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.20140611
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING June 11,2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 12:00 SITE VISITS: None 5:00 INTRODUCTION A. Roll call B. Approval of minutes- May 28, 2014 C. Public Comments D. Commission member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring G. Staff comments H. Certificates of No Negative Effect issued 1. Submit public notice for agenda items NEW BUSINESS 5.10 A. 435 W. Main Street- Substantial Amendment to Major Development approval, PUBLIC HEARING 6.00 B. 301 Lake Avenue- AspenModern Negotiation for Voluntary Landmark Designation, Conceptual Major Development and Variances, PUBLIC HEARING OLD BUSINESS A. None WORKSESSIONS A. None 7:15 ADJOURN TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM, NEW BUSINESS Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation (5 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Applicant presentation (20 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes) Applicant rebuttal (comments) (5 minutes) Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed (5 minutes) HPC discussion (15 minutes) Motion(5 minutes) *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. PROJECT MONITORING- Projects in bold are currently under construction. Jay Maytin 435 W.Main-AJCC 204 S.Galena 233 W.Hallam 507 Gillespie 1102 Waters 420 E. Cooper 420 E.Hyman Lift One Nora Berko 332 W.Main 1102 Waters 1006 E. Cooper 602 E.Hyman Sallie Golden 206 Lake 114 Neale 534 E . Hyman 517 E.Hyman(Little Annie's) 212 Lake Hotel Aspen Willis Pember 204 S.Galena Aspen Core 514 E.Hyman 624 W.Francis Patrick Segal 204 S.Galena 623 E.Hopkins 701 N.Third 612 W.Main 624 W.Francis 206 Lake 605 W.Bleeker Holden Marolt derrick 212 Lake John Whipple Aspen Core 208 E.Main 201 E.Hyman 420 E.Cooper 602 E.Hyman Hotel Aspen Jim DeFrancia 414 E.Hyman 420 E.Cooper M:\city\planning\hpc project monitoring\PROJECT MONITORING.doc 6/6/2014 • MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 435 W. Main Street, Aspen Jewish Community Center- Substantial Amendment to Major Development Approval- Public Hearing DATE: June 11, 2013 SUMMARY: In 2013, the Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen (AJCC) received approval to construct a parsonage on the eastern half of their property at 435 W. Main Street. The AJCC site is a designated landmark within the Main Street Historic District. The parsonage replaced earlier approvals for a social hall that was intended to supplement the special function space available in the main sanctuary structure. AJCC determined that being able to have the Rabbi and family live on site and receive the congregation in a smaller settin was a higher priority need. g The complex has been in the land use review process since 2004 and includes a sanctuary, preschool, and administrative building on the west portion of the lot and preservation of 6 historic 1940s era tourist cabins along the alley and Third Street, to be used as affordable housing and lodging for visitors related to church events and programming. Construction of the project was initiated in June 2012 and the main building is expected to be completed this year. The applicant would like to change the roof form and exterior materials on the parsonage in order to lower the building height and provide views from the sanctuary towards Independence Pass. The applicant provided two pitched roof options in the original submittal, and provided two flat roof revisions in response to initial staff comments. The building footprint remains essentially the same, although in the flat roofed options, the porch is under living space rather than projecting from the front of the building. APPLICANT: The Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen, represented by Arthur Chabon, architect and Alan Richman Planning Services. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-81-100. ADDRESS: 435 W. Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 38, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: MU, Mixed Use. 1 MAJOR DEVELOPMENT- SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Staff Response: The relevant design guidelines include the HPC guidelines for new development on a landmark lot, and the Main Street District guidelines found in the Commercial, Lodging and Historic Districts design document. They are attached as "Exhibit A." Planning staff has discussed the various options for the project and is unable to find that the revised designs meet the guidelines at this point. We understand the purpose for the changes and, while we supported the approved design, acknowledge that the steeply pitched roof created a substantial mass on the site. A lower profile building could be a good fit for the historic district and site. M� In terms of the pitched roof concepts that are proposed, staff finds the very shallow pitch to be out of character with both the cabins on the property and the new main building. A steeper pitch for the main gable could be achieved at the same height if the roof wasn't spanning such a large width. Staff had suggested that the applicant consider plan form changes that x would allow for a different roof plan, but we understand that is beyond the scope of what they hope to take on. We also recognize that the footprint and placement of the house were discussed at length and deemed appropriate by HPC. Staff suggested the applicant consider a flat roof, which could create a "quiet" building that did not conflict with the roof pitches already established by the other buildings on the property. We suggested that, if a flat roof was used, the whole building should have a more modern approach. The flat roofed proposals that are presented continue to feature what we perceive as a more rustic detailing. The use of the building seems very unclear, where in the approved design the building clearly read as a home. Images illustrating the general direction that staff has proposed might be successful are seen at right. We would recommend that fenestration be similar to that on the main building. 2 Staff finds that the proposal conflicts to some degree with all of the guidelines below. We find that a projecting porch should still be featured, materials and detailing should be more characteristic of the neighborhood and site, and the building should overall be more clearly tied to the architectural quality of the main structure. The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC continue the review to July 91h for additional study. The applicant may also submit information for review at the June 11 th hearing if it is delivered to staff by noon on Tuesday, June 10th Exhibits: A. Relevant guidelines B. Application "Exhibit A: Relevant Design Guidelines for 435 W. Main Street, Final Major Development" 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. ❑ The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry. • A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. • In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. ❑ Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. ❑ The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. ❑ The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. ❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 3 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. ❑ Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary_ roof form_ s. ❑ Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. ❑ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. ❑ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. ❑ Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. • These include windows, doors and porches. • Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. 7.16 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the Victorian era residences seen traditionally on Main Street. ❑ These include windows, doors and porches. ❑ Overall, details should be modest in character. 7.17 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not apart ofAspen's history are especially discouraged. 7.20 Use building materials that are similar to those used historically. ❑ When selecting materials, reflect the simple and modest character of historic materials and their placement. 7.21 Use roofing materials that are similar in appearance to those seen historically. 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 301 Lake Avenue— AspenModem Negotiation for Voluntary Landmark Designation, Conceptual Major Development and Variances, PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 11, 2014 SUMMARY: 301 Lake Avenue is a . . ` 9,231 square foot lot that contains a single family home built in 1972 and �" designed by internationally noted architect Victor Lundy for his own family. After enjoying the home for over 40 years, the Lundy's have chosen to sell to a new owner. This house is a clear 4 (1 illustration of the important opportunity created by the AspenModern program. An application for demolition could be submitted for this property at any time. Instead, the new purchaser recognizes the architectural significance of the y building is interested in discussing . alternatives that would allow for preservation. The applicant proposes to make an addition to the house in the form of a"bar"that hugs the alley in order to leave three sides of the original house untouched. HPC is asked to make a recommendation to Council regarding the historic significance of the property and the appropriateness of the requested preservation incentives. HPC is also asked to conduct Conceptual design review. The board has previously visited the property and held a worksession, as is required in any instance where a floor area bonus will be requested. APPLICANT: 301 Lake Avenue, LLC, represented by One Friday Design and Haas Land Planning. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-16-003. 