The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20020710ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION July 10, 2002 REGULAR MEETING, 5:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOON - SITE VISITS - 0011 Meadows Road (Trustee Townhomes) and 317 N. 4th St. Please site visit on your own. 5:00 I. Roll call II. Approval of minutes - May 22,2002 III. Public Comments IV. Commission member comments V. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) VI. Project Monitoring VII. Staff comments: Certificates of No Negative Effect issued - (Next resolution will be #26) VIII. OLD BUSINESS 5:05 A. 513 W. Smuggler Ave. - Final Review, Public Hearing /&'got.J 5:15 B. 110 E. Bleeker - Final Review, Public Hearing 31 . A so 5:40 C. 216 E. Hallam - Final Review, Public Hearing a Y fld50 IX. NEW BUSINESS 6:05 11 A. 0011 Meadows Road - Minor, Public Hearing 6:35 X. WORKSESSION A. 317 N. 4th Street :00 XI. All)JOURN Times are ektimates, please be here 30 minutes before your agenda item. PROJECT MONITORING Suzannah Reid 414 N. First- POLE 7th and Main 330 Lake Avenue 620 W. Bleeker Historical Society 328 Park Ave. 515 Gillespie 205 S. Third 935 E. Cooper Jeffrey Halferty 414 N. First- POLE 918 W. Hallam/920 W. Hallam 620 W. Bleeker - Historical Society 213 W. Bleeker 200 E. Bleeker 328 Park Ave. - Lane 209 S. Galena 332 W. Main 101 E. Hallam 735 W. Bleeker Gilbert Sanchez 333 W. Bleeker Street 501 W. Main Christiania Lodge 330 Lake Ave. 110 W. Main 200 E. Bleeker 214 E. Hopkins Wagner Park 428 E. Hyman Rally Dupps 501 W. Main Street - Christiania Lodge 129 W. Francis 104 S. Galena- St. Mary's Church 302 E. Hopkins 610 W. Smuggler 232 W. Main - Christmas Inn 434 E. Main Melanie Roschko Teresa Melville . 513 W. Bleeker 515 Gillespie 232 W. Main - Christmas Inn 735 W. Bleeker 323 W. Hallam Neill Hirst 450 S. Galena 101 E. Hallam 205 S. Third 419 E. Cooper 409 E. Hyman Mike Hoffman 950 Matchless Drive Paul D'Amato 118 E. Cooper - Little Red Ski Haus CONCEPTUAL APPROVALS WHICH HAVE NOT GONE TO FINAL: 640 N. Third- expires November 23,2002 135 W. Hopkins- expires September 26,2002 HPC Legal Procedures (Submit affidavit of notice for PH - conceptual) Swear In Staff presentation Applicant presentation Board Questions and Clarifications PH opened and closed Board Comments Applicant Comments Motion JUN-18-2002 TUE 08:43 AM FAX NO, F. Uj/Uq EXHIBIPT [=] 1 2/0_-04 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPER'rY: 57.3 ldâ‚¬5'71-~t ug,~,Â£,e: .5~err , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 101'Y /0 , 200* Jl STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County orPitkin ) I, Ee. k U,wirl r (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City ofAspen, 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 nolte: By rhe publication in the legal notice section ofan 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. A Posting of notice: BY posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproo f materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height, Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the 11 day of 39. , 200_Ayto and including the date and time of the public hear\4. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. _>4-_ Mailing of notice. By the mailing o f a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses ofproperty owners shall be those on the current tax records o f 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. (continued on next page) JUN-18-2002 TUE 08:44 AM PHA NU. 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 df this Title, or whenever the text o f 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 o f an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing ofnames and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. 42 9Â»3--4 Signature The fofegoing "Affidavit ofNotice" was acknowledged before me this ~C| day of 3 un.e_ , 200_2-by . WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL f i VICKI Et ~ My commission expires: 66 (05 ~ i KENNEY 3 g LY,~ 4 44-UA :0# ..08 11 Notary Public Mv Commission Expires 05/07/2005 ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL JUN-18-2002 TUE 08:43 AM FAX NO, P, 02/04 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 513 WEST SMUGGLER STREET- FINAL HPC DESIGN REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, July.10th, 2002 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p,m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Drew Harman represented by Harry Teague Architects requesting Final HPC approval for a new house on the newly created lot at 513 West Smuggler Street, the east half of ~t P and all of Lot G, Block 21, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further infonnation, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S, Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 920- 5096, amyg@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Suzannah Reid, Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on June 22,2002 City of Aspen Account 318 FOURTH STREET LTD 609 CORPORATION BASS RAIFIEL I CIO BUSTER FELDOM A COLORADO CORPORATION 606 E HYMAN PO BOX 445 PO BOX 1819 ASPEN CO 81611 HOUSTON TX 77001 ASPEN CO 81612 BE.u~INER ARTHUR S BLAICH ROBERT I CROWN TAPPER PATRICIA C/O WALDEN BLAICH JANET S 5 POLO CLUB DR 750 BATTERY ST #700 319 N FOURTH ST DENVER CO 80209 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94705 ASPEN CO 81611 CUNDILL JOAN REED DIKEOU LUCY SHARP DOREMUS FAMILY LTD PARTNE 432 W FRANCIS ST 25 POLO CLUB CIR 85 GLEN GARRY DR ASPEN CO 81611 DENVER CO 80209 ASPEN CO 81611 FIVE CONTINENTS ASPEN REA EPSTEIN ROBERT FINKLE S MARCUS & SARA F CO EDWARDS JOSEPH III 5000 PLAZA ON THE LAKE BLVD 117 AABC 502 MAIN ST STE 201 AUSTIN TX 78746 ASPEN CO 81611 CARBONDALE CO 81623 FOX SAM GELL-MANN/MURDOCK PARTNER HALL CHARLES L FOX MARILYN 500 W FRANCIS POBOX 1819 7701 FORSYTH BLVD STE 600 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 CLAYTON MO 63105 HELZBERG SHIRLEY BUSH TRU RIN ELLEN & BARRY HARMAN ANDREW J QUALIFIED PERSONAL RESIDENCE FRANCIS ST 563 HOMER AVE TRUST ASPEN CO 81611-1233 PALO ALTO CA 94301 4520 MAIN STE 1050 KANSAS CITY MO 64111 HOFFMAN JOHN L HOFFMASTER THOMAS J HOOK BRADLEY K & PAMELA D 1035 W 57TH ST 437 W SMUGGLER ST 782C N KALAHEO KANSAS CITY MO 64113 ASPEN CO 81611 KAILUA HI 96734 KELLNER GEORGE A IBBOTSON ANNE B ISRAEL CHARLES B KELLNER MARTHA B 505 N 5TH ST 522 W FRANCIS ST 117 E 78TH ST ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611-1235 NEW YORK NY 10021 ; LEWIS ADAM KIENAST CHRISTIE A KOEHLER DAVID R TRUST C/O KATHLEEN HONOHAN @NATIONAL 406 W SMUGGLER ST 618 W SMUGGLER ST CITY BANK ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 1900 E 9TH ST LOC 2030 CLEVELAND OH 44 114 OXLEY JOHN C 50% N MICHEL NEISSER JUDITH E REVOCABL ATIN BARBARA WALKER RESTON RD #730 LB 2 132 E DELAWARE APT 6201 1437 S BOULDER AVE #1475 DALLAS TX 75225 CHICAGO IL 60611 TULSA OK 74119 1 PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP POPE WILLIAM H SFP 1996 PERSONAL RESIDEN C/O CHRI STOPHER HEWETr 540 W SMUGGLER #2 PINE HILL LN PO BOX 2.577 ASPEN CO 81611 HOUSTON TX 77019 RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 SILVERMAN JACK E SMALL ALBERT H & SHIRLEY STAPLETON FAMILY LLLP 612 W FRANCIS ST 7116 GLENBROOK RD 1350 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR ASPEN CO 81611 BETHESDA MD 20814 ASPEN CO 81611 THALBERG KATHARINE VERLEGER PHILIP K & MARGA WALTON CAROLYN F 434 W SMUGGLER ST 15 TORREY PINES LN 413 W SMUGGLER ASPEN CO 81611 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 ASPEN CO 81611 WEST SMUGGLER LOT SPLIT L WAX RICHARD A & HILDEGARD WEI-NGLASS GABRIELE PEPPER C/O LEONARD WEINGLASS 2727 SULPHUR SPRINGS AVE 533 W SMUGGLER PO BOX 11509 ST HELENA CA 94574 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 WHIPPLE RALPH U & LYNNE C 855 GIBSON AVE 1 ASPEN CO 8I611 e. 4 i 'LÂ· . all .1 : 4 1 0 .. .*JÂ¢j. 1 ..:6.':LIf~ ..d - k . 6 4 2. .. . f . b. 4 . I . 11 28 , ' U4 7' - t> . ./.... ip > - :. 4, . 41 . . I. 6 /4 ' . , I ' 1 . /. I .. I I .... . , 4 1.42'jaÂ¢..,0 .,flic'.4 . I Ifi KI./4 ., Â¢4,1. 7 - . . 4 . -...Â£ ~- 07 4**f. 44 . 4 Â¥.' 4-- r I 4 1 . â€¢ 4--11 11'*' . g Â·3â€¢2Â· 11 103'Pr ''3/:&~A ;.;. 7 M ./ f .. 4 -f 4 I ..J-*5. . 1 . / --'ll - 9~ flia: I At,- - -i" . 4 fi. Â·/ >4 - N 4. U. . 4 3,/ I./2,1 0. r I ' .. 0 , .. > .A,1,12,9, .i.1 i X F 11 - 6 ..9 i ./ n. 1 . .. 4 ./. 39.1 42 I 1 2/ 14 , 2 lili ../*1 A 7 Uk'* 4 /4 ..2 1 0194 9 ..9 - i : '' 1*Â§ 2:(i .:t.'&,i A a~ 1 .. ' ./ I 4 1 1 1 L. -1=.. ~1........ .3 Â·i . 1 1.-/ 1/ 24 f '. .4, , 44 le . - '* 9 5 44\ 5. * U. 11 .q " itt Â£ 35 I I X . I- 4 ; , -J....Vp--./..Illill=' 1~, â‚¬M./ 1 I 1- 96 4. I JUL. 8.2002 9:59AM HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS NO.330 P.1 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS 412 north m11) aspen 1 81611 0 970 925 2556 f 970 925 7981 mall@reaquearch,com FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL RECEiVED b COM,Avw In_11,22Mmu r JUL - 8 klel To:,49 4 u.Â»**tr : Nrc- Fax No': Abvc,v, r'<14\14 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT From; gy,w Â£ TVB, 2- Date 07Â·,0 Â·02- Regarding: 513, v.,1 -SMU<)91.51.- No. of Pages: 2- CO..' A 1 - bug'.161 TRE bâ‚¬#10 -TD g 1718- (NlEN:,61, O P 7*f D(-0 <'St'J wE bro 1=140> Evive,ICâ‚¬ oF +t,1051- MA. DP 1-ME OBIh\Flk,- 960$. ~ 441#19Â¢nA Lt 0*naÂ»5 AM, 5/1â‚¬5>. -rpte .Brger PKNVE *AlÂ» REAMA h Sttiâ„¢A) D.f bRAW IA)* ~wl*nu WCHâ‚¬& 9 Leâ€¢61-~. o A 1Â¥g' \r' EST 14,4â‚¬ ~*qrkt.vig~ \AE D . 111 8141 0116 0.41.1M- WIA'OW SPEAW'j. WE PLA4 -Tb REPU CA,rE -r>hs Ff 400-1 AMP {+DPE TD boebic/,1â‚¬ 04 Tltâ‚¬ Nom--rMEK.u HALF- 511 -Dhs WALL. IF pub Lit,6 -rp -rhic *sou T -#1* CAA"iâ‚¬ OP- Loote- er 1-r ow Â·1 rrE, 4>LEASâ‚¬ C.*U. - ..:00-0~- ,/v - , , peÂ·+. .F . . . . 4 1&.-6:' Afr . 1... .::. f 0,9421#7"t. fi. - 40. .pl ' Al.... I ./. .... ... . , 7. .. * t#>t,Â·1 :.5 '' ,>14'.. 74 . 4 ./0 ; ~6 :~'IJ . : -'<f' 2 Â·hit 2,2 . . A , . .'. 4 & ... .f ..J - f * . 0 1 .. +11 ' - 1 0 ./8/'&124 1 . 0.. .. 'De : ... . f 4.&'i' >A I . W e. /4 0 0 . , 4 . I In. r. 1 0/ E . ,......ret ... .a. . j. ..4 ' 12 :,2 V . I .. f - -1 -- I It . I . , 1 <3:ellillillillillillillillillilliz4lill,3/4*: 12'lliti i* 4 . : W..#.10,1.' '-4 , V . /Â£35" . .. ' t ... A 4344:* : 44' 7 f - d :I ' y - t . Â·Â· t.... . 1 -' I . . / ~..r I AN.2 - . d,0* . 4 I ./7 . . b.... t plk..1 1 . ;4 i Â·%13,94 . ' -2 - P 1 't. r;4.,1. I b '' 141 8.' ng*m %6: j.% ..0 .4 . Illl:ll~'Ill#Im~~ , 1.,Â·4 -.Â» ' 4 0,5 1 - Â¥ ' 4 . - k ' 1.4, - 4 -0 I.- -- Â£ I. - -5 - I /*9. I .y=.-----L. - 4 ./.'I".I- 4 a. I - I 1 Â£.1 1... ---44% y y. f . . A .. * 4* 4. : " - lrâ€¢ 6 r.Â¢ T , , C. , , . ts -1 PUBLIC NOTICE / NE <Â·iktal SMUGGLERSTRFEÂ· UNAL HPC DESIGN REVIEW 6 NOnCE 6 + e i... , C pÂ¢ 'll d 1 3-4 * L 1. a 0441 4,7 'i j 1 i 1 1 1 /04/941 4 1 6 \ ~ b fÂ¢*8 w/' >kf 7, /fliflili %41 ,7=slky . . -*v;;16 r . 1 . 11 1 Â¥ 1 8 ':f(dll*1 111 '1---1-*..,1 I , . Eâ€¢. - 1 I 11 1 4 : An .. 4 7. A L, 4, ' p .AL 0.. . 0-'. 9 : " ... Â· 2/i I Â· ,,; i ... 9, )* 4, 4 . t. 41V ?. I. I * Â· /4 A. I. lilli ' x .le Â»e *a + 7 CONSâ‚¬E~~ * ' ' .L 'E 41 0' . ~EEP~~~~~ ~~A8~4;16~ 4 = 40 *b, : 221 f..4 . J.. &, . , :Â· Â· ~1 4 . ..,2 # V 1 -1-- 4 , 51 3 14 2Sm u##Lâ‚¬72.- _jug 10,2-001- MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 513 W. Smuggler- Major Development, Final- Public Hearing DATE: July 10, 2002 SUMMARY: Approval has been granted on this site for a historic landmark lot split, and the rehabilitation and addition to the existing miner's cottage are under construction. The application before HPC involves the design for a residence on the newly created lot. Because the entire site is listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures," the proposed building must receive HPC approval and must comply with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and Aspen Municipal Code. No variances from dimensional requirements are allowed for the new house. The maximum allowable floor area, 2,270 square feet was established through the lot split. HPC reviewed this application on June 12th expressing no concerns with conceptual approval. APPLICANT: Drew Harman, represented by Harry Teague Architects. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-10-002. ADDRESS: 513 W. Smuggler Street, the east half of Lot F and all of Lot G, Block 27, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential) MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the Final level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the stajf analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to 1 determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. The procedures for the review of Major Development projects include a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect-of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. On May 22nd and June 12th, HPC viewed a model, streetscape elevation, and computer animation of the the proposed new house. The issues that had initially caused the board to table the review were resolved by the June 12th conceptual approval meeting. Staff finds that there are no remaining issues that need to be addressed for final review, which is focused on selection of materials and details like the lanscape plan. All guidelines relating to these topics are met by the proposal. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Major Development approval (Final) be granted for 513 W. Smuggler Street, the east half of Lot F and all of Lot G, Block 27, City and Townsite ofAspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. Confirm that the site plan represents all major landscaping that is to take place. 2. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the information is available. 3. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures prior to their installation or purchase. All light fixtures must meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code as well as the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines." 4. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 5.. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies o f the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # , Series of 2002, granting Major Development approval (Final) for the new house at 513 W. Smuggler Street, the east half of Lot F and all of Lot G, Block 27, City and Townsite of Aspen, 2 Colorado, with conditions." 2 Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2002 A. Staff memo dated July 10, 2002 B. Relevant Design Guidelines C. Application 1 3 "Exhibit B, Relevant Design Guidelines for Final Review" 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. o 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. o Protect established vegetation du*ring construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department: o 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. o 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. o Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. o Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. o 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. o Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. o Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. o It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. Site Lighting 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. o 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. Building and RoofForms 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. 4 o Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. Materials 11.8 Use 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. o Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. Lighting 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that'used traditionally. o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. o 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. o 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. o Do not wash an entire building facade in light. o Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. o Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the sarne area. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spill from a building. o 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. o 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. 5 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) FOR THE NEW HOUSE LOCATED AT 513 W. SMUGGLER STREET, THE EAST HALF OF LOT F AND ALL OF LOT G; BLOCK 27, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, CbLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2002 Parcel ID #: 2735-124-10-002 WHEREAS, the applicant, Drew Harman, represented by Harry Teague Architects, has requested Major Development approval (Final) for the new house located at 513 W. Smuggler Street, the east half of Lot F and all of Lot G, Block 27, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review; and WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the Cio; of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.21 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 additiollal information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated July 10, 2002 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended the application be approved with conditions; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on July 10, 2002, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and approved the application by a vote of _to _. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the HPC approves Major Development (Final) for the new house located at 513 W. Smuggler Street, the east half of Lot F and all of Lot G, Block 27, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, finding that the review standards are met, with the following conditions: 1. Confirm that the site plan represents all major landscaping that is to take place. 2. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the information is available. 3. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures prior to their installation or purchase. Alllight fixtures must meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code as well as the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines." 4. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 5. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of July, 2002. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 513 WEST SMUGGLER STREET application for hpc conceptual review contents attachment 1 land use application form attachment 2 dimensional requirements form attachment 3 general submission requirements SEE PRELIM. APPLICATION Â¥ letter of authorization Â¥ title of authorization Â¥-vieinity-map attachment 1 specific submission requirements: conceptual review, partial domolition, on site relocation, variance, and historic landmark lot split Â¥ written description Â¥ existing sitc plan/su:vcy Â¥ proposed site plan Â¥-fleep-plans Â¥ building clevations attachment 5 specific submission requirements: final review Â¥ an accurate representation of ext. materials(samples to be presented at final review) Â¥ finalized drawings @ 1/4 =1 -0 scale Â¥ statement of the effect of proposed development on historic structure and neighborhood Â¥ statement indicating how final plan conforms to representations and conditions placed upon proposal at conceptual review attachment 6 residential design standards SEE PRELIM. APPLICATION 513 West Smuggler Street Conceptual Review Application Responses to Attachment 5 1. representation of exterior materials (samples to be provided at hearing) (see elevations for material designations) 2. finalized drawings @ 1/4 =1 -0 (see attached) 3. statement of the effect of proposed development on historic structure and neighborhood 4. statement indicating how final plan conforms to representations and conditions placed upon proposal at conceptual review HARRYTEAGUEARCHITECTS 412 north mill aspen co 81611 t 970 925 2556 f 970 925 7981 mail@teaguearch.com 513 West Smuggler Street Final Review Application Responses to Attachment 5.3 & 5.4 5.3 - written description of proposal This proposal is for a Historic Landmark Lot Split at 513 West Smuggler Street. The existing 90.06' x 100.00' (9606 s.f.) lot would be split into two 45.03' x 100.00' (4503 s.f.) lots. Following the lot split, the proposal includes the relocation and renovation of, and addition to the residence on the new western lot of 513 West Smuggler Street, as well as the construction of a new residence on the new eastern lot. The project breaks into two separate residences. The residence on the western lot, which has already been granted HPC approval, consists of the relocated cabin with a new addition built behind it. The second residence-on the eastern lot-is a completely new single family residence. Our principle intention with the design of this house is to provide a contemporary living space for the owner while relating to the scale of the adjacent miner's cabin. We have designed a house that fits into the urban setting with a formal entry facing the street and a detached garage located off the alley. The building addresses Smuggler Street with a deep, one-story porch. The porch will have similar proportions to the adjacent porch and will also continue the tradition of the entry procession with exterior steps and columns. To the east of the porch is a two-story element that "fills in the gap" between the neighboring two-story home and the single story porches and cabin. This two-story element which houses bedrooms and a second- story office also relates to the cabin and its additions by picking up their steep roof pitches and proportions. Fifteen feet behind the front porch, the house turns and orients its back half towards the views of Aspen Mountain and Independence Pass. This portion of the building is low (plate height = 6') where visible from the street and slowly rises and opens to the views from the second-story living spaces. Although the design of this building is stylistically different from it' s historic neighbor, we feel that this design maintains the established neighborhood scale and patterns. 5.4 - conformation to preliminary proposal The final proposal has not varied from the preliminary proposal HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS '12 N MILL ST ASPENCO 81611 970925 2556 FAX 970 925 7981 mal}@leaguea~ch, com drive con-/ i. ormat,on #01/ 2/ 03/ %1 + 14 f r % \ 1 4 1\ \ / property line J 'c/ . . I setback line; 1.- 2- . 4Â·dr, drerâ€¢ c / 41_31<.* UNSÂ¢- __ _L \9444 -1 - 0.,ed grape Iry-r 10. /1 1 . 1 1, ... 1 Z ; 1/- ----------64 ~ lig --- - 1 . ff > .1 11 ----I.11 1 1 11 If''ll Lr 1 -- -- . . 1 -1 1 % \ 0 33 floor elevation 100'-0" 1 .1 liD- ------- : 1'11 2--- Â· 1 C> / \1) Li, 32 contour elevation 7895 I 1 1-- - . i t- 94 3 0 1 8 , l j - Â·- .' :42 27 f.'<~ff----Cd'i--3. -7 / ..1 ,/ 1 h gutter / downspout locations setback line 9 1 Â· ,/,P -,f A AA, 0 - --- lot A 61 / U -\ J,\ \\ 3 47.--22 4/ 7 1 / /.\ lot B 9 i /1 17 1 / / -44 >32 % -\ Ii. il|' , . Â»-46 992 -- 1 1 1 1 . ,< 4 9------ 1 floor elevation 100'-0" 1/ i /4 ' 4/ 4 - - - >~~:i~,-20 contour elevation 7894.5 | _ 15-0- 1 3 4.-- . - . 0. 3':~ t I, i '' / 15'-0 Ii| li 11 1,11 1 1 111 91 11 ';11 -1 --4-34-\ 1,ghtwell I|i li i 1 1 -_! 1. ii ~ I 4*4=612%-3 /, /1 4 1 1 f i \5-9 ./'~ '|1 11 - f. -.\-\1 || 1. |~4~4-<f~ ' pÂ«P-hi U/-0 / L. . 1 J 2 - Â·21 1 - AT 6 1 bÂ· 8 1 date issue ~ C ( 4/( f-j--0 ff \ a ' I.' I ..* \ 04 24.02 Nx:conceptual appl 1, 4.- property line A \ /9 1 1 m / fr 1 ~ -~ - _ 06.04.02 *al appl 2 05 22.02 Ipc conceplual hrng 1 1 1 4.9 47Â£ ~~~~,') t~ ~ 061902 hpcnnalappl 4101 e / 06.12.02 14x conceptual hrng 2 yÂ« 1 Lw613 5> , 37$ 035 , * c-- 1 1 , 1% 01 06 25 02 p,ogress ' d.ve i ./.1 no 0107 lawn by rs site plan 1/4-=1'-9 A001 g - -Glley b ock 27 ~1.44 eouep!Sal UeU,Je4 leans Jelf>6nius ise/V\ â‚¬ Lg opejoloo uadse laails jei66ntus isaM 7895 7894 j HARRY TEAGUE - ARCHITECTS ~ 14 412 N Mus/ ASPENCOatell 970 925 2556 FAX 970925 7981 mal@league.ch corn '1,0 'S 4/ 94 1& fr \ % co~ginantinformalice 4 /, 4~-11 \ 1 1 357%. 02931 \ 1-1 , /2*Â¥Â£*ih J ' ---x ~ \ 4.1 9.- 1 <vt 44 L \ 7 / setback Jine K.3/ 1 \ /\ 4> (1.b) 3 I\011 I gi fage Nab abo~e \ 43- -% , 1 /---/ 0 .- -~~9 //r / ..I- mechanical \ laundry I \ - ~ - __ ,{ powder room ~ : IL j el L922.j \ k \ U 1 - / I C |Im-d 005 j -----------4 10/1 -- 1--1, 24%*- / 1- \\ Â« 44 - 1 72.< <A202J l1, 1 4% workroom , CA . lo 421/ 0 <A200~ 1 b CO 1,- 1 - * closet i .... abole , 9/\ rr- 1-992_1 ' \ hall C 4% N / 91 * E 9 \ 9- I kz 1 48 \ 1 \ - . 1 1 1 .' #* -li~ -//1,1 \ playroorn : 0 1 /24 fo J guest bedroom : 004 1 0 ; 1008 1 --- media room 1, ~3 ~ 1 bli~ IF ' ~~1.-1 \ w L999.-1 \ 6Â« \4 2 li 432 ~r \ 1/3--/ 1\ \\1 17-6Â» M.9.9.210 9- ---4 ~~ g */1 \ 1. 1 lk:Â§8Â¥- -- \ U setback line 2 ~ ~- ~~ ~- - \1 \ 1 4.-~i~~Ck \\ i - 21'-6" Â«-- 1 a . 1 50-0" 17'-6- 31'-0" 1 9'-3" Â· 15'-9" 2- bg . --1.6 - - -_ -1 oo~ 04 date issue 04.24.02 1,pc cir,ceptual appl -- - - --- 79'-31 052202 hpc conceptual .Ing 06 0402 hpcconceptualappl 2 06.12.02 - conceplual hfng 2 061902 hpc linal appl. 06 25 02 progress pro,ect no 0107 drawn by I lower level floor plan 1/4" .1 -0 A100 .WIO-.9 eouep!Sal leells Jelfifinuls )SeM â‚¬ E ope#Moo uedse HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS 412 N MILL ST ASPEN.0816tt 4 970 925 2556 FAX 970925 7981 . mal@leaguearch com // / 7- 1% t 1,-- - \ â‚¬'\ AA \ 4-9 12// 1 \ 0$* inlormal~& fence line ' /' ~ line of lot split ~30:Â©, \ \; , Â¥\ /;23,/238% b\ ~ 9 3 423,/ \ *2/'I47 9 42/ 4, F \ ,setback line \Â·--Â¢ ,-i T 9-'3 J \--\ \ 1 414 - /*304 1 11 1 1 --1-7 \,1\ \ \ ~\ \46\ \\ \ * 9 1 \\\ 15par garage 7 1111] \ lIb [ I 1 Ill ' \ , 1-1 4 â€ž/ / -d// J - 4.4 ||, -k-L |21 + r M --i _ -5--0=- -~1,1 Â»/1 0 -_fi *49%% - '' LELI . -- O Iii \1 4 /4 1 11 1 hall . \1 / -ltliFE- " 1 . hall - Â» ~~ - 9.9 = O \ ~A202~ Â»2 9 \ C 22%> \43 A229_j \ 6 el 0, 3/mudr om Mâ€¢ert. bekÂ» \ E \\ \ g \1, / (fi) walk in doset 1 - . 15-0 I [-1911 <<,\ / Ltal Â· 15'-0 \ A301 \ Â· m 1 master bedroom lili L F Vrclt \ 01 L11LI L192-1 \ bedroom 2 1 \ bedroom --p#!tERET ' 1 01-asi'15'94-~r, Ll*U 2191-1 .-' \\ . 1 0 1<19 2 1 F //1= /r- \ i . 11 Ir-44 ==1 \~ setback line . \~0* ~ , b \ \ \ 4 \ LO -- - - -- .-r 1 .'.-/11â‚¬-43: 1 - 2 - - 1/ 5'-0" 1 ___ __ 17'-6" -4 - _ 21':6" - _ -_ __ - __ g _ __ - fence line 31'-0" 9.-3. , 15'-9" 0 4 0 0-4 0 923 date Issue 79'-3" 04.24.02 hpÂ¢ conceÂ©tual apol I .- -- - I 05.22.02 hec conceptuN h,ng 06.04.02 hpÂ¢ conceplual appl. 2 06 12.02 hpe conceptual h.g. 2 06 1902 hp, nnal appl 06.25.02 .... piolecl no 0107 main level floor plan 1/4 =1'-0 A101 eollepIsal uellueq leens Jel65nLUS }se/V\ Â£ LS OpeJOIOO uedse &Â£6 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS 412 N MILt. ST ASPENCO 81611 970 925 2556 FAX 970925 7981 nia#eaguearchcom 4 103 61<-0. /, i -6 \ \ \ A ./.f c~WM'formal,rn 2.b) \ \ L - \ \\ *21.2 , 1 \ .\ \ 1 r- I-% 1 ' ' <A303~ N 424 /%34\ (A30:D, 1 \ dk, \ setdack line '~-3Â¢~ . i i . :N \9\\\99::. k \0.. . 34:\ . 1 3-A~- 00 2 -- i 0 bfeakiest nook Â· L.2041 \ - _ ,_ * 02 \\1~\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \1\\\t\ \\\,t\\4444\\\\ / 6 3* \ E 0 1 , \ 6 - \ 1, il B /0, 0 tÂ» \\11\\',; \ \ 4,2/ open lo below /\ 1/ '40 \Ok \ fA2O2~ - Ale") \ ED I c dining room \ ~ C .\ 4 fri \\\ -A L 2(*1 1 1./A 1 21 I I 1 0 11 0 E living room \ 035 , La]' ' -\ 1 -\ l_2911, r \ \ 4,7 officenibrary 3 \\1\ .C 1 /57 -\\271 1 -/92 \\ , <par 1 -.iz- Ix N ' \ 1 -- 1 r h' 1 - / 34/ 1 1 1 \ \1 1 1-' 1-/ 1 / / \ \r---8>/ /1 \\1\- k L+ setback line ~ Â· ~ - - =-= -- - t .- 1 1 4** 1 - -- \ \1 // \ \ I 17'-6" ! 21'-6- 31'-0 9'-3" : 'L--- - -./ 6 0 0 0 0 date issue 042402 hoc conce* appl 79'-3" 05.22.02 1,Â©c conceptual hrng 06 04.02 hpcconceplual ap#2 06 12 02 hpc conceplual hrng 2 06 1902 -nal appi 06?502 prOgfeSS proled no 0107 arawn by I upperlevel floor plan 1/4 -1-0 A102 188319 1 #6nLUS 198/V\ ELS peJoioo uadse HARRY TEAGUE 4.4 j.a) 3.4 4 a 5a 1.- -j ARCHITECTS 412 NMILLST ASPEN 008161~ ro.theisibL< 970 925 2556 FAX 470 925 7981 Fnall@lea9uearch corn 127--9 7 / fyi / i. - cement board â‚¬27Â«2<262 plate height 4 118'-7- '7 .....43 2-25*x 12" vertical boards i.5. | :--J- â‚¬r - *4 ---3 ----r----- - light gray (clear sealer) cons-Wmallon -- 3 ~~ 1 F R!@%1)09!It_ T 1167 1 1 - 41 i , . - .... - 21 - wood or stained cement board T .- ] -1 floor heighL - -4" horizontal boards 71 -0- m.7 - mahogany colored slain b,3- 11 k1 1 7 107'.4 (to match cabin porch) 9 111 N. ~1. 1Â· : -standing seam steel roofing 1 41~ ' 1 4044Â£Â£Â· z : .. - galvalume silver/gray 4 floor height .19'2-111*.Â·- ..Â·' U 1 7 100'-O /1 L / 1 _north elevation scale 1/4-=1'.0- E a â‚¬# 8.8 4-4 * ref Ile,ght 127 5 P 49 i roof height -64Â· Â· aw .2- i 124Â·-10Â· ~ 1 _IR- 11 1: 1 .,. . 1 94 1 -3-,1 0 1/*gbL 1 . 1 ' i 4 1187 11- 44 /1 4- 111 04 90 '1 1 ~ '4*- 1 Â·1 - ~- (:~=E~ c c L Â£ 1*"i LgL'\>4 \1 ~ floo heigbi _. -6,4=-1 J 41-_15 __~ _-_---_--_ - NTT-[ 1 -11 11 1111 - -11111111111 110Â·1 1 . It ....1 N 4/.,~, .//67'Par,!11 LI]1 d=. ------- 04.24.02 - co~e,*t01 301 i-NE 0 - 0522.02 Â®c conceptual Img 0604.02 .0 conceplual appl 2 1....1~ 1 :1 111 - - -- 0612 02 -conceptual 'mg 2 061902 Flpc Final appl 0625.02 progress - - - I. -0-f!99r height 100'-0 '.,47'./. w 4 .0 F ..p r-*. - . :'426 '>64 1Â·. "4019 <4&1 oro~ect no 0107 diawn by 2 9 elevations north & east /2 i east elevation / scate 1/4-=1 -0 1/4- =1Â·-0 A200 eouep!sai ueu,Je4 513 west smuggler street opeJoloo uedse HARRY TEAGUE E 0 1 - Â¢ ~ ARCHITECTS 412 N MILL ST ASPEN /0 8161 1 970 925 2556 FAX 970 925 7961 rreil@leaguearch corn 2!_ above grade ~ | _Ek joil_highl _ ~ 124'-10 //JTE= ~1Â· 1 Â»FP~' f ! Â· Â· . i - cement board 12" vertical boards 1 1 -light gray (clear sealer) 1.0 1 144 1 F T [Al I * || con~o,mat~. re/\ 2,4 C , 1 El 1 /32 It. - r 1 F 35 ' 1 - 1%11* 1. - 111 - wood or stained cement board 1 floor height -4" horizontal boards 7 110Â·-lÂ· i - - mahogany colored stain ' 1 1 Â·1 ! -standing seam steel roorng ;~ - galvalume silver/gray I. I -+ %,511. 3 f . south elevation ~ / scale 1/451'-0 0 0 - 0 D.a roof height * 127 -5 * roof height 124'-10 099/ z - -1â€¢ Â· - 1 1 1 , 111 11 118'-7 Plate height * --- -1,1 1 i 116'-2 1 11. ... 11, 1 --- La.----=---311 ... j.t-LI~~iii---:- _.. --- - 9.\OANÂ¥1446-1 12. , 14 1!i . - - __. 1 Â·Â· Â·Â· L L.../1 -~ C 1 |s 2-w#=Â·=1[:4'.~r:Â· P . 1 1 1 _ u -- ..349,0 4 'F 110'-V 11- i ...... 9%* UP b 1 1 plate height* |Atp:#31.- 7.-1 1. date Â· .5 - 11,1- 1 il 'i - 107'-4 (to match cabin porch) 1 - G>-3- f9441. 11 - h . . 9Â» 93*0,1- . .-------- 04 2402 hoc conce,iual agol i 05.22.02 hoc conceptual hrng /6.04.02 hic conceplual "/ 2 0612.02 Â®c corceptual hrng 2 1:. 1*NA ; ~ 06.19.02 1,pc fnalappl .25.02 Progfess /4 4- I %.. 44 ..A... .'led /0 0107 / ./. ./. / / 44 .Er~Vf:.0 'U 0/. - ./ U Â· 70/Xy '442 ....71 quu /. Â»~tric. f./.Â«. / diawn by . elevations south & west < 2 '\ west elevation 1 scale, 1/4-=1-0 1/4 =1'-0 A201 eouep!sel Ueulle4 513 west smuggler street Ope30100 uadSe JUL. 8.2002 9:59AM HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS NO.330 P.2 3 1 5 03 -3!U 4 52)( lo j EXHIBIIiz~ 1 7,-/(777 -1-D 1-1 C CJ4( 1 i T T Â® 1 - new weed =hingle= OVAT I Illting roof BIMICIUM /2 - ---lit MÂ¢gâ€¢ Mâ€¢BM (0*In) tls'Â·r 4 -- 11 11 1 11 1 11 11 1 11.1 fl 1 11 1 Illtir th-r-H I n ]111 Ij] 111 HI 111 Ily 1 1 lilli lilli 11.1 111111 Illl Â£ ~~~N.'1-1...l-118-+ILM+119-8-17 Il,YÂ® g ------ If 11 1 11 111 11 111 111*111 11 1 lilli lilli Ililli! 111 11 !11 Ti T '~ TL+Lr'LA4~1. f.pfr~riLLII ___.__.__.... _,......_~, 1 11 I 111]T lil rl I 1 I I 1 ] 1 I 1 I ax[.tlng ehiA#led Â¢18,40.4 ID rumoln IN' lilli 1181 lili'll lili 16...1.14 1 1 I lili 11 11 i lili 11 11 il'11 11 11 i l ili lo bo rapolnica (offwhiWimy} - lili 11 1, 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -I.- - - ---11 .... ~' 1~ . - -I-'- -& '1|'th 'd'I 'i|'1 ~Il'kp! '1|'I |lili lilli '~ 11 lilli lilli 11111111'1 11~'~ '~1'~ ' 1.'Fil H.'t, Â·444444#44,#4,64+4*~64444~2Ali'~ '"~I ~' 2 Pd !11'1111111111111 1 1111111111 li - lilli 1 1.1 411*11 1 lill i 111 le, 0 #18ts (*10) A 10,-4. (v.1.0 Y - t.....2 ' - but--1 e -- --0.--r,--, - ---- -t-- 1 elli , 1, I , . now MApboard Bidlrlg to mmtch oxl,1110 - 1 -.....-- polnwa (orlwhi!â€¢teray) . I -- , 11. It alow 100'Â·0' -_kiL-2-2= Â· . - - . - - 4 - ic C , O%1~(NA'L- Â¥a=,4,41(Wi C 7=102 Mal:G'~ ' NO ole'Al#BeL. VoL I -9 1 pâ€¢apÂ»'1 ---L------------ 71) M t 0:21,lt-- wfug,ai,J 04 Peour ce,u,*Ert OF- C,â€¢,24 A ~OK'41*M- Proms,â€¢- AHDWBP _3> Wid.915 &03 -râ€¢fuÂ· Â¥-k-Â£) Ativou J 7<10/on MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission tl THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director. _ ~ FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 110 E. Bleeker Street; Final Development- Public Hearing DATE: July 10, 2002 SUMMARY: The project involves an addition and restoration work on the existing house, which is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites. APPLICANT: Robert and Lexie Potamkin, represented by Alstrom Group. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-37-006. ADDRESS: 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lots L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential) SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving historic landmarks shall be granted unless the Historic Preservation Commission finds that all ofthe following standards (Section 26.415.010.C.5) are met: a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(B)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units, and 1 Staff Finding: The proposal is to make an addition on the west side of the existing house and to undertake restoration work on the historic building, which is an enhancement offered as part of an FAR bonus request. As part of the final design, the applicant has proposed to insert two double hung windows on the east elevation of the historic house as well. The HPC discussed this project on December 12th, January 23rd, February 13th, March 27th and April 10th. The architect had continued to make modifications to the design, including further reduction to the height of the addition, reworking of the front porch and the staircase at the rear of the building. Staff finds that th6 HPC's direction in regard to the design of the staircase/link has been met, and that lowering the height of the addition is beneficial to the historic resources on this property and the adjacent site. Staff has identified a few areas of the final design that require discussion. With regard to the landscape plan, staff has concerns with the rock cluster / garden and water fountain in the front yard of the property, and the plants that are proposed on the east side of the historic porch. The arrangement of rocks, patio and water fountain in the front yard of the property is not typical o f the Victorian era. The trees on the east may reach a height o f 5' and are too close to the house. The landscaping should not block or detract from the context of the historic site or building per the design guidelines below. 