Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20150722 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING July 22, 2015 5:00 PM City Council Meeting Room 130 S. Galena St. 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISITS A. Please meet at 305 S. Mill Street at noon, or visit the property on your own. II. INTRODUCTION (15 MIN.) A. Roll call B. Approval of minutes June 24, 2015; July 8, 2015 C. Public Comments D. Commissioner member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring Project Monitor List G. Staff comments H. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued I. Submit public notice for agenda items III. OLD BUSINESS A. 110 E. Bleeker Street- Final Major Development, PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM JULY 8TH (5:10) IV. NEW BUSINESS A. 305-307 S. Mill Street- Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Demolition and Viewplane Review, PUBLIC HEARING (5:40) V. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: Resolution #23, 2015 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 Chairperson identified 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. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 24, 2015 1 Chairperson, Willis Pember called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were John Whipple, Bob Blaich, Gretchen Greenwood and Patrick Sagal. Nora Berko and Jim DeFrancia were absent. Staff present: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk MOTION: Gretchen moved to approve the minutes of May 13, 2015; second by John. All in favor, motion carried. Debbie said on 411 E. Hyman there were issues about the possible need for an elevator for a means of egress to the second floor. Section 11.07 of the building code states accessibility issues do not apply to one unit on a second floor above a commercial unit. A single exit is permitted. Should the information made an impact on the off-site AH you could make a motion to reconsider. Amy said the unit is a free market and will be replaced with affordable housing. John said it is hard to present a clear cut decision from the Building code on ADU’s. My decision is still a yes and it is best suited off-site. If you have large high ceilings you could achieve more for the public space and create far more vitality. Willis said his conclusion was that the building is just too narrow. Gretchen said she hates to take employee housing out of the city. MOTION: Patrick moved to reconsider; second by Gretchen. John said we aren’t taking away employee housing. There is a free market unit there and it would be replaced by buying a unit. It would be one for one. Mitch said the applicant has a choice of 50% or 100% housing replacement. Once they meet that requirement they are allowed the rest of their free P1 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 24, 2015 2 market development exempt from mitigation; however that half of the equation is not available here because we are in the commercial core. The access would have to come from the Hyman mall. Patrick said he envisioned one door and an open stair case. John said that would cause security issues. Bob said you also have the possibility of pilfering but pollutions of other types when you combine facilities. VOTE: Patrick, yes; Bob, no; Willis, no; Gretchen, no; John, no Motion will not be reconsidered. 135 E. Cooper – Minor Development – Public hearing cont’d from April 8th , 2015 Amy said this is the fourth hearing we have had on this proposal to modify the existing one-story connector between an historic resource and addition and make it a two story connector. Staff recommends that the project be denied because we feel there is a negative visual impact being created by the new connector. It fills in what is supposed to be a sense of openness between the two volumes. It also results in the relocation of an historic window and it creates a very tight gap between the west wall of the historic resource and the connector where we feel snow and debris maybe trapped and cause deterioration against that side of the building. We also feel it is not consistent with previous HPC decisions. Staff also objects to removing square footage and putting it in another addition. We are also uncertain whether the applicant has the floor area available. They plan to destroy the usable attic space and take that square footage and move it into the connector. The applicant is proposing to move the connector forward between the two masses and we feel this does not meet the guideline. Mitch Haas, Haas Planning Dillon Johns, Zone 4 architects Dillon went over the power point regarding the design changes. The link moves forward to work between a couple of windows on the site. The roof of the connector is solid but it could be glass if the commission wants it transparent. The stairs were designed so that they are a minimum of 3 feet. P2 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 24, 2015 3 The profile is very thin. The risers will be open with a center support rail to minimize what goes on in the corridor. Mitch said he believes the attic space was labeled as a smoking room. The 2003 design is not functional for the client. We feel this proposal complies and does a better job than what is there today. Guideline 10.3 – Our feeling is that the connector doesn’t do a good job of complying with this guideline. The addition is often mistaken for being historic. The link is insubstantial in size and out of scale with the historic resource and addition. Guideline 10.4 – Enclosing the stairs in glass will show that it is a product of its own time and it will provide a clear separation from the historic resource and the addition. Guideline 10.6 – Both existing buildings are similar in height. By having a two story connector it will be compatible. Guideline 10.7 – this standard does not require a one story connector. The connector should be proportional to the primary building. A two story connector would be more proportional. The connector is well beyond ten feet back. We are proposing a flat roof over the link to keep the mass minimized and it slopes to the rear of the property. The property is well maintained and there is a caretaker that lives on the property. The plan minimizes the addition and maximizes the transparency. Dillon said we will have a metal roof and we could do shingle on the gable part if needed. We are happy to work with the monitor and staff on finishes and colors. The enclosure is glass. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. Marc Feinstein, neighbor said he likes the proposal and the way it will be retaining the historic nature. This Victorian is very close to the commercial core and it has not been touched. Willis closed the public hearing portion of the agenda item. Patrick recused himself. Willis identified the issues: Mass and scale Connector Design guidelines P3 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 24, 2015 4 Willis said this is a 2 ½ story with a 2 story addition. We don’t often see this. This is a large resource. The idea is to provide relief between the two masses. There is an equal rhythm with this proposal. The two story connector is warranted. The weakness is that we are permitting a destruction of the original Victorian character. We give license to modify existing fabric all the time. In terms of mass and scale I am fine with it. The applicant has offered to make it more glassier. Gretchen said where this falls short for me is that the roof line between the new addition and the Victorian is lost on one side and that shouldn’t be allowed. You could lower the two story addition and make sure that the fascia line maintains itself. We are here to protect the historic resource and cutting the fascia line up with another gabled roof line is a mistake. A flat roof addition and minimizing the floor so that the two roof lines are expressed and that they maintain their expression will help make this building feel like two separate buildings. Interrupting the fascia line on the historic building needs addressed. John said we are impacting a very small portion of the Victorian where in the past we have seen dormers built. I think the roof should also be a transparent glass and that might separate the two structures and give them breathing room. The white railing etc. all bleeds together as one big huge structure. Bob said maximizing the transparency is what needs to happen. The finish material should look different than the two structures on each side. What exists is a mistake right now. We have a unique project here. I could be comfortable approving it and working out the details with staff. John said if we get some separation between the two that is an improvement. Gretchen said you look at the details and they should be maintained on the historic resource. Willis asked if it is possible to have a roof tuck under the eave of the existing Victorian. Maybe they could re-work it and leave the fascia untouched. Bob said he likes the idea of it being glass and dark as it goes away. Most successful connectors are dark. P4 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 24, 2015 5 Willis suggested a black framed structure. John said he feels the mass and scale can be achieved and the issue is destructing the fabric of the historic resource. Bob said glass roofs could be bubbled or you could have a barreled vault etc. Gretchen said the fascia line should be maintained and deal with the architecture on the inside and if that is changing the floor level to bring that connector addition down then so be it. Dark does go away. Bob said he is comfortable having staff and monitor resolve the issues. MOTION: Willis made the motion that the fascia cannot be interrupted on the west side of the historic resource. If this cannot be accomplished the applicant must return to the board for further review. The metal finish is to be a dark color. The connector is to be as transparent as possible which could mean a glass roof. All items to be approved by staff and monitor. Motion second by Bob. Roll call vote: Bob, Gretchen, John and Willis. Motion carried. 4-0. Gretchen is the monitor. 834 W. Hallam St. – Conceptual Historic Major Development, Relocation, Variances, Residential Design Standard Review, Establishment of Affordable Housing Credits, GMQS, continue public hearing to September 9, 2015 MOTION: Willis made the motion to continue 834 W. Hallam until September 9 th ; second by Gretchen. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Willis moved to adjourn the meeting; second by Gretchen. All in favor. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk P5 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2015 1 Chairperson, Willis Pember called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were Nora Berko, Jim DeFrancia, Bob Blaich, John Whipple, Gretchen Greenwood and Patrick Sagal. Sallie Golden was absent. Staff present: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Amy Simon, Preservation Planner Sarah Rosenberg, Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk MOTION: Bob moved to approve the minutes of May 27 th and June 10 th ; second by Willis. All in favor, motion carried. 1280 Ute Avenue #34 – Minor Development, Public Hearing Debbie said the applicant indicated that they did the posting and mailings. Only the posting was required. Exhibit I Sarah said the request is to turn the explosive shed also known as Powder House 34 into an office space and add two windows on the west side of the structure. They will bring electrical and natural gas services to the site. They are also proposing a small ramp to bring the building up to code. The applicant plans on maintaining the original walls and roof, floor and existing door. The proposed new office requires 1/3 of a parking space but because it is on the Benedict office complex the site adequately fulfills the parking requirements. The shed is a 336 square foot masonry structure but in 1976. It is a designated landmark with one door on the east side and no other openings. Historically the structure was used as an explosive shed for the surrounding mining operation. There were two instances in which the shed collapsed. The second collapsed was in 1897 and two new sheds were erected with thick brick walls on a solid stone foundation. These still exist today. Staff is supportive about the adaptive reuse as it has been used for storage and vacant and deteriorating. Staff and monitor can review vegetation, mechanical, venting, light fixtures and signage. The applicant has provided a ramp solution to the front door which has been supported by the building department. The issue that concern staff are the windows. The applicant is proposing two steel frame warehouse style windows on the west wall which is the rear wall of the structure. They would face the pedestrian P6 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2015 2 bike path. Staff finds that the location etc. negatively impacts the integrity of the structure and significantly alters a solid wall that clearly reads as a utilitarian building. The windows do not meet guideline 3.2 and 3.3. Staff understands the design to add natural light to the space. Staff proposes a vertical window on the north side which has less of an impact on the character defining features and less visible from the public. On the roof there are three small skylights that are not historic. In order to bring in more natural daylight staff recommends enlarging the skylights. Staff recommends continuation to study the window placement style and size. Sarah said she sent HPC a drawing that was submitted to the Building Dept. and the specs of the windows. The proposed steel windows do not fit the Victorian era. Debbie said the clerk’s office will need copies of those for the record, Exhibit II Amy said the Hydro-electric plant, city shop are industrial buildings. They have wooden double hung windows. Pete McBride, owner Kate and Matt Holstein, owners Pete said he has never seen the building used except for partial storage. Our hope is to retrofit the building and everything presented here has been approved by the Benedict HOA. They would approve either the north or west side for the windows. We just mimicked the windows from the Benedict building which is a vertical window. We prefer the west side of the building because they can make a nice balance of light with the central entrance. We would have two working stations inside. Matt said the north side has a slanted roof and the windows looks odd and don’t fit in as well. Kate said with the north window the inside would be “cave like”. Pete said we could enlarge the skylights but they would only be used for six months because the roof pitch is too shallow and there is a lot of snow pile up. We are also proposing a natural gas pot belly heat system which is P7 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2015 3 supported with an electric baseboard. We intend to do a blow in insulation in the ceiling. The brick is three layers thick. We would also insulate the floor under the wide planks. Matt said there is a vent on the roof for the natural gas. Amy pointed out that the skylights are in conjunction with the north wall window. If the west wall windows are approved we would not support the skylights. Bob said the skylights are very tiny and you would have to add structural beams etc. if they were enlarged. Matt said the windows on the west would be metal to match the door and we would mimic the Benedict building and we would incorporate timbers for the headers. There is a metal roof that is sufficient. The skylights are caulked well as is. We want to keep the building looking historic. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. Ben Dodge, HOA president The HOA had a series of meetings and site visits and one of our issues was the location of the windows. It was a clear consensus that we prefer the windows be placed on the west side. This requires a condo change from storage to an office. Attention to the building will maintain the intent and characteristics of the building. It has been declining over time. Amy said the new office space will be exempt from affordable housing because it is a landmark. The entire lot is designated historic. Neil Beidleman, neighbor All the owners were thrilled when the applicants decided to purchase this property and had a vision of an office space. The only other option would be some construction or service provider company. We are also in favor of the west windows. The north side window would make it very much like a fish bowl. The west side wall also has a cool painting and to balance it having the two windows makes sense. Letters entered into the record Exhibit III Ben Dodge P8 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2015 4 Public Council of the Rockies Mary and Hugh Wise Theresa Salvador Powder house Condominium Chairperson, Willis Pember closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Issues: Windows on the north or west Skylights recommended by staff if the windows are on the north. Vent to the roof GMQS Removal of trees Willis said the trees for removal are on the public right-of-way. John said some of the trees are less than six inch in diameter and can be removed without the Parks Dept. permission. Willis said he understands where staff is coming from because the historical character of the building depends on not having any windows. Adding windows decreases the quality of the history. Maybe the applicant could maximize daylight without a penetrable image to the building. Jim said in its historic condition it is really dysfunctional. You preserve the essence of the building not with-standing the addition of the windows. Bob said he wouldn’t want it reverted to a powder house. Nora asked if we can get light without the windows. Patrick said he agrees with staff’s recommendation. Windows on the west destroy the preservation of the building as a powder building. Once heat is added the skylights will absorb moisture and they should be taken out. Gretchen said you lose a lot of heat with skylights and maybe they should be removed. The windows on the side should not be heavy. P9 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2015 5 MOTION: Jim moved to approve resolution #22 for 1280 Ute Ave, powder house and that the windows be placed on the west side and the final placement and details be approved by monitor and staff and largely follow the proposal as presented by the applicant. Motion second by Bob. Friendly amendment: Willis made the motion that none of the historic graphics are to be modified in anyway at this time. Photo documentation of the signs needs to occur. Jim accepted the amendment and Bob second it. Amy asked about the signs as to whether than can be restored or painted. Pete said they will leave them the way they are until they need touched up. Willis said two out of three are legible and the third one is not. Roll call vote: Nora, yes; Jim, yes; Bob, yes; Gretchen, yes; John, yes; Willis, no; Patrick, no. Motion carried 5-2. Gretchen is the monitor. 110 E. Bleeker Street – Final Major Development, Public Hearing cont’d from June 10 th Kim Raymond, architect Amy said the building is one block from the Yellow Brick School. They intend to restore the original building and fence and add an addition to the back. There would be a one story connector. At conceptual HPC approved the 500 square foot bonus, side yard variances etc. There were several conditions. The form of the addition was approved at conceptual to the back of the property. The one architectural concern is the fenestration on the south façade of the addition particularly the upper floor. There is a master bedroom in that area. At conceptual they saw a deck with French doors opening onto it and a dormer above. Staff recommended restudy because it feels like it is out of character and overwhelming. We are suggesting fewer sliding glass doors or the dormer eliminated or in some way that it relates to the solid to void of the historic house. That would be a condition of approval. Staff is also asking for a restudy of the perennial bed wrapping P10 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2015 6 around the historic house. The house is not being lifted and the historic foundation is being preserved and should not have a lot of moisture around it. We are asking for a more detailed drawing of the fence and all components of the fence should be wood. We also need cut sheets of the windows for appropriate sizes and they are asking for the typical three year vesting. Kim said they plan to restore the front and restore the fence and windows. There is a large pine tree that will hide the addition. On the south elevation we could take off the two side lights and keep the dormer and have a plain door in the center. We are proposing a skylight on the south elevation roof above the flat dormer. On the landscape plan we can let the grass come up to the edge of the building and we can work with the monitor on that. On the addition we are using four inch wood siding and staining it natural. We have eliminated the dormers on the north side of the addition on the back. Nora said at the last meeting we discussed keeping the north dormers and removing the dormers on the south. Kim said she misunderstood that the south dormers were to be eliminated. The south side is where we want more light. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was closed. Willis identified the issues: Dormers option A or B No restudy of the upper section of the south elevation Landscape plan Gretchen said she is not in favor of the dormers because it lifts the visual roof line of this building up to a very heavy fascia. At final we need to see the fascia details. The addition is overpowering the resource. The non- orthogonal window should be removed and doesn’t have a relationship to anything on the existing building. On the historic building the windows have meaning and that should occur on the addition. Willis said he is overwhelmed with the fascia in general. P11 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2015 7 Nora said there is so much glass there on the south that you barely notice the Victorian. Willis said there are two dormers on the south elevation. John asked about the deck over the connector. Amy said in this instance it is hidden. We are inconsistent about decks. Kim said she can take off the dormers on the south side of the addition. Willis said he is having a hard time approving the fenestration and the non- orthogonal windows on the east and west. It is not just the dormers it is the sliding doors as well. MOTION: Jim moved to continue 110 E. Bleeker until June 22 nd ; second by Willis. All in favor, motion carried. Eliminate dormers on the south Study fascia Thinner window door system East/West non-orthogonal windows Window placements and the French doors MOTION: Jim moved to adjourn; secondo by Bob. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk P12 II.B. C:\Program Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converter\temp\7147.doc 7/15/2015 HPC PROJECT MONITORS- projects in bold are under construction Nora Berko 332 W. Main 1102 Waters 1006 E. Cooper 100 E. Main 417/421 W. Hallam 602 E. Hyman 61 Meadows Road ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Bob Blaich Lot 2, 202 Monarch Subdivision 232 E. Bleeker 609 W. Smuggler ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Jim DeFrancia 435 W. Main, AJCC 420 E. Cooper 420 E. Hyman 407 E. Hyman Rubey Park Sallie Golden 206 Lake 114 Neale 212 Lake 400 E. Hyman 517 E. Hyman (Little Annie’s) Hotel Aspen Gretchen Greenwood 28 Smuggler Grove 135 E. Cooper 1280 Ute ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Willis Pember 204 S. Galena Aspen Core 120 Red Mountain 233 W. Hallam 101 E. Hallam 229 W. Smuggler 407 E. Hyman Patrick Segal 204 S. Galena 701 N. Third 612 W. Main 206 Lake 212 Lake Holden Marolt derrick 333 W. Bleeker John Whipple Aspen Core 201 E. Hyman 549 Race 208 E. Main 420 E. Cooper 602 E. Hyman Hotel Aspen 610 E. Hyman 301 Lake P13 II.F. C:\Program Files (x86)\Neevia.Com\Document Converter\temp\7147.doc 7/15/2015 Needed: P14 II.F. