Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20140910 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING September 10,2014 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROOM 130 S. GALENA ASPEN, COLORADO 12:00 SITE VISITS: None 5:00 INTRODUCTION A. Roll call B. Approval of minutes-August 27th C. Public Comments D. Commission member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest(actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring G. Staff comments H. Certificates of No Negative Effect issued-none I. Submit public notice for agenda items OLD BUSINESS A. 229 West Smuggler/426 N. Second- Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation and Variances, CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO OCTOBER 22 5:15 B. 28 Smuggler Grove Road- Conceptual Major Development, Floor Area bonus, Setback variances, Parking waiver, Demolition of non-historic additions, Relocation, Residential Design Standards variance, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING NEW BUSINESS 6:15 A. 206 Lake Avenue-Special Review For Mechanical Units in Street Facing Yard, PUBLIC HEARING 6:45 B. 434 E. Cooper Avenue- Amendment to Conceptual Major Development and Conceptual Commercial Design Reviews and Viewplane Review, PUBLIC HEARING WORKSESSION A. None 7:30 ADJOURN Pi TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM,NEW BUSINESS Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation(5 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Applicant presentation(20 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes) Applicant rebuttal (5 minutes) Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed(5 minutes) HPC discussion(15 minutes) Motion(5 minutes) *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. P2 PROJECT MONITORING- Projects in bold are currently under construction. Jay Maytin 435 W.Main-AJCC 204 S.Galena 233 W.Hallam 507 Gillespie 1102 Waters 420 E.Cooper 420 E.Hyman Lift One 400 E.Hyman Nora Berko 332 W.Main 1102 Waters 1006 E.Cooper 602 E.Hyman Sallie Golden 206 Lake 114 Neale 534 E.Hyman 517 E.Hyman(Little Annie's) 212 Lake Hotel Aspen 400 E.Hyman Willis Pember 204 S.Galena Aspen Core 514 E.Hyman 624 W.Francis 407 E.Hyman Patrick Segal 204 S.Galena 623 E.Hopkins 701 N.Third 612 W.Main 624 W.Francis 206 Lake 605 W.Bleeker Holden Marolt derrick 212 Lake John Whipple Aspen Core 208 E.Main 201 E.Hyman 420 E.Cooper 602 E.Hyman Hotel Aspen Jim DeFrancia 420 E.Cooper 420 E.Hyman 407 E.Hyman M:\city\planning\hpc project monitoring\PROJECT MONITORING.doc 9/4/2014 P3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 Vice-chair, Willis Pember, called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were John Whipple, Patrick Sagal, Jim DeFrancia, Nora Berko and Sallie Golden. Jay Maytin was absent. Staff present: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk MOTION: John moved to approve the minutes of July 23, 2014 and August 65 2014; second by Jim. Patrick amended the August 6' minutes page 24. All in favor, motion carried. Disclosure: Nora will recuse herself on the work session of 223 E. Hallam as she is part owner. Willis will recuse himself on 549 Race Alley. He has been in contact with the new owner. 135 E. Cooper Ave. —Minor Development, continued public hearing Amy said this is a large Victorian listed on the National Register of Historic Places and is on the corner site of Cooper and Aspen Street. In 2003 the owner proposed a renovation of the house which has the Victorian preserved on the corner and a similar mass next to it. The two pieces are linked together with a one story hallway. There has always been a concern of the minimal passageway between the two major living areas. The public hearing was continued to tonight. There have been a few different designs to try and turn this one story connector into a two story stair case that would link the house together so you could walk more freely between both levels of the house. In January HPC denied the project finding that the guidelines have not been met and it deteriorated the success of the project when you had a nice breathing space between the structures. There are a few proposal tonight but staff is not able to find that they are successfully meeting the guidelines. The linking element guideline shows that it should be as minimal as possible. Trying to incorporate a stair into this part of the project is 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P4 MINUTES OF AUGUST 27. 2014 really creating an object between the two masses that is bigger than what we think is successful in the context of the guidelines. This link is on top of the Victorian in a few concepts and staff cannot support the application. The compromise suggested is that the one story connector has a deck on it and from the new house you can actually walk out onto this deck but you cannot go into the Victorian because there is an historic window. Possibly the window could be turned into a door to get to the second floor levels of the house. Beyond that there is interior remodeling that could occur. There is also a request for a skylight in the historic out building in the alley. A skylight is an out of character way to add light into the building. Staff has suggested a window that could be approved by staff and monitor. Staff recommends that the proposal in your packet be denied but you would allow them to convert this one historic window into the door on the Victorian and that you would allow a window on the outbuilding to be approved by staff and monitor. Dillon Johns and Mitch Haas represented the owner Christy Ferer. Mitch said this project has been back and forth and we are trying to find a workable solution. The property is on the Corner of Cooper and Aspen Street. There is an out building that is occupied and used as an ADU and a garage. When the addition was made there was no room to go back with a linking element which is normally the case. There are two bedrooms and a stair in the historic house and a set of stairs in the addition that gets you to the master bedroom. We are trying to resolve that you don't have to go down the stairs and across the link and up the stairs to get from the one side to the other. Over time this has been an ongoing function. At the last meeting we heard that if we could find a way to solve the problem and disturb less of the historic fabric then we could bring it back to the HPC. We have tried to make it easier to tell where the old ends and the new begins. We have come up with three options. #1 Dillon said on the ground floor we would leave the existing connector and the stairs and on the upper level where the existing window is we would make a connection from the addition to the historic resource but stack the connector over the existing connector. The two story connector would be all glass. One window would need to be removed. Mitch said because of the roof line you can't pop a door through the window as suggested because the window goes up under the eave and if you put a 2 P5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 door in you would have to cut into the roof to make the door a normal height. #2 Dillon said the existing corridor would stay and the stairs are to the south of the corridor. We have shifted the,upper connector over so that it lands in between two existing windows. We would be preserving all the main features of the house and only penetrating the siding wall area in between them. With this design the roof connection becomes more clean and you don't destroy the historic windows. #3 Dillon said in this scenario we are eliminating the existing corridor and taking a new corridor and new stair and pushing it into the house. We are still leaving a gap between the new envelope and the historic house. We could move the historic window to keep it on the site. On the upper level the corridor would stack on top of the ground level connection. Dillon said the property owner is willing to further screen the connector with trees etc. On the carriage house the kitchen is dark and we are flexible as to the size and location of the window instead of a skylight. Mitch said the ADU is occupied year round as an ADU and it is dark. The siding is somewhat damaged in the area where the window would go. Nora inquired about the increase of site coverage. Would the two story connector impact the light going into the cabin. Mitch said he didn't think the connector would impact the cabin because it is glass. There might be a little more light coming to the cabin. Vice-chair, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing was closed. Willis identified the issues: Connector Window on the outbuilding on the alley instead of a skylight. Willis said the applicant has done a good job in explaining the difficulty in simply using an outdoor connector above the existing connector and its relationship to the roof option#1. Option #3 is a good synthesis between option #1 and #2. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P6 MINUTES OF AUGUST 27. 2014 Amy said this is a two story addition to a two story house. Guideline 10.7 said if you are designing an addition that is taller than the historic building set it back and use a connector. A one story connector is preferred and it should be ten feet long. This guideline has some relevance but this situation is somewhat different. There are other guidelines that talk about removing as little historic material as possible. Mitch said the link is about 7 feet east to west. Willis said the applicant has done a good job of interacting with the historic resource. Nora asked how far forward of the historic house is the connector moving. Dillon said he believes the connector/stair is moving forward five feet. The net change of the connector would be about the same. The question is do we leave what is originally built or do we puu it back. Willis said he is comfortable with #3 and there is vegetation and things grown that obscure the connector and site lines to it. Jim said he is also comfortable with option#3. Sallie said she agrees with staff and is not in favor of deviating from the guidelines with a two story connector between the buildings. Nora said she feels the floor plan is an internal question. This building is on the National Register and is a historically landmarked house and how do you honor these listings when you are changing it significantly and bulking up the site. The site is getting really heavy. Our charge is stewardship of the historic house and this design seems counter to the integrity that I am charged with. John said when he looks at this project the existing linking element really blends the two together where the glass delineates between the two buildings. The two buildings look similar and hopefully one could be painted differently. John said he could support option #3. Patrick said he agrees with staff that the project should be denied. You could put the bedrooms on the same side. The design destroys the character 4 P7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 and separation of the two houses. Even though it is glass it creates one house where it should be two houses. The skylight in back should not be approved but the window in the ADU could be approved. John asked if the connector could step down two or three steps to make the doorway as staff has suggested. Dillon said we are already dealing with a level change from one side to the other of approximately two steps as the addition is set slightly higher. Patrick mentioned the attic and its use and possibly the next owner would open up the attic. Amy said community development is taking this seriously that this property is maxed out on FAR and the idea of freeing some up for the project you are looking at is questionable. They would have to turn the attic back to storage instead of leaving it the way it is now. Mitch said the attic space is legal right now. We would only have to get rid of the space if we added the stairs. Dillon said if we were to get approval for the connector we would have to reconfigure the space no matter what. In order to convert the attic space we would have to have a drop down ladder access. Willis said the glass separates the two building and architecturally the design is appropriate. They have met the intent of the guidelines. It says a one story is preferred but it doesn't say never have two stories. Sallie said she has seen architecture that doesn't meet the guidelines in the past. The applicant should figure out a way to do what staff has recommended. MOTION: Willis made the motion to approve resolution #24 for 135 E. Cooper Ave. with the connector option#3 as presented by the applicant. Elimination of the skylight proposal on the out building and a window to be replaced in the vertical wall that is approved by staff and monitor. Staff and monitor to review the glass sample; motion second by Jim. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P8 MINUTES OF AUGUST 27 2014 Patrick said he would like to see two bedrooms on the same side. Staff recommends altering the interior. Mitch said there isn't enough room for two bedrooms on the same side. We have explored interior and exterior. There isn't an interior re-working that will solve this. This was originally approved as a one story connector because HPC wouldn't approve two stories. The guidelines also say the new should not mimic the old. We are still trying to find a reasonable balance between a private property owner's rights and the historic preservation interests of the city. A one story connector is not a hard and fast rule, it is a guideline. Nora said she appreciates the glass connector. Her issue is the bulk of the additional glass as it is quite massive. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Sallie, no; Nora, no; Willis, yes; John, yes; Patrick, no. Tied vote 3-3, no action. MOTION: John made the motion to continue the application until November 19°2014. John made the motion to approve resolution #25 for the window fon the ADU because they need light and it is not detrimental to the project. Motion second by Willis. Roll call vote: Jim, yes; Sallie, no, Nora, yes. Willis, yes, John, yes, Patrick, no. Motion carried 4-2. John said the applicant has the right to exercise their development rights with a continuation and for us to flat out deny this closes the conversation. We are here to have open conversations. 549 Race Alley and Lot 4 and Lot 5 for Fox Crossing Subdivision — Final Major Development, Setback Variance, Public Hearing Willis recused himself. Jim chaired the meeting. Debbie said the notice has been properly provided and the applicant can proceed. Exhibit I. 6 P9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 Amy said HPC granted a conceptual approval for the renovation of the Victorian house at Fox Crossing that sits on Lot 5. This building was abandoned in the 30's or 40's. It is one of the most pristine examples of a miner's cottage left in and town and it is in terrible condition. HPC approved an expansion to the building which involves picking the Victorian up and temporarily setting it on the north, Lot 4. The basement will be excavated and the Victorian brought back and the expansion finished. We want to make sure as this project goes to permit that it is very clear what will be preserved and what will not be. That will probably be figured out in the field. Our starting point is to preserve everything as possible. We will need a detailed preservation plan. All of the screen doors etc. are there for this building. We typically expect windows to be preserved. Around the base of the house to cover the joists there is some vertical wood. Staff recommends that the wood be reconstructed. The applicant has presented board formed concrete to replicate the texture of the wood foundation but in this case since the house is pristine we want to maintain its character and we are suggesting that the wood character be maintained. The applicant has also asked to use a composite shingle and we are suggesting wood or asphalt shingles. On the floor plans it indicates that the doors on the Victorian are not operable. One of the original doors needs to be operable so that you can walk through. It needs to be a primary entrance to the building. Some of the windows need to be more unified and that can be done with staff and monitor. Staff has no problem with the lighting chosen for the new construction. On the miner's cottage there is an interesting fixture that has the qualities of an old jelly jar but probably doesn't meet the lighting code because it is a clear lens and you see the bulb. HPC has the authority to accept or modify the light. With the landscape plan staff has identified a number of concerns. On the Victorian you walk up a couple of steps and it is 18 inches to 2 feet above grade. That is being maintained in the project but it appears that the grade on the entire site is being raised as much as two feet so the finished floor level of the Victorian will be four feet above where it is now. Staff needs clarification about this because there are retaining walls proposed around the site that don't exist now. This Victorian was set out in a meadow, rural and modest and informal character of the landscape. The landscape plan needs reviewed by staff and monitor if they intend to use retaining walls. The exact plants are not pointed out in the landscape plan and we need to know what is being planted so that it isn't too close to the historic structure. Our primary concern is the front and around the Victorian house and no so much what happens around the addition. There is a setback variance request for the addition. HPC already gave a setback variance at conceptual. This 7 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P10 MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 neighborhood has bigger side yards than the West End even though the zoning is the same. You need ten feet minimum on each side. HPC accepted five feet on one side and ten on the other. The applicant would now like to encroach into the ten foot side yard with an 18 inch overhang that would protect a pathway leading to their alternate front door for the house. Staff doesn't feel this meets the preservation effort. Amy said the line shack on the Victorian property will go to lot 4 and the line shack on lot 6 will stay where it is. The performance guarantee should be $30,000 like it is for all historic buildings: Staff is recommending approval with conditions. Oscar Carlson, Charles Cunniffe presented Charles said the preservation evaluation was done in 2008 and will be revised with Staff and monitor etc. Charles said because the wood or base of the house is sitting in the ground we thought that a board formed concrete that was colored and looked just like the wood would be more sensible. There is very limited visibility of the base and we felt it is a good solution. We are fine with wood shingles as recommended by staff. The front door is operable. We are happy to work with staff and monitor on the new windows of the addition and we do feel the windows should be contemporary in nature. The historic sconce as is could be frosted. Part of the beauty of the sconce is seeing the beauty of how the interior works. They are under the historic porch roofs. The house is down in a hole and in a hollow and Race Alley is considerably higher and we are trying to connect the garage to the house addition. If we can raise it 2 feet that would give the house more presence when you walk by. On the landscape plan we would do a very low wall with a gate and you would get the sense of the house being in a landscape setting. Raising the house would give its presence on the street. Charles also said he is withdrawing the variance request. Jim said staff is recommending approval with nine conditions. Board formed concrete Amy said there will be a concrete base and staff is suggesting that they apply wood to the foundation so that it looks like it does now. 8 P 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 John suggested a green treated pressed wood. Jim opened the public hearing. LJ Erspamer said he is a neighbor and serves on the Planning & Zoning Commission. LJ said he supports fascia or something at the base of the historic house. I would support the encroachment request also. Angie Griffith was a good friend and I represented the estate that sold the property originally to Camilla Auger and then it was sold to Harris. Angie lived on the property until she died. She married Griffith the sheriff who built the line shacks in the 60's. She was very emotionally tied to the building. It is hard to put this building together and make it functional and yet still look historic. Sconce Sallie said she likes the jelly jar design with a frosted glass. Sallie said she wants to be considerate of the code and the style of the house. Alteration to the natural grade Patrick suggested staff and monitor approve the two foot grade change. Jim said the landscape plan will be approved by staff and monitor. Their relocation plan will be approved with the security of$30,000 which is customary. The vesting period is in the resolution. Patrick said he agreed with John that the base of the historic house should be green treated or chemically treated wood that matches the house. Staff and monitor can review the sample. Jim said the condition would be treated wood with the condition that staff and monitor approve the color and character of the wood. MOTION: Nora moved to approve Resolution#24 with the changes as discussed at this meeting. Motion second by John. All in favor motion carried. 