The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.630 E Hyman Ave.0005.2010.AHPC0005.2010.AHPC 630 E. Hyman 1 Parcel ID: 2737 182 12 007 HPC Major Development Final & Amendment to ORD.48 Negotiation r Al /4 zil/'5 7 H SE 64 A P rIr rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308 1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f i,r Â· y,!%:' ~ Consultants ff.4 1 1 11': 1, , 'f 1 Â¢; '11 .i' r Â£ a Issue' 1 +Tiv; ~ 2 z ~3~'r 1 - t 29 MARCH 2010 E .4 1 ,( 4 *95... 8'..I.y :t : p. 1, 1 % 4 HPC FINAL-APEROVED REVISION* 1-4 I. f .- . (Goe ?ov Ad lfÂ¢'PO /4 N I . I -/f*23 I + . . S 4*>1.. J.*RE. 77â€¢ *1FLL 0 *iL:loi - ...... 2-i. Siv,44Â·~Ir., fRIA/\ obiU,-hoa of Â· G x ; ----- --I ..'. 1-42--'*'; 1 ...~i#~~~26%1</-,. .. , otEroug\\) :- 1 J ..f[.9 '07/11. 1~DI.21.../29, 7.0//6 . /2/*m :*â‚¬*ru Tr: ~,1 - - 'ill D -t.- ' t - = p . -f.L.Â·~~Â·1Â·LZEâ‚¬U-I-i4- -<:.Â·-Â· ~Â·4* -+-1 - 44 . 1 4---- -- .f-~% 01.-- - -~-2130;~*00.;Â·4.i~~~ I . 4~Â«i,iftil~~-1 4 ..... h. 442/1-' *1~ .-:eL=z:.92: .-r.433. :=17-rÂ·~24124-7â‚¬12#*-42*-.Â·:UN 7,-3-- /mt-Â·42-6. - . J... . 1, i. f. .NK 4' . 1Â¥41/9, .4,~~ U..f,Â« :. - 1 $L --J---. - - . - Â·Â· 1. p 15,9 R Knhivvi %:4 -F. . &4: -Mp ..4 Â£ ..., -9 1,//imv 2 * . . 4 ... $ th.Z.'5#t ; Â·?Â·*r*Â· Â· ./6 97 ..1 4 1 t.r , , ' 1*5 --702911!*% t . 1.97 -L I fl 2 1 1 1 .. I . .1 L . ..4. },1. I . R .64-- 1- 11 4 , 4 1. 1 IP- '14 Â£ Â·9- 4.- .~?â‚¬. - 11, _ : 4. 4 0 1 -- ./, - 1. 1 \1 fax'f : P ...li~ . - . -- 4 A ,[% 9 9 I., 9:r. 1~ 1 1 7 1.-M/-11 1, , I -- , - - " J --tp l- - W 1.- 1,- -- I e l.et ...224 P Â£ 4 I j. -, 1, THE CRANDALL BUILDING 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 RENDERING IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY AND MAY NOT FULLY REPRESENT THE FINAL PRODUCT CRANDALL BUILDING 24 MARCH 2010-HPC FINAL APPLICATION PROJECT NO: 2920 29 MARCH 2010-FINAL REVISIONS DWG FILE: 2920_AO-0.dwg SHEET TITLE COVER SHEET SCALE: N.T. S r / 9 AO.0 & m @ 1 COPYRIGHT 201D ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMAION MAYBE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. RO~.AND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS. INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. : P~ID-fT- -~28,2010Â·GSSprn 71039 MEÂ»naff f f ff - ~ rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f Consultants Issue: 29 MARCH 2010 HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS THE CRANDALL BUILDING 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROJECT NO: 2920 DWG FILE: 2920_Al-1.dwg SHEET TITLE PROPOSED SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" Al.1 COPYRIGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESSN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+SROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, . INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO 1 / \ -m 0 t athÂ· P \Pro}Â·2009/9~_Crandall\Drawings~2920_Al-1 dwg .-0 r ... 1 #,<:1, .. . ./.0.qk,/I".h / 'laki - lillilillilimilillihillillillill""Ri,<R: - - l,/ - Emr# 0. .. 4 - '025.4.* 1, 4 I.......en'.../.- ..... S--t'-0-~1/1&'/-~A--"A- 1 . -. ....iliaeldlill*ilillillillikpillilli ~:-el 1411/LL Â·- ~-7 5~1- 04%*R Ne 411*Nnqi<Ii,1 4 *i ~ - ./ 1 - .41". I-7:53"- 4-1'*UÂ»AW # M-:111-U/0.~0.-l 4 lib ...= 1 0 jg//7--A ..A .. . .A '. A ..A : I .. 2- .... A .'.. f A f.'.0.'4==wil.l + 0 - --'- 02 /04 --Il.li./1. ..4 -.A 0 e. a 1**1 ........ .A.. 4 .. . 19442/mar#A#//Aar -N - -f Â»64*pr. 4 rill"Imillililly 1,=11,~9* 4 . A . i ...0 -M LIS...h -1 1/*~4/1 ./ Aa--1 *9*}&882,2%:4, 4/24>Â»., 4 '' / --'46 0404255*64~~~:~5~*f#f#2%"bt}*{%*ai~,2 ill:'.-: i le' I..ablAM//i 1 I. 0 - -.m/-/ai.~ .A. ~,e I L/ .. . A. A. . A .1 1 }~ .. ... .... /1 .. 4.â€ž. 4- #-+ 41/,i,haL#-- 94.- ,~ .~ 4 . 1.. -- Al",1llillillilillillifilillilimillilill - Ill - '//54* . i 4 A 4 I ...7 , fili l lill l lilkilillidil:. */i,ilillil livil I ll i ll Ill- I A ....0 1 : 1 fp Aillillilimili~'llill,4. *9.i:*4 Ch rh /.h ~ /h /h /h 5 6 7~ 1 2 A4.4 3 4 A5.2 rle 94'-3" 7'-6" 15'-4" 10'-3" 8'-0" 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" 5'-0" rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f A A Consultants % CD LO 63 2- Issue: 29 MARCH 2010 B B HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS O 0 lA#.1.1 / . ,-- C C A ~A43~ 3 - Â¥ . I h 66 64 - 66 U) U) 80 2- A A A5.1 A5.1 tINKLER PE D D .INE CHASE 4 9 b THE CRANDALL BUILDING E E 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 F F - PROJECT NO: 2920 PLAN NOTES ' ' 1 1 ' ~Â£_11 DWG FILE: A6.1 2920_A2-0.dwg â€¢ GRID LINES ARE TO CENTER LINE OF EXISTING COLUMNS AND â€¢ ALL EXTERIOR STAIRS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH ILLUMINATION. BEAMS AND FACE OF CONCRETE AT FOUNDATION. â€¢ SMOKE AND CO ALARMS TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SLEEPING SHEET TITLE â€¢ DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER LINE OF COLUMNS AND FACE OF AREAS, OUTSIDE EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA AND ON EACH SPRING STREET | ~ mh - STUD OR CONCRETE WALLS. ADDITIONAL STORY. ALL ALARMS TO BE INTERCONNECTED. - BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED PROPOSED (ABOVE) Ii.~SCALE:1/K'=1'-D" â€¢ PLAN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER â€¢ CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL PRESSURE TREATED WOOD AT ALL PLAN TRUE BASEMENT LEVEL SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY APPLICABLE LOCATIONS. NORTH NORTH PLAN DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. ma SCALE: 1/4" -1'-0"- â€¢ HEAT TAPE TO BE PROVIDED AT ALL ROOF DRAINS AND SCUPPER 0 ~DESIGNATED AT DOORS AND WINDOWS DENOTES MEANS OF LOCATIONS. EGRESS PER I.R.C. R310. 8'-0" 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" 5'-0" â€¢ ALL ROOF AND DECKS TO SLOPE A MIN. 1,1/FT To DRAINS. A2.0 â€¢ BUILDING ELEVATION 100'-0" = SITE ELEVATION 7923,84' 94'-3" â€¢ TEMPERED GLASS IS REQUIRED WITHIN 12" OF ALL DOORS, 18" â€¢ FIRE SPRINKLES ARE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT BUILDING. A.F.F. AND IN ALL STAIRWAYS AND BATHROOM SHOWER COPYRIGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN ENCLOSURES. THE INFORMAnON AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN 1 â€¢ ALL BATHROOM AND LAUNDRY AREAS TOBEEQUIPPEDWITH 3 4B 5 6 7 8 DESIGN. NO PART OFTHIS INFORMATION MAYBE USEDWITHOUTTHE PRIOR B A5.2 WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN MECH. VENTILATION. â€¢ REFER TO BASE BUILDING CODE PLANS FOR ALL FIRE DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL ' RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. 4 SEPARATIONS. 1 1 15'-2" 2,9 L File Path PAPro 2009\2920 Crandall'Drawings.920_A2-0 dvig A A .... ... 4Â® . , 0 - I. . : 0 M M Â¢4 M 'r~.~21 Et al.....1,:0,-Win,+.~~44 .d ~d . Â» ....... 00,1.M-.... " M il............I- m M 0 ..... m I 1....91 * ilm:4 04 *..~1 'Â¥415':NE*X-:*INK>29 004--~-[1-1 * 0- -. "/1 , *~ - 1.4 A V.... . M .0 a Â¥ M....../.......2 M M- 0 4 - 1.~-=(,4 = N ... ~1~1.16.I.GME~ M - 16/. Allillillillilillillillillillillilliligirmillillillillilillilillilli~i~libill'll'll'll'IL,Ill'll'll'll'llilimill:1 *25* 0 - 4.,04 W 8&" *:Wilillilliw:':':Olimml:Ill:Ill:Im:milljiiiiall'll": ~ dillk-*:illi:Wi"::::::::::.1/'llill'll'Immipum/:Ill"lill/"Illimm:'::'::'::':::::Pd:N, %04~ - 11 - *40 *,4 *,40 - - 0 0 0.~1â€žâ€žâ€ž,Ii- *111'.11....9..... A M -- L 0 m *~1- . 4 =R Â¥*Al â‚¬D Ii",9,11&"i":li- iicm'I *44*. ..Illill..../.1./..Imm ..................................~......1............................ ~4fw 1~~1 1~ ...A., I'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'll'Irdk55................ - ~Le= : ==0~ ill-~- .... . 0 - ./. . .4.~,iel.~ ,â€¢-â€¢S*;isss*;222;22*;i; Ilmi 0% 0 - / 4 ...............................lillilliellillillill.......................1/Im.-~................ 1. -1 0 L==2188*9 .â€ž1 .E-A .. 1-Wil-1 -7,1---- Â»SSM<â€¢iâ€¢*Â»Mâ€¢iâ€¢Â»Â»Mkâ€¢:2*k*SMâ€¢:â€¢%. = . 1 0 -- M 1- e GD- - --~1 1 04 imi M . 'Di M .. 1 ~00~ 'll *.1 e, 0 .=. 1~. - Â®.1 -- *.1 4.-,4.4 i:'22 '.1 Blew< ~:-1,~M ,=g.*m--mgmmgm*.2.1 -L .1. . == -mi 7./A ....M mi .1- e e *:$1* .. ~04 -< .9,92 0.-1 . Â¥ M . - e ..- W. 0 *2:i:Si:S::SS':0 . *61:0+ imi m ~ Bil * Â¥ M 8 . I. Â¥ A D @* 41'4 . ....................... A 0 2 + G m. 8 0 0 0 94'-3" : 7'-6" 15'-4" 10'-3" 8'-0" 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" 5'-0" I D . . . 4 4 4 4 I e . . . 4 * * R rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 TAMARAWOOD ~ aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v BUILDING X36.2 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f 1 1 1 1 1 ..........................IX> .......................?flillI.I.X.X.>1'll ......................> ............../...................................1............ ..............................................X ......XX Â·Â· Â· " ~ '' '~ " ''*.Wy'36<'llyybdy'>AAnAex'Vy'*fbAA'Wb<'Wy><'pyllybox'llyybArx I I. I. M. 21 W M Wp EL=1 92i 9tpr_~~ 9 yl R E E Rl 2 1 92 2214 -@ 9-- - Â«fRI* i Consultants 1 HALL i ~ 111 a) ~ 1 1 1 11 ~ 42) 1~ - EGRESS PATH ~ 11 ,~' ryb!!I-, 1 11 /~ #- 1 105 I n - 1 11 J Â«193)11 - 2--7Â»~_~i_j~==0 1 . il % 3--RDA' ~ | 1 .WI:~0202*27 -23 191 VESTIBULE 1 11 1 0 313 - U 1 1 0 9R@|613'16" 11 11 1 I-10 jh 10*4492*922# 2~~i i ~ - ~-* Er b ~ T. 0. CONC, ~ 1 @UP \/\2 I c~ 1 7%\ 1 ~ I /100'-0" BT@~11" j ' A7.1 -2. # ~J U l n 03 -TE 4 1 1 \\\\ 1 1 STAIR ; =r..- --b< CLE=D â‚¬ *43 1 I Â«5<52>63<~06362 NW~Â»li [-BE-1 : ~1 -0- 1 1 11 1 1 1 f Q!129 / ELEVATOR 11 4/1 1 1-12 -- T. O. ASPHALT 9R@6 3*" 1 8 -r @ ' 1" - 2 DN 1 \ CED / 98'-3" el UNIT HAN[ RA4L ~R IBC SECTICN 1]09.11 1 1 1 Issue: 0 3 1 3 0999000400Â®QÂ®009*00*204 22<92*000$ *000Â®000* 4> 1 ~ UNIT 1 933 - 0 - - -*- - -____ *g:[ c i-i r - - ie J - - %~ - f 1 ' ~ HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS 4 4.,1 _ /4/Â«\ E 29 MARCH 2010 43>Ilt 31-1112 1 Lc-1- _lr 1 T. O. CONC. A6.14 UNIT % T. O. CONC / 98'-3" 2--- ----- -~-,1~ Ce) ~ / 100'-0" E-iii-1 * 1 * S? 9 BENT STEEL ---230112-1-FILEL-LL-2-2-2-1-3 9 COUNTER TOP ~ Lâ‚¬1-1 i 1 - ' 23, B r21)~* N 0 -1 1 - 1--n -- | = -J 1 - 0 /2\ \DN':3 T@ ~11" -10-3:~h-j';~~ *111\4 EXISTING SITE 0 lin 1 4 R@ 7'. 1 1 09 \ 1 1 > I -P=nt 1'1 WALL TO REMAIN ~ 1 1 - Fi 11 /~ --2------------------6.4 l 1 M .1 1 1 45/3 --- A, - -- -- -- tj 8/0 9444 OPEN TO BELOW | ~9~< 8 14 STAIR .' -T-Er r- EXISTING ' I A Lu 4 & ABOVE {3]~ (e) Â«22 D ClltÂ® 1 1 1 8T@ 10" -Â·U--2 / RECYCLING Eci--1 / GARBAGE / 1 I I r6121 DN' 9 R@ 7.125" ~ 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 R/ Â£-C\ ~4.3/ ~ M.1 / Lu THIN COAT CONCRETE WITH EXIT- ~ ~-_% 1 1 1 1 1 HANDRAIL PER 'BC SEC-floN 1[09.11 11[gr.-9 > - 7- 7 2. 9 ~ 4 2 ~b 1 1\Â»- ENTRY | 1 | J | 1 CONTROL JOINTS OVER 4/012 LU b Awco 1 7 | 1 EXISTING SUBFLOOR 1 '~~-~-4 3 A 11 1 11 1-Wil 1 0%11 ler=~ 1 1 1 861 10 1~ A51 i i 1-*iyl In COURTYARD ~| 1 n.2 0 8-r@ 11" 16 4 11 G 1-Gul ' 1 1 1 AX.XI 1 UP c 9 F@7" 1 m 1 ' 1-i66-1 I Ng>Â¢ ce) 3*3 ce) --- 1 5 0 j - 2- 1- : - 7-22 )4***Mugamâ€žMe i 1 0 1 1 f CED ----9----------------41-, - ELECTRIC METERS 1 11 1 1 \/2\ EXIT DISCHARGE 1 \ely 1 1 0/ r 1/ 1 1 -J T. O. CONC. -1- I-'FfELE--2-2-2-2-2-fEi~ _--___---- __- _ -1 1 / 100'-0" I L/ 0 GUARDRIAL IBC SECTION 1012 &16)7.7 1 Il (e) (e) 41* ' T. O. CONC. UNIT -wr-1 100'-0" 0 ORD F~l ~3â‚¬11 RD Fisil I A71 I 1 THE CRANDALL A7.2 1 An I ' BUILDING 0 9 0- - - - ---2- 3 P - 31 9 A AL< 24 w 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE ce) ce) 16 ASPEN, CO 81611 lili 1 1 11~ 1 Of 1 LLI 11 ,-1 1 E I ~1 1 Id UNIT 8 14 1 9 1 0 En w -A p Ill 1 1 1 1 IIi | -1- El 1 -- I A/.1 I - 1 ~ FIRE CONTROL (e) 1 110% CD f r-79 I ~ ~ ~_J 1 4 PANEL LOCATION U v 1 T.B.D. Ooft 1 LOW EXHAUST 1 - 11 11 11 11 147 - --- - - Mn F- 9 rama PROJECT NO: 00211 9=1 12*21 629629 (e) (e) (e) (e) (e) (e) HIGH SUPPLY 2920 PLAN NOTES â€¢ DWG FILE: 2920_A2-1.dwg â€¢ GRID LINES ARE TO CENTER LINE OF EXISTING COLUMNS AND â€¢ ALL EXTERIOR STAIRS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH ILLUMINATION. BEAMS AND FACE OF CONCRETE AT FOUNDATION. TITLE â€¢ SMOKE AND CO ALARMS TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SLEEPING â€¢ DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER LINE OF COLUMNS AND FACE OF AREAS, OUTSIDE EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA AND ON EACH SPRING STREET STUD OR CONCRETE WALLS. ADDITIONAL STORY. ALL ALARMS TO BE INTERCONNECTED. 0 MAIN LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED PROPOSED A2.1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" PLAN TRUE MAIN LEVEL â€¢ PLAN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER â€¢ CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL PRESSURE TREATED WOOD AT ALL NORTH NORTH PLAN SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY APPLICABLE LOCATIONS. :[3 [3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. â€¢ HEAT TAPE TO BE PROVIDED AT ALL ROOF DRAINS AND SCUPPER 0 ~DESIGNATED AT DOORS AND WINDOWS DENOTES MEANS OF LOCATIONS. F EGRESS PER I.R.C. R310, 5'-0" â€¢ ALL ROOF AND DECKS TO SLOPE A MIN. 1"/FT TO DRAINS. 8-0 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" I * . 4 . 4 4 . 4 * â€¢ BUILDING ELEVATION 100'-0" = SITE ELEVATION 7923.84' 94L3" , â€¢ TEMPERED GLASS IS REQUIRED WITHIN 12" OF ALL DOORS, 18" A2.1 â€¢ FIRE SPRINKLES ARE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT BUILDING. A.F.F. AND IN ALL STAIRWAYS AND BATHROOM SHOWER COPYRIGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS ENCLOSURES. THE PROPERrf OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN â€¢ ALL BATHROOM AND LAUNDRY AREAS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH ~ ~h' / ~ ~ DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED VVITHOUTTHE PRIOR MECH. VENTILATION. â€¢ REFER TO BASE BUILDING CODE PLANS FOR ALL FIRE DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHtTECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+8ROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS. : * SEPARATIONS. INCLUDINGCOPYRIGH[THERETO. 21 EVER A .Â£-,0 L 1SIX3 roj-2009~2920_Crandall'Drav,ings/920_Al rIc 0 0 90 (4~<il GB 0 0 94'-3" 7'-6" 15'-4" 10'-3" 8'-0" 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-01' , 51-01' I . . . . . . * I * I * 4 R * D I architecture and urban design rowland + broughton 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 TAMARAWOOD 01) aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v BUILDING A6.2 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f RAIN SHOWER HEAD AND FLOOR DRAIN, 1 1 1 IF POSSIBLE 0 0 53*IÂ» ' ' ' 99 g w EAN.z=*916Â«*997Â°13Â»*33<5Â»Â»92**~*12~*~*Â»tf: 3Â«Â«Â«"~~Â«tÂ°*222*Â«~12Â»*El 4*25*2821 111 t333$*5*RRXRRXRRRXRRXRRy< xxxXXXXX><xxX Consultants 9 ___u -J r- A7.1 | 1 1 1 1, 111 4* 1, 1 1 1 1 - 1 1-I r--1 ---- ~~~ KITCHEN low 1 1 = *)00*00Â®00%02<>009*00000* 7*Â¢40*04*QÂ®*299*2224 U 1Â© 1 1 14Â® 2 -2 900 0 1 1 Eww u ap FiBi-1 timo ST@'1" 2 DN < I T. 0. CONC 10 R~69.16" â€¢UP RES. :4 Â·Â·' il, L=ju RKE Â® - Z i < 0 STAIR * F UNIT 9 12 m UNIT 0 -77" 1-iii-1 It 11 REF 1-iii--1 aLLIQ: ~ | IM<%99056<~2WWWV %6266Â»29991 -0- iiI ~ ELEVATOR me= 10 R@613/16" , IX em ' 1 rwe ~ ~ - / (EED X Ma / 110'-9" HANDRAIL PER IBC SECTION 1009.11 ~ u i I x00*0000&8xxx>x*Xxxx>*< >0<00<>00041 --- 1311 Issue: 1XXX>00000Â¢00< (ER) 29 MARCH 2010 - - -4- 1 29 SMOKE DOO _ -==1 - HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS lilli 3 *D RD RD ~ UNIT |1 - EXISTING ATRIUM FLOOR ~ f TO BE COVERED 1--El --L 11 WITH A GLASS . ----2 11 11 11 Il 233 - SKYLIGHT (e) I[I[ . 1 - --B> - (e) - - \A#.1.1 / ------+------ Ll L BATH BEDROOM 7 - LE[ 4 Ill 8 - 1 1 0 0 1 E-WiE 1 4 A7.1 | ~\ 1 1 /~ --4- ----F------------- 1 - 1 1 + 111 '1 1 . ' 1.-4 0 --- - - ' ' ' FÂ¥}9 r--6- t__ 1-1 -- -1 -- |r -| T. 0. CONC. ~C. ' 1 | BR@7" 1 ~ DN. 1 // 110-9" h 7T@ 11" 1 1 1 vy 1 11 / PUBUC THIN COAT CONCRETE T. O. CONC. 1 ,- X GA~NG ~ *~ 110'-9" I (-1 , , -1-1 211* E & St<~~HT ~ 1 1 1 WITH CONTROL JOINTS 1 OVER EXISTING SLAB A5.1 A 3 '- 1 RE: STRUCT & GLASS g STAIR MANUFACTURE ' rEEl up o 8 T @11"' ~ ~' < gs@r 0 Z I-- 01 1 ~l HANDRAL PER'BC SED ~N ~9.11 1 1 4% | 1- 1 1 - w - E-- - 1- -- 1 EXISTING ROUND 11 0 1 0 01 1 1 OPENING TO BE ~ 1 1 INFILLED WITH | | < ~ ~ ~6.12j OPERABLE ROUND ~ | WINDOW lifl# 9 - 1 Pug-- -- - - -_-_-2- --- - - - -7.-7-------92 1 1 b l.=LJ LEI _ (e) IE[ 1 1 h Irl CO GUARDRIALIBC SECTION 1012&160".7 - UNIT u.1 Z riBi--1 RD = THE CRANDALL RD - A7.1 | 0 4*i> \ BUILDING - tt - - (e) G / 42) -1 25Â»-1- - 1 1 Rf. 11 CiED W4 j | <ER) ~ 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE A7.1 BATH | | ~~ 21-2 H f--\f ASPEN, CO 81611 11 1 1 1 1 UNIT UNIT L ' -- ' -- 0 7 _~ -- 1101-1 1-351 6 .,.. -6 1 <ia r - LO 1 1011 1 W1 11 -Ari- EXISTING WINDOW 1 1 ~ EXISTING WINDOW 111 EXISTING WINDOW TO BE REPLACED TO BE REPLACED N TO BE REPLACED ~ ~ AND REPLICATED AND REPLICATED : -- 0 PROJECT NO: 93 1 4 - 1 1 AND REPLICATED 't*.2-5 - 11 - %22% 2920 PLAN NOTES I I 1 I I DWG FILE: 2920_AM.dwg â€¢ GRID LINES ARE TO CENTER LINE OF EXISTING COLUMNS AND â€¢ ALL EXTERIOR STAIRS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH ILLUMINATION. BEAMS AND FACE OF CONCRETE AT FOUNDATION. â€¢ SMOKE AND CO ALARMS TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SLEEPING SHEET TITLE â€¢ DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER LINE OF COLUMNS AND FACE OF AREAS, OUTSIDE EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA AND ON EACH STUD OR CONCRETE WALLS. ADDITIONAL STORY. ALL ALARMS TO BE INTERCONNECTED. ( 1 j SECOND LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED PROPOSED SPRING STREET ~A2.2 j SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" PLAN TRUE SECOND LEVEL â€¢ PLAN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER â€¢ CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL PRESSURE TREATED WOOD AT ALL SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY APPLICABLE LOCATIONS. (BELOW NORTH NORTH PLAN DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. am SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" â€¢ HEAT TAPE TO BE PROVIDED AT ALL ROOF DRAINS AND SCUPPER â€¢ E]DESIGNATED AT DOORS AND WINDOWS DENOTES MEANS OF LOCATIONS. EGRESS PER I.R.C. R310. â€¢ ALL ROOF AND DECKS TO SLOPE A MIN. i"/FT TO DRAINS. 8-0 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" , 51-0,1 , 0 0 . 4 4 . , â€¢ BUILDING ELEVATION 100'-0" = SITE ELEVATION 7923.84' 94'-3" A2.2 â€¢ TEMPERED GLASS IS REQUIRED WITHIN 12" OF ALL DOORS, 18" ' â€¢ FIRE SPRINKLES ARE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT BUILDING. A.F.F. AND IN ALL STAIRWAYS AND BATHROOM SHOWER COPYRIGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUG,frON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS ENCLOSURES. 0 0 ,__8-3 DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMAnON MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR â€¢ ALL BATHROOM AND LAUNDRY AREAS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH WlaTTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN THE PROPERn OF ROWLAND+GROUGHTONARCHITECTURE AND UR8AN & DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL MECH. VENTILATION. â€¢ REFER TO BASE BUILDING CODE PLANS FOR ALL FIRE r INCLUDINGCOPYRIGHTTHERETO. ' RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, SEPARATIONS. i ZE 15'-9" MOCINIM /\ABN LE AVENUE P./49-2{732-ornndal[DravAngs2920,2.2 <jwg 0 Gee (T) 4% 8 G 0 0 8 94'-3" I I * 4 7'-6" 15'-4" 10'-3" 8'-0" 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" 5'-0" e . 4 4 4 * 4 4 4 I * * . D . I I * rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 TAMARAWOOD aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 BUILDING 011 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD -7 PARAPET WALL TO COMPLY WITH | ~~~ | | ELEVATOR OVER RUN ABOVE ~ 2003 IBC SECTION 704.11.5.2 I . I I 1 1 01 1- - - E GUARDRIAL IBC SECTION 1012 &~.7 \\U\\\- I -11 m Consultants BENCH I 1 1 - TILE | DECK STUDY 40 - F.D.1 -- GUEST (Ej) 1-ICEZI -24 ~ 1~ \86.14/ \ = = BATH 1 GUEST 11 0 # BED 2 1 r ~~ CPT I I STN FECH.=â‚¬HASE ---p ' 4 1 ~ 84 SF SPA | 1 2 -2 0 iII = 1 m 1 1 - 1 1 -r==25 1 1- ~ (%ID 1 = 230 01 I ,-1 1 (ED Â·51 J I ~~ /~~1810/ ~' ' ' 1 1 ro 2 \23./ IF.D. / STAIR ~ ~ Z ly\2< ~~ ~ | ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ C~'~~ 1 -WOODUSE/// (22 ~~ U - H 6 < = 200< ELEVATOR ~~ ~~ EXISTING - . 1 I 152 10 41 ' PARAPET WALL 2 ~ | | 1 ~ HALL CUBBIES ABOVk - TV | DRESSER ~ BELOW 1 '.6" ' N 9 R@6 9/|16" ~ BENCH 0444 DESK 11 1 8 T@'1" 3DN ~ :&4 I ~171 WN I z EX HAVDRAILPER IBC SECTIOF 1009.11 '6 -1 , 1 ,i , I 1 --- V N.. HP R.D. 1 .. . 1 N 1 . N .... 0- Â«40Â®Â«4_ 2 4 2 *an t>%Â»04*Â»20Â». el r-r--1 REF/ BENCH f - 29 MARCH 2010 ]OC -1- --- m 2 â€¢ 1 Issue: Dll 1 0 W4 AKIi! --U~:4 I - L_~172 -1- - 1 -F_* A7.1 _ _ - .~~~~ ~ - ~~~~~~ ~~~~ - - - ~ HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS - - -11- - fLAUNDRY Â£9 ' a-~ TiiÂ¢ Tifi rin~T FL u rin 1i ~ M u u Ni Ndli ~ '1 0 [11] I ulli, li l . tt ll i! c- ~ 1 B. I rm-1 F ---3 1 1 1111111 MIl 111111111111111111111111 " 111111111111 1 11 lk.'Lblk14 ;'i,~dd'v~iÂ·illi" 120BBY'~ 4 | E ~ MECH. 1 GUEST L 1 1 Ill 111111111111 Il 1111111111111111111111111111111111 1| INSET COCO MAT '; 17533-1 QW 1 9 z I ACCESS 1 / GUEST /'0--1 BED 1 ~ ~: 1 \\ 1 -11 1111 11111111 li li 1111 11111111 lili It 11111111111111 11|11|1111,1, i I ll'I ll|11|1111 lili\4 1 0 1 01 1 BATH 1 / /*\ z 136Â§-1 Iii T \-1,/ = f f--44 1 1 L-- 0.- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1111| 11 11 1| 111| 11 |111 |111 1| 1111111111 8 11 11 11 11 11 | 1 4 li li l! 11.11 P IL[Il,LILII 111 '1 1111 111Â¥1 1 FLOOR / (2)11 '- | 27 111 Â® i W/D DRAIN ~ STONEJ 3 WOOD ~-~ 1 1 / lili 1111 11111111 Il 1111 ---- 111 Il 1111111 0 11111111111- -3 -6111'r dh 111 1 1 ----*.-I-11 / 1 k 1 1 b I // i i'lilli N Illl Illilill Il Ilytit'll 0 0 Il Il N Il il Il Il I L _ l il li 11 ILI WOOD ~ CPT ~ 001 11 WIN E~j fay 1 // 636' 1 ~ ' 11 9 Il Il N I Il I I Il Il Il 'I 'I Il Il P r-=11 . 14 'i 'i '4 i li B l il li 1'/[ I m i --f 1 1 111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111 11 l.=N E 111111\4[111111111 77 0 POWDER r-- ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~| || || || || || || || || || || || ~! ~| || || li li i r-7 | 1 2 111111 li ll i| 11 l il li :1 ffil~ ~8 ~ ITED- 8 DRESSER |~ DESK CLOSET TV --- 4---+--41--6 I | 6.4 illl| 0 |Ill B |Ill|Il|Illili lilill N Illillill| 8 Ill_ _I lilli 1111111111111 1 1111 j j 11 Ill 1 J I L HP i' 1 -1- -tud 'U U U U Ult U u b U U U U IMI U U l U U U U tr- [1 i ,- -7 li ]CU'J U U [P-H B U J L JU ' ;---9-Ln L' 2 1 1,== EL_ f. 2 UL--~hn--/r1L=- ---=2=1 =+1-7-- - 1.] ~ 11. 1 -1-1 n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n ri n n n n n n ART n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n 45-4, n n n n n n n n n n n n n n fl r-1 n fl n n n n n 11, <~~ n m n liWOOD PANEL yVALL - fl. 4-1 1 1 41 0 1 | 1|| NOTe u u q u q .,i u q i' 111111 11 1111 N N lilli I #W// v V W M Il H H Illl" Il "Illl li li ~ 4 I ll 'I 'AAL'L !' Il Il Il Il Il Il Ill"ll"ll"ll"I li'ell Il Il Il Il ||IlllIililillillill WOODI " Il STONE / 3 R @ 8.125" f 1 1142=m'lit=Sm 'H~HHI 11 li li 1 lilli 11 11 r'9ZCNIS h D 1% 1 1 1 >42 - 6 Y u ll Il ll li li li M iT Illl IlillIlll [36Ell Il Il ll Il Il ll I IllilillillillllIlllIlllIlltlll ~ ~IlllIHIIIIIIIIIIIIN NII'l''ll DN[ 8 T@ 10' ~ 47-7 IM ~ ~ ' 11 1Â¥.8.9 d h Hil il h dil ii Il li li 111,1111 Il Il li lli '11111111111111 ,i ii 111111 811 11111111 11111<111111111 777111111 11111111111111111111111111Hillillillill 11111111111111111111111111 | louuuouuuguuuouuuuyouuuouL____ Ju~[juuuguu[JuuNuuuM[luguLJU 1 WOOD PANEL WALL ~ U U b-1 U "'IRRoli U U U U U U U U U U I I l] U U U U U U U U U U U L.~ U ----3-1 LIli 0 49 -41 TILE lili ._< JIB 11 7 T @10" 1 A 41 80 - ~, 1 -3 ILLI Boto .~ A â‚¬ E A 2 A /11 DECK ~ r. .. CUe~IES MIRROR ' 11 1 ri STAR r'E A5.1 OVEN/ DRAVERS ~ ~ â‚¬3>1 I ~ ~ ~ I .ar 4 4 24 DRAWERS 1 | ROOF 1 8 R @ 8.125" ~ m 1--3-1 / 1 1 11 Q MICRO ---1 I \~OOR~ ||| ACCESS ~ ~ A7.3 ~ ~ 3 - - ~_a: I MASTER , HATCH | I-ANDRAIL PE~ IBC S|ECTION 1009.11 1 O | MECH. CLOSET 1 1 1 4-11 -1 - - e | -% , ACCESS ~ 1-iii-1 - 1 - -1 -2 1 -1 1 1 1 7 2 1 III ---1 1 11 1 HANGING - 1 111 Pfuf ~ r 4 ) ---------------1---------\ - ~A6.1V Il WOOD | WOOD ~ ~ TILE ~ ~ 1 DN I i g oo WOOD I 1 1 1 11 LIVING ' 8 iiI| ~ 0 kE' f 1 4 1 = 1 1 ~1 11 1 1-3371 1 I b 1 4 1 ~| KITCHEN 1 I I-El I MASTER 1 9 -Cl' 1 \11 MASTER BED 1 6 1 WC N WOOD CEILING BATH Fiwl ' THE CRANDALL 11 1 F - 7 1 1.1 ABOVE Fiirl I r ' 191 1 1 - 1 1= 1 BUILDING ~ 'IDES [_31] 6 1 1 1-WiLl - 1 - - ~ Â® - - /1- ,%_ 31 _ f~,1-~ ~_f~' O- 0 - 11 - -------------- ill A7.1 | I TV IN NICHE WOOD CEILING ~ WOOD SOFFIT 1 1 WOOD CEILING 1 -ro~_ __ 1 Â° f PANT ABOVE ~ 1 ABOVE / no Il O ABOVE I ~ R.D. L_ ___ _ _ ___1 _ _195@13(5* LIE ~ ------ -. _____ _ BENCH -*0*- 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE 8 101 WR 1 4= -9 IE~- --- 2'ADE pOCKET | 1 -- S K = EHEDEPOCKET I E _ - -721 1 i ASPEN, CO 81611 91 ' 1 =i-- --- 75 1 0 A 1:MA-1- H BBQ , ~ H f~ f'-1-~1 / 0 wOOD SOFFIT - -EAVE ABOVE ABOVE / 1 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 GUARDRIAL IBÂ§ SECTION 1012 &1607.7 ~ F.D. ----------17,4 FE-------___ GUARDRIAL IBC SECTION 1012 &1607.7 ///-/--93, i =â€ž-- - 91 - 3\\ - -4 - - - lilie L U L-3 L-3 PROJECT NO: 1~ CMU/CONC - EXISTING 2920_A2-3.dwg 2920 PLAN NOTES ' ~ ~ ~~Jh I DWG FILE: â€¢ GRID LINES ARE TO CENTER LINE OF EXISTING COLUMNS AND â€¢ ALL EXTERIOR STAIRS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH ILLUMINATION. ~Pil.0,/ COLUMN BELOW, PARAPET BEAMS AND FACE OF CONCRETE AT FOUNDATION. TYP. â€¢ SMOKE AND CO ALARMS TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SLEEPING SHEET TITLE â€¢ DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER LINE OF COLUMNS AND FACE OF AREAS, OUTSIDE EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA AND ON EACH SPRING STREET STUD OR CONCRETE WALLS. ADDITIONAL STORY. ALL ALARMS TO BE INTERCONNECTED. 0 THIRD LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED PROPOSED (BELOVQ A2.3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" THIRD LEVEL â€¢ PLAN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER â€¢ CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL PRESSURE TREATED WOOD AT ALL PLAN TRUE SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY APPLICABLE LOCATIONS. NORTH NORTH PLAN DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. cm SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" â€¢ HEAT TAPE TO BE PROVIDED AT ALL ROOF DRAINS AND SCUPPER â€¢ ~DESIGNATED AT DOORS AND WINDOWS DENOTES MEANS OF LOCATIONS. . ~ EGRESS PER I.R.C. R310. â€¢ ALL ROOF AND DECKS TO SLOPE A MIN. t/FT To DRAINS. 81-0 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" 5'-0" * R * , * R b . . 4 . â€¢ BUILDING ELEVATION 100'-0" = SITE ELEVATION 7923.84' 94'-3" A2.3 â€¢ TEMPERED GLASS IS REQUIRED WITHIN 12" OF ALL DOORS, 18" , â€¢ FIRE SPRINKLES ARE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT BUILDING. A.F.F. AND IN ALL STAIRWAYS AND BATHROOM SHOWER COPYRIGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT 13 ENCLOSURES. < < THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN â€¢ ALL BATHROOM AND LAUNDRY AREAS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH v7 8 8 0 0 DESIGN NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY SE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+8ROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN MECH. VENTILATION. â€¢ REFER TO BASE BUILDING CODE PLANS FOR ALL FIRE r DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECWRE AND UR8AN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS R SEPARATIONS. INCLUDING COPYR~GHT THERETO. 2 13MOOd 3aVHS 13300d 3aVHS 13100d 30Â¥HS EXTERIOF 21@ ITvd--'- ,2-,9 L File Path 0 2009,2920 Crandall'Drawings,2920_ 0 Gee (41 Â£#-1 8 0 8 V V G rIr 94'-3" I * . 4 7'-6" 15'-4" 10'-3" 8'-0" 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" 5'-0. 4 . * 0 * 4 * 4 * . * * 4 I . * e rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 TAMARAWOOD aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v BUILDING X3637 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f - PARAPET WALL TO COMPLY WITH 2003 IBC SECTION 704.11.5.2 1-6-1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 1**1 1 1 %.:-% 1 : Consultants 9 - 11 1 1 1 1 - A7.3 | | | Â£ - ------------------------------------- --4- ------- ------- 9 0 +6" -m-1 19\3 7 - | A7.3 | 1 1 1 11 CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD r ELEVATOR OVER RUN .~ ~ FULLY ADHERED MEMBRANE ROOF W/ TAPERED INSULATION 4/>.l.7, AND INTERNAL ROOF +6" 1 1 DRAINS r 073 ~ LSCUpPER ///01*11 Issue: - --1- -, 7----7 \ 29 MARCH 2010 +1.53A - _ _ _ HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS - -0 11 bru zi - - A ,- 1 1 IL 1 Z 1 AREA OF HEAT TAPE AROUND 1 DRAIN 8 8 A 2 1 1 1 1 9 1 ~~UN\\ 1 37 11 0 \ A41.1 / r- Â«fl - 0 LL 1 1//.1 i e- 1 ~ -SCUPPER 1 1 8% - - 4-- - 1 lili - -1 11 1 9< A Q Â»31 ~ M w 77 1 LL 1 >4 k DECK 1 % | 7%/ 440 4 6 -- 0 0 V CE BELOW 1 ff/'/-j - | 41-1 80,0 ,(~ A 1 191 <Im A5.1 i ~ 4,5/ 11/j 1w1 : 73X <1 ------t 44099] -1 III - - 1 11- 11- | 1 1 | 48" x 48" 11Â«11-1 8 2 11 ROOF ACCESS 11 Er,1 6 HATCH A7.3 KITCHEN 38 \ COOKTOP 21 /1 1 1 FLUE +6" 1 \11 Ill I 21 ' 1 1 b Ul 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 LU THE CRANDALL \11 1 1 3 BUILDING - ~ FIREPLACE 1p BBQ FLUE 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE t ASPEN, CO 81611 1 9 1----- 1 LINE OF BUILDING BELOW | +611 4 i -- p E.1 lo UD -1 1 1 DECK BELOW 3 :\ - - - - - - - - \\0 PROJECT NO: 2920 PLAN NOTES 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 DWG FILE: 2920_A2-4.dwg â€¢ GRID LINES ARE TO CENTER LINE OF EXISTING COLUMNS AND â€¢ ALL EXTERIOR STAIRS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH ILLUMINATION. A6.1 BEAMS AND FACE OF CONCRETE AT FOUNDATION. XE â€¢ SMOKE AND CO ALARMS TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SLEEPING SHEET TITLE â€¢ DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER LINE OF COLUMNS AND FACE OF AREAS, OUTSIDE EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA AND ON EACH SPRING STREET STUD OR CONCRETE WALLS. ADDITIONAL STORY. ALL ALARMS TO BE INTERCONNECTED. 0 ROOF LEVEL PLAN PROPOSED BELOW A2.4 SCALE 1/4" = 1'-0" TRUE ROOF PLAN â€¢ PLAN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER â€¢ CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL PRESSURE TREATED WOOD AT ALL PLAN SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY APPLICABLE LOCATIONS. NORTH NORTH DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. a m SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" â€¢ HEAT TAPE TO BE PROVIDED AT ALL ROOF DRAINS AND SCUPPER â€¢ EIDESIGNATED AT DOORS AND WINDOWS DENOTES MEANS OF LOCATIONS. f EGRESS PER I.R.C. R310. â€¢ ALL ROOF AND DECKS TO SLOPE A MIN. 1"/FT TO DRAINS. 8'-0" 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" 5'-0" 4 # I . I 4 . I * 4 e â€¢ BUILDING ELEVATION 100'-0" = SITE ELEVATION 7923.84' 94'-3" A2.4 â€¢ TEMPERED GLASS IS REQUIRED WITHIN 12" OF ALL DOORS, 18" â€¢ FIRE SPRINKLES ARE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT BUILDING. A.F.F. AND IN ALL STAIRWAYS AND BATHROOM SHOWER COPYRIGHT 2Dlo ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN i ENCLOSURES. THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS el & THE PROPERâ„¢ OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN â€¢ ALL BATHROOM AND LAUNDRY AREAS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH MECH. VENTILATION. â€¢ REFER TO BASE BUILDING CODE PLANS FOR ALL FIRE T DESIGN, NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URaAN a : DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE IND URBAN DESIGN SHALL 0, I RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO SEPARATIONS. E1 E2 10'-3" 15'-9" â€ž6-,9 L .Â£-101 LINE OF PARAPET BELOW ~ r rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver,co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f Consultants A B CAD E F A5.1 59'-5" 15'-9" 10'-3" 8'-0" 10'-3" 15'-2" Issue: 29 MARCH 2010 ROOF TOP MECHANICAL HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS EQUIPMENT-T.B.D. 11 A7.3 CYLINDRICAL METAL METAL CHIMNEY CLAD ELEVATOR OVER RUN BEYOND 36' HEIGHT LIMIT - - -- - - - HVAC DUCT OVERFRAME METAL FASCIA CONCRETE PANELS WITH TOROOF- VERTICAL CONTROL - JOINTS OR REVEALS W-3 ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS A7.1 AND DOORS 1 1 0 0 1 METAL PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL METALEASOA 0 0 <fiR) JOINTS OR REVEALS POCKET cia) 4, SLIDER FIXED SLIDER SLI[~ER ECK b 42" GLASS - 91 - *-Ill-- GUARDRAIL - 1 0 11 1, 3 A7.3 1'-6" 1 =11 | | TO. PARAPET A - --1 - -- --- - - - - -120'-7" EXISTING STAINED SIDING 0 EXISTING C.M.U. / CONCRETE COLUMN b TO REMAIN TAMARAWOOD BUILDING THE CRANDALL 14 44Â« - - ---- - - 0-.I Â°4* , BUILDING T.O. CONCRETE * n WIND9 3 _C 0 i N %608'*E EFRONT --~ ----- - 110'-9" ,- , r 01 5 tv 'Al - - k.+â€¢6â‚¬ ':U 4 SPRING .* 21Â». 24146,; 7Â§~-Â· STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 /-ffity â‚¬.b:4:'0./Air 6 -'411 .V '':, 0 1 " 1 I 0 0/\ 0 0 0/\ 0 k #2':'C '~'+3. 1- = , 1%01%13 ly: Aliwi'Lopt-742 ) / / \ 1 IDTHt dE~SE 1 d.-M $ .M I . -42 / / \ ~EY r Â¢XISTING-266'~ ! ~6~ '-* h.r' *%0 ?9 1 19 - *INDOWS & DOORS b /(ED / CER> \ 6 Â® / CER) \ 6 / REMAIN ~ NEW WOOD 'STOREFRONT' -- - -- - - - - ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~R) WINDOW AND DOORS \ 1 1 \\/ \/1\/ 1 1 1 1 / I / - / 0 EXISTING SIDING . / ~O REMAIN 1 11 111 .~ T.O. CONCRETE ~ 100'-0" 1|1# L ; i' 1 1 Ill I EXISTING SITE WALL TO REMAIN - 57 PROJECT NO: e 2920 DWG FILE: 2920_A4-1.dwg | | SHEET TITLE T.O. SLAB .6 PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION / 1 ~ SOUTH ELEVATION 1- PROPOSED L-T- L-T-2 L-T-2 2- T - - SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" A4.1 COPYRIGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERâ„¢ OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY GE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS. INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO 22 .WL 9-,ZE Path P Pr/-2009,2920_Crandall'Drawings~2920_.-1.wg DM~- #*28,2010Â·142 pm rIr rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f Consultants Ch /h /h /h 1 2 3 1~/1 5 6 7 8 A5.2 94'-3" 7'-6" 5'-0" TO FACE OF TO FACE OF SECOND LEVEL BEAM 15'-4" 10'-3" 8'-0" 10'-3" 17'-11" 20'-0" ECOND LEVEL BEA Issue: 29 MARCH 2010 HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS ~ | METAL CHIMNEY | CYLINDRICAL METAL | | | | CLAD ELEVATOR OVER MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT RUN 36' HEIGHT LIMIT --- -- HVAC DUCT OVERFRAME 1 - METAL FASCIA METAL FASCIA A7.3 T.O. ROOF - - - 132-61/4" SCUPPER METAL PANELS WITH METAL PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS OR REVEALS 0 1 VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS 0 0 / 0 0 OR REVEALS CONCRETE PANELS WITH / VERTICAL CONTROL / JOINTS OR REVEALS POCKET POCKET ALUMINUM CLAD DECK SLIDER â‚¬iB) SLIDER ~ ~ 6 SLIDER dia WINDOWS AND - DOORS 42" GLASS - GUARDRAIL - 0 1-, 0\0 0 0 , W-X A?.3 6 A7.1 \ 0 \ 1'-6" I / \0 , 9 1 T.O. PARAPET 1210-3- T.O. DECKING 80 EXISTING - EX[STINGWINDOW--~ - - - - EXISTING WINDOW EXISTINGWINDOW 120'-7" TO BE REPLACED STAINED SIDING C.M.U. WALL 0 EXISTING STAINED SIDING BEYOND ~ 0 0 \ THE CRANDALL h -0 0 BUILDING T.O. CONCRETE h - --- --- - - -- - - - ---- 110'-9" N ALLEY 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE 0 \ 0/ SECOND LEVEL 18~ 42 22 HYMAN 1 0 / 1 0 1, 1 1 'b 'h ASPEN, CO 81611 1/*f*** AVENUE CANTILEVERED % 16 1 6 CANTILEVERED EXISTING SIDING 6 TO REMAIN - SECOND LEVEL C.M.U. STAIR BENT STEEL t ~;~ 1 COUNTER TOP ENCLOSURE BEYOND EXISTING SITE , I fâ€ž,1,1.1 1 4 ~ \ ~1 /1 5,= Ul 1. 1- . 1 WALL TO REMAIN - n ' Ah 1 m 14 J# M . 1 4 ,/<';U T.O. CONCRETE 9 lu In f J 1/ 100'-0" W 9 EXISTING WOOD ~ | N WINDOWS TO REMAIN || 1 CONCRETE STEPS EXISTING C.M.U./CONCRETE | | ~ ~ ~ ~ - EXISTING WOOD COLUMN TO REMAIN WINDOWS TO REMAIN EXPOSED C.M.U. ~ PROJECT NO: FOUNDATION WALL w 2920 11 i DWG FILE: 2920_A4-1.dwg 11 1 111 1 li I SHEET TITLE 442 7 Z - 7-E -~~ 4~~- Fl ~~fi Fl-fat ==1-30- --1 -4 PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION L--1 L-+ 2-T-= a I f ~~ EAST ELEVATION - PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" CA4.2 1 SCALE: 1,4" = 1'-0" - A4.2 COPYRIGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON â„¢IS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERT" OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMAION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS, En DESIGN ROV~AND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO 21 "t,/ 1. Â£-, L L .*/19-,ZE S3IhIVA 8/6 Mendall\D 2920_M-1 d.g r10 rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f Consultants 66 0 0 0 ~ 59'-5" Issue: 29 MARCH 2010 ROOF TOP MECHANICAL HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS EQUIPMENT-T.B.D. CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD ELEVATOR OVER 6 11 RUN A7.3 A7.3 36' HEIGHT LIMIT METAL FLASHING METAL FLASHING T.O. ROOF A - --- 132-61/4' ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW W-3 ~ 0 /\0 0 1% A7.1 /\ 1 1 ALUMINUM CLAD 1 1 WINDOW METAL PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL ~ ~ JOINTS OR REVEALS / / DECK / / 42" GLASS - GUARDRAIL 1'-6" 8 A7.3 T 0 PARAPET T.O. DECKING 6 - - - - - - - - 120'27" EXISTING WOOD 0 11\ 0 11 * 1 111~~31|IR~7 11=73h / It=T==71 r=711 , ITRIT==711 ~ 0 WINDOW TO BE , 11 /11 /11 11 /1 / 11 /11 11\ 11 \ 11\ 11 11 \ lili \ 11 \ WINDOWTO BE REPLACED 11/ 1 / 11/ 11 lilli \ 11 \11 11 \1111 \11 \ REPLACED - lili / 1 EXISTING WOOD / 11/ lili. 11 11/ 11 / / 1 \11 \11 1 \11 1 NEW STAINED SIDING 1 Â® 111[ 11 It 11 Â® Â£ 11 /lie 11 1 11 111 0 1 TO MATCH SIDING ON j ~ ~~x Il 1 1 Il \ Il /11/ 11 / il , lili I'll . EAST AND SOUTH \ 11 \ lili \ 11 11 \ 11 \ \ 11 11 1 11 1 11 1 11 U / / 11 / FACADE -Lf]I / 0 L==Â®11 Edi E--41 / 0 k \ Ih__ld Ill]1 11=1=11 * ' Ill_-111 THE CRANDALL BUILDING ENLARGED ENLARGED 6 - r BOILER INTAKE AIR 01 - - - - - - T.O. CONCRETE A 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE adsr=- - 4 SPRING 9:,*Â·' Fi r-~ q i I e -y *03hÂ»Â·> 1â‚¬ SER Â·b'Â¢.1 ..