The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20001115ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION November 15,2000 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. SISTER CITIES MEETING ROOM ~ITE VISITS - NOON - Meet at the first site. 101 W. Hallam 332 W. Main 5:00 I. Rgll call II. Public Comments III. Commission member comments and project monitoring IV. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) V. OLD BUSINESS j >-+1 1 le Vl J Et) , h Aii:10 9 2 A. 513 W. Smuggler, Conceptual, Continued from Oct. 25th 17 B. 303 S. Cleveland, Request for removal from the Inventory, Cont'd from 11/k, Public Hearing 4 0 -- 4. VI. NEW BUSINESS 6: 15 1% A. 719 E. Hopkins, Request for Removal from the Inventory, Public Hearing 0/q 6:30 Sts.-B. 427 E. Hyman (Baggage Claim Glass Door), Minor oiL 6:50 C. Bavarian Inn Referral 7:00 51 D. 1484 E. Cooper (Bath & Bodyworks Window) Minor VII. W~RKSESSIONS 7:15 A. 332 W. Main - Window Addition 7:35 B. 101 W. Hallam 8:00 ADJOURN 0 OJECT MOJVITORING Susan Dodington 240 Lake Avenue- Greenberg 930 King - No Problem Joe's 121 5th & North - Ernie Frywald 330 Gillespie Ave. 232 E. Hallam St. 7m & Main Street 213 W. Bleeker Suzannah Reid 414 N. First- POLE 240 Lake Ave. 312 S. Galena 7m and Main 330 Lake Avenue 620 W. Bleeker Historical Society Jeffrey Halferty ' 414 N. First- POLE 920 W. Hallam- Guthrie 212 W. Hopkins Ave. 312 S. Galena 620 W. Bleeker - Historical Society 213 W. Bleeker 200 E. Bleeker Lisa Markalunas 939 E. Cooper- Langley (work stopped) 240 Lake Avenue- Greenberg 214 E. Bleeker- Brumder 330 Gillespie Ave. 520 E. Hyman Ave. 200 E. Bleeker 419 E. Hyman - Paragon Gilbert Sanchez I 312 S. Galena 333 W. Bleeker Street 501 W. Main Christiania Lodge 330 Lake Ave. 121 5th & North - Ernie Frywald 200 E. Bleeker Rally Dupps 419 E. Hyman - Paragon 501 W. Main Street - Christiania Lodge 129 W. Francis 435 W. Main 930 King Street Melanie Roschko 232 W. Hallam 520 E. Hyman 213 W. Bleeker CONCEPTUAP APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: 4 W. Hallaml (Poppie's), expires April 26, 2001 5 W. Bleeker old house expires Oct. 14,2000 302 E. Hopkins- September 22,2001 HPC Legal Procedures (Submit affidavit of notice for PH - conceptual) Swear In Staff presentation Applicant presentation Board Questions and Clarifications PH opened and closed Board Comments Applicant Comrents Motion ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS Resolutions 2000 1. 330 Lake Ave. January 12,2000 2. 333 W. Bleeker St. January 12,2000 3. 221 E. Main Street January 12,2000 4. 312 S. Galena January 26,2000 5. 501 W. Main St. Christiana Lodge Feb. 9,2000 6. 130 S. Galena Street, City Hall Feb. 9,2000 7. 520 W. Main Street Ullr - Minor Feb. 9,2000 8. 110 W. Main Street Hotel Aspen Conceptual Feb. 9,2000 9. 417 E. Hyman Ave. Paragon Feb. 9, 2000 10. 330 Lake Avenue Feb. 23,2000 11.213 W. Bleeker - Landmark Designation Conceptual March 22,2000 12. 7th & Main Affordable Housing March 8,2000 13.333 W. Bleeker Street March 8,2000 14. Aspen Grove Cemetery - fence April 12,2000 15. 834 W. Hallam St. - extension of conceptual April 12,2000 16. 920 W. Hallam Lot A - April 12,2000 17. 920 W. Hallam Lot B - April 12,2000 18.213 W. Bleeker Final - April 26,2999 19. 240 Lake Avenue Parking Variance - April 26,2000 20.505 N. Eighth Street - Fence Variance - April 26,2000 21. 943 Unit C E. Cooper variance parking - April 26,2000 22. 819 E. Hopkins Ave. partial Demolition -May 10,2000 23.330 Gillespie Ave. -Minor Development -May 10, 2000 24. 110 W. Main Street, Hotel Aspen Conceptual - May 24,2000 25. 221 E. Main Street, Explore Booksellers - Final - May 24,2000 26.945 E. Cooper Ave. Unit D - Variance Parking - May 24,2000 27.609 W. Bleeker - Conceptual - May 24,2000 28. 1006 E. Cooper Ave. - Landmark Designation - June 14,2000 29. 129 W. Francis Street -Extension of Conceptual - June 14,2000 30.609 W Bleeker Street - Final Development - June 14,2000 31. 424 E. Cooper Avenue - Minor Development - June 14,2000 32.330 Lake Ave. - Issues from final - June 21,2000 33. 419 E. Hyman - Paragon-Minor Dev. and variances- July 12,2000 34.620 W. Bleeker Street, Aspen Historical Society - Minor - July 12,2000 35.406 W. Smuggler Street - Minor Development - July 12,2000 36.520 E. Hyman Ave. - Minor July 26,2000 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS 37.232 E. Hallam Street - Variances PH July 26,2000 38. 129 W. Francis Street - Final July 26,2000 39.435 W. Main L'Auberge - August 9,2000 40.200 E. Bleeker Street, Aspen Community Church - August 23,2000 41. 104 S. Galena St. St. Mary's Church - August 23,2000 42. Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures - September 11- rescinded 43. Inventory ofHistoric Sites and Structures - September 13 - rescinded 44.123 E. Hallam- September 13,2000 45.302 E. Hopkins -Extension of conceptual - September 13, 2000 46.232 E. Hallam-Landscape Plan - August 23,2000 47.735 W. Bleeker Street Extension ofconceptual approval Sept. 27,2000 48.200 E. Bleeker Street - Aspen Community Church Final Sept. 27,2000 49. 616 W. Main Street - Minor October 11, 2000 50. 203 S. Galena - Brand Bldg- Roof Top revisions Nov. 8,2000 51. 447 E. Cooper - Guido's - Minor Development Nov. 8,2000 52 513 W. Smuggler Conceptual Nov. 15,2000 53 719 E. Hopkins Request for removal from Inventory Nov. 15, 2000 54 303 S. Cleveland Request for removal from Inventory Nov. 15,2000 55 427 E. Hyman)Baggage Claim Nov. 15, 2000 56 484 E. Cooper - Body & Bathworks Window Nov. 15, 2000 5 e . '* i 1 4/f /1 JL A O- MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Fred Jarman, Planner RE: 513 West Smuggler- Conceptual Development, - PUBLIC HEARING (Continued from 10/25) DATE: November 15, 2000 SUMMARY: This proposal is for a renovation and addition to the residence at 513 W. Smuggler. Specifically, the applicant requests approval from the Historic Preservation Commission to 1) demolish an addition to a Victorian minor's cottage, 2) relocate and renovate the cottage, 3) construct a 3,600 sq. ft. new house which will include 4 bedrooms, 4) request an additional 500 sq. ft. bonus, and 5) a 2.5' side yard setback variance. APPLICANT: Drew Harman, represented by Harry Teague Architects. 0 LOCATION: Lots E, F, and G, Block 21, City and Townsite of Aspen. SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.C.5) are met: a. I The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, the Historic Preservation Commission may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in ~ development in accord with dimensional requirements. character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be 1 In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units. Staff Response: The applicant is proposing a renovation and relocation of an existing 600 sq. 1 Victorian miner's cottage. which is currently encompassed by a 3.000 sq. ft. addition making up the rest of the existing residence. The total structure contains 3.600 sq. ft. in total. The cottage will be relocated to the front of the lot in an effort to promote and expose more of the historical structure while creating a more contemporary addition. which does not mute the historical prominence of the original srructure. In order to accomplish this. the applicant is proposing an addition extending from the rear of the cottage to the rear of the site using long gabled masses running north to south. These elements are designed to reflect similar Victorian gable proportions in an effort to respect the scale and proportion of the original conage. The streetscape view from Smuggler reveals rhe front facade of the original conage fully exposing its northeast comer with a slightly recessed single-story linking element connecting the cottage zo a tworstory gable mass zo the east. This result achieves rwo primary masses which both are Victorian in their gabied roof similarities: however this stiil allows the original cotrage zo be the featured fagade. Smff is concerned with the degree of the conremp grarrlinkipg 'e~QL:Â£-rhe-212Â£:hec-orrage and * height of the . second primary mass as viewed trom the street. Histonc preservanon enorts to a conage such as Eis should Eot include an architectural-Resign that departs so massively from the - I-*... design and features~33iEN,-EnT:ical.ronage. StaE maintains rhar the linking siemenr to the east of the cottage is too draSIiC of a design change and would significantly detract from the focus and importance of the conage. which is to be preserved and promoted. The proposed addition :O the rear of the cortage is one story larger than the corrage and should be serforther apart from the historical structure and connecred by a smaller linking element. which is intended to maintain the scale and proportion of the hiSIOriC portion. While the use of the gable roof is laudable. Staff feels the proposed design does not quite achieve this intent as the linking element connecting Ihe new addition to the rear of the cottage is too close. Staff specifically refers to Chapter 10.4 Building Additions in the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. which states: An addition should be made distinguishable from the hisroric building, while .Ir also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. Scenario C illustrates an appropriare connecror for an addition that more clearly separates the addition from The historic building. The existing configuration of the original cottage relative to the addition does nor promote the cabin: rather, it is not easily differentiated from the addition. Chapter 10.8 of the Historic Preservanon Design Guidelines indicate that an applicant attempting an addition to a historical structure should strive zo ::242 1 2 Place~additions at the rear of a building or set is back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original prop4rtions and character to remain prominent. This pro#osal places the addition IO the rear of the historical structure as well as connect* a second primary mass to the east. Both addition sections are two stories in height and appear to shadow or dwarf the original structure thus muting rhehisto~ical significance. Staff feels the applicant has not been successful in their intent to create a Eitterlivingspace while complimenting and promoting the historical cottage. Specifically, the proposed design of the additions and their linking elements are (arciteommily Incompatible irmaterlats. sci~*ind relative- locatioR to the old h6G@ Roof Isanimportanelementto this project. as itl~TimimmiE:teristic of the Victorian architecture. Staff feels the gabled roofs on the additions respects the gable-type design aÂ¢d proportion of the cottage roof. Historical Significance This Lat43 Victorian era '4~/finer's Cottage", originally constructed in 1892. is characteÂ¢ized by the size. simple plan. and front gable / porch relationship. The structure was occ~pied by the original family through the years of the silver crash. Walter Peapke acquired the structure in 1945. Significant alterations have occurred to this structure over the year$ including a gamge addition. breezeway connector. second story shed dormer. single g*ble building at southwest corner. contemporary windows. as well as much of the materia.14 and original detailing has been repiaced before 1980. These aiterations have confused the original form of the structure and altered the original detailing. The form is recognizable due to ori.:r structures of similar type in the surrounding area. Finaily. the City of Aspen City Council designated this structure as a Historical Landmark in 1981. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: Staff fillds the proposed project specific to the addition to the east of the cottage, does not maintain an appropriate scale and design for this neighborhood. Staff would like to see the~ addition connected immediately to the rear and to the east of the cottage be reduced in height to minimize the shadowing effect on the cottage. Elongating the single story-cbnnecting element directly to the rear of the cottage may help to achieve this. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: The proposed development will move the cottage from its original location; this move and remodel will better promote the cottage from its current position and does not detract from the historic significance of this site. However, Staff finds that the proposed additions detract from the historical significance in their design. scale. and materials. *4*49 d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from 0 the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: As discussed above regarding the new additions, Staff finds that the proposed arlditioils detract from the historical significance in their design, scale, and materials. Staff is concerned with the addition's "very contemporary" look on the North (street) elevation. It appears that this connecting element represents a strong departure from the materials and design of the cottage. Certainly, a different design approach could be taken to better respect the historic fabric of the cottage while allowing it to be different. Additionally, the linking piece appears to be very close (almost flush) with the ftont fagde of the cottage. This linking element should be recessed or setback from the primary fa~ade at least 10 feet which is recommended by Chapter 10.8 ofthe Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, p. 83. [Staff feels that the Historic Preservation Commission should evaluate whether this design approach compliments rather than detracts from the Historic building.] ALTERNATIVES: The HPC may consider any ofthe following alternatives: â€¢ Approve the application as submitted. â€¢ Approve the application with conditions to be met prior to final review. â€¢ Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.) 0 â€¢ Deny approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Historic Preservation Commission evaluate the front fa,ade of this development and its appropriateness as viewed from the street. If the HPC believes this design approach is acceptable, then the following conditions should apply for a partial demolition, relocation of an existing historic cottage. and construction of an addition for a residence located at 513 West Smuggler, Lots E, F, and G, Block 21, City and Townsite of Aspen: 1. The HPC granted the following variances at conceptual review: a 1 foot height variance to accommodate the accessory dwelling unit above the garage located at the rear ofthe site; 2. The design of any new fencing on the property will require approval. Fences may not be more than 42" in height anywhere in front of the street facing walls of the historic structures; . r'?'ff?FIC: - .~ t. I . 4 f -* *.3*J.-AL* 1., . I 3. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly what a~eas of the historic house are to be removed as part of the renovation; 4. Submi~ a preservation plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating how the existinÂ¢ materials. which are to be retained, will be restored. The requirement is to retain frepair all original materials and replicate only those that are determined by HPC staff and monitor to be beyond salvage; 5. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor: 6. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures; 7. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved Without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor: 8. The preseivarion plan described above. as well as the conditions of approval will be requirÂ¢d to be printed on the cover sheet ofthe building permit plan set and all other prints ~made for the purpose of construction; 9. The a~plicant shall be required to provide the contmctor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit; 10. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit: and 11. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions; RECOMMENDED MOTION CALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "Imove to approve Resolution No. - Series of 2000, granting conceptual approval for a p*tial demolition, relocation of an existing historic cottage. and construction of an additio# for a residence located at 513 West Smuggler, Lots E, F, and G, Block 21. City and To*nsite of Aspen." ATTACHMENTS: ExmBrr A -DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION EXHIBrr B -RESOLUTION NO. -SERIES 2000 , 47?- 4*62&2=~~ 2 --- . 