9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P12 MINUTES OF AUGUST 27, 2014 223 E. Hallam —work session — no minutes Nora recused herself as she is one of the applicants. Debbie said the work session is non-binding and cannot be relied upon in any in connection with the proceeding of the Historic Preservation Commission. It is to acquire information and direction for the applicant. MOTION: Willis moved to adjourn the meeting; second by Patrick. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 10 P14 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd.— Conceptual Major Development Review, Setback Variances, FAR Bonus, RDS Variance, Relocation, Demolition, Parking Reduction PUBLIC HEARING continued from July 9, 2014. DATE: August 6, 2014 SUMMARY: 28 Smuggler Grove Road is a circa 1880s miner's cabin E�xFfr located in the Smuggler . Mountain neighborhood off of Midland Avenue. The applicant requests approval to relocate the building on the lot, ` """ demolish a non-historic addition and construct a new addition to the historic resource. A new single family residence , is requested on the lot. Conceptual Major Development, Setback �t I Variances, a Residential Design , Standard Variance, and FAR Bonus, are requested for the project. Figure 1: 28 Smuggler Grove current condition Continuation from July 9th to August 6th: The project was continued on July 9, 2014 for a redesign of the new single family home to better relate to the historic home. Neighbors attended the meeting and voiced concerns about the parking situation and the front yard setback. A revised design for the new home was presented on the July 91h meeting and is included in the revised application for review on August 61h. The applicant has addressed the parking concerns by meeting the parking requirement onsite. Staff has confirmed with the Engineering Department that 2 curb cuts are permitted for the property. Continuation from August 61h to September 10th: The project was continued on August 6, 2014 with direction to shift the two homes to the rear yard setback, to restudy the side deck on the second story addition to the historic home, to possibly adjust the site plan, and to reduce the width of the second story addition to the historic home. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 1 of 10 P15 Following are the applicant's responses to HPC and neighbor concerns voiced on 8/6/14: 1. Setbacks: a. Historic home - the applicant has increased the front yard setback of the historic home by pushing the mass to the rear yard setback as requested by HPC and the neighbors. b. Requested setbacks are as follows: Historic Home: Front yard setback—9'10"provided and 25' required East sideyard setback—9' provided and 10' required New Home: Front yard setback— 19'2 '/2"provided and 25' required West sideyard setback—5' provided and 10' required 2. Historic home addition width: a. Further reduced to be 1'3" setback on the west and 6" setback from the east side of the historic home. 3. Side deck on addition to historic home is relocated to the rear of the addition. 4. Parking variance is no longer needed for the parking space width. 5. FAR Bonus request reduced from 500 sf to 276 sf requested bonus. Staff recommends approval with conditions. BACKGROUND: The property was designated a historic landmark in 2008. The subject residence was moved to the Jukati Subdivision, specifically 28 Smuggler Grove Road, in 1976. Because the subdivision was not annexed into the City until 1987, the City did not propose landmark designation during the previous historic inventory surveys. The floor plan of this building is atypical to traditional miner's cabins in Aspen. Staff does not know where the home was originally sited; however during the designation hearing in 2008, Staff found a similar shaped building on the 1904 Sanborne Map that ma be the subject residence in its original location. APPLICANT: Pagewood LLC, represented by Sara Upton and Brian Rubenstein of Rowland and Broughton Architecture and Urban Design. PARCEL ID: 2737-181-23-002. ADDRESS: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd., Jukati Subdivision, Lot 2, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO. ZONING: R-15A CONCEPTUAL O. DEVELOPMENT, DEMOLITION Staff Response: Site plan: The applicant proposes 2 detached single family residences on the 7,378 sf lot. The landmark status of the property permits 2 detached residences in the R-15A zone district. Non- landmark parcels are required to have 30,000 sf of lot area for 2 detached residences. Similar to 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 2 of 10 P16 other lots located outside the original townsite, this lot is wider than it is deep, and it does not have alley access. The front porches of the residences align, and the front most wall of the historic home is closest to the street which places the historic home in a prominent location. Staff is supportive of the proposed site plan and finds that it meets the following key features of a new building on landmark property as described in the Design Guidelines, and Guidelines 11.1 and 11.2: Traditionally, a typical building had its primary entrance oriented to the street. This helped establish a "pedestrian friendly" quality. Locating the entrance of a new building in a manner that is similar to those seen traditionally is therefore preferred. 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. ❑ The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern of the site. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. ❑ The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry. • A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. • In some cases,the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street. Mass/Scale/Height: Historic House: The applicant proposes a rear addition to the historic home that includes a one story connector piece and a two story addition. The connector piece is 10' long, which meets Guideline 10.7. Staff finds that the proposed height of the addition is appropriate and meets the guidelines below. The width of the addition is reduced from the original submittal with the addition and the historic home at the same width. Staff finds that the proposed width is appropriate and subservient to the historic home. Staff appreciates that the applicant relocated the second story deck to the rear yard to better meet the design guidelines. The roof form and overall style of the addition are simple, relate to the historic home and meet the guidelines below. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 3 of 10 P17 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. ❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. ❑ A 1-story connector is preferred. ❑ The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. ❑ The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. ❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. ❑ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. ❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale. New House: The applicant has redesigned the new house to better relate to the historic home. The gable roof form (Guideline 11.6), front porch (Guideline 11.4), and the proposed setbacks for two story elements (Guideline 11.3) reference and compliment the historic home and meet the Design Guidelines. Staff finds that the proposed style does not imitate the historic home and is clearly a product of its own time. Staff voiced concerns on August 6th that the rooftop planter box adds unnecessary mass to the front fagade and recommended that the applicant relocate the rooftop planter box for discussion during Final Review. The applicant has included renderings in the application showing that the planter box is barely visible from street level. Staff no longer has a concern about the planter box due to the large setback of the feature and its visibility from the street. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 4 of 10 P18 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. ❑ Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. ❑ The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. ❑ The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. ❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. ❑ Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. ❑ Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. ❑ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. ❑ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. Demolition: 26.415.100.4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally,for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 5 of 10 P19 a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Staff Response: The applicant proposes to demolish non-historic additions at the rear of the historic resource. Staff has very limited definitive information about 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. There is a non-historic addition at the rear of the historic home. Staff is supportive of its removal and finds that review criteria(d) and the second set of review criteria (a—c) are met. Relocation: 26.415.090.C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The home is not in its original location. Staff supports the relocation of the historic home on the property and finds that it is an acceptable preservation method given the integrity of the building. Relocating the home will enable the landmark to have a more 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 6 of 10 P20 traditional relationship to grade: when the landmark was moved in 1976 and placed on a basement it was raised a few feet above grade. Further, relocation creates room on the property for a new separate single family residence that will absorb most of the development pressure from the historic resource. Staff finds that review criterion 4 is met. Staff recommends that HPC adopt a condition of approval for Final Review that a letter from a house mover demonstrating that the home can be relocated be included in the final design application. VARIANCES: FAR BONUS, SETBACK VARIANCES, RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD 26.415.110.F. Floor area bonus. 1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. Staff Response: The applicant requests 276 sf of the FAR bonus. The proposed FAR for the historic home is about 1,800 sf; and the proposed FAR for the new residence is about 2,102 sf. Staff has very limited information about the historic resource. At present, it is not clear exactly where the house was moved from—the 1904 Sanborne Map and the 1974 historic inventory map suggests that it was moved from the corner of Monarch and Deane Streets. The Building permit file indicates that it was moved in 1976. Based on the style of the structure, and some inspection of framing back in 2003, its construction date can be placed sometime in the late 1800's. The overall form of this house seems to be preserved. A modest one story addition has been constructed along the back, affecting the integrity of the rear wall, however, the plan form is otherwise intact. During the designation hearing the property scored 63 points out of 100 for integrity. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 7of10 P21 There is limited information available which makes the preservation or restoration of the historic resource challenging — especially since the floor plan is atypical of Aspen miner's cabins. The applicant is willing to replace the casement windows with traditional double hung windows in the front gable end and along the side elevations. Staff and the applicant conducted a site visit to examine the residence. The front porch appears to have been replaced when the house was moved. Many original window openings also appear to exist, although the sash have been replaced and details and dimensions area altered. The exterior siding is new and the eave details and shingles in the gable end are new. The applicant is also contacting the historical society and spoke with Bill Bailey (the original house mover in 1976) to gain any information about alterations to the home. The applicant proposes to replace the siding, windows, front porch, and store a historic relationship to grade. Staff finds that the review criteria a—f are met and recommends that HPC grant the 276 sf FAR bonus. 26.415.110.C. Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. The following variances are requested: Historic Home: Front yard setback—9'10" provided and 25' required East sideyard setback—9' provided and 10' required New Home: Front yard setback— 19'2 1/2" provided and 25' required West sideyard setback— 5' provided and 10' required 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 8 of 10 P22 Staff Response: Staff is supportive of the proposed variances which create more space between the buildings by reducing the sideyard setbacks. Staff finds that criteria 2.b is met in that creating more space between the buildings supports the historic preservation of the landmark and mitigates an adverse impact to the historic home. 26.410.020.D.2. Residential Design Standards. Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which do not meet this Section may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Historic Preservation Commission, if the project is subject to the requirements of Chapter 26.415. An applicant who desires to consolidate other requisite land use review by the Historic Preservation Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Planning and Zoning Commission may elect to have the variance application decided by the board or commission reviewing the other land use application. An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the deciding board shall find that the variance, if granted would: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering ` the context in which the development is proposed a < and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may w .H •. consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate ` neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the 8 k.` M - board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. Following is the requested variances, underlined area is not met in the proposal: 26.410.040.A.1 Building orientation. The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street-facing facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. Parcels as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall be exempt from this requirement. Staff Response: Smuggler Grove Road begins to curve at the western part of the subject property. The historic home is slightly off the tangent of the midpoint of the are of the street. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 9 of 10 P23 The new home and the historic home are parallel to each other and are mostly parallel to the street. Staff finds that the intent of the Design Standard is met and that both criteria listed above for a variance are met: the neighborhood in large part does not meet this standard; and the size and shape of the lot in relationship to the road created a site specific constraint. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Demolition of non-historic additions is approved. 2. Relocation of the historic home is approved with the following conditions: a. A letter demonstrating that the home can be relocated is in the Final Review application. b. A bond or letter of credit, or other form approved by the City Attorney, shall be submitted for $30,000 prior to issuance of a building permit for the relocation of the home. 3. The 276 sf FAR Bonus is granted. 4. The following variances are granted as shown on Exhibit A: Historic Home: Front yard setback—9'l 0"provided and 25' required East sideyard setback—9' provided and 10' required New Home: Front yard setback— 19'2 '/2"provided and 25' required West sideyard setback— 5' provided and 10' required 5. A Residential Design Standard Variance is granted for building orientation, Section 26.410.040.A.1, as shown on Exhibit A. 6. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. EXHIBITS• Exhibit A: Relevant design guidelines Exhibit B: 1904 Sanbome Map (provided on 7/9/14) Exhibit C: Minutes from 7/9/14 HPC meeting (provided on 8/6/14) Exhibit D: Application—revised for 9/10/14 Exhibit E: Minutes from 8/6/14 HPC meeting 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 9/10/14 Page 10 of 10 P24 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL), RELOCATION, DEMOLITION, FAR BONUS,AND VARIANCE APPROVALS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 28 SMUGGLER GROVE RD.,JUKATI SUBDIVISION,LOT 2, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION# , SERIES OF 2014 PARCEL ID: 2737-181-23-002 WHEREAS, the applicant, Pagewood LLC, represented by Sara Upton and Brian Rubenstein of Rowland and Broughton Architecture and Urban Design, requested HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Relocation, Demolition, FAR Bonus, and Variances approval for the property located at 28 Smuggler Grove Rd., Jukati Subdivision, Lot 2, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; and WHEREAS, 28 Smuggler Grove Road is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and. the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Relocation, according to Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property, it must be determined that: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2014 Page 1 of 4 P25 diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts. of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Demolition, according to Section 26.415.080.A.4, Demolition of Designated Historic Properties, it must be determined that: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area; and WHEREAS,the HPC may approve setback variances according to Section 26.415.110.C.La, Variances. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district; and WHEREAS, in selected circumstances, pursuant to Section 26.415.110.17,the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2014 Page 2 of 4 P26 a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. WHEREAS, the HPC may grant a variance from the Residential Design Standards upon a finding that: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints; and WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report to HPC dated September 10, 2014, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards and recommended approval of the project with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a meeting on September 10, 2014 continued from August 6, 2014 and July 9, 2014, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and approved the project by a vote of NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants Conceptual Major Development approval, Variances, and a 276 square feet FAR Bonus with the following conditions: 1. Demolition of non-historic additions is approved. 2. Relocation of the historic home is approved with the following conditions: a. A letter demonstrating that the home can be relocated is in the Final Review application. b. A bond or letter of credit, or other form approved by the City Attorney, shall be submitted for $30,000 prior to issuance of a building permit for the relocation of the home. 3. The 276 sf FAR Bonus is granted. 4. The following variances are granted as shown on Exhibit A: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2014 Page 3 of 4 P27 Historic Home: Front yard setback—9'10"provided and 25' required East sideyard setback—9' provided and 10' required New Home: Front yard setback— 19'2 1/2"provided and 25' required West sideyard setback— 5' provided and 10' required 5. A Residential Design Standard Variance is granted for building orientation, Section 26.410.040.A.1, as shown on Exhibit A. 6. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months.provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of September, 2014. Jay Maytin, Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn,Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Exhibit A: Conceptually approved site plan and elevations. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2014 Page 4 of 4 P28 Exhibit A—Relevant Design Guidelines 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. ❑ Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows. ❑ Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit. ❑ Preserve the original glass, when feasible. 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. ❑ Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature. ❑ Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. ❑ Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. Replacement Windows 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. ❑ Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. ❑ If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double- hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. ❑ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 3.5 In a replacement window,use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. ❑ Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. P29 ❑ Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. ❑ A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. ❑ Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. ❑ Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. ❑ If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. ❑ If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. ❑ Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 5.4 The use of a porch on a residential building in a single-family context is strongly encouraged. ❑ This also applies to large, multifamily structures. There should be at least one primary entrance and should be identified with a porch or entry element. Porch Replacement 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. ❑ Use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. ❑ Where no evidence of the appearance of the historic porch exists, a new porch may be considered that is similar in character to those found on comparable buildings. P30 Keep the style and form simple. Also, avoid applying decorative elements that are not known to have been used on the house or others like it. ❑ When constructing a new porch, its depth should be in scale with the building. ❑ The scale of porch columns also should be similar to that of the trimwork. ❑ The height of the railing and the spacing of balusters should appear similar to those used historically as well. 