Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Land Use Case.HP.417 W Hallam St.0038.2014.AHPC
0038.2014. AHPC 417-421 W HALLAM FINAL HPC REVIEW H PI THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER: PARCEL ID NUMBERS: PROJECT ADDRESS: PLANNER: CASE DESCRIPTION: 0038.2014.AHPC 2735-124-33-007 2735-124-33-008 417-421 W HALLAM A&F ?f SARA ADAMS FINAL HPC REVIEW DEREK SKALKO (1FRIDAY DESIGN) AND REPRESENTATIVE: JAKE BITTNER (THOMAS PHEASANT) FOR DAVID AND MARCIA KAPLAN DATE OF FINAL ACTION: CLOSED BY: ON: DEVELOPMENT ORDER 10/27/2014 ROBERT GREGOR 08/14/2015 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306 ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: A Aspen, CO STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, � (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) or Section 26.306.010 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. 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 no later than fifteen (15) days after an Interpretation has been rendered. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this —7 day of A�L ✓le�12J , 200_�t, by PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertain- ing to the following legally described property: 417 and 421 W. Hallam Street, Units A and B of the Hallam Street Condominiums. On October 22, 2014 the Aspen Historic Preservation Coommaissiof granted Major Development Review app pa - tial Demolition, Relocation, and a 500 square feet FAR Bonus Residential Design Standard varianc- es, and setback variances for the restoration of a historic landmark and the construction of a new addition. For further information contact Sara Ad- ams, at the C ty of Aspen Community Develop- ment Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 429-2778. s! City of Aspen Publish in The Aspen Times on November 6, 2014. (10691671) WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Notary Public [my AREN REED PATTERSON NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO ATTACHMENTS' NOTARY ID #19964002767 Commission Expires February15, 2111 COPY OF THE PUBLICATION DEVELOPMENT ORDER of the City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. David and Marcia Kaplan 9100 Burning Tree Road, Bethesda, Maryland, 20817. Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address 417 and 421 West Hallam Street Units A and B of the Hallam Street Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen Colorado. Parcel ID #s 2735-124-33-007 and 2735-124-33-008. Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property HPC granted Major Development approval Relocation Demolition a 500 square feet FAR Bonus Residential Design Standard variances and setback variances for the restoration of a historic resource and the construction of a new rear addition. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Approval by the Historic Preservation Commission,• conceptual approval granted on 7/23/14 via HPC Resolution # 22 Series of 2014 and final approval granted on 10/22/14 via HPC Resolution # 32, Series of 2014. Land Use Approvals) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) November 6, 2014 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) November 6, 2017 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this 27th day of October, 2014 by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. /I/. Chris Bendon, Community Development Director AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: L.11-7 -- 421 uE,5r , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: l�l�Y CxfCr3E)e 117_ 1p , 20a STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) 1-117-1421 W. NALt,4•v (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the _/V day of 0cTcr3r--� , 20 ll y , to and including the date and time \/ of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. 1� 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(Ex2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall -be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing of ��lpb "Affidavit of Notice" was ack owled ed e r' , 20*, by I)er P fo1&�/�� C1 P` G�Y� 0 ANDREA PIA MOROTE NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20134055079 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 08, 2017 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commissi n ex ires: l%I✓ ��� ��� of 151 is ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OFMINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103 3 • • PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 417 AND 421 W. HALLAM STREET— FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, October 22, 2014, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, in Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by David & Marcia Kaplan, P.O. Box 7928, Aspen, CO 81612, owners of the property located at 417 and 421 West Hallam, Parcels A & B of the Hallam Street Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen, PID #2735-124-33-007 and -008. The applicant, represented by Thomas Pheasant and 1 Friday Design, requests a Final Major Development approval for a redevelopment of the site which includes Demolition of non -historic construction, restoration of the original miner's cottage, and construction of a new addition. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2778, sara.adams@cityofaspen.com. s/Jav Maytin Chair, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on October 2, 2014 City of Aspen Account AS cT�- ::! / I4031'� 318 FOURTH STREET LTD C/O GULF & BASCO PO BOX 445 HOUSTON, TX 77001 501 WEST HALLAM LLC PO BOX 3389 VAIL, CO 81658 323 W HALLAM LLC 101 S MILL ST #200 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN DRAGONFLY PTNRS LLC 405 PARK AVE 6TH FLR NEW YORK, NY 10022 BAILEY RYAN TANNER MCKENZIE TRST BLAICH ROBERT I TRUST 50% 319 N FOURTH ST BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP ASPEN, CO 81611 303 E 17TH AVE #1100 DENVER, CO 80203 BLOCKER LAURA G PO BOX 9213 ASPEN. CO 81612 DAHL W ROBERT & LESLIE A 83 PECKSLAND RD GREENWICH, CT 06831 DRATCH KATE TYCHER 2012 TRUST ROSELAND PROPERTY CO / BARBARA MASCERA 233 CANOE BROOK RD SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078 GALLANT MARILYN J REV TRUST 309 N THIRD ST ASPEN. CO 81611 HILLMAN TATNALL L REV TRUST 504 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 JOSEPH RUSSELL C & ELISE E 3257 INWOOD DR HOUSTON, TX 77019 CITY OF ASPEN ATTN FINANCE DEPT 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 DH HALLAM LLC 2711 CENTERVILLE RD #400 WILMINGTON, DE 19808 EGGLESTON ROBERT H JR & TRACY H 434 W HALLAM ASPEN. CO 81611 GLENN SALLY RAE 504 W HALLAM AVE ASPEN. CO 81611 HUDGENS ROBYN PO BOX 570 RANCHO SANTA FE, CA 920670570 KEEFE PATRICIA A & DAVID B III 3435 BELLCARO DR DENVER. CO 80209 330 WEST BLEEKER STREET LLC PO BOX 2028 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN RETINA SURGEONS LLC 5014 WOODHURST LN MINNETONKA, MN 55345 BLANK JEFFREY C TRST 2 FBO 101 S MILL ST #200 ASPEN. CO 81611 COLLETT JOHN & VIRGINIA C 1111 METROPOLITAN AVE #700 CHARLOTTE, NC 28204 DOUBLE D CONDO ASSOC 300 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN. CO 81611 FISCHER SISTIE 442 W BLEEKER ASPEN. CO 81611 HENRY KRISTEN 525 W HALLAM ST ASPEN. CO 81611-1246 JANSS MARY TRUST 403 W HALLAM ASPEN, CO 81611 KEY R BRILL & ELIZABETH R 715 W MAIN #304 ASPEN. CO 81611 KOUTSOUBOS TED A LEVINE THEODORE A TRUST MACDONALD BETTE S TRUST 430 E HYMAN AVE #PH 425 E 58TH ST #25H 15 BLACKMER RD ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10022 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80110 .7 0 MAGGOS LAURA P 317 NORTH 4TH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 NEISSER JUDITH E QPRT 132 E DELWARE PL #6201 CHICAGO, IL 606111428 SIRKIN ALICIA 3500 N BAY HOMES DR MIAMI, FL 331336814 MARION BRANDON & ANGELA PO BOX 8837 ASPEN, CO 81612 POTVIN FAMILY TRUST 320 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 STILWELL REED & CLAIRE 191 UNIVERSITY BLVD #714 DENVER, CO 80206 NAMADA PARTNERS GP 780 THIRD AVE, 22ND FL NEW YORK, NY 10017 SEAL MARK PO BOX 9213 ASPEN, CO 81612 SWANSON LUCIA TRUST 425 E 58TH ST #25H NEW YORK, NY 10022 TEAGUE LEWIS TRUST TYCHER DANA 2012 TRUST WEST HALLAM LLC 862 N BEVERLY GLEN BLVD ROSELAND PROPERTY CO / BARBARA 2901 SW 149 AVE STE 400 LOS ANGELES, CA 90077 MASCERA MIRAMAR, FL 33027 233 CANOE BROOK RD SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078 10 • PUBLIC NOTICE Date: Wed. 0-1 22.2014 Time: 5 00 p m Place:( c,oro CRm hom cdy Hari 130 S 5awna. Aspen Purpose: HPC S asked to conduct Foal Dahprr Review for a redevebpriw t of the prop" mduMng restoration N the hmW c landmar*. partm drmldanand the Construction of a new wfdRan The application vras sunmdled ey David & Marca KaDtan P O Box 7928, Aspen. Co 81812. owners of Uxs property For fudhar �nformaban Cordad Aspen Planning Dept 970429-2778.attn-Sara Ada awl is I - IW!! - -.6411ilti— 417-421 West Hallam Notification Posting - Dated 10-7-2014 EXHIBIT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE COD ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ! fr? -�1► 4 2-1 UJ ..{"Vy" Sr , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: hid D c.t 2-2 Q2 5 : Oo ryn , 20_Lq. STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) 1, pnn!e -¢-AON (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ✓ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) da s prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the _ day of , 20_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage _ _... _. .prapaid- ail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the Jpi6�e44Wjct to the development application. The names and addresses of prop6gy own s shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared, no r tore than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of tAe s40ners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, SPAS or PUDs that create more than one lot, new Planned Unit Developments, and new Specially Planned Areas, are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. .4/-" -S:�� Sign ure The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 2 day of , 20Z!L, by A3 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Via Notary Public KAREN REED PATTERSON NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: NOTARY ID #19964002767 • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION My Commission Expires February 15, 2016 • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE. 417 FINALIMAJOR DEVELOPMENT D 421 W. HALLAM �_ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, October eo22 the Aspen at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p. n Council Historic Preservation S. Galena Stl Aspen. to chambers, City cons idet an application submitted by David & Mar- cia Kaplan, P.O. Box 792a, Aspen, CO 61612, owners of the propertyY located at 417 and 421 West Hallam, Parcels A & B of the Hallam Street Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen, PID p2735-124-33-007 and -006. The applicant, repre- sented by Thomas Pheasant and 1 Friday Design, requests a Final Major Development approval for a redevelopment of the site which includes Dem011- Lion of non -historic construction, restoration of the original miner's cottage, and consirudion of a new addition. For fuof As 1 en Community Development �mPs at n tion, contact are the City P �2g-2778,nsa e3adams®citYoasPen.rgm.e pen, (970) slJay Maylin Chair, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on October 2, 2014 (10594529) GRAND _JUNCTION CO SIS 23 /4\15 (G I Z • PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 417 AND 421 W. HALLAM STREET— CORRECTION TO HISTORIC DESIGNATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, September 22, 2014, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, in Council Chambers, City Hall, • 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by David & Marcia Kaplan, P.O. Box 7928, Aspen, CO 81612, owners of the property located at 417 and 421 West Hallam, Parcels A & B of the Hallam Street Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen, PID #2735-124-33-007 and - 008. The applicant, represented by Jake Bittner of Thomas Pheasant and Derek Skalko of 1 Friday Design, requests a correction to the legal description of the property that is landmark designated. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2778, sara.adams@cityofaspen.com. s/Steven Skadron Mayor Published in the Aspen Times on September 4, 2014 City of Aspen Account • 0 GRAiND JUNCTION CC) 815 c 1� I% 3•-' �= � il��li�iff�i�l��l'Illll�lif'��Iliiilll�liiilill�l�illl���i��il��i PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 417 AND 421 W. HALLAM STREET— FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, October 22, 2014, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, in Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by David & Marcia Kaplan, P.O. Box 7928, Aspen, CO 81612, owners of the property located at 417 and 421 West Hallam, Parcels A & B of the Hallam Street Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen, PID #2735-124-33-007 and -008. The applicant, represented by Thomas Pheasant and 1 Friday Design, requests a Final Major Development approval for a redevelopment of the site which includes Demolition of non -historic construction, restoration of the original miner's cottage, and construction of a new addition. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2778, sara.adams@cityofaspen.com. s/Jay Maytin Chair, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on October 2, 2014 City of Aspen Account MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: 417/421 W. Hallam Street- Final Major Development, public hearing DATE: October 22, 2014 SUMMARY: The subject property is a duplex — half of which is designated a historic landmark. When the property was designated in 1992, there was a clerical error that listed the wrong half of the duplex as historic. In addition, almost all designated properties affect an entire site, not just a single unit. This applicant seeks to correct the error. In addition the applicant is interested in converting the duplex into a single family residence and requests approval to demolish non - historic additions, pick up the house to dig a basement, and to construct a large addition. Variances including setback variances, the 500 square feet FAR Bonus and Residential Design Standard variances are requested. On October 23, 2013 HPC conducted a worksession regarding this property. Conceptual approval was granted on July 23, 2014. City Council amended the landmark designation to include the entire parcel on September 22, 2014 (via Ordinance 27, Series of 2014). The final land use review for this project is Final Major Development. Staff recommends approval of Final Major Development with conditions. APPLICANT: David and Marcia Kaplan, represented by Derek Skalko of 1Friday Design Collaborative and Jake Bittner of Thomas Pheasant. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-33-007 and 2735-124-33-008. ADDRESS: 417 and 421 W. Hallam Avenue, Units A and B of the Hallam Street Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO. ZONING: R-6 MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) Major Development review is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structures) andlor addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect oj'the proposed 417/421 W. Hallam — Final Review Staff Memo 10/22/14 P92 development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Conditions from Conceptual Review: The Resolution granting conceptual approval included a few conditions to be addressed in the Final Major Development application: La. Continue to refine the restoration plan for the Victorian, specifically the details of the front porch. Staff Response: The applicant has provided more information on the front porch restoration. Staff is supportive of the simple design and finds that it is consistent with Design Guideline 6.5: 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts. ❑ Where "scars" on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to related buildings. ❑ Using overly ornate materials on a building for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. ❑ It is acceptable to use salvaged materials from other buildings only if they are similar in style and detailing to other features on the building where they are to be installed. Staff finds that condition of approval La is met. Lb Specify the foundation profile, material, and style for the historic home for review at Final Review. Staff Response: A brick foundation is proposed for the historic home. The profile and style is proposed to be specified during excavation in case there is evidence of the original material/profile. Staff finds that condition Lb is met. Landscape: The application includes a detailed landscape plan on sheets 1,100, L700 and L801. The landscape plan includes a front walkway to the historic home and extensive planting in the front yard. The majority of the front yard has a perennial/ground cover mix. In addition, rows of bushes and plants are proposed. A low stone wall is proposed that defines a corner of the lot. Staff finds that the proposed walkway meets Guideline 1.9 and recommends that Staff and Monitor review and approve the proposed material for the proposed walkways and hardscape. Staff finds that the proposed stone wall is out of context with the landmark and recommends a restudy to meet Guidelines 1.3 and 1.4. A retaining wall does not seem necessary as there is no retaining wall currently onsite. 2 417/421 W. Hallam —Final Review Staff Memo 10/22/14 • 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent' quality allowing views into the yard from the street. ❑ A fence that defines a front yard is usually low to the ground and "transparent" in nature. ❑ On residential properties, a fence which is located forward of the front building facade may not be taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see the City of Aspen's "Residential Design Standards".) o A privacy fence may be used in back yards and along alleys, but not forward of the front facade of a building. o Note that using no fencing at all is often the best approach. ❑ Contemporary interpretations of traditional fences should be compatible with the historic context. 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally. o Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. ❑ Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. ❑ Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. ❑ Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials. Materials: A mix of wood, stone and glass are proposed materials for the new addition. The roof of the historic home is proposed to have wood shingles and the new addition is proposed to have lock seamed non -reflective grey metal. The front porch roof is flat and is proposed to have a copper roof. Generally Staff does not recommend copper roof material for historic landmarks, especially a modest landmark such as 417 W. Hallam. The flat roof will be virtually invisible from the right of way. Staff recommends that HPC decide whether copper material in this location is appropriate and if the copper should be treated to have a matte finish and meet Guidelin 11.7 and 11.8. Staff is supportive of the application and the style of the proposed materials and finds that they are consistent with the following Guidelines: 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. ❑ Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. ❑ If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non -reflective finish. ❑ Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. o If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non -reflective finish. 417/421 W . Hallam — Final Review Staff Memo 10/22/14 P94 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non -reflective finish. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. ❑ Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. Windows: Historic wood windows with interior storm windows are proposed for the historic landmark. Aluminum frame windows are proposed for the new addition. During the construction process Staff and Monitor shall work with the applicant to determine original openings in the landmark if possible. Staff is supportive of the different window materials as that further differentiate the old from new construction. Staff finds that the Guidelines below are met. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character -defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. ❑ These include windows, doors and porches. ❑ Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. Details: Simple architectural details are proposed for the new addition which compliments and highlights the historic resource. A site lighting plan was proposed as part of the landscape. Staff recommends that staff and monitor review and approve light fixtures and locations on the landmark and addition as part of building permit review. Staff also recommends that Staff and Monitor review and approve a front door for the historic landmark during building permit review. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. ❑ Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 4 417/421 W. Hallam — Final Review Staff Memo 10/22/14 P95 • 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. ❑ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. ❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. Li Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. o Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. ❑ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. ❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light. ❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. ❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. ❑ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. ❑ Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights -of -way. 26.410.020.D.2. Residential Design Standards. Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which do not meet this Section may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Historic Preservation Commission, if the project is subject to the requirements of Chapter 26.415. An applicant who desires to consolidate other requisite land use review by the Historic Preservation Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Planning and Zoning Commission may elect to have the variance application decided by the board or commission reviewing the other land use application. An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the deciding board shall find that the variance, if granted would: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site -specific constraints. Following is the requested variance, underlined area is not met in the proposal: 417/421 W. Hallam — Final Review Staff Memo 10/22/14 ZOU III.Ci. • 0 3. Windows. a) Street -facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve feet (12) above the finished first floor. For interior staircases, this measurement will be made from the first landing if one exists. A transom window above the main entry is exempt from this standard. "No window zone" Staff Response: The purpose of this Standard is to prevent tall vertic win that span between floors creating the illusion of a tall building and departing from the traditional residential development found i&Aspen with a clear first and second floor. A glazed curtain wall is propo§ed behind the historic resource that includes windows in the "no window zone." The glazing creates a very clean and simple backdrop for the historic resource. Staff recommends that HPC consider the "relationship of the proposed developineiit wide adjacent structures" including the historic landmark when consi ermg t e variance request. T0ThHPC approve the — bA ZA **"T) • approve the application with conditions, • disapprove the application, or • continue the application to a date certain to obtain addional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECONEVIENSATION: Staff recommends HPC grant Final Major Development approval for the project proposed at 417/421 West Hallam Street with the following conditions: 1: Items for Staff and Monitor review and approval: a. A material mock up shall be provided on site prior to purchase and installation of materials n W� A,44L b.f 1 re -treated to a matte finiSl� �. he window locations and sizes in the historic landmark shall be reviewed and 021 approved by Staff and monitor. d. Light fixtures and locations for the historic home and new addition shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. e. Front door of the historic home shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. ` f. The profile and style of the foundation shall be review and approved by Staff and monitor. Tlie landscape Wall proposed at the front of the house is not approved. 417/421 W. Hallam —Final Review Staff Memo 10/22/14 P97 0 0 III.C. 3. A Residential Design Standard variance is granted for Standard 26.410.040.D.3- windows between 9' and 12'. 4. The project is required to meet all requirements for a single family home unless varied by the Historic Preservation Commission. The project is only allowed have one kitchen for a single family home. 5. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site -specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site -specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 417 and 421 West Hallam Street, Units A and B of the Hallam Street Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Exhibits: A. Relevant HPC Guidelines B. Application 7 417/421 W. Hallam — Final Review Staff Memo 10/22/14 ..] 11I.C■ A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL), FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 417 AND 421 WEST HALLAM STREET, UNITS A AND B OF THE HALLAM STREET CONDOMINIUMS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION # , SERIES OF 2014 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-33-007 AND 2735-124-33-008 WHEREAS, the applicant, David and Marcia Kaplan, represented by 1 Friday Design Collaborative and Thomas Pheasant, requested HPC Major Development (Final) approval for the property located at 417 and 421 West Hallam Street, Units A and B of the Hallam Street Condominium, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, on September 22, 2014 City Council approved Ordinance 27, Series of 2014 amending a clerical error regArding the landmark designation boundaries to include the entire parcel located at 417 and 421 West Hallam Street; and, WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.4.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, the HPC may grant a variance from the Residential Design Standards upon a find that: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site -specific constraints. 417/421 W. Hallam Street HPC Resolution # , Series of 2014 ... Page 1 of 3 • WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report to HPC dated October 22, 2014, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards and recommended approval of the project with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 22, 2014, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and approved the project by a vote of NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants Final Major Development approval with the following conditions: 1. Items for Staff and Monitor review and approval: a. A material mock up shall be provided on site prior to purchase and installation of materials: brick foundation and landscape pavers. b. The copper metal roof for the front porch shall be pre-treated to a matte finish. c. The window locations and sizes in the historic landmark shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. d. Light fixtures and locations for the historic home and new addition shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. e. Front door of the historic home shall be reviewed and approved by Staff and monitor. f. The profile and style of the foundation shall be review and approved by Staff and monitor. 2. The landscape wall proposed at the front of the house is not approved. 3. A Residential Design Standard variance is granted for Standard 26.410.040.D.3- windows between 9' and 12'. 4. The project is required to meet all requirements for a single family home unless varied by the Historic Preservation Commission. The project is only allowed have one kitchen for a single family home. 5. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site -specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site -specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the generai pubitc of the approval of a site specific 417/421 W. Hallam Street HPC Resolution #_, Series of 2014 Page 2 of 3 P100 development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 417 and 421 West Hallam Street, Units A and B of the Hallam Street Condominiums, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 22"d day of October, 2014. Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Jay Maytin, Chair Exhibit A: Approved site plan and elevations. 417/421 W. Hallam Street HPC Resolution # , Series of 2014 Page 3 of 3 P101 • 417/421 W. Hallam — Final Design Review 1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original. ❑ Any fence which is visible from a public right-of-way must be built of wood or wrought iron. Wire fences also may be considered. ❑ A wood picket fence is an appropriate replacement in most locations. A simple wire or metal fence, similar to traditional "wrought iron," also may be considered. ❑ Chain link is prohibited and solid "stockade" fences are only allowed in side and rear yards. 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views into the yard from the street. ❑ A fence that defines a front yard is usually low to the ground and "transparent" in nature. ❑ On residential properties, a fence which is located forward of the front building facade may not be taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see the City of Aspen's "Residential Design Standards".) a A privacy fence may be used in back yards and along alleys, but not forward of the front facade of a building. ❑ Note that using no fencing at all is often the best approach. ❑ Contemporary interpretations of traditional fences should be compatible with the historic context. 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally. ❑ Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible with the historic context. ❑ A side yard fence is usually taller than its front yard counterpart. It also is less transparent. A side yard fence may reach heights taller than front yard fences (up to six feet), but should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. ❑ Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. ❑ Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing, on the upper portions of the fence. 