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 110 E. Bleeker –Final Major Development, CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: July 22, 2015 ________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: 110 E. Bleeker is a Victorian era home that was significantly altered many years ago as a result of the demolition of the original front porch, removal of the original street-facing bay window, and application of paint to the masonry walls. The house is currently very difficult to see from the street due to spruce trees that were planted in the public right-of- way within the last decade. Fortunately, there are photographs, maps, and other information available that will assist a purchaser who proposes to restore the home. A new addition is to be built at the rear of the property. HPC granted Conceptual approval, Demolition and Variances in March 2015. Final review is requested. HPC reviewed a Final application on July 8 th and continued for restudy of the following concerns raised by some members: remove the dormers, restudy/reduce the fascia dimension, propose a window/door spec with narrower frames, locate windows in a more symmetrical arrangement, revise the large non-orthogonal windows in the east and west gable ends and restudy/reduce the sliding doors on the south façade. The applicant has provided four design options, each addressing a different combination of the elements in question. The applicant has expressed a concern that the addition should not become characterless, which is the reason for providing a series of alternatives. APPLICANT: Bleek House LLC , represented by Kim Raymond Architects. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-37-006. ADDRESS: 110 E. Bleeker, Lots L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6. P15 III.A. FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Final review focuses on landscape plan, lighting, fenestration, and selection of new materials. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as “Exhibit A.” The house at 110 E. Bleeker was built in about 1887. Records from the Aspen Historical Society indicate it was constructed as a boarding house. Images below will be used to guide the restoration process. P16 III.A. The proposal is to leave the historic structure in place, with no basement excavation. A small, non-historic addition is to be removed from the back of the Victorian, as well as a non-historic garage that has caused numerous issues because it sits into the alley and onto the property belonging to the neighbor to the east. The existing garage and addition are pictured below. The proposed addition will be connected to the house with a one story linking element. A new garage and living space will be constructed along the alley. At Conceptual review, HPC approved side and rear yard setback variances. At Conceptual review, HPC also approved a 500 square foot bonus for restoration efforts. The applicant intends to use the bonus square footage for the project and will request Council approval to remove 500 square feet of the base allowable floor area from the site as two TDRs. The addition is not significantly larger than the historic resource. The physical connection to the historic house is very limited, in an area that has already been disturbed. The footprint, height and massing of the addition is sympathetic to the Victorian. There is valuable restoration work included in the project. Staff recommended approval of the Final design as presented at the July 8 th meeting, with conditions, several of which reiterate the specific setback variances and floor area bonus approved at Conceptual. We also proposed several conditions of approval related to restoration details and drawings that will be reviewed as part of building permit. Staff recommended the landscape plan be restudied with regard to plant beds around the base of the house. A continuous perennial bed may interfere with the visibility of the original stone foundation, and may introduce too much moisture in this area. The revised plans provided for this meeting reduce the foundation P17 III.A. plantings. More refinement to the plant palette, once selected, can be addressed by staff and monitor during construction. This has been included as a condition of approval. The landscape plan indicates exterior light fixtures, which will entail a pendant fixture at the front porch and sconces at the rear of the house. The proposed fixtures are not in the drawing set, but are depicted below. Staff has no objections to these lights. On July 8 th , staff recommended restudy of the glazing/dormer area associated with the master bedroom, on the second level of the new addition. This was a major concern of HPC’s as well. Of the four restudies included in this packet, staff supports any of the options, with a preference for Option B as proposed, or Option D (which has a reduced plate height on the addition) with no dormer. We have no concerns with any of the options proposed for the east, west and north facades of the addition. We feel that the guidelines are the addition is simple in character. There are many positive aspects of the application. =============================================================== STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant Final Major Development with the following conditions: 1. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, HPC has approved a 500 square foot floor area bonus. 2. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, HPC has approved a 3’1” east sideyard setback, a 3’8” rear setback, a 5’11” west sideyard and a 9’ combined sideyard. 3. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, HPC requires specifications for paint removal and mortar repair to be provided before building permit, along with shop drawings showing the details of the reconstructed elements. The specifications will be reviewed and approved by staff. 4. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, HPC requires the applicant to work with the Parks Department to have the spruce trees removed from the right of way in front of the house. 5. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, regarding window placement on the west side of the Victorian, refer to the window pattern on the “sister” building at 126 E. Bleeker and/or determine window location after P18 III.A. the paint has been removed from the brick, which may reveal some clues about the historic design. Final locations will be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 6. The final landscape plan will be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor prior to installation. 7. Provide a drawing of the proposed fence for review and approval by staff and monitor. All components are to be wood. 8. Provide cut sheets for any wood windows or exterior doors that are to replace original elements that have been removed from the Victorian, for review and approval by staff. 9. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property : 110 E. Bleeker, Lots L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. EXHIBITS : Resolution #__, Series of 2015 Exhibit A: Design Guidelines Exhibit B: Application P19 III.A. Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines for 110 E. Bleeker, Final review 1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original. Any fence which is visible from a public right-of-way must be built of wood or wrought iron. Wire fences also may be considered. A wood picket fence is an appropriate replacement in most locations. A simple wire or metal fence, similar to traditional "wrought iron," also may be considered. Chain link is prohibited and solid "stockade" fences are only allowed in side and rear yards. 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a “transparent” quality allowing views into the yard from the street. A fence that defines a front yard is usually low to the ground and "transparent" in nature. On residential properties, a fence which is located forward of the front building facade may not be taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see the City of Aspen's "Residential Design Standards".) A privacy fence may be used in back yards and along alleys, but not forward of the front facade of a building. Note that using no fencing at all is often the best approach. Contemporary interpretations of traditional fences should be compatible with the historic context. 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally. Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. P20 III.A. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 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. 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. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a historic window. Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the original window to be seen from the public way. If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub-frames or panning around the perimeter. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. Simple paneled doors were typical. Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 5.1 Preserve an original porch. Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions and spacing of balusters when replacing missing ones. Unless used historically on the property, wrought iron, especially the "licorice stick" style that emerged in the 1950s and 1960s, is inappropriate. Expanding the size of a historic porch is inappropriate. P21 III.A. 5.3 Avoid enclosing a historic front porch. Keeping an open porch is preferred. Enclosing a porch with opaque materials that destroy the openness and transparency of the porch is not acceptable. Enclosing porches with large areas of glass, thereby preserving the openness of the porch, may be considered in special circumstances. When this is done, the glass should be placed behind posts, balusters, and balustrade, so the original character of the porch may still be interpreted. The use of plastic curtains as air-locks on porches is discouraged. Reopening an enclosed porch is appropriate. 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. 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. 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. Repair only those features that are deteriorated. Patch, piece-in, splice, consolidate or otherwise upgrade the existing material, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be used. Removing a damaged feature when it can be repaired is inappropriate. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. P22 III.A. 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. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. Do not wash an entire building facade in light. Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area P23 III.A. P24 III.A. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2015 Page 1 of 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 110 E. BLEEKER STREET, LOTS L AND M, BLOCK 65, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2015 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-37-006 WHEREAS, the applicant, Bleek House LLC, represented by Kim Raymond Architects, has requested HPC approval for Final Major Development for the property located at 110 E. Bleeker, Lots L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.4 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on July 22, 2015. HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of __ to __. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC hereby grants Final Major Development approval for 110 E. Bleeker, Lots L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, HPC has approved a 500 square foot floor area bonus. 2. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, HPC has approved a 3’1” east sideyard setback, a 3’8” rear setback, a 5’11” west sideyard and a 9’ combined sideyard. 3. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, HPC requires specifications for paint removal and mortar repair to be provided before building permit, along with shop drawings showing the details of the reconstructed elements. The specifications will be reviewed and approved by staff. 4. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, HPC requires the applicant to work with the Parks Department to have the spruce trees removed from the right of way in front of the house. 5. Per Resolution #11, Series of 2015, regarding window placement on the west side of the Victorian, refer to the window pattern on the “sister” building at 126 E. Bleeker and/or determine window location after the paint has been removed from the brick, which may P25 III.A. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2015 Page 2 of 3 reveal some clues about the historic design. Final locations will be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 6. The final landscape plan will be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor prior to installation. 7. Provide a drawing of the proposed fence for review and approval by staff and monitor. All components are to be wood. 8. Provide cut sheets for any wood windows or exterior doors that are to replace original elements that have been removed from the Victorian, for review and approval by staff. 9. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property : 110 E. Bleeker, Lots L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. P26 III.A. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2015 Page 3 of 3 APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 22nd day of July, 2015. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: ______________________________ _____________________________ Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Willis Pember, Chair ATTEST: ___________________________ Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk P27 III.A. Scale: ISSUE A 1.0 7/14/15Plotted On:T I T L E S H E E T / G E N E R A L I N F O ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 0103 02 04 1 A7.1 LOCATION 1 A4.1 1 A5.1 PARCEL ID NUMBER: ZONING: SITE AREA: BLDG USE: OCC. GROUP: CONST. TYPE: CLIMATE ZONE: FIRE SPRINKLERS: LEGAL DESC'N: 273512437006 R-6 6,121 SQ. FT. RESIDENTIAL #### #### #### #### CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. BLOCK: 65 LOT: L AND LOT: M PLUS 121 SQ FT PER LOT LINE ADJ WITH 114 EAST BLEEKER STREET CONDOS 110 Bleeker Street "Brick Vic" ABBREVIATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEXPROJECT TEAMAPPLICABLE CODES PROJECT DATA ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS A 1.0 TITLE SHEET / GENERAL INFO A 1.1 SURVEY A 1.2 SITE PLAN A 1.3 FAR CALCULATION-PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS A 1.4 FAR CALCULATION-PROPOSED ELEVATIONS A 2.0 EXISTING: FLOOR PLANS A 2.1 EXISTING: ELEVATIONS A 2.2 EXISTING: ELEVATIONS A 2.3 DEMO CALCULATIONS A 3.1 BASEMENT LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A 3.2 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A 3.3 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A 3.4 ROOF PLAN A 4.1 SOUTH AND WEST ELEVATIONS A 4.2 NORTH AND EAST ELEVATIONS A 5.1 BUILDING SECTION A 6.1 DETAILS A 6.2 DETAILS A 6.3 DETAILS A 7.1 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: BATH 4 & BATH 5 A 7.2 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: MEDIA ROOM &LAUNDRY A 7.3 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: FAMILY ROOM & POWDER A 7.4 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: KITCHEN A 7.5 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: MASTER BATH 1 A 7.6 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: MASTER BATH 2 A 7.7 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: BATH 3 A 7.8 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS: MASTER TV A 8.1 WALL SECTIONS A 10.1 3D PERSPECTIVES A 10.2 3D PERSPECTIVES A 10.3 3D PERSPECTIVES A 11.1 DORMER COMPARISON #### OWNER: ARCHITECT: GENERAL CONTRACTOR: STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: LIGHTING DESIGNER: ALL CODES REFERENCED ARE TO BE USED AS AMENDED BY THE STATE OF COLORADO AND LOCAL JURISDICTION. #### FAR (FLOOR AREA RATIO) 1. THESE DRAWINGS AND ANY ACCOMPANYING SPECIFICATIONS, AS INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE, ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF THE ARCHITECT REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR WHICH THEY WERE PRODUCED IS CONSTRUCTED OR NOT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE NOT TO BE REUSED OR REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT CONTRACT WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE ARCHITECT. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO INSURE THAT CONSTRUCTION CONFORMS TO ALL FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL AND RELATED CODES AND PRACTICES. SKILLED AND QUALIFIED WORKMEN IN THEIR ASSOCIATED TRADES SHALL PERFORM ALL WORK AT THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF CRAFTSMANSHIP. 3. THE ARCHITECT WILL PROVIDE DETAILS AND/OR DIRECTION FOR DESIGN INTENT WHERE IT IS NEGLECTED IN THE DOCUMENTS OR ALTERED BY EXISTING CONDITIONS. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS DEPICTED IN THESE DOCUMENTS AND SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, OMISSIONS, AND/OR CONFLICTS PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. ALL DIMENSIONS ON STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS SHALL BE CHECKED AGAINST ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS. NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT AND ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. 5. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. THE DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DRAWINGS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING ALL TRADES UNDER THEIR AUTHORITY WITH DRAWINGS AND/OR SPECIFICATIONS. 7. THE OWNER AND/OR ARCHITECT SHALL APPROVE ANY “EQUAL” MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, FIXTURES, ETC. PRESENTED BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY THE ARCHITECT AND/OR OWNER WITH SAMPLES OF ALL FINISH MATERIALS AND SHALL NOT PROCEED WITH INSTALLATION UNTIL THE ARCHITECT AND/OR OWNER ISSUES AN APPROVAL. ALL WORK MUST CONFORM TO THE APPROVED SAMPLE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FORWARD ALL REQUIRED SUBMITTALS AND VERIFICATIONS TO THE ARCHITECT WITH ADEQUATE TIME FOR REVIEW AS NOT TO DELAY THE WORK IN PROGRESS. 8. IF REQUIRED, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT WITH A CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN PRIOR TO OBTAINING A BUILDING PERMIT. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS TO THE ARCHITECT FOR WINDOWS, DOORS, CASEWORK, METAL DETAILING, STAIRS, FIREPLACE, AND ANY OTHER WORK NOTED IN THE DOCUMENTS. FABRICATION SHALL NOT PROCEED ON ANY OF THESE ITEMS UNTIL THE CONTRACTOR RECEIVES APPROVED SHOP DRAWINGS FROM THE ARCHITECT. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPROVED SHOP DRAWINGS. 10. THE DESIGN, ADEQUACY, AND SAFETY OF ERECTION BRACING, TEMPORARY SUPPORTS, SHORING, ETC. SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STABILITY OF THE STRUCTURE THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL CONFORM TO ALL FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL O.S.H.A. REGULATIONS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY AND CARE OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES UNTIL THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED. 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR REQUESTING BUILDING INSPECTIONS AS APPLICABLE TO THE INTERNATIONAL BUILDING / RESIDENTIAL CODE AND LOCAL ORDINANCES. 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL OPENINGS THROUGH WALLS, FLOORS, AND CEILINGS WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL, STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, AND LIGHTING DRAWINGS. REFER TO THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR ALLOWABLE OPENING SIZES / REQUIREMENTS IN STRUCTURAL MEMBERS. 13. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE STONE MASON’S TAKE-OFFS AND WILL ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY OF COORDINATING ANY ITEMS THAT REQUIRE CLARIFICATION DURING THE BIDDING PROCESS. 14. THE ARCHITECT WILL VERIFY IN FIELD ALL LIGHTING FIXTURES, SWITCHES, MECHANICAL GRILLES, REGISTERS, AND THERMOSTAT LOCATIONS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ROUGH-IN LIGHTING FIXTURES AND ILLUSTRATE SWITCH, REGISTER, AND GRILLE LOCATIONS PRIOR TO THE ARCHITECT WALK-THROUGH. 15. ALL EXTERIOR PENETRATIONS SUCH AS GRILLES, BOILER FLAPS, ETC. TO BE COPPER OR ENCLOSED BY COPPER FITTINGS. - 2009 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE - 2006 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE - 2009 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE - PITKIN COUNTY LAND USE CODE - PITKIN COUNTY BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION CODE - PITKIN COUNTY PROPERTY RESOLUTIONS OFFICE PHONE: OFFICE FAX: CONTACT: KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. 0133 Prospector Rd. Unit 4102X ASPEN, CO 81611 #### 970.925.2252 KIM RAYMOND / kim@krai.us #### #### LIVABLE LOWER LEVEL: 60 sf. MAIN LEVEL: 1686 sf. UPPER LEVEL: 1315 sf. SUBTOTAL: 3061 sf. GARAGE MAIN LEVEL: 133 sf. TOTAL: 3194 sf. *REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DOCUMENTS A1.3 AND A1.4 FOR THE FAR GRAPHIC ILLUSTRATION. JST.JOIST VINYL COMPOSITION TILEVCT YARD WROUGHT IRON WOOD WITHOUT WITH WEIGHT WEATHER PROOF WAINSCOT WINDOW WATER CLOSET VERTICAL VOLT AMPERE VERIFY IN FIELD VAPOR BARRIER URINAL UNFINISHED TYPICAL TRANSFORMER TOILET THROUGH THICK THREADED THRESHOLD TELEPHONE TELEVISION OUTLET TUBE STEEL TOP OF WALL TOP OF SLAB TOP OF MASONRY TOP OF JOIST TOP OF FOOTING TOP OF CURB TOP OF BEAM TOP OF TELEPHONE MOUNTING BOARD THROUGH BOLT TONGUE AND GROOVE SYSTEM SYMMETRICAL SWITCH SUSPENDED STEEL STANDARD SOUND TRANSMISSION CLASS SQUARE INCHES SQUARE FEET SPEAKER SPECIFICATIONS SPACE SIMILAR SHEATHING SHEET SERVICE ENTRANCE SECTION SECTION SCHEDULE SELF CLOSING STAINLESS STEEL SKYLIGHT SHUT OFF VALVE SMOKE DETECTOR SOLID CORE REMOVE ROOM REVISION RETURN REQUIRED REINFORCED REFERENCE REFRIGERATOR RIGHT OF WAY ROUGH OPENING ROOF DRAIN OVERFLOW ROOF DRAIN LEADER RADIUS QUANTITY QUARRY TILE POWER POLYVINYLCLORIDE PARTITION POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT PREFABRICATED PERFORATED PORCELAIN PLYWOOD PLUMBING PLASTIC PLATE PLASTER PHASE PERPENDICULAR POINT OF CONNECTION PLASTIC LAMINATE PROPERTY LINE PRECAST CONCRETE OPPOSITE OPENING OVER HEAD OUTSIDE AIR INTAKE OUTSIDE RADIUS ORNAMENTAL IRON OVER HANG OUTSIDE DIAMETER ON CENTER NOMINAL NUMBER NAILER NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION NON-CORROSIVE METAL NOT TO SCALE NOT IN CONTRACT MULLION METAL MODULAR MISCELLANEOUS MINIMUM MANUFACTURER MANUFACTURING MEDIUM MECHANICAL MAXIMUM MATERIAL MASONRY MARBLE MASONRY OPENING MALLEABLE IRON MANHOLE MACHINE BOLT LAMINATED VENEER LUMBER LIGHTING LIGHT LINOLEUM LINEAR LEAD LAVATORY LATERAL LAMINATE LINEAR FEET LIGHT EMITTING DIODE KNOCK OUT KILN DRIED KNOCK DOWN JOINT JUNCTION JUNCTION BOX INTERIOR INSULATION INCLUDE, INCLUSIVE IMPREGNATED INTERMEDIATE METALLIC CONDUIT ISOLATED GROUND IDENTIFICATION INSIDE FACE INSIDE DIAMETER INTERCOM OUTLET HYDRAULIC HOT WATER HEATING, VENTILATING & AIR CONDITIONING HEATER HORIZONTAL HEIGHT HARDWARE HARDBOARD HANDICAPPED HOLLOW METAL HOLLOW CORE HOSE BIBB GYPSUM BOARD GYPSUM GALVANIZED RIGID TUBING GATE VALVE GRADE MARK GLUE LAMINATED BEAM GLASS GROUND FAULT INTERRUPTER GROUND FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER GARAGE GALVANIZED GAUGE GALVANIZED IRON FURNISH FOOTING FIRE PROOF FLUORESCENT FLOORING FLOOR FINISH FIRE HOSE CABINET FOUNDATION FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FIRE ALARM CONTROL PANEL FABRICATE FIBERGLASS FLOOR SINK FACE OF FIELD NAILING FIRE EXTINGUISHER FLOOR DRAIN FLOOR CLEAN OUT FAN COIL FIRE ALARM EXTERIOR EXISTING EXHAUST EXCAVATE ELECTRIC DRINKING COOLER EVAPORATIVE COOLER ESTIMATE EQUIPMENT EQUAL ELECTRICAL NON-METALLIC TUBING ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING ELECTRICAL METALLIC CONDUIT ELEVATOR "ELECTRIC, ELECTRICAL" ELEVATION EACH EACH WAY END NAILING EXPANSION JOINT EXHAUST FAN EXPANSION ANCHOR DOOR DOWN DEAD LOAD DIMENSION DIAGONAL DIAMETER DEMOLITION DOUBLE DISHWASHER DOWN SPOUT DECOMPOSED GRANITE DRINKING FOUNTAIN PENNY COPPER CONTRACTOR CONTINUOUS CONSTRUCTION CONCRETE COMBINATION COLUMN CENTERED CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CLEAR CLOSET CAULKING CEILING CENTERLINE CIRCUIT BREAKER CHANNEL CUBIC FEET PER MINUTE CERAMIC CEMENT CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION CAMBER CABINET CERAMIC TILE CLEAN OUT CONTROL JOINT CAST IN PLACE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS CONCRETE ASBESTOS PIPE BRONZE BEARING BRASS BEAM BLOCKING BLOCK BUILDING