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. ❑ Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Instead, maintain the perceived line and orientation of the roof as seen from the street. ❑ Retain and repair roof detailing. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. ❑ The shadows created by traditional overhangs contribute to one's perception of the building's historic scale and therefore, these overhangs should be preserved. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. ❑ Flat skylights that are flush with the roof plane may be considered only in an obscure location on a historic structure. Locating a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is not allowed. ❑ A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be positioned below the ridgeline. 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. ❑ In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. ❑ It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative. ❑ Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. ❑ A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. ❑ Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house. ❑ The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for new construction. ❑ In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved. 9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district should be avoided. P31 ❑ The significance of a building and the character of its setting will be considered. ❑ In general, relocating a contributing building in a district requires greater sensitivity than moving an individually-listed structure because the relative positioning of it reflects patterns of development, including spacing of side yards and front setbacks, that relate to other historic structures in the area. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. ❑ If a historic building straddles two lots, then it may be shifted to sit entirely on one of the lots.Both lots shall remain landmarked properties. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. ❑ It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. ❑ It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. ❑ On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a modest miner's cottage is discouraged because it would be out of character. ❑ Where a stone foundation was used historically, and is to be replaced, the replacement should be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. ❑ Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it substantially above the ground level is inappropriate. ❑ Changing the historic elevation is discouraged, unless it can be demonstrated that it enhances the resource. 9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space. ❑ In general, a lightwell is prohibited on a wall that faces a street (per the Residential Design Standards). ❑ The size of a lightwell should be minimized. ❑ A lightwell that is used as a walkout space may be used only in limited situations and will be considered on a case-by-case basis. If a walkout space is feasible, it should be surrounded by a simple fence or rail. P32 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. ❑ A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. ❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design anew addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.5 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments that may exist on the street. ❑ Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings in the area may align at approximately the same height. An addition should not be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered or obscured. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. ❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. ❑ A 1-story connector is preferred. ❑ The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. ❑ The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. ❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. P33 ❑ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. ❑ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. ❑ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. ❑ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. ❑ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. Building Orientation 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. ❑ The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern of the site. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. ❑ The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry. ❑ A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. ❑ In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street. Mass and Scale 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. ❑ Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. P34 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. ❑ The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. ❑ The front should include a one-story element, such as a'porch. Building & Roof Forms 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. ❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. ❑ Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. ❑ Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. ❑ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. ❑ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. Materials 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. ❑ Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged.. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. Architectural Details 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. ❑ These include windows, doors and porches. ❑ Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. P35 Sara Adams From: Steve Hach <ucphach @rof.net> Sent: Thursday,August 14, 2014 9:11 AM To: Sara Adams Subject: FW: 28 Smuggler major redevelopment Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Sara, The owners of lukati Lot 1 asked me to forward this to you. This is the neighbor to the west of 28 Smuggler Grove. They live in Canada and will not likely be able to significantly participate in this process. Steve Hach From: carol kaltenbock [ma i Ito:carol.kaltenbock @sympatico.ca] Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 9:04 PM To: ucphacKbrof.net Subject: 28 Smuggler major redevelopment Historic Preservation Commission c/o Sara Adams, Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 August 7, 2014 To the Historic Preservation Commission RE: 28 Smuggler Redevelopment I question whether what you are giving away in variances and other goodies is worth what you are getting: "preservation" of a small structure that will itself be overwhelmed by the scale of what is proposed. If "preserving" such an out-of-the-way small structure comes at such a price it is too high. And if the benefits of such a "preservation" accrue to the entire city of Aspen, why are only the neighboring properties expected to sacrifice? Neighboring properties, I might add, that have followed the regulations, and house real locals, unlike this proposed spec development whose profits will benefit only the developers. This is way out of whack. I'm not willing to have my neighbor's side setback whittledp36 away so he can maximize his profit. As proposed, this development would be a blight to our cozy little neighborhood. Don't allow it. Yours truly, Ernst Kaltenbock 312 Midland Avenue, Aspen z P37 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 2014 Willis said the more minimal alteration to the historic property the better. 28 Smuggler Grove Road - Conceptual Major Development, Floor area bonus, Setback variances, parking waiver, demolition of non-historic additions, relocation, residential design standards variances. Continued public hearing. Sara said there are some requested setback variance; 500 square foot FAR bonus; a technical residential design standard variance; relocation of the historic resource; partial demolition of the, 'no' addition and a variance from the required width of a parking space. On July 9th, the last meeting HPC requested a restudy of the'new single family home that is proposed for the site. This property has a,landmark that was moved at some point to this location in 1976. In 1987 the'entire area was annexedinto the city and the property was added to the inventor in 2008. The proposal is to pick up the historic home and move it on the sit,I e and to construct a new single family home that is detached on the.site. There were concerns voiced by the neighbors regarding the parking situation. There was a request for a waiver of one parking space and they are,required to have four on-site parking spaces and they were proposing flree. The applicant has looked at the plan and has moved some things round and now they are proposing four parking spaces on-site and one space is'four inches off the required width. Because of the four inches they would need a parking waiver from that standard but they do have four on-site parking spaces. Staff confirmed with Engineering that they.are approved for two curb cuts for this property. On July 9th it was suggested that the applicant look at reducing the width of the addition behind the historic resource a little more to be a little more subservient to the width of the historic resource. They could research this and bring it back,"for final. Staff raised concerns with the second story deck that is located between the historic home and the new residence. We are recommending that be removed for final review. There is space at the rear of the historic resource and to have the deck extended back there. We are supportive of the re-design and they are pulling architectural features from the historic resource and they are not imitating the landmark. They have gable roofs and forms reminiscent of what you see on the historic resource. Staff is concerned with the roof top planter box that seems to add un- necessary mass to the front fagade and we recommend that be relocated for final review. Staff is supportive of the demolition and relocation. Staff 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P 3 8 MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 2014 finds that the amount of restoration and preservation proposed does warrant the 500 square foot bonus. The re-design of the new single family home meets the design guidelines and this is a project worthy of the bonus. The review criteria A-F are met. A site visit occurred today to review the width of the road and understand how the existing conditions are situated. The applicant is requesting front yard setback variances for the historic home and an east side-yard setback variance for the historic home. For the new home a front yard setback variance and a west side yard setback variance are being requested. The property is zoned such that it needs a 25 foot setback variance in the front. This property is more wide than it is deep which in our opinion having a historic resource on the property and trying to meet the setback variances does not work in terms of meeting the guidelines. We think that the solution they have proposed meets the review criteria for granting a variance. Having a rear addition to the historic resource supports the preservation as opposed to a side addition to the historiGresource. Having a detached single family home that absorbs.most of the floor area on the property that is available is supportive of preservation rather than having everything attached to the side of the historic resource. Staff finds that the review criteria are met for the variances that are being requested. The residential design,standard variance is a technical variance and has to do with building orientation and site plan and whether or not the historic resource is angled to the side and we feel the site plan is appropriate because both houses are parallel. The parking variance is needed just for the width. Staff is recommending approval.with conditions. Exhibit I— Michael Hoffman, attorney sent a letter representing four neighbors who are opposed to the setback variances and that they also feel there is too much development on the site. Patrick asked staff what the allowable square footage is and what is the applicant requesting. .............................. _.._......_. ._._.... Sara said they are reaching close to their maximum. The historic home required front yard setback is 25 feet and they are proposing 7 feet. They are also meeting the 10 foot distance between the two buildings. This zone district requires ten feet on either side of the buildings. They are proposing 8'2" on the historic home and on the west side five feet instead of ten feet. Patrick said the planter is on the new house. It is to separate so that there isn't a deck on top of the garage. 9 P39 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 2014 Sara said the planter adds mass that is unnecessary. Sara Upton and Brian Rubenstein from Rowland Broughton Architects presented. Sara Upton said the original massing is the historical resource with a two story massing behind and a linking element. The new house has a gable form that also possesses a rhythm that relates to the,historic resource next door. We were instructed to look for common elements that could be shared between the new and the historic house. Sara Upton said the historic house is a three bedroom with,a bedroom upstairs in the addition and two bedrooms in the basement with a linking element on the first floor attaching to the addition. Sara Upton said the new house is. a four bedroom house with two bedrooms on the main level, two in the basement and the upper level is the area for the . living spaces. There is a deck off the back of the house. There is a gable roof and a 134 square foot roof deck that is separated from the remainder of the flat roof by a platiter,box. The'roof deckarid the flat roof are in the same plane. If we remove the planter box we are effectively removing the roof deck because it is'the planter,box that,Creates the separation and keeps us from having a larger-roof,deck than is allowable. Regarding the FAR we are maxed out and Have 24 square feet remaining. The total FAR proposed is 1855 square feet for the historic house and the new house is 2247 square feet. We have increased the linking element to ten feet and shrunk the width of the two story addition behind the resource by 10 1/4 inches. With regard to the planter box it is approximately 25 feet back from the front facade of the house. It isYvery.hard to perceive the planter box from street level. The only place you would have a,great vision of it would be from a second story of the neighbor's house. 'We could restudy the planter box but the end result would be getting rid of the roof deck because we need to have a physical separation in the roof deck and the flat roof area. We felt this was a respectful way to create those boundaries. Sara Upton said we are requesting the front setback variance because if we are to restore the historic resource and place it completely within the setbacks with the ten foot linking element that only leaves us with 2 feet to spare in between the setbacks so it makes it difficult to take advantage of the 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P40 MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 2014 allowable floor area. The second item for the request of the variance is the lot itself which is shallow. It is 91 feet wide and 76 feet deep. The third is that the historic resource front gable volume is much longer than you typically see anywhere else in town. If restoration and preservation of the resource is our number one goal then we need to do that in a way to keep it visible and allows us to have a connector link behind it so that any additional development does not dwarf the resource. While we are requesting front and side yard setback variances 85% of our development is taking place within the setback and that does include the ten foot separation in between the building. By moving the window well off the east wall and into the courtyard where the linking element is we are managing to fit a parking space. UPC made comments about the deck on the historic house that is maybe not appropriate between the two houses. The deck is 46 feet back from the historic resource so we don't feel it is in a position of prominence. The setback encroachments are also being requested because HPC requested that the two porches on the houses be aligned to create the street front rhythm. Vice-chair Willis Pember opened the public hearing. Steve Hawk, 23 SmugglerGrove said he is`representing`several of the neighbors. We do,appreciate that the applicant has"updated the plan to include minimum parking and we wouldn't object to the width variance either. The applicant said HPC is making us do this and do that. The site is 20%`smaller than any other site on the road and it has always been a shallow lot: They bought an expensive piece of property that just doesn't contain the magnitude of what they want to do and that is the cause of the setback variances. Another solution is don't put a program on the back of the historical site and then you wouldn't have a setback variance problem. It is an economic decision not an aesthetic decision. We have supported other redevelopments over the past 25 years. The developers have the right to make a profit but not to the detriment of the other neighbors. All the lot owners are against the significant setback and the scale of the improvements. We did a redevelopment and had a four foot encroachment of a corner of our structure into the setback. When we asked we weren't allowed to put any living space into the existing encroachment. 73 Smuggler was granted an encroachment since the annexation. Based on the noise and activity I can't image 7 feet from the property line. It is very clear where the property line is and everyone has to drive by it. We need better planning and involve the neighbors that are impacted. Just because someone owns the ground it is not 11 P41 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 2014 the city's responsibility to make it possible for developers to make a huge profit. If approved we feel this project will be the "Aspen Art Museum" of Smuggle Grove. Marty Ames, 23 Smuggler Grove Marty said he has been studying historic preservation rules to understand it better. HPC has to make tough decisions and some might not be appreciated by the neighbors to save and preserve the real valuable properties and structures. On the other side this is not a contributing structure, it was moved here to this lot from somewhere. It is a sweet old house and we watched it be renovated four times. How do you differentiate what concessions you give to the very valuable resources vs the non-contributing resources and how do you make those decisions. I am apposed to the setback. Our street is an easement and not a city street. 'It is 40 feet wide instead of 60 feet wide. It is hard for pine to imagine this property being ten foot closer than it is now. It is already in the setback. It is also hard to imagine one of the structure s''being 7 feet from the property line. I'would ask the HPC to consider the`front setback variances of that magnitude and perhaps suggest that the rear setback'often feet doesn't have to be ten feet. A previous proposal was to encroach five feet on the back. It would be more respectful to the neighborhood and neighbors to have the setback further back on the front. Exhibit I Mike Hoffman; s letter Vice-chair, Willis Pember-closed the public hearing. Sara Upton:said with the HPC guidelines we are bounded by a ten foot utility easement then that-does not leave a lot of depth to create an addition behind the house, ??????We consider two feet as a hardship. We have a shallow lot with a connector. We think the historic resource is worth preserving. It would be difficult to do any kind of addition without a front setback. The house is already situated at 16 feet from the lot line. The new house is moving east and it will be ten feet further from the Hawks. We have taken measurements in this area and it is very normal to see from one house across the street to another to be 70 feet. If we don't bring the historic house forward it will have no prominence. We don't want to build a large appendage on the side 12 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION P42 MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 2014 of the historic house. We are pleading for the setback variances and they are important to historic house. Willis identified the issues: Reduce the width of the addition Remove the planter Narrow the addition in the back of the historic property Variance regarding setbacks Willis said all variances are not created equal Thy rules for historic properties are different. We need to determe whether the site plan is contributing to the character of the historic ptlo are here to respect the historic resource. On the site plan, the historic foi tprint there is at least five feet in the rear of the propy`that is not utilized for architecture. The a"Iicant should explore that. I applaud connecting the pp es but the doesn t need to be a stairwell, it could bo orch talking to a porch. +man" The project is very close and we appreciatethe input from the neighbors. �. tY Patrick agreedk� tlekoject neeconti�d I agree with staff that the ROI new nine the roof top planter if it was removed would only tale away a dcthatwvas 9x12 and that wouldn't be a hardship and it would also take awaythe staircase. The front of the new HNI v ,x home could be looked at. TlYere is also three feet in the back of the historic home th :could be looped at to pull the house back. ° Al � f k*ta1k^� nh� s John agreed withstff'a comments and the commissions comments. There maybe some way to'het into that three feet in the back of the house. Maybe the porch could encroach over the utility easement. Moving it back will not do a disservice to the historic structure. Willis said the FAR is fine and the bonus is achievable and it is just the matter of fine tuning it. You need to bring back something that resonates more with the neighborhood and the board. 