5 0 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and WHEREAS, Staff performed an analysis of the application based on the standÂ¢ds, found favorably for the application, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on November 15th, 2000, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and approved the application with conditions by a vote of to L - THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the review standards are met and HPC granted approval for conceptual design to 1) demo#sh an addition to a Victorian minor's cottage, 2) relocate and renovate the cottage, 3) coÂ¢struct a 3,600 sq. ft. new house which will include 4 bedrooms, 4) request an additidnal 500 sq. ft. bonus, and 5) a 2.5' side yard setback variance for a residence 0 located at 513 West Smuggler, Lots E, F, and G, Block 21, City and Townsite of Aspen. as presented at the November 1501,2000 meeting, with the following conditions: 1. The HPC granted the following variances at conceptual review: a 7 foot rear yard setback variance, an 8 foot combined front and rear yard setback variance, and a 5 foot east sideyard variance for a lightwell, and a 240 square foot floor area bonus; 2. The design of any new fencing on the property will require approval. Fences may not be~more than 42" in height anywhere in front of the street facing walls of the historic sthictures; 3. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly what areas of the historic house are to be removed as part of the renovation; 4. Submit a preservation plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating how the existing materials, which are to be retained, will be restored. The requirement is to retain /repair all original materials and replicate only those that are determined by HPC staffand monitor to be beyond salvage; 5. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor; 0 6 EXHIBIT B 0 RESOLUTION NO. ~1 (SERIES OF 2000) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT TO 1) DEMOLISH AN ADDITION TO A VICTORIAN MINOR'S COTTAGE, 2) RELOCATE AND RENOVATE THE COTTAGE, 3) CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION, 4) REQUEST A 500 SQ. FT. BONUS, AND 5) A 2.5' SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 513 WEST SMUGGLER, LOTS E, F, AND G, BLOCK 21, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the applicant, Drew Harman, represented by Harry Teague Architects, has requested conceptual design approval to 1) demolish an addition to a Victorian minor's cottage, 2) relocate and renovate the cottage, 3) construct a 3,600 sq. ft. new house which will include 4 bedrooms. 4) request an additional 500 sq. ft. bonus. and 5) a 2.5' side yard setback and height variance for a residence located at 513 West Smuggler, Lots E, F, and G, Block 21, City and Townsite of Aspen. The project involves a partial demolition, relocation of an existing historic Victorian miner's cottage, and construction of an addition for a new residence; and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.415.010.C.5 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design. massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 5 6. RIPâ‚¬ staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures; 7. Thdre shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staffand monitor; 8. The~ preservation plan described above, as well as the conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction; 9. The; applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC res61ution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HP9 staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of ap~roval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit; 10. ThJ General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty lic~nse in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit; and 11. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of Approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPRÂ©VED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 15th day of November, 2000. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Appr*ved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suza~nah Reid, Chair 7 ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 8 County ofPitkin } 1~ (/-- js-j-40 ~ AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT Stite of Color1do } SS. --1 TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATION SECTION 26304.060 (E) 1 I, 5:1 r c f- -t--~ * Jr , 7< , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in the following manner: . 1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class, postage prepaid ., U.S. Mail to all owners of property with three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the day of . 199_ (which is _ days priorao the public hearing date of 1 (f\\By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as ir could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously good from the 7. day o f /U~ cs 0 +991Â· (>dust be posted for at lean ten (10) 5.111 days before the hearing date). A photograph of Gte posted sign is attached hereto. * 11 \,/ 1 43-Â« Al\-/ ~0~9912 -32%. L/, . S lihilre i 40.: t. 4:.,4 Signed before me this lidD day 0 19 K)046\4 8 EC '*99-11.-- LLYTPED 4 4 01 1 0. i : C r. k 1-4 +OUC) , 1 1 71/ 4 WITNESS MY HAND.AND OFFICIAL SEAL : f puu:.Ic '101"C E My commission expires: 06-7 5 -2-â‚¬002 ~ tâ‚¬ Co l Ah A L- 00 E~ TIME .1 ...t, *4.A C Notary Public 0 + 1/ 1141Â» kv * I , .~ Notary Kiblic~gnature 4 ./ . 1 ........../1 Â· 8 - MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission TIIRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 303 S. Cleveland Street- Request to be removed from the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures," CONTINUED PUBLIC IIEARING (from 10/11) DATE: November 15,2000 SUMMARY: The property at 303 S. Cleveland Street contains three cabins. On the northern end of the site is a 500 square foot one bedroom unit built in 1948. A duplex cabin with two studio units, built in 1950, sits along the west property line and a third duplex with two studios, built in 1952, is sited along the alley. 303 S. Cleveland Street was identified as significant in the 1991/1992 "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures," and formally adopted to the inventory by City Council Ordinance #34, Series of 1992. The property owner contends that he did not receive notice. Starting in about 1995, Community Development Department staff, the property owner, and his architect, began a series of discussions about what sort of redevelopment could take place on the property. Aside from historic preservation regulations, various other land use code issues, such as affordable housing and allowed density, would have an impact on the site, as would some non-conforming aspects of the structures. No clear direction that would satisfy the owner could be determined. The owner then inquired as to the process to be removed from the inventory. City staff informed him that he needed to wait for the next update. The inventory is to be reviewed every five years, which would technically mean that an update should have occurred in 1996/1997, however because of a change in staff during the 1992 process, and an adoption schedule that took until 1995, it was determined that 1999/2000 would be the most appropriate time to visit the inventory again. Nonetheless, the owner of 303 S. Cleveland Street has expressed a desire to have his property discussed, and has therefore been allowed to meet with HPC on a separate track from the other already listed sites. Please note that HPC will have the final decision in this matter, and that the applicant may appeal to Council only on the basis of a denial of due process, or if it is felt that the HPC exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. APPLICANT: Charles Tower, owner, represented by Michael Hoffman. 0 LOCATION: Lots H and I, Block 35, City and Townsite ofAspen. PROCESS: During the summer, this site was visited, photographed, and recorded along with the other 109 properties that are already listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures." The property was evaluated as viewed from the public right-of-way, and entered onto the form created by the Colorado Historical Society. REVIEW STANDARDS: Section 26.420.080 of the Land Use Code provides guidance on the evaluation of the inventory. According to that passage, the Inventory shall include all structures in the City of Aspen which are at least fifty (50) years old and which continue to have historic value, and such other structures identified by the Historic Preservation Commission as being outstanding examples of more modem architecture. All properties included on the inventory will be adopted by legal description and the Historic Preservation Commission will have the appropriate review authority over the entire property. All structures shall be evaluated by the Historic Preservation Commission regarding their current architectural integrity, historic significance, and community and neighborhood influence and shall be categorized as follows. (Please note that the category for each resource has no effect on the review process. It is merely a method to understand the overall quality or level of alterations made to properties on the inventory.): 0 Significant: All those resources, which are considered exceptional, excellent, or those resources individually eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Contributing: All those historic or architecturally significant resources that do not meet the criteria for "significant," provided, however, these resources have maintained their historic integrity or represent unique architectural design. Supporting: All those historic resources that have lost their original integrity, but are "retrievable" as historic structures or sites. The structures have received substantial alterations over the years, but with substantial effort could be considered "contributing" once again. Non-Contributing: All those structures that are either new or non-historic construction within a historic district, or historic structures with complete loss of integrity, either within or outside of a historic district. RECOMMENDATION: The recently completed survey form for this property is attached, along with the property owner's 1997 application for landmark designation. At the time of that application, the owner was trying to work with the HPC to find a solution for 0 the site. Unfortunately no conclusion was reached, however, it is important to note that in their own analysis of these structures, the property owner's architect came to the same conclusions that have been reached on the inventory form; that the property has significance as a representation of the type of housing that was being built for the average citizen in Aspen during the early ski era. Following is a section of Suzannah Reid's context report of the inventory update, "Aspen's Architectural Context, Post World War II." "Rustic Style 1800's - present The Rustic Style emerged from the original pioneer structures that were created out of locally available materials, were of straightforward construction, and had housed people since the beginning of white settlement of the West. A taste for Rustic Style can be traced to England and the mid 18th century, where gardens and folly buildings were created out of natural materials in their natural forms, such as twigs and tree trunks. When the modest structures of the American frontier became associated with "rugged individualism" and were romanticized, America's Rustic style was born. The Rustic Style became the preferred style for the National Parks and examples range from simple rectilinear log structures to elaborate structures of log and stone, with varied roof forms, dormers and expressed structural details. The structures, based on indigenous materials, blended into the landscape and became expressive of that landscape. Whether in rolling hills and lakes, such as the Adirondack camps of the late 19th century, or in the dramatic mountain settings of Yellowstone and Yosemite, these structures came to embody the idea of 'simple' mountain living. (Note that the Pan Abode is the standardized and manufactured version of this style.) While this style continues to be built today, in very elaborate forms, the character defining elements listed below are related to the more modest local structures from the 40's and 50's. These structures were used as simple vacation homes and inexpensive housing for early ski workers. A variety of log "types" were used in more modem structures, to replicate early log structures, from machine cut logs assembled in the traditional way to manufactured applied logs used for siding frame structures. Characteristics ofthe Rustic Style: â€¢ Buildings are constructed out of locally available materials, usually log; stone may be incorporated at the base, or in the form of a fireplace and chimney. â€¢ Buildings are usually single story, with a low pitched gable roof. â€¢ True log construction with overlapping log ends, coped and stacked. Logs may be dressed and flattened for stacking or may be in rough form. Chinking infills the irregularities between the logs either way. â€¢ Window openings are spare and usually horizontally proportioned, wood trim is used to finish out the window openings. â€¢ Building plans are simple rectangular forms, with smaller additive elements. â€¢ Roof springs from the log wall, and gable ends are infilled with standard framing. This may be a small triangle or a second level of living space. â€¢ The emphasis is on hand made materials and the details come out of the use of the materials, otherwise the detail and decoration is minimal. â€¢ Materials in later buildings are used to simulate log construction and refer to the particular visual details of the original log structures. Specific details of traditional log buildings, and construction techniques are not always carried forward into the newer structures." The context report was written as part of the inventory update process, to provide a framework for the analysis of each site. It serves as background by which the property's place in our local history's patterns, themes, and trends, can be understood. Two of the three structures at 303 S. Cleveland Street are at least 50 years old. The inventory form describes their historic value as being derived from their "position in the context of Aspen's rebirth as a resort community. The emergence of skiing as an industry required low cost housing for workers, and the continuing summer activities attracted families to the area whose needs were simple." The early ski era has been clearly identified as an important period in Aspen's history and the development of the ski industry led to a complete renaissance in a town that had become economically depressed. In addition, those two cabins represent the qualities that are described as being key to the "rustic style," specifically that they are one story, rectangular plan buildings with a low pitched roof, built out of local materials, in this case milled logs, with small, horizontally oriented windows, and little detailing. They maintain their architectural integrity, and their original Â·setting, arranged in a "U" shape around a courtyard. There have been no exterior alterations of significance since their original construction. Building permit records document the addition of the pop-up skylight to the northernmost cabin in 1976 and minor window alterations to the same building in 1986. The third cabin on the site was built in 1952, making it 48 years old. This minor difference in age in no way makes the cabin along the alley less significant than the others. Fifty years of age is a rule of thumb and that building has all of the same characteristics that make the older pair significant. Staff would also point out that the language regarding designating only "outstanding examples" of buildings that are less than fifty years of age does not mean that the buildings have to be an outstanding example in terms of their artistic qualities; it means that the buildings have to be outstanding examples of their type. Even if the HPC determined that the third cabin did not measure up to the term "outstanding," the other two buildings clearly qualify for the inventory by virtue of their age, indicating that the property should remain designated. Based on the criteria listed earlier in this memo, staff recommends that the entire property be categorized as a "contributing" historic resource. 