The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.623 E Hopkins Ave.0010.2012.AHPC0010.2012.AHPC 623 E. HOPKINS MAJOR HPC CONCEPTUAL p.. 1 5.6-60Ak C .. THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0010.2012.AHPC PARCEL ID NUMBERS 2737 182 12 001 PROJECT ADDRESS 623 E HOPKINS AVE PLANNER AMY SIMON CASE DESCRIPTION HPC CONCEPTUAL REPRESENTATIVE MITCH HAAS DATE OF FINAL ACTION 06/13/2012 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 09/01/2015 oo ID Â·2012- Aft ?c 1131 c l %2,Â·- l'2,~<00, Upgjill/11~ Elle Edit Record Navigate Firm Repor* Format Iab Belp i@*)x, e -~ 0~i #.I â‚¬ 3 28Â·~ i N 1 , 4 0 j i jump 1 : *~i ol@~ leâ‚¬1.@3@o â€¢1 i&33.al#:~ li , 1 Roirg Status | Feet | Fee 5ummarf 1*] 8ctions |Attachments Routhg ~story | Yaluation |Arch$Eng ~Custom Fields |Sub Eermits I Parcels | - I - ..............I e pl + .. ~ Permit type ahpc Aspen Historic Land Use ~ Permit # 0010.2012,AHPC ~ - Address 623 E HOPKINS AVE Apt/5ute ' 1 * City ASPEN . 5tate ~~~| Zip 81611 L Permit InformaWon Master permit Routing queue aslu07 Applied 323/2012 Project Status pending Approved DescriÂ®on APPLICATION FOR HPC HOME AND OUT BUILDINGS - MAJOR HPC CONCEPTUAL BREd DEVELOPMENT Cled/Final Â·. f Submitted MITCH HAAS 925 7819 Clock @*"-| Days [-61 Expires 3/18/2013 am **f 1 2 Submitted via *6,9 .46~ Owner f- ~ -1 Last name ASPEN BLOCK 99, LLC First name AKA 'SUSIE'S' 535 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN CO 81611 Phone () - |OM Address idi L-9 Applicant ~ ~ Itl 7,17 Il Owner is applicant? Il Contractor is applicant? Â·iF 1 -4, Last name HAAS LAND PLANNING LL( First name El N MILL ST 1 2.-9 STE 108 t Phone (970) 925-7819 Cust # 25346 Address ASPEN CO 81611 . -1Â· Lender ~ .~- Last name First name I If Phone ( ) - Address 'AspenGolf [selver] angelas Fl~ 1 Oil ,Â·i c,k AÂ·rÂ« \ Mo . 8 -2 3)3 11 LlÂ« .0*U feS r cl rf #11% AÂ»a SUk 99. UL 532- E Reflok j Ad, ASAn G 97 6 0 APHS 03 -Â»129 0 1 .. SAMPLE LETTER TO ACCOMPANY CASHIER'S CHECK PROVIDED AS FINANCIAL SECURITY FOR A HSITORIC PRESERVATION PROJECT 4 Date: /O k - /3 Cashier's Chfck Amount: 36), a (f O BankÂ·. ./1--C ,Â¢, /4 84 A i To: Attn: Historic Preservation Officer Check Number: City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St. A1D Aspen, CO 81611 Properly OW&~~~dO~C ~ 7 606.- 0 fv .* Subject Property Street Address: (, 2.-, 25 ,44~/ ki AS jfri . Aspen, CO 81611 Subject Property Legal Address: The City of Aspen, as a condition of approval of certain land use approvals relating to the above referenced property, has required that the undersigned Owner of the above referenced property provide financial security to guarantee the performance of the following: -7Ai, 4,Â·A vit'00't-1,Â« Dt 111, ('Al Fi If-1, teu (5vt.EA jy,AJ/li G 5 l.,1. 1( A L Â£- f(k, A +rÂ· f r. 1-1 L +Ir~ . F fL, 4 â€ž l# 1-1\0 - A copy of the relevant approvals is appended hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this referenced incorporated herein. The undersigned Owner of the above referenced property hereby provides a Cashier's Check made payable to the City of Aspen as, and for, the financial security required by said land use approvals. The City of Aspen may deposit the Cashier's Check in a non-interest bearing account of the City of Aspen. The City of Aspen may make withdrawals from said deposit at any time in its sole discretion upon notification by the City's Community Development Director to the City's Finance Director and to Owner that Owner has failed to perform one or more conditions of the land use approvals of the City of Aspen Historical Preservation Commission. Within thirty (30) days of the acceptance of the work to be performed by Owner in accordance with the above referenced land use approvals, the balance of Owner's deposit, if any, shall be returned to Owner; provided, however, that the Qwner's balance is not the subject of litigation. Owner' signature: Cl / l. A A- V L c M~,4?t,5 rf,-le-r / 141,/vx 1*kek 9 9 606.- JPW- saved: 7/17/2013-281-G:\john\word\agr\HPC-Cashiers-Check.doc Alpine Bank ~ ~ Cashiers Check P.O. Box 10000 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602 538622 1970) 945-2424 NOTICETOCUSTOMERS The purchase of an Indemnity Bond will be required before any Cashier's Check 01 this bank will be replaced in the event it is lost, misplaced or stolen. DATE: 11/20/13 BION'(11: 2020 O11IC.IN.1 1-014: BKING REMITTER: ASPEN BLOCK 99 LLC TIJIE: 10:53:37 532 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ('K:\ ~ IT: $30,000.00 1/1/.IC.\M'I: 3.00 ro: CITY OF ASPEN '10'1.U.: $30,003.00 FOR SAFE RELOCATION BOND NON-NEGOTIABLE .. A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, CONCEPTUAL COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, ON-SITE RELOCATION AND DEMOLITION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 623 E. HOPKINS AVENUE, LOTS F AND G, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN RESOLUTION # 14, SERIES OF 2012 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-001 WHEREAS, the applicant, Aspen Block 99, LLC, represented by Oz Architecture and Haas Land Planning. submitted an application for Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual Commercial Design Review, Demolition and On-Site Relocation for the property located at 623 E. Hopkins Avenue, Lots F and G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Commercial Design Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines per Section 26.412.040 of the Municipal Code. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Relocation, according to Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property, it must be determined that: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; gr 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; QI 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; QI 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not 623 E. Hopkins Avenue HPC Resolution #14, Series of 2012 .. adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation. repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Demolition, according to Section 26.415.080, Demolition of Designated Historic Properties, it must be determined that: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all ofthe 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. WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HPC dated June 13, 2012, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had been met, and recommended approval of the project with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on June 13, 2012, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application during a duly noticed public hearing, the staff memo and recommendation, and public comments, and found the building to be consistent with the criteria by a vote of 4 to 1. 623 E. Hopkins Avenue HPC Resolution #14, Series of 2012 .. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby approves Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual Commercial Design Review, On-Site Relocation and Demolition as represented in the application with the following conditions: l. HPC approves amendments to the third floor as represented in the drawings presented at the meeting and dated June 13,2012. 2. No HVAC equipment or sunshades will be permitted on the roof of the building and the roof deck is limited to the size represented in this application. 3. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension o f the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 13th day of June, 2012. Ann Mullins, Chair Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 623 E. Hopkins Avenue HPC Resolution #14, Series of 2012 .. C . MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 623 E. Hopkins Avenue- Conceptual Major Development, Conceptual Commercial Design, Demolition and Relocation-Public Hearing DATE: June 13,2012 SUMMARY: 623 E. Hopkins is a 6,000 square foot lot that currently contains two Victorian era structures along the street and one non-historic building along the alley. All of the buildings are occupied by local businesses, with no residential use on-site. The proposal before HPC includes restoration of the historic buildings and temporarily lifting the "Susie's" structure in order to build a new basement. No additions to the Victorians are planned. At the back of the site, the existing building is to be demolished and replaced with a new commercial/residential structure. The applicant and architect are responsible for the Conner Cabins project behind City Hall and are taking a similar approach on this property. The application does not require any variances and is well below the maximum square footage allowed on the site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends some adjustments to the upper floor of the proposed rear structure in order to minimize the impact on the historic structures, as described in this memo. With those improvements, which have been suggested as conditions of approval, we support Conceptual approval, Demolition and Relocation. APPLICANT: Aspen Block 99, LLC, represented by Oz Architecture and Haas Land Planning. PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-001. ADI)RESS: 623 E. 1 lopkins, Lots F and G. Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: C-1. Commercial, Ilistoric Landmark MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) 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 1 .. 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 LIPC 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 shelli be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of tile structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." Since the March 2012 submission of this application. staffhas worked with the applicant to bring the project towards compliance with the historic preservation guidelines. The packet includes the first proposed streetscape elevation, as well as the current proposal, which is the fourth revision. Within downtown Aspen, there are approximately 12 miner's cottages that exist among the much larger masonry commercial buildings that predominate. Preservation of the residential scale of these buildings is very difficult given the intensive uses and development rights in the area. In staff's opinion, there are several very positive aspects of the proposed project at 623 E. Hopkins. The two Victorian structures on the site uillbe restored to a great degree and preserved as free standing buildings, with no major additions, at the front of the site. The project does not include any variances and is less than 40% of the allowed square footage that could theoretically be built on the property. The proposal retains two small commercial spaces and adds additional ground floor small commercial units at the back of the site. There is significant open space preserved around the historic buildings. That said. the proposed new structure at the rear of 'Â· " ./.V ..%40.Â» ..% ..k:/ the site creates ali obviously larger and non- residential form as a backdrop to the old structures. Staff does believe that the Conner cabins project . (at right), which is quite similar. has successfully - demonstrated that the new construction can be compatible and sympathetic to these small historic . 'i + 06 houses. Except for these two Victorians and the * lift; 41~ 77%~4'~=~6* *5. â€¢m I*t'g~~~fl!~â€¢'~~i~ Berg project which is about to begin construction 44- . --AWj up.Â£,4 1 124,0164-:NiG~6 4 immediately to the east. the neighborhood is &4* 4.-=/.,.J,1 generally made up of two story, mostly flat roofed, mixed-use and multi-family structures. - 2 15*t .. The application contains a historic photo of the site which indicates 9 63/ 011< 063 0'r, that the eastern cabin was a carriage house type of structure. 1 he applicant plans to recreate that character to the extent possible. The , LZ-9. f k D 1904 Sanborne map depicting the propert> is seen at right. -- /0 At the Conceptual level, HPC should be primarily concerned with site - plan and form. Staff would like to see the upper floor of the new ..61 - structure continue to be adjusted to diminish the impact on the historic buildings. To the extent that the form can continue to be made more compact or perhaps reduced iii height in any manner, it t. 61 would be an improvement. Staff does not recommend that the upper roof deck be approved. The usable area of the deck is small, but requires a relatively significant staircase fur access. and a railing that - only emphasizes the height of the new building. Staff recommends HPC require additional study as a condition of approval. The guidelines in question are: 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. u Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW The City has an adopted set of guidelines. "Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives" which are in addition to the 1-IPC design guidelines. Development on this site is affected by the chapter that addresses what is known as the "Commercial Character Area." All of the Conceptual level guidelines address setback and height issues that are primarily applicable to a new building along the street frontage. Any additional design guidelines that are applicable to Final will be presented to I IPC at that time. An application for commercial design review may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: A. '1 he proposed development meets the requirements ol Section 26.412.060, Commercial design standards, or any deviation from the standards provides a more appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose 3 0 0 .. 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. B. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060. Commercial design standards, to the greatest extent practical. Changes to the fagade of the building may be required to comply with this Section. C. The application shall comply with the guidelines within the Commercial, Lodging and Historic I)istrict Design Objectives and Guidelines as determined by the appropriate Commission. The guidelines set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The City shall determine when a proposal is in compliance with the criteria, standards and guidelines. Although these criteria, standards and guidelines are relatively comprehensive, there may be circumstances where alternative ways of meeting the intent of the policy objectives might be identified. In such a case, the City must determine that the intent of the guideline is still met, albeit through alternative means. Staff Response: The guidelines are attached. Staff finds that the guidelines are met, particularly those that deal with required public amenity space (open space.) The project maintains yard area around these historic buildings. ON-SITE RELOCATION The intent of this Chapter is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. Ilowever, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. The following standards apply for relocating a historic property as per Section 26.415.090.C of the Municipal Code: C. Standards for the Relocation of Designated Properties Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; g[ 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; 9.r 4.1'he relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversel> affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was 4 .. originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The applicant proposes to temporarily lift the historic "Susies" cabin to excavate a basement, then put it back in place. but F closer to Hopkins. Staff recommends that the building maintain the original location. This is one of three Victorians in a row. The historic alignment between the buildings should be respected. Conditions of approval will include a letter of credit to ensure a safe relocation process, along with a plan from the housemover. DEMOLITION It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures will be allowed unless approved by the H PC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. The LIPC shall review the application. the staff report and hear evidence presented by the properly owners. parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural. archaeological. engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a, The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located and b. The loss ofthe 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 u ill be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. 5 .. Staff Response: Staff agrees with the applicant's assessment that there are non-historic additions along the rear of the Susies structure. This is supported by the Sanborne maps and is obvious from visual inspection. These are to be removed. Staff supports demolition of this non- contributing construction jinding that it has no historic significance. The applicant proposes complete demolition of' a building along the alley. The building was constructed in the 1970s and has not been determined to have any historic significance. Staff supports demolition finding that no documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance. The building is considered "non-contributing" to the historic significance of the property and area. Staff supports the demolition requests. 0 The Hl'C may: â€¢ approve the application, â€¢ approve the application with conditions, â€¢ disapprove the application, or â€¢ continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC grant Conceptual Major Development and Commercial Design Review, Demolition and Relocation as proposed with the following conditions: CD 1. Do not change the location of the 'Susie's" cabin. Provide a $30,000 letter of credit or cashier's check to insure the safe relocation of the building. as well as a plan for protection of the building from a housemover or structural engineer. 2. Continue to study the upper floor of the rear building to reduce footprint and height to the extent possible, liliminate the upper floor deck and access stair. 3. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of June 13. 2012, the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The 1 listoric Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. Exhibits: A. Relevant HPC Guidelines B. Commercial Design Guidelines C. Application 6 .. Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines, Conceptual Review 4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. It may not, for example. be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. o Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it substantially above the ground level is inappropriate. u Changing the historic elevation is discouraged. unless it can be demonstrated that it enhances the resource. 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. o Such an addition is usually similar in character to the original building in terms of materials, finishes and design. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. u The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern of the site. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. o Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. o The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. u The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. o They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. On a residential structure. eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. o Exotic building and root forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodcsic domes and A-frames. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. --7 009 000 .0 . These include windows, doors and porches. Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. o When it is feasible. screen service areas from view5 especially those associated with commercial and multifamily developments. o This includes locations for trash containers and loading dod<s. o Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists. 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. o Mechanical equipment inay only be installed on an alley fucade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. 1 Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the buildiiig itself. Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges. A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. o Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or alley. Also niinimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant building facades or highly visible roof planes. o Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds. 14.16 Locate standpipes, nieters and other service equipment such that they will not damage historic facade materials. u Cutting channels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric and is inappropriate. Do not locate equipment on the front facade. o If a channel must be cut either locate it on a secondary facade, or place it low on the wall. 14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. o Plan parking areas and driveways in a manner that utilizes existing curb cuts. New curb cuts are not permitted. u If an alley exists. a new driveway must be located off of it. 14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene. See Chapter 8. Secondary Structures. 8 0 0 0 0 OC .. HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC June 5,2012 Ms. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Revised Conceptual Application for 623 East Hopkins, Aspen (Lots F & G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen; PID # 2737-182-12-001; a/kia "Susie's" Property) Dear Amy: Based on the comments received via email on May 31,2012. after your staffmeeting, the applicant has completed several revisions to the proposed plans. A new plan set has been prepared by Oz Architecture for your use and distribution to the HPC. In addition, some explanation of the plans and response to the aforementioned email is provided below. First, to be clear, absolutely no variances are required for this mixed-use project in the C- 1 Zone District. There is no minimum lot area per dwelling unit. no minimum lot width, no setback requirements. and no minimum distance between buildings for this type of development. Additionally, the maximum height of the third-story element on the new construction is proposed to be approximately 31'4 feet tall and only 341/4 feet to the top of the railing on its rooftop deck; the maximum height allowed by-right in this zone district is 36 feet for these three-story elements. In other words, in an effort to be as sensitive as possible to the historic resources and despite the fact that the adjacent townhomes are significantly taller, the proposal is not even using all the height allowed by right on this property. In addition, the proposed two-story elements top out more than four (4) feet below the 28 foot height limit applicable to these portions of the structure. The residential unit will contain 2,487 square feet of net livable area; the applicant will utilize one '1'DR to accommodate this, as allowed by the Code fur the C-1 Zone District. With this net livable unit size, the total proposed Free-Market Residential Floor Area is still just 95.3% of that allowed. Additionally, the overall development not only complies with all applicable FAR limits, but seeks to develop only 37.2% of the 15,000 square feet allowed by-right. Put another way. almost twice as much allowable floor area is being left unused than will be developed in the entire project. Finally, the total free-market residential net livable area proposed (2,487sf) remains less than the total above grade commercial FAR (2,6564 thereby assuring compliance with the Commercial/Residential ratio requirement of the C-1 zone. In total, although the property maintains certain clearly specified development rights by code, less than 38% of the permitted iloor area is proposed for development. Similarly, although no yard area setbacks are required, the applicant has included more than â€¢ 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108â€¢ ASPEN.COLORADO â€¢ 81611 â€¢ â€¢ (970) 925-781 9 â€¢ MITCH@H LPASPEN.COM â€¢ .. sufficient setbacks, more public amenity space than necessary and generous distances between the historic structures and the new construction while keeping all construction well below allowable/applicable height limits. Moreover, the proposed designs have increased the setbacks of each Iloor level from the level below so as to better step the height and massing back away from the two historic resources at the front of the property. Although the two historic structures to be preserved and fully restored are only one story in height, the approved and existing development patterns of adjacent properties (i.e., the [3erg property to the east. and the existing townhornes structure to the west) as well as the sensitivities the applicant has clearly incorporated must be kept in mind during the project's review. Furthermore, the application does not request any Floor Area bonuses and, therefore, a fair balancing of applicable HPC Design Guidelines is required. Next, in response to the concerns outlined in your May 31 email, the plans have been revised to make perfectly clear that the basement level of the new structure does not include anything that might possible serve as net leasable commercial space. There is merely a mechanical room in one small section and the remainder of that level is nothing more than crawl space with inadequate head heights to serve any leasable function; no deed restriction will be required as the plans and representation provide more than adequate assurance. However, if a condition of approval stating that these areas cannot be used as net leasable space, the applicant is amenable to such. The second floor commercial/office space in the new structure has been eliminated altogether. The entirety of the second and third floors is within the single residential unit only, and the ground level includes only the garage, common circulation areas and two commercial/office spaces. As such, there should be no concern going forward about any of the commercial spaces being absorbed into the free market residential unit. Like the basement/crawl space level, there will be no need for a deed restriction as the plans and representations provide more than adequate assurance. Similarly. should staff feel a condition of approval is warranted, the applicant will be amendable to a condition outlining that the only approved net leasable space is on the ground level. As correctly pointed out, the most current code provisions distribute the floor area exemption for deck space between the various uses within a mixed use project. With an allowable free market residential FAR of 3,000sf, the available deck exemption is just 450sf and the revised plans reflect and comply with this limitation. While up to 1,350sf of commercial deck space is allowed as exempt FAR, no such space is currently proposed. The third floor massing has been further minimized as suggested. It has been pulled in from the boundaries of the second floor on all sides of the building. The proposed two- story elements top out more than four (4) feet below the 28 foot height limit applicable to these portions of the structure. The third floor has also been minimized in profile to fall well below the allowable height for third story elements in the C-1 zone district. As mentioned above, the maximum height of the third-story element on the new construction Susie's Remodel - 1 IPC Conceptual Addendum Page 2 .. is proposed to be approximately 31!4 feet tall and only 3414 feet to the top of the railing on its rooftop deck; the maximum height allowed by-right in this zone district is 36 feet for these three-story elements. In other words, iii an effort to be as sensitive as possible to the historic resources and despite the fact that the adjacent townhomes are significantly taller, the proposal is not even using all the height allowed by right on this property. In addition, the third floor has been clad in a different and softer material than found on the levels below, which will further decrease its perceived mass and scale. Cues have been taken from the successful massing of the Connor Cabins project. The overall size of the rear building has been decreased substantially and, again, falls well below limits allowed by right in this zone district. The ability to use a TDR to enable more livable area within the free market residence is clearly and objectively provided in the code. More importantly, the use of a TDR has no bearing on the size, mass or scale of the rear building as the TDR merely enables use of the allowable Floor Area within the unit, as livable space, as opposed to the same floor area being wasted on inefficient common areas, hallways. staircases. etc. Please also note that this proposal uses only 95.3% of the allowable free market residential floor area. Finally, the proposed fenestration and exterior building materials have been somewhat revised as well. That said, the applicant is aware that these elements and the details of their design will be further discussed during the Final HPC review process. It is hoped that the information provided herein and in the accompanying plan sets proves helpful in the review and approval ofthis exceptional project and exemplary preservation effort. If you should have any questions or desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning,LLC f Â§61 Mitch Haas Owner/Manager Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Addendum Page 3 .. HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC May 21,2012 Ms. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Revised Conceptual Application for 623 East Hopkins, Aspen (Lots F & G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen; PID # 2737-182-12-001; a/kla "Susie's" Property) Dear Amy: Please consider this letter and the accompanying plans set prepared by Oz Architecture to constitute a formal request for Conceptual Approval of a Major Development to allow restoration and remodeling of the two historic buildings located at 623 East Hopkins, Aspen, as well as demolition and redevelopment ofthe non-historic alley building. The property is legally described as Lots F & G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen (Parcel Identification Number 2737-182-12-001). It is a 6,000 square foot historically designated lot in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District. A vicinity map (not to scale) showing the approximate location of the subject property is provided below. r. . . .. - liZM -Cl; ; r.)â€¢ 1. d. s .t.Jammin & <Al#it 1 L 129~32Â£~4*m'UL 4% TiRM:EL,lfiNilll."IiÂ£2/.6/.t"ki~.r'iMi4k'J" / ~ - .-.l' kf:Pil .... * -- - --'tUlli r-4. I ~:M:LÂ· Â¥ 7 tt-1&*1~ i . 442 4, .3. 7 , 't' I ... 7 I-, Â· 3# . !7 t pe.. i .. .. ./.* T, - '1 . Vicinity Map - 623 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen â€¢ 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108 â€¢ ASPEN, COLORADO â€¢ 81611 â€¢ â€¢ (970)925-7819 â€¢ MITCH@HLPASPEN.COM â€¢ .. In association with the Conceptual Major Development, the applicant is also requesting approvals for partial demolition and temporary on-site relocation of the Miner's cottage that currently houses Susie's consignment shop in order to fully restore its historical appearance and enable development of a new, properly engineered foundation and basement. The historic "Barn" building will be restored in its current location. As mentioned above, the non-historic building set along the alley will be demolished and redeveloped as provided in "The Proposal," below. Existing Conditions The plans set prepared by Oz Architecture and provided herewith include an existing conditions site plan and photographs of existing and historic conditions, along with graphic depictions of all proposed changes. The historic commercial buildings are a Victorian Era Miner's Cottage and an outbuilding ("Barn"), both of which were originally constructed in the 1880s. This property was designated to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures (the Inventory) in June of 2000. The Architectural Inventory Form describes the main structure as a typical wood-frame Miner's Cottage with a gable-end facing the street, a pair of double hung windows, and a cross-gable parallel to the street with a shed roof porch infilling the corner. It is a single- story structure with wood horizontal siding and original vertically proportioned double hung windows. The porch has simple details and its floor is at grade. Window trim has a triangular pediment over principal windows which appear to be the original windows. The historic entry door is intact. A pair of additions has been made to the rear of the building. There is also a separate two-story structure on the alley that is not historic and will be demolished for redevelopment. The original open metal fence defines the street frontage and a large spruce tree occupies the northwest corner of the property. The original use of the Victorian cottage and the outbuilding was residential; however, these building have long since been converted through adaptive reuse to commercial purposes. The proposed development will continue the commercial use of the two historic buildings at the front of the property, while the new building proposed along the alley will contain both commercial and residential space. As such, it will become a mixed-use property. This is explained in more detail in "The Proposal" section of this application, below. The two historic structures were found to be significant for their position in the context of Aspen's mining era. They are considered to describe the nature of the life of an average family or individual during that period, while being representative of the construction techniques and materials available at the time. The buildings were found to retain the original scale and form, with the window openings largely intact and the character of the buildings retained. The additions in the back, while in scale with the original structures have not themselves been deemed to have achieved historic significance. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 2 .. The Proposal As mentioned above, the property is located in the City of Aspen's C-1 Zone District. The proposed changes and development are all clearly and thoroughly depicted on the accompanying plans set prepared by Oz Architecture. Highlights of the proposal are described below in narrative form. The applicant proposes to restore the two historic resources (the Miner's cottage and the barn) to their original appearance (see Plan Sheet H-15). The siding on the Miner's cottage will be restored where feasible and replaced where necessary, while the Barn's siding will be replaced with natural barn siding for an enhanced and more consistent historical appearance. Additionally, as necessary, new gutters and downspouts will be installed on both of these historic buildings. The Barn will receive a new metal roof and an old barn door will be installed to match the original opening. The restoration efforts on the Miner's cottage will also include the removal of two non-historic additions at the rear, the construction of a new raised wood porch, the restoration and replacement of windows to restore original proportions and detailing, and a new wood shingle roof. The Miner's cottage will be temporarily relocated on-site to accommodate construction of properly engineered foundation with a basement. With this, the Miner's cottage is proposed to be relocated five feet, ten inches (5'10") to the north, thereby reducing the setback from Hopkins Avenue (see Plan Sheet H-14). This relocation will increase the prominence of this historic resource from Hopkins Avenue and will increase the distance between the cottage and the new construction behind. The Historic Barn will be restored in its current location, which is slightly further back from Hopkins Avenue than the cottage, as is appropriate for a secondary structure. As previously mentioned, the existing non-historic building on the southern portion of the lot (along the alley) will be demolished and redeveloped with a three-story structure, and when completed, the development will again result in three completely detached structures. No variances are required for this mixed-use project in the C-1 Zone District (see Exhibit 6). There is no minimum lot area per dwelling unit, no minimum lot width, no setback requirements, and no minimum distance between buildings for this type of development. Additionally, the maximum height of the third-story element on the new construction is proposed to be approximately 34!4 feet, where 36 feet is allowed by-right. The residential unit will contain 2,234 square feet of net livable area; the applicant will utilize one TDR to accommodate the 234 square foot increase, as allowed by the Code for the C- 1 Zone District. Additionally, the overall development not only complies with all FAR limits, but seeks to develop less than thirty-nine percent (<39%) of the 15,000 square feet allowed by-right. Finally, the total free-market residential net livable area proposed (2,234sf) is much less than the total above grade commercial FAR (3,165sf), thereby complying with the Commercial/Residential ratio requirement o f the C-1 zone. In total, although the property maintains certain clearly specified development rights by code, less than 39% of the permitted floor area is proposed for development. Similarly, Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 3 .. although no yard area setbacks are required, the applicant has included more than sufficient setbacks, more public amenity space than necessary and generous distances between the historic structures and the new construction while keeping all construction below allowable height limits. Although the two historic structures to be preserved and fully restored are only one story in height, the approved an existing development patterns of adjacent properties as well as the sensitivities the applicant has clearly incorporated must be kept in mind during the project's review. Furthermore, the application does not request any Floor Area bonuses and, therefore, a fair balancing of applicable HPC Design Guidelines is required. Next, the development complies with the Public Amenity Space requirements of Section 26.575.030 and the Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Area required by Code Section 26.575.060. Although the Public Amenity Space requirement in the C-1 Zone District is twenty-five percent (25%), since this is a redevelopment of a parcel that currently contains only 23% of public amenity space, the effective requirement is reduced to 23%. Nevertheless, the proposed redevelopment actually increases the amount of public amenity space to approximately 25% (see Plan Sheet H-3). The utility/trash/recycle service area is located along the alley frontage and, with the included access into and through it, meets all required dimensions and design standards. This development requires efforts to restore historic integrity and return the resources to their true historic appearance. As mentioned above, the restoration efforts to be undertaken include: â€¢ Removal of two non-historic additions from the rear of the Miner's cottage. â€¢ Development of a properly engineered foundation below the Miner's cottage. â€¢ The corner of the Miner's cottage where the smaller addition is being removed will be restored to its original appearance with new siding and a new window to match existing historic windows. â€¢ The siding on the Miner's cottage will be restored where feasible and replaced where necessary, in kind. â€¢ The siding on the Barn will be replaced with natural barn siding for a more historically consistent appearance. â€¢ An old barn door will be installed on the Barn to match the original opening. â€¢ A new metal roof will be installed on the Barn, while a new wood shingle roof will replace the existing roof on the Miner's cottage. â€¢ The gutters and downspouts will be replaced on both structures. â€¢ There will be a new raised wood porch in the same location as the existing porch on the Miner's cottage. â€¢ Finally, windows on the Miner's cottage will be restored to their original proportions and detailing. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 4 .. Review Requirements Given the above-described proposal and accompanying plans set, approvals are needed for Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation and (Partial) Demolition. Conceptual Development Plan, Section 26.415.070(D)(3) & The HPC Conceptual Design Standards Conceptual Review focuses on the height, scale, massing, site plan and proportions of a proposal. Conceptual Development Plan approval is required for the development proposed by this application. The only applicable review standard for Conceptual Review is a determination of consistency with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (hereinafter "the Guidelines"). The applicant is not requesting any Floor Area bonuses. Accordingly, the following portion of this application demonstrates adequate consistency with a sufficient number of relevant guidelines, as called for in the italicized print on the very first page of the Guidelines, which specifically state that, ...not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. The HPC must determine that a significant number of relevant guidelines have been adequately met in order to approve a project proposal. Chapters 1 through 10 of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (the HP Guidelines) are applicable to the proposed development as they refer to the renovation of Historic Structures. Chapter 11 provides guidelines for new buildings on Landmark Properties and is likewise relevant to this development. Since Chapter 12 is concerned with design in the Main Street Historic District and Chapter 13 concerns designs in the Commercial Core Historic District; thus, Chapters 12 and 13 do not apply 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 ofthe HPC's Final review. The relevant guidelines from Chapters 1 through 11 are outlined below in bold italicized text and each is followed by a response demonstrating compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. Fences 1.1 Preserve Original Fences. 1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original. 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views into the yard from the street. 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally. 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street facing faqIde. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 5 .. 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible with the historic content. The original fence defining the Hopkins Avenue frontage will be preserved. No replacement fences are proposed. Guidelines 1.7 and 1.8 are not applicable to this development as there are no original retaining walls. Walkways 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. The established progression of public to private space will be maintained with the proposed development. The public sidewalk will continue to connect to semi-public walkways to and between the two historic buildings, leading to the new building on the alley, and will end in private commercial and residential spaces. The Miner's cottage is proposed to be relocated five feet, 10 inches to the north (towards Hopkins Avenue), which will enhance the visibility of the cottage and create more space between this historic resource and the new construction. Private Yard 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures area inappropriate. The large spruce tree at the northwest corner of the property will be preserved. Site Lighting 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. â€¢ Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and ontofacade planes. This standard is understood by the applicant and will be addressed at Final HPC Review. Streetscape 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape and design features. 1.17 Maintain historic irrigation ditches as an integral component of the streetscape. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 6 .. All significant landscape designs and features in the public right-of-way will be preserved. 2.1 Preserve original building materials. 2.2 Protect wood features from deterioration. 2.3 Plan repainting carefully. 2.4 Brick or stone that was not painted historically should not be painted. 2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. 2.6 Maintain masonry walls in good condition. 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. 2.8 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for primary building materials. Original building materials will be preserved to the extent practicable. The siding on the Miner's cottage will be restored where feasible and replaced where necessary. The Barn siding will be replaced with natural barn siding which will enhance the Barn's historical appearance. As appropriate, this standard will be more fully addressed at Final HPC Review. 2.9 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. 2.10 Consider removing later covering materials that have not achieved historic significance. The proposal does not include/involve the covering of original building materials. The siding on the Barn is not original and will be removed and replaced with more appropriate materials. The siding on the Miner's cottage will be preserved to the extent practicable, but replaced in-kind where necessary, and painted. 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a historic window. Although this standard will be more specifically addressed at the time of Final HPC Review, the removal of two small, non-historic additions to the Miner's cottage will also entail the restoration of since lost windows to their original proportions and locations. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 7 .. One window will be added to the back of the building and will match existing historic windows. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. 4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 4.4 If a new screen door is used, it should be in character with the primary door. 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. 4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, consider using a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. Although this standard will be more specifically addressed at the time of Final HPC Review, all historically significant doors will be preserved. However, the unoriginal door and bay window on the Barn will be removed and replaced with an old barn door that will match the original opening. Treatment of Porches 5.1 Preserve an original porch. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials und details on a porch. 5.3 Avoid enclosing a historic front porch. 5.4 The use of a porch on a residential building in a single-family context is strongly encouraged. Porch Replacement 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original inform and detail. The existing porch on the Miner's cottage will be replaced to match the original in form and detail. Treatment of Architectural Features 6.1 Preserve signijicant architectural features. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. 6.4 Repair or replacement Of missing or deteriorated features should be based on original designs. 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts. 6.6 Replacement of missing elements may be included in repair activities. All significant architectural features will be restored and/or preserved, as applicable. Treatment of Roofs 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 8 .. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts ofskylights and other rooftop devices. The original roof form and the original eave depth will be preserved. No skylights are proposed for this development. The Miner's cottage will receive a new wood shingle roof, while a new metal roof will be installed on the Barn as part of the restoration efforts. 7.4 A new chimney should be the same scale as those used historically. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. 7.6 When planning a rooftop addition, preserve the overall appearance of the original roofÂ· The existing building does not have a chimney and no chimney is proposed in the renovation. No rooftop addition is planned. 7.7 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. There are no new dormers proposed for the historic buildings. 7.8 Preserve original roof materials. Original roof materials will be preserved to the extent practicable, although new metal roofing is proposed for the Barn, while a new wood shingle roof will replace the existing roof on the Miner's cottage. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. 7.10 If it is to be used, a metal roof should be applied and detailed in a manner that is compatible and does not detract from the historic appearance of the building. 7.11 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. The replacement roof materials will convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. There will be no conjectural features on or added to the roof. Secondary Structures 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. 8.2 U an existing secondary structure is beyond repair, then replacing it is encouraged The existing outbuilding (barn) next to the cottage has already been deemed historically significant and will be preserved. The building on the alley is not historic and will be demolished and replaced with a new mixed-use building. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 9 .. 8.3 Avoid attaching a garage or carport to the primary structure. 8.4 A garage door should be compatible with the character of the historic structure. No garage or carport is proposed for the primary historic cottage or barn. A garage is proposed on the alley side of the new building. 8.5 Avoid moving a historic secondary structure from its original location, The historic secondary structure (barn) will remain in its current location. Preserving Building Locations and Foundations 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district should be avoided. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries Of its historic parcel. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. 9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space. The Miner's cottage will be moved temporarily to allow for construction of a proper foundation and basement. The new foundation will be properly engineered and appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation; the cottage will remain at its historic elevation above grade. The Miner's cottage is being relocated approximately five feet, ten inches to the north (towards Hopkins Avenue) which will increase the prominence of this historic structure and create a greater distance between the cottage and the new construction. Two light wells will be installed in the basement on the barely-visible west side ofthe cottage. 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. There are two non-historically significant additions on the rear of the cottage and these will be removed. The cottage will then be restored to its original appearance. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. 10.5 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments that may exist on the street. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 10 .. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. 10.9 Roofforms should be similar to those of the historic building. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. 10.12 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. 10.13 Set a rooftop addition back from the front of the building. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. The only "addition" to the historic structure involves the new foundation and basement, neither of which will be visible. As such, the above cited criteria from Chapter 10 of the Guidelines are not applicable to the proposed development. Chapter 11 provides the guidelines for new buildings on landmarked properties. Said chapter states that when new building occurs on a historic property, it should reinforce the basic visual characteristics of the site. Imitating historic styles is generally discouraged. The Guidelines explain that "rather than imitating older buildings, a new design should relate to the fundamental characteristics of the historic resources while also conveying the stylistic trends of today." The specific guidelines of Chapter 11 are addressed below. 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. The primary entrance of the new building is oriented toward the street, but it is set behind the historic structures and the building resides along the alley frontage. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. The new building is a mixed-use building and does not have a front porch, but its primary entrance is clearly defined by a walkway/path from the sidewalk. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. Although taller than the historic structures, the new building is set significantly back from the historic structures along the sidewalk. The new building is in scale with the Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 11 .. adjacent portion of the building recently approved on the next door Berg property, the adjacent townhomes to the west, the restored and remodeled Crandall Building on the other side of the alley, and the Tamarawood building located directly across the alley from the subject site. Additionally, the upper floor of the new building steps back, away from the resources. The new structure is similar in scale and massing to the existing structures on the west and south sides as well as the approved structure (to be built this summer, 2012) on the east side. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. 11.6 Use roofforms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. Given the zoning of the parcel (C-1), it would not be reasonable or desirable to expect that the design of the front elevation of the new building would be similar in scale or form to the historic buildings. However, the new building is in scale and of similar form to the recently approved addition to the Berg property next door and the multi-family structure to the west, as well as the remodeled Crandall building and the building directly across the alley. The roof form of the new building will be similar to other, non-historic buildings on the block. It would not be appropriate for the roof form or materials to be similar in scale and texture to the historic buildings as this building will feature a predominantly flat roof; a pitched roof would produce inappropriate form, massing and scale. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. Again, given the C-1 zoning of the parcel, it would not be appropriate for the new building to use building components that are similar in size and shape to the historic resources. Nevertheless, the proposed development on the property breaks down the massing of the new building by using modules and varied building materials. The upper floor of the new building steps back from the levels below so as to better inflect toward the resources. As mentioned above, the new building will be in scale with the new addition approved for the adjacent Berg property and the existing townhomes to the west, as well the buildings across the alley. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. â€¢ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. â€¢ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. The new building is clearly distinguishable from the historic buildings, but is visually compatible with the approved development on the adjacent lot. The new building is set Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 12 .. ten (10) feet back from the Miner's cottage and ten feet four inches (10'- 4") from the Barn building, and its third floor is set ten (10) feet back from its lower levels on the front/street side. The new building proposes to use different but compatible materials from the historic buildings and its contemporary design will complement the historic buildings while clearly being a product of its own time. As mentioned above, the Guidelines of Chapter 14 are more directly applicable to Final Review than they are to Conceptual Review. Nevertheless, the project is and will be found consistent with Chapter 14's general guidelines addressing such topics as accessibility, color, lighting, on-going maintenance, and treatment of mechanical equipment, service areas, driveways and parking; the elements of the proposal relative to many of these features are depicted on the accompanying plan sets. In summary, the foregoing has amply demonstrated an exceedingly high level of consistency with more than a "sutticient number of relevant guidelines." The proposal does not include a floor area bonus request. To the degree that any inconsistency with the Guidelines exists at all, such inconsistency is primarily the result of conflicting guidelines and the required balancing of goals. The proposed development maximizes the potential for consistency with the Guidelines. Conceptual Commercial Design Review 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. They are organized to address the different design contexts that exist in the City. These distinct settings are defined as "Character Areas," within which variations exist among the physical features that define each area. The subject site is located in the Commercial Character Area, one block east of the Commercial Core. Per the Commercial Character Area Guidelines, all development projects should achieve the following design objectives: â€¢ Promote an interconnected circulation system that invites pedestrian use, including a continuous street and alley system and a respect for the natural topography; â€¢ Promote a system of public places that support activities, including public amenity spaces, compatible landscaping and paving, and unobtrusive off-street parking; and â€¢ Assure that buildings fit together to create a vibrant street edge that reinforces a sense of appropriate scale. The Commercial Zone District correlates with the Commercial Character Area and forms the immediate fringe of much of the Commercial Core Historic District (CC). Building heights and materials in this zone vary. Storefront design and display is a less dominant Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 13 .. characteristic than in the CC area, and this intentionally diminishes the pedestrian experience in some places as compared with the core. The street wall is less defined than in the CC, and building facades are sometimes set back or include front yard space, which weakens the edge. The purpose of the Commercial (C-1) zone district is enumerated in Section 26.710.150(A) as follows: ,,,to provide for the establishment of mixed-use buildings with commercial uses on the ground floor, opportunities for affordable and free-market residential density. A transition between the CC and surrounding residential neighborhoods has been implemented through a slight reduction in allowable floor area as compared to the Commercial Core, the ability to occupy the Ground Floor with offices, and a separate Chapter in the Commercial Design Guidelines. [Emphasis addedl As provided in the above-cited, codified "Purpose" statement, by complying with the zoning and associated dimensional requirements, this proposal has already succeeded in transitioning from the CC to the surrounding residential neighborhood. Moreover, this proposal leaves more than 9,000 square feet of FAR on the table/unused and the new building is below the thirty-six foot height limit for third story elements. The key design objectives in the Commercial Character Area are as follows: 1. Strengthen the sense ofrelatedness with the Commercial Core Historic District. Strengthening the definition of the street edge in a manner similar to the Commercial Core is desired. At the same time, the Commercial Area is a place where more variety in design is encouraged. Imitating historic styles is not an objective, but re- establishing a sense of a stronger fundamental framework will enhance the urban qualities of this area and is a priority, 2. Maintain a retail orientation. Greater retail presence at the street edge should be achieved to ensure an enhanced street vitality and an enriched and more urban definition of the commercial street frontage. 3. Promote creative, contemporary design. Designs should seek creative new solutions that convey the community's continuing interest in exploring innovations. At the same time, the fundamental principles of traditional design must be respected. This means that each project should strike a balance in the design variables that are presented in the following pages. 4. Encourage a well-defined street wall. The intent is to more clearly establish a strongly defined street wall, but with some greater variety than in the Commercial Core Historic District since the historic building edge is not as defined. A stronger streetfagade definition should be achieved while at the same time recognizing the value ofpublic dining and landscaped space. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 14 .. 5. Rellect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. It is important that a range and variation in building height and scale in the Commercial Area be recognized in future development. Larger buildings should be varied in height and reflect original lot widths. 6. Accommodate outdoor public spaces while establishing a clear definition to the street edge. Providing space in association with individual buildings remains important, but should be balanced with much greater building street presence and corner definition. 7. Promote variety in the street level experience. Display cases, architectural details and landscaping are among the design elements that should be used. The historic Miner's cottage will move five feet, ten inches closer to Hopkins Avenue, thereby increasing its prominence from the street, as well as increasing its distance from the new construction. The barn will maintain its current distance from and orientation toward the street edge and will be slightly further from the street than the cottage, as is appropriate for a historic secondary structure. The new construction's unique and innovative design will also enhance the street vitality. The proposed renovation restores the original design and integrity of the historic buildings while simultaneously infusing behind the resources an innovative contemporary building that will clearly be viewed as a product of its own time. The new building recognizes the importance of having varied building heights in the Commercial Character Area and reflects this goal relative to structures on surrounding properties. Outlined below is each of the Commercial Character Area's Conceptual Review Design Guidelines in italicized print, followed by a description of the proposal's compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. 1.1 Orient a primary entrance toward the street. â€¢ A building should have a clearly defined primary entrance. â€¢ Providing secondary public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger buildings. The buildings are on a 6,000 square foot lot and each of the historic buildings will continue to have a clearly defined primary entrance on Hopkins Avenue, recessed from the street edge. The new building, which is situated behind the historic buildings, will also have a clearly defined primary entrance. All front entrances are clearly defined by walking path access as well. 1.2 Maintain the established town grid in all projects. â€¢ The network of streets and alleys should be retained as public circulation space andfor maximum public access. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 15 .. â€¢ Streets and alleys should not be enclosed or closed to public access, and should remain open to the sky. All streets and alleys will be retained and will provide maximum public access. No streets or alleys will be enclosed or closed to public access. Internal Walkways 1.3 Public walkways and through courts should be designed to create access to additional commercial space. The public walkway and through court will remain similar to what currently exists in order to access the new mixed-use building that will sit behind the two historic resources. The relocation of the Miner's cottage five feet, ten inches closer to Hopkins Avenue will help to visually accentuate this resource. 1.4 Develop an alley faqade to create visual interest. Materials and massing variation are used creatively yet practically along the alley side to enhance visual interest and reduce the perceived scale of the building. The new building also employs a third-story setback along the alley 1.5 The visual impacts of structured parking should be minimized. The access shall be: Â· Located on an alley when feasible or a secondary street, designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building fagade, and integrated into the building design. 