13 P43 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 2014 Jim said what was presented today is quite commendable. Some issues raised here today will fine tune the project. MOTION: Jim made the motion to continue Conceptual Development and the public hearing for 28 Smuggler Grove Road to September 10th to allow the applicant and staff to make some minor adjustments and bring it back to the board. Motion second by Willis. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Jim moved to adjourn; second by Willis"Roll call vote: Jim; yes, Patrick, yes; John, yes; Willis, yes. Motion carried 4-0. a Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk a 14 P44 r MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: 206 Lake Ave. —Special Review for AC units in yards facing a street DATE: September 10, 2014 SUMMARY: 206 Lake Avenue, aka the Newberry House or the Shaw House, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and is a locally designated landmark. It is located at the corner of Lake Avenue and Smuggler Street, across from Triangle Park and above Hallam Lake. The property was constructed circa 1886 in the Queen Anne Shingle Style. It is one of the more significant residential structures in Aspen not just for its architectural style, but also for its association with a number of important people including Judge Robert Shaw, and T.G. Lyster who helped organize the First National Bank of Aspen. HPC granted approval for the house to receive a new foundation and new basement, and to rework the non-historic addition. Hallam Lake Bluff review approval was granted. The approved project is currently under construction. The applicant requests a variance through the Special Review process to locate air conditioners in a yard facing a street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with conditions. APPLICANT: Lake 206 LLC, represented by Don Carpenter of Project Resource Company, LLC. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-88-005. ADDRESS: 206 Lake Avenue, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. ZONE DISTRICT: R-6 Medium Density Residential Zone District. Land Use Code Section 26.575.020.E Measuring Setbacks reads as follows[emphasis added]. n) Heating and air conditioning equipment and similar mechanical equipment are prohibited in all yards facing a Street. Mechanical equipment may be placed within non-street facing yards but shall not exceed thirty (30) inches above or below finished grade. These features may be up to thirty (30) inches above and below finished grade simultaneously. The Planning and Zoning Commission may consider exceptions to this requirement pursuant to the procedures and criteria of Chapter 26.430—Special Review. 1 206 Lake Ave. AC units variance Staff Memo 9/10/2014 P45 SPECIAL REVIEW: No development subject to special review shall be permitted unless the JHPCJ makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all standards and requirements set forth below. A. Dimensional requirements. Whenever the dimensional requirements of a proposed development are subject to special review,the development application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met. 1. The mass, height, density, configuration, amount of open space, landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. 2. The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on surrounding uses or will mitigate those impacts, including but not limited to the effects of shading, excess traffic, availability of parking in the neighborhood or blocking of a designated view plane. Staff Response: The applicant proposes AC units beneath the wrap around porch. Staff is supportive of the location and finds that it is compatible with the neighborhood, and it does not visually impact the historic resource. Staff finds that the review criteria are met and recommends approval with the condition that the area beneath the front porch be lattice work to match the photograph below. Staff recommends that HPC include a condition of approval that does not allow the proposed brick columns which are out of character with the photograph below. F F• q7 Ly yy I� to '' $1e w•e l • t 2 206 Lake Ave. AC units variance Staff Memo 9/10/2014 P46 The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant approval for the property located at 206 Lake Avenue, with the following conditions: 1) The AC units are approved in the location shown in Exhibit A. 2) Reconstruct the lattice work to match the historic photograph above. The brick columns are not approved. Exhibits: Resolution# , Series of 2014 3 206 Lake Ave. AC units variance Staff Memo 9/10/2014 P47 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING SPECIAL REVIEW TO ALLOW MECHNICAL IN A YARD FACING A STREET FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 206 LAKE AVENUE,LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 20 OF THE SHAW AND WPW JOINT VENTURE SUBDIVISION, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #_, SERIES OF 2014 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-88-005 WHEREAS, the applicant, Lake 206 LLC, represented by Don Carpenter, submitted an application requesting Special Review of the property located at 206 Lake Avenue, legally described as Lot 20 of the Shaw and WPW Joint Venture, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, 206 Lake Avenue is included in AspenVictorian and listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places; and WHEREAS, Section 26.575.02.E(n) of the Municipal Code states that "Heating and air conditioning equipment and similar mechanical equipment are prohibited in all yards facing a Street. Mechanical equipment may be placed within non-street facing yards but shall not exceed thirty (30) inches above or below finished grade. These features may be up to thirty (30) inches above and below finished grade simultaneously. The Planning and Zoning Commission [or Historic Preservation Commission] may consider exceptions to this requirement pursuant to the procedures and criteria of Chapter 26.430— Special Review.;" and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on September 10, 2014, the Historic Preservation Commission opened a duly noticed public hearing, took public comment, considered the application, the staff memo, staff recommendation, and public comments, and found that the application for Special Review met the review standards with conditions by a vote of NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Staff recommends that HPC grant Special Review approval for a variance from the requirement of 26.575.020.E(n) for the property located at 206 Lake Avenue, with the following conditions: 1) The AC units are approved in the location shown in Exhibit A. 2) Reconstruct the lattice work to match the historic photograph above. The brick columns are not approved. [signatures on following page] 206 Lake Ave. Special Review HPC Resolution# , Series of 2014 P48 APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 101h day of September, 2014. Jay Maytin, Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Exhibit A: Site plan and elevations illustrating approval. 206 Lake Ave. Special Review HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2014 P49 PROJECT COMPANY, July 10,2014 Revised August 29,2014 Ms. Sara Adams City of Aspen Community Development 130 S. Galena Street,3rd Floor Aspen,CO 81611 Re:206 Lake Avenue—Variance for Heating and Air Conditioning Equipment Dear Sara, On behalf of our client,please find twelve sets of the following documents related to the subject property. The variance request is made with respect to the proposed location of project mechanical equipment. Specifically,the applicant seeks to locate three condensing units underneath the existing wrap-around porch as shown on the Landscape Layout,as provided.We include: ■ Historic Site Improvement Plat of 206 Lake Avenue,Recorded under Rec. #607503. ■ Sheet Z2;Landscape Layout illustrating the location of the 3 condensing units. ■ Sheet A7;Exterior Elevations illustrating the new lattice/brick design at the deck skirt(need this with a detail and materials description from Tankersley) Section 26.430.040 describes the relevant code language and review standards for special review.The proposal complies with the specific code provisions in this section as follows: A.Dimensional requirements.Whenever the dimensional requirements of a proposed development are subject to special review, the development application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met. 1.The mass,height,density,configuration,amount of open space,landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. The deck skirt is-unenty constructed of brick. Under the proposed plan, the deck skirt will be reconstructed with wood lattice between brick columns as shown on Sheet A7. W/e believe this proposal enhances the character of the remodel,as the deck skirt was constructed with lattice prior to a circa 1980 remodel. The proposed revision brings the building closer to the original appearance. 2.The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on surrounding uses or will mitigate those impacts,including but not limited to the effects of shading, excess traffic,availability of parking in the neighborhood or blocking of a designated view plane. The proposed condensing units will not be visible to surrounding uses, as they will be hidden underneath the porch and enclosed behind wood lattice in between brick columns. Per your follow up request to provide additional information,we have consulted with Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning and offer the following: 16 North 4th Street■Carbondale■Colorado■81623■(970)948.9905 don @projectresourceco.com■www.projectresourceco.com P50 1. Provide an analysis of the characteristics of similarly situation properties in the same Zone District and of neighboring parcels with respect to whether these properties comply with the dimensional,off-street parking or utility and delivery service area equipment which is subject to special review. The subject request deals only with dimensional standards and not with off-street parking or utility and delivery service area equipment. The propery is in the heart of the West End neighborhood, almost all of which, including the subject properly,is Zoned R-6. The residence just two doors to the west, at 212 Lake Avenue, is nonconforming with regard to FAR,site coverage, both sideyard setbacks,and setback from the Hallam Lake Bluff top of slope. In fact,many of the properties surrounding Triangle Park are nonconforming in at least one regard or another. The bottom line with regard to the subjectpropery and the variance requested is the result will have no affect whatsoever on neighborhood character as the proposed AC units will be completely screened from view and located beneath an existing porch/deck. 2. Explain whether the following conditions are met:The mass,height,density,configuration, amount of open space,landscaping and setbacks of the proposed development are designed in a manner that is compatible with or enhances the character of surrounding land use and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone district. The general purpose of the underlying Zone district is to provide areas for residential use and development. The proposal to locate three AC units beneath the existing wrap-around porch will have no discernible impact on the mass,height, density, configuration, amount of open space, landscaping or setbacks of the subject proper y, nor will it result in any reduction of compatibility with the character of surrounding land uses. The single-family residential use of the properly will be unaltered;therefore, its complete consistency with the purpose of the R-6 Zoning will be fully maintained. 3. The applicant demonstrates that the proposed development will not have adverse impacts on surrounding uses or will mitigate those impacts,including but not limited to the effects of shading,excess traffic,availability of parking in the neighborhood or blocking of designated view plane. The location of the subjectAC units beneath the frontlside wrap-around porch will have no adverse impacts whatsoever on the surrounding uses, including such considerations as shading, excess trafc,availability of parking in the neighborhood or blocking of any designated view planes. The units will be under the historic porch and therefore cannot cause shading impacts. The units have no bearing at all on tra , roadways or parking. There are no designated view planes affecting the subject property and the proposed location is completely consistent with Hallam Lake Bluff Review requirements. We look forward to presenting this revision to HPC at the earliest convenience. Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions. Sincerely, 5 Don Carpenter Principal Project Resource Company,LLC 16 North 411,Street■Carbondale■Colorado■81623■(970)948.9905 don @projectresourceco.com■www.projectresourceco.com MEMORANDUM P52 TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: 434 E. Cooper Avenue — Amendment to Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual Commercial Design and Viewplane - Public Hearing DATE: September 10, 2014 SummARY: The applicant requests approval to construct a two story building on the corner of Galena Street and Cooper Avenue. The 9,000 square feet property is located at r. 434 East Cooper Avenue and is part of the Commercial Core Historic District. HPC has seen various redevelopment proposals for this site since 2007. The current r application is for a 100% commercial building with a basement, first floor, and smaller second floor. Demolition approval was granted in 2007 and remains valid. _ x- HPC granted Conceptual Commercial Image 1: Existing building at 434 E.Cooper Ave. Design Review, Conceptual Major Development, and Viewplane Review on December 12, 2014. The applicant requests an amendment to the conceptual design approvals and viewplane review: massing changes adjacent to the Red Onion and at the corner of Galena and Cooper Streets are proposed. As an amendment to Conceptual approvals, the entire project is back on the table for review and consideration. Staff recommended continuation on December 12, 2012 to restudy the two story elements. Staff remains consistent with this recommendation. The memo below is from 12/12/12 updated items are highlighted. RECOMMENDATION: Continuation to relocate the 2 story element to provide relief to the historic Red Onion and to restudy the massing to better relate to the traditional development pattern and the Design Guidelines APPLICANT: 434 East Cooper Avenue, LLC, c/o Curtis Sanders, Sherman and Howard, 201 N. Mill Street, Aspen, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects. PARCEL ID: 2737-182-16-011 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 1 of 10 P53 ADDRESS: 434 East Cooper Avenue, Lots Q, R and S, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO, commonly known as 434 East Cooper Street. ZONE DISTRICT: CC, Commercial Core, Historic District Overlay. AMENDMENT TO CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEWS Approval of a conceptual development plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structures) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the conceptual plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions NO changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the final development plan unless agreed to by the applicant. If the applicant chooses to make substantial amendments to the conceptual design after it has been approved, a new conceptual development approval hearine shall be required,pursuant to Section 26.415.070.D.3. Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the scale, massing,height and proportions of a proposal. The design guidelines for conceptual review of a building in the downtown historic district are all located within the "Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives." The relevant guidelines are attached as `Exhibit A" and/or referenced below. SITE PLAN: The building is proposed to be located on the property lines and parallel to the streets. As described below, off-site public amenity is proposed. Staff finds that the proposed site plan reinforces the traditional town grid and meets the design guidelines. As a reminder for Final Review,interior airlocks are required and need to be illustrated on the floor plans. 6.1 Maintain the established town gird in all projects • The network of streets and alleys should be retained as public circulation space and for maximum public access. • Streets and alleys should not be enclosed or closed to public access, and should remain open to the sky. 6.20 Orient a new building to be parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. • The front of a primary structure shall be oriented to the street MASS/SCALE: The applicant proposes a two story building with the second floor significantly setback from the street facing facades (237" from Cooper and 19' 11" from Galena). A large deck is proposed to be accessed from the second floor commercial space. Typically setbacks are reserved for three story building downtown in order to create a strong two story street wall. Staff is concerned about the compatibility of the proposed setback of the second story mass with the surrounding 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 2 of 10 P54 downtown buildings. The Guidelines emphasize a range in building heights and maintaining a two story mass along the street, especially for corner lots: "Here the buildings should confirm the pattern of a strongly defined building wall at the street edge. " In Staffs opinion, based on traditional development patterns, defining a strong street edge includes both the first and second floors of a building as stated in Guidelines 6.18 and 6.25. 6.18 Maintain the alignment of facades at the sidewalk's edge. • Place as much of the fagade of the building at the property line as possible. • Locating an entire building front behind the established storefront line is inappropriate. • A minimum of 70%of the front fagade shall be at the property line. 6.25 Maintain the average perceived scale of two-story buildings at the sidewalk. • Establish a two-story height at the sidewalk edge, or provide a horizontal design element at this level. A change in materials, or a molding at this level are examples. The images below show a range of one and two story buildings along Cooper Avenue. Note the strong two story buildings that define the street corners and reinforce the town grid. The yellow circle highlights the subject property. Image 2: Historic photograph of Cooper Avenue and Mill Street looking to the north. 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 3 of 10 P55 i jr i F f ' WAi Image 3: IIistoric Photograph of Cooper Avenue and Galena Street intersection, looking west. Across the alley is the Aspen Block Building and across Galena Street is the Andres Building and 308 S. Galena(see photographs on following page) - all of which are two story landmarks. 308 S. Galena is a good example of a one story building that steps up to two stories along the street. As stated in the Design Guidelines, "...buildings create a strong edge to the street because they traditionally aligned on the front lot line and were usually built out to the full width of a parcel. Although small gaps do occur between some structures, these are exceptions. This uniform wall of building fronts is vitally important to the historic integrity of the district and should be preserved." 