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public -to -private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. P102 ❑ This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public' sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi -private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. ❑ Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. ❑ Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. Private Yard 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. ❑ The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. ❑ Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. ❑ If a tree must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project. 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs. ❑ Retaining historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways is encouraged. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. ❑ Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. ❑ Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. ❑ Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. ❑ Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. ❑ Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. ❑ It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. P103 E ❑ Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. ❑ If the original is double -hung, then the replacement window should also be double - hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. ❑ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character -defining facades. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character -defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. ❑ Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. ❑ Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. ❑ A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. ❑ Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. ❑ Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. ❑ If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. ❑ If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade m,�-4. rei"Os oper0ble, P104 III.C. 0 0 4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. ❑ For additional information see Chapter 14: General Guidelines "On -Going Maintenance of Historic Properties". 4.4 If a new screen door is used, it should be in character with the primary door. ❑ Match the frame design and color of the primary door. ❑ If the entrance door is constructed of wood, the frame of the screen door should also be wood. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. ❑ A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. ❑ A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. ❑ Simple paneled doors were typical. ❑ Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. ❑ Use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. ❑ Where no evidence of the appearance of the historic porch exists, a new porch may be considered that is similar in character to those found on comparable buildings. Keep the style and form simple. Also, avoid applying decorative elements that are not known to have been used on the house or others like it. ❑ When constructing a new porch, its depth should be in scale with the building. ❑ The scale of porch columns also should be similar to that of the trimwork. ❑ The height of the railing and the spacing of balusters should appear similar to those used historically as well. 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts. ❑ Where "scars' on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to related buildings. ❑ Using overly ornate materials on a building for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. ❑ It is acceptable to use salvaged materials from other buildings only if they are similar in style and detailing to other features on the building where they are to be installed. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. P105 ❑ Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. ❑ If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non -reflective finish. ❑ Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. ❑ If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non - reflective finish. 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. ❑ A metal roof material should have an earth tone and have a matte, non -reflective finish. ❑ A metal roof with a lead -like patina also is an acceptable alternative. ❑ Seams should be of a low profile. ❑ A roof assembly with a high profile seam or thick edge is inappropriate. 7.11 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. o Adding ornamental cresting, for example, where there is no evidence that it existed creates a false impression of the building's original appearance, and is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. ❑ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non -reflective finish. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. ❑ Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are £iiCvuiag a. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. P106 III.C. 0 9 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. o 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. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. ❑ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC:. ❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. ❑ Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. ❑ Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. ❑ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. ❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light. ❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. ❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. ❑ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. ❑ Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights -of -way. P107 I FRIDAY DESIGN F _'�r_N�'" DESp3,C'i J PO Box 7928 Aspen, CO 81612 T / 970.309.0695 E / mail: derek@lfriday.com TO: Ms. Sara Adams, AICP; City of Aspen Senior Planner 130 South Galena Street, Third Floor Aspen, Colorado 81611 T / 1.970.429.2778 E / sara.adams@cityofaspen.com CC: File REF: 417-421 West Hallam Residence MEMn DATE: 13 OCTOBER 2014 HPC Final Hearing Submission Responses to Residential Design Standards Compliancy Responses to Historical Preservation Design Guidelines Dear Sara & Members of the Aspen Historical Preservation Commission, We are writing on behalf of David & Marcia Kaplan regarding the HPC Final Hearing for their property located at 417-421 West Hallam. As you are well aware, the property consists of an existing historical mining cottage with an incorrectly historically designated addition that was constructed between 1987 and 1991. In September of 2014, we appeared before the Aspen City Council to formally amend the designation error, and now find ourselves again before you in hopes of reaching an approved resolution towards the design as proposed in the packet issuances dated 10-10-2014 headed by Thomas Pheasant Design and Bluegreen. Per request, the letter information contained herein addresses the topics of compliancy towards the Aspen Land Use Code Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.410 and the Aspen Historical Preservation Design Guidelines. We hope this information will serve as a helpful addendum to the primary graphical packets provided detailing the project as follows: Introduction / Cover Sheet Graphical Model Representation of 417-421 West Hallam Proposed Plans Drawings (Lower, Main, & Upper Floor Plans) Proposed Elevation Drawings (N,S,W,E Elevations with Material Callouts) Proposed Material Callout Information in Graphical Form Garage Door & Siding Detailing Callout Examples / Clarification Plan & Elevation Detail Information Pertaining to the Proposed Front Porch Construction Graphical Illustrations for the N, S, E & W Elevations depicting Materials Model View Renderings of the Proposed Construction for 417421 West Hallam Proposed Rendering with Landscape Information in Graphical Format Proposed Landscape Site Plan with Material and Vegetation Callouts Proposed Exterior Lighting & Electrical Plan with Lighting Specification Sheets 417/421 W. Hallam — Aspen Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.410 Responses 26.410.040 A. Site Design 1. A_/n hnlin�in 4hn A17 A0 1 lA/nn4 L-Inllnm nrnicn4 nn nrnnncnrd mnnl'n nt�niJn rrlc nn rlennnrihnrl fnr 1 R::ilrlinn Orientation, 2.Build-To-Lines and 3.Fences. Due to the location of the exsiting historical mining cottage and our requirement to re-establish a front porch in accordance with the known Sanborn information, the porch once constructed will actually be located on the property but into the front yard required minimum 1: setback. Should a variance for this situation be formally necessary, we will bring this to the attention of the HPC at the final hearing. 26.410.040 B. Building Form Per our conceptual approval, the building and mass is in accordance with the dimensions, massing, and heights consistent of the HPC approval. The topic of secondary mass does not apply to our historically designated property and proposed construction. 26.410.040 C. Parking, Garages & Carports The project as proposed has alley access and proposes all usage for vehicular elements via this aspect of the property. We have a one stall garage door being proposed for the project. 26.410.040 D. Building Elements 1. Street Oriented Entrance & Principle Window: Per the conceptual approval, the primary entrance of the home is proposed directly off of the front fagade of the existing mining cottage. Distance offsets and door heights are in accordance with the RDS per the drawing submission provided. Although our front porch as proposed dimensionally varies from the set requisites of the RDS, we are re-creating the porch per the understood dimensions of the Sanborn Mapping !_ rmn+;n n 4 UD/` (�nr�n�ptu�ul /��mrnVal. If a variance lc, required fnr Chic tnnir� We W!ll I1. lII IL-1 � l 1- 111 V Co. VV IV `1 vpi c, make notation of this at the Final Hearing. We understand the principle window for the building as the west side proposed double hung window as existing on the historical mining cottage. 2. First Story Element: Being the historical mining cottage is a single story element situated as the primary mass along Hallam Street, we believe we are in compliance from this RDS. 3. A. We are requesting a Residential Design Standard Variance for proposed Street Facing Windows designed as a glazed curtainwall element/ area in the "No Window Zone" as defined per the RDS. The new proposed construction calls for a glazed wall that does contain windows between the 9'-12' height area, and we are requesting a variance from RDS 26.410.040 D-3A accordingly. No exiting non orthogonal windows are existing on the mining cottage, nor are any non - orthogonal windows being proposed on the new construction along Hallam. We are in compliance with the lightwells as proposed and approved with our HPC Conceptual hearing. 26.410.40 E. Context 1. Materials A,B & C: Per the proposed design solution, the quality of the materials and detailing as proposed is consistent on all sides of the proposed construction. Materials are accurately represented as they would structurally indicate for visual consistency. Highly Reflective Materials are not proposed for the exterior material palette. 2. Inflection: Per the existing historical conditions of the site and HPC Conceptual Approval, we have maintained a single story massing elements for the initial 46' of the proposed 417-421 West Hallam property. We believe we are in compliance with the inflection RDS requisite, but will request a formal variance from this if necessary at HPC Final. 417/421 W. Hallam — Aspen Historical Preservation Design Guideline Responses 1.1 —1.17 Sections HPDG Section have been addressed by Ms. Christine Shine of Bluegreen, and the project responses can be found accordingly within Bluegreen's letterhead to the HPC dated October 10th, 2014. Thank you. P109 • 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. ❑ If the original is double -hung, then the replacement window should also be double -hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. ❑ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character -defining facades. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character -defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. ❑ Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. ❑ Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. ❑ A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Sections 3.4 -3.7, we are proposing the maintenance of the existing wood double hung window as indicated on the North Elevation of the home (West Hallam Orientation). For all new proposed windows not currently existing on the West and East facades, we are proposing to match the comparative rough opening size of the West Hallam window in a vertically oriented, painted wood, double -hung configuration. The exact locations of the windows to be determined upon a full demolition process to determine if any indication of historic locates are still deiinabie. Deierminaiion of the specific winduw rough Upuliiiiy lucaiiuiis iu be ayieed upon Pei the siaff and monitor process. We understand the importance of the historic window detailing, and agree to work with the window manufacturer, once selected, to represent, as closely as possible, the existing sash profiles and components comparative to the original window. In the case of the 417-421 Hallam residence, the existing window detailing is rather basic, and this can be achieved quite readily. Phoenix Windows and Loewen are of consideration as possible manufactures to ensure a consistent detail. Please Refer to Proposed Elevations sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 for graphical information responding to HPDC Sections 3.4-3.7. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. ❑ Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. ❑ Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. ❑ If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. ❑ If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. 4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. ❑ For additional information see Chapter 14: General Guidelines "On -Going Maintenance of Historic Properties". 4.4 If a new screen door is used, it should be in character with the primary door. ❑ Match the frame design and color of the primary door. ❑ If the entrance door is constructed of wood, the frame of the screen door should also be wood. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. ❑ A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. ❑ A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. ❑ Simple paneled doors were typical. ❑ Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Sections 4.1-4.5, we will be required to restore aiiu p1-iys1ca11'y- i8-iiiierp,ei file ueiieveii locaiiGii anUJ 51Z1iig of iiie front docii per itie FiuNv3cu i_ievaiioiis sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 responding to HPDC Sections 4.1-4.5. We have determined the size and location of the door in accordance with the known existing Sanborn mapping information available to us. Additionally, on page 13 of the 11 x 17 PDF packet, Pilo 0 a plan and elevation blown up detail of the proposed new front entry door and porch has been provided. Material callouts and finish are compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically. 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. ❑ Use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. ❑ Where no evidence of the appearance of the historic porch exists, a new porch may be considered that is similar in character to those found on comparable buildings. Keep the style and form simple. Also, avoid applying decorative elements that are not known to have been used on the house or others like it. ❑ When constructing a new porch, its depth should be in scale with the building. ❑ The scale of porch columns also should be similar to that of the trimwork. ❑ The height of the railing and the spacing of balusters should appear similar to those used historically as well. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 5.5, we will be required to restore and physically- re -interpret the believed location and sizing of the front porch and door conditions per the Proposed Elevations sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 responding to HPDC Section 5.5. We have determined the size and location of the door in accordance with the known existing Sanborn mapping information available to us. Additionally, on page 13 of the 11 x 17 PDF packet, a plan and elevation blown up detail of the proposed new front entry door and porch has been provided. Material callouts and finish are compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Section 5.5. 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" desiqns for replacement parts. ❑ Where "scars" on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to related buildings. ❑ Using overly ornate materials on a building for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. ❑ It is acceptable to use salvaged materials from other buildings only if they are similar in style and detailing to other features on the building where they are to be installed. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 6.5, we will be required to restore and physically- re -interpret the believed location and sizing of the front porch and door conditions per the Proposed Elevations sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 responding to HPDC Section 6.5. We are maintaining simplicity of the detailing as we believe is compatible with the original design intent of the property. For reference, on page 13 of the 11 x 17 PDF packet, a plan and elevation blown up detail of the proposed new front entry door and porch has been provided. Material callouts and finish are compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Section 5.5. Although it is deemed acceptable to utilize salvaged parts, we intend to rebuild the porch as a new construction in this condition. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. ❑ Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. ❑ If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non -reflective finish. ❑ Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. ❑ If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non -reflective finish. 7.101f 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. ❑ A metal roof material should have an earth tone and have a matte, non -reflective finish. ❑ A metal roof with a lead -like patina also is an acceptable alternative. ❑ Seams should be of a low profile. ❑ A roof assembly with a high profile seam or thick edge is inappropriate. 7.11Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. ❑ Adding ornamental cresting, for example, where there is no evidence that it existed creates a false impression of the building's original appearance, and is inappropriate. r.r �. c_.._ .•_ r.__ _.._. ._a: �.- n-_ _ n..'J_I:... /1 Inn/" \ Q....ai...... 7 A 7 -1 I�L. I C.I i 1'saUl Iv 1 I G:a v'� ��ii iiv� i iJ �::.n ... .. .. _ - .. -, -•. - _... _.. .... � _ r • t- the existing standing seam metal roof condition of the historical mining cottage and replace with a more historically consistent stained cedar shingle of natural or earth tone colour. No reflectivity will be created via use of the proposed cedar shingle roofing in conjunction with a paint locked non -reflective metal flashing also of natural and earth tone basis. The roof as it is proposed to be constructed is shown per the P111 Proposed Elevations sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 for graphical information responding to HPDC Sections 7.9-7.11. We are maintaining simplicity of the detailing regarding flashing and profiles as we believe is compatible with the original design intent of the property. Material callouts and finish are compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Sections 7.9-7.11. 10.4Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.11 On anew addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. ❑ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Sections 10.4-10.11, the addition has been proposed to clearly be recognized as a product of its own time period. Although the building does propose a departure from the mining cottage in the use of a 4" high random length stone as an accent material to the setback front fagade of the new construction, we believe the use of the stone helps to assist in "anchoring" the extensive use of a proposed glazed curtain wall system across the predominant north and south facades as depicted on sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 responding to HPDC Sections 10.4 — 10.11. We are maintaining simplicity in the detailing of the roof overhangs and painted wood siding found on the majority of the proposed addition. The sizing of the proposed rain screen detail is a direct response to the 4" traditional lapped siding that will be utilized upon the historical mining cottage, which, although being clear not to replicate the historical structure, is compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Sections 10.4-10.11 when tying the mass and scale of the old and new together. For the roof material, the new proposed construction is to utilize a paint locked standing seam metal roofing condition that is intended to be of a natural and earth tone colour palette. The proposed metal roof will be finished in a non -reflective finish per the HPDG requisites. 11.7Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non -reflective finish. 11.8Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. ❑ Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 11.9Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. ❑ These include windows, doors and porches. ❑ Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Sections 11.7-11.10, the addition has been proposed to clearly be recognized as a product of its own time period while addressing comparative elements of the vernacular existing conditions via the form and scale of the volumes as approved via the conceptual approval process. In the new proposed construction, we believe proposing the north and south glazing facades as depicted on sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 helps to further enhance the dialogue between the old and new constructions, as we are not mimicking or re-creating the visual language found within the mining cottage. We are maintaining a consistent simplicity through the new proposed construction in the detailing of the roof overhangs, the application and laying of the proposed stacked stone accent areas, and within the painted wood siding round on the majoruy of the piopused iiew cuiisiiuc ioii. rur exampie, i ie siziriy or irie piopused rail -I screen detail is a direct response to the 4" traditional lapped siding that will be utilized upon the historical mining cottage, which, although being clear not to replicate the historical structure, is compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Sections 10.4-10.11. We believe this further ties the mass and scale of the old and new together while also providing a detailing P112 condition compatible to the human scale and consistent with the architectural traditions of Aspen's West end vernacular, both old and new. For the roof material, the new proposed construction is to utilize a paint locked standing seam metal roofing condition intended to be of a natural and earth tone colour palette. The proposed metal roof will be finished in a non -reflective finish per the HPDG requisites. 14.6Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. ❑ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. ❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 14.6, exterior light sources have been called out as proposed on pages 23-25 of the 11 x 17 packet issuance per Bluegreen. Wattage and lumen capacities are provided to show compliancy with the City of Aspen standards and guidelines. Architecturally, down lighting as required per code near all points of entry and egress will comply with the City of Aspen Exterior Lighting Code. No up lighting is called out for usage on the 417-421 West Hallam project. 14.7Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. ❑ Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. ❑ Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. ❑ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. ❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light. ❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. ❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use bn/o fixtures that light the same area. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 14.7, exterior light sources have been called out as proposed on pages 23-25 of the 11 x 17 packet issuance per Bluegreen. Wattage and lumen capacities are provided to show compliancy with the City of Aspen standards and guidelines. Architecturally, down lighting as required per code near all points of entry and egress will comply with the City of Aspen Exterior Lighting Code. No up -lighting is called out for usage on the 417-421 West Hallam project. 14.8Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. ❑ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. ❑ Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights -of - way. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 14.8, we realize we are proposing a large amount of glazing to the north and south elevations of the project. In order to appropriately respond to the potential concerns of visual impact of light spill onto adjacent properties, we will be utilizing a combination of strategies to reduce the impact on the neighborhood. First, roll down opaque shading devices are anticipated to be incorporated into the design solution and utilized along the interior north and south facades in their entirety. We are proposing a 60%opacity at the present time. Additionally, the standard lighting parameters typical to the layout of a residence will be quantified via modeling numerically to ensure there are no great and unnecessary overages within the layout developments themselves. We internally desire a home that is comparatively 20% to 30% less than what is typically the standard recommendation of lumen output capacity. Lastly, all code requisites set forth by the Residential Design Standards and Land Use Code for the City of Aspen will be adhered to in accordance. We greatly appreciate your working through this process with us regarding 417-421 West Hallam, and we look forward to presenting and discussing all provided information to you in greater depth on October 22"d We thank you for your consideration towards our proposal. i esNCCifiiiiy, Derek Skalko Local Representative, 417-421 West Hallam P113 to Sara Adams —Historic Preservation Staff from Christine Poirier Shine date 10 October 2014 project name 417 + 421 W Hallam subject HPC Final Guidelines and Responses copy to project files The following memo responds to the Historic Preservation Guidelines Preservation Principles: • Respect the historic design character of the building • Seek uses that are compatible with the historic character of the building • Protect and maintain significant features and stylistic features and stylistic elements • Preserve and existing original site features and original building materials and features • Repair deteriorated historic features, and replace only those elements that cannot be repaired Streetscape and Lot Features: Fences 1.1 Preserve original fences • no existing fence exists on this site 1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original no record or evidence of original fence 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent' quality allowing views into the yard from the street no record or evidence of original fence 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally • no fence/wall is located forward of historic resource • a low 30" freestanding wall is proposed and less than the HPC suggested 42" height • this stone wall is low to the ground and helps define the private yard • this wall allows views into the yard from the street and transitions from public to semi -private space • this contemporary interpretation of traditional fence is compatible of the historic context in both height (30") and material (stone) p. 1 of 3 www.bluegreenaspen.com P114 • this 30" freestanding wall is consistent in scale and is consistent with traditional fences in that it is further complemented with plantings 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street facing facade • a 6' privacy fence along the west side of the property and along the alley is proposed • the privacy fence is not located forward of the front facade of the mining cabin and provides a sense of open space between homes 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along alley should be compatible with historic context • The 6' side yard and alley privacy fence incorporate details of interest/transparency, such as open vines and open slats Retaining walls 1.7 Preserve original retaining walls no existing retaining walls on this site 1.8 Maintain the historical height of a retaining wall • not applicable Walkways 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public -to -private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project • public>semi- public>semi private>private transition is emphasized through the use of the low retaining wall and complementary planting; the planting is a layered approach, providing a variety of height transitions • the entry walkway is perpendicular from the street to the front entry • paving materials for pathways to be natural stone paving which is consistent with historic building style Private Yard 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures • the front yard will be maintained in a traditional manner with planting material and paving only for circulation; lighting is limited to safety 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs • all healthy trees on site will be preserved when possible, cottonwood street trees as well as a double stem willow are preserved o tree protection during construction will be implemented o replacement of damaged and unhealthy trees will be approved by the parks department o approved replacement trees will be large enough in scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs • no historically significant planting were observed on site • mature trees are preserved, where possible, in coordination with the Parks Department • historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways are limited on site, but will be preserved where possible p 2of'1 11_. ii':_rr i,... i.)