0 RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Resolution #2~ Series of 2000, 3,614-VE retaiaing 303 S. Cleveland Street, Lots H and I, Block 35, a contributing property, on the City of Aspen "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures." Exhibits: Resolution #_, Series of2000. A. Architectural Inventory Form for 303 S. Cleveland Street. B. Attachments from the property owner's 1997 application for landmark designation. C. Letter from property owner's representative. 0 0 6 hpll ~26.420.080 Oddouju 26.420.080 Establishment of inventory of historic sites and structures. A. Purpose and Intent Fifty (50) years old is generally the age when a property may begin to be considered historically significant. Aspen's ski history and modernist tradition are very important parts of our local history and significant resources from these periods must be addressed or they are likely to be lost. It is not the intention of the Historic Preservation Commission to include insignifi- cant structures or sites on the inventory. The Historic Preservation Commission will focus on those resources which are unique or have some special value to the community. B. Establishment of inventoo. There is hereby established an "inventory of historic sites and structures" in the City of Aspen. The inventory shall be maintained in the office of the community development department for inspection by the general public during regular business hours. The inventory of historic sites and structures shall include all structures in the City of Aspen which are at least fifty (50) years old and which continue to have historic value and such other structures iden- tified by the Historic Preservation Commission as being outstanding examples of more modern ar- chitecture. Historic sites are land parcels which may or may not have structures on them, but which primarily have significance as parks, cemeteries, archaeological resources, or similar types of land- scapes. Archaeological resources are sites which include material remains, both above and below iround, of prehistoric or historic human activity. All properties included on the inventory will be adopted by legal description, and the Historic Preservation Commission will have the appropriate review authority over the entire property. When an application is made for a lot split on an invento- ried parcel, HPC shall review the application in terms of impacts on the significance of the historic resource and shall forward any appropriate conditions of approval or a recommendation for denial 0 to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. C. Periodic evaluation of inventoo. The Historic Preservation Commission, based on the rec- ommendations of the Community Development Director, shall have the responsibility of evaluating the inventory of historic structures at least once every five (5) years and of holding a public hearing to solicit comments on its evaluations. The purpose of the evaluation shall be to determine those structures which are to be removed from the inventory, any structures which should be added to the inventory, and to rate all structures which remain on the inventoiy. D. Process. The Historic Preservation Commission evaluation process shall proceed as follows: The structures on the inventory shall be categorized as to whether or not they are historic land- marks. No further action need be taken with respect to designated historic landmarks. All structures which are not historic landmarks shall be evaluated by the Historic Preservation Commission re- garding their current architectural integrity, histoIic significance, and community and neighborhood influence and shall be categorized accordingly as follows: 1. Significant. All those resources which are considered exceptional, excellent, or those re- sources individually eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. All struc- tures or sites within the City of Aspen, which are listed on or eligible for listing on the Na- tional Register of Historic Places shall be reviewed according to the "Secretary of the Interior' s 0 547 (Aspen 4/00) 26.420.080 Standards for Rehabilitation" in addition to the review standards of this Chapter. The "Secre- tary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation" are as follows: 0 a. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a property which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or site and its environment, or to use the property for its originally intended purpose. b. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure, site or its en- vironment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or dis- tinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. c. All buildings, structures, and sites shall be recognized as products of their own time. Alterations that have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier appearance shall be discouraged. d. Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of a building, structure, or site and its environment. These changes may have acquired significance in their own right, and this significance shall be recognized and respected. e. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which characterize a building, structure, or site shall be treated with sensitivity. f. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced, wherever possible. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features should be based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historic, physical, or pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other buildings or struc- tures. g. The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken with the gentlest means possi- ble. Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that will damage the historic building mate- rials shall not be undertaken. h. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological resources affected by, or adjacent to, any project. i. Contemporary design for alterations and additions to existing properties shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historical, ar- chitectural or cultural material, and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the property, neighborhood, or environment. (Aspen 4/00) 548 26.420.090 j. Whenever possible. new additions or alterations to structures shall be done in such a manner that if such additions or alterations were to be removed in the future. the essential form and integrity of the structure would be unimpaired. ~) Contribiding. All those historic or architecturally significant resources that do not meet the criteria for "significant;" provided, however. these resources have maintained their historic in- regrity or mpresent unique architectural design. 3. Supporting All those historic resources that have lost their odginal integrity, but are "re- trievable" as historic structures or sites. These structures have received substantial alterations over the years but with substantial effort could be considered "contributing" once again. 4. Non-Contributing. All those structures that are either: a. New or non-historic construction within a historic district, and b. Historic structures with complete loss of integrity, either within or outside a historic district . - EXHIBIT ' fal_2*2 ATTACHMENT 4 This proposal seeks landmark designation for the three cabins located at 303 S. Cleveland Street Aspen, Colorado. Response to attachment 4 (Standards for Designation) . A. Historical importance. The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associatell with a person or an' event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. It could be argued that these cabins at the time they were built were a direct response to a significant cultural and social change in the history of Aspen. Small dwelling units built during this period 1948 - 1952 were specifically intended to acknowledge the beginnings of the tourist industry created by the establishment of skiing in Aspen in 1946. B. Architectural importance. The structure or site reflects and architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant of unique architectural type, (based on building form), or specimen. Although not magnificent examples of more glorious architectural styles. These cabins do clearly represent an architectural type that was both practical and easy to construct. The -stacked log- style was extremely cost effective and become the predominant architectural slyle during the post war beginnings of Aspen as an international resort. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Does not apply. EL l,1 1 6 I -4 E> D. Neighborhood character. The structure or site is a significant component of a historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. The small scale of these cabins was very much like the other small miners cabins that once dotted Aspen's East end. This character has changed dramatically over the past years as lodges. condominiums and large homes have been developed. Even though these smaller structures are no longer part of a larger context they help to retain a sense of the past and point out differences even in Aspen between the kind of development that occurred on the West end verses that on the East side of town. E Community character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location, and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Aspen continues to fight to retain some of its small scale character. Smaller structures can still be valuable as housing for Aspen's work force as well as insuring a diversity of population within neighborhoods. As well as preserving examples of an important series of social changes in Aspen. these s#uctures can allow a few members of the local work force to live close in to the downtown area, an opportunity that where it still exists should be protected. Hyman ave. 5.16 9--tcabinA 1948 1 aRm. 5O1sf. 1--7 Cabin B 1950 Studio ....... ......... CIO veland st. Studio 544st Cabin C 1952 ; ' Studio : Studio 559 sf. : TOWER . 0 ./ . . . -- north 1~= 20'Â· Alley Lot Area 6000sf. Zo ne RMF r-9 El L,CtÂ£1,2dwnAC K.*A te ",AE.c.1 'A SPIN COLOAADO 8 1 6 1 7 1 .11 - 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Historic Preservation Committee THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: Fred Jarman. Planner -., 21 . RE: 719 E Hopkins DATE: November 15. 2000 APPLICANT /OWNER: . -.. -,41'. ./ 97 John Lauderback * *U' 5 1 REPRESENTATIVE: - . .91%4?c~ I NA - r %-4 - 1 21/*- 4,~B~'*=~d 4- 46:'W--v ' --&2&9*C-4 CURRENT ZONING: i.1 Commercial / Office Â· CURRENT LAND USE: 1 Site ofthe 719 E Hopkins residence ' ,/IN#/11/7W ' - * ~ PROPOSED LAND USE REQUEST: **V,#Rj.='0" Request for removal from Historic , ' I. Inventory -*ifF# SUMMARY: Applicant requests that the structure and 9/:-22592<- L property be removed from the City of i Aspen Historic Inventory. On September . r â€¢ 13,2000. HPC took action to remove the ' " -- - property form the inventory. However, on . In - -7-3.9 il U - September 20, HPC rescinded the action as > -il . :1 , City Council requested that work cease on ~ ' ' ~ the Historic Inventor>-. Staff is in favor of # 4> removal from the inventory in that the . integrity o f the structure as a historic -Ser resource has been diminished due to Â·Â·Ir... 1 7 j . physical alterations through the years. REVIEW PROCEDURE An application for rescinding a designation shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation, an explanation shall be included describing why the designated site or structure is not consistent with the standards. Structures on the inventory are evaluated on being at least 50 years old and which continue to have significant historic value. (Section 26.429.080) The Historic Preservation Commission shall by resolution remove sites from the Historic Inventory at a public hearing. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff feels that because of significant alterations that 719 E. Hopkins has undergone over time, the structure no longer meets the standards for inclusion on the inventory. At the meeting of 9/13/00 both staff and the consultant recommended that this property should be removed from the historic inventory for lack of character defining features, apparently having no historic materials remaining, and having additions and alterations obscuring the historic quality of the structure. In sum, the structure has suffered a significant loss of integrity and undergone irreversible alterations. As noted in the Architectural Inventory Form, Exhibit C, "AIterations and additions seriously interfere with the integrity of the structure, only the original form of the structure remains." The structure is clearly a representative of the typical miners cottage form. However, only the original "form" of the structure exists, which precludes it from meeting the standards for being listed on the inventory. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends removal of 719 E. Hopkins from the City ofAspen Historic Inventory. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE STATED IN THE POSITIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. _, Series of 2000, approving the removal of 719 E. Hopkins from the City ofAspen Historic Inventory ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Parcel Location Exhibit C -- Architecture Inventory Form Exhibit D -- Resolution No. , Series 2000 Exhibit E -- Letter from Joyce Ohlson to John Lauderback explaining current status and ~ staffs feelings over 719 E Hopkins 0 2 EXHIBIT A 719 E. Hopkins REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS SECTION 26.420.060: STANDARDS FOR RESCINDING DESIGATION An application for rescinding a designation shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation. An explanation shall be included describing why the designated site or structure is not consistent with the standards. Structures on the inventory are evaluated on being at least 50 years old and which continue to have significant historic value. Pursuant to Section 26.420.080 of the Land Use Code. Staff Finding Staff feels that based on the fact that none of the following character defining features remains in tact, this building should be taken off the inventory. â€¢ The original window pattern is gone and has been replaced with contemporary windows in inappropriate locations. â€¢ The porch has been completely reconstructed in an inconsistent manner. â€¢ Additions to the rear of the house have significantly compromised the 0 entire form of the structure. â€¢ The original doors have been replaced with contemporary doors and are no longer in their original location. â€¢ The original roof shape has been lost due to alterations. â€¢ Materials on exterior are no longer consistent with original character, have been replaced with contemporary siding and windows. As a result of the drastic alterations mentioned above, the structure has lost almost aII of it original historic integrity. Due to multiple irreversible changes, we will never know what the original building looked like and thus makes it impossible to restore it to its original character. 0 3 EXHIBIT B PARCEL LOCATION 719 E Hopki ns N 20 1# 1/ro -V/ - 7 2 / 640 Let i PKINS AVE NEALE AVE CO . 4 P: 7- Resolution No. 53, Series of 2000 A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING THE REMOVAL OF 719 E. HOPKINS AVE FROM THE ASPEN HISTORIC INVENTORY. CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO. Parcel ID # 2737-182-11003 WHEREAS, the applicant, John Lauderback, has requested his property located at 719 E. Hopkins Ave, City and Townsite ofAspen for removal from the City of Aspen's Inventory of Historical Sites and Structures; and, WHEREAS, an application for rescinding a designation shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation, an explanation shall be included describing why the designated site or structure is not consistent with the standards. Structures on the inventory are evaluated on being at least 50 years old and which continue to have significant historic value. (Section 26.420.080) WHEREAS, Community Development Staff, in a staff report dated November 9,2000, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found favorably for the application, and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on November 15, 2000, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and approved the application with conditions by a vote of _ to_ 02Â· NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the property located 719 East Hopkins Ave, City and Townsite of Aspen, as presented at the November 15, 2000 meeting, be approved for dismissal from the City of Aspen Historical Inventory. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 15th day of November, 2000. APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Suzannah Reid, Chair Historic Preservation Commission 5 ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 6 AHP1403 Official eligibility determination ev. 9/98 (OAHP use only) Date Initials COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Determined Eligible- NR Detennined Not Eligible- NR Determined Eligible- SR Architectural Inventory Form Determined Not Eligible- SR (page 1 of 4) Need Data Contdbutes to eligible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR Distict 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT.936 2. Temporary resource number: 719.EHO 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: Aspen 5. Historic building name: 6. Current building* name: 7. Building address: 719 East Hopkins Street Aspen, CO 81611 8. Owner name and address: Â·Jacaueline M. Louderback 719 East Hopkins Street Aspen. CO 81611 11. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 84 West SE M of SW 14 of SE lA of SW lA of Section 7 10. UTM reference Zone 1 3;3 4 3 2 5 OmE 4 3 3 9 1 4 OmN 11. USGS quad name: Asoen Quadrangle Year: 1960. Photo Rev. 1987 Map scale: 7.5' X 15' Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): Â· E&F Block: 104 Addition: East Aspen Townsite Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comprised of Lots E & F. Block 104. Citv and Townsite of Asoen. Assessofs office Record Number: 2737-182-11-003 This descrintion was chosen as the most specific and customarv descrintion of the site. 111. Architectu ral Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): Irreaular 15. Dimensions in feet: Length x Width 16. Number of stories: One Storv 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Vertical Wood Sidinq 18. Roof configuration: {enter no more than one): Gable Roof 19. Primary external roof material (enter no more than one): Asphalt Roof 20. Special features (enter all that apply): Resource Number. 5PT.936 Temporary Resource Number: 719.EHO 0 Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: A tvoical wood frame Miner's Cottage form. A qable end facing the street with a bav window offset to the east, and a small double hung with an A/C unit in the qable peak. The bav contains a sinale class Dane instead of the large double hung typically located in this positiont 45Â° walls of the bay have casements an-d return to the main wall. A shed roof extends from the east side of the qable for the entire depth of the structure. The roof covers a shallow recessed porch where the front door and sideliahts are located. A larae rectangular chimnev sits on the east side. A larae, low pitched. two story, front cable form sits at the rear and to the east of the site. connected to the back of the small structure. Both structures have the same sidina and details. 22. Architectural style/building .type: Late Victorian 23. Landscaping or special setting features: none 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: as described above IV: Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate 1888 Actual Source of information: Based on Sanborn Maps 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: Vi/ 27. Builder/Contractor: Unknown Source of information: 28. Original owner: Unknown Source of information: 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): Maior sidina. window. and Dorch alterations. addition of rear structure. all dates unknown, Dre 1980 30. OMginal location X Moved Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Domestic 32. Intermediate use(s): 33. Current use(s): Domestic 34. Site type(s): Residential Neighborhood, with some multi familv structures. 35. Historical background: This structure is reoresentative of Asoen's minina era character, The building represents a typical tvpe known locally as the "Miner's Cottage", characterized bv the size, and simple DIan. 0 Resource Number: 5PT.936 Temporary Resource Number: 719.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) 36. Sources of information: Pitkin Countv Courthouse records; Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maos; 1990 and 1980 Citv of Asoen Survey of Historic Sites and Structures VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes No X Date of designation: Designating authority: 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our - history; B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; X C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: Architecture 40. Period of significance: Late 1800's Silver Mining Era 41. Level of significance: National State Local X 42. Statement of significance: This structure is sianificant for its Dosition in the context of Asnen's mining era. It describes the nature of the life of an averaae family or individual durina that Deriod. as well as the construction techniques. materials available and the fashion of the time. 43. Assessment of historic physical integrity related to significance: Alterations and additions seriously interfere with the integrity of the structure. onlv the oriainal form of the structure remains. VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: Eligible Not Eligible X Need Data 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes No X Discuss: If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing Noncontributing 46. If the building is in existing National Register district, is it: Contributing - Noncontributing Vlll. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: R12: F6,7 Negatives filed at: Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 48. Report title: City of Asgen Update of Survey of Historic Sites and Structures, 2000 Resource Number: 5PT.936 *,Ii,- Temporary Resource Number: 719.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) 49. Date(s): 6/29/2000 50. Recorder(s): Suzannah Reid and Patrick Duffield 51. Organization: Reid Architects 52. Address: 412 North Mill Street. PO Box 1303, Aspen CO 81612 53. Phone number(s): 970 920 9225 NOTE: Please attach a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad. map indicating resource location, and photographs. Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 0 0 October 26,2000 ASPEN Â· PITKIN John Lauderback COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMEXT 719 E. Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Mr. Lauderback, This letter shall serve as notice of the status of your.property located at 719 E. Hopkins Avenue as it relates to the City's Historic inventory. Your property was. recently included in a City-initiated project to update its Historic Inventory. Your property was listed on the inventory in 1980 and was under reconsideration as part of this project. This project is a requirement of the City of Aspen Land Use Code which requires a periodit re-evaluation and a re-adoption of the inventory: The City of Aspen Historic Preservation *Commission (HPC) has the sole responsibility for art addition to and removal from the Historic Inventory. On September 13,2000, in a public hearing, the HPC evaluated several properties, including yours, for continued ' inclusion or removal from the inventory. On September 13th, the HPC took formal action to remove your'property from the inventory. The Community Development Staff and, consultant recommended removal from the inventory and recommended findings that the property did not meet the applicable review standards. Based on a site visit to your property, Staffs recommendation and the public tesiimany received, the HPC also found the property to no longer meet the review standards; hence, its actions to remove the site. from the inventory. On September 20th, the HPC rescinded all of the actions it. took on September 1 1 0 and September 13 m. This action was at the request of City Council who directed the HPC to cease its work' on the Historic Inventory project for a nudber of reaions. Consequently, this action rescinded the action taken on September 13th by the HPC to remove your property from the inventory, despite the support by Staff, consultant and the HPC for its removal. Therefore. your property is currently officially on the City's Historic fnventory. As we have discussed, Community Development Staff has scheduled a public hearing on November 15, 2000 before the HPC so that they again may consider and take action regarding your property. We request that you submit a letter of request for this process as soon as possible. Given the circumstances associated with your particular case, the Community Development Department will handle the mailing of notices to adjoining properties and provide a legal public notice to the newspaper. We ask that you post the property 15 days prior to the hearing with a poster provided in our office. If I can provide any further assistance or should you have any questions, Please feel free to call me at 920-5062. Sincerely, Joyce A. Ohlson Deputy Director of Community Development I , 3:33,~ T PUBLIC NOTICE DATE Nov. ]F,2000 TIME 5 00 Prn Counc.1 CkaÂ»16/5 PLACE &14 t~L s.,AS.- PURPOSEÂ»*.+ for 2,w~ow.2 4 -Ill e . Hopic,As â‚¬-M *54.4, Ik.nteÂ·-t* / l oH n~ 4â‚¬;1 ~0-*UTU* CONTAC 1 TI~ ASPENrpl.N PLA~N~,O OFFICE $30 S~TH G~LEâ€ž1. A-EN CO (303) *0 50,0 0 Â£2Â»1 County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT---~ } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS State of Colorado } SECTION 26304.060(E) I, '344 Lou Ae,Le.-cjk , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following manner: 1. By mailing ofnotice, a copy ofwhich is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. IA~ A Mail to all owners ofproperty within three hundred (300) feet ofthe subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the day of , 200 (which is days prior to the public hearing date of ). 69~ *to 1*4 (t- 46 45 (23 By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the 3 day ~-~ of ObVe*~14 200.2_, to the 15 day of Movtvwfwir, 200 O . (Must be posted for at least viv ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph ofthe posted sign is attached hereto. Signature u ~-4.je-,4- LJ (Attach photograph here) Signed before me this '/ day of n o *un bee- 20011Â·by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My Commission expires: 0 Notaiy public (I ,Â·.A n (4.6 leif - .Ma ] 1 3-21 My Commission Expires - July 30,2002 16 6) MEMORANDUM To: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Fred Jarman, City Planner f!5- 0 RE: 427 East Hyman Avenue- Minor Review, Public Hearing DATE: November 15, 2000 .. :.' Pt. . . 1 + :kli lit. 4,1*C I I 3,5 - "- , 1- T.4 If. ... 4 -Â·' f . 1 1 3 :4 ./ J '/,4/01.412 : 1-1 % 1--, 14 . :. r - 14 '4 1 -*.An :76.- 0 , - . 1. . :1 - ,- .â€ž-- - i : Ll.4 1 i.1-11- jo. ..111- .â€ž1..... ...9. 16. 2 4 :*i' 1-1 I + 4 â€¢9.&6 - * 6 :44* + * $ 71. 0 .4.. 'B6*90*26.L . t .1. 2 ./.Â·"â€¢Â·rl,*4. APPLICANT: Karen Woodard LOCATION: 427 East Hyman Avenue, Lots H, I, and six feet of Lot G, Block 89, Cit and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. ZONING: Commercial Core (CC) Zone District with a Historic District Overlay SUMMARY: The applicant wishes to improve the recessed entryway and replace a existing 1960s glass door with wood frame with an solid glass doo resembling the current door located at Amen Wardy. 1 2#,2 . I I 0 STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant, Karen Woodard, is requesting approval for a minor development to replace an existing 1960s glass door with wood frame with a solid glass door resembling the current door located at Amen Wardy. The door to be modified is located in the Aspen Block building which fronts both South Galena Street and Hyman Avenue. The building received landmark designation via Ordinance 57, Series 1981 by City Council. This building, zoned CC, is also located in Aspen's Historic District. Staff and members of the Historic Preservation Commission have conducted site visits to the property. The request to improve the current appearance of the existing entryway with replacing the existing door that is in. poor condition with a more contemporary solid glass panel door will enhance the current entryway to the store. Staff has no concerns with the door replacement as it does not face the street and is a marked improvement to the existing entranceway. The Historic Preservation Commission, upon review of this application may consider the following decision alternatives: k Approve the application as submitted; 1 Approve the application with conditions to be met prior to issuance of a building permit; 0 1, Table action to allow the applicant further time for restudy. (Specific recommendations should be offered.); or > Deny approval finding that the application does not meet the Development Review Standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the HPC approve this minor development request to replace an existing wood framed glass door with a solid glass door as represented in the photographs with the following conditions: 1. That the applicant agrees to utilize a contractor that has participated successfully in the Historic Preservation Contractor Licensing Program; and 2. That the applicant shall not install or use the proposed glass door in a manner that blocks the existing fire-exit door at the back wall of the landing in the entranceway. Discussions with the City of Aspen Building Department indicated any blocking of the fire-exit door represents a significant fire hazard and shall not be permitted. The fire-exit door shall remain fully functional at all times; 0 2 3. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff; 4. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit; 5. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions; and RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Resolution # , Series of 2000, for a minor development request to replace an existing wood framed glass door with a solid glass door as represented in the photographs with the following conditions stated herein." EXHIBITS: Exhibit A: Review Criteria and Staff Findings 0 - Exhibit B: Application and photo documentation Exhibit C: Resolution # , Series 2000 0 3 EXHIBIT A MINOR DEVELOPMENT No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.B.4) are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, the Historic Preservation Commission may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(21 for detached accessory dwelling units. Response: The project involves one minor alteration to the property, which does not directly face the street. The Aspen Block building, originally constructed in 1886, has maintained a business, commercial service, and residential function consistent to its function today. The applicant wishes to replace the existing door to the old "Baggage Claim" with a new solid glass door for the new tenant - TUMI. Staff feels that given the buildings uses and facial modifications and perpendicular location to the Hyman Mall, the new glass door does not detract from the historical significance of the Aspen Block Building. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Response: There are several other solid glass doors in the immediate vicinity of the proposed location for this door. The proposed changes would not affect the character of the neighborhood. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Response: Staff finds that the proposed door does not detract from the significance of the Aspen Block building as it is not seen directly from the street. 4 d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Response: Staff finds that the proposed solid glass door does not detract from the significance of the Aspen Block building as it is not seen directly from the street. 