW 2 VIEW FROM ALLEY 1 FRONT VIEW 126 501 E. Hyman Ave. Suite 205-Aspen, CO 81611 www.kimraymondarchitects.com AUGUST 31, 2021 135 W. FRANCIS ST. SUPPLEMENTAL VISUAL PRESENTATION 127 HISTORIC REFERENCE: SANDBORN MAP: 1898 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO HISTORIC REFERENCE 135W. FRANCIS 128 EXISTING: YEAR: 2021 HISTORIC REFERENCE 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 129 HISTORIC REFERENCE EXISTING: YEAR 2021 WEST SIDE 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 130 HISTORIC REFERENCE EXISTING: YEAR 2021 WEST SIDE PARTIAL VIEW (ADDITION) 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 131 HISTORIC REFERENCE EXISTING: YEAR 2021 SOUTH SIDE VIEW (ADDITION) 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 132 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.01 8/27/21 EXISTING: SITE PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21123456 BBCCEEDDAAE1E17'-2"14'-4"1°PROPERTY LINEGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTNORTH 1ST STREET 75.45 ROW EDGE OF PAVEMENT 5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN: EXISTING 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO EXISTING LILAC EXISTING LILAC EXISTING LILAC EXISTING COTTONWOOD EXISTING COTTONWOOD EXISTING EVERGREEN 133 EXISTING: DEMO CALCULATIONS 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO RG FRGF WDR1 2 3 4 5 6 B B C C E E D D A A E1 E1 GAS METER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 1,745 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 B B C C E E D D A A E1 E1 MASTER BEDROOM BEDROOM HALL BATH OPEN TO BELOW LOFT 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 871 sq ft RG FRGF WDR1 2 3 4 5 6 B B C C E E D D A A E1 E1 GAS METER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 610 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 B B C C E E D D A A E1 E1 MASTER BEDROOM BEDROOM HALL BATH OPEN TO BELOW LOFT 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE 130 sq ft SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL-EXISTING SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 UPPER LEVEL-EXISTING SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 MAIN LEVEL-DEMO SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 UPPER LEVEL-DEMO EXISTING AREA CALCULATIONS: EXISTING: - MAIN LEVEL: 1,745.00 SQ FT - UPPER LEVEL: 871.00 SQ FT TOTAL: 2,616.00 SQ FT DEMO AREA CALCULATIONS: EXISTING TO DEMO: - MAIN LEVEL: 610.00 SQ FT - UPPER LEVEL: 130.00 SQ FT TOTAL: 740.00 SQ FT PERCENTAGE OF DEMO AREA: (740 X 100)/2,616.00 = 28.29 % 134 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.1.02 8/27/21 PROPOSED: SITE PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/2112345 BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.12A 3.45'-2 3/4"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"47'-1 1/2"4'-4"10'-0" 2'-5 1/2"5'-0"1'-10"31'-0"2'-2"5'-0"14'-4"7'-2"DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUTDOWNSPOUT PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEGRAVEL PARKINGEDGE OF PAVEMENTEDGE OF PAVEMENT788678877888788710' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.5DOWNSPOUT FENCE NN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN: PROPOSED 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO EXISTING LILAC EXISTING LILAC 135 PROPOSED: LOWER LEVEL 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.05 9/2/21 PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.3W/DW/D12345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.511 1/2"14'-11"5 1/2"13'-8 1/2"11 1/2"11 1/2" 15'-7 1/4" 5 1/2" 10'-0"3 1/2"6'-0"5 1/2"12'-1"5 1/2"5'-11"6'-0"11 1/2"3 1/2"24'-2"11 1/2"34'-6 1/2"84'-7 1/4"3 1/2"9'-11 1/2"7'-3 3/4"5 1/2"1'-9 3/4"12'-9 1/2"6'-10"31'-0"7'-2"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"11 1/2"1'-3 