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 4 of 10 P56 a � `� I. �• Via. ' � :" Image 4: The Andres Building Image 5: The Aspen Block Building �'.N , 3. i - r C yam-_ t Image 6:304 and 308 South Galena Street The traditional pattern of a variety of heights along the street edge is important to maintain a cohesive Historic District. Staff recommends that the applicant move the second story mass toward the street to meet the design guidelines, reflect traditional development downtown, and break up the proposed mass of the building into more traditional modules. Staff appreciates the amendment to add a two story element along Cooper Street, however it is in the least desirable location because it obscures the Red Onion vertical signage and 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 5 of 10 P57 the historic landmark. HPC approved a 3 story building adjacent to the historic Red Onion to replace the 1 story "poster shop" building last year. The 2'd and 3rd floor of the approved new development are significantly setback to expose the side wall of the historic Red Onion. Staff recommends that the applicant restudy the massing to expose the Red Onion signage and to better meet the Design Guidelines below. Staff is concerned that the massing is identical to the recently built 204 S. Galena project just 2 blocks down the street. Also, the location of the 2 story mass further penetrates the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane. The applicant proposes a chamfered corner, which is consistent with the Historic District and context. HEIGHT: The proposed building height is 28' for two story elements, which meets Code requirements. A 2' overrun is proposed for the elevator for a maximum total of 30'. The first level has a floor to floor height of between 12'. to 15' (to compensate for grade changes along Galena) topped with significant parapets ranging between 3' 6" and 5' 6" tall. The second level has a floor to floor height of 14'. The proposed floor heights and the overall height of the building meets Land Use Code requirements. 6.28 Height variation should be achieved using one or more of the following: • Vary the building height for the full depth of the site in accordance with traditional lot width. • Setback the upper floor to vary the building facade profile(s) and the roof forms across the width and the depth of the building. • Vary the facade (or parapet)heights at the front. • Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. The altering parapet heights attempt to provide height variation along the large 90' x 100' lot as stated in Guideline 6.28. However the facade articulation are not entirely successful on such a large lot. Actual height changes that run the depth of the lot is more aligned with the intent of Guideline 6.28 for a large corner property than parapet details. In addition, this treatment is very similar to the approved project at 204 S. Galena (the former Gap) which is located only 2 blocks away. Staff is concerned that the two buildings are almost identical in their architectural treatment which could be detrimental to the Historic District and its interesting range of building types,heights and styles. The Design Guidelines list as a key objective to "promote variety in the street level experience....and build upon established design traditions, creativity and innovation in a manner which strengthens the architectural richness and identity of the city core." While these are issues for Final Review, Staff is concerned that the proposed details on the second story, the window sizes, and some of the architectural treatments on the first story do not meet the Design Objectives for the Historic District: 2) Promote creative, contemporary design 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 6 of 10 P58 that respects the historic context and 6)promote variety in the street level experience. Outside of Commercial Design Review Staff is concerned about the versatility of proposed Space B that spans three floors, which if divided into smaller spaces will necessitate an extensive remodel to meet egress requirements and possibly more mechanical equipment depending on the type of commercial use. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC continue the hearing for a restudy of location of the second floor mass to better reflect traditional development patterns and height variations and to not obscure the historic Red Onion sign. PUBLIC AMENITY: Provision of public amenity. The Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant to the review procedures and criteria of Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Review, shall determine the appropriate method or combination of methods for providing this required amenity. One (1) or more of the following methods may be used such that the standard is reached. 1. On-site provision of public amenity. A portion of the parcel designed in a manner meeting Subsection 26.575.030.F., Design and operational standards for on-site public amenity. 2. Off-site provision of public amenity. Proposed public amenities and improvements to the pedestrian environment within proximity of the development site may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission,pursuant to Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Review. These may be improvements to private property,public property or public rights-of-way. An easement providing public access over an existing public amenity space for which no easement exists may be accepted if such easement provides permanent public access and is acceptable to the City Attorney. Off-site improvements shall equal or exceed the value of an otherwise required cash-in-lieu payment and be consistent with any public infrastructure or capital improvement plan for that area. 3. Cash-in-lieu provision. The City Council, upon a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, may accept a cash-in-lieu payment for any portion of required public amenity not otherwise physically provided, according to the procedures and limitations of Subsection 26.575.030.E, Cash-in-lieu payment. 4. Alternative method. The Commission, pursuant to Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Review, may accept any method of providing public amenity not otherwise described herein if the Commission finds that such method equals or exceeds the value, which may be nonmonetary community value, of an otherwise required cash-in-lieu payment. 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 7 of 10 P59 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Providing onsite public amenity is redundant in this location on the Cooper Mall. In addition, defining a strong street corner is more consistent with traditional patterns of development in the Historic District. The Design Guidelines state "a street facing amenity space, usually located towards the middle of a block, may be considered. However, within the heart of the district, where the greatest concentration of historic storefronts align, creating new gaps in the street wall is discouraged." And Guideline 6.7 states that "any public amenity space positioned at the street edge shall respect the character of the streetscape and ensure that street corners are well defined, with buildings placed at the sidewalk edge." Staff is supportive of off-site public amenity in this location. Staff finds that standard 2 is met in the proposal. Currently the property has 9% public amenity and is required to mitigate for 10% public amenity, which equals 900 square feet. The applicant commits to at least $67,500 (900 sf * $75 = $67,500) worth of public improvements in the Pedestrian Malls subject to Parks Department and Community Development Department approval. The improvements shall be consistent with any public infrastructure or capital improvement plan for the area. TRASH/UTILITY/RECYCLE AREA: B. Utility, delivery and trash service provision. When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one (1) building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall apply: 1. A utility, trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060, Utility/trash/recycle service areas,unless otherwise established according to said Section. 2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary when existing site conditions, such as an historic resource, dictate such encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed. 3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. 4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the street as practical. 5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not be visible from a 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 8 of 10 P60 public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As represented in the application the trash/recycle/utility area meets the dimensional requirements of the Code. A common mechanical room is located adjacent to the second floor commercial space in an enclosed room. The roof plans do not show any mechanical equipment on top of the roof. The applicant represents that this building is to be all commercial, probably retail, spaces. Staff questions whether this is the extent of the mechanical equipment proposed for the development, or if additional venting and equipment is required depending on the tenants. Staff recommends that a complete mechanical plan that meets standard 5 be submitted for review and approval as a condition of Final Review. The delivery service area is located along the alley. VIEWPLANE: 26.435.050.B. Exemption. The Community Development Director may exempt the addition of mechanical equipment to an existing development which protrudes into the view plane only if such development has an insignificant effect upon the designated view plane. The addition of a satellite dish, elevator shaft or any other piece of equipment whose height and mass have a significant effect upon the designated view plane shall be reviewed pursuant to the standards of Subsection 26.435.050.C. 26.435.050.C. Mountain view plane review standards. No development shall be permitted within a mountain view plane unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. 1. No mountain view plane is infringed upon, except as provided below. When any mountain view plane projects at such an angle so as to reduce the maximum allowable building height otherwise provided for in this Title, development shall proceed according to the provisions of Chapter 26.445 as a Planned Unit Development so as to provide for maximum flexibility in building design with special consideration to bulk and height, open space and pedestrian space and similarly to permit variations in lot area, lot width, yard and building height requirements and view plane height limitations. The Planning and Zoning Commission, after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Department, may exempt a development from being processed as a Planned Unit Development when the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the proposed development has a minimal effect on the view plane. When any proposed development infringes upon a designated view plane, but is located in front of another development which already blocks the same view plane, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether or not the proposed development will further infringe upon the view plane and the likelihood that redevelopment of the adjacent 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 9 of 10 P61 structure will occur to re-open the view plane. In the event the proposed development does not further infringe upon the view plane and re-redevelopment to reopen the view plane cannot be anticipated, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall exempt the development from the requirements of this Section. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Only the southwest corner of the proposed building falls within the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane. A small corner of the proposed second story falls about 13' 9" into the Viewplane. The current building height sits about 11'5"into the Viewplane. The one story T-shirt shop and four story Roaring Fork Building already block the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane; therefore, the Mountain Plaza proposal does not directly impact the Viewplane in the current downtown configuration. The Roaring Fork Building is under HPC's purview, as it is located in the Commercial Core Historic District. Future redevelopment of the Roaring Fork Building would appear to potentially open some of the View Plane although this is highly unlikely since the building is 4 stories - a height and FAR that is no longer permitted. The landmark Independence Square building, located across the intersection of Cooper and Galena, infringes upon the Wheeler Viewplane. Due to landmark status, it is unlikely that Independence Square will be redeveloped in the future. Staff recommends that HPC grant Viewplane approval due to the existing buildings that already block the view between the Wheeler Opera House and Aspen Mountain and the improbability of future redevelopment of the existing buildings. The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application,or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC continue Conceptual Commercial Design Review and Conceptual Major Development Review for the project located at 434 East Cooper Avenue to restudy the location of the mass on the second floor. Exhibits: A. Relevant Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Guidelines and Objectives. B. Application. 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Conceptual Reviews Staff Memo Page 10 of 10 P62 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING AMENDMENTS TO MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL), COMMERCIAL DESIGN STANDARD REVIEW (CONCEPTUAL),AND VIEWPLANE FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 434 EAST COOPER AVENUE, LOTS Q,R,AND S, BLOCK 89, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION#_, SERIES OF 2014 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-16-011. WHEREAS, the applicant, 434 East Cooper Avenue, LLC represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects, has requested amendments to Major Development (Conceptual), Conceptual Commercial Design Standard Review, and Viewplane Reviews the property located at 434 East Cooper Avenue, Lots Q, R, and S Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, 434 East Cooper Avenue is located within the Commercial Core Historic District; and WHEREAS, 434 East Cooper Avenue received Demolition approval by the Historic Preservation Commission on May 24, 2006 via Resolution number 14, Series of 2006; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Commercial Design Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines per Section 26.412.040.A.2, Commercial Design Standards Review Procedure, of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, pursuant to 26.435.050.C., Mountain Viewplane Review Standards, of the Land Use Code, no development shall be permitted within a mountain view plane unless the Planning 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2014 Page 1 of 3 P63 and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. 1. No mountain view plane is infringed upon, except as provided below. When any mountain view plane projects at such an angle so as to reduce the maximum allowable building height otherwise provided for in this Title, development shall proceed according to the provisions of Chapter 26.445 as a Planned Unit Development so as to provide for maximum flexibility in building design with special consideration to bulk and height, open space and pedestrian space and similarly to permit variations in lot area, lot width,yard and building height requirements and view plane height limitations. The Planning and Zoning Commission, after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Department, may exempt a development from being processed as a Planned Unit Development when the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that the proposed development has a minimal effect on the view plane. When any proposed development infringes upon a designated view plane, but is located in front of another development which already blocks the same view plane,the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether or not the proposed development will further infringe upon the view plane and the likelihood that redevelopment of the adjacent structure will occur to re-open the view plane. In the event the proposed development does not further infringe upon the view plane and re-redevelopment to reopen the view plane cannot be anticipated,the Planning and Zoning Commission shall exempt the development from the requirements of this Section; and WHEREAS, during the December 12, 2012 meeting the applicant demonstrated compliance with Land Use Code Section 26.304.035 Neighborhood Outreach; and WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report to HPC dated December 12, 2012 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had not been met and recommended continuation of the hearing to restudy the mass; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on December 12, 2012, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application during a duly noticed public hearing, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and approved Resolution#33, Series of 2012 with conditions by a vote of five to zero (5 - 0). WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070.E.2 of the Municipal Code states that" all changes to approved plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial amendment; and WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report to HPC dated September 10, 2014 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had not been met and recommended continuation of the hearing to restudy the mass; and 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Resolution# , Series of 2014 Page 2 of 3 P64 WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on September 10, 2014, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application during a duly noticed public hearing, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and .granted approval with conditions by a vote of NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants amendments to HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Conceptual Commercial Design Standard Review, and Viewplane Review for the property located at 434 East Cooper Avenue, Lots Q, R, and S, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. Conceptual approval is granted as presented in the application.. 2. The applicant shall restudy the parapet/cornice in greater detail for Final Review. 3. Off-site public amenity improvements to the Pedestrian Malls is approved in accordance with Land Use Code Section 26.575.030.C(2) Off-site provision of public amenity and is subject to review and approval by the Parks Department. The improvements shall equal or exceed the value of the cash in lieu payment of$67,500. 4. The trash/utility area is approved as presented with the following conditions: a. A detailed mechanical plan shall be submitted for Final Review. b. Trash/alley access for all of the retail spaces shall be demonstrated and reviewed at Final Review. 5. The proposal is determined to have a minimal impact on the viewplane due to the existing development that already blocks the viewplane and is hereby exempt from being processed as a PUD in accordance with Section 26.435.050.C.1. Any mechanical equipment placed within the viewplane shall comply with Section 26.435.050, which may require a new viewplane review. 6. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. Jay Maytin, Chair Approved as to Form: - - - Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Exhibit A: approved conceptual drawings 434 East Cooper Avenue HPC Resolution#_, Series of 2014 Page 3 of 3 P65 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Encompassing the Commercial Core Zone District Design Objectives and Guidelines Policy: Improvements in the Commercial Core Historic District should maintain the integrity of historic resources in the area.At the same time, compatible and creative design solutions should be encouraged. This chapter presents guidelines for new Existing" Character construction and alterations to existing non- The heart of Aspen centers around the Commercial historic structures in the Commercial Core Core Historic District. It is the first area that Historic District. Key design characteristics of developed in the early mining days of the town this district are summarized and then specific and its character reflects this rich mining heritage, guidelines are presented. which is the image that many carry with them of this historic Colorado mountain town. Each Location historic building contributes to the integrity of the The Commercial Core of the city is defined by district and preservation of all of these resources Monarch Street to the west,Durant Avenue to the is,therefore,crucial. This is especially important south,Hunter Street to the east, and roughly the as new development continues. alley to the north of Main Street to the north.