BOARD BACK OF CURB BUILT UP BOTTOM OF FOOTING BOTTOM OF BOUNDARY NAILING BENCH MARK ANGLE AMERICAN WIRE GAUGE AVERAGE ASPHALT ANNEALED ALTERNATE ALUMINUM AIR HANDLER UNIT ABOVE GRADE ADDITION or ADDENDUM ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE ACOUSTIC ASBESTOS-CEMENT BOARD ABOVE ACRYLONITRILE-BUTADIENE-STYRENE AGGREGATE BASE COURSE AIR CONDITIONING ABOVE FINISHED GRADE ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR ANCHOR BOLT AMPERES YD. W.I. WD. W/O W/ WT. WP WCT WDW WC VERT. VA V.I.F. V.B. UR UNF. TYP. TRANS. TLT. THRU THK. THD. TH. TEL. T.V. T.S. T.O.W. T.O.S. T.O.M. T.O.J. T.O.F. T.O.C. T.O.B. T.O. T.M.B. T.B. T & G SYS. SYM SW SUSP. STL. STD. STC SQ. IN. SQ. FT. SPKR. SPECS SPA. SIM. SHT'G. SH SES SECT. SCHED. SC S/S S/L S.O.V. S.D. S.C. RMV. RM REV. RET. REQ'D. REINF. REF. REF R.O.W. or R/W R.O. R.D.O. R.D.L. R QTY. Q.T. PWR. PVC PTN. PSI PSF PREFAB. PERF. PORC. PLYWD. PLUMB. PLAS. PLT. PL. PH or Ø PERP. or P.O.C. P.LAM. P.L. P.C. OPPO. OPNG. OH OAI O.R. O.I. O.H. O.D. O.C. NOM. NO. NLR. NFC NCM N.T.S. N.I.C. MUL MTL. MOD MISC. MIN. MFR. MFG. MED. MECH. MAX. MAT'L MAS. MAR. M.O. M.I. M.H. M.B. LVL LTG. LT. LINO. LIN. LD. LAV LAT. LAM L.FT. L.E.D. KO KD K-D JT. JCT J-BOX INT. INSUL. INCL. IMPG IMC IG ID I.F. I.D. I.C. HYD. HW HVAC HTR HOR. HGT. HDW HDBD. H/C H.M. H.C. H.B. GYP. BD. GYP. GRC GM GM GLB GL GFI GFCI GAR. GALV. GA. G.I. FURN. FTG. FP FLUOR. FLG. FL FIN. FHC FDN. FDC FACP FAB. F/G F.S. F.O. F.N. F.E. F.D. F.C.O. F.C. F.A. EXT. EXIST. or E EXH. EXC EWC EVAP. EST. EQUIP. EQ. ENT EMT EMC ELEV. ELECT. EL EA. E.W. E.N. E.J. E.F. E.A. DR DN. DL DIM. DIAG. DIA. or Ø DEMO DBL. D/W D.S. D.G. D.F. d CU CONTR. CONT. CONST. CONC. COMB. COL. CNTRD. CMU CLR. CLO. CLKG. CLG. CL or C.L. CKT. BKR. CH CFM CER CEM. CCTV CAM. CAB C.T. C.O. C.J. C.I.P. C.D. C.A.P. BRZ BRG. BR BM. BLKG. BLK. BLDG BD. B/C B.U. B.O.F. B.O. B.N. B.M. AWG AVG ASPH. ANL ALT. AL. or ALUM. AHU AG ADD. ACT ACOU. ACB ABV. ABS ABC A/C A.F.G. A.F.F. A.B. A SLOPE TO DRAINS.T.D. GENERAL NOTES FINISH WOOD WOOD STUD BLOCKING STEEL STEEL STUD FRAMED WALL BATT INSULATION OR PLYWOOD PLYWOOD OR GLU-LAM CONCRETE STONE CMU SAND GRAVEL GWB COMPACTED SOIL SPRAY-FOAM INSULATION RIGID INSULATION GRID LINE BREAK LINE MATCH LINE REVISION A9.1 ELEVATION MARKER SECTION MARKER DETAIL CUT DETAIL 1 A6.1 ELEVATION 100 A ROOM NAME 101 INTERIOR ELEVATION MARKER ELEVATION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SECTION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER DETAIL NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SPOT ELEVATION DOOR MARK WINDOW MARK ROOM NAME AND NUMBER ELEVATION NUMBER SHEET NUMBER SYMBOL LEGEND LANDSCAPE LA 1.0 LANDSCAPE + EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN STRUCTURAL S 1.1 #### ELECTRICAL E 1.1 #### LIGHTING LP-A #### P 2 8 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE A 1.2 7/14/15Plotted On:S I T E P L A N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 D D E E 11 55 N C C A A B B 22 44 F 33 3 '-1 1 /8 " 5 1 / 2 " 9 ' 3 ' - 8 1 / 8 " R E P A I R O R R E P L A C E O R I G I N A L F E N C E T O M A T C H H I S T O R I C G A T E M A I L B O X P I N E T R E E S T O B E R E M O V E D S P R U C E T O B E R E M O V E D L I V I N G R O O M F R O N T P O R C H 2 C A R G A R A G E F A M I L Y R O O M P A T I O T .O . P L Y 9 8 '-6 " T .O . P L Y 9 8 '-0 " D N Y A R D P R O P E R T Y L I N E B L E E K E R S T R E E T G R A V E L A L L E Y W A L K W A Y 9 8 '-1 0 " K I T C H E N T V F P G U E S T B A T H P O W D E R D I N I N G E N T R YB I C Y C L E P A T I O W I N D O W W E L L T .O . P L Y 1 0 0 '-0 " C L O S E T U P D N W 1 9 W 2 0 W 2 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 P U Z Z L E T A B L E NOTE: ARCHITECTURAL 100'-0" = SITE 7891'-2" P 2 9 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE A 1.3 7/14/15Plotted On:F A R C A L C U L A T I O N - P R O P O S E D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 W 2 4 W 2 4 D17 D 0 4 D17 D 0 4 D04 D 0 9 D 1 0 D01 D01 W C D D D E E 1 1 5 5 C C A A B B 2 43 1,508 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 D D E E 1 1 5 5 C C A A B B 2 4 F 3 356.25 sq ft 70 sq ft OPENTOABOVE F I R E P L A C E / M E D I A UPDN CLOSET CABINET UC WINE FRIDGE KITCHEN STORAGE CABINETS DW FRIDGEFRZ ICEDWR TRASH PANTRY FRIG/FRZR F L O A T I N G B U F F E T SLAB FOR BIKE STORAGE SIDE WALK FROM ALLEY S K I S T O R A G E W / B O O T S B E L O W RUN NEW GAS FPFLUE THROUGHROOF AT CHIMNEY W 1 9 W 2 0 W 2 1 718.5 sq ft 969.75 sq ft 508 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 D31 W 2 3 W 2 3 W26 W27W58 W30W30W30W32W32 D 3 4 D 2 2 D D E E 1 1 5 5 C C A A B B 2 43 112.5 sq ft 112 sq ft 174.25 sq ft MONTEGO SINGLE SIDED FIREPLACEMODEL R320 882.25 sq ft D 3 1 11 432.25 sq ft SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" LOWER LEVEL FAR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" MAIN LEVEL FAR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" UPPER LEVEL FAR 3240 ALLOWABLE FAR BASED ON 6000 SF LOT - LOWER LEVEL FLOOR AREA- GROSS 1508 SF -MAIN LEVEL FLOOR AREA MAIN LEVEL PATIOS- EXEMPT ON GRADE GARAGE: 508 SF -UPPER LEVEL FLOOR AREA UPPER LEVEL DECKS: 112.5 +112+174.25= 133 SF508 SF- 250 SF = 258-125 718.5 SF + 970 SF= 399 SF 15% ALLOWABLE DECKS = 486 SF 104 + 352= 456 SF (2)50'-11" X 9' = 917 SF (2)34'-9" X 9' = 626 SF - TOTAL LOWER LEVEL WALLS EXPOSED WALLS: 14'-8" X 7' = 103 SF 1543 SF EXPOSED/TOTAL WALLS (103 / 1543 =6.6% 1508 X 6.8%101 SF LIVING FAR= 3105 SF GARAGE FAR= TOTAL FAR= 3238 SF 3740 FAR INCLUDES 500 SF HPC BONUS - PROPOSED FAR- EXISTING FAR MAIN LEVEL FAR 1105 + 115 SF = 1220 SF UPPER LEVEL FAR 914 SF GARAGE 480 SF 480-250 = 230/2 = 115 SF EXISTING FAR TOTAL: 2249 SF FLOOR AREA- NET 1315 SF 1689 SF 133 SF LIVING FAR TOTAL: 3105 SF P 3 0 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE A 1.4 7/14/15Plotted On:F A R C A L C U L A T I O N - E L E V A T I O N S ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 2 3 '-2 3 /4 " 2 9 '-2 3 /4 " 73.13 sq ft T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE98'-0" T.O. PLY @ MAIN 100'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER 110'-0" T.O. PLY @ LOWER MOD 87'-6" 329.34 sq ft 1 '-1 /4 " 2 '-6 " 2 9 '-2 3 /4 " 1/3 point roof T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-6" T.O. PLY @ MAIN 100'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER 110'-0" T.O. PLY @ LOWER MOD 87'-6" T.O. RIDGE127'-3/4" T.O. PLY @ UPPER LINK DECK 108'-6" T.O. EXISTING RIDGE 126'-4" 329.34 sq ft 2 9 '-3 1 /4 " UPPER LEVEL T.O. PLY 110'-0" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 100'-0" T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLY @ LOWER 88'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 121'-10 1/2" 495.67 sq ft 2 '-6 " 2 9 '-3 1 /4 " T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLY @ LOWER 88'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 121'-10 1/2" 495.86 sq ft 40 sq ft SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" WEST ELEVATION - FAR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION - FAR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" SOUTH ELEVATION - FAR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" NORTH ELEVATION - FAR SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" S. ELEV. PARTIAL ELEVATION AREA FAR CALCULATIONS TOTAL WALL AREA: 1670 SQ FT EXPOSED WALL AREA (WINDOW WELLS) : 73 + 40 = 113 SQ FT 113 SQ FT/1670 SQ FT= 0.067 = 6.7 % EXPOSED WALL BEHIND VICTORIAN P 3 1 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE A 3.1 7/14/15Plotted On:B A S E M E N T L E V E L F L O O R P L A N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 W 2 4 W 2 4 D17 D 0 4 D17 D 0 4 D04 D 0 9 D 1 0 D01 D01 N W C D D D E E 1 1 5 5 C C A A B B 2 43 1 0 1 / 2 " 1 0 '-0 " 2 3 '- 4 " 8 " 23'-3 3/4"6'-5" 50'-10 3/4" 24'-1 5/8"5'-7 1/8"20'-1 3/8"1'-0 5/8" 4 3 '- 8 3 / 4 " 25'-8 1/2" 5'-7 1/8"20'-1 3/8" 8 " 2 8 '-7 3 /8 " 4 '-1 5 /8 " 11 1/2"15'-7 3/4"5 1/2"5'-7"8" 5'-8 1/4" 1 1 1 /2 " 4 '-2 3 /8 "3 1 /2 " 5 '-8 3 /8 " 5 1 / 2 " 1 6 '-8 5 /8 " 1 1 1 / 2 " 11 1/2"5'-6 1/2"3 1/2"8'-8 3/8"5 1/2"6'-11"5 1/2"7'-5"5 1/2"10'-4 5/8"11 1/2"8'-4 1/4" 1 1 1 / 2 " 2 2 '-1 " 1 1 1 / 2 " 4 '- 4 5 / 8 " 5 1 /2 " 1 1 '-1 0 1 /2 " 11 1/2"19'-3"11 1/2" N/S1/A5.1 CRAWL SPACE CRAWL SPACE T.O. PLY 88'-0" MEDIA ROOM T.O. PLY 88'-0" CLOSET GUEST MASTER BATH T.O. PLY 88'-0" CLOSET GUEST MASTER GUEST MASTER BATH LAUNDRY MECH. STORAGE UP 1 A5.12 A5.2 4 A5.2 3A5.2 P 3 2 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE A 3.2 7/14/15Plotted On:M A I N L E V E L F L O O R P L A N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 D D E E 1 1 5 5 1 2 3 N C C A A B B 2 2 4 4 F 3 3 10 1/2" 3'-1 1/8" 10 1/2"11'-11 3/8" 24'-8 1/4"5 1/2"13'-4 1/8"5 1/2"2'-6"5 1/2"7'-5 7/8" 5 1 / 2 " 9 '-0 " 4 3 '- 1 1 5 /8 " 1 0 '-0 " 2 4 '- 0 " 3 '-8 1 /8 " 23'-3 7/8"6'-5"21'-2" 1'-0" 5'-11 1/2" 5 1 / 2 " 1 7 '-8 3 / 8 " 5 1 / 2 " 50'-10 3/4" 1'-0 5/8" 8 '- 9 3 / 8 " 5'-2 5/8" 12'-0 1/8" 5'-7 1/8"20'-1 3/8" 8 '-1 0 1 /4 " 1 0 1 /2 " 5 '-2 1 / 4 "3 1 /2 " 5 '-8 1 /2 " 3 1 / 2 " 1 9 '-1 0 7 / 8 " 1 '- 1 1 3 /4 " 1 0 1 / 2 " 1 A5.12 A5.2 4 A5.2 LIVING ROOM FRONT PORCH OPEN TO ABOVE 2 CAR GARAGE FAMILY ROOM F I R E P L A C E / M E D I A UPDN PATIO CLOSET CABINET T.O. PLY 98'-6" T.O. PLY 98'-0" DN YARD PROPERTY LINE WALKWAY 98'-10" KITCHEN UC WINE FRIDGE KITCHEN STORAGE CABINETS DW FRIDGE FRZ ICE DWR TRASH TV FP GUEST BATH POWDER PANTRY FRIG/FRZR DINING F L O A T I N G B U F F E T ENTRY SLAB FOR BIKE STORAGE SIDE WALK FROM ALLEY S K I S T O R A G E W / B O O T S B E L O W BICYCLE PATIO W I N D O W W E L L T.O. PLY 100'-0" CLOSET RUN NEW GAS FP FLUE THROUGH ROOF AT CHIMNEY UP DN 3A5.2 W 1 9 W 2 0 W 2 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 PUZZLE TABLE P 3 3 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE A 3.3 7/14/15Plotted On:U P P E R L E V E L F L O O R P L A N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 D31 W 2 3 W 2 3 W26 W27W58 W30W30W30W32W32 D 3 4 D 2 2 D D E E 1 1 5 5 C C A A B B 2 2 4 4 3 3 N N/S1/A5.1 <MARKERDRAWINGNUMBER_R><MARKERSHEETNUMBER_R> <MARKERDRAWINGNUMBER_R><MARKERSHEETNUMBER_R> 1 A5.12 A5.2 4 A5.2 24'-1 5/8"25'-8 1/2" 1 0 '-0 1 / 8 " 5 1/2"1 0 '-8 1 / 2 " 5 1 /2 " 7 '-0 " 5 1 /2 " 5 '-4 1 /2 " 3 '-0 1 / 2 " 2'-9"24'-11 5/8"18'-6 1/8"7'-5" 11'-3 3/4" 50'-10 3/4" 8 '-7 3 /8 " 3 5 '- 1 1 / 8 " 13'-8 3/8"12'-0 1/8" 4 3 '- 8 3 / 4 " 1 0 '-0 " 1 8 '-7 3 /8 " 5 '-4 5 /8 " 1 0 '-0 " 5 1 / 2 " 1 2 '-8 3 /4 " 3 1 / 2 " 4 '-8 1 /8 " 5 1 /2 " 6"14'-9 3/4"5 1/2"7'-1"5 1/2"6'-5"5 1/2"5'-2 1/2"3 1/2"14'-9"5 1/2" 3A5.2 MONTEGO SINGLE SIDED FIREPLACE MODEL R320 OPEN TO BELOW CLOSET shed dormer t.o. wall at 70 1/2" gable 77 1/2" to center b e n c h CANTILEVERED DECK DECK DORMER WALL ABOVE MASTER BATH REMOVE CHIMNEY BELOW; RUN NEW GAS FP FLUE THROUGH ROOF AT CHIMNEY T.O. PLY 109'-0" OPEN TO BELOW WINDOW SEAT F I R E P L A C E STEAM SHOWER OVERFLOW CLOSET D R E S S E R HIGH PULL DOWN HANGING ABOVE TV F U L L L E N G T H M I R R O R , S E T I N D R E S S E R I N -C A B I N E T W / D s h e l v e s o r o p e n a b o v e shoe rack WC BATH BEDROOM 1 DECK ON ROOF BELOW B U I L T I N S T O R A G E O N B O T H S I D E S O F F P / T V O P E N T O K I T C H E N B E L O W F O R L I G H T D E T A I L CLOSET MASTER BEDROOM DW D 3 1 P 3 4 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE A 3.4 7/14/15Plotted On:R O O F P L A N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 D D E E 1 1 5 5 C C A A B B 2 2 4 4 3 3 N 50'-10 3/4"7"7" 24'-3 3/4"5'-7"22'-2" 14'-9 3/4"14'-11" 9 '-1 1 1 5 /1 6 " 1 8 '-7 3 /8 " 5 '-4 1 1 /1 6 " 9 '-7 7 /1 6 " 3 3 /4 " 3 '- 4 5 / 8 " 3 '-1 1 3 / 4 " 8 '-4 1 /4 " 7 '-8 1 /2 " 2 0 '- 3 5 /1 6 " 1 '-2 1 /1 6 " 5 3 '-8 5 /8 " 1 8 '-7 3 /8 " 5 '-4 1 1 /1 6 " 1'-4 15/16" 6'-10 3/16"6'-10 3/16"1'-6 5/16" 9 3 /4 " 4 3 '-8 1 /2 " 1 '-2 1 /1 6 " 14'-3 15/16"13'-9 11/16" DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT DOWNSPOUT 10:12 PITCH 10:12 PITCH10:12 PITCH 10:12 PITCH E X I S T I N G P I T C H E X I S T I N G P I T C H E X I S T I N G P I T C H E X I S T I N G P I T C H EXISTING PITCH E X I S T I N G P I T C H E X I S T I N G P I T C H REBUILD HISTORIC ROOF "FLAT ROOF" SLOPED TO DRAIN EXISTING SKYLIGHT TO BE REMOVED SNOW BARRICADE DECK BAR MOUNT SYSTEM SNOW BARRICADE DECK BAR MOUNT SYSTEM SNOW BARRICADE DECK BAR MOUNT SYSTEM NOT TO SCALE SNOW STOP - BARRICADE GUTTER DOWNSPOUT PLAN KEY SNOW BARRICADE - SNOW STOP P 3 5 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE HPC D1 7/14/15Plotted On:O P T I O N D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 HORIZONTAL 4" SIDINGHORIZONTAL 4" SIDING T.O. PLATE 117'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 120'-18" METALLIC TILE STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL 2 7 '-3 " REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH COLUMNS TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH GABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL SHINGLES ATGABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REBUILD BAY WINDOW FEATURE TO MATCH HISTORIC EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY TO REMAIN ABOVE ROOF METALLIC TILE HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING METALLIC TILE RESTORE FENCE AND POST TO ORIGINAL PER PICTURE RESTORE WINDOWS TO ORIGINAL T.O. PLATE 117'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER 110'-0" T.O. RIDGE 125'-3" T.O. PLY @ UPPER LINK DECK 108'-6" T.O. EXISTING RIDGE 126'-4" STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL BENT METAL FLASHING @ WALL CORNERS TYPICAL EXT. WALL FRAMING 1/2" SIDING, MITERED AT CORNER INSIDE OUTSIDE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION D - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION D - EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" CORNER WALL DETAIL P 3 6 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE HPC D2 7/14/15Plotted On:O P T I O N D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH COLUMNS TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH GABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL SHINGLES ATGABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REBUILD BAY WINDOW FEATURE TO MATCH HISTORIC EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY TO REMAIN ABOVE ROOF HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING RESTORE HISTORICAL FENCE GAS FIREPLACE VENT UPPER LEVEL T.O. PLY 110'-0" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 100'-0" T.O. PLATE 117'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 120'-8" STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL METALLIC TILE T.O. PLATE 117'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" METALLIC TILE HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING GAS FIREPLACE VENT 3" 9 " WOOD SHINGLE GUTTER TYPICAL EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY 9" DEEP SPRAY IN PLACE POLYEURETHANE FOAM INSULATION. LEAVE 2" MIN. AIR SPACE IN BOTTOM OF RAFTER CAVITY. METAL FLASHING BLOCKING 5/8" GYP BRD. BITUTHENE AT EAVES ( 3'-0) AND VALLEYS, W/ 30LB. FELT PAPER ON REST OF ROOF, OVER 3/4" CDX PLYWOOD OVER RAFTERS (REF. STRUCT.) SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION D - SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION D - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0" EAVE DETAIL P 3 7 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE HPC.A1 7/14/15Plotted On:O P T I O N A ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 2 9 '-3 " HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 121'-10 1/2" METALLIC TILE STEEL HANDRAIL 1 '-1 /4 " 2 9 '- 3 " REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH COLUMNS TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH GABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL SHINGLES ATGABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REBUILD BAY WINDOW FEATURE TO MATCH HISTORIC EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY TO REMAIN ABOVE ROOF METALLIC TILE HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING METALLIC TILE RESTORE FENCE AND POST TO ORIGINAL PER PICTURE RESTORE WINDOWS TO ORIGINAL 1/3 point roof T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLY @ MAIN 100'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER 110'-0" T.O. RIDGE 127'-3/4" T.O. PLY @ UPPER LINK DECK 108'-6" T.O. EXISTING RIDGE 126'-4" BENT METAL FLASHING @ WALL CORNERS TYPICAL EXT. WALL FRAMING 1/2" SIDING, MITERED AT CORNER INSIDE OUTSIDE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION A - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION A - EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1:10.67 CORNER WALL DETAIL P 3 8 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE HPC.A2 7/14/15Plotted On:O P T I O N A ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 2 9 '-3 " REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH COLUMNS TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH GABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL SHINGLES ATGABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REBUILD BAY WINDOW FEATURE TO MATCH HISTORIC EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY TO REMAIN ABOVE ROOF HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING RESTORE HISTORICAL FENCE GAS FIREPLACE VENT UPPER LEVEL T.O. PLY 110'-0" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 100'-0" T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 121'-10 1/2" 2 3 '- 2 3 / 4 " EXISTING BRICK RESTORE ORIGINAL FRONT WINDOW RESTORE SIDE WINDOWS TO ORIGINAL T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLY @ MAIN 100'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER 110'-0" METALLIC TILE METALLIC TILE HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING GAS FIREPLACE VENT 3" 9 " WOOD SHINGLE GUTTER TYPICAL EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY 9" DEEP SPRAY IN PLACE POLYEURETHANE FOAM INSULATION. LEAVE 2" MIN. AIR SPACE IN BOTTOM OF RAFTER CAVITY. METAL FLASHING BLOCKING 5/8" GYP BRD. BITUTHENE AT EAVES ( 3'-0) AND VALLEYS, W/ 30LB. FELT PAPER ON REST OF ROOF, OVER 3/4" CDX PLYWOOD OVER RAFTERS (REF. STRUCT.) SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION A - SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION A - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0" EAVE DETAIL P 3 9 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE HPC.B1 7/14/15Plotted On:O P T I O N B ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 121'-10 1/2" METALLIC TILE STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL 2 9 '-3 " REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH COLUMNS TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH GABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL SHINGLES ATGABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REBUILD BAY WINDOW FEATURE TO MATCH HISTORIC EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY TO REMAIN ABOVE ROOF METALLIC TILE HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING METALLIC TILE RESTORE FENCE AND POST TO ORIGINAL PER PICTURE RESTORE WINDOWS TO ORIGINAL T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER 110'-0" T.O. RIDGE 127'-3/4" T.O. PLY @ UPPER LINK DECK 108'-6" T.O. EXISTING RIDGE 126'-4" STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL BENT METAL FLASHING @ WALL CORNERS TYPICAL EXT. WALL FRAMING 1/2" SIDING, MITERED AT CORNER INSIDE OUTSIDE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION B - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION B - EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" CORNER WALL DETAIL P 4 0 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE HPC.B2 7/14/15Plotted On:O P T I O N B ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH COLUMNS TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH GABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL SHINGLES ATGABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REBUILD BAY WINDOW FEATURE TO MATCH HISTORIC EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY TO REMAIN ABOVE ROOF HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING RESTORE HISTORICAL FENCE GAS FIREPLACE VENT UPPER LEVEL T.O. PLY 110'-0" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 100'-0" T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 121'-10 1/2" STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" METALLIC TILE HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING GAS FIREPLACE VENT 3" 9 " WOOD SHINGLE GUTTER TYPICAL EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY 9" DEEP SPRAY IN PLACE POLYEURETHANE FOAM INSULATION. LEAVE 2" MIN. AIR SPACE IN BOTTOM OF RAFTER CAVITY. METAL FLASHING BLOCKING 5/8" GYP BRD. BITUTHENE AT EAVES ( 3'-0) AND VALLEYS, W/ 30LB. FELT PAPER ON REST OF ROOF, OVER 3/4" CDX PLYWOOD OVER RAFTERS (REF. STRUCT.) SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION B - SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION B - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0" EAVE DETAIL P 4 1 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE HPC.C1 7/14/15Plotted On:O P T I O N C ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH COLUMNS TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH GABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL SHINGLES ATGABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REBUILD BAY WINDOW FEATURE TO MATCH HISTORIC EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY TO REMAIN ABOVE ROOF HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING RESTORE HISTORICAL FENCE GAS FIREPLACE VENT UPPER LEVEL T.O. PLY 110'-0" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 100'-0" T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 121'-10 1/2" STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL METALLIC TILE T.O. PLATE 118'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" METALLIC TILE HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING GAS FIREPLACE VENT 3" 9 " WOOD SHINGLE GUTTER TYPICAL EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY 9" DEEP SPRAY IN PLACE POLYEURETHANE FOAM INSULATION. LEAVE 2" MIN. AIR SPACE IN BOTTOM OF RAFTER CAVITY. METAL FLASHING BLOCKING 5/8" GYP BRD. BITUTHENE AT EAVES ( 3'-0) AND VALLEYS, W/ 30LB. FELT PAPER ON REST OF ROOF, OVER 3/4" CDX PLYWOOD OVER RAFTERS (REF. STRUCT.) SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION C - SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION C - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0" EAVE DETAILP 4 2 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE HPC D1 7/14/15Plotted On:O P T I O N D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 HORIZONTAL 4" SIDINGHORIZONTAL 4" SIDING T.O. PLATE 117'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 120'-18" METALLIC TILE STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL 2 7 '-3 " REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH COLUMNS TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH GABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL SHINGLES ATGABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REBUILD BAY WINDOW FEATURE TO MATCH HISTORIC EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY TO REMAIN ABOVE ROOF METALLIC TILE HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING METALLIC TILE RESTORE FENCE AND POST TO ORIGINAL PER PICTURE RESTORE WINDOWS TO ORIGINAL T.O. PLATE 117'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER 110'-0" T.O. RIDGE 125'-3" T.O. PLY @ UPPER LINK DECK 108'-6" T.O. EXISTING RIDGE 126'-4" STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL BENT METAL FLASHING @ WALL CORNERS TYPICAL EXT. WALL FRAMING 1/2" SIDING, MITERED AT CORNER INSIDE OUTSIDE SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION D - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION D - EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 3/4" = 1'-0" CORNER WALL DETAIL P 4 3 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE HPC D2 7/14/15Plotted On:O P T I O N D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH COLUMNS TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL PORCH GABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REPAIR OR REPLACE ORIGINAL SHINGLES ATGABLE END TO MATCH HISTORIC REBUILD BAY WINDOW FEATURE TO MATCH HISTORIC EXISTING BRICK CHIMNEY TO REMAIN ABOVE ROOF HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING RESTORE HISTORICAL FENCE GAS FIREPLACE VENT UPPER LEVEL T.O. PLY 110'-0" MAIN LEVEL T.O. PLY 100'-0" T.O. PLATE 117'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" T.O. PLATE @ DORMER 120'-8" STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL STEEL & GLASS HANDRAIL METALLIC TILE T.O. PLATE 117'-0" T.O. PLY @ UPPER NORTH 109'-0" T.O. SLAB @ GARAGE 98'-0" METALLIC TILE HORIZONTAL 4" SIDING GAS FIREPLACE VENT 3" 9 " WOOD SHINGLE GUTTER TYPICAL EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY 9" DEEP SPRAY IN PLACE POLYEURETHANE FOAM INSULATION. LEAVE 2" MIN. AIR SPACE IN BOTTOM OF RAFTER CAVITY. METAL FLASHING BLOCKING 5/8" GYP BRD. BITUTHENE AT EAVES ( 3'-0) AND VALLEYS, W/ 30LB. FELT PAPER ON REST OF ROOF, OVER 3/4" CDX PLYWOOD OVER RAFTERS (REF. STRUCT.) SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION D - SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" OPTION D - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0" EAVE DETAIL P 4 4 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE A 10.1 7/14/15Plotted On:3 D P E R S P E C T I V E S A & D ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 NOT TO SCALE OPTION A - NO DORMER NOT TO SCALE OPTION D - DORMER AND LOWER ROOF PLATE HEIGHT P 4 5 I I I . A . Scale: ISSUE LA 1.0 7/14/15Plotted On:L A N D S C A P E + E X T E R I O R L I G H T I N G P L A N ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS I N DIC A T ED B Y T H E S E D R AWI N G S A N D SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. 