5 RESOLUTION NO. -, EXHIBIT C (SERIES OF 2000) RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT TO REPLACE AN EXISTING WOOD FRAMED GLASS DOOR WITH A SOLID GLASS DOOR FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 427 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS H, I, AND SIX FEET OF LOT G, BLOCK 89, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL ID# 2737-182-16-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, Karen Woodard, requests minor HPC approval to replace an existing wood framed glass door with a solid glass door for the property located 427 East Hyman Avenue, Lots H, I, and six feet of Lot G, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. The property is designated landmark and located in the Historic Overlay Zone District; and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a property listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures" must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.415.010.B.4 of the Aspen Land 0 Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. e 6 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and WHEREAS, Staff performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found favorably for the application, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on November 15th, 2000, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and approved the application with conditions by a vote of to NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That this minor development request to replace an existing wood framed glass door with a solid glass door as represented in the photographs for the property located 427 East Hyman Avenue, Lots H, I, and six feet of Lot G, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, as presented at the November 15th, 2000 meeting, be approved with the following conditions: 1. That the applicant agrees to utilize a contractor that has participated successfully in the Historic Preservation Contractor Licensing Program; 2. That the applicant shall not install or use the proposed glass door in a manner that blocks the existing fire-exit door at the back wall of the landing in the entranceway. Discussions with the City of Aspen Building Department indicated any blocking of the fire-exit door represents a significant fire hazard and shall not be permitted. The fire-exit door shall remain fully functional at all times; 3. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff; 4. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit; and 5. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. 7 APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 15th day of November, 2000. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 8 Robert J. Snyder Realty Services, Inc. r-=iN-1 304 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 970-925-2450 lita".../.Ult.Ill.r/E.L....~...1...2.1...6./.El,/I'lli 970-544-0996 (fax) November 14, 2000 The Historical Preservation Commission Community Development Department City of Aspen Attn: Fred Jarmen Dear Commission; As managing agent for The Aspen Block Building Partnership, owners of the Aspen Block Building, I would like to express our complete support for the door change request at the former L'Equipe space that will come before you at the November 15, 2000 meeting. The existing door in the recessed entry of 427 E. Hyman Ave. is in very poor condition and has been in need of replacement for some time. We are in support of replacing this door with an all glass door very similar to the front door of the Amen Wardy store. The existing door is not historic and was put into service sometime in the late 1960's or early 1970's during one of the renovations that was completed during that time. The entries to both stores on Hyman Street were completely re-done in the late 1960's and early 1970's to the current configuration so I would not think this door we are asking to replace would have any historical significance. We have recently completed Part One of the application process to add the Aspen Block Building to the National Register of Historic Structures. The Architectural Officer, Mr. Joseph Saldibar of the Colorado Historical Society has no objection to this change of the door but suggested that we keep the existing door in storage to prove it date of manufacture if requested by the National Park Service who will review both the exterior of the building and interior rehabilitation within the next 30 months. The new proposed glass door will "disappear" when open during the summer months and closed during the winter and not be visible at all from a front elevation perspective. The concrete step is going to be replaced in the spring when weather and contractors scheduling will permit. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincer*3017 2-1(/,4 ;' Ipit D'< v,yL, Rob Sf@der, Managing Agent Aspen Block Building Partnership .11* # 01 ....1=.,- ' -- :#'/5 t Â· Â·- 1 m 6 1 - j f/ 11~11111 -1- 1 11~. r ~6-_151 1 %, - - f - . -'-I'Ywl 09. i ..14 .-A 4424 * .., /* EL...........1/.IhJL-**76 - fit---....:--*I- -I--.- - I.V7: W~'.. --*/.-'.......'.'-- . .f '11. e '11 W 1- m - -- I- -- 1-,i N:t ...1./lil 1-1 - - :,4.-14 li U.1- 11 14,9.-:.0/ 84 - . ./.&- t - I ...il-*- 1/ .--- "LI hiwi. #4*~*4 - . r. bIL * , a . . 1-* 1. | $ 344 , 1- - 4:,11 *1. 9 - 1.1 .01 ' *1.1 45 4.1 A + . . ': @Air I . I-. 2 r C d - 2,9 1, A . - 'i 4 0 10- . I. 6 1.. PUBMEMOTICR DATE.L.11 TIME__lan=,4 I I PLA Z-1 - - i PUAPOSE - . , - el- #UFENTON /,9/ - ~CON>,11<lj( 1 ION, 1 1 C ..ilil, j NVAAH 3 ZE,f â€žâ€ž, ., ,(â€žIâ€žj.â€ž) ,+1*1 * } Â·4 't " " It 4,4 fluil ,(114'.UOJ 0. 't.""11,0 1 â€¢ 11"1.Jeptse#I .--'I Nt)1 NÂ·lÂ·~9~ , I ./ , , ff' *04011 Or,I& County of Pitkin } ~ /k,/09Â»07/ ~ AFFIDAVrr OFNO'fICE PURSUANT TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATION ~ State of Colorado } SECTION 26304.060 (ED I, - , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060 (IE) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in the following manner: ~~\. By mailin~notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class, postage prepaid 124(Â¢iail to all owners of property with three hundred (300) feet of the subject <proper@>a~ndicated on the attached list, on the day of . 199_ (which is _ ~ days prior to the public hearing date of 1. 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen 0 from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously 0.000 from the 44 day of /~Lfibi~fii<. (Must be posted for at least ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. 444.1 l<) 0 4601,1 Signarut: (Attach photograph here) Signed before me this -524 day 0~- A )0 2/ QÂ«<A- J *:1&4) WITNEW@11,2 6=9~ SEAL -~ My commission expires: . A June-I- 0. 0~ U 4207 0 . Not#y PUEnc // W >-x/1 / N6tary Public's Signature 0 4 1-7 C kly 41 4_ ACTION: Minor Review All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet allfbur Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) ofthe Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. Standard 1: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(13)(2). Standard 2: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Standard 3: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Standard 4: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. 113 c) MEMORANDUM TO: Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: Joyce A. 0hlson, Deputy Directoâ„¢HE) RE: Bavarian Inn-Referral to the HPC DATE: November 15, 2000 On December 6, 1999, the City Council granted conceptual approval to the Bavarian PUD. The PUD must now proceed to final review with the P&Z and Council. The Council requested that prior to final review the applicants seek referral comments from the HPC. This project is not located in the historic district nor is any structure on the property on the inventory or landmarked. The Council is 0 primarily seeking HPC input on the architecture in that the project is located in a highly visible part of the City and long the current and proposed Main Street. The HPC comments will not be binding on the applicant; however, Staff will forward any recommendations to the Council for their consideration. 0 -'Ar PAV>' 4 i 01 # pi 1.41 1 U 'f - RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) APPROVAL FOR THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ON LOTS D THROUGH I, BLOCK 11, AND LOTS K THROUGH P, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735.123.08.004 Resolution #99 - 94 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Savanah Limited Partnership, owner. as represented by Vann Associates. LLC. for Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval of a for sale, deed restricted. residential affordable housing development of 19 units. 40 bedrooms and 31 parking spaces on two (2) parcels located between W. Main Street. Seventh Street. Eighth Street. and W. Bleeker Street; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.84.030 of the 1998 Aspen Municipal Code. the Planning and Zoning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding requests for Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval: and. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.84.030 of the 1998 Aspen Municipal Code. City Council shall approve, approve with conditions. or disapprove Conceptual PUD approval requests upon receipt of recommendations from Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission. and after taking and hearing public comment regarding the proposal: and WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City Water Department. City Engineering, Parks Department. Environmental Health Department. the City Transportation Planner. the City Zoning Officer, the Roaring Fork Transit Agency. the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, and the Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions: and. WHEREAS, the above referenced application was legally noticed for a public hearing held before the Planning and Zoning Commission on April 13,1999, and, WHEREAS, the above referenced application was, subsequent to the conclusion of the Planning and Zoning Commission hearings, legally noticed for a public hearing to be held before the City Council on November 8, 1999 and continued to November 22, 1999; and, WHEREAS, during the third continuance of the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing, on August 24, 1999 (first hearing on 4/13/99 was continued to 6/1/99. then continued to 7/20/99, and finally to 8/24/99), the Commission recommended that the City Council grant Conceptual PUD approval for the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing PUD (Lots D through I, Block 11, and Lots K through P, Block 12. City and Townsite of Aspen) with conditions by a vote of six to zero (6-0) by Resolution No. 09, Series of 1999; and, 1 . WHEREAS, City Council conducted a public meeting, as part of the action item agenda, on September 27, 1999, and conducted a legally noticed public hearing opened on November 8, 1999. and continued to November 22, 1999, then to November 23, 1999. then to December 6. 1999. at which time City Council received and took into consideration public comments and the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City staff; and, WHEREAS, after consideration of agency and public comment. the applicable review standards as contained in Chapter 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code. to wit Section 26.84.030 (Planned Unit Development), and the recommendations of staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission, the City Council finds the proposed Conceptual PUD plan of the above referenced application to be consistent with the minimum requirements and review standards for Planned Unit Development provided that the stipulated conditions are met. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Aspen City Council: Section One: That the City Council hereby grants Conceptual Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval for the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing PUD with the following conditions: 1. If the requested rezoning of Parcel 2 from R-15 to R-NIF/PUD is not approved. this Conceptual PUD approval shail be rendered null and void. 2. For the Final PUD application. the proposed Site Development Plan shall be revised and other submittals made as follows. with final determination to be made at Final PUD review: a. The Bleeker Street frontage of the property shall remain undeveloped (with the exception of Nl) to serve as a play area. courtyard and open space. Trees located outside of the areas designated for driveway, sidewalk and parking shall be preserved with final determination to be made by the Parks Department. b. The three conifer trees on the north side of the N2 building shall be preserved and the final plan shall show how the site plan layout (particularly the N2 building location) and construction practices will accomplish this. The N2 building shall provide for a two (2) bedroom unit. c. Parking shall meet as closely as possible with the off-street parking standards of Section 26.515, however; a minimum of 31 parking spaces shall be allocated for the entire PUD. d. Vehicular access to parking shall be signed in order to encourage access to the development from Bleeker Street and from the east end of the alley only. with the exception of the existing parking spaces accessed from Seventh Street. in front of the Bavarian Inn. The applicant shall develop a signage plan which will minimize general public use of the alley at the 8th Street intersection. Such plan shall be coordinated with and meet with the approval of all effected City department staff and effected utility/service districts. e. Turning movements at the east end connection of the alley to Seventh Street shall be restricted to right-in and right-out only. Once Highway 82 has been realigned 2 to Main Street, the Seventh/Main Street intersection has been signalized. and traffic volumes on Seventh have decreased. the right-in and right-out only restriction may be removed after further analysis by the City's staff upon application for an insubstantial PUD amendment to allow left turn movements to and from the alley. f. The applicants shall submit a remodeling plan for the Bavarian Inn showing architectural changes, facade materials. and any other proposed exterior improvements. Landscaping for the Bavarian Inn shall be included in the overall PUD landscaping plan. -Â« 3. All buildings shall have flat roofs. Heights must comply with the R-MF zone district's twenty-five (25) foot limitation and specifically, the Nl/N2 building complex and Sl-S5 building complex shall not exceed 20 feet in height to the top of the roof, and the W2-W5 complex shall not exceed 25 feet in height to the top of the roof. Prior to Final PUD plan submittal. the applicant shall meet with the Historic Preservation Commission (in an advisory capacity) to review the architectural design of the proposed structures to discuss compatibility with the 8th Street and Main Street neighborhoods and streetscape. v 3 10 -Â· 4. The Final PUD application shall include a plan for the relocation of the two (smaller) 1 -e cabins located on Parcel 1 of the site. The third (larger) cabin may be included.in this relocation plan. The final disposition of the cabins shall not interfere with the review process of this PUD. 0 5. The proposed landscape plan of the Final PUD shall be modified in accordance With the changes required pursuant to condition 2.. above. In preparing the proposed landscape plan for the Final PUD application. the applicant shall work with the City Parks Department to arrive at an acceptable plan with regard ro selection of species. spacing of plantings, tree relocation, preservation. and removal requirements as well as how the landscaping could potentially mitigate noise impacts from Main Street. The landscape plan shall also include a construction management plan which describes specific tree preservation strategies during the construction period. The plan shall demonstrate consistency with the recommendations of the "Entrance to Aspen Main Street Design Report . including addressing the post-development grade changes between the "new" Main Street and the development site. In association with the landscape plan. the applicant shall provide plans or documents describing provisions for the on-going maintenance of all common areas and for ensuring landscape success for a three-year period. 6. The Final PUD application shall include a detailed outdoor lighting plan which illustrates that any outdoor lighting used on the subject property will comply with the City's current lighting regulations. 7. The Final PUD shall meet all requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District. including but not limited to the installation of approved fire sprinkler and alarm systems, and the maintenance of all fire department apparatus emergency access 0 routes. Proposed snow storage areas shall be identified on the Final PUD Site Development Plan. 3 8. The Final PUD shall include a Special Review application for parking addressing the specific off-street parking requirements of Section 26.515 of the Municipal Code. Any and all PUD variance requests shall remain outstanding until Final PUD review. 