-" ''4'-Â·MÂ·Jr. _ .... >2~ 2- - -1 111,2- IF=62%7*Â»,-CFT..:.,iÂ·.4 2-y 1% ; ASPEN, CO 81611 ST=7 Â».4..99.-17-ft?t.joÂ· BUILDING * eeb -'Â«.. Â»., - 31634 Â°43..~~Â·:ST 3 18Â¢t f- f GAS METER, TELEPHONE BOX TO 2/103 3/103 BE RELOCATED T.O. CONCRETE .5- 92 N< NEW WOOD CLAD 1 GARAGE DOORS. CONCRETE LOADING GAS METERS GARBAGE / 1 EXISTING LOADING . SIDEWALK DOCK TO REMAIN RECYCLING DC)CK TO BE 5 PROJECT NO: (D LOWERED TO MEET 2920 ALLEY GRADE. DWG FILE: 2920_A4-1.dwg SHEET TITLE T.O. SLAB 4 - - - - - -90'4" PROPOSED - lf_zi- ------ ~-ttr=77==-=ftfty-n= 9_3_it~==~ ~ - 7 r -1 NORTH ELEVATION L+-1 L 3 Â· L_1_1_NORTHELEVAI-ION--PROPOSED L -- -~ - 2 -- -~- ---L- -- -~- --L- - -~ _ L- ~2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"- . 0 A4.3 COPYRIGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMA11ON AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS :It WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+8ROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR DESIGN, RoWl.ANO+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALLCOMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS. Â§R INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. /17/1. E-,IdÂ· .WI. 9-2 â€ž0 1-.6 /0/ rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f Consultants 121 (11 94 6) Ll 5'-0" 7'-6" TO FACE OF TO FACE OF ECOND LEVEL BEA 20'-0" 17'-11" 10'-3" 8'-0" 10'-3" 15'-4" SECOND LEVEL BEAM Issue: 29 MARCH 2010 HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS 11 ECHANICAL EQUIPMENT - - CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD ~ A7.3 ELEVATOR OVER RUN 36' HEIGHT LIMIT - - - - METAL FLASHING PARAPET WALL TO 6 1 COMPLY WITH 2003 IBC A7.3 A7.3 SECTION 704.11.5.2 - T.O. ROOF SCUPPER 132'-6 1/4" METAL PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS OR REVEALS ALUMINUM CLAD 24 0 <ip WINDOWS AND DOORS DECK 42" GLASS GUARD RAIL XXXXX . ./ x bâ‚¬ I X.XY 0 0 0 EXISTING PARAPET 1'-6" 1 4 T.O. PARAPET M 121'-3" 1 :3<., /vâ‚¬ xÂ»X*Â»*>0â€¢W , T.O. DECKING 6 120'-7" EXISTING GLASS BLOCK TO BE REPLACE WITH FIRE RATED 0 0 1 1,TRANSPARENT WALL" GLASS SYSTEM - 0 0 THE CRANDALL -Fl - 9, Â«14Â«, 4.>t r" I 7/ -' ..nx , < - -' - --1-3 -17 : .7. 7 < - <3 1 1 X. I.% BUILDING v ./'/ eâ‚¬/1 /7 . ' T.0 NCRE -= 22* 110'40â€ž - 7 436'& *124.30143* 1fÂ·* 4.Â·' - - 40Â· 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE 1 CM.U.WAL ON 6 r* --w14~7- .: 1-1 . f HYMAN ALLEY WE T SI E O AvENDE fit*-26*Tt-~~~ 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 C AN ALL UIL ING - -9 ,.Â·Â·Â·St.9â‚¬ BU=%:4 7 I *4'94Â£4,2... of.9,0.:g~~f %10' 1 1 I R 1 1 . ' - -- ,= -7 3: I. I , I /%7 XI m /77 , 7 = 7 I T.O. O CRETE J~ 1 100'-0" 1 g ~11 1 L'H STA IA ST IRW Y OUR YAR 1 1 - 1 5 PROJECT NO: - - - Il ill. C. 1 2920 1 DWG FILE: | 2920.j\4-1.dwg 1 - 1 SHEET TITLE 1 T.O. SLAB J---- - 7 ... I I -- --- 90'-5" PROPOSED - A--4 WEST ELEVATION 9 1 1 29 1 1 Lf U J L--1 OUTLINE OF ADJACENT (' 1 ~ WEST ELEVATION - ~ROPOSED TAMARAWOOD BUILDING SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" IN FOREGROUND SHOWN DASHED A4.4 COPYRIGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN. NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WITHOUT THE PRIOR d bri 0 WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN RO~AND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL % RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS. ' INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO e1 .W1 E-. L L .WI. 9-,ZE .,0 L-,6 File Path P 'P j-20092 20 Crandall\Draw,ngsl292 M-1 e R 60 ~ 02 h 0 ~6.137 -7- -1 9 -1--~ rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f R3 A72 CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD Consultants 36' HEIGHT LIMIT ELEVATOR OVER RUN . f- 1 . R3 . 0 A7.2 - HOIST BEAM RI T.O. PLYWOOD A J J J - f-- - - METAL FASCIA 21-0,1 | 1 1 /0 1 L = MECHANICAL CHASE 9 : LIVING LOBBY - " >(t - -- - 22.~- -- - 9- - GLASS GUARDRAIL 1384-1 [351 6 9 Issue: â‚¬ R4 FS /1 29 MARCH 2010 A7.2 A7.1 , EXISTING PARAPET - HPC FINAL-APPROVED REVISIONS 2 T.O. PLYWOOD 121'-11/4" - F.D. - - - - T.O, DECKING A - - - - - - .120'-7" BACKL T WOOD LASS Â° ' ROLL DOWN COLUMN, TYP. SMOKE DOOR f W6 A71 SIDE OF EXISTING SIDING DECORATIVE METAL PANEL UNIT UNIT [3371 - riE--1 13331I-FlÂ·.110334-1. tpilÂ«JU 1~ 1 F1 - ..,ng*%10./-1*4 A7.1 - T.O. CONCRETE : =,f-- 4 g ROLL DOWN 4/\4 SMOKE DOOR p 1 -aÂ·J,+44 TAMARAWOOD UNIT BUILDING 4 STREET 0%=* U .;\ 1 DECORATIVE - b UNIT METAL PANEL ELEVATOR \/N / 1/ - , <m<'7' 7-:; m,i,~V,jj'' ~<~XX~.1,. :~.JÂ·-37700277.77XXXX>~7'>'73 ~71XXX><2~Â· 0,7"'~~ > -'E A7.1 SHAFT 2 Â· Â· Pvt/v</v</vvâ‚¬ pv'/V%/%>C N , ,~'.1~ A 4, illf'/11 Â·Â·dL.LL- ._13. Â· 9%'c. .. .1 ~ T.O. CONCRETE A - 1 ! 100'-0" 7 ROLL DOWN \\\/4, ty,t~~<CY' 01/*6 1/4 32~ 1 0/3 SMOKE DOOR Â»4Â»<Â»4044t<%~~~~~~~ THE CRANDALL 77 1 1 / SIDE OF 01 \ f /f # n / / DECORATIVE - UNIT / / METALPANEL UNIT p BUILDING [365-1 FEE' 9 lo// \ - I d~ F2 \ A/.1 / \ Ark 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE '10~46 94444:. 44<4 ASPEN, CO 81611 . . 14. /4/799~ ret 4*Ek, 4/ / 4:4 ---- .. A- 4.% \ \ 1\ \/\ \Al / \\ 0/ . \\7/ 1 1/ \ 1 \\71 \\ 1 3 85 \\ \I I V V I ~ 4 4 0\9\6 44~<*#421 214**444 7â€ž1~,<,,~0â€ž4 4Â« i,=Â» 1 1 1 Im/lil I 1% 1%47/\<9Â»94Â§44>~2%2Â»3>~~Â«11 I 0 * 1 \ 4\ \ 4\9 . V /\ /44 . 1934049&,4 44/4:7 suMP pIT 94>/ 1/.6474Â»/i ' /47144441~ 4<9/ /Â»t<~~~~jithtttfÂ»~~v:*tj'<4~44~ /0 %:ki ,4~<~4<4jf~<1",<"4'1"1)â€ž1/*,44 1 lili 1- 499/ 4/4 /44 b \4~ 35<t~ 1*<311/ / / /1 A/%4*APÂ« 4 4~ 4//0 64/14\NO /49 3.44~66~/\94,41*41*42>Â«/ Â«VA/.24 / 11 N \ '4 4 4<4<"<44</)</,414~2< /Â»Â»99\ // /4/ 4 / ~ \444Â»1\ 1 6 <#// 31\ 9 6 1 1 . f / TAL.hi / 4 447/ ~~Â»~Â«+94Â«444Â«4Â«~:~~ ~-*4 944Â«4443Â»4Â»46~Â» RE: MEP Â« fÂ«~~194 1<~flÂ»>f~t~<t~ ~Â»~< 1~Â« 1144Â»/34 4 3 . 194>14>~~ 4>44>'A 3~4~4 \04 1/1/1/ \Â» 0/3/4.5/./lf<3<1<,04%~0~44~ '1 1 1 /1 1 'ji'l 'j '1 I :Â·b . . /Â»4/1Â»Â»Â»/P/\ \\ 4 / Â»44,<21:244,4â€ž43&44,4)412,)'12:44Â£~14&434,NAFN)44<4<444&2,<AN<4<4344%,<0<0,4â€ž<3,<34454 Â· 4/4 44' 1~~\ 1711~~~1~<;\ 4Â»4~91Â»49 4 NI / / 42 .,4 410 4/\4* 1/41<NK<'.T, \ 4 <44:#~44~,~,P#id<~~&4*44*,WA~*~104>44/ \\ \/A,V\,/4/4/\/ /4/44>4 4 4,\#,4,41*%3 #~04 ,%\ \,5*>4$9540~,/,#f#â€ž 444 /\,PAÂ¢0 \ t>/6*2 / 4â€ž \ <> t' t<>x/x/34 4/Â«09/\ \ 44/Â«\/\2/40<WW<40.<D<4.<4441#44:42*)4.<',"pi. PROJECT NO: 2920 DWG FILE: BUILDING SECTION - PROPOSED 2920_A5-1.dwg EX537--iCALE-1/4".123" SHEET TITLE PROPOSED BUILDING SECTION B SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" ,f i A5.2 copÂ·nUGHT 2010 ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN THE INFORMATION AND DESIGN INTENT CONTAINED ON THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF ROWLAND+GROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN WRITTEN PERMISSION OF ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN m. DESIGN NO PART OF THIS INFORMATION MAY BE USED WIâ„¢OUT THE PRIOR I M DESIGN. ROWLAND+BROUGHTON ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN SHALL RETAIN ALL COMMON LAW STATUTORY AND OTHER RESERVED RIGHTS. INCLUDING COPYRIGHT THERETO. 1,â€¢/:9-,LL â€ž /l 9 â€ž0 /6 .WIÂ· 0-,ZE .. THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0005.2010.AHPC PARCEL ID NUMBER 2737 18 2 12 007 PROJECTS ADDRESS 630 E. HYMAN PLANNER AMY GUTHRIE CASE DESCRIPTION MAJOR DEV. FINAL REPRESENTATIVE MITCH HAAS DATE OF FINAL ACTION 12.6.10 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 01.26.11 .. 9-739 - M -2-tz -007 0609- 16[0Â· AM-fc- 4 2 9 111 1./.~ Eile Edit Record Navigate F,rm Reporls Format Iab Help 1 i@ 2 IX ) â€¢/ -5 g li gl â‚¬) .El ~d-liJA 4 / 4 0 *1 Ok lump 1 : 0 1!01@1 i g E] ~I i d J * / i U d / l.9 [b J p 1 J~4 galuation I Custom FWds I Actions ~ Feei I Parce!~ I Fee Summary |Sub Eermits 1 Attachments | Routing Status |Routing 4 I Permit Type ~ahpc ..~]Aspen Historic Land Use Permit # |0005.2010.AHPC Address |630 E HYMAN Â£] Apt/Suite ~ City ~ASPEN , State ICO E Zip ~81611 =1 Permit Information Master Permit | w Routing Queue |aslu07 Applied ~03/19/2010 _] 1 Project ~ 21 Status ~pending Approved I Description ~ MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) AND COMMERCIAL DE5IGN REVIEW (FINAL) Issued | ~ ASSOCIATED WITH'CONCEPTUAL REVIEW' PLEASE REFERENCE PERMIT# 0020.2009.AHPC - DEPOSIT PAID - THIS FINAL REVIEW WILL BE BILLED AGAINST. Final ~ ~ I Submitted ~MITCH 925 7819 Clock |Running Days E--0 Expires |03/14/2011 ~ i 4 f Owner i Â· * Last Name ~630 EAST HYMAN LLC iJ First Name ~GREG HILL5 532 EAST HOPKINS ' 21 A5PEN CO 81611 Â£' i pÂ·Â·Â· Phone |(970) 920-4988 E Owner Is Applicant? 1* Applicant : Last Name |HAA5 LAND PLANNING LLC -~ First Name ~ | 201 N MILL 5T 5TE 108 Phone |(970) 925-7819 Cust # ~25346 -2.~ I ASPEN CO 81611 ~ Lender Last Name ~ -2.~ First Name ~ Phone ~ Permit lenders lull address Asper,Gold[bl ~ Record: 1 of 1 fllod .00 â‚¬Â«s wi-.6 GluuÂ« t U- Ulid a~ - f 44 -2 pol 1 100 4 - AS. 0 44 leÂ·P. Â«; 3Ut GL I *Â°qpoll 1 -'019 qell .. DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a five-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the fifth anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. 630 E. Hyman LLC, c/o Greg Hills, 532 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property A Community Development Director Exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for the voluntary conversion of an existing commercial space into an affordable dwelling unit was granted. The effective date of the development order for this action is established by the effective date of the development order for Final Historic Preservation Commission review of the project. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan HPC granted Final Major Development and Final Commercial Design Review approval via Resolution #5, Series of 2010 on March 24,2010. Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) April 4.2010 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) April 4,2015 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 ofthe City of Aspen Municipal Code,) Issued this 23rd day of September, 2010, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. This development order amends the previous order dated April 4, 2010. ~~~ 4 NÂ¥VVV V V V~.~_:> Chris Bendon, CbmfAunity Development Director .. DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen . Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a five-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the fifth anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date o f this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. 630 E. Hyman LLC, c/o Greg Hills, 532 E. Hopkins Avenue. Aspen, CO 81611, Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property The applicant received Final Major Development and Final Commercial Design Review approval for a remodel and addition to the existing building. The project separately received approval from Aspen City Council for Historic Landmark Designation and negotiation of preservation incentives under Ordinance #48, Series of 2007. A Community Development Director Exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for the creation of one free market dwelling unit was also granted. The effective date of the development order for all of these actions is indicated below. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan HPC granted Final Major Development and Final Commercial Design Review approval via Resolution #5, Series of 2010 on March 24, 2010. Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) April 4,2010 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) April 4,2015 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 ofthe City of Aspen Municipal Code.) .. Issued this 23rd day of September, 2010, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. This development order amends the previous order dated April 4, 2010. FÂ» Chris Bendon, Ctinmunity Development Director .. DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter b'Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, ~'Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a five-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the fifth anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075. or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement. or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470. but shall be subject to any amendments to the I.and Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. 630 E. Hyman LLC, c/o Greg Hills, 532 E. liopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611. Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property The Applicant received Final Major Development and Final Commercial Design Review approval for a remodel and addition to the existing building. The project separately received approval from Aspen City Council for Historic Landmark Designation and negotiation of preservation incentives under Ordinance #48. Series of 2007. A Community Development Director Exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for the creation of one free market dwelling unit and an Exemption for the voluntary conversion of an existing commercial space into an affordable dwelling unit were also granted. Written Description ofthe Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan HPC granted Final Major Development and Final Commercial Design Review approval via Resolution #5, Series of 2010. Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) April 4,2010 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) April 4,2015 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this 4th day of April, 2010, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. 0%lk--0 - 11 1 Chris Bendon, Community Development Director .. PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVE11)PARENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan. and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68. Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following legally described properly: 630 E. Ilyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99. City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. 81611. Parcel ID No. 2737-182-12-()07, by order of the City of Aspen 1-listoric Preservation Commission on March 24. 2010. The Applicant received Final Major Development and Final Commercial Design Review approval for a remodel and addition to the existing building. The project separately received a Community Development Director Exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for the creation of one free market dwelling unit and an Exemption for the voluntary conversion of an existing commercial space into an affordable dwelling unit. For further information contact Amy Guthrie. at the City of Aspen Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St. Aspen. Colorado (970) 429-2758. s/ City of Aspen Publish in The Aspen Times on April 4.2010 .. PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE- 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, ASPEN, COLORADO Cashier's Check Amount: $250 000 Bank: A I p (4 (LA' TO: Attn: Historic Preservation Officer Cheek Number: ysbly 1 City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Property Owner: 630 E. Hyman LLC Subject Property Street Address: 630 E. Hyman Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Subject Property Legal Address: Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite ofAspen. The City of Aspen, as a condition of approval of certain land use approvals relating to the above referenced property, as contained in Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, has required that the undersigned Owner of the above referenced property provide financial security to guarantee the completion ofthe approved project, as follows: Aspen City Council has approved an increase in the maximum residential unit size for the free market unit represented for 630 E. Hyman from 2,000 net livable square feet to 2,500 net livable square feet, with the extinguishment of an historic TOR to be issued by the City. Council has authorized the issuance of an historic TDR with the restriction that it only be used for this purpose. At the time of building permit application, City staff shall deposit the TDR with the building department and the developer shall deposit the sum of $250,000, representing the estimated value of the TDR, into an interest bearing escrow account with the City as the beneficiary of the account. A copy of the relevant approvals is appended hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this referenced incorporated herein. The undersigned Owner of the above referenced property hereby represents that a Cashier's Check in the amount of $250,000 shall be deposited in an interest bearing account with the City as the beneficiary of the account, for the financial security required by said land use approvals. The City of Aspen may make withdrawals from said deposit at any time in its sole discretion upon notification by the City's Community Development Director to the City's Finance Director and to Owner that there is a default in terms and conditions of the building permit and the construction is not completed. The City shall have recourse to the sums on deposit to complete the work and cure any default in the terms and conditions of the building permit, with any remaining sums, including interest, returned to the developer. The TDR shall be extinguished and the deposit shall be returned to the developer upon issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Final Inspection, whichever occurs first; provided, however, that the Owner' s balance is not the subject of litigation. Owner' signa*0: ' ~71(1 2-b . " ION#: 576498,01/04/2011 at 10:41:44 AM, 1 OF 3, R $21.00 Doc Code ORDINANCE Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO ORDINANCE #26 (Series of 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AMENDING ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 2009, A NEGOTIATION FOR THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested an amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, which approved a package of incentives for the landmark designation of the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and lownsite of Aspen, Colorado under the provisions of Section 26.415.025 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 13, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the proposed amendment and made a motion to recommend approval to City Council which resulted in a tie vote of 2-2; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer, in her staff report to City Council dated December 6, 2010, performed an analysis of the proposed amendment and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1 : Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby grants the following Land Use entitlement, an amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, which resulted in the voluntary landmark designation of 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. All provisions o f Ordinance #26, Series of 2009 shall remain in full force and effect, except: 1. Council hereby grants a variance to the allowable FAR for Commercial Uses, from 1.5:1 to 1.57:1 with the condition that the property owner provide evidence that the current 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 1 of 2 C j .. tenants are offered a contract to purchase their spaces at the rates attached as Exhibit A to the ordinance. This will ensure the community benefit that has been represented in the project is honored. Section 2: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 3: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 6* day of December. 2010, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council ofthe City of Aspen on the 2501 day of October, 2010. Michael C. Ireland, Mybr ATTEST: jlt--) 4Â«_ 'Kathryn Koch, ~y Clerk I>IL FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this U day of ~14'2010 cvul 0,44 Michael C. Ir&!and, Maypf ATTEâ‚¬TÂ· Katnryn Noc~fity Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 7 44 02#141%5 Clohn-*Ercester, City Attorney 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 2 of 2 . ~A/A f Ma.tneâ‚¬ 4 28, 9,4-2 06 20[0 &,jA'l 6 &4 /,4 CRANDALL BUILDING Price per Sq.FL Price Sq.Ft. Finish Barber 226 $ 105,000 $465/s.f. total build out Saftdfs 2342 $ 1,278,000 $546/s.f. partial build out AVP 1100 $ 630,000 $575/s.f. total build out 1 - .. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306 ASPEN LAND USE CODE A-DBRESS 02 PR-OVERTY : 14 ~ A Aspen, CO STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1,.4044 6 ce(â‚¬Wl (name, please print) being or reprefenting an Applicant to the Cify of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) or Section 26.306.010 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: v Publication of notice: By the publication iii the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fifteen (15) days after an Interpretation has been rendered..4 copy ofthe publication is attached herefo. *inature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this 5 day of Afri I , 20~-3 by .,#y~Â·'b-621-u Â«&Â·c-----~_-,--n i L....., 0 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL PUBLIC NOTICE Of , DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby 9.-en to the general public of the My commission expires: .1/(St 11 approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertain- ing to the following legally described property: 630 454* 82 -Ugisw E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 90, City and Townsite of Aspen. Colorado, 81611, Parcel ID Notary Public No. 2737-182-12-007, by order of the CIty of As- pen Historic Preservation Commission on March 24,2010. The Applicantreceived Final Major De- velopment and Final Commercial Design Review approval for a remodel and addition to the existing building. The project separately received approval from Aspen City Council for Historic Landmark ATTACHMENTS: Designation and negotiation of preservation incen- 2 tives under Ordinance #48, Series of 2007. A I Community Development Director Exemption from the Growth Management Quota System for the I creation of one free market dwelling unit and an COPY OF THE PUBLICATION Exemption for the voluntary conversion of an ex- isting commercial space inlb an affordable dwell- 1 ing unit were also granted. For further information contact Amy Guthrie, at the City of Aspen Commu- 1 nity Development Dept 130 S. Gatena St. Aspen, ~ , Colorado (970) 429-2758, ~ sl City of Aspen ' < Publish in the Aspen Times Weekly on April 4, 2010 [48373241 . A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW (FINAL) APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 FAST HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #5, SERIES OF 2010 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E, Hyman LLC, represented by Haas I .and Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested 111'C Major Development (linal) and Commercial Design Review (Final) for the property located at 630 E. 1 lyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, 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 sullicient information have been submitted to the Community Development [)irector and approved in accordance with the procedures established fur 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.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for Final Commercial Design Review, the HPC' must review the application. a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the Commercial, Lodging, and 1 listoric District Objectives and Guidelines per Section 26.412,040 of the Municipal Code. The 11PC 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 to Hit dated March 24, 2010, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had been met, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on March 24, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of 5 to 0. RECEPTION#: 569053, 05/04/2010 at 630 E. liyman Avenue 11:22:59 AM, 1-1PC Resolution #5, Series of 2010 1 OF 3. R $16.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO Page 1 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby grants HPC Major Development (Final) and Commercial Design Review (Final) for the property located at 630 E. 1-lyman Avenue, Lots R and S. Block 99, City and 1 ownsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. 1-he cave depth on the east side of the third floor roof is approved to be 2'. 2. The location of the glass railing around the third floor deck is approved with an 18" setback from the building fagade. as shown in the Final application drawings. 3. The new circular window to be installed in the opening on the south faga(ie is to include a horizontal element where the fixed and awning windows abut, and two decorative horizontal mullions on the awning window to approximate the horizontal railing depicted in Torn Benton's original elevation drawings, submitted at the HPC meeting as "Exhibit 3" 4. Staff and monitors will provide referral comments to the Parks Department regarding landscape design. 5. The applicant is to provide information on any new exterior lights that are proposed for review by staff and monitors. 6. The south faqade ground floor storefronts and entries are to be constructed as depicted in revised drawings submitted at the HPC meeting as -Exhibit 2." except that the space between the entry doors into the courtyard and the "spiderweb" wood panels is to be all glass, or spandrel glass. The wall surface between the door into the new staircase and the double doors into the westernmost tenant space is to be a glazing of the maximum width possible, with a column (of design to be approved by staff and monitors) terminating the wall separating the stair and the tenant space ifnecessary. 7. All windows on the rear fa~ade of the building are to be free of mullions, as depicted in revised drawings submitted at the 1 [PC meeting as "Exhibit 2." 8, The existing wood siding is to be retained (refinished and repaired as needed. but in-kind replacement only where adequately demonstrated to staff and monitor to be necessary). Wood siding to match is approved to be added to the north fa*ade, second floor. 9. There shall be no deviations from the approved plan without first being reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 10. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of five (5) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, anv failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested properly right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the 630 E. Hyman Avenue 1IPC Resolution #5, Series of 2010 Page 2 of 3 City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of five (5) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26,304,070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen liome Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE CLOMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 24th day of March, 2010. 449 Michael Hoffman, Chair Approved as to Form: g/lim l'rue, Special Counsel -1 /427 -019-Lig>9/~ yk-6> 1 .'''ri Kathy Stâ‚¬ijdand, Chief Deputy Clerk 630 E, Hyman Avenue HPC Resolution #5, Series of 2010 Page 3 of 3 8. MEMORANDUM Aspen I listoric Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 630 E. Hyman Avenue- Major Development (Final) and Commercial Design Review (Final)- Public Hearing DATE: March 24,2010 SUMMARY: 630 E. Hyman Avenue - . is a modern commercial building constructed beginning in 1969. It was identified on Ordinance #48. Series of . 2007 as a '~potential historic resource tr'f~ ly*..' i .: r- j -4Â£ - and voluntarily designated by the ER*--z- le'lfitit- . I ------- ----Fil-J I.andmark/Conceptual Development ..i#'ff 44.../tfAC#,i'-~triwizi#j P~'R~~AM*~MdW~~~ ~14<2#.c. 4..:~91* application reviewed by 1 1PC and City ~ Council in Fall 2009. Final 111,(' *:. ..~ ---Â·r-~r*14.--- -4 - -r..I'-I'.UZ-:Il/=.....=...L,.I.*.--i-IN review is the last step required before 6 proceeding to building permit. .1 + ./ ..34,4 ; .,1 - 1 - ... 1 ...,4..: l'he proposal is to repair and refinish exterior woodwork, replace some windows. reconfigure the primary staircase, add a third floor residential unit, and improve the interior courtyard. which becomes an enclosed area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the review criteria are met, with conditions, and recommends HPC grant Final Major Development and Commercial Design Review approval. APPLICANT: 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects. PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007. ADDRESS: 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: C-1 Commercial. 1 .. MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) Theprocedurefor a Major Development Review, at the Final level, is asfollows. 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, discipprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing und proportions. No clianges will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: 630 E. Hyman was built beginning in 1969. commissioned by Jack and Gesine Crandall, and designed by Tom Benton. Benton was an architect, and a prolific and acclaimed graphic artist who resided in Aspen from 1963 until his death in 2007. The Crandall building has remained relatively unaltered and it is the only intact design of Benton's within the City of Aspen. HPC granted Conceptual approval for designation and the proposed construction project in October 2009 with conditions, as follows: 1. Redesign the storefroni configuration on the south favade to retain the two existing "spiderweb" panels. 2. Restudy or remove the proposed new window on the east fagade, upper floor. 3. Restudy the eave depth on the east faqade of the rooftop addition. to possibly provide greater shadow line. 4. Restudy the location of the railing for the third floor deck. 5. Consider creating a way to bring natural light through the third floor unit and into the courtyard. 6. Install an operable or removable window in the round opening on the south faqade. The first two conditions of approval are accomplished, as represented in the Final drawings. With regard to Condition #3. the eave on the east side of the third floor unit has been extended to twice the depth shown at Conceptual. The architects will provide renderings at the liPC meeting so that everyone can understand the visual impacts of the change. as viewed from the street. 2 .. Addressing Condition #4, the upper Iloor deck railing. previously planned to be 12" from the back of the parapet wall has been pulled in 6" further, which does decrease it's visibility. This may be adequate, however staff recommends some discussion. Obviously the rooftop addition has greater presence than the railing. but. to the extent that the railing is in approximately the same plane as the favade of the original Crandall building, it has the potential to have a negative impact. and it also creates the opportunity to place rooftop furnishings in highly visible locations. Condition #5 was a request to retain some natural light from the rooftop into the courlyard. The applicant has found this impossible. particularly due to building code issues. The courtyard will receive natural light from the round window at the front of the building. 1 he last condition of Conceptual approval was that the applicant ensure that â€ž~.i--19 any window installed in the round opening that faces 1-lyman Avenue be 2===z=z---- operable. Historically there has been no window in this south facing ---@~mÂ·m=i~~=DÂ»-=4~=0*~****&*NERS*We*>.a-%**b-5kamMAÂ¥*me ~N~~IN-~*~*~**4*~****~i~XÂ«*Â¢**~~R~~~~~~0~~Â»4%*Â«All.-.4 4-',Â¥Na~Nle0Â®*#Â¥Pm$mmS****em*%*&****&*U-Râ‚¬l '44* opening, although there are original circular windows on the east fa~ade. r= Â· - --: The drawings indicate the new south window will match the side windows. Staff recommends HPC discuss whether there should be horizontal mullions that replicate the appearance of the railing that currently bisects the circle. While the railing may have primarily been a functional feature. it is part of the original design and does have some relationship to graphics created in HUNIER S.l,nUGON Benton's posters. Af**NEIX[*!INRE~ARCHrUIND,n N Final review also deals with details such as the landscape plan, lighting, fenestration and selection of new materials. A list of the relevant design guidelines is attached as "Exhibit A." Only those guidelines where discussion is needed are included in the memo. Landscape plan there is very little planting area on the private property, but ample area for street trees and vegetation in the adjacent right-of-way. Parks Department approval will be required for all work on public property. The application represents retaining existing crabapple trees along Hyman and Spring Streets, and removing junipers. At this time it is uncertain whether Parks will recommend removal of any trees, or what species they might suggest be added. 1nput on the final resolution of the landscape should be assigned to staff and monitor. The character of this landscape is very important, however it is outside of the landmarked area. Photos of the original and current conditions are shown on the next page. The relevant guideline is: 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact o f mature growth. Reserve the use o f exotic plants to small areas for accent. Do not cover grassy areas with gravel. rock or paving materials. 3 CL C .. 1 Â«UNE- -351--ipt#14.-= Left: Young crabapple trees and junipers, set in gravel, circa 1970's. Below: Mature landscape today. 1 8- 1 . ltd Ill-- 3.1 1 * -V : 1.9 1 ... .... . 44 Â£- '44 24-:- - --- 1 -U=*. - * I . 5.Â·1690 1 4*NET:tl~.G/)/Il"#11-: .-Â· â€ž r- 1 ' . 6 .4 1- 2 , 1 9. - 14 ANÂ·B .r -lit<VAL AUR,13< 42 4 Z . , - 4'14'*-3.J.f = *1:: -M'-- 2 4 -4 ...... im ... . 1 .1,> 1 11 i. 1- . #m-ty,Q'/* Lighting The plans do not indicate any exterior fixtures, but the application mentions that recessed cans are to be installed under the cantilevered area on the south fagade. The applicant must provide more detail about any planned exterior lighting. Fenestration The drawings indicate that many of the existing windows and doors on the ground floor are to be retained. but that most second floor windows will be replaced. Staff is unaware of the upper ftoor windows having any special artistic quality (for instance hand-built on site) that must be preserved, therefore replacement is acceptable with the condition that details of the existing window profile. and proposed replacement be provided for review by staff and monitor. On the south, it has already been mentioned that the round window should relate to the existing horizontal railing pattern. On the ground floor. staff recommends that fenestration be simplified 4 .. and be arranged more symmetrically, in keeping with Benton' s original drawings (attached to this memo.) Benton's original drawings actually show no doors facing I lyman Avenue. ile may have intended that stores be entered from the courtyard. Staff is uncertain when the front doors into the retail spaces were installed. but generally recommends that there be more study of this itwade. Currently there is a wide opening in the center of the fag(le. where the open air staircase exists. Although the courtyard is being enclosed, it may not be appropriate to narrow the opening as planned, by filling in the space between the spiderweb panels and the two central CMU columns in the same plane as the storefronts. To preserve the existing visual character of that area, it might be preferable to preserve the existing entry width more accurately, as depicted in the sketch below. This does affect tenant space. although the minimum distance that the new fenestration ought to be set back to achieve the effect would be an important part of the discussion, The relevant guidelines include: 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in it building wall. u linclosing 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. u Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. In the same vein, staff recommends that the door into the new auxiliary staircase, on the west end of the fagade. be moved forward to align with the existing doors and windows. We recommend the possible deletion of the new CMU column indicated at the staircase opening because it interferes with the symmetry of Benton's design. cr' /100-0- 1.-2--1 <=11 1 IX 1 h UNII - - -': 1 % 4- U.L' _ 2%1 #==2=- i lem,4~2Â·- F%-AY 1 19 1 0%9 1.0 CONC 1 1 A .. The remaining area where staff recommends discussion of fenestration is windows on the rear fava(le. The existing windows generally match the size and placement of Benton's original design, but the glass is divided with mullions. These windows are all proposed to be replaced and/or enlarged. Staff recommends the window units be undivided if it is possible to do so and still allow them to be operable. Staff has no concerns with the proposed fenestration on the rooftop addition. Materials Staff has no concerns with the proposed materials for this project. Existing exterior materials are to be repaired and retained. 