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. o The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.13 Revisions,or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. o Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. o Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. Do not cover grdssy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. o Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. o Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. o It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. Staff recommends that the mugo pines, rocks and fountain be removed from the landscape plan. The applicant should also consider removing the aspen trees in front of the house, because they are too close and their canopies touch the building. The Parks Department has indicated that this would be appropriate. 2 The fastigiate Norway spruce, and possibly the cotoneaster by the porch should also be removed from the landscape plan. The architect has told staff that there is no existing evidence of any windows that might have existed on the east elevation of the historic house. The applicant proposes to create new window openings on a character defining faâ„¢le of the historic house, in addition to increasing the solid to void ratio. The design guidelines should be referenced again. 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. o 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. o Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. o Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. The building should be studied more carefully as it is likely there would have been a window on this side. Staff has concerns that the windows are not centered under the gable, as would be typical, and are too conjectural. The windows should be studied more carefully as not to detract from an otherwise successful restoration and addition project. Also, on the topic of restoration, it seems evident to staff, from the historic photo that we have of this building, that there were two front doors. The plan does not show the street facing door, which must be added. The final issue that staff recommends HPC address are the proposed materials on the addition. The architect will provide a sample at the meeting of the zinc that will surface the walls of the connector and the roof on the new construction. The guideline is: 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. Staff wonders whether the finish of the wood on the addition, which is represented in the drawings as stained (rather than painted), is important enough to HPC to warrant a condition of approval. It seems to be an important part of the character of the design. (Please note that the light wells, shown on the west side of the addition are being eliminated due to setback issues.) b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood Of the parcel proposed for development, and 3 Staff Finding: The proposal is in line with other efforts to restore and expand historic homes throughout the neighborhood. The project will be a successful addition to the neighborhood. c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significande of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels, and Staff Finding: The project as proposed has been restudied in order to preserve the significance of the home and its original scale and character. d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. Staff Finding: The project will enhance the current state of historic significance of the home by restoring the porch area, the front window and brick, to their original condition. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the review standards and design guidelines are met and that Final should be granted with the following conditions: 1. The proposed front yard rock garden, mugo pines and water fountain should be removed, including the pine on the east of the porch. The applicant should consider r6moving the existing aspens in front of the house and the proposed cotoneaster by the porch. 2. As part of an overall restoration of the historic character of the property, staff recommends the owner work with the City Parks Department to remove and replace the existing trees on the City right of way with more appropriate trees. The current trees disrupt the relationship between the front of the house and the street. If the owner is in agreement, this will be done at the City's expense. The landscape plan represents that this will be done. 3. The addition of the two proposed double hung windows on the east elevation of the historic house should also be reconsidered per the design guidelines, to be as accurate to the historic house as possible. 4. In order for this project to qualify for the FAR bonus, the porch, front window, and both front doors must be restored to their original condition and the paint must be removed from the masonry. 5. HPC must confirm that the materials and finishes on the addition are acceptable. 6. A cut sheet must be provided for any new windows to be installed in the historic building. 7. The method for removing the paint from the masonry must be approved by HPC staff. 4 8. HPC staff' and monitor must approve a plan for the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures prior to wiring, installation or purchace of them. The light fixtures must comply with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and the "City Lighting Code." 9. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the information is available, before their installation. 10. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly what areas of the existing house are to be removed as part of the renovation. 11. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist, other than what is approved by HPC. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor. 12. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 13. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 14. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditionsof approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservatidn Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 15. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to approve Resolution # , Series of 2002, granting Final approval for 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lots L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite ofAspen, Colorado." Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2002 A. Staff memo dated July 10, 2002 B. Application 5 "Exhibit B, Relevant Design Guidelines for Final Review" 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. o 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. o Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. o 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. o 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. o 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. o Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. o Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. o It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. Site Lighting 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. o 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. Treatment of Materials 2.1 Preserve original building materials. o Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. o Only remove siding which is deteriorated and must be replaced. o Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. 6 O 0 o Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. 2.2 Protect wood features from deterioration. o Provide proper drainage and ventilation to minimize rot. o Maintain protective coatings to retard drying and ultraviolet damage. 2.3 Plan repainting carefully. o Always prepare a good substrate. Prior to painting, remove damaged or deteriorated paint only to the next intact layer, using the gentlest means possible. o Use compatible paints. Some latex paints will not bond well to earlier oil-based paints without a primer coat. 2.4 Brick or stone that was not painted historically should not be painted. o Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer, or patina, to protect it from the elements. Repair of Materials 2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. o Avoid the removal of damaged materials that can be repaired. o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be used. Replacement Materials 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on prinlary surfaces. o If the original material is wood clapboard, for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, the amount of exposed lap and finish. o Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. 2.8 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for primary building materials. o In some inst,nces, substitute materials may be used for replacing architectural details, but doing so is not encouraged. If it is necessary to use a new material, such as a fiberglass column, the style and detail should precisely match that of the historic model. o Primary building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic materials. o Synthetic materials include: aluminum, vinyl siding and panelized brick. o EIFS (synthetic stucco) is not an appropriate replacement for real stucco. 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. 7 o 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. o Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. o Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. o 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. o Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. o A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's easing, 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. Treatment of Architectural Features 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. o Repair only those features that are deteriorated. o Patch, piece-in, splice, consolidate or otherwise upgrade the existing material, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be used. o Removing a damaged feature when it can be repaired is inappropriate. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. o Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. o Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. o If the originalÂ·detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish, which traditio,nally was a smooth painted finish. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features should be based on original designs. 8 o The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building's heritage. o When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts. o 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. o Using overly ornate materials on a building for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. o 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. 6.6 Replacement of missing elements may be included in repair activities. o Replace only those portions that are beyond repair. o Replacement elements should be based on documented evidence. o Use the same kind of material as the original when feasible. o A substitute material may be acceptable if the form and design of the substitute itself conveys the visual appearance of the original material. For example, a fiberglass cornice may be considered at the top of a building. New Additions 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. o An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. o 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. o 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. o Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. Materials 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. 9 o Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encourage4. o Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. o This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. o Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. 14.3 Keep color schemes simple. (Advisory) o Using one base color for the building is preferred. o Using only one or two accent colors is also encouraged, except where precedent exists for using more than two colors with some architectural styles. 14.4 Coordinating the entire building in one color scheme is usually more successful than working with a variety of palettes. o Using the color scheme to establish a sense of overall composition for the building is strongly encouraged. 14.5 Develop a color scheme for the entire building front that coordinates all the facade elements. o Choose a base color that will link the entire building face together. For a commercial building, it can tie signs, ornamentati on, awnings and entrances together. On residences, it can function similarly. It can also help your building relate better to others in the district. o The complexity of the accent colors should be appropriate to the architectural style of the building. o Doors may be painted a bright accent color, or they may be left a natural wood finish. Historically, many of the doors would have simply had a stain applied. o Window sashes are also an excellent opportunity for accent color. o Brilliant luminescent or "day-glo" colors are not appropriate. Lighting 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. o 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. o 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. o Do not wash an entire building facade in light. 10 o Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildi]Ags. o 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. o 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. o 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. On-going Maintenance of Historic Properties 14.9 Use the gentlest means possible to clean the surface of materials and features. o Perform a test patch (in an inconspicuous place) to make sure the cleaning method will not damage the surface. Many procedures can have an unanticipated negative effect upon building materials and result in accelerated deterioration or a loss of character. o Harsh cleaning methods, such as sandblasting, can damage the historic materials, make them vulnerable to moisture, accelerate deterioration and change their appearance. Such procedures are inappropriate. o If cleaning is hecessary, a low pressure water wash is preferred. Chemical cleaning may be considered if a test patch is first conducted to determine safety. o Also see technical rehabilitation literature published by the National Park Service and available through the Aspen Community Development Department. 14.10 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. o Avoid the removal of damaged materials that can be repaired. o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be uked. 14.11 Plan repainting carefully. o Note that frequent repainting of trim materials may cause a buildup of paint layers that obscures architectural details. When this occurs, consider stripping paint layers to retrieve details. However, if stripping is necessary, use the gentlest means possible, being careful not to damage architectural details and finishes. o Remember good preparation is key to successful repainting but also the buildup of old paint is an important historic record of the building. The removal of old paint, by the gentlest means possible, should be undertaken only if necessary to the success of the repainting. Remember that old paint is of very good quality and is enviable in today's painting world. o Old paint may contain lead. Precautions should be taken when sanding or scraping is necessary. 11 14.12 Provide a weather-protective finish to wood surfaces. o The rustic bare-wood look is not a part of the heritage of the historic districts or individual landmark properties. o Painted surfaces are most appropriate. Stains may be accepted in combination with materials that give a well-finished appearance. Use water seal to preserve the porch deck. o Rustic finishes will not be approved. 14.13 Leave natural masonry colors unpainted where feasible. o Where the natural colors of building materials exist such as with stone or brick, they should be left unpainted. o For other parts of the building that require painting, select colors that will complement those of the natural materials. o If an existing building is already painted, consider applying new colors that simulate the original brick color. o It is also appropriate to strip the paint from a masonry building to expose the natural color of the stone or brick. Mechanical Equipment & Service Areas 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. o When it is feasible, screen service areas from view, especially those associated with commercial and multifamily developments. o This includes locations for trash containers and loading docks. o Service areas should be accessed off of the alley, if one exists. 