9. The Final PUD application shall include a detailed utility plan including proposed easements; a detailed stormwater drainage plan: a PMto mitigation plan: a fugitive dust control plan and construction management plan; a report detailing the results of an asbestos inspection of the Bavarian Inn and its associated out-buildings as completed by a person licensed by the State of Colorado; a draft plat and Subdivision/PUD Improvements Agreement; and, any other reports as required for Final PUD pursuant to the land use code. 10. The applicant shall record (and pay the applicable fees) with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder the signed Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution that provides City Council with a recommendation regarding the proposed Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Conceptual PUD. In the alternative, the applicant may pay the recordation fee to the City Clerk, who will record the Resolution. 11. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval. unless otherwise amended by a Board/Commission having authority to do so. Section Two: In accordance with Section 26.84.030(C)(1)(b) and (c). Sections One of this Resolution. as provided above. shall not constinlte final Planned Unit Development approval or permission to proceed with development. Instead. such approval shall constitute only authorization to proceed with a development application for a final development plan. A development application for final development plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the conceptual development plan's date of approval by City Council. Unless an extension is granted by the City Council. failure to file such an application within this time period shall render the approval of a conceptual development plan null and void. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 6~1 day of December, 1999. 20 14-fAG> Rach~ E. Richards, Mayor ~ ATTEST: 91 .n~ ,\0, Kathryn S. Ko#, City~lerk L 4 0 APPROVED AS TO FORM: (MA? th=At John Worc*ster, City Attorney 0 0 G: planning/aspen/resos.dockitycounc/Bavcoucreso.doc In , Ff. .4 4-t n-qi#. . th-i g., Af .. 1/4 '111 11 161 4,1 . 8 1 ka. . p '- . I h 4 ' :i.V- N~k- In-4/8 - 2 14 4 1. ~ = .4 .,e./ 1%......... 7 "41 4 -2 ./1- ' t--- I #LU' 4,~ *g- 0,-Ill'll'll ~11 - Â·4- 4 4 4...., WUR"Nutb I l-* ....4.2 . - .. , 1.. . i.1 , . 4 7~ 'Â·I.,5$...~ 4~ t. ff., 1 '/# , 11Â» .14Â·L Â· 'fiN .1. 1.10 . ....r a M.4.Â·141 1:. ....A t: 93 .&. h~ /./.-'/ 4'' l 1 l. 4 - , PUBLIC NOTICE '.14 1 91:Py DATE.%15,00 i.,7 "3.1 6 '. 4. ; 1 TIME i , . 7 4 i . . 1.1 4 PLACE . ~ ...h, PURPOSE , Mh A .1 M > 2.- i./ / 1'.1.4 'tr - , t ~ 2 - . 1 Attachment 8 0 County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS State of Colorado } SECTION 6-205.E. I, being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 6-205.E. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in the following manner: 1. \Er mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached heretoÂ·7' by firdes postage prepaid U.S. Mail-all owners of property with].1!--thEsehun~ (300) feet of the HK. subject property, as;'cated-oheattached list, on the , _/-2 Nal'trl/5134 -1~whicliib daytr B'-â‚¬6 the public hearing date of 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible 2000 continuously from the leT day of NOJ. to the ~f~- day of 140 U , *199_. (Must be Zooo posted for at least ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. L joiv\ &Â»tÂ» />goTARA % SigÂ®ature 3 I ++4 3 2 (Attach photograph Reked : 2 Signed before me this 16+" day of $6 UBL\0/64# NOVâ‚¬*n bar , 4:99*40 by tÂ»JAclavoÂ»n MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 0 MAY 2212001 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My ,(:DomEN,4 ion #*pires : HAN 2-7-22:01 y#**Â¤,c.LE.1.*Syl, - No~ry ~blic 4. ) â€¢â€¢' F.Â· 1 Â·. 4 , 722/42,2 t. I :. 0. 'll 41<19,4%44, . *,, 4 1 .. r# 1 4 ... . 1:34 . 1. p :- 1 4.. t. 0 - St '. . â€¢ ~ 1.t. . B 4.. %2. - 0 1 1.h .Ji 1 1 : I , , 1. i'.0,1 I, 1 h f -* 13.3.-.Mul't ./ 9 I : * ..4- A Â· Â· i~.1- .'. f. A 61â€¢ 1 . ; tsr . ic L.,1., ~ ' 0 4 Â· . 4 - :70. 1.:.. ~ . -- * 0/(RFIQ#%1:MiMBvkiwiA:..t,Â·fÂ«V Â·.4 4% f ' 7, Â» , .,.~&*EA9/*~i'.1& j: .f~ f 4 . L '44... ...â‚¬ 4 Ti &:a'..44 'U ... $ . * 37 424#24Â· j .,4.t~ 4-Â¥Â¥47Â·64 4 - . t. . I .. . ilt/3 # r-:.i .*3..,Aift:731'ir-~ ~ '~~Â·~ Â·Â·Â· 1#.4 r. 4,2-'.1, 7- 1.;+7 ~ , 4 , e. e 65 1 f . - 1 - .Â· I I i 4 5 I Â» 46 : , 1 -=ti 9:â€¢â€¢ 1 v .:I .64.3: //.I' .i . , I -- 1* .6 22 i -- . ix M .1 . ,b'.A .filif: -:. r,2 64:*2 . Mife~*-,~.,1,~-1- * "4 .4 42. ,. - : 0- ./ ,- 1 I '. , l...: I eli. - 9. 0.4. 1.t . 66.-** .f I - 7 1 4. .4 '' 2.. :2.74 ... i . . .r . ' I .' 44.Wi ; . _ . 2-1- I ./ .,1 - -21 *. - : . . + 117:7,4 $ k - ' i. *. ~ n . - . . V., .ir, "'J.."'1. 7.*:,4;42 v,k'*.2-~.-.,i,Â· ' 0 - *-45*kemp . A 444Â« -0 Â· /3 f 2 -stle, Abir, 7.i , 'r :S, 7 0,11' V t Â· I FN~ 6 4 f , 7 4 - 'f,4 .. ..Yot 1, 41*14 %, , , A '079 .i :04'*, 4 i'tir I sÂ·:09,Â·* Â· 36*~-*:d . 44 - 4: Â· ~.9,2 r - . . .4 4 A : â€¢â€¢6 - Â·. . "- S -- t. i ... .F : . 4 4 6 0 545'f .. 4:- 4% 2 . R 0 EL./ t * '' U jq# :A - J:.- pt V. . ,; 4'12#L 4 .2 .: : : . :b i.46 ; . . ..1 &18 +TI~ Â· Et 4, :.tt' p 0 '' .j -rl '00:44 - P/, *11 r '94 3:- ' b .. . .. . ,.-./ .: : 44 //- El< 3:"i- 1 .24.,>*13 . ./ . , ~,Â«9%*41 -: 3..r, 14#JUMihIli# AAEKN ,4 67 4 U ....4 . . ' # , . i - 4.&: :142 :R,9Â·14, r.t:. I . ', Â· 1-Ii .':4 1- -7 '3 r - - * --4 f 4044 64 2-SK/'JiÂ·?igu.t 09.14?t~n r lit~Ul 12/#f?~ ~Â·fl .Â· I ; 111' 344 4 K '- .14 1\% Â¥ - L - I.I. . ''... 11-1 -'2=.6.2*" , HillivA ils. 4 - 2 I ' A. 3 â€¢ 9.11 -'.,A.Â£1, $ 1.1 1.- Â¥. ':4/Aill....i .... . ' ..1 0 1/k 1261 - . -- 4139 *116-92.7.mal;24:4, "I.'7Â·4 11*1111 m P 13 & . 1 ' 'i 4 s .6/LL ' 4 4 9 11 4 1 41,1.9 , . .. :A . -2. . 4 % . E .0 t. lim =f-â€ž01.. . Â·Nllil--1-2 -'â€¢ ' 1-*17.,23/f,I. -: ,Â· -I--lf./- . I. -,02 , 24., ,-2,==..=*3232-t*FL.u*;fi. Ir,t~v.-.: *. . --. '.4- + 1 - ' . 9941 'iÂ·.9kt . A. 5: '. .t . - . - -... - - *4-*10*Bannim#e - .-.. :- -- - 0 ./ 4. - - . . - t - - - *. 0 - - - r . 1 Â· - ./ - 4.- . U. - ./--4 b : - . - I ./ .- , ....k- - - . -7. 4 4 - r ,9,1'kta 4 Â·I 40 -- â€¢ #4 â€¢4$52 *f ., 2- ER, 4 f 1 1 ... ~*f4. I .ttillimiÂ· */1 . A. Â·â‚¬'-71*4 7 :7918<flow -/i .... I # 1 .4 :49,t . '9,ibkiN . 3(295< ..22>15 4 I , V 57 . 0 â€¢iÂ·ZÂ· ''~B1 'd:/ â€¢/4~â€¢- 7 4~ , #13211628: â€¢R' Â·' ,~i13~I ~' ' 'rtr )' 1:2LL~--~fi .3, -,SL.JEVE<3311':s- .- 3 4..., ft t tz:~g.:t~ 142 Y.... v. p T I . 4 1446*%24 :24-AM/t . * 1- 4 ' , .2 '- ' ./-- 4291 3 j . 7'94'kiÂ·**'bi-0 v...;'..274:19.944. i: i,tu;it,fi.r'L.; , i*a I .; .0 1*41- Â»61 7 9," . * 4.e,r 24**ri .Ite t. %211Â·<f .. 941~~ , I. 1/ 4 - â€¢ M..1-,~IA */4,~Ike'jj. L .. '42. E ... '. ./ - ' . 40/5-.'4 04, ..I' t~ *0*52 -, ri Â· ~~'~0 rt.**, ..r r,41%16.372,11.:~twt.'>1 C...F.' 3.r .Ji *,CJ#/fi' ...2.4...: 7, J "37Â«. Â»t, . Â· 9: I - . : . I â‚¬ . ..47 61. -3 - ...4 / 1~03:% . - a ?44*2 # N - ./ *t- '0 -1 2 f .r 9.2.4:-L.317.44> - :- . * . 4 .# . ' 7 } 4* ,14 4 9614-- . C ~ '-Â·. - :i ) . *ti . + I---/ .Â·Â· t~ / . lilli kilfic. -44 ..?Ef, .ft:t.U . *231 ../. t:v:2 -4* 4. ."141 t*--- - - - -- 1 4.c 0... 1â€¢â€¢ e /2-- r . 4 4 Â¥3,441,0.#lp*Â·a.:;,fl'Cl 2-1,;* Dj,Â·Â· -Â·-. Â·'1-4.1.2-k'-22?i - 4 : P / ~~ .. 1 .--34.. t, F. 1,-96''f.2,->4- bilism.11â€¢l. ; .r \\Â·'â„¢ - Â· '2 ...1 4,31, -FM;=- 0-3 . 74+2 Â· 9:;4974,f<% 7. RY!#-9-4 -4 . -3 -67--'/j"'01>\ .f.,W-~:,A . ... . *.. 1 .-- r I.-phz,9 16/ /* 47 4 . '* # ..:k- \.' XÂ».: 21 1.Ii.... ..17' . . . D /92Â£ 7 , 9/4 -Â· Â·- '71-1~''tÂ»#.31 902,Â·,4.Dyl~12--+52,4~Â»* - . 4,3 + l. 2 :/4 44 04 - . 4 + 1 1 lili 1 111 1 1 1 1 1 bog.verolib coqi rtc,â€¢:rm htf%m&-rs,~N715%2*7Ut~'- IrtrUnON CÂ¥ THE r,Orâ„¢rr.:*-OWN /â€¢+43 PEeCKIC>trp 1-OCON Â»If] FOUND b\C) 0-Â·V+Ge, PLUN +2) StÂ»v,4,410 DESÂ«IXIP HE.APH /&6.-f:- 4\ WEST BLEEKER ST ALMHE- SUMYW, IKE. DrÂ·-:U:Gt4L- r .91. WvuL ----il I.'.... Fi KIN-Caljfm- TITLE ING. Ces NO. HOTEL I ... - lou- I FOUNDÂ· Ls ID71O -------4, RE#R * PLAS. CAP swo,# i 1,4 .0361 - FET 13240 WAÂ·5 Lard IN THE ASS,UMU; cITY Wolulll,T C -.. f'I<CrAÂ»ION OFT}-415 S.JIÂ«trr Ill. :.. \ -.NE&011 â€¢ '.0.31â€¢â€¢â€¢r ... ... 7Â«1- + r-'16.-: \ .... .4.\ /6 \ T /11~r~ \ 100 67\' f mIâ‚¬EL 1 ~ Ntl / t..:*r F.4 0,47:Â»4Â¥ ~mop rl/u -" - , 1X LOTS ncI C .7/ . I F. 0>1 - PLA/7/ A 1,1.00 6.4,1-- 0/IC Â· 'T = i 26*M~j \ MU Ref , POLIA' SCALE, f. 20' M o to to 40 40 Â® 100 N 76.09' 11-W iSo 51 ' - mFUL CAP ~2 TELE Â·TVD BASIS OF BEARING: FOUND MONUMENTS AS SHOWN ELIC FED. DATUrl ruâ€¢+IC. 1 ASSUMLD, tooÂ·C> PUT MT 65---- ...1 7 LLEY ,-'BLO 9,2Â· 12 Â·- .... FOrCAIT aDANCA /4Â¢5 2MOWN. -1 BURVEYOWS CERTIFICATE ~~# PLAI.CAP *0 378~09'11"E ./ 91Â»OIl - ~XTRA,li ~ .. i J IHEREBY CERTIFY THATTHIS MAPACCURATELY DEPICTS / -+N~ aTELL.Ma 1 \ *- - 1990 OF A SURVEY MADE UNDER NY SUPERVISION ON JANUARY 3RD, :4 11=fE64.2~1'b=did=+StMKEhiNGS, 1 1 1 // ME IGHTS-OF-WAY IN EVIDENCE --- 2-1 OR KNOWN TO Mt AND ENCRdACHMENTS BY OR ONTHESE \ PREMISES ARE ACCURATELY BHOÂ¥04. SEE MTKINCOUNTYTITLE 1 POLICY No. PCT-4242 FOR EASEMENTS WHICH WY AFFECT 1 .4 r. PROPERTY. 00 ... n>[ /203<6: PARCEL 2 ALANE SURVEYS INC. I in -~.I:> LOTS K-P JANUARY15TH, 1940 i 4 Um<5*er / TABLE OF TREES ~i r~ZZ n Â£=2 ..0 ..... $ ti78 It @RE C ' :: 10.1- -im& . LU ('/ 1 ZFL-- :6 1:i=: ./.4 â€ž78'09' 11-W leoÂ·61 ... .. t: A#ge. ..7.1 lk*59- 9 fam ST . WEST MAIN - 'bÂ»\ 4/ I- Â»- - 1 6 1 1 | Job No 89Â·153 Survoyld 3 JAN. 1990 A-ImionS I JUNE *990 04Pt' 170, APJUST DiiÂ· rodÂ·11*M> TntÂ» IMPROVEMENT SURVEY Alpine Surveys, Inc. Draft,d 12 JAk 1990 M SE.r[ 1118 Umâ‚¬m Clent .5Â»Â»*Al-1 F}~INEMCHI 01998 0- WIÂ·VEY, -1 C.,â€¢â€¢w .tkie,â€¢ ,--*,â€¢-. â€ž,tâ„¢2 Poit Offlo, Box 1730 16 rED 1711 '1;â€¢FULI'+ 'rAMULL' U MITED Aspin, Colorado 81611 303 925 2688 ST N 14'50'49'E 100-00 ... - 14 9Â¢1 \ 0 ..1 L-L ~4532 -L 2 - -al---*....S..< - \-//=551, L , -/=rE=Meâ‚¬,tmL---- M~==S~Â£2kg*5*EEM~~*EL, - i-4)JJ 7/ - 3 / 1 in- -3---fl/Â£2#//1 ---' 0 - -- . 1 13----EEE~ --~EENE~E--- u/~*-/.2/.13:rifil:hil" . 111 I 4}ju- - Dit - N \ i I E.SUEh 1\Ell 1 . , 11'.1 + I - EESÂ» , *3~~~ZEEE=*EMEE R T , 1 1,1 1 .. , : 12-R 81/ 111 Cly i t I . -f ~N /TH S ~ ~ ~ ~ LiTI~ S , 1 .- 2 -1= 7 '1 i '12=@Salip i -fl > -- 1 H.1 1 il Â· m ~'iF'=2~ 1 5%"me.Wil 1 1 -4/ : I--/1. """1 -11 -f f s 6-1-hi ST N 0>i-H s-~ ) ~ 0 60*~ S T-- h --. LlL......~==Â·L..............]......., ' n 1 --- : 2:1 5 1 1 1 1 1 , 5 - : 1 i ././*f......~,01 ! ! ~ lilli P---------.---==-== 4 1 .- --------........... .- i 1- 1- 11=Zzz k 11('1/ - West Main Area i Ii,1 2 N Pre-Survey Map 4,5380,4 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET, SU]TE 300 ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 (Ph) 970/925-2254 Ox) 970/925-2258 . r <21 (27. i.b.,ILL.b RE-- "'immI.A 4 MA. F.NE~ I (35 3 4 5 CE- 0 - 31 Nl - ula- r 1,1. jk - U dE/~ L N2 1 1 - .0Â¢1'.4. 12' L I -/4 (3 --R . i /\7 "'41.4.~' Bavarian Inn (0 (-)0 (i) Affordable 44'-4,/4 L__ /:1 Â· 2 - ) COTTONWOOD / f STREET TREE P &/ Fau.â€¢Mâ€¢' Housing */4 ASPEN, COLORADO /,lit ~'f,Â· i . -fltÂ¥,r,Aa\WA, 3 43.75 employees ~j, 42=re*&*Lik.*y////j/# 40 bedrooms :4:@*2 37r--S'' OWNER: V--t -Â¥11/ IFf- 32 Parking Spaces~ 'WI SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 17:Ir 7 . required ,/=%7. ASPEN, CO. 81611 DJ provided artili, 6-21 19 Dwelling Units * s SPRUCE %-la 1 / ~jalt~'6 Wl 33 Parking Spaces DATE: ISSUE: 18, -t Poo -/ â€¢ i SEFTEMBEK 1998 SCHEMATIC - DESIGN SET l ~ February 1999 Re-submission -r-1 ~ J JUNIPER 5-10 15/0 W2 . W3 September 1999 Redesign for City Coun< November 1999 Revision , V Sl ,.-61 Sl S3 54 S5 8 V NEW SHRUB GROUPING March 2000 Final PUD L x La c, ce 0 ' Development Plan W4 cne 1490 'lle â€¢f 4 3 n :el aw* m n A L Mhum. =r =i- =1â€ž -17 Z.- o 4. , 0:2----Â»Al/t54 B,varian Inn 0*r 4 l -tf le,5 ~VIA v,* 1 Wity 5 south III P NEW PINE 7- (g J -47& rs LA? ufloy - F~ Housing 2 north \ 8-/1 i . i) I j CD - O 2.0*8 (i) 4 west Cv, / %*MiltÂ»: ec. Co A d .2 j , at --t 11.19.99 //mill\\\4 SCALE: 1"=16'-0" Conceptual A NEW ASPEN TREE U Z. 04Â£ Landscape Plan Copyright Â©2000 Stryker/ Brown Architects, PC Ll.2 STRYKER/BROWN -&~~W L ARCHITECTS,p.c. ~ ROOM ~ ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET. SUITE 300 1'"!1~:: STUDIO (Ph) 970/925-2254 (F*)970/925-2258 (e-mail) sba@rof.net Â¥3Â»k 09.111.11%*9 I.,14/4. Al I. 4/ '*>t '4. $ p g 2 2 1 1 2 f 9 0 1 9, 2 2 ~4,0â€ž ,~J'~idp,2~~161~~~~i*&alk 5 ~8**064*A 9441\\\%6;,1~/1,6.,4;4(1.*9 'AW . E 0 0 - 43 1 1/\\1\\1 ~#/41, P,pperty L+ :. 1 -- 51 ROOM 9#,/4/, 4# ~~,W** 140.51' 0 % &0 2 STUDIO STUDIO 61 11 -4 GENEP~pEES 1 f / existing lodee %.2 f '~t-{\,1 f "1141* - 1 49712 -*C , //,lip 21\ , 4--4* jm'11%\,00 BAVARIAIMINN balcony balmny / t= . ~ 9% 21 11.1.11 Â» 6 - ii@) ROOM f 9 An .\9 4/ C 4 - 9 ---- uzz re STUDIO ~ ROOM - - 41 I. lili MttltuN =24310 ril/" di i h \Utry ./ 1 29 , 4 101 7 Bedroom t73 1 Dining ~ ~ ~FC+ J 1210 ~ ROOM w Unath 1 6 parking spaces .8 9, b 46 -1 C =1 existing_---- % 1 - 01 1.9- 101 9 J Kitchen I = Ele] ii 8- 1 U 18 1 11 4 L/' Living ROOM 11 11 ii L- Bedroom Bedroom STUDIO STUDIO -:E M Bavarian Inn Il,,[ . CO PHONE Upper Level Plan ya STORAGE . - m Affordable L Housing ASPEN, COLORADO L . . FOYER 'lll 7-=Â· OFFICE OWNER: STORAGE ~ r-------------1 ; - 0 4 SAVANAH LIMrrED PARTNERSHIP STORAGE w t 2. â‚¬ 9 ASPEN, CO. 81611 MECHANICAL ~4\11 --------J 1 4 00% ,=* 2----. L UR 1 & .0 Ob .6 bo bio 6 Parking spaces C Â£ S DATE: ISSUE: 8~MpNT @ Â·1 1 SEPTEMBER, 1998 SCHEMATIC al, 3 I DESIGN SET f u__..~ ~Prop~rty Line ~ ~ ~ February 1999 Re-sublnission UNUSED i r-------7 up Or*sh prmpder; snow storage March 2000 Final PUD Developmmt plan 180.51' ,,) NORTH . 11 purnat ALLEY 1-- p n - open to 35 ti above 1 up -Â¥ F- Main Floor and Site Plan SCALE: 1"=8'-0" retaining Existing wall Laundry slab above ~ Floor Plans Bavarian Inn 111111 Copyright Â©2000 Suyker/ Brown Architects, PC Storage Furnace 2 A 0.1 Lower Level Plan STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS, P.C, 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET.SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 STUDIO (Ph)970/925-2254 (Fx)970/9252258 (e-mail) sba@rof.net 4163/ LIVING Â£1 LIVING BEDROOM 0 â‚¬'C > .00';Ill;404,11!11~~'//4,>44: a, / BEDROOM E j *p ~:4 4 Mil . BEDROOM BEDROOM - . P E Â£ 11 -42# $3 %0 0 *and#aping ~7~ Px /- O 9 4/*4 - ~ - , 1..2* V#Aralk im/)11!W\*\ -1 STUDG-3 balcony balcony / 410/ 0.11'11'14. .*'.1444., ill.9*- Â·Â·4.. *1 LIVING G o p a ,~~.\\l'/1,1.'' 4/ Prtsperty Li#4 ~ 4 Sunken .,\ 111 LT...0/. W /fy * 44.1 . 4 Courtvard I ~. 1$~i '%254 424\1/14Â» 110.51' O M i 0 2 BeloW '%22205 3 22~ R - 2 ... 1 ~ R-[-p UN f existine lodee 4 , '13 9 09 4/ 2 + BAVARIANINN 6 1//4 f ., 1% 9.R-9 . '/ til~~B\.1: A.04*.F Bedroom 't*J ~ i Dining J 8//4 1,/{fl\\< 1 \ STUDIO .-- f 2'BEDROOM / - 1 ...1 --1 1~NG 0 3 =17 Kitchen j - BEDROOM r Living ~ ip ~ STUDIO L u Bedroom Study 4.0/ > 0- : 6 parking spaces Bavarian Inn UVING m ..11.. a -9-J 30 1 f F 8 - Affordable existing 1 .-W \J 9 Housing BEDROOM .0 Upper Level Plan 677 7- Lh BEDROOM U L- ASPEN, COLORADO IA'ING ~| BEDROOM i C f 11 .- A - 1 . . M yard STORAGE . - OWNER: \01 220 E STORAGE SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP STORAGE ASPEN, CO. 81611 MECHANICAL 9 6 1 . U DATE: ISSUE: r==i EN11{ S--Â· BEDROOM 1 1 j SEFrEMBEK 1998 SCHEMATIC _ i ~ ~j~ ~ DESIGN SET BATH U ev / O)3 ! Bike K[TCHEN DINING ~ ~ :~ February 1999 Re-submission 2 Old L 2 ~ Racks ; ~ BATH Â·--------~ Up Bar L---J ~ 6 99 - MARCH 2000 FINAL PUD DEVELOPMENT L---- 3 BEDROOM ~ R E PLAN 1160ij bo - -721(ly).1 7 2% -r 1 294 - 6 Parking spaces 31 BEDROOM BEDROOM , 3 Ilj L Furnace 1 - LIVING 17 r-------1 =2 Â¢h ; snow storage 1 9/th L--------1 ~mpster ~ Property Line - SCALE: 1"=8'-0" 180.51' ~) NORTH ~ining ~ ALLEY Laundry slab above Main Level Plan Bavarian Inn Proposed 0 75- Floor Plans Copynght Â©2000 Stryker/ Brown ArchitectE, PC Storage Pumace 2 A 0.2 Lower Level Plan T 1 Â®1 | balcony | STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET. SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (P}0 970/93-2254 (Px)970/925-2258 (e-mail) strykerbrown.com BLEEKER ST. LandÂ»câ€¢r'. h 1.-A,c// 'Ae.A rmerrfÂ¥ 1.1,1 PARCEL 1 1.0.51' 18051 SF .di Aa- upper level , lower ~evet i -Hy 6 parkin, 8-- â„¢d &1*Rk#kN two itones typical Nl Nl EM M. N â€ž1.f\\ ppgn to below , ti NHANC - E 3 1 1- 4--tf - CED mt 6 ...16.0, 4 11 11 6 1,/114,"Câ€ž Bavarian Inn Affordable rmocrÂ¥ 11.. 1 1 =frt, Li- existing significant trees Housing . ALLEY ALLEY ASPEN, COLORADO .