1 he proposed metal siding on the third floor will be distinct from the historic resource, without being visually competitive. COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW Commercial Design Review Standards applicable to this project are attached as "Exhibit C." Staff finds that few guidelines are relevant to this project, which primarily involves preservation of existing conditions rather than all new construction. Guidelines which are particularly relevant include 1.45, which requires that roofs be thoughtfully designed, particularly in terms of placement of mechanical equipment: guideline 1.50, which requires the materials used for third floor additions to be more subdued that lower facades; and 1.51, which addresses landscape design. Staff finds that the project is in compliance with the Commercial Design review guidelines. The HPC may: â€¢ approve the application, â€¢ approve the application with conditions, â€¢ disapprove the application, or â€¢ continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant Final Major Development and Commercial Design Review with the following conditions: 1. At the HPC meeting, HPC should review renderings of the eave depth on the east fagade of the third floor to determine the best relationship to the historic resource. 2. At the HPC meeting, I IPC should review renderings of the third floor railing to determine appropriate placement. 3, The new circular window to be installed in the opening on the south fagade should include mullions that relate to the existing horizontal railing. 4. Staff and monitor will provide referral comments to the Parks Department regarding landscape design. 5. The applicant is to provide information on any new exterior lights that are proposed. 6 .. 6. The applicant is to provide a restudy of the south fai:ade ground iloor storefronts and entries to preserve the symmetry, solid to void relationships, and other characteristics of Benton's design. 7. The applicant is to remove mullions from windows on rear favade if this can be accomplished and still allow the windows to be operable. 8. There shall be no deviations from the approved plan without first being reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. Exhibits: Resolution #_, Series of 2010 A. Relevant HPC Design Guidelines B. Benton s original elevations C. Relevant Commercial Design Standards D. Application "Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines for 630 E. Hyman , Final Review" 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. o This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk. proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. c] Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. o Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs. u 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. u Select plant and tree material according to its mature size. to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. u Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. u 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. u Do not plant climbing ivy or trees too close to a building. New trees should be no closer than the mature canopy size. El Do not locate plants or trees in locations that will obscure significant architectural features or block views to the building. u It is not appropriate to plant a hedge row that will block views into the yard. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. u 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. 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape designs and features. o This includes the arrangement of trees. shrubs, plant beds. irrigation ditches and sidewalks in the public right-of-way. 7 .. 1 Preserve original building materials. Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. Only remove siding which is deteriorated and must be replaced. Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. u 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. 2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. o Avoid the removal o f 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. 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. 1 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. 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. Features important to the character of a window include its frame. sash. muntins/mullions. sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operation and groupings of windows. Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them. whenever conditions permit. Preserve the original glass. when feasible. .2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. u Enclosing a historic window opening in a key character-defining facade is inappropriate, as is adding a new window opening. This is especially important on primary facades where the historic ratio of solid-to-void is a character-defining feature. Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear walls. Do not reduce an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or door or increase it to receive a larger window on primary facades. 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. u Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character-defining facade will negatively affect the integrity ola structure. 3.4Match 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. u Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. u Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades. However. a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those ofthe original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. u Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. 8 C O W EL C 0 0 0 9 .. o Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. u 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. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. u Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These may include the door, door frame, screen door. threshold, glass panes, paneling. hardware. detailing. transoms and tlanking sidelights. Do not change the position and function o f original front doors and primary entrances. If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also. keep the door in place. in its historic position. u I f the secondary entrance is sealed shut. the original entrance on the primary facade must remain operable. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. u Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. Simple paneled doors were typical. Very ornate doors. including stained or leaded glass. are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 1 Preserve significant architectural features. Repair only those features that are deteriorated. Patch, piece-in, splice, consolidate or otherwise upgrade the existing material. using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. u 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. 3 Removing a damaged feature when it can be repaired is inappropriate. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. If a substitute is used. such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth lone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non-reflective finish. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. u A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. 9 EEC C C C i' CCCC C C .. o An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. u An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. o An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. u An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building. while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. u 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. u The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. u The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. u All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. rimers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. Do not wash an entire building facade in light. Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. u 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. u Lighting shall be carefully located so as not to shine into residential living space. on or offthe property or into public rights-of-way. 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. When it is feasible. screen service areas from view. especially those associated with commercial and multifamily developments. 1 his includes locations for trash containers and loading docks. Service areas should be accessed offof the alley. if one exists. 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. c, Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. u 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. 10 00 0 6 0 00 0 .. u Screen ground-mounted units with fences. stone walls or hedges. u A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. u 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. a 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. u Cutting channels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric and is inappropriate. Do not locate equipment on the front facade. o If a channel must be cut, either locate it on a secondary facade. or place it low on the wall. 11 941 /0 11- b ~ .9.- L..,Of .94?121%Â·.'14*101*ii*:*_'~~~0~~~ . i.,1 44/455-'>S:.&%2.,E,9.<f'-1 1.4 -1- -r ff~= r .1,15$444:294;ZE 14 #L - .:1 - .t ./,21.F.4. j.1*13Â¥i*.H~SCâ‚¬*~7- 9 1 1 Â»G.0.,f>DIA:?*2749.:it. 1- - 11 = 7-7-7Tn----K h -===I==ta-==tfIE~1,6- 1 Pe~ 4.011 - 11 11! 41 2-r-141 || 3%1%24%11;::11,1-0.2.11&2 .1,6,4 -61 1,1.,Itprt i m Â»-=il_J!=-01.-Lt-Ld LiOPT . E - E v A T 1 0 11 4- 1.-0' -_1 0 U T H EL E V A T' ~C~~~~~'~~~-:~~~~~~"~~2~~~' ~ IÂ·-Â·,~i' ;~'~it?~3-*2lf--:f;~i*Â·Â» r - --/El. re/4 -....rn.. ..0.-1 ts:Plf..efed+4.1'*074 -7" 6..5,.Cfâ‚¬43,111.2.32115.M'%/P: 1$- . / -68 e:,VELED cer),2 92. 11-uc e,oc~ COUUM. // 1 1 / A 9.1.1 + Id - E-=go-~ tii-_ _~-- --~--tr-f=~-f_â‚¬~ -=*g~n-~1Â«-~~ 010-1 2Â«43. r~I -Gt Â«~4~ ~t--7 -Â»~~<OF,21442-,139 + 142 -1 -4 U un 1 I -- _-u ela- ' Ff_li~ Flt-* F~ AEK -~ d ,Â»L i ' ' I i --- ./14 -t- m 111 11! lt-L><U I F.~ F.....~~.-1 .:1,:~:*545Â»..'9.~f*30:Witi'47-Wl * +1.-LI, 0- Pf.. - - m 1- 1 EAST ELEVATiO U â‚¬44.(.4~. IÂ·.:.:-: -)-il--~g~-Ii--~i~-i-+EWMI--W--I~-~--1 ' r~ ~Â· (r}?L~LE<#ef~&~&_' -trt~~~';7,11j13*112 0 1 ... . 14 1 - Ii,-1 , 1 1 -1 I ' . I...1 ... - i ..i... A ....... .0- . C;,44,<}.1,Fil,trug#BieÂ« -4 -*-2 . 1-Itu ' -vi tiv.iÂ·Â·~.irE.j~!~'â€¢a.G':"r'*43â€¢....4.*PI, A . Â·:Â·24~Â·tÂ·k' .i L â€ž:-Ii:Â·: tÂ·.2346,;:i#:7 .-2::24::fÂ·*ffle...4:,.,~~:=:~ 4%4Â£7,'(f ~12 i. 39 p., 1'. :s- Â·1'.%91'i#-4'29*... .... 0 ' A 0 . allbAC) City of Aspen Commercial Character Area Final Review Design Guidelines The following derign guidelines >liall apply at the final review stage. Building Design 6 Articulation upon a human scale and a variation in building -~1 ~â€¢-â€¢,~-~2%~- height, massing, design, architectural detail and -1-4 , .1---1 materials. This in turn is influenced primarily ,-Â· 193131%*g*k*-1Â£ i .i i=.i *-,-re.--4,1 .I. 1 1 by the articulation of the traditional lot width ......â€ž,i,6652,3...i lip- MEd---2 .7,-24 39. in the city center. New buildings which occupy E] more than one traditional lot width should be 1 fl M~*+9 ~INA I fi~ ~~~E~2]~ 1 articulated to reflect these characteristics of city L' 22.- 1*=Â·1&Ju.~1 ~IL'lk'....11' i form and scale. 2.5,244%<*Firfs=Wa' */11F1W-Ki,14 On the other hand, excessive articulation of the 66 11:1 Z ..1 1 -43% 1.1: : t-, street fagade in the use of multiple setbacks from k 9-121 -- -1. 1__ 12161.L! 1--- FLUI E theedge ofthe sidewalk weakens and adversely Â».,...r=- L. .--4 .*aa kB#'El '~~IF--~ ~~~'~; 71~ affects the structure of the street fa,ade, the =am,%â€¢Aa- ~m=z=....2,~i;m~ coherence of the street block and the sense of Buildingmodules maybeexpressed within asingle structure using urban definition and enclosure and should be variations in setbacks, materials and height. avoided. Articulation can be reflected in the height design and variation in the modules and form of the street fagades. It is also refiected in the roofscape. In the city center this is predominantly of flat roof form, often with decorative street fagade parapet and cornice. Because buildings are viewed from the mountain slopes, enhancing the roofscape is especially important. 1he vertical articulation of the street fagade as a 'base, middle and cap' is also important in the composition of a human scale of building and street fa,ade. This is often defined by the first floor storefront, elements of fagade composition and hierarchy of the fenestration pattern, as well as the cornice or similar horizontal element. The depth of modeling, texture and detail of the fagade is essential to the creation of the light and shadow which define and animate the scale and character of the street fa,ade. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 0647 page 27 Design Objectives and Guidelines 1 29 .. Commercial Character Area City of Aspen Expression of Lot Widths 74\ 1- \+ 4- \444\ 1 4 1- The street fagade is composed of a sequence of , arrangement by original lot dimensions. The NtkZZ liivtjgt; buildings defined either in width or in design building fagade composition, fenestration pattern, 3/ 1 / detail and materials will accentuate the diversity of the street fa,ade, and consequently the richness : 4 t/ of the street character. Articulation of the traditional lot width enables larger scaled development to integrate more ~ successfully. It also creates the opportunity to enhance visual vitality and activity in various A building should be designed to respect the traditional lot respects within the building. A new building width. should be designed to define this unit of scale. 1.29 A new building shall reflect the traditional lot width (30 ft.) as expressed by two or more of the following: â€¢ Variation in height at internal lot lines 0.*=â€¢-:a -IiA- - :Â·.- 1 - Ilâ€¢WI..Ix:15-,i â€¢ Variation inthe plane of the front fagade â€¢ Street fagade composition ~ --4,--1.,-Ijr-~M â€¢ Variation in architectural detailing and materials to emphasize the building Inodule 1.30 The detailed design of the building fagade A single building with multiple style imitations to break up the should reflect the traditional scale and rhythm facade of the building is inappropriate. of the block. This should be achieved using all of the following: â€¢ The fenestration grouping - T+ â€¢ The modeling of the fagade A411.-127' =lt* - â€¢ The design framework for the first floor 1.k~:E-- &. t 1 -,C.-4-Â·-1 , storefront 29 â‚¬ O- f j â€¢ Variation in architectural detail and / or the palette of fagade materials @'40114 --* -i- 1 .,0 1 cy . 1 12=44 -Â· =51< '~ 'Â·4Â· e 01 ..4/4 -rt+~.. ,-Â· ~ -9 Facadearticulation shouldbeaccomplished whilestill maintaining a sense of consistency in design, as this single building does, using variations ofmasonry colors andfenestration patterns. all within a cohesive.#amework page 28 64~ Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 01] Design Objectives and Guidelines .. City of Aspen Commercial Character Area Fagade Articulation th>" ~/A Traditional architectural composition aligns '1 elements within adjacent street fagades, and in 1 -, doing so creates a sense of cohesion and human - /...SON. scale. These include pilasters, moldings, cornices, ~24224Â»X window dressings and reveals. Contemporary - interpretations of such elements are encouraged. Contemporary design will rely upon the use of E==*----I -- v-kill f high quality materials, architectural modeling r '11.....Il--I- . I \>>4\ and detail to create a sense of both human scale and continuity. iN U . mity , While the emphasis is often placed on the __ stature and design of the first floor storefront this visual prominence also depends upon its relationship with the fa,ade above. The hierarchy - ' of proportion in the sequence and pattern of Creative interpretations Of traditional building components are windows and capping cornice help to complete appropriate. the fagade composition and define the height of the building in increments which relate to human 129-2-4944*29-El;ZIÂ«Â· tÂ·-mrâ‚¬, ,-31~4,Â«tuu, - w .....,1%4 ~ ..*9152- scale. The design of a new building should include 1-,4-=AAN:E.V., 1. .. . .=i.Â· ...f.ic such articulation toreflect the traditional character . of the street fagade(s). This is also essential to the .- -*. ic - ---# :*32. visual strength, presence and animation of the ,. street fagade, through play of light and shadow. - -au 1@ M ~~....- 4*iâ‚¬k 1.31 A building should reflect the architectural C +9~%*T--1L8324-~1 :. J oYÂ»- hierarchy and articulation inherent in the composition of the street fagade. The following - 1. 2 should be addressed: .....72.a.41 742.7 . 11 - - ... '42-â‚¬ ..3 ... 3tf~Â¥04 .1.W&7.--Â· '# ) â€¢ Thedesignand definitionofthe traditionally ./2~ 43.1 -- r Â»- 1 -1-Â·- tall first floor Facade articulation provides a sense of scale and enhances visual â€¢ The vertical proportions of the upper level interest. fenestration pattern and ratio of solid wall to window area. - c 7 16- - 1.32 A building should reflect the three- 6 . '4.1 -./ %7 Â£1=1 3 dimensional characteristics of the street -F ...> 1> fa,ade in the strength and depth of modeling, fenestration and architectural detail. Â£ M Q #* . m 27 1 ,i 4.- I 45-9. reÂ©.: ' 7 Contemporary design interpretation enhances the vocabulary of architectural options available to design a street fa,ade. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines page 29 .. Commercial Character Area City oJ Aspen Street Level Character 9 -%61:1'Â· -2,38-': 45 : ,1 Aspen is widely recognized for its visually 9/ OF /9 16/I'll./.-.,/ I-. '1%*S<' Â· vibrant and attractive street character. Several characteristics combine to create this. They 'Fl L--I.~1-Il'.'k include the stature and also the design character of the traditional first floor retail frontage. New development within the Commercial Character Area should be designed to reflect these characteristics. The quality of the design of a the first floor is also essential to the creation of - an attractive and successful secondary frontage . I# :.* to the side or the rear of the building. A building should reflect the three dimensional characteristics of Floor Stature the street faqade in strength and depth of modeling, fenestration The design of a new building should respect and architectural detail. the heights of traditional building design, in the predominant stature of the first floor and in the -- â‚¬ hierarchy and the proportion of upper floors as -7..Ch. =*kt ---; --f ~.--"-- Â·.N'.3....-t---1-=-- -1..C - Â·de- expressed inthe building faâ„¢le. The street level is - generally taller than the upper floors. Storefronts ImE 2 11 $ N>-- of 13 to 15 feet high are typical, whereas second - floors of 10 to 12 feet are typical. - ) - ..4 El. 2 2 1 The street level features of traditional Aspen 3 91 Itt 12.- - commercial buildings are clearly distinguishable : from the upper floors. First floors are predominantly * 1 fixed plate glass with a small percentage of opaque materials. Upper floors are the reverse; 6 ** opaque materials dominate, and windows appear - .. /3.. ~~~ ~~~** ~,g~.Â»a-7Â« ~~ as smaller openings puncturing the solid walls. M:~ Â»t .Â· ~F'~-I.-~,u45,7*14Â· Â· _..-9 -3 2:22Â»,0.-ir -UÂ¢r' 914:aâ€¢eeCe-1.gia~*-:,L-- Within the Commercial Character Area this A building shall reflect thearchitecturalhierarchy ofa traditionally relationship should generally prevail, but can tallfirstfloor and the relationship of transparency to solid wall at be more widely interpreted, with greater design the first floor and upper floors. flexibility than in the Commercial Core. I +1.-,t:*1*5 =-_Jusâ‚¬F -9341.~~99FTZ: fFF 1.33 Any new building shall be designed to ./. 1 ---- 276:f<Eli-u 11:/lill/"ImilrF/fivelb -2 - -- , 3 maintain a minimum of 9 feet from floor to c:-Â·. -3=4 ceiling on all floors. ..~-.4,237-- i y.p. - ~ 'All 2 -: .,21 The alignment of storefkonts at the sidewalk edge is a tradition in the Commercial Core that should be extended to the Commercial Area. page 30 Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines .. City of Aspen Commercial Character Area 1.34 Maintain the distinction between the street level and upper floors. â€¢ The first floor should be the tallest floor to floor height in the building. : . ~ - . t-0- - - A--anl mi ';4 â€¢ The first floor ofthe primary fagade should 2-2/miN /*L + 1 *13.f i?St '11 -4. bepredominantly transparent glass. â€¢ Upper floors should be perceived as being 1.-/.1. more opaque than the street level. Upper - - - 1Â·til~ iI . story windows should have a vertical - *. 1.1....I , :4:. emphasis. , N -7.=4 - - *em 'r.-0 â€¢ Highly reflective or darkly tinted glass is ~4-- - * -646. 44 *111 - inappropriate. , Ir .3 1 . f â€¢ Express the traditional distinction in floor - - 0 <, 6 : 4* 7 -- -- p. I heights between street levels and upper _ Â· r-- - ~ 0 -'31 levels through detailing, materials and e . ./1 arnÂ¥;7,MA=p-Â·'==Le..Â£.#-.F+....1- , .t.- ..* , ... fenestration. The presence of a belt course is Buildings should be designed to reflect the architectural hierarchy an important feature in this relationship. and articulation inherent in the coinposition Of the streetfagade, . 1.35 A new building should be designed to retail frontage. maintain the stature of traditional street level â€¢ This shouldbe 13-15 ft. infloortofloorheight on the first floor. â€¢ The minimum required first floor height must be maintained for at least the first 50 foot depth of the lot and may only be dropped to a lower height beyond that point for areas that are devoted to storage, circulation, offices, restaurantkitchens, alley cornmercial spaces, or similar secondary uses. 13'to 15 1.36 Minimize the appearance of a tall third ~ 9' Min. Floor to Floor Aoor. Floor to Ceiling â€¢ Where a third floor's floor to ceiling height is in excess of 12 ft., it should be set back a V minimum of 15 ft. from the street fagade to reduce the apparent height. â€¢ Increase the parapet height to screen the visual impact of a tall top floor. â€¢ The design of a set back third floor shall be simplerinform, moresubdued inmodeling, detail and color than the primary fagade. V v A new buildingshould be designed to reflect the traditionalstature of the street level retail.Fontage, which should be 13-15 feet iii floor to floor height. ~ page 31 Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines ..11- .. City of Aspen Commercial Character Area h,2+Er&*94*ki[*fljf#Â£4~4~-iÂ» First Floor Character "IQ,qf162?7~~g.*i)--4*2:92*02 0<,$.~LLL) The characteristic street level storefront, the L. IP-M:,1~5117~~4 f>,4~< relationship between the retail entrance and sidewalk, the architectural embellishment and ...1~;4-,-%.-*27-ats.2.%41- 13\ detail and the quality of materials combine to C"mii=.- A~ gxfO,1-gsa,# I Ill ' 'Ill'll.2...i/iiii./14&FI'lli'.28234 , ~~* ,~g create the visual vitality and interest associated r.- -~ a.=* with the street level retail frontage. 1~ 1.37 The first floor faqade should be designed M * S' 1* k jicÂ·- to concentrate interest at the street level, using the highest quality of design, detailing and materials. â€¢ A strong and distinctively designed *E . f retail framework for the first floor of the -* â€¢ An entryway designed to use the full height * | building of the storefront. â€¢ A distinct change in the palette of materials ir* ~. :- I _jit@3 used for the first floor design framework. â€¢ The depth and strength of the modeling of elements and details. 9 _ - f .-3*2,2 '- 4 Retail Entrance A building shall be designed to maintain the character and The close relationship between the level of the transparency of the traditional street level retail frontage. shop frontage and entrance with the public sidewalk is critical to a successful retail character. A new building should locate an entrance at sidewalk level. Elevated or sunken entrances shall be avoided. 1.38 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. â€¢ All entrances shall be ADA compliant. â€¢ On sloping sites the retail frontage should be as close to a level entrance as possible. 1.39 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. â€¢ An airlock entry that projects forward of the primary fagade at the sidewalk edge is inappropriate. â€¢ Addingtemporaryentries during the winter season detracts from the character of the historic district. â€¢ Using a temporary vinyl or fabric "airlock" to provide protection from winter weather is not permitted. page 32 4Â·~ Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 45: Design Objectives and Guidelines .. City of Aspen Commercial Character Area Transparency The transparency created by large storefront A.Â·91â‚¬5 : i g.,c~ window area and the immediate relationship 4 ~ ,@ ,---Â¥M?~ E~* .e=---1 )33;A -r . this creates between public and internal display, 1 4-e: ~ ME 1 tW-J:.4-4 01014 interestandattraction, shouldbeanintegralpart .d,91 9[317:7'im : '-'TEF- : Wl--Â· .4 1 r, 42,=Â«821 of the design of anew building inthe Commercial <24# lk'-14-,E ~~-zizi: 1 11 11 â€¢ 2:9~ Area. 214, 4-/11/ fl 1111 1 11961 1.40 Window area along the first floor shall be ..yMÂ¥t~'1~ , ~~' ~~1 .-2- I . a minimum of 60% of exterior street fa,ade area --mil: 1 - 9 1. 2 when facing principal street(s). -3/..r ,â€¢ 1.41 Where appropriate a building shall The first floor facade and retail frontage should be designed to be designed to maintain the character and concentrate interest at the street level. using the highest quality transparency of the traditional street level retail of design, detailing and materials frontage. I - Storefront Design 1 : - 2 The traditional storefront where architectural display was frequently used to draw attention r Â· ~7Â»- 27*4.L.A .4 , ....1- t. - to retail goods display, remains an essential . 6 0 -~ feature of the attractive and vibrant commercial .1*76-*6 -Â¥'*Ffi - '-'N. rf~ -= center. The role and relationship of the traditional ,.. ~ =2 1-14, = 1:. /6-â‚¬.5, Â£=% , -.I-i.. : storefront can readily be interpreted through - contemporary design. A new building shall be L.-=-'Â·k~ -i.., J im.. designed to express these principles. 12*,4 i kid#*I,Vil~ 1.42 Design of the first floor storefront should 22. Imt-flifi~~~ f include particular attention to the following: --..: â€¢ The basic elements and proportions of - * --n- storefront design A building shall bedesigned to maintain or create the character and â€¢ Depth and strength of modeling transparency of the traditional street level retail frontage. â€¢ The palette of materials and finishes used in both the structural framework and the storefront window â€¢ The concentration of architectural detail to ensure a rich visual experience â€¢ The complementary use of signage and letteringto enhance the retail and downtown character â€¢ The use of lighting to accentuate visual presence Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 0* page 33 E Design Objectives and Guidelines .. Commercial Character Area City of Aspen Side and Rear Fagades 1.43 Retail frontage facing onto side courts or rear alleys should follow similar design it principles to the street frontage, adjusted for - f . 7--~ 6,~ the scale of the space. â€¢ It should be designed with a similar attention to architectural articulation, detail and materials. E â€¢ These should have a richness of detail that is inviting to users. 2 Ak. â€¢ Roofscape A building's roofscape should be regarded as an architectural 'elevation', given its visibility from , nearby buildings and mountain slopes. Specific I l., u - 7 - attention should be paid to creating a varied and .Â· . pe*z -r â€¢Â·- interesting roofscape. The form seen from above Building designalongarearfagadeshould be designed should reinforce the rhythm and scale of the street with the same attention to detail and materials, but fagade. may have morefreedom of design expression than the primary fagade 1.44 A larger building should reflect the 4 Te. i VVJ $ M/. /97-4 3+ Il 8.' traditional lot width in the form and variation Z.g088-1.,2. f...:-:VÂ· 124.- ..70â‚¬â‚¬f ~~*R: : of its roof. This should be achieved through the 4~ -- following: ~4 < Jil-1/91 â‚¬ ic R , li..-#--dE f'..'i _ - â€¢ A set back of the top floor from the front 1 . -.. eÂ¥*gi .... fagade 2:3#'I'- 4== 39 - '1#~f~~~~~51~J~i â€¢ Reflect the traditional lot width in the roof . plane Â·â€¢ :,â€¢6. 1---- .1//e/~/~JJJ*' r,-449.-p---.:12....A-Ur -9.~ 0 -I 115,~ 1~' --- 1.45 The roofscape should be designed with - the same design attention as the secondary All I~ elevations of the building. â€¢ Group and screen mechanical units from view. Reflect the traditional lot width ill the roofplane. â€¢ Locate mechanical equipment to the rear of the roof area. â€¢ Position, articulate and design rooftop enclosures or structures to reflect the modulation and character of the building. 4 * *I' 8CkÂ·'4' blj':i.:U,512=1.11~ â€¢ Use materials which complementthe design of the building faâ„¢les. .~la~ â€¢ Design roof garden areas to be unobtrusive 1---, ' - .L.-=tz---7ETFF} f. 0 -/ i 4 4.ri=:~ from the street. â€¢ Use 'green roof' design best practice, where feasible. A building's roofscape should be regarded as an architectural 'elevation,'given its visibilityfrom nearbybuildings and mountain slopes. page 34 U Di?4% Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines R 1 . . City of Aspen Commercial Character Area Architectural A/laterials The Commercial Area of Aspen comprises a rich - Predominant within this palette is the range of variety of building materials, some of local origin. generally high quality brick, often used with natural stone accent. In contrast, wood is the ; il~ ft_I ,;~--0 -Â· E. qÂ· material for the construction of early residential ~ f ..12 %1 4.- . -. U. Â·.Â·.WV -Â· 4 buildings. The combination, quality and variation _ s k ._---- - -1#*. . jl ;''Z/2,78 4 1% 'hbi L--Â·41 - traditionally found in these materials within the Commercial Area conveys a sense of durability a ~ /- 4. -. and permanence. These qualities should be ~ 1- m 1- continued. . -0 t. 94, ..0 iti t# . 24Â· 1 A range of fagade materials should be used to Â», 8.2- I reduce the apparent scale of a larger building. ~ ~ The immediate setting of a historic building i~ - , b will require particular care in the choice of I i . materials. High quality durable materials gradually express i '49. ///I the maturity of the streetscape and community W The palette of materials adopted for all fagades 1.1. - 1 -1 1, of a building should reflect, complement and A Â· 2 '. â€¢4. enhance the evolving form and character of the - Â£ .ye center of the city. High quality, durable materials should be employed. 1.46 High quality, durable materials should be 1 employed. - â€¢ The palette of materials should be 7<4*3- 1 . ./.--I--\- specified, including samples of materials : i. 1 as re quired. 2=31 1.47 Building materials should have these :1; , ~>AZP#i~:lfITFL. 144* ,0 !~il:g21 Tihl features: e#- :E .L-':,4 -4 =---- t - R.6 ~nt...11 * 1 21- . /2 -2. //'-7,52-~5*'/ â€¢ 1- f BO '~p.'~~ â€¢ Coilvey the quality and range of materials -3.- i...,. fjpt seen traditionally . A 4 4 , fz. â€¢ Reduce the perceived scale of the building .37.1 -74 m - 'A - I and enhance visual interest of the facade 1 1 ..2 ~ .C?'1':r,41Â«. â€¢ Convey a human scale - - I N -19 â€¢ Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen's climate 4 944 3 Â¢**32â€¢44/Im LE Ill ~Â·. V==i W - p z.. Materials used in the Commercial Area should be ofhigh quality in durability and finish, convey a human scale, and be used in combination with a traditional masonry palette. Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 64% page 35 Design Objectives and Guidelines U] Commercial Characifkrea City of Aspe 1.48 A building or additions should reflec 1 1 â€ž the quality and variation in materials seei - traditionally. 0.-99. 1.49 Where contemporary materials are usec . they shall be: 4... k â€¢ High quality in durability and finish 1 P + 1 58 17 - â€¢ Detailed to convey a human scale V. â€¢ Compatible with a traditional masonry palette 4-79- 1 a= 1.50 Materials used for third floor accommodation set back from the street 8 - fagade(s) should be more subdued than the i Â¥A< 1 1 9,6 1 I primary fa,ades. I. - ANd 'UNT:146 Paving & Landscaping Certain settings and buildings within the city are Publicartis a way to both ident#j~andreinforce thesense ofidentity associated with the quality of design and materials and individuality of the city. in paving and/or landscaping. It is important that ~ this be recognized and retained where it exists, Fli>-93- . -â€¢Â·Â·TNe=g**r-i~;F-* M-----Il 12*Â¥f-'3--I (f f-,iNiC--37'-ti---f-31Ill/-/ - -- Â·4-3 is of historic relevance, or otherwise successful. '*it,~,394Â·2*--El-.Â·{9,~ :*f--ft~ .-4.2.12 ' The site and setting of all development shall be enhanced by design of both paving and landscaping within any proposal. 0/WSÂ·:4.-'Â· --~. .3394:.*2&,41/i Proposed enhancements within the public right of way shall form part of a comprehensive improvement proposal for the street or area, and i-- + . =t / approval will be required. === , .1 1 ... 3 3.-~N,4 4. C 7--/ iti=:~~St@-f- 2 r- Bu .:Ii=dighâ‚¬..91{=.1/L 1.51 Paving and landscaping should be 4 designed to complement and enhance the immediate setting of the building and area. #-:.1 f 4-0'Arma . .4--U, 4 ' .1 -r: ...0.01&#Fell,11.dia I '. f ;104,7/9Â£/4/"63./1 The site and setting of all development should be enhanced by the design Of both paving and landscaping within any proposal. page 36 Commercial, Lodging and Historic District 1 ~N-' Design Objectives and Guidelines .. A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (FINAL) AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW (FINAL) APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #_,SERIES OF 2010 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested LIPC Major Development (Final) and Commercial Design Review (Final) for the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99. City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado: and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that '-no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered. repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application. a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The 11PC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for Final Commercial Design Review, the l IPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines per Section 26.412.040 of the Municipal Code. The 11PC 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 to HPC dated March 24, 2010. performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had been met, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on March 24.2010, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of _ to 630 E.Hyman Avenue 11PC Resolution#_.Series of 2010 Page 1 of 3 .. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That 1 IPC hereby grants 1 IPC Major Development (Final) and Commercial Design Review (Final) for the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue. Lots R and S. Block 99. City and 1 ownsite o f Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. At the HPC meeting, HPC should review renderings of the cave depth on the east fa~ade of the third floor to determine the best relationship to the historic resource. 2. At the I IPC meeting, HPC should review renderings of the third floor railing to determine appropriate placement. 3. The new circular window to be installed in the opening on the south fagade should include mullions that relate to the existing horizontal railing. 4. Staff and monitor will provide referral comments to the Parks Department regarding landscape design. 5. The applicant is to provide information on any new exterior lights that are proposed. 6. The applicant is to provide a restudy of the south lagade ground iloor storefronts and entries to preserve the symmetry, solid to void relationships, and other characteristics of Benton's design. 7. The applicant is to remove mullions from windows on rear favade if this can be accomplished and still allow the windows to be operable. 8. There shall be no deviations from the approved plan without first being reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 9. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of five (5) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested properly rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 18() days of the ellective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen. a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan. and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of five (5) years. pursuant to the I.and Use Code of the City of Aspen and title 24. Article 68. Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. 630 E. I lyman Avenue HPC Resolution #_, Series of 2010 Page 2 0 f 3 .. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of' Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review: the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen 1 lome Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 24th day of March, 2010. Michael Hoffman, Chair Approved as to Form: Jim True, Special Counsel ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 630 E. 1 lyman Avenue I WC Resolution #__,Series of 2010 Page 3 0 f 3 .. HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC 201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 925-7819 MHAAS@SOPRIS.NET To: The Aspen Historic Thru: Amy Guthrie Date: March 12, 2010 Preservation Commission (HPC) Subject: Crandall Building/630 E. Hyman Avenue Final Major Development & Commercial Design Review Existing Conditions: The subject property is legally described as Lot R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, and is located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue. This 6,000 s.f. lot on the northwest corner of E. Hyman Avenue and S. Spring Street is home to the Crandall Building, which was built in 1969 and designed by Tom Benton, a local architect/artist. This two-story plus basement building which houses Sandy's Office Supply was identified in Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 as a "potential historic resource." It is located in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District, one block east ofthe Commercial Core (CC). The applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC has previously applied for voluntary Historic Landmark Designation and Ordinance #48 negotiation, as well as Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) approval of a Major Development (Conceptual) and Commercial Design Review (Conceptual). HPC Conceptual Approval: Pursuant to Resolution No. 19, Series of 2009, the HPC unanimously determined that the necessary criteria for listing this property on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures had been met and recommended approval of Historic Landmark Designation and Ordinance #48 negotiation by the City Council, and granted HPC Major Development (Conceptual) and Commercial Design Review (Conceptual), subject to the following conditions: 1. For Final Review: â€¢ Redesign the storefront configuration on the south facade to retain the two existing spider web panels. â€¢ Restudy or remove the proposed new window on the east facade upper floor. â€¢ Restudy the eave depth on the east facade of the rooftop addition to possibly provide greater shadow line. â€¢ Restudy the location of the railing for the third floor deck. â€¢ Consider creating a way to bring natural light through the third floor unit and into the courtyard. â€¢ Install an operable or removable window in the round opening on the south faQade. 1 .. 2. HPC supports the applicant's incentive requests to allow the extra free market residential floor area and the increase of the free market unit size without the landing of a Transferable Development Right. 3. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of October 28, 2009, the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may at its sole discretion and for good cause shown grant a one time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six 6 months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date on or before September 28 2010. (ltv Council Approvals On December 7,2009 the Aspen City Council unanimously passed Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 approving the Historic Designation of the property and granting the following incentives as part ofthe Ordinance #48 negotiation: 1. A variance to the allowable FAR For Commercial Uses from 1.5:1 to 1.51:1. 2. An increase in the maximum residential unit size for the free market unit represented for 630 E Hyman from 2,000 net livable square feet to 2,500 net livable square feet with the extinguishment of an historic TDR to be issued by the City. Council authorized the issuance of an historic TDR with the restriction that it only be used for this purpose At the time of building permit application City staff shall deposit the TDR with the building department and the developer shall deposit the sum of 250,000 representing the estimated value of the TDR into an interest bearing escrow account with the City as the beneficiary of the account. In the event that there is a default in terms and conditions of the building permit and the construction is not completed the City shall have recourse to the sums on deposit to complete the work and cure any default in the terms and conditions of the building permit with any remaining sums returned to the developer. The TDR shall be extinguished and the deposit shall be returned to the developer upon issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Final Inspection whichever first occurs. The terms of such escrow shall be set Forth in the development agreement applicable to this project. 3. An increase in the allowable Free Market Multi Family Housing FAR from 0.5: 1 to 0.59:1 without provision of affordable housing. 4. Execution an Encroachment License for the existing encroachments into City right of way. 5. The applicant has represented that the remaining two uncommitted commercial spaces will be offered for sale to local businesses. 6. Five years vested rights from the date of issuance of the Final Development Order. 2 .. Changes from the Conceptual HPC Design: Per the conditions set forth by the HPC in its Resolution, the following changes to the design of the building have occurred: the storefront configuration on the south fai:ade has been redesigned in order to retain the two existing "spider web" panels; the window that was proposed for the upper floor on the east faâ„¢le has been eliminated; and a portion of the round opening on the south faGade will now become an operable window instead of the previously proposed fixed window. This round window will not be removable due largely to its impractical size and weight, and it will be operable to match the circular windows of the east facade. The applicant has restudied the eave depth on the east faGade of the rooftop addition and has found that it can be increased to provide a greater shadow line. However, any increased eave depth will create more visibility from the street level, which was another concern of the HPC. The applicant is flexible and will need guidance from HPC before any final decision is made with regard to eave depth. The location of the railing for the third floor deck was also restudied. The railing has been moved back half a foot (6 inches), and now sits eighteen (18) inches from the building faGade on the second level, thereby reducing its visibility from the adjacent sidewalks below. Additionally, the visibility of the railing is further reduced by the use of seamless glass without railing caps. The applicant was also asked to consider creating a way to bring natural light through the third floor unit and into the courtyard. The third floor has already been approved by the City Council pursuant to Ordinance 26, Series of 2009, making the "courtyard" an interior space. Interior spaces are not typically subject to HPC Review. Building Code issues also necessitated certain additional changes to the interior, including the glass ceiling (or sky light) that will now cover the basement/first floor courtyard while continuing to allow light and views to penetrate all three interval levels. Nevertheless, the possibilities of creating natural light through the addition and down to the "courtyard" below were researched by the applicant and found to be prohibitive due to costs and/or building codes. Two potential means of delivering natural light were considered. One option would require a very expensive fiber-optic system that would, in the end, simply resemble recessed lighting. The other option is light tubes that would need to penetrate a 2-hour fire assembly (floor of the penthouse/ceiling of the second floor), which is impractical and presents a host of building code issues. The same desired effect can be achieved through good lighting design, while avoiding these cost and code issues. The "courtyard" will be amply lit and landscaped to give it the feel of an open-air space. Proiect Description and Design Criteria for Final HPC: The exterior materials were discussed to some degree during the conceptual hearings and HPC work sessions. For Final HPC Review, these materials are unchanged but better detailed on the plans. The primary exterior materials are stained cedar siding, wood windows and doors, the existing CMU columns, and horizontal metal panels on the third floor addition. The applicant plans to keep as many ground floor windows as practicable, while any replacement will be in- kind. The proposed roof is a flat EPDM membrane with tapered insulation and internal roof drains; the flat roof surface is not visible from any surrounding public ways. 3 .. HPC Final Design Standards: Since the property has been Landmark Designated, Chapters 1 through 10 of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (the HP Guidelines) are applicable to the proposed development, as they refer to the renovation of Historic Structures. Chapter 11 provides guidelines for new buildings on residential Landmark Properties; Chapter 12 is concerned with design in the Main Street Historic District; Chapter 13 concerns designs in the Commercial Core Historic District; therefore, none of these Chapters (11-13) apply to this proposal. The project has been designed to be consistent with the guidelines of Chapter 14, and specific consistency with these requirements is demonstrated below as part of this HPC Final review. The HP Guidelines state that "not every guideline will apply to each projecf' and that 4'some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. The HPC will determine that a sufficient number of the relevant guidelines have been adequately met in order to approve a project proposal:' These statements imply a level of negotiation inasmuch as determinations must be made as to which guidelines are most relevant and most important in balancing between potentially conflicting concerns. The HPC Conceptual Review resulted in approval for the height, scale, massing and proportions of the project. The guidelines addressing treatment and preservation of materials, lighting, fenestration, and the like are more specifically addressed below as part of this Final HPC Review. Chapter One of the HP Guidelines relates to streetscapes and lot features and is largely inapplicable to this proposed development. That is, Sections 1.1 through 1.8 concern fences and retaining walls, while Sections 1.10 through 1.14 relate to private yards; none of these sections are applicable as no fences, retaining walls or private yards exist on the subject property Likewise, Sections 1.16 and 1.17 are not applicable as no historically significant landscape designs or irrigation ditches exist on the property. The only applicable guidelines from Chapter One (1.9 Walkways and 1.15 Site Lighting) are addressed below. 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. The established progression of public to private space will be maintained. The public sidewalk will connect to a straight and perpendicular semi-public walkway leading to the entry of the building. This will lead to the semi-public interior courtyard and end in private commercial and residential spaces. The existing site wall along the Hyman Avenue sidewalk serves to define the progression of public-to-private spaces and will be preserved as a historic element of the property and building design. 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. The visual impacts will be minimized, however this is a commercial building and some illumination will be necessary. It is the applicant' s intention to install recessed lighting under the portion of the second floor that is cantilevered over the Hyman Avenue entrances and storefronts. 4 .. The relevant guidelines from Chapters 2 through 10, as well as those from Chapter 14, are outlined below in italicized text and each is followed by a response demonstrating compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. 2.1 Preserve original building materials. 2.2 Protect wood features from deterioration. 2.3 Plan repainting carefully. 2.4 Brick or stone that was not painted historically should not be painted. 2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. 2.6 Maintain masonry walls in good condition. 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. 2.8 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for primary building materials. Original building materials will be preserved to the extent practicable. The CMU columns are being retained, as are the circular openings, almost all of the siding, including all of the "spider web" panels, and the foundation of the building. The siding will be power washed and stained with a weather protective finish in order to keep it from deteriorating. The original CMU site wall that sits in front of the building on Hyman Avenue is also being retained. Final details and methodologies will be coordinated with Staff and an HPC Project Monitor. 2.9 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. Most of the original redwood siding on the upper level and cedar siding on the lower level of this building will be maintained to the extent practicable while the overall aesthetic will be enhanced in a manner consistent with the original design intent. The CMU columns, CMU site wall, circular openings, and the building foundation are all being retained. Original materials will not be covered with new materials. 2.10 Consider removing later covering materials that have not achieved historic significance. Almost all of the original siding will be retained, while the overall aesthetic will be enhanced in a manner consistent with the original design intent. There are no known "covering materials" on the property, much less any that have achieved historic significance. 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a historic window. The size and proportion of the circular openings on the second level are being preserved while the shape and size of the one on the Hyman Avenue side (south elevation) will be 5 .. maintained, although a portion of the window will become operable. The applicant is no longer proposing to add a new window to the second floor on the Spring Street side. However, new storefront windows will be added to the street level on both the Hyman Avenue and Spring Street sides to enhance the pedestrian experience. New windows will also be added to the second floor on the alley side of the building. The new windows have been located and modestly sized so as to maintain the historic proportions and solid-to-void ratios while providing much needed natural light into the office spaces within. Also proposed on the alley side are wood clad garage doors and new wood siding at street level on the northeast side. The only change proposed to the west side of the building is to replace the existing glass block windows with a fire-rated "transparent wall" glass system. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. 4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 4.4 If a new screen door is used, it should be in character with the primary door. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. 4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, consider using a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. The primary open-aired entrance will be replaced with a set of doors. The new doors are set back into the end of the open-aired entrance so as to maintain its historic appearance while providing a more climate-appropriate solution that will comply with the City's Building and energy codes. These changes were discussed at length during the work sessions and hearing that culminated with the unanimous Conceptual Approval from the HPC. There are no historically significant doors on the building. Chapter 5 of the HP Guidelines involves porches. There are no porches on the existing building and none are proposed for the renovation. The following guidelines from Chapter 6 and 7 are applicable. 6.1 Preserve significant architecturalfeatures. 6.2 When disassembly Of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features should be based on original designs. 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts. 6.6 Replacement of missing elements may be included in repair activities. As previously mentioned, the applicant intends to preserve the circular openings, the CMU columns, most of the existing siding, and the footprint of the building. As such, consistent with this guideline, preservation of the building's significant architecture features is proposed. 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. The original form of the roof is flat and will be maintained. The third floor addition will also have a low-profile, flat roof consistent with the historic form of the structure. 6 .. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. â€¢ The shadows created by traditional overhangs contribute to one's perception of the building's historic scale and therefore, these overhangs should be preserved. There are no eaves on the original roof but it is the applicant' s intention to maintain the portions of the second floor overhanging the ground level (at the front and rear). As previously mentioned, the applicant has restudied the eave depth on the east fagade of the rooftop addition and has found that it can be increased to provide a greater shadow line. However, any increased eave depth will create more visibility from the street level, which was another concern of the HPC. The applicant will need guidance from HPC before any final decision is made with regard to the ease faoade's eave depth. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. This standard was written to address visible sides of pitched roofs on residential structures. The subject building is commercial in nature and has a flat roof that cannot be seen from the surrounding streets. Nevertheless, no skylights are proposed for this development. 7.4 A new chimney should be the same scale as those used historically. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. The existing building does not have any chimneys and no chimneys are proposed in the renovation. Minimum ventilation required by building codes will be through the rooftop, but these projections are not expected to be visible from the surrounding public ways. 7.6 When planning a rooftop addition, preserve the overaH appearance of the original roof. Although the third floor addition will be above the original roof, the overall appearance and lines of the original roof will be preserved. Both the original roof and the proposed third floor roof are flat. The third floor is significantly setback from the outer edges of the second level (more than 22' on the Hyman Avenue side and more than 11' on the Spring Street side) and there will be a transparent guardrail around the inside edge of the original roof. The applicant was asked to restudy the location of this third floor deck railing. As a result, the railing has been moved back an additional six (6) inches and now sits eighteen (18) inches from the building faGacle on the second level, reducing its visibility from the adjacent sidewalks below. 7.7 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. There are no dormers on the existing building and none are proposed. 7.8 Preserve original roof materials. This standard was written to address visible roofs on residential structures. While the design of the existing building is significant, the original roof materials are not. It is a flat roof that cannot be seen from any public ways and its materials are not historically significant. 7 .. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. The replacement roof materials will be of earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish of its own time. Again, it will be a flat roof that cannot be seen from any adjacent public ways. 7.10 If it is to be used, a metal roof should be applied and detailed in a manner that is compatible and does not detract from the historic appearance of the building. The new low-profile roof is proposed to be an EPDM Membrane (rubber) roof, and will have a matte, non-reflective finish. It will not detract from the historic appearance of the building. The metal fascia and soffit will compliment the historic CMU columns while clearly being a product of modern times. 7.11 Avoid using conjecturalfeatures on a roof. There will be no conjectural features on or added to the roof. However, access to the third floor for disabled persons is required by building codes which, in turn, require an elevator and an overrun. The overrun has been cleverly and creatively disguised in a non-ornamental fashion but to give the appearance of a cylindrical rooftop cistern that might have existed historically. It will be clad in metal to match the soffit and fascia of the rooftop addition. The exterior materials of this functional design element will avoid its being confused as historic while serving to compliment the historic architectural features of the CMU columns and the round fenestration patterns. Furthermore, the elevator overrun will fall well below the established by- right height limit of thirty-six feet. Chapter 8 of the HP Guidelines involves secondary structures. No secondary structures currently exist on the property and none are proposed. Chapter 9 discusses building relocation and new foundations; this building is not being relocated and the original foundation is being preserved. Next, the guidelines of Chapter 10 are discussed below. 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. There are no known additions on the property, only the original building, which was built over two phases. To the extent that any additions have been made, none have achieved historic significance. The supplied plans indicate any existing elements proposed for removal, but none that will be removed are believed to be significant. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. The third floor addition to this building has been designed to compliment the historic character of the primary building, but is clearly a product of its own time. No historically significant features will be covered up by this addition. The historic character of the building is being fully maintained and even enhanced. 8 .. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. The proposed addition is clearly distinguishable from the historic building, but is visually compatible with the earlier design. The addition is set back more than 22 feet from the Hyman Avenue faQade, more than 11 feet from the Spring Street faGade and almost 5 feet from the alley side. The addition uses different but compatible materials from the historic portion of the building. The third floor addition's modern design will complement, yet be subordinate to, the historic first and second levels. The addition will clearly be a product of its own time. 10.5 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments that may exist on the street. This building is not in a historic district. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scate with the main building. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significantfacades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. This standard was written with residential structures in mind and, as such, is difficult to apply to a flat-roofed structure that consumes virtually its entire lot. A connector element is not possible as the only way to add to the existing structure is upward. This standard is a prime example of one where the HP Guidelines statement that not every guideline will apply to each project and that some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis must be applied. Again, determinations must be made as to which guidelines are most relevant and most important in balancing between potentially conflicting concerns. The proposed addition simply adds a third level to the historic building. The addition is compatible in size and scale with the historic resource as it is smaller, subservient, and substantially set back from the two primary facades. Its overall height and profile have been minimized to ensure the greatest degree of compatibility. This incentive (the third floor addition), which was approved by the HPC and City Council, allows the applicant to achieve its goal of providing an exemplary preservation effort. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. As previously mentioned, the proposed third floor addition is set back more than 22 feet from the first two levels of the historic building on the Hyman Avenue side, more than 11 feet on the Spring Street side, and almost 5 feet on the alley side. These setbacks serve to minimize the visual impact of the addition while allowing the original proportions and character of the historic structure to shine through and remain prominent. 10.9 Roofforms should be similar to those of the historic building. The existing building has a flat roof, and the renovated building maintains this roofline while proposing a similar flat roof above. 9 .. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. No architectural details will be lost, altered or obscured by the third floor addition to this building. The important architectural features of the circular openings and CMU columns will be accentuated, while the "spider web" patterns and wood siding will also be preserved. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. The addition uses different but compatible materials from the historic portion of the building. The third floor addition's modern design will complement, yet be subordinate to, the historic first and second levels. The third floor addition proposes using horizontal, matte-finish metal panels that will complement the horizontal cedar siding below, as well as new wood windows and doors. The addition will clearly be a product of its own time while complementing the historic architectural detailing of the building. 10.12 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. The proposed rooftop addition is subordinate in mass and scale to the historic building and it is set back from the lower levels. The addition will not overhang lower floors on any side, and no dormers are proposed. Please also refer to previous responses to similar guidelines. 10.13 Set a rooftop addition back from the Pont of the building. As mentioned above, the third floor is proposed to be set back more than 22 feet from the Hyman Avenue faGade, and more than 11 feet from the Spring Street fagade. The original profile of the building as seen from the street will be preserved. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. The proposed addition envisions a flat roofline similar to and in character with the existing roofline. 14.1 These standards should not prevent or inhibit compliance with accessibility laws. 14.2 Generally, a solution that is independent from the historic building and does not alter its historic characteristics is encouraged. Much of the existing building does not comply with ADA requirements. The proposed renovation has an elevator that will be accessible from the front entrance of the building and will provide for compliance with accessibility laws. None of the character defining features of this building will be lost or even compromised by the addition of an elevator. Building codes require elevator access to the third floor, and all elevators must have an overrun. The elevator shaft has been designed to look less mechanical, and more like a rooftop cistern. The elevator shaft is tucked into the west side of the property, adjacent to the tallest portions of the building next door, and will have little visibility from the street. The overrun has been cleverly and creatively disguised in a non-ornamental fashion but to give the appearance of a cylindrical rooftop cistern 10 .. that might have existed historically, although it will be clad in metal to match the soffit and fascia of the rooftop addition. The exterior materials of this functional design element will avoid its being confused as historic while serving to compliment the historic architectural features of the CMU columns and the round fenestration patterns. 14.3 Keep color schemes simple. 14.4 Coordinating the entire building in one color scheme is usually more successful than working with a variety of palettes. 14.5 Develop a color scheme for the entire building front that coordinates aH the fagade elements. Although the HPC does not review the choice of color, there are guidelines that are provided to encourage similar paint schemes. These guidelines are understood by the applicant. The first two levels of the building will look virtually same as they did originally. The siding will be power washed and stained with a weather protective finish. The third floor addition will use horizontal metal panels with a slightly darker hue which will help to distinguish the addition from the historic portions of the building. The color scheme for the entire building is earth-toned and coordinates all ofthe fagade elements. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. 14.8 Minimize the visual impact of light spillfrom a building. The lighting standards are understood by the applicant. The visual impacts will be minimized, however this is a commercial building and some illumination will be necessary. It is the applicant's intention to install recessed lighting under the portion of the second floor cantilevered over the Hyman Avenue entrances and storefronts. 14.9 Use the gentlest means possible to clean the surface of materials andfeatures. 14.10 Repair deteriorated primary buitding materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. 14.11 Plan repainting carefully. 14.12 Provide a weather-protective finish to wood surfaces. 14.13 Leave natural masonry colors unpainted where feasible. The existing redwood and cedar siding that is being preserved will be power washed and stained with a weather protective finish. To the extent that any of the siding must be replaced, it will be done in kind. There are no plans to change the CMU columns at this time. 14.14 Minimize the visual impacts of service areas as seen from the street. The service area for the renovated building will be cleaned up and located off of the alley, largely in its existing location, thereby minimizing any visual impacts from the street. 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. Mechanical equipment will not be seen from the public ways and will not create a negative visual impact. 11 .. 14.16 Locate standpipes, meters and other service equipment such that they will not damage historic facade materials. No service equipment will be located on the front faGade and none will damage any historic fa~ade materials. 14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. 14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene. 14.19 Use a paving material that will distinguish the driveway from the street. 14.20 Off-street driveways should be removed, iffeasible. 14.21 For existing driveways that cannot be removed, provide tracks to a parking area rather than paving an entire driveway. 14.22 Driveways leading to parking areas should be located to the side or rear of a primary structure. 14.23 Parking areas should not be visually obtrusive. 14.24 Large parking areas, especially those for commercial and multifamily uses, should not be visually obtrusive. No driveways, garages or parking areas currently exist on the property. New garage doors will be added at the northwest corner of the property, off the alley and in the least visible part ofthe site, where the fenced-in storage area currently exists. 14.25 Locate signs to be subordinate to the building design. 14.26 Sign materials should be similar to those used historically. 14.27 Use signs to relate to other buildings on the street and to emphasize architectural features. 14.28 Pictographic symbols are encouraged on signs. 14.29 Illuminate a sign such that it complements the overall composition of the site. These guidelines are understood by the applicant. The existing CMU site wall that sits in front of the building on Hyman Avenue and contains signage for the businesses in the building will remain. Additionally, some signage may continue to be hung from the cantilevered portion of the building. All signs will be subordinate to the building design and materials shall be similar to those used historically. Final Commercial Design Review Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines: The Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Objectives and Guidelines (the "Commercial Guidelines") set forth design review criteria, standards and guidelines that are to be used in making determinations of appropriateness. The Commercial Guidelines are organized to address the different design contexts that exist in the City. These distinct settings are defined as "Character Areas," within which variations exist among the physical features that define each area. The proposed development is located in the Commercial (C-1) zone district, one block east ofthe Commercial Core. Per the Commercial Guidelines, all development projects should achieve the following design objectives: 12 .. â€¢ Promote an interconnected circulation system that invites pedestrian use, including a continuous street and alley system and a respect for the natural topography; â€¢ Promote a system of public places that support activities, including public amenity spaces, compatible landscaping and paving, and unobtrusive off-street parking; and â€¢ Assure that buildings jit together to create a vibrant street edge that reinforces a sense of appropriate scale. According to the Commercial Guidelines: the Commercial Zone District (C-1) forms the immediate fringe of much of the Commercial Core Historic District (CC); building heights and materials in this zone vary; storefront design and display is a less dominant characteristic in the C-1 zone than in the CC area, diminishing the pedestrian experience in some places; the street wall is less defined than in the CC; and building facades are sometimes set back or include front yard space, which weakens the edge. The purpose of the Commercial (C-1) zone district is enumerated in Section 26.710.150(A) of the Code as follows: "to provide for the establishment of mixed-use buildings with commercial uses on the ground floor, opportunities for adfordable and free-market residential density. A transition between the CC and surrounding residential neighborhoods has been implemented [emphasis added] through a slight reduction in allowable floor area as compared to the Commercial Core, the ability to occupy the Ground Floor with olfices, and a separate Chapter in the Commercial Design Guidelines. By complying with the zone district regulations, the proposal has already succeeded in appropriately transitioning from the CC to the surrounding residential neighborhood. Moreover, this proposal leaves more than 2,500 square feet of FAR on the table, so to speak, and is well below the "by-right" height limit. The proposal maintains the interconnected pedestrian circulation system present in the sidewalks of Hyman Avenue and Spring Street, as well as the associated street and alley systems. The site is relatively flat topographically, and the proposal does not suggest changing this condition. The pedestrian experience and systems will be improved by the enhanced building design and, if allowed by the Parks Department, replacement of the inappropriate, fruit-bearing street trees with appropriate species and spacing between plantings. The existing site wall separating the building entrance from the sidewalk will be maintained as a contributing element to the historic resource. While existing street setbacks will not be changed, storefront windows and entrances will be enhanced and continue to provide room for public amenities. New off- street parking will be accommodated in garages to be located at the least visible part of the property, at the northwest corner of the site and off the alley. The key design objectives in the C-1 district are as follows: 1. Strengthen the sense of relatedness with the Commercial Core Historic District. 2. Maintain a retail orientation. 3. Promote creative, contemporary design. 4. Encourage a well-defined street wall. 5. Reflect the variety in building heights seen traditionally. 6. Accommodate outdoor public spaces while establishing a clear definition to the street edge. 7. Promote variety in the street level experience. 13 .. Given the property has been designated a Historic Landmark, there is only so much opportunity to forward the goals of these guidelines. That is, the applicant is not working with a blank slate/vacant lot on which new designs could adhere closely to the cues suggested in these guidelines. The proposed renovation of the Crandall Building will maintain the already defined street edge, while its unique and innovative design will enhance the street vitality. The replacement of a small amount of the cedar siding on the Hyman Avenue street level with new storefront windows and doors will create greater retail presence at the street edge as well as an enriched and more urban definition of the commercial street frontage similar to that experienced in the CC zone. While this renovation maintains much of the original design and its street setbacks, it infuses innovative contemporary features on the third floor to create an addition that is compatible, but will clearly be viewed as a product of its own time. The addition will also create better corner definition, while recognizing the importance of having varied building heights in the Commercial Area. With its second floor roof height, third floor roof, and elevator overrun, the building itself will present a microcosm of the varied building heights in the zone and on the subject block. Furthermore, the third floor addition will add approximately 1114 feet to the current structure, and will be only 5 feet or so taller than the adjacent building. Outlined below are the Commercial Character Area's Final Review Design Guidelines in italicized print, with each followed by a description of the proposal' s compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. 1.29 A new building shall reflect the traditional lot width (30 ft.) as expressed by two or more of the following... Since this is a remodel of an existing building that has been designated a Historic Landmark this standard is not applicable. 