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. o Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. o Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. o Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges. o A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. o Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant building facades or highly visible roof planes. o Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds. 14.16 Locate standpipes, meters and other service equipment such that they will not damage historic facade materials. 12 o Cutting channels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric and is inappropriate. Do not locate equipment on the front facade. o If a channel must be cut, either locate it on a secondary facade, or place it low on the wall. 13 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR FINAL DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 110 E. BLEEKER STREET, LOTS L AND LOT M, BLOCK 65, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2002 WHEREAS, the applicants, Robert and Lexie Potamkin, represented by Sven Altstrom, architect, and Herb Klein of Klein/Zimet, has requested Final Development for the property located at 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lot L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The property is listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures"; and WHEREAS, all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or development involving a historic landmark must meet all four Development Review Standards of Section 26.72.010(D) of the Aspen Land Use Code in order for HPC to grant approval, namely: 1. Standard: The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and'with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in a "H," Historic Overlay District or is adjacent to an Historic Landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard sbtbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot, exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet, or exceed the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant necessary variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this Section exceed those variations allowed under Section 26.520.040(13)(2), for detached accessory dwelling units, and 2. Standard: The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character 6f the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. 3. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or on adjacent parcels. 4. Standard: The proposed development enhances or does not diminish from the architectural character or integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof; and WHEREAS, the project was reviewed by the HPC on December 12th, January 23rd, February 13th, March 27th, April 10th and July 10th. Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated July 10, 2002, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended approval of the project finding that the review standards and the design guidelines are met, with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 10, 2002, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application met the standards, and was consistent with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and approved the application with conditions by a vote of _ to _. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That Final Development for the property located at 110 E. Bleeker Street, Lots L and M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, are approved with the following conditions: 1 1. The proposed front yard rock garden, mugo pines and water fountain should be removed, including the pine on the east of the porch. The applicant should consider removing the existing aspens in front of the house and the proposed cotoneaster by the porch. 2. As part of an overall restoration of the historic character of the property, staff recommends the owner work with the City Parks Department to remove and replace the existing trees on the City right of way with more appropriate trees. The current trees disrupt the relationship between the front of the house and the street. If the owner is in agreement, this will be done at the City's expense. The landscape plan represents that this will be done. 3. The addition of the two proposed double hung windows on the east elevation of the historic house should also be reconsidered per the design guidelines, to be as accurate to the historic house as possible. 4. In order for this project to qualify for the FAR bonus, the porch, front window, and both front doors must be restored to their original condition and the paint must be removed from the masonry. 5. HPC U*fc&nfiriffthat the materials and finishes on the addition are acceptable. 6. A cut sheet must be provided for any new windows to be installed in the historic building. 7. The metted fpr removing the paint from.the masonry must be aporoved by HPC staff. lest 1)0(brk,ze Miulk lk_ /220uu,u-02. 8. HPC staff and monitor must approve a plan for the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures prior to wiring, installation or purchace of them. The light fixtures must comply with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and the "City Lighting Code." 9. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the information is available, before their installation. A h-aâ‚¬ LfÂ£*t--4 40.16 0,1-0-~i f4 1-1- 41Â»5--1'St Â»citz>_ 10. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly what areas of the existing house are to be removed as part of the renovation. 11. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist, other than what is approved by HPC. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor. 12. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 13. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 14. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 15. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of July, 2002. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk P -#tIT 2.I.-6- 1 1 J PUBLIC NOTICE V n , DATE~%22 1 , TIME G -4 I- PLACE PURPOSENPO - *i .r . 19.I --I - - A 1 -1 JUN-18-2002 TUE 08:42 AM FAX NO, P. 03 r-==7 11740-0 -3 1. ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: //0 E., 2>LUPâ‚¬,7%4: Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE; Sjot-24. /O . 200 ~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) 51 County of Pitkin ) I, *3 VEA1â€ž2/* 4â‚¬.77*PPR(name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, 1.:reby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) o f the Aapert Land Use Code in the following manner: Publica:ion of notice. By the publication in the legal notice :;ection of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City ofAspen a:: least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. ___ Posting 0/notice: By posting of notice: which form was obtrined from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (21) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed o f letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least Â£ fteen (15) days prior to thÂ¢ public hearing,gd was continuously visible from the *day of U/A AQ . , hip and including the date and time of Me public hearing. 4hotograph 01 the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ~c Mailing 0/notice, By the mailing of a notice obtained from tile Community Development Department, which contains the information de.;cribed 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 fimt class postage prepeid U,S. mail to any federal agency. state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of proper:y owners shall be those on the current tax records ofPitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmenta! agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) JUN-18-2002 TUE 08:42 AM P fly NU. $ I Rezoning or text amendmeylt. Wherlever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a gerieral revigion 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 orherwise, the requirement of an accurate surve:y map or other sufficient legal description of, anc! the notice to and listing of names and addresses ofowners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours fc r fifteen (13) days prior to the public hearihg on such amendments. . 164/1 LU/01Â£*l ' Slgadture The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ~9 - day of M , 2001 by Â£(Slcu 'R- 9.6.09-' . WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 0 4.. My co~ssion expifesc c28>NOI/folbo< 2066- . C. 3/ 1, ~ y LESLIE R. i ~ ~. GEORGE 4 0 ~tâ‚¬tad'Public ..ON ...09 94Â£(11 4 CÂ©lomdo Call) 4 7 iftÂ·0~-A ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL C P 120 EAST MAIN PARTNERS LLC ASPEN COMMUNITY UNITED HENRY FREDERICK B 120 E MAIN ST MEIHODIST CHURCH 100 W HALLAM ST ASPEN, CO 81611 < ' ! ASPEN ST ASPEN, CO AorEN, CO - CLINIC BUILDING ASPEN HOTEL ASSOCIATES LLC ASPEN HOTEL ASSOCIATES LLC A LORADO GENERAL 250 MARTIN ST STE 100 C/O VETRA BNK-COMM LENDER PARTNERSHIP BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009-3383 534 E HYMAN 100 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 * BROCKWAY LEXIE BROWN ANTHONY CITY OF ASPEN 7714 FISHER ISLAN-D DR C/O VETRA BANK-COMM LENDER 130 S GALENA ST FISHER ISLAND, FL 33109-0966 534 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CRAWFORD RANDALL & ABIGAIL EPSTEIN RUTH E W/ SHAFIR F 124 N GARMISCH ST 38 BIGELOW AVE G ASPEN, CO 81611 MILL VALLEY, CA 94941 CITY O.FÂ·ASPEN - ASPEN, CO 130 S GALENA ST FRINK ALBERT A TRUST GARCIA SCOTT D GORMAN JAMES & PATRICIA 9 OCEANCREST 120 N GARMISCH 1426 ROSE GLEN RD NEWPORT COAST, CA 92657-1802 ASPEN, CO 81611 GLADWYNE, PA 19035 GROSSE ADELINE M REVOCABLE GSW FAMILY INVESTMENT LTD HOGUET CONSTANCE M G TRUST PARTNERSHIP 333 E 68TH ST EE EDWIN J & ADELINE M RD # 1 BOX 110* NEW YORK, NY 10021 JSTESS WHEELING, WV 26003 100 E BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 HOTEL ASPEN LTD HOTEL ASPEN LTD JOHNSON RICHARD & MONTAE IMBT C/O ASPEN GROUP C/O VETRA BANK-COMM LENDER 6820 BRADBURY 600 E HOPKINS 534 E HYMAN AVE DALLAS, TX 75230 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 JOHNSON-HAUGLAND HELENE L KRUMM DONALD PAUL LANDIS CAROLYN . 105 E BLEEKER #B PO BOX 874 128 N GARMISCH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 LISS ARTHUR LUBIN RICHARD G MORGAN JOAN 1/2 INT 250 MARTIN ST STE 100 1217 S FLAGLER DR 2ND FL FLAGLER C/O LARRY SNYDER INC BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009-3383 PLAZA 500 OLD YORK RD WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 JENKINTOWN, PA [ 9046-2852 . aTH & SOUTH ASPEN LLC PARDUBA JIRI PENN PAUL E & SUSAN W ASPEN ST PO BOX 9903 3830 E 79TH ST N, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46260-3457 PRICE DOUGLAS QWEST CORP FKA US WEST TL393 SADLER PRISCILLA ANNE TRUSTEE 86 11 MAWOOD RD ATTN: S JACKSON - FOR BETHESDA, MD 20817 6300 S SYRACUSE WY STE 700 N SADLER PRISCILLA A REVOC TRUST '' ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111 PO BOX 2989 C ASPEN, CO 81612 IN WILLIAM L SHOAF JEFFREY S SILVERSTEIN PHILIP PO BOX 4274 PO BOX 3123 SILVERSTEIN ROSALYN ASPEN, CO 81612 Â· ASPEN, CO 81612 25 KNOLLS CRESCENT BRONX, NY 10463 SUTTON JENNY W SUTTON KERMIT S & JENNY W ZATS JULIE 4101 CUTLASS LN 80 1 12TH AVE S STE 400 118 N GARMISCH NAPLES, FL 34102 NAPLES, FL 33940 ASPEN, CO 81611 JUN-18--2UUY l'UE UB: 41 RM f M NU. r. uc . PUBLIC NOTICE RE ; 110 L BLEEKER STREET FINAL HPC DESIGN REVIEW NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that apublic hearing will beheld on Woinesday, July 10,2002 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before rhe Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Robert Potenkin requesting final HPC design 'approval. The property is located at 110 E. Bleeker Street. and is legally described as Lots L & M, Block 65, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin County C<,mmunity Development Dcpaitnent, 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, CO (970) 920-5096, amyg@ci.asp:n.co.us. s/Suzannâ€¢h Reid. hair Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on June 22,2002 City ofAspen Account 1 ALSTROM GROUP ECOLO GICA L ARCHITECTURE post office box 551 aspen, colorado 81612 (mail) 432 twining flats road woody creek, colorado 81656 (ups/fedex) 970 925 1745 970 925 4576 fax www.ecologicalarch.com email: svenskarch@aspeninfo.com 17 June, 2002 Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Com m unity Development / City of Aspen , 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 HPC FINAL APPROVAL - response to Attachment 5 POTAMKIN RESIDENCE / 110 EAST BLEEKER/ ASPEN, COLORADO Dear Amy, - We will be presenting a revised model, perspective sketch of the Bleeker Street side of the projed, and samples of building materials at our meeting on July 10, 2002. Attached are finalized drawings which include: Ll Landscape / Site Plan Al Basement Level Plan A2 Main Level Plan A3 Upper Level Plan A4 Roof Plan A5 East & South Exterior Building Elevations A6 West & North Exterior Building Elevations A7 Building Sedion through Main Stair (connedor) Following as an Appendix (attached) is our projed description with regard to The development of this projed, an addition to the historic residence at 110 East Bleeker. FAR is unchanged since our last conceptual meeting. Our Project description Appendix also states how we have responded to some detail questions and modifications proposed at our last HPC meeting. Sincerely i/7 2]U/V\ R:*olu Sven Erik Alstrom AIA cc: Robert & Lexie Potamkin Herb Klein HPC FINAL APPLICATION POTAMKIN RESIDENCE 110 EAST BLEEKER 17 JUNE 2002 page 1 APPEN DIX I PROJECT DESCRIPTION This addition to an existing historic brick residence occurs on a vacant lot which originally had a residence aligned with the "build-to" line of this House and the corner residence at 100 East Bleeker. We have recessed a small cottage-like wood addition 15 feet back from the main historic brick fagade. Our addition is connected by a further recessed 5 foot wide connector and new main stair for the project. 1 The main ridge of the new addition is 2 feet below the main ridge of the historic residence. We are restoring/replicating a historic bay window on the front of the brick residence from a historic photo. The original front porch and related openings are also to be restored to their original configuration. We believe that this project has evolved into a very good example of how to setback a new addition from a historic fagade, how to design with compatible but different materials in an "archetypally" related roof form, and that our design will make the new addition appear to "recede" when viewed from the street, and also make a gesture toward the integration of the first three lots on this corner as these three help to com plete a more historical building pattern as they are reinforced - together as a group when compared to the two duplex buildings which fragmented the block pattern built to the east of this house in the 1960's. CLARIFICATIONS & REVISIONS SINCE CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL 1 - The main roof slope of the addition has been revised to a 9:12 slope in order to lower the main ridge height as much as possible. 2 - The stair section has been revised to show in greater detail the relationship of the floor levels. Since Conceptual Approval we have revised the project design to have 2 risers down from each level to the corresponding levels of the new addition. The alley elevation has been revised and co-ordinated with this new sedion drawing - the flat roof at the exterior windows of the stairway is about the same height as previously shown - however, we have had to add new stair landings (like a winder type stair) to make the stair work. 3 - The Landscape Plan details how the new addition is more "connected" to the ground plane while the Historic Residence is slightly above the level of the new addition (2 risers). A small water feature and very naturalistic paving / outdoor seating patio is shown. 4 - Fenestration patterns have been refined with most new windows having a 4 pane muntin pattern which is relatively simple and not confused with the double hung patterns of the historic residence. 1 HPC FINAL APPLICATION POTAMKIN RESIDENCE 110 EAST BLEEKER 17 JUNE 2002 page 2 APPEN DIX I 1 ' 5 - Lightwells to the basement level Exercise room are shown on both the plans and Landscape Plan. 6 - The Landscape Plan shows how the alley parking and existing deck are to be coordinated and reconstruded. Several existing small trees are to be relocated on site. 7.- Two (2) new windows are shown in the existing bedroom and replacement / restoration windows are shown on the front elevation as part of the front porch restoration work. These new windows on the east elevation were reviewed with Amy. 8.- Basement Construdion and impads upon the existing house have been reduced by limiting the size of the new basement footprint / plan that is immediately adjacent to the house.Â· Our Strudural Engineer, Steve Peightal P.E. of SKPEIGHTALENGINEERS, 927 9510 in Basalt, has suggested that we limit the deeper foundation as much as possible and we have revised the lower level basement plan accordingly. 