„ P115 0 1.13 revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site • plant and tree material will be selected according to its mature size, to allow for long-term growth o use of non-native, hardy plants will be limited to small areas as accent plants o grassy areas will not be replaced with paving 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate • clear views to the mining cabin are maintained with the proposed planting • Views to the historic mining cabin are framed through thoughtful placement of vegetation Site Lighting 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting • all site lighting will be shielded and down directed and limited to walks and entries Streetscape 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape designs and features • low groundcover and perennials will be maintained along the planting strip • street trees are maintained where healthy and new street trees are added to reinforce the rhythm of the block as well as shade for pedestrians which is integral to the historic landscape features 1.17 Maintain historic irrigation ditches as an integral component of the streetscape • not applicable on this site r ,UE reenas�:e cc.i P116 0 111.D. TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner RE: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd.— Conceptual Major Development Review, Variances, FAR Bonus, RDS Variance, Relocation, Demolition, Reduction PUBLIC HEARING continued from July 9, 2014. DATE: October 22, 2014 SUMMARY: 28 Smuggler Grove Road is a circa 1880s miner's cabin located in the Smuggler Mountain neighborhood off of Midland Avenue. The applicant requests approval to relocate the building on the 'lot, demolish a non -historic addition and construct a new addition to the historic resource. A new single family residence is requested on the lot. Conceptual Major Development, Setback Variances, a Residential Design Standard Variance, and FAR Bonus, are requested for the project. 6" , �'l I I Figure 1: 28 Smuggler Grove current condition Setback Parking Continuation from July 9th to August 6th: The project was continued on July 9, 2014 for a redesign of the new single family home to better relate to the historic home. Neighbors attended the meeting and voiced concerns about the parking situation and the front yard setback. A revised design for the new home was presented on the July 9ch meeting and is included in the revised application for review on August 6`h. The applicant has addressed the parking concerns by meeting the parking requirement onsite. Staff has confirmed with the Engineering Department that 2 curb cuts are permitted for the property. Continuation from August 61h to September 101h: The project was continued on August 6, 2014 with direction to shift the two homes to the rear yard setback, to restudy the side deck on 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 1 of 10 P144 the second story addition to the historic home, to possibly adjust the site plan, and to reduce the width of the second story addition to the historic home. Following are the applicant's responses to HPC and neighbor concerns voiced on 8/6/14: Setbacks: a. Historic home - the applicant has increased the front yard setback of the historic home by pushing the mass to the rear yard setback as requested by HPC and the neighbors. b. Requested setbacks are as follows: Historic Home: Front yard setback — 9' 10" provided and 25' required East sideyard setback — 9' provided and 10' required New Home: Front yard setback — 19'2 ''/z" provided and 25' required West sideyard setback — 5' provided and 10' required 2. Historic home addition width: a. Further reduced to be l'3" setback on the west and 6" setback from the east side of the historic home. 3. Side deck on addition to historic home is relocated to the rear of the addition. 4. Parking variance is no longer needed for the parking space width. 5. FAR Bonus request reduced from 500 sf to 276 sf requested bonus. BACKGROUND: The property was designated a historic landmark in 2008. The subject residence was moved to the Jukati Subdivision, specifically 28 Smuggler Grove Road, in 1976. Because the subdivision was not annexed into the City until 1987, the City did not propose landmark designation during the previous historic inventory surveys. The floor plan of this building is atypical to traditional miner's cabins in Aspen. Staff does not know where the home was originally sited; however during the designation hearing in 2008, Staff found a similar shaped building on the 1904 Sanborne Map that may be the subject residence in its original location. APPLICANT: Pagewood LLC, represented by Sara Upton and Brian Rubenstein of Rowland and Broughton Architecture and Urban Design. PARCEL ID: 2737-181-23-002. ADDRESS: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd., Jukati Subdivision, Lot 2, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO. ZONING: R-15A Staff Response: Site plan: The applicant proposes 2 detached single family residences on the 7,378 sf lot. The landmark status of the property permits 2 detached residences in the R-15A zone district. Non- 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 2 of 10 P145 0 0 III.D. landmark parcels are required to have 30,000 sf of lot area for 2 detached residences. Similar to other lots located outside the original townsite, this lot is wider than it is deep, and it does not have alley access. The front porches of the residences align, and the front most wall of the historic home is closest to the street which places the historic home in a prominent location. Staff is supportive of the proposed site plan and finds that it meets the following key features of a new building on landmark property as described in the Design Guidelines, and Guidelines 11.1 and 11.2: Traditionally, a typical building had its primary entrance oriented to the street. This helped establish a "pedestrian -friendly" quality. Locating the entrance of a new building in a manner that is similar to those seen traditionally is therefore preferred. 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. ❑ The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern of the site. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. ❑ The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry. ❑ A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. ❑ In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street. Mass/Scale/Height: Historic House: The applicant proposes a rear addition to the historic home that includes a one story connector piece and a two story addition. The connector piece is 10' long, which meets Guideline 10.7. Staff finds that the proposed height of the addition is appropriate and meets the guidelines below. The width of the addition is reduced from the original submittal with the addition and the historic home at the same width. Staff finds that the proposed width is appropriate and subservient to the historic home. Staff appreciates that the applicant relocated the second story deck to the rear yard to better meet the design guidelines. The roof form and overall style of the addition are simple, relate to the historic home and meet the guidelines below. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 3 of 10 P146 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. ❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. ❑ A 1-story connector is preferred. ❑ The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. ❑ The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. ❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. ❑ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. ❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale. New House: The applicant has redesigned the new house to better relate to the historic home. The gable roof form (Guideline 11.6), front porch (Guideline 11.4), and the proposed setbacks for two story elements (Guideline 11.3) reference and compliment the historic home and meet the Design Guidelines. Staff finds that the proposed style does not imitate the historic home and is clearly a product of its own time. Staff voiced concerns on August 61h that the rooftop planter box adds unnecessary mass to the front facade and recommended that the applicant relocate the rooftop planter box for discussion during Final Review. The applicant has included renderings in the application showing that the planter box is barely visible from street level. Staff no longer has a concern about the planter box due to the large setback of the feature and its visibility from the street. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 4 of 10 P147 • 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. ❑ Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. ❑ The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. ❑ The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. ❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. ❑ Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. ❑ Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. ❑ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. ❑ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A -frames. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. o This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. Demolition: 26.415.100.4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 5 of 10 M: 11I.D. 9 is a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. Staff Response: The applicant proposes to demolish non -historic additions at the rear of the historic resource. Staff has very limited definitive information about 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. There is a non -historic addition at the rear of the historic home. Staff is supportive of its removal and finds that review criteria (d) and the second set of review criteria (a — c) are met. Relocation: 26.415.090.C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. Staff Response: The home is not in its original location. Staff supports the relocation of the historic home on the property and finds that it is an acceptable preservation method given the integrity of the building. Relocating the home will enable the landmark to have a more 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 6 of 10 P149 0 0 III.D. traditional relationship to grade: when the landmark was moved in 1976 and placed on a basement it was raised a few feet above grade. Further, relocation creates room on the property for a new separate single family residence that will absorb most of the development pressure from the historic resource. Staff finds that review criterion 4 is met. Staff recommends that HPC adopt a condition of approval for Final Review that a letter from a house mover demonstrating that the home can be relocated be included in the final design application. 26.415.110.F. Floor area bonus. 1. In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. Staff Response: The applicant requests 276 sf of the FAR bonus. The proposed FAR for the historic home is about 1,800 sf; and the proposed FAR for the new residence is about 2,102 sf. Staff has very limited information about the historic resource. At present, it is not clear exactly where the house was moved from — the 1904 Sanborne Map and the 1974 historic inventory map suggests that it was moved from the corner of Monarch and Deane Streets. The Building permit file indicates that it was moved in 1976. Based on the style of the structure, and some inspection of framing back in 2003, its construction date can be placed sometime in the late 1800's. The overall form of this house seems to be preserved. A modest one story addition has been constructed along the back, affecting the integrity of the rear wall, however, the plan form is otherwise intact. During the designation hearing the property scored 63 points out of 100 for integrity. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 7 of 10 P150 11I.D. 0 0 There is limited information available which makes the preservation or restoration of the historic resource challenging — especially since the floor plan is atypical of Aspen miner's cabins. The applicant is willing to replace the casement windows with traditional double hung windows in the front gable end and along the side elevations. Staff and the applicant conducted a site visit to examine the residence. The front porch appears to have been replaced when the house was moved. Many original window openings also appear to exist, although the sash have been replaced and details and dimensions area altered. The exterior siding is new and the eave details and shingles in the gable end are new. The applicant is also contacting the historical society and spoke with Bill Bailey (the original house mover in 1976) to gain any information about alterations to the home. The applicant proposes to replace the siding, windows, front porch, and store a historic relationship to grade. Staff finds that the review criteria a —f are met and recommends that HPC grant the 276 sf FAR bonus. 26.415.110.C. Variances. Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning's dimensional standards. 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a) Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b) Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c) Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d) Less l)ublic amenity than required for the on -site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a) Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b) Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. The following variances are requested: Historic Home: Front yard setback — 9' 10" provided and 25' required East sideyard setback — 9' provided and 10' required New Home: Front yard setback — 19'2 '/2" provided and 25' required West sideyard setback — 5' provided and 10' required 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 8 of 10 P151 III.D. Staff Response: Staff is supportive of the proposed variances which create more space between the buildings by reducing the sideyard setbacks. Staff finds that criteria 2.b is met in that creating more space between the buildings supports the historic preservation of the landmark and mitigates an adverse impact to the historic home. 26.410.020.D.2. Residential Design Standards. Variances from the Residential Design Standards, Section 26.410.040, which do not meet this Section may be granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Historic Preservation Commission, if the project is subject to the requirements of Chapter 26.415. An applicant who desires to consolidate other requisite land use review by the Historic Preservation Commission, the Board of Adjustment or the Planning and Zoning Commission may elect to have the variance application decided by the board or commission reviewing the other land use application. An applicant who desires a variance from the Residential Design Standards shall demonstrate and the deciding board shall find that the variance, if granted would: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the noara teeis is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site -specific constraints. Following is the requested variances, underlined area is not met in the proposal: 26.410.040.A.1 Building orientation. The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street -facing facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. Parcels as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall be exempt from this requirement. Staff Response: Smuggler Grove Road begins to curve at the western part of the subject property. The historic home is slightly off the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 9 of 10 P152 The new home and the historic home are parallel to each other and are mostly parallel to the street. Staff finds that the intent of the Design Standard is met and that both criteria listed above for a variance are met: the neighborhood in large part does not meet this standard; and the size and shape of the lot in relationship to the road created a site specific constraint. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Demolition of non -historic additions is approved. 2. Relocation of the historic home is approved with the following conditions: a. A letter demonstrating that the home can be relocated is in the Final Review application. b. A bond or letter of credit, or other form approved by the City Attorney, shall be submitted for $30,000 prior to issuance of a building permit for the relocation of the home. 3. The 276 sf FAR Bonus is granted. 4. The following variances are granted as shown on Exhibit A: Historic Home: Front yard setback — 9' 10" provided and 25' required East sideyard setback — 9' provided and 10' required New Home: Front yard setback — 19'2 ''/2" provided and 25' required West sideyard setback — 5' provided and 10' required 5. A Residential Design Standard Variance is granted for building orientation, Section 26.410.040.A.1, as shown on Exhibit A. 6. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A: Relevant design guidelines Exhibit B: 1904 Sanborne Map (provided on 7/9/14) Exhibit C: Minutes from 7/9/14 HPC meeting (provided on 8/6/14) Exhibit D: Application — revised for 10/22/14 Exhibit E: Minutes from 8/6/14 HPC meeting (provided on 9/10/14) Exhibit F: Minutes from 9/10/14 HPC meeting 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. 10/22/14 Page 10 of 10 P153 • • III.D. A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL), RELOCATION, DEMOLITION, FAR BONUS, AND VARIANCE APPROVALS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 28 SMUGGLER GROVE RD., JUKATI SUBDIVISION, LOT 2, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLO O RESOLUTION 4�2: SERIES OF 2014 k PARCEL ID: 2737-181-23-002 R \� WHEREAS, the applicant, Pagewood LLC, represented by Sma\J� Rowland and Broughton Architecture and Urban Design, requested HPC Major Development (Conceptual), Relocation, Demolition, FAR Bonus, and Variances approval for the property \ located at 28 Smuggler Grove Rd., Jukati Subdivision, Lot 2, City and Townsite of Aspen, CO; n and WHEREAS, 28 Smuggler Grove Road is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Relocation, according to Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property, it must be determined that: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or 28 Sn3gggler Grove Rd. HPC Resolution eries of 2014 Page 1 of 4 P154 III.D. 0 0 diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security; and WHEREAS, in order to approve Demolition, according to Section 26.415.080.A.4, Demolition of Designated Historic Properties, it must be determined that: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area; and WHEREAS, the HPC may approve setback variances according to Section 26.415.110.C. La, Variances. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district; and WHEREAS, in selected circumstances, pursuant to Section 26.415.110Y, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. HPC Resolution #_, Series of 2014 Page 2 of 4 P155 a) The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; b) The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; c) The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; d) The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; e) The construction materials are of the highest quality; f) An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; g) The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h) Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. WHEREAS, the HPC may grant a variance from the Residential Design Standards upon a finding that: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site -specific constraints; and WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report to HPC dated September 10, 2014, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards and recommended approval of the project with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a meeting on October 22, 2014 continued from September 10, 2014, August 6, 2014 and July 9, 2014, the Historic P Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, d fou d the roposal consistent with the review standards and approved the project by a vote f�. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RE That HPC hereby grants Conceptual Major Development approval, Variances, and a 276 square feet FAR Bonus with the following conditions: 1. Demolition of non -historic additions is approved. 2. Relocation of the historic home is approved with the following conditions: a. A letter demonstrating that the home can be relocated is in the Final Review application. b. A bond or letter of credit, or other form approved by the City Attorney, shall be submitted for $30,000 prior to issuance of a building permit for the relocation of the home. 3. The 276 sf FAR Bonus is granted. 4. The following variances are granted as shown on Exhibit A: 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. HPC Resolution #_, Series of 2014 Page 3 of 4 P156 Historic Home: Front yard setback — 9' 10" provided and 25' required East sideyard setback — 9' provided and 10' required New Home: Front yard setback — 19'2 '/Z" provided and 25' required West sideyard setback — 5' provided and 10' required 5. A Residential Design Standard Variance is granted for building orientation, Section 26.410.040.A.1, as shown on Exhibit A. 6. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 22" d day of October, 2014. Approved as to Form: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Jay Maytin, Chair Exhibit A: Conceptually approved site plan and elevations. 28 Smuggler Grove Rd. HPC Resolution #_, Series of 2014 Page 4 of 4 P157 Exhibit A — Relevant Design Guidelines 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. ❑ Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows. ❑ Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them, whenever conditions permit. ❑ Preserve the original glass, when feasible. 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. ❑ Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character -defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid -to -void is a character -defining feature. ❑ Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. ❑ Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. Replacement Windows 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. ❑ Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character -defining facade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. ❑ If the original is double -hung, then the replacement window should also be double - hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. ❑ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character -defining facades. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character -defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. ❑ Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. P158 • ❑ Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. ❑ A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. ❑ Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. ❑ Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. ❑ If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. ❑ If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. ❑ Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 5.4 The use of a porch on a residential building in a single-family context is strongly encouraged. ❑ This also applies to large, multifamily structures. There should be at least one primary entrance and should be identified with a porch or entry element. Porch Replacement 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. ❑ Use materials that appear similar to the original. o While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. ❑ Where no evidence of the appearance of the historic porch exists, a new porch may be considered that is similar in character to those found on comparable buildings. ZKOIJ Keep the style and form simple. Also, avoid applying decorative elements that are not known to have been used on the house or others like it. ❑ When constructing a new porch, its depth should be in scale with the building. ❑ The scale of porch columns also should be similar to that of the trimwork. ❑ The height of the railing and the spacing of balusters should appear similar to those used historically as well. 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. ❑ Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Instead, maintain the perceived line and orientation of the roof as seen from the street. ❑ Retain and repair roof detailing. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. ❑ The shadows created by traditional overhangs contribute to one's perception of the building's historic scale and therefore, these overhangs should be preserved. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. ❑ Flat skylights that are flush with the roof plane may be considered only in an obscure location on a historic structure. Locating a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is not allowed. ❑ A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be positioned below the ridgeline. 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case -by -case basis. ❑ In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. ❑ It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative. ❑ Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. ❑ A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. ❑ Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house. ❑ The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for new construction. ❑ In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved. 9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district should be avoided. P160 III.D. • 0 o The significance of a building and the character of its setting will be considered. ❑ In general, relocating a contributing building in a district requires greater sensitivity than moving an individually -listed structure because the relative positioning of it reflects patterns of development, including spacing of side yards and front setbacks, that relate to other historic structures in the area. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. u If a historic building straddles two lots, then it may be shifted to sit entirely on one of the lots. Both lots shall remain landmarked properties. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. ❑ It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. ❑ It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. ❑ On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a modest miner's cottage is discouraged because it would be out of character. ❑ Where a stone foundation was used historically, and is to be replaced, the replacement should be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. ❑ Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it substantially above the ground level is inappropriate. ❑ Changing the historic elevation is discouraged, unless it can be demonstrated that it enhances the resource. 9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below -grade living space. ❑ In general, a lightwell is prohibited on a wall that faces a street (per the Residential Design Standards). ❑ The size of a lightwell should be minimized. ❑ A lightwell that is used as a walkout space may be used only in limited situations and will be considered on a case -by -case basis. If a walkout space is feasible, it should be surrounded by a simple fence or rail. P161 0 0 111.0. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. ❑ A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. ❑ An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. ❑ An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.5 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments that may exist on the street. ❑ Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings in the area may align at approximately the same height. An addition should not be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered or obscured. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. ❑ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. ❑ A 1-story connector is preferred. ❑ The connector should be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. o The connector also should be proportional to the primary building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. ❑ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. P162 • Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. ❑ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. ❑ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. ❑ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. ❑ For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. ❑ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. Building Orientation 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. ❑ The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern of the site. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. ❑ The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry. ❑ A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. ❑ In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street. Mass and Scale 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. ❑ Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. P163 • • i11.D. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. ❑ The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. ❑ The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. Building & Roof Forms 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. ❑ They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. ❑ Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. ❑ Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. ❑ On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. ❑ Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A -frames. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non -reflective finish. Materials 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. ❑ Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. Architectural Details 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. ❑ These include windows, doors and porches. ❑ Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. P164 III.D. 0 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 Chairperson, Jay Maytin called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were Willis Pember, Patrick Sagal and Sallie Golden. John Whipple, Jim DeFrancia and Nora Berko were absent. Staff present: Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Sara Adams, Senior Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Patrick reminded the board that the intent of the historic preservation commission is to ensure the preservation of Aspen's character as an historic mining town and early ski resort and cultural center. The guidelines should be applied as intended when we look at different applications. MOTION: Jay moved to approve the minutes of August 27, 2014; second by Sallie. All in favor, motion carried. 