1.30 The detailed design of the building fa,ade should reflect the traditional scale and rhythm of the block. There is limited potential for implementation of this standard as it is a Designated Landmark. Nevertheless, the maintenance of the existing character will reflect the traditional scale and rhythm of the block. 1.31 A building should reflect the architectural hierarchy and articulation inherent in the composition of the streetfaqade. 1.32 A building should rellect the three-dimensional characteristics of the street faÂ¢ade in the strength and depth of modeling, fenestration and architectural detail. As mentioned above, this building is a Historic Landmark and as such, the design of the existing building will stay the same, with the addition of the third floor, which is setback and not visible from the sidewalks below. 1.33 Any new building shall be designed to maintain a minimum of 9 feet fromfloor to ceiling on all jloors This standard is not applicable as this is not a new building. 14 .. 1.34 Maintain the distinction between the street level and upper jloors. Since this building has been landmark designated, its historic character cannot be changed. The round windows are being maintained as significant historic elements. 1.35 A new building should be designed to maintain the stature of traditional street level retail frontage. This standard is not applicable as this is not a new building. 1.36 Minimize the appearance of a tal! third jloor. The third floor addition is set back from both Hyman Avenue and Spring Street in order to minimize its appearance and make it subordinate to the historic portion of the building. Additionally, the floor to ceiling height of the third floor has been reasonably minimized, as was discussed and agreed upon during Conceptual Review. 1.37 The first floor fara(le should be designed to concentrate interest at the street level, using the highest quality of design, detailing and materials. Although there is limited opportunity to make changes to this building due to its landmark status, new storefront windows and recessed doors are being added to the Hyman Avenue side of the building in order to concentrate interest at the street level. 1.38 The retail entrance should be at the sidewalk level. The retail entrance is at the sidewalk level, and all entrances will become ADA compliant. The existing building does not meet ADA requirements. 1.39 Incorporate an airlock entry into the plan for all new structures. This renovation involves adding a door to the entry of the building. The new door provides access to the internal circulation and courtyard areas providing an airlock effect. 1.40 Window area along the first floor shaN be a minimum of 60% of exterior street faÂ¢a,le area when facing principal street(s). As previously mentioned, there is limited opportunity to make changes to this building due to its landmark status. However, appropriate amounts and locations of new storefront windows and doors are being added to the Hyman Avenue side of the building in order to concentrate interest at the street level. 1.41 Where appropriate a building shall be designed to maintain the character and transparency of the traditional street level retailfrontage. The historic character of this building is being maintained and, as such, the traditional street level retail frontage is being maintained as well. 15 .. 1.42 Design of the jirst.floor storefront should include particular attention to the following... As previously mentioned, there is limited opportunity to make changes to this building due to its landmark status. However, appropriate amounts and locations of new storefront windows and doors are being added to the Hyman Avenue side of the building in order to concentrate interest at the street level. 1.43 Retail frontage facing onto side courts or rear alleys should follow similar design principles to the streetfrontage, adjusted for the scale of the space. There is limited opportunity to make changes to this building due to its landmark status, and the building has no retail frontage that faces onto side courts or rear alleys. 1.44 A larger building should reflect the traditional lot width in the form and variation ofits roof. The third floor addition to this building is substantially set back from the front fa~ades, while the historic 2nd floor' s "roof' will be maintained and reflects the traditional lot width. 1.45 The roofscape should be designed with the same design attention as the secondary elevations of the building. The equipment for the building systems has not yet been finalized. Final equipment selection will require further direction from the owner and individual tenants with regard to function and energy efficiency. The applicant proposes consulting with HPC staff and monitor in determining final equipment location, layout, and/or screening. 1.46 High quality, durable materials should be employed. The historic materials are being maintained and refinished. New first or second floor doors and windows will utilize wood to match the existing fenestration. The new materials used on the third floor addition are highly durable wood and metal. 1.47 Building materials shoutd have these features: â€¢ Convey the quality and range of materials seen traditionally â€¢ Reduce the perceived scale ofthe building and enhance visual interest of thefacade â€¢ Convey a human scale â€¢ Have proven durability and weathering characteristics within Aspen's climate The perceived scale of the building is reduced by the third floor setback, and through the use of dark colors and matte finishes. The visual interest of the fagade is also enhanced by the materials chosen for the addition. The metal panels, cedar siding, and CMU columns all have proven durability. 1.48 A building or additions should reflect the quality and variation in materials seen traditionally. As previously mentioned, this Historic Landmark will maintain most of the existing materials including the horizontal cedar siding and CMU columns. Doors and windows will mostly remain or 16 .. be replicated. The third floor addition uses horizontal metal panels which vary from and complement the traditional materials. 1.49 Where contemporary materials are used they shall be: â€¢ High quality in durability and finish â€¢ Detailed to convey a human scale â€¢ Compatible with a traditional masonry palette 1.50 Materials used for third floor accommodation set back from the street fa,ade(s) should be more subdued than the primary fa,a(les. The horizontal metal panels that are proposed for the third floor addition are high quality in durability and finish, and are more subdued than the primary facades. 1.51 Paving and landscaping should be designed to complement and enhance the immediate setting of the building and area. The sidewalk paving and the walkways leading to the front entrance will remain the same. Although the landscaping opportunities are limited, a final plan will be coordinated with the Parks Department and HPC staff and monitor. Exhibits: 1. Copies of Prior Approvals (HPC Resolution No. 19, Series of 2009, and City Council Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 2. Authorization Letter 3. Proof of Ownership 4. Property Owners within 300' Attachments: â€¢ Existing Conditions Plan Set â€¢ Proposed HPC Final Drawings 17 . A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) SUPPORTING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND BENEFITS NEGOTIATED UNDER ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007, AND GRANTING MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL) AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW (CONCEPTUAL) APPROVAL FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #19, SERIES OF 2009 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested Historic Landmark Designation and Ordinance #48 negotiation, HPC Major Development (Conceptual) and Commercial Design Review (Conceptual) for the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for Designation and states that an application for listing on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall be approved if City Council, after a recommendation from HPC, determines sufficient evidence exists that the property meets the criteria; and WHEREAS, the property is included on Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 48, Series of 2007, as a potential historic resource. This Ordinance is codified at Section 26.415.025 of the Municipal Code and provides for a ninety day period during which Council may negotiate with the property owner for a mutually acceptable agreement that preserves the resource; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review," and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Commercial Design Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Objectives and Guidelines per RECEPTION#: 564435, 11/12/2009 at 630 E. Hyman Avenue 09:43:33 AM, HPC Resolution #19, Series of2009 1 OF 3, R $16.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Page 1 of 3 Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO -Salqqm Section 26.412.040 of the Municipal Code. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HPC dated October 28,2009, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had been met, and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 28, 2009, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and recommended approval with conditions by a vote of 5 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby recommends Council approval of Historic Landmark Designation and Ordinance #48 negotiation, and grants HPC Major Development (Conceptual) and Commercial Design Review (Conceptual) for the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. For Final Review: â€¢ Redesign the storefront configuration on the south faede to retain the two existing "spiderweb" panels. â€¢ Restudy or remove the proposed new window on the east favade, upper floor. â€¢ Restudy the eave depth on the east fagade of the rooftop addition, to possibly provide greater shadow line. â€¢ Restudy the location ofthe railing for the third floor deck. â€¢ Consider creating a way to bring natural light through the third floor unit and into the courtyard. â€¢ Install an operable or removable window in the round opening on the south fagade. 2. HPC supports the applicant's incentive requests to allow the extra free-market residential floor area and the increase of the free market unit size without the landing o f a Transferable Development Right. 3. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of October 28,2009, the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date (i.e., on or before September 28,2010). 630 E. Hyman Avenue HPC Resolution #19, Series of 2009 Page 2 of 3 . 1 APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 28th day of October, 2009. 41/2/. Michael HONnan, Chair Approved as to Form: 4-237- Aim True, Special Counsel t ATTEST: 0054Â«30Â¢0~ Kathy stAckland, Chief Deputy Clerk 630 E. Hyman Avenue HPC Resolution #19, Series of 2009 Page 3 of 3 .. ORDINANCE #26 (Series of 2009) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007 NEGOTIATIONS FOR POTENTIAL HISTORIC RESOURCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested negotiation for landmark designation pursuant to Ordinance No. 48, Series of 2007 for the proposed alterations to the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, the property is included on Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 48, Series of 2007, as a potential historic resource; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025(E) of the Municipal Code states that, during the negotiation period set forth in the Code, "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the Potential Historic Resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission;" and WHEREAS, the property owners were notified of the Historic Preservation Commission meeting; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HPC dated October 28,2009, performed an analysis of the building and the impact of the proposed alterations to the potential historic significance of the building and found that the criteria for landmark designation are met; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 28, 2009, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application and approved a recommendation to City Council by a vote of 5-0; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements ofthe Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. RECEPTION#: 565306,12/15/2009 at 630 E. Hyman Avenue 09:40:53 AM, 1 OF 4, R $21.00 Doc Code ORDINANCE Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page l of 4 Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO .. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Historic Designation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby approves Historic Designation for 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Section 2: Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby grants the following Land Use entitlements, conditioned upon the voluntary landmark designation of 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado and the issuance of a Development Order to be granted by the Historic Preservation Commission, following Final Major Development and Commercial Design Review: 1. Council hereby grants a variance to the allowable FAR for Commercial Uses, from 1.5:1 to 1.51:1. , 2. Council hereby approves an increase in the maximum residential unit size for the free market unit represented for 630 E. Hyman from 2,000 net livable square feet to 2,500 net livable square feet, with the extinguishment of an historic TDR to be issued by the City. Council hereby authorizes the issuance of an historic TDR with the restriction that it only be used for this purpose. At the time of building permit application, City staff shall deposit the TDR with the building department and the developer shall deposit the sum of $250,000, representing the estimated value of the TDR, into an interest bearing escrow account with the City as the beneficiary of the account. In the event that there is a default in terms and conditions of the building permit and the construction is not completed, the City shall have recourse to the sums on deposit to complete the work and cure any default in the terms and conditions of the building permit, with any remaining sums returned to the developer. The TDR shall be extinguished and the deposit shall be returned to the developer upon issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Final Inspection, whichever first occurs. The terms of such escrow shall be set forth in the development agreement applicable to this project. 3. Council hereby approves an increase in the allowable Free-Market Multi-Family Housing FAR from 0.5:lto 0.59:1, without provision of affordable housing. 4. Council hereby permits the City's execution of an Encroachment License for the existing encroachments into City right-of-way. 5. The applicant has represented that the remaining two uncommitted commercial spaces will be offered for sale to local businesses. 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 2 of 4 .. 6. Council hereby grants five years vested rights from the date of issuance of a development order. Section 3: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or, portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: Vested Rights The Land Use entitlements granted herein shall be vested for a period of five (5) years from the date of issuance of a development order, following Final Major Development and Commercial Design Reviews by the Historic Preservation Commission. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, including Final Major Development and Commercial Design Reviews by the HPC, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of five (5) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 3 of 4 .. of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 6: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 7th day of December, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council ofthe City ofAspen on the,23 day of Aln/, 2009, . / i ./1 U---FJOL1/41 4 9, r. 1~0 te 6 r Michael C. tland, Mayor ATTEST: 1Â»443 0-_ Kathryn Koc~>City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this ~- day of~,2009. FO+ Mic]Aael C. ]~eland, MAM" AI*ST: ' Kathryn Kock~ty Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 90hri-Worcester, City Attorney 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 4 of 4 .. 1 , September 30,2009 Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Re: Crandall Building (630 E. Hyman Ave.) Land Use Application To whom it may concern: Haas Land Planning, LLC (HLP), and R+B Architecture + Urban Design (R+B), and Klein Cote Edwards, PC (Klein) are hereby authorized to act as the designated and authorized representatives with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for the Crandall Building located at 630 East Hyman Avenue (Parcel ID No. 2737-182-12-003. HLP, R+B and Klein are authorized to submit an application for an Ordinance 48 negotiations, landmark designation, conceptual major development review, conceptual commercial design review and any other incidental reviews. HLP, R+B and Klein are also authorized to represent the Patio Building Company LLC in meetings with City staff, boards, and commissions. Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review, please do so through Haas Land Planning, LLC, whose contact information is provided in the application. Sincerely, /447( Fflo 630*ast Hy#~an LLC 531 Easy Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 EXHIBIT RECEPTION#: 561144123/2009 at ~ 0 .1 12:51:51 PM, 1 OF 2, R $11.00 DF $460.00 Doc Code SPEC WD Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO Documentary Fee $ 460.00 SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, Made July 23,2009 between PATIO BUILDING COMPANY LLC of the County of PITKIN, and State of COLORADO, of the first part, GRANTOR and 630 EAST HYMAN, LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY whose legal address is: 532 E. HOPKINS, ASPEN, CO 81611 of the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO, of the second part, GRANTEE WITNESSETH, That the said parties of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten dollars and other good and valuable considerations, to the said parties of the first part. in hand paid by the said parties of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby confessed and acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed and by these presents do grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm unto the said parties of the second part, its successors and assigns forever, all the following described lots or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the County of PITKIN and State of COLORADO, to wit: PATIO BUILDING CONDOMINIUMS, according to the Condominium Map of Patio Building Condominiums recorded September 16, 1982 in Plat Book 13 at Page 83 and as defined and described in the Declaration for the Patio Building Condominiums recorded September 16, 1982 in Book 432 at Page 798. Also known as Lots R and S, Block 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Together with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances there-unto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof; and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever, of the said parties of the first part, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the said parties of the second part, its successor's and assigns forever. And the said parties of the first part for themselves, their heirs and assigns do covenant, grant, bargain and agree to and with the said parties of the second part, their successors and assigns, to WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of said parties of the second part, its successors and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming or to claim the whole or any part thereof, by through or under the said parties of the first part. The singular shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto set their hand(s) and seal(s). SIGNATURES ON PAGE 2 011-7 OP ASPEN 1 WRETT PAID CITY OF AGFEN DATE REP NO. HRETT PAID DAT'E REP NO. 7(23/09 MUW- 3Â¤3 j 1 (Mal \Â»At 39-9-3 / .. SIGNATURE PAGE TO SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED PAGE 2 PATIO BUILDING COMPANY LLC BY: 4,4 4@jet. TITLE; 4VIANAGER STATE OF COLORADO ) SS COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Cit:F~ day of JULY, 2009 By: GESINE CRANDALL, MANAGER OF PATIO BUILDING COMPANY LLC WITNESS my hand and official seal 34 3,44Â« ~ Notary Publid \ .~F.S.-./ my commission expires: '06 . , .'# i JOYS.H-IGENS 11 1~ NOTARY PUBLIC H \123$07 1~â€¢~/2010 PCT22425L4 r 1 , r... I./.wil i i . 1.............. 506 E. MAIN ST., SUITE 201 PITKIN COUNTY~X NOTICE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-2903 PHONE # (970) 920-5170 FAX # (970) 920-5175 For 2009 taxes due 111~2010 www. pitkinassessor.org LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ~ TAXING DISTRICT ~ MILL LEVY 9~ TEMPORARY MILL ~ TAX AMOUNT LEVY CREDIT Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Block: PITKIN COUNTY 3.878 - 1.928 $2,827.49 99 Lot: R AND:- Lot: S HEALTHY COMMUNITY FUND 0.503 - 0.109 $571.30 ASPEN AMBULANCE DISTRICT 0.278 - 0.140 $200.10 OPEN SPACE & TRAILS 3.763 - 0.430 $4,832.85 PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY 1.628 - 0.722 $1,313.70 CITY OF ASPEN 5.904 - 1.862 $5,860.90 r ASPEN FIRE PROTECTION 1.282 0.136 $1,661.70 e ..r'.1 n ' ,I (2..a d,2 4,1~ -,=! 3 ASPEN SANITATION DISTRICT 0.130 $188.50 ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL 0.969 $1,405.05 f 44 4, 4 f ' ' I t. f 1 9 c ASPEN SCHOOL DISTRICT 7.846 $11,376.70 ' Â« ;~"' COLORADO MTN COLLEGE 3.997 $5,795.65 COLORADO RIVER WATER CONS 0.253 - 0.087 $240.70 f ASPEN HISTORIC DISTRICT 0.300 - 0.064 $342.20 PROPERTY VALUATION ACTUAL ~ ASSESSED ~LAND 4500000 1305000 BUILDING 500000 145000 SEWER CHG/CITY LIEN/SPECIAL IMPR PERSONAL PROPERTY EXEMPTION - DISABLED VET. OR SENIOR HOMESTEAD * A mill levy is the tax rate per $1,000 of assessed valuation. NET TOTAL 5000000 1450000 Without state legislative funding your school NET MILL LEVY FULL TAX mill levy would have been 7.846 25.253 $36,616.84 TAX DISTRICT SCHEDULE NUMBER 1YPE OF PROPERTY UNPAID PRIOR YEAR TAX: ly. ~AYMENT SCHEDULE 001 R000339 Real NUMBER OR MESSAGE APPEARS HERE ~ CONTACT'[REASURER IF A $18,308.49 IS YOUR ADDRESS CORRECT? $18,308.45 Please check the box on the coupon for change of address. OR FULL PAYMENT DUE APRIL 30 $36,616.8, 630 EAST HYMAN LLC Make checks payable to: PITKIN COUNTY TREASURE 0 532 E HOPKINS AVE Post-dated checks are not accepted. 8 ASPEN, CO 81611-1910 If your real (not personal) property taxes will be paid by yc mortgage company, please do not duplicate payment. If you have sold this propedy, please forward this statemi 4 ZLL to the new owner or return It to this office marked "prope sold" (and include the name and address of the new owr if known). F. 1 .1. RETAIN TOP PORTION FOR YOUR RECORD PLEASE SEE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS FORM FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. TAX NOTICE R000339 2009 ; ~Contact.Treasuier's office Immediately if a numberÂ· ~ ' TAX YEAR SCHEDULE NUMBER . or message appear$ above. (970) 920-5170 PLEASE USE YOUR CANCELLED ~4*.: 6,:,Â·)6, Â·;~t.%1k*4*N:THI*Â©PUPONLW00*COIND H~~~A,F,4Y.MENT~~04..'<~a.,-Â·4~ Â·~.:Â· Â·4 ;Â·Â·'1 CHECKAS A RECEIPT. 1F YOU NEED A / ,;,NApi'EN...'.,(:Aiti~.?~4[2, Â·':Â·,Â·:A 4:'i'v:?'-:,"~t'.-'932Â·t Â·Â·w <t'-Â·,tifit, :1,.?461:1:J h.3:,i~64%Â·%~NÂ¢32:'03'ir.<it :.:, %*i:.42*2~ Ck?@:,:Â·.:, -\ SEPARATE RECEIPT PLEASE RETURN < "?Â·*:'.rÂ·,9-'4Â·,re.Â·.,, - ' " Â· Â·Â·.'.Â·,~~ , Â·~~'INÂ·Â·Â·,Ci;,Â·~k,',4%'.~â€¢.i'.t,Â·i., .. I - THIS COUPON AND CHECK HERE. *AdiHilf{~Cuddhhj~puuevjunerlsift 186:~2 0-*gl \;4'~<~Â·*f#â‚¬~.foÂ· fÂ·:2*Â¢4Â·~'tÂ·i:.i.i,~Â·;?'t~:Â·-**FA/MÂ£tlh,Qt*$491:41'Â·4*23*f?Â·jpl~/ / 3:~Topaybycred#;gardni' Â», v..9.,Topay bycheck: 1111111 lili l l' ll'll Ill lilli lilli lili 11111 lilli 11111111' lili ; "Â·. Return this coupon and make M!~1 1 DISCOVER I IM VISA j check for exact amount indicated. i. 0 below, payable to â€¢1/R000339 * 001 001 0002501 Visitwww.officialpayments.com PITKIN COUNTY TREASURER 0002501 01 AV 0.335 -AUTO m 0 0836 81611-191032 72 or call 1 -800-2PAY.TAX 1 / : 506 E MAIN ST, SUITE 201 lilli 1i1I lilli lilli llI,,lll,,lll,I .,,,.llII.i... ll.i,lill..'Il ,Â·fluse-,luils,Il@on: Cod*Â·16071 ASPEN, CO 81611-2903 630 EAST HYMAN LLC Ofhcial,$69*enti~, #W service provider, payments must 1)4 ih U .S. 'dollars and 532 E HOPKINS AVE charges a 2.55Â¥fdeÂ¢fdrthis service. 9 drawn on a U.S. bank lilli , j g ASPEN, CO 81611-1910 TAX AMOUNT 4 8 u.1 SECOND HALFAMOUNT m $18,308.42 DUE BY JUNE 15, 2010 E] Check this box for change of address and complete back of form. AnnoRAQ PROPERTY OWNER PERTY OWNER Easy Feet@ labeis L A '~ Bend along line to | EXHIBIT Use AveryÂ® Template 5160Â® ~ Feed Paper ~ expose Pop-Up Edgeâ„¢ ~ 610 EAST HYMAN LLC - 42 92* ~ :go vJrfOJ-sT R?&21.NJILL i C/O CHARLES CUNNIFFE 610 E HYMAN AVE DENVER, CO 80218 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ALEINE-BANK ASPEN 719 EAST HOPKINS AVE LLC ALEXANDER THOMAS L PO BOX 11600 715 E HYMAN AVE # 27 ATAN ERÂ© GARDEY PO BOX 10000 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 ASPEN PLAZA LLC ASPEN LEGACY HOLDINGS LLC BARTLETT KATY I PO BOX 1709 132 MIDLAND AVE #4 715 E HYMAN AVE #18 C/O STEVE MARCUS BASALT, CO 81621 ASPEN, CO 81611-2066 ASPEN, CO 81611 BATTLE GERALD LIVING TRUST BASS CAHN 601 LLC BAUM ROBERT E ASPEN RES TRST HIXON BURT LIVING TRUST PO BOX 4060 PO BOX 1518 PO BOX 2847 ASPEN, CO 81612 STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659 BELL MTN QUAL RES CONDO ASSOC BISCHOFF JOHN C BORGIOTTI CLAUDIO LLC 502 S VIA GOLONDRINA 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN 320 S SPRING ST TUCSON, AZ 85716-5843 VIENNA, VA 22192 ASPEN, CO 81611 BULKELEY RICHARD C & JULIE J CARVER RUTH A & MARTIN G CHATEAU ASPEN CONDO ASSOC 801 JOY ST - 10 BYRON LN , 630 E COOPER AVE RED OAK, IA 51566 MUSCATINE, IA 52761 ASPEN, CO 81611 CHATEAU ASPEN UNIT 21-A LLC CHOOKASZIAN KAREN M CLARY EDGAR D IV BLDG 421-G AABC 1100 MICHIGAN 715 E HYMAN AVE #9 ASPEN, CO 81611 WILMETTE, IL 60091 ASPEN, CO 81611 CM LLC COLBY WARD COLOSI THOMAS W C/O AERSCAPE LIMITED 715 E HYMAN #20 715 E HYMAN AVE APT 6 230 S MILL ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2099 ASPEN, CO 81611 COOPER SPRINGS LLC DAILY CONNIE M DEVINE RALPH R 393 N COLUMBIA AVE 715 E HYMAN AVE #14 715 E HYMAN #13 COLUMBUS, OH 43209 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 EDGE OF AJAX INC DODEA NICHOLAS T DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST C/O ANDRE ULRYCH 715 E HYMAN AVE #19 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY 201B E SILVER ST ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 MARBLE, CO 81623 hiquettes faciles & peler I * Repliez 4 la hachure afin de I www.avery.com Sens de ,_Con_rn- Ag,cov Utilisez le gabarit AVERYÂ® 5160Â® , ..6.....0.-2.-4 7@74!er le reboril Pon.tinâ„¢ 1 .. EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA ERGAS VENESSA BLAIR & CLAUDE ETTLIN ROSS L 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 PO BOX 4316 715 E HYMAN AVE # 7 JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 FERRY JAMES H 111 FIGHTLIN JONATHAN D FLOWERS JUDY R BOX 167 715 E HYMAN #46 715 E HYMAN AVE #1 GLENCOE, IL 60022-0167 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 FURNGULF LTD GELD LLC GAUBA ALENA A COLO JOINT VENTURE C/O LOWELL MEYER 715 E HYMAN AVE #21 616 E HYMAN AVE PO BOX 1247 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612-1247 GOODING SEAN A 80% & RICHARD L GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY & BARBARA GOFEN ETHEL CARO TRUSTEE 20% 460 ST PAUL ST 455 CITY FRONT PLAZA C/O PARAGON RANCH INC DENVER, CO 80206 CHICAGO, IL 60611 620 E HYMAN AVE #1 E ASPEN, CO 81611 GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES GORGE MICHAEL D & WENDY S HAYLES THOMAS PARTNERS LLC 25300 FRANKLIN PARK DR 715 E HYMAN AVE #5 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD #2222 FRANKLIN, MI 48025 ASPEN, CO 81611 LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 HEXNER MICHAEL T TRUSTEE HOPKINS STVENTURE HEWINS SAMUEL JUSTIS KAREN L TRUSTEE C/O TED MUI-ARZ 715 E HYMAN AVE #23 2555 UNION ST PO BOX 1328 ASPEN, CO 81611 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123-3832 ASHLAND, OR 97520 HORSEFINS LLC HUNTER PLAZA ASSOCIATES LLP HUNT SARAH J C/O PITKIN COUNTY TITLE C/O CAPMARK FINANCE INC 715 E HYMAN AVE #22 601 E HOPKINS AVE 200 WITMER RD ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 HORSHAM, PA 19044-6657 HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES 11 LLC IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 PO BOX 642 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 ISRAEL FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD JOYCE EDWARD KANTAS NICOLETTE 263 OCEAN BLVD 11 SLASALLEST#1600 715 E HYMAN AVE #15 GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 CHICAGO, IL 60603-1211 ASPEN, CO 81611 KASH]NSKI MICHAEL R LANDIS JOSHUA B LANDRY ELIZABETH J 0343 GROVE CT 715 E HYMAN AVE #4 PO BOX 3036 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN,CO 81612 .. LAZY J RANCH LLC MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MARTELL BARBARA C/O W R WALTON 317 SIDNEY BAKER S #MOO 702 E HYMAN AVE PO BOX 665 KERRVILLE, TX 78028 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 MCMURRAY WILLIAM & HELEN MAYLE KENNETH D MIAO SANDRA 29 MIDDLE HEAD RD 715 E HYMAN AVE #3 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN MOSMAN NSW 2088 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 VIENNA, VA 22182 AUSTRAILIA, MONTANARO JOHN & SUSAN FAMILY NATTERER HELEN MYSKO BOHDAN D TRUST 67 BAYPOINT CRES 615 E HOPKINS PO BOX 457 OTTAWA ASPEN, CO 81611 MALIBU, CA 90265 ONTARIO CANADA, K2G6R1 NETHERY BRUCE NIELSON COL STEVE & CAROL D OLITSKY TAMAR & STEPHEN 715 E HYMAN AVE #25 501 S FAIRFAX PO BOX 514 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 OLITSKY TAMAR G & STEPHEN L P & L PROPERTIES LLC PACIFIC WEST INVESTMENTS LLC 2127 HAINES WY 101 SOUTH 3RD ST #360 7115 ORCHARD LAKE RD STE 220 LANSDALE, PA 19446 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 WEST BLOOMFIELD, MI 48322 PITKIN CENTER CONDO OWNERS PRICE GAIL REVOLUTION PARTNERS LLC ASSOC C/O ASPEN POTTERS INC PO BOX 1247 517 W NORTH ST 231 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ROTHBLUM PHILIP & MARCIA RUST TRUST RYERSON GEORGE W JR 624 E HOPKINS AVE 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD #760 715 E HYMAN AVE #17 ASPEN, CO 81611 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 ASPEN, CO 81611 SAHN KAREN R SAHR KAREN M SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST 715 E HYMAN AVE #11 715 E HYMAN AVE #8 PO BOX 4897 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 SCHNITZER KENNETH L & LISA L SCI ASPEN LLC SHARP TERRI L 2100 MCKINNEY AVE #1760 3200 OHIO WY 715 E HYMAN AVE #12 DALLAS, TX 75201 DENVER, CO 80209 ASPEN, CO 81611 SHUMATE MARK SILVER DIP EQUITY VENTURE LLC SMITH ALICIA M 1695 RIVERSIDE RD 2100 MCKINNEY STE 1760 715 E HYMAN AVE #16 ROSWELL, GA 30076 DALLAS, TX 75201 ASPEN, CO 81611 .. STERLING TRUST COMP STEWART TITLE CO SNOWMASS CORPORATION C/O BERG ALAN M C/O JENNIFER SCHUMACHER PO BOX 620 110 STONE CANYON RD PO BOX 936 BASALT, CO 81621 LOS ANGELES, CA 90077 TAYLORSVILLE, NC 28681 STRIBLING DOROTHY TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS CO TREUER CHRISTIN L WACHOVIA BANK NA FL0135 602 E HYMAN #201 981 E BRIARWOOD CIR N PO BOX 40062 ASPEN, CO 81611 LITTLETON, CO 80122 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32203-0062 VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC TROUSDALE JEAN VICK WEIDEL LAWRENCE W C/O KATIE REED MGT 611 E HOPKINS AVE PO BOX 1007 418 E COOPER AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 MONROE, GA 30655 ASPEN, CO 81611 WILLIAMS CRAIG & LEE FAMILY PTNRSHP WISE JOSEPH WOODS FRANK J 111 1320 HODGES ST 205 SMILLST#301A 8990 HEMPSTEAD HWY #200 RALEIGH, NC 27604-1414 ASPEN, CO 81611 HOUSTON, TX 77008 WRIGHT CHRISTOPHER N YERAMIAN CHARLES 13 BRAMLEY RD PO BOX 12347 LONDON W106SP, UK ASPEN, CO 81612 V V .-I .-/ .-, .-' .-' 94'-3 . 8'-0. 10'-T 17'-11' 20'-0" 5.-Â·0. 10 :/ 7 ' ~EXHIBIT r ' 4 i "~31 4- /0 TAMARAWOOD . BU}LDING 0 : : , . i.. L . . . Â· 1 A t#U "~-LIU' Lila .UL 242-Â«ju - r--1-r- J 0-1.J ~31Â·3 23. 0==1 1 0-11-4-64. Consultants HALL ' e EGRESS PATH [T6i-1 a / UNIT I Fial T O CONC. W (lim} /100'-0~ --------------------1---# -I-----I------ u < VESTIBULE J 1 -1683 -, F.D ... | ,@R@'613116â€¢I ,Up Il r.wi-1 -- 1 -'| 8-@11â€¢ J | AY.1 | -/ L '457 S-FAIR B [-aiÂ¥-1 01 1 ELEVATOR Re V 19 R@030- 1 .0,4 f TO ASPHALT 8 T @11- Â· 1 (ER / 98'-r /<ED I UNIT UNIT HANDRAIL PER IBC SECTION 1009.11 ~ 1 1 1363 Issue E-iii--1 11 FD 24 MARCH 2010 B) " --a - - -./- L_ - -11-3 --- - ' \ O HPC FINAL APPLICATION 11 ~ ~ RD RD 2 T O. CONC <A6 14j UNIT T O. CONC (e) lili / 100'4 E /98'-3* F-wrg 1 ~ 1 BENT STEEL , A7.1 0 -1 - COUNTER TOP - 1 -'<3 - = ' t_-2 EXISTING SITEE WALL TO REMAIN -1 r I M eN.* *1Â® 11 1 -- -0- -1 -_.~~L-- 0- _- 11 k - E-123Â»td -lu 58 -11 OPEN To BELOW 0 (81 2_Â· 8 0 . 02\ - ~121 M * 1 L | .Cren r-EXISTING - & ABOVE 1 -1 FBTil IER@7.125~| _ ~-~ 1 / GARBAGE / DNâ€¢ -76-T~@10'--1---~---- 2 1"Ur,f RECYCLING ENTRY 1}70=2170'rE~EVaTH - s. p.~ 22-3/ ,!EL-r i 91 6 i EXIT- HANDMILPER IBC S~CTION 1009Â·11 | . Â£*+Ell >4 ~ ' A61 EXISTING SUBFLOOR | 1 B wl AX.X I EW-1 9 R@r W-X 1 3 â‚¬ 0 1 41 6 A/2 1 COURTYARD 1 ~ Al 2 I 0 - 8 TO 11. rial -- - -1-33 1 (e) r=--- M 10 1 1 f 10 1 11 13--91 1 \ ~ ELECTRIC METERS ~ Â« 2 1 1 1.4 110 / 45/ --=- 11 115---- EXIT DISCHARGE 1 3 6 - -1-1 - - - - - --- 11 3 To.CONC /1001-0. 0 n GUARDRIAL BC SECTION 1012 &1607 7 ' U 1 -- P (e) D (e) ~ THE CRANDALI T O CONC ; 3 UNIT -Wi--1 / 100'-OÂ· T' 1 Emil rl,+L _ _ _ /7.1 RD *1 ~~ RD (e) c BUILDING S -- --- /72-- -1 12 4-73 - -- - -~ - - nE- - - - i % 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE M ASPEN, CO 81611 m - I I -- M UNIT (ED .V_ <F*) 16 CRE ~- 1 A.1 1 (e) FIRE CONTROL (0) PANEL LOCATION #=) a 0% TB.D - 11-tx LOW EXHAUST - -----1\ 8 ~ ~ ~ PROJECT NO Ce) Ce) (Ii- - HIGH-SUbpliÂ·23~ DN 2920 DWG FILED PLAN NOTES i ---- -- - - 2920_*2-1 dve â€¢ GRID LINES ARE TO CENTER LINE OF EXISTING COLUMNS AND â€¢ ALL EXTERIOR STAIRS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH ILLUMINATION BEAMS AND FACE OF CONCRETE AT FOUNDATION -- -- â€¢ SMOKE AND CO ALARMS TO BE INSTALLED IN ALL SLEEPING SHEET TITLE â€¢ DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER LINE OF COLUMNS AND FACE OF AREAS. OUTSIDE EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA AND ON EACH SPRING STREET REVISED STUD OR CONCRETE WALLS ADDITIONAL STORY ALL ALARMS TO BE INTERCONNECTED ( 1 J MAIN LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED <Al.1 7 SCALE 14Â·=1'-0Â· MAIN LEVEL â€¢ PLAN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER â€¢ CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL. PRESSURE TREATED WOOD AT ALL PLAN TRUE SCALED DIMENSIONS NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY APPLICABLE LOCATIONS NORTH NORTH PLAN DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS ma â€¢ HEAT TAPE TO BE PROVIDED AT ALL ROOF DRAINS AND SCUPPER SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" â€¢ ~DESIGNATED AT DOORS AND WINDOWS DENOTES MEANS OF LOCATIONS EGRESS PER I.R.C R310 8'-0- 17'-11- 20'-0Â· 5-0 â€¢ ALL ROOF AND DECKS TO SLOPE A MIN. 1'/FT TO DRAINS / --- / / / â€¢ BUILDING ELEVATION 100Â·-0Â· =SITE ELEVATION 7923.84 94'-31 - - A2.1 / â€¢ TEMPERED GLASS IS REQUIRED WITHIN 12' OF ALL DOORS. 18' â€¢ FIRE SPRINKLES ARE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT BUILDING A.F.F AND IN ALL STAIRWAYS AND BATHROOM SHOWER - ~- J EXISTING CANTILEVER ABOVE 15'.2' 15'-9 HYMAN AVENUE 0 0 0 e llc-,01 ..0-,90 ME .... architecture and urban design rowland + broughton 117 s. monarch st 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver. co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303308.1375f Consultants Issue ROOF TOP MECHANICAL 24 MARCH 2010 EEQUIPMENT.T.B D HPCFINALAPPLICATION CYLINDRICAL METAL 2 _ ~i_ _ ~~ _ -_ _ ~ __~ ~ ~~ _ _~_ METAL CHIMNEY CLAD ELEVATOR OVER RUN BEYOND 36' HEIGHT LIMIT HVAC DUCT OVERFRAME l_ Ul METAL FASCA CONCRETE PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL ~ JOINTS OR REVEALS \ ~ .ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS -=--fÂ¥17 AND DOORS f POCKET 42 GLASS ---- - - - -- SLIDER FIXED | SLIDER SLIDER DECK GUARDRAIL 11 -- 1 EXISTING STAINED - SIDING ~Â«=ii_~~ Lf---i-LILLÂ»// c - - - - - - - - -- -EXISTING C M.U / CONCRETE COLUMN TO REMAIN " N[W' ROUND \VHDOW WII H HORIZON I AL - -El ----- 2-In--_2---- ------/ 3 RUEIDAELL) 7 -I--1_- THE CRANDALL 4---nof/ BUILDING - f / 11- - t-- r 7 11 7 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE - SPRING ----- ---- STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 0 & -2 - L__Tz z NIDTH~*~IGINAL ZE- 21-- JE 77- 1 % 1- ! RECESSED ZE FACADE ii _-Â» 4{~~ ~ ~~~~-~ f<~ 3~ --1 WJNDOWS&DOORS - EX!STING WOOD TO REMAIN TAMARAWOOD - u - BUILDING _ ~~~ 33 - -51 EXISTING SIDING, 4 TO REMAIN . h - . 