9. - The new addition will have its own mechanical / electrical which while tied into the historic house will essentially be a new mech. System located as shown in the basement mechanical room so as to "least disrupt" the historic residence systems that are in place. 1 NEOÂ¥6140Â»247 i I ;@rer:tmm g>,twir' LAIAVEL- 9*guLLhÂ·*- *4-16Â¥Â«Â·l- -9.--t- Waf ..Â®0~1 (f, T ked-44'%44, 11 11./1.'- 11 jÂ«/ 7 rd,/#R#*8"p 4 - 3.6.- , 414<- _ _1Â« F--1 FSÂ®002. -w .i . I'l' ''~ 1, l.,f i . 1 11 1,1 1 j / fiIll 93< Y e 1 KEN 572*- ,Iii :Nk) ill/ill /' 1 t: Â·It 111 f A ~ 1 1 14 2, fz'Hil 1 1 11} 2: in Â£11< 11 L 1 A ) 4 - 19 \ '-'- 6/&3/4165= -- mtineÂ·2 â‚¬ 3 PS-2 'Ify f! 1 0: 4: - a k '0 - 3 f _ 1 ~ i I Â»_062.:T-~{ r -~. r 4\ .ki - 4 r:y + * 0/1 -I'. 11 Sm /11% 1-- - -il V/,111... 4, km 2/f- f' -#4 &&#-r.- I ~ , R % 31% .1.:= r kj Ult , ill 0 1% frA E 5 11-fi U U - 69 Â·9 - Afn=ke,Â»-Â·Â· -0 ~43 .1 -f-- 10 - 1 ... 8- 1 1 m . A.N , - 111 11.1 1 Â¢ Ti 4 1 1,1,1 Â«41:..: 11'171 1 il '1 4 1 Â·j h.1 9- - 1 1 91111, #[ 5 FEJEE,; P.5.1.......176 3 L MÂ¥3 !13 1 - E 0 - I *31 128(T"--1- .8*44 11 1 L 1 5 --3 Fel i , 1 --1131 2.- =El't . 1 ~ r lilli 1 1.. 1.1.1 A E /7 T Q_ 1# 61 1 1 0.. EkÂ».f - - 1.2.* %51_ 1 1 '.,ilikp~k'~i,~li: :~, 5' U . , Â· Â·-10 , INÂ» 44: 13: - r.1 , 1 tioN*11 11 1 Il'1111,1,1 f.254 NJ : 17-lip IT D Id j -i.d.L#;2! fr ; It<Ki 7-Li~ .*AMPY E .? t{.1 lim , -81 -1 )1 Â»10* *Â«aâ‚¬OZI >t Â® i f /7 C-TD AdÂ·'Outjal- 3 i 11%3 \ U-- 1Â»**5' ftkkL~ T ; r- 1.1 F 1 11 \\ Ill -'. '4-*7..#Â· r'h~.f ~rk.1<~â€¢W-~CV,=V.P.'.:.-4 113 0 D- L i#/ir/844 < Mr*=*# 41~ 1 / 0411,/t:JN/""fil/G'/ti/ ~2 00 1 1 t.-2 t-7 m %,1: 4% '- 41741**W MAâ€¢ 'i,\illl!/ 11'' A.Ar.....i. Hr , 1 7. i.4 111-141.1. \-094 4;Flihlth*, *110 ekee' a TZPAA'AW I / --# \ lili; i ,1,1,~,141,-p,r kÂ»Â·4- pm28Â¢LNIAÂ·Â·Â· 0â‚¬?Â» --7 ,i < 1 1 1 i UHfrK- -/// 10'Â·,l ~~,IXJ 4 -L- - I lip-1 ) /0-12 1 \ 4 i-roton -1. 1 1 - --1 1 0 - FO-EAM AU - 1 11 0 8403 -4524* tm.ept %72&140 *90 .44*135 128*-AAAÂ« - -115 -- l{J Â·e:;695*FRT 712-*-21 Â»Â»2> &/Ve/F. 174Â·*7 2~ *2("/. 14//7 52160'r- OF \.1.*Gf~~ 15>'re#l.*p :Eker- *~aa.e Adua- -to Rt>Â¢57 -Otage __ Ed(lÂ» Mca-kz .,40Â£14:- 0*459*â‚¬: ART<*t(122Â·r- -9 '970 0Â«- 151.9 129 6 13> 15 1.- b -f- .r- 1..0 -t-/ -t- l/Â· (1 ,Â«7 -al -5- D. MA, ..j# 3 V ~Â·.ir: 1\ 378Â©290 r lexc,0 --04*Â«AVAZED 0. it--+ " i Â®_1 BALL 113/7 'j -2-LÂ»*-T 01*CLLS----->1 V -t Â© 1.- --N><]S-r-1 Ne i 71545241'5.4-7(c:J@L.,6-AK-,--= 22<95155 3-OON< i v A 1 T rÂ»1, FliA, J 1 /Nel,~ \ \ -,- 1~ 2.,0 5114. HC 1 / - 1 6 54,3'-011 Â· , ej-oll . -....ble IRT H ALSTROM GROUP 0 ECOLOGICAL ARCHITECTURE ~ POB 551 ASPEN. COLORADO ~ 81612 1 432 TWINING 5665MENT FLATS ROAD 4 WOODY CREEK. 1 PLA !\1 COLORADO t: 970/ 925 1745 TEL ~ /41<= 1[-eli 970/ 925 4576 IX POTAMKIN RESIDENCE 110 EAST BLEEKER ' ASPEN. COLORADO 1 81611 J ' ' date: 17 JUNE 2002 drawing no: HPC FINAL APPROVAL 1 Nme'-50* 1 â‚¬ A 22,ke i ME N 12 E V E F Fn e k f Ne - SMÂ°Ac E >kfa EA - 5%.IST -0Â«RAâ‚¬ -ft) BEIVTÂ«IN Ll.-2 I . 1- . *Lo" - 585 LeÂ©ScÂ»PS -- FLAN 1-1415 6;=EA , -LE>Cls-Mble --c>ECX, BeE .DANDSCAFE FLAN 0. 7-1-- ...11 --- 41 -Lei Â· , L_._1 1 1 ' y./.- i Em"27' 4 1 t~,ri- CJ -1/ Cl-osET-3~ ~ ~Â« L V ' N 51,4 4-AUNCer - 1 Il i L.-9 - 1 11-O.- - . HiS Ne-lepeci I 1 4aw... tr !301 32 9 0-1 0 -02 ecaÂ«luly " 1 1- --REIVM?DELED 223 feb ~ 1 -: K.l-TCHEN f--Dy--IST, 4 84-T-it ~ Ir- -eguck - 77 1 ---2--1-2- 4 ' - 017 Na - 1 1 1-Li_. , L) (123 3 <1 SEDROOKÂ·,1 MT# 1 LE 0-1-1 1 1 *L J. 1 n.,h/fl LY BOOÂ»f 3 4 1./0Â»N! no 090, CA-o â€¢ -1219+4-rk>I@LLS 32= -~*; 645 477>]ANCE IiN~+ A-DÂ· - NE]Al 7;Â»FR. 910 5,50 - DININe <t:kess pORC PA - 1 0 a , 0 EASEVENT 14 N l.8-, EXIST FÂ»Ja. 1, 2.-1 1.0 de) MLAN *9 L= TAS ..LENED 1,088.50'54'm-, t--/f-II>ftltu~~~~-r 05'bac>,0~vt 411\ .Syl 5-71 Ne Â· : . 1-fl] 67-*q:21CD --7 -NON ININDONS 55-5 BAST 0 62 5-TORS ~ _.LIÂ»5.1.MIDNV. 1 TA 1 -12-2 65Â¢Vi 'LJ 1 * 2 3 Â»1570Aks 2>'INMINS _g L EV'Â«710 N 1 j L.1 6'Ne 0 i ._E_CON<fl -2 555- LANDSCAPE . ~D ALSTROM GROUP _ - -- -- -~ - PLAIN| - PO CH+ ARCHITECTURE 0 Z NOFa-3-1- ECOLOGICAL , POB 551 161-eli 9.01 2. ' '' ASPEN, COLORADO ~ '' 81â‚¬12 432 TWINING Tt~~~~----1- , 1 FLATS ROAD 1 1 :i NAP+ 1 hi L E\40 COLORADO ' ~ Â·'.,t. . WOODY CREEK," 1 PDAN 9701 125 4576 FAX -ft 970/ 925'1745 TEL 1 , Te e - 1/411 = 1 1.,1. Dll POTAMKIN 4. RESIDENCE L 110Â·EAST BLEEKER 3 ASPEN. COLORADO , B1511 kEST-DRS?D -~ date: , b; N Co :Â·Â·4 37#Y SEE.. LANDSCAPE 17 JUNE 20 4 -- .- PAN ' ~ drawing no: . r{ HPCFINAL APPROVAL 74 2 37'-O ' 5><Â·' s-7- a,Nee E _.270 QEVAN SEE--DAND 0-FE - -- PL+44 55LDIN 18,1-011 -- 1 4 -4 -1 V i Â· .FILAT / fs><i ST;>425 BOOM 19 2 -TD AE VAb - 4 OPEN _TO / -- --DE-LON r /0 ~1_.. j .x \ 1 -X' X x\-1 /CI / Nee-+507 \VJ IM ' 4 Art- 44 N 1 t e 1~1 \ 7*-f 7Â»21 r,1 -, / 11/ ./\/\ JI.E-1 - I 21 2-2=11134'9-9-Â·-- 1411L]Al I Orq . 1- um=ES. .P, PN NUM HALA 1 3~>4 111 S 4--%-<C--Â·--245;~ttl-'CS, r---L E- ... u I- 0- Â· 17-T-t . t 9 1 0 up~ NEIN F:Â»6 6.le, O '~ ~t~/Â»Nif-_- - 4 L.1 1 r=== 2 ~ _~] (23 DENI 9-4 .ext'ST, FSâ€¢Â«, 811,0 _73-D-Â»> h/r,Â«S--TECR. ~1.*>t,it f 85312.00Â« *1- CE) 9%'s-77 Nâ‚¬ . 7+13 IAIED 1, 4,99,0 stÂ· FT, 1 PI N, FLB. 4 29]Nlbol/4 -70 ReÂ»N~L- '5537001Â« 1 4-: (03 =3Â»6*6- T - - 4 1 3+J.Câ‚¬ INy Z 0 -6 4 +ve'.2 u 1, i / <43 tek 4 , or F=1(g 1 /0/- 01 1 709:26 RENde\%Â·irm)N (35>OrÂ© Noq~TH- , ALSTROM GROUP D ECOLOGICAL iN 161-eli , 5 -O / . U--7 ASPEN, COLORADO ARCHITECTURE P08 551 1 11 81612 n 432 TWINING FLATS ROAD WOODY CREEK, . 0 41 U'713.Ef LEVED 970/ 925 1745 TEL A COLORADO PLÂ»N 970/ 925 4576 FAX -1,/ 411 = 11 -O i POTAMKIN RESIDENCE k 110 EAST BLEEKER ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 date: 17 JUNE 2002 drawing no: HPC FINAL APPROVAL 3 2&9, / il 1 =LAT / < 24~JET314 BEL O H 1 1 - 1|<i-_INODD--Le*+Jete 1 BErÂ»â€¢dEMENT , 1 1 ill 9 51- 1 1 'N + r r 1 00 *42.1 *tti / 10 f 15. 10: 1.1/ 0 1*cD 614Â·INas N-ODD--SH"Nel.- 1 DORS=B 94 1 .- Mor= 12009= 1 U -5>â‚¬TÂ» , 0; 11/ 3 0>- 01 NC- 1Â»159+ . Zy 1 2-9807 R V) -- - 5>< tsr & 5453 * IFLAT --Reef= ~ CPORNAGB.-7,/ 4 21@. ST,â‚¬1*. / 1 - R ON.7->Â»UNSIED ' - 300~14>1 ILâ€ž 1Â«E T'(SANNE /4 1 r 1 ./.3 M : 132' < = 1 / c - ry e 1 ( A L P 1 -*ro ] . Â¥1 1 1114 0- h/123344 5 56 -1 .Â©PICK / C+41bdNE'VS 1-_ -.soor - 4 3, 1 5%15-'rle .7~ RE'VIA.IN act. 1 342 D \ 1 1 < 1 < ---ahs.2 1 PORN/TER- 1 -iczale.ER L_ ~ REMAIN 70 REÂ»NN 1 1 DALGNY - e,=LOk.4 ' 149Â©D I-SHI Na--5 =4357 e ~ 9 E PLACE#ENT Roorm C RELOCATED - *.-- .-2,19,1.- C- ' "D REMAIKI ALSTROM GROUP 1 / 10! 1,2.- ~ m><ISTINAB 14 ORT ECOLOGICAL ARCHITECTURE POS 551 ASPEN, COLORADO 1 10:1+ k 'L-j 81612 432 TWINING FLATS ROAD =- LIPBER .- 19Â·009 WOODY CREEK, COLORADO ,\ r -PUAR /70/ 925 4576 W 970/ 9251745 TEL POTAMK1N RES-POFEED 1 -1 ES-ThfiED RESIDENCE < 110 EAST BLEEKER EAX INI NCÂ©/41 I --MORCÂ»---Roof- h ASPEN. COLORADO bel 0161 j -,AND PORC!-1- 51611 PLAN I--.-". date: 17 JUlIE 2002 drawing no: H PC FINAL APPROVAL 4 EXISne ROD- 72005'S-- -129 RfbrAIN 5Es 5â€žLON 1 15>41:ST-INe 665LE DORk/[Elk.4 SHâ‚¬D \ 1 PORM=R -8 FENRAIN 7 NEW *Bourive --: NUIN- ADDIT'IDN 491 # ~sE= 52-0143 -M,hIN ROOFÂ¤ - BEYOND 1,1 -1Â¤ e. r - 915-ItBÂ·.2- 1 07*54 ABVEL -- Noto . -- - '- -- SHINE,62 -- - ------------------- - NON - H I S-OF=u c RESTORe 0 -------- LAUNDIer' Sh/1 HIS-1~FIC 4YÂ©- O .- SO SE>Â·1+44 - ADDITION i _ChIll>;DDN CE><3 = EXISTTIN'a zzr EX --U-==37 - FULL---- _ KINCDON - ---- 'To UN/AIN RESTERAT/D N - - i *TS-TOR ict. _. El S-0'6,8 ADDIFT#N i !*GNN LEVE!.0 - 1 ,; - ---OEMOND T= *v --- _ ~~~__-_-____ - i | - NON 381.. HILINe IN!NDONS Â·i Belck ophle . EXIS-11140 ' Res-'DRS (3 MRON-r 66.DRODIV[ ADD 1 -1- ft W HHS-IDBIO taESTORE 5 1571#e -7!t. RE 41,4 IN BRIc< DN STONS LED>em MoUND, E 549' HIS-70 8Ic All NDCIN , Poic A .AMVE -1--P>< 15-1-, FeNT - DDZ, LOGAmoN 1 --SAST--~ El/EVATTON | | -7n-F~-:-w-:~ MEFprlg E><1673 5RICK. 35-T-AiNgp ... ChiÂ»PNEYS - - _ - -cacpg-g~.~- 4--51NL.St+tre.e~.,- Roo,4 INe - .*- NE IN- ~ Boop _ 6 JHSTORIC RES![DENG= 01 7-1359 -RETARDAN-1- l -I 11 N C '9 3. 5% '11618 .SH#D -7 A Erâ‚¬-ED 04 0 6-TERN % 1.. DbRIVIER- 70 1 -EED CEDAR >91\BLES 1 j ver 2-r,4* 3 -- 9 e h/lAi N ON CESÂ» R BR MAÂ«HERA = 20,6,1.- $0% 1 UNDE<l..A-eNT- 1 10, /X 710 16, misT, , - 52<15Tlkie dABLe 31 -7 TNo--- i / T I FLUM /~ DC) Q VIER, 369540 to -N fk~ -It Remp/,/ (545 Â»Ove - EMI 5-1-ALNEDt 11 2..1.1 1 1 t~ CaDAN _F>l,ANA 44 1--.:-- - -171,11-rER L EVEL -8 Â£ f 5 0[Ne 19 11 - 0 --IHtS'Top i C NfEN UFFE'B- _ , i 0.11 , FLO U #1% - ... ... .- - - u- - T,ir--9)% bege- _vt'T~ey ~ - '. ~ - NES-TOBE --GIJARD*KIL f 1 1 -- /; HIS-TOR IC 1 A,60 04000 i _F'ORâ‚¬ A-1 J WINDOWS- AND - ; "-goot=, *16 j AND 50%Â»f. ~ = CÂ©DR5 4 1 191-9 02 t . 11 -1 Â® 0 I . 1 '161 INDO IN -Q : DIVIDED 61!TE ] 1 7 1 1 \ I i ST,NNED 1 FICK - 1 \/ECTO 1 , jill'\1 111: i 3'te 52=1 e ,- RES-MR,Â«ON ' VE> ECOLOGICAL NEN *141 3 - plaER. LE ~ ALSTROM GROUP (- 1 '-GIl) -- -- D EVEL 1 - STORI-CD POB 551 ARCHITECTURE Â· ASPEN, COLORADO CES-T-Ufie i 81612 1 -> Il . 1'~ ;ple-rÂ©Mic 432 TWINING FLATS ROAD l aer ' INDAN i 15Â·jee-7 -Alll L...0 --,44-el- 3.11$11 1 1 - 1- " ta 1 2,1-011 4/- f - 51- 1, 1 COLORADO 2 1/<-Ene I -01 1871-011 WOODY CREEK. - -~ * 970/ 925 1745 TEL oCCUR-5 - 1 1 11 ,~ 1 11 1 970/ 925 4576 FAX POTAMKIN | 30 4 0 - 1 ' RESIDENCE, 11 301-0" f - 110 EAST BLEEKER ASPEN, COLORA INEN 5,024'rT' I i 81611 1,â‚¬VEL- -~.7-4-7-------------1/friti date: 17 JUNE 2002 drawing no: 5 HPC FINAL APPROVAL i/AN= 11- 0 11 -0 _-2.- SHED Do AMEA-- -23 MASTE;2. 6 +74 - r=,0 g pâ‚¬PÂ©'ZOON/1 1 7 * 1 R M 1 1 |1 ST* IRIN,AX ROOM - 1 -- 55Â»ND Â©SE 566'1"fON Z. f .1 . 1, ZI ~ 11'll 1, 17859 LE'VEL '11 1 hil I 122-9,4' PJSTos-Ic UPPER, LA/1- i . 3 11 1.1 1. , 1-1 1- 1 '14 1~ I" ~i i \ ISMS [PENCE tit___ MiST-vel c 1 gil 1 h!.2 1 1 lili 1 52Â¥0 +4 D .S/Al@ PATIe 1.1 NO SIC)'Ne U' rid '''1 1556 an'DIND 1 11 L /'ILANDSCÂ»al 1 1 1 1,11 I 1 -1 -1 1 -' 1 4 ~4 - PWAN ~ 1-111 MAIN LEVEL- 11 1 1.1 J' 1 //6/4 2601 1-1181'0RIC> - T 1 3 ZI: 1 1 le - 11 11 11 11 . b RecT VENT f 51Â»INES= 744 ve=-TIGAL .~~ '~ 59.APPL IANCE ~1~ Ge.C+8Â· ;SID I Ne , *FIi-74.-5-4.- i -5:-A NED --OECAR 1 *36\SCIA@ NEN ADDITION , 1 'ZINC ROOMINe , 70 5]NC - SIDINe SA-00 N5 4- 0.-SeleD 9' SICI'LI@~+~31 -DOEIV:ER Fl] Â·s--0 21 C Â· ~ | ] 1 - -.~ -/ A 0 _42*52 1 1~ 1 " ?13% m i -4 4 j ~ ?14(Ili~ 44 !iI -~--- - ~l~-~~i ;~-:'1" :,~'itÂ·:'1,~~ ti~~i:,i - =1 -1 19.*1915:--- - *---_____. LI'T' bri' Il m .=Â§561 uppEA 1>V>. 4 - , [ 1 'r-â‚¬)16-m ; 1 )1! 9411111 &=motÂ©'C) L N 111 4 1 i 1 ' ALSTROM GROUP ECOLOGICAL - 1 1 - . '1 I d s iaic ' I'' 1'41 lili 111'll NEI/,1 MAIN DEVE'I, ~ , ARCHITECTURE - - POB 551 1 1 11, 1 ' 1 -(1 1- *D ASPEN, COLORADO 01-9 11 MUDE 0 - 81612 ' 1 432 TV,fINING THIS -PortÂ·104 - REAR DECK J i i | 91 - 011 ~ COLORADO ~ FLATS ROAD WOODY CREEK, 1 70 * 02 hÂ»,1 16 -0. , 970/ .925 1745 TEL 970/ 925 4576 FAX -467#els- -1 1 ' ST)4112. | -O K ~ ' POTAMKIN , 1 RESIDENCE 110 EAST BLEEKER 2 1 ; ASPEN, COLORADO : 81611 1 -Nel,1 -Â·jASEMENT 1-- . i date: 4 -4 17 JUNE 2002 , drawing no: HPC FINAL APPROVAL 6 /4'1 -1'.Ch; r Â·23 %-27Â·0 sr<ilÂ·t la+T- Â«---4-- *ismhle 1 4/2/ - 1 051:KNiffeg 1 4 -ls ReÂ»44'N LIF~t='ae LEVEL -44/ li -lE / 4 NEIN ADDITION 1 - =F [11 - 01 8-11 ---*-41-14'--Ae- <-- ~~4- . Bglas; f J - OF?Ne / 70. RE_MAI N ...J 400 4 4 14 --88121<- REErs--rof*AmoN Ef ' -4 ~ -1*IN REVEL 9 y -- 4 171 -_ 1 ..._--. 11 ; I i . CRAWL- -Sm/â‚¬65 1 tt 1 1 - BAJEr>re kIT 1 S' 99 SOUCD Ne --5.SOTIC>14 4- -4 21 0 2--(3 5.-Â» L.9. ALSTROM GROUP , ECOLOGICAL t I : ARCHITECTURE - ~ \ POS 551 ASPEN, COLORADO / 81612 432 TWINING FLATS ROAD WOODY CREEK, COLORADO 970/ 925 1745 TEL 970/ 925 4570 FAX POTAMKIN RESIDENCE 110 EAST BLEEKER ASPEN.COLORADO 81511 date: . 17 JUNE 2002 drawing no: HPC FINAL APPROVAL 1 EXHIBIT ..-- Il _21/ 1 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE L-----/ REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 216 E. Hallam , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 10 Julv , 2002 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, F. L. Stan Clauson (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 (IE) ofthe Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: X Publication ofnotice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper qf 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. 1 X Posting of notice: By posting ofnotice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible fromthe 19th day of June_, 2002, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photogr~aph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. X Mailing ofnotice. 1By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) ofthe Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, hotice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet ofthe property subject to the development application. The names and addresses ofproperty owners shall be those on the current tax records ofPitkinÂ·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. .. PUBLIC NOTICE - â€¢. DATE ,<1 -, m - TIME 3,0pv PLACE .â€¢ - PURPOSE ' R vM E-7-77 ' --rf'-__ ~_1Â«--4 - A 7 -2 (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision ofthis Title, or whenever the text ofthis Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal ofthis 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 bfowners ofreal property inthe area ofthe proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on suph-amendments. C ck PX-(- f- -Signam?e L'/ The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 1Â°7 day of 3 ,.,w-L , 2001 by P L 5*.pÂ·+1 C.fl AC-2,Â·a--h WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: \\ < 11 | 7.-0 DIP - ' 1 Â· . i A -1 (,06--1 4 LA-J fÂ«. Notary P(~lic I & ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) 1 LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL . 1 fv,<vig g.,6( 4,/ l' â‚¬5 ,Â£) c-OÂ·--< 60 00 /21 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 216 E. HALLAM FINAL MAJOR HPC REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, July 10, 2002, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by the Frost Property, LLC, requesting final major design approval at 216 E. Hallam Street. The property is described as Lots D, E, H, and I, aka Lots D, E, N, and O, Block 71, City and Townsite of Aspen. There are two separate lots, one of which contains the existing house and the other the existing barn. The existing house is to be rehabilitated and expanded into a duplex. The barn is to be rehabilitated and converted into a single family - residence. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5096, amyg@ci.aspen.co.us s/Suzannah Reid, Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on June 22,2002. City of Aspen Account 9 - , SMooth Feed SheetsTM Use femptate for 5660Â® 225 N MILL ST LLC ASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL AMATO JOSEPH A A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY CO STUDIES 225 N MILL ST PO BOX 503 ' 100 PUPPY SMITH ST HIGHLAND MILLS NY 10930 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN COMMUNITY UNITED ' BRUMDER WILLIAM G FLORIDA LAND BERKO FERENC FAMILY TRUST 28.835% METHODIST CHURCH TRUST PO BOX 360 114 N ASPEN ST 2054 FIRST WISCONSIN TRUST CO ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 MILWAUKEE WI 53201 ELDER NELS REINHAIU) ESTATE OF FROST MONA J TRUST CITY OF ASPEN ELDER JANET C C/O US BANK ATTN: LORI J HAMILTON 130 S GALENA ST 202 N MONARCH ST 950 17TH ST CNDT0615 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 8161 I DENVER CO 80256 HODGSON PHILIP R FROST PROPERTY LLC GIVEN INSTITUTE HODGSON PATRICIA H 709 N SPRUCE ST REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO 212 N MONARCH ST ASPEN CO 81611 BOULDER CO 80304 ASPEN CO 81611 LIGHT HOLDINGS LLLP MYRIN CUT'HBERT L JR 37.5% PACE LINDA MARIE 733 13TH,ST PMB 101 300 PUPPY SMITH #203 445 N MAIN AVE BOULDER CO 80302 ASPEN CO 81611 SAN ANTONIO TX 78205 ,YBOK WILLIAM G JR TRUSTEE PENN PAUL E & SUSAN W PUPPY SMITH LLCÂ· 14023 220TH AVE NE 3830 E 79TH ST 205 S MILL ST SUITE 301A WOODINVILLE WA 98072 INDIANAPOLIS IN 46260-3457 ASPEN CO 81611 SADLER PRISCILLA ANNE TRUSTEE FOR SEGUIN WILLIAM L SUTTON JENNY W SADLER PRISCILLA A REVOC TRUST PO BOX 4274 4101 CUTLASS'LN PO BOX 2989 ASPEN CO 81612 NAPLES FL 3.4102 ASPEN CO 81612 SUTTON KERMIT S & JENNY W . US POSTAL SERVICE 801 12TH AVE S STE 200 WESTERN REGION NAPLES FL 34102 SAN BRUNO CA 94099 . Â¥~ AVERYÂ® Address Labels Clear Laser 5660Â® MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 216 E. Hallam Street- Major Development Review (Final) - Public Hearing DATE: July 10, 2002 SUMMARY: This project affects two parcels, which are currently separated by an alley and which are both listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures." The front lot contains a 19th century house, commonly referred to as the "Mona Frost House," after the long-time occupant. The rear lot contains a large 19th century barn. Both structures are in very poor condition. HPC has granted conceptual approval for this project, which involves an addition to the house, converting the structure into a duplex, and adaptive re-use of the barn as a single family home. According to the Municipal Code, "Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part o f their review o f the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant." The HPC conceptual approval included the granting of setback and parking variances, and an FAR bonus on the front parcel. The exact variances are listed in the attached resolution. HPC has also authorized the relocation of the. historic structures within their respective sites, and demolition of a non-historic carport on the Mona Front house. This project is under review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council for several actions, including abandonment of the alley, which has previously been vacated throughout the rest of the block, and permission to use the trail along the east side of the Red Brick School as a driveway to access this property. The Planning and Zoning Commission is conducting a "Conditional Use" review to determine if the front lot will be allowed to have a duplex. A single family house is a permitted use, but landmark properties can apply for a second unit. This application has been continued to July 16th, because the P&Z wished to hear the outcome of Council's July 8th decision on the use of the driveway. P&Z expressed concerns with the duplex concept, but the applicant has informed staff that whatever the outcome of that review, the design will be as represented to HPC now (with the possible conversion of the door on the front of the east unit into a window.) APPLICANT: The Frost Property LLC, represented by Camilla Auger and Studio B Architects. 