1" ACTUAL AS NOTED DATE SCHEMATIC DESIGN06/20/12 1 1 0 B L E E K E R S T " B R I C K V I C " A S P E N C O 8 1 6 1 1 BIM Server: RSCSrv - BIM Server 18/Kim Raymond Architects, Inc./110 BLEEKER 6.15.15 123456789 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 123456789 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 123 N F 2 2 3 '-1 1 /8 " 5 1 / 2 " 9 ' 3 ' - 8 1 / 8 " R E P A I R O R R E P L A C E O R I G I N A L F E N C E T O M A T C H H I S T O R I C G A T E M A I L B O X P I N E T R E E S T O B E R E M O V E D S P R U C E T O B E R E M O V E D L I V I N G R O O M F R O N T P O R C H 2 C A R G A R A G E F A M I L Y R O O M P A T I O T .O . P L Y 9 8 '-6 " T .O . P L Y 9 8 '-0 " D N Y A R D P R O P E R T Y L I N E B L E E K E R S T R E E T G R A V E L A L L E Y W A L K W A Y 9 8 '-1 0 " K I T C H E N T V F P G U E S T B A T H P O W D E R D I N I N G E N T R YB I C Y C L E P A T I O W I N D O W W E L L T .O . P L Y 1 0 0 '-0 " C L O S E T U P D N W I N D O W W E L L W 1 9 W 2 0 W 2 1 P U Z Z L E T A B L E 2 1 PERENNIALS LANDSCAPE KEY SHRUBS MULCH OR BEACH COBBLE UNDERNEATH TREES CONCRETE WALKWAY GRAVEL WALKWAY EXISTING TREESSOD DECORATIVE GRASSES STONE PATIO SITE ELECTRICAL KEY Kichler RIPLEY COLLECTION OUTDOOR WALL LANTERN OLDE BRONZE #490610Z KICHLER DISTRESSED COPPER ENERGY STAR 9 1/2" HIGH WALL LIGHT STYLE#53726 KICHLER RIPLEY COLLECTION OUTDOOR HANGING PENDANT 1LT TREES TO BE REMOVED P 4 6 I I I . A . 1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 305-307 S. Mill Street – Demolition, Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Mountain View Plane, Public Hearing DATE: July 22, 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: The subject property is located at 305-307 S. Mill Street, a 6,000 square foot lot which is currently occupied by the popcorn wagon, Grey Lady and Jimmy’s Bodega. The Historic Preservation Commission is asked to review demolition and replacement of all the existing development. The structures on the site are not historically designated, but the property is in the Commercial Core Historic District. The review will include design, encroachment into the Wheeler View Plane, Public Amenity, Utility/Delivery/Trash, Parking, and Transportation Impact. Affordable housing mitigation will be assessed and reviewed at Final. HPC is expected to be the only decision making board for this proposal. APPLICANT: 305-7 Mill Street LLC, represented by Camburas and Theodore, Ltd. and Haas Land Planning. ADDRESS: 305-307 S. Mill Street, Units A, B, and C, Aspen Commercial Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. PARCEL ID: 2737-182-17-802 and 2737-182-17-003 through -005 . ZONING: CC, Commercial Core. DEMOLITION 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 P47 IV.A. 2 Staff response: The structures on the property are sound and are not an imminent hazard. The buildings cannot practically be moved to another location, however the property owner is interested in offering the popcorn wagon to the City to use for outdoor food vending elsewhere in town. The City has expressed interest in this possibility. The structure currently occupied by Grey Lady was of interest during early AspenModern surveys, however staff has been unable to identify the architect or document the history of the structure, other than a construction date of 1960, therefore we cannot justify a finding of significance. The popcorn wagon is a vintage vehicle that has been used as a food cart in Aspen since the 1960s. It appears to have been originally located in the area where it sits now, then moved to Galena and Cooper for a time, and returned to its setting across from the Wheeler Opera House in 1986. The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission has never designated the popcorn wagon as a historic resource, and the wagon was significantly remodeled by a previous restaurant operator and has limited original materials. Staff finds that Criterion D is met. There is no documentation that supports a finding that any development on this property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance. 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. Staff response: As stated, the existing development is not considered historically significant. The property is not directly adjacent to any historic resources and in fact is generally surrounded by non- historic structures, except for the buildings across the street. (See vicinity map at right. Historically designated structures are shown in green.) Demolition of this structure will not affect the historic preservation needs of the area. Staff finds these criteria are met. P48 IV.A. 3 CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW & COMMERCIAL DESIGN The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Conceptual level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project’s conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. The design guidelines for conceptual review of a new building in the Commercial Core Historic District are all stated within the “Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives.” The applicable guidelines are listed in “Exhibit A.” The subject property is located on a block that contains no historic resources. Directly across the street is a row of Victorian era buildings including the Wheeler, the Motherlode and the Crystal Palace. The property is zoned Commercial Core and is therefore theoretically permitted a building up to 28 feet in height and a floor area of just over 12,000 square feet. However, the site is directly within the path of a viewplane which originates from the Wheeler Opera House and projects towards Aspen Mountain as seen in the illustration on the next page. Because of the view plane regulations, the applicant is proposing a development that is limited to a basement retail/restaurant space, main floor retail/restaurant, and a partial roof deck with associated access, storage and mechanical equipment. P49 IV.A. 4 Regarding the design guidelines, staff finds that the project is largely successful as proposed. The building occupies the entire site, providing a stronger relationship to the historic development pattern downtown (engaging storefronts directly adjacent to the sidewalk) than the current building achieves. The primarily one story height of the building provides variety within the downtown context. The drawings indicate multiple tenants and entry points from the street, which relates well to Aspen’s historic commercial buildings. Please note that the project has been revised somewhat from the original proposal. The drawings, more so than the application text, reflect the proposed building dimensions. An image reflecting this building in context with the others on the Hyman block face is needed in order to address design guidelines that require variation in heights of adjacent buildings. The project will require mitigation of development impacts, such as parking and affordable housing. The applicant wishes to address affordable housing at Final design review, which is permissible. Regarding parking, the proposed new net leasable space generates a requirement for approximately 5.6 parking spaces. The site has no on-site parking now and there is no way to provide parking that meets code requirements without alley access. The applicant has the right to mitigate parking with a cash in lieu payment of $30,000 per space. Redevelopment of the site requires the applicant to incorporate improvements to pedestrian and transit amenities, such as safety improvements, public bike racks, etc. The application addresses the requirements, called “Transportation Impact Analysis.” Any actions related to this provision are likely to involve work in the area surrounding the site. HPC review will not be needed. The P50 IV.A. 5 applicant must continue to work with the Engineering and Transportation Departments for an approved plan prior to Final review. There are additional design related standards that HPC must find are met in order to approve the project. These standards are listed below. Any deviation must be found to provide a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site constraints can justify a deviation from the standards. Compliance with Section 26.412.070, Suggested design elements, is not required but may be used to justify a deviation from the standards. The suggested design elements relate to signage, display windows and lighting, all of which are deferred until Final review. Public Amenity Space. Redevelopment of this site requires the provision of an on-site public amenity space, or a cash in lieu payment. The outdoor seating area on this property currently qualifies as public amenity and the applicant must replace it with something comparable. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of- way or private property within commercial areas. The design guidelines in Exhibit A describe desirable characteristics of on-site amenity space, as do the following requirements: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. Staff response : The applicant is proposing to provide a very small amount of public amenity at the ground level of the site, and the balance in the form of a rooftop deck. At the ground level, the only proposed amenity that will count is the area on the east side of the building, adjacent to the green wall. The planter boxes will not count because they are underneath a roof overhang. Public amenity must be open to the sky. Staff does not recommend P51 IV.A. 6 that any additional public amenity be provided on the ground level of this development. The area for potential redevelopment is limited by the view plane. It is sensible to maximize the ground level, and this meets the design guidelines, which call for commercial buildings to extend to the lot lines. The property is also surrounded by pedestrian mall and generous sidewalk areas. A rooftop deck is a possibility for public amenity and has been accepted in some instances. In this case, staff is not supportive of the deck counting towards the amenity requirement because there is no restaurant space directly adjacent to it. The associated tenant space is on the ground floor and basement and could easily be used for retail, limiting the activity level on the deck. The plans do not indicate any built in improvements, such as a bar. If these features are intended, they must be represented as part of this view plane review. Staff recommends that the public amenity requirement be addressed through a cash in lieu payment. 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 building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The success of the project related to these topics is assessed by Environmental Health, Engineering and Utilities, using the following criteria: 1. A trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum size and location standards established by Title 12, Solid Waste , of the Municipal Code, unless otherwise established according to said Chapter. 2. A utility area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum standards established by Title 25, Utilities , of the Municipal Code, the City’s Electric Distribution Standards, and the National Electric Code, unless otherwise established according to said Codes. 3. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. 5. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be along and accessed from the alleyway, unless otherwise approved through Title 12, Solid Waste , of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review . 6. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible from the street, unless they are entirely located on an alleyway or otherwise approved though Title 12, Solid Waste , of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review . All fences shall be six (6) feet high from grade, shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than ninety percent (90%) opaque, unless otherwise varied through Chapter 26.430, Special Review . 7. Whenever utility, trash, and recycle service areas are required to be provided abutting an alley, other portions of a building may extend to the rear property line if otherwise P52 IV.A. 7 allowed by this Title, provided that the utility, trash and recycle area is located at grade and accessible to the alley. 8. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property. 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. 9. All commercial and lodging buildings shall provide a delivery area. The delivery area shall be located along the alley if an alley adjoins the property. The delivery area shall be accessible to all tenant spaces of the building in a manner that meets the requirements of the International Building Code Chapters 10 and 11 as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All non-ground floor commercial spaces shall have access to an elevator or dumbwaiter for delivery access. Alleyways (vehicular rights-of-way) may not be utilized as pathways (pedestrian rights-of-way) to meet the requirements of the International Building Code. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. 10. All commercial tenant spaces located on the ground floor in excess of 1,500 square feet shall contain a vestibule (double set of doors) developed internal to the structure to meet the requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen, or an air curtain. 10. 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. 11. 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 public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. 12. The trash and recycling service area requirements may be varied pursuant to Title 12, Solid Waste , of the Municipal Code. All other requirements of this subsection may be varied by special review (see Chapter 26.430.040.E, Utility and delivery service area provisions ). Staff response: The property currently has a very poor arrangement for trash services. As stated, there is no alley access. Trash must be stored in an enclosed space which is directly next to Hyman Avenue. The proposal addresses this issue and the new trash area is supported by the Environmental Health Department. Each tenant space in the building must have a direct, enclosed route to the trash area. One of the tenant spaces, Tenant B, does not have access. Redesign is required. P53 IV.A. 8 The trash area may or may not be able to accommodate some of the utility meters or the project. The applicant must indicate how these elements will be addressed. The Utilities Department has suggested that an on-site transformer may be needed. This should be located on the south side of the building, and must be open to the sky. The plans must be amended to incorporate a utility area. Amendments to the plans are needed in order for HPC to grant approval. MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE 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 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. HPC, after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Department, may exempt a development from being processed as a Planned Development when the board 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 redevelopment to reopen the view plane cannot be anticipated, HPC shall exempt the development from the requirements of this Section. Staff response: The view plane has a significant impact as it intersects the site at a height 7’3” above grade along Hyman Avenue and 10’6” at the pedestrian walkway on the south end of the site. Both the existing and proposed development exceed the height of this plane. Because of view plane limitations, the existing structure has unsightly mechanical equipment on the roof that is not well screened. The proposed development is not prohibited from intruding into the view plane, but in order for this to be permitted, HPC must find that the effect of the new building (vs. the existing building, which is already out of compliance) has a minimal effect on the view plane. The zone district does require that the minimum height between the first floor and second floor (in this case roof) is 13,’ to ensure that downtown buildings have a storefront proportion that is compatible with Victorian era structures. This is a dimensional requirement, not a guideline. The proposed height is 15’. While the design is appropriate to the area, the subject property must minimize impacts to the view plane. The 3’6” parapet wall is not a required element and also must be reduced. To the extent that the roof is used for a deck, a railing can be pulled in from the first floor and the deck can be concentrated where the new impact to the view plane is minimized. P54 IV.A. 9 Similarly, any access provided to the roof must be as low in height and small in footprint as possible. The applicant should study elevator options that have the minimum overrun. An enclosed elevator lobby on the roof is not required. Staff does support the screened mechanical areas shown on the plans. Better graphics are needed to assess the view plane impact from several angles. Additional drawings superimposing the proposed development over the existing would be useful. Staff finds that the project needs more study on this topic. ______________________________________________________________________________ The HPC may: • approve the application, • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. ______________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION : Staff recommends HPC continue the hearing for restudy in order to: • Provide an image reflecting this building in context with the others on the Hyman block face in order to address design guidelines that require variation in heights of adjacent buildings. • Commit to cash in lieu payment for public amenity. • Provide all tenants direct enclosed access to the trash area. • Indicate where meters will be located • Provide a location for an on-site transformer. • Reduce impacts on the view plane and provide additional graphics illustrating the proposal. EXHIBITS : A. Relevant Design Guidelines B. Application Exhibit A, Relevant Design Guidelines 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. P55 IV.A. 10 6.3 Develop an alley façade 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. 6.6 A street facing amenity space shall meet all of the following requirements: Abut the public sidewalk Be level with the sidewalk 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 fronts in the Commercial Core. 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. Sunken spaces, which are associated with some past developments, adversely affect the street character. Where feasible, these should be replaced with sidewalk level improvements. 6.8 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. These may include one or more of the following: Street furniture Public art Historical/interpretive marker 6.12 Second level amenity space should be compatible with the character of the historic district. It shall remain visually subordinate to any historic resource on the property. If located on a historic property, it may not alter the appearance of the resource as seen from the street. 6.13 A second floor amenity space should meet all of the following criteria: Ensure consistent public access Be dedicated for public use Provide a public overlook and /or an interpretive marker Be identified by a marker at street level 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. P56 IV.A. 11 6.16 Second level dining may be considered. If the use changes, the space must remain accessible to the public, so long as it is to be considered meeting the public amenity space requirement. 6.18 Maintain the alignment of façades at the sidewalk’s edge. Place as much of the façade 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 façade shall be at the property line. 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. 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. Providingsecondary public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger buildings. 6.22 Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core façades. Rectangular forms should be vertically oriented. The façade should appear as predominantly flat, with any decorative elements and projecting or setback “articulations” appearing to be subordinate to the dominant roof form. 6.23 Use flat roof lines as the dominant roof form. A flat roof, or one that gently slopes to the rear of a site, should be the dominant roof form. Parapets on side façades 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 façade, 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. 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. 6.26 Building façade height shall be varied from the façade 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 façade height by a minimum of 2 ft. P57 IV.A. 12 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. A minimum 9 ft. floor to 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 building. - The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic Building, Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.) - Some portion of the property is affected by a height restriction due to its proximity to a historic resource, or location within a View Plane, therefore relief in another area may be appropriate. - To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units. - To make a demonstrable (to be verified by the Building Department) contribution to the building's overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved day- lighting. 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. Set back the upper floor to vary the building façade profile(s) and the roof forms across the width and the depth of the building. Vary the façade (or parapet) heights at the front. Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with commercial and multifamily developments. This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks. Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists. P58 IV.A. ATTACHMENT 2 –LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Name: Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) APPLICANT: Name: Address: Phone #: REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: GMQS Exemption Conceptual PUD Temporary Use GMQS Allotment Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) Text/Map Amendment Special Review Subdivision Conceptual SPA ESA – 8040 Greenline, Stream Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane Subdivision Exemption (includes condominiumization) Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) Commercial Design Review Lot Split Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion Residential Design Variance Lot Line Adjustment Other: Conditional Use EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $_________ Pre-Application Conference Summary Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards 3-D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5” X 11” must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-D model. Your pre-application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. P59 IV.A. ATTACHMENT 3 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: Applicant: Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing:__________Proposed:___________________ Number of residential units: Existing:__________Proposed:___________________ Number of bedrooms: Existing:__________Proposed:___________________ Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only):__________ DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Principal bldg. height: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ Access. bldg. height: Existing:_________Allowable:__________Proposed:________ On-Site parking: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Site coverage: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ % Open Space: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Front Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Rear Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined F/R: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Side Setback: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Combined Sides: Existing:_________Required:___________Proposed:________ Distance Between Buildings Existing ________Required:__________Proposed:_____ Existing non-conformities or encroachments:___________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ Variations requested: ______________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ P60 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 1 Section I: Introduction This application seeks Major Development (Conceptual) approval, as well as approvals for Conceptual Commercial Design Review, and Mountain View Plane Review to remove the existing commercial buildings and redevelop the property located at 305/307 South Mill Street. This 6,031 square foot lot is not on the City of Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures (the Inventory), but is located within the Commercial Core Historic Overlay District. The property is comprised of Lots H and I of Block 82, legally described as Aspen Commercial Condo, Units A, B, and C, City & Townsite of Aspen. This application is submitted pursuant to the following sections of the Aspen Land Use Code (the Code) by 305-7 Mill Street LLC, the owner of the property: 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, including 26.304.060(B)(1), Combined Reviews; 26.412, Commercial Design Review; 26.415.070, Historic Preservation; 26.415.080, Demolition of Properties within a Historic District; 26.435.050, Mountain Viewplane Review; 26.515, Parking; 26.575.030, Public Amenity; 26.610, Impact Fees; 26.630, Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines; and 26.710.140, Commercial Core (CC) Zone District. The application is divided into four sections, with this Section providing a brief introduction while Section II describes the existing conditions of the project site and environs. Section III outlines the applicant’s proposed development and Section IV addresses the proposed development’s compliance with the applicable review criteria of the Code. For the reviewer’s convenience, all pertinent supporting documents are provided in the various exhibits to the application, as follows: • Exhibit 1: Land Use Application, Dimensional Requirements Form, and Homeowners Association Compliance Form; • Exhibit 2: Pre-Application Conference Summary prepared by Sara Adams; • Exhibit 3: Proof of the Applicant’s Ownership and Authority; • Exhibit 4: Authorization for Haas Land Planning, LLC (HLP) to represent the applicant; • Exhibit 5: Vicinity Map; • Exhibit 6: Transportation Impact Analysis; • Exhibit 7: Mountain Viewplane Map, Photos, Renderings & Comparisons; • Exhibit 8: An executed application fee agreement; and • Exhibit 9: Mailing addresses of record for all property owners located within 300 feet of the subject property. In addition, existing conditions are depicted on a survey and various plans that accompany this application. Similarly, all proposed development is depicted on the accompanying architectural plans prepared by Camburas & Theodore (C+T). While the applicant has attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Code, and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application, questions may arise which require further information and/or clarification. Upon request, Haas P61 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 2 Land Planning, LLC will gladly provide such additional information as may be required in the course of the review. Section II: Existing Conditions The 6,031 square foot 305-7 S. Mill Street property is on the Mill Street Mall that runs between the malls on Hyman And Cooper Avenues. This location on the southwest corner of Hyman Avenue and South Mill Street and is in the Commercial Core Historic District, across the street from the Wheeler Opera House. The existing development on the property includes three (3) non-historic commercial buildings that currently house Jimmy’s Bodega, the Grey Lady and the Popcorn Wagon. The subject property, which is located on the Mill Street mall, sits between the Wild Fig restaurant, the mall fountain, the “tooth” park, and Wagner Park. The platted alley to the rear/south of the property is not open to vehicular or bicycle traffic; instead it is the pedestrian walkway link from the Mill Street Mall to Monarch Street. The existing buildings, while only one-story in height, include significant mechanical equipment, ducting, and venting flues on their roofs. The structures do not cover the entire lot, as there is a private restaurant seating courtyard between the two structures as well as the old fire-pit area at the northeast corner (which has been covered by a trellis structure and, until recently, had been enclosed for private restaurant seating). There is no off-street parking associated with the existing uses. The property contains 22% public amenity space, most of which is below a trellis structure and next to the so-called popcorn wagon. Trash and recycling are stored on-site but in a location that is not accessible from the street or platted alley; instead, trash and recycling must be hauled out to Hyman Avenue at appropriate times for pick-up. Code Section 26.515.030 provides that the existing commercial use generates an off-street parking requirement of one (1) space for every 1,000 square feet of net leasable area, or 5.05 off-street spaces for the 5,054 square feet of existing net leasable area (3,588 square feet on the ground floor and an addition 1,466 square feet below grade). With no dedicated parking, the property maintains an off-street parking deficit of 5.05 spaces. The property is within the designated Wheeler Opera House Viewplane, which ascends across the site from north to south. While the Commercial Core Zone District’s height limit for the property is twenty-eight (28) feet, the view plane would effectively reduce this limit to approximately 7’-3” at the Hyman Avenue frontage, ascending to approximately 10’-6” at the southerly boundary of the property. The existing trellis structure (which received Viewplane Review approval from the HPC) located at the northeast corner of the subject property where the Viewplane height limit is just under 7’-3” has a height of 10’-6”, thereby already encroaching a bit more than 3’-3” into the view plane. The north end of the Grey Lady building has a height of 13.9’ where the Viewplane height limit is merely 7.7’ (a 6.2- foot encroachment, meaning the existing building’s height at its closest and most impactful distance from the regulated vantage point is equivalent to 181% of the Viewplane height P62 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 3 limit). In addition, the Grey Lady and Jimmy’s Bodega structures both have an abundance of rooftop mechanical equipment, ductwork, flues and venting apparatuses projecting above these measured heights and even further into the Viewplane. Not too far beyond/behind the subject property, the Wagner Park bathrooms and clock tower already impede on the designated Wheeler Opera House Viewplane as well. The Wagner Park restrooms reach a height of 17’-6” where the mapped Viewplane height restriction is approximately 12-13 feet. The clock tower is 30 feet tall. Incidentally, these restrooms also encroach well into and effectively obliterate the designated Wagner Park Viewplane; yet, for whatever reason, the City’s public restrooms were reviewed and approved by the HPC and then built without ever considering the Wheeler Opera House or Wagner Park Viewplanes. Section III: Project Description/The Proposal The applicant is requesting that the HPC grant Conceptual Approval of a Major Development as well as Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval and Mountain View Plane approval. All applications for Conceptual Approval of a Major Development must receive a determination of consistency with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (hereinafter “the Guidelines”). Although not historically significant itself, since the subject property is located in the Commercial Core Historic District, conceptual approval of the proposed design requires a finding of consistency with Chapter 13 of Guidelines, in terms of height, scale, mass, bulk, and site plan. Additionally, the applicant must show consistency with the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines (the “Commercial Guidelines”). The current proposal envisions a one-story building with one commercial retail space on the street level and a restaurant in the lower level, with a rooftop deck/lounge area that will be part of the lower level restaurant. No residential units are included in this redevelopment, and the proposal fully complies with the Commercial Core zoning (residential use is not permitted in the CC Zone District). Although only one story, the roof contains a deck/lounge space along with interior bathrooms, modest storage space, and stair/elevator enclosures. The proposal is fully depicted on the accompanying architectural plans and renderings prepared by Camburas & Theodore (C+T). The proposed development will contain 3,811 square feet of commercial net leasable area NLA) on the ground floor, 423 square feet of NLA on the roof deck (bathrooms and storage), and 5,099 square feet of NLA on the lower level. This total/combined NLA of 9,333 square feet carries an off-street parking requirement of 4.28 spaces (9.33 spaces at one space per every 1,000 square feet of net leasable area, minus the existing off-street parking deficit of 5.05 spaces), which will be completely satisfied through the payment of cash-in- lieu as allowed by right pursuant to Code Section 26.515.030. The payment-in-lieu of parking will be due and payable at the time of building permit issuance for the redevelopment. At the currently codified rate of $30,000, which may be amended, the P63 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 4 payment due would be $128,400 ($30,000 x 4.28 spaces). The Code clearly provides the right to satisfy the off-street parking requirement through a payment in-lieu without any review or approval and doing so does not in any way whatsoever represent any kind of variance or variation. As explained above, the property is within the designated Wheeler Opera House Viewplane, which ascends across the site from north to south. While the Commercial Core Zone District’s height limit for the property is twenty-eight (28) feet, the view plane would effectively reduce this limit to slightly less than 7’-3” at the Hyman Avenue frontage, ascending to approximately 10’-6” at the southerly boundary of the property. It is noted that and that a structure cannot be built to compliance with Building Codes, zoning requirements, and the Commercial Design Standards while remaining below the artificial 7’-3” view plane limitation. For instance, no above-grade structure that complies with commercial Building Codes can simultaneously comply with the codified Viewplane given that a typical door height, not even including the framing for the door, is seven (7) feet tall. Further, the Commercial Design Standards require that structures and entryways be built at sidewalk grade. In addition, the Commercial Core Zone District’s minimum first floor to second floor floor-to-floor height is 13 feet, effectively precluding compliance with even the high-end 10’-6” Viewplane height limitation at the south side of the property. These factors combine to clearly prove that, without approval to infringe upon the codified view plane, it is simply too low to allow any above-grade commercial development at all. Furthermore, the existing trellis structure (which received Viewplane Review approval from the HPC) located at the northeast corner of the subject property where the Viewplane height limit is just under 7’-3” has a height of 10’-6”, thereby already encroaching more than 3’-3” into the view plane. The north end of the Grey Lady building has a height of 13.9’ where the Viewplane height limit is merely 7.7’ (a 6.2-foot encroachment, meaning the existing building’s height at its closest and most impactful distance from the regulated vantage point is equivalent to 181% of the Viewplane height limit). In addition, the Grey Lady and Jimmy’s Bodega structures both have an abundance of rooftop mechanical equipment, ductwork, flues and venting apparatuses projecting above these measured heights and even further into the Viewplane. Beyond the subject property, the Wagner Park bathrooms and clock tower already impede on the designated Wheeler Opera House Viewplane as well. The Wagner Park restrooms reach a height of 17’-6” where the mapped Viewplane height restriction is no more than 12- 13 feet. The clock tower is 30 feet tall. Incidentally, these restrooms also encroach well into and effectively obliterate the designated Wagner Park Viewplane; yet, for whatever reason, the City’s public restrooms were reviewed and approved by the HPC and then built without ever considering the Wheeler Opera House or Wagner Park Viewplanes. In the proposed redevelopment, only the stair/elevator enclosures, which are set to the far westerly side of the structure, are significantly taller than the approximately 14-foot tall P64 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 5 existing structures on the property. The predominant height of the proposed structure is 15 feet to the roof, while the stair and elevator enclosures will reach the CC zone’s height limit of 28 feet. In light of the points made above, not only is it clear that the Viewplane restriction is set too low, but it is also evident that the new/additional Viewplane impacts associated with the proposed redevelopment will be minimal. The Dimensional Requirements of the underlying CC Zone District in comparison with the proposed redevelopment, given the description of the project provided above as well as the accompanying plans, is detailed below to show the project’s conformity with all applicable requirements. Dimensional Requirements Comparison Table CC Zoning & The Proposed Redevelopment DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENT COMMERCIAL CORE ZONE DISTRICT PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT Minimum Gross Lot Area No requirement 6,000 square feet Minimum Net Lot Area per Dwelling Unit No requirement N/A Minimum Lot Width No Requirement 60 feet Minimum Front Yard Setback No requirement No requirement (None) Minimum Side Yard Setback No requirement No requirement (None) Minimum Rear Yard Setback No requirement No requirement (None) Minimum Utility/Trash/Recycle Area1 20’W x 15’D x 10’H 1 9’10.5”L x 22’5”D x 10’3”’H 1 Maximum Height 2 For properties on the south side of a street, twenty-eight (28) feet for two-story elements 2 28 Feet 2 Minimum floor to floor heights Minimum first floor to Second floor: thirteen (13) feet. Minimum upper floor-ceiling height: Nine (9) feet N/A (No second floor but first floor to roof deck is 15 feet in height) Minimum Distance between Buildings on the Lot No requirement N/A Public Amenity Space3 22% (1,330.5 square feet) 3 70% (4,255sf) per Code Sections 26.575.030.C.4. 3 P65 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 6 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2:1 for Commercial Uses 1.01:1 (6,031sf, plus a margin of error since allowable is 2:1) DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS NOTES: 1 : Pursuant to Code Section 12.10.030(A)b., for Commercial Buildings that will contain or that will have the capacity to contain an establishment with a Retail Food Service License and the reserved trash and recycling storage space must be adjacent to the alleyway. However, there is no functioning alley associated with this property. The proposal provides for adequate storage space for trash and recycling and the designated storage area will comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 12.10 of the Code. 2 : The height limit on the subject property is effected by the Wheeler Opera House Mountain Viewplane, as described and discussed elsewhere in this application. Pursuant to Code Section 26.575.020.F.4., specific exceptions to height limitations are allowed, as may be applicable. 3 : Pursuant to Code Section 26.575.030.B., 25% of the area of the 6,031 square foot parcel shall be provided as public amenity; however, for redevelopment of parcels on which less than 25% currently exists (the current public amenity space on the parcel is 22%), the existing (prior to redevelopment) percentage shall be the effective requirement provided not less then 10% is the end requirement. The applicant proposes below that the approximately 4,200 square foot roof deck/lounge area coupled with the approximately 55 square foot bench seating area at ground level (adjacent to the mall) be accepted as public amenity consistent with many previous City of Aspen approvals as well as Code Sections 26.575.030.C.4, F.5 and F.10. This restaurant deck area and mall seating area equates to a public amenity space of approximately 70% (4,255sf divided by 6,031sf of lot area). The proposed redevelopment of the 305/307 South Mill Street property is consistent and compatible with surrounding development patterns in terms of uses, densities, building heights and intensities. The property, which is located on the Mill Street pedestrian mall, is surrounded largely by commercial uses and Wagner Park. The majority of the sites are built out to their front lot line or close to it and with strong street/mall presence. Although public amenity space exists in the area next to the popcorn wagon, beneath the trellis structure, the provision of street level public amenity would not only be shaded by the structure but it would also abut the ample, perpetual public amenity space that is the Mill Street pedestrian mall. Provision of actual public amenity space on the subject site is neither practical nor desirable. As such, the applicant believes that the approximately 4,200 square foot roof deck/lounge area coupled with the approximately 55 square foot bench seating area (at grade, adjacent to the mall) qualifies and should be approved as public amenity space consistent with many previous City of Aspen approvals as well as Code Sections 26.575.030.C.4, F.5 and F.10. These areas equate to public amenity space of approximately 70% (4,255sf divided by 6,031sf of lot area). P66 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 7 Section IV: Review Requirements This application is submitted pursuant to the following sections of the Code: 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, including 26.304.060(B)(1), Combined Reviews; 26.412, Commercial Design Review; 26.415.070, Historic Preservation; 26.415.080, Demolition of Properties within a Historic District; 26.435.050, Mountain View Plane Review; 26.515, Off-Street Parking; 26.575.030, Public Amenity; 26.610, Impact Fees; 26.630, Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines; and 26.710.140, Commercial Core (CC) Zone District. The applicable review standards are addressed below. A. Common Development Review Procedures and Combined Reviews Section 26.304.060.B(1) of the Code discusses combined reviews and states that, The procedures for reviewing development plans and applications where more than one (1) development approval is being sought simultaneously may be combined or modified whenever the Community Development Director determines, in consultation with the applicant, that such combination or modification would eliminate or reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense and clarity; provided, however, that all public noticing normally associated with the subject development application(s) is maintained and that a thorough and full review of the application and proposed development as otherwise required by this Title is achieved. It is proposed that the associated Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Viewplane review, and other requests made herein all be combined and made part of the Conceptual Major Development Review and approval by the HPC. Accordingly, rather than have a Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) Resolution granting portions of the applicable approvals and a P&Z Resolution addressing the remaining parts (potentially in manners that could conflict with one another), it only makes sense that, pursuant to Code Section 26.304.060(B)(1), Combined Reviews, all final decisions be documented in a single ordinance adopted by the HPC. Combining the reviews in this manner will eliminate or at least reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense and clarity. All public noticing normally associated with an application such as this will be maintained via publication, sign posting and mailing. Moreover, a thorough and full review of the application and proposed redevelopment will still be achieved. B. Conceptual Approval of a Major Development Code Section 26.415.070 addresses development involving non-historic property located within a historic district, such as the subject site. Said Code section provides that, No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a P67 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 8 Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. The proposed redevelopment of 305-7 South Mill Street is considered a major development because it involves demolition of non-historic structures and the development of a new structure in a historic district. The procedures for the review of major development projects include a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a conceptual development plan and then a final development plan. As mentioned above, it is requested that the HPC Conceptual Review be combined with the Commercial Design Review, Mountain View Plane Review and, as addressed throughout, all other approvals required for this application. All applications for Conceptual and Final approval of a Major Development project must receive a determination of consistency with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (the “HP Guidelines”) to be approved by the HPC. Chapter 1 of the Guidelines is not applicable as it concerns streetscapes and lot features on residential buildings. Chapters 2 through 10 are likewise inapplicable as they address the rehabilitation of historic structures. The current project involves redevelopment of a commercial property that has no recognized historic significance. Chapter 11 provides guidelines for new buildings and additions on residential Landmark Properties. Chapter 12 is concerned with design in the Main Street Historic District. Neither of these Chapters applies to this proposal. The project has been designed to be generally consistent with the guidelines of Chapter 14, but specific consistency with these requirements will be demonstrated as part of the HPC Final Review. Since the proposed development is located on a non-historic lot in the Commercial Core, its design must comply with Chapter 13 of the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Guidelines. However, these guidelines have been replaced by the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines, Commercial Core Historic District, which are discussed below in the Commercial Design Review section of this application. The proposed redevelopment of 305-7 S. Mill Street will reinforce the retail-oriented function of the Mill Street Mall and will enhance its pedestrian character. The proposed design, while clearly of current times, is compatible with the historic character of the Commercial Core and respectful of the fundamental principles of traditional design without engaging in mimicry. It is a creative new, low profile yet corner-location embracing design that is in keeping with the community’s continuing interest in exploring innovations. P68 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 9 C. Demolition of Properties within a Historic District Code Section 26.415.080 states that no properties located within a Historic District can be demolished without HPC approval. Subsection A(4) provides the criteria that HPC must use in determining whether or not to approve the demolition and states the following: 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: 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. The existing buildings were built in 1960, cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen, and have no historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, thus meeting the first criteria (c) and (d), above. Furthermore, the structures do not contribute to the historic significance of the Commercial Core, and their loss will not adversely affect the integrity of the District. Although the Wheeler Opera House is across the street from the property, the loss of the existing buildings will not adversely affect their aesthetic relationship to the Wheeler. Finally, demolition of these buildings will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Therefore, the second set of criteria (a) through (c) is met. D. Conceptual Commercial Design Review Section 26.412.050 of the Code provides the review criteria for Commercial Design Review and states, in relevant part, that the proposed development must comply with the requirements of Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards, as well as the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines. The proposed development is located in the Commercial Core Historic District. The design standards of Section 26.412.060, as well as the Commercial Core Historic District Design P69 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 10 Review Guidelines are all enumerated below in italicized print, and each is followed by a description of the proposal’s compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. The following design standards, in addition to the commercial, lodging and historic district design objectives and guidelines, shall apply to commercial, lodging and mixed-use development: A. Public amenity space. Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment atmosphere. Public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas. On parcels required to provide public amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030, Public amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity. Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the public amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according to the following standards: 1. The dimensions of any proposed on-site public amenity sufficiently allow for a variety of uses and activities to occur, considering any expected tenant and future potential tenants and uses. 2. The public amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses, shade trees, solar access, view orientation and simple at-grade relationships with adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged. 3. The public amenity and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent structures, rights-of-way and uses contribute to an inviting pedestrian environment. 4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by malls, sidewalks or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from the pedestrian environment. 5. Any variation to the design and operational standards for public amenity, Subsection 26.575.030.F., promotes the purpose of the public amenity requirements. According to Code Section 26.575.030(A), public amenity can take the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of–way or private property. Subsection B states that the public amenity requirement is 25%; however, for redevelopment of parcels where less than 25% currently exists, the existing percentage is the effective requirement provided that in no case shall the requirement be less than 10%. In its existing condition, the property contains 22% (approximately 1,330 square feet on the 6,031 square foot lot) public amenity, most of which is covered by a trellis structure and next to the so-called popcorn wagon. As such, the effective public amenity requirement upon redevelopment is 22%, or 1,327 square feet on the subject 6,031 square foot lot. Code Section 26.575.030.C provides the four methods that may be used to satisfy the provision of public amenity, including the following: on-site provision of public amenity; off-site provision of public amenity; cash-in-lieu provision; and alternative method. The provision of on-site public amenity meeting the codified design and operation standards is unbefitting of the property location on a pedestrian mall and backing up to a public park; P70 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 11 on-site space would be inefficient and redundant, especially since the City can be expected to allow seasonal privatization of mall space for outdoor dining areas. Furthermore, the merely 6,031 square foot parcel is on the south side of the street, meaning on-site public amenity space would be sited to the north of the structure and be shaded. The subject property is located on the Mill Street pedestrian mall, is adjacent to Wagner Park, and is surrounded largely by commercial uses. The majority of surrounding development is built out to its lot lines or close to them and maintains a strong street/mall presence. Although public amenity space exists in the area next to the so-called popcorn wagon, beneath the trellis structure, and in the shaded recess between the two existing restaurant spaces, the provision of a new street level public amenity would not only be shaded by the structure but it would be redundant as the property abuts the ample, perpetual public amenity spaces that are the Mill Street pedestrian mall and Wagner Park. As such, the applicant believes that the approximately 4,200 square foot roof deck/lounge area associated with the lower level restaurant space, combined with the approximately 55 square foot bench seating area to be located alongside the mall frontage, qualify and should be approved as public amenity space consistent with many previous City of Aspen approvals as well as Code Sections 26.575.030.C.4, F.5 and F.10. This restaurant deck area equates to a public amenity space of 70% (4,255sf divided by 6,031sf of lot area). Consistent with the codified design and operational standards for public amenity, the proposed roof deck and lounge area will be: 1) open to view from the street at pedestrian level; 2) open to the sky; 3) unenclosed other than by the 36” high glass (i.e., fully transparent) handrails required by Building Code; 4) free of storage areas, utility/trash service areas, delivery areas or parking areas (as an aside, all such areas must also be accommodated on ground level of this 6,031 square foot lot and leave little remaining room for redundant public amenity space); 5) within stipulated grade limitations given that the Commission is specifically authorized to approve second level public amenity space; 6) easily maintained; 7) will be used for commercial restaurant use with adequate pedestrian and emergency vehicle access; and 8) meets the parameters of the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines. As such, the proposed roof deck and lounge satisfies all applicable Section 26.575.030.F design and operational standards for public amenity. For this reason, similar second floor, outdoor restaurant deck and lounge areas, such as but not limited to the space on the redeveloped “Gap Building” site, the space on the approved but not yet built Sky Hotel, the upper floor courtyard at 409 East Hopkins, and the rooftop of the Base 1 Lodge, to name just a few, have all been accepted and approved by the City in satisfaction of the public amenity requirements. Additional discussion of the proposed amenity space is provided on pages 17-18, below, in response to the standards specific to second level public amenity from the Commercial Design Standards and Objectives for the Commercial Core. Please also refer to and consider these on-point guidelines and responsive narratives. P71 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 12 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 trash and recycle service area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum size and location standards established by Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, unless otherwise established according to said Chapter. 2. A utility area shall be accommodated on all projects and shall meet the minimum standards established by Title 25, Utilities, of the Municipal code, the City’s Electric Distribution Standards, and the National Electric Code, unless otherwise established according to said Codes. 3. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be co-located and combined to the greatest extent practical. 4. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be along and accessed from the alleyway, unless otherwise approved through Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. 5. All utility, trash and recycle service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible from the street, unless they are entirely located on an alleyway or otherwise approved though Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code, or through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. All fences shall be six (6) feet high from grade, shall be of sound construction, and shall be no less than ninety percent (90%) opaque, unless otherwise varied through Chapter 26.430, Special Review. 6. Whenever utility, trash, and recycle service areas are required to be provided abutting an alley, other portions of a building may extend to the rear property line if otherwise allowed by this Title, provided that the utility, trash and recycle area is located at grade and accessible to the alley. 7. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property. 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. 8. All commercial and lodging buildings shall provide a delivery area. The delivery area shall be located along the alley if an alley adjoins the property. The delivery area shall be accessible to all tenant spaces of the building in a manner that meets the requirements of the International Building Code Chapters 10 and 11 as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All non-ground floor commercial spaces shall have access to an elevator or dumbwaiter for delivery access. Alleyways (vehicular rights-of-way) may not be utilized as pathways (pedestrian rights-of-way) to meet the requirements of the International Building Code. Any truck loading facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly encouraged. 9. All commercial tenant spaces located on the ground floor in excess of 1,500 square feet shall contain a vestibule (double set of doors) developed internal to the structure to meet the requirements of the International Energy Conservation Code as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen, or an air curtain. P72 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 13 10. 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. 11. 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 public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs. 12. The trash and recycling service area requirements may be varied pursuant to Title 12, Solid Waste, of the Municipal Code. All other requirements of this subsection may be varied by special review (see Chapter 26.430.040.E, Utility and delivery service area provisions). Pursuant to Code Section 12.10.030(A)b., a 20’W x 15’D x 10’H area for trash and recycling storage must be provided for the proposed commercial building as it will contain an establishment with a retail food service license. Also, the reserved trash and recycling storage space must be adjacent to an alleyway but the subject property does not abut a functioning alleyway. Instead, the platted alleyway on the south side of the property does not permit vehicular access, as it is merely a pedestrian walkway. For this reason, the existing restaurant spaces on the subject property have always stored their trash and recycling on-site and hauled it out to Hyman Avenue for pick-up. The current proposal provides a far more appropriately sized and located trash and recycling storage area than exists today, but pick-up will still need to occur on Hyman Avenue. Pursuant to Code Section 12.10.030(C), since the property does not have functional alleyway access, the proposed trash and recycling storage area requires Special Review approval from the Environmental Health Department and such approval is hereby requested. Utility connections and meters can be accommodated in a combination of within the trash and recycling storage area, on the southerly side (at the southwest corner) of the proposed structure, like is currently the case, and within the mechanical spaces internal to the building. The proposed trash and recycling area is sited at grade, screened from but accessed via Hyman Avenue, and the southwest corner of the structure will be at grade as well, adjoining the pedestrian alleyway at the rear of the property. The existing electric transformer located just across the pedestrian alleyway need not be relocated and will continue to serve the redeveloped subject property. The proposed ground floor commercial space has a vestibule in the form of the shared/common area entry that also serves the restaurant spaces on the lower and roof levels. To the extent that the other entryways would require as much, air curtains will be provided during winter months so as to enable compliance with the International Energy Conservation Code, as adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. All mechanical exhaust will be vented through the roof, which ensures such ventilation will be as far from the streets as practical, and these features will be designed and sited so as not to be visible from an adjoining public right-of-way at pedestrian level. P73 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 14 With the sixty feet of Hyman Avenue frontage providing the only and nearest vehicular access to the proposed building, entryways on the north side have been provided to allow deliveries to all tenant spaces to occur efficiently. In an effort to minimize building height along Hyman Avenue and in keeping with the spirit of the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane, the elevator for the building has been located at the southwest corner but will be used to accommodate deliveries to the non-ground floor commercial spaces. The pedestrian rights-of-way on all three exposed sides of the building are permitted to serve at delivery pathways to meet the requirements of the International Building Code, as these are not vehicular rights-of-way. The Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines (the “Commercial Guidelines”) set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The Commercial Guidelines are organized to address the different design contexts that exist in the City. These distinct settings, or contexts, are defined as "Character Areas," within which variations exist among the physical features that define each area. The proposed development is located in the “Commercial Core” character area. Per the Commercial Guidelines, all development projects should achieve the following design objectives: • Promote an interconnected circulation system that invites pedestrian use, including a continuous street and alley system and a respect for the natural topography; • Promote a system of public places that support activities, including public amenity spaces, compatible landscaping and paving, and unobtrusive off-street parking; and • Assure that buildings fit together to create a vibrant street edge that reinforces a sense of appropriate scale. The proposed development will achieve the above-cited design objectives in a manner that far exceeds the existing buildings’ consistency with said objectives. The proposed design will create a more vibrant and visually interesting street edge, reinforcing a sense of appropriate scale that has long been largely absent on this property. The surrounding pedestrian circulation system will remain fully interconnected and inviting to pedestrian use. The existing character of the Commercial Core is explained as follows: The heart of Aspen centers around the Commercial Core Historic District. It is the first area that developed in the early mining days of the town and its character reflects this rich mining heritage, which is the image that many carry with them of this historic Colorado mountain town. Each historic building contributes to the integrity of the district and preservation of all of these resources is, therefore, crucial. This is especially important as new development continues. P74 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 15 The purpose of the Commercial Core (CC) zone district is stated in Section 26.710.140(A) of the Code as follows: “to allow the use of land for retail, service commercial, recreation, and institutional purposes within mixed-use buildings to support and enhance the business and service character in the historical central business core of the City...The district permits a mix of…uses oriented to both local and tourist populations to encourage a high level of vitality. Retail and restaurant uses are appropriate for ground floors of buildings…” (This Purpose statement is clearly outdated, as the District no longer allows residential uses, largely precluding mixed-use buildings.) The proposed development will retain the existing commercial use but within an updated and well laid-out building while enhancing and improving this central property in the Commercial Core. The retail/restaurant mix of the building is oriented towards and will serve both the local and tourist populations to encourage a high level of vitality. The key design objectives in the Commercial Core are as follows: 1. Maintain a retail orientation. 2. Promote creative, contemporary design that respects the historic context. 3. Maintain the traditional scale of building. 4. Reflect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. 5. Accommodate outdoor public spaces where they respect the historic context. 6. Promote variety in the street level experience. 7. Preserve the integrity of historic resources within the district. The proposed redevelopment of 305-07 South Mill Street meets all of the key design objectives listed above, as follows: • The design reinforces the retail-oriented function of the street and enhances the pedestrian character; • The design is creative and contemporary, but respects the historic Commercial Core as it is creative and low in profile while still embracing and anchoring its corner location; • The design acknowledges, is consistent with, complements and enhances the existing scale and character of the area; • The tallest portion of this building is only 28 feet. All historic buildings in the area and the intent of the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane have been taken into consideration; • The design of the building, with its large, storefront windows and restaurant deck/lounge area above serve to promote variety in the street level experience; and, • The integrity of all historic resources within the district is preserved by the proposed compatible, complimentary and subservient design while also being in keeping with the community’s continuing interest in exploring innovations. Please also refer to the responses provided above in association with all similar HPC Design Guidelines. P75 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 16 Outlined below is each of the Commercial Core’s Conceptual Review Design Guidelines in italicized print, followed by a description of the proposal’s compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. Street Grid 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. The proposed redevelopment respects the established town grid by aligning with the street (mall) frontages. By contrast, the existing development, with its inconsistent, odd street frontages and facade lines, does not truly align with the town grid. Internal Walkways 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 of the site. • See also: Public Amenity Space design guidelines. No internal public walkways or through courts are proposed. Alleys 6.3 Develop an alley façade to create visual interest. • Use varied building setbacks and changes in materials to create interest and reduce perceived scale. • Balconies, courtyards 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. There is no vehicular alley associated with the subject property, only a public walkway between the site and Wagner Park. The property backs up to another building (315 East Hyman) and is adjacent to Wagner Park on its south side. The side of the building facing Wagner Park maintains visual interest and includes a deck atop its ground level. Parking 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 necessary. • Designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building façade. • Integrated into the building design. There is no structured or other type of parking proposed. P76 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 17 Public Amenity Space 6.6 A street facing amenity space shall meet all of the following requirements: • Abut the public sidewalk • Be level with the sidewalk • 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 fronts in the Commercial Core. • 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. • Sunken spaces, which are associated with some past developments, adversely affect the street character. Where feasible, these should be replaced with sidewalk level improvements. 6.8 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. These may include one or more of the following: • Street furniture • 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. Please refer to the Public Amenity Space discussion on pages 10-11, above. Additional narrative with regard to Public Amenity is provided below, in reference to Guidelines 6.12 through 6.15. Guidelines 6.9 through 6.11 discuss mid-block walkway and alley-side public amenity spaces and are not applicable to the proposed development. Guidelines 6.16 and 6.17 address front yard amenity spaces and are, likewise, not applicable. Guidelines 6.12 through 6.15 are applicable to the current proposal as said Guidelines address second level amenity spaces. Per the Commercial Design Standards, An outdoor patio space on the second floor, which is directly accessible to the general public, will be considered as a form of public amenity space 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. As discussed above, and for the various reasons explained in the foregoing, the applicant is proposing a 4,200 square foot outdoor patio space on the second floor in satisfaction of the Commercial Core Zone District public amenity requirement. The proposed amenity space has been demonstrated to provide compatibility with the historic context and will be clearly inviting for public use. The proposed second level amenity will be used for outdoor dining and lounge space and will reside on a site that it significantly affected by the Wheeler Opera House Mountain Viewplane. P77 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 18 6.12 Second level amenity space should be compatible with the character of the historic district. • It shall remain visually subordinate to any historic resource on the property. • If located on a historic property, it may not alter the appearance of the resource s seen from the street. Compatibility of the proposed second level amenity space with the character of the commercial core historic district has been demonstrated at length throughout the foregoing narratives. There are no historic resources on the subject property itself. 