-- / \ru\ 3 43.75 employees ) f (1 *L) NOTE: 40 bedrooms 1. Two (2) accessikle units, 4 rAquired by Colorado OWNER: / 1 S le are the units sqbstanttallf on grade: 32 Parking Spaces 831% R~~~:~r~.Oms On grade: Unita 51 ad SL required SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ASPEN, CO. 81611 2. Be existing Bavarian iB a 1:*1*inition, ie, 31 Parking Spaces iA:Ighgp:ep:tar,tols:id~E'acei- 0 0 provided Wl 19 Dwelling Units DATE: ISSUE: ft I ler- -CL -ar~~r--ar Â·Â·Â·Â·- SEFreviBER, 1998 SCHEMATIC (0 DESIGN SET February 1999 Re-submission ; IR unU - September 1999 Redesign for City Coundl Pon'. im WZ MARCH 2000 FINAL PUD W3 1 story klence DEVELOPMENT PLAN 11.3-Â· Sl Sl SZ S3 S4 S5 S5 En/ang -lei - - W4 4 11% 11#10' f~~: Mu ]1 4 0~e two - -7 -r- "on. --LI~- LJ@E~ 19 1 J =d --r. FARCEL 2 1-- 18 051 SF - Ai AMI r~-tv Linâ€¢ l...2 1 MORT ,idewalk â€¢dew.Lk -il-------- 1.andsÂ¢*ping LandsÂ¢/ping MAIN ST. MAIN ST. SCALE: 1"=16'-0" Site Development Plan Copyright Â©2000 St,ykE/ Brown Architects, PC Al.0 Â«\<\--111 1 US HU p-1 1 8TH ST. STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. lul SOUT 11 SPR INCÂ· ST R E[Tr SU ITE ill ASPEN. COLORADO 81/11 (Ph}4741/925Â·2254 {rk)978/925-2258 (e-mail) hba@rof net BLEEKER ST. x / 1 ...1.,4"n. 1/i,J,4/pir~' La.â€¢caring ' .,ile-.lk .,drm r,0-1â€¢ I rn, PARCEL t 1,â€¢1 5, IN 0,1 ~F 4 f Ane, upper I v.1 1/wer level râ€¢-1 â€¢w I ........... DININC 1 E b.,~ i :' y.d n34*nn;X9.r~NN = 1/Â·[i ....Â·. h pR/1 ant. =5432 $ 2- A =ag L - WIng .-1 1=NE 1 ...... 34... -*-- ouien to W ~~1~FNC'E :Rat 1, 1 %,â€¢ling 1./. unit........4 m ir Bavarian Inn 3 - 1- - 4 Â£ L-' 1,Â·"' a - -1-U b Â· Affordable E-E~] 1 *=111 F~~ . I 2/ fi . -91 MA . 5- I ........4 , 1.king,r.... 1 , ASPEN, COLORADO I ti.in* 'hh ..... ....Er ri prri, t ine r,1.1-,1, 1... 'Al / OWNER: A.Ii""K >':'Id'<.in' tree' ALLEY ALLEY SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ASPEN, CO. 81611 / ./Â·r-,Â·.,.~.0 . / 14 r,lk,ns 'P-'â€¢ 1 1 /, 3 i NOTE 1. Two (2) arcesz.ible urils, aN required h, Colorado \ h-JET k h Stat u le are t he u n N subst antial W on â€¢ raÂ£le: DATE: ISSUE: â€¢ 111 with bedrooms on grade: Units 51 ar2 Sl 2. The existing Bavarian InnisapprorimatehÂ· 1 1 0 dul 95' high per Aspen Land Use Retulations definition, ie, SEPTEMBER 1998 SCI IEMATIC I . I DESIGN SET tolhe mlapoint of the sloped rodi surfaces. 2ZA .1.'., 411'.. February 1999 Re-submission littl~ :-/. September, 1999 City Colm it L , r.â€¢1 1 P- 7) ~ wy r L ... Pyrd -r7 -4 November 1999 Revision - V .//1..../rl>.0/4, ./I-frl- V . IN'-Â· Il liwia.!I .,VING i 1 , L -- E 1'.ING 1: 1 Lil ....1 1 'NTHI; L 1 r-T- -MJ =U: I March 2000 Final PUD -/1, 'VT.. .INING -1-Â· -f ty- DINING ,/ING Development lim lit'/ C Housing E Building S. 41Â£Z] ~31111~ A...ih 11~62.1 - -rl}HOOM -fic "P=J 436 te= er.,400â€¢.1 1.one 1 story _ ~i Resfilence â€ž2!EN . IRITCHUNI~_Z.TCH[& r- . I - -01 i'Trâ€žMi=~41â‚¬14 f,Nk FI'llÂ°IiI map *~ M El L= _~23 |HI diCF 12 i.1,11~~ 1Jinin~ -,-rr-fiF k-1 f -4#Ililli: 1 1..h 1 11 'W~ ~.2 . ....6- LIVING lil)'6'.1 ROOM k:21- Â£96,1. =7= -_r,Jiltmt: .....--.. 1 -"7': 1 Kirrl[J ,(W 1 -. \ 1 1,1.1.,4 l.._- J 1 ,â€ž *I .IL_. 1 ..ri. I I.â€¢. 1 --1 : -Al ~ ... .â€žirie. â€¢ PARCIFI- 2 â€¢~'~'~ * ,Â«"I ...51 51 E- TU 1 r.Â·prn, Line ./~.51' NORT . - ~ | SCALE: 1"=16'-0" 0 - Â·Â·id,-,lk 6..1. MAIN LEVEL 1,n~.t.,ping MAI NSr. MAIN S] ~ FLOOR PLAN Ctipyright Â©2llt S.trv ke,/ Brtiwn Archilecti, PC A 1.1 IS /Â·LL: Su-}Spurl N I '41 .1 A t 11 221- STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 A S P EN, COLORADO 81611 (Ph) 970/925-2254 (Fx) 970/925-2258 (e-mail) sbaÂ®rof.net IEDIOOM c Zi t -0 1 Bavarian Inn 3 -- IC=- r O L= BROOM B Affordable I Housing ASPEN, COLORADO OWNER: SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSH[P ASPEN, CO. 81611 DATE: ISSUE: SEPTEMBER 1998 SCHEMATIC 11 ..DROOM Z DESIGN SET 1 r--7* ---- February 1999 Re-Submission BED.00. 960*00.{ BEDIC. - BEDROOM '0100% September 1999 City Council redesign gil k - ra@2 November 1999 Revision 11 - fle= 9 -le f... .d March 2000 Final PUD E Z . Development Man L. i...0. BEDROOM BEDROOM .DROON -i-J EDROOM M 1 -1 ..h 111'EDROOM =r21+J =1-2-41 SCALE: 1"=16'-0" 2ND FLOOR PLAN Copyright Â©2000 Stryker/ Brown Architects, PC A 1.2 .m STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 . ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (Ph) 970/925-2254 (Px) 970/925-2258 (e-mail) sba@rof.net -r- .00. 'ELOW - -) Bavarian Inn ROOPS 'ELOW Affordable Housing r- ' | ASPEN, COLORADO OWNER: SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ASPEN, CO. 81611 DATE: ISSUE: SEFTEMBEK 1998 SCHEMATIC DESIGN SET 11*M February 1999 Re-submission September, 1999 City Council .DROOM . CL redesign I bia 1.â€¢â€žd BEDROOM ; March 2000 Final PUD Imt I /173 : : Development Plan 1 : ROOFS BELOW ~e. n~M '-Rm_ râ‚¬J71==1 1 ' 1 J DEDROOM ' f -2 I -1- 4 ,---_d SCALE: 1"=16'-0" 3RD FLOOR PLAN Copyright Â©2000 Stryker/ Brown Architects, PC A 1.3 SlRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET, SU]TE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (Ph) 970/925-2254 (Fx)970/925-2258 (e-mail) sba@rof net I Stucco - Stucco One Storey One bedroom ~ Horizontal Wood Siding Wood Shingles ~ Horizontal Wood Siding ~ing of 3 BR unit 118'-0" 0/ i top of roof g~~~m ~'~~~~E~EE@E~ m../. One Storey 1 One bedrocm ~ ~One StoreyUnit 0;;~-1.--_m ~1&4MIPREPI ~~~ On,?StoreyUnit\~~ wingof3~grnit 1 1 1, 11, 111 11, 4,1 1,1 1 .L--1,1,1111'.111111.11111 â€ž' 1 low-0â€ž -6713EEP,2"71,4,7.7.1./427- i jÂ· ~ second Aoor -111 t1111*11 :pnrl m I w mw i MN g I Flr[-lki -9,2.46. 1 0\ / #47 - j9.11-1.~ 1%4 .U f : -LL =UU .lE 18*~j~~*1'WEASLE:-1,66: =*=1541 1- 11*L 1 N I 04 :'Â·': i..1 1 10000" , Â· -L.,I'Zb,<~~CmtIZM I Brit noor Vertical Wood Siding ~ Vertical Wood Siding - North Elevation South Elevation facing Alley facing Main Street Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing ASPEN, COLORADO Horizontal Wood S7 Horizontal Wood Siding guardrait deckon roofof OWNER: ~ , guardial deck on root of , i Wood Shingles 1 1Â°ne 'torey end module L ~< one storey end module 4 118'-0" SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP top of roof --42*itr.YEELES:343*31FFT'/34~442_r. -. ASPEN, CO. 81611 44134 6Â£4-4 1 21<42=<'1#MA i Mlf r90 2,9~~kÂ»3WdP:' I e.-- wood Shingles 3''ll"/1 ' second floor DATE: ISSUE: SEPTEMBER, 1998 SCHEMATIC DESIGN SET first ftoor February 1999 Re-submission 1 Vertical Wood Siding let,Joc/ Vertical Wood Siding ~ September 1999 City Counc:il Redesign West Elevation East Elevation Development Plan March 2000 Final PUD SCALE: 1"=8'-0" South Building Elevations Copyright Â©2000 Stryker/ Brown Architects, FC A 2.1 3 1 li X A M li / D li U Â¥V IN -1 ARCHITECTS,p.c. 301) SOUTH SPRING SIRIET, SUITE:100 AS Y' E N COLORADO '1611 (Phy 9711/425-2254 (Fx}970/925-2251 (tÂ·-m.1,1) ,Â·1~1@rof i,el horizontal ~ wood shingles horizontal stucco \ wood siding ~ , stucco 1 ~ wood siding 125'-0" EER'1Â£,.~35:,'-,'<'t'=,t#.-,3~2~:8' ' top of roof Iff#le.*pÂ»iÂ·1 .,,.t~.-0-?, i--r:-:,--tile,ph-~1Â·Â©'i-,ff#r#-4,',i<hy,v,',64f..Â·4Â·2---1 0%*{31Â»84'mt?#40131 â€¢g-%4*%3fo.. 1-2-...H j./ 1 L -1 -4-1/ . - ~ ' *72,7-/982 t*y=+UNE*16-- .-'. 4.-42*Â¥**.gag#St..:,0:,*=:Eff</4 116'-0' third-iiaor FillimvmmismENTE:lim591/Ilir#.figilizzaapealmimpilile:elimmili# .Â·A ~ 107'-0- - second noor 1-'liwing;)IMIHomiwigIiNIMI111111:wigginiNIN QI/Iwiuj Il p fli-1---ttl;Z~, C--7--2~72 . f :7-3----M. f fit~I--5--~3~~ ~' +19*312.finished grade 1*1-*Ill lillitr-1-ll!1311Illillir 1111--Illillir litrt-114 Il ' > IXIrmIC)MitÂ·_11111 â€¢r----~mrâ€¢ill' Â·Â·111111,111 11 Vi 1,--rrr-,-rn, iii IL_11 -_......,-,6........â€ž-1 n f wood shingles T first floor vertical wood siding vertical wood siding East Elevation West Elevation facign 8th Street Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing horizontal / wood shingles horizontal 1 wood shingles ASPEN, COLORADO ~ Stucco \ ~wood siding ~woodsiding OWNER: 125'-0. ~-4-4214*41 52~1--,vjyr ru top of roof SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ASPEN, CO. 81611 116'4" .;34.4 third floor DATE: ISSUE: SEFIEMBER, 1998 SCHEMATIC DESIGNSET 107'-0 second Aoor February 1999 Re-,Mbmission 0,--0:11 8 I EamL-ER*Â§52%m RV IFI REE! Il Il September 1999 City Council Redesign _1023E__ HIMA #===Lil IEQ5259S95250~WLN====141 I I I1 -2.QQMI~ March 2000 Final PUD first floor Development PIAn 1 1 vertical wood siding vertical wood siding North Elevation South Elevation facing Alley facing Main Street SCALE: 1"=8'-0" West Building Elevations West Building on 8th Street - C,ipyright Â©211[N) Stryker/ Brinvn Architecb, PC A 2.2 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET.StliTE 34)11 ~ ASPEN, COLORADO MI /1 1 g'h) 9711/925-2254 Ux) 97[)/925-2258 le-mall) ;b.,@rof ne, iwood Shingles , Stucco / ,Horizontal Wood Siding J i ) 118'-0" 118'-0" lilli ~11 111 111 .1 ~11 lilli 111 111 1 â€ž . vâ€ž,. P 6 1 S, r~=A- : top ofroof top of roof 109'-0" second floor CEÂ» 7 100'-0" first floor first floor ~ Existing Log T Vertical Wood Siding Siding North Elevation West Elevation on Bleeker Street Bavarian Inn Affordable , Horizontal Wood Siding Housing ASPEN, COLORADO / Wood Shingles ~ ~Wood Shingles Stucco i Horizontal Wood Siding~ / Stucco 1 1 118'-0" ~ 118'-0" top of roof . 19Â·.1.1,1 111~11 Â·9 5.:1".m.'.1 J.1115k'XÂ·Â·~,.,21*Â¢1 1.!2-110.~rdgFÂ£Â¢*EWajEAj--gL:-8 -6F~ top of roof OWNER: Id=Itack/*01=Y. , EIÂ¢!1 41:Â·l-~fr-MIFY*pre~vIE{*R-Q 13='Â°JERL SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 1**1*t*%*9 ' F1~I44*3414*192-?+W-VAL -1*%1 ASPEN, CO. 81611 1 ert F.) I.,WLÂ¥971 109'-0" -TWA :Â·i"Â°fff,4'~91;i,9 1 109,-0â€ž' ..Ai'*43-ibIF*N'?di'Â¥1-&1-3-w I second floor 361.5/EEW~~.'ril,122~tivkleir2isifPt<x~34,11,#322:Wflit/$19 -I'--.-/Il1- second floor 4-4411- ./, lilli f- 61 -Â·*-Al:141 DATE: ISSUE: laant l 100'-0" 100'-0" SEPTEMBER, 1998 SCHEMATIC first floor first floor DESIGN SET ~ Existing Log Siding Vertical Wood Siding ,/ February 1999 Re-sibmission T Existing Log lVertical Wood Siding Siding September, 1999 City Colincit Redesign South Elevation East Elevation on Alley North Building SCALE: 1"=8'-0" on Bleeker Street North Building Elevations c,â€¢pyrighi Â©1944 Stryker/ Bri,wn Architects. 1 'C A 2.3 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET,SUITE. 300 â€ž ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (Ph) 970/925-2254 (Px) 970/925-2258 (e-mail) sba@rof.net 0 54 .upal:NLAJEm-1 #*21'-i.* - E*Ant I .=La~JU4U - 31. -t ~C,IR-2'kdz&- 4 -L-L - Ull. MI--~1~~'(L.,1 11 \ n 74. 1 m 7/) -L kE - 1 , f -Ir]11 1-11]El x LE.LI 1- - 1 / \ &354*1.--11 -4 1 1.. I . ,/./,6 -I.Â· 7 -4 j-1 _ . .-- , South Building South Building Main Street Building Main Street Building view from the South west from Main Street view from the South-South west from Main Street Bavarian Inn 245**@i:t, '04,15*L-.al:1:111'_u'21651 ... . Il ., Itl .1 - Housing .....14,1,"11]111 #Stery/*<hidjj,Irm r 14 'a,2 0 -1 ' IE:+.Â·m,ii:Â· ASPEN, COLORADO ' / 1 1 OWNER: SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP South Building ASPEN, CO. 81611 Main Street Building view from the South on Main Street DATE: ISSUE: SEYTEMBEK 1998 SCI-IEMATIC DESIGN SEr February 1999 Re-submission September 1999 City Council Redesign March 2000 P~nal PUD Development Plan 1,7 P. $41â‚¬14:DJ 1/3 ;,32,6.a==lul..-=..far-i..W/m 1137/#d=V/**=iwi~~'4164.*228 11 ! -1Â·Iii 1,1 111 lil. 111 111 1 f 111.11 1 -1,11 111/ ILI./ 7-kiLL' " 11' " 1, I ,~-'F'.. 'Â· -idâ€ž4: % - - 71 v-4+--7-17 1, -. 1,1 11 . fLO Lit South Building Perspectives Copyright Â©2000 Str'yker/ Brown Architects, PC South Building NorthWest view - on alley A 3.1 STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. * 300 SOUTH S P R]NG STREET. SUITE 300 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (Ph) 970/ 925-2254 (Fx) 970/925-2258 (e-mail) sba@rof.net :t ~'On- i ~,2-.: no 10-8] H /0/,I /,Â·o I u..a,4 9 2 ..2-11*94Â» 41-3*1*t 4 Re .49%:ii 1 1- 114 '1 1111,111[ '- 1, 1 Oil - e SouthEast NorthEast view from Main Street view from Alley nommooman Bavarian Inn Affordable 11 1. , / 'ili,Y, ''111'I'M U.!11 . 11Â£,"'1" m 11. Housing 11 1 . 1._liU_U L.,1 U _Ul..~ L------19**!UrÂ«9 L n.1 U / 111 111/ 1 h.l 'll /1 Ill 1 T..1 11'l :1~,1 111. *tÂ¢#*45 Â®*WMATE ASPEN, COLORADO 17 =0' 1 M i I Bi--1.-_im OWNER: 11 / 1 SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ASPEN, CO. 81611 West view from 8th Street DATE: ISSUE: / 4% 91\ SEPTEMBER 1998 SCHEMATIC DESIGN SET O mom February 1999 Re-submission #.141 1 :1 *111,1 March 2000 Final PUD September, 1999 City Council Redesign Â·11. 6011 Development Plan o 0 .1 -1--1 11 7 U l / 11 North.West SouthWest West Building view from Sth Steet at Alley view from 8th and Main Perspectives Copylight Â©2000 Stryker/ Brown Architects. PC West Building A 3.2 on 8th Street STRYKER/BROWN ARCHITECTS,p.c. 300 SOUTH SPRING STREET, SUITE 300 â€¢ ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (Ph) 970/925-2234 (Px) 970/925-2258 (e-maA) sbaerof.net 7:Ty:T:-r.:I~, - I[u lr I'nTr!TrIEI!Iu ~~~~~~~~~f%7~0~3-7O 041 : 9/Za Nmaill'/ I Ill/Xzod, lul..1 lili 1-lul!1111 SouthWest SouthEast view from alley view from Alley Â£EE~-=n==A â€¢jine= ~i'.1 111 11, 111 lilli Bavarian Inn /1 44, 11, 1/1 1 . Il" 11, 1,; '1,11, .I .0 .I Il .1 1,11 Affordable Housing ASPEN, COLORADO North view from Bleeker OWNER: SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ASPEN, CO. 81611 DATE: ISSUE: SEPTEMBER, 1998 SCHEMATIC DESIGN SET ..2 e .; G- February 1999 Re-submission 0.-.ts:, September 1999 City Council Redesign November 1999 Revision - -.I//Ill//batin â‚¬4.0.02.1/,9 '87 March 2000 Final PUD 1%4,k. Development Plan NorthEast NorthWest view from BIeeker view from Bleeker North Building Perspectives North Building Copyright Â©2000 Suyker/ Brown Architects, PC on Bleeker Street A 3.3 -YE b) MEMORANDUM TO: Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development DirectorÂ·Â·~0 Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner ~~'| RE: 484 E. Cooper St. Minor HPC DATE: November 15, 2000 U - - 1 --- 1 APPLICANT: , 4:42,4 1~~11 Mark Allan Bidwell -- j- -1-1 Jeannine Ann Bidwell -I.- - -Il.-*I--I--i- --4-,1 4 - --. Michael Anthony Bidwell f#Il'.M,7.. ..11'f,â€¢ REPRESENTATIVE: i INE'll'/0/ R~-Al . â€¢ ft, la Graeme Means 11 9 i .7.-51 BUIke kili LOCATION: 484 E. Cooper St. -11 1 - -9 LAND USE: 0 -4 11 1 -43r~,1 _ 4-l -*# -- Retail 1,1- 1 1 2.-41 4 * 1 11 - - No changes are proposed to the front of the Fritz ZONING: Benedict building, facing Cooper St. mall. Commercial Core :T------------- -----â€ž9.-=~... SUMMARY: b.:0.'llip--12-"L- The applicant is requesting HPC ~ - approval to add two (2) new - windows to the east facade of a -Ill- li-: 1 . Fritz Benedict building on the -- Cooper Street Mall. The window , would be located in a space leased i.*â€ž --ti-=-E. --I. ......... by Bath & Body Works facing 'F:B.... Galena Street. Previously, I* 4%.,1 4..~... - - x-v.Â·14Â©4 Mountains and Streams occupied .me//pr9pit the space. - 1 12-~44.*/./.- The proposed windows would be placed in the center of the bricks, facing Galena Street. The windows would be separated by a fir post, and be approximately the same size as the windows shown L to the right. - REVIEW PROCEDURE The Historic Preservation Commission may, by resolution, approve, approve with conditions, or deny a minor development application at a public meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: The Bidwells ("Applicant"), represented by Graeme Means, is requesting approval for a minor development application to add two (2) windows to a Fritz Benedict building on the Cooper Street Mall. The windows are proposed to be added to the Galena Street side of the building. The property is in the City of Aspen's Historic District, but not a historic landmark nor on the inventory. The small area of the facade proposed for the windows is the only brick area of the facade on the first floor without windows/glazing. Staff would prefer to see the brick remain in place to minimize the glazing on the facade, and the integrity of this Benedict building. Despite this preference, Staffbelieves the windows will be compatible with the existing and neighboring buildings based on the representations in the application. Staff supports the application, finding that the review criteria 0 have been met. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending approval of the minor development for to add two (2) windows to the east facade of the existing building at 484 East Cooper Street. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE STATED IN THE POSITIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. _, Series of 2000, approving the minor development of the existing building at 484 East Cooper Street, with conditions." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Development Application 0 EXHIBIT A 435 E. MAIN STREET REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS SECTION 26.415: DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES OR WHICH OCCURS IN AN"H", HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all of the following standards are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, the Historic Preservation Commission may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units, and Staff Finding The existing building is not a historic landmark and not on the City's historic inventory; rather, it is located in the Historic District. Staff believes the proposed windows to the east (Galena Street) facade of the existing building are compatible in general design and scale with other facades and features of the existing building, the Cooper Street mall, and adjacent parcels. b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development, and Staff Finding 0 Staff believes the proposed windows are consistent with other facades and windows on the same building, as well as other Cooper Street mall buildings. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels, and Staff Finding The building is not a historic resource; rather, it is located in the Historic District. Staff does not believe the windows will detract from the historic significance of historic buildings in the immediate area. d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Finding The building is not a historic resource; rather, it is located in the Historic District. Staff does not believe the proposed windows will enhance or detract from the architectural character of the existing building. 0 0 - I .,K ggi , D . ' 1. 4?, 1 -,0 0 -- ..t, .1 - 9Â¥ r -a V U . her lilli /:Ill:'ll"/.T.:'i"///1- ~Ill , ./ U. 11 -27-2000 FRI 04:09 PM FAX NO. U fir) /flu ~-EXHIBIT 11 UzZilk@ L--Ii- County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS State of Colorado } SECTION 26.304.060(E) I, L.~ 12-MZ-krk- Pl FLA.K , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public nolice requirements pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following manner: 1. By mailing ofnotice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the day of , 200_ (which is days prior to the public hearing date of 3, 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the -6 day of U Qu . 200=329-*1531ay of # o u , 200 0 . (Must be posted for at least ten (10 full days before the hearing date). A photograph ofthe posted sign is attached hereto. Signature (Attach photograph here) Signed before me this 11 day of No IMAÂ£ bd, 200 0.by - Â»*_CY WU,lu._09. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My Commission expires: 5 1 26( 0 6 Notary Public . 0 A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING A MINOR DEVELOPMENT TO ADD TWO WINDOWS TO THE EAST FACADE OF AN EX[STING BUILDING IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AT 484 EAST COOPER STREET, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO. Parcel ID # 2737-182-16-011 Resolution No. , Series of 2000 WHEREAS the applicants, Mark AIIan Bidwell, Jeanine Ann Bidwell, and Michael Anthony Bidwell, represented by Graeme Means, have requested minor development approval to add two (2) windows to the east facade of a non- historic building at 484 East Cooper Street, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a property listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures" must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.415.010.B.4 of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1.Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, 0 massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site coverage by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units pursuant to Section 26.40.090(ED(2). 2.Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 0 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and 0 WHEREAS, Community Development Staff, in a staff report dated November 15, 2000, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found favorably for the application, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on November 15, 2000, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and approved the application with conditions by a vote of _ to_ (_-_). NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That minor development for the property located 484 East Cooper Street, City and Townsite of Aspen, as presented at the November 15, 2000 meeting, be approved with the following conditions: 1. There shall be no deviations from the architectural designs or materials as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff. 2. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application 0 indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 3. All representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Historic Preservation commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 15th day of November, 2000. APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Suzannah Reid, Chair Historic Preservation Commission .. ATTACHMENT 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM 1. project name 8Â£70+ 4 150 DY U./8 23<.a 2. Project location Stant. * 6098, CooppLE S-th k/lALL 66 4-9 4 484 41, Cer) b m.. D. --3, ASP*M CA, (indicate street address,'lot and block number ortnetes and bounds description) 3. Present zoning C C_ 4. Lot size 5. Applicant's name, address and phone number =,4 2-r:52 < / Â».l E-15 ?Uk i '13 4 7-4 9 [3,0 0 Â· EGLUM sts. 28Plo 431 30 ( 6 i 4-) 415- - 9 40 k 6. Representative's name, addres, and phone number 4 11- 4 *LM ft |1 EA ALS 2-16 90, 4?AL,FERA- 51-, 1 *sibitow; 6-0. 816 4 7. Type of application (check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual SPA Conceptual HPC Special Review Final SPA Finai HPC 8040 Greenline Conceptual PUD 1 Minor HPC Stream Margin - Final PUD Relocation HPC Subdivision Text/Map Amend. Historic Landmark GMQS allotment GMQS exemption Demo/Partial Demo View Plane Condominiumization Design Review Lot Split/Lot Line Appeal Committee Adjustment 8. Description of existing uses (number and type of existing structures, approximate sq. ft., number of bedrooms, any previous approvals granted to the property) kÂ·Fl~-At 1,_ 9. Description ofdevelopment application ADED \All k.4 & 0\,-/ Tb fl* 1& 7-1 K.Le~ 13UI l.-blkle~ 10. Have you completed and attached the following? 1/ Attachment 1- Land use application form 1 Attachment 2- Dimensional requirements form 0 Response to Attachment 3 . 1/* Response to Attachment 4 11111111 .. 0 ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Applicant: - 3.A.*1146_ t.. 890Â·i U O Q-*.-5 Address: . HowNâ„¢u*-PtÂ«,6 1%u 14.0.*19*- *'Â·~DK,W . Zone district: ,, 0_tic, -i Lot size: -- , Existing FAR: Allowable FAR: Pnoposed FAR: Existing net leasable (commercial): Proposed net leasable (commercial): 1 Exjsting % of site coverage: Proposed % of site coverage: Existing % of open space: Proposed % of open space: Existing maximum height: Principal bldg: Accesor~gidg: Proposed max. height: Principal bldg: Acce~ry bldg: Proposed % of demolition: Existing number of bedrooms: h 8-1- A-PÂ© Lic. Alb LE- I .V Proposed number of bedrooms: 0 Existing on-site parking spaces: On-site parking spaces required: Setbacks Existing: Minimum r uired: Proposed: Front Front: Front: Reac Rear Rear: Combined C ined Combined FronUrear. ont#ear: Front/rear: Side: Side: Side: Side: Side: Side: Combined Combined Combined Sides: Sides: Sides: Existing n nformities or encroachments: V tions requested: a (HPC has the ability to vary the following requirements: setbacks, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 500 sq.ft, site coverage variance up to 5%, height vatiations under the cottage infill program, parking waivers for residential uses in the R.6, R-15, RMF, CC, and O zone districts) 3037621404 RAS BUILDERS DENVER 725 P02/03 OCT 04 '00 11:19 10/03/80 1 7 !49 r-,RQFR QM T TH Ilr-, 1-KA37AN) 14(34 Nf'I HAS 1,1912 ~ 0 - 0 Bort Bidwell Inve:1ment Company P.O. Box 567 Aspent CO 51612 1084000 City of Aspen Mitorical Proswvation Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Mounmin Pia= Building To Whom U May Concern: I herâ€¢by imthorize Bath & BodyWele; Ing. to imall + window on ele west-rior w,11 (side closest to the comlyard) provided that any modi~cation i# consistent with the prooent architeÂ¢&Ire ofthe building and adjaoeat buildings. The app:oval is *180 continionÂ¢ upon compliance with t building codc and any other lacal ordiningâ€¢. 0 Any quâ€¢tion, can be directed to Bill Bidwell st D)248 273 20001605 orH)248 375 2001 (Eastern Time). Yountruly, t.- -h William Bidwell 0 3037621404 RAS BUILDERS DENVER 725 P03/03 OCT 04 '00 11:19 . I ~U ILD ERS COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION - NEWâ€¢ RENOVAT/ONâ€¢ /NTER/OR F/N/SH Denver Office Local O.ormnÂ»mom Naljonal GIAâ€¢em v,ww.raaÂ·*6414â€¢8.com 180 E. Hampden Avenue Englewood, CO 80110 Phone: (303) 762-0505 Fax: [303) 762-1404 October 3,2000 City of Aspen Historical Preservation Committee Aspen, CO. 81612 RE: Mountian Plaza Building Bath & Body Works Tenant Improvements Subject: Ownership Disclosure To Whom lt May Concern: The owners of the above referenced building are. Mark Allan Bidwell Trust Jeannine Ann Bidwell Trust Michael Anthony Bidwell Trust Flinher information ifrequired may be obtajned from: William Bidweli 2055 Avon Crest Dr. Rochester Hills. MI. 48309 (248) 273-2000 x305 Office (248) 375-2001 Home Sincerely RAS Builders .- B /1 ct-- \-4-Juv,* Cikn Lockenby ~ Project Mmager l:\F.STIMATRUIML~01.0197 Bulh & Body Work,0197 Aspen HPC Uner,DOC pa,01 oil Corporate Headquarters â€¢ 180 E. Hampden Avenue â€¢ Englewood, CO 80110 Denverâ€¢Phoenixâ€¢Tucsonâ€¢Los Angelesâ€¢Lae Vegasâ€¢San Franciscoâ€¢ Sacramentoâ€¢Seattleâ€¢Dallasâ€¢Chicago .. 0 1 1 0 0 BBW STORE # 1695 0 SPACE NO. 484j "0 Ml 3,7 1 --- GALENA ST. \ - L Y - WAGNER PARK MONARCH ST. 6 1 -1- E DIA Grk A 1-1 0 DURANT AVE. 3AV 113,1000 OCT. 4. 2000 11:54AN ASPEN INSTI-UTE NO. 2007 P. 2 , Graeme D. Means 210 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 970-925-9150 Minor HPC Review Project: Bath & Body Works Store #1695 Cooper Street Mall#484 484 Cooper Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Date: October 2,2000 Representative: Graeme Means - Architecture 210 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 The proposed development consists of adding a new storefront window into an existing wall ofa non-historic building in an histolic zone. Exhibit 'C' shows the location and olientation of the site. Exhibit 'D' shows thedÂ©signoftheproposed window. Photo 'E' shows the existing materials and context. Following is a discussion responding to the 0 specific Development Review Standards. 1. The existing massing, volume, scale and site plan do not change under this proposal The general design of the proposed window is compatible with the existing context in that it duplicates in detail the storefront windows, which are on either side ofthe proposed window. The proposed rough sawn post between windows duplicates the existing posts and maintains the aesthetic structural integrity of the building. Ihe proposed window completes a band of first floor windows that starts on Galena Street and runs to the existing brick wall and around the corner to the adjoining property on Cooper Street Mall. 2,3, & 4: The immediate neighborhood ofthe proposed window consists ofthe building itself Since the new window replicates existing details, it is consistent with the immediate neighborhood. The new window will not change the character of the building that it is in, and thus will not affect the character or historical significance of historic buildings on adjacent properties, The proposed window is very small within the neighborhood context, is located a minimum of 32 feet from any historic structure, is compatible in design with the existing structure, and therefore has very little, if any, impact on the neighborhood context on adjoining historical properties. 0 'it. I -' ./ / *!J Â·W I % 1-1 1 9-111 1 1 'r W 74,+ 45 . 1 -_.:r ..8.. Â¢ - L !*41-Il - 21 I Â· â„¢14 - -1 1 .le. -4[2 - ' th > A it. 3 f }i.Ii:p i * 2 I h \0{ 013 1 + I _ 43 , . 1,6. a +29 ~ 5. '/ S 4 .. -... DA,JEC> 6 1-1<>'Â·Aâ€¢t:S 1'14.4 Fls S g- 1:> UÂ©C,LTIC) hi Of A, HEÂ»/ Wi IN Dow 1 14 *,LLS -t-1 H Gr 8 1232*. 9/&-LL_ 4/, - i# i r 'f I ! i A /4 ' N. --- 4 -5>< L S-1-- 1 4 4- 04 1 KlD,S~/.S I 11 MI Z.D I A- 1-XLY -lt) R. 1 Grkk-r <De 524' 4- . \Â¢/,4. 1-1, 4%4. ACTION: Minor Review All development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a historic landmark must meet alljour Development Review Standards found in Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval. Standard 1: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For Historic Landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the iot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to Section 26.40.090(B)(2). Standard 2: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. Standard 3: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. Standard 4: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereoÂ£ 2Azr* 4 BO D r 4/0 E.:ES. i e . < < CoDPEL ET MUL B +84 ( 21-6 4- AS -E COO P EE- 6-1- Â· 6*A K BELE..ILL,t Cto 1.1.LDITIC>Â¢41 02 j #-f- 4 m,<7- 152:4416 15 c.03 hFT- 1 N 14 11-r 1.0 8 0.- la. Posr ., .-i x 141Â·4*Â·Na,Â»44 - ir+4614Â·0*_ ST12-UCTI-k 2.AL 13>WA.421 +Ur- A.b P 150+4 00 1-0 wOOP PLU*-LI UC=r To t--1,6.70+ -Ebc-tb-r-I LLGT- ~061.- --6 -- --- 1 - U -/~8/803.~f~-;Â· ~~-1 'SFEASOL & 1 - - x 1,3. Â· 4.-I ---- L KÂ·;~: 26:.4 :Â·Â·1 -1,3415111-1+ WINDows f#14 lfBES 2*-- 1-Lo ELZE> MILD \6,7 I a. 6-Tpes : _- m *2.-Lst-1 +4*r BIA-H TÂ© -F-*tlh.1+4 --%- -EKLS-1-11-ler 2>24(40 VE.N.M.&â‚¬_ . 04*,iv 'V,INDE ws IN 1 -M.* -.---- --Ll kle- <,F DS'- 6,Â·8 Z,/6 PIE POS-- - Ho-IZE W- GILL i 4 6-1-t,0 70 0.542â‚¬ caNTIHI1,1-r oÂ·r Payr =f=20 MI -- i N',AUL StzÂ»-FIS A--r- 1--Â©P -TZ> MAJOK!-RY WA--l-L 15'2-l-aÂ»/ 43 - H 'Eve 8 4 10- 12/4 1360#Gr IN -1-~-2-10 Â£ 1-124 M A.5 PEE J .0 2. FINISH# 2.CH-*01-1-l... 1 1/~~~ C '1 12- PAST- - -_-1 N.51-1-LArrED GrLA,2- 1446r 1Â»Lt-r L.-09/ * 1 0 1-0-/V-1 % .4 -. 4 \Nk//r . â€¢ I 9 6.1 -E~iÂ£Â«~~~~~ *-Ut-14..ler IÂ»rDRAÂ·64'1- 10 1 c j, ~r 3 0- 11 BAS Des UGâ€¢r-Fl 2- St L-0- \*' 1)â€¢.:FEELe- ter KI>GldE. ._11 ' -in k V. 19-1 14 *Zin 1 //7 11 11 11 11 *.N 1 0 2 S I L-L 6 1ZA.4-Â· 4 4=A.L.UE C- 130774 s U.2/4Â£193 11 1 F 11 46 14 . ,Â£14<3 tt lz:*16 1-1 tA Gr- 5-ZE;-4-Ch-1-EAL ~a,$4-LL- *SSLL-Pt t b TO Ibt & .1 0 - Cakic. 13,462- DEMID AS HECUSA-ta'* A-DE> 4-Itw / \6/c>c> D -rEA+111-4 â‚¬r- -rÂ» , 14 0 11 6<ED ' - +4*>Â« 06/000 9.-WELLUG,- -to MA.,r-CH Â·P<Â·1671 Nir 91 21- - i,O ~ ---i -e - Â®CISTI N Gr 13,12-lok- VE+Â·4 E-IC EL -Â»LCOk PLAN- 2 64 , 1/+11 - 1 '-0 -1 1 ~ 6 -r L A;Gr 4-TA-DE .. . I VE-trICAL .2 %01--10 N A 111 = It-63 11 -7-Â·. ... d 9/ 0o 30 61' \\\., 9 1 \91 , 125.25 1 c a - --- 3 i 2 /Â·. 1 \ I 94* P \ N ~ 22Â·, -tb 2 .42'-6 ' i Ili~ ff'* 1 Â·Â©e.>*4> . -Rt Py 1 / *KL:>TIU* 2%-IC RA 15*A-MS r +0- - 1/p< LS 1 lil* 6 2~10â€¢b= V tkI /4/464 / Â»~5,{3lf 111 7& =4 , : I. 4- 41 491./-40 - Lipt -F&(r ] --2% - - Â¥><16 -r- 1 AL#- Â»/00 D '2*1â€¢=- 1 ff U Â£/ #416 *1 +46r- sl-2-UC-rl-* R-SL \6/ALL M. *Al - -GAJ--3 - 0.3 , h '1 ~~~~-/2/ 341 1 -I-~1 -T--11-4 - 612-kits V *NIE* E- 2- **eÂ·rt #Gr -L/Sm SILL Â©15,4-4 + CAÂ·ULâ€¢t= e_ *:A. S 112>E- t:W * 2 - 1 41.-/ , WALL -170 t.-CklÂ»Â·1 1-4 ~ ,n + 4-S Â« Â«9.42' -Lk-- 0 : J._~_IF--F=-7 1 Â· - ~ #_l~ i 1 49 0 ' PE ' r 1 1 1 1,1,31 NtÂ« AA I k E-/5 V t,400Vt >23$ . -F 1 1'r--1- lili It :*... Â·Pk.4.Ma - 1 4 10- R.,ts OTE> FS ..fl - -fl*L~TL ~ ~ ~ ~~3- ~71+41 4* T'*. arLAa-1 N'r L.!-H 1-~ O 04 < - 19 lili I A , lilli 1 3/ Ti +10 11 111111 - liNN \ 1 ~ Ii-'~-- NEW Dbl_*,8 R./6 *:IK. POST_ 1. )- 4 -~3 2 \ 1 1 I -+1tw' 05 6 11 2/6 FIE. SH-1- 3 23 '0 ~~-- Htâ‚¬ DBL 6<8 R./5 1*664- 14< m ST- , y 1--All--} 1.11 * 1 ~ 1 2 ki&-**i ' ~'7'12\ 1.12'U< gh-\ Â»4ap~ r , 1,t i . 7-77 --WOO D> PA+4Ll-11-45â€¢r 're> tl Â©104 . 0 - '3*- 11 S 1 1.-I- _~h_-hfftic --1- lilli ]Lf.4 1 ~ rl 1- ifii-_ \ 1. 1 Ii--~ / ---/ TALS 1-1 k.1+ GrEARE ~ , I G. .\ 1 lilli.lili 1 1 [.III fl F .9 1 ': -' - . 'A-'*. '5'' 4* . ''. Ni... . Â·DE,6-1-1 UGr- 4928- 1-11~DEÂ»47- 4 A- 1-A-LM 1-10 WLE..VI~.4 H 1-10 RIZONT-AL SECTION 1 .0 9 11 , 1 ta 1 = 1 Ltb hÂ« < 12447- *-l-*_vl-r-la~L 94003