229 West Smuggler/426 N. Second (continue the public hearing to October 22"d MOTION: Jay moved to continue the public hearing until October 22°d; second by Willis. All in favor, motion carried. 28 Smuggler Grove Road Sallie recused herself. Debbie explained to the applicant that they need a 3-0 vote for approval. Sara said the biggest concern at the last hearing had to do with setbacks. There are new setbacks. The applicant has pushed as much mass as they can up against the ten foot utility easement at the back. They are providing 9 feet on the east and ten feet is required. For the new home the front yard setback is at 19' 2 V2" and 25 feet is required. On the west five is being provided and ten required. In staff s opinion we find that the review criteria for granting setback variances are met. This is a site that is wider than deep and there is a 25 foot setback requirement for this zone district. When this area was annexed with it came some funky zoning and it is zoned R-15A which has a generous front yard setback. Having the rear addition is more in line with the design guidelines than having a side addition. The site plan is P165 • ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 appropriate and does deserve the setback variances that they are requesting. The side deck has been eliminated from the historic home and relocated to the rear of the addition. They no longer need a parking variance and can accommodate all their parking onsite. They far bonus has been reduced from 500 to 276 square feet. The width of the addition to the historic home has been reduced slightly. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. Exhibit I — one letter and one e-mail. Letter from Tom Whitehead and John Redmond. John Rowland, Sara Upton and Brian Rubenstein represented the owners. John Rowland asked Sara when this house was designated. Sara said this is a designated landmark and was designated in 2008. This house is not in its current location. John said there is talk that this lot is 20% smaller than the neighbors lots and how can you develop this. Sara said FAR is based on the percentage of your lot size. It is proportionate. John said we have a smaller lot and are building.a smaller building. Sara said each case is looked at separately. Sara Upton said it was brought up to move the house back to the setback line or encroach and request a variance. There is a utility easement that exists in the back of this lot and it is impossible to build back there. The houses are placed approximately 11 feet back from the property line. The Engineering Department would not grant a permit for these structures if we could not either micropile and stabilize the excavation or lay the soil back. The houses are placed to the rear as far as is physically practical. The Engineering Department also said we could not get a permit for any construction in a utility easement. There was comment by staff that the front porches of these two houses should align within reason. The historic house has a porch that is set at 6.7 feet deep and the new porch is within four inches of each other. The planter on the balcony is set back 16 feet from the front fagade of the house and is 39 feet back from the property line. The only place to see it is 2 P166 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 from a neighbors second story window. There are 3 bedrooms in the historic home and four in the new home. The overall square footage that is above grade for these houses is 4,064. We feel our application is consistent in terms of the density that is being proposed onsite. John pointed out that they are surrounded on three sides with utility easements. Jay pointed out that because of the easement the footprint is smaller. Sara said the utility easement is not deducted from the lot area for determining floor area. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. Lynn Carlson said she lives across the street at 63 Smuggler Road. I am very concerned about the setback. The current location of the home seems very close to our narrow street. They are proposing a 9' 10" setback which is basically on top of the road. David Lockren, resident at Snyder Park. We share a common property line with this particular lot. We have been there 14 years and have experienced over the years with the people that live there when they have a party we get to share every conversation and music that comes out of that house. The neighborhood is very dense. Putting two houses on a lot that now has one both of which will have outdoor decks and have moved back to the property line is a concern. I'm most concerned with the roof top deck and loud parties making it really difficult for those of us who live less than 50 feet away to enjoy the quiet of our neighborhood. Maybe you can eliminate the roof top deck or put restrictions on what can occur on the roof top deck. The roof top decks are right across from our bedrooms. I understand that they are well in their rights to build these two buildings and all the things that have been worked out to make them fit better into the neighborhood is appreciated but the density is going to become a problem especially with outside decks elevated off ground. Greg McPherson said he owns half the duplex at 21 Smuggler Grove which is right from the proposed development. I live in a 1,025 square foot house. I see very little to do with preservation and a lot of maximizing of this lot and within that I see destruction of our neighborhood where we have people 3 P167 • ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 living there full time. I see in this project the same thing that is happening in the West End where no one lives there anymore and there is no sense of family and community. By allowing this will effect everyone living on this street. I would like to see it smaller. Marty Ames said she lives at 23 Smuggler Grove. Marty said she likes the house and wants to see it preserved. Marty said it has been the setbacks that are an issue. Chairperson, Jay Maytin closed the public hearing. Jay asked what is the amount of square footage above ground for each home? Sara Upton said 2,335 for the new home and 1,762 for the historic home. On the historic home you could not raise up the mass until you get back to the addition and that is 60 feet back from the property line already. The mass is as big as it can possibly get. John said we are proposing two small homes that are in character with this neighborhood and in character with Aspen. Jay said the option of one home would have a side addition because of the setback constraints. John said it is 9' 10" setback to the historic structure, however from that front yard setback all the way back to two story addition it is about 40 feet with is significant and respective to the historic resource. With regard to noise and party decks that is a lot of speculation and our city noise ordinance policies would take care of that. I see a lot of my colleagues moving back into the West End. The West End did go through a period of time when it was quite and that is changing. This town would benefit seeing more houses like these. Sara said you can review the deck at final regarding the size and if it is appropriate but HPC cannot review the use of the deck. Willis said HOA's can address the use etc. It is not our charge. This street is small and funky. There are large homes on this street and the applicant 4 P168 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 has done as best possible and has been here three times. They have nailed in securing the setbacks and are as compliant as they can be. Patrick thanked the applicant for the re -designing and thanked the neighbors for appearing at the meeting. The purpose and intent is to preserve Aspen's character as an historic mining town and early skiing resort and cultural center. The applicant is close on mass and scale but the flat roof garage is more massive than it should be. I looked at guidelines11.5, 11.6 and 10.9 speaking to roof forms that should be gabled, hipped or shed. I would suggest strongly that the applicant slightly re -design it to a gabled or shed roof over the garage and I won't vote for the flat roof. I also have a concern about the four foot variance for the stairs going into the side setback. Willis said 80% of the new structure has roof forms that are identical to the historic. Willis pointed out that the flat roof is isolated and we need to address the entire composition. Willis asked Patrick to reconsider. Patrick said if the flat roof was in the back or behind where it isn't seen rather than out in front he would reconsider. Jay said 2/3rds of the flat roof is in the front of the building. If the roof was hipped you would then lose the planter. The flat roof is on the subservient side of the property from the historic resource. With a shed roof it would increase the mass. You have a hardship created by the utility easement. It is appropriate to bring the building forward because the mass coming forward is small, a one car garage. This part of town has no uniformity. At the last meeting it was clear that no one wanted cars parked on the street and the applicant has addressed that. It seems to me that the applicant has done everything to address the concerns that were brought up at the last two meetings. The envelope has gotten smaller and the buildings have moved back. I am completely sympathetic as to what could happen. Jay said he would support the application. Sara said guideline 11.6 says flat roofs should only be used in areas where it is appropriate to the context. Flat roofs are allowed in certain situations and we have found that the flat roof here is appropriate. It is also important to point out how the land use measures height for roofs. Flat roofs are measured to the top. If you have any sloping roof you are measuring to a 1/3 point or V2 point of that slope. You would need to understand changing the 5 P169 0 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 roof form and what that does to the mass and how it would make it possibly look bigger. Patrick said he finds that gabled roofs even if the top is higher than a flat roof the appearance of mass and scale is less. Jay said with the flat roof some of the neighbors views would be protected. If you put a gable on you are taking away more views of Aspen Mountain from across the street. MOTION: Willis moved to approve resolution #26 for 28 Smuggler Grove Road, second by Jay. Roll call vote: Jay, yes; Willis, yes; Patrick, no. Motion failed 2-1. John Rowland requested a continuation. John said he wished this topic would have come up at one of the first hearings. At the first hearing we had a flat roof. MOTION: Jay moved to continue the public hearing on 28 Smuggler Grove Road until October 22nd, second by Patrick. All in favor, motion carried. 206 Lake Avenue — Special Review for Mechanical Units in Street Facing Yard, Public Hearing Sallie was seated. Don Carpenter represented the owner. Debbie reviewed the affidavit of publication and that portion of the public notice has been property provided. Debbie said Don Carpenter did not bring his public notice to the meeting. Debbie asked that the original be submitted to staff within 24 hours. Don said the affidavit asks whether or not the notices were sent. The notice posting was posted onsite on the 25th of August. The mailing occurred and there is a picture of the notice and a copy of the noticing addresses. Don said he will provide the original the next day. Sara said this review is for mechanical equipment in the front yard. HPC saw this project about a year ago and is currently under construction. They are picking up the two story house, digging a basement and putting it back 6 P170 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 where it originally was located. They are doing some minor changes to additions that were made to the house. The property is also listed on the National Register. The application tonight is technical in nature. The applicant has some sight constraints on the property. They have a Hallam Bluff review area where they cannot develop into. The lot is a triangular shape. They are trying to figure out where to put their air conditioning units. They are proposing to put them under the wrap around front porch in the front yard. This is a technical variance that needs to happen in order to have the mechanical placed under the front porch. Staff is recommending approval because you cannot see the units and they do not impact the historic resource. We are also recommending that the lattice work that is beneath the wrap around porch match the historic photograph that has been provided to the board in the packet. In the application it is wood lattice work with brick columns between and staff feels strongly that the brick columns should not be there because they are a little too fancy as to what was historically there. Jay opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Don said the three condensing units would be under the wrap around deck and below grade. The units would be accessed through the stairs of the carriage house side of the property Don asked for consideration as his design team would prefer the brick columns because it is a continuation of the brick wainscoting that is going back in place and to tie into what is existing. MOTION: Jay moved to approve resolution #26 with the two conditions; the units are approved in the location as shown on exhibit A. Reconstruct the lattice work to match the photograph. The brick columns are not approved. Motion second by Sallie. All in favor, motion carried 4-0. 434 E. Cooper Ave. — Amendment to Conceptual Major Development and Conceptual Commercial Design Review and View plan Review, Public Hearing Jay said his wife has done business in the past with the applicant but not with this property. 7 P171 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 Debbie asked Jay if he could be fair and impartial. Jay said he can be fair and objection. Debbie said the affidavit is in order and the applicant can proceed. Sara said this is an amendment to the conceptual approval that was granted in 2012 by BPC. The entire project is up for review. The applicant has added a two story element closest to the Red Onion building. A chamfered corner has been introduced which staff is supportive of and is consistent with what is happening in the historic district. In 2012 staff recommended bringing the second floor closer to the street so that it would be more consistent with what is downtown. This development is similar to 204 S. Galena. The applicant has pulled the two story element to the street fagade but in the proposed location it will obscure the Red Onion as you are coming down Cooper Street. We appreciate that they added a two story element but in staff s opinion it is in the wrong location. The building was in the view plane with the previous approval. This development will not further infringe on the view plane. Sara said there is the two story volume with the poster shop in between and the Red Onion. Before it was a one story with a setback. Charles Cunniffe, architect Council upheld the approval from HPC. There is a cutout in the alley for a transformer that has to be open to the sky. There is also a provision for a second means of egress and elevator to the second floor and basement that was not showed in the previous scheme. The trash and recycling also have to conform with the guidelines. The stair elevator is on the south west corner. The Red Onion addition is significantly set back and is visible. You wouldn't be able to see the sign because of the trees etc. unless you get up close. There was public outcry to not have the corner obstructed and have it stepping back on the second floor. We are keeping the building low on the corner to protect the public space. The Guido and Paradise building are set back. The Independence building has a chamfered corner. The proposed chamfered corner interacts with the other existing buildings. On the materials we think it will be a redish sandstone approach. Sara has a concern that downtown will look a little too homogenized as this building is similar to the 204 S. Galena building. s P172 • ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 Sallie asked Charles to explain how this building is different from the Gap building. Charles said this building will be in stone and the retail storefronts would be different. The building also steps down four feet along the sidewalk on Galena. The building has a different movement than at 204 S. Galena. The materials will be completely different and we would possibly use a linear brick. Chairperson, Jay Maytin opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. Jay identified the issues: Two story element possibly blocking the Red Onion sign The Wedding Cake design of the building itself Chamfered Corner Willis commented that the Gap building is a perfectly fine structure and it looks great and is well done. I concur with staff s comments about replicating the proposed building with a buffed stone version. The massing is a little "Pueblo' style. When walking down the mall your sights are blocked by the vegetation until you get right up to the building. I support the two story mass where it is proposed. Jay said when we approved this the setback second floor seemed very important to the public. It is inviting you into the mall and creating what I call the mouth of the river and it opens the mall up. The chamfered corner also opens the building up and helps people walk into the mall. The two story structure is helping to meet the center or middle of the block. This design is opening the view up to the Red Onion. Patrick said he likes the design. The "wedding cake design is appropriate because it does let more light in on the mall. The owner has done a great job to make the downtown as friendly to the public and fit the purpose and intent of our guidelines. Two stories to the street would not work. The open chamfered corner is appropriate. That corner is the center of life in Aspen. 9 P173 • ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 Sallie pointed out that she likes the Gap building and the owner did a great job. On this building it needs to be unique so we don't have similar buildings downtown. Willis pointed out that the mass and scale is the same as the Gap building. Charles said we are trying not to wonder to far from what was previously approved and at final we will handle the details. Mark Hunt, owner said the continuance is important to keep the conceptual moving forward. This design was done long ago and we understand the boards concerns. Sallie said it needs more a more contemporary take on the design. Jay said on the southeast corner it is appropriate to have the mass off the street. Patrick said he disagrees with Sallie and Willis. The majority of the people in Aspen want Aspen to remain an historic town. I would approve this design as presented. Mark Hunt said the Gap building would be a different building if there were three or four more feet on the top but the 28 foot height limit comes into play. Willis pointed out that the existing building represents a mark of diversity designed by Fritz Benedict with regard to historic development downtown with the wood framing. MOTION: Jay moved to continue 434 E. Cooper Avenue to January 28th, second by Patrick. All in favor, motion carried. Motion carried 4-0. MOTION: Jay moved to adjourn; second by Sallie. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 10 P174 0 aspen 234 a hopkins ave, aspen co 81611 + t 970 544 9006 denver 1830 blake st, ste 200, denver co 80202 + t 303 308 1373 visit www.rowlandbroughton.com rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design MEMORANDUM Project: 21374.00 Jukati Subject: Continuance Hearing — Description of changes Date: 13 October 2014 To: Sara Adams From: Rowland Broughton Architecture, Sara Upton Cc: Dear Sara, Please find attached our documents required for the submittal of a Major Development/ Conceptual Review, Continued Public Hearing, for the property located at 28 Smuggler Grove in Aspen, CO. Below is a brief chronology of this project's involvement with HPC: • February 26, 2014: Worksession with HPC showing massing of two separate structures, one is the historic resource with a two story addition behind a linking element, and the other is a more modern new house with a gable roof facing the street. The proposal was generally well -received, and we received guidance to de - mass the new house to increase visibility of the historic resource. • April 4, 2014: Conceptual Review package submitted to HPC. • July 9, 2014: Conceptual Review hearing, with a recommendation to continue based on the lack of common elements between the two houses. The flat roof of the new house does not share any relationship with the historic resource. Much public concern was voiced regarding the parking waiver and the setback variance requests. The design requests a 500SF bonus for Floor area. R+B submitted an alternate design for the new house based on feedback contained within the staff memo, but because the drawings were not submitted prior to the hearing, the board voted to continue. • August 6, 2014: Continued Conceptual Review hearing. The houses have been shifted back on the site, but the setback variances are still being requested. A fourth parking space has been added to the site, but a technical variance is still requested because the parking space does not meet the minimum width dimension. The bonus floor area is still being requested. Public comment is primarily focused on the setback variance requests, and the board votes to continue. • September 10, 2014: Continued Conceptual Review hearing. Four board members are present, and Sallie Golden must recuse. The board must vote unanimously to approve the project. The houses have moved further back on the site, and Page 1 of 7 P175 rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design information is presented regarding the utility easement at the back of the site, and the decision to lay back the excavation as the solution that will push the houses as far back on the site as would be approved by the Engineering Department. The request for bonus floor area has been reduced by 274SF. Jay and Willis approve, but Patrick votes against the project because he does not feel that the flat roof over the garage of the new house is in keeping with the design guidelines. The public comment has diminished over time as the houses get pushed back further on the site. Unfortunately, the vote was 2-1. • October 22, 2014: Continued Conceptual Review hearing. In response to Patrick's request to study different roof massing options, we are including a sheet of model views showing three different roof forms, but we are still in support of the design that was submitted for the September 10 hearing. The remainder of this memo is consistent with the information submitted for the September 10 hearing. As stated in our conceptual description, dated May 13, our client's goal is to create two modest family homes on the lot where an existing historic home has been relocated, and condominiumize them. The historic house would be shifted to the east side of the lot. This will allow the historic resource to receive maximum exposure, because the lot to the east has a large rock outcropping that will make it an unlikely candidate for redevelopment. The proposed addition to the historic house consists of a two story mass attached to a linking element behind the existing miner's cabin. Based on the staff memo and comments made during the public hearing on August 6, the following changes have been made to the design of the historic house and addition: • The historic house is being moved back on the lot in order to minimize the requested front setback variance. (Front setback variance requested from 25' to 9'- 10". The front of the house has been pushed back 2'-9" from what was presented at the continuation hearing on August 6.) • Staff has requested that the front porches of the two homes align, or are within 4" of each other. The front porch of the historic home is not original, and will be rebuilt to a precedented depth of 6'-7", and using more historically accurate detailing than what exists today. The front faces of the two porches have been located 4" from each other. • The addition to the rear of the historic home has been further reduced in width to minimize the impact of the massing in relation to the historic resource. The west side of the addition is 1'-3" set back from the side of the historic home, and the east side of the addition is set 6" back from the east side of the historic home. • The second story deck on the west side of the house has been moved around to the rear of the home. The 10'-0" required separation between all elements of the historic building and the new home is being maintained along the entire length of the houses. • The connector separating the historic house from the addition is 10'-0". • The house has been shifted as far as possible to the rear of the lot in order to accommodate a full 8'-6" wide parking space. This will eliminate the need for a technical parking space variance. • Both houses are pushed back on the lot as far as the Engineering Department will allow. The rear of the lot is bounded by a 10' easement that cannot be developed Page 2 of 7 P176 rowland+broughton arc;;.,., t r rf . ,...: a nterior desigr below grade. This leaves us without the opportunity to micropile, because we are not able to leave the micropile rods in the ground once excavation is complete. The best method to excavate this area is to lay back the dig. If we are excavating 11' down, we must place the houses at least 11' back from the property line. Our site plan demonstrates that we are 11'-4'/2" from the property line, which will allow for any unforeseen existing conditions to be accounted for during the construction phase. Between the two houses, the FAR has been reduced by more than 200SF since the last presentation. Based on the staff memo and comments made during the public hearing, the following changes have been made to the design of the new house: • We intend to stabilize the excavation along the west side of the lot through the use of micropiles. The micropile rods will be located along the line of the easement. The concrete cap that will hold the rods together will be removed from the utility easement upon completion of backfill. There is a requirement of 3'-4" of separation between the rods and the foundation of the house, so the house shrunk in the east - west dimension by 12" to allow for this relationship. This results in a reduced side setback variance request of 1'-4 5/8". • The new house also shrunk in length in response to comments regarding encroachment into the front setback. The stair volume shrunk by 6", and the back of the home shrunk by more than 12". Overall, the front face of the house has moved back 1'-10'/2" to the south. • The roof deck has been retained, based on our exhibit that demonstrates the planter will not be visible from the street level, and therefore does not add to the overall bulk and mass of the front elevation. We are seeking a reduced square footage bonus of 276SF for this project (26.415.1105) The square footage will be shared between the two homes in order to more successfully provide for a three bedroom program for each house. We are requesting front setback variances for this project (26.415.110.C). The R15-A zoning establishes a 25' front yard setback, which creates a hardship for this 76' deep lot. The front of the historic resource is located 9'-10" back from the front property line. This location serves to establish a streetscape with the two adjacent building front facades, and allows for visibility of the historic portion of the house. The new house is located 19'-2 1/2" from the front property line in order to give prominence to the historic resource. We are also requesting reduced side setback variances for this project in order to allow as much space as possible between the historic resource and the new house. We propose to use the 5' easements on each side of the lot as setback lines and give the additional space to the separation between the houses. In most cases, the encroachment into the side setbacks is for light well placement. Our team spoke with concerned neighbors on August 28 regarding changes to the design, and explaining the major site constraints, in particular the rear easement that prevents Page 3 of 7 P177 0 0 III.D. rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design development within it. In general the neighbors seemed to feel that the new design was an improvement, but stated that they would feel more comfortable with the homes being an additional 6' back from the front property line, and that the overall proposal was still too dense for both the neighborhood and the lot. Please refer to comments from the applicant below, addressing some of the public concerns stated at the August 10 hearing: This is to address many of the objections to development made by the owner of 23 Smuggler Grove. Similar objections were raised by Mr. Michael Hoffman, the attorney for the owner of 23 Smuggler Grove as well as the owner of 43 Smuggler Grove. In response to such objections, the Applicant points out the following: The Applicant proposes redevelopment of the subject property consistent with properties in the area. Modest and reasonable variances are needed to accomplish this. The property is a Historic Landmark designated by the city of Aspen in 2008. That designation is not subject to debate or diminishment. The Applicant seeks to use the property in a manner that complies with all HPC guidelines while being respectful of neighborhood context. This is the only historic resource on Smuggler Grove. Its development and preservation is part of a citywide program that provides residents and visitors with insights into a significant period in Aspen's history. Two detached residential structures are permitted as a matter of right for historic properties in R-15A Zone district (see 26.710.060 (133) and (D2a)) with a minimum of 6,000 square feet (SF) of lot area. The property at 28 Smuggler Grove contains 7,378 SF of area, considerably larger than the minimum and thus amenable to a condominiumization which would still yield two acceptable and proportionate homes. This is the vision that led the Applicant to purchase the property. The Applicant does not envision any satisfactory single-family option for this property because it would require a side addition to the required connector that would visually compete with the historic house and be architecturally unappealing. As a consequence, the Applicant is requesting variances that will allow both the preservation of the resource and the simultaneous redevelopment of the property with two appropriate -scale single-family dwellings. M-i Page 4 of 7 P178 11I.D. 0 0 rowland+broughton Historic Homes line Park Avenue, 300 feet to the west of the subiect property. THE VARIANCES REQUESTED FOR THIS PROJECT ARE REASONABLE AND ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE PREVIOUSLY GRANTED. The variances requested are very modest and consistent with existing setbacks and variances previously granted in the area, and would result in homes having a footprint that is not unlike those of existing homes in the neighborhood. Smuggler Grove was annexed to the city in1987. In 2002, the non -historic property located 200 feet to the east of the subject at 73 Smuggler Grove was granted variances allowing for a 10 foot front yard setback (25' required) and a 5 foot side yard setback (10' required) for the principal dwelling and a 10 foot front yard setback (30'required) for an adjacent garage and accessory dwelling unit. The motivating factor for these variances was the combination of a shallow lot and the existence of an easement that ran through property. In August of 2014, a variance was granted to Lot 1 East Meadow to accommodate a design request to move the new home to be built further back on the lot than would be allowed by zoning. The immediate neighbor to the west (Lot 1 Jukati), has an address of 312 Midland, but has its long property dimension on Smuggler Grove. The two-story house is located only 10 feet off the lot line facing Smuggler Grove. Per design guidelines, this house should front Smuggler Grove and sit 25 feet back. The neighborhood of the subject property encompasses the messy vitality of Park and Midland Avenues as well as the immediate homes of Smuggler Grove. Characteristic of the area are the narrow road widths similar to those of Smuggler Grove. They all share a varying and often conflicting potpourri of development zoning. Since much of the area was annexed to the original town with homes already in place, much of that development, if built today, would not comply with current setback requirements. Eight lots exist on Smuggler Grove. Three of the lots, with parcel sizes ranging from 6,212 to 9,090 square feet, already have two residences per lot. One such lot is 23 Smuggler Grove. The other two are found at 43 and 73 Smuggler Grove. HARDSHIPS Seen below is a rendering of the footprint of the historic home, plus the mandatory 10-foot connector, that would fit inside the setbacks. Without any variances, the configuration of the existing single family historic structure plus the 10 foot connector needed to highlight the resource, which in this case leads to nowhere, would allow a single -level, one-story home with only 810 feet of FAR on the ground level (above grade). A second story is not permitted on the resource or the connector. Page 5 of 7 P179 0 rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design If this parcel did not have an irregular -shaped one-story resource to preserve, these variances would not be needed. They are, however, necessary for reasonable development and use of the property. The lot size is not particularly deep (76 feet), and the fact that a very large part of the lot is occupied by the one story historic home leaves very little wiggle room when it comes to preserving the home and developing the property. The initial goal was, and remains, to create a relatively modest and livable space. The proposed design is the product of numerous discussions and meetings with HPC staff, meetings before the HPC board, and discussions with the public. Neither home could in any way be called a 'McMansion'. The below rectangular area in orange is that area that is devoted to the resource and the 10 foot connector. It has a footprint of approximately 35 feet by 40 feet = 1,400 square feet. 0 - _ .... .. . . .. _ _ .. _ r -..