(See the Character Area map in the appendix.) " h r nr e .F a The Commercial Core Zone District is located at the core of Downtown Aspen. Commercial,Lodging and Historic Districts page 91 Design Objectives and Guidelines P66 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Street Pattern As the historic core of the city, its current urban form reflects these origins. It is a grid of streets aligned to the north. Rectangular street blocks of 270 ft.by 220 ft.with long axes and rear alleyways are oriented east-west,and subdivided into 30 by 100 ft.lots.Buildings generally occupy the full lot t P, width within the core area and span the full depth from street frontage to rear alley. a This arrangement still anchors the historical urban r I form of the ci tY despite ite some recent departures Lures MF II from the traditional hard street edge. The variety • '��` of building forms & scales is influenced in areas by previous site-based open space requirements. The traditional lot widths continue to define the r majority of the buildings in this area,either in total width or, where lots have been amalgamated,in their architectural composition, articulation and fenestration pattern. This ensures that the city center is still appreciated for its essential human scale, concentration of historic buildings and The sheet pattern frames spectacular scenic views. visual and cultural experience. Building Character The commercial buildings of the mining era establish the context for new construction, even though individual landmarks of later periods may also be found in the area.Buildings range in scale from early residential including miners'cottages to larger 'iconic'landmark Victorian commercial and community buildings. The latter tend to occupy corner sites and range in scale from one to three stories in height. This area includes the varied range of buildings dating from the city's early history and representing all periods of development in the evolution of Aspen. The character is predominantly urban, while the building pattern in many areas continues to exhibit the original traditional lot width arrangement. The street fagades are strongly defined in many areas by a combination of larger Victorian and smaller scale buildings. This is particularly the case on street corners. page 92 Commercial,Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P67 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Storefront context Most buildings have features associated with t traditional commercial designs. Ground level ` floors of the buildings are oriented to pedestrian views,with large display windows highlighting ` the goods and services offered for sale inside. Recessed entries are also typical. A horizontal band of molding usually separates the ground ` floor from upper portions of the fagade and the parapet is capped with a decorative cornice. ' !*4 These elements combined to establish a horizontal emphasis along the street. Fenestration on upper floors is predominantly ° solid and void'hole in the wall'form and vertical in proportion, reflecting classical architectural proportions.There are,however,departures from this pattern which contribute to the rich diversity of the street. A hard street wall as seen along the walking mall downtown is a characteristic throughout Character Area 1. Outdoor Spaces There are also instances of small scale spaces created by the set back of building fagades. They are, however, the exception to the historic % alignment of building fronts.Where these are used Y. for outdoor dining they provide attractive public . gathering spaces and street vitality.The intent is to maintain the strong definition of the street wall in this area,and therefore creating further breaks 3M' in the street wall should be minimized. The resulting character is both intimate and stimulating, and in keeping with the variety and harmony unique to Aspen. There have been departures from the hard street edge, where more recent development has stepped back to create semi-basement space and detached or internal retail frontage often on more than one level. In many cases these have detracted from the immediate relationship between shop frontage and public sidewalk and the sense of street fagade definition, with adverse effects on street vitality and the urban character within Victorian storefronts anchor the Commercial Core and define downtown Aspen. the key characteristics of building height,mass,articulation and materials. Commercial,Lodging and Historic District page 93 Design Objectives and Guidelines P68 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Design Objectives 4. Reflect the variety in building heights seen These are key design objectives for the Commercial historically. Core.The City must find that any new work will New development should stay within the range help to meet them: of building heights,and be designed to reflect the variation in height across traditional lot widths. 1. Maintain a retail orientation. The scale and form of a new building should be Traditionally the hub of Aspen and the center of designed to safeguard the setting of a historic commercial and cultural activity,the Commercial building,whether single story or the large'iconic' Core should remain so. Designs for new three plus stories. construction should reinforce the retail-oriented function of the street and enhance its pedestrian 5. Accommodate outdoor public spaces where character, they respect the historic context. The street vitality associated with the center 2. Promote creative, contemporary design that of the city should be retained and enhanced respects the historic context. through a combination of the form and design of While new construction should be compatible the walkable street network and the associated with the historic character of the district,designs areas of public gathering space at street level and should not copy early styles but instead should above. The design of any public space within seek creative new solutions that convey the the core should be a central consideration in community's continuing interest in exploring the design and configuration of the building, to innovations. At the same time, the fundamental ensure that it contributes to a positive experience principles of traditional design must be respected. in the streetscene,whether or not used for street This means that each project should strike a dining. balance in the design variables that are presented in the following pages. 6. Promote variety in the street level experience. 3. Maintain the traditional scale of building. Architectural form should recognize existing scale The Commercial core of the city is likely to and diversity and build upon established design experience continuing market pressure for hotel, traditions,creativity and innovation in a manner commercial and residential development and Which strengthens the architectural richness the parallel needs of affordable commercial and and identity of the city core. The contextual residential accommodation. It is important that contribution of building and storefront design future growth acknowledges, complements and will depend on detailed consideration of the street enhances the existing scale and character of this fagade and associated landscaping and paving. area. 7. Preserve the integrity of historic resources within the district. The original form,character,materials and details of historic resources should be maintained. This applies to individual structures of landmark quality as well as more modest "contributing" structures. page 94 Commercial,Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P69 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Conceptual Review Design Guidelines 1-he foll.mving design guidelines shall apply at the conceptual review stake. Street & Alley Systems �� .,f� �► . The street pattern is essential 'infrastructure' pew for the character of the district. The north/ r� south orientation of the streets accentuatesy* ' the relationship of the City with its dramatic landscape setting. The circulation pattern provided by the network [ A f of streets,alleys and courts should be retained to ensure maximum public access. It should not be Fre Y enclosed by gating and it should not be spanned by development above. Wherever possible b "' pedestrian access to alleys should be enhanced. p i. r The creation of additional public walkways to • h y , a rear alleys and other public spaces enhances the The network of streets,alleys and existing pedestrian passageways interest of the city center. enhances access in the downtown. Additional links and an enhanced public circulation pattern can increase commercial frontage and access to the side,to the rear and also to the interior of development sites. Improved access also creates opportunities for additional commercial space,which is to be encouraged. Street Grid The original arrangement of parcels significantly affects the visual character of the area. The city was platted on a grid system of lots and blocks, and buildings were typically sited parallel with these lot lines. The layout of early buildings, streets, sidewalks and alleys still can all be seen in this system, and should be maintained. 6.1 Maintain the established town grid in all projects. • The network of streets and alleys should be retained as public circulation space and for maximum public access. • Streets and alleys should not be enclosed or closed to public access, and should remain open to the sky. Commercial,Lodging and Historic District page 95 Design Objectives and Guidelines ""� P70 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen 3,. Internal Walkways X, 6.2 Public walkways and through courts, when appropriate,should be designed to create access to additional commercial space and frontage, within the walkway and/or to the rear s of the site. See also: Public Amenity Space design guidelines. Alleys Historically, alleyscapes were simple and Maintain the established town grid in all projects. utilitarian in character,with a variety of materials and building scales. Many structures had additions that were subordinate to the main building, stepping down in scale at the alley. Others had loading docks, stairs and balconies that contributed to the human scale. This traditional character should be maintained, while accommodating compatible new uses.The continued development of visual interest in these alleys is encouraged.Greater variety in forms and materials.is also appropriate here. 6.3 Develop an alley facade to create visual interest. • Use varied building setbacks and changes in materials to create interest and reduce perceived scale. • Balconies, court yards and decks are also appropriate. • Providing secondary public entrances is strongly encouraged along alleys. These should be clearly intended for public use, but subordinate in detail to the primary street-side entrance. page 96 Commercial,Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P71 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Parking The character of the Commercial Core Historic I� District is one which is primarily appreciated on foot. The human scale and concentration of walkable streets is a key attraction. Therefore the visual impact of parking should in all cases be minimized. Parking should be structured or placed underground where the scale and setting of the site affords this opportunity. Where a parking structure is considered this should be contained within a'wrap' of commercial and/or Where a parking structure might be considered this should be residential uses. within a 'wrap' of commercial and/or residential uses, as this building is. 6.4 Structured parking should be placed within a'wrap'of commercial and/or residential uses. • The exposure of auto entry areas should be minimized. 6.5 Structured parking access should not have a negative impact on the character of the street.The access shall be: • Located on an alley or secondary street if x necessary. • Designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building fa dde. Parking access located on an alley and integrated into the building design. • Integrated into the building design. Commercial,Lodging and Historic District °a page 97 Design objectives and Guidelines y P72 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Public Amenity Space In every case Public Amenity Space should be On-site and communal open space has been a well defined and carefully designed. The design long-standing priority and characteristic of the of public gathering space, its enclosure, layout city. Where it is required the form, orientation, and content, will be an integral consideration quality and use of such open space is of the utmost in the proposed form of the space. Although a importance. Well defined public space should be matter for full review and approval at the Final integrated with traditional streetscape character. Stage,its design should be envisioned at the time The Planning and Zoning Commission and/or of conceptual review. the Historic Preservation Commission will decide whether,where and in what form Public Amenity Design Objectives Space will be required. Where considered to be compatible within the Commercial Core Historic District,public amenity In the past,open spaces occurred as accents along space should be designed and placed to achieve the street, usually where a house existed in the the following objectives: historic context or where a lot stood temporarily 0 Create an active and interesting street vitality vacant.In more recent years,outdoor spaces were through the promotion of public gathering built that sometimes eroded the character of the space. street edge. These conditions are not precedents 0 Maintain a well-defined street edge and for future development. While some open space street corner to ensure that such public space may occur, it should be subordinate to the creates an accent within the street facade. traditional character of the street. Create an additional commercial frontage Public amenity space along the primary street • and/or space to the side or rear of the site frontage should be an accent within, and or building exception to, an otherwise well defined street 0 Create a well defined,localized public space fagade. There will be locations within the city at the street edge, where e.g. additional core where the character and setting of the site space for street dining might be beneficial. or a historic building will also influence the form, 0 Design a space that maximizes access to location or appropriateness of such a space. sunlight throughout the year. • Create a second level space designed to ensure that it is permanently open to the a t- public and provides interest in the form of a - R s *z ; scenic or other interpretive marker for the life 41, "Yj` 9M"{j. . �'- of its service as a public amenity space. Achieve second floor patio space that � � • provides access to affordable commercial { uses. The Downtown Enhancement and Pedestrian Plan should serve as an additional reference. Whereopen space within a parcel is appropriate,develop an amenity that can be experienced by the general public. page 98 Commercial,Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P73 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Public Amenity Space Types Public amenity space is a requirement in the t Commercial Core. In this area, particular types : of public amenity space would be in character with the urban form of the Commercial Core area. These include: • Street facing amenity space • Mid-block walkway amenity space • Alley side amenity space • Second level amenity space • Front yard amenity space Guidelines for the location and design of each of these types follow. A variety of public amenity spaces exist in Downtown Aspen.In future development it is important to focus on the quality of the space rather than the quantity. The walking mall in Downtown Aspen provides substantial public amenity space for the bu ildings located there,and therefore creating breaks in the block facade within this area to provide more street- facing public amenity space should be carefully considered. Commercial,Lodging and Historic District 44,r� page 99 Design Objectives and Guidelines P74 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Street Facing Amenity Space ¢-°----= �= A street facing amenity space, usually located i f r towards the middle of a block, may be considered. However, within the heart of the district, where the greatest concentration of historic storefronts i I align, creating new gaps in the street wall is discouraged. Providing space on sites that are f,I located in the outer edges of the district,especially = `. w along the southern edge is more appropriate. f' 't- ' -,-: 6.6 A street facing amenity space shall meet all of the following requirements: • Street facing amenity space should abut the public sidewalk,be Abut the public sidewalk Be level with the sidewalk level with the sidewalk,open to the sky,directly accessible to the • public and be paved or otherwise landscaped. • Be open to the sky • Be directly accessible to the public ' � � • Be paved or otherwise landscaped 6.7 A street-facing public amenity space shall remain subordinate to the line of building .,X. fronts in the Commercial Core. r Any public amenity space positioned at the .H t street edge shall respect the character of the 4x streetscape and ensure that street corners are s� well defined, with buildings placed at the sidewalk edge. • Sunken spaces, which are associated with some past developments, adversely affect the street character. Where feasible, these should be replaced with sidewalk level improvements. P � 6.8 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. These Street facing amenity space should contain public art and other may include one or more of the following: Street furniture amenities to promote its use. • • Public art • Historical/interpretive marker The detailed design of Public Amenity Space, with regard to guidelines 6.8,will be a matter for approval at the Final Review Stage, although it may be discussed at the Conceptual Stage. page 100 Commercial,Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P75 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Mid-Block Walkway Amenity Space New buildings on sites occupying more than ;' ` one traditional lot width may provide a mid- block walkway or through court within a single . development or between two developments. This type of space shall be an extension of and a r complement to the street and public circulation network within the center of the city. See also = ` Street&Alley System design guidelines. r "All The Commercial Core is highly regarded for x its pedestrian character and 'walkability'. The opportunities created by the extension and ,vl,­. enhancement of the public circulation network " has distinct urban benefits and is encouraged. ; Typically only one such space would occur along F a single block face. This form of Public Amenity Space should be __ �. a consideration on larger development sites ..-z within the city. It links the potential of additional a commercial frontage and access, with human scale space and circulation, enriching the public experience. Situated along the edge of a development site,it should extend to link with the Amid-block passage may link through a property to provide access l� to uses along the side of a building or to businesses on an alley. rear alley. Adjacent to a residential type historic building it can provide a respectful break and a space between the two. 6.9 Mid-block walkways shall remain �' ' subordinate in scale to traditional lot widths. a • Mid-block public walkways shall bebetween 8 ft. and 10 ft. in width. V ' z J9 6.10 A mid-block walkway should provide ] public access to the following: , • Additional commercial space and frontage within the walkway 1 • Uses located at the rear of the property A passageway may be considered as Public Amenity Space when it remains subordinate to the continuity of the block face.It should be designed to visually appealing and to provide access to active uses. Commercial,Lodging and Historic DistrictW page 101 Design Objectives and Guidelines P76 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Alley Side Amenity Space Public amenity space may be located to the rear -_a of the site in association with the alleyway. Such --° * a space shall provide access to commercial uses at the street or second floor level.Public amenity space may also be located at the corner of an alley � ' ---' and a street. Such spaces should be designed ' - to enhance the use of alleys for or supporting - commercial uses. ►" 6.11 An alley side amenity space shall be designed to have these characteristics: I Direct public access to commercial space at street or second floor levels Public amenity space located at an alley should generally be south • Maximize solar access to the alley side facing to maximize solar access for the space and provide access to commercial space that may be located there. amenity space • Enhance of the attractiveness and use of the rear alley • Minimize the adverse impacts of adjacent service and parking areas page 102 a Commercial,Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P77 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Second Level Amenity Space An outdoor patio space on a second floor,which is directly accessible to the general public, will be considered as a form of public amenity space x when it is compatible with the historic context -" .. and is clearly inviting for public use. This will be most successful in association with outdoor dining space. In this respect it may be favorably considered within sites affected by mountain view planes. 6.12 Second level amenity space should be Second level space shall be accessible f om a public space such as compatible with the character of the historic a sidewalk or street facing amenity space. district. - _ • It shall remain visually subordinate to any historic resource on the property. i • If located on a historic property,it may not alter the appearance of the resource as seen from the street. k ill 1 ` 6.13 A second floor amenity space should meet E all of the following criteria: • Ensure consistent public access • Be dedicated for public use • Provide a public overlook and/or an interpretive marker Outdoor private space shall be demarcated from the public amenity • Be identified by a marker at street level space. 6.14 Second level space should be oriented to maximize solar access and mountain views, or views of historic landmarks. 