6.13 A second floor amenity space should meet all of the following criteria: • Ensure consistent public access • Be dedicated for public use • Provide a public overlook and/or an interpretive marker • Be identified by a marker at street level. As was required with other second level public amenity spaces approved by the City, consistent public access will be ensured. As is customary and consistent with prior City approvals, and public safety and liability concerns and practices, and given that the space will be associated with outdoor dining and a restaurant use, public access will be extended only during hours of business operation. The proposed second floor amenity provides a public overlook, with open views to the pedestrian malls, Wagner Park, Aspen Mountain and the historic Wheeler Opera House. A sign identifying the second level amenity and its access will be provided on the building and at Hyman Avenue street level. 6.14 Second level space should be oriented to maximize solar access and mountain views, or views of historic landmarks. With its long axis oriented in a north-south fashion, the proposed second floor public amenity, outdoor dining and lounge space maximizes solar access, mountain views, and views of the historic Wheeler Opera House. 6.15 Second level space should provide public access by way of a visible and attractive public stair or elevator from the public street, alley, or street level amenity space. The proposed 4,200 square feet of second level amenity space provides public access by way of a visible and attractive public stair and elevator, both of which are easily reached from the Mill Street pedestrian mall. The public amenity will also be accessible by way of the stairs that will enter from the Hyman Avenue sidewalk. Building Setbacks 6.18 Maintain the alignment of façades at the sidewalk’s edge. • Place as much of the façade 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 façade shall be at the property line. P78 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 19 6.19 A building may be set back from its side lot lines in accordance with design guidelines identified in Street & Circulation Pattern and Public Amenity Space guidelines. The proposed structure maintains a consistent façade alignment at the sidewalk’s edge on all three of its exposed sides. It is sited at the adjoining lot lines and will provide the consistency with this standard that is fully lacking with the existing development. Providing for consistency with this Guideline is yet another factor working against the desirability of street-facing public amenity space along the sidewalks/pedestrian malls. Building Orientation 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. The proposed building is oriented parallel to its lot lines and the front of the structure is oriented to and adjoins the street/mall. There is nothing traditional about the existing building orientations, which fail to address one of the site’s two street frontages. 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. The new building will have a clearly defined and recessed primary entrance that is oriented toward the street (mall) as well as a secondary public entrance along Hyman Avenue. There are no interior courts or sunken courtyards proposed, and the entrances are on the sidewalk/street level, providing for pedestrian friendliness and accessibility for people with physical disabilities. The existing primary entrance at the corner building (Grey Lady restaurant) is oriented to an interior court rather than either of its adjoining streets. Building Form 6.22 Rectangular forms should be dominant on Commercial Core façades. • Rectangular forms should be vertically oriented. • The façade should appear as predominantly flat, with any decorative elements and projecting or setback “articulations” appearing to be subordinate to the dominant form. The proposed building is rectangular in form and vertically oriented to the extend possible given the applicant’s desire to be as respectful of the spirit of the designated Viewplane as possible. The façade is predominantly flat. The decorative elements remain subordinate to the dominant rectangular form and are appropriate for this unique corner location. P79 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 20 6.23 Use flat roof lines as the dominant roof form. • A flat roof, or one that gently slopes to the rear of a site, should be the dominant roof form. • Parapets on side façades should step down towards the rear of the building. • False fronts and parapets with horizontal emphasis also may be considered. The roofline is flat. 6.24 Along a rear façade, 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. As mentioned above, there is no vehicle-accessible alley associated with this property. As such, this property does not have a traditional alley-type frontage and all exposed sides are being treated as street/sidewalk frontages. As such, all exposed sides of the building maintain visual interest and include an outdoor restaurant deck atop its ground level. Building Height, Mass & 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. Being as respectful of the Viewplane spirit as reasonably possible, this application proposes a one-story building with a rooftop deck/lounge area for restaurant use. In essence, this gives the perception of two-story scale at the sidewalk without second floor mass. The storefront glazing/windows are similar in height to those seen traditionally. 6.26 Building façade height shall be varied from the façade 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 façade height by a minimum of 2 ft. The only adjacent structure is the building that contains the Wild Fig restaurant. That structure is also one-story in height although its first floor elevation is several steps above that of its adjoining Hyman Avenue sidewalk. The proposed single-story development provides a compatible but varied façade height as compared with that of the Wild Fig structure. 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. • A minimum 9 ft. floor to ceiling height is to be maintained on second stories and higher. P80 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 21 • 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 building. - The primary function of the building is civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic Building, Performance Hall, Fire Station, etc.) - Some portion of the property is affected by a height restriction due to its proximity to a historic resource, or location within a View Plane, therefore relief in another area may be appropriate. - To benefit the livability of Affordable Housing units. - To make a demonstrable (to be verified by the Building Department) contribution to the building's overall energy efficiency, for instance by providing improved daylighting. The proposed building reflects the range and variation in building heights found throughout the Commercial Core. The parts of the proposed structure that will be in the least impactful locations relative to the Wheeler Opera House Viewplane reach to the 28- foot height limit of the Commercial Core zone district, while other parts have a heights of 15 feet and 18’-6”. For the most part, the proposed heights ascend from Hyman Avenue toward Wagner Park to correlate with the spirit of the Viewplane. The minimum 9-foot floor to ceiling height is achieved on the partial second story. No “additional” height is requested. 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. • Set back the upper floor to vary the building façade profile(s) and the roof forms across the width and the depth of the building. • Vary the façade (or parapet) heights at the front. • Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. 6.29 On sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths, the façade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. 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 façade heights or cornice line. While the subject lot comprises two traditional lot widths (i.e., Lots H and I of Block 82), development of this property has always been appropriately oriented toward the 100-foot Mill Street pedestrian mall frontage. This pattern is being maintained with the redevelopment but in a manner that far better provides the three-directional orientation this unique site dictates, with appropriate façade treatments facing each of Hyman Avenue, the Mill Street pedestrian mall, and the pedestrian walkway between the site and Wagner Park. Height variation is achieved with the proposed design both with respect to adjacent development and between modules of the proposed building itself. P81 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 22 6.31 A new building should step down in scale to respect the height, form and scale of a historic building within its immediate setting. The only historic building in the immediate setting is the Wheeler Opera House and the proposed building more than adequately respects that iconic structure by stepping down in height, form and scale. To the extent that the Paragon Building is also considered to be in the immediate setting, the same respect is paid thereto. Guidelines 6.32 and 6.33 address new buildings that are located adjacent to one- or two- story historic, residential buildings. Since there are no one- or two-story historic or residential buildings adjacent to this property, these guidelines do not apply. 6.34 The setting of iconic historic structures should be preserved and enhanced when feasible. • On sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths, the third floor of the adjacent lot width should be set back a minimum of 15 ft from the front facade. • Step a building down in height adjacent to an iconic structure. • Locate amenity space adjacent to an iconic structure. The only iconic structure in the immediate vicinity of the subject property is the Wheeler Opera House. The building proposed on this lot will in no way negatively affect this iconic structure as the proposed design, coupled with distance, ensures subservient compatibility. E. Mountain View Plane Review Section 26.435.010(C) of the Code provides that development within designated mountain view planes is subject to heightened review so as to protect certain mountain views from obstruction, strengthen the environmental and aesthetic character of the City, maintain property values, and enhance the City’s tourist industry by maintaining the City’s heritage as a mountain community. In relevant part, there is an established and regulated view plane originating from approximately 5’-6” above the sidewalk along the north side of East Hyman Avenue in front of the Wheeler Opera House and its adjoining park space to the west. No buildings or land uses are supposed to project above the established view plane unless the Historic Preservation Commission grants an exemption. Nevertheless and without exception, every single existing structure within the first block or two of the designated Wheeler Opera House Viewplane area, even the tee-shirt shop and the popcorn wagon, already projects above the regulated plane. Since many, if not most, of these existing structures were in place when the Viewplane height limitation was first adopted and not a single structure built or altered since then complies with the Viewplane height limitation, it seems obvious that the regulation should be amended to better reflect reality. Responses to the standards of Section 26.435.050(C) are provided below, as applicable to the proposed development. Said section of the Code states that, “No development shall be permitted within a mountain view plane unless the Planning and Zoning Commission [or Historic P82 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 23 Preservation Commission] makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all of the 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 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 [or Historic Preservation Commission], after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Department, may exempt a development from being processed as a Planned Development when the Planning and Zoning Commission [or HPC] 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 [or Historic Preservation 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 redevelopment to re-open the view plane cannot be anticipated, the Planning and Zoning Commission [or Historic Preservation Commission] shall exempt the development from the requirements of this Section. With Community Development Director approval to combine reviews pursuant to Section 26.304.060(B)(1), all references to “the Planning and Zoning Commission” can be replaced with “the Historic Preservation Commission.” Thus, based on the foregoing Code language, the view plane only has the effect of reducing the height limit of the underlying zone district if the HPC will not approve an exemption from the view plane height limit (in such cases and when the proposed height would exceed the limitation of the underlying zone district, a height limit variance becomes necessary and is only attainable through the PD review process). The Code language provides that HPC approval of an exemption from the view plane height limitation shall be granted when another development already blocks the same view plane; in making such a determination, the HPC is to consider two things: 1) whether or not the proposed development will further infringe upon the view plane than does an existing development; and, 2) the likelihood of the already infringing structure(s) being, first, redeveloped and, second, redeveloped in a manner that would re-open the designated view plane. If the proposed development does not further infringe on the view plane, and P83 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 24 redevelopment of the existing structure(s) infringing on the view plane cannot be anticipated, the proposed development is to be exempted from the view plane’s height limitation. Additionally, if it is determined that the proposed development will have a minimal impact on the view plane, the HPC can exempt the development from being processed as a PD. When the HPC approves an exemption from a designated view plane, the effective height limit, by default, is that of the underlying zone district. Further, when a proposed development warrants an exemption from the view plane but complies with the height limit of the underlying zone district, there remains no need for PD review. This is especially true of a development involving a property within a historic district, for such development is already subject to HPC review and approval, which entails a heightened level of scrutiny (i.e., “special consideration”) with regard to mass, scale, bulk, site planning and design, affects on streetscape and pedestrian experiences, and neighborhood compatibility. Given the “Purpose” of the City’s Planned Unit Development (PD) regulations, as stated in Section 26.445.010 of the Code, there would be nothing to gain by requiring the proposed development to proceed as a PD according to the provisions of Chapter 26.445. That is, the HPC review process is designed to encourage flexibility and innovation in the development of land while also requiring compatibility with historic resources. Moreover, imposition of a PD review seems inappropriate for a property with a total area of merely 6,000 square feet, especially since the existing structure to be replaced is of roughly the same height (about a 1-foot difference) as the predominance of the proposed structure. The accompanying Improvement Survey illustrates the elevation of the regulated view plane as it crosses the subject property relative to ground elevations, showing the affects of the view plane’s ascending height limitation as it projects southward across the subject site. While the Commercial Core Zone District’s height limit for the property is twenty-eight (28) feet, the Improvement Survey demonstrates that view plane would effectively reduce this limit to just 7.2 feet (which equates to slightly less than 7’-3”) at the Hyman Avenue frontage, ascending to approximately 10’-6” at the southerly boundary of the property. It is noted that and that a structure cannot be built to compliance with Building Codes, zoning requirements, and the Commercial Design Standards while remaining below the artificial 7’-3” view plane limitation. For instance, no above-grade structure that complies with commercial Building Codes can simultaneously comply with the codified Viewplane given that a typical door height, not even including the framing for the door, is seven (7) feet tall. Further, the Commercial Design Standards require that structures and entryways be built at sidewalk grade. In addition, the Commercial Core Zone District’s minimum first floor to second floor floor-to-floor height is 13 feet, effectively precluding compliance with even the high-end 10’-6” Viewplane height limitation at the south side of the property. These factors combine to clearly prove that, without approval to infringe upon the codified view plane, it is simply too low to allow any above-grade commercial development at all. P84 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 25 As mentioned above, without exception, every single existing structure within the first block or two of the designated Wheeler Opera House Viewplane area, even the tee-shirt shop and the popcorn wagon, already projects above the regulated plane. Since many, if not most, of these existing structures were in place when the Viewplane height limitation was first adopted and not a single structure built or altered since then complies with the Viewplane height limitation, it would actually be unreasonable to expect that enough redevelopment might occur in a manner that would re-open the Viewplane. The existing trellis structure (which received Viewplane Review approval from the HPC) located at the northeast corner of the subject property where the Viewplane height limit is just under 7’-3” has a height of 10’-6”, thereby already encroaching a bit more than 3’-3” into the view plane. Even the existing popcorn wagon exceeds the Viewplane height limit. The north end of the Grey Lady building has a height of 13.9’ where the Viewplane height limit is merely 7.7’ (a 6.2-foot encroachment, meaning the existing building’s height at its closest and most impactful distance from the regulated vantage point is equivalent to 181% of the Viewplane height limit). In addition, the Grey Lady and Jimmy’s Bodega structures both have an abundance of rooftop mechanical equipment, ductwork, flues and venting apparatuses projecting above these measured heights and even further into the Viewplane. Not too far beyond/behind the subject property, the Wagner Park bathrooms and the clock tower already impede on the designated Wheeler Opera House Viewplane as well. The Wagner Park restrooms reach a height of 17’-6” where the mapped Viewplane height restriction is not more than 12-13 feet. The clock tower is 30 feet tall (i.e., more than the 28- foot maximum building height currently permitted in the CC Zone District). Incidentally, these restrooms also encroach well into and effectively obliterate the designated Wagner Park Viewplane; yet, for whatever reason, the City’s public restrooms and clock tower were reviewed and approved by the HPC and then built without ever considering the Wheeler Opera House or Wagner Park Viewplanes. In the proposed redevelopment, only the stair/elevator enclosures, which are set to the far westerly side of the structure, are substantially taller than the existing structures on the property, which are approximately 14 feet tall. In light of the points made above, not only is it clear that the Viewplane restriction is set too low, but it is also very much evident that the new/additional Viewplane impacts associated with the proposed redevelopment (predominantly 15-18 feet tall) will be minimal and enough redevelopment to re-open the Viewplane cannot be reasonably expected. The Code explains that the purpose of Mountain View Plane Review is to protect certain mountain views from obstruction, strengthen the environmental and aesthetic character of the City, maintain property values, and enhance the City’s tourist industry by maintaining the City’s heritage as a mountain community. The foregoing has amply demonstrated that the proposed redevelopment will not compromise the purpose of the mountain view planes but will, instead, further these purposes by strengthening the aesthetic character of P85 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 26 the City, enhancing surrounding property values, promoting economic vitality and sustainability, and maintaining the City’s heritage as a mountain community. F. Parking Code Section 26.515.030 provides that the existing commercial use generates an off-street parking requirement of one (1) space for every 1,000 square feet of net leasable area, or 5.054 off-street spaces for the 5,054 square feet of existing Net Leasable Area (NLA). With no dedicated parking, the property maintains an off-street parking deficit of 5.054 spaces. The proposed development will contain total NLA of 9,333 square feet carries an off-street parking requirement of 4.28 spaces (9.33 spaces at one space per every 1,000 square feet of net leasable area, minus the existing off-street parking deficit of 5.05 spaces), which will be completely satisfied through the payment of cash-in-lieu as allowed by right pursuant to Code Section 26.515.030. The payment-in-lieu of parking will be due and payable at the time of building permit issuance for the redevelopment. At the currently codified rate of $30,000, which may be amended, the payment due would be $128,400 ($30,000 x 4.28 spaces). The Code clearly provides the right to satisfy the off-street parking requirement through a payment in-lieu without any review or approval and doing so does not in any way whatsoever represent any kind of variance or variation. G. Impact fees Section 26.610.090 of the Code provides the established impact fees for development within the City of Aspen. The Parks Development fee is $4.10 per square foot of net leasable commercial space. The Transportation Demand Management/Air Quality impact fee is $0.46 per square foot of net leasable commercial space. Non-unit space does not count towards these fees. The additional net leasable commercial space from that existing amounts to 4,279 square feet. This would generate a Parks Development fee of $17,543.90, and a TDM/Air Quality fee of $1,968.34. These fee amounts will be confirmed and paid at the time of building permit issuance. H. Transportation Impact Analysis Please see the Transportation Impact Analysis (Transportation Demand Management/ Multi-Modal Level Of Service analysis, “TDM-MMLOS”) provided in Exhibit 6. While the “Example Minor TIA” provided on the City of Aspen Community Development Department webpage indicates the presence of an “Enforcement and Financing” section as part of the Tool, after a multitude of attempts, no such section can be found or otherwise exists when the Interactive Tool is opened on a Mac computer, which is the only type of P86 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 27 system available to Haas Land Planning, LLC. Consequently, that section cannot be completed. Furthermore, the “Narratives” area on the Tool cannot be used on a Mac either as every time its use is attempted, several error messages and script debuggers open but no ability to input any of the required narratives is provided. Thus, the following provides the “Narrative” that accompanies the analysis contained in Exhibit 6; the applicant reserves the right to modify any of the following commitments prior to final project approvals. The TDM-MMLOS Interactive Tool requires input of “Net New Units/Square Feet of the Proposed Project” in an effort to require mitigation only for the net increases in impacts associated with a development proposal. The completed Tool includes a net increase of 4,918 square feet of net leasable commercial area (the plans have since been amended to reduce the net increase in this commercial area by 639 square feet). Even at the higher net leasable increase of 4,918 square feet (as opposed to 4,279sf), the Tool results in negligible 0.36 net trips to be mitigated. This is an application for conceptual design review and related issues only. Completion of the TDM-MMLOS, while required, is very much premature. Should the current application be approved, the subsequent application(s) will include final design details and all growth management related reviews. During that application review process is the appropriate time to fully consider the Transportation Demand Management and Multi- Modal Levels of Service