2~ Li, 1%4-r, 1- EXISTING SITE WALL TO REMAIN PROJECT NO 2920 DWG FILE 2920_A4-1_HPC_PP (lwg SHEET TITLE REVISED SOUTH ELEVATION < 1 j SOUTH ELEVATION - PROPOSED SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0' ~A4.1 j SCALE 1/4'= 1'-0 A4.1 .... rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monalh st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver,co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.34731 303.308.1375 f Consultants Issue 24 MARCH 2010 HPC FINAL APPLICATION METAL CHIMNEY - CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD ELEVATOR OVER MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT RUN 4- 7/ 36' HEIGHT LIMIT 01-1 1 HVAC DUCT OVERFRAME -- --- -1~ ~ METAL FASCIA METAL FASCIA SCUPPER ---Â£=- 4 - METAL PANELSWITH METAL PANELS WITH / -- 0 __ _- I / VERTICAL CONTROL VERTICAL CONTROL * l 0 0 - --- --- 7 - .... - 1 JOINTS OR REVEALS -- -- - -- ~~~ ~ ~~ -- - JOINTS OR REVEALS ALUMINUM CLAD POCKET POCKET 42Â· GLASS ---- SLIDER - - WINDOWS AND DECK SLIDER - - - - SLIDER i GUARDRAIL - - DOORS 1 - 11Â« 1 --- , 11 It- -- 7 p -4 1 - -- ZEE[7- ---- - - EXISTING WINDOW fÂ¥'@TING WiNPOW EXISTING_WINDOW EXISTING --- ----- - - -- TOBEREPLACED _ _-__------21-21,12JFRERPELptut --- ---------2- 7 3.002A~tl2-2225-17-_LILIJ----fIE~LICUL--2-- STAINED SIDING AND REPLICATED ~ --- --- -- - --- - - --- -- I . ~~1~~-~~~1~- _~fi-Â«-__-iffÂ°- -ff_li ~ i---ii=-f -Â«fft-f C M U WALL BEYOND THE CRANDALL - ~_ ~_ __ ~2-2 BUILDING - ------ -- -- ------ - --- ALLEY 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE HYMAN - -- - , & - - - - --- - I 0'------ --- ----- ASPEN, CO 81611 ~L- CANTLEVERED --- SECOND LEVEL -- -- ~~ EXISTING SIDING CANTILEVERED - _ - SECOND LEVEL --___ __ -- TO REMAIN - - - ~ / -~ ~ ~ -- - ChAUSâ„¢R BENT STEEL COUNTER TOP - . ENCLOSURE -- BEYOND . EXISTING SITE , 1 WALL TO REMAIN - r - ==Ir==-- 1 /i WINDOWS TO 17- REMAIN I - CONCREE STEPS EXISTING C.M.U./CONCRETE EXISTING WOOD EXPOSED C M.U COLUMN TO REMAIN WINDOWS TO REMAIN PROJECT NO FOUNDATION WALL 2920 DWG FILE 2920_A4-1_H PC_PP dwg SHEET TITLE REVISED EAST ELEVATION < 1 j EAST ELEVATION - PROPOSED SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ~ Al.2 7 SCALE 1/4.=1'4 A4.2 COPÂ¥â„¢GHT 20.0 RowLâ€ž-â€¢eADu - -ov.wn- - w,c,-- .... rowland + broughton archnecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st 3377 blake st, 106 aspen,co 81611 denver, co 80205 4 970.544.9005 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 1 303.308 1375 f Consultants Issue 24 MARCH 2010 - ROOF TOP MECHANICAL HPC FINAL APPLICATION EQUIPMENT-T B D - CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD ELEVATOR OVER RUN 36' HEIGHT LIMIT METAL FLASHING - METAL FLASHING ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOW ~---- --- - - 0 1 0. *" 7 0 - 11 It -Â·- - METAL PANELS WITH - - --_ ALUMINUM CLAD VERTICAL CONTROL -~ i -- WINDOW 11 JOINTS OR REVEALS 42" GLASS - DECK GUARDRAIL | Â«i- 4-E EXISTING WINDOW - --- ir---ar===-11===-In TO BE REPLACED -- --- 1 EXISTING WINDOW AND REPLICATED TO BE REPLACED 1 KIE-Em AND REPLICATED NEW STAINED SIDING 1 , 1 1 1 -- -4 1 1 1 1 --- --- 7 y' 0 ------- 011 0.1 011---- -- --- - ------- 01 01 51 -1- r I /11 0 THE CRANDALL - --- ----------- -- - --- - BUILDING _27-2-2--TARGEe-~ - - . -- _ _- - _-148*L --_ -_ _- ..~ - _22- - - - -- WINDOW-.-- - - -- --- Â·WINDOW------ - -------------- BOILER INTAKE AIR 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE SPRING ---- ---- ---- --- ----- ------- - --- -- i[1(ZiEILD ASPEN, CO 81611 STREET -- ------- - - - - - - -- - -- ----- - TAMARAWOOD - ------__- - - - - BUILDING - GAS METER, TELEPHONE BOX TO 1 - ---- ---- -- - -- - --- - ---- BE RELOCATED NEW WOOD CLAD GARAGE DOORS CONCRETE LOADING GAS METERS GARBAGE/ EXISTING LOADING SIDEWALK DOCK TO REMAIN RECYCLING DOCK TO BE PROJECT NO LOWERED TO MEET 2920 ALLEY GRADE DWG FILE 2920_A#-1_HPC_PP dwg SHEET TITLE REVISED NORTH ELEVATION LL_-1.-NORTH-ELEXATION-PROPOSEL_____ ALLEY SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0' E-43-7 SCALE 1/4 =1'-0- A4.3 COP'-Im,0â€ž--AID-ar.u[,Im.I-{m~~~U~,11Â¢,2,~ .... rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st, 106 aspen, co 81611 denver.co 80205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v 970.544.3473 1 303.308.1375f Consultants Issue 24 MARCH 2010 HPC FINAL APPLICATION -ECHANICAL EQUIPMENT -- CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD F- SCUPPER PARAPET WALL TO / ELEVATOR OVER RUN COMPLY WITH 2003 IBC / / 36' HEIGHTLIMIT SECTION 70411.5.2 - - --- -- METAL. FLASHING 3-3 ------ -- - - METAL PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS OR REVEALS ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS --- ---f~ 1 ---- -------- -' - - '-'- -- 42' GLASS GUARD RAIL DECK ~~ ~~~~~ ~0 EXISTING PARAPET 27271 1- -- 721<F 1 -11 -1- ------ ~~ 1 1--- - --2 -- - - ---- -- ~i - EXISTINGGLASS BLOCKTOBE REPLACE WITH FIRE RATED 11317 --_. . ~ .12-121-217-------1- -- .2211-1 _ --UT- 1-2 iI- -7--~---7- -1 -T~-----1 --- 1 'TRANSPARENT WALL' GLASS t L_=1_ SYSTEM 44-1- ---- -1__-222272 7-~_-01- 1-2222-f- 4_J_-2_2] 123 211:1------- --- ----- -- --- 11- -- -- ---------------------- --- ----- ---il -"---------- --- -"-1-1- -------- ------ ----- ----- ---- --- THE CRANDALL __ _-_--_-__- __: ~ _-- . - BUILDING -------------------------------------------------7---------------------------7 r----- 1 2- 12,2 31]11-2-1=12-1-- -LLI-_1-2 -- - i.--2-2==22=2 2211 -20_-2713 --7222--2-3- 2 2. 22222Ii- ii .--J-2UI2LINC0LiK19721-2-â€ž-2322223 -2 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE --- - -=-- HYMAN ALLEY 1 -I---7-1 -1-133---372222 -- -7-22-223-2-I -1 - -----3 322-2722272-1222222-2214----------22222227-22-- ----2222-2-221 11 1--22=2232_21*R#lts* oF --- --- - ----- AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 CRANDALL BUILDING --7 1----7-Â«323[--- ---.-.---- - ---- --- - --- -47- --- ll - - ---- -- ---- 0 1 ---------- .1 - 1-- ---- -- - ----- 1 I - --- ~-7 r------------------------------------------------------------------------7T--7 1 - ---=3--- - -~ 1 h 1 -1.------------ - ------------ - - ---- - - ------ -- ------------ - ------ -- 11 ---LJ--- - -- 1 ---2-22 -_ -_ - f- -7 3-f___31 - -EHOSTARM---- - - --1Â«~ 7-_STA/RWAY I - 1 __ --0-_i COURTYARD - = - 1- -,- -- - --- 1 -11- 1 -- 1 ' 1-~- -- 1 1- - ---- - - -----------~------ -- ------~------------ ---------- -- 11 _- | PROJECT NO 1 1 * -- 2920 DWG FILE 1 -1 i 11.~~-----~1 ---~ 1 ---= 2920_M-1-HPC_PP.dwg SHEETTITLE 11 ----~-------------1-1---- ---------- | -1-1 1 - --- - ----- -------- ~- 1 L_-________ _-_--________-------_______-____-__________-________________--______-__---___-_________--___--_____________-_____ ____-__J REVISED WEST ELEVATION < 1 j WEST ELEVATION - PROPOSED - OUTLINE OF ADJACENT TAMARAWOOD BUILD]NG SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" SCALE 1/4.= 1 '4 IN FOREGROUND SHOWN DASHED A4.4 ''Ipl I aplijilifYihm#Mil -ug--1-=Em*~~m~ 0 111* 1 11- 3 i 1 3/Plt- 111 4 , ~Plift=~(11<1'Ell'i"ru..1.-Â«Un...... i .4 . 6 It,-1*.111-91 .09*47%4 *#p* ~ :11**ill K ~~ k/,21, '*tÂ»: ' 'a 7' rL - 21 2 06 31 & 2. 2 1 0- 11 ke .' -0 -/9 6#Â·:.300*6 19': . 97 . .--Tr--LIENT- .Â·. Â·:Â·..v,~.~m...~ liey fÂ·fr*xt. -*red,1 f.: . : 1 1(// -U-4 1 91 1 it-. 14- , 1 U./ 5 3 1~ -i = ____~~~2 -> 41% . 1311111111~ -1 le 91Â¥~ T : 1, Illl lid I'l LE' 1 40 f Â¥ .1/ u w ~ ~|~ 1 ~ d) 2 1 1 : 11 16)7 --&- lili 1 f 4 1 1 1Lf< /1 14:--Tr - E-T- - ---- Â«<\- 41'll i .- 1, Â· 01?4 1111 il 1 91'11 - - 1 -fiÂ· !11 ! all' 111 i 1 F Illilll;:I I'l - I 1,111+1111 -----1~5 11 ~ll'~111 ~111 1['1 Ill I vd' 0 W 1 - 1 111 11 1 , 41 .f:-.2--7.If- 3 4 -1 1 11; 1:11111 Vil I It. ----- 1 1 0,1 1 1~ 11 # x Fj '--= 1.~ lk_ f . ir-rT U. -T-W . 1 1./ 1 \ 9 ' 11 : rn j 1 .: ft 83 1 . ~44,1 '1" '1111'j l:'j 1, Â·4 .*ff,2 -*- - 1 111%1'h'111111 0 .trit 11 1 Â£ -11 1 LM i b i 11. Il 'll 'I ! -Y 1. 1 '111 il:~1 i.3 111 .4 0 ' 122 . 1 'Â·, ~ ~.kÂ· a,i,6- 1 L--1-1 4 232-j 1 /Â»41 .. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 60 E it)nun AL , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: wed feb Â£ 0 Â£ 5-:0(r," , 20~_0_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) L 4617L/4 f5(0<241 (name, please print) being or reptesenting an Applicant to t'he City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ,-/ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof , materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing ' and was continuously visible from the day of , 200-, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet ofthe 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) .. Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision o f this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal o f this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners o f real property in the area o f the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. 04= 6- Signa&re The foregoing "Affidavit ofNotice" was acknowledged before me this 25 day of ~4LÂ·,~1 , 20~f_,by 4Â·,n &4 sc~ ~~ ~2. A'DOMINI&6--@@I80=3% = mi 2.29%3362.0%.Jig 55 -4 *7 451Â§ 2+51"15?121 u WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL hz U 1Â°RE:31%*ga~00:Â¤.03: 0~1 g. 13 80:#R@F:@PIFiil#JE -0 '4 My c~mission expires: 0% ~ 10 ~ 0.0 10 I-mul 0 m,-:1- 2 Zi 3 2=- g~ ~ *-e- m ~ 5 = s Â«i 0 91 2 - -0029*Â®55=226~332'- 707~4 Notary Public l..~ . 't, ..t- CiÂ«-tÂ« ~*Sal .EMA c '222-**i-*-2-52&2-6-15-22~ Bm 3/ ...408 0 J 2- C# ?2 91 g a & a :3 4 4 1 -2 5* 2 1- mm i LAURA 1 1 & 4 MEYER i # 1. a ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: ..68 8 â€¢ COPY OF THE PUBLICATION OFCOLu' â€¢ PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) ilv Commissen Expires 08/10/2010 â€¢ LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL â€¢ APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. Â§24-65.5-103.3 UOISSIWWOO '04 e/Jead 0! SeupeM Sl 30:1-ON .. 0 Q -- 1 -3 Ar. 1-GWED 6* rb h C -P I I 20io aw . 2 91 R4: 8 2 iowland+1 roughton COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR i %- architecture and urban design CITY OF ASPEN 5 2- 2 15 September 2010 22 i Z Chris Bendon, Director City of Aspen Community Development Department 8 2 3J 130 South Galena Street 4 Aspen, CO 81611 go RECEIVED /R= PROJECT: Crandall Building - 2920 80 bif 1 5 2010 PROJECT ADDRESS: 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen Colorado *5 1 PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 23@ CITY OF ASPEN PERMIT: 0061.2010.ACBK 3@k SUBJECT: Insubstantial Change to the HPC Approval 3 00 (0 ts,10*rieiss,0 Ng. CC: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director 0 D gw Dear Chris, 3 The Applicant for the Crandall Building (a/Ida Patio Building) - 630 E. Hyman LLC is proposing a minor addition of a 331 sf deck located on the roof of the new residential unit. The proposed roof deck surface falls below the 36' height limit and is within the allowable deck area. Glass guardrails will be used to enclose the deck surface and stair to match other building guardrails. The Applicant is requesting an insubstantial change to the HPC approvals under code section 26.415.070.E.1.a (1) (4) E. Amendments, insubstantial and substantial. There are two processes for amending plans approved pursuant to a development order and an associated certificate of appropriateness. All requests for amendments, insubstantial or substantial, must be in writing and accompanied by, drawing(s) and elevations as specified below. 1. Insubstantial amendments. a. Insubstantial amendments are minor modifications to HPC approved plans that: (1) Address circumstances discovered in the course of construction that could not have been reasonably anticipated during the approval process or... â€¢ The addition of the roof deck is in response to the approval of the Aspen Art Museum proposed to be built directly south of the Crandall Building. The Aspen Art Museums proposed height of 47' (11' taller than allowed in the Cd Zone District) will substantially impact the views from the residential unit located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue. The proposed roof deck will allow for views that were available prior to the AAM approval. 4) Change the shape, location or material of a building element or feature but maintains the same quality and approximate appearance of that found in the approved plans. â€¢ The proposed roof deck will have minimal impact to the appearance of the approved building. The roof deck and associated glass railings are no taller than the mechanical and solar equipment located on the roof. The edge of the roof deck is located 28'-8" back from the Hyman Avenue fagade and 30'-6" back from the Spring Street fagade. There will be minimal visual impact from adjacent streets. No additional increase in building mass is proposed. Page 1 of 2 aspen 1 . monarch street, aspen co 816 00367 1 97%71)3473 8.1375 .. owland+broughton architecture and urban design b. The Community Development Director may authorize insubstantial amendments to approved plans. f. Approval of insubstantial amendments of plans will be reported to the HPC at their regularly scheduled meetings. The following is a list of items we would like to submit on behalf of the Applicant for the request of an insubstantial amendment to the HPC approvals under code section 26.415.070.E.1.a (1) (4): â€¢ Application letter and responses â€¢ Owner consent letter authorizing Rowland+Broughton to represent Applicant â€¢ Title certification letter - proof of ownership â€¢ Proposed 2D drawings, including plans and elevations â€¢ 3D model images If you have any questions about the attached documents or if you need additional information please do not hesitate to contact us. Best regards, Ryan Hoffner, AIA Arpw a a. iwAW A.*1~ APPROVED LE? 1 - 20'i0 41~ 100 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CITY OF ASPEN Page 2 of 2 .. 630 EAST HYMAN LLC 532 E. Hopkins Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 920-4988 September 15, 2010 Chris Bendon, Director Community Development Department City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Re: PATIO BUILDING CONDOMINIUMS - CONSENT TO PROCESS LAND USE APPLICATION Dear Mr. Bendon: This letter will confirm that Rowland + Broughton Architects, Klein Cote and Edwards, LLC and Haas Land Planning are authorized to represent 630 East Hyman LLC, the owner of the Patio Building Condominiums, with respect to all applications for the redevelopment of the Patio Building Condominiums located at 630 E. Hyman Ave., Aspen, Colorado, and allland use matters related thereto. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at the address above. 630 East Hyman LLC By its Manager, AUSTIN LAWRENCE. PARTNERS, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company An - ByÂ·/ 1/1/ 1 U' -, Name: G/p[Dry ]~/ Y[illst' Title: A/#6ager ~ Ul .. KLEIN, COTE & EDWARDS, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW HERBERT S, KLEIN hsk@kcclaw.net 201 NORTH MILL STREET, STE. 203 LANCE R. COTE, PC* Irc@kcelaw.net ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 JOSEPH E. EDWARDS, III, PC jee@kcelaw.net TELEPHONE: (970) 925-8700 COREY T. ZURBUCH ctz@kcelaw.net FACSIMILE: (970) 925-3977 EBEN P. CLARK epe@keelaw.net www.kcelaw.net MADHU B. KRISHNAMURT[ mbk@keelaw.net DAVID C. UHLIG dcu@kcclaw. net 0 2150 admittÂ¢d in Catiforrja September 15, 2010 Chris Bendon, Director City ofAspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Title Certification - Proof of Ownership - Patio Building Condominiums. Dear Mr, Bendon: The undersigned attorney hereby certifies that title to all of the condominium units in the Patio Building Condominiums, located at East Hyman St., Aspen, Colorado, are held by 630 East Hyman LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company. The Property is described as all of the condominium units shown on the Condominium Map of the Patio Building Condominiums dated June 7,1982 and recorded in the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder on September 16, 1982 at reception number 244198 and the Declaration for The Patio Building Condominiums dated June 7,1982 and recorded in the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder on September 16,1982 at Book 432 and Page 798, of the records ofthe clerk and recorder of Pilkin County, Colorado. The above described property is subject to the lien ofa deed of trust in favor ofVectra Bank. All easements affecting the condominum units are shown on the Plat and otherwise described in the Condominium Declaration. Very truly yours, KLEIN, COTE & EDWARDS, LLC 1 1 CE>6/1/ / 93 By: Herbert S. Klein Some ofour project goals are to respect the character of the building improve accessibility energy improvements retain the Opening onthe second level and introduce a Tom Benton art ga||ery in the common spaces Tom Bsenton work will be displayed onthe common spaces on all levels and we will enhance the pedestrian amenities and engage the side wall asa p|aCe to sit and gather and be communal The character of the COUrtyard is being maintained because the space will be moreenjoyable and usable This will be another gathering space that will be lighted and Engaging Jamie asked if the interior courtya rd really is exterior space Amy said if you allow for the enclosure ofthe courtyard it does eliminate HPC purview onthe interior It is animpact making what wasexterior interior The applicant is not proposing to chop up that area for offices I see this as an adaptation ofthe space Preserve the ability to open the second story window on the south facade 3 Restudy th Mitch said bringing natural light from the third floor into the COUrtyard is largely impractical It also created building code issues We looked atfiber optic lighting but it was extremely expensive There is no practical solution We will use interior lighting to make it look like natural lighting 0 0 0 0 râ€¢ rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117s monarch st 3377 blake st. 106 aspen, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970.544.9008 v 303 308.1373 v 970.544.3473 f 303.308 1375 f Consultants 0 0 0 90 0 0 0.5. \ r 1 1 Issue: 05.19.2010 ROOF TOP MECHANICAL- CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT EQUIPMENT-T.B.D. 08.24.2010 42Â· GLASS GUARDRAI METAL CHIMNEY ENCLOSURE CD / PERMIT REVISIONS TO HOUSE F.P. AND BBQ FLUES 36Â· HEIGHT LIMIT - - - - - -~~-- -- - 0 1 HVAC DUCT OVERFRAME - J , [1 METAL- GRAVEL STOP W/ DRIP EDGE CONCRETE PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL ---------- To ROOF k JOINTS OR REVEALS ,/I'l METAL HANDRAL ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS AND DOORS METAL PANELS WITH , METAL PANELS WITH - ~ ~ -~0 HID 3--1 JOINTS OR REVEALS VERTICAL- CONTROL VERnCAL CONTROL JOINTS OR REVEALS 19 POCKET - SLIDER FIXED SLIDER SLIDER 0,= C f k METAL. STAIRS WITH . 42~ GLASS -~ 1 *Ii--I GLASS GUARDRAIL .-2-- GUARDRUL 0 0 0 0 1'-2- | | I I i '~ ~----,31.3 T O PARAPET 1 RECEIVED - T O. DECKING J ' 120'7 V EXISTING STAINED SIDING TO eE REFINISHED bEF 15 2010 4 EXISTING C.M.U. / P CONCRETE COLUMN 4 Z TAMARAWOOD NEW ROUND WINDOW TO BE REFINISHED : M ULDING THE CRANDALL BUILDING . . 1. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN-{ T.O. CONCRETE i --'- - NEWWOODÂ·STOREFRONT ---7.' .'ft; , 4 -Â·r.-- ~ -_ WINDOWANODOORSTO rE--1FT--1 . 3 . I pr Â·Â· 1' 1,.-: '~-~~~' ' SPRING 9Â· MATCH EXISTING 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE 1 '1 , 1 01 - STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN \ / / \ 1 1 1 / \ 1 1//1\ EXISTING WOOD 124 h / / il / \ 11 / \ WINDOWS & DOORS / *3 1 8 0-1 \ 8 1 1 - TO BE REFINISHED NEW EGRESS EXIT DOOR - --- - ~ \/ # / ~ ~ j / , EXISTING SIDING 51-3 TO BE REFINISHE NEW WOOD 'STORE FRON / 1 1 \ / WINDOW AND DOORS TO $ 1 1 P \ / \ / . / r' 1, 11 307----3* MATCH EXISTING \ / , / GPG#/I%9-* -=-L _1=r- - WIDTH OF RECESSED 1 1 ENTRY - EXISTING SITE WALL TO REMAIN PROJECT NOÂ· 2920 DWG FILE: 1 2920_M-1._Deck.dwp SHEET TITLE 1~r----~===p=--jiti--i--Â·--IÂ·Â·Â·-~ct-yr---=~---~1~jj~L_L~I~1-1-JUn_~__~2-~~~~~'~ TOI SLAB . 90.-5. Â¥ PROPOSED 4 - -1 L_--3 --T--J 1 L-t-_1 L-T--U LT SOUTH ELEVATION PROPOSED SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" / 1 j SOUTH ELEVATION I A4.1 ne -- ~=noâ€¢-[1,â€¢froll ~~=â€ž~cn- --I C~-- IK}~MT(-C=~*Y-U~m-V- Â£-.LE .... r'k rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch st 3377 blake st. 106 :;niA<221 denver. co 80205 303.308 1373 v 970.544.3473f 303.30813757 Consultants 0 0 0 04 9 0 0 0 94'.3Â· -1 TO FACE OF | 1 TO FACE OF SECOND LEVEL BEAM 15'4 10'-3 10'-3Â· 17'-11. 294 COND LEVEL BEAM Issue: 05.19.2010 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT METAL CHIMNEY TO I | r- CYLINDRICAL METAL | SCUPPER | | | 08.24,2010 CD / PERMIT REVISIONS ENCLOSURE TO HOUSE F.P. CLAD ELEVATOR OVER MECHANICAL- EQUIPMENT AND BBQ FLUES RUN _ - - RE: MECH 36Â· HEIGHT LIMIT 1 - - - - HVAC DUCT OVERFFUJ,i'IE METAL GRAVEL I STOP W/DRIP TO ROOF . EDGE - --- - 1 ~ SCUPPER METAL PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL --Â· VERTICAL METAL PANELS JOINTS OR REVEALS \HOOD -- 1 1 S S S 1 1 / CONCRETE PANELS WITH 1/ 1 VERTICAL CONTROL 1 / . JOINTS OR REVEALS < POCKET , POCKET ALUMINUM CLAD - DEQK SLIDER ~ 5 SLIDER ~ '0' <EiID <i> (FijD i WINDOWS AND N 47 GLASS - - - - - DOORS r GUARD]RAIL ' ~ /'4 1 \ ' 1 \ 0 i u, RECEIVED Bee j \ I T.0 PAJW'ET I 121'-3 EJOSTINGWINIJOV- - - - - ---- ---- EXISTING-WINDOW - T O. DECIaNG 6 bEF 1 5 2010 EXISTING WINDOW 'El EXISTING SIDING P C TO BE REANISHED AND REPUCATED - AND REPUCATED KA. - ~-~ CITY OF ASPEN 0 1 1 - .-. EXISTING SIDING TO CMU WALL ---- ---- -- ~ OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BEYOND TO BE ~ BE REFINISHED : R REFINISHED ~ - Â® Â® / \ / \ / \ THE CRANDALL - ,- -- --- 1 , ~ ~- 0 ~ * 349 - BUILDING TO, CONCRETE ~ b 1 1049 16 _ - 1 92 9 Â· '' 4 HYMAN - , \ 1/ ---- ----- j $ j j $ ~ 1 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE AVENUE - CANTILEVERED ASPEN, CO 81611 1 SECOND LEVEL 1 6 SECOND LEVEL ~ | | - - | | | T CANTLEVERED b EXISTING SIDING - , TO BE REFINISHED BENT STEEL _ __- COUNTER TOP ; C.M.U STAIR 7 ENCLOSURE TO EXISTING SITE BE REFINISHED WALL TO REMAIN . , ,/ TO CONCRETE I . " . ' iÂ· J \Tw,f. ..7 ' TA i - Â·Â·-- 6 m 1657-Â¥- EXISTING WOOD 1 1 k, WINDOWS TO BE REFINISHED I EXISTING C.M. U./CONCRE< ' ~ ~ C CRETE STE EXISTING WOOD COLUMN TO BE REFINISHED WINDOWS TO REMAIN EXPOSED C M.U. ; TO BE REFINISHED 2920 111 1 FOUNDATION WALL 6 PROJECT NO DWG FILE: 2920_A4-1.Deck.dwg SHEET TITLE TO S...,6 90Â·r V PROPOSED -1 L -+ EAST ELEVATION / 1 J ~ASIT ELS~VATION EAF.777-ar-14'-10 _T_ J ~ ~ L_T_ J __T_ J 1 L_ 3 ~ LT SCALE~ 1/4"=1'-0- A4.2 EESEEE=* 1 .....'#I'........ .... rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch I 33/7 blake st, 106 denver, co 80205 303.308 1373v 970544.34731 303 308 1375 f Consultants 0 0 0 W O (6) 63 6~ r 5'-0Â« 1 4 TO FACE OF , TO FACE OF i 42 1 Issue: 05.19.2010 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT 42Â· GLASS GUARD RAIL 08.24,2010 MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD CD / PERMIT REVISIONS RE MECH ELEVATOR OVER RUN 36' HEIGHT LIMIT PARAPET WALL TO SCUPPER ' METAL GRAVEL STOP VW DRIP COMPLY Wlâ„¢ 2003 IBC l * U EDGE I SECTION 704.11 5.2 TO ROOF I \ SCUPPER -~ METAL PANELS WITH 1 VERTICAL CONTROL JOINTS 1 | OR REVEALS 1- GLASS GUARDRAIL 1 r -- - - -- -- -r- -- 1 1 / 1 1- DECK ~~ 47 GLASS GUARD RAIL f 1 - -1_ -- ---- - -- - RECEIVED , 0 j , EXISTING PARAPET VW 1 1 METAL CAP !p TO. PA~PET M 5Ef 1 5 2010 121'-3 T.O.DECKING 1 6 EXISTING GLASS BLOCK TO BE CITY OF ASPEN r - - Â· 1 ' t~ ---- REPLACE WITH FIRE RATED 2-HR 1 TRANSPARENT PANEL SYSTEM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1 6 0 63, i,1 1 ' ' THE CRANDALL ---- 7 -- 7-[7.7---'77[-37-1 7--7 -, - T--- --7-7--3 1-7 7-73- -1-7-3 7-17 TV --- 7-- M.---- 7-- -1- 3---1 22Â£1- , ' I BUILDING __ k: i 11 7 61.0.w , --- ---- 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE 1 1 , ALL UILDING AVENUE J ~ Al: ASPEN, CO 81611 WEST SI O HYMAN ,- Â· 'Â·-' 4'' 4 b 1 / 1 I - 1 6 i 1 1 1 - : _2'lacur 1 .1 :' 1'-31 i i~liII IIII 1 1 1: 1 ! 1 1~1 1'1 1 LII I 1 1 1 1'---1 :1 Ill I l 11 1 ELI! r- 1.17 111[ 1 1 1 11' 1 CH STARIA STA/RW Y , OURTYA 1 1.1 [~.. 1 [IT 1 1, 1. 7 I [-7- 1- Tri -1 __ --' r--1- -L I T-1 T - - 13-- I r [ I Lf I C I- 2-- 1 1 1 1 1 -2 1---1 --22 ~ t PROJECT NO 2920 DWG FILE: 1 r- r -- --- 1. - -- 1 IN I T _CI -- I.14 - -1 -J- 1 2920_A+1_Deck.dwg i , SHEET TITLE T.O SLAB 3---------------------------------3 TT----------------Tr .7--- -- - PROPOSED 04 i i' 7-1-1 4-J ~ i L _+__T T TI J WEST ELEVATION -* PROPOSED OUTLINE OF ADJACENT / 1 j WEST ELEVATION I TAMARAWOOD BUILDING SCALEÂ· 1/4' = 1'-0" ~4.4~ SCALE: 1/4- = 1'4 g IN FOREGROUND SHOWN i DASHED A4.4A rhâ‚¬ -c*-t,cÂ» a,Â«. cÂ£,Gâ€¢, Â»rle~ cc,nue --xx~â€žIl -~TE, ~N=-011/le4~Â»1 ~~0,7~n~.1/ -I DEÂ¥al M~'.~0â€¢-~-4*~TE11--~E- t1 h .. RECEIVED 5tf 1 5 2010 dieÂ» , r , - 1-. CITY OF ASPEN . ..1 i \ If'#Â£*ed ' ... t . I. . 4 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - f , I 6- " k~ rEAL ESTATE 00-ANY . 1 . %, . I 0 ' :r 1 .06 % 9 22 4 I 44 f I ' , .. 1 1 ' Il+Fili ,-1 . 2-, 4 .LIMO-k- 1 1. ' .'.2.1 38/6, -3 .811'mi~~~~lMili6 --. - imip-.m=; 1 - - < 2 1 L.727-71 -32;PE--- r Â»â‚¬4 79 - / '1 . I 42Â© 0 - ' 1 , 93Â·'444~iF . 6 .5/ , 1 1 4'irt,;6 6~,64: - , /4 *~ 1-- .r - , 2/1923Â·,11 :~i. ./ All-& .' . ... 6. 1 , .Pe-ar,-41 .F ..... 1.,Ktâ€¢,%â‚¬' V ... . .1. ----.F 't .4 t . ~. . ., --~ ~-r 'F. .....ta-- . 4*. I. I . .th>/, ~ Il . - -4.-",5-A~-~~ , Ne, ..-AY .---liA , ./.$*# . Â£ I i / [STO P]- 2 04-62: 4 .. 11 r. 4-6,~., 1. 2 , .ve. ,/ ..7 , , 4, I r '' :fÂ· 3'\ ./. 1., .q,h. 247 0 , f:Me *; 4,//Eiii& #x<"a"': m.", , - â€¢.r ' I . - . 1:*fr . k, \ c - *- Â· >, i 7 * r 7*2ht -~i.-: .lr : ma; 41 -9.-~.*g.-,-3:4.171'* Â·fb 3. e.5.--- ..:1~ .42?1 14â‚¬jit; . y,-*tran ~ 9.... iÂ·, i , Â· Â·. .,0 ~fl , '.< . 1*.zle,~, , 5. 2 441~ , Â«ft. .4 â€¢ A,M.Â» 1 Â·- 61 -r 1 .., e. 9 'f 4 Pâ€¢ Â¥'-j'el~F, ~, ..flf, id--=f..0~:.. 4:Â·Â·Atg 7{4. .. .... , .1 . , 'C u.&-6 '- 4 6 :0,â€¢2~:t 1. ~ 1 1 ve>. , 39. 2 .t.. . u 'Â·2Â· TA . 4 ... , 41 ./ b - - - 7 .,*r .*6 , i.,6,+b&~90 .,biMJ~~ - .. ..r i, .4 ' ... 2.49 uff,a .Fi67<62 - i . - - ---./. Gil: 1. 1.. imAL.m:471:6*Alieja,~st : 3 I. 41 8 6 6,19:Fl*../Il:::I~/ . :=lillia mt- ill %1 -1 i $ s'J .... . 1, 9.' /91,4.,WI =Ill. -- ..**t Â·lt?t.' 4, /â€¢,4, Â·4:f'*f - I Syli-/-- rm, 4 ./ I I. . I . I /-4 21*- 533- -/ I Â· 4 e' -- ---- -=....;..--- 94*%:,<*2 4'96. ft 944 %7*= 4 4211- --. G: .11 ."A' '94* :46, Â¥~ \W *1 i.k. Â» . <rt 'am - ~~'~~~*~tit*;>.r -9â€ž*97,8â‚¬F,-7/18"'14 . '#0~Ma~~, 2=89L,aeâ€¢..... ' . 1 *40*04&4Willi~-IM#Mtiv:0542 - 4325*. Â· ../ .' 3*mk' 2 64Â« . 4; #er- I# i 4,Â·9 <ak - 7.- 443: 1/#4.-- < ~. - 91'Vr 4 .- . lilliv I I 11 1 0. .... .. . ....43... 'Jf. ..:'. /.Â·~:0..r . Â· 3 0.- --*.....iw./.../.--*. -4.-. P . '& 00. . ' .4 / . . I Alt.,4 - ...F .I~.0-*--1 4 *1 ,,Ct 4./ Â· .*Z : .1*te I- ~ ,Â· . 1 't,43. . , 3:f\â‚¬ . -I#.......4//~lil.........I-F ~80*211: 1..: 98'el .~~.-61.~-0.*.~ali~~I.*I. I.'-- :2 Yi. Â· I ::.. F. *: t '1 4 . .,m' 0-- V67,â€¢, 4 . 11. *- . 6 "it: 9,4& ma '7 " " - ..44 1$ 3-*- *. 44 ~ , , b 6 . 1 , . ... . , , I I , .. , . Un> Â¥ 4 1 r , I * . .1 i . -23/l.1 1, . , .4 . ...34..1 .. ..1 1 2.-4 w,~ 10,=,6 . 'tu .6 0 , r 1.â€¢ .11 :Â· 't . 1 it . t. . 5 .."I'll:#. 4/ . 1 *1 . ./ I . 1 , ./tic'.&f' .' 1' 16 0-45* i >.4 di#: .., 2 h. 1 1 .. A . 26 ...' W V.. 6. -- ~ 0 .. .w, Â·t.: ~_I'll.: . . A. t,Â· 4./1 4, 1 13 -1,1 , , 4 '' 01 , .1 '.4 ,/ r. ... :0 4, 0. nizE 1 2 r Â». i ./.4 7 - I ./ - ..2./=//2. :=T ... )4 â€¢ A ' .l.. ..I1""I,I,â€¢â€¢t:,4â€¢% Â¥44:: . .1 ilill"/pr ...0 ,&. .... 11.- r ' , Â£ 1.e, = ..1 - '1 'll' Il,I i ilmidifi FEFFEE~.P.A.Z.L.1.mill.,1.4 :ma _â€¢_1.imiv - , . 4 iii., b 1 1. ..em.....ix.)5*thee.c.a~& 1--Lioj / 1/ V..4./4. 7/'-Vil#im' W:':Imi .4 ip---Iâ€¢ â‚¬ -a I./ *I..../....4//I'll/"*Ill///illilk - 41/ 139 1 21 --A ,/ ..2 ..Il-'lli.r: ---rEEZI ~ .-=t 4 .1 1 -r ~ Dll 1 1.t 'A~ -1-- -41~: . . le 2 1 10.1,1 . d..il.'.-I.I./1:/,-'IW-lidli-- --I--- V---i-M---.Ilil-=.---I---=; --I----I -I--I 1. 4 4 Â· li immt e'' â‚¬ 4. . i...r 1 latir .... '11 0 0 0 0 p, m V. 0 0 0 FilililliMMIFI vÂ¥ 94'-3 74. 154 1~-~ 8'-0~ i 19-3 17/11- 2047 rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117. monarch st 3377 blake st 106 TAMARAWOOD 1 "-1 00 81611 denver. co 80205 970 544 9006 v 303 308 1373 v 1 1 1 =1 11 BUILDING M. 970 5443473 f 303308 1375 f (BELOVQ PARAPET WALL TO COMPLY WITH 6 2003 IBC SECTION 70411.5 2 A73 A A - GU - RAIL BC SECTION 1012 &1607.7 9 /'- Consultants 11 4 1 A7 3 2OR 6 5/le 10 A73 ---- ----- _. --- ---- _ ----- __--- ------ H N RAIL PER IB SE TION 00.11 SIU 10 A73 1 9 --1- 1 ' CYLINDRICAL METAL CLAD ~ 2 - OVER RUN | 7 I ELEVATOR I A62 STOP ] SCUPPER Issue: 05.19 2010 - 1 - ~ 7-PANELSOLAR ---- - - ~ CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT ROOF MA11~1 - - - ~ i HOT WATER 08.24.2010 UNDER DE L_,7-2 g COLLECTOR CD / PERMIT REVISIONS I 1 8 0 7 ONC. MECH. PAD I M 1 1 ALIGNED WITH b - 1 RE: STRUCT HALLWAY BELOW SCUPPER -DECKINGÂ·--- A73 BOILER FLUES VENTILATOR HEAT RECOVERY ~ ~ - C C - ------ - 1--- - 1.1 1 1 [ 1 7 DECK | inIK 1 1 - 1 44 | BELOW 1 0 4 FULLYADHERED I|~ b -/1. 1 5 1 MEMBRANE ROOF VW ' An 1 J 14 1 ~ | TAPERED INSULATION 1 4 Â£ RECEIVED ~2 1 AND INTERNAL ROOF 1 - - --- 1--- --- -1 - - DRAINS ~ 1 ./7 48 x 48 - - e bEV 15 2010 1 1 . ROOF ACCESS I - - HATCH 11 tÂ·LIKFFGAER A73 12 FLUE CITY OF ASPEN 473 ~ COOKTOP 11 \1 1 1 1 0 EA OF HEAT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT T AROUND METAL GRAVEL 1 1 STOP THE CRANDALL E BUILDING E -1 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE < k LINE OF BUILDING BELOW - MEÂ¥*EGAVEL~- ASPEN, CO 81611 9 STOP .. FIREPLACE AND BBQ FLUE ~ DECK _ _ _l-_ _ BELOW F ~-~--- P PROJECT NO. PLAN NOTES 2920 â€¢ GRID LINES ARE TO CENTER LINE OF EXISTING COLUMNS AND â€¢ ALL EXTERIOR STAIRS TO BE EQUIPPED WI-TH ILLUMINATON. | | | | 1 | DWG FILE: BEAMS AND FACE OF CONCRETE AT FOUNDATION. 1 2920_A2-4.dwg â€¢ SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS TO BE INSTALLED IN .1 â€¢ DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER LINE OF COLUMNS AND FACE OF ALL SLEEPING AREAS. OUTSIDE EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA STUD OR CONCRETE WALLS. AND ON EACH ADDITIONAL STORY ALL ALARMS TO BE SHEET TITLE INTERCONNECTED. 1. SPRING STREET -' PROPOSED â€¢ PLAN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER (BELOW) 1 ROOFPLAN PROPOSED EXi.4-*Exci7172=14=-FLAN-TRE ROOF PLAN :%22'CQZNDS:gcp,ZZ[= 1%2122=:=Clil:F ANY . ~~T-~~~~OCIA|~SON~L. PRESSURE TREATED WOOD AT ALL â€¢ ~ DESIGNATED AT DOORS AND WINDOWS DENOTES MEANS OF â€¢ HEAT TAPE TO BE PROVIDED AT ALL ROOF DRAINS AND SCUPPER EGRESS PER I.R C. R310 LOCATIONS. SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0' mm â€¢ BUILDING ELEVATION 100'-0" = SITE ELEVATION 7924.16' â€¢ ALL ROOF AND DECKS TO SLOPE A MIN. t/FT TO DRAINS 1411=22=1741=f===51 â€¢ FIRE SPRINKLERS ARE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT BUILDING. â€¢ TEMPERED GLASS IS REQUIRED WITHIN 17 OF ALL DOORS, 18Â» 94'-3- A2.4 A.F.F. AND IN ALL STAIRWAYS AND BATHROOM SHOWER â€¢ ALL BATHROOM AND LAUNDRY AREAS WITHOUT OPERABLE ENCLOSURES. WINDOWS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH MECHANICAL VENTILATION â€¢ REFER TO BASE BUILDING CODE PLANS FORALL FIRE 3 (1) 1 5 6 â€¢ PROVIDE FLOOR DRAINS AT ALL NEW AND EXISTING BATHROOMS SEPARATIONS. \zy --.-I.I--=,il 6 G c*-- -m--â€¢r=*U-OR LOCATED ON THE MAIN AND SECOND LEVELS il AVENUE LINE OF PARAPET BELOW LINE OF BUILDING BELOW ~ rowland + broughton archltecture and urban des~gn L#,54.1,14 0 0. 90 9 0 0 T:...... | -Â°.ACE.F *LONL LEVEL BEAU ~r)-a- 1 2 4 1 SECOND LEVEL BEA' | 05 19 2010 .S ' r ,~ ,~ _or ~11 ' SÂ·t -....I '- CYLINDPICA -TN C~D 2~i 11 Â« i ",IG-1 u,,1 1 1- 22. 46 .,0. ELEiATOROvEA RUN PURAPE'#L 'f ~1;~~ 1 ~111 }MP.I;-- 2(toÂ·â€¢I8, ~li lilli 1 /1- - -- 1- - i tr' lit -Ilt'.-Al'.SL:-r.... ,â€¢< â€¢<C:ELA~S 1 1 1 vERTiCAt JON'/)i Â©1NTS 1 1 :Â«-197' IP-ilri-*;-11 WINOO.s Aâ€¢ID Doo>Qi r42=+-f-1--t--firt-=--1 f. . 47 1-Abl â€¢LAR[ 441. 1 112 1 i .1 EAS-ING~ARAPETvw 1.1 1 41 .T. iTT 1 1 r A-+77-1T- . li â€¢ Il I, 1. T- . - == / 1-Tr n n META.:AP IC-1 4 9 r-Â»011111177773 3-7 -1 '-'--1 7 0711'1-0771-11.il#19-JE +Arifi)111-'T~,-i-,+- J ~--f-' f' T 'titi ) 1 I Â»71-1--f- -Ensâ„¢41 44,6 8.0:. 'eBE 1 . Iii 111111 112 11[1'~111'HI'lb din 1 7--*-r-;541.4 REâ„¢ ACF nlrâ€¢4 2,RE RA,FE ~ â€¢IR S. ASS SÂ¥*â€¢â€¢U 1, 111'111'111111 lili 1 , CD imr'- O ++Â«--r- Â° , - rl~l~l 1 ~14~ I 1 1 1 i - THE CRANDALL 111 1 111 dill I i BUILDING ' 49-0 -+1 1 1 1, . I i ' 86&2 i lili 1 1 1 111.11< r' 1 1 %ANE}A,L ~UIL~ING // . A 1.4 -p 1111~1 i~ 1~ Ct:~r 11111~1~11 11 ;1 1 1 ~1 11;ill'1~11117*< Mkbl)1111111,1 1~; 1 1 1 111 1 11 A 1 V'/h 1 1 lilli 1 11 Illili ~1111 lilli d.*& A. 1. 1 ASPEN CO 81611 '-v ' 1 I -I W 1111.fill'111 111'11111 11 11 11 11 1, 11 1 11 lilli 11 11 11 '11'*liti --4~~4094>00*-7-iMEP#AtiSTr-"FÂ©t-~fu=:--77,:-~r~-:luÂ«-â€žrn-,K Wtit 1 4 1 lilli|'1111:I.11'Ili,1~111~1~1~ ~1~111~ 11~1~111 fl, Lf 1'/ d '~' Il' i, - 1 1 11: i- 1 '' Er" A e hy*â€¢WMY I 1 11,1.: 11 111; 1 11111111,~f,111 111 4070'.4. 1/1 \ 11 1 111 1 1 1 111 ' '' H" ~''' I' ''' ' ''';'U . PeOJEC Â·Â·4(1 0*GgLE 11 "11 :11'ill 't 1111:ill'111,11111'11111111111111 ~~ 1 11 1124 71.~~ lilli 1 1 =A--- 1 '11 11 lili' 1 1 11,1 lili 1 81 4 1 1 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION C ) WESTELEVATION | AMARAna~6 ILDIN SCALE N = 0- n PROPOSED | .w- 0, -,ING Of â€¢0'APEN L ' '44 3 ScA~t - ='-C | IN 'ORE./ 140 /â€¢4Â©WN DASHED A4.4 46(2,1/ D-21Â© 21,9#OU h.e-- K .4 4 1 .PijeCD w.0 l.~ l ~-0 / 9 . Fl ulc>\ , to, istioul -TED Au, iv~ a Â·14 4 v 061 0 0 O 8 8 9990 0 9 9 ,-G ... L .0, .-0- f S. 1 T Â· | | I rowland + broughton arr...Mufe and u'lan de'gr I f......... -t.:,/6, 6~v~r co Â¢02. 3- 108 0. BUUDING 4. Â«*.~ 4- w.,0.11'I 2 (Balil N | 6Â»-- ID - -------------------1-- ---- - K.0 9 liN 4 1-/ 1 I r ivER./. E :4 ' 419 Trt. ,-MelAL GRAV. 1 1 ////f , I .c.,4..., Ne~,5 1 \*ussr 0 (.4J.I. JD..E~-S PERMI- 05 I92{]1C F.4..)â€¢ .- HO~ *VA. E0 \ CQLLErÂ·,O,7 \ I 11 4-- 3 t A.JÂ¢%EvM!Â·Â· 1/Â« 1 'E 5-1 --3 ~/ < E--7-te.â€¢PPEâ€¢< 011 43 14 J ~dLS~40 ~ j-~-n ~ -4 -Eâ€¢' RECO~E~, 1 -v'DA 1. <19 GELÂ¢. trÂ»t- 41* .4.7 Â·.,IEME.wANE 4/. AJC _ __1_112__ i g -AÂ»EZIP' 92 1 ,/ I *.9- ...DC 1 u F 1e ReCI â€¢CCFS5 1 9 - - -:a.rly - . * , A - 4 1 Â»1497â‚¬N - 5,21*ix,le \I J' 11 6 /.1irjitiÂ« 21 Â£ 1 1 i NREAOr.EAT gl 1 -AN AROUND 2 ME-. GRAIE ' i 1' THE CRANDALL BUILDING 3 1, LIE 1 4 SIE /4MANAVENUE ASPEN CO .1611 - rup'A. 041%1 \ I *08.OTLJE, 51 1 .ec. 1 1 r 1 11 ~-IiÂ·- --- --- -i -- Â»---- ---- ------__- 7-~- - - - + - - ---t- --- -6 -- t- L'U PLAN NOTES ~~ L_L ~420_B- 92Â£ ./I'll S *E ': C.ENTE. _INEOF Ell 'Flf. COLâ€¢.NS ./O ./Al../.FAC~ " 7.4(Qel I .â€¢ ./.'6,/ SME,KCANCEAMBOIM~NOAIDEA-4*rneEINSTAL[Cl ~ ] | | | ** ARÂ£ TE UNPER ING . ,&, -S AN' 'ACE r. . ...MAREAS O .IDE ./â€¢SEP-ATE SLEEPNSAA) ~- .,t OR CONCRETE m.i_LS ANG 06 EM â€¢Â· AC]011â€¢'NA SM,2. k. A~AgMS -' BE - PROPOSED I | SPR~NG STREE T PROPOSED C Â· 3 ROOF PLAN AANCAMEISIONSS.â€¢AL.~*A~S'AKE='MCiEDLNCE 'iEW 1 /BELOWI ROOF PLAN inkED C~MENSIANS ~OTIc ALâ€¢~TErTI~DV~VE.Â¥LH.Â· ON-RA TAR-i),NSTklpRESS,RET*EVEDWOODÂ·V~L \ /2 4 j S.Al[ 44â€¢'I al-NS,UNA DISi RE- /3 00 â€¢â€¢f" 9, kE [>f,AwlÂ·~S .2r.IL 'LE ..>â‚¬.A... 001 1 [1 DE SIGNA 7 f D A 1 00(3 5 4 2 ,A,Nrh,w,IS DEâ€¢~0.[ 5 Miâ‚¬ANS - -[Al -APE . 3[ Pk -DED 1, A~. 4â‚¬**>AINS ~05<~114'CK 1 1 EGBE.%L /,1 U 4 uÂ· ~1/45 SCALE ./ = 1 -r i G.,UÂ».3[-f ./.Ill!/r .,1/4./.T1~7424" .....ANCCE â€¢ST<.0.EA-â€¢ f.-Too'RA# 1/8-4 E.oÂ· -11 - i A2.4 4Â· 4 i=E SPRINÂ«-ERSARE aE;JUIRÂ£8 ...1.â€¢OUT...ING VEPED ,-A. IS .f:JUIRED WITMIN '2044. 000Rs I f A f r AND'/41 S'*..'I./AN. 6/IMROOMS'/WER ALLBAâ„¢ROOMANCLA.JNORÂ¥ AREAS Wrâ„¢OLITOPERAa. .Â·.cs-RE~ 4006 0 0 4 i *I[Â».5 -0.E ....'/IED Villy..El--INICA ,â€¢EN'LA 1. -16=EP - I BASE 8 ~ILI,IM~ COE -AVS M. I. I. 9 : 4: 'CA'ED .'.E ...AND.3,/LE'/6 NOVIDE.....DOWNâ‚¬ A' A-.* ANCE*16'-~N .BAT-ROOI,â€¢S SE~â€¢PA'./ ~INE .4Lt)11+G HE~M rowland + broughton arch:tecture and urban design .- *i l, <. 0 0 eGO 0 0 00 -t race . : ..2:":V.* __ __ *{-IND EVEL 8[4 1 1 1 05 19 2010 9 JNS â€¢Â¢1 f 1.,~ 2A, ul.,9.Nrs â€¢1_12/ u. ...1/NEV TO - F OvLINCRILA METAL , ,-- 5'UPPE. 24 E~C,OS.RE yo MO.9, -I \ .â€¢r E .â€¢-on OVER A~'Bao:.*b \ Ruly <Â£ MEr.,1 /1 1 11 F.JUVEL - /Ili,!1 - ..â„¢1111'opÂ» -7-5 11 - Sâ€¢-IMIR '7711-__-4 1 111111 1--- -17 E--t ./ L-1 1 f Luna=taL__-._-.1 ~_ ~~~ hi ' 4%-Q â€¢2@EvEALS >h r-n~ 111 -3~E . <fe k--4---11 2% " 7iCJ :rl o I'~~----7 3,if-L.,] <3 1kd' Il il It-zrcz:] *NE]O~S AN[ 1 # ' ill....IL |- 49. 0, '4* - -~ N i~ Â»rÂ« - 1 #, , -411 , -14 -]- 11 1 1 A--- , ' 1-, , ''~ __jEEJUNL_.1 eE Â·4[PL~,Sâ‚¬D _~ a4 ~ 2*'1â€¢.6 iNG - -1 ~- Â»r -1-- % - I.*D 6, Â· 9 -- 7 le 1 -141- -4-41~ ~ ~~ - --- 1 THE CRANDALL 727-menty -37-1 | | BUILDING 1-41 -_--- - ---- --- -_- - - - ---_-- _ --4-1 1 -~- -I-- TANILE .EREC ASPE' CO 81611 ,11 ,~ ~ M -- --- ----Â· 11 1 ~gic.~iNCLE,EL | | | +92221= 1 11 111 111-1 1 1 1 1 Â»-1 Â·127 - 0 --9#40 -35-9. 11 E JND L ~ 111 dENT STEEL D C'r7 , .._.~ , . -2.ZEZ 11 M U '.111*KE~ ~i ,29--Fr~.'-Â·Me s,~ i I.Â£Â·oe_ | , ___ | |~ EN,-LOScRE 73 8â‚¬ Â°EcINISHFU ~ 4.-1,1 A k I /')00 'f '11â€¢19â€¢CC ONCRE-E STEPS ~ Â£,13'4$24.,v'.01.( Rel .....00/ ix}luMN-08.gE'INISHEÂ¥ Â· MNDOWS'ORE#N ~ EXPOSED 'll * PHOJECT"le e,%...... G, -OBE REc~*ED I 2*G +ILE 5.EEÂ· vi' I Trz- - -, +- 2 2 2~Z-2 JEI - -77Â«-~2 - =-.- -r= . c-- -z-z=-r=-n :n r =--fi PE== r= ====r-nu - ~-YUL=-~ =-2 --==T= it- ~= -~- -=-=Â« - PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION n PROPOSÂ¢O ' ' A--2--LEMELEEMEL.-___-______ ! i ' \ -42 j SCAL-2 44 â€¢9 | 1 SCALE 1/4-=10 A4.2 r- 1 222â‚¬=33- 3 RECEPTION#: 576498,01/04/2011 at 10:41:44 AM, 1 OF 3, R $21.00 Doc Code ORDINANCE Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO ORDINANCE #26 (Series of 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AMENDING ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 2009, A NEGOTIATION FOR TIll LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC. represented by Haas Land Planning. LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects. has requested an amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009. which approved a package of incentives for the landmark designation of the properly located at 630 E. i lyman Avenue, Lots R and S. Block 99. City and Townsite of Aspen. Colorado under the provisions of Section 26.415.025 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 13, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the proposed amendment and made a motion to recommend approval to City Council which resulted in a tie vote of 2-2; and WliEREAS, Amy Guthrie. Historic Preservation Officer. in her staff report to City Council dated December 6. 