6.15 Second level space should provide public access by way of a visible and attractive public , stair or elevator from a public street, alley, or street level amenity space. z - °A -'x Second level public amenity space shall provide permanent public access from the street. Commercial,Lodging and Historic District d"-t page 103 Design Objectives and Guidelines ''' P78 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Front Yard Amenity Space Certain areas within the Commercial Core retain a distinct historic residential character.This is often defined by a landscaped front yard and side yard " setback. To maintain and enhance this tradition in certain areas,a landscaped front yard amenity �rr!"j space may be considered. 6.16 Second level dining may be considered. If the use changes, the space must remain ,may' � . accessible to,the public, so long as it is to be considered meeting the public amenity Certain areas within the commercial core are identified with historic space requirement. single story buildings with setbacks.Front yard setbackareas may be considered as public amenity space in such an instance. 6.17 Front and side yard amenity space should be considered in the context of a historic one P1.1001 1 51 story residential type building. Building Placement The ftMm O�HZ7 E.Hyman Ave. Street Corners a Street corners are important elements in the qM1 We • 0 street block and in the framing of many of the R views which characterize the Commercial Core. Many buildings on corner lots exhibit special This figure ground study illustrates the alignment and amount of features that add accents. Corner entrances and open space along the street edge during the year 1904. storefront windows that extend along intersecting street facades are examples. These elements are KILN appropriate in many corner lot locations and v should be encouraged.Here the buildings should confirm the pattern of a strongly defined building m m ; M wall at the street edge. Building facades should be oriented parallel to the street, with variation E.Hyman Ave. pm".,Amu In E 3 in front wall setbacks kept a minimum. Any departure from the street wall,ll, for well defined and designed public dining space, should occur as an accent within the street block, not the predominant pattern. The same blocks in 1999. Notice how the increased use of open space has eroded the building wall along the sheet. Exceptions for street dining might be considered, in the outer southern edge of the Commercial Core. These sites often serve as focal points for public activity and therefore sitting areas and other gathering spots are appropriate in the outer edges of the district. page 104 Commercial,Lodging and,Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P79 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Building Setbacks The Commercial Core has a strong and relatively consistent street fagade line. Corner buildings, often of late 19th/early 20th century form,anchor ,* the street block in many instances. Within the street fagade however there are some departures from this where small areas of open space provide individual street dining experiences. Setbacks within the central commercial area should reinforce the objective of maintaining , W, ,m and enhancing the special urban and traditional character of the strong urban edge of the street Traditionally,commercial buildings were built to the sidewalk edge fagade and street corner. Local areas of open space and anchored the corner.This should be continued. also further the objective of the street vitality created by well defined dining space within the city. These should however remain as an accent within the street fagade. Side setbacks provide the opportunity to create or > enhance public passageways or through courts to the rear alley, with the advantages of improved public permeability, access and additional commercial frontage. See also Street&Circulation Pattern guidelines,design idelines, Rear setbacks create < g 1 ; the opportunity to achieve more creative and attractive commercial and public space to the rear ti of the site and alley. '' In sum, buildings create a strong edge to the � r street because they traditionally aligned on the front lot line and were usually built out to the full width of a parcel.Although small gaps do occur x. between some structures, these are exceptions. _� This uniform wall of building fronts is vitally This second floor patio incorporates an abstract interpretation of important to the historic integrity of the district upper-story windows and cornice elements to define the space and and should be preserved. maintain the building wall line along the block. Commercial,Lodging and Historic District u�1 page 405 Design objectives and Guidelines "' P80 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen 6.18 Maintain the alignment of fagades at the sidewalk's edge. • Place as much of the fagade of the building at the property line as possible. Locating an entire building front PCB€ ry� behind the established storefront line is a inappropriate. �u � • A minimum of 70% of the front facade k shall be at the property line. rX 6.19 A building may be set back from its side lot lines in accordance with design guidelines identified in Street & Circulation Pattern and v Q•. Public Amenity Space guidelines. i e Yd, Building Orientation Development within the core area has been r, traditionally oriented with the street grid. This relationship should be maintained. a x- 6.20 Orient a new building to be parallel to its ` lot lines,similar to that of traditional building orientations. • The front of a primary structure shall be Maintain the alignment of fagades at the sidewalk's edge. oriented to the street. 6.21 Orient a primary entrance toward the street. • Buildings should have a clearly defined primary entrance. For most commercial buildings, this should be a recessed entry way. • Do not orient a primary entrance to an interior court. • Providing secondary public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger buildings. page 106 Commercial,Lodging and Historic District = Design Objectives and Guidelines P81 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Building Form A prominent,unifying element of the Commercial Core is the similarity of building forms. '� �� Commercial buildings were simple rectangular " solids,deeper than they were wide,with flat roofs. -- „ In a few instances,gabled roofs,with false fronts, f �' � N. may have been seen. This characteristic of flat roof lines is important and should be continued - - ' in new projects. ng 3M 6.22 Rectangular forms should be dominant Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core on Commercial Core facades. facades. • Rectangular forms should be vertically oriented. r - - - - T - - � - - - - , • The fagade should appear as predominantly flat, with any decorative elements and projecting or setback "articulations" appearing to be subordinate to the dominant i YES! NO! YES! YES! form. 6.23 Use flat roof lines as the dominant roof sidewalk form. • A flat roof, or one that gently slopes to the street rear of a site, should be the dominant roof form. Orient a building parallel to its lot lines. • Parapets on side fagades should step down towards the rear of the building. • False fronts and parapets with horizontal emphasis also may be considered. 6.24 Along a rear fagade,using building forms that step down in scale toward the alley is encouraged. • Consider using additive forms,such as sheds, stairs and decks to reduce the perceived scale.These forms should however,remain subordinate to the primary structure. • Use projecting roofs at the ground floor over entrances, decks and for separate utility structures in order to establish a human scale that invites pedestrian activity. Commercial,Lodging and Historic District page 107 Design Objectives and Guidelines "''' P82 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen Building Height, Mass & Scale The character of the Commercial Core derives E in part from the range and variety of building heights. These vary from one to three stories. Building height with traditional lot width and creates a constantly changing cornice profile along a block face. This is the basis of the human scale, architectural character and visual vitality of the b' f city center. New development in this area should continue this variation. With respect to scale,a new building shall also be Maintaining a block fagade and orienting new development with sensitive to nearby historic building These range the street grid are two key objectives in the Commercial Core from single story historic residential structures to District. three story Victorian commercial buildings. Two Story Scale 6.25 Maintain the average perceived scale of two-story buildings at the sidewalk. Establish a two-story height at the sidewalk edge,or provide a horizontal design element at this level. A change in materials, or a molding at this level are examples. Height Variation Maintain the average perceived scale of two-story buildings at In the Commercial Core area building heights the sidewalk. range from one to three stories. This variation in fagade height is a key characteristic that should be maintained. Variation in height should occur where the site is larger than two traditional lot widths,in order to reduce overall scale of the building. A variation in fagade height,often in conjunction with setting back an upper floor,may be required. 6.26 Building facade height shall be varied from the facade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories. • If an adjacent structure is three stories and 38 ft.tall,new infill may be three stories,but must vary in fagade height by a minimum of 2 ft. page 108 Commercial,Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P83 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District 6.27 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Core. : • Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height limit on the subject property. • Aminimum 9 ft.floorto ceiling height is to be maintained on second stories and higher. • Additional height,as permitted in the zone district,may be added for one or more of the following reasons: - In order to achieve at least a two-foot variation in height with an adjacent A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation building. in building height of the Commercial Core. - The primary function of the building is civic.(i.e.the building is a Museum,Civic Building,Performance Hall, Fire Station, = -- 7 etc.) _ he property is affected Some portion oft p p ty - by a height restriction due to its proximity � R to a historic resource, or location within a View Plane, therefore relief in another rtp =*1 A � *i;t�, area may be appropriate, + - To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units. - To make a demonstrable(to be verified by Methods of achieving height variation within a single building include(A)stepping the building down as it approaches the alley the Building Department)contribution to and(B)stepping the building along the primary fagade. the building's overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved day- Existing Building New Building lighting. 6.28 Height variation should be achieved using one or more of the following: (( "42' • Vary the building height for the full depth ss' of the site in accordance with traditional lot width. • Setback the upper floor to vary the building facade profile(s) and the roof forms across Building facade height shall be varied from the facade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories. the width and the depth of the building. • Vary the fagade (or parapet) heights at the front. • Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. Commercial,Lodging and Historic District page 109 Design Objectives and Guidelines ° P84 Commercial Core Historic District City of Aspen --. Height Variation for Larger Sites Buildings within the commercial center and m historic core of Aspen represent the traditional lot rx widths of the city(30 ft.),either in building width • � or the horizontal and vertical design articulation of the street facade. New development occupying a site of more than one traditional lot width _�•� 1� should be designed to integrate with the scale created by narrower existing buildings. The -ii architectural rhythm of earlier street fagades should also be reflected in new development to retain and enhance the human scale and character of the center of the city. + ° 6.29 On sites comprising more than two �N traditional lot widths, the facade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. s f The fagade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. Height should be varied every 60 ft. minimum and referabl 30 ft. of P Y every i� _' linear frontage in keeping with traditional lot widths and development patterns. •- No more than two consecutive 30 ft.fagade Height variation can occur in a number of ways,depending on site modules may be three stories tall,within an conditions and design intent, individual building. • A rear portion of a third module may rise to three stories, if the front is set back a minimum of 40 feet from the street fagade. (e.g.at a minimum,the front 40 feet may be no more than two stories in height.) 6.30 On sites comprising two or more traditional lots,a building shall be designed to reflect the individual parcels. These methods shall be used: • Variation in height of building modules across the site • Variation in massing achieved through upper floor setbacks, the roofscape form and variation in upper floor heights • Variation in building fagade heights or cornice line page 110 Commercial,.Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines P85 City of Aspen Commercial Core Historic District Height Adjacent to Historic Structures .s The Commercial Core Historic District is the --- " setting for a very diverse range of historic structures. Designing a building in the historic -- district demands a sensitivity in design analysis ' and approach which is exacting and which will vary with each situation. The intent is that a �►; } new building or addition to an existing building should be designed to respect the height and4'` -. scale of historic buildings within the commercial core. ## 4 Historic One Story Commercial Type 6.31 A new building should step down in Building scale to respect the height, form and scale of a historic building within its immediate setting. Building fagade height shall be a maximum of one floor higher within 30 ft.of an adjacent single story historic building. 6.32 When adjacent to a one or two story historic building thatwas originally constructed -� for commercial use,a new building within the same block face should not exceed 28 in height *' within 30 ft. of the front facade. • In general,a proposed multi-story building r... must demonstrate that it has no negative impact on smaller, historic structures L, nearby. • The height and proportions of all facade Mn components must appear to be in scale with Story P Pp Historic One Sto Residen' I nearby historic buildings. type Building 6.33 New development adjacent to a single New infill adjacent to historic miners cottages shall not exceed story historic building that was originally 28 ft. in height within 30 ft.of the property line adjacent to the constructed for residential use shall not exceed historic structure. 28 ft.in height within 30 ft.of the side property line adjacent to the historic structure, within Iconic Historic Structures the same block face. Visually prominent historic structures 6.34 The setting of iconic historic structures influence the design character of Downtown should be preserved and enhanced when Aspen and should be recognized.These are: feasible. The Wheeler Opera House • On sites comprising more than two The Elks building traditional lot widths, the third floor of The Independence building the adjacent lot width should be set back a • Pitkin County Courthouse minimum of 15 ft from the front facade. • p Ste a building down in height adjacent to Hotel Jerome City Hall an iconic structure. St. Mary's Church • Locate amenity space adjacent to an iconic • structure. Commercial,Lodging and Historic District page M Design Objectives and Guidelines EXHIBIT C. Thomas Whitehead 43B Smuggler Grove Aspen, CO September 7, 2014 Sara Adams Senior Planner City of Aspen Aspen Historic Commission Dear Sara Adams, My name is Tom Whitehead and I'm writing to comment on and object to the redevelopment plan at 28 Smuggler Grove. I own the property directly across the street at 43B Smuggler Grove. I bought the property in 2005 and spend about five months a year in Aspen. Before buying this property, my wife and I rented houses in both the east and west end of town for about fifteen years. I have an understanding and appreciation for historical preservation and believe it has been a very positive program for Aspen. However, I do not think that the use of the historical preservation criteria for 28 Smuggler Grove is appropriate. The house was moved to the neighborhood from somewhere else and has no significance in the history of the development of the neighborhood. The size of the proposed structures and their encroachment on the front setback will dramatically alter the feel of the neighborhood. I believe that the size, height and front encroachment will make the structures feel like a wall and not residences. I believe all the current property owners were looking forward to someone buying and doing a rehab of 28 Smuggler Grove, but two houses on such a small lot was not something we were prepared for. Had the current developers introduced themselves and sought feedback,perhaps they would have understood why no one on the street is in favor of their plan. I believe this is a totally speculative real estate deal in that the "historic asset" is being used to maximize their potential for profit. Should the plan be approved, I think the structures should be scaled back in footage and moved back as far from the street as possible. I love the Smuggler Grove neighborhood and the fact that all the current property owners get along quite well. I hope to spend a lot of time in Aspen in the future and would not like to see the change in the character of the neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, C. Thomas Whitehead EJ(HIBIT C. Thomas Whitehead Aq 43B Smuggler Grove Aspen, CO September 7, 2014 Sara Adams Senior Planner City of Aspen Aspen Historic Commission Dear Sara Adams, My name is Tom Whitehead and I'm writing to comment on and object to the redevelopment plan at 28 Smuggler Grove. I own the property directly across the street at 43B Smuggler Grove. I bought the property in 2005 and spend about five months a year in Aspen. Before buying this property, my wife and I rented houses in both the east and west end of town for about fifteen years. I have an understanding and appreciation for historical preservation and believe it has been a very positive program for Aspen. However, I do not think that the use of the historical preservation criteria for 28 Smuggler Grove is appropriate. The house was moved to the neighborhood from somewhere else and has no significance in the history of the development of the neighborhood. The size of the proposed structures and their encroachment on the front setback will dramatically alter the feel of the neighborhood. I believe that the size, height and front encroachment will make the structures feel like a wall and not residences. I believe all the current property owners were looking forward to someone buying and doing a rehab of 28 Smuggler Grove,but two houses on such a small lot was not something we were prepared for. Had the current developers introduced themselves and sought feedback,perhaps they would have understood why no one on the street is in favor of their plan. I believe this is a totally speculative real estate deal in that the"historic asset" is being used to maximize their potential for profit. Should the plan be approved, I think the structures should be scaled back in footage and moved back as far from the street as possible. I love the Smuggler Grove neighborhood and the fact that all the current property owners get along quite well. I hope to spend a lot of time in Aspen in the future and would not like to see the change in the character of the neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, C. Thomas Whitehead EXHIBIT C. Thomas Whitehead 43B Smuggler Grove Aspen, CO September 7, 2014 Sara Adams Senior Planner City of Aspen Aspen Historic Commission Dear Sara Adams, My name is Tom Whitehead and I'm writing to comment on and object to the redevelopment plan at 28 Smuggler Grove. I own the property directly across the street at 43B Smuggler Grove. I bought the property in 2005 and spend about five months a year in Aspen. Before buying this property,my wife and I rented houses in both the east and west end of town for about fifteen years. I have an understanding and appreciation for historical preservation and believe it has been a very positive program for Aspen. However, I do not think that the use of the historical preservation criteria for 28 Smuggler Grove is appropriate. The house was moved to the neighborhood from somewhere else and has no significance in the history of the development of the neighborhood. The size of the proposed structures and their encroachment on the front setback will dramatically alter the feel of the neighborhood. I believe that the size, height and