1/4"13'-11 1/2"3 1/2"5'-9"3 1/2"13'-3"5 1/2"9'-1 1/4"3 1/2" 12'-5" 3 1/2"12'-6 3/4"3 1/2"5'-5 1/2"5 1/2"9'-0"11 1/2"2"2 3/4"11 1/2"14'-1 3/8"3 1/2"5'-3 5/8"5 1/2"12'-5 1/2"11 1/2"2 3/4"5 1/2"3'-9"6'-1 3/4"3 1/2"6'-0 1/4"8'-11"3 1/2"3'-6 3/4"3 1/2"8'-10"5 1/2"1'-4 3/4"5'-2" 3 1/2" 10'-1 3/4" 6'-0" 3 1/2"3 1/2"2'-0"4'-10 1/4"3 1/2"10'-4 1/4"6'-0 1/2"3 1/2"8'-7"5 1/2"3'-5 1/2"10" 3'-0"10"8'-8 1/8"8'-5"10"3'-0"10" 5'-7 5/8"10"3'-0" 10"1'-11 1/4" 10"3'-0" 10"10"3'-0"3'-3 1/2"1'-11 1/4"16'-11"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"5'-0" 2'-4"2A 3.12A 3.12A 3.1GUEST MASTER BATHGUEST MASTERBEDROOMGUEST MASTERCLOSETGYMLAUNDRYKID'S PLAY ROOMMECHANICALWETBARUPTHEATREBATH 2CLOSET 2BATH 3BATH 4BEDROOM 2BEDROOM 3BEDROOM 4(BUNK ROOMELECTRICALCLOSET / THEATEREQUIPMENTTVCLOSET 4CLOSET 3LINENPOWDEROWNER'SCLOSETBENCHBENCH1A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.43.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 136 PROPOSED: MAIN LEVEL 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.06 8/31/21 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.3F12345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.52A 3.12A 3.12A 3.15 1/2" 5 1/2"10'-0"4'-0"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"11'-4"5 1/2"5'-3 1/2"5 1/2"5'-6 1/2"5 1/2"14'-2 1/4"2'-0"3'-2"3'-0"3'-6 7/8"13'-6 1/8"2'-6"2'-0" 18'-0 1/8"6 1/8"5'-2 7/8"7'-11 1/8"6'-1"3'-8 5/8"9'-10 3/4"11'-8 3/8"3'-0"3'-0"4'-0" 5'-5 1/2" 17'-5 1/4"5 1/2" 6'-11 1/2"17'-10 3/4" 8'-8 5/8" 2'-0 5/8" 16'-0 1/8" 5 1/2"5 1/2"2'-6 1/2"5 1/2"3'-6 1/2"2'-9 1/4"2'-5 1/2"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"25'-10 1/2"10'-0 1/2"5'-11 5/8"5'-3"4'-4"10'-0"8'-4 1/2"5 1/2"17'-8 1/2"5 1/2"1'-0"5 1/2"21'-1 1/2"3 1/2"4'-0"5 1/2"9'-7"5 1/2"5'-6 1/8"5 1/2"3'-3 1/2"1'-11 1/4"1'-10"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"2'-2"5'-0"5'-0"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"16'-11"1'-0"2'-4"1'-0"5'-0"5 1/2"9'-4 1/8"5 1/2"5'-7 7/8"5 1/2"5 1/2"6'-5 1/2" 20'-9 1/2"5 1/2"13'-10 7/8"3 1/2"2'-3 1/8"5 1/2"16'-8 1/2"5 1/2"T.O.PLY100'-0"T.O.PLY 99'-4 1/2"-9 3/4"T.O.FF: 7887.51' (100'-2 1/4"T.O.PLY:7887.32' (100'-0")T.O.PLY 99'-4 1/2"1A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.32A 3.4GAS METERPANTRYUPDNENTRYENTRYPORCHKITCHENOVENSWARMINGDWR & MWSINKRANGESINKHISTORICPORCH TO BEREBUILTPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPATIOCLOSETSTEP"SCREEN"LIVINGROOMDININGROOMBEDROOM 1BATH 1GARAGECLOSETDRESSERUPPANTRYBENCHSTEPELECT. METERTELEPHONECATVMUD ROOMPOWDERROOMCLOSETSAND CUBBIESFIREPLACEWINE CABINETTV10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.55 1/2"4A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"137 PROPOSED: UPPER LEVEL 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.07 8/31/21 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL PLAN DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.51A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.35 1/2"21'-7 3/4"5'-5 1/4"5 1/2"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"12'-11 3/8" 5 1/2" 2'-1 1/4" 5 1/2" 5 1/2"9'-6 1/8"5'-1 1/2" 4'-9 1/8"5 1/2"3'-8 5/8"6 1/8"9'-7 1/2"5 1/2"6'-8 7/8"5 1/2"5'-2 3/4"16'-11"4'-11 3/4" 5 1/2" 10'-6 1/4" 5 1/2"9'-5 3/4"3 1/2"7'-8"5 1/2"5 1/2"32'-7 1/2"5 1/2"1'-2 1/4"12'-10 3/8"10'-0"11 1/2"5 1/2" 6'-5 1/2" 5 1/2"1'-0"15'-0"5 1/2"3'-10 1/4"5 1/2"12'-10 1/4"5 1/2"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"5 1/2"5 1/2"3'-9 1/4"5 1/2"12'-4 3/4"5 1/2"10'-0"5 1/2"5 1/2"16'-5 1/2"3 1/2"3'-6 3/4"5 1/2"12'-10 1/4"5'-0"1'-10"3'-0"4'-0"12'-3"5'-9"6'-0"2'-2"5'-0"2'-9 1/4"2'-5 1/2"4'-11 1/2"18'-4 1/4"10'-0"25'-10 1/2"10'-0 1/2"5'-11 5/8"5'-3"4'-4"10'-0" 8" 8" 2'-4"5'-0"GUEST MASTER BEDROOMGUEST MASTER BATHFIREPLACE AND TV IN CABINETRYCLOSETWCDNSTEAMSHOWERDECKCONNECTINGGLASS LINK BELOWMASTERBEDROOMMASTERBATHDNUP(INTO