2010, performed an analysis of the proposed amendment and recommended approval:and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan: and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion ot public health, safely. and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BÂ¥ THE CITY a)UNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1 : Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby grants the following I.and Use entitlement, an amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, which resulted in the voluntary landmark designation of 630 E. i-lyman Avenue. Lots R and S, Block 99. City and l'ownsite of Aspen, Colorado. All provisions of Ordinance #26. Series of 2009 shall remain in full force and effect. except: 1. Council hereby grants a variance to the allowable FAR for Commercial Uses, from 1.5:1 to 1.57:1 with the condition that the property owner provide evidence that the current 630 E, Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 1 of 2 f j .. tenants are offered a contract to purchase their spaces at the rates attached as Exhibit A to the ordinance. This will ensure the community benefit that has been represented in the project is honored. Section 2: Severabilitv If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 3: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Public Ilearing A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 6th day of December. 2010. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLINHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 25th day of October. 2010. Michael C. ireland, Mybr ATTEST: u tro jiÂ«_ Kathryn Koch. ~fy Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 31 day of -Ve*'2010 Michael C. IrMand, Mayy' ATTEQTÂ· .11 }KIAQ 97 1 /1 ~~EV~--, Aalltly" rÂ·.uND'~ity Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 7 ill( ek.(46Â· aohn drcester, City Attorney 630 E. Ilyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 2 of 2 (OVA , w 7,4 ce * 2432 5,462 09 20[0 CRANDALL BUILDING Price per Sq.Ft. Price Sq.Ft. Finish Barber 226 $ 105,000 $465/s.f. total build out Saridfs 2342 $ 1,278,000 $546/s.f. partial build out AVP 1100 $ 630,000 $575/s.f. total build out r ' 1(4. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 630 E. Hyman Avenue- Amendment to Ordinance #48 negotiation DATE: October 13, 2010 SUMMARY: HPC is asked to provide a referral comment to City Council regarding a proposed amendment to the Ordinance #48 negotiation approved for the Crandall Building. The property owner finds that it is necessary to consider creating an additional tenant space on the second floor, in the area that was expected to be common space. HPC approved a rooftop addition on this building that has rendered the central courtyard interior space, which is no longer in the board's purview. However, there was lengthy discussion about the historic procession through the courtyard and up the stairs to the circular view window on the south favade of this building. The proposed remodel affects FAR and cannot be undertaken without Council's approval. HPC is asked to comment on whether the new tenant space is an appropriate amendment to the negotiation. Minutes of the HPC meetings are attached for reference. OUP 10,/C~va j ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION We.a~ Â£Â£,~ MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 Chairperson, Michael Hoffman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Jason Lasser, Brian MeNellis, Ann Mullins and Jamie McLeod. Nora Berko, Sarah Broughton and Jay Maytin, were excused. Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel Amy Guthrie, Preservation Officer Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Public comments: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director A demolition permit was issued on the ticket booth at the Lift 1 lodge site on Willoughby Park . There was not a 1940 building in the structure. Essentially there are two standing applications; a 2006 application that went through HPC that had a corner of the 1940's building and a 2008 that had the 1950's building, COWOP. Both received HPC approvals. The COWOP was not approved by City Council so the 2006 application was reopened and when it went to City Council it was recommended that it look as much like the COWOP application as it can. On the 2006 application HPC recommended to go forward with demolition but stop if you recognize a 1940's structure on the corner. It was recommended that the 40's structure be preserved. There is no evidence of the 40's structure. It looks like the structure was destroyed when they did the 1950's version. Two conditions of demolition are recommended: documentation of the dimensions and window placements ofthe existing building so that if a recreation of the building is desirable in the future we can have some basis for that. Also save as much lumber from the current building as possible. The studs are affected by mold and dry rot. The applicant that is represented by Bob Daniels is favorable to whatever recommendations are made by the city. Ann said she recalled an investigation to occur and then come back to the HPC so that the board could look at conclusions not that the building would be leveled. We would look at the findings and come to some kind of compromise. Chris said the focus was on the corner and it is obvious that the building is not there. The building was torn away and the 1950 building built in its place. There was a check in with staff and if nothing was there the demolition would occur. The City Asset department is conducting the work for the Historical Society on their behalf. 1 .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 Amy said the concern is that council has recommended that the applicant go with the COWOP plan which is that the larger ticket office be preserved. Brian said he agreed with staff' s recommendation. He was never convinced that a 1940's building existed. He is an advocate for reclaiming the materials. Michael said he agreed that the 1940's building was to be investigated but there is no 1940's building. Ifthis is of no historic significance we should not save it but preserve the materials. Jason said the asset department should be cautious with the city inventory. I would prefer not to see any building torn down. Ann said her concern is the fact that the building was allowed to get in the state it is. It should have been repaired when it collapsed. Saving the materials would be great but we need to take care of our buildings in the future. 630 E. Hyman Ave. Landmark, Conceptual HPC and Commercial Design Review, Ord. #48 negotiation Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning LLC. The first and second floor are largely left intact and we are replacing a few openings with actual windows. A rectangular window has been added to the Spring Street side of the faâ„¢le. The building is on Ord. #48. We are voluntarily designating the building with a third floor residential unit set back over 22 feet from the faGade facing Hyman Ave. and 11 feet back on the Spring Street side. The design o f the third floor does not compete with the structure but compliments it. There are also new windows on the alley side. On the ground level changes to the front were requirements of the building code. The siding will be recovered to a light color that was historically there. Under ord. #48 there is negotiation. In terms of incentives we have not asked for much. We are asking that growth management exemptions be discussed with city council. f he building today is over the commercial floor area and after the remodel it would still be over. The residential floor area exceeds the allowable and that footage is in the common spaces. We are 524 square feet over. 832 square feet is in common areas which is counted as 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 residential. In the zone district the maximum residential unit allowed is 2,000 net livable square feet and can be increased to 2,500 square feet with a TDR. We are asking for the 2,500 without a TDR. We are under the allowable FAR for the property. The existing structure has two encroachment licenses into the right-of-way; one for the CMU columns on the Spring Street side and the other for the stairs along the alley. What is the point for a revocable license when the building can't go away because it will be landmarked? John Rowland, Rowland Broughton architects: The property is in the C 1 zone district. The basement was built in 1962 and in 1973the remaining upper floors were constructed. The courtyard is not functional and we have handicapped issues and energy requirements that are not being met. Existing windows are not functional. Thomas Benton was the original designer and he is becoming an icon in Aspen particularly because ofthe round windows. The intent of the building is that it will truly be a mixed use with a residence on the upper fioor. Some of our project goals are to respect the character ofthe building, improve accessibility, energy improvements, retain the opening on the second level and introduce a Tom Benton art gallery in the common spaces. The client Greg Hill would like to sell back the condominium units to the existing tenants at an affordable price as well as adhering to the community master plan. Preservation concepts that are important are the round windows and the second level opening; the expressiveness o f the concrete columns; the red wood siding and spider effect on the siding detailing as well as the general architecture forrn. Sustainable goals: We are not demolishing the building but will enclose the courtyard. Currently 64% of the surface area is exposed to cold weather and we will up the insulation values and retain the redwood siding. We will upgrade the stairs and elevator to required standards. We are proposing to bring the stair on the south side to meet code and egress. The stair will be relocated. There will be an additional egress to the street per fire codes. Tom Benton's work will be displayed on the common spaces on all levels and we will enhance the pedestrian amenities and engage the side wall as a place to sit and gather and be communal. The pent house is 5.6 offthe west setback, 26.7 feet offthe property line andll.3offthe Hunter Street side. The highest element is an elevator overrun that will be 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 flat in a round form. We will sandblast the faede to bring it back to its original intent. The architecture on the upper floor is a combination of metal panels. There is a new window proposed on the Hunter Street side. Amy Guthrie, Preservation Officer: Amy stated that in the assessment scoring the building scored 99 out of 100 due to window changes in the back. Other than that the building is just as it was designed. Tom Benton is known beyond Aspen with his work and we feel he contributed to modern architecture during 1945 to 1975. The building clearly meets the designation criteria and staff supports that. This is a voluntary designation and because this building is on Ord. #48 HPC has no authority to designate without the owner' s consent. The primary issue with the project is the addition on the roof and the entryway to the building. We generally do not like the entrances changed but in order to keep the stair and address fire code issues it would require enclosing it in a manner that had a piece jutting out in front of the building which staff feels is worse that moving the stair over. You still enter through the center of the building. At final we should revisit the store front level to reduce demolition. In general staff supports the stair relocation. In terms of the upper floor addition we find that it is sympathetic to the building. It has been pulled in from the roof's edges. The overall height is about 10.6 plate height which is reasonable. The glass railing seems to align with the walls of the Benton structure and staff feels that possibly it could be improved by pulling it back. The next discussion is windows. The applicant intends to replace all ofthe windows in the building and in this case we feel there is no artistic merit to the windows. They do not have craftsmanship that we would be interested in saving. We have no issue with the replacement but they need to be replaced in-kind as the originals and they need to be all wood. The application suggests a clad window and the existing windows are wood. These are issues that can be addressed at final. One window will be added on Spring Street which is not a negative impact on the building. Commercial design review applies here. In general we did not find any guidelines that were in conflict. Most of the commercial design guidelines talk about new buildings. Growth management will be issued by the Community Development Director to allow the new free market unit with no employee mitigation. They are already over the commercial allocation and 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 they are going to improve that but still out of compliance. They are already an existing non-conformity. The applicant wants to expand the size of the upper unit. The allowable is 2,000 and they want to go to 2,500 and the only way they can do that is by landing a TDR. They would like to do that without landing a TDR and that is something that council would have to allow. The issue of encroachments is an attorney and engineering matter. The applicant is also requesting waiver of school land dedication fees and that is money that we gather for the school districts benefit and we don't think that it can be waived. The character of the courtyard is being maintained because the space will be more enjoyable and usable. It is an important aspect of this project the way the weather and this building interact. That will change with the new addition but your experience from the street will not. In summary we are very pleased in seeing this voluntary designation offered and feel this is a good project and we recommend HPC grant conceptual approval. Clarifications: Brian inquired about the commercial square footage. Mitch said the commercial FAR is going down but because the courtyard right now is being exposed from above grade on the lower level it counts as floor area. When you put a roof over it, it doesn't count as floor area. The amount of commercial space is not going down but the commercial FAR is. John Rowland clarified the commercial square footage is going down by 340 square feet. Ann asked about the parking situation. Mitch said right now there is no parking but two garages will be offthe far corner of the alley. Ann asked if the applicant is intending to keep the spider web design throughout the fa~ade. Mitch said the proposal is to replace the spider webs with store front windows. John Rowland said they would like to hear what the board has to say about the spider webs. Jason asked if a skylight was investigated that would light the whole way through to the courtyard; just a small shaft of light. John said they had discussed it early on and found some problems with it. 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 Jamie said the existing building is pretty much an open courtyard and very inviting for people to walk in and you are proposing doors which limits that interaction. Was this discussed at the work sessions. John said it was discussed from an environmental standpoint. We are at a time where energy is expensive and precious and we wanted to enclose the courtyard for that reason. There will also be foliage that will be able to grown inside due to the lighting system. It will be a great place to go and to check out Tom' s art work. This will be another gathering space that will be lighted and engaging. Amy said the doors are recessed which gives you the sense of openness. Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing: John Olson, public said he has had the opportunity to work with Greg in the past and the owners are very sensitive and focused on the hiktoric preservation and to do it right. This project would be done no different than what they have done in the past. Bill Mitchell, pediatrician : My office is in the building and it is a great place to watch events on the mountain. One of the biggest improvements are the elevators. Most parents currently use the back stairs and with the elderly my partner and I either go to Basalt or to the hospital. The Hills are making this affordable. My partner and I are the only ones from here to Glenwood that will see Medicade patients. Over the past 24 years I have spent well over a million dollars in rent in this building and I have nothing to show. We have been trying for years to buy. With the open roof the snow comes right down and the area gets very slippery. It will be nice to have Tom's work accessible in the building to show or sell. June Kirk, said she served on Historic Preservation Task Force Many of us are concerned that historic preservation doesn't become an avenue for just over incentives and adding additional FAR without preserving the integrity o f historic structures. This building came about in the 60's when the codes were some restrictive and you could only build one or two story buildings. Along this three block area there are just one and two story buildings. I am concerned with the third floor on this building and it changes the integrity and the whole character of what we are trying to preserve. The old Boomerang lodge was preserved without changes. I can't see why you can't have your residential unit in the building instead of 6 . ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 having a hat on top. The conceptual review changes the character of the neighborhood and the building that we are trying to preserve. If you are getting rid of the patio you should somehow maintain the two story structure which is typical of Tom Benton design and feel and still have the residential unit within the building as it stands today. Toni Kronberg, public I look at this application as the beginning of a domino effect like what happened across the street from Wagner Park. This is one block east of the historic district. When the Dancing Bear got built everything around it got bigger. The Wienerstube went before city council and it was a tie vote so it was a failed motion. The reason it failed because it did not keep within the existing size and scale of the neighborhood which is in the Aspen Area Community Plan. In the historic district guidelines chapter 10 building additions it basically says any additions are to be outside o f the building and have a connector to it. It also talks about roof top additions which are to go out perpendicular to the building and not up. In the assessment the roof form was given a score of 10. How can you get a score of 10 when you are adding a third story. In the guidelines it says any new additions are supposed to be subservient to the historic structure. Adam Walton's house is historic and right behind this structure. If this is allowed to be built everything around it will go higher. The community character and neighborhood character will be diminished and destroyed. I commend the owner voluntarily coming in and asking for designation. Once the third floor is on, the historic aspect is diminished. This project needs more thought. Brain said there maybe historical significance associated with this building and in order to preserve it there are certain things requested in order to maintain it which entail increase in height o f the building. Given that information is it a wiser choice not to approve this with the understanding that this may go away entirely and they would have to come through a regular process in which you would hope only a two story building would be proposed. Toni said she has given that a lot of thought. The building has changed with the elevator and filling in the front. This is like the Mother Lode. It might be better that this not receive landmark designation and the building go through another process. 7 - ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 Brian said his point is at the end we could end up with nothing being preserved on this building. Are minor modifications OK to preserve what we see as historical in this building or is it better to take a risk and start over. Bill Wiener, 701 Gibson Street; For the past couple of years I have been involved in preserving Aspen' s character. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Everyone is talking about numbers rather than should we be doing things. Is it good for the community should be discussed and this has gotten me angry. Ifthey buy a piece of property for twice what they should be then that opens the door to do more to get a fair return and it doesn't make any sense at all. This is a piece of sculpture and you don't add a knob on top of it. It is an introverted building and you can do a lot of energy upgrades without putting a house on top of it. You can put an insulated glass roof over the courtyard and have double doors coming in. You need to try and get some of the sunlight back in. I remember an employee unit in here and it disappeared and does employee housing have to go back into the building. The elevator is needed. HPC is following under the code and it shouldn't come down to that, it should be this is important to our community and what can we do to keep it without giving the developer something that undoes the whole reason for keeping it. This is not minor; you are building a house on top o f the building. Greg Hill, owner of the building. I appreciate all the comments that everyone has made. Our philosophy when we take a building that is tired we like to bring it back to life and that doesn't necessarily mean keeping the building exactly the way it is in our opinion. Certain buildings lose their functionality and their life. What we have tried to do through all the comments from the commission and public is to make minor changes to the original structure to make it a better building for the people that are going to inhabit the building and we wanted to add more vitality through landscaping or public amenities. We have tried to minimize the unit on top. This height that we are adding is fairly minimal. We are only four feet higher than the building next door. The point o f having the residential unit philosophically is to help the pediatrician, the barber, and Sandy's being able to afford their space. Yes, we will make money off the residential unit. It becomes a choice, do we add the unit on top and minimize the impact or not do that and charge higher rates. The choice as a citizen ofthis community is to restoring what is currently there and creating an opportunity for locals to stay put. We are really trying to make this a better building and something that we all will be proud of when it is done. 8 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 Chairperson Michael Hoffman closed the public input portion o f the agenda itern. Clarifications and questions: Jason asked what the maximum height could be if this building was torn down. Mitch said 36 feet and up to40 feet with commercial design review. This building is at 33 feet. John Olson said they did a structural analysis for this building and it is a very strong structure and can receive the third floor with what is existing right now. Michael said regarding any demolition he would like to see what is being proposed. Jamie asked ifthe interior courtyard really is exterior space. Amy said if you allow for the enclosure of the courtyard it does eliminate HPC purview on the interior. It is an impact, making what was exterior interior. The applicant is not proposing to chop up that area for offices. I see this as an adaptation ofthe space. Michael inquired about the housing unit. Mitch said the space occupied by a salon we feel was a residential unit at one time but staff researched it and none of the approvals of record show it was allowed in the first place so we are not allowed to use it as a credit. If we were allowed to use it as a credit we don't even need an HPC exemption for the free market unit which is moving within the building. Designation: Jason said we are talking about two names in Aspen that are big, Jack Crandall and Tom Benton. I am glad to see someone is trying to preserve it and we have a great opportunity here. Anytime you have designation there is compromise involved. Ann said she is in favor of designation and the building complies with b,c, of the criteria and the integrity scoring was 99. Brian said he understands the importance o f this building and how it adds to the culture o f Aspen which are all great attributes. It is too much of a risk not to accept designation. 9 .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 Jamie said overall she is in favor of designation. Michael agreed with his fellow commissioners. It meets designation criteria b and c. The designation is being brought to us voluntarily. Major Development Conceptual: Michael said the issue is the roof top addition. Jamie said she is a little concerned about how historic it will feel with you will be seeing a very modern top added. The preservation o f the interior courtyard is great and the preservation ofthe exterior skin. Another concern is the modern glass railing up against the historic fagade. Ann said this is one of the tradeo ffs we have been talking about. The architects have done a nice job of updating the building and it seems vibrant now and there will be more activity on the roof top garden and keeping the old tenants is very appreciated. It would be great to leave it without the top; on the other hand it is nicely designed and integrated well into the building itself. We are much better off with a known solution rather than losing the building and not knowing what is going tobe there. It also has a great relationship to the Hannah Dustin Building which is quite a bit higher and it works out nicely. The landscaping is a little robust and a few trees should be removed so you can see the building. Jason reflected that Design Guidelines 10.12 - When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. The ceiling height is 9 feet and pretty modest and that guideline is met. It also meets 10.13 - Set a rooftop addition back from the front of the building. Staff has a good point about the glass railing and it needs to be set back from the plane of the historic fa~ade. Guideline 10.14 - The roof form and slope of the new addition should be in character with the historic building. Maybe we can see more of a shadow line on the eastern fagade so that it disappears more and you don't see the glazing. Jason said he has questions with guideline 3.3 - Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a favade. The spider walls on the Hyman side are very important and worth saving. The rectangular window on the Spring Street side is a large "add" to the fagade. It could be justified if it lit the courtyard but it is lighting a private space. The biggest issue is the courtyard and if it had an element through I could get behind the pent house. 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 Mitch Haas said they will restudy the window for final. Greg Hill said they could possibly move the closet etc. and add light down the courtyard. Brian said the architects have done a good job to add a third story and making it as least impactful as possible. As a suggestion maybe the front faGade should go back a little further on the third story. Another concern is the courtyard space and everything that can be done to create that space more habitable for the community I am fully in favor of. Maybe adding natural light would be a big component for making that a better space. With the addition on top it will help preserve the integrity of this building and hopefully make the interior space more inviting. Ann said i f there is any way to get a light shaft in the courtyard I would support studying that. Michael pointed out that the HPC struggles with "who is the gate keeper" of preservation if it is not the HPC. It is a reality if we don't approve the third story then the whole scheme that the Hill's need the investment pursuant to will blow up and we will be stuck with an entire new building. 1 am very sensitive to the individuals who have paid over a million dollars in this building and do not have an ownership stake in it. This plan will give them that. Those particular factors are not in the guidelines but I can find plenty in the guidelines that justify the creation of this third level and Jason pointed them out. I feel this is a good compromise for the community. I don't feel this will start a domino effect for the rest of the block. Reconfiguration ofthe entry stair case and spider web: Ann said this is a compromise and it is important to maintain the spider web panels along the front the same way you are along the side of the building. John Rowland said the spider webs can be retained. MOTION: Michael moved to continue the Historic Preservation Guidelines and Update on the new recycling containers to the next meeting; second by Jason. All in favor, motion carried. Commercial design review: 11 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28,2009 Michael said the major issue with the design review is the increased height of the building and Jason went over the guidelines that apply. Plate height: Jason said we can't request anything less than 9 feet. Brian said he thinks it could come down a little more. John Rowland said he cannot lower the plate height. It is livability and there are mechanical equipments that will lower it to 8 feet in some places. Mitch Haas pointed out that they are already three feet under the height limit. The board agreed that 9 feet plate heights are acceptable. Ordinance #48 negotiations: Michael said the issue he would weight in on is the 2,500 square foot residence on the upper floor. This can be justified because theoretically they are preserving the building and basically creating their own TDR and applying it to the roof. The board feels this is a good compromise in order to preserve the building. Ann pointed out that this is a compromise and the benefits that will come out o f this development merit what they are asking for such as keeping the tenants and upgrading the building and streetscape. Jason asked if the 500 square feet is not approved by city council does the project come back to the HPC. Greg said some of the interior common area for Benton's display would go away. Jamie said she is new on the board and should we be taking monitory issues into consideration? Michael said you listen to the presentation and it will have some effect on your decision but you need to follow the guidelines first and the monitory issues have to be secondary. They could propose to sell it so that the tenants can afford it but they can always change that at any point. Ann pointed out that the residential unit is there to subsidize the rents so that the same tenants can stay there. 12 . ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28.2009 Michael said promises that they make to their tenants is outside our decision making. Greg Hill, owner said it because an issue with my reputation. I am trying very hard to keep the prices set but as we all know people's financial situations change. I have told everyone what the price was going to be. Mitch Haas said normally you would not consider anything financial but this is not normal, it is an ordinance #48 discussion which basically means throw out the codes and negotiate on incentives. This is an incentive that we have requested and it is perfectly within reason. You can achieve a 2,500 square foot unit in this zone district by landing a TDR. We are already 2,500 square feet plus under the allowable floor area and we would like to have the 2,500 square foot unit and that goes with getting an historic preservation project and a landmark structure. Michael made the motion to approve 630 E. Hyman Ave. with the standard conditions and the following conditions of approval: 1. Preserve the spider walls. 2. Preserve the ability to open the second story window on the south faqade. 3. Restudy the rectangular window on the second floor east fa~ade. 4. Consider a skylight that lights the courtyard through the residential unit. 5. Recommend the approval of the 2,500 residential unit on the third floor pursuant to ordinance #48. 6. Investigate the eave on the upper east addition. 7. Restudy pushing the glass railing back. Jason second the motion. All in favor, motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Michael moved to adjourn; second by Jason. All infavor, motion carried. Meetig adjourned at 8:00 p.m. 4 244 0.1, s 7Â»a t~ 4/L.~-_,R_--- Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 13 . ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 24, 2010 Michael explained that the neighbors can do an appeal. Amy explained that the appeal needs to be based on information that the HPC had acted improperly not that they di sagreed with the project concept. 630 E. Hyman, Crandall Building - Final Review, Public Hearing Exhibit I - Revised Elevations John Rowland, Architect Amy relayed that when conceptual was awarded that locked in the massing aspects of the project including the placement and height of the third floor. The spider webs will be retained and the second floor window on the east fagade has been removed from the conceptual approval. On the penthouse the applicant showed a minimal eave overhang on the Spring Street side of the building. At conceptual they were asked to revisit that again for final. The location of the glass railing on the Third floor was six inches away from the back side of the parapet and it has been pulled in a little further. HPC needs to consider the more the upper floor deck space approaches the edge of the building the more potential there is for things to pop up on the roo f. That is not necessarily a bad thing but it might interfere with the two story quality ofthe original building and its character. There was also a condition to look at bringing natural light into the building and that is not possible for a number o f reasons including building code issues. The circular window on the front fa~ade is open right now and the applicant proposed that it be closed and staff is asking that it be an operable window. Staff suggested that it be restudied and the applicant has proposed a revision that maintains the sense of the horizontal lines cutting through the window on the front fa~ade. Regarding landscaping there are only two small areas but the applicant would also like to deal with the right-of-way. The applicant can work with the Parks Department regarding the crabapple trees in the right-of-way which is out of HPC purview. We also need clarification ofthe exterior lighting. On the south faQade there is a wide opening where you walk into the courtyard and onto the main staircase. The staircase is being moved and staff is suggesting that there be careful thought about how much that space gets closed in. On the far West side is the main access that will take you to the third floor and staff is suggesting that the door not be a recessed door and that it align with the adjacent storefronts. On the rear faQade ofthe building 9 .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 24. 