1.6 Structured parking should be placed within a 'wrap' of commercial and/or residential uses. There is currently no off-street parking on the site. The proposed development includes a two-car garage in the new building that will be accessed from the alley. One of the garage spaces will serve the residence while the other will be dedicated to commercial use. Public Amenity Space 1.7 A street-facing amenity space shall meet all of the following requirements: â€¢ Abut the public sidewalk â€¢ Be level with the sidewalk â€¢ Be open to the sky â€¢ Be directly accessible to the public â€¢ Be paved or otherwise landscaped 1.8 A street-facing public amenity space shall remain subordinate to the line of building fronts in the Commercial Area. 1.9 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. These may include one or more of the following: Â· Street furniture â€¢ Public art Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 16 .. â€¢ Historical/interpretive marker The site currently maintains approximately 23% public amenity space. The proposed development will increase this space to approximately 25% and this space will continue to abut the public sidewalk. The public amenity space will be level with the sidewalk, open to the sky, directly accessible to the public and will be paved and/or landscaped. The pedestrian amenity space is being enhanced by adding some public amenity space along the west side of the property (see Plan Sheet H-3). 1.18 Maintain the alignment offacades at the sidewalk's edge. â€¢ Place as much of thefacade ofthe building at the property line as possible. â€¢ A minimum of 60% ofthefront fagade shall be at the property line. â€¢ Locating an entire building front behind the established storefront line is inappropriate. 1.19 A building may be set back from its side lot lines in accordance with design guidelines identified in Street & Alley System and Public Amenity Space guidelines. The historic Miner's cottage will be relocated approximately five feet, ten inches closer to Hopkins Avenue, thereby placing the front fagade closer to the property line. The historic Barn will remain in its current location. The prominence of the cottage will be enhanced by the relocation as it will be closer to the sidewalk edge and will be slightly in front of the secondary structure (the Barn). 1.20 Building fa,ades shall be parallel to the facing street(s) and primary entrances shall be oriented toward the street. 1.21 Orient a new building to be parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. â€¢ The front of a primary structure shall be oriented to the street. The facades of the existing buildings and the proposed new building are all parallel to the street and their primary entrances are oriented toward and parallel with the street. 1.22 Building faqade height shall be varied from the faÂ¢ade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories by a minimum Of 2 feet. . If an existing structure is three stories and 38 ft. tall for example, then adjacent new infill may be three stories, but must vary infa,ade height by a minimum Of 2 ft 1.23 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Area. Â· Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height on the subject property. â€¢ A minimum 9 ft. floor to ceiling height is to be maintained on second stories and higher. The maximum height in the C1 zone district is established at twenty-eight feet for two- story elements and thirty-six (36) feet for three-story elements of a building, which may be increased to forty (40) feet through Commercial Design Review. The proposed three- story building has a maximum height of 34'-6", thereby complying with the height limit. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 17 .. The Berg residence is on the lot next door to the east. The proposed building on the alley is one story taller than the approved addition on the Berg property, but only slightly taller than the Crandall building on the other side of the alley. The structure to the west of the subject property is an approximately 10,000 square foot, 214-story multi-family townhome building; this building is immediately adjacent to the historic Miner's cottage. The proposed new building will be somewhat taller than this adjacent building, but as mentioned throughout this application, will be located along the alley. As such, the proposed new building varies in height from adjacent buildings by more than the prescribed two (2) feet but not so dramatically that compatibility is compromised. 1.24 Height variation should be achieved using one or more ofthefollowing: â€¢ Vary the building height in accordance with traditional lot width. â€¢ Set back the upper floor to vary the buildingfagade profile(s) and the roofforms across the width and the depth of the building. â€¢ Vary the fa,ade (or parapet) heights at theftont. â€¢ Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. This proposal envisions a separate three-story structure which is set ten feet (10') back from the historic Miner's cottage, ten feet four inches (10' - 4") from the Barn structure, and more than 50 feet from the front property line. Additionally, the upper floor steps back from the levels below so as to recede and provide visual relief. The creative use of exterior materials on the new building also assist in reducing its perceived scale while breaking down its massing. 1.25 On sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths, the faÂ¢ade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. 1.26 Buildings on sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths shall achieve a minimum of two of the following: Since this site is comprised of only two traditional lot widths these standards are not applicable. 1.27 A new building should step down in scale to respect the height, form and scale of a historic building within its immediate setting. 1.28 New development adjacent to a single story historic building that was originally constructed for residential use shall not exceed 28 ft. in height within 30 ft. of the side property line adjacent to the historic structure within the same block face. Although the adjacent Berg property contains a single story historic residence, the two historic resources on the subject property (the Miner's cottage and Barn) are also single story structures. The new development proposed in this application will be behind the two historic resources on the subject property and will be adjacent to the new two-story building addition that was approved along the alley for the Berg property. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 18 .. Demolition, Section 26.415.080(A)(4) Section 26.415.080(A)(4) of the Code provides that the HPC shall review the application, staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine i f the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one ofthe 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, atl 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 building on the alley that is proposed to be demolished cannot practically be moved to another location in Aspen. Furthermore, it maintains no historic significance, thus, such an effort would be unnecessary. Additionally, since it does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel, the loss of this structure will not adversely affect the adjacent designated property (Berg) and demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. With regard to the historic structures, the applicant proposes demolition of only the non- historic and inappropriate additions and alterations to the rear of the Miner' s cottage. There is no documentation to support or demonstrate that the building portions to be demolished have historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 19 .. The additions and the non-historic elements of the historic Miner's collage do not contribute to the significance of the parcel, and the loss of these structures (or portions thereof) will not adversely affect the integrity of either the resource or its relationship to adjacent designated properties. The overall historic integrity and resource value of the property will be greatly enhanced by development o f the proposed plans. On-Site Relocation, Section 26.415.090(C) The intent of Chapter 26.415 is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant, as is the case here. Section 26.415.090(C) of the Code provides the standards for the relocation of designated properties and states that, Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district, or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship: or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be niet: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified: and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessaryfinancial security. Please refer to Plan Sheet H-14 for a graphic depiction of the proposed on-site relocation. The applicant proposes only on-site and temporary relocation of the historic Miner's cottage in order to develop a proper foundation and basement space. Once the foundation Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 20 .. and basement are completed the cabin will be relocated approximately five feet, ten inches (5'10") to the north (towards Hopkins Avenue). This relocation will help to enhance the visibility of this historic resource, while also increasing the distance between the resource and the new construction. The ability to develop basement space provides the main incentive to undertaking the cost and endeavor of stabilizing, and relocating the structure which needs a new foundation anyway. Given the foregoing, it is fair to say that the relocation activity provides an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building. In fact, the relocation activity and ability to place usable basement space below the Miner's cottage provides an incentive for restoration and preservation. The move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties. The structure will be properly supported prior to any relocation activity. A letter from a building relocation expert will be provided with the Final HPC application to substantiate that the structure is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the proposed relocation. Finally, a plan for safe relocation, repair and preservation of the buildings, along with provision of the necessary financial security will be provided with the Final HPC application and/or building permit application, as required. It is hoped that the information provided herein and in the accompanying plan sets proves helpful in the review and approval ofthis exceptional project and exemplary preservation effort. If you should have any questions or desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC Mitch Haas Owner/Manager Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 21 .. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1: Completed Land Use Application & Dimensional Requirements Forms Exhibit 2: Pre-Application Conference Summary Exhibit 3: Proof of Ownership & Statement o f Authority Exhibit 4: Authorization to Represent Exhibit 5: Architectural Inventory Form Exhibit 6: Dimensional Requirements for the C-1 Zone District Exhibit 7: Agreement for Payment of Application Fees Exhibit 8: Affected Property Owners List ACCOMPANYING PLAN SETS Sheet H-0: Cover Page Sheet H-1: Existing Survey Sheet H-2: Site Plan Sheet H-3: Existing and Proposed Pedestrian Amenity Sheet H-4: Level 0 (Basement) Plan Sheet H-5: Level 1 Plan Sheet H-6: Level 2 Plan Sheet H-7: Level 3 Plan Sheet H-8: Roof Plan Sheet H-9: West Elevations Sheet H-10: East Elevations Sheet H-11: North Elevations Sheet H-12: South Elevations Sheet H-13: Perspectives Sheet H-14: Building Relocation Plan Sheet H-15: Restoration Efforts and Photos Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 22 HAAS LAND PLANNI~G, LLC March 23, 2012 RECEIVED MAR 2 3 2012 Ms. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer CITY OF ASPEN 130 South Galena Street COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Conceptual Application for 623 East Hopkins, Aspen (Lots F & G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen; PID # 2737-182-12-001; a/Ida "Susie's" Property) Dear Amy: Please consider this letter and the accompanying plans set prepared by Oz Architecture to constitute a formal request for Conceptual Approval of a Major Development to allow restoration and remodeling of the two historic buildings located at 623 East Hopkins, Aspen, as well as demolition and redevelopment of the non-historic alley building. The property is legally described as Lots F & G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen (Parcel Identification Number 2737-182-12-001). It is a 6,000 square foot historically designated lot in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District. A vicinity map (not to scale) showing the approximate location ofthe subject property is provided below. 3 91/MyÂ°444<21%- Â·=m-.. - --7/ ;9# IiÂ·:.- ., ,-, niuu'l,jue '~~~ Ban/De/di_*2~ 244. .4711 - rE.Eran.:' 1,9/5"4/7976%4/3 276;4A-'* 57 .'Ity)1~1, t,/'-~- t~#4~,â€¢~S*. L.2,4 2~~7* -A ~*Pr' Â·474*al- , T~~154*frf# , #04 k . ...0 4 --'1â‚¬* I.'(Pr~*4'p)01 2,41~44~~ 4:,t eâ€žaÂ· 43 1 *4518:4eNE;ya.Â».2:. N'Ik>72~ I + . t. iON:.5 1,2. r *~~t~k Le>t,te 24Â· Main StÂ»- Park. P' _ .9 - -,t i Park &25~~M! ~ 9j-3!*â€¢, 2:4*2.f.2.~a..1.9,â€¢1*wi42*76 11'W~,g421'râ„¢â€¢4.,it t 2 ' 42 54Â·u~> -40'9~ 44 1 -4% 2 14-- M ..rus/- .O -67/t .li~ .- -.-,v ;#2 E 4 .1-4. 46 dia':7.-~.Li - 2 - Er<Xfwy'uvi-J-~93TC 1/0/CWID/U At~~01,20~2 â€¢-c,ibed.a~~VTIQ 623 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen â€¢ 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108 â€¢ ASPEN, COLORADO â€¢ 81611 â€¢ â€¢ PHONE: (970) 925-7819 â€¢ FAX: (970) 925-7395 â€¢ .. In association with the Conceptual Major Development, the applicant is also requesting approvals for partial demolition and temporary on-site relocation of the Miner' s cottage that currently houses Susie's consignment shop in order to fully restore its historical appearance and enable development of a new, properly engineered foundation and basement. The historic "Barn" building will be restored in its current location. As mentioned above, the non-historic building set along the alley will be demolished and redeveloped as provided in "The Proposal," below. Existing Conditions The plans set prepared by Oz Architecture and provided herewith include an existing conditions site plan and photographs of existing conditions, along with graphic depictions of all proposed changes. The historic commercial buildings are a Victorian Era Miner's Cottage and an outbuilding ("Barn"), both of which were originally constructed in the 1880s. This property was designated to the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures (the Inventory) in June of 2000. The Architectural Inventory Form describes the main structure as a typical wood-frame Miner' s Cottage with a gable-end facing the street, a pair of double hung windows, and a cross-gable parallel to the street with a shed roof porch infilling the corner. It is a single-story structure with wood horizontal siding and original vertically proportioned double hung windows. The porch has simple details and its floor is at grade. Window trim has a triangular pediment over principal windows which appear to be the original windows. The historic entry door is intact. A pair of additions has been made to the rear of the building. There is also a separate two-story structure on the alley that is not historic and will be demolished for redevelopment. The original open metal fence defines the street frontage and a large spruce tree occupies the northwest corner of the property. The original use of the Victorian cottage and the outbuilding was residential; however, these building have long since been converted through adaptive reuse to commercial purposes. The proposed development will continue the commercial use of the two historic buildings at the front of the property, while the new building proposed along the alley will contain both commercial and residential space. As such, it will become a mixed-use property. This is explained in more detail in "The Proposal" section of this application, below. The two historic structures were found to be significant for their position in the context of Aspen' s mining era. They are considered to describe the nature of the life of an average family or individual during that period, while being representative of the construction techniques and materials available at the time. The buildings were found to retain the original scale and form, with the window openings intact and the character of the buildings retained. The additions in the back, while in scale with the original structures, have not themselves deemed to have achieved historic significance. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 2 .. The Proposal As mentioned above, the property is located in the City of Aspen's C-1 Zone District. The proposed changes and development are all clearly and thoroughly depicted on the accompanying plans set prepared by Oz Architecture. Highlights of the proposal are described below in narrative form. The applicant proposes to restore the two historic resources (the Miner's cottage and the barn) to their original appearance (see Plan Sheet H-15). Both structures will have their siding replaced with natural barn siding for an enhanced and more consistent historical appearance. Additionally, as necessary, new gutters and downspouts and new metal roofs will be installed on both of these historic buildings. The restoration efforts on the Miner' s cottage will also include the removal of two non-historic additions at the rear, the construction of a new raised wood porch, and the restoration and replacement of windows to restore original proportions and detailing. The Miner's cottage will be temporarily relocated on-site to accommodate construction of properly engineered foundation with a basement. With this, the Miner' s cottage is proposed to be relocated seven and one-half (7.5) feet to the west of its current location while maintaining its historic setback from Hopkins Avenue (see Plan Sheet H-14). This relocation will not change the distance of the cottage from Hopkins Avenue but will help to open the space between the historic commercial structures and create more pedestrian amenity space. The Historic Barn will be restored in its current location. As previously mentioned, the existing non-historic building on the southern portion of the lot (along the alley) will be demolished and redeveloped with a three-story structure, and when completed, the development will result again in three completely detached structures. No variances are required for this mixed-use project in the C-1 Zone District (see Exhibit 6). There is no minimum lot area per dwelling unit, no minimum lot width, no setback requirements, and no minimum distance between buildings for this type of development. The applicant is requesting a maximum height of 40 feet pursuant to the criteria of Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Review. Although the third-story element is only proposed to be approximately 34!4 feet, enclosure of the stair tower and elevator overrun will include an additional five and a half feet, thereby requiring the forty (40) foot height limit. The residential unit will contain 2,290 square feet of net livable area; the applicant will utilize one TDR to accommodate the 290 square foot increase, as allowed by the Code for the C-1 Zone. Additionally, the overall development complies with all FAR limits. Finally, the total free-market residential net livable area proposed is much less than the total above grade commercial FAR, thereby complying with the Commercial/Residential ratio requirement of the C-1 zone. Next, the development complies with the Public Amenity Space requirements of Section 26.575.030 and the Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Area required by Code Section 26.575.060. Although the Public Amenity Space requirement in the C-1 Zone District is Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 3 .. twenty-five percent (25%), since this is a redevelopment of a parcel that currently - contains only 23% of public amenity space, the effective requirement is reduced to 23%. Nevertheless, the proposed redevelopment actually increases the amount of public amenity space to approximately 29.7%. The utility/trash/recycle service area is located along the alley frontage and, with the included access into and through it, meets all required dimensions and design standards. This development requires efforts to restore historic integrity and return the resources to their true historic appearance. As mentioned above, the restoration efforts to be undertaken include: â€¢ Removal of two non-historic additions from the rear of the Miner' s cottage. â€¢ Development of a properly engineered foundation below the Miner' s cottage. â€¢ The corner of the Miner's cottage where the smaller addition is being removed will be restored to its original appearance with new siding and a new window to match existing historic windows. â€¢ The siding on both buildings will be replaced with natural barn siding for a more historically consistent appearance. â€¢ New metal roofs will be installed, and the gutters and downspouts will be replaced on both structures. â€¢ There will be a new raised wood porch in the same location as the existing porch on the Miner' s cottage. â€¢ Finally, windows on the Miner' s cottage will be restored to their original proportions and detailing. Review Requirements Given the above described proposal and accompanying plans set, approvals are needed for Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation and (Partial) Demolition. Conceptual Development Plan, Section 26.415.070(D)(3) & The HPC Conceptual Design Standards Conceptual Review focuses on the height, scale, massing, site plan and proportions of a proposal. Conceptual Development Plan approval is required for the development proposed by this application. The only applicable review standard for Conceptual Review is a determination of consistency with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (hereinafter "the Guidelines"). The applicant is not requesting any Floor Area bonuses. Accordingly, the following portion of this application demonstrates adequate consistency with a sufficient number of relevant guidelines, as called for in the italicized print on the very first page ofthe Guidelines, which specifically state that, ...not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. The HPC must Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 4 .. - determine that a significant number of relevant guidelines have been adequately met in order to approve a project proposal. Chapters 1 through 10 of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (the HP Guidelines) are applicable to the proposed development as they refer to the renovation of Historic Structures. Chapter 11 provides guidelines for new buildings on Landmark Properties and is likewise relevant to this development. Since Chapter 12 is concerned with design in the Main Street Historic District and Chapter 13 concerns designs in the Commercial Core Historic District; thus, Chapters 12 and 13 do not apply 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 ofthe HPC's Final review. The relevant guidelines from Chapters 1 through 11 are outlined below in bold italicized text and each is followed by a response demonstrating compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. Fences 1.1 Preserve Original Fences. 1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original. 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views into the yard from the street. 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally. 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street facing faqIde. 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible with the historic content. The original fence defining the Hopkins Avenue frontage will be preserved. No replacement fences are proposed. Guidelines 1.7 and 1.8 are not applicable to this development as there are no original retaining walls. Walkways 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. The established progression of public to private space will be maintained and enhanced with the proposed development. The public sidewalk will continue to connect to semi- public walkways to and between the two historic buildings, leading to the new building on the alley, and will end in private commercial and residential spaces. The Miner' s cottage is proposed to be relocated 7.5 feet to the west which will open the space between Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 5 .. the two historic buildings thereby creating a better pedestrian experience and increased visibility for the resources. Private Yard 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly tandmark trees and shrubs. 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context Of the site. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures area inappropriate. The large spruce tree at the northwest corner of the property will be preserved. Site Lighting 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site [ighting. â€¢ 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. This standard is understood by the applicant and will be addressed at Final HPC Review. Streetscape 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape and design features. 1.17 Maintain historic irrigation ditches as an integral component of the streetscape. All significant landscape designs and features in the public right-of-way will be preserved. 2.1 Preserve original building materials. 2.2 Protect wood features from deterioration. 2.3 Plan repainting carefully. 2.4 Brick or stone that was not painted historically should not be painted. 2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. 2.6 Maintain masonry wails in good condition. 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. 2.8 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for primary building materials. Original building materials will be preserved to the extent practicable. The siding on the two buildings will be replaced with natural barn siding which will enhance the historical appearance of the resources. As appropriate, this standard will be more fully addressed at Final HPC Review. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 6 .. 2.9 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. 2.10 Consider removing later covering materials that have not achieved historic signijicance. The proposal does not include/involve the covering of original building materials. 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorativefeatures of a historic window. 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wai!. 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wail on afacade. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the projile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a historic window. Although this standard will be more specifically addressed at the time of Final HPC Review, the removal of two small, non-historic additions to the Miner' s cottage will also entail the restoration of since lost windows to their original proportions and locations. One window will be added to the back of the building and will match existing historic windows. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. 4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 4.4 If a new screen door is used, it should be in character with the primary door. 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. 4.6 If energy conservation and heat [oss are concerns, consider using a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. Although this standard will be more specifically addressed at the time of Final HPC Review, all historically significant doors will be preserved. Treatment of Porches 5.1 Preserve an original porch. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details on a porch. 5.3 Avoid enclosing a historic front porch. 5.4 The use of a porch on a residential building in a single-family context is strongly encouraged. Porch Replacement Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 7 .. 5.5 If Porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. The existing porch on the Miner' s cottage will be replaced to match the original in form and detail. Treatment of Architectural Features 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. 6.2 When disassembly Of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features should be based on original designs. 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts. 6.6 Replacement of missing elements may be included in repair activities. All significant architectural features will be restored and/or preserved, as applicable. Treatment of Roofs 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. The original roof form and the original eave depth will be preserved. No skylights are proposed for this development. Both structures will receive new metal roofs as part of the restoration efforts. 7.4 A new chimney should be the same scale as those used historically. 7.5 Preserve original chintneys, even if they are made non-functional. 7.6 When planning a rooftop addition, preserve the overall appearance of the original roof. The existing building does not have a chimney and no chimney is proposed in the renovation. No rooftop addition is planned. 7.7 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. There are no new dormers proposed for the historic buildings. 7.8 Preserve original roof materials. Original roof materials will be preserved to the extent practicable, although new metal roofing is proposed for both historic structures. Susie' s Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 8 .. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. 7.10 If it is to be used, a metal roof should be applied and detailed in a manner that is compatible and does not detract from the historic appearance of the building. 7.11 Avoid using conjecturalfeatures on a roof. The replacement roof materials will convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. There will be no conjectural features on or added to the roof. Secondary Structures 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. 8.2 If an existing secondary structure is beyond repair, then replacing it is encouraged The existing outbuilding (barn) next to the cottage has already been deemed historically significant and will be preserved. The building on the alley is not historic and will be demolished and replaced with a new mixed-use building. 8.3 Avoid attaching a garage or carport to the primary structure. 8.4 A garage door should be compatible with the character of the historic structure. No garage or carport is proposed for the primary historic cottage or barn. A garage is proposed on the alley side ofthe new building. 8.5 Avoid moving a historic secondary structure from its original location. The historic secondary structure (barn) will remain in its current location. Preserving Building Locations and Foundations 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. 9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district should be avoided. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. 9.7 A Ughtwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space. The Miner's cottage will be moved temporarily to allow for construction of a proper foundation and basement. The new foundation will be properly engineered and appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation; the cottage will remain at its historic elevation above grade. The Miner's cottage is being relocated approximately Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 9 .. seven and one-half feet to the west in order to provide more space between the historic - buildings and thereby create a more pedestrian-friendly experience. Two light wells will be installed in the basement on the barely-visible west side of the cottage. 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. There are two non-historically significant additions on the rear of the cottage and these will be removed. The cottage will then be restored to its original appearance. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. 10.5 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments that may exist on the street. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it backfrom the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. 10.9 Roofforms should be similar to those of the historic building. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architecturalfeatures. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. 10.12 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. 10.13 Set a rooftop addition back from the front of the building. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. The only "addition" to the historic structure involves the new foundation and basement, neither of which will be visible. As such, the above cited criteria from Chapter 10 of the Guidelines are not applicable to the proposed development. Chapter 11 provides the guidelines for new buildings on landmarked properties. Said chapter states that when new building occurs on a historic property, it should reinforce the basic visual characteristics of the site. Imitating historic styles is generally discouraged. The Guidelines explain that "rather than imitating older buildings, a new design should relate to the fundamental characteristics of the historic resources while also conveying the stylistic trends of today." The specific guidelines of Chapter 11 are addressed below. Susie's Remodel - HI?C Conceptual Application Page 10 .. 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. The primary entrance of the new building is oriented toward the street, but it is set behind the historic structures and the building resides along the alley frontage. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. The new building is a mixed-use building and does not have a front porch, but its primary entrance is clearly defined by a walkway/path from the sidewalk. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. Although taller than the historic structures, the new building is set significantly back from the historic structures along the sidewalk. The new building is in scale with the adjacent portion of the building recently approved on the next door Berg property, the restored and remodeled Crandall Building on the other side of the alley, and the building located directly across the alley from the subject site. Additionally, the upper floors of the new building step back, away from the resources. The new structure is similar in scale and massing to the existing structures on the west and south sides as well as the approved structure (to be built this summer, 2012) on the east side. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. 11.6 Use roofforms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. Given the zoning of the parcel (C-1), it would not be reasonable or desirable to expect that the design of the front elevation of the new building would be similar in scale or form to the historic buildings. However, the new building is in scale and of similar form to the recently approved addition to the Berg property next door and the multi-family structure to the west, as well as the remodeled Crandall building and the building directly across the alley. The roof form of the new building will be similar to other, non-historic buildings on the block. It would not be appropriate for the roof form or materials to be similar in scale and texture to the historic buildings as this building will feature a predominantly flat roof; a pitched roof would produce inappropriate form, massing and scale. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 11 .. Again, given the C-1 zoning of the parcel, it would not be appropriate for the new building to use building components that are similar in size and shape to the historic resources. Nevertheless, the proposed development on the property breaks down the massing of the new building by using modules and varied building materials. The upper floors of the new building step back from the levels below so as to better inflect toward the resources. As mentioned above, the new building will be in scale with the new addition approved for the adjacent Berg property as well the buildings across the alley. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. â€¢ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. â€¢ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. The new building is clearly distinguishable from the historic buildings, but is visually compatible with the approved development on the adjacent lot. The new building is set more than ten (10) feet back from the historic buildings and its second and third floors are setback from lower levels. The new building proposes to use different but compatible materials from the historic buildings and its contemporary design will complement the historic buildings while clearly being a product of its own time. As mentioned above, the Guidelines of Chapter 14 are more directly applicable to Final Review than they are to Conceptual Review. Nevertheless, the project is and will be found consistent with Chapter 14's general guidelines addressing such topics as accessibility, color, lighting, on-going maintenance, and treatment of mechanical equipment, service areas, driveways and parking; the elements of the proposal relative to many of these features are depicted on the accompanying plan sets. In summary, the foregoing has amply demonstrated an exceedingly high level of consistency with more than a "suficient number of relevant guidelines." The proposal does not include a floor area bonus request. To the degree that any inconsistency with the Guidelines exists at all, such inconsistency is primarily the result of conflicting guidelines and the required balancing of goals. The proposed development maximizes the potential for consistency with the Guidelines. Conceptual Commercial Design Review 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. They are organized to address the different design contexts that exist in the City. These distinct settings are defined as "Character Areas," within which variations exist among the physical features that define each area. The subject site is located in the Commercial Character Area, one block east of the Commercial Core. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 12 .. Per the Commercial Character Area Guidelines, all development projects should achieve the following design objectives: â€¢ Promote an interconnected circulation system that invites pedestrian use, including a continuous street and alley system and a respect for the natural topography; â€¢ Promote a system of public places that support activities, including public amenity spaces, compatible landscaping and paving, and unobtrusive off-street parking; and â€¢ Assure that buildings fit together to create a vibrant street edge that reinforces a sense of appropriate scale. The Commercial Zone District correlates with the Commercial Character Area and forms the immediate fringe of much of the Commercial Core Historic District (CC). Building heights and materials in this zone vary. Storefront design and display is a less dominant characteristic than in the CC area, and this intentionally diminishes the pedestrian experience in some places as compared with the core. The street wall is less defined than in the CC, and building facades are sometimes set back or include front yard space, which weakens the edge. The purpose of the Commercial (C-1) zone district is enumerated in Section 26.710.150(A) as follows: ...to provide for the establishment of mixed-use buildings with commercial uses on the ground floor, opportunities for affordable and free-market residential density. A transition between the CC and surrounding residential neighborhoods has been implemented through a slight reduction in allowable floor area as compared to the Commercial Core, the ability to occupy the Ground Floor with ojfices, and a separate Chapter in the Commercial Design Guidelines. [Emphasis added] As provided in the above-cited, codified "Purpose" statement, by complying with the zoning and associated dimensional requirements, this proposal has already succeeded in transitioning from the CC to the surrounding residential neighborhood. Moreover, this proposal leaves more than 8,000 square feet of FAR on the table/unused and, other than the stairway/elevator overrun centered on the roof form, the new building is below the height limit. The key design objectives in the Commercial Character Area are as follows: 1. Strengthen the sense of relatedness with the Commercial Core Historic District. Strengthening the definition of the street edge in a manner similar to the Commercial Core is desired. At the same time, the Commercial Area is a place where more variety in design is encouraged. Imitating historic styles is not an objective, but re- establishing a sense of a stronger fundamental framework will enhance the urban qualities of this area and is a priority. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 13 .. 2. Maintain a retail orientation. Greater retail presence at the street edge should be achieved to ensure an enhanced street vitality and an enriched and more urban definition of the commercial street frontage. 3. Promote creative, contemporary design. Designs should seek creative new solutions that convey the community's continuing interest in exploring innovations. At the same time, the fundamental principles of traditional design must be respected. This means that each project should strike a balance in the design variables that are presented in the following pages. 4. Encourage a well-defined street wall. The intent is to more clearly establish a strongly defined street wall, but with some greater variety than in the Commercial Core Historic District since the historic building edge is not as defined. A stronger street fagade definition should be achieved while at the same time recognizing the value of public dining and landscaped space. 5. Reflect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. It is important that a range and variation in building height and scale in the Commercial Area be recognized in future development. Larger buildings should be varied in height and reflect original lot widths. 6. Accommodate outdoor public spaces while establishing a clear definition to the street edge. Providing space in association with individual buildings remains important, but should be balanced with much greater building street presence and corner definition. 7. Promote variety in the street level experience. Display cases, architectural details and landscaping are among the design elements that should be used. The Miner's cottage and the barn will maintain their current distance from and orientation toward the street edge after the proposed renovations are completed, while the new construction' s unique and innovative design will en-hance the street vitality. The proposed renovation restores the original design and integrity of the historic buildings while simultaneously infusing behind the resources an innovative contemporary building that will clearly be viewed as a product of its own time. The new building recognizes the importance of having varied building heights in the Commercial Character Area and reflects this goal relative to structures on surrounding properties. Outlined below is each of the Commercial Character Area's Conceptual Review Design Guidelines in italicized print, followed by a description of the proposal's compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 14 .. 1.1 Orient a primary entrance toward the street. â€¢ A building should have a clearly defined primary entrance. â€¢ Providing secondary public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger buildings. The buildings are on a 6,000 square foot lot and each of the historic buildings will continue to have a clearly defined primary entrance on Hopkins Avenue, recessed from the street edge. The new building, which is situated behind the historic buildings, will - also have a clearly defined primary entrance. All front entrances are clearly defined by walking path access as well. 1.2 Maintain the established town grid in ail projects. â€¢ The network of streets and alleys should be retained as public circulation space andfor maximum public access. â€¢ Streets and alleys should not be enclosed or closed to public access, and should remain open to the sky. All streets and alleys will be retained and will provide maximum public access. No streets or alleys will be enclosed or closed to public access. Internal Walkways 1.3 Public walkways and through courts should be designed to create access to additional commercial space. The public walkway and through court will be somewhat larger than what currently exists in order to access the new mixed-use building that will sit behind the two historic resources and to visually accentuate the resources. 1.4 Develop an alley fa,ade to create visual interest. Materials and massing variation are used creatively yet practically along the alley side to enhance visual interest and reduce the perceived scale of the building. The new building also employs varied building setbacks along the alley 1.5 The visual impacts of structured parking should be minimized. The access shall be: â€¢ Located on an alley when feasible or a secondary street, designed with the same attention to detail and materials as the primary building fagade, and integrated into the building design. 1.6 Structured parking should be placed within a 'wrap' of commercial and/or residential uses. There is currently no off-street parking on the site. The proposed development includes a two-car garage in the new building that will be accessed from the alley. One of the Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 15 .. garage spaces will serve the residence while the other will be dedicated to commercial use. Public Amenity Space 1.7 A street-facing amenity space shall meet all of the following requirements: â€¢ Abut the public sidewalk â€¢ Be level with the side-walk â€¢ Be open to the sky â€¢ Be directly accessible to the public â€¢ Be paved or otherwise landscaped 1.8 A street-facing public amenity space shall remain subordinate to the line of building fronts in the Commercial Area. 1.9 Street facing amenity space shall contain features to promote and enhance its use. These may include one or more of the following: â€¢ Street furniture â€¢ Public art â€¢ Historical/interpretive marker The site currently maintains approximately 23% public amenity space. The proposed development will increase this space to approximately 29.7% and this space will continue to abut the public sidewalk. The public amenity space will be level with the sidewalk, open to the sky, directly accessible to the public and will be paved and/or landscaped. The pedestrian amenity space is being enhanced by the proposed development. 1.18 Maintain the alignment offacades at the sidewalk's edge. â€¢ Place as much ofthefacade of the building at the property line as possible. â€¢ A minimum of 60% of the frontfagade shall be at the property line. â€¢ Locating an entire building front behind the established storefront line is inappropriate. 1.19 A building may be set back from its side lot lines in accordance with design guidelines identified in Street & ANey System and Public Amenity Space guidelines. The historic buildings will maintain the existing alignment of the front facades, which are recessed from the street edge. Although the Miner's cottage will be relocated seven and one-half (7.5) feet to the west of its current location, its front fagade distance from the sidewalk edge will not change. 1.20 Building fa,ades shall be parallel to the facing street(s) and primary entrances shall be oriented toward the street. 1.21 Orient a new building to be parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. Â· The front Of a primary structure shall be oriented to the street. The facades of the existing buildings and the proposed new building are all parallel to the street and their primary entrances are oriented toward and parallel with the street. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 16 .. 1.22 Building faÂ¢ade height shaN be varied from the faÂ¢ade height of adjacent buildings of the same number of stories by a minimum of 2 feet. Â· If an existing structure is three stories and 38 ft. tall for example, then adjacent new infill may be three stories, but must vary infagade height by a minimum of 2 ft. 1.23 A new building or addition should reflect the range and variation in building height of the Commercial Area. â€¢ Refer to the zone district regulations to determine the maximum height on the subject property. â€¢ A minimum 9 ft. floor to ceiling height is to be maintained on second stories and higher. The maximum height in the C1 zone district is established at twenty-eight feet for two- story elements and thirty-six (36) feet for three-story elements of a building, which may be increased to forty (40) feet through Commercial Design Review. The proposed three- story building has a maximum height of forty feet at the stair tower that is centered on the roof. The predominant roof line of this new building is at 34'-6"; however, due to the height of the stair tower enclosure the applicant is asking the HPC to increase the allowed height to 40 feet. The Berg residence is on the lot next door to the east. The proposed building on the alley is one story taller than the approved addition on the Berg property, but only slightly taller than the Crandall building on the other side of the alley. The structure to the west of the subject property is an approximately 10,000 square foot, 2!4-story multi-family townhome building; this building is immediately adjacent to the historic Miner's cottage. The proposed new building will be somewhat taller than this adjacent building, but as mentioned throughout this application, will be located along the alley. As such, the proposed new building varies in height from adj acent buildings by more than the prescribed two (2) feet but not so dramatically that compatibility is compromised. 1.24 Height variation should be achieved using one or more ofthe following: â€¢ Kary the building height in accordance with traditional lot width. â€¢ Set back the upper floor to vary the building fagade profile(s) and the roofforms across the width and the depth of the building. â€¢ Vary the fagade (or parapet) heights at the front. Â· Step down the rear of the building towards the alley, in conjunction with other design standards and guidelines. This proposal envisions a separate three-story structure which is setback ten and one-half feet (10'-6") from the historic structures and approximately 50 feet from the front property line. Additionally, the upper floors step back from the levels below so as to recede and provide visual relief. The creative use of exterior materials on the new building also assist in reducing its perceived scale while breaking down its massing. 1.25 On sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths, the fa,ade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 17 .. 1.26 Buildings on sites comprising more than two traditional lot widths shall achieve a minimum of two of thefollowing: Since this site is comprised of only two traditional lot widths these standards are not applicable. 1.27 A new building should step down in scale to respect the height,form and scale of a historic building within its immediate setting. 1.28 New development adjacent to a single story historic building that was originally constructed for residential use shall not exceed 28 ft. in height within 30 ft. of the side property line adjacent to the historic structure within the same blockface. Although the adj acent Berg property contains a single story historic residence, the two historic resources on the subject property (the Miner's cottage and Barn) are also single story structures. The new development proposed in this application will be behind the two historic resources on the subject property and will be adjacent to the new two-story building addition that was approved along the alley for the Berg property. Demolition. Section 26.415.080(A)(4) Section 26.415.080(A)(4) of the Code provides that the HPC shall review the application, staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located, and Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 18 .. 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 building on the alley that is proposed to be demolished cannot practically be moved to another location in Aspen. Furthermore, it maintains no historic significance, thus, such an effort would be unnecessary. Additionally, since it does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel, the loss of this structure will not adversely affect the adjacent designated property (Berg) and demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. With regard to the historic structures, the applicant proposes demolition of only the non- historic and inappropriate additions and alterations to the rear of the Miner' s cottage. There is no documentation to support or demonstrate that the building portions to be demolished have historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance. The additions and the non-historic elements of the historic Miner's cottage do not contribute to the significance of the parcel, and the loss of these structures (or portions thereof) will not adversely affect the integrity of either the resource or its relationship to adjacent designated properties. The overall historic integrity and resource value of the property will be greatly enhanced by development of the proposed plans. On-Site Relocation, Section 26.415.090(C) The intent of Chapter 26.415 is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a properly may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant, as is the case here. Section 26.415.090(C) of the Code provides the standards for the relocation of designated properties and states that, Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 19 .. 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or ~ parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate ofeconomic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all ofthefollowing criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Please refer to Plan Sheet H-14 for a graphic depiction of the proposed on-site relocation. The applicant proposes only on-site and temporary relocation of the historic Miner' s cottage in order to develop a proper foundation and basement space. Once the foundation and basement are completed the cabin will be relocated approximately seven and a half feet (7.5) to the west of its current location. Its distance from the front property line will not change. This relocation will help to increase the public amenity space between the two historic structures and increase their visibility. The ability to develop basement space provides the main incentive to undertaking the cost and endeavor of stabilizing, and relocating the structure which needs a new foundation anyway. Given the foregoing, it is fair to say that the relocation activity provides an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building. In fact, the relocation activity and ability to place usable basement space below the Miner' s cottage provides an incentive for restoration and preservation. The move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties. The structure will be properly supported prior to any relocation activity. A letter from a building relocation expert will be provided with the Final HPC application to substantiate that the structure is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the proposed relocation. Finally, a plan for safe relocation, repair and preservation of the buildings, along with provision of the necessary financial security will be provided with the Final HPC application and/or building permit application, as required. Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 20 .. It is hoped that the information provided herein and in the accompanying plan sets proves helpful in the review and approval of this exceptional project and exemplary preservation effort. If you should have any questions or desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC Mitch'Haas Owner/Manager ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1: Completed Land Use Application & Dimensional Requirements Forms Exhibit 2: Pre-Application Conference Summary Exhibit 3: Proof of Ownership & Statement of Authority Exhibit 4: Authorization to Represent Exhibit 5: Architectural Inventory Form Exhibit 6: Dimensional Requirements for the C-1 Zone District Exhibit 7: Agreement for Payment of Application Fees Exhibit 8: Affected Property Owners List ACCOMPANYING PLAN SETS Sheet H-0: Cover Page Sheet H-1: Existing Survey Sheet H-2: Site Plan Sheet H-3: Existing and Proposed Pedestrian Amenity Sheet H-4: Level 0 (Basement) Plan Sheet H-5: Level 1 Plan Sheet H-6: Level 2 Plan Sheet H-7: Level 3 Plan Sheet H-8: Roof Plan Sheet H-9: West Elevations Sheet H-10: East Elevations Sheet H-11: North Elevations Sheet H-12: South Elevations Sheet H-13: Perspectives Sheet H-14: Building Relocation Plan Sheet H-15: Restoration Efforts and Photos Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Application Page 21 .. Â» EXHIBIT d 1 4 11 ATTACHMENT 2 - Historic Preservation Land Use Application 2 2 - - RECEIVED PROJECT: ...- -.....1 .---- MAR 2 ' 2012 Name: Sbs ItÂ°,3 CITY OF ASPEN Location: 4 23 01 4 No o k//1 5 Aite,n V â‚¬13)MMUNITY DEVE!.0DMEN- Lot F+ 6- 1610 el 9 9 CAÂ·q 4-1-ownsite of ,Ajfen (Indicate street addrAs, lot & block number 6r metes And bounds description of property) Parcel ID # BEQUIRED) 21 37 - 1 91 4 1.--00 / APPLICANT: Name: Aspen B I00 k 99, LLC-, Address: 0 5311 6 -Hopkins t-ve ; Age,n j Co I 161 1 Phone #: Fax#: E-mail: REPRESENTATIVE: Name: -Naas lano Pion M,Ma Address: 2-0 i N, Nill St j 90 146 1Or I A *tr) , Co E /(9/ i Phone #: 116-79 I 9 Fax#: 926,73Â£15 E-mail: Fy)1491 (PltlfQSfrA.foin TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): U Historic Designation ,E' Relocation (temporary, on U Certificate of No Negative Effect U or off-site) U Certificate of Appropriateness ,[g- Demolition (total , demolition) of nol--6367Â£, -Minor Historic Development 601/4,194.84. -Major Historic Development m Historic Landmark Lot Split U -Conceptual Historic Development -Final Historic Development -Substantial Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) Wdoricharne *AA 004\09, \A,4& -1.Inat kq\Â£ 6em conve/Â·led iD commtracd usâ‚¬ . Nonâ€¢hts-lor, r. bij,litrA dn 16â‚¬ al (ey-. J PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) an>f , EffÂ¥\944'L +445hric (+Ae#A.ret ,,demolisk -lk aliciA Lut Id,toe tqkce it wh[49 a. iree-61-0Â¥~j M,Xf d u\C buricKÂ»(ane rgider*,4 U (/(01 rk) Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29,2007 m #219 El General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO X O Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration? C] Does the work you are planning include interior work; including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration? C] Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time? 10 In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits? Il El If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not.) 10 If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use: 0 Rehabilitation Loan Fund n Conservation Easement Program m Dimensional Variances U Increased Density U Historic Landmark Lot Split O Waiver of Park Dedication Fees C] Conditional Uses 0 Exemption from Growth Management Quota System m Tax Credits Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29,2007 .. 4 ATTACHMENT 3 - Dimensional Requirements Form (Item #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projects.) 0,1 Proj ect: ausles Applicant: Nove,4 8-ock 09 i Ll_C_- (531 E. Hookta Ave, Agoen Project â€¢ , j Location: 613 E. .[lop (,As -Avenue Zone District: Lot Size: 10 1 000 * Lot Area: b, 000 54 (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: 175% 64 Proposed: 3,34-7 sf Number ofresidential units: Existing: 0 Proposed: 'L Number of bedrooms: Existing: 0 Proposed: 3 Proposed % of demolition: DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone district) Floor Area: Existing:~9 9 & SfAllowable: 191(00 8-f Proposed: (,967 92 Height Principal Bldg.: Existing: /~A Allowable. 36 * proposed: 34 4+* Accessory Bldg.: Existing: A/A Allowab-r-t\)~A Proposed:/\1~4, On-Site parking: Existing: No'ne, Required: Norle Proposed: 2- % Site coverage: Existing: Required: Proposed: % Open Space: Existing: 2-3 70 Required: 23 70 Proposed: 29 70 Front Setback: Existing.Â· I~<A Required. Ri-A Proposed: t~A Rear Setback: Existing: M IA Required: R ~74 proposed,Â· Rj-A Combined Front/Rear: Indicate N. S. E. W E:gisting: NA Required: MIA Proposed: NLA Side Setback: Existing: /0/-A Required: AM Proposed: 4/A Side Setback: Existing: ,fl ~ A Requir ed: A 1 A P r oposed: ~ A 1 4 Combined Sides: Existing: M~A Required: M~A Proposed: t#A Distance between Existing: N~A Required: N~,A proposed: 14)A buildings: Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed):\ 0 -axn. U *cray# 44 40 44Â· ** -61-air lover exiertls to 40-feet Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29,2007 Matrix of The City of Aspen's Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements To review full procedures for all applications, reference 26.415 of The City of Aspen Building Code, Historic Preservation Ordinance. When submitting multiple step applications, do not replicate submission materials. Two copies of the application are required for a Certiticate ot-No Ellect, 15 copies are required for each meetingall other review. Also note that an electronic version of all text documents is required in a .txt, .doc, .wpd, or .rtf format. Application Fees Type of Review Notice Requirements Requirements Deposit Fee Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Designation 1-9,11,12 $0 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.) at HPC and Council Consult with Historic Preservation None Exempt Development $0 Officer to confirm exempt status ~ Certificate of No Negative Effect 1-9, 15, 17 $245 None Minor Development 1-10,15,16,17,36 $735 Posting Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) 09 Development under 1,000 s.f., $1,470 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Maior Development / Conceptual 1-10, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20 / Development over 1,000 s.f., $2,940 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Maior Development / Final 1-10,16,21, 22, 36 Paid at time of conceptual 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Substantial Amendment 1-10,16,23,24,25,36 $735 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Demolition 1-9, 26 $2,940 26.304.060 03) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections ~ Relocation 1-9,27-34 $2,940 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Historic Landmark Lot Split 1-10 $1,470 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) at HPC and Council Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Rescindine Designation 1-9,35 $1,470 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) at HPC and Council Aspen Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements, Updated: May 29,2007 . .. CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY i PLANNER: Amy Guthrie, 970.429.2758 DATE: 2.27.12 PROJECT: 623/625 E. Hopkins, Lots F and G, Block 99 DESCRIPTION: The subject parcel is 6,000 square feet in size and contains a Victorian era home and a historic outbuilding that has been converted to commercial use. The applicant proposes to remodel the historic structures, and to demolish the existing building along the alley and replace it. The historic structures will be temporarily lifted in order to construct basements below them. Design review will be according to two sets of guidelines; the Historic RECEIVED HPC will review the condition and history of the buildings on the site and Preservation Design Guidelines and the Commercial Design Standards. MAR 2 3 2012 must approve any alteration, on-site relocation, or demolition. CITY OF ASPEN HPC can consider variances, including an FAR bonus of up to 500 square COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT feet, setback or parking waivers, if they are necessary to preserving the buildings. The applicant is advised to consult with the Parks Department at an early date regarding tree preservation requirements. Affordable housing mitigation is dependent on the amount of new net leasable space that is created. The applicant proposes one free market unit, which is exempt from Growth Management. Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.412 Commercial Design Standards 26.415.070.D Major Development 26.415.080 Demolition of designated properties 26.415.090 Relocation of designated properties 26.415.110 Benefits 26.470.060.4 Administrative GMQS or 26.470.070.1 Minor GMQS 26.515 Off-Street Parking 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.150 C-1 Zone District Land Use Code: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-DevelopmenUPIanning-and-Zoning/Title-26- Land-Use-Code/ HPC Design Guidelines: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-DevelopmenUHistoric-Preservation/Historic- Properties/ .. Review by: Staff for completeness, HPC for determination of approval Public Hearing: Yes, at HPC. Referral Agencies: None. Planning Fees: $1,890 for 6 billable hours (additional or less billable hours are at $315 per hour) Referral Agency Fees: None. Total Deposit: $1,890. Il Proof of ownership with payment. Â¤ Signed fee agreement. 0 Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 0 Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. Il Total deposit for review of the application. 0 10 Copies of the complete application packet and maps. Il An 8 1/2" by 11"vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. Â£ Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, including all easements and vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. (This requirement, or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not to warrant a survey document.) Â¤ A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing 0 Copies of prior approvals. 1 Applicants are advised that building plans will be required to meet the International Building Code as adopted by the City of Aspen, the Federal Fair Housing Act, and CRS 9.5.112. Please make sure that your application submittal addresses these building-related and accessibility regulations. You may contact the Building Department at 920-5090 for additional information. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Parcel Detail EXHIBIT 1 Pitkin County Assessor C Parcel Detail Information Assessor Property Search I Assessor Subset Query I Assessor Sales Search Clerk & Recorder Reception Search I Treasurer Tax Search Search Basic Building Characteristics I Value Summary Parcel Detail I Value Detail I Sales Detail I Residential/Commercial Improvement Detail Owner Detail I Land Detail I Photographs Tax Area Account Number Parcel Number 2011 Mill Levy 001 R000250 273718212001 31.653 Primary Owner Name and Address ASPEN BLOCK 99 LLC 532 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 Additional Owner Detail Legal Description Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Block: 99 Lot: F AND:- Lot: Thru G Location Physical Address: 623 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Land Acres: 0.000 Land Sq Ft: 6,000 2011 Property Value Summary Actual Value Assessed Value Land: 2,805,000 813,450 Improvements: 284,400 82,480 Total: 3,089,400 895,930 Sale Date: 11/17/2010 | 11 11 11 http://www.pitkinassessor.org/assessor/parcel.asp?AccountNumber=R000250 2/23/2012 Parcel Detail page 2 of 2 Sale Price: ~2,500,000 Additional Sales Detail Basic Building Characteristics Number of Residential Buildings: 0 Number of Comm/Ind Buildings: 3 Commercial/[ndustrial Building Occurrence 0 Characteristics MERCH FIRST FLOOR: 961 Total Area: 961 MERCHANDISING- Property Class: IMPROVEMENT Actual Year Built: 1888 Effective Year Built: 1978 Quality of Construction: AVERAGE Exterior Wall: FAIR Interior Wall: FAIR Neighborhood: COA COMMERCIAL "C" Top of Page Assessor Database Search Options Pitkin County Home Page The Pitkin County Assessor's Offices make every effort to collect and maintain accurate data. However, Good Turns Software and the Pitkin County Assessor's Offices are unable to warrant any ofthe information herein contained. Copyright Â© 2003 - 2011 Good Turns Software. All Rights Reserved. Database & Web Design by Good Turns Software. http://www.pitkinassessor.org/assessor/parcel.asp?AccountNumber==R000250 2/23/2012 .. Colorado Secretary of State lE-Filed Date and Time: 10/19/2010 01:20 PM Document must be filed electronically. ID Number: 20101576104 Paper documents will not be accepted. Document processing fee $50.00 Document number: 20101576104 Fees & forms/cover sheets Amount Paid: $50.00 are subject to change. To access other information or print copies of filed documents, visit www.sos.state.co.us and select Business Center. ABOVE SPACE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Articles of Organization filed pursuant to Â§ 7-80-203 and Â§ 7-80-204 ofthe Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) 1. The domestic entity name ofthe limited liability company is Aspen Block 99 LLC (The name ofa limited liability company must contain the term or abbreviation "limited liability company", -' ltd. liability company", "limited liability co. ", ''ltd. liability co.". 'limited", "l.l.c.", ''llc". or "ltd." See Â§7-90-601. C. R.S.) (Caution: The use ofeertainterms or abbreviations are restricted by law. Readinstructions for more information.) 2. The principal office address ofthe limited liability company's initial principal office is Street address 532 E. Hopkins Ave (Street number and name) Aspen CO 81611 (City) (State) (ZIP/Postal Code) U nited States (Province - if applicable) (Country) Mailing address (leave blank if same as street address) (Street number and name or Post Ofice Box information) (City) (State) (ZIP/Postal Code) (Province - if applicable) (Country) 3. The registered agent name and registered agent address ofthe limited liability company's initial registered agent are Name (if an individual) Uhlig David C (Last) (FirsO (Middle) (su~Oftx) OR (if an entity) (Caution: Do not provide both an individual and an entity name.) 201 North Mill Street Street address (Street number and name) Suite 203 Aspen co 81611 (City) (State) (ZIP Code) ARTORG_LLC Page 1 0 f 3 Rev. 02/28/2008 .. Mailing address (leave blank if same as street address) (Street number and name or Post Office Box information) -CO- . (City) (State) (ZIP Code) (The following statement is adopted by marking the box.) ~ The person appointed as registered agent has consented to being so appointed. 4. The true name and mailing address of the person forming the limited liability company are Name Uhlig David C (if an individual) (Last) (First) (Middle) (Suffix) OR (i f an entity) (Caution: Do not provide both an individual and an entity name.) 201 North Mill Street Mailing address (Street number and name or Post Office Box information) Suite 203 Aspen CO 81611 (Cio,) (State) (ZIP/Postal Code) United States , (Province - if applicable) (Country) (Uthe following statement applies. adopt the statement by marking the box and include an attachment.) U The limited liability company has one or more additional persons forming the limited liability company and the name and mailing address of each such person are stated in an attachment. 5. The management ofthe limited liability company is vested in (Mark the applicable box.) , ~1 one or more managers. OR D the members. 6. (rhe folowing statement is adopted by marking the box.) ~ There is at least one member of the limited liability company. 7. (Uthejollowing statementapplies, adopt the statement by marking the box and include anattachment.) E] This document contains additional information as provided by law. 8. (Caution: Leave blankifthe document does not have a delayed elfective date. Stating a delayedeffective date has significant legal consequences. Read instructions before entering a date.) (Uthejollowing statement applies, adopt the statement by entering a date and. ifapplicable. time using the required formaL) The delayed effective date and, if applicable, time of this document is/are (mm/dd/yyyy hour: minute am*m) ARTORG_LLC Page 2 of 3 Rev. 02/28/2008 .. Notice: Causing this document to be delivered to the Secretary of State for filing shall constitute the affirmation or acknowledgment of each individual causing such delivery, under penalties of perjury, that the document is the individual's act and deed, or that the individual in good faith believes the document is the act and deed of the person on whose behalf the individual is causing the document to be delivered for filing, taken in conformity with the requirements of part 3 of article 90 of title 7, C.R.S., the constituent documents, and the organic statutes, and that the individual in good faith believes the facts stated in the document are true and the document complies with the requirements ofthat Part, the constituent documents, and the organic statutes. This perjury notice applies to each individual who causes this document to be delivered to the Secretary of State, whether or not such individual is named in the document as one who has caused it to be delivered. 9. The true name and mailing address of the individual causing the document to be delivered for filing are Uhlig David C (LasO (First) (Middle) (SufAX) 201 North Mill Street (Street number and name or Post Office Box information) Suite 203 Aspen CO 81611 (City) (State) (ZIP/Postal Code) United States (Province - if applicable) (Country) (If the following statement applies, adopt the statement by marking the box and include an attachment.) ~ This document contains the true name and mailing address of one or more additional individuals causing the document to be delivered for filing. Disclaimer: This form/cover sheet, and any related instructions, are not intended to provide legal, business or tax advice, and are furnished without representation or warranty. While this form/cover sheet is believed to satisfy minimum legal requirements as of its revision date, compliance with applicable law, as the same may be amended from time to time, remains the responsibility ofthe user ofthis form/cover sheet. Questions should be addressed to the user's legal, business or tax advisor(s). ARTORG_LLC Page 3 of 3 Rev. 02/28/2008 .. ASPEN BLOCK 99, LLC WRITTEN CONSENT OF MANAGER IN LIEU OF MEETING October 26,2010 The undersigned, being the Manager of Aspen Block 99, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (the "Company"), does hereby consent to the following resolutions: RESOLVED: That David C. Uhlig is appointed as the third party designee ofthe Company for the sole purpose of applying for and obtaining a Tax Identification Number for the Company from the Internal Revenue Service. RESOLVED: That David C. Uhlig is authorized to answer questions on the application for a Tax Identification Number for the Company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been executed by the Company's Manager. MANAGER: AUSTIN LAWRENCE PARTNERS, LLC, a Colora~]*ited liability company By: f I n A 1.-Â»n Nde: 9*ry Â¢yAilld Title: A~nager , Ul .. RECEPTION#: 575248, 11/17/2010 at 03:34:07 PM, 1 OF 1, R $11.00 DF $0.00 Doc Code AUTH Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY (38-30-172, C.R.SO 1. This Statement of Authority relates to an entity named Aspen Block 99 LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company And is executed on behalfofthe entity pursuant to the provisions of Section 38-30-172, C.R.S. 2. The type of entity is a: Limited Liability Company 3. The mailing address for the entity is: 5 7 1 2Â· Ud 0 k M_5 ..4Â·V4 4. The entity is formed under the laws of: (0(4 r50 0 5. The name ofthe person(s) authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering, or otherwise affecting title to real p*perty on behalf of the entity is: CQ re 6 94-3 Y . lÂ·41 ({J 6. The authority of the foregoing person(s) to bind the entity is ~ Not limited OR 12'Limited as re 62 -2 3491 follows: 7. Other matters concemins,the manner in which the entity deals with interest in real property: N PK Dated this 17th day ofNovember, 2010. Aspen Block 99 LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company By: Austin Lawrence Partners, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company By: - n. -11/-2 Egagis@*432~ ~ l Manager State of Colorado ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) The foregoing instrument was subscribed and sworn to before me this 17th day of November, 2010, by Gregory P. Hills, Manager of Austin Lawrence Partners, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company, Manger of Aspen Block 99 LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company _.....4.,1 Witness my hand and official seal. C--DECIER DORN _L- i NOTARY PUBLIC ); 4 - $ STATE OF COLORADO _ J ,+003_ -' ~blic: DruRITR n My conimission expires: 4/21/2011 Statement of Authority - Buyer . EXHIBIT rEl City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: 623 East Hopkins Avenue, Aspen Lots F and G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen (PID# 2737-182-12-001) Request for Conceptual Major Development On-Site Relocation, and Demolition To whom it may concern: As applicant for the above requested approvals for 623 East Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, Aspen Block 99, LLC hereby authorizes Haas Land Planning, LLC (HLP) and Oz Architecture (OZ) to act as designated and authorized representatives for the preparation, submittal and processing of the application requesting the approvals listed above, as well as, any subsequent applications that may be associated therewith. HLP and OZ are also authorized to represent Aspen Block 99, LLC in meetings with City staff, the Historic Preservation Commission, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Aspen City Council. Should you have any need to contact us during the course of your review, please do so through Haas Land Planning, LLC. Yours truly, A ic- a..44 L Aspen Block 99, LLC 532 E. Hopkins Ave Aspen, CO 81611 ..lqqm EXHIBIT 0 .~.. I j OAHP1403 Official eligibility determination Rev. 9/98 (OAHP use only) Date Initials COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Determined Eligible- NR Determined Not Eligible- NR Architectural Inventory Form Detennined Not Eligible- SR Detehnined Eligible- SR (page 1 of 4) - Need Data Contributes to eligible NR District Noncontributing to eligible NR District 1. IDENTIFICATION 1. Resource number: 5PT. 181 2. Temporary resource number: 623.EHO (623.Dll 3. County: Pitkin 4. City: Asnen 5. Historic building name: Charles Cram House 6. Current building name: 7. Building address: 623 East Hopkins 8. Owner name and address: Boqaert Family Trust PO Box 300792, Escondido CA 92030 and PO Box 1166 Aspen, CO 81612 11. Geographic Information 9. P.M. 6 Township 10 South Range 84 West SE 44 of SE 44 of SW 1/4 of SW 9 of Section 7 10. UTM reference Zone 1 3;3 4 3 1 8 0 mE 4 3 3 9 1 1 0 mN 11. USGS quad name: Aspen Quadranale Year: 1960, Photo Rev. 1987 Map scale: 7.5' X 15' Attach photo copy of appropriate map section. 12. Lot(s): F&G Block: 99 Addition: Year of Addition: 13. Boundary Description and Justification: Site is comprised of Lot F & G, Block 99 of the City and Townsite of Asnen. Assessors office Record Number: 2737-182-12001 This description was chosen as the most snecific and customarv description of the site. 111. Architectural Description 14. Building plan (footprint, shape): L- Shaped Plan 15. Dimensions in feet: Length 50' x Width 27' 16. Number of stories: One storv 17. Primary external wall material(s) (enter no more than two): Wood. Horizontal Sidina 18. Roof configuration: (enter no more than one): Cross Gable 19. Primary external roof material (enter no more than one): Steel Roof 20. Special features (enter all that apply): Porch. Fence, .gle,q. .. Resource Number: 5PT.181 Temporary Resource Number: 623.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 2 of 2) 21. General architectural description: A tvpical Wood frame Miner's Cottaqe. A qable end facing the street with a pair of double hunas as the principal window. A cross gable runs parallel to the street with a shed roof porch infillina the corner. Single storv with wood horizontal sidinq and original vertically proportioned double hung windows. Porch has simplified details and the floor is at grade. Window trim has a trianaular pediment over principal windows. Windows appear to be the original windows. A shed addition has been made to the rear of the building, beginning at the parallel ridge line 22. Architectural style/building type: Late Victorian 23. Landscaping or special setting features: Open metal fence alonq street frontaqe (original). Larae spruce at west corner. 24. Associated buildings, features, or objects: Concrete Block rectanaular structure. flat roof. IV. Architectural History 25. Date of Construction: Estimate Actual 1886 Source of information: Pitkin County Assessor 26. Architect: Unknown Source of information: 27. Builder/Contractor: Unknown Source of information: 28, Original owner: Unknown Source of information: 29. Construction history (include description and dates of major additions, alterations, or demolitions): Two small additions have been made at the rear, date unknown. New roofing materials. 30. Original location X Moved Date of move(s): V. Historical Associations 31. Original use(s): Residential 32. Intermediate use(s): 33. Current use(s): Commercial 34. Site type(s): Commercial Core, Residential Pattern 35. Historical background: This structure is reoresentative of Asoen's minina era character. The building represents a typical tvoe known locallv as the "Miner's Cottage". characterized bv the size, simple plant and front aable / Dorch relationship. The two historic entrv doors, which are a unique characteristic of this type, are intact. 36. Sources of information: Pitkin County Courthouse records: Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maps, 1990 and 1980 City of Aspen Survev of Historic Sites and Structures .. :. ~ Resource Number: 5PT. 181 Temporary Resource Number: 623.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 4 of 4) 49. Date(s): 6/24/2000 50. Recorder(s): Suzannah Reid and Patrick Duffield 51. Organization: Reid Architects 52. Address: 412 North Mill Street. PO Box 1303, Aspen CO 81612 53. Phone number(s): 970 920 9225 NOTE: Please attach a sketch map, a photocopy of the USGS quad. map indicating resource location, and photographs. Colorado Historical Society - Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 (303) 866-3395 .. Resource Number: 5PT.181 Temporary Resource Number: 623.EHO Architectural Inventory Form (page 3 of 3) VI. Significance 37. Local landmark designation: Yes No X Date of designation: Designating authority: 38. Applicable National Register Criteria: A. Associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad pattern of our history; B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or that possess high artistic Values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Qualifies under Criteria Considerations A through G (see Manual) -1 Does not meet any of the above National Register criteria 39. Area(s) of significance: Architecture 40. Period of significance: Late 1800's Silver Mining era 41. Level of significance: National State Local X 42. Statement of significance: This structure is significant for its Dosition in the context of Aspen's mining era. It describes the nature of the life of an average family or individual durina that Deriod. as well as the construction techniques. materials available and the fashion of the time. 43. Assessment of bistoric physical integrity related to significance: The building retains the original scale and form. The window openings are intact and the building retains its oriainal character. Additions are in the back and in scale with the original structure. VII. National Register Eligibility Assessment 44. National Register eligibility field assessment: Eligible Not Eligible X Need Data 45. Is there National Register district potential? Yes No X Discuss: If there is National Register district potential, is this building: Contributing Noncontributing 46. If the building is in existing National Register district, is it: Contributing Noncontributing VI11. Recording Information 47. Photograph numbers: R10, F15 Negatives filed at: Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 48. Report title: Citv of Aspen Update of Survev of Historic Sites and Structures, 2000 .. Page 2 of 2 State Site Number Local Site Number 623.EH FUNCTION ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY Current Use: Commercial Architect: Unknown Original Use: Residential Builder: Unknown Intermediate Use: Residential Cohstruction Date: 1886 Actual _ Estimate X Assessor Based On: MODIFICATIONS AND/OR ADDITIONS Minor Moderate X Major Moved Date Describe Modifications and Date: Additions and Date: Small additions to rear; date unknown NATIONAL/STATE REGISTER ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Is listed on National Register; State Register Is eligible for National Register; - State Register Meets National Register Criteria: A __ B __ C __ b E Map Ke]L Local Rating and Landmark Designation Significant: Listed on or is eligible for National Register Contributing: Resource has maintained historic or 11 - architectural integrity. o Supporting; Original integrity lost due to alterations, however, is "retrievable" with substantial effort. Locally Designated Landmark Justify Assessment: Numerous modifications made to original cottage Associated Contexts and Historical Information: The significance of this residential structure is not of those who owned it or lived in it, nor of its architecture, although this structure is representative of Aspen's Mining Era. This structure is of historical importance bv illustrating the family/home environment and lifestvle of the average citizen in Aspen which was then dominated bv the silver mining industry. Other Recording Information Specific References to the Structure/Building: Pitkin County Court- house Records; Sanborn and Sons Insurance Maps Archaeological Potential: N (Y or N) Justify: Recorded By: Les Holst Date: August. 1990 Affiliation: Aspen Historic Preservation Committee - City of Aspen Project Manager: Roxanne Eflin, Historic Preservation Officer/Planner .. HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL BUILDING/STRUCTURE FORM State Site Number: Local Site Number: 623.EH Photo Information: ASP-N-13 Township 10 South Range 84 West Section 7 USGS Quad Name Aspen Year 1960 X 7.5' 15' Building or Structure Name: Charles Cram House Full Street Address: 623 East Hobkins Legal Description: Lot F and part of Lot G. Block 99 East Aspen Townsite City Aspen County Pitkin Historic District or Neighborhood Name: East End Owner: Private/State/Federal Private Owner's Mailing Address: ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Building Type: Residential Architectural Style: Cross Gable Cottage Dimensions: L: 50 x W: 27 = Square Feet: Approximately 1.350 Number of Stories: 1 storv Building Plan (Footprint, Shape): "L" shaped Landscaping or Special Setting Features: Sidewalk in front, street trees, open metal fencing at sidewalk Associated Buildings, Features or Objects - Describe Material and Function (map number / name): None For the following categories include materials, techniques and styles in the description as appropriate: Roof: Cross gabled with shed roof and gable addition on rear; corrugated metal Walls: Horizontal clapboard siding; wood Foundation / Basement: Unknown Chimney(s): Red brick. original Windows: Paired one-over-one double hung with qabled lintel on front and side (east); one-over-one double hung at front Doors: 2 at front; both double arch 1/2 light over wood panel Porches: Open shed roof over 1/2 of front facade; supported by square posts with decorative brackets General Architectural Description: Small Victorian qabled cottage with two small additions to rear. Retains its original fenestration. .. EXHIBIT . m. Dimensional Requirements of the Commercial (C-1) Zone District. Section 26.710.150 â€¢ Minimum Gross Lot Area: No requirement. â€¢ Minimum Net Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit: No requirement. â€¢ Minimum Lot Width: No requirement. â€¢ Minimum Front Yard: No requirement. â€¢ Minimum Rear Yard: No requirement. â€¢ Minimum Side Yard: No requirement. â€¢ Minimum Utility/Trash/Recycle Area: - Pursuant to Section 26.575.060. - Existing Condition: -N/A. - Proposed: See Plans GO'L x 10'D x 10'H) â€¢ Maximum Height: - C-1 Zoning: 28 feet for two-story elements of a building. 36 feet for three-story elements of a building, which may be increased to 40 feet through Commercial Design Review. See Chapter 26.412. - Existing Condition: NIA - Proposed: 34 14 feet to roofline; however, stair tower extends to 40 feet. â€¢ Minimum Distance between Detached Buildings: No requirement. â€¢ Public Amenity Space: Pursuant to Section 26.575.030, the requirement is 23%. The Public Amenity Space proposed with the redevelopment is over 29%. â€¢ Floor Area Ratio (FAR): - C-1 Zoning: Maximum of 2.5:1 or 15,000sf where Commercial Uses are limited to 1.5:1 (9,000sf) and Free-Market Multi-Family Housing is limited to 0.5:1 (3,000sf)). - Existing Condition: 2,996sf of Commercial FAR. - Proposed: 4,262sf of Commercial FAR (0.71:1) and 2,702sf of Free- Market Residential FAR (0.45:1); cumulative FAR of 6,964sf (1.16:1). â€¢ Maximum Multi-Family Residential Unit Size: - C-1 Zoning.- 2,000 square feet of net livable area. This can be increased to 2,500 square feet through use of a Historic TDR. - Existing Condition: N/A - Proposed: 2,290 square feet ofnet livable area (with use of one TDR). â€¢ Maximum Lodge Unit Size: Not applicable as the property does not and will not include any lodging use. â€¢ Commercial/Residential Ratio: C-1 Zoning: Total free-market net livable area cannot exceed above grade floor area of the commercial space. - Existing Condition: No free-market residential - Proposed: 2,290 square feet of net livable area; 3,054sf of above-grade commercial FAR (plus and additional ? sf of subgrade commercial space). This development does not require any variances from the C- 1 Zone District Dimensional Requirements for a Mixed-Use project. 0 0 EXHIBIT ,%t CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of CitÂ¥ of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and Aspen Block 99, LLC. bv Greg Hills (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for Conceptual Maior Development, On-site Relocation. and Demolition for 623 East Hopkins Avenue, Aspen (PID# 2737-182-12-001), (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT' S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ 2.940 which is for twelve (12) hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $245.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. '-l CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT: 1 Greg Hills By: Chris Bendon JAspe,Â®47Â§, U.C Community Development Director 532 Â¢~t- ~ins Ave, Asptn, Cd 81611 mr 09L~LQÂ® fleAV OBAB Glq!*dI,JOO lUlU Zg X UJU] 98 .12'Ulol 8~~ EXHIBIT ~918/091.9Â® KleAV 41!M elqlleduloo â€ž8/9 z x â€ž1 049 10/ 3,343Â« , 300 SPRING STREET ASPEN LLC , 308 HUNTER LLC : 530 HOPKINS L PO BOX 5000 490 WILLIAMS ST ; 5301/2 E HOPKI i SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 DENVER, CO 80218 . ASPEN, CO 81611 625 MAIN ASPEN LLC 630 EAST HYMAN LLC 633 SPRING 11 LLC 106 W GERMANIA PL #230 ' 532 E HOPKINS AVE 418 E COOPER AVE #207 CHICAGO, IL 60610 ASPEN, CO 81611 : ASPEN, CO 81611 ' ALPINE BANKASPEN ~ ARCHDIOCESE OF DENVER 635 E HOPKINS LLC ATTN ERIN WIENCEK ~ SAINT MARYS 532 E HOPKINS PO BOX 10000 1300 S STEELE ST ASPEN, CO 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 DENVER, CO 80210 ASHTON JONATHAN G ASPEN 719 HOLDINGS LLC ~ ~ ASPEN ART MUSEUM PO BOX 26 PO BOX 11600 590 N MILL ST ' JAMES TOWN, CO 80455 . ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ; ASPEN PLAZA LLC ' '' ' AUSTIN LAWRENCE CONNER LLC AVP PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 1709 1 532 E HOPKINS AVE 630 E HYMAN AVE #25 C/O STEVE MARCUS ~ ASPEN, CO 81612 I ~ ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 1 ' 11 BASS CAHN 601 LLC : BAUM ROBERT E BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC PO BOX 4060 PO BOX 1518 65 FIRST NECK LN i ASPEN, CO 81612 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 , BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BG SPRING LLC BOOHER ANDREA LYNN 944 PARK AVE 14TH FL 300 S SPRING ST #202 : ~ 709 E MAIN STREET #303 1 NEW YORK, NY 10028 : ASPEN, CO 81611 , 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 :1 BRYANT CAROLINA H : BURSTEN GABRIELLA C[CUREL CARY PO BOX 5217 PO BOX 2061 : 2615 N LAKEWOOD SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60614 1:1 ~ CIPOLLINO NICHOLAS COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA 1 CROSS JUDITH 300 QUAIL RD ~ ~ PO BOX 1927 ~ PO BOX 3388 MERRITT, NC 28556-9641 1 CARSON CITY, NV 89702 , ASPEN, CO 81612 1 1 1 DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST EDGE OF AJAX INC 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY 8051 LOCKLIN LN 201 E SILVER ST SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 ~ COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI 48382 , MARBLE, CO 81623 e;. ,2YE'35,1233" 52ti,EfE~veryf~16~11/.4rn .--1 09 18/~ Al@Ay 00Ae @Iq!1Bduloo lull' 29 X U.Jul gg jel,Ulo, 8p 0).ib!13 Fildeabm= 1 I ~8/09L9Â® ReAV 41!M 0|q! ledu]00 1,8/9 EX â€ž L ens leclel~ , ~4#rafjr'-.*-*-e . P EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA ~ EDWARDS CHARLES N 'EXELCEDAR INC 20% '19900 BEACH RD STE 801 189 BENVENUE ST 534 E HYMAN AVE i JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 WELLSLEY, MA 024827104 | ASPEN, CO 81611 '. f:! FURNGULF LTD GELD LLC FARRELL SCOTT W A COLO JOINT VENTURE C/O LOWELL MEYER PO BOX 9656 616 E HYMAN AVE PO BOX 1247 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612-1247 GOODING SEAN A 80% & RICHARD L GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY & BARBARA 20% ' PARTNERS LLC 460 ST PAUL ST C/O PARAGON RANCH INC 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD #2222 DENVER, CO 80206 620 E HYMAN AVE #1 E , LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 ASPEN, CO 81611 GURHOLT CHARLES J & VERNE HESSELSCHWERDT BILL & TRISH HIMAN LLC PO BOX 6159 I N5999 GURHOLT RD : PO BOX 1266 SWANBOURNE WA 6010 SCANDINAVIA, WI 54977 ! BASALT, CO 81621 AUSTRALIA, HONEA KATHARINE M 1 HOPKINS DEV LLC HORSEFINS LLC PO BOX 288 | 345 PARK AVE 33RD FLR 601 E HOPKINS AVE BASALT, CO 81621 , NEW YORK, NY 10154 ' ASPEN, CO 81611 i HOVERSTEN PHILIP E & LOUISE B i HUNDERT DANIEL G ~ ~ HUNTER SQUARE LLC 90% 2990 BOOTH CREEK DR 417-A MAIN ST 1' * PO BOX 2 VAIL, CO 81657 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 1 SONOMA, CA 95476 1:, i,1 HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES 11 LLC 1 IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 1 PO BOX 642 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 | GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 INDY HOUSE LLC IRVINE DOUGLAS FORBES JARDEN CORPORATION 605 OCEAN BLVD 201 N MILL ST I 2381 EXECUTIVE CENTER DR GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 : ASPEN, CO 81611 ; , BOCA RATON, FL 33431 JOSHUA & CO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS JURINE LLC 10% LAWROM LLC LLC PO BOX 2 : 533 E HOPKINS AVE 300 S HUNTER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 SONOMA, CA 95476 ; ASPEN, CO 81611 LEE GREGORY K & DEBBIE L : LINK LYNN B ' LUCKYSTAR LLC 9777 W CORNELL PL PO BOX 7942 I PO BOX 7755 LAKEWOOD, CO 80227 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 '1 : label size 1"x2 5/8" compatible with Avery Â®5160/81*0 Ftin|IA#A r|A fornint 9#1 mm w 87 mm r.nmnitihip m/Art A,/An, Â®51 Afl/Al Afl 09*LiÂ®Al@AV 08Ae 0'q!*100 Ullu zg x lulu gg jeuljoi ep-mlenb!13 9 ke/09 LgÂ® ReAV l'UAA elq!