1 PARCEL ID: 2737-073-14-001. ADDRESS: 216 E. Hallam Street, Lots D, E, H, and I, aka Lots D, E, N, and O, Block 71, City and Townsite ofAspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential). CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residence and storage building. MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) The procedure for a Major Development Review, at the final level, is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. A list of the design guidelines relevant to Final Review is attached as "Exhibit B." This memo will discuss only those which staff finds are not met by the proposal. The house and barn are to be relocated on their sites to accommodate new additions in a sympathetic manner. Staff feels that the architect has been successful in distancing the new construction from the original buildings by using small or very subordinate connecting elements. The new areas are respectful to the historic buildings in terms of height, massing, and architectural detailing. The only outstanding concern with the proposal is the need to document the original appearance of the house as much as possible. The applicant has recently located a 1954 photograph which shows the building, its original trim and features, prior to the modem alterations. This photograph will aid significantly in the restoration of the structure. The applicant has agreed to use this photograph, and physical evidence found during construction to faithfully restore the house. 2 1 0 \ 4 h \14,Â£141 f y. - , ' ' '' tr i '51-1 Â·L' 6 74 ls, ' 1, r =k 6'' 1Â£4* P.:-' : F 4 th Â· Eel r . I. I , 4. .. , WgiMP=~id) ...L. - --* - , w.â‚¬Y t. . 3 4021 _22,=m= =ST -t ~~. illift--*a. 4 4 - 0 t ..7, ~,. , , 0 #I-i -b---Ill..-* ===== i-=1=:,r~ .~:2.% 1~~-1~... 1* 4 9 ---~ m . 4 r -...13/111KW-4.Â· Â·~.. mtv . 'li I ..# __*k- 7*- 9 ';4 ~ 77-f1M1M~4)1~~z# --.-- s .-2-4, ......1= r 1 Vt't i 4 K- I. 1 1 1 . --tÂ·Â·rs-1:**trIff 7/// :,/51 . â‚¬/....1.-1,riwâ€¢~ 1 2 -__-198 - .i)**049';Z=1114 j:$11.EE:3929111Â®*81&JJ-UJ f LiLL 4 i tilt With regard to other conditions of conceptual approval, at HPC's direction, the applicant now shows both historic front porches restored on the house (the east porch was missing on the previous drawings.) The second porch has a grate over a lightwell at it's landing, which is not an ideal configuration in staffs mind, although something similar was allowed for the project at 330 Lake Avenue. 3 Staff has no additional concerns beyond what will be required in the standard conditions of approval. Final approval is recommended. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve Major Development Review (Final) for 216 E. Hallam Street, Lots D, E, H, and I, aka Lots D, E, N, and O, Block 71, City and Townsite ofAspen, Colorado with the conditions listed below. 1. The HPC has approved a waiver of one parking space, a 5' combined front and rear yard setback variance, a 2' west sideyard setback variance, a 7' combined sideyard setback variance, and a 500 square foot FAR bonus on the front lot. A 2' west sideyard setback variance and a 2' combined sideyard setback variance are approved for the rear lot. 2. Elevations representing the proposed restoration of the exterior of the Frost house, based on the photograph, must be submitted for review by staff and monitor prior to applying for a building permit. This set of drawings must list any outstanding issues which will be addressed in the field. The elevations may be further refined during demolition and discovery as more information surfaces. Any information discovered about the historic appearance of the structure must be used to faithfully restore the house. 3. The Frost House and the barn may be moved as proposed. 4. Provide a structural report demonstrating that the buildings can be moved and/or information about how the house will be stabilized from the housemover. 5. Provide a bond or letter of credit in the amount of $30,000 to insure the safe relocation of the structures. 6. Provide a relocation plan detailing how and where the buildings will be stored. 7. A cut sheet must be provided for all new windows and doors on the historic structures. 8. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures by reviewing a plan prior to wiring, purchasing, or installing the fixtures. 9. Confirm that the site plan represents all major landscaping that is to take place and what the material for the sidewalks to the historic structures will be. HPC is particularly concerned with planting lairge trees or shrubs in locations that could damage the historic structure or block important public views of it. 10. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the information is available. 11. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly what areas of the existing house are to be removed as part of the renovation. 12. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor. 13. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 4 14. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 15. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 16. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # , Series of 2002." Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2002 A. Staffmemo dated July 10,2002 B. Relevant Design Guidelines C. Application 5 "Exhibit B, Relevant Design Guidelines for Final Review" 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. o 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. o Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. o 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. o 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. o Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. o Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. o 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. o Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. o Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. o It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. Site Lighting 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. o 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. Treatment of Materials 2.1 Preserve original building materials. o Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. o Only remove siding which is deteriorated and must be replaced. o Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. o Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. 6 2.2 Protect wood features from deterioration. o Provide proper drainage and ventilation to minimize rot. o Maintain protective coatings to retard drying and ultraviolet damage. 2.3 Plan repainting carefully. o Always prepare a good substrate. Prior to painting, remove damaged or deteriorated paint only to the next intact layer, using the gentlest means possible. o Use compatible paints. Some latex paints will not bond well to earlier oil-based paints without a primer coat. 2.4 Brick or stone that was not painted historically should not be painted. o Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer, or patina, to protect it from the elements. Repair of Materials 2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. o Avoid the removal of damaged materials that can be repaired. o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components aIso may be used. Replacement Materials 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. o If the original material is wood clapboard, for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, the amount of exposed lap and finish. o Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. 2.8 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for primary building materials. o In some instances, substitute materials may be used for replacing architectural details, but doing so is not encouraged. If it is necessary to use a new material, such as a fiberglass column, the style and detail should precisely match that of the historic model. o Primary building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic materials. o Synthetic materials include: aluminum, vinyl siding and panelized brick. o EIFS (synthetic stucco) is not an appropriate replacement for real stucco. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. o 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. o Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 7 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. o 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. Treatment of Architectural Features 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. o Repair only those features that are deteriorated. o Patch, piece-in, splice, consolidate or otherwise upgrade the existing material, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be used. o Removing a damaged feature when it can be repaired is inappropriate. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. o Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. o Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. o If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish, which traditionally was a smooth painted finish. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features should be based on original designs. o The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building's heritage. o When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts. o 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. o Using overly omate materials on a building for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. o 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. 6.6 Replacement of missing elements may be included in repair activities. o Replace only those portions that are beyond repair. 8 o Replacement elements should be based on documented evidence. o Use the same kind of material as the original when feasible. o A substitute material may be acceptable if the form and design of the substitute itself conveys the visual appearance of the original material. For example, a fiberglass cornice may be considered at the top of a building. Roofs 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. Building Relocation 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. o 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. o 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. New Additions 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. o The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. General Guidelines 14.3 Keep color schemes simple. (Advisory) o Using one base color for the building is preferred. o Using only one or two accent colors is also encouraged, except where precedent exists for using more than two colors with some architectural styles. 14.4 Coordinating the entire building in one color scheme is usually more successful than working with a variety of palettes. (Advisory) o Using the color scheme to establish a sense of overall composition for the building is strongly encouraged. 14.5 Develop a color scheme for the entire building front that coordinates all the facade elements. (Advisory) o Choose a base color that will link the entire building face together. For a commercial building, it can tie signs, ornamentation, awnings and entrances together. On residences, it can function similarly. It can also help your building relate better to others in the district. o The complexity of the accent colors should be appropriate to the architectural style of the building. o Doors may be painted a bright accent color, or they may be left a natural wood finish. Historically, many of the doors would have simply had a stain applied. o Window sashes are also an excellent opportunity for accent color. o Brilliant luminescent or "day-glo" colors are not appropriate. 9 Lighting 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. o The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. o All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. o 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. o 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. o Do not wash an entire building facade in light. o Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. o 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. o 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. o 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. On-going Maintenance of Historic Properties 14.9 Use the gentlest means possible to clean the surface of materials and features. o Perform a test patch (in an inconspicuous place) to make sure the cleaning method will not damage the surface. Many procedures can have an unanticipated negative effect upon building materials and result in accelerated deterioration or a loss of character. o Harsh cleaning methods, such as sandblasting, can damage the historic materials, make them vulnerable to moisture, accelerate deterioration and change their appearance. Such procedures are inappropriate. o If cleaning is necessary, a low pressure water wash is preferred. Chemical cleaning may be considered if a test patch is first conducted to determine safety. o Also see technical rehabilitation literature published by the National Park Service and available through the Aspen Conununity Development Department. 14.10 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. o Avoid the removal of damaged materials that can be repaired. o Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epo)des and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be used. 14.11 Plan repainting carefully. 10 o Note that frequent repainting of trim materials may cause a buildup of paint layers that obscures architectural details. When this occurs, consider stripping paint layers to retrieve details. However, if stripping is necessary, use the gentlest means possible, being careful not to damage architectural details and finishes. o Remember good preparation is key to successful repainting but also the buildup of old paint is an important historic record of the building. The removal of old paint by the gentlest means possible, should be undertaken only if necessary to the success of the repainting. Remember that old paint is of very good quality and is enviable in today's painting world. o Old paint may contain lead. Precautions should be taken when sanding or scraping is necessary. 14.12 Provide a weather-protective finish to wood surfaces. o The rustic bare-wood look is not a part of the heritage of the historic districts or individual landmark properties. o Painted surfaces are most appropriate. Stains may be accepted in combination with materials that give a well-finished appearance. Use water seal to preserve the porch deck. o Rustic finishes will not be approved. 14.13 Leave natural masonry colors unpainted where feasible. o Where the natural colors of building materials exist such as with stone or brick, they should be left unpainted. o For other parts of the building that require painting, select colors that will complement those of the natural materials. o If an existing building is already painted, consider applying new colors that simulate the original brick color. o It is also appropriate to strip the paint from a masonry building to expose the natural color of the stone or brick. 14.16 Locate standpipes, meters and other service equipment such that they will not damage historic facade materials. o Cutting channels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric and is inappropriate. Do not locate equipment on the front facade. o If a channel must be cut either locate it on a secondary facade, or place it low on the wall. 11 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 216 E. HALLAM STREET, LOTS D, E, H, AND I, AKA LOTS D, E, N, AND O, BLOCK 71, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2002 PARCEL ID: 2737-073-14-001 WHEREAS, the applicants, The Frost Property LLC, represented by Camilla Auger and Studio B Architects, have requested Major Development Review (Final) for the property located at 216 E. Hallam Street, Lots D, E, H, and I, aka Lots D, E, N, and O, Block 71, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The property is listed on the "Aspen Inventory ofHistoric 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 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, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated July 10, 2002, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended that the project be approved with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 10, 2002, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and other applicable sections of the Municipal Code and approved the application with conditions by a vote of_ to _. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC approves Major Development Review (Final) for 216 E. Hallam Street, Lots D, E, H, and I, aka Lots D, E, N, and O, Block 71, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the conditions listed below. 1. The HPC has approved a waiver of one parking space, a 5' combined front and rear yard setback variance, a 2' west sideyard setback variance, a 7' combined sideyard setback variance, and a 500 square foot FAR bonus on the front lot. A 2' west sideyard setback variance and a 2' combined sideyard setback variance are approved for the rear lot. 2. Elevations representing the proposed restoration of the exterior of the Frost house, based on the photograph, must be submitted for review by staff and monitor prior to applying for a building permit. This set of drawings must list any outstanding issues which will be addressed in the field. The elevations may be further refined during deinolition and discovery as more information surfaces. Any information discovered about the historic appearance of the structure must be used to faithfully restore the house. 3. The Frost House and the barn may be moved as proposed. 4. Provide a structural report demonstrating that the buildings can be moved and/or information about how the house will be stabilized from the housemover. 5. Provide a bond or letter of credit in the amount of $30,000 to insure the safe relocation ofthe structures. 6. Provide a relocation plan detailing how and where the buildings will be stored. 7. A cut sheet must be provided for all new windows and doors on the historic structures. 8. HPC staff and monitor must approve the type and location of all exterior lighting fixtures by reviewing a plan prior to wiring, purchasing, or installing the fixtures. 9. Confirm that the site plan represents all major landscaping that is to take place and what the material for the sidewalks to the historic structures will be. HPC is particularly concerned with planting large trees or shrubs in locations that could damage the historic structure or block important public views of it. 10. Information on all venting locations and meter locations not described in the approved drawings shall be provided for review and approval by staff and monitor when the information is available. 11. Submit a demolition plan, as part of the building permit plan set, indicating exactly what areas o f the existing house are to be removed as part o f the renovation. 12. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor. 13. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor. 14. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 15. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 16. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of July, 2002. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk STUDIO B architects 27 June 2002 Amy Guthrie Aspen HPC Officer City of Aspen 130 Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: 216 East Hallam Street Mona Frost Property - Final HPC Approval The Final Development Plan set of architectural drawings and plans exhibit the same character and architecture as the earlier Conceptual Plans with a couple of minor modifications. We have added the smaller existing East facing porch back to the plans and elevations and have scaled back the West-facing porch to the existing condition as these porches appear in the Sanborn map. We have elaborated on the exterior material palate to include a stone base to the historic house and barn, and propose painted clapboard siding on the historic house with painted wood windows and doors. The new architecture has sealed natural wood siding, clad doors and windows, and standing seam metal roofs. This difference in materials would provide the element of contrast between 'Old and New', while contextually responding in massing, proportion, and scale to Hallam Street and the neighborhood. We propose that during demolition, should the actual fenestration pattern be different than what we are proposing, that the elevations would be changed to reflect those changes since we have not been able to uncover actual historic photos of the property. This would be coordinated with the project's monitor. Regards, 0 ~ 1 AAn Scott (inclenau Studio B Architects 555 n. mill st. aspen co. 81612 970.920.9428 fax 970.920.7822 LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: Frost Property Location: 216 E. Hallam Street; Lots D and E, and Lots N and O (a/Ida H and I), Block 71 (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) APPLED*F r Name: Camilla Auger, Managing Partner Address: Frost Property, LLC, 709 North Spruce Street, Aspen, CO 81611 Phone #: 970 544-0745 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Studio B Architects, Scott Lindenau Address: 555 N. Mill Street Aspen, CO 81611 Phone #: 970 920-9428 Fax#: 970 920-7822 IE-mail: studiob@sopris.net TYPE OF APPUCATION: (please check all tbat apply): Conditional Use El Conceptual puD C] Conceptual Historic Devt Special Review Â¤ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ,E[ Final Historic Development Design Review Appeal m conxptual SPA U Minor Historic Devt GMQS Allotment ~ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) U Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption El Subdivision U Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ~ Subdivision Exemplion Oncludes Â£ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane U Lot Split 01 Temporary Use ' Â® Other: Relocation ~ Lot Line Adjustment Â£ Text/Map Amald!=t EXISTING CONDmONS: (description ofexisting buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) Existing historic house and barn, currently non-habitable. Will relocate on site and renovate. PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Would like to move structures and add onto each structure, creating a duplex with the main historic house, and a single-family home out ofthe existing barn on the rear parcel Have you attached the following? FEES DuE: U Pre-Application Conference Summary C Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement Â® Response to Attachment #2, Dimensional Requirements Form Â® Response to Attacbment #3, Minimum Submission Contents Â® Response to Attachment #4, Specific Submission Contents Â® Response to Attachment #5, Review Standards for Your Application mmmmmm RESPONSE TO REVIEW STANDARDS 216 East Hallam St. A. The proposed development is compatible in general design, scale, site plan, massing and volume with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with the development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. The massing and volume of the proposed additions are intended to defer to the historic house and barn. This is primarily achieved through careful siting of the new construction. On the south lot, the street fagade of the addition is set back 31' behind the street fa,ade of the historic house, and presenting a narrow, gable-end profile to the street minimizes the bulk of the addition. The two-story addition is separated from the new garage on the historic house by a one-story volume. The addition to the barn on the north lot is located along the less visible east property line. Its lower plate heights and ridge height result in a massing that is subordinate to the bulk of the barn. A one-story link connects the addition to the historic building. B. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development. The site is a boundary for mixed use within this west-end neighborhood. Residential and civic/recreational uses exist on adjacent properties. The proposed development expands the existing residential use of the property, which is consistent with the residential use that is evident to the east and across the street. C. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels. Restoration Of the existing house and barn are integral components of this proposal. The extent of restoration remains dependent on the discovery of appropriate documentation or physical evidence as the process proceeds; however, every effort will be made to restore the structural and physical integrity of the existing buildings so that all historical significance is preserved. D. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. The restoration Of the existing buildings is intended to reverse earlier remodeling that has eroded their original architectural character. The restoration of historic window configurations, replacement of exterior finish materials and structural stabilization will return historic architectural character that has been lost over the years. On the south lot, a significant setback of the proposed new addition allows the historic house to maintain its prominence on the site. . \ li \\ \\ \ 4 4 \ A \ *\ I % \4 ... J % 2/qi . K 1 * F XI \ % I\\ \. 1 \1t\ 1 - -- .0.- Jr---- - --- \ Gl \0\ 1 ALLEY (107:.dpe# 20) 7 - --77 tv- 11/ K \\ \\ 7 -T lÂ« \ % o PA -5. n O-4 % . . 4,> -7\ R - -- 2 (0 252~ 10153 -0 \ 11 /1/ 13 1 /2 .\ L--2 \% I 0 Fo (3â€¢6 $*it 4.- J h &4.1- \ \ N %/4 0/6 2/8 320 208 224 226 932 234 'Â·P 234 * (%28Â·230) (331 40 M< p/FE- - ==== : = = = EL=.11=A 6:LAM= = = - V 6FDT OPENÂ¢0) 11 . 0/6 11 % 11 , 75 \ 11 N,MoARREN Jr 11 6 11 11 MONA FROST TRUST BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION/LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND VICINITY MAP et.T.S.) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots N and O, Block 71 and Lots D and E Block 71, Aspen, Co (PARCEL ID #) 216 West Hallam Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 i . . \2 = Halla.m _5-t~ree7--4 obF 1- 40 1. 1 '-I~it I 1.4&4 i - --Bleeker Street 1 1 1. T 1 1.21"pi & ..11 e. .: -- 43 - -W, .Majn__Street (Hwy, 80) CA O 5 2&1. â€¢, 1ia t.â€¢.11-6 - It â€¢#: Fl,i 1.t fill.. <ililijlli~-i. ,â€¢, I ,â€ž D & a,Iâ€¢ 10 /- 3 10 -W._Hopkins .Ave_ ._. _. 1- - -- -9 IC- jlli 1 'â€¢ Wr: 1, ... ATTACHMENT 4 07/08/02 18:15 121 813 262 3335 SUTTON COMPANIES ~ 002/003 EXHIBI-~~- KERMIT S. SUTTON \ 1.//9 0 1 rn July 8,2002 Ms. Jasmine Tygre via facsimile Chair (970) 920-5197 Aspen Planning and Zoning Committee Aspen City Hall 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Ms. Amy Guthrie Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Committee Aspen City Hall 130 S. Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Mona Frost Property - 216 E. HalIam Variance Applications Dear Ms. Tygre and Ms. Guthrie; My wife and I own 131 and 127 E. Hallam which are located at the corner of Aspen and East Hallam Streets and less than one block from the Frost property, This is to voice our deep concern and objection to the variance applications currently pending before the Aspen Planning and Zoning and the Historic Preservation Committees for the development of this property. While we would welcome the restoration of the existing house and barn, we are appalled at the prospect of two additional duplexes crammed onto this property resulting in twelve bedrooms and eleven bathrooms for the site. Notwithstanding the horrendous impact that such density and massing would have upon our Victorian single family neighborhood in general, the utilization of the pedestrian walkway along the western edge of the Red Brick Arts Center constitutes a significant safety issue for those patronizing the Center, Is it necessary to mention the desirability of the additional vehicles concomitant to such density? 801 Twelfth Avenue South â€¢ Suite 200 â€¢ Naples, Florida 34102 â€¢ (239) 263-8333 FAX (239) 262-3335 kermit@suttonco.org 07/08/02 18:16 Cl 813 262 3335 SUTTON COMPANIES 2003/003 Unless the intent is to allow Ihe creation of a pristine example of early twenty-first century unchecked developmental excess, I would urge the Historic Preservation and the Planning and Zoning Cornmittees zo mject out of hand the variances required to build this inappropriate and detrimental development Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Â£0,02#ZIk,- 7=- Kennit S. Sutton ca Ms. Helen Klanderud. Mayor JUN-18-2002 TUE 08:45 AM FAX NO. P. 03/04 EXHIBIT 1 95/0 -612 - [=] ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Doll AAegolows AbtzO . Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Jultg loi /AobA , 200,2~ U STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) ' L @rdlhen C?recn w-ood (name, please print) being dr representing an *plicant 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 rhe 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 ofAspen at least fifteen (15) ~days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. \~ posting ofnotice: 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 iess than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the nublic hearing and was continuously visible from the57% day of Ul"tulf -- , 200.2, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing ofnotice. 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 delivtted or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns 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. (continued on next page) PUBLIENOTICE DATE 1 2, TIME Ze/r PLACE-LL=Â£=- . . PURPOSE- 001 4 ki padawid.i,3 . JUN-18-2002 TUE 08:45 AM FAX NO. P. 04/04 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 Titic 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 ofnames and addresses of owners of real property in the area ofthe proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Sigaure The fo~going "Affidavit of Notice" was*knowledged before.methis |0 day i of , -1 Ull~- , 2002 by M Â¥7 *Crl Ul (*lonloood WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL W 42: ",0 ~ My commission expires: #g #) 0 1 i NICOLE M. 1 1 f DEwirr : P\141,4) Â· kOW)Wt ron NotAry Public ....NW ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL ' MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Planning Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Christina Amato, Historic Preservation Intern RE: 0011 Meadows Road- Minor Development- Public Hearing DATE: July 10, 2002 SUMMARY: The application before HPC involves enclosing a 210 square foot upper level patio on Unit 1 of Trustee Town homes at the Aspen Meadows and adding a lightwell to serve the below grade space. The unit was added to the original Bayer townhouse development in 1996 by the approval of the HPC and was designed to reflect the complex's architectural history. Because the entire site is listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures," the proposed building must receive HPC approval and must comply with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and Aspen Municipal Code. No variances or additional FAR are requested for this project. APPLICANT: Barry Smooke, represented by Gretchen Greenwood and Associates. PARCEL ID: 2735-122-39-011. ADDRESS: 0011 Meadows Road, Unit 1 of the Trustee Town homes At-the-Aspen Meadows, A Condominium, City of Aspen, Pitkin County Colorado. ZONING: Aspen Meadows SPA MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to 1 obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. The proposal is to enclose a 210 square foot upper level patio on the front fagade of the structure as well as to add a light well on the south side to accommodate a new office on the lower level. Staff has concerns with the proposal to enclose the upper level patio. In 1996 HPC approved the plans for the three additional units that were added to the eight historic Bayer structures. Among the concerns discussed at the time was the issue of the street facing faGade in relation to the historic Bayer structures and the importance of a one story element on this elevation. There was also discussion of the open decks, carports, and low pitched roofs that are found on the Bayer buildings and how the new buildings related to those features. Please refer to the attached minutes, Exhibit C. Staff finds that the proposed addition is in conflict with the goals stated in the original approval. See guidelines below: r- 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. o The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. o 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. I o They should not overwhelm the original in scale. ~ 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. o Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the L street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames. Staff believes that enclosing the upper level patio will change the originally approved structure which was carefully considered in 1996 and that it will no longer be as sensitive to the Bayer design. The only way in which staff can see that it would be acceptable to build in the existing deck area on the new unit would be if its design were modified to meet the guidelines and other open deck areas were added to the front faGade to replace this one. Staff does not have concerns with the lightwell and recommends its approval. 