front encroachment will make the structures feel like a wall and not residences. I believe all the current property owners were looking forward to someone buying and doing a rehab of 28 Smuggler Grove, but two houses on such a small lot was not something we were prepared for. Had the current developers introduced themselves and sought feedback,perhaps they would have understood why no one on the street is in favor of their plan. I believe this is a totally speculative real estate deal in that the "historic asset" is being used to maximize their potential for profit. Should the plan be approved, I think the structures should be scaled back in footage and moved back as far from the street as possible. I love the Smuggler Grove neighborhood and the fact that all the current property owners get along quite well. I hope to spend a lot of time in Aspen in the future and would not like to see the change in the character of the neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, C. Thomas Whitehead Sara Adams From: John Redmond <johnredmond @gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 4:24 PM To: Sara Adams Subject: Smuggler Grove Sa ra, I'm in opposition of a variance toward the street. The impact is inconsistent with the rest of the neighborhood.As for moving the house, if he existing house is moved east, it would negatively Impact Snyder Park residents due to the nature, historically, of the renters(louder party types) Thanks for your consideration. John Redmond Snyder Park Resident Sent from my iPad 1 AFFIDA VIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE COD ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: , �ZT_Aelspen, CO SC D LED PUBLIC/HARING DA E: 20jy STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitldn ) (name,please print) being or representing an Applicant to e City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication notice•o f . By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the_ day of " 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304..060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to N the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage �102q3TT prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the �r J pzopeity'subject:to the development application. The names and addresses of O(WIQ.f property.owners'shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as the `aC3004a3 appeared no moe than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A err Qf the.,a s and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued 071 next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the ublic hearing on the application of development. date scheduled for the initial p The names and addresses of min eral estate ownurbsdivisionse, SPAsoor PUD that tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, create more than one lot, new Planned Uni Developments, and.new Specially .pled Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or teat amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any in revision Of this way to be changed or amended 'dental to or amended, whether general such revision be as part of a Title, or whenever the text of thus Title is to b made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new of oee�ent legal Otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map description of, and the notice to and listing of names be ��vesde5 However,of owners t0 real property in the area of the proposed Chang proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature davit of Notice" was ac o hedged befor e thiO l�day The forgoin A f h fo , 20 ,by Of Pl1YLICHOTICE WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ICAI UNITS IN STREET FACING YARD RE:208 LAKE AVE--SPECIAL REVIEW FOR MECHAN NOTICE ISNEREBYGWEN$eatemberlo 20 a, My commission expires: will be held on Wednesday., P m betore at a regular meeting to begin at 5:00 p., . the Aspen Historic Prey Ha1l i 1"30 S.galena Stn. Council Chambers,City lication submd- Aspen. HP C will consider an aPan on behalf of at led by Protect owner of he property located W Lake 206,LLC, -Notary Public Lake Lake Ave,Lot 20 of the Shaa d,d the ie of The applicant re- Joint Venture Subdivision,Cdy "pen'Special aI Rev eW4 PP oval to I"ca+e mesh Fo KAREN REED PATE ERSON quests Sp `ach. cal equipment underneath the front p NOTARY PUBLIC ent Department, STATE OF COLORADO further information,contact Sara Adams 970)429-2778. of As en Commundy Pene1C0 C 130 g.Galenatyt.,A en.com. NOTARY ID#19964002767 sara.adamscci ofasp APPLICABLE: da Ma in Preservation Commission MES` AS My Commission E Tres February 15,2016 Chair,Aspen Historic Prese 1�1L Publl sh dint the the Aspen T ITes on me Weekly on Au9ust�oN • 21,2014 10471210 1 u 1 L AA ur 1 HE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED B Y MAIL . • CER TIFICATION OF MINERAL ES TAE OWNERS NOTICE APPLICANT AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103 �g EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPER (z n s Aspen, CO SC DULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 204 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitldn I �YU4 [�ti��� (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the _ day of , 20_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached-hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage w.�. ­-prepaid U:S,.­mffi all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the 008937 i p pe ' 8Ro the development application. The names and addresses- of O(JAr;p46 pv rs sh lI be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they msooa 8. . at 'it re an sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A atos.t►ysu+t� K x 1 fS fY1J p91 nd governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued 077 next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAs or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and. new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any ' way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection n the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. I Signature The fore ing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged befor me this a of f, 20 f4,by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL PUBLIC NOTICE E.COOPER CO My commission expires: CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN RE- VIEWS and VIEWPLANE REVIEW " NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday,September 10,2014, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m.before the As- pen Historic Preservation Commission,Council Otary public Chambers,City Hall,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,to consider an application submitted by 434 East . Cooper LLC with authorization from property own- [KAREN REED PATTERSON er Bert Bidwell Investments Corp.,215 S.Monarch Street,Suite 203. The applicant is represented by NOTARY PUBLIC Charles Cunniffe Architecture. The project affects STATE OF COLORADO the pproperty located at 434 E.Cooper Avenue Lots 0,Fi,and SS Block 89,City and Townsite of Aspen, NOTARY ID#18964002767 County 2- 6-011n, State is Colorado, PID CHIVIENTS AS APPLICABLE•place t e exis-011. The applicant proposes to re- y Commiuion Ettpi►rs p�bruary 15,2018 place the existing building with a new two story en-` tirely commercial building.An amendment to Con-- HON +7 ceptual Commercial Design Review,Conceptual CAl HON Major Development Review for a property located within the Commercial Core Historic District and ME POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) Viewplane Review are requested.For further in- formation,contact Sara Adams at the City of As- pan Community Development Department,130 S.�AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED Galena St.,Aspen,CO,(970)429-2778,sara.ad- amsOcityofaspen.com Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commie-ICATION OF MINERAL ES TAE OWNERS NOTICE sion 77 Published in the Aspen Times on August 21,2014 R•S• §24-65.5-103.3 Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on August 21,2014(10471142) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDPZESS rr OF PROPERTY: //�� Goc pao r f1vnntAP , Aspen, CO SCHEDLED PUBLIC HEARING DATE- D M r I©� , 2014 1 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin I ) 1, �r i a n V-) (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. _X_ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted_at least fi tee (15) days prior to the public hearing on the22'5��i"ay of s S , 20)�- , to and including the date and time of the public hearing.Aphojt�ograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this W day of gen �b�r- , 20 14 , by r;sN �- YePLB� WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL :•� `DI ROSE e My commission expires: ? VVERSKY Notary Public MY C@ta '�i g 0&2612013 ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPYOFTHEPUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 t PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 434 E. COOPER AVENUE, AMENDMENT TO CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEWS and VIEWPLANE REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, September 10, 2014, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by 434 East Cooper LLC with authorization from property owner Bert Bidwell Investments Corp., 215 S. Monarch Street, Suite 203. The applicant is represented by Charles Cunniffe Architecture. The project affects the property located at 434 E. Cooper Avenue Lots Q, R, and S, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, PID #2737-182-16-011. The applicant proposes to replace the existing building with a new two story entirely commercial building. An amendment to Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Conceptual Major Development Review for a property located within the Commercial Core Historic District and Viewplane Review are requested. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2778, sara.adatns@cityofaspen.com s/Jay Mavtin Chair,Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on August 21, 2014 City of Aspen Account Easy el®Labels ♦ Bend along line to Use Ave ry®Template 5160® j Feed Paper expose Pop Up EdgeTM j WAVERY® 56604D i 305-7 MILL STREET LLC 4 SKIERS LP 400 EAST HYMAN LLC 412 N PAULINA 1 108 NORFLEET DR 400 E HYMAN AVE STE# A202 CHICAGO, IL 60622 NASHVILLE,TN 372201412 ASPEN, CO 81611 400 HYMAN LLC 400 HYMAN LLC 407 HYMAN LLC 6829 QUEENFERRY CIR PO BOX 351 416 MOORE DR BOCA RATON, FL 33496 RIFLE, CO 816500351 ASPEN, CO 81611 409 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC 413 EAST HYMAN AVENUE LLC 450 SOUTH GALENA ST INVESTORS LLC 2001 N HALSTED #304 320 W MAIN ST 450 S GALENA ST#202 CHICAGO, IL 60614 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 514 AH LLC 520 EAST COOPER PTNRS LLC AGRUSA LISA ANN 514 E HYMAN AVE 402 MIDLAND PARK 4761 W BAY BLVD #1704 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ESTERO, FL 33928 AJAX MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATES LLC AP RT 29 LLC ASPEN CORE VENTURES LLC 520 E DURANT ST#207 601 E HYMAN AVE 418 E COOPER AVE #207 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN GROVE ASSOCIATES LLP ASPEN MOUNTAIN FUN LLC ASPEN RETREAT LLC 51027 HWY 6 8.24#100 PO BOX 10264 6536 E GAINSBOROUGH GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 ASPEN, CO 81612 SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85251 ASPENHOF CONDO ASSOC ASPENHOF CONDO ASSOC AV STEIN LLC 19.08% 520 E COOPER AVE 600 E HOPKINS AVE #203 601 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AVH ONION VENTURES II LLC BARNETT-FYRWALD HOLDINGS INC BLACK HAWK ASPEN LLC 601 E HYMAN AVE 2222 COTTONDALE LN #200 ROECLIFFE COTTAGE JOE MOORES LN ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLE ROCK, AR 722022017 WOODHOUSE EAVES LEICESTERSHIRE LEI 8TF ENGLAND, BOOGIES BUILDING OF ASPEN LLC BOUNTY LLC BPOE ASPEN LODGE #224 C/O LEONARD WEINGLASS 415 E HYMAN AVE 210 S GALENA ST #21 534 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CARLSON BRUCE E TRUST CHISHOLM REVOCABLE TRUST CITY OF ASPEN PO BOX 3587 3725 N GRANDVIEW DR 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81612 FLAGSTAFF, AZ 86004-1603 ASPEN, CO 81611 Etiquettes fabari peter 1 Repliez 6 la hachure afin de; www.averycom Utilisez le gabarit AVERY®5160 ' Sens de � i rharoam%nt r6v6ler le rebord Pop-Up- i 1-800•GO-AVERY s i T JlWA"D-008-L f w.dn-dod piogai a�jOlgAgj luapwa6jey� !• ® �1a3A1f il�ege6 a)zaslllifi i wo�tiane-mmm ap uye a�ny�ey e�a zai�da� a su 09LS jalad g selpel sa�anbli4 CM LLC COASTAL MOUNTAIN INVESTMENTS COASTAL MTN PROPERTIES LLC C/O ROGER MAROLT LLC 2639 MC CORMICK DR 230 S MILL ST 2519 N MCMULLEN BOOTH RD #510- CLEARWATER, FL 33759 ASPEN, CO 81611 307 CLEARWATER, FL 33761 COOPER STREET COMPANY COOPER STREET DEVELOPMENT LLC COTTONWOOD VENTURES I LLC 601 E HYMAN AVE C/O PYRAMID PROPERTY ADVISORS 419 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 418 E COOPER AVE #207 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 COTTONWOOD VENTURES 11 LLC COX JAMES E LIVING TRUST CRAMER ROBERT W 300 CRESCENT CT#850 3284 SURMONT DR 3502 ARMSTRONG AVE - DALLAS,TX 75201 LAFAYETTE, CA 94549 DALLAS,TX 75205 DARHOWER ADRIENNE DCGB LLC DOLE MARGARET M 1511 NICKERSON ST ATT GIORGIO RIGHETTI CFO 400 E HYMAN AVE #302 AUSTIN,TX 78704 610 WEST 52 ST ASPEN, CO 816111989 NEW YORK, NY 10019 F& M VENTURES LLC FITZGERALD FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD FOOTLOOSE MOCCASIN MAKERS INC C/O MORRIS &FYRWALD RE C/O PITKIN COUNTY DRY GOODS LLC C/O MANUEL GOUVEIA 415 E HYMAN AVE 520 E COOPER 44 SILVERADO CT ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CANON CITY, CO 812129484 FORD ANN MICHIE G & K LAND CO LLC GALENA COOPER LLC 216 WAPITI WAY 0167 WILLOW LN 601 E HYMAN BASALT, CO 81621 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 ASPEN, CO 81611 GERARDOT J REVOCABLE TRUST GONE WEST LLC GORDON DAVID F& LETICIA LLC 5526 HOPKINTON DR 401 W CENTER 555 E DURANT FORT WAYNE, IN 46804 SEARCY, AR 721451406 ASPEN, CO 81611 GORSUCH COOPER LLC GUIDOS SWISS INN LLC HAMMER DRU RESIDENTIAL TRUST 263 E GORE CREEK DR 23655 TWO RIVERS RD 2828 HOOD ST #1602 VAIL, CO 81657 - BASALT, CO 81621 DALLAS,TX 75219 HOPPES DIANA HORSE ISLAND LLC HUDSON KAREN DAY 5400 VERNON AVE #106 300 CRESCENT CT STE #850 409 E COOPER AVE EDINA, MN 55436 DALLAS, TX 75201 ASPEN, CO 81611 HYMAN MALL COMMERCIAL INDEPENDENCE PARTNERS INDEPENDENCE SQUARE UNITS LLC CONDOS LLC 602 E COOPER AVE #202 400 E MAIN ST#2 PO BOX 1028 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 T00995® MV(� t waa6p3 dn-dod asodxa jaded p894 X0915 a;eldwaj any ash `v-A I o;sulk 6uole puag MOM-laaA Aseq 'T JlZl3AV-09-008-! �..dn-dod piogaa Of J9lgAga luawafuetp � WOX/J8Ae•MMM ap up a,ntpey el g zagdag ap suas � gp09t5�Ag3At/3lJege6 al zasllRfl v I laud q selpol sauon;q 'JACOBSON GREGORY JENNE LLP K & W PROPERTIES INC 1511 NICKERSON ST 1510 WINDSOR RD 728 W CANAL ST AUSTIN,TX 78704 AUSTIN,TX 77402 NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FL 32168 KANTZER TAYLOR M FAM TRST #1 KEENE KAREN M KRISTAL ASPEN LLC 216 SEVENTEENTH ST 1700 BASSETT ST#503 1417 WEST 10TH ST MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 DENVER, CO 80202 AUSTIN, TX 787034816 LCT LP LEFFERS JEFFREY J TRUSTEE LINDNER ERIKA L REV TRUST TENNESSEE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 5526 HOPKINTON DR 17017 SE 26TH ST PO BOX 101444 FORT WAYNE, IN 46804 BELLEVUE,WA 98008 NASHVILLE,TN 37224-1444 LOMA ALTA CORPORATION MAIERSPERGER RENELL MARCUS DURANT GALENA LLC PO BOX 886 404 S GALENA PO BOX 1709 LANCASTER,TX 75146-0886 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 MCDONALDS CORPORATION 05/152 MEYER BUSINESS BUILDING LLC MORRIS ROBERT P PAUL NELSON 23655 TWO RIVERS RD 600 E HOPKINS AVE STE 304 142 TANAGER DR BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 MTN ENTERPRISES 80B NH ONION VENTURES II LLC NJ STEIN LLC 52.98% C/O HILLIS OF SNOWMASS 601 E HYMAN AVE 418 E COOPER AVE#207 PO BOX 5739 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 EAGLE, CO 816315739 P & L PROPERTIES LLC PARAGON PENTHOUSE LLC PEYTON MARI 101 S 3RD ST#360 9950 SANTA MONICA BLVD 409 E COOPER #4 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 ASPEN, CO 81611 RANKMORE KEVIN L& JASMINE RED ONION INVESTORS LLC RG COOPER ST 4.83% PO BOX 168 420 E COOPER AVE C/O RONALD GARFIELD WELLINGTON NSW 2820 AUSTRALIA, ASPEN,CO 81611 601 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 RG ONION VENTURES 11 LLC ROSS ROGER A REVOCABLE TRUST RUTLEDGE REYNIE 601 E HYMAN AVE 4720 WAILAPA RD 51 COUNTRY CLUB CIR ASPEN, CO 81611 KILAUEA, HI 96754 SEARCY, AR 72143 SCHROEDER FAMILY TRUST SCHULTZE DANIEL G SEVEN CONTINENTS LLC 4 GREENWOOD CT 404 S GALENA ST #210 601 E HYMAN AVE ORINDA, CA 94563 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 T 0099S ®AU3Ad r woo;a�dd6 Q(�pasodxa �ade�aa� ,� 009LS aleldwaj GAJaAV as0 t`-'-t siaae, a la8A Asea Easy Peel'd labels i A Bend along line to i i Use Avery®Template 51600 Feed Paper expose Pop-Up EdgeTm I DA%MRY(D 56600 OZZ8i7 IW '31VON2133 trOZ# 3AV OdVMOOOM OSLZZ Damn O 3ON321MV1 31OM £Z917l AN 'd9IS3HOO8 )I21Vd O2113W 091 OOSSV NI130N3M I 1918 00 'N3dSV 60Z# 3AV 213d000 3 OZ9 1Sf1211 AIIWVA SNI)IWOl Z I£LZ ON 'OdO9Sllld 02 ION NOON 099Z I V210NVS'8 S3WVf `7d3N3MS 1 t919 OO 'N3dSV LOZ#3AV 213d000 19 LI? 311 S3IVIOOSSV VFS £OZ99 OW 'V19Wf11O0 IOZ MS OAl9 Wf110V1S N 11Z 311 JNIOII(19 xOOl9 N3133HM ZV61-60£09 VI 'UNIOW S3G OOZ#3AV ONV80 3 Z/I Z 19 dl S311213dONd OAVM OZOb-81ZL£Nl'3111AHSVN OA19 A21ON311-1 (11O££09 91800 H f 0/3 SlV1N3d 3321H133SS3NN31 801£6 VO 'VNV921V9 V1NVS 021 NOSl31NV0 9 L££I OIAVO SSO21 SNAHd31S £ZO01 AN ')121OA M3N 2110 SI19Wf11O3 09 011 1V13213WWOO WV1S HAAlIS Z1918 00 'N3dSV 291711 X09 Od dl ,lllWbd SQOOM LZ£0£VJ 'V1NVl1V MN NO NONVW AVMNOO OStr 311 N3JN121V3MS AM 11918 00 'N3dSV ZOZ# 213d000 3 Z09 011 S1N3W1S3AN1 A311VA bVb 1-17ZZL£ Nl'3llIAHSVN W7101 X09 Od 398H133SS3NN31 1 19 18 00 'N3dSV 3AV NVWAH 3 109 °fit 1'£Z 311 `.Nicking N131S 11.919 03 'N3dSV 3AV NVWAH 3 t09 31111 S321f11N3A NOINO HS- IttIquettes faciles a peter ; A Repiiez 6 la hachure afin de i www.averycom Utilisez le gabarit AVERYO 5160® j chargement r6v6ler le rebord Pop-Up-j 1-800-GO-AVERY r 4 PUBLIC NOTIC Date: Wed., Sept. 10, 2014 Time: 5pm Place_:_Basement of City Hall, 130 S. Galena St. Purpose: A public. hearing_by-the Historic Pres-__ p ervation Commission to consider a proposal to replace the existing bldg. with a new 2 stork commercial bldg. The applicant is 434 East CooperLLC represented by Charles Cunniffe 970/925-5590.The applicant requests an amendment to Viewplane,Conce-_ ptual Commercial Design & Maj_or Dey. approvals. Contact the Aspen Plannin Office at 970-920-5090. ' EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: U U 414 &Qav- LO M la I Z ,Aspen,CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 20A STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, 17ftx 4MG111_1P✓ (name,please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E)of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on the?S4day of AvAvvt , 20 J�E, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. 4 photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested,to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty(30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. S]Vture The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before me this day of A f✓ , 201!I , by Dcw) C�r��► r WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL M KR6ME SMITH My commission expires: y/a5/aU lt� Nolary Public state of Colorado - Notar Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) • LIST OF THE 0WNERSAND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 Easy Peel®Labels ♦ Bend along line to I Use Avery®Template 51600 1 Feed Paper expose Pop-up Edge- 1 ® AVERY®51600 � 1 100 W FRANCIS LLC 212 WEST FRANCIS LLC 229 WEST SMUGGLER LLC 3595 ANCHORAGE WY 255 13TH AVE SOUTH#202 3509 CRESCENT AVE COCONUT GROVE, FL 33133 NAPLES, FL 34102 DALLAS,TX 75205 426 NORTH SECOND LLC ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASPEN RIVER RENDEZVOUS LLC 3509 CRESCENT AVE STUDIES 186 VAIL LN DALLAS,TX 75205 100 PUPPY SMITH ST• NORTH SALEM,NY 10560 ATTN KATIE SCHWOERER ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN VALENTINE LLC BARNHART PAUL F JR BRUNDIGE CHELSEA C C/O GERSCHEL&CO 2121 SAGE RD#333 1755 SNOWMASS CREEK RD 600 MADISON AVE SUITE#1601 HOUSTON,TX 77056 SNOWMASS,CO 81654 NEW YORK, NY 10022 CITY OF ASPEN CMML PROPERTIES LLC CONOVER CATHRINE M 130 S GALENA ST 120 E 56TH ST#320 1010 WISCONSIN AVE NW STE#550 ASPEN,CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10022 WASHINGTON, DC 20007 COTSEN 1985 TRUST FRANCIS AND SECOND ST LLC GREENBERG ASPEN LP 50% 12100 WILSHIRE BLVD STE 905 4545 POST OAK PLACE DR#144 #3 BRENTMOOR LOS ANGELES, CA 90025 HOUSTON,TX 77026 ST LOUIS, MO 63105 GREENBERG RONALD K TRUSTEE 50% HANSON LUCY C JAMMB LLC 230 S BEMISTON AVE#101 1775 FIR ST 500 S DIXIE HWY STE 201 ST LOUIS,MO 631051907 PORT TOWNSEND,WA 98368 CORAL GABLES, FL 33146 LEWIS JONATHAN D REV TRUST LEWIS TOBY D TRUST PHILLIPPE THOMAS E JR&SUSAN MARIE 414 N FIRST ST 18930 S WOODLAND RD 225 W SMUGGLER ST ASPEN,CO 81611 CLEVELAND,OH 44122 ASPEN,CO 81611-1356 SCHERMER LLOYD G&BETTY A SCHIFF DAVID T WINTON CHARLES&BARBARA REV 210 LAKE AVE 1177 AVE OF THE AMERICAS 42ND FL TRUST 09/27/2011 ASPEN,CO 81611-1347 NEW YORK, NY 10036 2949 AVALON AVE BERKELEY,CA 94705 Nquettes facllaS b paler ® i Sens de Repliez h la hachure afln de; www.avery.com i Utllisez le gabarit AVERY®5160 j charnament rhvtler le mbord Pop-upTm 1-800-GO-AVERY ' W q "osq, � W3 F7 Y� �0 it OA �L• I J bu 2 VIM- t s 5 1 Y Y 3 i