-nr , coca 4ni That same footprint without the resource, if relocated within the setbacks, would allow for 2,800 square feet of living space on two levels. Due to the resources' irregular shape, and the requirement that it be only one story, it contains only 810 square feet of living space. This is less than one-third the amount of living space that an unencumbered property area would have. In essence the preservation of the historic resource directly affects or compromises 70% or about 2,000 square feet of the above grade development on site. These hardships make the variances sought reasonable and justifiable. It should also be noted that prior to redevelopment, the existing historic home already sits within the front setback by nine feet. The existing house, however, has a non -historic addition and no connector separating the addition from the historic home. The Applicant's development plan will properly highlight the historic home, re-establishing the back wall of the original structure and using a 10' connector to separate the addition. Page 6 of 7 P180 rowland+broughton t r•- +I-, -,� ;r - ri;.,ior uesigr. FRONT SETBACKS After development the new house (on the west side of the lot) will be further back from the street than the existing house. The historic home on the east side of the lot will be about 6 feet further forward than it is today. The entertainment areas of both homes are oriented to the back, so as not to disturb neighbors. One of the neighbors has argued that Smuggler Grove Road is a driveway and not a public street. We would point out that it also is a dead-end cul-de-sac with minimal traffic, so the logic for setbacks on streets with significant vehicular traffic does not apply here. Lot sizes on the street and adjacent areas to the west have more similarities with R-6 zoning than R-15A. R-6 zoning utilizes front yard setbacks of 10 feet rather than the R-15A overlay of the neighborhood with the large 25-foot setbacks. The lot adjacent to 28 Smuggler Grove borders R-6 zoning even though the lot sizes are about the same. To the immediate west of the subject is 312 Midland with a visually imposing streetscape dominated by a long, two- story wall only 10 feet back from Smuggler Grove. The proposal for the subject Historic Landmark at 28 Smuggler Grove has the mass broken into two detached homes with the following front setback characteristics: • The new house, setback 19 feet from the property line, is 9 feet further from Smuggler Grove Rd. than neighboring house at 312 Midland, and has only 140SF of its footprint (including portions of porch and garage) within the front setback • The closest point of the historic house is just less than 10 feet from the front lot line, which is the same as the house at 312 Midland, but the historic home has only a single story mass until the addition is reached at 49 feet back from the front lot line • The historic resource has only 190SF of front living area, plus 83SF of porch, within the setback • The main front entrance walls of both houses are behind the 25-foot setback line The Applicants believe that their prior proposal struck the best balance for all concerned, but have made a sincere effort to further reduce the already modest mass and push the homes as far back as possible. Beyond these changes, the livability and appeal of the homes are being compromised. As previously mentioned, there is no acceptable single-family option available using the historic house as the space and shape is too irregular. We believe what we have presented is not only modest but appropriate. We respectfully ask for approval to allow us to move forward with restoration and development of this historic property. We look forward to receiving your feedback at the HPC hearing on October 22. Best regards, Sara Boulet Upton Senior Project Manager Rowland + Broughton Architecture Page 7 of 7 P181 aspen 234 a hopkins ave, aspen co 81611 + t 970 544 9006 denver 1830 blake st, ste 200, denver co 80202 + t 303 308 1373 visit www.rowlandbroughton.com rowland+broughton i i I erior des-gn ►711:11�,Eel - • Big] JA Project: 21374.00 Jukati Subject: Continuance Hearing — Description of changes Date: 13 October 2014 To: Sara Adams From: Rowland Broughton Architecture, Sara Upton Cc: Dear Sara, Please find attached our documents required for the submittal of a Major Development/ Conceptual Review, Continued Public Hearing, for the property located at 28 Smuggler Grove in Aspen, CO. Below is a brief chronology of this project's involvement with HPC: • February 26, 2014: Worksession with HPC showing massing of two separate structures, one is the historic resource with a two story addition behind a linking element, and the other is a more modern new house with a gable roof facing the street. The proposal was generally well -received, and we received guidance to de - mass the new house to increase visibility of the historic resource. • April 4, 2014: Conceptual Review package submitted to HPC. • July 9, 2014: Conceptual Review hearing, with a recommendation to continue based on the lack of common elements between the two houses. The flat roof of the new house does not share any relationship with the historic resource. Much public concern was voiced regarding the parking waiver and the setback variance requests. The design requests a 500SF bonus for floor area. R+B submitted an alternate design for the new house based on feedback contained within the staff memo, but because the drawings were not submitted prior to the hearing, the board voted to continue. • August 6, 2014: Continued Conceptual Review hearing. The houses have been shifted back on the site, but the setback variances are still being requested. A fourth parking space has been added to the site, but a technical variance is still requested because the parking space does not meet the minimum width dimension. The bonus floor area is still being requested. Public comment is primarily focused on the setback variance requests, and the board votes to continue. • September 10, 2014: Continued Conceptual Review hearing. Four board members are present, and Sallie Golden must recuse. The board must vote unanimously to approve the project. The houses have moved further back on the site, and Page 1 of 7 0 • rowland+broughton information is presented regarding the utility easement at the back of the site, and the decision to lay back the excavation as the solution that will push the houses as far back on the site as would be approved by the Engineering Department. The request for bonus floor area has been reduced by 274SF. Jay and Willis approve, but Patrick votes against the project because he does not feel that the flat roof over the garage of the new house is in keeping with the design guidelines. The public comment has diminished over time as the houses get pushed back further on the site. Unfortunately, the vote was 2-1. October 22, 2014: Continued Conceptual Review hearing. In response to Patrick's request to study different roof massing options, we are including a sheet of model views showing three different roof forms, but we are still in support of the design that was submitted for the September 10 hearing. The remainder of this memo is consistent with the information submitted for the September 10 hearing. As stated in our conceptual description, dated May 13, our client's goal is to create two modest family homes on the lot where an existing historic home has been relocated, and condominiumize them. The historic house would be shifted to the east side of the lot. This will allow the historic resource to receive maximum exposure, because the lot to the east has a large rock outcropping that will make it an unlikely candidate for redevelopment. The proposed addition to the historic house consists of a two story mass attached to a linking element behind the existing miner's cabin. Based on the staff memo and comments made during the public hearing on August 6, the following changes have been made to the design of the historic house and addition: • The historic house is being moved back on the lot in order to minimize the requested front setback variance. (Front setback variance requested from 25' to 9'- 10". The front of the house has been pushed back 2'-9" from what was presented at the continuation hearing on August 6.) • Staff has requested that the front porches of the two homes align, or are within 4" of each other. The front porch of the historic home is not original, and will be rebuilt to a precedented depth of 6-7", and using more historically accurate detailing than what exists today. The front faces of the two porches have been located 4" from each other. • The addition to the rear of the historic home has been further reduced in width to minimize the impact of the massing in relation to the historic resource. The west side of the addition is 1'-3" set back from the side of the historic home, and the east side of the addition is set 6" back from the east side of the historic home. • The second story deck on the west side of the house has been moved around to the rear of the home. The 10'-0" required separation between all elements of the historic building and the new home is being maintained along the entire length of the houses. • The connector separating the historic house from the addition is 10'-0". • The house has been shifted as far as possible to the rear of the lot in order to accommodate a full 8'-6" wide parking space. This will eliminate the need for a technical parking space variance. • Both houses are pushed back on the lot as far as the Engineering Department will allow. The rear of the lot is bounded by a 10' easement that cannot be developed Page 2 of 7 • • rowland+broughton . �:rn design � ntenor design below grade. This leaves us without the opportunity to micropile, because we are not able to leave the micropile rods in the ground once excavation is complete. The best method to excavate this area is to lay back the dig. If we are excavating 11' down, we must place the houses at least 11' back from the property line. Our site plan demonstrates that we are 11'-4'/2" from the property line, which will allow for any unforeseen existing conditions to be accounted for during the construction phase. Between the two houses, the FAR has been reduced by more than 200SF since the last presentation. Based on the staff memo and comments made during the public hearing, the following changes have been made to the design of the new house: We intend to stabilize the excavation along the west side of the lot through the use of micropiles. The micropile rods will be located along the line of the easement. The concrete cap that will hold the rods together will be removed from the utility easement upon completion of backfill. There is a requirement of 3'-4" of separation between the rods and the foundation of the house, so the house shrunk in the east - west dimension by 12" to allow for this relationship. This results in a reduced side setback variance request of 1'-4 5/8". The new house also shrunk in length in response to comments regarding encroachment into the front setback. The stair volume shrunk by 6", and the back of the home shrunk by more than 12". Overall, the front face of the house has moved back 1'-10 '/2" to the south. The roof deck has been retained, based on our exhibit that demonstrates the planter will not be visible from the street level, and therefore does not add to the overall bulk and mass of the front elevation. We are seeking a reduced square footage bonus of 276SF for this project (26.415.110.F) The square footage will be shared between the two homes in order to more successfully provide for a three bedroom program for each house. We are requesting front setback variances for this project (26.415.110.C). The R15-A zoning establishes a 25' front yard setback, which creates a hardship for this 76' deep lot. The front of the historic resource is located 9'-10" back from the front property line. This location serves to establish a streetscape with the two adjacent building front facades, and allows for visibility of the historic portion of the house. The new house is located 19'-2 1/2" from the front property line in order to give prominence to the historic resource. We are also requesting reduced side setback variances for this project in order to allow as much space as possible between the historic resource and the new house. We propose to use the 5' easements on each side of the lot as setback lines and give the additional space to the separation between the houses. In most cases, the encroachment into the side setbacks is for light well placement. Our team spoke with concerned neighbors on August 28 regarding changes to the design, and explaining the major site constraints, in particular the rear easement that prevents Page 3 of 7 0 rowland+broughton . 7-hilecture ! u,ban desigr Men— design development within it. In general the neighbors seemed to feel that the new design was an improvement, but stated that they would feel more comfortable with the homes being an additional 6' back from the front property line, and that the overall proposal was still too dense for both the neighborhood and the lot. Please refer to comments from the applicant below, addressing some of the public concerns stated at the August 10 hearing: This is to address many of the objections to development made by the owner of 23 Smuggler Grove. Similar objections were raised by Mr. Michael Hoffman, the attorney for the owner of 23 Smuggler Grove as well as the owner of 43 Smuggler Grove. In response to such objections, the Applicant points out the following: The Applicant proposes redevelopment of the subject property consistent with properties in the area. Modest and reasonable variances are needed to accomplish this. The property is a Historic Landmark designated by the city of Aspen in 2008. That designation is not subject to debate or diminishment. The Applicant seeks to use the property in a manner that complies with all HPC guidelines while being respectful of neighborhood context. This is the only historic resource on Smuggler Grove. Its development and preservation is part of a citywide program that provides residents and visitors with insights into a significant period in Aspen's history. Two detached residential structures are permitted as a matter of right for historic properties in R-15A Zone district (see 26.710.060 (133) and (D2a)) with a minimum of 6,000 square feet (SF) of lot area. The property at 28 Smuggler Grove contains 7,378 SF of area, considerably larger than the minimum and thus amenable to a condominiumization which would still yield two acceptable and proportionate homes. This is the vision that led the Applicant to purchase the property. The Applicant does not envision any satisfactory single-family option for this property because it would require a side addition to the required connector that would visually compete with the historic house and be architecturally unappealing. As a consequence, the Applicant is requesting variances that will allow both the preservation of the resource and the simultaneous redevelopment of the property with two appropriate -scale single-family dwellings. Page 4 of 7 0 rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design Historic Homes line Park Avenue, 300 feet to the west of the subject property. THE VARIANCES REQUESTED FOR THIS PROJECT ARE REASONABLE AND ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE PREVIOUSLY GRANTED. The variances requested are very modest and consistent with existing setbacks and variances previously granted in the area, and would result in homes having a footprint that is not unlike those of existing homes in the neighborhood. Smuggler Grove was annexed to the city in1987. In 2002, the non -historic property located 200 feet to the east of the subject at 73 Smuggler Grove was granted variances allowing for a 10 foot front yard setback (25' required) and a 5 foot side yard setback (10' required) for the principal dwelling and a 10 foot front yard setback (30'required) for an adjacent garage and accessory dwelling unit. The motivating factor for these variances was the combination of a shallow lot and the existence of an easement that ran through property. In August of 2014, a variance was granted to Lot 1 East Meadow to accommodate a design request to move the new home to be built further back on the lot than would be allowed by zoning. The immediate neighbor to the west (Lot 1 Jukati), has an address of 312 Midland, but has its long property dimension on Smuggler Grove. The two-story house is located only 10 feet off the lot line facing Smuggler Grove. Per design guidelines, this house should front Smuggler Grove and sit 25 feet back. The neighborhood of the subject property encompasses the messy vitality of Park and Midland Avenues as well as the immediate homes of Smuggler Grove. Characteristic of the area are the narrow road widths similar to those of Smuggler Grove. They all share a varying and often conflicting potpourri of development zoning. Since much of the area was annexed to the original town with homes already in place, much of that development, if built today, would not comply with current setback requirements. Eight lots exist on Smuggler Grove. Three of the lots, with parcel sizes ranging from 6,212 to 9,090 square feet, already have two residences per lot. One such lot is 23 Smuggler Grove. The other two are found at 43 and 73 Smuggler Grove. HARDSHIPS Seen below is a rendering of the footprint of the historic home, plus the mandatory 10-foot connector, that would fit inside the setbacks. Without any variances, the configuration of the existing single family historic structure plus the 10 foot connector needed to highlight the resource, which in this case leads to nowhere, would allow a single -level, one-story home with only 810 feet of FAR on the ground level (above grade). A second story is not permitted on the resource or the connector. Page 5 of 7 • rowland+broughton architecture / urban design / interior design If this parcel did not have an irregular -shaped one-story resource to preserve, these variances would not be needed. They are, however, necessary for reasonable development and use of the property. The lot size is not particularly deep (76 feet), and the fact that a very large part of the lot is occupied by the one story historic home leaves very little wiggle room when it comes to preserving the home and developing the property. The initial goal was, and remains, to create a relatively modest and livable space. The proposed design is the product of numerous discussions and meetings with HPC staff, meetings before the HPC board, and discussions with the public. Neither home could in any way be called a `McMansion'. The below rectangular area in orange is that area that is devoted to the resource and the 10 foot connector. It has a footprint of approximately 35 feet by 40 feet = 1,400 square feet. r i That same footprint without the resource, if relocated within the setbacks, would allow for 2,800 square feet of living space on two levels. Due to the resources' irregular shape, and the requirement that it be only one story, it contains only 810 square feet of living space. This is less than one-third the amount of living space that an unencumbered property area would have. In essence the preservation of the historic resource directly affects or compromises 70% or about 2,000 square feet of the above grade development on site. These hardships make the variances sought reasonable and justifiable. It should also be noted that prior to redevelopment, the existing historic home already sits within the front setback by nine feet. The existing house, however, has a non -historic addition and no connector separating the addition from the historic home. The Applicant's development plan will properly highlight the historic home, re-establishing the back wall of the original structure and using a 10' connector to separate the addition. Page 6 of 7 rowland+broughton FRONT SETBACKS After development the new house (on the west side of the lot) will be further back from the street than the existing house. The historic home on the east side of the lot will be about 6 feet further forward than it is today. The entertainment areas of both homes are oriented to the back, so as not to disturb neighbors. One of the neighbors has argued that Smuggler Grove Road is a driveway and not a public street. We would point out that it also is a dead-end cul-de-sac with minimal traffic, so the logic for setbacks on streets with significant vehicular traffic does not apply here. Lot sizes on the street and adjacent areas to the west have more similarities with R-6 zoning than R-15A. R-6 zoning utilizes front yard setbacks of 10 feet rather than the R-15A overlay of the neighborhood with the large 25-foot setbacks. The lot adjacent to 28 Smuggler Grove borders R-6 zoning even though the lot sizes are about the same. To the immediate west of the subject is 312 Midland with a visually imposing streetscape dominated by a long, two- story wall only 10 feet back from Smuggler Grove. The proposal for the subject Historic Landmark at 28 Smuggler Grove has the mass broken into two detached homes with the following front setback characteristics: • The new house, setback 19 feet from the property line, is 9 feet further from Smuggler Grove Rd. than neighboring house at 312 Midland, and has only 140SF of its footprint (including portions of porch and garage) within the front setback • The closest point of the historic house is just less than 10 feet from the front lot line, which is the same as the house at 312 Midland, but the historic home has only a single story mass until the addition is reached at 49 feet back from the front lot line • The historic resource has only 190SF of front living area, plus 83SF of porch, within the setback • The main front entrance walls of both houses are behind the 25-foot setback line The Applicants believe that their prior proposal struck the best balance for all concerned, but have made a sincere effort to further reduce the already modest mass and push the homes as far back as possible. Beyond these changes, the livability and appeal of the homes are being compromised. As previously mentioned, there is no acceptable single-family option available using the historic house as the space and shape is too irregular. We believe what we have presented is not only modest but appropriate. We respectfully ask for approval to allow us to move forward with restoration and development of this historic property. We look forward to receiving your feedback at the HPC hearing on October 22. Best regards, Sara Boulet Upton Senior Project Manager Rowland + Broughton Architecture Page 7 of 7 • • 0 Sara Adams —Historic Preservation Staff Christine Poirier Shine 10 October 2014 417 + 421 W Hallam HPC Final Guidelines and Responses project files The following memo responds to the Historic Preservation Guidelines Preservation Principles: • Respect the historic design character of the building • Seek uses that are compatible with the historic character of the building • Protect and maintain significant features and stylistic features and stylistic elements • Preserve and existing original site features and original building materials and features • Repair deteriorated historic features, and replace only those elements that cannot be repaired Streetscape and Lot Features: Fences 1.1 Preserve original fences • no existing fence exists on this site 1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original • no record or evidence of original fence 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a "transparent" quality allowing views into the yard from the street • no record or evidence of original fence 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally • no fence/wall is located forward of historic resource • a low 30" freestanding wall is proposed and less than the HPC suggested 42" height • this stone wall is low to the ground and helps define the private yard • this wall allows views into the yard from the street and transitions from public to semi -private space • this contemporary interpretation of traditional fence is compatible of the historic context in both height (30") and material (stone) • this 30" freestanding wall is consistent in scale and is consistent with traditional fences in that it is further complemented with plantings 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street facing facade • a 6' privacy fence along the west side of the property and along the alley is proposed • the privacy fence is not located forward of the front facade of the mining cabin and provides a sense of open space between homes 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along alley should be compatible with historic context • The 6' side yard and alley privacy fence incorporate details of interest/transparency, such as open vines and open slats Retaining walls 1.7 Preserve original retaining walls • no existing retaining walls on this site 1.8 Maintain the historical height of a retaining wall • not applicable Walkways 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public -to -private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project • public>semi-public>semi private>private transition is emphasized through the use of the low retaining wall and complementary planting; the planting is a layered approach, providing a variety of height transitions • the entry walkway is perpendicular from the street to the front entry • paving materials for pathways to be natural stone paving which is consistent with historic building style Private Yard 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures • the front yard will be maintained in a traditional manner with planting material and paving only for circulation; lighting is limited to safety 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs • all healthy trees on site will be preserved when possible, cottonwood street trees as well as a double stem willow are preserved o tree protection during construction will be implemented o replacement of damaged and unhealthy trees will be approved by the parks department o approved replacement trees will be large enough in scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs • no historically significant planting were observed on site • mature trees are preserved, where possible, in coordination with the Parks Department • historic planting beds, landscape features and walkways are limited on site, but will be preserved where possible 1.13 revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site • plant and tree material will be selected according to its mature size, to allow for long-term growth o use of non-native, hardy plants will be limited to small areas as accent plants o grassy areas will not be replaced with paving 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate • clear views to the mining cabin are maintained with the proposed planting • Views to the historic mining cabin are framed through thoughtful placement of vegetation Site Lighting 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting • all site lighting will be shielded and down directed and limited to walks and entries Streetscape 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape designs and features • low groundcover and perennials will be maintained along the planting strip • street trees are maintained where healthy and new street trees are added to reinforce the rhythm of the block as well as shade for pedestrians which is integral to the historic landscape features 1.17 Maintain historic irrigation ditches as an integral component of the streetscape . not applicable on this site ■ 1 FRIDAY DESIGN PO Box 7928 Aspen, CO 81612 T / 970.309.0695 E / mail: derek@lfriday.com TO: Ms. Sara Adams, AICP; City of Aspen Senior Planner 130 South Galena Street, Third Floor Aspen, Colorado 81611 T / 1.970.429.2778 E / sara.adams@cityofaspen.com CC: File DATE: 13 OCTOBER 2014 REF: 417-421 West Hallam Residence HPC Final Hearing Submission Responses to Residential Design Standards Compliancy Responses to Historical Preservation Design Guidelines Dear Sara & Members of the Aspen Historical Preservation Commission, We are writing on behalf of David & Marcia Kaplan regarding the HPC Final Hearing for their property located at 417-421 West Hallam. As you are well aware, the property consists of an existing historical mining cottage with an incorrectly historically designated addition that was constructed between 1987 and 1991. In September of 2014, we appeared before the Aspen City Council to formally amend the designation error, and now find ourselves again before you in hopes of reaching an approved resolution towards the design as proposed in the packet issuances dated 10-10-2014 headed by Thomas Pheasant Design and Bluegreen. Per request, the letter information contained herein addresses the topics of compliancy towards the Aspen Land Use Code Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.410 and the Aspen Historical Preservation Design Guidelines. We hope this information will serve as a helpful addendum to the primary graphical packets provided detailing the project as follows: Introduction / Cover Sheet Graphical Model Representation of 417-421 West Hallam Proposed Plans Drawings (Lower, Main, & Upper Floor Plans) Proposed Elevation Drawings (N,S,W,E Elevations with Material Callouts) Proposed Material Callout Information in Graphical Form Garage Door & Siding Detailing Callout Examples / Clarification Plan & Elevation Detail Information Pertaining to the Proposed Front Porch Construction Graphical Illustrations for the N, S, E & W Elevations depicting Materials Model View Renderings of the Proposed Construction for 417-421 West Hallam Proposed Rendering with Landscape Information in Graphical Format Proposed Landscape Site Plan with Material and Vegetation Callouts Proposed Exterior Lighting & Electrical Plan with Lighting Specification Sheets 417/421 W. Hallam — Aspen Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.410 Responses 26.410.040 A. Site Design We believe the 417-421 West Hallam project as proposed meets standards as described for 1. Building Orientation, 2.Build-To-Lines and 3.Fences. Due to the location of the exsiting historical mining cottage and our requirement to re-establish a front porch in accordance with the known Sanborn information, the porch once constructed will actually be located on the property but into the front yard required minimum setback. Should a variance for this situation be formally necessary, we will bring this to the attention of the HPC at the final hearing. 