1 ADDRESS: 301 Lake Avenue, the east %2 of Lot 5 and all of Lots 6 and 7, Block 40, Hallam's Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6. lhs,romc DESIGNATION AspenModern Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures as an example of AspenModern, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The quality of significance of properties shall be evaluated according to criteria described below. When designating a historic district, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet at least two of the criteria a-d, and criterion e described below: a. The property is related to an event, pattern, or trend that has made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific event,pattern or trend is identified and documented in an adopted context paper; b. The property is related to people who have made a contribution to local, state, regional or national history that is deemed important, and the specific people are identified and documented in an adopted context paper; c. The property represents a physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman, or design philosophy that is deemed important and the specific physical design, designer, or philosophy is documented in an adopted context paper; d. The property possesses such singular significance to the City, as documented by the opinions of persons educated or experienced in the fields of history, architecture, landscape architecture, archaeology or a related field, that the property's potential demolition or major alteration would substantially diminish the character and sense of place in the city as perceived by members of the community, and e. The property or district possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association, given its age. The City Council shall adopt and make available to the public score sheets and other devices which shall be used by the Council and Historic Preservation Commission to apply this criterion. Staff Response: Victor Lundy was a renowned modernist architect at the time he built a second home for his family at 301 Lake avenue in the West end in 1972. Lundy received a Bachelor's Degree and a Master's Degree in Architecture from Harvard, studying under Walter Gropius and Marcel Breuer, former Bauhaus leaders. 2 After earning his degrees, Lundy moved to Sarasota, Florida in the 1950s, where he started his first office and became well known as one of a small group of architects who designed dramatic modernist structures in the area. Lundy's beautiful sculptural buildings were a departure from the more rectilinear modernist forms that dominated the celebrated architecture of the mid- century period. These examples of his work have been described as "more roof than wall." 1 � k .r,. a Above: Unitarian Universalist Church, Westport, w CT, 1959 Above right: St. Paul's Lutheran Church, Sarasota FL 1958-1970 i Right: Warm Mineral Springs Motel, Sarasota, FL, 1958. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places. 3 Lundy relocated his office to New York City in 1960 and began receiving important government commissions, such as the U.S. Embassy in Sri Lanka in 1961 and the U.S. Tax Court in 1965. The tax court is one of two Lundy buildings listed on the National Register of Historic Places, a recognition that is rarely given to the work of a living architect. V if I.r 4 ifs r i� i k qy - Top left: Shade structures at The Smithsonian Insitute, 1965. Top right: "Space Flowers" inflatable structures designed for concessions at the New York World's Fair of 1964- 65. Bottom: U.S. Tax Court,Washington, D.C., 1965. Listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In 1976, Progressive Architecture writer Stanley Abercrombie rated the U.S. Tax Court among the best federal buildings constructed in the previous 50 years and, more recently, a 2003 General Services Administration study of federal government office buildings rated the U.S. Tax Court as one of a small group of buildings that "qualify as Modern masterpieces with high levels of architectural significance." In early 2014, The GSA released a documentary film about Victor Lundy, called "Victor Lundy, Sculptor of Space," which can be viewed at httv://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/185759. The house at 301 Lake Avenue is featured in the film. Lundy describes it as one of his favorite buildings. QQ Left: Church of the Resurrection, f Harlem, NY, 1966 (demolished ,{ in 2007) \. Below: Model of the U.S. Embassy, Sri Lanka. loll 1 1111111 q 5 The Lundy house at 301 Lake Avenue is unaltered from the original design. Staff finds that it meets all of the designation criteria, including criterion D, related to architecture of singular significance to the City. This criterion has not been cited in any of the previous designation discussions since AspenModern was adopted. The fact that 301 Lake was not just a commission, but the part-time home of the architect and his family for decades illustrates the importance of architectural design as part of the "Mind, Body, Spirit," concept that is so important to the community. In staff's opinion, the property is an iconic example of the importance of the AspenModern program as part of the City's historic preservation efforts. Notably, the building was photographed and identified in the City's first historic resources survey in 1980, only eight years after it was constructed. Lundy, who has received innumerable awards and accolades for his work, is among the most significant of the renowned architects who produced work in Aspen in the mid-century, including Herbert Bayer, Eero Saarinen, Harry Weese, and John Lautner. Lundy is a Fellow of the American Institute of Architects, received a Federal Design Achievement Award, the highest honor in design granted by the National Endowment for the Arts, and he has been profiled in many professional and popular magazines, including a feature in Dwell in 2008. The second component of designation is scoring the physical integrity of the building. Staff's score sheet is attached as Exhibit B. Staff scored the building as a "Best" example of AspenModern, with 18 out of 20 possible points. PRESERVATION HISTORIC The Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, at a public meeting, regarding the proposed land use application or building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting. The Historic Preservation Commission, using context papers and integrity scoring sheets for the property under consideration, shall provide Council with an assessment of the property's conformance with the designation criteria of Section 26.415.030.C.1. When any benefits that are not included in Section 26.415.110 are requested by the property owner, HPC shall also evaluate how the designation, and any development that is concurrently proposed, meets the policy objectives for the historic preservation program, as stated at Section 26.415.010, Purpose and Intent. As an additional measure of the appropriateness of designation and benefits, HPC shall determine whether the subject property is a "good, better, or best" example of Aspen's 20th century historic resources, referencing the scoring sheets and matrix adopted by City Council. 6 Staff Response: The applicant requests preservation benefits that include variances to dimensional requirements, fee waivers, encroachment into the public right of way, and extended vested rights. All of the benefits, except for setback variances and 500 square feet of the requested floor area bonus, are beyond the authority of the HPC and will require review by City Council. Up until 2011, no historic designations in Aspen required "owner consent." City Council could designate any property that was found to meet landmark criteria. Lengthy debates about the appropriate approach to use for non-Victorian era architecture resulted in voluntary program that relies on the negotiation of individualized incentives that address the unique conditions of each property. This concept has led to some remarkably successful historic preservation projects over the last two years and resulted in the recent naming of the Aspen HPC as "Commission of the Year" by the National Alliance of Historic Preservation Commissions. The HPC criteria for setback variances and a 500 square foot floor area bonus are addressed below under Conceptual review, so that HPC may make a recommendation to Council on those incentives. Council will ultimately determine the package of incentives to be awarded. The additional benefits that will be discussed by Council include the following items. Staff is awaiting input from some other City Departments and we have not formulated a Council recommendation at this time. Waiver of permit fees. Permit fees are related to the valuation of the work and the amount of square footage affected. An estimated cost of the permit fees for this project is $200,000. The applicant has suggested that an alternative is for Council to provide two Transferable Development Rights certificates. Recent sales of TDRs have been in the range of$200,000 to $250,000 each. Waiver of impact fees. Building permits are generally subject to impact fees which include park fees, transportation demand management fees and affordable housing mitigation. These fees are calculated based on any increases in floor area. The proposed expansion involved in this remodel is approximately 2,400 square feet of floor area. All landmarks typically receive waiver of Parks and TDM fees by right through existing code provisions. The applicant requests this standard incentive. Landmarks are also typically exempt from providing affordable housing mitigation for a project like this one. By the time of City Council review, the applicant will need to identify any other fees, such as tree removal or stormwater cash-in-lieu fees that are requested to be