BEDROOM)WCSTEAMSHOWERMASTERCLOSETLINENBENCH5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 138 PROPOSED: ROOFTOP LEVEL 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.2.08 8/31/21 PROPOSED: ROOFTOP DECK DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 5A 5.35A 5.312345BBCCEEDDFFGG07HHAA6II0.51A 5.31A 5.32A 5.32A 5.33A 5.33A 5.36A 5.36A 5.37A 5.37A 5.38A 5.38A 5.35'-2 3/4"16'-11"1'-10"7'-5"18'-4 1/4" 1'-4 3/4"9'-2 7/8"7'-2 5/8"6 1/8"7'-4"17'-7 1/2"10'-8 3/4"6'-4"7'-4 1/8"6'-9 1/4"15'-5 5/8"2'-3"4'-6 3/8"5'-4 1/8"5'-4 1/8"2'-10 3/4"5'-9 7/8"5'-9 7/8"6'-11 1/8"4'-4 1/8"4'-4 1/8"17'-7 1/2"5'-2 3/4"DNROOF TOPDECK5' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINE10' SETBACK LINEPROPERTY LINE3.54A 5.34A 5.3NSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 139 PROPOSED: ELEVATION NORTH + EAST 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 3.02 8/27/21 ELEVATIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION6"6"ELECT. METERTELEPHONECATVPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONNORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION 140 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO PROPOSED: ELEVATION SOUTH + WEST6"6"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKWEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION 141 PROPOSED: LONGITUDINAL SECTION 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTSAND PLANS INDICATED BY THESEDRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARETHE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIMRAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. ANDSHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHERWORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHERPERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVERWITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKEP R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E DDIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED ATTHE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONALDISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TOTHE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECTPRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.06 9/2/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 H G F E D C B AI 7 1/2"15'-0"25'-0"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" MASTER BATHROOM GARAGE MUD ROOM LIVING ROOM GUEST MASTER BATH GUEST MASTER BATH GUEST MASTER BEDROOM GUEST MASTER CLOSETLAUNDRY MECHANICALBATH 4 BEDROOM 4 (BUNK ROOM T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 0" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATION0 1 2 3 3.5 4 5 760.5 15'-0"25'-0"8'-8"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL99' - 0"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL108' -11 1/2"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL100' - 0"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL108' - 11 1/2"T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL118' - 8"T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" CLOSET 3BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM 4 (BUNK ROOM BEDROOM 1 GARAGEMASTERBEDROOMMASTERBATHROOMROOFTOPDECKT.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL99' - 4 1/2" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"6 BUILDING SECTION 6 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 BUILDING SECTION 5 142 PROPOSED: LONGITUDINAL SECTION 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE SCHEMATIC DESIGN HPC CONCEPTUALDI PAOLA RESIDENCE135 W. FRANCIS ST.ASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTSAND PLANS INDICATED BY THESEDRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARETHE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIMRAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. ANDSHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHERWORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHERPERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVERWITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKEP R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E DDIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED ATTHE SITE . ANY DIMENSIONALDISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TOTHE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECTPRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. A.4.07 8/27/21 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS DATE 01/21/21 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-225202/12/21 A B C D E G HF I 15'-0"25'-0"9'-4"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 99' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 108' - 11 1/2" T.O.PLY DECK LEVEL 118' - 8" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 85' - 6" BATH 2 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOM 3POWDEROWNER'S CLOSET BEDROOM 1BATH 1 MASTER BEDROOM BATH 3 MASTER CLOSET DINING ROOM THEATER PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACK10' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE10' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONA B C D E F G H I 15'-0"9'-6 7/8"T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL99' - 4 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL108' - 11 1/2"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL118' - 8" T.O.PLY SLAB LOWER LEVEL 88' - 0" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL100' - 0"T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL109' - 4 1/2" T.O.SLAB LOWER LEVEL 85' - 6" MASTERBEDROOM CLOSETBEDROOM 1KITCHEN THEATER FAMILY ROOM LINEN BEDROOM 3BATH 2 BATH 3 MASTERCLOSETBEDROOM 2 T.O.SPRING POINT118' - 5 1/2"LIVING ROOMGUEST MASTERBEDROOM SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"8 BUILDING SECTION 8 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"7 BUILDING SECTION 7 143 VIEW: NORTH 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 144 VIEW: SOUTH 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 145 VIEW: WEST 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 146 VIEW: WEST 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 147 VIEW: EAST 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO 148 WEST ELEVATIONS: PROPOSED ROOF 135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO135 W. FRANCIS STREET, ASPEN CO WEST ELEVATION: PROPOSED A B C D E H I 11 5/8"10'-0" 2'-4" 10'-0"4'-4" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2" T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 119' - 8" T.O.PLY MAIN LEVEL 100' - 0" = 7889.31' T.O.PLY UPPER LEVEL 109' - 4 1/2"PROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKPROPERTY LINE5' SETBACKHISTORIC RESOURCELOCATIONF G WEST ELEVATION: PROPOSED 082621 149 SHRUBSCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTWATER USEBK BERBERIS THUNBERGII 'KOREN' / SUNJOY CITRUS JAPANESE BARBERRY5 GAL LCH CORNUS ALBA 'BAILHALO' TM / IVORY HALO DOGWOOD10 GAL MCB CORNUS ALBA 'BUD'S YELLOW' / BUD'S YELLOW DOGWOOD10 GAL MRX ROSA X 'CHEWHOCAN' / OSO EASY LEMON ZEST ROSE1 GAL LSX SYRINGA X 'PINK PERFUME' / BLOOMERANG PINK PERFUME LILAC10 GAL LPLANT SCHEDULEPERENNIALSCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTWATER USEQTYAS ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM 'SUMMER BERRIES' / SUMMER BERRIES MIX COMMON YARROW FLAT L126AC AJUGA REPTANS 'CATLIN'S GIANT' / CATLIN'S GIANT CARPET BUGLEFLAT M83HM HOSTA (VARIOUS) / HOSTA3 GAL M25HO HYLOTELEPHIUM TELEPHIUM 'LAJOS' TM / AUTUMN CHARM STONECROPFLAT L19NL NEPETA RACEMOSA 'LITTLE TITCH' / LITTLE TITCH CATMINT1 GAL L21NR NEPETA RACEMOSA 'WALKER'S LOW' / WALKER'S LOW CATMINT1 GAL L22NB NEPETA X FAASSENII 'BLUE WONDER' / BLUE WONDER CATMINT1 