26.410.040 B. Building Form Per our conceptual approval, the building and mass is in accordance with the dimensions, massing, and heights consistent of the HPC approval. The topic of secondary mass does not apply to our historically designated property and proposed construction. 26.410.040 C. Parking, Garages & Carports The project as proposed has alley access and proposes all usage for vehicular elements via this aspect of the property. We have a one stall garage door being proposed for the project. 26.410.040 D. Building Elements 1. Street Oriented Entrance & Principle Window: Per the conceptual approval, the primary entrance of the home is proposed directly off of the front fagade of the existing mining cottage. Distance offsets and door heights are in accordance with the RIDS per the drawing submission provided. Although our front porch as proposed dimensionally varies from the set requisites of the RIDS, we are re-creating the porch per the understood dimensions of the Sanborn Mapping Information and HPC Conceptual Approval. If a variance is required for this topic, we will �\ make notation of this at the Final Hearing. We understand the principle window for the building �as the west side proposed double hung window as existing on the historical mining cottage. 2. First Story Element: Being the historical mining cottage is a single story element situated as the primary mass along Hallam Street, we believe we are in compliance from this RIDS. �A. We are requesting a Residential Design Standard Variance for proposed Street Facing Windows designed as a glazed curtainwall element/ area in the "No Window Zone" as defined per the RDS. The new proposed construction calls for a glazed wall that does contain windows between the 9'-12' height area, and we are requesting a variance from RIDS 26.410.040 D-3A accordingly. �J No exiting non orthogonal windows are existing on the mining cottage, nor are any non - orthogonal windows being proposed on the new construction along Hallam. We are in compliance with the lightwells as proposed and approved with our HPC Conceptual hearing. 26.410.40 E. Context 1. Materials A,B & C: Per the proposed design solution, the quality of the materials and detailing as proposed is consistent on all sides of the proposed construction. Materials are accurately represented as they would structurally indicate for visual consistency. Highly Reflective Materials are not proposed for the exterior material palette. 2. Inflection: Per the existing historical conditions of the site and HPC Conceptual Approval, we have maintained a single story massing elements for the initial 46' of the proposed 417-421 West Hallam property. We believe we are in compliance with the inflection RIDS requisite, but will request a formal variance from this if necessary at HPC Final. 417/421 W. Hallam — Aspen Historical Preservation Design Guideline Responses 1.1 — 1.17 Sections HPDG Section have been addressed by Ms. Christine Shine of Bluegreen, and the project responses can be found accordingly within Bluegreen's letterhead to the HPC dated October 10`', 2014. Thank you. 0 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. ❑ If the original is double -hung, then the replacement window should also be double -hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. ❑ Matching the original design is particularly important on key character -defining facades. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character -defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. Li Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. Lj Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. ❑ A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Sections 3.4 -3.7, we are proposing the maintenance of the existing wood double hung window as indicated on the North Elevation of the home (West Hallam Orientation). For all new proposed windows not currently existing on the West and East facades, we are proposing to match the comparative rough opening size of the West Hallam window in a vertically oriented, painted wood, double -hung configuration. The exact locations of the windows to be determined upon a full demolition process to determine if any indication of historic locates are still definable. Determination of the specific window rough opening locations to be agreed upon per the staff and monitor process. We understand the importance of the historic window detailing, and agree to work with the window manufacturer, once selected, to represent, as closely as possible, the existing sash profiles and components comparative to the original window. In the case of the 417-421 Hallam residence, the existing window detailing is rather basic, and this can be achieved quite readily. Phoenix Windows and Loewen are of consideration as possible manufactures to ensure a consistent detail. Please Refer to Proposed Elevations sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 for graphical information responding to HPDC Sections 3.4-3.7. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. ❑ Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. ❑ Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. ❑ If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. u If the secondary entrance is sealed shut, the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. 4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. ❑ For additional information see Chapter 14: General Guidelines "On -Going Maintenance of Historic Properties". 4.4 If a new screen door is used, it should be in character with the primary door. ❑ Match the frame design and color of the primary door. ❑ If the entrance door is constructed of wood, the frame of the screen door should also be wood. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. ❑ A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. ❑ A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. ❑ Simple paneled doors were typical. ❑ Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Sections 4.1-4.5, we will be required to restore and physically- re -interpret the believed location and sizing of the front door per the Proposed Elevations sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 responding to HPDC Sections 4.1-4.5. We have determined the size and location of the door in accordance with the known existing Sanborn mapping information available to us. Additionally, on page 13 of the 11 x 17 PDF packet, a plan and elevation blown up detail of the proposed new front entry door and porch has been provided. Material callouts and finish are compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically. 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. ❑ Use materials that appear similar to the original. ❑ While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. ❑ Where no evidence of the appearance of the historic porch exists, a new porch may be considered that is similar in character to those found on comparable buildings. Keep the style and form simple. Also, avoid applying decorative elements that are not known to have been used on the house or others like it. ❑ When constructing a new porch, its depth should be in scale with the building. ❑ The scale of porch columns also should be similar to that of the trimwork. ❑ The height of the railing and the spacing of balusters should appear similar to those used historically as well. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 5.5, we will be required to restore and physically- re -interpret the believed location and sizing of the front porch and door conditions per the Proposed Elevations sheets 8-9 of the 11 x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 responding to HPDC Section 5.5. We have determined the size and location of the door in accordance with the known existing Sanborn mapping information available to us. Additionally, on page 13 of the 11 x 17 PDF packet, a plan and elevation blown up detail of the proposed new front entry door and porch has been provided. Material callouts and finish are compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Section 5.5. 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts. ❑ Where "scars" on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to related buildings. ❑ Using overly ornate materials on a building for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. ❑ It is acceptable to use salvaged materials from other buildings only if they are similar in style and detailing to other features on the building where they are to be installed. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 6.5, we will be required to restore and physically- re -interpret the believed location and sizing of the front porch and door conditions per the Proposed Elevations sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 responding to HPDC Section 6.5. We are maintaining simplicity of the detailing as we believe is compatible with the original design intent of the property. For reference, on page 13 of the 11 x 17 PDF packet, a plan and elevation blown up detail of the proposed new front entry door and porch has been provided. Material callouts and finish are compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Section 5.5. Although it is deemed acceptable to utilize salvaged parts, we intend to rebuild the porch as a new construction in this condition. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. ❑ Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. ❑ If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non -reflective finish. ❑ Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. ❑ If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non -reflective finish. 7.101f 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. ❑ A metal roof material should have an earth tone and have a matte, non -reflective finish. ❑ A metal roof with a lead -like patina also is an acceptable alternative. ❑ Seams should be of a low profile. ❑ A roof assembly with a high profile seam or thick edge is inappropriate. 7.11Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. ❑ Adding ornamental cresting, for example, where there is no evidence that it existed creates a false impression of the building's original appearance, and is inappropriate. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Sections 7.9-7.11, we are proposing to remove the existing standing seam metal roof condition of the historical mining cottage and replace with a more historically consistent stajne_ _cedar-shjngle.4f_ natural or earth tone colour. No reflectivity will be created via use of the proposed cedar shingle roofing in conjunction -with a paint locked non -reflective metal flashing also of natural and earth tone basis. The roof as it is proposed to be constructed is shown per the Proposed Elevations sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 for graphical information responding to HPDC Sections 7.9-7.11. We are maintaining simplicity of the detailing regarding flashing and profiles as we believe is compatible with the original design intent of the property. Material callouts and finish are compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Sections 7.9-7.11. 10.4Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ❑ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. ❑ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.11 On anew addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. ❑ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Sections 10.4-10.11, the addition has been proposed to clearly be recognized as a product of its own time period. Although the building does propose a departure from the mining cottage in the use of a 4" high random length stone as an accent material to the setback front fagade of the new construction, we believe the use of the stone helps to assist in "anchoring" the extensive use of a proposed glazed curtain wall system across the predominant north and south facades as depicted on sheets 8-9 of the 11 x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 responding to HPDC Sections 10.4 - 10.11. We are maintaining simplicity in the detailing of the roof overhangs and painted wood siding found on the majority of the proposed addition. The sizing of the proposed rain screen detail is a direct response to the 4" traditional lapped siding that will be utilized upon the historical mining cottage, which, although being clear not to replicate the historical structure, is compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Sections 10.4-10.11 when tying the mass and scale of the old and new together. For the roof material, the new proposed construction is to utilize a paint locked standing seam metal roofing condition that is intended to be of a natural and earth tone colour palette. The proposed metal roof will be finished in a non -reflective finish per the HPDG requisites. - - 11.7Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. ❑ Roof materials should have a matte, non -reflective finish. 11.8Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. o Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. ❑ Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 11.9Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. ❑ These include windows, doors and porches. ❑ Overall, details should be modest in character. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. ❑ This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. ❑ Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Sections 11.7-11.10, the addition has been proposed to clearly be recognized as a product of its own time period while addressing comparative elements of the vernacular existing conditions via the form and scale of the volumes as approved via the conceptual approval process. In the new proposed construction, we believe proposing the north and south glazing facades as depicted on sheets 8-9 of the 11x17 Issuance and the enlarged Elevations Sheets A3.01 & A3.02 helps to further enhance the dialogue between the old and new constructions, as we are not mimicking or re-creating the visual language found within the mining cottage. We are maintaining a consistent simplicity through the new proposed construction in the detailing of the roof overhangs, the application and laying of the proposed stacked stone accent areas, and within the painted wood siding found on the majority of the proposed new construction. For example, the sizing of the proposed rain screen detail is a direct response to the 4" traditional lapped siding that will be utilized upon the historical mining cottage, which, although being clear not to replicate the historical structure, is compatible with what would have occurred on the residence historically per requirements of HPDG Sections 10.4-10.11. We believe this further ties the mass and scale of the old and new together while also providing a detailing 0 condition compatible to the human scale and consistent with the architectural traditions of Aspen's West end vernacular, both old and new. For the roof material, the new proposed construction is to utilize a paint locked standing seam metal roofing condition intended to be of a natural and earth tone colour palette. The proposed metal roof will be finished in a non -reflective finish per the HPDG requisites. 14.6Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. ❑ The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. ❑ All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 14.6, exterior light sources have been called out as proposed on pages 23-25 of the 11 x 17 packet issuance per Bluegreen. Wattage and lumen capacities are provided to show compliancy with the City of Aspen standards and guidelines. Architecturally, down lighting as required per code near all points of entry and egress will comply with the City of Aspen Exterior Lighting Code. No up lighting is called out for usage on the 417-421 West Hallam project. 14.7Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. ❑ Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. ❑ Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. ❑ Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. ❑ Do not wash an entire building facade in light. ❑ Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. ❑ Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 14.7, exterior light sources have been called out as proposed on pages 23-25 of the 11 x 17 packet issuance per Bluegreen. Wattage and lumen capacities are provided to show compliancy with the City of Aspen standards and guidelines. Architecturally, down lighting as required per code near all points of entry and egress will comply with the City of Aspen Exterior Lighting Code. No up -lighting is called out for usage on the 417-421 West Hallam project. 14.8Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. ❑ Prevent glare onto adjacent properties by using shielded and focused light sources that direct light onto the ground. The use of downlights, with the bulb fully enclosed within the shade, or step lights which direct light only on to walkways, is strongly encouraged. ❑ Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space, on or off the property or into public rights -of - way. RE: Per Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDG) Section 14.8, we realize we are proposing a large amount of glazing to the north and south elevations of the project. In order to appropriately respond to the potential concerns of visual impact of light spill onto adjacent properties, we will be utilizing a combination of strategies to reduce the impact on the neighborhood. First, roll down opaque shading devices are anticipated to be incorporated into the design solution and utilized along the interior north and south facades in their entirety. We are proposing a 60%opacity at the present time. Additionally, the standard lighting parameters typical to the layout of a residence will be quantified via modeling numerically to ensure there are no great and unnecessary overages within the layout developments themselves. We internally desire a home that is comparatively 20% to 30% less than what is typically the standard recommendation of lumen output capacity. Lastly, all code requisites set forth by the Residential Design Standards and Land Use Code for the City of Aspen will be adhered to in accordance. We greatly appreciate your working through this process with us regarding 417-421 West Hallam, and we look forward to presenting and discussing all provided information to you in greater depth on October 22"d We thank you for your consideration towards our proposal. Respectfully, Derek Skalko Local Representative, 417-421 West Hallam 01/17/2014 13:10 30W1-6309 FEDEX OFFIC(& 1829 LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION January 15, 2014 We, David P. Kaplan and Marcia Press Kaplan, owners of the property at 417-421 West Hallam, Aspen, CO, authorize Derek Skalko of 1 Friday Design Collaberative and Jake Bittner of Thomas Pheasant Interiors to act on our behalf before the Historic Preservation Commission and any and all other Aspen city agencies in connection with securing the necessary permits for the renovation/construction of a single family home at 417-421 West Hallam. PAGE 01 Please direct any questions you may have to either Marcia or David at 9100 Burning Tree Road, Bethesda, Maryland 20817; 301-802-3532 or 301.-802-3568. Sincerely, Marcia Press Kaplan David P. Kaplan KLULIfto 1 0 ,)n1A 66 3g , _-20 ( 4_ -Mf( _ Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the aty of Aspen (-'Uity ) ano Property Derek Skalko & Jake Bittner C/O: Owner ("I'T David & Marcia Kaplan Phone No.: 970.309.0695 / 202.337.6596 Email. derekCa)lfriday.com/jake@thomasphea Address of Billing Attn: Derek Skalko Property: 417-421 West Halam Street Address: C/O: David & Marcia Kaplan (subject of Aspen, Colorado 81611 (send bills here) PO BOX 7928 application) Aspen, CO 81612 I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. , Series of 2011, review fees for Land Use applications and the payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner that I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $ 1950 flat fee for HPC Final Review Process $ flat fee for ---------------------- flat fee for $ flat fee for For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration, unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices mailed by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy including consequences for non-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for the processing of my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $_1 ,950 _ deposit for 6 hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325 per hour. $___________ deposit for ______ hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $265 per hour. City of Aspen: Property Owner: David & Marcia Kaplan Derek Skalko & Jake Bittner : Project Representatives Chris Bendon Community Development Director Name: Derek Skalko /Jake Bittner City use: 1950 Title: Fees Due: $ Received: $____________ ant.com Project Representation on Behalf of the Owners M M sw+x Z Irl 0 -4c)1HY� Permits Pi; File Edit Record Navigate Form Reports Format Tab Help 1 a}; v� '� tf_ 1 _h • =i R A lump I i 13 Main Custom Fields Routing Status Fee Summary Actions Routing History 7 o Permit type Fah pc iAspen Historic Land Use Permit # 0038.2014_AHPC Address 1417421 W HALLAM I ApVsuite o City ASPEN State CO Zip 81611 Ia I Cr xX Permit Information fl Master permit �— Routing queue aslu07 Applied 0813 201� Ia F Project Status pending Approved z o ; Description APPLICAT10Jd Issued FOR FINAL HPC REVIEIN PROCESS i� I Closed/Final i Submitted IDEREK SKALKO 309 0695 Clock Running Days n Expires 108108,2015 Owner Last name SKALKO I First name IDEREK i Phone f970j 309-0695 Address 3� ' Applicant �Owner is applicant? 0Contractor is applicant? Last name JSKALKO I First name DEREK 0"W3. Phone i970) 309-0695 1 Cust = 29873 Address Lender Last name First name i Phone i i Address Displays the permit lender's address ., AspenGold5 (server, angelas -1 of 1 $ (`i s-o -oo � 7ros 7 A I was 01/17/2014 13:10 3JOBI-6309 FEDEX OFFIff 1829 PAGE 02 Date: October 04, 2013 DAVID P. KAPLAN AND MARCIA PRESS IiAPLAN 9100 BURNING TREE ROAD BETHESDA, MD 20817 Subject: Attached Title Policy Q62005383 for 417 AND 421 W HALLAM ST #A & B ASPEN CO 81611 Enclosed please find the Owner's Title Insurance Policy for your purchase of the property listed above. This title policy is the final step in your real estate transaction, and we want to take a moment to remind you of its importance. Please review all information in this document carefully and be sure to safeguard this policy along with your other legal documents. Your owner's policy insures you as long as you own the property and requires no additional premium payments. Please feel free to contact any member of our staff if you have questions or concerns regarding your policy, or you may contact the Final Policy Department directly at 970-925-1678. As a Colorado -owned and operated title company for over 45 years, with offices throughout the state, we take pride in serving our customers one transaction at a time. We sincerely appreciate your business and welcome the opportunity to assist you with any future real estate needs. Not only will Land Title be able to provide you with the title services quickly and professionally, but you may also be entitled to a discount on title premiums if you sell or refinance the property described in the enclosed policy. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to work with you on this transaction. We look forward to serving you again in the future. Sincerely, Land Title Guarantee Company 01/17/2014 13:10 3*1-6309 FEDEX OFFIC(D 1829 PAGE 03 * OWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE ANY NOTICE OF CLAIM AND ANY OTHER NOTICE OR STATEMENT IN WRITING REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN TO THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY MUST BE GIVEN TO THE COMPANY AT THE ADDRESS SHOWN IN SECTION 18 OF THE CONDITIONS. * COVERED RISKS SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE B AND THE CONDITIONS, OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Minnesota corporation, (the "Company" I. insures, as of Date of PobcY and, to the extent stated in Covered Risks B and 10, after Oate of Policy, against loss or damage, not exceeding the Amount of Insurance, sustained or incurred by the insured by reason of: I. Title being vested other than as stated in Schedule A. ?. Any defect in or lien of encumbrance on the tube; This covered Risk includes but is not limited to insurance against less front (a) A defect in the Title caused by (i1 forgery, freud, undue influence, duress, incompetency, incapacity, or impersonation; fill failure of any person or Entity to have authorized a transfer of conveyance; (u) a document affecting Title not properly created, executed, witdossed, sealed, acknowledged, notarized, or delivered; (ivl failure to perform those acts necessary to create a document by electronic means authorized by low; Iv) a document executed under a falsified, expired, or otherwise invalid power of attorney, (vi) a document not properly filed, recorded, or indexed in the Public Records including failure to perform those acts by electronic means authorized by law; or (vii) a defective judicial or administrative proceeding. (Ill The lien of real estate taxes or assessments imposed on ilia Title by a govemmentel authority due h payable, but unpaid. Ic) Any encroachment. encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be ningldisclosed d, an accurate and complete onto t land survey is the Land. The term "encroachment" includes eacroacfmemts of existing improvements located on the Land onto adjoining land, and encroachments onto the Laud of existing improvements located on adjoining land. 3. Unmarketable Title. 4. No rigbt of access to and from the Land. 5. The violation or enforcement of any law, ordinance, permit, or govemncental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (a) the occupancy, use or enjoyment of the Land; (b) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; Ic) the subdivision of land; or (dl environmental protection if a notice, describing any part of the Land, is iacoided in the Public Records setting forth the violation or intention to enforce, but only to the extent of the violation or enforcement referred to in that notice. 6. An enforcement action besed on the exercise of a governmental police power not covered by Covered Risk 6 If a notice of the enforcement action, describing any part of the Lend, is recorded in the Public Records, but only to the extent of the enforcement referred to In that notice. 7. The exercise of the rights of eminent domain if a notice of the exercise, describing any part of the Land, is recorded in the Public Records. 