reduced. Dimensional Variances. The applicant requests duplex floor area, although the site will be developed as a single- family home. This is an increase in floor area of approximately 420 square feet. HPC Review 06.11.2014 301 Lake Avenue Page 7of14 The applicant requests a 500 square foot exemption for the garage, instead of the 375 square feet that would normally be waived. The applicant is seeking an exemption of the historically significant fire hearth wall from floor area calculations. This very thick masonry wall, which does not really create livable space, would typically count as approximately 200 square feet of floor area. Note: The total floor area increase being requested, on top of the HPC 500 square foot bonus requested below is approximately 750 square feet. Site coverage allowance of 54.3% instead of 39% is requested. This amounts to a footprint on the ground of approximately 1,400 square feet more than the standard allowance. The areawell does not count as site coverage. The proposal includes a height exception related to the areawell. Because of the size of the basement level walk out space, in one area where it is close to the master bedroom building height would be measured from the bottom or the areawell to the top of the addition, which would be over the height limit of 25 feet. Enroachment LicenseNacation The applicant asks to install some landscaping in public right of way along Lake Avenue, in coordination with Parks Department. A corner of the master bedroom projects over the public right of way. This requires the City to vacate (i.e. deed) the land to the applicant. Vested Rights According to State statute, all projects that receive a Development Order as a result of a land use review are automatically provided with a three year period of "vested rights" status, which allows the project to be constructed under the land use regulations that were in place at the time of approval. The applicant for this project requests ten years of vested rights, to allow for the possibility that construction would be delayed for some time. CONCEPTUAL OR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic HPC Review 06.11.2014 301 Lake Avenue Page 8 of 14 Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. A list of the relevant HPC design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." 301 Lake is an unusual triangular shaped lot at the transition between the original Aspen Townsite and Hallam's addition, where the layout of lots and blocks shifts to follow the curving path of Lake Avenue. Staff finds that the Conceptual review guidelines are met and the project is sympathetically designed. There are no other reasonable or less impactful locations for an addition to be placed. Staff finds the form of the addition to be appropriate. The applicant has tried to maximize the livability of below grade space in order to construct a one story, rather than two story addition. The way that the addition "floats off the ground near Lake Avenue literally gives the new construction a lightness that keeps the focus on the substantial quality of the masonry historic building. Though materials are reviewed at Final, the work appears to be very thoughtful and a worthy addition to such an important building. Staff recommends Conceptual approval, however, staff also recommends some adjustments to the project related to the incentive requests. As will be discussed below, staff recommends a greater west sideyard setback, and elimination of the cantilevered master bedroom over the public right of way. Staff is concerned with the amount of floor area bonus that is being requested, for instance the increased garage exemption, however we find that the requested square footage is generally being accommodated on the site in a manner which is exceptional and may be a model for other local and national projects. We recommend a minor adjustment to the length and area of the addition in order to address impacts beyond the site, which might be burdensome to the neighborhood as a whole. There are numerous other landmarks in the immediate vicinity, including a Herbert Bayer designed home immediately to the west of this property. HPC Review 06.11.2014 301 Lake Avenue Page 9 of 14 FAR BONUS In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. Staff Response: The applicant is requesting a 500 square foot floor area bonus. The applicant held a worksession with HPC, which is a requirement of any floor area bonus request. The 500 square foot bonus is an invaluable incentive that has motivated many property owners to construct high quality preservation projects throughout town. This bonus has been available to excellent projects for over 25 years. Staff finds that this project meets the bonus criteria. We find that many possible negative impacts to the original building have been avoided with this project, which is well designed and balances the HPC guidelines with the development opportunities on the site. SETBACK VARIANCES In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic_property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Response: HPC has the authority to consider setback variances if they allow for better placement of the new construction relative to the historic building. In many instances, a historic preservation project in Aspen includes the repositioning of a historic structure on a lot in order to physically distance it from new construction. This particular home cannot be relocated, and regardless, HPC prefers to maintain original building locations when possible. HPC Review 06.11.2014 301 Lake Avenue Page 10 of 14 The house is set along the west boundary of the lot and generally complies with today's setback requirements. The applicant requests an 8 inch setback from the alley instead of 10 feet; an 8 inch setback from Lake Avenue instead of 10 feet; a 1 foot setback from the west sideyard instead of 10 feet; and a combined sideyard setback of 2 feet 6 inches instead of 31 feet. The applicant has created a design that places all new construction along the alley. This is the only area where construction can happen while preserving three sides of the building untouched, and maintaining clear views of the historic building from the street. Staff would not recommend in favor of any construction that was placed in front of the east facade of the existing building. Staff finds that setback variances in this case can help mitigate adverse impacts on the historic structure. With regard to the west sideyard, this is the only location where a variance might impose on an adjacent property owner. Staff recommends that the applicant provide a greater setback for the garage along the west property line, for review at the HPC hearing. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS The existing home does not comply with some of the Residential Design Standards, which were of course written after the house was constructed. The existing house can maintain the non-complying conditions. Only new work should meet the standards or receive a variance. The new work does not comply with Residential Design Standards related to "Building Orientation"and "Build to Lines." 1. Building orientation. The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street-facing facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. Parcels as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall be exempt from this requirement. One (1) element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front corner of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. 2. Build-to lines. On parcels or lots of less than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet, at least sixty percent (60%) of the front facade shall be within five (5) feet of the minimum front yard setback line. On corner sites, this standard shall be met on the frontage with the longest block length. Porches may be used to meet the sixty percent (60%) standard. All Residential Design Standard Variances, Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.410.020(D)(2) must: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and purpose of the particular standard. In HPC Review 06.11.2014 301 Lake Avenue Page 11 of 14 evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Staff Response: The existing house and the new addition meet the Building Orientation standard relative to North Street. The north facades are parallel to that street. The existing house and new addition do not meet the standard related to Lake Avenue, unless the area of the master bedroom that is proposed to cantilever onto vacated right of way is removed. Staff recommends that the master bedroom be designed to be entirely on the private property in order to eliminate this variance request. The existing house does not meet the Build-to-line standard because it is setback from North Street. The addition will not improve the condition, but staff would not support moving the addition towards North Street. Staff recommends HPC grant this variance under variance criterion B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC support landmark designation and negotiation for preservation incentives. Staff recommends HPC grant Conceptual approval, a 500 square foot floor area bonus and the requested setback variances (pending acceptance by Council), and a variance from the Build-to-line Residential Design Standard. Staff recommends that the applicant provide a minor adjustment to the length and area of the addition in order to decrease impacts to the neighborhood, as described in this memo. In order for the restudy to be considered by HPC at the public hearing, it must be provided to staff by noon on Tuesday, July l 01n EXHIBITS: Resolution#_. Series of 2014 Exhibit A: Design Guidelines Exhibit B: Integrity Score Sheet Exhibit C: Public comment Exhibit D: Application Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines for 301 Lake Avenue, Conceptual review 8.3 Avoid attaching a garage or carport to the primary structure. ❑ Traditionally, a garage was sited as a separate structure at the rear of the lot; this pattern should be maintained. Any proposal to attach an accessory structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. HPC Review 06.11.2014 301 Lake Avenue Page 12 of 14 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. ❑ A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. ❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. ❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. ❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. ❑ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. ❑ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. ❑ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. ❑ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene. HPC Review 06.11.2014 301 Lake Avenue Page 13 of 14 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVE ASPENMODERN HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 301 LAKE AVENUE,THE EAST V, OF LOT 5 AND ALL OF LOTS 6 AND 7,BLOCK 40, HALLAM'S ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AND APPROVING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND VARIANCES RESOLUTION #_, SERIES OF 2014 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-16-003 WHEREAS, the applicant, 301 Lake Avenue, LLC, represented by One Friday Design and Haas Land Planning, has requested that the property located at 301 Lake Avenue be considered for voluntary historic designation through the AspenModern process described at Section 26.415.025 and Section 26.415.030 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the applicant also requested approval for Conceptual Major Development and Variances; 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. For review of benefits, such as a floor area bonus and setback variances, HPC must determine conformance with Section 26.415.110 of the Municipal Code. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Amy Simon, in her staff report to HPC dated June 11, 2014, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards. The staff recommendation was that the property should be designated a landmark as it meets the criteria for designation and the integrity score qualifies as the "best" category of historic resources. Staff also recommended in favor of the Conceptual design review and Variances, with some areas for restudy; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on June 11, 2014, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application during a duly noticed public hearing, including the staff recommendation and public comments, and found the project to be consistent with the review criteria, with conditions, by a vote of— to NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby finds that the property located at 301 Lake Avenue,the east %z of Lot 5 and all of Lots 6 and 7, Block 40, Hallam's Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado meets the designation criteria of Land Use Code Section 26.415.025 and 030. HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development and Variances with the following conditions: 1. HPC finds that 120 Red Mountain Road meets designation criteria a through e, listed in §26.415.030.0.1 2. HPC finds that 301 Lake Avenue is a"best" example of Modern architecture. 3. HPC grants a 500 square foot floor area bonus and the following setback variances, pending approval of the entire preservation incentives package by City Council: An 8 inch setback from the alley instead of 10 feet An 8 inch setback from Lake Avenue instead of 10 feet A 1 foot setback from the west sideyard instead of 10 feet; (TO BE RESTUDIED) A combined sideyard setback of 2 feet 6 inches instead of 31 feet 4. HPC grants a waiver of the Build-to-line standard. HPC requires the master bedroom to be entirely on private property, and designed to meet the Building Orientation standard. 5. 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. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 11th day of June, 2014. Willis Pember, Vice Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk unaracter Defining Features atures 1) Simple geometric formsbo of the B© a u h a u s/i n to rn a ti o n a l Check box if elevation . oth in plan and style Statement IS true 2) Flat roofs, usual) 8) Entry is usually marked b y single story © a cantilevered screen element, or Ottherthe wall. 1 point per box. architectural clue that directs one i 3) Proportions are long and low. horizontal lines composition into the are emphasized ■ 9)Buildings are connected to n 4) Asymmetrical arrangement of elements the use of courtyards, wall ele nature through 5) Windows are treated as slots in the extend into the landsca menu that c surface, either vertically or horizontallgazing e wall that allow a visual connection to the na u a glazing appears as a curtain wall y' or environment 10) Schemes are monochromatic, using 6) Detailing is reduced to the com decor neutral colors. Primary colors are used for elements rather than position of decorative effects accents. 7) Materials are general) A building must have 6 0 standardized. surfaces are smooth, and f the 10 no detail at window with © character definin ambs. minimal or g features, either grade. and roof edge present or clear) through Y documented 9h photographic of "W T = `;-� evidence to qualify as physical Bauhaus/International S Restoration Style. n 0 y maY be required as of the award of i part ncentIves. "r If the property earned 6 or more , continue to the next Points, page. If the property earned less than 6 ._ .; points, scoring ends. A _ 0 Total Points 0 - 10 INTEGRITY SCORING If a statement is true, circle the number of points associated with that true statement. The building is in its original location. The building has been shifted on the original parcel, but maintains its original 2 points alignment and/or proximity to the street. 1 point The property is located within the geographical area surrounded by Castle Creek, the Roaring Fork River and Aspen Mountain. 1 point The property is outside of the geographical area surround by Castle Creek, the Raoring Fork River and Aspen Mountain. 112 point DESIGN- The form of the building (footprint, roof and wall planes) are unaltered from the original design. 3 points a.) The form of the building has been altered but less than 25% of the original walls have been removed, OR b.) The alterations to the form all occur at the rear of the subject building, OR c.) The form of the building has been altered but the addition is less than 50% 2 points of the size of the original building, OR d.) There is a roof top addition that is less than 50% of the footprint of the roof. MATERIALS Exterior materials The original exterior materials of the building are still in place, with the exception of normal maintenance and repairs. 2 points 50% of the exterior materials have been replaced, but the replacements match the original condition. 1 point ' Windows doors The original windows and doors of the building are still in place, with the exception of normal maintenance and repairs. 2 points 50% of the original windows and doors have been replaced, but the replacements match the original condition. 1 point Lest: 15 up to 20 points i metter: 12 up to 15 points Integrity Score (this page) maximum of 10 points: 10 Character Defining Features Score (first page) maxi-• • • I up to 12 points qot Eligible:0 up to lo points mum of 10 points: HISTORIC ASSESSMENT SCORE: 1 s LAW OFFICES OF PAUL J. TADDUNE, P.C. PAUL J.TADDUNE AFFILIATED OFFICE 323 WEST MAIN STREET,SUITE 301 FOWLER,SCHIMBERG&FLANAGAN,P.C. ASPEN,COLORADO 81611 1640 GRANT STREET,SUITE 300 TELEPHONE (970)925-9190 DENVER,COLORADO 80203 TELEFAx (970)925-9199 TELEPHONE (303)298-8603 INTERNET:taddune @compuserve.com TELEFAX (303)298-8748 June 3, 2014 HAND DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL: amy.simon�cityofaspen.com Ms. Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street, Third Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 301 Lake Avenue, Aspen Landmark Designation and "AspenModern" Negotiation Dear Amy: For many years, I have provided legal assistance to the Block family, which owns 309-311 West North Street, Aspen. The property is occupied by long-time Aspen residents, Dr. Martin and Ms. Beate Block. Dr. Block is a prominent professor of Physics and Astronomy at Northwestern University, and he has been instrumental in the success of the Aspen Center for Physics. In 1985, he inaugurated the highly successful free Public Physics Lecture series at the Wheeler Opera House. The Block property, a Bauhaus home designed by renowned architect Herbert Bayer, itself holds a historic designation. Dr. and Mrs. Block first learned of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) application submitted by Haas Land Planning, LLC on May 24, 2014. We understand that a meeting has been scheduled with the HPC for June 11, 2014. I was forwarded the application over the weekend and have not reviewed it at length. However, my initial reaction is that it is a very complex application which attempts to harvest every conceivable development opportunity on this unique lot. In fact, it seems so excessive that I wonder what historic value of the Lundy designed home will remain? The Block family's initial reactions to the proposed application are as follows: 1. The proposed one story garage, set back just F 10" from the Block property line, will completely obliterate all light (coming from the east) on the Block property. Not only is the sunlight illuminating the garden obliterated, but all light to the Blocks' windows, which face the Ms. Amy Simon June 3, 2014 Page 2 east, will be completely cut off. a) The proposed narrow setback will make it impossible to service or maintain the existing wooden fence that separates the lot from the neighbors on the Lundy-house side. A human being cannot fit into the narrow gap between the proposed structure and the Blocks' boundary line fence. b) The proposed narrow setback would lead to heavy snow accumulation in the narrow gap between the structure and the fence during the winter, and make it impossible to carry out ally snow'rcnio�,al, result-M6 ?;"3 inevitable damage to the Blocks' boan Clary fence. And in the summer, it will not be possible to carry out any necessary yard maintenance (e.g., weed removal) in the too-narrow gap. c) The proposed narrow setback would lead to an unacceptable "dumping" of snow directly into the Blocks' yard, as well as the City-owned alley, directly from the roof of the remodeled Lundy structure. d) In case of a fire, the lack of adequate setback may pose a serious safety issue, both with respect to the potential spread of the fire, and for the access of fire-fighting equipment, which will put the Blocks in danger. All these considerations negatively affect both the quality of the Blocks' life and the value of their property. 