*duloo â€ž0/g Exâ€žL ezis 181~ LUNDGREN WIEDINMYER DONNA TRST ' MAHONEY SHARON A f MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP PO BOX 6700 1 PO BOX 11694 317 SIDNEY BAKER S #400 i SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81612 KERRVILLE, TX 78028 :1 MARTELL BARBARA 1 MCDONALD FRANCIS B MCPHETRES RICHARD M 7 YOUNG ST 702 E HYMAN AVE I i 1 PO BOX 4671 BARTON ASPEN, CO 81611 EÂ·' ASPEN, CO 81612 ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA, MHT LLC MONTANARO JOHN & SUSAN FAMILY ~. MYSKO BOHDAN D PO BOX 25318 ~TRUST 615 E HOPKINS 1 PO BOX 457 ST CROIX VIRGIN ISLANDS 00824, ASPEN, CO 81611 MALIBU, CA 90265 1 NONNIE LLC ORIGINAL CURVE CONDO #310 LLC PATTERSON VICKI C/O LAU RA P I ETRZAK PO BOX 565 PO BOX 8523 1796 E SOPRIS CREEK RD ASPEN, CO 81612 : I ASPEN, CO 81612 BASALT, CO 81621 PINKOS DANNY & ANNA PITKIN COUNTY BANK 80% PITKIN CENTER CONDO OWNERS i PO BOX 6581 , ASSOC 534 E HYMAN AVE : 517 W NORTH ST SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 : ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 , QUARRY INTERESTS LTD | RAINER EWALD : ! REDSTONE SUSAN 9932 LAKEWAY CT 1 Â· 1409 E COOPER AVE #4 ~ 120 E 90TH ST#11-B DALLAS, TX 75230 | ASPEN, CO 81611 I NEW YORK, NY 10128 I:1 I ROSENFIELD LYNNE CARYN ROSS NEIL ~ ROTHBERG MARJORIE 709 E MAIN ST #203 100 S SPRING ST 1 2006 N BANCROFT PKWY ASPEN, CO 81611-2059 ASPEN, CO 81611 ~ WILMINGTON, DE 19806 1 ROTHBLUM PHILIP & MARCIA RUST TRUST SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST 40 EAST 80 ST #26A : 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD #760 Â· PO BOX 4897 NEW YORK, NY 10075 ' BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 I Â· ASPEN, CO 81612 SEID MEL i 1 SELDIN CHRISTOPHER G SHOAF JEFFREY S 1104 DALE AVE 22 MOUNTAIN CT PO BOX 3123 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 : 1 BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81612 11! '' STEWART TITLE CO SLS LLC SNOWMASS CORPORATION C/O JENNIFER SCHUMACHER 101 FOUNDERS PL#104 PO BOX 620 PO BOX 936 ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 1 TAYLORSVILLE, NC 28681 label size 1"x25/8" compatible with Avery Â®5160/81~60 Etio~lette de format 25 mm x 67 mm comnatihle avec Averv Â®5160/8180 09[8/~/09LgÂ® Al@AV l#!AA elq!*1100 â€ž8/9 2 x (,1 ens lequl(~ 0 Al@Av 0@AB elq!1Bduloo lull] 29 X UJUI 98 11?lil]01 0P 0]12!13 1 41*49 \1; I t.%12Â£-i> TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS CO THOMPSON ROSS & LYNETTE TRAVIS SHELBY J 602 E HYMAN #201 PO BOX 1186 208 E 28TH ST - APT 2G ASPEN, CO 81611 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 NEWYORK, NY 10016 * VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC TROUSDALE JEAN VICK VANWOERKOM LAURIE C/O KATIE REED MGT 611 E HOPKINS AVE PO BOX 341 2 418 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 ASPEN, CO 81611 VVAGAR RICH VRANA MALEKA ~ WEEKS ROBIN C/O RICH WAGAR ASSOC LLC PO BOX 4535 526 RIDGEWAY DR 100 S SPRING ST #3 ASPEN, CO 81612 METAIRIE, LA 70001 ' ASPEN, CO 81611 i WHITEHILL STEPHEN LANE WILSON STACE S ' 1 WOODS FRANK J 111 5320 W HARBOR VILLAGE DR #201 PO BOX 5217 205 S MILL ST #301A , VERO BEACH, FL 32967 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ' ~ ASPEN, CO 81611 WRIGHT CHRISTOPHER N 13 BRAMLEY RD LONDON W10 6SP UK 1 1 1 : I L P i il i '1 label size 1"x2 5/8" compatible with Avery Â®5160/8160 Etiobette de format 25 mm x 67 mm comnatihle avec Averv Â®5160/8160 . ./.1 L A- 6 City of Aspen Commercial Character Area Encompassing portions of the Commercial, Commercial Lodge, Lodge and Neighborhood Commercial Zone Districts Design Objectives and Guidelines Location a hard and unrelieved street edge, with little or This area forms the immediate fringe of much no variation in height. It is in direct contrast to of the Commercial Core Historic District. To the the smaller, predominant building scale within east of the Core, the Commercial area is roughly adjacent areas. bounded by Spring Street, Cooper Avenue and Original Street, to the south, by Dean Street, and Street Pattern to the west by Aspen Street and Hyman Avenue. The street pattern is essential 'infrastructure' (See the Character Area Map in the appendix.) for the character of the district. The north/ south orientation of the streets accentuates the relationship of the City with its dramatic Existing Character This area is immediately adjacent to the landscape setting. Commercial Core to the south, east and south- T he circulation pattern provided by the network east. To the south, towards the mountain base, of streets, alleys and courts should be retained it is directly influenced by lodge development to ensure maximum public access. Wherever where the street block is frequently defined by possible pedestrian access to alleys should be a single building. On several blocks this forms enhanced. 4 ....1 -- ./-fl.--- Ce .:. ;S : R--49- L A 494 4% r 524~// i.-45'AQ#VIJAMW<.2,frfix'EY+Ljrr . 1.,1. 174 U.k:i'>55/P .. rÂ·Â· 44/ =r. .r . 1. 2./''r -4 4-%4.re,Prt qi f. / &- Am/". â€¢ t" .1 4 - 4/ % 4. : . , 41.9, r *.irto.- Ar - .-j..Cf Â·Â· r-~47:fi Ill'll'/11/...::47N.t: I -2... --4..â€¢:,. The Commercial AiÂ·en wraps aroitild the core of Doiontozon Aspen. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District puge 13 Design Objectives and Guidelines 1 7% 4-7 1 .. Commercial Character Area City of Aspen Building Character 2. Maintain a retail orientation. Building height varies from one story towards Greater retail presence at the street edge should the north to four stories in the more intensely be achieved to ensure an enhanced street vitality developed blocks to the south. Buildings define and an enriched and more urban definition of the the street edge to the south, whereas they are commercial street frontage. increasingly set back and framed by open space, as building height and scale reduces to the 3. Promote creative, contemporary design. north. Designs should seek creative new solutions that convey the community's continuing interest in Building materials, although varied, are still exploring innovations. At the same time, the urban in character with a predominance of fundamental principles of traditional design must brickwork and other masonry. Storefront design be respected. This means that each project should and display is much less a characteristic than in strike a balance in the design variables that are the Commercial Core area, and this diminishes presented in the following pages. the pedestrian experience in some places. 4. Encourage a well-defined street wall. Outdoor Spaces The intent is to more clearly establish a strongly Moving north from the mountain base, the smaller defined street wall, but with some greater variety scale of buildings, combined with increasing areas than in the Commercial Core Historic District of open space, either adjacent to the buildings since the historic building edge is not as defined. or opening off the street frontage, allows more A stronger street fagade definition should be sunlight to penetrate while creating a varied and achieved while at the same time recognizing the fragmented street edge. The greater architectural value of public dining and landscaped space. diversity here lacks the coherence provided by a more consistent block face. 5. Reflect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. The street wall within this area is less defined than It is important that a range and variation in in the Commercial Core, and building fagades are building height and scale in the Commercial Area sometimes set back or include front yard space, be recognized in future development. Larger which weakens the street edge. buildings should be varied in height and reflect original lot widths. Design Objectives 6. Accommodate outdoor public spaces while These are key design objectives for the Commercial establishing a clear definition to the street Area. The City must find that any new work will edge. help to meet them: Providing space in association with individual buildings remains important, but should be 1. Strengthen the sense of relatedness with the balanced with much greater building street Commercial Core Historic District. presence and corner definition. Strengthening the definition of the street edge iii a manner similar to the Commercial Core is desired. 7. Promote variety in the street level At the same time, the Commercial Area is a place experience. where more variety iii design is encouraged. Display cases, architectural details and Imitating historic styles is not an objective, but landscaping are among the design elements that re-establishing a sense of a stronger fundamental should be used. framework will enhance the urban qualities of this area and is a priority. page 14 Commercial, Lodging ami Historic District LI=-1 4 Design Objectives and Guidelines .. City of Aspen Commercial Character Area Conceptual Review Design C. ... Â·fines Fhe following ile:ign gllidelines >hal] applv at the conceptual review >teige. Street & Alley System 4 / If47-"'d,-m J -*1 4% FJ / The street pattern is essential 'infrastructure' -,â€¢Â·'.Il"Ii/1.~1-1- --9.'f- . 7.,-/I.-p1-.ki 0 *64%1â‚¬14 to the character of the Commercial Area. The 44-â€¢ ~ 4*9 t... I. $ 49.9 network of streets, alleys and courts are key and 40 I . 4 14 should be retained for maximum public access. .2 . These should not be enclosed by gating and -44.4 .. should not be spanned by development above to .4 maintain view corridors and permit sun and light , 442 4 # I. . / penetration along public ways. Whereverpossible ~Â§5: 'ff + ::::M::tif~ Atif~Â¢* 4~ .~ -3 9 t pedestrian access to alleys should be enhanced. .64 I ii::i: 4~ A -: *4: Â· . The creation of additional public walkways to t, 21 51Â», 4 fle rear alleys and other public spaces enhances the 9 .4/" .&1 4 . .9, 21 attraction, permeability, intricacy and interest ' *' 9.: /*b'.*'f: of the area and is encouraged. improved access .. creates opportunities for additional commercial space, which is to be encouraged. The networkof streets, alleys and existing pedestrianpassageways enhances access iii tile Commercial Area. Street Grid The original arrangement of parcels significantly I affects the visual character of the area. The city was platted on a grid system of lots and blocks, - and buildings were typically sited parallel with 4 these lot lines. This development pattern should Â·Â· be maintained. + 1.1 Orient a primary entrance toward the ~ -NUIIA- j 7 street. +1 - â€¢ A building should have a clearly defined ~ rhe networkof streets, alleys and existing pedestrianpassageways primary entrance. should be retained for maximum public access. â€¢ Providing secondary public entrances to commercial spaces is also encouraged on larger buildings. 1.2 Maintain the established town grid in all projects. â€¢ The network of streets and alloys should be retained as public circulation space and for maximum public access. â€¢ Streets and alloys should not be enclosed or closed to public access, and should remain open to the sky. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 44 page 15 Design Objectives'and Guidelines EVI_1 .. Commercial Character Area City of Aspen Internal Walkways Parking rhe character of the Commercial Area is one 1.3 Public walkways and through courts which is most appreciated on foot, and the human should be designed to create access to additional scale of streets and spaces lies at the heart of commercial space. the attraction of the town center. Therefore, the â€¢ Thesemaybeshopsthatfaceontowalkways visual impact of parking should be minimized. or courtyards. Whenever possible, parking should be placed â€¢ See also: Public Amenity Space design underground. Where a parking structure might guidelines. be considered this should have a 'wrap' of commercial and/or residential uses around it. Alleys Where it is permitted to be constructed, these Traditionally, alleyscapes were simple and guidelines shall apply: utilitarian in character, with a variety of materials and building scales contributing to the human 1.5 The visual impacts of structured parking scale. This traditional character should be should be minimized. The access shall be: maintained, while accommodating compatible . Located on an alley when feasible or a new uses. The continued development of visual secondary street, designed with the same interest in these alleys is encouraged. Greater attention to detail and materials as the variety in form and materials is also appropriate primary building fagade, and integrated here. into the building design. 1.4 Develop an alley falade to create visual 1.6 Structured parking should be placed interest. within a'wrap' of commercial and/or residential â€¢ Use varied building setbacks and changes uses. in materials to create interest and reduce perceived scale. â€¢ Balconies, court yards and decks are also 1,-1.0. 1. ... .. ./ f + .3 appropriate. t. 1. â€¢ Providing secondary public entrances is .. Â¢. + 2, h ...4, strongly encouraged along alleys. These Â·- +. 4 , should be clearly intended for public use. ' b.<. i.73 N I M j9 1 â€¢ j J - 1 4 but subordinate in detail to the primary f street-side entrance. .19:'. If , 644 1.-,1 - .. The visual impact of the entry to a parking facility should be minimized, as it is iii this building. The opening is subordinate to tile overall mass of the fagade page 16 , 441., Commercial, Lodging und Historic District Desigâ€ž Objectives and Guidelines & -<4* ISÂ»V .. City of Aspen Commercial Character Area Public Amenity Space Design Objectives On-site and communal open space has been a Where considered to be compatible within the long-standing priority and characteristic of the Commercial Area, public amenity space should city Where it is required the form, orientation, achieve the following objectives: quality and use of such open space is of the 0 Create street vitality through the promotion utmost importance. Well defined public space of public gathering space. should be integrated with the traditional â€¢ Maintain a well-defined street edge and streetscape character o f a well-de fined street wall. street corner to ensure thatsuch public space The Planning and Zoning Commission and/ or creates an accent within the street fa,ade. the Historic Preservation Commission will decide â€¢ Create an additional commercial frontage whether, where and in what form Public Amenity and/ or space to the side or rear of the site Space will be required. or building Public amenity space along the primary street â€¢ Create a well defined, localizedpublicspace atthe street edge, where e.g. additional space frontage should be an accent within, and exception to, an otherwise well defined street fagade. The for street dining might be beneficial. urban form within this area is however less â€¢ Design a space that maximizes access to tightly defined than in the Commercial Core and sunlight throughout the year. there will be greater opportunity to create public â€¢ Create a second level space, when gathering space. There will be locations within appropriate, designed to ensure that it is the Commercial Area where either the character permanently open tothe publicandprovides and setting of the site or of a historic building will interest in the form of a scenic or other influence the form, location or appropriateness interpretive marker for the life of its service of such a space. as a public amenity space. In every case Public Amenity Space should be â€¢ Achieve second floor patio space that provides access to affordable commercial well defined and carefully designed. The design u ses. of public gathering space, its enclosure, layout and content will be an integral consideration in the proposed form of the space. Although a rhe Downtown Enhancement und Pedestrian Plaii matter for full review and approval at the Final should serve as an additional reference. Stage, its design should be envisioned at the time of conceptual review. , e ,Â· r, .. 36 - T -*E,rt,.p. 7211. * ./ *.. i /4- Â·'F f â€¢124 + I. . 7 . . '11 . . . 1 I. I ... .... ... Â·frr + . I a -9 21 *.4 9 :< fl. . irt?,2. --â‚¬Â£#*% pl.YEP *4*1*.4Â¥11Â·-7 $ -*.P 1. + t Public Amenity Space should be well-defined and designed to encoiti-age pedestrian acti-vity Cominercitil, Lodgi,ig and HistorieDistrict ' 4 \dk..,\ pagel7 Design Objectives and Guidelines ~ L_1-1-' .. Commercial Character Area City ofAspen 1. Providing public amenity space is a requirement r Public Amenity Space Types f:' in the Commercial Area. Here particular types . ,l .. . + -*' of public amenity space would be in character, .. . 21 Â· 7.-1. ensuring that they are well defined and an accent . *-,-JUA~.4 within the street block. These include: b 2 â€¢ Street facing amenity space â€¢ Mid-block walkway amenity space ~~ â€¢ Second level amenity space â€¢ Alley side amenity space Front yard amenity space i - . 12*___ - ..._-*..s ~ Guidelines for the location and design ofeach of g... these types follows. Amenity space is required in the Commercial Area. Street Facing Amenity Space A street facing amenity space, usually located toward lhe middle of a block, may be considered. % 1. R '4 1.7 A street facing amenity space shall meet 1 0 , ~ all of the following requirements: 1 1 â€¢ Abut the public sidewalk Be level with the sidewalk 4 F.1 :, 4 1%,mÂ»*1 ' * .. Ill 1 . . 1 [F1 1 â€¢ Be open to the sky iii '1 i .il-;li 1, 0 Be directly accessible to the public â€¢ Be paved or otherwise landscaped 1.8 A street-facing public amenity space shall A street facing amenity space sliall abut the ptiblic sidewalk. remain subordinate to the line of building fronts in the Commercial Area. A, V . -~ 1 0 Any public amenity space positioned at the . street edge shall respect the character of the - - 1% le 01 I streetscape and ensure thatstreet corners are - well defined, with buildings placed at the â€¢ i sidewalk edge. 1. 1 4 Pt - 4- 1 ... '6 â€¢ Sunken spaces, which are associated with .AA lit -- some past developments, adversely affect M .. . 4/ it. 4 . the street character. Where feasible, these -ts .y It - -2 f should be replaced with sidewalk level * -t M ~3:f ~2 - .2 6 IC, 2**1.'i . F 41 improvements. ... 'f.*99 1.9 Street facing amenity space shall contain , features to promote and enhance its use. These I. - , may include one or more of the following: 4"~.~'24 <2*'"*'Â·t-:.~ â€¢ Street furniture â€¢ Public art Sti-eet facing amenity space sliould be located to take advantage â€¢ Historical/interpretive marker of solar exposure. page 18 Commercial, Lodging and Historic District "1'15/ Design Objectives und Guidelines .. City of Aspen Commercial Character Area 0012-22211Â«00~01 r Ir :. *. , with regard to guideline 1.9 will be a matter for ' Â· k./td Â· - -.- may bediscussed atthe Conceptual Stage. I A .. / +,- i * Dl *' 11'FE' Mid-Block Walkway Amenity Space Â· The Commercial Area should be highly regarded L â‚¬r F./.. t '. . AR#.Mi~~i~i~~~~f".~:2Â·.*,. Alki 1 for its pedestrian character and 'walkability'. L' .2.4~ 4- The opportunities created by the extension and '. ..i '+ 1 . enhancement of the public circulation network , : Z -9 are encouraged. Typically only one such space ~9 - .... 47...... would occur along a single block face. t.'44+' ~.13 .*-T~ "*'w*,4* r///8 New buildings on sites occupying more than iff: ,9 1 *Â·.1-lied"a". ill"'. one traditional lot width may provide a mid- 1 .m . M -f + i 1 i l: 1: block walkway or through court within a single ....... I development or betweeii two developments. *IM ..; t..... This may also extend only part-way through the *49 ' parcel if locate- away from the site boundary ., This type of space shall be an extension of and a complement to the street and public circulation Apassageway throughaproperty,orone thatteads to aplaza, inay be considered.for Public Amenity Space. It should remainsubordinate network within the center of the city. to the overall wail plane of the block, and lead to actiuities within tile property or along an alleNÂ· This form of Public Amenity Space shou]d be a consideration on larger development sites within the city itlinks the potential ofadditional commercial frontage and access, with human scale space and circulation, enriching the public experience. Situated along the edge of a development site, itshould extend to link with the rear alley. Adjacent to a residential type historic building it can provide a respectful break and a space between the two. 1.10 Mid-block walkways shall remain subordinate in scale to traditional lot widths. â€¢ Mid-blockpublicwalkwayssliallbebetween 8 ft. and 10 ft. in widlh. 1.11 A mid-block walkway should provide public access to the following: â€¢ Additional commercial space and frontage within the walkway â€¢ Uses located at the rear of the property that are commercial in nature. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 5 - - /4 Design Objectives and Guidelines page 19 .. Commercial Character Area City of Aspen - Alley Side Amenity Space Public amenity space may be located to the rear I. I 1 7 of the site in association with the alleyway. Such a space shall provide access to commercial uses Â· ~ at the street or second floor level. Public amenity space may also be located at the corner of an alley ~~~3?r~*~~~:~~~.~,Â·~ and a street. Such spaces should be designed to enhance the use of alloys for supporting ./ ir i 1, i commercial uses. > 1.12 An alley side amenity space shall be designed to have these characteristics: â€¢ Direct public access to commercial space at ground or second floor levels â€¢ Maximize solar access to the alley side - amenily space Public amenity space located at mi alley should generally be solith â€¢ Enhance the attractiveness and use of the facing to maximize solar access. rear alley +4 '-4 -1 .... â€¢ Minimize the adverse impacts of adjacent 1 - r.1. 21- -1 I ,- - ~ service and parking areas 9 b ~~ ril '*ki t~~ :*,râ€¢ .~ -7- 44Â¢>'4: 1 M./.I' P ./. CULLFill/6% Alleys can be enhanced for ptiblic mnenity space mid commercial use. page 20 WI Commercial, Lodging und Historic District *h 358 Design Objectives a,id Guidelines -l~k . .. City of Aspen Commercial Character Area Second Level Amenity Space - / A -4..$.?wie, An outdoor patio space on a second floor, which is directly accessible to the general public, c ~ (: 1 1% , will be considered as a form of public amenity space when it is compatible with the context 1 1,< and is clearly inviting for public use. This will .# . I . - be most successful in association with outdoor -we- , dining space, In this respect it may be favorably *~j~;g*14i . :Â· considered within sites affected by mountain view planes. el Â·Â· . U.. 1.13 A second floor amenity space should meet ~ ; : all of the following criteria: . 1 I , â€¢ Ensure consistent public access . 1 â€¢ Be dedicated for public use . â€¢ Provide a public overlook and/or an Secoiid letiel space shall be accessible from a public space such as a sidewalk or street facing ainenity space. interpretive marker â€¢ Be identified by a marker at street level 1.14 Second level space should be oriented r./Mall~ to maximize solar access and views to the - I , i mountains or other landmarks. 3 Â«as- -6 - 1.15 Second level space should provide public r- - access by way of a visible and attractive public 4-A -- - . stair or elevator from a public street, alley, or t- 1-y=..4-t --~1 street level amenity space. 6/Millit.j 1,"Il""liallil I I. 7 . -.1. , 1.16 Second level dining may be considered. Ft --- ---- -- - â€¢ If the use changes, the space must remain ~ - accessible to the public so long as it is to Second floor amenity space should be oriented to maximize solar be considered meeting the Public Amenity access and views to the mountains. Space requirement. Front Yard Amenity Space , 1 .4 r . t. 1, lili// .. . Three historic one-story residential type buildings .b'.:1 . .... I 1/ * exist in ttlie Commercial Area. These are often lik; 4 ta,+ .- defined by a landscaped frotit yard and side yard setback. To maintain and enhance this tradition *2*t *-7.* A UL- * incertain areas, a landscaped front yard amenity ~ -.iq,< *9 1 ,-7* *.Â·Â·Â· ' -r A. g . I. space may be considered. rE* 1.17 Front and side yard amenity space should ~*4 ' 'ff34 I . be provided in the context of a historic one story .F. 4. . residential type building. . ... 1 ront yard amenity space shotild be provided in the context of a historic one-story residential hme building. Commercial, Lodging und Historic District page 21 Design Objectives and Guidelines .. Commercial Character Area City of Aspen Building Placement Street Fafades & Corners ~6 r Y 0 ~gll ?, Street corners are important elements in the i 7 . 1 >r de finition o f the street block and in the framing of 2 ....1 1.0 - f E-Â· l ..Â· many ofthe views which characterize the center - of the city. Here the buildings should strengthen k-- 2- F and define the building wall at the street edge. .. 1 0 Fa,ades should be oriented parallel to the street with variation in front wall setbacks kept to a minimum. Breaks in the street wall should occur as an accent within the street block, not the predominant pattern. Maintain the alignment offacades at tile sidewalk' s edge. Setbacks The Commercial Area has a strong and relatively consistent street fagade line to the south and a much varied line as building scale reduces to the north. Cornerbuildings anchor the street block to varying degrees throughout the area. Setbacks within the Commercial Area should reinforce the objective of enhancing the urban character and a stronger urban edge of the street falade and street corner. Local areas of open space further the objective of the street vitality created by well defined dining space. These should however remain as an accent within the street fagade. Side setbacks are associated with the more traditional small scale development within the area. They also provide the opportunity to enhance public passageways or through courts to the rear alley, with the advantages of improved public permeability, access and additional commercial frontage. See also Street & Circulation Pattern and Public Amenity Space design guidelines. Rear setbacks create the opportunity to achieve more creative and attrac.tive commercial and public space to the rear of the site and alley. page 22 1-34-1 e /11.3 1 Commercial, Lodging,ind Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines .. City of A.spen Commercial Character Area 1.18 Maintain the alignment of facades at the f t sidewalk's edge. 4.9, â€¢ Place as much of the facade of the building ~ 0' 7 F. I at the property line as possible. k 0: , I .,4114:3:dier,r...imilillilill/0, â€¢ A minimum of 60% of the front falade shall be at the property line. y 4 / *f &-1 I. :4~' I . â€¢ Locating an entire building front b will.; 4 ED'Â·,m//Ill behind the established storefront line is , >'044414 t. -1.1. lf Er'.- 4 * 2-I-- 1 inappropriate. , 1,-1.-+ i 1.19 A building may be set back from its side * I *st. b -Â· Â£u : I lot lines in accordance with design guidelines laa identified in Street & Alley System and Public >I ,; Amenity Space guidelines. %Â· i â€¢A: *4g Â·~ Building Orientation ' ** 4 *- tlia :ArÂ· 1 -0 4. Development within the Commercial Area is tab .... traditionally oriented with the street grid. This relationship should be maintained. 7 . p. ' 0 3 9 i a.:. 1.20 Building falades shall be parallel to the ~ ' + i facing street(s) and primary entrances shall be 4 Â·â€¢*.. - .t'. I oriented toward the street. Orient a building facnde pm-nllel to thefacing street. 1.21 Orient a new building to be parallel to its lot lines, similar to that of traditional building orientations. â€¢ The front of a primary structure shall be oriented to the street. Building Height, Mass & Scale The character of the Commercial Area derives in part from the range and variety of building heights. These generally vary from one to three and four stories towards the mountain base. To the north, the building height frequently varies and traditional lot width becomes again evident in the modulation of the block face. This helps to express and maintain the human scale and architectural character of the area. New development should continue this variation while also enhancing the definition of the street facade. A new building should also be sensitive to the setting of an adjacent historic building and the edge of a historic district. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Desig*Objectives and Guidelines * page 23 .. Commercial Character Area City of Aspen Height Variation Variation in height should occur where the site is larger than two traditional lot widths, in order to reduce overall scale of the building. A variation in faqade height, often in conjunction with setting back an upper floor, may be required. It :*W, ./. %- .Â£ : 1.22 Building fagade height shall be varied . . from the fagade height of adjacent buildings of I .... . , , the same number of stories by a minimum of 2 1 < â€¢ ; 1 4,0 t ; 0 : feet. i â€¢ 1.1 â€¢ If an existing structure is three stories and 38 ft. tall for example, then adjacent new infill may be three stories, but must vary in Amethod ofachiroing height Variatioll within n single bilitding is to step the buildiug Along tile plimary .faqade. fagade height by a minimum of 2 ft. 1. 1.23 A new building or addition should ref[ect 111 '. the range and variation inbuildingheightof the Commercial Area. â€¢ Refer to the zone district regulations to /0 : determine the maximum height on the subject properly. ' t. â€¢ Aminimum9ft. floortoceilingheightistobe maintained on second stories and higher. â€¢ Additional height, as permitted in the zone 4 Â¢;Xt '. 2 1 district, maybeadded for one ormore of the following reasons: - Inordertoachieveatleastatwo-footvariation i in height with an adjacent building. - The primary function of the building is Height varied bet-weeit two mid three stories, -with the three story civic. (i.e. the building is a Museum, Civic portion at the rear of the lot. Building, Performance Hall, Fire station, -4- etc.) 3 -,P. :Â¥k:, ' ,$ 6.~h=~ 01Â»t> - 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. 7-0 benefit the livability of Affordable 0 Â· Housing units. 4' 4 - To make a demonstrable (to be verified by U Â¥12 vyl B It r. 1 : t the Building Department) contribution to I â‚¬ ' 4444 Â·Â·v. the building's overall energy efficiency, A ..'; I for instance by providing improved day- lighting. Height varied between troo and three stories, :uith the thiÂ·ee story portion at the front of the lot. page 24 EU' ~ , - Commercial, Lodging and Historic District = 2 Design Objectives und Giddelines 3 74 .. City of Aspen Commercial Character Area 1.24 Heightvariationshouldbeachievedusing ,+ -'-~*"- -Â· .... ./ .//*./.-....... one or more of the following: 2 ~ 1 -- --- ' .- --- 1 --4-. --- -I. - --.---u --'-- --- ... &' - r.IRNA. -2--- Of r, â€¢ Vary thebuildingheight inaccordancewith #. - traditional lot width. =9JN" â€¢ Setbacktheupper floorto vary thebuilding fa,ade profile(s) and the roof forms across -- -->- -. >-,1.21 :f jiti ~ r the width and the depth of the building. â€¢ Vary the fagade (or parapet) heights at the 4 ., , : ' , -i . 1.,ri i 44*-0.- front. :Â·.A : t. &9*F â€¢ Step down the rear of the building towards Â· - the alley, in conjunction with other design 4,1 standards and guidelines. Buildings otisites larger than two traditional lot widths sliould be Height Variation for Larger Sites designed to reflect the traditional scale of development. Buildings within the commercial center and historic core of Aspen represenl the traditional lot widths of the city (30 ft.), either in building width orthe horizontal and vertical design articulation of the street fa,ade. This pattern should be expressed in the Commercial Area. New development occupying a site of more than one traditional /ee 0 + lot width should be designed to integrate with the scale created by narrower existing buildings. Ail, â€¢'.,4.. The architectural rhythm ofearlierstreet faqades should also be reflected in new development to I '.. 6 ... 4~ i retain and enhance the human scale and character , I of the center of the city. Height varied between one and two stories, in the center of a 1.25 On sites comprising more than two tliree-lot bitilding traditional lot widths, the fagade height shall be varied to reflect traditional lot width. - â€¢ The fagade lieight shall be varied to reflect - - ; . 91'nul. .... 4 z ... 4.0 . . Â· 11. traditional lot width. â€¢ Height should be varied every 6() ft. 1-' 1.+07 I minimum and preferably every 30 fl. of linear frontage in keeping with traditional - lot widtlis and development patterns. â€¢ No more thaii two consecutive 30 ft. fagade 1% .1 1, modules may be three stories tall, within an r . : individual building. r L. â€¢ A rear portion of a third module may rise to three stories, if the front is set back a minimum of 40 feet from the street falade. Height varied between two mid three stories. (e.g. at a minimum, the front 40 feet may be no more than two stories in height.) Commercial, Lodging tind ilistoric District page 25 1Design Objectives iln d GililltÂ·lilles 339 0 0 0 MATERIAL LEGEND SAND STONE PANELS METAL PANELS NEW WOOD SIDING METAL PANELS GLASS RAILING ~ NEW BARN SIDING EXISTING WOOD SIDING PAINT TOP ah 139' -6" 1 l --- 1-13-E--4 ROOF â€ž 131'- 6" rl' 2 41:. 101 2 ...10 u.Â£7 1-4 . 5 21.7 62*2, i 19% I 3 r MIC Y. 3 Â§1 - /4 rk , -Iff,. 02.u, t ,/22,=- i-E.u.â€¢-I .0 -Â· - ~ r:agir..59 /.-Â·.Â·Â·i' -1-1 d# J.,- 11 a L., Jl;:1~11+4 -li.ihz: 7 Â·â€¢ i. Â·. .41 Â· 0,U:,1 u 20: v-- - - k. 4 , - I I. 2'*J_ Â·d. 7, t. 4.., - 1 .. .N... . .... _ A ' ./ t. - f . - I I Level 1 â€ž 100'06" BERG DUPLEX AND CRANDALL BUILDING /--1 EXIST. CAB INS NORTH 00 11 0 V toit ..1 tivo .054 ARCHITECTURE ~ ~ 1211 -2ImIIllly .....ill.