GAL VL40RG RUDBECKIA FULGIDA SULLIVANTII 'GOLDSTURM' / GOLDSTURM CONEFLOWER1 GAL L9SOD/SEEDCODEBOTANICAL / COMMON NAMECONTWATER USESPACINGQTYHPC REVIEW PLANL.1.000'5'10'SCALE: 1"=5'NORTHISSUE & REVISION DATESPlot Date: 09/01/21 Project #: 443Drawn By: ST Checked By:HPC REVIEW PLANHPC REVIEW PLANHPC REVIEW PLAN06/23/202107/27/202109/01/2021135 W FRANCIS ASPEN, CO0,0,0LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ▪ LAND PLANNING 350 MARKET STREET | SUITE 307 | BASALT | CO | 81621 WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.355.5457PROPERTY BOUNDARYALLEYW FRANCIS STN 1ST STPROPERTY BOUNDARYPROPERTY BOUNDARYPROPERTY BOUNDARYSETBACKSETBACKSUBSURFACE LIMIT OF STRUCTURESUBSURFACE LIMIT OF STRUCTUREEXISTING TREES TO REMAIN (TYP)NEW CURB AND GUTTER - SEE CIVILPORCH - SEE ARCHPORCH - SEE ARCH3' WIDE CONCRETESIDEWALK. GRAY, SANDFINISHNEIGHBOR'S EXISTING FENCETO REMAININTEGRAL COLORCONCRETE GARAGEAPRON. SANDFINISH.CONCRETE-SETSTONE PAVERSCONCRETE-SETSTONE PAVERSDIMENSIONAL STONEPAVERS AS STEPPERSPROPOSED FENCEAPPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXISTINGLILAC TO REMAIN150 © 2021 Microsoft Corporation © 2021 TomTom SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021COVER SHEETC1SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE135 WEST FRANCIS STREET // PARCEL NUMBER 273512421001LOT A AND WEST 12 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO811#151 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021GENERAL NOTES&ABBREVIATIONSC1.1“”··········152 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021EXISTINGCONDITIONS &DEMO PLANC2811153 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021SITE PLANC3811154 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021STORMWATERMGMT. NOTES &LEGENDC4.0“”155 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021STORMWATERMGMT. PLANC4.1811156 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021GRADING PLANC5811157 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021UTILITY PLANC6.1811158 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021UTILITY PLANC6.2811159 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021FOUNDATIONDRAIN PLANC6.3811160 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021HORIZONTALCONTROL PLANC7811161 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHICREPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, ARE PROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED,DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITED IN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM YARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILSC8.1162 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS - CITYOF ASPENC8.2163 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS -SANITARYSEWERC8.3164 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS -WATERC8.4165 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS -STORMWATERMGMT.C9.1166 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDING ALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DETAILS -STORMWATERMGMT.C9.2167 SHEET NO.SHEET TITLENO.NAME YARNELL CONSULTING &CIVIL DESIGN, LLCP.O. BOX 3901, EAGLE, COLORADO 81631(970) 323-7008 ISSUE / REVISION DATE: DATE THE DESIGNS SHOWN HEREIN INCLUDINGALL TECHNICAL DRAWINGS, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION & MODELS THEREOF, AREPROPRIETARY & CAN NOT BE COPIED, DUPLICATED, OR COMMERCIALLY EXPLOITEDIN WHOLE OR IN PART WITHOUT THE SOLE AND EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROMYARNELL CONSULTING & CIVIL DESIGN, LLC. DESIGN BY: DRAWN BY: REVIEWED BY: PROJECT NO.: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 135 WEST FRANCIS STREET LOT A & WEST 1/2 OF LOT B, BLOCK 56 ASPEN, COLORADO J. YARNELL J. YARNELL J. YARNELL 21.007 9/2/2021DRAINAGE PLAN(PROPOSED)D18111168