2. The size of the proposed renovation is completely off-scale for this neighborhood, dwarfing all homes in this part of the historic West End (the home is already over-sized before considering any additions). 3. The new development proposal would turn the alley into a virtual tunnel that would completely shield from view the modern historic Bayer house at 309-311 West North Street. 4. The proposed application would dwarf and diminish the two modern Bauhaus houses in the immediate neighborhood that were designed by Herbert Bayer, the internationally esteemed Bauhaus architect brought to Aspen by Walter Paepcke: (i) 309-311 West North Street, which is adjacent to the Lundy house on the west; and (ii) the other, located directly across the street from the Lundy house, at 240 Lake Avenue. 5. Because of its peculiar construction and placement on the lot, it appears likely that the proposed renovation would significantly diminish, rather than enhance, the architectural value of the original Lundy house. 6. The proposed addition appears to request permission to encroach significantly into every possible setback, and, in effect, asks for a donation of City property as well, making the impacts of the requested encroachments even more severe. Ms. Amy Simon June 3, 2014 Page 3 7. In looking at the list of persons notified by the City, it appears that Dr. and Mrs. Perros, who own the house at 280 Lake Avenue directly across the street from the Lundy home, were not included. If the efforts to preserve AspenModern involve a negotiation process, then those most impacted, and in particular the Block family, should also be an integral part of any such process. Therefore, please accept this as both a formal protest to the application, as presented, and also a request o be included in any such process going forward, so that the rpro",CSs becomes more transparent. I expect that I and the Blocks will have additional comments once we have the opportunity to review this application in greater detail. The Blocks are under the impression that they have only until June 4, 2014, to submit a protest letter; therefore, the urgency of sending this letter at this time as the analysis is ongoing. Interestingly, the application was referred to an acquaintance of the Blocks who happens to be a recognized expert in land use and urban planning, and who also was, at one time, the architectural critic for the Los Angeles Times. He observes that the historic land use designation, in this case, seems to be used as a facade to actually build a Trojan horse, and he feels that the design reflects pernicious intentions that ignore the scale and character of the neighborhood. For Modernist architects, including Lundy, the concept of"Light and Air," which the proposed development does pretend to achieve, were bywords of their movement. He further observed that the proposed addition appears to flaunt every possible zoning setback, to crowd an irregular shaped lot at the expense of its neighbors, and (ironically) therefore expresses architectural intentions diametrically opposed to those of the Modernists. Please forward this letter to the Historic Preservation Commission for its information and consideration. Also, please feel free to call if you have any questions. Very truly yours, PAUL J. TADDUNE, P.C. Paul J. Taddune PJT/nwe cc: Martin and Beate Block Mitch Haas,Haas Land Planning, LLC Historic Preservation Commission Lloyd G. Schermer 210 Lake Ave Aspen, CO 81611 Ph/fax 970-544-0421 Cell 970-274-0476 sche_rmerag_r_of net web site—schermerart.com 3 June 2014 Dear Sirs, It has come to our attention that variances are being sought for the Lundy house remodel across the street from our home at 210 Lake Ave. First, I want to congratulate and express our appreciation to the Historic Preservation Commission past, and present, for preserving the unique beauty and character of the West End. Twenty-three years ago we bought our lot on which a miner's cabin was located that was on the Historic Register. Our plans for remodeling had to be approved by the HPC that made us jump thru hoops, backwards and forwards, before we could proceed. In retrospect we came to greatly appreciate the HPC's suggestions in spite of increasing our costs and time frame. We were not allowed any variances. We love living in the West End. I learned my watercolor painting in Anstis Lundy's home. Pussy Paepke lived two doors away and we became very close friends for many years. Pussy insisted I join the ACES board on which I served for ten years. I knew Pussy well enough that if she were alive today she'd be in front of the HPC raising hell on this proposed project. A jasper blows in from out of town and wants variances with no appreciation for the unique beauty of the West End. Every variance establishes precedents, large and small, that will chip away at the West End for years to come and the fine work the HPC has done. Finally, I understand the new owner wants to move the property line even closer to the Blocks whom we've known for twenty years. What could possibly be the rationale for such a variance? The new owner bought the property with full knowledge of its restrictions. So be it. Sincerely ,r r i J� y' Amy Simon From: Diane Perros <dianeperros @hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 10:46 AM To: Amy Simon Subject: Lundy House Dear Ms. Simon, This letter is regarding the proposed construction for the project at 301 Lake Avenue. We reside across the street at 280 Lake Avenue and have been there since we built our house in 1991. Over the past 23 years we have watched with dismay as houses in the West End have either been built or renovated in violation of existing regulations with sometimes appalling results. We realize that this case is not one of violation but of proposed variances yet the results may be indistinguishable in their negative impact on the neighborhood. After viewing the plans, we believe that the footprint of the proposed addition is of such a scale and placement that the impact will be negative both from an aesthetic point of view and from the effect it will have on the neighboring properties. The proposed setbacks are particularly egregious. We built our home and renovated our deck in strict accordance with the myriad regulations involved. We certainly would have liked to be able to do several things differently yet believed that since the regulations were formulated for the good of the community there would be no justification for requesting something which would have benefited us to the detriment of our neighbors and the neighborhood. We sincerely hope that enough time will be given for the voices of all concerned to be heard and that your committee will respect the requirements which you helped to formulate. Sincerely, Diane and Dimitri Perros 1 Loyal and Bernice Durand 415 Pearl Court Aspen, CO 81611-1256 (970) 925-7321 June 4, 2014 Ms. Amy Simon Historic Preservation Commmission City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Ms. Simon: We are writing to object to the proposed redevelopment of the Lundy prop- erty, 301 Lake Avenue, by Haas Land Planning LLC. It is proposed that the Lundy house, designed by noted modernist architect Victor Lundy, be granted Landmark Designation and preserved subject to a set of conditions or "benefits" which would allow a substantial addition to the house. We believe that Landmark and Historic Designation for the existing house would be quite appropriate. However, the proposed addition would com- pletely change the use and appearance of the property, and should not be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission or the City Council. We live two blocks from the Lundy house, and pass by very frequently on foot Lake Avenue is the short route downtown from our house, and we like to walk by Triangle Park. The Lundy lot is odd shaped, essentially triangular, and has been left in a semi-wild state since the house was built, with just the existing glass-walled structure facing toward Triangle Park. As such, it blends nicely with the park. The house complements existing modernist structures by Herbert Bayer immediately adjacent to the west, and across Lake Avenue, and is quite consistent with a large Victorian house immediately south across the alley. With its lack of formal landscaping, the property also blends nicely with the properties along Lake Street to the north. The proposed addition to the house would involve the granting of substantial variances to existing residential codes. It is proposed to have setbacks from the property lines of only 8 inches on the south or alley side and along Lake Avenue, and of only 1 foot 10 inches to the west, adjacent to the Bayer house at 311 North Street; 10 foot setbacks are required by code. These variances are a huge departure from code, would substantially crowd the alley and Bayer house, and should not be granted. The Haas group also requests a variance with respect to site coverage, and an easement to allow landscaping to be extended roughly 25 feet into the Lake Avenue right-of-way to within 3 feet of the street, with a possible fence along that side of the property. The site already appears crowded on the plans submitted even with the extreme setback variances noted above. The extension of "landscaping," presumably a yard with fence, would completely change the present appearance and "feel" of the property, now semi-wild and compatible with its surroundings. We strongly oppose the granting of the extreme variances, easements, and "benefits" requested, but would happily support the granting of Landmark and Historic status for the Lundy house as it stands. Sincerely, Loyal and Bernice Durand 2 EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CO A-DPRES S OF PROPERTY: ,Aspen, CO C PUBLIC HEARING DATE: STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) being (name, please print) ing •r representing an Ap icant to the City.of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: V Publication of notice.