8. Any taking by a governmental body that has occurred and is binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without Knowledge Vi Title being vested other than as stated in Schedule A or being defective rnative remedy, of a transfer of all or any part of the title to or any interest in Is) as a result of the avoidance in whole or in part, or from a court order providing an site the Land occurring prior to the transactioI vesting Title as shown in Schedule A because that prior transfer constituted a fraudulent or prefetential transfer under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws; or (bi because the Instrument of transfer vesting Title as shown in Schedule A constitutes a preferential transfer under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws by reason of the failure of its recording in the Public Records Id to be timely, or (ii) to impart notice of its existence to a purchaser for value or to a judgment or lien creditor, 10. Any defect in or Public Records'en or subsequent to Date ofnce on ihe pol ryle or and prior to theer Included in Covgrgd Risks 1 recording of he deed or other Instrumouuh ent of transfthat has er bcreated or een the Publicattached Records th tas been filed ve is Title asrshown in Schedule A, The Company will also pay the Costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred in defense of any matter insured against by this Policy, but only to the extent provided in the Conditions. Old Republic National Title Insurance Company A Stock Company 400 Second Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Issued through the Office of; 1612J 371.1111 LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY 533 E HOPKINS H102 ASPEN, CO 81611 Oyo-025-1678 os,Pt.*IrtPzti , Mark Bibrey k� / y President Au hnrired Sign tur� o * * o ; uN0 7171E .� tt lF e �� At30C1ATICN d1770 . yN�a.' Rand, Yeager ' Secretary Copyright 7006-2012 American land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA member$ in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American l arrd Tide Association. AO.ORT.06 (ALTA 0617•00) Cover Page 1 at 5 '01/17/2014 13:10 3J$81-6309 FEDEX OFFICO 1829 PAGE 04 EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company viill not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' tees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (1) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (1)) the charat ler,.dimeneions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land: (iii) the subdivisloh of lend; or 11v) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1In) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 11b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This 1 xdusioo does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or S 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the data the Insured Claimant became an Insured underthhis policy: (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) alteching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk g and 10); or (a) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Title. 4. Any clean, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction vesting the Title as shown In Schedule A, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or freaduient transfer; or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason ant stated in Covered Risk g of this policy. 5. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS The following terms when used in this policy mean: (al "Amount of Insurance The amount stated in Schedule A, as may be increased or decreased by endorsement to this policy, increased by Section 8(b) or decreased by Sections 10 and 11 of these Conditions. lb) "Date of Policy": The date designated as "Date of Policy" in Schedule A. (c) "Entity' A corporation, partnership, trust, limited liability company, or other similar legal entity. (d) "Insured": The Insured named in Schedule A. (I) The term "Insured" also includes (AI successors to the Title of the Insured by operation of law as distinguished from purchase, including heirs, devisees, survivors, personal representatives, or next of kin; (6) successors to an Insured by dissolution, merger, consolidation, distribution, or reorganization. (C) successors to an Insured by its conversion to another kind of Entity; (DI a grantee of an Insured under a it:ed delivered without payment of actual valuable consideration conveying the Title 11) if the stock, shares, memberships, or other equity interests of the grantee are wholly owned by the named Insured 12) it the grantee wholly owns the named insured, (3) if the grantee Is wholly -owned by an affiliated Entity of the named Insured, provided the affiliated Entity and the named Insured ere both wholly -owned by the same person or Entity, or (4) if the grantee is a trustee or beneficiary of a trust created by a written instrument established by the Insured named in Schedule A for estate planning purposes. (ii) Vith regard to (A),161, (C), and (D) reserving, however, al rights and defensed as to any successor that the Company would have had against any predecessor Insured. fell'insured Claimant": An Insured claimlag loss or damage. it) "Knowledge" or "Known": Actual knowledge, not constructive knowledge or notice that may be imputed to an Insured by reason of the Public Records or any other records that impart contructive notice of matters affecting the Title. (g) "Land-: The land described in Schedule A. and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The terra "Land" does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described In Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, at easement in abutting streets. roads, avenue, alleys, lames, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a Fight of access to and from the Land is insured by this policy. (h) "Mortgage": Mortgage, deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. (i) "Public Records': Records establi under state statutes at Date of Policy for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowkidgo. With respect to Covered Risk 5(d), "Public Records" shall also include environmental protection liens filed in the records of the clerk of the United States District Court for the district where the Land is located. 'Title": The estate or interest described in Schedule A. "Unmarketable Title": Title affected by an aliened or apparent matter that would permit a prospective purchaser or lessee of the Title or lender an the Title to be released from the obligation to purchase lease, of lend if there is a contractual condition requiring the delivery of marketable title. 2, CONTINUATION Or INSURANCE The coverage of this policy shall continue in force as of Date of Policy in favor of an Insured, but only so long as the Insured retalns an estate or interest in the Land, of holds an obligation secured by a purchase money Mortgage given by a purchaser from the Insured, or only so long as the Insured shall have liability by reason of warranties in any transfer or conveyance of the Tide. This policy shell not continua in force in favor of any purchaser from the Insured of either GI an estate or interest in the Land, or fii) an obligation secured by a purchase money Mortgage given to the Insured. A0,0RT.D6,2 Cover Page 2 of 5 '01/17/2014 13:10 30,081-6309 FEDEX OFFIC(& 1829 PAGE 05 3. NOTICE OF CLAIM TO BE GIVEN BY INSURED CLAIMANT The insured shall notify the Company promptly in writing (i) in case of any litigation as set forth in Section 5(al of these Conditions, (ii) in case Knowledge shall come to an Insured hereunder of any claim of title or interest that is adverse to the Title, as insured, Ind that might cause loss or damage for which the Company may be liable by virtue of this policy, or Dill if the Title, as Insured, is rejected as Unmarketable Title. If the Company is prejudiced by the failure of the Insured Claimant to provide prompt notice, the Company's liability to the Insured Claimant under the policy shall be reduced to the extent of the prejudice. 4. PROOF OF LOSS In the event the Company is imable to detem ina the amount of loss or damage, the Company may, at its option, require as a condition of payment that the insured Claimant furnish a signed proof of loss_ The proof of loss must describe the defect, lien, encumbrance, or other matter insured against by this parry that consitutes the basis of loss or damage and shall state, to the extent possible, the basis of calculating the amount of the loss or damage. 5. DEFENSE AND PROSECUTION OF ACTIONS la) Upon written request by the Insured, and subject to the options contained in Section 7 of these Conditions. the Company, at its own cost and without unreasonable delay, shall provide for the defense of an Insured in litigation in which any third party asserts a claun covered by this policy adverse to the Insured. This obligation is limited to only those stated causes of action alleging matters insured against by this policy. The Company shall have the right to select counsel of its choice (subject to the right of the Insured to abiscl for reasonable cause) to represent the Insured as to those stated causes of action. It shall not be liable for and will not pay the fees of any other counsel. The Company will not pay any fees, costs, or expenses incurred by the Insured in the defense of those causes of action that allege matters not insured against by this policy. lb) The Company shell have the fight, in addition to the options contained in Section 7 of these Conditions, at its own cost, to institute and prosecute any action or proceeding of to do any other act that in its opinion may be necessary or dasireable to establish the Title, es insured, or to prevent or reduce loss or damage to the Insured. The Company may take any appropriate action under the terms of this policy, whether or not ii shall be liable to the Insured. The exercise of these rights shell not be an admission of liability or waiver of any provision of this policy. It the Company exercises its rights under this subsection, it must to so diligently. (c) Whenever the Company brings an action or asserts a defense as required or permitted by this policy, the Company may pursue the litigation to a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and it expressly reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to appeal any adverse judgment or order. 6. DUTY OF INSURED CLAIMANT TO COOPERATE Is) in all cases where this policy permits or requires the Company to prosecute or provide for the defense of any action or proceeding and any appeals, the Insured shell secure to the Company the right to so prosecute or provide defense in the action or proceeding, including the right to use, at Its option, the name of the Insured for this purpose. Whenever requested by the Company, the Insured, at the Company's expense, shell give the Company all reasonable aid III in securing evidence, obtaining witnesses, prosecuting or defending the action or proceeding, or effecting settlement, and (R) in any other lawful act that In the opinion of the Company may be necessary or desirable to establish the Title or any other matter as Insured. It the Company is prejudiced by the failure of the insured to furnish the required cooperation, the Company's obligation to the Insured under the policy shag terminate, including any lability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation, with regard to the matter or matters requiring such cooperation. IN The Company may reasonably require the Insured Claimant to submit to examination under oath by any authorized representative of the Company and to produce for examination, Inspection, and copying, at such reasonable times and places as may be designated by the authorized representative of the Company, all records, in whatever medium maintained, including books, ledgers, checks, memoranda, correspondence, reports, a -mails, disks, tapes, and videos whether bearing a date before or after Date of PoLcy, that reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. Further, if requested by any authorized representative of the Company, the Insured Claimant shall grant its permission, in writing, for any authorized representative of the Company to examine, inspect, and copy all of these records in the custody or control of a third party that reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. All information designated as confidential by the Insured Claimant provided to the Company pursuant to this Section shall not be disclosed to others unless, in the reasonable judgment of the Company, it Is necessary in the adminlstration of the claim, Failure of the Insured Claimant to submit for examination under oath produce any reasonably requested information, or grant permission to secure reasonably necessary information from third parties as required in this subsection, unless prohibited by law or governmental regulation, shal terminate any liability of the Company under this policy as to that claim. 7. OPTIONS TO PAY OR OTHERWISE SETTLE CLAIMS; TERMINATION OF LIABILITY In case of a claim under this policy, the Company shall have the following additional options: (al To Pay or Tender Payment of the Amount of Insurance. To pay or tender payment of the Amount of Insurance under this policy together with any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment or tender of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay. Upon the dxerc'ise by the Company of this option, all liability and obligations of the Company to the Insured under this policy, other than to make the payment required in the subsection, shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation. (b) To Pay or Otherwise Settle With Parties Other Than the Insured or With the Insured Claimant 6) To pay bi otherwise settle with other parties for or in the name of an insured Claimant any claim insured against under this policy. In addition, the Company will pay any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay; or Oil To pay.or otherwise settle with the Insured Clalmant the loss or damage provided for under this policy, together with any costs, attomeys' fees, and expensed Incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the tithe of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay. Upon the exercise by the Company of either of the options provided for in subsections (bP or (it), the Company's obligations to the insured under this policy for the claimed loss or damage, other than the payments required to be made, shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation, B. DETERMINATION AND EXTENT OF LIABILITY This policy is a contract of indemnity against actual monetary loss of damsge sustained or incurred by the Insured Claimant who has suffered loss of damage by reason of matters insured against by this policy. (a) The extent of liability of the Company for loss or damage under this policy shel not exceed the lesser of (r) the Amount of Insurance. or 00 the difference between the value of the Title as insured and the value of the Title subject to the risk insured against by this policy, AO.URT.08.3 Cover Page 3 of 5 '01/17/2014 13:10 3000' 81-6309 FEDEX OFFIC9 1829 PAGE 06 lb) If the Company pursues its rights under Section 5 of these Conditions and is unsuccessful in establishing the Title, as insured, (i) the Amount of Insurance shall be increased by 10%, and IN the Insured Claimant shall have the right to have the loss Or damage determined either as of the date the claim was made by the Insured Claimant or as of the date it is settled and paid. (c) In addition to the xtent o1 liability under le) and (b), the Company will also pay those costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred in accordance with Sections 5 and 7 of these onditions. B. LIMITATION OF 11ABILITY (al If the Company eslltablishlis the T1Ne, or remoras the alleged defect, lien, or encumbrance, or cures the lack of a right of access to or from the Land, or cures the claim of Unmarketable Title, all as insured, in a reasonably diligent manner by env method, including litigation and the completion of any appeals, it shall have fully perfo d its obligations with respect to that matter end shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused to the Insured. 1b) In the event of 2nV litigation, Including litigation by the Company or with the Company's consent, the Company shall have no liability for loss or damage until there has been a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and disposition of all appeals, adverse to the Title, as insured. (c) The Company she I not be liable for loss or damage to the Insured for liability voluntarily assumed by the Insured in settling any claim or suit without the prior written consent bf the Company. in. REDUCTION or INSURANCE; REDUCTION OR TERMINATION OF LIABILITY All payments under this paticy, except payments made for costs, attorneys' f lies, and expenses, shall reduce the Amount of Insurance by the amount of the payment. 11. LIABILITY NONII ULATIVE The Amount of Insurance shall be reduced by any amount the Company pays under any policy insuring a Mortgage to which exception is taken in Schedule B or to which the Insured has agreed, assumed, or taken subject, or which is executed by an Insured alter Date of Policy and which is a charge or hen on the Title, and the amount so paid shalt be deemed a payment to the Insured under this policy. 12. PAYMENT OF LOSS When liability end the extent of loss or damage have bean definitely fixed in accordance with these Conditions, the payment shall be made within 30 days. 13. RIGHTS OF RECOVERY UPON PAYMENT OR SETTLEMENT ia) Whenever the Company shall have settled antl paid a claim under this policy, It shall be subrogated and entitled to the rights of the Insured Claimant in the Title and all other rights and remedies in respect to the claim that the Insured Claimant has against any person or property, to the extent of the amount of any loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses paid by the Company. If requested by the Company, the Insured Claimant shall execute documents to evidence the transfer to the Company of these rights and remedies. The Insured Claimant shall permit the Company to sue, compromise, or settle in the name of the Insured Claimant and to use the name of the Insured Claimant in any transaction or litigation involving these rights and remedies. If a payment on account of a claim does not fully cover the loss of the Insured Claimant, the Company shall defer the exercise of its right to recover until after the Insured Claimant shell have recovered its loss, (b) The Company's right of subrogation includes the rights of the insured to indemnities, guaranties, other pelicys of insurance, or bonds, notwithstanding any terms or conditions contained In those instruments that address subrogation rights. 14. ARBITRATION Either the Company or the Insured may demand that the daim or controversy shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the Title Insurance Arbitration Rules of the American Land Title Association ("Rules'). Except as provided in the Rules, there shell be no joinder or consolidation with claims or controversies of other persons, Arbitrable matters may include, but are not limited to, any controversy or claim between the Company and the Insured arising out of or relating to this policy, any service in connection with its issuance or the breach of a policy provision, or to any other controversy or claim arising out of the transaction giving rise to this policy. At) arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is $7,600,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured. All arbitrable matters when the Amount of Insurance is In excess of $2,000,000 shall be arbitrated only when agreed to by both the Company and the Insured. Arbitration pursuant to this policy and under the Rules shag be binding upon the parties. Judgment upon the award rendered by the Arbitrater(s) may be entered in any court of competent jurisdiction. 15. LIABILITY LIMITED TO THIS POLICY; POLICY ENTIRE CONTRACT (a) This policy together with all endorsements, if any, attached to it by the Company is the entire policy and contract between the Insured and the Company. In interpreting any provision of this policy, this policy shall be construed as a whole. (b) Any claim at loss or damage that arises out of the status of the Title or by any action asserting such claim shall be restricted to this policy. (c) Any amendment of or endorsement to this policy must he in writing and authenticated by an authorized person, or expressly incorporated by Schedule A of this policy. Id) Each endorsement to this policy issued at any time is made a part of this policy and is subject to ell of its terms and provisions. Except as the endorsement expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of tine policy, lii) modify any prior endorsement, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or Qv) increase the Amount of Insurance. 16. SEVERABILI7Y In the event any provision of this policy, in whole or in part, is field invalid or unenforceabe under applicable law, the policy shall be deemed not to include that provision or such part held to be invalid, but all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect, AURT.06.4 Covor Page 4 of 5 01/17/2014 13:10 3qo1-6309 FEDEX OFFI0 1829 PAGE 07 17. CHOICE OF LAW; FORUM (a) Choice of law; The Insured acknowledges the Company has underwritten the risks covered by this policy and datermned the premium cherged therefor in reliance upon the law affecting interests In reel property and applicable to the interpretation, rights, remedies, or enforcement of policies of title insurance of the ludadicton where the Land is located_ Thmefore, the court or an arbitrator shall apply the law of the jurisdiction where the Lend is located to determine the validity of claims against the Title that are adverse to the Insured and to interpret and enforce the term: of this policy. In neither case shall the court or arbitrator apply Its conflicts of law principles to determine the applicable levy. Ib) Choice of Forum; Any litigation or other proceeding brought by the Insured against the Company must be filed only in a state or federal court within the United States of America or its territories having appropriate jurisdiction 18. NOTICES, WHERE SENT Any notice of claim and any other notice or stetemant in writing required to be given to the Company under this policy must be given to the Company at: 400 Second Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401, (6121371-1111. ANTI -FRAUD STATEMENT: Pursuaett to CRS 10.1-128(6)(a), it is unlawful to kuo%yingly provide false, incomplete, or nusleadtug facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fitnes, denial of insurance and civil damages. Any insurauce company or agent of an insurance company who knovingly provides false, incomplete, or ndsleadimg facts or information to a policyholder or cininiant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claitnaut with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado division of insurance within the department of regulatory agencies. This auti-fraud statement is affixed and made a part of this policy. AO.OHT.06.5 Cover Page 5 of 5 01/17/2014 13:10 3I81-6309 FEDEX OFFI0 1829 PAGE 08 LTG Policy No. LTFI62003383 )Form AO10RT Land Title Guarantee Company Representing Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Our Order No. Q62005383 Schedule A Amount $2,975,000.00 Property Address: 417 AND 421 W HALLAM ST #A & B ASPEN CO 81611 1. Policy Date: August 20, 2013 at 5:00 P.M. 2. Name of Insured: DAVID P. KAPLAN AND MARCIA PRESS KAPLAN i 3. The estate or interest in the Land described or referred to in this Schedule and which ;is covered by this policy is:' A Pee Simple 4. Title to the estate or interest covered by this policy at the date hereof is vested in: DAVID P. KAPLAN AND MARCIA. PRESS KAPLAN 5. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: SEE ATTACHED "EXHIBIT A" FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION This Policy valid only if Schedule B is attached. Copyright 2006-2013 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. A)) other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. �r AMF CAN LAND 7176E A990CM .01/17/2014 13:10 3YS81-6309 FEDEX OFFIV 1829 PAGE 09 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: LTG Policy No. LTFX 62 0 053 83 Our Order No. Q62005383 UNIT A, HALLAM STREET CONDOMINIUMS, ACCORDING TO TI4E CONDOMINIUM MAP RECORDED OCTOBER 27, 1977 IN BOOK 337 AT PAGE 371 AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT RECORDED NOVEMBER 17, 1977 IN BOOK 338 AT PAGE 805 AND THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED OCTOBER 27, 1977 IN BOOK 337 AT PAGE 357 AND AMENDMENT TO THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED APRIL 15, 1997 UNDER RECEPTION NO, 403426. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. PARCEL B: UNIT B, HALLAM STREET CONDOMINIUMS, ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM MAP RECORDED OCTOBER 27, 1977 IN BOOK 337 AT PAGE 371 AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT RECORDED NOVEMBER 17, 1977 IN BOOK 338 AT PAGE 805 AND THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED OCTOBER 27, 1977 IN BOOK 337 AT PAGE 357 AND AMENDMENT TO THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED APRIL 15, 1997 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 403426. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. '01/17/2014 13:10 3W1-6309 FEDEX OFFIO 1829 PAGE 10 Form Our Order No. Q62005383 Sebeduie B FLTG Policy No. LTFI62005383 I This policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following: 1. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the Public Records. ITEM NOS 5(A) AND 5(B) OF THE STANDARD EXCEPTIONS ARE HEREBY DELETED. 6. 2013 TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS NOT YET DUE OR PAYABLE. 7. RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS IN THE DEED FROM THE CITY OF ASPEN RECORDED APRIL 23, 1888 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 425. S. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF DECREE RECORDED FEBRUARY 02, 1957 IN BOOK 175 AT PAGE 472. 9. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION RECORDED JULY 07, 1977 IN BOOK 331 AT PAGE 494. 10. EASEMENTS, RIGHTS OF WAY AND ALL OTHER MATTERS AS DISCLOSED ON THE PLAT OF HALLAM STREET CONDOMINIUMS RECORDED OCTOBER 27, 1977 IN BOOK 337 AT PAGE 371 AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT RECORDED NOVEMBER 17, 1977 IN BOOK 338 AT PAGE 805 AND SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAP RECORDED APRIL 15, 1997 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 403426 - EXHIBIT A. 11. CONDOMINIUM DECLARATIONS, WHICH DO NOT CONTAIN A FORFEITURE OR REVERTER CLAUSE, BUT OMITTING ANY COVENANTS OR RESTRICTIONS, IF ANY, BASED UPON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, FAMILIAL STATUS, MARITAL STATUS, DISABILITY, HANDICAP, NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, OR SOURCF, OF INCOME, AS SET FORTH INAPPLICABLE STATE OR FEDERAL LAWS, EXCEPT TO THE 01/17/2014 13:10 31081-6309 FEDEX OFFI* 1829 PAGE 11 Form AO/ORT Our Order No. Q62005383 Schedule B LTG Policy No. LTF162005383 EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT OR RESTRICTION IS PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 27, 1977, IN BOOK 337 AT PAGE 357 AND AS AMENDED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED APRIL 15, 1997, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 403426. 12. ANY FACTS, RIGHTS, INTERESTS OR CLAIMS WHICH MAY EXIST OR ARISE BY REASON OF THE FOLLOWING FACTS SHOWN ON IMPROVEMENT SURVEY DATED JULY 01, 2013 PREPARED BY ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS, INC., JOB# 27054B: SKIED ROOF ENCROACHMENT. TRASH PAD AND STRUCTURE ENCROACHES INTO LOT C. ITEM NOS. 1 THROUGH 3 OF THE STANDARD EXCEPTIONS ARE HEREBY DELETED, ITEM NO.4 OF THE STANDARD EXCEPTIONS IS DELETED AS TO ANY LIENS RESULTING FROM WORK OR MATERIAL CONTRACTED FOR OR FURNISHED AT THE REQUEST OF JOSEPH V. MYERS, JR. AND JENNINE HOUGH. OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY FOR ANY LIENS ARISING FROM WORD OR MATERIAL FURNISHED AT THE REQUEST OF DAVID P. KAPLAN AND MARCIA PRESS KAPLAN. �01/17/2014 13:10 30fl-6309 FEDEX OFFIC0 1829 PAGE 12 LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY ENDORSEMENT PATENT - 06 Case 062005383 Policy LTFZ62005363 Loan # The Company insures the Insured against loss or damage which the insured shall sustain by reason of damage to existing and future improvements, including lawns, shrubbery or trees resulting from the exercise of any right CO use the surface of the Land for enforcement of any reservations contained in the patent to the Land excepted from the description or shown in Exception -NO(s)- 7 of schedule B. This endorsement is issued as part of the policy. Except as it expressly states, it does not (1) modify any of the terms and provisions of the Policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsements, (iii) extend the Date of policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance- To the extent a provision of the policy or a previous endorsement is inconsistent with an express provision of this endorsement, this endorsement controls. otherwise, this endorsement is subject to all of the terms and provisions of the policy and of any prior endorsements. Representing Old Republic National Title Insurance Company • 417-421 WEST HALLAM RESIDENCE FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT SUBMISSION THOMAS PHEASANT 1029 33RD STREET, WAHS[NGTON, DC 20007 1' RFC El ��� PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL SCALE: 1 /8" = Y-0'' I PRINT FULLSIZE 1 1 X17 CURB AT STREET REVISION HIGHLIGHTS: 1- FRONT PORCH ADDED PER 1904 SANBORNE MAP 2- LINK ELEMENT EXPANDED TO 10' 3- DEPTH OF MASS OF REAR ADDITION REDUCED BY 2' 4- LIGHTWELLS REMAIN WITHIN SETBACKS 5- MECHANICAL SPACE UNDER GARAGE ON MAIN LEVEL SITUATED WITHIN SETBACK; ENCROACHMENT HAS NOT BEEN INCREASED FROM PREVIOUS SUBMISSION WHEN MASS PUSHED BACK TO ADDRESS HPC REQUEST TO INCREASE SIZE OF LINK ELEMENT 63'-3" LOT WIDTH (PROPERTY LINE WEST HALLAM) I i i I I i i I I i i I I j i I I 10' FRONT YARD I i I I i i I PROGRAM KEY: j ! 1- STAIR 8 2- BEDROOM 2 3- BATHROOM i 4- TELEVISION/RECREATION I i 5- OFFICE 6-EXERCISE 7- MECHANICAL ii 3 8- LIGHTWELL i I r cn 0 -- m D - 3 A co W _ D -- n 2 l 8! i I 1 I I I I L-__ J o I r I - � I O 0 I o m S 5:!2 D - Im I° m n i 8 l I I 10' REAR YARD HABITABLE SETBACK 5' REAR YARD GARAGE SETBACK I I I I I i I I I -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 63-3_LOT WIDTH (PROPERTY LINE ALLEY)- - - - - - - - - - - * 6-0"- PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL SCALE: 1 /8" = 1'-0" 1 PRINT FULLSIZE 1 1 X17 CURB AT STREET REVISION HIGHLIGHTS: 1- FRONT PORCH ADDED PER 1904 SANBORNE MAP 2- STREET FACING FRONT DOOR RELOCATED AND RESTORED TO MINING CABIN 2- LINK ELEMENT EXPANDED TO 10' 3- DEPTH OF MASS OF REAR ADDITION REDUCED BY 2' 4- LIGHTWELLS REMAIN WITHIN SETBACKS 5- SECOND PARKING SPACE RETAINED 6- 1-LEVEL MASS WITH BEDROOM PULLED FORWARD TO REDUCE "BACKDROP" EFFECT OF ADDITION 7- REAR SETBACK WAS MAINTAINED FROM PREVIOUS _ 63'-3" LOT WIDTH (PROPERTY LINE WEST HALLAM) SUBMISSION; GARAGE EN�ORACHE��N REAR 20'-24" iSETBACK TO ALLOW SPACE REQUIRED FOR � ---10-82- 0' LINK ELEMENT - - - I i- i I - p I i "o i I "' of I 10' FRONT YARD I T i PROGRAM KEY: - _ - 1- STAIR " 2- BEDROOM i 3- BATHROOM 4 I co c i 4- FOYER/GALLERY l U i 5- DINING � 00 N i I I I I II li I li I I I li I I I li i I I i I I i I I I I i I I i I b D- i� I I I � I p I � I I I I I I I I I � I I � i i I I i I i I I I I 9I I o I✓ � ' I b c„ — m m D rn ' co D I I I I I I I I i 5' REAR YARD GARAGE SETBACK I i W PROPERTY LINE ALLEY " LOT WIDTH �. �- -- -- 63 3 ( ) -- -- -- --.