2 000 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Minor Development be approved for 0011 Meadows Road, Unit 1 of the Trustee Town homes At-the-Aspen Meadows, A Condominium, City ofAspen, Pitkin County Colorado, for a lightwell only. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution # , Series of2002." Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2002 A. Staff memo dated July 10, 2002 B. Relevant Design Guidelines C. Minutes dated Aug.28,1996 D. Application 3 "Exhibit B, Relevant Design Guidelines for this Minor Review " 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. o They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are himilar to those seen traditionally in the block. o Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. o Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. o On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. o 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. o Roof materials should have a matte, non-reflective finish. 11.8 Use 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. o Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 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. o Overall, details should be modest in character. 4 00 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT FOR A LIGHTWELL AT 0011 MEADOWS ROAD, UNIT 1 OF THE TRUSTEE TOWNHOMES AT-THE-ASPEN-MEADOWS, A CONDOMINIUM, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. -, SERIES OF 2002 Parcel ID #: 2735-122-39-011 WHEREAS, the applicant, Barry Smooke, represented by Gretchen Greenwood and Associates, has requested Minor Development approval for an addition and a lightwell at 0011 Meadows Road, Unit 1 of the Trustee Town homes At-the-Aspen Meadows, A Condominium, City ofAspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Aspen 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. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a Development Order; and WHEREAS, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC reviews the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie and Christina Amato, in their staff report dated July 10, 2002 performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended the application be approved in regard to the lightwell, but not the proposed addition; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on July 10, 2002, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards in regard to the lightwell, but not the addition, and approved the lightwell by a vote of_ to THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the HPC approves Minor Development for 0011 Meadows Road, Unit 1 0 f the Trustee Town homes At-the-Aspen Meadows, A Condominium, City of Aspen, Colorado to install a new lightwell, finding that the review standards are met, with no conditions. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of July, 2002. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to Content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Suzannah Reid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28.1996 Meeting was called to order by ist Vice-chairman Roger Moyer with Susan Dodington, Suzannah Reid, Mark Onorofski and Donnelley Erdman present. Jake Vickery was seated at 5:10 p.m. Melanie Roschko and Sven Alstrom were excused. MOTION: Susan moved to approve the minutes of July 10th as amended and the minutes of July 24th; second by Suzannah. All in favor, motion carried. STAFF COMMENTS Amy stated that 820 E. Cooper was red tagged. Amy also stated that the Hotel Jerome is requesting air conditions for a few days in their rooms to accommodate a group of clients requests. Roger stated that Aspen is an tourist town and possibly health issues are a concern. He also stated that it could be an air exchange.system and more research needs done. Amy stated unless there is some justification she recommends against air conditioners and the use of fans would be more appropriate. ASPEN MEADOWS TRUSTEE TOWN HOMES - CD - PH Gretchen Greenwood, architect presented the affidavit of posting to Assistant Attorney David Hoefer. David Hoefer stated that the affidavit of notice meets the requirements of the City of Aspen and the HPC has jurisdiction to proceed. Amy stated that an approval was given in 1991 to modify the units and-add three new units. At that time all the units weie going to be brought to 2500 sq. ft. Sinde that time the plan has changed and the existing units are going to be itiodified as is without much additional square footage. The new units were expected to be built basically to match. 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 She also stated that tile applicant would like to now change the new units. They are proposing the same square footage but the building has a different character. Originally there were to be detached car ports and the three new units have garages which is very different. There is not the solid and void character in the new units. There ought to be some type of one story element on the street facade. The HPC also needs landscape information. Staff recommends tabling. Gretchen Greenwood is the architect and Doug MacPherson is the developer. There is one site at the south and two sites at the north end of the existing town homes. The Aspen Meadows restaurant is at the South end. In 1991 the units were designed for 2700 sqft. including a ten foot addition on the back and a below grade space. The car port was to be eliminated and garages were approved to be built. Although garages do not exist they have to ability to build them at anytime because they are approved plans. She stated that the proposed plans for units 1,10, & 11 are similar in size in terms of FAR, they are 2700 sql but closer to 3400 sqft. in terms of what is below grade in terms of mechanical laundry room which are below grade quite extensively. The intent was to not replicate the designs of the existing units. There is a one story element at the street which is a garage and the door recesses back six feet with wing walls on either side and cut outs to de- emphasize the garage and pick up other elements of different units. The existing Bayer units are 1 1/2 story down a steep site. The intent is to re- create that with the two story element 30 feet back from the face of the building. The height ofthe existing building is 21 feet above the existing grade at the street and the proposed buildings. are 26 feet. The buildings sit in the approved foot print of 1991. The buildings are separated from the existing town homes about five feet. There will be shingles and clad windows on the building. Suzannah asked about the FAR and does it reduce the availability of square footage for the other units. Doug MacPherdn stated that the Institute owns two other units and David ' McLaughtin owns one and he has assigned that square footage to these three units. None of the other home owners would loose square footage. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28,1996 Amy stated that they were approved for ati the units to have the same square tbotage. Gretchen stated that the SPA amendment allowed the units to vary in the FAR due to the way each unit sits with the grade. Our attempt is to create a different development because there are so many Bayer houses and they stand on their own. 4 Chairman Jake Vickery opened the public hearing. Bob Maynard resides in unit #2 owned by the Aspen Skiing Co. which was involved with the redo of the Aspen Meadows from the beginning. He stated that the square footage is larger than the existing units and in the existing units not one person has tried to do the expansion that was approved in 1991. You can't do it economically. He stated for the last thing to do in the institute is to bring in a foreign design different than what was there before. Harris Sherman stated that he owns unit 91 and he walked the area. As a general matter he agrees with Bob about the character of the Meadows. The existing eight units are low density and they all step down from the south to the north end. There is a feeling of openness that goes with the units. He stated that the car ports create space between the units and for those units that have windows on the north side you can see Castle Creek and the hillside coming down. Herbert Bayer made an impressive design. He stated now on the north side there will be a two story wall beside his unit and he is greatly effected by it literally being five or ten feet from his house. He stated that he is looking into a wall o f the new unit and detracts from his unit and the overall ambiance of the Meadowi It is partly a problem of size and how the units are located. There is adjacent land that the institute owns and the units could be moved 40 feet to the north and vegetation planted. He stated that he did not know what could be done with the south side of the project. He stated that these are serious design issues and impacts. The Aspen Institute owns the land and is selling it to Mr. MacPherson and Mr. - j Sherman does not want to complicate the plans of the institute. They have the right to sell the land and get as much money as they can within the context of what is being preserved. All of the existing eight units are C9 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28.1996 between 1600 and 1700 square feet. On the west side there is permission to add space under the first tioor living room and technically you could not do unless you excavated underground in order to create a basement area. No one at present intends to do that. The proposed units start at 2700 sq. ft. Lip to 3200 sq. ft. which is almost a doubling of the square footage. That will change the character as it is twice the size. If the units could be separated visually from the other units this maybe acceptable. Moving it 40 feet may not be acceptable depending on how the buildings are positioned. Bob Maynard stated that there is a waiting list for the existing units and to say that larger units are needed to meet the market demand is inappropriate. Doug MacPherson stated that there maybe some demand for the existing units but we are taking at a lower price given the price that he is going to pay the institute for the vacant sites. Financially a bigger unit is needed given the difficulty of the site and because ofthe price the institute wants for the land. The prices for the existing units is $500,000. The biggest unit is 3600 sqft. with some of it below grade. The institute had expressed interest in having this kind of unit. David McLaughlin gave us the transfer of square footage to this unit because the institute felt the need for larger units. Gideon Kaufman, attorney for the Institute stated that they support the proposed projects. He spoke on behalf of five ofthe eleven units. In 1991 when HPC had the debate whether the units should mirror the existing there ~ was a split on the HPC at that time. He presented a letter from the institute in support of the project. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Donnelley stated that he is the monitor and acted on the project in 1991. HPC's responsibility then and now is to the existing styling of the architecture created by Herbert Bayer and Fritz Benedict. He stilted HPC cannot comment on the FAR beca'use the applicant does have Â·the right to build to what they are allowed. They are also building within the foot print that was approved in 1991. He stated that there are three major problems: 1) Hipped roofs are explicitly anathetical to that design. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28.1996 2) The roof pitch is too steep. What was approved in 1991 the S. elevation acknowledge the very shallow pitch of the other units and that is consistent with the Bauhaus aesthetics, no hipped roofs appeared in this design. 3) The vertical fenestration or bands o f fenestration always emphasized horizontality. Susan stated that the HPC needs to stay with the Herbert Bayer plan. She also stated her concern is that on the north there is one house and the south has two which looks awkward. It is unbalanced and she also indicated that the new houses should be spaced appropriately, i.e. 40 feet separation on the south. Mark stated that his concern is the proximity of the two units to the existing units. He also stated that roofpitches need addressed and he agrees with Donnelley. Suzannah agreed with Donnelley also. A cue should be taken from the older buildings in the way the massing was done and the way they split from side to side with the stoped roof and flat roof. That is important to the rhythm of the project. They do not respect one another the way the original design does as the eaves drop down. #10 should be sifted to the outside and well as #11. The new buildings need to be significantly separated and the amount should be determined. Roger stated that he was here in 1991 and concurs with Donnelley. He also agrees with the separation of units at both ends. Gretchen stated that they want the units divorced from the original units and it would be better project if they could be stepped down. Right now we are allowed a five foot setback and they are 21 feet from the side so there is room to move. 40 feet might put them over the property line on the road. Doug MacPherson stated that he met with Sherman and his concern was stzparation and he would move them as far to the north as possibly. He ~ Â· stated that he-could get some separation on Bob Maynard's unit on the sollth but the restaurant is close and it is a steep site. He will get a topo done this week. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 Roger asked about the garages. Doug stated that the present homeowners did not want to peruse it. Gretchen stated that if you site visited the area the turning radius would be very difficult to do. Bob Maynard stated that the units a-re large but that is his personal concern. It is deviation from what is there historically that concerns him. MOTION: Donnelley moved that theapplicationforunits 1, 10 & 11 of the Aspen Meadows town homes be tabled suggesting restudy of specific areas: 1) Reduction or elimination of hipped roofs. 2) Reduction Of the pitch ofthe main roofs. 3) Restudy offenestration to be more consistent with the prevailing aesthetics. 4) Investigationof possible further separation of the proposed new work from the existing town homes; second by Roger. DISCUSSION Suzannah stated that she would like massing included in the motion. She stated that you have a tall volume and a longer low volume going along and in the proposed elevations there is one single large volume and the hipped roof doesn't effect that. Amended motion: 5) Restudy of massing in general to reflect a better articulation of heights as expressed in the existing town houses. second by Roger. All infavor of motion and amended motion. Suzannah also stated that she has concerns with the garages. Roger stated that he does not find the garages objectionable and they differentiate between Bayer and new. He also likes the idea of the winged walls and recbssed doors. In this particular case it is not on the street. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AUG. 28. 1996 Donnelley stated that there is a precedence as the entrance to the units is on the side where you park your car. Gretchen stated that the entry is 26 feet back from the face o f the garage. They tried to get a relationship between the depth o f the entry without cars similar to the existing town homes. Donnelley stated that the 1991 approvals did not approve garages within the units. He also stated that he would rather see car ports than garages. He would rather see a more appropriate reflection of the shallow pitched roofs. Jake stated that the issue o f the car port should be considered with the general issue of massing. MOTION: Suzannah moved to table the application until Sept. 25, 1996, second by Roger. All infavor, motion carried. ENTRANCE TO ASPEN Stan Clauson, Community Development Director presented the EIS in its most recent form. The impact statement was handed out to the Board. Stan - also presented a draft resolution to the Board on part of the Elected Officials that would be a unified response. The response accepts the modified direct alignment which goes through the Marolt Open Space. In CDOT's suggestion of the supplementary draft a highway would be constructed as the first phase which would contain two general traffic lanes and two dedicated bus lanes. This draft is asking CDOT for two lanes of highway. and a transit envelope. The concern of a four lane has impacts on Marolt Open space which is too great. The proposed cut and cover of 400 feet would mitigate for the open space of the new road. There would be a continuous flow of open space from upper Marolt Thomas to the golf course. Cemetery lane would be brought in on the Castle Creek Bridge and intersect with Main Street. b Amy stated that at the last meeting HPC did not support the cut and cover and she supplied comments to council. Numerous issues need to be taken into account. 7