- By the publication in the legal notice section of paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen official 15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the_ day of , 20_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sib z) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailuig of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The naives and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and goverTZnaental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, suminarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of tJze neighborlood outreach sunz»iary, including the method ofpublic notification a71d a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued 077 next page) i Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt at least thirty(30) days prior to the requested, to affected mineral estate owners b on the application of development. date scheduled for the initial public hearing Pp n the current The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those or PUDs flint tax records of Pitkin County. At a minim , create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice rNuir Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any ' i way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part whetheer such reviisiion be Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to b made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land the use regulation,gal otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map rs of description of, and the notice to and listing of names l be addresses edHowever, the real property in the area of the proposed change proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection ;1n the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing g on such amendments. Signature The foregoing"Affidavit of Notic " was ackn wledge day d before me this 341 1 Of ImLk4 20 ,by Z. � a- PUBLIC NOTICE AND OFFICIAL SEAL R COM UNITY CENTER- UBSTANTIAL JEWISH WITNESS 1V1-1 HAND 435 W.MAIN STREET ASPEN AMENDMENT TO MAJOR DEVELOPMENT 1 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing C p� s will be held on Wednesday,June 11,2014,at a meeting to begin at 5:00 f:s.before the Aspen y . Historic Preservation Comm,ssion,Council Cham- bers,City Hall,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,to con- sider an application submitted by Jewish Resource Center COh81611 f represented d by Arthur Chabon As scribed as 435hW subject Main Street LotslA Ile Block 38, No P li ' city and Toioo,an of Aspen, Parcel Ion CHRISTOPHER LUNDGREN 2735-124-81-100,and the request is for design changes to the parsonage that has been approved NOTARY PUBLIC to be constructed on the eastern portion of the site. For further information,contact Amy Simon at the STATE OF COLORADO City of Aspen Communityy Development (970) Depart- ment 130 S.Galena St.,Aspen, NOTARY ID 20144000722 429.2758,amysimon@cityofaspen.com. - s/Jay Maytin,Chair 1YIENTS AS APPLICABLE: COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN.09,2018 Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 22,2014[ION (10203485) TED NOTICE (SIGN • pgo TUU AI'H Up (tl `ND COyERNMENTAL AGENCLES NOTICED • LIST OF THE OWNERS B Y MAIL APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL-ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: t1 ,20 1� STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin n ` ) w- being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado,herebyepersonally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on the 21 day of_ yl'` , 20 1 y, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A I copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAs or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The forego' g "Affidavit of Notic "was ac wledged before me this�d of , 20 ; by Y WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL FNSOTARy A L. NELSON �/ ARY PUBLIC My commission expires: q t JZ-51ZO - OF COLORADO ID 20014030017 / i �YVV ON EXPIRES 09/26/2 017 Not Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPYOFTHEPUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERSAND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 435 W. MAIN STREET, ASPEN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER- SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO MAJOR DEVELOPMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, June 11,2014, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Jewish Resource Center Chabad of Aspen, 435 W. Main Street, Aspen, CO, 81611, represented by Arthur Chabon Architects. The subject property is legally described as 435 W. Main Street, Lots A-I, Block 38, City and Townsite of Aspen, Parcel ID# 2735-124-81-100, and the request is for design changes to the parsonage that has been approved to be constructed on the eastern portion of the site. For further information, contact Amy Simon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2758, amy.simon@cityofaspen.com. s/Jav Mavtin, Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 22, 2014 City of Aspen Account tasy Peep Labels W AverP Template 5160® Pa Paper ��� Bend along line to I Feed J P expose Pop-up EdgeTM D AVERYO 51600 320 202 W MAIN 331 W BLEEKER LLC j 2020 CALAMOS OS CT 2727 ALLEN PKY STE 1400 400 WEST HOPKINS LLC NAPERVILLE, IL 60563 HOUSTON,TX 77019 601 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN,CO 81611 501 WEST MAIN LLC 532 E HOPKINS AVE ALLAN ANDREW S ALPINE BANK 80 ASPEN,CO 81611-1818 154 MARION 8 ATTN ERIN WIENCEK DENVER,CO 0218 PO BOX 10000 GLENWOOD SPRINGS,CO 81602 AMIRA ASPEN LLC ASPEN FAMILY HOLDINGS LLC 2521 BROADWAY#A 137 WESTVIEW DR ASPEN FSP ABR LLC BOULDER,CO 80304 ASPEN,CO 81611 11921 FREEDOM DR#950 RESTON,VA 20190 ASPEN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ASPEN MESA STORE LLC A COLO NON PROFIT CORPORATION C/O ASPEN BLUE SKY HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC INC 311 W MAIN ST PO BOX 8238 617 E COOPER ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN, 82 81612 ASPEN,CO 81611 BAILEY MIRANDA TRUST 50% BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON BAKER&HOSTETLER LLP BLOCKER LAURA G 303 E 17TH AVE#1100 8742 LUCENT BLVD#300 PO BOX 9213 DENVER, CO 80203 HIGHLANDS RANCH,CO 80129 ASPEN,CO 81612 BOND RICHARD CAREY 320 JULIA ST BOOKBINDER FISHDANCE&DELANEY LLC BRAFMAN STUART&LOTTA BEA TRST 164 LITTLE PARK RD NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 GRAND JUNCTION,CO 81503 5630 WISCONSIN AVE#401 CHEVY CHASE,MD 20815 BRIEN ALICE 110 BROOKS NORMAN A&LESLEE S E AVE 16311 VENTURA BLVD#690 BROWDE DAVID A ASPEENN,,CO C 81611 ENCINO,CA 91436 604 QUAKER RD CHAPPAQUA, NY 10514 CARINTHIA CORP CARTER RICHARD P 45 E LUPINE PO BOX 2932 CHAMBERS PETE ASPEN, CO 81166 11 TELLURIDE,CO 81435 PO BOX 220 CABIN JOHN,MD 20818 CHOOKASZIAN DENNIS CHRISTIANA UNIT D101 LLC 1100 MICHIGAN AVE 795 LAKEVIEW DR CITY OF ASPEN WILMETTE, IL 60091 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33140 ATTN FINANCE DEPT 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN,CO 81611 CLEANER EXPRESS CLICK JANE 435 E MAIN ST 333 W MAIN ST#2A COCHENER CAROLINE A TRUST#5 ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 7309 EAST 21ST ST#120 WICHITA,KS 67206 Etiquettes faciles h peler i A Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®5160® Sens de Repliez h la hachure afin de r6v6ler le rebord Pop-upTM chargem WWw.avery.com ent 1-800-GO-AVERY J ! Easy Peel'Labels 0 Use Averyt Template 51600 ' �� Bend along line to 11 Feed Paper ® , P expose Pop-up EdgeTM D AVERY@ 51600 COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA 1 PO BOX 1927 CORONA VANESSA LOPEZ CORTALE-ITA- CARSON CITY, NV 89702 PO BOX 3670 PO BOX 12346 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 816129237 CRETE ASSOCIATES LP CRETE ASSOCIATES LP 1630 LOCUST ST#200 PO BOX CROWLEY SUE MITCHELL REV TRUST 1524 PHILADELPHIA,PA 19103 BRYN X 1524 PA 19010 409 S GREENWOOD AVE COLUMBIA,MO 65203 DAHL W ROBERT&LESLIE A DCBD2 LLC 83 PECKSLAND RD 1601 ELM ST 8TH FL DESTINATION RESORT MGMT INC GREENWICH, CT 06831 DALLAS,TX 75201 610 S WESTEND ST ASPEN,CO 816112142 DILLON RAY IV DRATCH KATE TYCHER 2012 TRUST PO BOX 10543 SELAND PROPERTY CO/ EMERICK SHELLEY W RO BARBARA ASPEN,CO 81612 ROSELAN 2449 5TH ST 233 CANOE BROOK RD BOULDER,CO 80304 SHORT HILLS,NJ 07078 FARR CHARLOTTE FAT CITY HOLDINGS LLC 306 MCCORMICK AVE 402 MIDLAND PARK PL FINE FREDRIC N&SONDRA CAPITOLA, CA 95010 ASPEN,CO 81611 412 MARINER DR JUPITER, FL 33477 FISERV ISS&CO FRANKEL KATHY TRUST FBO ROBERTA N LOWENSTEIN 299 1STAVE S FRIAS PROPERTIES OF ASPEN LLC