� 7'-34 , ,� 14'-6 - - ,� 47'-2" - - - - - - -94 - �, PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL SCALE: 1 /8" = l'-0" I PRINT FULLSIZE 1 1 X 17 CURB AT STREET REVISION HIGHLIGHTS: 1- FRONT PORCH ADDED PER 1904 SANBORNE MAP 2- STREET FACING FRONT DOOR RELOCATED AND RESTORED TO MINING CABIN 2- LINK ELEMENT EXPANDED TO 10' 3- DEPTH OF MASS OF'REAR ADDITION REDUCED BY 2' 4- RIDGE LOWERED DUE TO 2' REDUCTION IN WIDTH- REDUCTION OF PITCH HAS LOWERED RIDGE HEIGHT 4'-6" FROM INITIAL PRESENTATION OF CONCEPT S- 1-LEVEL MASS WITH BEDROOM PULLED FORWARD TO REDUCE "BACKDROP" EFFECT OF ADDITION 63'-3" LOT WIDTH (PROPERTY LINE WEST HALLAM) 6-SEA--5ET-BACK VtA-S-lvAINfAtNED-FRC lm PkEvtOt-S-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -� ;SUBMISSION; GARAGE ENCORACHES ON REAR (SETBACK TO ALLOW SPACE REQUIRED FOR 10' LINK ELEMENT i I I I i i I I i i I I 10' FRONT YARD I I I I I PROGRAM KEY: 1- STAIR i 2- FAMILY ROOM I 3- WET BAR 4- BATHROOM i S- DECK/BALCONY I 6- GREEN ROOF (NOT ACCESSIBLE) i 7- SITTING i I I i i I I i i I I i i � I I i i I I i i I I i i I I i i \ I I � i i � I I \ i j A I I i i I I 6 I i i I I i 1p to io to O O i= cn 4 cn I rn Irn v' - `n AID cn IFD > - im I-, 0 0 Irn Ix 7 10 m W - 10 cv Irn D D I� I� n n 7� 1— I I 3 I i I i O O - - -- - - - _--------- - I I i I I I i i I 5 I O I 10' REAR YARD HABITABLE SETBACK �oLe j I I i I 5REAR YARD GARAGE SETBACK i i I i I j I --' 63'-3" LOT WIDTH PROPERTY LINE ALLEY -- -- - II I 14'-63" - - - - ONE _ ONE PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION (HALLAM STREET) PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION (ALLEY) PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION LEGEND SYMBOL TYPE SYMBOL TYPE SYMBOL TYPE VINE PERENNIALS ` I I I- NATURAL STONE PAVING ® SHRUB 1- hhh 444 1 ` 2'-0" TALL DECIDUOUS SHRUB <6'GROUNOCOVERS NATURAL STONE PAVERS fV� SHRUB 2- 3'-0' TALL DECIDUOUS SHRUB ANNUALS © 48'SCREEN WALL O SHRUB 3- 3'-6" TALL DECIDUOUS SHRUB n 24' METAL PLANTER OSHRUB 4- SHR TALL DKIDUOUS SHRUB 30' FREE STANDING WALL 9 E3 6' PRIVACY FENCE 0 DECIDUOUS TREE 30' WALL + 42' FENCE m —i 2 D D m m 24" STEEL PLANTER WITH 4' SCREEN 6' SLIDING SCREEN GARAGE DOOR E V t- landscape Plan LI L100 g �CM9nt Nueyr,,.•. 417-421 WEST HALLAM RESIDENCE FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT SUBMISSION THOMAS PFI EASANT 1029 33RD STREET, WAHSLNGTON, DC 20007 1' PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL SCALE: 1 /8" = Y-0" I PRINT FULLSIZE 1 1 X17 CURB AT STREET REVISION HIGHLIGHTS: 1- FRONT PORCH ADDED PER 1904 SANBORNE MAP 2- LINK ELEMENT EXPANDED TO 10' 3- DEPTH OF MASS OF REAR ADDITION REDUCED BY 2' 4- LIGHTWELLS REMAIN WITHIN SETBACKS 5- MECHANICAL SPACE UNDER GARAGE ON MAIN LEVEL SITUATED WITHIN SETBACK; ENCROACHMENT HAS NOT BEEN INCREASED FROM PREVIOUS SUBMISSION WHEN MASS PUSHED BACK TO ADDRESS HPC REQUEST TO INCREASE SIZE OF LINK ELEMENT 63-3" LOT WIDTH (PROPERTY LINE WEST HALLAM) I i i I I i i I 1 i i I I j i I I 10' FRONT YARDSEMEN j i I D o 0 0 0 I i j I PROGRAM KEY: ! 1- STAIR 2- BEDROOM pl j I 3- BATHROOM 2 I i 4- TELEVISION/RECREATION I 5- OFFICE 6-EXERCISE T,111111'1�11' 7- MECHANICAL8- LIGHTWELL I I 2 ❑ I ❑ �- - ❑ 5 - - - - - -Mir- - I I li � � I I i it i; 8 to I I Ip I Ir ' 10 10 rn I� � I= _ I I� c cn D cn D u Ip I_u o i 3 - - - 0 rn I� � I� I rn 70 I� D Ci -_ - - rn I� 7� I� ' I I I I I � j 10' REAR YARD HABITABLE SETBACK I i I 5'REAR YARD GARAGE SETBACK I i I �04 �i _ 63'-3" LOT WIDTH (PROPERTY LINE ALLEY) PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL SCALE: 1 /8" = 1'-0" I PRINT FULLSIZE 1 1 X17 CURB AT STREET 1- FRONT PORCH ADDED PER 1904 SANBORNE MAP 2- STREET FACING FRONT DOOR RELOCATED AND RESTORED TO MINING CABIN 2- LINK ELEMENT EXPANDED TO 10' 3- DEPTH OF MASS OF REAR ADDITION REDUCED BY 2' 4- LIGHTWELLS REMAIN WITHIN SETBACKS 5- SECOND PARKING SPACE RETAINED 6- 1-LEVEL MASS WITH BEDROOM PULLED FORWARD TO REDUCE "BACKDROP" EFFECT OF ADDITION 7- REAR SETBACK WAS MAINTAINED FROM PREVIOUS 63'-3"_LOOT WIDTH (PROPERTY LINE WEST HALLAM) SUBMISSION; GARAGE ENCORA�HE��N REAR 20'-24� -' 6ETBACK TO ALLOW SPACE REQUIRED FOR I 10'-�" 0 LINK ELEMENT I i I i I I _ j I 10' FRONT YARD 'n j PROGRAM KEY: i 1- STAIR I 2- BEDROOM i 3- BATHROOM 4 4- FOYER/GALLERY l O 5- DININGF� i 0 i 6- KITCHEN co i 7- MUDROOM i 8- CLOSET i 9-GARAGE ! 10- LIGHTWELL BELOW GRADE i 1 1-ONE STORY LINK ELEMENT i c° m - D 0 rn � -� D i-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -- -- -- --- PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL SCALE- 1 /8" = Y-0" I PRINT FULLSIZE 1 1 X 17 CURB AT STREET REVISION HIGHLIGHTS: 1- FRONT PORCH ADDED PER 1904 SANBORNE MAP 2- STREET FACING FRONT DOOR RELOCATED AND RESTORED TO MINING CABIN 2- LINK ELEMENT EXPANDED TO 10' 3- DEPTH OF MASS OF REAR ADDITION REDUCED BY 2' 4- RIDGE LOWERED DUE TO 2' REDUCTION IN WIDTH- REDUCTION OF PITCH HAS LOWERED RIDGE HEIGHT 4'-6" FROM INITIAL PRESENTATION OF CONCEPT 5- 1-LEVEL MASS WITH BEDROOM PULLED FORWARD TO REDUCE "BACKDROP" EFFECT OF ADDITION 63-3" LOT WIDTH (PROPERTY LINE WEST HALLAM) 6=1;�EA-R-SET-13A(fl< Vv -A-S-MA[NfAfN E-Dr NNt PRE'Vt�- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --� ;SUBMISSION; GARAGE ENCORACHES ON REAR I SETBACK TO ALLOW SPACE REQUIRED FOR 10' LINK ELEMENT 10' FRONT YARD PROGRAM KEY: I \ 1- STAIR 2- FAMILY ROOM 3- WET BAR 4- BATHROOM 5- DECK/BALCONY 6- GREEN ROOF (NC 7- SITTING i I i I i I j I i I I i I i I i I i I i I i I i I to � � I � � I \ I I I I I I I I I i � I i I i I i I i I i I i I i I jo to to I� Ir i� I= v, 4 O O 1= Irn 1�, j0 7 N �_u , 70 - IO cvi I m D -- y I I� n n I� I� 7� I— i ; I 3 I I I I I j I O o I I I I ; I o I II ' 10REAR YARD HABITABLE SETBACK i i I i i I I I j 5REAR YARD GARAGE SETBACK I i I I li-- I �- -- -- - -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- 63'-3" LOT WIDTH (PROPERTY LINE ALLEY) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - - - - --- -- PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION (HALLAM STREET) PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION (ALLEY) PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION 0 • 0 LEGEND SYMBOL TYPE SYMBOL TYPE TYPE } VINE 6--1.- PERENNIALS iSYMBOL ` NATURAL STONE PAVING SHRUB 1- ® 2'-0" TALL DECIDUOUS SHRUB <6- GROUNDCOVERS NATURAL STONE PAVERS 0 SHRUB 2- 3'-0' TALL DECIDUOUS SHRUB ANNUALS 0 48"SCREEN WALL O SHRUB 3- 3'-6" TALL DECIDUOUS SHRUB 24' METAL PLANTER OSHRUB 4- 4'-6" TALL DECIDUOUS SHRUB a 30- FREE STANDING WALL � � 6' PRIVACY FENCE • DECIDUOUS TREE D r r rn cc r- O n 77 w rn 24' STEEL PLANTER - WITH 4' SCREEN 6' SLIDING SCREEN —� GARAGE DOOR 30" WALL + 42- FENCE landscape plan data I issue 02/04/2014 HPC Submittal 07/01/2014 HPC Review L100 • • 0 MEIALROOFING; GREYFINFH1O MAICHSIDNECOIDR WHQEPAIN'IED 4" WOOD RAINSCR[HEN SIDING (3.5" w/ 2" REVEAI); GLAZING WI1HDARKGREYALUMINUMCHA 4" HIGH RANDO M IING`IH IEBLUIEDMIQUARIDCEDAR ROOF KiNGIEw/ 6"EXP PALMED WOOD TRIlVI; WOOD WINDOW w/ r-T RIORSIDRM ]PANELTD MAICHH610RU EXS1G UN➢ WHIIEPAM D CIABOARD 1D MATCHBISIORIC (+/-4") PAINTED WOOD DOOR WIlH G WEIDEPAINIED TRIM WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING; WIM 2" WOOD SIATRAIL 4" HIGHRANDOM WOOD RAINSCREEV SIDING; I (V.LF,) 2 '1Y.)N ISA.I,II..EW.D (3 4"HGH RANDOM IENGTH SIDNE GIA2NG WIIH DARKGREY A1UMINUM CHANNEL T.O. Ridge Proposed Addition ELEV - 126'-6" (V.LF,) J, T.O. Plate of Proposed Addition ELEV - 119'-'11.25" (V.I.F.) T.O. Ridc e Historic Miners, Cottage ELEV - 118'-4" (V.I,F,) 4" WOOD RAINSCRE N SIDING GLZING WMI)ARKGREYALUMINUM CHANNEL, T.O. BalconyRail ELEV - 114'-6.25" T.O. Upper Finish Floor Propused Addition ELEV 111' 4,75" 't',O. Plate Proposed Addition ELEV - 110'-0,5" T O. Plate Hstoric Miners Cotta;e ELEV 108.8" (V.I.F. 4" HGHRANDOM IENG1HSIONE (ARcii-rp0-o^:: TO F.F, 79p?.a TORO : VIF.i �, ,-., , T.Q. Ridge Pro used Addition ELEV - 126-6" N.l.F.) O. Plate of Proposed Addition ELEV - 119'.11.25" T.O. Ridge Historic. Miners Cottage ELEV - 118'-4" N.l,F.I O. balcony Rail t Et.EV i14 b25' REBUITID RESQUARED CEDAR ROOFSHINGIEw/ 6" EXPOSURE T.O. U:per Fhrist: Floor Propused Addition ELEV - i 11'-•3.Ir' T.O. Plate Pro ;+sad Addition EL.:v - i 1>> -0.5 T.O. Plate Historic Miners Cottage ELEV --c7,,8'-8" {V,1,F.) PAINTED WOOD TRIM; WHITE WHIIEPAMED CIABOARD TO MATCHEMRIC (+/-4") WOOD WINDOW w/ PMRIORS10RM PANELIO MAICHBMRU EXSIG = PAINTED WOOD DOO R WI1H G1AS5IIGHP T.O. F.F. Pro used Addition ELEV-'i01"4" ia.RI;H -ono'-o• T.O. F.P. Historic Miners Collage '907.8 T'CPO: V.I.F.) 417+421 WEST HAIIAM RE I K*;C E 417+421 WFSPHAUAM RE S[DENC E ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 OWNERS: DAVID AND MARC IA KAPLAN 9100 BURNING TREEROAD BEIHESDA, MD 20817 DESIGN: 1029 33M SIIZFECNORIIiWESf <>9IDMASPBE131Nf WAS WGION, DC 20007 202-337-6596 IDCALREPRESENMMVE 1 Po Box7s2s BDX 7928 Aspen, Cobwds 81612 T 970.309.0695 LANDSCAPEARC EMO T BDF&BFIN 300 South Sprang Stmet 9i6e 202 ... AT. n, Cob.do 81611 T 970 429 7499 C AMFNGIlVEFR SIRUCIURALENGINEER MEP ENGINEER DRAWINGSAND SPiEPUAMNSAREN91142ARMOFSEINUE AND F MAIN IIfPROPFSIYOF'B%IMASPRFASANT UE DOCLMRMARENOT'ID BEL®INVIMIEORIN PARrFOR ANY OTERPROJEC73ORPLWOSES ORBYANY0111ER.PARR S M4NMDSEPRDP=ALYMIMDBYCON7RACTWIQ$ IT SMIEY; WRIDEQAUR EMAMNOF'RIOMASPREASANT 1 10-07-2014 M DATE PLOTTED: 10-09-2014 SEAL& SO NATRE EDMN: HPC-FINAL I DRAWN BY JIB Mo' EKHM R EL VATO NS DRAWING#: A-301 • • • • Is • • 0 • 417+421 WEST HAIIAM RES DK'gC E 417+421 WE4PHAILAM RIMENCE ASPEN, COIORADO 81611 OWNN - DAVID AND MARCIA KAPIAN 9100 BURNING 1REEROAD BEIHFSDA, MD 20817 DESIGN: 79DMASFEMSAM 1029 33RD SIIHMNORUMESL WASMGIDN, DC 20007 202437-6596 IO CALREPRE SITM IlVE BOX Design PO � Po Rox7sza Aspen, Cob�ndo 81612 T 970.309.0696 IANDSCAPEARCHIIECT RD.HGRREN 6 300&uth Spdng 9�eet ant. 202 Aspen,b Co®do 81611 T 970 429 7499 C AMENGINIM- S'ItUCIURALENGINEER: MEP FNGINIM- DRAWINGSAND SPEr]EDAMNSARE WSHMEN79 OFSQIVDE AND REMAWMEPROPEMYOFIFIDMASPHFASANT = DOCUMMMARENOTT7 HELM IN WHDIEORINPAREFOR ANY01HEIIPROJED78 ORPOISOSM OREYANY 07HERPAIMES IEANIMSBPROPMZAUMFJZEII RYCONRIACTWMIOUE SPEx]ED WRI2NAUIEDRP&DDNOFMDMASPHFA8ANf 1 30-07-2014 SSH DAM PiDTIF72 10-09-2014 SEAL& SGNAILM EDIEDN: HPC-FINAL DRAWN BY: J7R s"E E KEMR ELEVATO NS DRAWING#: A-302 0 0 0 +.apFrWeij set 417/421 WEST HALLAM ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 HPC- FINAL REVIEW AMENDED PACKET 10-10-2014 � 1' 40 1 + 40 t - vt {1 ate, ,• wi �-' a • • PROPOSED PLANS w Li-i H- cn Q J J Q F- W G • • • 0 I I I I I I a I I I I I I I I I I - I "^v I I a I I I I I I I I I I i I i I L- -- -- -- -- ----•-----•--•--•--•--•--•--•- PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL PLAN E „9-, l PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR PLAN • I I i I i I I I j I j I I I I I I I I I I j I I I j I I o I I I I I I I z I I R I I j I i I I I j it I N I I I I � � I I = I W i01 jj Li i ; I 3 I II I I I I I I I I I I I i L-•---- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ------ --- --- ------- -•--•--•--•-----•--•--•--•--•- •--•--•--•--•--•--•--.-�.J U "m PROPOSED UPPER FLOOR PLAN • • s 0 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS • • 0 0 METAL ROOFING; GREY FINISH TO MATCH STONE COLOR WHITE PAINTED TRIM 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING (3.5" w/ 2" REVEAL); WHITE GLAZING WITH DARK GREY ALUMINUM CHANNEL 4" HIGH RANDOM LENGTH STONE REBUTTED RESQUARED CEDAR ROOF SHINGLE w/ 6" EXPOSURE PAINTED WOOD TRIM; WHITE WOOD WINDOW w/ INTERIOR STORM PANEL TO MATCH HISTORIC EXSTG UNIT WHITE PAINTED CLABOARD TO MATCH HISTORIC (+/-4") PAINTED WOOD DOOR WITH GLASS LIGHT , 11 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ------------ REBUTTED RESQUARED CEDAR ROOF Z_ - SHINGLE w/ 6" EXPOSURE PAINTED WOOD TRIM; WHITE - - WHITE PAINTED CLABOARD TO MATCH G WITH DARK GREY ALUMINUM FRAME- -0 HISTORIC (+/-4") 4" HIGH RANDOM LENGTH STONE \\- WINDOW LOCATIONS TBD WOOD WINDOW w/ INTERIOR STORM PENDING DEMOLTION AND COORDINATION W/ HPC STAFF PANEL TO MATCH HISTORIC EXSTG UNIT I WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" v A III a A -a E', F , A-1 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING GLAZING WITH DARK GREY ALUMINUM ELEY •L 25- - T O U e u.o Aaaeon --- T O Pin• : - -y=-: 74 F s - 4" HIGH RANDOM LENGTH STONE ------------------- ------------------------ WEST HALLAM I — — — — — — — — I I I I I I iI t I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L----------------J ALLEY TITLE: NURTH+WEST ELEVATIONS CLIENT: JTB SCALE: 1 /8"-1 -0" DATE: 10-10-2014 PLOTTED: 10-10-2014 WHITE PAINTED TRIM ti 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING; WHITE S ELEV 'I to b2E' L17F.-Fb PIWp A RvpurE AaCnon 0-05' � at.NH�paK MnNs Cotl.q. GLAZING WITH DARK GREY ALUMINUM FRAME 0 f • • WEST HALLAM r----------------- I I I I METAL ROOFING; I I GREY FINISH TO MATCH STONE COLOR I I I I I I WHITE PAINTED TRIM 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING; WHITE I I GLAZING WITH DARK GREY ALUMINUM CHANNEL 2" WOOD SLAT RAIL: WHITE I 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING; WHITE GARAGE DOOR CLAD TO MATCH SIDING DETAIL I L J I L----------------J ALLEY s TITLE: SOUTH+EAST ELEVATIONS CLIENT: JTB SCALE: 1/811-1'-0" DATE: 10-10-2014 PLOTTED: 10-09-2014 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING: WHITE WHITE PAINTED TRIM ���I SOUTH ELEVATION �/ SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" w -�. ,...;4,1 .. M1,FF,F 4" HIGH RANDOM LENGTH STONE GLAZING WITH DARK GREY ALUMINUM CHANNEL X x x i 0 R-90 RppMp AWOI i FLEV 1256'IVIF I " P.. of P,ppptta M69un S ELEV - 119 11 25' NIF, TO RT Mi4wic m—U.." 4, TO 01-IV IF1 TO 8—m Rai ELEV 4'E2.' 10 Upp, f-w F bw Pmp— Aubt,on B ELEV-1 —15' 9 T O P" Plop— MWO, ELEV 11005- EO P WN .m MIMM 0pvpt B ELEV10A 8"IV iFI T O F F P,ppvO AGOt,p,I 9 ELEV -101 r IAFr.P 1p0p LTO FF HW—M—U 09 TO Rgpe Prappttp A .- ELEV 264"VIF. T 0 PIAb'I P,pp—MdEm ELEV 4'.125- IFI y Rb0! HrNalc M,ro,l Cpntpe IEV I BJ'IV IFI T S T REBUTTED RESQUARED CEDAR ROOF SHINGLE w/ b" EXPOSURE L :Fy F`4. P,VposeG n a t- PAINTED WOOD TRIM; WHITE WHITE PAINTED CLABOARD TO MATCH HISTORIC (+/-411) WOOD WINDOW w/ INTERIOR STORM PANEL TO MATCH HISTORIC EXSTG UNIT PAINTED WOOD DOOR WITH GLASS LIGHT 1 ti MATERIALS AND DETAILS HISTORIC CABIN TO HAVE 4" PAINTED CLAPBOARD FEATURE WALLS TO BE CLAD IN CONSITENT GREY TONED STONE IN 4" HIGH COURSES CONSITING OF RANDOM LENGTH "PLANKS" REAR PROPOSED ADDITION END WALLS TO BE CLAD IN PAINTED WOOD RAIN SCREEN WITH 4" COURSES ROOF OF HISTORIC CABIN TO HAVE REBUTTED RESQUARED CEDAR SHINGLES WITH 6" EXPOSURE ROOF OF PROPOSED REAR ADDITION TO HAVE LOCK SEAMED METAL ROOF IN DARK GREY COLOR • GLAZING ON PROPOSED ADDITION FACADE FACING W. HALLAM . AS WELL AS LINK ELEMENT, AND FRONT MASS BEHIND FEATURE WALL TO BE MINIMAL ALUMINUM FRAMES ANODIZED DARK GREY w/ MINIMAL SIGHTLINES DOORS FACING ALLEY TO HAVE GREY ANODIZED FRAMES AND MINIMAL SIGHTLINES. PROPOSED MATERIAL PALLETTE 0 • SKETCH ILLUSTRATING GARAGE DOOR DETAIL TO MATCH WOOD SIDING IMAGE OF PROPOSED WOOD SIDING DETAIL AT PROPOSED REAR ADDITION. TO BE PAINTED WHITE GARAGE DOOR DETAIL 10'$" [SCALE OM 1904 SANBOURNE MAP] 5X5 POST c/AVA rC`rill 11r Vlk DOOR RESTORED TO BELT PORCH PLAN DETAIL A % SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0" a wl SANBORNE MAP- 1904 r-� I CQ L LU Z I O m Z Q I N O� I O i of w J Q N PORCH __ H DETAIL_ B ` SCALE: 3/4"=1'-0" i R P DFDETAIL P O OSE RONT PORCH i C • 0 ILLUSTRATIONS N7 _ ll PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION 0 0 • • 0 0 • • LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING Imp '.06 IP 1 .7 • ®` 0 • LEGEND LEGEND (SYMBOL TYPE SYMBOL ABBR. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE QUANTITY SPACING SYMBOL ABBR. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE QUANTITY SPACING SCAB -SET NATURAL STONE PAVING TREES SANCISET NATURAL STONE PAVERS CV CRATAEGUS CRUS[aAlLi THORNLESS COCKSPUR 2.5' 1 PER PLAN ® lxE LONICERA XYLOSTEUM EMERALD MOUND •S 52 PER PLAN INERMIS HAWTHORN 'EMERALD MOUND' HONEYSUCKLE 48' SCREEN WALL 5HRu85 PIP .PINKPOTENTILLA FRl1TICOSA PINK BEAUTY POTENTILLA #5 39 PER PLAN GRA\EL (ROOF LEVEL) /^� 'PINK BEAIJTI" / \ VINES /I LYC LIGUSTRUM VULGATE CHEYENNE PRIVET a' S PER PLAN 24' NETAL PLANTER �� 'CHEYENNE' PIV PARTHPNIN'ICi115 BOSTON IW # t 15 PER PI AN TRICUSPIDATA VEITCHII' 6' PRVACY FENCE, EXCEPT WHERE 1EIGHT O Po5 PHYSOCARPUS OPULIFOLIUS SUMMER WINE NINEBARK 118 12 PER PLAN PERENNIALS/GROUN)COVER IS OTHERWISE NOTED 'SUMMER WINE' FUTUI YARIES7 30' WALL a 42' FENCE -- - .=a • • W W i 24' STEEL PLANTER \ WITH 4' SCREEN ! 6' SLIDING SCREEN - GARAGE DOOR 0 • 00 C()(:y)00o -0 0 Ln r 3 Ln m m E ro rl landscape plan date I Issue t0/;0/2014 HPC SuDmhtal scalf 0 2 4 © .... L100 LEGEND • • SYMBOL NAME TYPE WATTS HEIGHT QUANTITY C1 0 m HINKLEY LANDSCAPE LIGHTING LED PATH <4.5 WATTS 25' 6 NEXUS SMALL LED PATH LIGHT DOWNLIGHT (15471BZ) HINKLEY LANDSCAPE LIGHTING LED, RECESSED WALL/ <4.5 WATTS 22' 7 NEXUS SMALL LED CAP AFFIXED T-CONNECTOR LIGHT (154728Z) DOWNLIGHT NOTES: 1. LIGHTING TO BE COMPLIANT WITH CITY OF ASPEN CODE. 2. ALL LIGHTING CONTROLS TO BE LOCATED IN RESIDENCE. —A O 0 D r r m r O n LA1 rn �00�0 0■ � �000 ---� �00 0 00� •DO i � � v `D AQ * A01-11 oe�\ �0000 IT U) D D 3 (n m m E fo ru c - NE 10/10/2014 hpc submkial L79• C HINKLEY&R. NI" KLEY LIGHTING, INC. MOO PIN OAK PARKWAY I AVON LAKE. OHIO 44012 (PH) 440 653 5500 IF) 440 653 5555 HINKLEYLIGHTING COW I FREDRICKRAMOND COW NEXUS SM. PATH LIGHT 15471 BZ BRONZE WIDTH: 14.5" HEIGHT: 25.0" WEIGHT: 1.0 LBS MATERIAL: ALUMINUM SOCKET: 1-4.50W LED 'INCLUDED NOTES: 6.8VA 235 LUMENS. LINEAR HEAD ROTATES 360 DEGREES FOR PRECISE ADJUSTMENTS. COMPATIBLE WITH ANY 12VAC TRANSFORMER. INCLUDES 18" STEM. A WIRING KIT AND GROUND SPIKE IS SUPPLIED. LEADWIRE: 36.0" VOLTAGE: 12V UPC: 640665154740 AT HINKLEY. WE EMBRACE THE DESIGN PHILOSOPHY THAT YOU CAN MERGE TOGETHER THE LIGHTING. FURNITURE ART COLORS AND ACCESSORIES YOU LOVE INTO A BEAUTIFUL ENVIRONMENT THAT DEFINES YOUR OWN PERSONAL STYLE WE HOPE YOU WILL BE INSPIRED BY OUR COMMITMENT TO KEEP YOUR 'LIFE AGLOW' lifeAGLOW' N IN KLEY LIGHTING. INC- 33000 PIN OAK PARKWAY I AVON LAKE. OH;O 44012 IPHJ 440 653 5500 IFI 440 653 5555 HINKLEY® MINKLEYLIGHTING COW I FREOPICKPAMOND COW NEXUS SM. T-CONNECTOR 15472BZ BRONZE WIDTH: 19.5" HEIGHT: 2.5" WEIGHT: 1.0 LBS MATERIAL: ALUMINUM SOCKET: 2-4.50W LED INCLUDED NOTES: 13.6 VA 470 LUMENS. LINEAR HEAD ROTATES 360 DEGREES FOR PRECISE ADJUSTMENTS. COMPATIBLE WITH ANY 12VAC TRANSFORMER. SHOWN WITH 6" STEM. A WIRING KIT AND GROUND SPIKE IS SUPPLIED. LEADWIRE: 36.0" VOLTAGE: 12V UPC: 640665154757 AT HINKLEY WE EMBRACE THE DESIGN PHILOSOPHY THAT YOU CAN MERGE TOGETHER THE LIGHTING FURNITURE ART COLORS AND ACCESSORIES YOU LOVE INTO A BEAUTIFUL ENVIRONMENT THAT DEFINES YOUR OWN PERSONAL STYLE WE HOPE YOU WILL BE INSPIRED BY OUR COMMITMENT TO KEEP YOUR 'LIFE AGLOW' life AG LOW' ADJACENT CONDITION MAY VARY 12' DEPTH PLANT MIX MIN GRANULAR ROCK BACK DRAIN STONE VENEER, 4' BASALTINA; TYP. ox_> �s0x of BLACK STEEL SUPPORT; 112 IN. REVEAL PLANTING FOUNDATION OR FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 4' PVC PERFORATED DRAIN FILTER FABRIC UNDISTURBED OR 95% COMPACTED SUBGRADE NOTE: 1. REFER TO PLANS FOR WALL HEIGHT, WIDTH & LIGHTING; WALL WIDTHS INDICATED ON PLANS REFER TO FACE OF VENEER TO FACE OF VENEER. 2. VENEER BOTH SIDES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. 3. WALL MATERIALS, LAYOUT B STAKING TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. _1 STONE VENEER WALL LB01 SCALE: 1" = P-0" gC C s o 0 1 fo 3q N= 10/10/2014 hpc 5u0mlttal L801 c YlQht dreg � SITE PLAN 417/421 WEST I IALLAM ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 DRAWING INDEX G-001 IM SHEEr A-100 PRO PO SEED LO WER LEVELPLAN A-101 PROPOSED ENTRY LEVELPIAN A-102 PRO POSED UPPERLEVECPLAN A-301 E ERD R ELEVATIO NS: NORTH+WEST A-302 EXTEFDRELEVATIONS: SOUTH+EAST L RIIJSMrRONOFIANDSCAPE 1,100 LANDSCAPEPIAN L700 LANDSCAPELIGH➢NG PLAN L801 WAILDEIAILANDLANDSCAPE UGHTFDMJRES 417+421 WEST HAIIAM RESDENC E 417+421 WESPHAIIAM RESIDENCE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 OWNERS: DAVID AND MARCLA MPLAN 9100 BURNING TREDROAD BEIIIDA, MD 20817 DESIGN: WDMASPE&ASANT 1029 33RD SUMNORMWEST WASFHNGTDN, DC 20007 202-337-6596 IOCALRFPRE3IN'11 MVE 1 BOX79 8 11 B0x9-06 Aspen, Cobmdo 81612 T 970.309.0695 LANDSC APEARC HnW T. E,300S.oth Spig She e t 02—Cbmdo 81611 T 970 429 7499 C AMENGINE ER- SIRLTC TURAL E NG INE ER- MEP INGINIM- DRAWINGS AND SPIrFTCATDNSARELNSRILAIKVIS OFSHRVCE AND RIINAlYT-IEPROPERIYOFT-DMASPHFASAN'T THNSE DOC LWF,\M ARENOTTD REUSED N WHOIEOR INPARTFDR ANY OnM PROJECTS O RPURPOM OR RYANYOIHM PA= T4AN T40SEPROPERLYAURCRM) IIYCONIRACTWIQ40UP SPfCIFD WI=AUMRIIA'IDNOF=MASPHFASA\T 1 10-07-2014 ES# DAM PIDTR9: 10- -2 14 ga SFAL& SGNATJRE EDDINN: HPC-FINALr��� DRAWN BY: JIB 4idT 11J.1_E DRAWING#: G -001 Ll Ll 0 0 417+421 WEST HAL AM RESIDDTC E 417+421 WESMAIIAM RESDINC E ASPIN, COLORADO 81611 OWNERS: DAVID AND MARC IA KAPLAN 9100 BURNING TREEROAD BEHIMA, MD 20817 DESIGN: T3DMASPEEtS1NT 102933RD SEZFECNOFrHWA T WA3INGTON, DC 20007 202-337-6596 IOCALREPRESIIV'I TVE Po 79 8 EFBOBOX792 Aspen, Co iDmdo 81612 12 970.309.0695 LANDSCAPEARC HIIDC T -EdIN 300 South Spdn" Sheet Su to 202 Aspen, Cobmda 81811 T 970 429 7499 C NII.FNGPgM- SIRUCTURALENGINIM MEP INGNEE -- DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICA'IDNSAREWSHUA EIMOFSERVCE AND REMAIN lIIEPRDP=YOFMMASPER''AS9NT Mi SE DOCUMENLSARENOTIO BEL60)INWHOLE OR IN PARrFOR ANY O'RR3t PROJED7S ORFURPOSES OR BY ANY 0IHERPARR6 THAN 7UOSEPId)PERLYALMURM:) EY C ONMACTWEMLYr SPE] W, WRII7IN ALJMIiFATDN OF'E-IDMASPB AS4NT 1 10-07-2014 ISBN DAM PID=: 1 - -2 14 t `ts SEAL& SIGNATURE EDDGN: HPC-FINAL DRAWNBY: M SH= IO VTM MVM MN DRAWING#: A-100 0 A 0 0 • * 0 0 0 4 0 417+421 WEST HAIIAM FEIDENC E 417+421 WE3PHAEIAM RESIDENCE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 O WNERS: DAVID AND MARC IA SAPIAN 9100 BURNING 1REEROAD BEHIE :)A, MD 20817 <>DEgGN: 710MASFEEkSANp 1029 33RD SR=NORMMESP WAS RNG10N, DC 20007 202-337-6596 LOCALRPPREBQV' UVE 1 Hidar Design Po eox7sz6 Aspen, Cob®do 81612 T 970.309.0696 LANDSCAPE ARC HIIEC T EUIG" 300 Suuth Spdng Street Suite 202 Aspen, Cabredo 81611 T 970 429 7499 C AMENGDTIM- SIRUCIURALINGDTIM MEP INGPUM-- DRAWINGSAND SPECKEAMNSARENSO-MFSMOFSEWEE AND IUMANTEPROPEHIYOFTHOMASPIMAA T 1ERE DOC LWENISARENOTIO BEDSED N WED EORIN PARITOR ANY O MM PRO JEC IS O R FLWO SEi O R BY ANY O 111ER PAMIES 1HANUnMPROPMYAU=RYPDEYCONUa TWEMUp SPECRU WMENAiTR10RIIAMNOFE-DMASPRFAS W 1 30-07-2014 FEW DAM piorm: 10-09-2014 SNAL& SG NAUM IDIIEN: HPC4E7NAL DRAWN BY: SM SEM UPPER I EVM PLAN DRAWIlVG#: A-102 MERILROOFING; GREYFINM10 MA'ICHSIONEC010R WHIIEPAMED Wd 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING (3.5" w/ z" REUFAI); WBM GIA23NG WILHDARKGREYAlIJMINUM CHANNEL 4" HGHRANDOM LINGIHSIONE RFBLTrfFD RESQLARFD C IDAR ROOF SHNGIE w/ 6" EKPO SURE PAINTED WOOD TRIM; WHIIE WOOD WINDOW w/ IN IERlO R SIORM PANELIO MAICHEEDRIC EKSM UNIE WBIIEPAIN MCIABOARD10 MAICHEMRIC (+/-4") PAIN MWOODDOORWMIGLASSIIGHP WIMPAbTI D RAINSCRE N SIDING; V 2" WOOD SIATRAI 4" HGHRANDOM LENG`IH 'OOD RAINSCRffiQ SIDING; Eli 5 (V.LF) 2 AlII)N Li' V,144WT) (_ 4" HIGH RANDOM LFNG`IH STONE —GIA23NG WITH DARKGREY ALUMINUM CHANNEL T.O. Hid2e P r000sed Addition ELEV 126' 6" (V.I.F.) T.O. Plate of Prof .ed Addition ELEV 9 M 11. V,i.F.) T.O. Pit <e Historic r0iners Cottage ELEV - 118'-4" (WY, 4" WOOD RAINSCRJlN SDING GIAZING WMlDARKGREYAIUMII -UM CHANNEL T'.O. Baicony Hail ELEV - 114'-6.25" T.O. I.J per Finish Floor Pro osed Addition ELEV 111' 4.75' T'.Q. Plate Pru osed Addition ELEV - 11U-0.5" T.O. Plate Nsforic Miners Cottage ELEV - 108' 8" (V.LF. 4" HGHRANDOM IINGIHSIONE ;ARCH 7907.870PO V.I.F.': i r 417+421 WEST HAIIAM RE DENC E 417+421 WFBPIIAIIAM RINDINC E ASPEN, COIDRADO 81611 OWNERS- DAVID AND MARC IA KAPIAN 9100 BURNING IREEROAD BEIHESDA, MD 20817 i • • i F----------------- I RESOZ1EDRE9QUAREDCEDARROOFSHNGIEw/ 6" PAINTM WOOD TPIM; WHIIEPAMMCLABOARDTO MAUCHEFORU (+/-4') WOOD WINDOW w/ INTMDRSIORM PANELID MA'1C H EM RIC EKSIG UNIT MEIALROOFING; GREYFNMID MAZCHSIONECOIDR WBIIEPAMM Wd 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING; WHQE GIAZING WIIHDARKGREYAIUMINUM CHAN 2" WOOD SLATRAIL WIM 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SDING; GARAGEDOORCLADIO MATCHSIDING -- — 12 10.5 L......... I PANEL PAN11, OPLIIN 01UN T.O. Ride Proposed Addition ELEV - 126-6" (V.I.F. T.C. Plate df Prmosed Addition ELEV i 1 - 9' 11.25' V.I.F.) ,k T.U. R.idge Historic Miners Collage T ELEV - 118:-4" (V.I.F.; f3aloony Rail Et.EV - 11 4'-6.25" m T.C. Upper Finish Floor Propused Addition ELEV - 11 V-4.75" T.O. Plata Pro sed Addition El.EV - 11cr-4.6° T.C. Plate Historic Miners Gattage ELEV.. ip8'-8"\V.I.F.) T.C. F.F. Proposed Addition LEV - 1 p'1' (ARCH -i o' e^ T.U. F.F. Hisfor'sc Miners Cott, %SIGI s "G.-0 : V.I. T O. nidge Proposed AddtiLn T.C. Plate of Proposed A 'd€bo WHIIEPA]NIFD 7fiIM ELEV- IIW-11 25" (V.1.F.) T.O. Ride Historic Miners Cott, ELEV - 118'-4" iV.l.`:^ .'; 4" WOOD RAINSCREEN SIDING; WFM T.U. Bz1 ccryMail ELEV - 114'-6.25" ELEV - 111'.416 T.O. Plate Propa ELEV -11 V-0.8" GLAWG WIIHDARKGREY ALUMINUM FRAME T.O. F.F. 417+421 WEST HAIIAM RESIDWC E 417+421 WFSPHAIIAM RESIDINCE ASPEN, COIORADO 81611 O WNEL - DAVID AND MARCIA KAPIAN 9100 BURNING IREEROAD BEIHE DA, MD 20817 DN3FGN: 210MASFERUP.NT 1029 331M SUMNORHMEN <> WASWGB)N, DC 20007 202-337-6596 10CALREQREM,?]AMVR Po BOX7928 Aspen, Colomdo 81612 T 970.309.0695 I ANDSCAPEARC HIIEC T FIIIFGBFSV 300 South Spring Sloe e t So" 202 Aspen, Co bmdo 81611 T 970 429 7499 CAMFNGINFIIt S UXILIRALENGINFER: MEP FNGP4E R: DRAWINGSAND SPECEEAD7NSARED IIU21M3OFSFRVCE AND RMUSiMPROM?1YOFT9DMASMWASANT MUM DOUNENSARENOTIO BF USED IN WHOM ORIN PARTFOR ANYOMMPRO.B CM ORPl ONORBYANY 0TiMPAIM URN' IID)SEPROPFRLYAUMMD BY C ONBiACTWIBHUT SPW Fr W MINAUBDCRI7ATONOF'BDMASPBFAS4NT 1 10-07-2014 I-M DAM PLOTrrn: 10-09-2014 3 SFAL& 90NAIURE EDMN: BPC-FINAL DRAWN-' .]'B EKMM R E EVATDNS DRAWING#: A-302 • • 0 46 0 C Z N Q ro MR: LM vignette date I issue 10/10/2013 hpc submittal L- @ copyright bluegreen LEGEND LEGEND SYMBOL TYPE SLAB -SET NATURAL STONE PAVING SANDSET NATURAL STONE PAVERS 48" SCREEN WALL 9 '3V Vv g OG9'� p 090P9 GRAVEL (ROOF LEVEL) F7 24" METAL PLANTER _s 6' PRIVACY FENCE, EXCEPT WHERE HEIGHT IS OTHERWISE NOTED 24" STEEL PLANTER WITH 4' SCREEN 4, 6' SLIDING SCREEN GARAGE DOOR SYMBOL ABBR, BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE QUANTITY SPACING TREES z s g CCI CRATAEGUS CRUS-GALLI THORNLESS COCKSPUR INERMIS HAWTHORN b SHRUBS LvC LIGUSTRUM VULGARE CHEYENNE PRIVET 'CHEYENNE' PoS PHYSOCARPUS OPULIFOLIUS SUMMER WINE NINEBARK 'SUMMER WINE' SYMBOL ABBR. BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE QUANTITY SPACING 2.5" 1 PER PLAN LxE LONICERA XYLOSTEUM EMERALD MOUND #5 'EMERALD MOUND' HONEYSUCKLE PfP POTENTILLA FRUTICOSA PINK BEAUTY POTENTILLA #5 4' 5 #10 17 52 39 #1 35 PER PLAN PER PLAN PER PLAN y° s l� ' 1- C G) W L Ch 0) rn d- rn rn N O r, rn w rn rn n rn N O r\ O� Y E o �o c r+ a� 00 a w ° m m C L N O Q] O L U cn N c C o $ m 3 — 3 N O N N Y .j th 1J v L En N O1 C �L a L Y J ° O O fn r`- L-'0 N Nt landscape plan date I issue 10/10/2014 HPC Submittal scale 0 2 4 north L100 © copyright bluegreen 0 0 0 0 • 0 6 LEGEND SYMBOL NAME TYPE WATTS HEIGHT QUANTITY HINKLEY LANDSCAPE LIGHTING LED PATH <4.5 WATTS 25" 6 NEXUS SMALL LED PATH LIGHT DOWNLIGHT (15471BZ) HINKLEY LANDSCAPE LIGHTING LED, RECESSED WALL/ <4.5 WATTS 22" 7 NEXUS SMALL LED CAP AFFIXED T-CONNECTOR LIGHT (15472BZ) DOWNLIGHT NOTES: 1. LIGHTING TO BE COMPLIANT WITH CITY OF ASPEN CODE. 2. ALL LIGHTING CONTROLS TO BE LOCATED IN RESIDENCE. lighting plan date I issue 10/10/2014 hpc submittal scale 0 2 4 N north L700 © copyright bluegreen 0 0 r'� 0 0 HINKLEY&RI. .+ WNKLEY LHLHTINIi, INC, 331.100 PIN OAK PANKV4AY € AVON LAKE, € WO 444112 [PH) 440 653.5505 IF) A40,953 6555 N.N KLE YL3L'xH71Pd3 „Oi9 5 NAFORt C3GRA biQNfl-.`:t3M NEXUS SM. T-CONNECTOR 15472BZ BRONZE WIDTH: 19.5" HEIGHT: 2.5" WEIGHT: 1.0 LBS MATERIAL: ALUMINUM SOCKET: 2-4.50W LED 'INCLUDED NOTES: 13.6 VA 470 LUMENS. LINEAR HEAD ROTATES 360 DEGREES FOR PRECISE ADJUSTMENTS. COMPATIBLE WITH ANY 12VAC TRANSFORMER. SHOWN WITH 6" STEM. A WIRING KIT AND GROUND SPIKE IS SUPPLIED. LEADWIRE: 36.0" VOLTAGE: 12V UPC: 1640665154757 AT HINKLEY.. WE EMBRACE THE DESIGN PHWCOSOPHY'T►iAT YOU CAN MERGE TOGETHER THE: LIGHTING, FURNITURE, ART, CO] -ORS AND ACCESSORIES YOU LOVE INTO A BEAUTIFUL ENVIRONMENT THAT DEFINES YOUR OWN PERSONAL STYLE. ViL HOPE YOU WILL BE INSPIRED BY OUR COMMITMENT TO KEEP YOUR'LIFE AGLOW.' life A G LOW— NiNKL E9` 11GHTEA INC HINKLEY&R..1300 0 N ! fi A KWAY AVON AKE, 0WO 44M2 [PHI i 65 55wc €FI 140 E51 5555 tti,v rx-[ �,..,K aAR{C:Np.f, t7 Ra WIDTH: 14.5" HEIGHT: 25.0" WEIGHT: 1.0 LBS MATERIAL: ALUMINUM SOCKET: 1-4.50W LED 'INCLUDED NOTES: 6.8VA 235 LUMENS. LINEAR HEAD ROTATES 360 DEGREES FOR PRECISE ADJUSTMENTS. COMPATIBLE WITH ANY 12VAC TRANSFORMER. INCLUDES 18" STEM. A WIRING KIT AND GROUND SPIKE IS SUPPLIED. LEADWIRE: 36.0" VOLTAGE: 12V UPC: 1640665154740 AT HINKLEY, WE EMBRACE THE DESIGN PHILOSOPHY THAT YOU CAN MERGE TOGETHER THE LIGHTING, FURNITURE, .ART, COLORS AND ACCESSORIES YOU LOVE INTO A BEAUTIFUL ENVIRONMENT THAT DEFINES YOUR OWN PERSONAL STYLE. WE HOPE YOU WILL BE INSPIRED BY OUR COMMITMENT TO KEEP YOUR 'LIFE AGLOW,' . lirOAGLOW' ADJACENT CONDITION MAY VARY 12" DEPTH PLANT MIX MIN GRANULAR ROCK BACK DRAIN STONE VENEER, 4" BASALTINA; TYP. zr d w O Q 0 = L > ZOzQ Q Of BLACK STEEL SUPPORT; 1/2 IN. REVEAL PLANTING FOUNDATION OR FOOTING PER STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 4" PVC PERFORATED DRAIN FILTER FABRIC UNDISTURBED OR 95% COMPACTED SUBGRADE NOTE: 1. REFER TO PLANS FOR WALL HEIGHT, WIDTH & LIGHTING; WALL WIDTHS INDICATED ON PLANS REFER TO FACE OF VENEER TO FACE OF VENEER. 2. VENEER BOTH SIDES UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. 3. WALL MATERIALS, LAYOUT & STAKING TO BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. STONE VENEER WALL SCALE: 1" = 1'-0" C a) d L p1 ai O� o+ v 01 a% N V O n O� w rn rn n N N a O N rn a� E 0 c0 C 'ti N O a O In C L � O U ILI N C 7 C a 3 f0 3 — 3 N O N N .w+ an u N N L V) IM C •L O- IN L J O to O O M O i0 N l--1 Nt hardscape details date I issue 10/10/2014 hpc submittal L801 © copyright bluegreen