----1.-l.Jol--li.=---- ~------------- ...fill URBAN DESIGN INTERIOR DESIGN .1,1.-~ ..... ~- EXHIBIT 1~ RECEIVED MAY 3 0 2012 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 61-3 E. HDphns Are-nm , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: \No Wn-n ' 1 L) l/ne / 3 ,20~2-, STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, Jok Jacobion of Nia< Und Plannin r- (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Coforado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: A Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. f Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen~*) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the 20 day of NAM , 2002=-,to and including the date and time ofthe public hearing.1 A photograph Of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. A Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy ofthe owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) .. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. /-4-6-'.-4.ae-Â»- U The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 361 day of fhay 2001, by J o d i .1 4,0 he.A 40'k WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ' -4 Mycommission expires: tola,(?LA/015 LORI MOSCHET NOTARY PUBLIC du Â«Ulecket- ~ STATE OF COLORADO Notary Public My Commission Exoires 10/29/2015 ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL .. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 623 E. HOPKINS AVENUE, CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, DEMOLITION AND ON SITE RELOCATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, June 13, 2012, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Aspen Block 99, LLC, 532 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, 970-920-4988. The applicant is represented by OZ Architecture and Haas Land Planning, LLC. The project affects the property located at 623 E. Hopkins Avenue, Lots F and G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, PID #2737-182-12-001. The applicant proposes to temporarily lift the two historic structures at the front of the property to install basements, undertake restoration work on the two structures, and to demolish and replace a non-historic building along the alley. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2758, amy.guthrie@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Ann Mullins Chair, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on May 24,2012 City of Aspen Account 14-4 . ...4 . 44â„¢ 1 * M// 1 1-,4.2 *1* In:% 4 fa F"fr] 49'.ke.ped: . 1.. .7 4 ' I . 11 .blri. - dy- I ...54.5-- , â€¢, it- e ... 7/ 4 43, Â·, ./ a. *F.;/.,A. , 09 l~91.0Â® Al@Av 0@Ae elqi led[UOO lUlU 29 x u.lu.1 98.1Eullol opienb!13 EXHIBIT * 1~ 51@Av 41!AA 0'q!Â·leduloo â€ž8/g zxâ€žL ezis li~ Â£1* I. 300 SPRING STREET ASPEN LLC t 308 HUNTER LLC 530 HOPKINS L Â» PO BOX 5000 : ' 490 WILLIAMS ST 6 5301/2 E HOPKI SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 DENVER, CO 80218 , ASPEN, CO 81611 625 MAIN ASPEN LLC 630 EAST HYMAN LLC 633 SPRING 11 LLC I 106 W GERMANIA PL#230 532 E HOPKINS AVE 418 E COOPER AVE #207 CHICAGO, IL 60610 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 11 ' ALPINE BANK ASPEN I ARCHDIOCESE OF DENVER 635 E HOPKINS LLC ~ ATTN ERIN WIENCEK ; 'SAINT MARYS 532 E HOPKINS : PO BOX 10000 1300 S STEELE ST ASPEN, CO 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 , DENVER, CO 80210 ASHTON JONATHAN G ASPEN 719 HOLDINGS LLC i ASPEN ART MUSEUM PO BOX 26 PO BOX 11600 , ' 590 N MILL ST ' JAMES TOWN, CO 80455 ASPEN, CO 81612 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN PLAZA LLC ' '1 1 AUSTIN LAWRENCE CONNER LLC : AVP PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 1709 532 E HOPKINS AVE 630 E HYMAN AVE #25 C/O STEVE MARCUS ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 i ASPEN, CO 81612 11 BASS CAHN 601 LLC : BAUM ROBERT E BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC PO BOX 4060 PO BOX 1518 65 FIRST NECK LN i ASPEN, CO 81612 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 ' SOUTHAMPTON, NY 11968 BERN FAMILY ASPEN PROPERTY LLC BG SPRING LLC .'BOOHER ANDREA LYNN 944 PARK AVE 14TH FL 300 S SPRING ST #202 r 709 EMAIN STREET #303 1 NEW YORK: NY 10028 ASPEN, CO 81611 ; 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 BRYANT CAROLINA H BURSTEN GABRIELLA CICUREL CARY PO BOX 5217 PO BOX 2061 . 2615 N LAKEWOOD SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81612 CHICAGO, IL 60614 CIPOLLINO NICHOLAS COLORADO MTN NEWS MEDIA ~ CROSS JUDITH 300 QUAIL RD ~ ~ PO BOX 1927 ~ PO BOX 3388 1 MERRITT, NC 28556-9641 CARSON CITY, NV 89702 ASPEN, CO 81612 DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST DUNN JUDITH A REV LIV TRUST EDGE OF AJAX INC 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY 8051 LOCKLIN LN 201 E SILVER ST SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 ~ COMMERCE TOWNSHIP, MI 48382 , MARBLE, CO 81623 label size 1"x2 5/8" compatible with Avery Â®5160/8160 Ctin 04+0 ria firm'+ OC n,rn v 27 ,-nrn narn..+:61. nun,â€¢ A..-..(Rk:408/0-lon 09 Le/OWL 51@AV 00/2 8lqlledll!00 lUlU 29 X LUU] 98 -lewjoi op 0#2!13 41*At ~/09L9Â® 53 @Av 41!M 0'q!.leduloo â€ž9/9 Ex â€ž I @zis Ieqel ~ --52..Â£44 EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA EDWARDS CHARLES N 1 EXELCEDAR INC 20% 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 189 BENVENUE ST : 534 E HYMAN AVE ~ JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 WELLSLEY, MA 024827104 , | ASPEN, CO 81611 FURNGULF LTD GELD LLC FARRELL SCOTT W A COLO JOINT VENTURE C/O LOWELL MEYER PO BOX 9656 616 E HYMAN AVE PO BOX 1247 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612-1247 GOODING SEAN A 80% & RICHARD L GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY & BARBARA 20% 460 ST PAUL ST ' PARTNERS LLC C/O PARAGON RANCH INC 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD#2222 DENVER, CO 80206 620 E HYMAN AVE #1E , LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 ~ ASPEN, CO 81611 GURHOLT CHARLES J & VERNE HESSELSCHWERDT BILL & TRISH HIMAN LLC PO BOX 6159 N5999 GURHOLT RD : PO BOX 1266 SCANDINAVIA, WI 54977 1 BASALT, CO 81621 ' AUSTRALIA, SWANBOURNE WA 6010 1 . . 1' HONEA KATHARINE M Â· HOPKINS DEV LLC HORSEFINS LLC PO BOX 288 345 PARKAVE 33RD FLR 601 E HOPKINS AVE BASALT, CO 81621 ~. NEW YORK, NY 10154 ASPEN, CO 81611 HOVERSTEN PHILIP E & LOUISE B ' : HUNDERT DANIEL G ~ | HUNTER SQUARE LLC 90% 2990 BOOTH CREEK DR. 417-A MAIN ST 1' , PO BOX 2 VAIL, CO 81657 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 i : ' SONOMA, CA 95476 HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES 11 LLC ~ . IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 1 PO BOX 642 ~ NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 1: | GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 INDY HOUSE LLC 5 IRVINE DOUGLAS FORBES JARDEN CORPORATION 605 OCEAN BLVD 1 201 N MILL ST I I ~ 2381 EXECUTIVE CENTER DR GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 : ~ ASPEN, CO 81611 ; , BOCA RATON, FL 33431 i Â·Â·1 11 1, I JOSHUA & CO REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS :JURINE LLC 10% LAWROM LLC LLC PO BOX 2 533 E HOPKINS AVE 300 S HUNTER ST SONOMA, CA 95476 ~ ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 LEE GREGORY K & DEBBIE L LINK LYNN B ' LUCKYSTAR LLC 19777 W CORNELL PL PO BOX 7942 ~ PO BOX 7755 LAKEWOOD, CO 80227 ' ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81612 1 !1 i label size I"x25/8" compatible with Avery Â®5160/81&0 Ftin|IAHA rlo formit 95 mm v 87 mm r.nmngtihIA 91/Art Avon, Â®41Aft/Al All STAPt**il rn.77~~-7/948 09L8/091.9Â® Al@AY 08/'le elq!*duloo lUlu 29 X lulll 93 lelll]01 ep euenb!13 ~0918/09 19Â® Al@AV 41!AA @Iq!*100 .9/g gxâ€žLez!3 1<~~~ 1 LUNDGREN WIEDINMYER DONNA TRST MAHONEY SHARON A 1 MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP PO BOX 6700 1 PO BOX 11694 5 317 SIDNEY BAKER S #400 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81612 KERRVILLE,TX 78028 MARTELL BARBARA 1 MCDONALD FRANCIS B MCPHETRES RICHARD M 7 YOUNG ST 702 E HYMAN AVE ' r | PO BOX 4671 BARTON ASPEN, CO 81611 i ASPEN, CO 81612 ACT 2600 AUSTRALIA, MHT LLC MONTANARO JOHN & SUSAN FAMILY I ~ ~ MYSKO BOHDAN D TRUST PO BOX 25318 615 E HOPKINS ST CROIX VIRGIN ISLANDS 00824, , ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 457 MALIBU, CA 90265 NONNIE LLC ORIGINAL CURVE CONDO #310 LLC PATTERSON VICKI C/O LAURA PIETRZAK PO BOX 565 ~ PO BOX 8523 1796 E SOPRIS CREEK RD ! ASPEN, CO 81612 . 1 ASPEN, CO 81612 BASALT, CO 81621 PINKOS DANNY & ANNA | PITKIN CENTER CONDO OWNERS PITKIN COUNTY BANK 80% i PO BOX 6581 'ASSOC 534 E HYMAN AVE SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 |517 W NORTH ST : ASPEN, CO 81611 i Â· 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 1 ,~ 1 1 Iii , QUARRY INTERESTS LTD RAINER EWALD ' REDSTONE SUSAN 9932 LAKEWAY CT r Â·1409 E COOPER AVE #4 ~ 120 E 90TH ST #11-B DALLAS, TX 75230 f ASPEN, CO 81611 : i NEW YORK, NY 10128 ' ROSENFIELD LYNNE CARYN ~ ROSS NEIL ~ ROTHBERG MARJORIE 709 E MAIN ST #203 100 S SPRING ST 1 2006 N BANCROFT PKWY ASPEN, CO 81611-2059 ASPEN, CO 81611 WILMINGTON, DE 19806 I,i ROTHBLUM PHILIP & MARCIA RUST TRUST SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST 40 EAST 80 ST #26A 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD #760 Â· ~ PO BOX 4897 NEW YORK, NY 10075 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 1 Â· ASPEN, CO 81612 1 j f 2, i SEID MEL 1 1 SELDIN CHRISTOPHER G SHOAF JEFFREY S. 1104 DALE AVE 22 MOUNTAIN CT PO BOX 3123 ASPEN, CO 81611 ; ~ BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81612 SLS LLC SNOWMASS CORPORATION STEWART TITLE CO C/O JENNIFER SCHUMACHER 101 FOUNDERS PL#104 PO BOX 620 PO BOX 936 ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 , TAYLORSVILLE, NC 28681 ,;t !1 1 11 label size 1"x25/8" compatible with Avery Â®5160/8160 Etiohette de format 25 mm x 87 mm comnatihle aver Averv Â®.5160/8160 09 [8/0~~ 51@AV 09/\2 9Iq !12dll!00 Ullil Z9 X LULU 98 11?u.1101 ep 0110nbl 13 ./0919Â® Al@Av 41!AA elqlleduloo â€ž8/9 E x,1 L Dz!s leqel ~ / T TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS CO THOMPSON ROSS & LYNETTE TRAVIS SHELBY J 602 E HYMAN #201 PO BOX 1186 208 E 28TH ST - APT 2G ASPEN, CO 81611 i CARBONDALE, CO 81623 NEW YORK, NY 10016 ' ~ VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC TROUSDALE JEAN VICK VANWOERKOM LAURIE C/O KATIE REED MGT 611 E HOPKINS AVE ' PO BOX 341 418 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 ASPEN, CO 81611 VVAGAR RICH VRANA MALEKA ~ WEEKS ROBIN C/O RICH WAGAR ASSOC LLC PO BOX 4535 526 RIDGEWAY DR : 100 S SPRING ST #3 ASPEN, CO 81612 METAIRIE, LA 70001 'ASPEN, CO 81611 \ i WHITEHILL STEPHEN LANE ' WILSON STACE S 1 WOODS FRANK J 111 5320 W HARBOR VILLAGE DR #201 PO BOX 5217 205 S MILL ST #301A Â· VERO BEACH: FL 32967 1 SNOWMASS VILLAGE, CO 81615 ASPEN, CO 81611 WRIGHT CHRISTOPHER N 13 BRAMLEY RD LONDON W10 6SP UK, j: 1 1: 1/ i: h L 1 4 :i i label size 1 " x 2 5/8" compatible with Avery Â®5160/8160 Etiohette de format 25 mm x 67 mm comnatihle avec Averv Â®5160/8160 e . AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 623 Â£ 46fkkNLS AÂ«. , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Uted -\ IN#il tb / Q 5:Sof,0~ , 2012. STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1, (name, please print) AÂ»re.4 <Scc,-re..n being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: r V Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials. which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 20 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date o f the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) ' 1 Z .... Â¢ 0 51 . El : d I 9 4 ce . 0 4 1 0 J /O 1 3 2 /9 Â·44, A 8 24.71 2 2 3 ,.,..........ae -3 'E 0 8 g 60 -g g A i m ps 3 2 41 -3:Â·- 4 C i Z U Z Â© 2 b 02=togâ‚¬~ @ h N. M = -2 23) 2 -2 19 2 -ce 5 U X EV 9 -9 2 =2 2 2 M et 2 4 O2 Cd O 13 .r~ . 0 11 Gagâ‚¬55 ArM E la e i t VJ DE; E- 32 (c M o.f 0 5 2 314 45 5 -* 2 -2 4* 2 1 1 01 1% 7~ *42 w 29 'k 8 JA 8 0 9 58 /8 04 A <3-t 8 11% i m 2 5143 W E O 5 6â€¢ M A -O o i 7 + 4 2 .6 2 2 0 G f 2 OvE A Oung h * * 7 A d g u 2 PUBLIC NOTICE ,--1 N 1 "EV,2 E= 8 0 24 4 - k O .9 .9 RE:623 E. HOPK NS AVENUE, CONCEPTUAL 2 .m .16* U C M MAJOR DEVELOPMENT AND COMMERCIAL U#2% *r ~- DESIGN REVIE,M, DEMOLITION AND ON SITE <<r,-7 C/D Ench*,~fof&2 01 RELOCATION -U=22 Sed 0 #filfwgig NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, June 13,2012, at a 43*W UU meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen = 4 POMMOD 4Â§.85 20 . Historic Preservation Commission, Council Cham . bers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to con- U sider an application submitted by Aspen Block 99. A h 2 E .8 d W g.g ~Fo Em LLC, 532 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, 97&.920-4988. The applicant is represented by OZ g * P C .9 .d â‚¬ project affects the property located at 623 E. Hop- Arcllitecture and Haas Land Planning, LLC. The ..2 m NME EE* *M rado, PID #2737-182-12-001. The applicant pro- kins Avenue, Lots F and G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colo- poses to temporarily lift the two historic structures +0:41<4 at the front of the property to install basements, ~ and to demolish and replace a non-historic build- undertake restoration work on the two structures, 2287/~ ing along the alley. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community De velopment Department, 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2758, amv.quthrie@ci.aspen.co.us. UAAÂ©Qi< s/Ann Mullins Chair, *** * Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on May 24, 2012. [7932645] aGILLON 62[IDAIGID r text ame dme nt: Whenever the official zoning trict map is in other WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL SIOI.LONI SMSINIA<0 1.LVISGI 7 SIATIAT AO enactment o :SO.Itdxo :37HVOITddÂ¥' SV SAL amended i DIION alI, The foregoing "Affidavit of No~e" was a cient le a addresses .. HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC June 5,2012 Ms. Amy Guthrie City ofAspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Revised Conceptual Application for 623 East Hopkins, Aspen (Lots F & G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen; PID # 2737-182-12-001; a/lda "Susie's" Property) Dear Amy: Based on the comments received via email on May 31,2012, after your staff meeting, the applicant has completed several revisions to the proposed plans. A new plan set has been prepared by Oz Architecture for your use and distribution to the HPC. In addition, some explanation ofthe plans and response to the aforementioned email is provided below. First, to be clear, absolutely no variances are required for this mixed-use project in the C- 1 Zone District. There is no minimum lot area per dwelling unit, no minimum lot width, no setback requirements, and no minimum distance between buildings for this type of development. Additionally, the maximum height of the third-story element on the new construction is proposed to be approximately 31 14 feet tall and only 344 feet to the top of the railing on its rooftop deck; the maximum height allowed by-right in this zone district is 36 feet for these three-story elements. In other words, in an effort to be as sensitive as possible to the historic resources and despite the fact that the adjacent townhomes are significantly taller, the proposal is not even using all the height allowed by right on this property. In addition, the proposed two-story elements top out more than four (4) feet below the 28 foot height limit applicable to these portions of the structure. The residential unit will contain 2,487 square feet of net livable area; the applicant will utilize one TDR to accommodate this, as allowed by the Code for the C-1 Zone District. With this net livable unit size, the total proposed Free-Market Residential Floor Area is still just 95.3% of that allowed. Additionally, the overall development not only complies with all applicable FAR limits, but seeks to develop only 37.2% of the 15,000 square feet allowed by-right. Put another way, almost twice as much allowable floor area is being left unused than will be developed in the entire project. Finally, the total free-market residential net livable area proposed (2,487sf) remains less than the total above grade commercial FAR (2,656sf), thereby assuring compliance with the Commercial/Residential ratio requirement of the C-1 zone. In total, although the property maintains certain clearly specified development rights by code, less than 38% of the permitted floor area is proposed for development. Similarly, although no yard area setbacks are required, the applicant has included more than â€¢ 201 N MILL STREET, SUITE 108 â€¢ ASPEN, COLORADO â€¢ 81611 â€¢ â€¢ (970) 925-7819 â€¢ MITCH@HLPASPEN.COM â€¢ .. sufficient setbacks, more public amenity space than necessary and generous distances between the historic structures and the new construction while keeping all construction well below allowable/applicable height limits. Moreover, the proposed designs have increased the setbacks of each floor level from the level below so as to better step the height and massing back away from the two historic resources at the front of the property. Although the two historic structures to be preserved and fully restored are only one story in height, the approved and existing development patterns of adjacent properties (i.e., the Berg property to the east, and the existing townhomes structure to the west) as well as the sensitivities the applicant has clearly incorporated must be kept in mind during the project's review. Furthermore, the application does not request any Floor Area bonuses and, therefore, a fair balancing of applicable HPC Design Guidelines is required. Next, in response to the concerns outlined in your May 31 email, the plans have been revised to make perfectly clear that the basement level of the new structure does not include anything that might possible serve as net leasable commercial space. There is merely a mechanical room in one small section and the remainder o f that level is nothing more than crawl space with inadequate head heights to serve any leasable function; no deed restriction will be required as the plans and representation provide more than adequate assurance. However, if a condition of approval stating that these areas cannot be used as net leasable space, the applicant is amenable to such. The second floor commercial/office space in the new structure has been eliminated altogether. The entirety of the second and third floors is within the single residential unit only, and the ground level includes only the garage, common circulation areas and two commercial/office spaces. As such, there should be no concern going forward about any of the commercial spaces being absorbed into the free market residential unit. Like the basement/crawl space level, there will be no need for a deed restriction as the plans and representations provide more than adequate assurance. Similarly, should staff feel a condition of approval is warranted, the applicant will be amendable to a condition outlining that the only approved net leasable space is on the ground level. As correctly pointed out, the most current code provisions distribute the floor area exemption for deck space between the various uses within a mixed use project. With an allowable free market residential FAR of 3,000sf, the available deck exemption is just 450sf and the revised plans reflect and comply with this limitation. While up to 1,350sf of commercial deck space is allowed as exempt FAR, no such space is currently proposed. The third floor massing has been further minimized as suggested. It has been pulled in from the boundaries of the second floor on all sides of the building. The proposed two- story elements top out more than four (4) feet below the 28 foot height limit applicable to these portions of the structure. The third floor has also been minimized in profile to fall well below the allowable height for third story elements in the C-1 zone district. As mentioned above, the maximum height of the third-story element on the new construction Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Addendum Page 2 .. is proposed to be approximately 31!4 feet tall and only 3414 feet to the top of the railing on its rooftop deck; the maximum height allowed by-right in this zone district is 36 feet for these three-story elements. In other words, in an effort to be as sensitive as possible to the historic resources and despite the fact that the adjacent townhomes are significantly taller, the proposal is not even using all the height allowed by right on this property. In addition, the third floor has been clad in a different and softer material than found on the levels below, which will further decrease its perceived mass and scale. Cues have been taken from the successful massing of the Connor Cabins project. The overall size of the rear building has been decreased substantially and, again, falls well below limits allowed by right in this zone district. The ability to use a TDR to enable more livable area within the free market residence is clearly and objectively provided in the code. More importantly, the use of a TDR has no bearing on the size, mass or scale of the rear building as the TDR merely enables use of the allowable Floor Area within the unit, as livable space, as opposed to the same floor area being wasted on inefficient common areas, hallways, staircases, etc. Please also note that this proposal uses only 95.3% of the allowable free market residential floor area. Finally, the proposed fenestration and exterior building materials have been somewhat revised as well. That said, the applicant is aware that these elements and the details of their design will be further discussed during the Final HPC review process. It is hoped that the information provided herein and in the accompanying plan sets proves helpful in the review and approval of this exceptional project and exemplary preservation effort. If you should have any questions or desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC *f 1 7 / 1% J Mitch Haas Owner/Manager Susie's Remodel - HPC Conceptual Addendum Page 3 C. 1, ' . . 2= . I . : :44 . â‚¬lt..... .1,- X.,12ti-*241/"9 1Â£~,~ * 4 - t.* 0 0, *~ 73% Id ./ .Ii '* 6 -4 1 1 I. 214 -8. - â€žr ..4. E .. 6 Â¢, .,1-: 34 49 1 1.F - 1.1 1 1 ..~ - 1:.1 I. i ' * 11 41. ~ h tÂ¥ â€¢A :.*%% .i 0 . ..Â« 4 ..3:de--91â€¢4Â·ro-- p flu . .tle.t. ..Of-/9-4..195 "fi- .&. 4Â·'tÂ·Uk'. 7 '~'~rtU~z ti*.A<' - ,A 1: < â‚¬ I. i . ., ' ' I t.J .$14. , 1.- i ''Â·Â·Â·u,ZetÂ«â‚¬. 4-49.:i. . *4*/L~~~W~jiN.iv. 91 -a -:. ~: -4.-rte ' Â·14*4%$7Â¥,94,~ ' 7 9 19.2. 7 -/4-r 5.1,1Â·:t- Zk- 9:t.,2, 623 EAST HOPKINS PHONE: 303.861.5704 PAGE Perspective 01 FAX: 303.861.9230 ASPEN, CO 0 510128.01 â€¢ 06.13.2012 â€¢ WWW.OZARCH.COM H-17 , 4 ~'*t ''iÂ· ./ .f . . -4* ..........Fl,>I Â· â€¢ 13/9 .-- 41,4 .W . 1 . ' 40 4 â‚¬ . .% 7 3.!E . 44 2 Ve -1-,7 .. 1 .%44 . - --* 7 /. / ry :'~iÂ· f...:' *. ~I,13 : 70- -31?.7-- ~ i* . ~i= f# ; Â· fit-Â¢9. I. : '., 7.xur. d-,gl -4:4..-* . *~~~ *.'i~*6 t~9,.2*24526 1 3= , 3,-E -- 3--7 60 P~43:At?'i~ ..j\*d~.2-2.9.4..... ; . _-I. : 7/0 *>'39.../.7 I 42. ~9:44. -7.-~m-"k 2,4/Viâ‚¬/ 2 64 fÂ·. . 7 -J..=L- p 4 2 - Â·f. A. -/.~.dig.,i 7.4, 11.=. 17 .1,2,!4'.11 A.ple /4 P : 1~: ;*El" r.. -t, .. 4-5,2,4,0 Â·- 7 &/ 3 Tri , itri"eÂ· .Â¥t ..'/ i.'| 1/ .4-*-~~ ~R: ':: y~ ~-222 .- - 10 I.Ii.-I ' . 3.0Â§) A- 1.10.6 , ':f: 1,9; 1. ~ , M,/9.-.~.2~ ..i L "*.i:*i:Â· I ~led>.2,4 *Â»**0*4/* I .. j.# 1- 1 1 . 'vÂ· .e ..'., I - -3~i: W+71*p tiilÂ©kin , . 1% .1.1...,et:- 1.:â‚¬k~. , -- .4.-itaÂ¥?a 4- , 4. 39<-2 . -1.1.47%40. â„¢*-Â·.- -* * * : r .- - rr. f--4- 1 - lt.Â· ist/li"F - I ... 623 EAST HOPKINS PHONE: 303.861.5704 Perspective 021 FAX: 303.861.9230 PAGE ASPEN, CO â€¢ 510128.01 â€¢ 06.13.2012 0 WWWOZARCH.COM H-18 p' "t 44 1 1 :Â·44Â·, /9 $ I 1 , S ,Â£ t , . 4 - 9 , 7 4 f ?44 4 ..~ 941 11 ....3, ~ . j.../W. 'r--I.- ~ I. -- f 1 . ... A. -- a./.Al- - &1.3 f A~&*&:24'.!.20" ..........In 0 :' ... . 3 IF 3 1 . 3, : .. ... .. . I./ . -1-- , . 7 _7'f , S--6%*404 ..e=U - I ilillillillillill ilbli. 3 ''442 42%%-7 "Â·Â·Â»;e : i,Ar Â·Â·~ AM== .. 1.6,& 1. V; I rk fliN: Z tt . 4% 26,4/71 5 22.4Â»Â¢4*1 14//H orÂ» . -I-Illillill./.- 'tuf.241Â« - 4 %1*2. 2-. , 4. k . i.tfuleÂ»f I,Â·Â· ~\ #~. :-7 4>6x I ' \4 , r ~. . 1\ .n /11/ 1 .,4ik-Â· - \1 .a- m-.-9':r---'4 ...1 -+I'lilli-I. \ It..+ ./. V. Jlk ~ 1 n , + - 1 0 111 1 S - lit . 0 ---i j I .. Â·11 , 1.1 . 1 /1 lim .44-tf..:3*;REÂ»44,5.-0,2 . I 'F &-. *... - I .. - .32-1.4 - 623 EAST HOPKINS PHONE: 303.861.5704 Perspective 031 FAX: 303.861.9230 PAGE .. D ASPEN, CO â€¢ 510128.01 â€¢ 06.13.2012 â€¢ WWW.OZARCH.COM H-19 Au\liu I .~ 4% f ...' A If-Â«,62..r . - 77 4. ve---2.- - . L .9 . ... I , 4 / r ... vp3 . 4,Â·o ..4Â·k:r.Â· L .. 1 %4 . â€¢ . 1, I. . .. d. 4..6 1. 74_ L. - * .4.-,--A r . ..* .I . ..er- & I . '- ", 44-â€¢ Â¢ 1- '1. :440. 1 Â·Â· : 3. .4 . 2 421 " . 0. .1.- r .. J ** 4, 0.40 " .' ,#. 4*%- - 9 1 Ij #Ift, .. 2 'a (11 Fs /i)&4 9. 1- AÂ¢ Â» . .. i 11 5 4 :~ ~ z ~* 25Â»-V t -/91'Env â‚¬ P , 41.4 : :- 1 4. - k E-'&.eli='.gl.-.. j Ntt = I- 2 ./r.. 4 -1.. *0492 3*1 Q -4. ikk ' 4.....I , M.~Â·., k t. .% , ~ ~ 4.~. 4. - (11 r m. ~-1 L 11, . 7- J.N. . - 4 . ./2 .- . - . 1..3 t.,--:gi'.flt. .. :A<.1 ''~~ "k 44 -.1 4.7,, tz> 4/.714.6,42:. I jilli I r . 3/vqi , ;47 2â‚¬ I V e. .e '11%-.b 4 ...1 . An 4 44 . V ... ,.- , Ft ' . . . re- adl ' ...6 .1. .- 1 -4 4. 0/9..C. ~Â·,p.{4 , 1.. :. . - 1 ./4 i.-i I .q I , I .- . . A'll - " ..ei. 0 1. 9*44.94 .;33( ~[Â·rt ' 41 9/ , 449+ 4 t- 5/ D.' ..f * - ft 67 4.1 X. W.<2 ,- I - + 9, $ 6. 111.. - rY -7 f R.I - I. 6 ... - *.1- ! - 1 | '71 ' i .f 1 11. . -4 . Â¥29 1 1 - :22*.1 4 ~ . . 42 1.-, I - 1 0, Â·d44 .i ; F , g...... , J 1 .. .i,- I '* Â· . ...-2- 7-.1 .r ---. c â‚¬-,7 -3.2 r i f *i -- t lt- 2 = N . -1.- 62 - 623 EAST HOPKINS PHONE: 303.861.5704 Perspective 04 1 FAX: 303.861.9230 PAGE ASPEN, CO â€¢ 510128.01 â€¢ 06.13.2012 â€¢ WWW.OZARCH.COM H- 20 .... 1 -N k ' . Â«"f -A=gÂ·râ€žo) 4 //7 Â£4~~i~92bJU3\ L U - E Uals U 4 - 240:* oftÂ» 9 3 4 Â» ki C *7 ./ 3742%*fritÂ®~ l*~lmejh *e Cl.,gm~EA44-7 44254%/&7 Aulf-7< 9 /7~~Â» ttiO-*Â«IEz#~mr,-,_- 3~ RENDERING FROM HOPKINS -- i 1,9 OEW ur*~ BUd**47*rk-- 7 1 AOISE-/25 â‚¬ 44- ,-4 0_*~*~-DE COOPER AVE UJ1-i It -1 lic k. "i VICINITY MAP: ASPEN, COLORADO DESIGN TEAM: ARCHITECT. OWNER. PLANNER: GREG AND JANE HILLS OZ ARCHITECTURE MITCH HAAS 3003 LARIMER STREET 635 E. HOPKINS LLC HAAS LAND PLANNING LLC. 532 E. HOPKINS AVE. DENVER, CO 80205 201 N. MILL STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 SUITE 108 303-861-5704 970-920-4988 EXT. 201 ASPEN, CO 81611 970-925-7819 ARCHITECTURE ~ ~ URBAN DESIGN Â® INTERIOR DESIGN â€¢ â€¢ O , :0 1. 0. 0 . .. 0 3. 1â€¢6*45sph#4'Â·.Â·4~2.2 Â·tiNhr 1 IMP~VEMENT & TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY~ 39'Qi'~M 3:?99. 42.4-'&.4213"~.4*jj Z 0Â£ Â£0 - F :41 COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO~ 9*~~.llÂ·j.6,.Or GO 2 8 6889 LOTS F & G, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Â¥pi234:*' '-,AÂ¢fg~ ftqmt- @ki %14 Â·i ..b /-16 %43Â©2 . 4,<> '4%Â»1 1 44-F- # .3-o p:Â·-~*43 5 CM 7#laPM*xiff.kdt:AIGwn,dÂ·.,0.~ A m E. HOPKINS 1 2RL,"WRI. -------L 14)11Aw-Aff7/14414414;:4( fÂ« i 6%#2$~4~4*1*6,46;:-eq {.Â·3:f ~323'013 ---*... ROADWAY -- - 7 19. \-\. + IÂ· 'Un, 'ryÂ¢ ,/.4 /1-'k *C â€¢-r - - - ... ; Â· '00.: i.414.0 62#ai:4.i *--CZ/=26/1- - 3-- 1 T - - Â· Â·Â· . Â· -Â¤=mrp . r###42 - <* . VICINKY MAP 02Â«-cir GR lE: 791815 PARIN I -- SCALE 1" = 1000 KIOSK - ~CUP-E-7915.16 1 1 - Jet#. 7- T..Ic- ...Â»36= - 7-_ / FOUND NO. 5 REBAR I NELLOW PLASTIC t 7 - 1 i CAP I.,LE 1 - (8493 OP GRAPHIC SCALE S75'09'71'~5*RNGSJ &9fc~ . - I. - ~0 0 5 10 20 40 0 79'* 4. 1 1 - </ PICKET 4 , 3 7.- - _- 75Â·col?E..71Â» 1 1 n ~ kh- lee 1 2 & RECLBLASIC CAP - - p D NO. 5 REBAR '4 -\ ( IN F'EEr) ---Vi l I inch = 10 11, CE _ or -7920 â„¢NESH' Â·42 \ TREE CHART 1 ---- - *ZE09~i,~w 7919.48 60. tsÂ»> .7- --e Â°21 \ TREE TYPE SIZE DR]P 1 4 + CONIFEROUS 12- I 9' / =4= 1 CO-EROUS 7 1 9. Ii: 2' i 0 , D PROPERTY AREA ~,, - 0 3 IM 2 DECOUOUS 15 5 - PROPERTY DESCRIPTION / E qi *TAL 0 6,000 S.F. ,0 , I M 1% 9 CH'INE' 9 ST Ry 4 7 1 IWI7 Or ITKN, SIME y COLORADO. FOUND Y SCRIBED- ' LO-S F AND G, BLOCK 99 CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN ON ALUMINUI CAP 127Â° #mi d BUILDING i LAWN.~ NOTES: . 4 ' LEGEND ~ ) LOT P 11 - ~ d l 1 - C] CATV PEOESTAL i OF LOT F. A NO. 5 REBAR AND CAP -SNO. ILLEGIBLE AND TAE NE CORNER OF LOT G, A AO. 4 / L BASIS OF EEARINGS FOR THIS SURVEY ISA BEARING OF 975Â·09'111 BETWEEN RE NW CORNER 1 1 g 0 TE1EPHONE PEDESTAL REBAR AND CAP LS NO 13129 I PLACE AS SHOMI HEREON, ELECIRICAL TRANSFORIER : ,~3 0 . / , 1 1 4 1 ELECTRICAL METER 2. DATE OF SURVEY' APRIL 20 2012. \ . 5. r -==IJ/ 1 " 4000-42> i IND NO. 5 REBAR & Im GAS METER 3. UNEAR UNITS USEC TO PERFORM THIS SURVEY WERE U S SURVEY FEET. iN MES = \ 0% skill I / t YELLOW PLASTIC CAP UTILI AS SHOÂ¥/4. 56' M TRI-W 1 1 CHANAN. TME CITY OF ASPEN GPS MINLMINTATION 2009 MAP AND CORNERS FOUND IN PLACE. Z.8, 8 ~-- WOOD SIGN 4. THIS SURVEY 16 BASED ON THE 1959 OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY CF ASPEN PREPARED 8Â¥ G,E. LEAN-TO w , r..49 PLS12707 CLOSET . .- ~ LOT G rb / / 1 1 122 0 5 THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED â€¢THOUT THE BENEFIT OF A Trn E 204111â„¢ENT. THEREFORE, ANY 2 21 2 IRRIGAT ON CONIOL BOX 0 425 9 1 0 , 11 6 1 1 11 111 1 SPRINKLER HEAD ~C~~01~1!~h~n~,~~R~f ~~ECT -'HE SUBJECT PROPERn HAM NOT BEEN RESEARCHED 2 f Ull EDUT-OF- LLAm-1 -4- GAS SHU T-OF- RECORD OR IN PLACE R > FOU~ NO. 5 ... ' 1 $' li l,/. 1 8 THIS PROPERTY IS SUBECT To RESERVATIONS. RESTRIC[loNS. COVENANTS AND EASEME,ITS OF I g 6 , f ) I ~O PLANC CAP 0 .7 liETAINING -1 /3 8 .ARKED /11 t.. 1 I 1 1 #1 5 -55-'S- SEWER UNE 88) REFERENCED FROM NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEY (NGS) BENCHMARK STAÂ·nON S 159 HAVING A -1 - WATER UNE 7 ELEVATIONS SHOWN HERE?ON ARE BASEO ON loRil AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 1 WALL / , 0 X <2.p-\L f j PUBLISHED El.EVATJCN OF 7720,88. i fli M tif' -7 - TELEPHONE UNE S7#S m lifi 6 H a. Wl 2 45: - Â·0-VE- ELECTRIC 8. CONTOUR INTERVAL EQUALS 1 FOOT. LANDING' % 4 I -6' WOOD 0 -2 7916 9 -. FENCE I P /8 , : Gls LIE 9. UNDERGROUND UTILIT~S HAVE BEEN MARKED OUT BY 0â„¢ERS, ONLY PAINT MARKS AND Unurr Z 1 --/ 1 1 L FLAGS HAVE BEEN LOCATED BY HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC. THE ACTUAL LOCATION OK 11 11%,i CATY LNE UNDERGROUND UTILITIES MUST BE FELD VERIFIED PRIOR TO CCNSRUCT,ON. SrrE BENCHMARK ia-s-roRY 1 1 SET NO. 5 REBAR a FILOW Pl.,~110 CAP . 492 1 WARKED PROP CORNER / k *. ....1 1 42 m~k92_ 11hi 1 ' il li -i #948 80/40/NG 4 -7924_, /OÂ· .2 4 1 // --I~ 1 4770. IMPROVEMENT SURVEY STATEMENT re. 7, 2.431 #l ' l i HEREBY STATE THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY WAS PREPARED BY HIGH COUNTRY ENCNEERING, ' K. FI OZ AROUTECTURE. /// I .IMP -h 9*72# < 1.-7: 7 Wee W / 4 4 f f 1 FURTHER STATE THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ON THIS DATE. 6 f./O NO. 5.BAR 1 / APRIL 20. 2012 EXCEPT UllUTY CONNECTIONS, ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF -HE r- - 16/ I. 94 ALLEY-~3--6 %* -X i 48 I #re..-/ 1 & YELLOW PLASnc PARCEL. EXCEPT AS SHOWN. IHAT THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCR BED 1 4 V- 11 THERE 15 NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF ANY EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENING ANÂ¥ PART CAP MAR=n MNE i t 1 lili PREISES BY NPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND THAT 41 i x- - OF SA]D PARCEL. EXCEPT AS NOTED. LINER ERROR OF CLOSZIE I S LESS THAN 1: 15,000. 44:,6 ./-/ -- \ -=s..lip*K- - ajo EE 1 1 -E#-6,\ Il N - #144 I FOUND NO S REBAR ~ ' RY 9- 444.4,1 TAB, (0 0.0= 1 ~ & YELLOW FLASAC - ~ ~ ~/ FRANK W. HARRINGTON,1 ~*01~*. fkS 31 CAP MARKED TRI-CO 7\\ -0 -1 - --- % 1 PLS 12070 2 6 i ----- 0 9 ... e ..4 2 \ , ---- \ --7 W..s-I.4 '/ .Â·Â·-en Â·~----CITY OF ASPEN CONTROL- MONUMENT ~ -\ 1 GPS-2 -3 / \ 0 -- 0-- FOUND 3 ALU-UM ~ - CAP IN MONUMENT BOX ~ 1 0' ITNESS CORNER -- ~'k-t Fe,/8 /K t,/I & 591â‚¬R , 16 MARKED LS15710 2 I ~Â» f'Â·c** 0/ 1 1 CLERK AND RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE 0-1 10/ #. z 4 w mEZ I THIS PLAT WAS FILED FOR RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITKIN COUNTY P / 1 - 4--' \\073~:~~Â» ~ %71 BUm{),4 -f f AT __ O'CLOCK_-M e ON THE -- DAY OF A.0. 2012. AND S DULY RECORDED - 1 IN BOOK _-- PAGE _.