PO BOX 741626 NAPLES,FL 34102 730 E DURANT BOYNTON BEACK,FL 33474 ASPEN,CO 81611 GANT CONDO ASSOC INC GARMISCH LODGING LLC 610 S WESTEND ST 110 W MN ST GILDENHORN MICHAEL S 50% AI ASPEN,CO 816112142 ASPEN, AI 8 T 5008 BALTON RD BETHESDA,MD 20816 GOLDENBERG STEPHEN R&CHERYL J GOLDMAN DIANNE L 430 W HOPKINS AVE BOX 518 GUNNING JANINE L PO ASPEN,CO 81611 PO BOX 51 CT 06824 PO BOX 11705 ASPEN,CO 81612 H&H PROPERTIES LLLP HAYMAN JULES ALAN 807 W MORSE BLVD STE 101 9238 POTOMAC SCHOOL DR HOWELL DANIEL B&MARY H 3701 WINTER PARK,FL 32789-3725 POTOMAC,MD 20854 TAM A,FL 3 629 CT TAMPA,FL 33629 HUCKABEE CHRISTOPHER M HUDGENS ROBYN 4521 S HULEN 3220 PO BOX 570 HY-MOUNTAIN TRANSPORTATION INC FORT WORTH,TX 76109 RANCHO SANTA FE,CA 920670570 214 B AABC ASPEN,CO 81611 ttiquettes faciles a peler Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®51600 Sens de Repliez A la hachure afin de; www.avery com r6v6ler le rebord Po u TM J chargement P P 1-800-GO-AVERY J Easy Neel'a Labels i A war Use AverYO Template 51600 Feed Pa Paper �� Bend along line to i J P expose Pop-up EdgeTM D AVERY0 51600 700 JACOBY 20T H FAMILY LP JOHNSTON FAMILY TRUST VE 1 2018 PHALAROPE KARP MICHAEL RO T BEACH, FL 32960 COSTA MESA,CA 92626 1630 LOCUST ST#200 PHILADELPHIA,PA 19103 KASPAR THERESA D KATZMAN LORI ANN PO BOX 1 301 MERCER BLVD KENDIG ROBERT&SUE ASPEN,CO 8 81612 CHARLEVOIX,MI 49720 PO BOX 4649 ASPEN,CO 81612 LAMBERT HENRY M LEVY ROBERT I 320 JULIA ST 2099 NW PINE TREE WY LORENTZEN AMY L NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 STUART, FL 34994 26 GREENVIEW WAY MONTCLAIR, NJ 070432532 MACDONALD BETTE S TRUST MARION BRANDON&ANGELA 15 BLACKMER RD PO BOX 37 MARTEN RANDOLPH 88 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110 ASPEN, 88 81612 129 MARTEN ST MONDOVI,WI 54755 MCCARTY DANIEL L MONARCH III LLC PO BOX 4051 8 4601 COLLEGE BLVD#300 MOUNTAIN LODGE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN,CO O 81612 LEAWOOD, KS 66211 PO BOX 5109 ASPEN,CO 81612 MURPHY JULIANNE&WILLIAM R JR REV TRUST NAVIAS CRAIG&ESTHER TRUST NEWTON BARBARA 9833 SHORELINE DR PO BOX 4390 PO BOX 9410 LONGMONT, CO 80504 ASPEN,CO 81612 ASPEN,CO 81612 NORTH AND SOUTH ASPEN LLC NORTHWAY LLC 200 ASPEN ST 106 S MILL ST#202 PERRY EMILY V ASPEN,CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81611 1497 ISABELLA LN SANTA BARBARA,CA 93108 PIONEER PARTNERS LTD PRICE DOUGLAS 617 W MAIN ST PO BOX DOUGLAS RAINBOW CONNECTION PROPERTIES LLC ASPEN,CO 81611 CABIN JOHN, MD 20818 4475 NORTH OCEAN BLVD#43A DELRAY BEACH,FL 33483 RICKEL DAVID RISCOR INC 275 GOLDENROD DR 2651 N HARWOOD ST#580 ROSENTHAL DIANNE LANDSDALE, PA 19446 DALLAS,TX 75201-1576 PO BOX 10043 ASPEN,CO 81612-7311 SCHALL FAMILY TRUST SCHULMAN WILLIAM PAUL 3841 HAYVENHURST DR 301 MERCER BLVD SCRUGGS DAVID C&PHYLLIS R ENCINO,CA 91436 CHARLEVOIX, MI 49720 365 RIVERBLUFF PL MEMPHIS,TN 38103 ttiquettes faciles a peler i ♦ , Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®51600 Sens de Repliez a la hachure afin de; rytom 'Www.ave rev6ler le rebord Po TM TM J chargement p P 1-800-GO-AVERY J i Easy PeelQ Labels We Avi ry0 Template Paper plate 5160® ' Feed Pa �� Bend along line to 11 , A P expose Pop-up EdgeTM j w AVERY® 51600 SEAL MARK SHEEHAN WILLIAM J j PO BOX 9213 SHEEHAN NANCY E SHERWIN ENTERPRISES LLC C ASPEN, CO 81612 10 GOLF VIEW C C/O JENNIFER SHERWIN FRANKFORT, IL 60423 VISTA ST DUURR HAM,NC 27701 SILVERSTEIN PHILIP SMITH ANDREW C&DONNA G SILVERSTEIN ROSALYN 3622 SPRINGBROOK ST SNYDER GARY 25 KNOLLS CRESCENT DALLAS TX 75205 8324 BROODSIDE RD , BRONX, NY 10463 ELKINS PARK,PA 19027 STASPEN LLP STUART DANIEL S&TAMARA B 1180 PEACHTREE ST NE PO BOX 74 TAD PROPERTIES LLC 32 ATLANTA, GA 303093521 ASPEN, 32 81612 PO BOX 9978 ASPEN,CO 81612 TEMPKINS HARRY&VIVIAN TOLER MELANIE S TRUST 605 LINCOLN RD#301 6400 S CLIPPINGER DR TOMS CONDO LLC MIAMI BEACH, FL 33139 CINCINNATI,OH 45243 C/O BRANDT FEIGENBAUM PC 132 MIDLAND AVE#4 BASALT,CO 81621 TUCKER LUCY LEA TWIN COASTS LTD PO BOX 1480 433 PL#275 TYCHER DANA 2012 TRUST PLAZA REAL ASPEN,CO 81611 433 P BATON, L 275 150 JOHN F KENNEDY PKWY SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078 TYCHER JACK 2012 TRUST ULLR CONDO LLC ROSELAND PROPERTY CO/BARBARA 6450 AVENIDA CRESTA ULLR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION MASCERA LA JOLLA,CA 92037 600 E HOPKINS#304 233 CANOE BROOK RD ASPEN,CO 81611 SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078 VERNER DANIEL A&MERYLE WAGNER HOLDINGS CORP LLC 2577 NW 59TH ST C/O BILL POSS WARBLE ERIC BOCA BATON, FL 33496 605 E MAIN ST 0124 SPRING PL ASPEN,CO 81611 EDWARDS,CO 81632 WENDT ROBERT E II WERLIN LAURA B TRUST 350 MT HOLYOKE AVE 2279 PINE ST WHIPPLE JOHN TAGGART PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272 121 S GALENA ST SAN FRANCISCO,CA 94115 ASPEN,CO 81611 WINER CAROL G 50% YOUNG PAUL III FAMILY TRUST 6740 SELKIRK DR 413 W HOPKINS AVE BETHESDA, MD 20817 ASPEN,CO 816111603 ttiquettes faciles A peter Utillsez le gabarit AVERY®5160® 11 Sens de Repliez A la hachure afin de i WWW.ave ry'com rdvcler le rebord Po TM TM ' j chargement P p 1-800-GO-AVERY IM! RAI- c p C � " I f � / / /4 a De im p 0 / }F cater/; = y Cl k 5 _ P tl aw U � ayX � $ j / a i EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE COD AD ©�OF�ROPERTY: I/L IZ ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 2 iI � 20jH STATE OF COLORADO ) County of Pitldn ) ss. I, c� go rz� �h being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Coloradon hereby persoe, please certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: B the publication By p tion in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on the_ day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sigz) is attached hereto Mailing of notice, By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Coty Development Department, which contains the information described in Section mmuni 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. ,q copy of the owners and gonernnzental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A coPY of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued 077 next page) the certified mailing of notice, return receipt Mineral Estate owner Notice. By Y 30 days prior to the requested,to affected mineral estate owners bon lleea a thirty lion of development. date scheduled for the initial public hearing PP e current The names and addresses of min eral estate owsurbs�halonss, SPAsoor PUDs that tax records of Pitkm County At a minimum, and new Specially create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. district map is in any Rezoning or text:amendment. incidental tho or asc part of general revision of this I way to be changed or amended incide whether such revision be Title, or whenever the text Viand Title is of e new land use regulation, or made by repeal of this T ma or other sufficient legal • otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey p description of, and the notice to an d listing of names and addresses vedHowever, the P e shall real property in the area of the proposed Chang ection_an the planning. proposed zoning map shall be, available for public insp ours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing agency during all business h on such amendments. Signature �r avit of Notice" was acknowl ged before me this day The fore omg mg-Affidavit of , 2014,by PUBLIC NDncE AND OFFICIAL SEAL . RE-301 LAKEAVENUE-ASPENMANDM K HAND pOT1A TIO FOR VOLUNTARY LANDMARK pESIGNATION,CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DAL `T�"'E�J OPMENT AND VARIANCES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing My slo expir s will be held on Wednesday,�ubefo e t e As - meeting to begin at 500 p. Historic Preser Hallo,130 S.GalenaSt.CAspenl chambers,will City application submitted by 301 ' HPC will consider , app' Lake Avenue,LLC,c/o David Willens,Manager, 2385 NW Executive Center Dr.,Suite 440,Boca lC Raton,Florida,33431,represented by One Friday O Design aioca ed at 301 Lake Avenue,the east9/e of the property 55 end all of Lots 6 and 7,Block 40,Hallam's CHRISTOPHER LUNDGREN Addition to the city and Townsite of Aspen,Colo- NOTARY PUBLIC rado,Parcel ID#2735-124.16.003.The applicant is proposing voluntary landmark designation and STATE OF COLORADO negotiation for incentives through the AspenMod- ern program. Conceptual design review is re- NOTARY ID 20144000722 quested for n adddbn to the messing house. Re, qEN l S AS APDT TCAB E quested incentives include dimensional variances, �7 APPLICABLE:L COMMISSION EXPIRES JAN.09,218 design guideline variances and extended vested rights. For further information,contact Amy Simon CityofA M p Rm 130558Ga Galena St.,Aspen,Development o,(970) TON 429.2758'amy.,imona ityofaspen.com. 'OSTED NOTICE (SIGN) C, �n Historic Preservation Commission GO ygRVMENTAL AGENCLES NOTICED Chair,Asps o Published in the Aspen Times on May 22,2014 `10 ) ES TAE OWNERS NOTICE (0 3M__- . APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-X 03.3 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: -34�2 p_!�14f 17ae _ , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: ✓ f, f —,201V STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of 1'itkill ) (, ✓OCCt t/ac r� �� —L�!?