impacts. Along these lines, the applicant cannot reasonably be expected at this time to fully understand what types of on- or off-site improvements or trip mitigation measures will eventually make sense. Similarly, the applicant cannot yet be expected to know what types of programs (i.e, amenities packages, shuttle services, TOP Participation, transit fare subsidies, employee parking cash-outs, workplace parking pricing, compressed work weeks, sponsored vanpools, etc.) each of the eventual tenants might be willing to implement with regard to transportation demand management. As such, it is requested that the TDM-MMLOS mitigation review be temporarily delayed and be required as part of the subsequent application for all growth management related approvals. Given the foregoing, to the extent that explanation is needed the for those items the applicant has proposed credit for in the attached TDM-MMLOS Tool, the following narratives are provided. MMLOS Input Page, Item 2: The project adjoins the sidewalk of the north side of Hyman Avenue at Townsite Block 82, the South Mill Street pedestrian mall, and the pedestrian- only alley along the north side of Wagner Park. All of these provide effective sidewalk widths that are greater than the standard minimum. MMLOS Input Page, Item 7: As part of the project development, the applicant will install an appropriate, improved crosswalk running north-south across Hyman Avenue (presently there is only a crosswalk that runs east-west across S. Mill Street) and linking the westerly P87 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 28 S. Mill Street sidewalk at the Wheeler Opera House corner with the westerly side of the S. Mill Street pedestrian mall. MMLOS Input Page, Item 8: One of the two existing commercial spaces on the subject property is accessed by pedestrians only through an entryway that is set behind a courtyard area that also accommodates dining and bar patrons. In addition, there is no direct pedestrian access to either of he existing restaurants from Hyman Avenue. The proposed redevelopment provides pedestrian access to an entry serving each tenant space directly from the adjoining sidewalk or pedestrian mall, as applicable. MMLOS Input Page, Item 9: The two provided pedestrian entries are approximately 100’ apart as the crow flies and approximately 125’ apart via dedicated pedestrian ways. This is a pedestrian directness factor of approximately 1.25 (i.e., less than 1.5), which is merely a 5’ difference from a directness factor of 1.2 and not a distance truly worthy of reducing. TDM Input Page, Participation in TOP: The applicant will participate in the City’s Transportation Options Program and all employees will be eligible. All reporting requirements will be met. TDM Input Page, Transit Fare Subsidy: Given the project’s location near the Rubey Park bus station and adjacent to the Hunter Creek shuttle stop, implementation of a transit fare subsidy strategy makes sense, and tenants on the property will be required to provide a subsidy to all full-time employees for not less than 25% of daily work-related bus ridership/transit usage costs. No additional TDM Input page credits are proposed. Enforcement and Financing: The MMLOS measures described above do not require any financing or enforcement. If approved, the applicant will be held to the proposed development, which guarantees the measures. The applicant will finance the development privately and, once built, will require no enforcement. Participation in the TOP and provision of the transit fare subsidy program will be provided and paid for the first five years of ownership to each tenant and move in. The tenant is responsible for enrolling in the programs and payment for usage outside of the membership fees. The TDM measures will be included in lease agreements and reviewed by the tenants, who will accept the terms by means of executing/agreeing to their lease. Scheduling and Implementation Measures: All MMLOS items will be completed during the construction phase of the project. They will be part of the plan set submitted to the City of Aspen Building Department for Engineering review. The applicant understands the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy is contingent upon satisfactory installation of the MMLOS improvements, as reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. These items will be the responsibility of the applicant. TDM measures will be implemented when tenants sign their lease agreements. P88 IV.A. 305-307 S. Mill Street Redevelopment Application 29 Monitoring and Reporting: All MMLOS items will be completed during the construction phase of the project. The applicant understands the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy is contingent upon satisfactory installation of the MMLOS improvements, as reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. Once installed and after a Certificate of Occupancy is issued, the improvements will require no additional monitoring or reporting as they will simple exist and function. With regard to the TDM measures, the property manager or other representative of the owner will issue a survey to the commercial tenants on an annual basis. This simple survey will determine what level of use the tenants engage in for the TDM measures and if they have effectively reduced trips. The survey results will be issued as an annual report to the City of Aspen Transportation Department. P89 IV.A. P 9 0 I V . A . P 9 1 I V . A . P 9 2 I V . A . P 9 3 I V . A . P 9 4 I V . A . P 9 5 I V . A . P 9 6 I V . A . P 9 7 I V . A . P 9 8 I V . A . P 9 9 I V . A . P 1 0 0 I V . A . P 1 0 1 I V . A . P 1 0 2 I V . A . P 1 0 3 I V . A . P 1 0 4 I V . A . P 1 0 5 I V . A . P 1 0 6 I V . A . P 1 0 7 I V . A . P 1 0 8 I V . A . P 1 0 9 I V . A . P 1 1 0 I V . A . P 1 1 1 I V . A . P112 I V . A . P113 I V . A . P114 I V . A . P 1 1 5 I V . A . P 1 1 6 I V . A . feet meters 100 50 P117 IV.A. feet meters 300 90 P118 IV.A. E A S T H Y M A N A V E N U E S O U T H M I L L S T R E E T W A G N E R P A R KPAVEDWALK P A V E D W A L K BRICK PAVED PEDESTRIAN MALL305 M I L L S T .3 0 7 M I L L S T .T R E E G R A T E T R E E G R A T E T R E E G R A T E T R E E G R A T E DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT CS-1COVER SHEET__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO AS P E N , C O LO C A L J U R I S D I C T I O N : TH E C I T Y O F A S P E N 13 0 S . G A L E N A S T R E E T AS P E N , C O 8 1 6 1 1 TE L ( 9 7 0 ) 4 2 9 - 2 7 6 1 CO N T A C T : B Y D E P A R T M E N T AR C H I T E C T : CA M B U R A S & T H E O D O R E , L T D . 24 5 4 E . D E M P S T E R S T R E E T , S U I T E 2 0 2 DE S P L A I N E S , I L 6 0 0 1 6 TE L ( 8 4 7 ) 2 9 8 - 1 5 2 5 CO N T A C T : T E D J . T H E O D O R E , N C A R B , L E E D A P OR R O B A V I L A , L E E D A P LA N D P L A N N E R : HA A S L A N D P L A N N I N G , L L C 42 0 E A S T M A I N S T R E E T , S T E . 1 0 - B AS P E N , C O 8 1 6 1 1 TE L ( 9 7 0 ) 9 2 5 - 7 8 1 9 CO N T A C T : M I T C H H A A S VI C I N I T Y M A P DR A W I N G L I S T : SH E E T N U M B E R SHEET NAME CS - 1 CO V E R S H E E T PA - 1 EX I S T I N G P U B L I C A M E N I T Y PA - 2 PR O P O S E D P U B L I C A M E N I T Y A- 0 1 0 PR O P O S E D S I T E P L A N FA R - 1 FL O O R P L A N - F A R C A L C U L A T I O N S NL - 1 FL O O R P L A N - N E T L E A S A B L E A- 2 1 0 EX T E R I O R E L E V A T I O N S A- 2 1 1 EX T E R I O R E L E V A T I O N S AL T A EX I S T I N G L A N D S U R V E Y EC - 1 EX I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N F L O O R P L A N A- 1 0 0 PR O P O S E D F L O O R P L A N A- 1 0 1 PR O P O S E D R O O F P L A N OW N E R ' S R E P R E S E N T A T I V E : M D E V E L O P M E N T 20 0 1 N . H A L S T E D S T . , S U I T E 3 0 4 CH I C A G O , I L 6 0 6 1 4 CO N T A C T : M A R K H U N T EC - 2 EX I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N F L O O R P L A N A- 2 2 0 BU I L D I N G S E C T I O N S P119 IV.A. C:\General CADD 12\Gxd\15243B.gxd -- 04/22/2015 -- 01:47 PM -- Scale 1 : 120.000 P120 I V . A . 86 6 . 5 S . F . PU B L I C A M E N I T Y 46 4 S . F . PU B L I C A M E N I T Y DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT PA-1EXISTING PUBLIC AMENITY__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 3 / 3 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 EX I S T I N G P U B L I C A M E N I T Y P121 IV.A. NE T L E A S A B L E AR E A - 1 , 7 7 1 S . F . NE T L E A S A B L E AR E A - 1 , 6 3 3 S . F . NE T L E A S A B L E AR E A - 1 1 4 S . F . NE T L E A S A B L E AR E A - 7 0 S . F . DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT EC-1EXISTING CONDITION PLAN - MAIN LEVEL __305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO NE T L E A S A B L E : 1 , 7 7 1 + 1 , 6 3 3 + 1 1 4 + 7 0 = 3 , 5 8 8 S . F . CO M M O N A R E A : 0 S . F . P122 IV.A. NE T L E A S A B L E AR E A - 1 , 4 1 3 S . F . NE T L E A S A B L E AR E A - 5 3 S . F . DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT EC-2EXISTING CONDITION PLAN - LOWER LEVEL __305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO NE T L E A S A B L E : 1 , 4 1 3 + 5 3 = 1 , 4 6 6 S . F . CO M M O N A R E A : 0 S . F . P123 IV.A. DN UP DN EA S T H Y M A N A V E N U E S O U T H M I L L S T R E E T WA G N E R P A R K A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G PA V E D WA L K PA V E D WA L K B R I C K P A V E D P E D E S T R I A N M A L L 30 5 M I L L S T . 30 7 M I L L S T . TR E E GR A T E TR E E GR A T E TR E E GR A T E TR E E GR A T E 3 Y D D U M P S T E R 3 Y D D U M P S T E R LA N D S C A P E D A R E A 29 4 . 4 3 S . F . PU B L I C A M E N I T Y AR E A 5 4 . 7 4 S . F . PU B L I C A M E N I T Y AR E A 5 4 . 7 4 S . F . LA N D S C A P E D A R E A 30 . 7 2 S . F . PU B L I C A M E N I T Y 13 5 . 2 7 S . F . DN DN 100' - 0" 60 ' - 4 " 60 ' - 4 " PU B L I C A M E N I T Y AR E A 3 , 2 4 1 . 7 9 S . F . GREEN ROOF AREAGREEN ROOF AREA DN DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT PA-2PROPOSED PUBLIC AMENITY__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SI T E P L A N - P U B L I C A M E N I T Y 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 RO O F P L A N P124 IV.A. WA G N E R P A R K A D J A C E N T B U I L D I N G PA V E D W A L K B R I C K P A V E D P E D E S T R I A N M A L L 30 5 M I L L S T . 30 7 M I L L S T . TR E E GR A T E TR E E GR A T E TR E E GR A T E TR E E GR A T E BR I C K P A V E D WA L K W A Y 1 8 ' - 8 " 2 0 ' - 2 " PE D E S T R I A N M A L L 73 ' - 8 " NE W C R O S S WA L K A N D CU R B C U T 10 0 ' - 0 " R O U T E BE T W E E N D O O R S NE W PE D E S T R I A N EN T R A N C E NE W P E D E S T R I A N EN T R A N C E . 13 0 ' - 0 " R O U T E BE T W E E N D O O R S NE W P E D E S T R I A N EN T R A N C E . 94 ' - 0 " R O U T E BE T W E E N D O O R S . 67 ' - 0 " R O U T E BE T W E E N D O O R S 10 4 ' - 0 " R O U T E BE T W E E N D O O R S NE W P E D E S T R I A N EN T R A N C E . 20 1 ' - 0 " R O U T E BE T W E E N D O O R S TR A S H T TR A S H DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT A-010SITE PLAN__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 SI T E P L A N N P125 IV.A. UP UP DN DN UP UP 60 ' - 4 " 1 0 0 ' - 0 " TE N A N T ' B ' B1 0 0 ST A I R # 1 B1 0 4 TE N A N T ' C ' ST O R A G E B1 0 1 EX T E R I O R S T A I R B1 0 2 PA S S A G E B1 0 5 EL E V A T O R B1 0 3 20 ' - 5 " 37 ' - 5 " 2 0 ' - 9 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 2 1 ' - 0 " 3 8 ' - 3 " 5' - 2 " 5' - 2 " 5 ' - 2 " 9 ' - 8 " 5 ' - 2 " 4 ' - 8 " 8' - 2 " 11 ' - 7 " 37 ' - 5 " 3 3 ' - 7 " 60 ' - 4 " 100' - 0" 1' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 1' - 0 " 9' - 0 " 10 ' - 6 " 28 ' - 1 0 " 4' - 0".. OP E R A B L E ST O R E F R O N T SY S T E M OPERABLE STOREFRONTSYSTEM PL A N T E R PLANTER TE N A N T ' A ' 10 1 PA S S A G E 10 5 TR A S H A N D UT I L I T Y A R E A 10 6 TE N A N T ' B ' 10 2 TE N A N T ' C ' 10 3 EX T E R I O R S T A I R 10 4 EL E V A T O R 10 7 ST A I R # 1 10 8 PLANTER BE N C H PL A N T E R BE N C H BENCH T 8' - 2 " 5' - 4 " 10 ' - 0 " 5' - 2 " 10 ' - 0 " 5' - 3 " 10' - 0"5' - 4" 1 7 ' - 1 0 " 2 0 ' - 9 " 2 1 ' - 0 " 3 8 ' - 1 " 44 ' - 7 " 3 5 ' - 1 " 4 ' - 0 " 2 0 ' - 0 " 3 8 ' - 7 " 5 ' - 2 " 9 ' - 8 " 5 ' - 2 " 5' - 0 " 5' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " PROPERTY LINE5' - 0" 3 ' - 4 " 3' - 0" 58 ' - 4 " 49 ' - 7 " 1' - 0 " 2' - 6"10' - 0"2' - 7"10' - 0"2' - 7"10' - 0"2' - 7"6' - 2"7' - 0"6' - 10"7' - 2"32' - 7" 1 7 ' - 8 " 1 7 ' - 5 " 34 ' - 6 " 8' - 1 0 " 49 ' - 6 " 2 0 ' - 9 " 1 7 ' - 1 0 " 2 A- 2 2 0 1 A- 2 2 0 TR A S H TR A S H DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT A-100FLOOR PLANS__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 LO W E R L E V E L P L A N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 MA I N F L O O R P L A N P126 IV.A. DN 42 " H I G H G L A S S RA I L I N G , T Y P . RO O F T E R R A C E 20 0 ME C H . A R E A 20 2 ME C H . A R E A 20 5 EX T E R I O R S T A I R 20 6 TE R R A C E EL E V A T O R LO B B Y 20 7 ST A I R # 1 20 4 EL E V A T O R 20 3 4 ' - 0 " 9' - 0 " 4' - 0 " 9' - 0 " 4 ' - 0 " ME C H A R E A 20 1 60 ' - 4 " 4 0 ' - 3 " 2 0 ' - 0 " 3 9 ' - 9 " 1 0 0 ' - 0 " 1 7 ' - 6 " 1 6 ' - 7 " 4 ' - 2 " 3 4 ' - 2 " 2 2 ' - 0 " 3 3 ' - 8 " 8' - 2 " 4' - 8 " 8' - 2 " 8 9 ' - 1 0 " GR E E N R O O F A R E A , T Y P . DN 40 ' - 5 " 6' - 0 " 11 ' - 9 " 1' - 0 " 21 ' - 8 " 1' - 0 " 5' - 0 " AW N I N G B E L O W GR E E N R O O F A R E A = 1 , 0 6 2 . 3 8 S . F . GR E E N R O O F A R E A , T Y P . GR E E N R O O F A R E A , T Y P . 20 ' - 1 1 " 2 0 ' - 0 " AW N I N G B E L O W (M E C H . A R E A B E L O W ) (R O O F T E R R A C E B E L O W ) (M E C H . A R E A B E L O W ) OP E N S T A I R B E L O W ) ME C H . A R E A B E L O W ) GR E E N R O O F A R E A = 41 8 . 3 3 S . F . GR E E N R O O F A R E A BE L O W = 1 , 0 6 2 . 3 8 S . F . TO T A L G R E E N R O O F A R E A 1, 4 8 0 . 7 1 S . F . DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT A-101FLOOR PLANS__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 RO O F T E R R A C E P L A N 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 UP P E R R O O F P L A N P127 IV.A. UP UP DN DN UP DN CO M M E R C I A L A R E A : 5, 7 4 0 . 7 8 S F (E X E M P T ) NO N - U N I T C O M M O N AR E A 2 8 8 . 3 9 S F (E X E M P T ) PA S S A G E B1 0 5 EX T E R I O R S T A I R B1 0 2 TE N A N T ' C ' ST O R A G E B1 0 1 ST A I R # 1 B1 0 4 EL E V A T O R B1 0 3 TE N A N T ' B ' B1 0 0 CO M M E R C I A L A R E A : 4, 9 5 8 . 6 4 S F PL A N T E R 1 9 4 . 9 6 S F (E X E M P T ) 3 0 . 3 9 S F (E X E M P T ) NO N - U N I T C O M M O N A R E A 46 3 . 3 9 S F NO N - U N I T C O M M O N AR E A 2 1 3 . 8 8 S F 1 0 0 . 2 1 S F (E X E M P T ) PL A N T E R 3 3 . 3 2 S F (E X E M P T ) 3 5 . 0 9 S F (E X E M P T ) TE N A N T ' C ' 10 3 EX T E R I O R S T A I R 10 4 TE N A N T ' A ' 10 1 PA S S A G E 10 5 TR A S H A N D UT I L I T Y A R E A 10 6 EL E V A T O R 10 7 ST A I R # 1 10 8 TE N A N T ' B ' 10 2 UP OU T D O O R T E R R A C E A R E A 4 , 5 4 3 . 1 2 S F ( E X E M P T ) NO N - U N I T A R E A : 213.88 SF (E X E M P T ) CO M M E R C I A L A R E A : 49 4 . 3 8 EX T E R I O R S T A I R 20 6 ME C H . A R E A 20 5 ME C H . A R E A 20 2 TERRACE ELEVATOR LOBBY 207 EL E V A T O R 20 3 ST A I R # 1 20 4 ROOF TERRACE 200 NO N - U N I T A R E A 6 7 7 . 7 9 S F (E X E M P T ) DN FL O O R A R E A S U M M A R Y : MA I N L E V E L : 5 , 6 3 5 . 9 1 S F LO W E R L E V E L : 6 , 0 2 9 . 1 7 S F RO O F L E V E L : 5 9 2 9 . 1 7 S F CO M M E R C I A L A R E A : 4 , 9 5 8 . 6 4 S F NO N - U N I T C O M M O N A R E A : 6 7 7 . 2 7 S F ( B L U E & P U R P L E ) DE D U C T I O N S : 3 9 3 . 9 7 S F ( P L A N T E R & S E A T S ) AR E A T O W A R D S F A R : 5 , 2 4 1 . 9 4 S F CO M M E R C I A L A R E A : 5 , 7 4 0 . 7 8 S F DE D U C T I O N S : 6 , 0 2 9 . 1 7 S F ( S U B G R A D E E X E M P T ) AR E A T O W A R D S F A R : 0 S F CO M M E R C I A L A R E A : 4 9 4 . 3 8 S F DE D U C T I O N S : 5 , 4 3 4 . 7 9 S F ( B L U E & P U R P L E , E X E M P T ) AR E A T O W A R D S F A R : 4 9 4 . 3 8 S F TO T A L F A R : 5 , 7 3 6 . 3 2 S F ( 0 . 9 6 : 1 F A R ) ZO N I N G I N F O R M A T I O N A N D C A L C U L A T I O N S : ZO N I N G : ( C C ) C O M M E R C I A L C O R E NE T L O T A R E A : 6 , 0 2 9 S F ( 6 0 ' - 3 1 / 2 " X 1 0 0 ' ) ZO N I N G A L L O W A N C E ( 2 : 1 ) 1 2 , 0 5 8 S F ( 2 X 6 , 0 2 9 S F ) CA L C U L A T I O N S : GR O S S F L O O R A R E A : CO M M E R C I A L S P A C E : 9 , 3 5 8 . 6 5 S F NO N - U N I T S P A C E : 3 , 7 8 1 . 4 8 S F EX E M P T S P A C E : 1 2 , 0 0 6 . 1 6 S F EX P O S E D W A L L B E L O W G R A D E NO R T H : 0 S F E X P O S E D SO U T H : 0 S F E X P O S E D EA S T : 0 S F E X P O S E D WE S T : 0 S F E X P O S E D BE L O W G R A D E W A L L A R E A : NO R T H : 6 0 ' - 3 1 / 2 " SO U T H : 6 0 ' - 3 1 / 2 " EA S T : 1 0 0 ' - 0 " WE S T : 1 0 0 ' - 0 " TO T A L : 3 2 0 ' - 7 " L E N G T H X_ _ _ _ 2 0 ' - 0 " H E I G H T 6, 4 1 1 ' - 8 " S F T O T A L W A L L A R E A 0 S F T O T A L E X P O S E D W A L L A R E A 0 / 6 , 4 1 1 ' - 8 " = 0 % A P P L I E D FI N A L F L O O R A R E A : MA I N L E V E L = 5 , 2 4 1 . 9 4 S F ( 3 9 3 . 9 7 S F E X E M P T ) RO O F L E V E L = 4 9 4 . 3 8 S F ( 5 4 3 4 . 7 9 S F E X E M P T ) LO W E R L E V E L = 0 S F ( 6 , 0 2 9 . 1 7 S F E X E M P T ) CU M U L A T I V E = 5 , 7 3 6 . 3 2 S F ( 0 . 9 6 : 1 F A R ) NO N - U N I T C O M M O N A R E A : 2 8 8 . 3 9 S F ( B L U E ) NO N - U N I T C O M M O N A R E A : 2 1 3 . 8 8 S F ( B L U E , E X E M P T ) DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT FAR-1FAR CALCULATIONS__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 LO W E R L E V E L P L A N - F A R CA L C U L A T I O N S 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 MA I N F L O O R - F A R C A L C U L A T I O N S 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 3 RO O F L E V E L P L A N - F A R CA L C U L A T I O N S P128 IV.A. DN DN UP UP UP DN NE T L E A S A B L E C A L C U L A T I O N S : MA I N L E V E L : LO W E R L E V E L : RO O F L E V E L : S F NE T L E A S A B L E A R E A : 4 , 7 3 6 . 0 7 S F SU B - T O T A L M A I N L E V E L : 4 , 7 3 6 . 0 7 S F NE T L E A S A B L E A R E A : 5 , 4 6 6 . 8 6 S F SU B - T O T A L L O W E R L E V E L : 5 , 4 6 6 . 8 6 S F NE T L E A S A B L E A R E A : 4 2 4 . 2 1 S F OU T D O O R T E R R A C E : 3 , 5 6 6 . 3 8 S F SU B - T O T A L : 4 2 4 . 2 1 S F TO T A L N E T L E A S A B L E : 1 0 , 6 2 7 . 1 4 S F NO N - U N I T C O M M O N AR E A : 3 9 3 . 6 6 S F NO N - U N I T C O M M O N AR E A : 1 6 4 . 0 1 S F TE N A N T ' A ' 10 1 NE T L E A S A B L E A R E A : 4, 7 3 6 . 0 7 S F EX T E R I O R S T A I R 10 4 PA S S A G E 10 5 TR A S H A N D UT I L I T Y A R E A 10 6 TE N A N T ' C ' 10 3 EL E V A T O R 10 7 ST A I R # 1 10 8 UP NE T L E A S A B L E A R E A : 5, 4 6 6 . 8 6 S F NO N - U N I T C O M M O N AR E A : 2 2 1 . 1 8 S F EX T E R I O R S T A I R B1 0 2 TE N A N T ' B ' B1 0 0 ST A I R # 1 B1 0 4 EL E V A T O R B1 0 3 TE N A N T ' C ' ST O R A G E B1 0 1 PA S S A G E B1 0 5 OU T D O O R T E R R A C E A R E A 3 , 2 7 2 . 4 1 S F ( E X E M P T ) NO N - U N I T C O M M O N AR E A : 1 6 6 . 8 0 S F (EXEMPT)ROOF TERRACE 200 ME C H . A R E A 20 2 ME C H . A R E A 20 5 NE T L E A S A B L E A R E A : 424.21 SF (E X E M P T ) (E X E M P T ) DN ST A I R # 1 20 4 EL E V A T O R 20 3 TERRACE ELEVATOR LOBBY 207 EX T E R I O R S T A I R 20 6 OU T D O O R M E C H A N I C A L A R E A 55 3 . 8 8 S F ( E X E M P T ) ME C H A R E A 20 1 DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT NL-1NET LEASABLE PLANS__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 MA I N F L O O R - F A R C A L C U L A T I O N S 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 3 LO W E R L E V E L P L A N - F A R CA L C U L A T I O N S 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 4 RO O F L E V E L P L A N - F A R CA L C U L A T I O N S P129 IV.A. FIRST FLOOR 0' - 0"ROOF TERRACE 15' - 0"PARAPET 18' - 6"V I E W P L A N E V I E W P L A N E CO N C R E T E C U R B OP E R A B L E ST O R E F R O N T GR E E N W A L L SY S T E M PLANTERSLIDINGSTOREFRONTSYSTEMUPPER PARAPET 29' - 6" OR N A M E N T A L ME T A L D O O R OP E R A B L E ST O R E F R O N T LI G H T FI X T U R E , T Y P . METAL PANEL RAINSCREEN SYSTEM, TYP AD D R E S S PL A C A R D WO O D F A C A D E SH E E T M E T A L CO P I N G T/ O D O O R OP E N I N G 11 ' - 7 3 / 4 " SHEET METAL COPING METAL PANEL REVEAL, TYP. EG R E S S D O O R BO A R D F O R M E D CO N C R E T E GR E E N W A L L SY S T E M BO A R D F O R M E D CO N C R E T E SH E E T M E T A L CO P I N G BU T T G L A Z E D ST O R E F R O N T S Y S T E VIEWPLANE 7' - 2 3/8" FI R S T F L O O R 0' - 0 " RO O F T E R R A C E 15 ' - 0 " PA R A P E T 18 ' - 6 " T. O . W I N D O W 11 ' - 6 " VI E W P L A N E CO N C R E T E C U R B SH E E T M E T A L CO P I N G ME T A L P A N E L RE V E A L , T Y P . PL A N T E R ME T A L P A N E L RI A N S C R E E N SY S T E M , T Y P . SL I D I N G ST O R E F R O N T SY S T E M TR A S H A N D U T I L I T Y AR E A S C R E E N I N G BU T T G L A Z E D ST O R E F R O N T SY S T E M AL L G L A S S EG R E S S D O O R VI E W P L A N E 7' - 2 3 / 8 " UP P E R P A R A P E T 29 ' - 6 " T/ O U P P E R GL A Z I N G 26 ' - 0 " T/ O D O O R OP E N I N G 11 ' - 7 3 / 4 " SH E E T M E T A L AW N I N G BO A R D F O R M E D C O N C R E T E SH E E T M E T A L C O P I N G BO A R D F O R M E D C O N C R E T E DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT A-210BUILDING ELEVATIONS__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 X- P R E L I M I N A R Y - E A S T E L E V A T I O N 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 X- P R E L I M I N A R Y - N O R T H E L E V A T I O N P130 IV.A. FIRST FLOOR 0' - 0"ROOF TERRACE 15' - 0" V I E W P L A N E V I E W P L A N E SH E E T M E T A L AW N I N G CO N C R E T E C U R B SH E E T M E T A L C O P I N G UPPER PARAPET 29' - 6" 1 1 ' - 6 " ME T A L P A N E L RA I N S C R E E N SY S T E M , T Y P . VIEWPLANE 7' - 2 3/8" SH E E T M E T A L C O P I N G BO A R D F O R M E D CO N C R E T E FI R S T F L O O R 0' - 0 " RO O F T E R R A C E 15 ' - 0 " PA R A P E T 18 ' - 6 " VI E W P L A N E VI E W P L A N E CO N C R E T E C U R B OP E R A B L E S T O R E F R O N T LI G H T F I X T U R E UP P E R P A R A P E T 29 ' - 6 " T/ O U P P E R GL A Z I N G 26 ' - 0 " WO O D F A C A D E T/ O D O O R OP E N I N G 11 ' - 7 3 / 4 " T/ O O P E N I N G 10 ' - 0 " SH E E T M E T A L CO P I N G BO A R D F O R M E D CO N C R E T E SH E E T M E T A L CO P I N G BU T T G L A Z E D ST O R E F R O N T S Y S T E M VI E W P L A N E 7' - 2 3 / 8 " DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT A-211BUILDING ELEVATIONS__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 X- P R E L I M I N A R Y - W E S T E L E V A T I O N 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 X- P R E L I M I N A R Y - S O U T H E L E V A T I O N P131 IV.A. FI R S T F L O O R 0' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 4 ' - 0 " RO O F T E R R A C E 15 ' - 0 " PA R A P E T 18 ' - 6 " T. O . W I N D O W 11 ' - 6 " VI E W P L A N E 7' - 2 3 / 8 " UP P E R P A R A P E T 29 ' - 6 " T/ O U P P E R GL A Z I N G 26 ' - 0 " T/ O D O O R OP E N I N G 11 ' - 7 3 / 4 " TE N A N T ' B ' TE N A N T ' C ' ST O R A G E EL E V A T O R TE N A N T ' A ' TE N A N T ' C ' EL E V A T O R EL E V A T O R V I E W P L A N E FI R S T F L O O R 0' - 0 " LO W E R L E V E L -1 4 ' - 0 " RO O F T E R R A C E 15 ' - 0 " PA R A P E T 18 ' - 6 " UP P E R P A R A P E T 29 ' - 6 " T/ O U P P E R GL A Z I N G 26 ' - 0 " T/ O D O O R OP E N I N G 11 ' - 7 3 / 4 " VI E W P L A N E 7' - 2 3 / 8 " VI E W P L A N E TE N A N T ' B ' EL E V A T O R TE N A N T ' C ' EL E V A T O R PA S S A G E DRAWING TITLE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:DATE:REVIEWED:PROJECT NO.:LOCATION NO.:ALL DRAWINGS AND WRITTEN MATERIAL HEREIN CONSTITUTE THE ORIGINAL AND UNPUNLISHED WORK OF THE ARCHITECT, AND THE SAME MAY NOT BE DUPLICATED, USED OR DISCLOSED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT: CAMBURAS & THEODORE, LTD.RA TT A-220BUILDING SECTIONS__305-307 SOUTH MILL ST.ASPEN, CO 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 BU I L D I N G S E C T I O N - V I E W P L A N E 1 3 / 1 6 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 BU I L D I N G S E C T I O N - V I E W P L A N E 2 P132 IV.A. P133 IV.A. P134 IV.A. P135 IV.A. P136 IV.A. P 1 3 7 I V . A . P 1 3 8 I V . A . P 1 3 9 I V . A . P 1 4 0 I V . A . P 1 4 1 I V . A . P 1 4 2 I V . A . P 1 4 3 I V . A . P 1 4 4 I V . A .