-, RECEPION NO 1 1 W u 1 8 1 1. a. Il 1 3Qi MARKED 41 LS"947 / . .. . ..11 ' PROJECT NO FOLND PK NAIL & SHIN . CLER< AND RECORDER 1 1 ., 1 1 i i 1 2121629 I + .li & DEPUTY ~ Cm OF â€¢SPEN- \ S 2 4.f jl 40/CE: ACCORD).0 TO COLORADO LAI YOU WUST COÂ»HENCE ANY LEGAL ~ CONTROL MONUMENT -. 1. 1 11 4 ACHCN 8ASEI) UPON AlrY DEFECT m, 1,05 Sule,EY MTIN THEE ':EARS GPS-1 ArnE,e ,~11 F~5. OISCO~R %91 Â©EFECT, IN NO EVENT WAY ANY ACDON FOUND r ALUMINUM 1 ~. a.,SED ~Â»CÂ», ANY DEFECT Â»1 "Â·f -DICED UORE nUM TEN ~ CAP IN MONUMENT BOX VO / b 1 OF 1 'ARS FROW ./DA. CF ./.*nÂ», Slom, .... ; " I --4- ARCHITECTURE 1 I. 1 URBAN DESIGN Â® INTERIOR DESIGN 3ONV,Aav DN dS GOO 0 )OdO.LÂ·INE AOHdWI 38 9823"n OCIVMO 00'NadSÂ¥ NOISIA.EIM al.V[3 ON NnOO HeIH ~ee DMO 639 I .Vul DHV ZO 4Â·'00+00 /1 ./ \ ..~ f\ / 3. \ \ \ \ \ \ . \ 1 \ El r.- - \ Â£ 1 1 1 / 1 I Eltilifilillill'll'll'll'llill'llill'll-il---Ill'll'll'llilill- .-- / 1 - / / / III \ 1 / -/1- L ~ OFFICE ' / -fl -* 6 li\'' , 1 -- 1. 51 - 1 / \ 1 1 1 9 "j. ,//- -- .1- SHARED GARAGE / 1/2 1 -223-=.2eb=--.4/0#1- 1. r /4/ .3 SUSIE'S 11 ~,~ . .1 COMMERCIAL ''. LOBBY Â¢ 1 -7 1 Â» I. : .+59 - i -*44:**p .%/<./&....:.-.**:2 09* ./ = 1 1 ,1111.- Iâ‚¬= 1 1 1. -C_-1 ..Ill t.Â« E .W---- I - /,iE-3-RASHL__ . .r. 5 ~~. ~ yf - ~4=sf, m 11-l r.4 1% 1-Dr- ~ Itâ€ž RECYCLE& E -diâ€ž,Illâ€ž,I,m~ < A [F, _ Tpir o=.0 xi -1 EXISTING . ~ . lum- Ni UTILITY -1 k k + ,-47 1 1 ~t' AREA ' <4*Â£*a'.W~.:":.6*196:/ 1 â‚¬9'I L *74. -- OFFICE I I. *f '. C J * I I 1 1 4 1 F I. -4pep '/JI NE**4& . e yeeeftÂ¢4 -- 4 -Ifi - - BARN J COMMERCIAL 359 - 1 li. // 1 1210, f. 1 .7 1 - , *A '. .* 41 A- 4% e .... ._1 - -- -- -- -- - - 6 41 - -==--=1.-, .1. -I/ ; /~-1 PROPOSED - SITE N (1 ) 1/8" = 1'-0" ARCHITECTURE PHONE: 303.861.5704 ~ ~ URBAN DESIGN 623 EAST HOPKINS SITE PLAN I FAX: 303.861.9230 Â® INTERIOR DESIGN ASPEN, CO â€¢ 510128.01 â€¢ 06.06.2012 â€¢ 1 WWW.OZARCH.COM H-2 -7-=//- ~11.0*9:/ PEDEST~N AMENITY LEGEND PEDESTRIAN AMENITY SPACE P. 2. VIEW ANGLE FROM PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ./16;- - , /0.*.WA ...... - - -14/7-:~/d-, Â·'(-L fl" ~' I[Jl.'. n'11 9 n,11.1.1.â€žN'.,D' : "',[ ( f E-""~"1 11 < -db AUddY' 'r N14'50'49"E .1-00:00' f 1.-a 'I / - 0 0 M 6.-,r'*,i~...f'~~7''1I . I I-.itâ€ž2%24,MSâ€žâ€žâ€žti~tultI'l 1 / - STEPS 9 + R \ 7 N / __ m 9 1% h // A 0 1 17 - --24#4 41421_--u.6-8 11 - \ L_ / ~ 3.6' f ' - 16 2 - rm I E U Fl - - i LE 50 0' - /1191.93 1 4 002 -==i *Z : _m- r . T \2 \4 f 73*93 1- 15 -M- 4 _\. PH 9 2 m 1 1% 4 n -1 . up piL / O lit 1 7 1 2%73%49> 3% \2_ r ri-~ Â®\4 .4.7. 1 3 9 * 77 -im - 11% 14 b Orn, 7 i141[\49 - 1-01 6 1 KE''In~ DN- , Ill lilli 0-1 % 4 4 - x)GIL ---- IN . aka ~ 41 1 <L- & C L==::=U 24 7' TE -N-- .-1 - / 4 4 1 -/ 130/74 . t flu - - y ELEd- - - -=-1 M - -/ LL-1 32 4 . t /Â»1/-/01 cr- 1 - STORY 4 2 1.8.-]1 Kimp r u FRAME BUILDING 612. gigi p \ GIffil 2 l.~ j 102' ~~ IiI 1 1 -~ - 10.2'(TIE) ; LEAN-TO/STdRAGE T - -- -- 1 ...,1, '|'4# _1 _-n- -en _---i--t--+ 100' - 0" EXISTING PEDESTRIAN AMENITY SPACE PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN AMENITY SPACE AREA OF PEDESTRIANS = 1,384 SF AREA OF PEDESTRIANS = 1,502 SF SITE = 6,000 SF SITE = 6,000 SF % OF PEDESTRIAN AMENITY TO SITE = 23% % OF PEDESTRIAN AMENITY TO SITE = 25.0% I ---vi I ARCHITECTURE PHONE: 303.861.5704 URBAN DESIGN 623 EAST HOPKINS PEDESTRIAN AMENITY SPACE I FAX: 303.861.9230 PAGE WWW. OZARCH.COM H-3 ~Â® 1 INTERIOR DESIGN ASPEN, CO â€¢ 510128.01 â€¢ 06.06.2012 â€¢ 626L,00'09 3â€žll,60.GLSFKila- SNIC]ling 3 .... -- 1 1 Â£1 ..............9/ I 1 1 MECHANICAL 1 WELL I , WELL , 891 -0,1, 11 1 9 UP COMMERCIAL # 1 1 11 -4- 89' -0" - 2 up ' E------3 1 - 1 r---1 r---1 6 1 1 k---4 ? 7-FT--r--1-k----] > 1 1 1 1 1111111 1 I 1 1 1 .Ill-LL.IIL___J 7/_- 1 I ELL~-T~ 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 11 CRAWLSPACE 1 11 93' - 0" 1 1 11 1 1 11 1 1 L------------------3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- /--1 PROPOSED -BASEMENT N (1 ) ~ 1 Z:= . 1 :. . 1 0 Â® INTERIOR DESIGN â€¢ â€¢ O , :0 0. 0. 0 LL11-1 J Trlll . 0 - 2.ZDÂ·Â·Â·j~ A.~ -- -- --- --11~- 1-2.-;'t 11 -1 1 0 27- M.H-Im..111 ~ I '-I. CL : - 1 LO OFFICE N 4 1 1 Â¥- C BA \ AREA WELL AREA WELL ]011 ./-f -p--4.--1 : 124- UP 1 :4'- 0" ~ 1 SHARED GARAGE -/---3 10' -0 3/8" 1 SUSIE'S - -17 COMMERCIAL ~ ~ LOBBY - 41 - 'Â«129 /-//11 i '' a 1 UP 100'-0" 1 N .0- 1 X. 0 1 1 41 fifo ---1 =71 0 1 6, 1[ 1, , -1 J .' _ly_ 1 Ly=f - - DN 1-3.-7 1 TRASH, BATH -- -tu 7- T ,-1-1 y <~ -RECYCLE_L_ ~ , DE-STAIRSE . DE -1 5 H' 101 EXISTING p I I .1-la -___ 42 2 0--- = UTILITY 96 1 1 ---m ' 1 â€¢ BATH - , R 9 1 D h! Â£* .~;~Il'~~*WMk;i:;*.SÂ»w"A-*m' . 1. T~V I .3ty//9'MIFI=**941.-486 ~ 2:2:kp>~:â€ž9 _ r- 9 OFFICE - 14 4- 100' - 0" - 1 00 1 43 -- 1 A ~ 11, 0 7 -' - .,2.1-=PE- 9' - 2" 1 --..."*Â«393911 11 4.1/Allifi=IÂ»=4/4,# -im:m. It I mantl -1 F 1 ---'Ye - BARN COMMERCIAL 1 %1 L.-~. ~ ~ 1 100' - 0 0 . L "-1 0 T -6" 1 1 . 1 n â€ž 11 - - - - /-1 PROPOSED -GROUND N (1 ) ELEVATION 100' - 0" ARCHITECTURE URBAN DESIGN ==-IIA'A INTERIOR DESIGN ~ ~ ~ .. BR DEN BA - ROOF ~ 7== rF,//=/ueeÂ·Â·EÂ¥,FEE,/,tH+9A@fi~ L.....4--*4 Irm-rr,r-.-7-- -Â·'Tr--Â·-* IL--1- -11_=.u=u' 111-~fitdjttrtfftL~*uul h~Â»Â·Â«n-+f'icÂ· -*r---rr-~~:.43i~--I=6=*rÂ· Â·Â·~Â·Â·Â·Â·Â·4****&tÂ¤1I m: T-r -T---rrn-,r- . -rilÂ·11 1, 1,11 lili 11 ~ 0 Lwic -~~ EEE~-~~~ 13*1*2211 2~ Uet-~~f.-tup 'tutq#f~19]1 Â·Â· Â« Â·Â·tff,4....Â»Â«Td *=a___~ni.*Atie/FBEÂ· -rn----BMIPÂ»~~ 4#.- -"Trrr-rrm" Ill Â·Â·lili I Il'llÂ·,U+ArÂ· Â· . Â·Â· Â· Â· .-Â·-Â·.- Â·~ .Â·..~Â·47-~ ~~ 3 FIC-'..- ..-2.-?314-pyâ‚¬ .OUFFP-- ~ '~' "~19'' ~ .~~ ~~.~~ ~~-4 1 i ENTRY HALL - I -~2/reabÂ·.:.- I~~ iCL x< 11 . ~.*032.- ' 21'Â· Uu-81 UP 1Â·Â·-Â·......-- _---rs. 2-2137 '~Â· ' Â· 7. . Â· Â· I .... I. '02+ -Obttâ‚¬:......... \ 11 '---- -- r ZI ma--4 = 1-~0=Ij ~-~ ~-Â·-Â· . DN Â·ti IL '~-g W/D El R rn=Â«y-In-- Â· . Â·:~ -99%3- -7 + U-r- < ... BR L .A 1 1 1 r--- . CL h Â»3== ' WIC '-9 WIC 1 1 1 - : 1 11 .///f E~t~E - L 29=1Â·Â·*AÂ».- 43-4 , 1 1 4 4 ~3*GE=~38=Â» u 1 1 0 1.-2 11 -- --1 / /// A 1 / M.BA M-.BR BA - 1 0 7-71 , 1 / 1 /,-3 1/ 1 11011/4 1 9 1 /- 6 1 L.--2 L====1 I 44444144441{41 - ______________112Â©1211[Wflfl MI'lli-~Ilk li _11 /--1 PROPOSED - LEVEL 2 c 1)----~47 ELEVATION 110' - 6" ARCHITECTURE .95â€ž.ilill:elle/::::9::Ill"lillililillipillipl~ ~ ~ URBAN DESIGN V , Â® INTERIOR DESIGN â€¢ â€¢ O ,:, 0. 0. 0 . ./ 0 /lillil""i.... . . 0 . | 6 DECK nyfL_ -M 1 '~--1 LIVING - 1 -. F--~~--"--~Trt . ~ ..*.--'.-t I. r~M);VWL. - I Â«CE=At==cjEE-: â€¢ 1 - -I - . Tillri -, T 7 1 Â·tmi , ...i..., ~~~~, 4, If: 1 -It.. fi.If.- JLT' i -1 - 1 _J DN . PR -- . -- . Â· m 1 1 1 + e. 11 - IJ-1-7--1--1 - Â« 7 Â»_ DECK ~ D DINING U 1. 54 SF 1 -u=-[-- 1\4 =0- -O-1- 1 49 = - -4 P= 4 Â·-= 4 -4 1 - 4 ~'-Ch- 3 -C.-64= 1 KITCHEN _ Â» _â€ž - ctaffte= 23 -14 I ,= 1 -4 --'-T--- - L#tmELEMIZErS/Elft-- 6.47 - . 4. 1 2/ [1 3 -1 BBQ E -Mt-03--*~EÂ«f~=c~=12=~E- 1 1-ct-332 1 41 i 1 FAMILY ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ @ 1 JU) FW El I DECK 1 ..1 1 - H..1 - -1-28-Sq 1 - . - 1,7 I 1 __-7- ~------- 6 --~i /-1 PROPOSED - LEVEL 3 ELEVATION 121' - 0" 1-/ ARCHITECTURE A~=-A- URBAN DESIGN ....Vill.-ir-ral:r.1*1.7,.. INTERIOR DESIGN .~00:00.0.0~~~~ 44-9-13-21144440"-f Â°~.6:QI--Ill . . 0 . -- I 1 - I LLII 1 ROOF EE== 1 - 1 1 // DECK DN 144 SF ROOF 1 HOT LI~ I TUB - 1 11 1 1 1 1 ROOF 1 1 1 1 1 Â®1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- /-1 PROPOSED -ROOF N (1 ) ELEVATION 131' - 6" ~ URBAN DESIGN ARCHIECTURE I~IOIANA 0,/ 0 .//. Â® INTERIOR DESIGN â€¢â€¢ 0 1 i I 1. 0. 0 -1 / .. *Ar...........Ellil......ij'LJ........123:91'/gilivill:1&2~J.~Mir, EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC - PRESERVATION CLASSIC - DOWNING / STRAW SW2813CO BRICK SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC - PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD - NEW COMPOSITE DARK GREEN SW2816 PANEL - RECLAIMED BARN SIDING RUSTED METAL ~ - SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC PANELS PRESERVATION CLASSIC - WHITE SW2929 I 1. . 1:' N aly- - ---- -.- ----0.- - -Â·~ GLASS RAILING /29/6 SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC - â€ž-. ~ -- PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD RED SW2802 - Level 1 An *r ~ - WINDOW MULLION 100'-O" ' .- WOOD SHAKE SHINGLE BLACK PROFILE TO MATCH EXIST. /-1 EXIST. BARN WEST Fr'9+3- STANDING SEAM METAL DECK c 2 3 4. id Â· *14*MEL~ 4 ' 46'/7 - -r 1 2 -**Ff T.O.W ' ' 134'-6" ~ '' ROOF--.h 1. 1 1 "'. 1 1 9-- 131'- 6" 1' 41 $ .-W~ . .2 - 9.1 - I A * J 19 - I - r Level 3, 4 - 121 1 -0,1 - el * - I -It*-4 1 4 /111. Level 2 , . 1101 - 6,1 . --- .~ n ..4 I t 14 t t T Level 1 an 1 00'-0" ' CRANDALL /-1 PROPOSED - WEST ELEVATION BUILDING (1 ) INTERIORDESIGN~~~~ . . 0 . EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC 9.-,kl3., - PRESERVATION CLASSIC - DOWNING STRAW SW2813CO -i=.,1/9,2/Imill BRICK ..C-,~ L SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC -- PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD 1 NEW COMPOSITE DARK GREEN SW2816 9~ PANEL - RECLAIMED BARN SIDING RUSTED METAL Â· PANELS -- SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC .i'.a~9,480 5 U - Tial 0.9 i PRESERVATION CLASSIC - WHITE SW2929 19- E GLASS RAILING 14-im--fill- . , ~'.0 M SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC 1 1 - PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD . ~ - 22,61 â€ž- 15*4~Lizj RED SW2802 - WINDOW MULLION - 4IWIL,pvel 1 _.h BLACK -.- WOOD SHAKE SHINGLE 1 co'-O" u' - PROFILE TO MATCH EXIST. /-1 EXIST. CABIN EAST U:Uâ€¢,2W--- STANDING SEAM METAL DECK 2 ADJACENT TOWNHOMES 14 . T.O.W .-3 I //-* y 1,4.T, . - - .,.,.%~Â»%==7"-,e,Ukele: 1- 1*91/vr 134'-6" ' .... 1 . 1 1 H ti384 ROOF /1 1 .-$.1 -'| 131'- 6" Ki' 1 .1 I , . ... I /)=. 1 /.4~*1* ../ Â«t~. I . 1-,1 # 0 6 ... 1 , - I i I 1 11'117 ' ., lili 11.. . eve| 3 _Â£ - 1 Â£ 1~1 1 Le-t:imir-r-- -L .1.-"c:ir-4-' 1 1 r-~-1 -,11 *1 + W. * 21 ' -0" u' /k> ..t Tff ' - .4 . W /1 - 1-3 In... - r - /*4Â»i' N * %4 -. -- 46Â·ce '1> 8Â£ i= : evel 2 - i . K 110' 76" 4 h t -.1 - - t,1 1., - t. A..i-,U*-US.L- - I . 1 /4 1 0 2 -4- -4 4 -- - -- Â·Â· " Level 1 .h 100'-0" ' /--1 PROPOSED -EAST ELEVATION CRANDALL BUILDING (1 ) ~ ~ ARCHITECTURE URBAN DESIGN Â® INTERIOR DESIGN 5 â€¢ A _/ EXTERIO~ATERIAL LEGEND SH~/ IN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC - PR ~RVATION CLASSIC - DOWNING STRAW SW2813CO BRICK SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC -- PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD NEW COMPOSITE DARK GREEN SW2816 PANEL - RECLAIMED BARN SIDING RUSTED METAL PANELS SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC 1-\-- PRESERVATION CLASSIC - WHITE SW2929 GLASS RAILING ~ -- PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC RED SW2802 -- WINDOW MULLION BLACK 1 WOOD SHAKE SHINGLE PROFILE TO MATCH EXIST. - STANDING SEAM METAL DECK '9,7 ..de. T.O.W b . i - - I 134' - 6" . I. , p. .1- ---- . jr i ---if ROOF 131' - 6,1 - 1 4 0,44* - ' 246... 5--- 1/1+ 4. Ab"3+>14=~1 1, t.Â¢1:, i Â«*'mt-f:+9-1-39-3 . *7 - L Level 3 6 121' -0"' -2- --R'"m,/'72-- I= i i + - iiI ' i -2-r- i IP+Irm- . --if . 64Â·4Â«4Â·Â·r ... rÂ·,4-Ar - I ....1 I Â£ -k,â€ž 1 . = U.== 1 - - 14 i Â·Â·*LA"* Level 2 . 1-+ .....21 ,1100 - 6" t - ,~ &74:*--7_21*~ -- - tifl.. n*... - 1.44 % 4.1 ..? 0 -- , 1 - - 1 r .11- -/ 1 1 . 11.. 4.1- . . t:E i. T -+3" 1.- V .....fl. - $1 .- 515 Level 1 f 2 3 100' - 0" BERG DUPLEX AND CRANDALL BUILDING BEYOND /-1 EXIST. CAB INS NORTH TAMARAWOOD BUILDING (1 ) ADJACENT TOWNHOMES ARCHITECTURE ~ ~ URBAN DESIGN , 1 1. Â® INTERIOR DESIGN 4 â€¢ F I ,:, 0'. 0/. 0 4 11 --Mir 0 0 EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC - - PRESERVATION CLASSIC - DOWNING - STRAW SW2813CO --I.-7--- ~,/S. 1 i SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC ~ BRICK PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD NEW COMPOSITE DARK GREEN SW2816 PANEL - 60 - RECLAIMED BARN SIDING . f 9 ./ - r r PANELS ~~ - SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC 0 1 RUSTED METAL Â£ A Q-I iv -- PRESERVATION CLASSIC - WHITE SW292 * ~ GLASS RAILING , .2. SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC - PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD v#! 1 ~ RED SW2802 00' - O" ~~ Â«- WINDOW MULLION - EXIST. CABINS SOUTH .11 BLACK ...1- WOOD SHAKE SHINGLE PROFILE TO MATCH EXIST. - STANDING SEAM METAL DECK .-' 1 . 0 8. 49 I F --> ./ 96 4 / I , - - I --I Â·I- 17' - T .- .,Itrfu--~ 1 1 An-Â« "r--20* Â·t. 2-1.1-21; 1.Â·/fr. -u ~~ . Â· -- + r ./: . "== 6 -9--a rz ~ .1 .2.-:.--/-1.-:. ~ - 1 2/yey 1 ( I * .. B , 10 - ' ADJACENT BERG DUPLEX TOWNHOMES 63_PROPOSED - SOU_TH ELEVATION ARCHITECTURE ~.-A-1-I=.A- URBAN DESIGN - 1 01~11-~~~-~A~11O1~~--~â€¢m~~ ~ ' ... I. P r = -1 1 ! 4.2 2 . . - . .p-Â» 0....X0" 89 . I. b 922 F fi & PERSPECTIVE HOPKINS AVE. 1 ~ PERSPECTIVE HOPKINS AVE. 2 4 11Â» / 2, . fwa 7.-i...E 1 7 - j <V .i--1 . /-/ 9% Â£ r 1 h , Â»4 1 > .1 --1 4 1 WR Â»U ,-,r Â«Ir ~ ,1 7 l?f:. .IN 4''. 4- u -8 19 , '414~ da ' . 4 h. 47 -74-3- '121 -4-IJ 4 3.U.7L-[ -9 1 W 'C: 1 -1.1 . 1 .... 4 .~rt L 1 0 4 ... 0 â‚¬Â»1Â¥. i'11 -, . - L.frÂ·- 1 7-1.~1 f-1 r }.'... l~ ' Gfi. -49 1-1 - 1311 ...1 11 ~~ . ~704 22 . -* 1 - 1 1 j liT L :11 1-r-7- i 6 ..1 1 J -- r -1 ' L.L A ..51 /-1 PERSPECTIVE SPRING ST. /1 PERSPECTIVE ALLEY ARCHITECTURE I/0//i -/AL#- - 1.1.1,-1 AIL~~~-li/-1;/-7p=1.78 -yal*lullull:14-7111- - ~Â® ~ URBAN DESIGN ,/15".1/1/5/Ill'llllid//1,1/2/lilill-liti"-llk~~ :6 ill :illi' '. Illill | Illil imiiillillilifill/1/21/(31/1/lill ill'll'll'll . 1/lill.Ailillillilill INTERIOR DESIGN ..~ . . 0 . , -0~/.DA.4/.'- 7/04.4/' , 11, '1'',''Â·â€¢1..,1,/1, 'i':' ,â€¢ eâ€¢t.b,1â€¢\0.'â€¢,i'â€¢i,Â·i,itâ€¢t'ti'it;,i,/i,â€¢it'i.r-r-r-al-T-5==-- l..X=:'PVT t OKILA GArt-'aU UU[Nufft It WALL ~" +11111/1/1,11111111}111#/1/1,1/1,11. All,IABFNT RI:liCK Bl 111 nINC, - : â€ž. â€ž â€ž â€ž â€ž, /~,fpigÂ¢;'2&3 4,1~ \ / . 1-- . i .OVY Z 46243997 k \ -727, - N14'50'49"E -1-00700- ' 1 - A 11 c / OS 9 4; a ey'li ~ frt: - N-- l IZ STEPS 9 Fly b * C r /1 1 / , CRAY u,\ 4 ./ 99 7 1 - -O , Re 9 m_ d, -4 0 k/ 47 n> 7 (l I A .27 -' m b .1 S r- 7 / i J.â‚¬ f-1 12 1 30 / 521---r,a 1 "R ' 1 Lial lEi 4 34 - \ f.- 9.. 3.n ) r . 11.5 1'1 I \ 7 1 2/7- 14% 11 l. 02 I liNN 41 \ 1-~Â»â€ž 9 9,MS*Mi#Y<;2# 1 PORTION OF 1Â«4 'BASEMENT ADDED AND\f<j~~'1## E~Â¥ING bABIN TO BE LIFTED X\ \1 X~ \IN~xxcl ' th ILM . CABI N TO BE 1 x AdIN#OB.E PUCED TO THE \ \~\\~ 1 1 1,\ 14 1 1 .-*-- CkifI 14211 j M- REMOVED \~ \~ \q~NORTH 5' 10" FROM EXISTING~\ \ 11 1. 1 VN ~ 1 4-0- 1 Ne- 1 91 -71 1-Ear./brrialaifiri~~~~~ti~ii,/faf#~~~~~~~~~~~~21 \\22 1 11 -O m â€ž--85= 1-=-4-4- 1\ \ ---11 1 IÂ¢ 9- 6 0 --1 p==Ef / a - i li PORTION J 1Â« 4 OX 1 01 1 ' , $ 40)- 1, REMOVED \\ \In 1| CABIN TO BE 1-09 -4 1 - 1 9 4% b 19\ 11 EXISTING NON-HISTORIC 1 F- / DJ 4 , . / --1-11~. -'...,- -,1 CO b O U 7925- ~ ~ STRUCTURE TO BE 11 f 0~4 |EXISTING ~~ 1 0 0 f Â£ I\. 10 7 0 REMOVED + ICABIN --1 11 4 re - UJ 0.04 1 LOCATION - 11 / 0 1 11\1 .rrl m bl El Ill_ t. 0 - i 11 1) 6 -0 \--- -, , 12 8 L _ L . LL,Lia~ '-'- &4 LANDSCAPING- - 1 .t' 11 1, 10 0 4 AA- A W Or " E r G-.<f -2Â·26 r 0 11 11,\, 7 -li r- 11 11.,/ --7.919.-j/- ' ~7.5'(TIE)6 1 Â«' Ra " 0 , 1 0 '7 91 1 AterÂ»M 4 j 1-0 i Â£ / O\1 EXISTING BARN TO REMAIN | L Ni M 141Â¢2- 11 11 --4 PORTION OFBARNTOBE po mi,1 1 , Ntl--///0, 1 0-, - - I m x ~~~ ~i 16 IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION | ~ REMOVED : <,t ~ 9.fi- I I, --X, - LA,NDSCAPING -11 r ,-4-r- -T - - - - -7- - - T- 1 -lo-- 10.2'(110 1 1 LEAN-TO/STORAGE G & 1 3 - -12.. *"-='=r L 477 - ~ " Â£-1 Aâ€¢CA'An'hA, 44 AA An' Fi---- ------ ----- B T \- tb. I 100'-0" 6N ~ ~ URBAN DESIGN 623 EAST HOPKINS BLDG. RELOCATION PLAN I FAx:303 861 9230 ARCHITECTURE PHONE: 303.861.5704 Â® INTERIOR DESIGN ASPEN, CO â€¢ 510128.01 â€¢ 06.06.2012 â€¢ WWW.OZARCH.COM H-14 08Â¥110 ' -+26L--- ... -"3#]All/'ihirlf/J&TTZE'/////ID#- . 'rÂ· h ---illipip./11- i i V . ADJACENT | .D BARN DOC -C \ NEW WOOD SHINGLE TOWNHOMES /~ REPLACE GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS NAL ROOF -NIN - NEW RAISED WOOD PORCH ORIGINAL SIDING AND ADD --j ORIGNAL PROPORTIONS ~ RESTORE CORNER TO 1/ *4 RESTORE WINDOWS TO NEW/RAISED METAL ROOF WINDOW TO MATCH EXISTING REMOVE ADDITIONS TO - REPLACE SIDING WITH OLD ORIGINAL CABIN NATURAL BARN SIDING TO ADJACENT - TOWNHOMES ENHANCE HISTORICAL APPEARANCE . >35*~42 . 4 . ..Ar.7 . 4 1 _ T ' .. % 4. 0 -ff': : + 4 YN h al#.- Â» *- -- 2* 1 8 i 't+ - 2.La= . Â· t. i . /11 , 1,4 4.jilli.* 920â‚¬~ I - - 1 3 1- 4 Ii' ./. I ;' 7 -4- .,7- , AL. 4 -r 1....... *% .U........ ARCHITECTURE . 1 :. 1 ~Â® ~ URBAN DESIGN -Id-11 16-/11 Jil'/1.4.-Iâ€¢/MI)11.-Illaill' INTERIOR DESIGN 4.700;OIoI,I--n . . EXTIOR-MATERIALL-EGEND ISHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC Â»~RESERVATION CLASSIC - DOWNING / STRAW SW2813CO - BRICK . ,- PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC NEW COMPOSITE DARK GREEN SW2816 PANEL """m -- RECLAIMED BARN SIDING RUSTED METAL PANELS ~ --- SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC PRESERVATION CLASSIC - WHITE SW2929 ~v~ l Â£4 0~Â« g (O-t/7 ~ GLASS RAILING ~~~--- PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC ~ =-- WINDOW MULLION BLACK WOOD SHAKE SHINGLE ..L RED SW2802 PROFILE TO MATCH EXIST. 111' , L- STANDING SEAM METAL DECK t T.O.W j 134' - 6" ROO 131' - 6" , 4, 0 .* 0 ... 4, - =h=SI== I' ' rÂ·.I I i =ZLE.--111 ' vel 3 - 0,1 TI:Q I I U 1/:it . r =TI 4.93 * , , ~ i . IT-4/.'-i -'Ll--rr Zed 7- . 4 J_ ..... 9 \7 i/ *. W / . -Il X. .... a -~ r... Â£11 - I .1 -- v. Â· Level 1 '100'-0" BERG DUPLEX AND CRANDALL BUILDING BEYOND TAMARAWOOD BUILDING ---~ (43_EXIST. CABINS__NORTH_ ADJACENT TOWNHOMES INTERIOR DESIGN ~~~~~ IFIAU...../.'....07Â¥- ~ Jtv,_,fri......3/2/1./.E ty t.Â· -AW ENvERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC - - PRESERVATION CLASSIC - DOWNING t STRAW SW2813CO -- ~ BRICK . 42.Â£.i.~111 - SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC Â· . 1-- PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD NEW COMPOSITE DARK GREEN SW2816 PANEL - --- RECLAIMED BARN SIDING *<26 r2 I'll/ RUSTED METAL A A . 1 -,tâ‚¬ + + 4- .Â· .r .... PANELS ~ 0- SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC PRESERVATION CLASSIC - WHITE SW25 -P f, 4 GLASS RAILING SHERWIN WILLIAMS - HISTORIC U - PRESERVATION CLASSIC - ROCKWOOD RED SW2802 ..' ~ .". Miz WINDOW MULLION /--1 EXIST. CABINS SOUTH BLACK 1- WOOD SHAKE SHINGLE PROFILE TO MATCH EXIST. c 2 )- IM Itil / 1/8" = 1'-0" - STANDING SEAM METAL DECK 1 4..dc,92 4 f 76623Mdgp~ T.O.W /3 , ROOF ., 31'; -6" 1 I r /:t . I '.0 r 1 ........i , .0 r 1 83 Â£:-~~&1~1-~ '.f 4%:pi- 3311 C r.7-â€¢~ r 2:- -2:- ./5/.OF:* :- 31 4-trÂ£:.41â€¢ 5 + . : #*m-4Â£pe- Â·- , 2 A _,-_. _14,+19.. t. Â·Â·Â·.iÂ£ At r V . 44+ 04, 2 < I .11Â·1%1, I 4. ;r ,v ,.4,~4*,. t.' Â¥ ./ "4 . Uki - ~- ..EFG , I . .. r. , ' t,~*22. #t + 1 .: .:: E ..nal 1 - ADJACENT TOWNHOMES -) PROPOSED -SOUTH ELEVATION BERG DUPLEX (1 ) - ARCHITECTURE ~-. - ~~~-~~ . e . ~XTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND SAND STONE PANELS METAL PANELS NEW WOOD SIDING -> METAL PANELS d WQA O #\ GLASS RAILING NEW BARN SIDING EXISTING WOOD SIDING PAINT <41- _T.O.W - _ 134' -6" 8 .dil - ' WÂ·~ ROOF__~ 131' - 6" ,~!r~~Â»16,~ 1- , 2%i 9 ~ '21154â€ž5p)1 ~S,il/// f 3 -&- Â£ _.IP.T. ..+....... ./ IRK.-Â·-.71 p- 4..1~ i... I .. E-4,. ~4.4 *st.. .1.; i :40.021Â§12' 4 - 1.,3 ~ +1+ . A i :I - 2 - 1 - 1@.0*9 40 - - I 1 - M -. 4..L i - '2,7 Â« . 4 917 - Fl 21(- - ' ./ V ~ ~ | Â£ ' - . 1 1, al ' - - Level 1 .3 1 00'-0" c' BERG DUPLEX AND CRANDALL BUILDING (1 ) /----1 EXIST. CABINS NORTH ARCHITECTURE , I. ~ Â® ~ URBAN DESIGN lilli mililififeigilillillilill 1, --0 0 ..". I ... EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND . - , --'"ya ~ . 1 11.32 SAND STONE PANELS 11.1 'r . , - . METAL PANELS - 0% ;Fr=. 1.1. J..1- Â¥ 1 2- 1-1- - 9. NEW WOOD SIDING 4 . 4-... 1 1~:" METAL PANELS . 4 fl ve| 1 ah 2,4 # . GLASS RAILING 9 : 00' - 0" 4' /--~1 EXIST. CAB INS SOUTH IFI~ NEW BARN (2 ) ~ 1 SIDING EXISTING WOOD SIDING PAINT S b . - --* _ T.Q.W 11 2 + Â· -h=Â· '4- 134 - 6" Â»SE'~ ROOF /1 31'- 6" 1' , 4, '4 rk - I . - vel 3 -. - , 1.- 1 1:" - l e. . , r 7- I I. 1: 4 , . U4 . *,4, ~. 1 4 1 1 , 1.-- K Q" . 6.-"r 1 Â·Â· -El 11 1 .. . 11 1 1 . 11 lia.- I , 1 1&/iIT.-*-I_ I. ..â€ž i Zil I Leve 100' - 0" /--1 PROPOSED -SOUTH ELEVATION BERG DUPLEX (1 ) ARCHITECTURE - 0 UNAN DESIGN . A e .~ HAAS L~ND PLANNI~G, LLC May 14,2012 RECEIVED MAY 1 5 2012 Ms. Amy Guthrie CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Administrative Growth Management Application for 623 East Hopkins, Aspen (Lots F & G, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen; PID # 2737-182-12-001; a/k/a "Susie's" Property) Dear Amy: Please consider this letter to constitute a formal request for Administrative Growth Management approval pursuant to Section 26.470.060(4), Minor Enlargement of an Historic Landmark for Commercial, Lodge or Mixed-Use Development, of the Code in association with the separately proposed Major Development to allow restoration and remodeling of the two historic buildings located at 623 East Hopkins, Aspen, as well as demolition and redevelopment of the non-historic alley building. Existing Conditions The subject property currently contains three detached structures, all in commercial use. The Susie's Cabin includes 916 square feet of ground floor net leasable space (NLS). The Susie's Barn structure includes 469 square feet of ground floor NLS. The alley structure includes 702 square feet of NLS on each of its ground and basement levels. As such, the property currently contains 2,087 square feet of ground floor NLS and 702 square feet of lower level/basement NLS. Pursuant to Code Section 26.470.100(1), the property currently generates the following number of full-time equivalent employees (FTE): Ground Floor: 2,087sf x (4.1 FTE / 1,000sf) = 2.087 x 4.1 = 8.56 FTE Lower Level: 702sf x (3.075 FTE / 1,000sf) = 0.702 x 3.075 = 2.16 FTE TOTAL FTE GENERATION (EXISTING) = 10.72 FTE Code Section 26.470.060(4) The cited Code section provides that, "The enlargement of a property, structure or portion of a structure designated as an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed-use development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director based on the following criteria." The referenced â€¢ 201 N. MILLSTREET, SUITE 108 â€¢ ASPEN, COLORADO â€¢ 81611 â€¢ â€¢ PHONE: (970) 925-7819 â€¢ FAX: (970) 925-7395 â€¢ .. criteria are provided below in indented and italicized text, with each followed by a response demonstrating compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. a. If the development increases either floor area or net leasable space/lodge units, but not both, then no employee mitigation shall be required. The proposed enlargement of structures on the designated, subject historic landmark property for mixed-use development has the effect of increasing both floor area and net leasable space. b. If the development increases both floor area and net leasable space/lodge units, up to four (4) employees generated by the additional commercial/lodge shall not require the provision of affordable housing. An expansion generating more than four (4) employees shall not qualijj for this administrative approval and shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.1. The proposal includes 2,092sf of ground floor NLS, 924sf of basement level NLS, and 340sf of second floor NLS. Pursuant to Code Section 26.470.100(1), the proposed enlargement generates the following number of full-time equivalent employees (FTE): Ground Floor: 2,092sf x (4.1 FTE / 1,000sf) = 2.092 x 4.1 = 8.58 FTE Other Levels: 1,264sf x (3.075 FTE / 1,000sf) = 1.264 x 3.075 = 3.89 FTE TOTAL FTE GENERATION (PROPOSED) = 12.47 FTE Given that the applicable standard speaks to employees generated by the "additional" commercial development, one must deduct existing employee generation from the subject property to determine the net increase in employee generation, as follows: Total FTE Generation (Proposed) = 12.47 FTE Total FTE Generation (Existing) = 10.72 FTE ADDITIONAL FTE GENERATION: 1.75 FTE Therefore, since the standard provides that "up to four (4) employees generated by the additional commercial/lodge shall not require the provision of affordable housing" and the additional commercial development generates only 1.75 employees, no affordable housing is required. Furthermore, Section 26.470.070.1. of the Code is rendered inapplicable as less than four (4) employees are generated by the additional commercial development. c. No more than one (1) free-market residence is created. This shall be cumulative and shall include administrative GMQS approvals granted prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2007. Susie's Remodel - Administrative Growth Management Application Page 2 .. Only one free-market residence is being created through this minor expansion, and no other free-market residences exist or will exist on the property. Under the terms of this standard and how it has been consistently administered over the years, no employee housing is required in association with this single free-market residential unit. Summary In light of the foregoing, there are no employee housing mitigation requirements associated with the proposed development. Accordingly, the standards of Code Section 26.470.050, General Requirements, are rendered largely inapplicable and moot. There are sufficient growth management allotments available to accommodate the proposed development, and the proposed development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the C-1 Zone District, as such existed on the date the submitted Conceptual HPC Major Development application was deemed complete (April 5, 2012). The proposed development is currently in the HPC Conceptual Review process for Major Development and Commercial Design Review, and will be consistent with the approval that results; to the extent that HPC requires changes to the plans that would alter anything stated herein, an amendment to this request will then be submitted. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure. Existing public infrastructure is sufficient to accommodate the proposed development or any necessary upgrades will be made and associated costs will be borne by the applicant. It is hoped that the information provided herein and in the plan sets provided for the HPC submittal prove helpful in the review and approval of this request. If you should have any questions or desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC Mit~ Haas Owner/Manager cc: Greg Hills, Applicant Susie's Remodel - Administrative Growth Management Application Page 3 0 0 0 0 Susie's House - Proposed FAR GROSS FLOOR AREA NON-UNIT SPACE FLOOR LEVEL COMMERCIAL FREE-MARKET TOTAL COMM. 61% FREE-MARKET 39% TOTAL F.A.R. TOTALS DECK AREA BASEMENT LEVEL 1,045 0 SF 1,045 0 0 SF 0 1,045 LEVEL ONE 2,539 0 SF 2,539 167 106 SF 273 2,812 LEVEL TWO 386 1,320 SF 1,706 74 47 SF 121 1,827 LEVELTHREE 0 1,116 SF 1,116 0 0 SF 0 1,116 ROOF O OSF 0 0 OSF O 0 TOTAL 3,970 2,436 6,406 240 154 394 6,800 0 COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA TOTAL FLOOR AREA 3,970 240 4,210 SF ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA (1.5:1) 9,000 SF COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA ABOVE GRADE 2,925 240 3,165 SF GARAGE FLOOR AREA TOTAL FLOOR AREA 250 * (250) 0 250 SF (*-INCLUDED IN COMM. FAR) FREE MARKET FLOOR AREA TOTAL FLOOR AREA 2,436 154 2,590 SF ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA (0.5:1) 3,000 SF TOTAL BUILDING F.A.R. BUILDING AREA SUM 6,406 394 6,800 SF SUBGRADE SPACE EXEMPTION 968 SF TOTAL BUILDING FLOOR AREA 5,832 SF ALLOWABLE TOTAL FLOOR AREA (2.5:1) - SITE SIZE = 6,000sf 15,000 SF ALLOWABLE DECK AREA (15,000 X 15%) 2,250 SF NET LEASABLE (COMMERCIAL) AREA NET LIVABLE (FREE MARKET) AREA BASEMENT LEVEL 924 BASEMENT LEVEL 0 LEVEL ONE 2,092 LEVEL ONE 0 LEVEL TWO 340 LEVEL TWO 1,203 LEVELTHREE O LEVELTHREE 1,031 TOTAL 3,356 TOTAL 2,234 P:\510128.01 Conner Cabins - Susie Block\Project Management\Code\2012_0509-Susie's House Proposed FAR.xlsx .. MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 623 E. Hopkins Avenue. GMQS Exemption for one free market residence in a mixed use development, and new net leasable commercial space in a mixed use development DATE: January 27,2014 SUMMARY: 623 E. Hopkins Avenue is zoned -C-1" and is legally described as Lots F and G. Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. It was designated a historic landmark through Ordinance #34, Series of 1992. The property owner, Aspen Block 99, LLC, has requested GMQS exemption in order to add one free market residential unit and to expand the amount of net leasable commercial space on the property. An exemption is permitted in Section 26.470.060.4, Minor Enlargement of a Historic Landmark for commercial, lodge, or mixed-use development, as follows: Minor enlargement of an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed- use development. The enlargement of a property, structure or portion of a structure designated as an historic landmark for commercial, lodge or mixed-use development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the Community Development Director based on the following criteria. The additional development of uses identified in Section 26.470.020 shall be deducted from the development ceiling levels established pursuant to Section 26.470.030 but shall not be deducted from the respective annual development allotments. a. If the development increases either floor area or net leasable space/lodge units, but not both, then no employee mitigation shall be required. b. If the development increases both floor area and net leasable space/lodge units, up to four (4) employees generated by the additional commercial/lodge shall not require the provision of affordable housing. An expansion generating more than four (4) employees shall not qualify for this administrative approval and shall be reviewed pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.1. c. No more than one (1) free-market residence is created. This shall be cumulative and shall include administrative GMQS approvals granted prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2007. 1 .. The Community Development Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny this GMQS exemption request pursuant to findings on the review criteria. Commercial expansion that was approved through HPC Resolution #23, Series of 2012, would require mitigation for 0.61 employees. This is within the exemption that is permitted for landmarks within the Aspen Municipal Code. There are currently no residential units on the site. therefore the proposed free market unit is eligible for GMQS exemption. , Staff finds that the review criteria are met and recommends approval of this Administrative GMQS application. APPROVAL: I hereby approve a GMQS Exemption for Minor Expansion of a Historic Landmark for commercial, lodge, or mixed-use development at 623 E. Hopkins Avenue, as proposed. The requirement to mitigate for generation of 0.61 employees related to commercial expansion, and the employee generation related to one free market residential unit is waived. Date i 27'# Cnris Bendon, Community Development Director 2 .. THE CITY oF Aspi:N Land Use Application Determination of Completeness Date: April 5,2012 Dear City of Aspen Land Use Review Applicant, We have received your land use application for 623 E. Hopkins and reviewed it for completeness. The case number and name assigned to this property is 0010.2012.ahpc. The planner assigned to this case is Amy Guthrie. Your Land Use Application is complete for HPC review, however the application contains errors that cause the proposal to be out of compliance with the Municipal Code, as follows: The interior door linking the ground floor office in the new building to the adjacent residential unit does not comply with limitations on maximum unit size for the residential unit. Please submit amended plans removing this interior door. The basement in the new building cannot be labeled as common storage area when the space is only accessible from the residential unit. This does not comply with limitations on maximum unit size. Please submit amended plans that would allow this space to function as common area, or identify a different purpose for the space. Please submit the aforementioned missing submission items so that we may begin reviewing your application. Your hearing is tentatively scheduled for June 13th. Other submission items may be requested throughout the review process as deemed necessary by the Community Development Department. Please contact me at 429-2758 i f you have any questions. Thank You, 094 Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer City o f Aspen, Community Development Department