� PlRtlt (name, please prfilt) being or representing an Applicant to the of City m -- 5 pen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publicatioll of Notice: By the publication to the legal Notice sect►oll of all offlclal paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is clllachecl hereto. X Posting of Notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Co►lllllunity Development Depart►llent, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, Nvllicll was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than o►le inch in height. SaiSI notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing oil tllc, , day of _ , 20 / , to and including '� g the date and till, af't11,public hearing. pho10'vapll oitliG poslecl notice (sign) is attached hel eto. X Mcd1ilrg of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained fi•olu the Community Development Department, whicli contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (1.5) days prior to the public hearing, naticc was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the ct►1•rent tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A c0M'of the 011117ers and goiel•17nleNtccl agencies so Noticect is oticrched hereto. AVeighboi-hooct 01111-each: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, sum.nlarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A cop}, of' the Neighborhood ollll•each sllllumn), iNChrding the lllelhacl gfP11blic Notification and a copy gfan))ctoclmlentntion that )vas presented to the public is cltlached hel-eto. (conlinued on nexl pag(,) �i�Iit�eral Estate 011ner �ltoticc�. B y the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkill County. At a millill111111, Subdivisions, SPAs or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rez011illg or tex! amen nlem. Whenever the official zoning district neap is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactillent of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change stlall be waived. However, the proposed zoning inala shall be available foi public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. f i �4S(�;Ilatlli The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before nle this ,;•.• day of 20 by -- WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL BARBARA J O'AUTRECHY NOTARY PU8"C M}' C0I111111SS1Qi1 exl)ll'eS: NOTARY 10# O07 4R' 87 MY COMMISSION EXPIREa JUNE 11.2017 Notary Public _.__... ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICE BYAWL D • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE ORINERSNOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X524-65.5-103.3 RE: 301 LAK PUBLIC NOTILAKE AVENUE- ASPF.NMODERN NEGOTIATION FOR VOLUNTARY LANDMARK DESIGNATION, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND VARIANCES NOTICE I,S HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, ,tune 11, 2014, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m, bcfbrc the Aspen Historic Preservation Conunission, in Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St.,Aspen, HPC will consider an application submitted by 301 Lake Avenue, I,LC, c/o David Willeris, Manager, 2385 NW Executive Centel- Dr., Suite 440 Boca Raton, Florida, 33431, represented by One Friday Design and Haas Land Planning, and affecting the property located at 301 Lake Avenue, the cast '/2 of Lot 5 and all of Lots 6 and 7, Block 40, Hallam'sAddition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, Parcel ID #2735-124-16-003. The applicant is proposhlg voluntary landmark designation and negotiation for incentives tlu•oGr h th AspenModern program. Conceptual design review is requested for an addition to the existing house. Requested incentives include dimensional variances, design guideline variances and extended vested rights. For firrtlrer information, contact Amy Sinlon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2758, amy.sinton @1 city0faspen.com. s/may Nlaytin Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 22, 2014 City of Aspen Account 229 WEST SMUGGLER LLC 3509 CRESCENT AVE 320 LAKE LLC 322 SMUGGLER LLC DALLAS,TX75205 151 E 85TH ST#C NEW YORK,NY10028 6120 SO YALE AVE#813 TULSA,OK74136 426 NORTH SECOND LLC 3509 CRESCENT AVE ALTIERI FAMILY TRUST ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL DALLAS,TX75205 206 DRIFTWOOD RD STUDIES CORONA DEL MAR,CA92625 100 PUPPY SMITH ST ATTN KATIE SCHWOERER ASPEN,C081611 ASPEN RIVER RENDEZVOUS LLC 186 VAIL LN BLOCK FAMILY TRUST NORTH SALEM,NY10560 311 W NORTH ST CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN,C081611 ATTN FINANCE DEPT 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN,C081611 CONOVER CATHRINE M 1010 WISCONSIN AVE NW STE#550 COTSEN 1985 TRUST D W RINGSBY ENTERPRISES LLC WASHINGTON,DC20007 12100 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 905 1123 LOS ANGELES,CA90025 EN ER,C08 PKWY#200 DENVER,C080204 DODGE LARRY D&SARA P LiV TRUST PO BOX 2029 E A OX 500 S PARTNERSHIP ILLP FOUR ELEVEN WEST NORTH TRUST RANCHO SANTA FE,CA92067 PO BOX 50 4701 GROSVENOR AVE ASPEN,C08811 612 RIVERDALE,NY10471 GREENBERG ASPEN LP 50% GREENBERG RONALD K TRUSTEE 50% #3 LOUIS, 063 230 S 13EMISTON AVE#101 HUNT EVEN B ST LOUIS,M063105 ST LOUIS,M063105-1907 PO BOX 8770 ASPEN,C081612 KIENAST FAMILY LP LLLP LAND TRUST 406 W SMUGGLER 1650 TYSONS BLVD#900 LUBAR SHELDON B&MARIANNE S ASPEN,C081611 1650 TY, NS BLVD 700 N WATER ST#1200 MILWAUKEE,W153202-4206 MCMAHAN FAMILY'iRUST 201 OCEAN AVE 1606P MCMANUS JAMES R MUSTANG HOLDINGS LLC SANTA MONICA,CA90402 430 GRAND BAY DR#301 KEY BISCAYNE,FL33149 715 W MAIN ST#201 ASPEN,C081611 NITZE WILLIAM A OAK LODGE LLC 1537 28TH NW PO BOX 7951 PHELPS ELIZABETH K TRUST WASHINGTON,DC20007 ASPEN,C081612 1768 LA JOLLA RANCHO RD LA JOLLA,CA92037 PHILLIPPE THOMAS E JR&SUSAN MARIE 225 W SMUGGLER ST L EDWARD III 50% FIVE PO RANDALL ELLEN MIDDLETON TRUST 50% ASPEN,C081611-1356 FIVE POST OAK PARK#2580 4400 POST OAK PKWY 600 JEFFERSON STE#350 HOUSTON,TX77027 HOUSTON,TX77002 RICHARDS ANN K 1537 28TH ST NW SCHERMER LLOYD G R BETTY A WASHINGTON,DC20007 210 LAKE AVE SCHIFF DAVID T ASPEN,C081611-1347 1177 AVE OF THE AMERICAS 42ND FL NEW YORK,NY10036 SIERRA ADVISORS LP 333 LITTLE JOHN LN SMUGGLER 326 LLC HOUSTON,TX77024 10671 CHALON RD TENEDOS LLC LOS ANGELES,CA90077 79 LOCUST RD WINNETKA, IL60093 WESNER BLAINE F$ALEXA 900 LIVE OAK CIR AUSTIN,TX78746 v, F-4 I MA 1` 3 w a r � II,,,, ! ,, pVyfli ,v oul YuolulV�ldl�4Vlli�l,t ��{ Wyl ud Ilu�l+;� ��III yr' I�I��Ip�il�ae" I i�• I iu�� �p,Ill � I it Ya,���1+' NI d " 3,'f!d I' 1i 111111' t ,t� I�r� I�t�lll� IIVIVI II IY��� � � �illl'j,i{�fl IIII I. YY I � s, C IVI6'4 V w' f 4 r �4 EXHIBIT�"f' Kathy Strickland I From: Amy Simon Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 3:31 PM To: Kathy Strickland; Debbie Quinn; Sara Adams; DeFrancia, Jim;Jay Maytin (jaymaytin @gmail.com); John Whipple; Nora Berko (norahowie @comcast.net); Patrick Sagal (patricksagal @yahoo.com); Sallie Golden (salliegolden @hotmail.com); Willis Pember (willispa @comcast.net) Subject: The Lundy House Please see the letter below from the Lundy family re: Wednesday's review. Dear Amy and members of the Historic Preservation Committee, On behalf of the Lundy family and my brother Mark who co-owned the house with me, I feel it is important to share my thoughts concerning the house in anticipation of the meeting on Wednesday concerning the new owner's requests for incentives to develop and landmark the house. On a personal level, having lived in the house as it was literally being built over my head and periodically in the 40 years since, I have a very deep connection to it and know first hand its value not only to me but to the town of Aspen. My mother, Anstis, moved to Houston in the late 1970's but came back every summer to teach her watercolor class and I spent many summers there myself designing sets for the operas at the Wheeler. For us, it was a place of joy, of friends and family gathering in that wonderful big room looking out over the natural meadow like yard and beyond into triangle park.But beyond our love for it,the house is not only a significant example of my father Victor Lundy's work, but also an y important example of a world class Modernist architectural gem built as a response to and reflection of the beauty of Aspen. It was championed by Elizabeth Paepke at a time when not everyone appreciated it- in fact, she sold my parents the land to build it.The house was a bold statement at the time but over the years it has become a symbol for a uniquely Aspen sensibility of forward thinking and sophistication. I think we can all agree that the house has an important place in the history of the town. When my brother and I decided to sell it last year, we were both extremely concerned that the house would be torn down and we turned down offers from potential buyers with plans to do so.We knew that the house and site would be developed in some way, and that it was important to us that the buyer have a level of sophistication and competence to create an environment that respected the original structure while adding living space to suit current expectations. It was with Bill Stirling's help, as our agent,that we found the current owners.We have seen their preliminary plans and are extremely pleased with both the quality of the design as well as the preservation of the original structure. Given the alternative,which is to raze the house and build a structure that will erase an important part of Aspen's history, I implore the members of committee and anyone else who may have their own agendas to work with the new owners, give them the incentives and let them do what they've planned. We sold them this precious place with the hope and expectation that they would be supported in their efforts by the town as they have by us. Sincerely, Nicholas Lundy i EXHIBIT LWFND AND NOTES `. ..... ..« ,.. n.. ..,... lib".__ • • uu.m+wx ra.osrn � '�t`r_ f VICiNrrY MAr T_ ILL e� w O f �LLq U�o w U . � w�� /•; \- •art ;&Man ""as.wn aat aw w FARM FARM 1, \ i, 6 ,1 6. � _ \� tart...n wren♦..0.00. /I an a .rxm'c,+�•` V � A@_ � � �� -� i �„ gg �� ` * �\ � •any 1 � �', y,- ....w r.r"r AS Y YENG 0 ��\ d PFN SURVEY�IGWH['JtS.WG "• .StM.f.OtMIDO No, ar�Or:ClT..(9M1 93S-.1H +• r ISTIING4SRE- 301 LAKE AVENUE RESIDENCE::LUNDY REMODEL 4 aw v � � s 8 V R SHEET F i 3 i . i i I , c i •o}k ! / Wilt 1 / �• 1 l/ jy 11 1 m M z w o_ X X m D m z c m X m cn 0 m z 0 m r z Z O m m K O 0 m r 301 LAKE RESIDENCE-LUNDY :: HPC CONCEPTUAL F '' �i [Val = HPC •„� ” � 301 Lake Avenue ;! ;± '11� Hi m CONCEPT I .0 City of Aspen-Colorado t .t W to •• ° °'°�' '° °"""" 3