2010 the proposal o f windows should be as close as possible to Benton's original design. Materials: They are planning to add wood siding on the rear fai:a(ie of the second floor. Staff recommends approval of the project with conditions. Mitch Haas, Haas Planning Mitch went through the conditions of conceptual. The spider panels have been retained on the ground floor and we have eliminated the window on the second floor of the east faGade. On the eave depth we originally had it the same as the drawing in the packet. The concern was the east faQade that it would be more visible from the street level; however, if you bring it back out it would create a larger shadow line over the third floor addition to further obscure it. There would be a trade off, i f you bring it closer to the street and therefore being more visible from below or creating the shadow line effect to reduce the overall perceived mass o f the third floor. The applicant is proposing to create the shadow line. John Rowland, architect We are proposing to align the store front of the egress fire access as well as opening up the recessed entry ofthe current opening. This would widen the opening back to the original width as staff recommended. Mitch said it was recommended to restudy the railing on the third floor. It was slid back on both sides. John said the railing was moved back 12 inches and then another additional six inches. Mitch said bringing natural light from the third floor into the courtyard is largely impractical. It also created building code issues. We looked at fiber optic lighting but it was extremely expensive. There is no practical solution. We will use interior lighting to make it look like natural lighting. John said we will have unique interior lighting in the floor of the third level. It will be a cool detail as you walk into the space. Mitch said it was recommended to install an operable or removable window in the round opening on the south fagade. We looked at a removable window but the opening is quite large and it would be too heavy and 10 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 24, 2010 cumbersome and impractical to try to remove the thing. We went with an operable window to match the windows on the east fagade. The bottom portion on all the round windows is operable. Staff wanted to make sure the feeling o f the horizontal Benton art work was carried through. Amy explained that Benton had circles with horizontal bisects and possibly it should be reflected in the new window. Mitch said we will also have some of the Benton art work on the walls. Mitch explained that the landscape area is very small and we will be subject to what the Parks Dept. has to say and perhaps it should be handled with staff and monitor. Mitch said on the exterior lighting there is very little proposed, pretty much what exists on the two Banks and nothing on the east fa~ade. We are hoping that it can be staff and monitor only. John said they will restudy the ground floor entries store fronts. We will remove the mullions from the windows on the rear favade. Materials: John explained that the fascia and soffit material will be a galvanized aluminum. To compliment that we are proposing metal clad windows and doors like a dark zinc on the third floor level. Currently the lower level is red cedar siding and it has wear and tear and there is patch work all around. The stain that is on will be difficult to match. The other problem is that we would like to bring the building back to the original color. We would like to remove the second floor horizontal siding but not the lower level. Anymore sanding and blasting will deteriorate the boards. If we leave it as is, we will have to do a full bodied stain. Mitch said we would be replacing different boards and ending up with different colors. John said the siding would look a lot cleaner and lighter if it was replaced. We would not be replacing the spider webbing only the second floor. Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the agenda item was closed. 11 .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 24, 2010 Michael went over the conditions: 1. Redesign the storefront configuration ofthe south fagade to retain the two spider web panels. Jason said his concern is the panel next to the egress. John said we could sneak a break of glass in i f need be. Brian agreed that the far side (west) should be more opened up as Jason suggested. It would allow interaction with the streetscape, Jamie said her concern are the panels next to the spider webs. Visually it makes it feel "blocky". John said they can do approximately a 24 inch glass panel. Jay and Jamie agreed that the spider webs should remain. Jamie said we will keep the spider web panels and the two panels on either side o f the opening are going to be glass and we will have glass next to the west double door and there is going to be another material, not CMU added to be reviewed by staff and monitor. 2. Restudy or remove the proposed new window on the east favade, upper floor. That window has been removed. 3. Restudy the eave depth on the east fagade of the rooftop addition, to possibly provide a greater shadow line. Mitch said the south side has a four foot depth. John said we can do a two foot eave on the east side and use a darker material. 4. Restudy the location of the railing for the third floor deck. Jamie said the railing is frameless and it was pulled back 12 inches and back another six inches. 5. Consider creating a way to bring natural light through the third floor unit and into the courtyard. Michael said according to the applicant there is no solution. Jason said the spaces in side will be a lot different without the natural light. 6. Install an operable or removable window in the round opening of the south 1*ade. Jason said interesting the round windows on the east side did not have any kind of divider. John said they tried to mimic the existing windows. Michael said he would like to see horizontal elements which would be three. 7. Landscape plan to be approved by staff and monitor. Jason said he likes the zero landscaping. Brian said given the small amount of landscaping that the applicant has, purview over the plan can be approved by staff and monitor. 12 --. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 24, 2010 8. Exterior lighting. Michael said the applicant will use exterior lighting the same as the existing. 9. Fenestration: Jason said the larger windows as proposed tonight are appropriate. The tall vertical windows with no horizontal division on the north windows. 10.Materials: Jason clarified that the roof overrun material is galvanized aluminum. Jamie said her concern is taking off the horizontal wood. If you do that it will not look historic. It is a building that we are trying to preserve not replace. Jay also said it is inappropriate to replace the material. Jason said guideline 2. lsays retain existing materials. John said we will just have to go with a solid body stain. Jason said sand blasting is the most harsh way you can do it and I would not recommend it. The "sunburned" building is distinguishing, John Olson said this building is different and some ofthe wood is 40 years old and some not. Michael said there should be a technique that could be used. John Olson, contractor said the only option we have is hand sanding it and get it as smooth as possible. You would still have to have a solid body stain in order to get it to look like it originally did. John said the lower floor is a different wood. Michael said the wood needs to be retained and it looks like a solid body stain will be used. Jamie said the renderings look like a brand new building and that it doesn't have historic integrity and I would caution staff and the monitor to be careful of those materials so that it doesn't get too sleek with what we are trying to preserve and that we do keep its integrity. John R. said they can have the solid body stain pick up more of what is existing. MOTION: Jason moved to approve Reso. #5 for 630 E. Hyman with the following conditions: Entry fagade on the south side to retain the spider web patterns, all other materials to be glass or equivalent. 13 .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF MARCH 24, 2010 Upper east eave to be pushed back two feet. On the northfagade no horizontal division in the windows. Original siding on the second story to remain. Circular window on the south to be retained (3 original horizontal mullions) Landscaping to be approved by staffand monitor. Railing on the third floor be pushed back as proposed. Wood siding to wrap around the northfagade on the second floor as proposed. Exterior lighting to be approved by stajf and monitor. Motion second by Jay. All infavor, motion carried 5-0. Jason and Jamie are the monitors. Motion: Michael moved to adjourn; second by Jamie, All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. V 2-6Â«242 Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 14 .. V"G- MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon. Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie. Historic Preservation Officer -00+21- RE: First Reading of Ordinance #26 Series of 2010 an Amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009. 630 E. 1-lyman Avenue Historic Landmark Negotiation DATE: October 25. 2010 SUMMARY: 630 E. 1 lyman 13'3'*~Â¤.'."'~i;'"FI'li7ti~4!0~ - . ...14 , .::45721â€ž1.lt,~~ .9/3- Avenue, the Crandall Building. is a Â·Â·' Â·~ 1 Â· ~~1?r,; .Â· .r#B'. .... Â·Â·Â· ;'J.0-2<!m modern commercial building constructed beginning in 1969. It was identified on Ordinance #48, Series of -1.'Â£0 k ' "A A 2007 as a potential historic . .U@C- --43=.2.-21 -f~Â£--f-pli..=I-; . - - Vil .8 resource. " The property owners. brep and Jane Hills. volunteered for 4.:-p . , -,ry . . landmark designation in 2009 and :4~*= . . . 6 negotiated specific incentives with & 0 2 -1.. 1-!PC and City Council. Â· I--Il... The Hills plan a refurbishment of the ~ *. Â· 0- , building, including repair and ~3 Â·Â·~211. ~~ - Â· Â·~Â· - e. ...1 , refinishing of exterior woodwork, replacing all windows, and reconfiguring the primary staircase. A third floor residential unit is proposed. which will result in the interior courtyard becoming an enclosed area. Public access will remain and will be enhanced with the addition of artwork and seating. In addition, the commercial units are to be condominiumized so that several long-term tenants may purchase their spaces. As the project has moved towards building permit, the owners have found that one aspect of the plan needs to be revisited. It has become important economically to assign a portion of the public seating area/gallery space that was to be created on the second floor of the building to commercial tenant space instead. HPC discussed the amendment on October 138. The change in use of the interior is not within HPCs purview. however the board played a role in the landmark negotiation process and the approval of the alterations to the Crandall building. HPC was split in their opinion of this .. revision by a vote of 2-2. Some felt that the public seating area that is to be eliminated is an amenity that should not be sacrificed. Others felt that the conversion to tenant space won't detract from the historic significance of the building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the interior plan change as requested. APPLICANT: 630 1â‚¬. Hyman I.I.C. represented by 1 Iaas Land Planning. LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects. PARCELID: 2737-182-12-007. ADDRESS: 630 E. Hyman Avenue. Lots R and S, Block 99. City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: C-1.Commercial. ORDINANCE #48 NEGOTIATION rhe application proposes an amendment to the benefits awarded to incentivize voluntary designation of the property. Council Ordinance #26, Series of 2009 is attached and lists all of the agreements made between the City and property owner. The existing building is less than the maximum allowable FAR, but exceeds the amount of space that can be dedicated to commercial use by 3.306 square feet. (9.000 square feet is allowed and 12â€ž306 exists.) The fact that the courtyard is becoming enclosed will reduce the FAR calculation significantly, Even so. the approved project exceeded the commercial cap and Council granted a 60 square foot variance to allow the commercial FAR to be 9.060 square feet. This proposed revision will increase the commercial space on site to 9.472 square feet, requiring a variance o f 472 square feet. The revision cannot go forward unless the applicant finds a way to reduce FAR to the approved limit, or Council grants a variance. If the request is approved. the project will remain below the maximum FAR that could be allowed fur commercial and residential space combined on this site. The project also amounts to less net leasable tenant space than currently exists because reconfigured entries. installation of an elevator. and other changes will eliminate some existing commercial area. This is important because, even with the new office area that is proposed, the variance does not generate space that has never existed before and would require affordable housing mitigation. With regard to HPC's recommendation, the reason the public area was provided in this project had to do with the historic layout of the building. and a significant view window that awaited those who climbed the front stair to the second floor. This window seems to have been very .. intentionally placed to offer a view of Aspen Mountain. HPC felt that the community should continue to enjoy this feature. The applicant has argued that the view will be blocked by the new art museum. Staff believes that the perspective towards the museum may be just as interesting and is not in and of itsel f a reason to abandon the intent of the approved plan. However, we support the requested amendment because it does not increase net leasable commercial space or commercial FAR beyond what has historically existed in the building. The public view window is potentially a lost amenity. but approval has been granted to enclose the interior courtyard and reconfigure the main stairease, and these actions will fundamentally change the nature of the central space. The applicant still plans a significant gallery and common area that will be comfortable year round and will likely be used more than the existing courtyard. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the interior plan change as requested by allowing the commercial FAR for the Crandall project to be 1.58:1, or 9,472 square feet. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance #* Series of 2010. which amends Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, on First Reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Exhibits: Ordinance #3*Series of 2010 A. Ordinance #26, Series of 2009 B. Application .. ORDINANCE #2~7 (Series of 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AMENDING ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 2009, A NEGOTIATION FOR THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS RAND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning. LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested an amendment to Ordinance #26. Series of 2009, which approved a package of incentives for the landmark designation of the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue. I.ots R and S, Block 99. City and Townsite of Aspen Colorado under the provisions of Section 26.415.025 of the Municipal Code: and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 13, 2010. the Historic Preservation Commission considered the proposed amendment and made a motion to recommend approval to City Council which resulted in a tie vote of 2-2; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie. Historic Preservation Officer. in her staff report to City Council dated October 25. 2010. performed an analysis of the proposed amendment and recommended approval: and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan: and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code. Aspen City Council hereby grants the following 1.and Use entitlement. an amendment to Ordinance #26. Series of 2009. which resulted in the voluntary landmark designation of 630 E. I lyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99. City and fownsite of Aspen. Colorado. All provisions of Ordinance #26. Series of 20()9 shall remain in full force and effect. except: 1. Council hereby grants a variance to the allowable FAR for Commercial Uses. from 1.5:1 to 1.58:1. 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 1 of 2 .. Section 2: Severability If any section, subsection. sentence, clause. phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate. distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereoli Section 3: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided. and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 22nd day of November. 2010. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall. Aspen. Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _ day of ,2010. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk ~ FINALLY, adopted. passed and approved this __ day of _.2010. Michael C. Ireland. Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney 630 E. 1 lyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 2 of 2 ORDINANCE #26 (Series of 2009) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND ORDINANCE #48, SERIES OF 2007 NEGOTIATIONS FOR POTENTIAL HISTORIC RESOURCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested negotiation for landmark designation pursuant to Ordinance No, 48, Series of 2007 for the proposed alterations to the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and l ownsite of Aspen. Colorado; and WHEREAS, the property is included on Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 48, Series of 2007, as a potential historic resource: and WHEREAS, Section 26,415.025(E) of the Municipal Code states that, during the negotiation period set forth in the Code, "the Community Development 1)irector shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the Potential Historic Resource. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission;" and WHEREAS, the property owners were notified of the Historic Preservation Commission meeting; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HPC dated October 28,2009, performed an analysis of the building and the impact of the proposed alterations to the potential historic significance of the building and found that the criteria for landmark designation are met; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 28, 2009, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application and approved a recommendation to City Council by a vote of 5-0; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plant and, WIIEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. RECEPTION#: 565306,12/15/2009 at 630 E. Hyman Avenue 09:40:53 AM, 1 OF 4, R $21.00 Doc Code ORDINANCE Ordinance #48 Negotiation Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO Page 1 of 4 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TllE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Historic Designation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby approves Historic Designation for 630 E. 1 lyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Section 2: Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby grants the iollowing Land Use entillements, conditioned upon the voluntary landmark designation of 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado and the issuance of a Development Order to be granted by the Ilistoric Preservation Commission, following Final Major Development and Commercial Design Review: 1, Council hereby grants a variance to the allowable FAR for Commercial Uses, from 1.5:1 to 1.51:1 2. Council hereby approves an increase in the maximum residential unit size for the free market unit represented for 630 E. Hyman from 2,000 net livable square feet to 2,500 net livable square feet, with the extinguishment of an historic TDR to be issued by the City. Council hereby authorizes the issuance of an historic 1 DR with the restriction that it only be used for this purpose. At the time of building permit application, City staff shall deposit the TDR with the building department and the developer shall deposit the sum of $250.000, representing the estimated value of the TI)R, into an interest bearing escrow account with the City as the beneficiary of the account. In the event that there is a default in terms and conditions of the building permit and the construction is not completed, the City shall have recourse to the sums on deposit to complete the work and cure any default in the terms and conditions of the building permit, with any remaining sums returned to the developer. The TDR shall be extinguished and the deposit shall be returned to the developer upon issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Final Inspection, whichever first occurs. The terms of such escrow shall be set forth in the development agreement applicable to this project. 3. Council hereby approves an increase in the allowable Free-Market Multi-Family Housing FAR from 0.5:1 to 0.59:1, without provision of affordable housing. 4. Council hereby permits the City's execution of an Encroachment License for the existing encroachments into City right-of-way. 5. The applicant has represented that the remaining two uncommitted commercial spaces will be offered for sale to local businesses. 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 2 of 4 6. Council hereby grants five years vested rights from the date of issuance of a development order. Section 3: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause. phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: Vested Rights The Land Use entitlements granted herein shall be vested for a period of five (5) years from the date of issuance of a development order, following Final Major Development and Commercial Design Reviews by the Flistoric Preservation Commission. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein. within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, including Final Major Development and Commercial Design Reviews by the HPC, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title, Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of five (5) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described properly: 630 E, Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval ofthe general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law fur the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 3 0 f 4 0 - . of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen IIome Rule Charter. Section 6: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 7th day of December, 2009, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council o f the City of Aspen on the,5 day of b|d, 2009. 1 ./ 1 / /\OL.--1 A1 4 9 5 1 - C 'lt fl 1 ~b i Michael C. I~eland. Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koc~City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this ~I day of~~g, 2009. FL<-u Micliael C. 1'~eland, MAhyf< gâ‚¬ST: s Kathryn Koc h,~ity Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: .,44:f j it.t~*a__ Ljohn-Worcester, City Attorney 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 4 of 4 .. HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC October 6, 2010 Ms. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Amendment to Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 for the Historic Crandall Building Dear Amy: Please consider this letter and the attached exhibits to represent a formal request for an approval of an amendment to the Commercial FAR allowed in Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 for the Crandall Building, a designated Historic Landmark located at 630 E. Hyman Ave, Aspen. The subject property is legally described as Lot R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen. This 6,000 square foot lot on the northwest corner of E. Hyman Avenue and S. Spring Street is home to the Crandall Building, which was built in 1969 and designed by Tom Benton, a local architect/artist. The two-story plus basement structure is located in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District, one block east of the Commercial Core (CC). Pursuant to Resolution No. 19, Series of 2009, the HPC unanimously determined that the necessary criteria for listing this property on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures had been met and recommended City Council approval of Historic Landmark Designation and Ordinance #48 negotiation, and granted HPC Major Development (Conceptual) and Commercial Design Review (Conceptual). On December 7,2009, the Aspen City Council unanimously passed Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 approving the Historic Designation of the property. One of the conditions of approval established a Commercial FAR limit of 1.51:1, or 9,060sf of Commercial Floor Area. Finally, on March 24, 2010, the HPC granted Major Development (Final) and Commercial Design Review (Final) for the property. During the HPC meetings, there were discussions concerning the circular opening on the second floor of the south faGade of the building. There had been a request for a removable window to be installed, which was shown to be, and accepted by the HPC as, impractical. In the end, an operable â€¢201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108Â· ASPEN, COLORADO â€¢ 81611 â€¢ â€¢ PHONE: (970) 925-7819 Â· FAX: (970) 925-7395 Â· .. window was agreed to with a horizontal element to approximate what was depicted in Tom Benton's original elevation drawings. The space inside this window was to become a common area conference room. During the HPC review, the publicly accessible views of Aspen Mountain from this window were thought to be an important element to retain. However, since these approvals were granted, the City has approved the approximately 47' tall Aspen Art Museum directly across the street, which will completely eliminate any views of Aspen Mountain from this vantage point. Given that Aspen Mountain views will no longer be available (to the public or anyone else) through this window, the applicant is now seeking to convert this space on the second floor into a commercial unit. The conversion of this area into a commercial space will not change the overall FAR of the development, nor will it change the appearance of the building from the outside. However, conversion of this area to a commercial space is extremely important to the viability of this entire project. There are very few commercial spaces available with windows. Due to current economic conditions, the ability to sell this space is now crucial to the applicant. The conversion of this area into a commercial space will result in total commercial FAR of 9,472 square feet, thereby exceeding the 9,060 square feet of allowable commercial FAR by a total of 412 square feet. The applicant therefore requests an amendment to Condition #1 of Section 2 of Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 which limits the Commercial FAR to 1.51:1. Said condition would need to be revised to instead allow for a Commercial FAR of 1.58: 1. In the HPC minutes from October 28, 2009, it was stated by Staff that the enclosure of the courtyard would eliminate HPC purview of the interior. Furthermore, it seems as though the main issue to the HPC members when considering Landmark Designation was the roof-top addition, and not the retention of this space for the public's benefit. Even if staff considers this to have been an important factor in the negotiations, the fact remains that there will no longer be any view of Aspen Mountain once the Aspen Art Museum is built, and that the proposed change involves only interior spaces. It is hoped that the provided information proves helpful in the review of this application. If you should have any questions or desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC ===3Â«47 Mitchliaas Owner/Manager Crandall Amendment Page 2 .. ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: 0 0,6 4-4.1,\ 84 I rl/> a Location: 630 f. N-4 mak Avef Asprl <Lots R u, S Woot 99~I) (Indicate street address, lot & blok number, legal description where apptopriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 2-737- 1 52.- /2-06-7 APPLICANT: Name: 63 0 E Rumn,n LLO Address: 534 E. ftpkine A-we. Aspe,rt; Ob %)62 1 Phone #: (?70) PAC) (-49EE- , REPRESENTATIVE: Name: \lang l-and planninG LLC, Address: 0.-0/ N. H-,// ~f-fre ejf SU!~4 101 L.S)?tyl; C,D K|(7~ | Phone #: (930 916 -32/9 TYPE OF APPLICATION: *14ase eli*k all that apply): GMQS Exemption U Conceptual PUD U Temporary Use GMQS Allotment Â£ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) El Text/Map Amendment Special Review 61 Subdivision El Conceptual SPA ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ~ Subdivision Exemption (includes U Final SPA (& SPA Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Amendment) Mountain View Plane ~1 Commercial Design Review U Lot Split U Small Lodge Conversionl Expansion U Residential Design Variance U Lot Line Adjustment 91- Other nloidÂ«10.# 9.-n E Conditional Use OrdinAAce ..44% 4 4 20Â·n EXISTING CONDIFIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) Lan 4 ma- r-k- UÂ¢A \ cg~Ued AL 10 4-9-14 hi, ;lct, Ab PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Reo (102-64 -&r adoL 17 0001 Cen,1 /722-rUd FAR ,0 Uave you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ U Pre-Application Conference Summary' D Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement U Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form H Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards U 3 -D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5" X 11" must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-D model. Your pre-application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. 0000 .. CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Amy Guthrie DATE 09.23.10 PROJECT: 630 E. Hyman Avenue REPRESENTATIVE: Mitch Haas; Haas Land Planning TYPE OF APPLICATION: Amendment to Ordinance #48 negotiation for preservation incentives DESCRIPTION: The property was designated a historic landmark in association with a package of approvals and incentives granted through III?C Resolution #5, Series of 2010 and City Council Ordinance #26, Series of 2009. The property owner is proceeding towards constructing improvements to the property and wishes to change the use of a portion of the second floor common space into a commercial unit. The area in question is adjacent to the only window that will provide natural light directly into the common area. Staffperceives that the preservation of natural light and views from the common area was a representation that may have influenced HPC and Council's decisions in the negotiation of mutually acceptable preservation incentives, therefore a change to this condition will be reviewed by HPC, who will make a recommendation to Council. Council will determine if the change is consistent with the negotiation. The new commercial unit may affect some specific conditions of Ordinance #26, Series of 2009 with regard to FAR. Council approved variances for the Commercial and Residential FAR. To the extent that amount of variance would be increased by the new commercial space, Council would be asked to amend the conditions. Land Use Code Section(s) that may be applicable: 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.025 Potential Historic Resources Review by: Staff for complete application, III?C for recommendation to Council, Council for final determination Public Hearing: Yes, at Council. Planning Fees: $1,470.00 Deposit for 6 hours of stafftime (additional staff time required is billed at $245 per hour) Referral Fees: None. Total Deposit: $1,470 Total Number of Application Copies: HPC: 8 Copies Council: 8 Copies To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number o f the representative authorized to act on behalf o f the applicant. 3. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of . 0 Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. Completed Land Use Application. 5. Signed fee agreement. 6. Pre-application Conference Summary. 7. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcels within the City of Aspen. 8. Proof of ownership. 9. Existing and proposed site plan, landscaping plan, and parking plan. 10. Existing and proposed floor plans and elevation drawings that include proposed dimensional requirements. 11. A site improvement survey that includes all existing natural and man-made site features. 12. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 13. A written description of proposed construction techniques to be used. 14. All other materials required pursuant to the specific submittal requirements. 15. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing. The GIS department can provide this list on mailing labels for a small fee. 920.5453 16. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD)-preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text format easily convertible to Word is acceptable. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. gge,7- .0 0 -- . .4 1*0:-4-. 5%0- Us.fÂ·â‚¬3*1 0 0 00 + 0 0 9 0 Â¥ ~ -4-1.6,6.1 ur ar-St EP Lâ‚¬.-2. 449 ..Â· *91 04'-3 59-0. 1, 74â€¢ htyÂ» 1 17'-11~ 20'-0- ' .-2------ILLIEÂ» , ~ ~ f tr:-' rowland + broughton architecture and urban design I ..4. ... Â£ -;:f:.4- 117 s. monarch st- 3377 blake St.106 I. ?11-' 9 + - < f.4 TAMARAWOOD amen, co 81811 denver, co 8C205 970.94.9008 v 303.308.1373 v 1Â¢ 131 1 2.EDING 970.SU.3473f 303.308.1375 f YA62; (BELOW) e ... 1 6 1 1 1 1 1. ~%,%8 4 ~ 5 Â©<Â« 1- J _1504---1--7--7 .21 22 u _ 1 Consu!*ts 21* - ----- . 2.ar----Â»3.--ru---,A,UE,1_i--L-~ 3 - E -1 LILLI '~ TENAAMNPROVEMENK I ..1 I SIM. I I 101/4-- ~ p APPROX MATHROp M 42 / Irt-W 03 ; 1, 18'-2 1/8' +~4| LOCATION ~Â£r 8'-5 5/8Â· *31 ~Â¢ 1 4--7--c~ II=~ Â® 1 41%' 1 1 / Â·7,ill UNIT , 6 1 j-044 ~MFERE,CE M : 9 - * . ~' "' ' -" 5 '~ RECEPTION ~ 14 1 11 EX A Â§ UNIT i ~ STAIR ~: L L-- E 1 1 . (e) E . 111 000 Appeou-aa r 41 AILL 'i ri1 .1 7-113/4~ ,7-1518'4 2'-r ~ LEN)/8. 9 El.EVATOR ~ ~~ ,5 1/2Â· _ ---_t>i;LIA__c~_~~** i ~ADFUPE:*410': 10~9.-~DNCÂ©~ 1 .i I. ' I Issue ti : m \ -1 -~222*12-II ILI- I -L== *AilgE Â£77-2%,L --- _-__-_ ____ - 41- _Em_~ -3-4-ftÂ»g=-- -- ./ 0 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT Lf!-1 % --0 1 10) 05.19.2010 0 ~ j ====~~~1% 11 ---C -Tm11 ROLL DOWN SMOKE DOOR < 9 08.24.2010 U FLOOR RDO . LLO CD / PERMIT REVISIONS HEAT PUMP V53/ UNIT RE:MECH. RE e ff ,-2.-Ch 4 L.-~2+ZE_ / BATHROOM ~\ OFFICE 1 1/ D 1 1 1 EXISTING ROUND OPENING $ 7 j ~ IA'-7 ~, & 1'-8- ~ ~- -~ ~~BOILER~ ~ 1. TO BE INF1LLED WITH 6~c7 - . RE: MEECH+ ~ OPERABLE ROUND | EXISTING OPEN WINDOW ~ -1---- --~L ~ -~ 19--=1_3Â«-373=rgl~VE~Â«% e ATRIUM TO BE - M.. ..t Ze ~SKYZiNFr-- -~-[ -mÂ® 0- 9 1 COVERED WHH A | ~| -.wr ' 9_32 ~ [17 2 44..111 EdÂ» 2 THIN COAT CONCRETE d I - 1 0 /XÂ® 1 T O. CONC PUBUC Iz--- 1 0 FLAT -81 1 111 109 GATHERING - I 1 SKY LIGHT 1 42/ ~ i ~ WITH CONTROL JOINTS 00 < Al-1 ~ ~ 41% . - CS 4. 37 : 0 0 -- E UP,--lat.in MI ; OVER EX]STING SLAB STAIR MANUFACTURE FA7.4,~ 7'-91/4~ 1%- '1 1 3.2 , i <*- kth, 43 / HA~'DFAIL, PE81:c i:E TI,J~10,0~.11 1 . - - - - - -% 8 : 1 1 GUA~ RAIL IBC SECTION 10Â· 3 &1603.7 11 10-If 4-1 1 + ) , 9 n b (a) R ~ I liu z 1/Ae.13 2 7 "0â‚¬4 UNFT E--- - ~ Re ~ ~RD %4514 - ~ -_ - -:-91 _- Gl~ 1 _____I ~ - o /A9.1544 11.14 [iii] lk& 1 /eli OIl THE CRANDALL ~1 1 M %~-x,f-, ----6-to BUILDING fi.=7'=-7 - -1,=t'* I-win 11 / rant Iil 1 ~ 1-â‚¬1-1 ' 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE 9 1 9 .17 030 43' I lili - ASPEN, CO 81611 .41 T eor J It -1 c -- 1 Ir UNIT UNIT 1 - -Â» '7'Mr. 1 %20 4 (e) 1 494 h L 1 2% 1 1 - Esl 83 11 8 - EXISTING WINDOW ! - EXISTING WINDOW I EXISTING WINDOWI O C f-* F 19 2 1:fi TO BE REPLACED TO BE REPLACED I |(7-177 1 Â» AND REPLICATED TO BE REPLACED dY.f'Â·r . .% : 4 / AND ~_TED * 4. 71 - 216 AND REPUCATED mr 1/1 4 1 t a Ls W t-m . d :1 -11 1 - 11 -- .... 0 PROJECT NO: JL,141 NOTES 2*, e te) 929 (e) 29 (e) 49 1 54 â€¢ GRID LINES ARE TO CENTER LINE OF EXISTING COLUMNS AND â€¢ ALL EXnERIOR STAJRS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH ILLUMINA'nON. | 1 I I SUPPLY LINES ~ ~ . RE: MECH. 2920_A2-2.dwg BEAMS AND FACE OF CONCRETE AT FOUNDATION. 1 - 4 0 -HEAT PUMP 1 2920 ,; t:-, 9 r')r-'1' â€¢ SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS TO BE INSTALLED IN DWG AL~0 -3 .j 'I L-'. â€¢ DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER LINE OF COLUMNS AND FACE OF ALL SLEEPING AREAS, OUTSIDE EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA LAT W& U i- ro r C iN STUD OR CONCRETE WALLS. AND ON EACH ADDmONAL STORY. ALL ALARMS TO BE INTERCONNECTED. â€¢ PLAN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER ( 1 j SECOND LEVEL PLAN -PROPOSED SPRING STREET PLAN TRUE SECOND LEVEL 30!RatatbEVELOPA/EN SCALED DIMENSIONS. NonFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY â€¢ CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL PRESSURE TREATED WOOD AT ALL \ A2.2 1 SCALE: 1/4Â» =1'-0 13â‚¬ L. DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS. APPLICABLE LOCATIONS. (BELOPU (*) e-kiA- NORâ„¢ NORTH â€¢ ~ DESIGNATED AT DOORS AND WINDOWS DENOTES MEANS OF â€¢ HEAT TAPE To BE PROVIDED AT ALL ROOF DRANS AND SCUPPER am PLAN LOCATIONS. EGRESS PEER I.R.C. R310. SCALE: 1/4' = 1'-0" â€¢ BUILDING ELEVATION 100'-0Â· = Sn E ELEVATION 7924.16' â€¢ ALL ROOF ANO DECKS TO SLOPE A MIN. 1/FT TO DRAINS. 8Â·-0 10'-3. 17'-11. 20'-0. 5-or 4 ,- â€¢ FIRE SPRINKLERS ARE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT BUILDING. â€¢ TEMPERED GLASS IS REQUIRED WITHIN 12- OF ALL DOORS, 18 : A2.2 AF.F. AND IN ALL_ STAIRWAYS AND BATHROOM SHOWER â€¢ ALL BATHROOM AND LAUNDRY AREAS WITHOUT OPERABLE ENCLOSURES. WINDOWS TO BE EQUIPPED WrlÂ·H MECHANICAL VENTILATION. â€¢ REFERTO BASE BUILDING CODE PLANS FORALL FIRE ~ (i) i ~ Â® 0 Â© Â® - _ _-- --w- â€¢ PROVIDE FLOOR DRMNS AT ALL NEW AND EXISTING BATHROOMS SEPARATIONS. 2-/ 1 LOCATED ON THE MAIN AND SECOND LEVELS. HYMAN AVENUE . . . 0 9 0 8 04 + 3 0 0 0 94-3- - 7-64 15'4' 10-5 81-0 10:3 17'41 20'.0 5'-0" rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117'. monarchst 3377 blake st. 106 TAMARAWOOD aspen. co 61511 denver. co 50205 970.544.9006 v 303.308.1373 v BUILDING 970 544.3473 T 303.308.1375 f - 0 (BELOW) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 el Â® 1 1 1 1 1 It 23 43 d j Bred -1.-laTLVEME ~ ' - 3 -3 6 43 -14 1 L- Consultants k 1 1 10 1/4â€ž-14 7 APPROX.~EBA~HROpl'~f ,=7 4 -! LU LM:1] SIM. , 18-21/8 _.U-N LOCATION 32]5 8-55/8- & 1 1/16 1 6- .yÂ¥Â¥., , ...-.-. - 2& 9 '1 1:iIi 0/ .---I--11 4 @65'16 , RECEPTION ~~~ CONFERENCE ~ ~ 6 m gp,4 1 -up uNT 1 UNIT 1 1 0./[ 0 3 I| I| STAIR U ~ M . 4 ' A,g,.OMJ 9 Fri M. ELEVATOR *? 7- i 7Â·-11 3/4 2-1 5/07 2-5 71111/8- - 44 11 151/2. T 9 10"/ |1 Issue . I .1, 1 HA 4DF Al PEJIc sEC[ ior 10'19.-1 f <* 11 .; 2 1~ f I 1 1 1-Wi-1 i, . 4 /1 . | >Â»00'Â«>xÂ»x>x>Â»>00000<>Â»xÂ©o<>xÂ«Â«al _ ~ iÂ«>0<<~ f<>000<00Â«4 LEI lili A -41- - __ __ _- f _1 0 1 1-= 1 1 05.19.2010 OLL DOWN SMOKE DOOR 1 .1 C a ~ IL/ .% 0 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT 2 08.24.2010 CD / PERMIT REVISIONS FLOOR ~ HEAT PUMP ...1 UNIT S WER RE: MECH. gao : 1/=\ - 09.24.2010 4 - / BATHROOM 3 OFFICE ~ 1 BENTON COMMERCIAL- SPACE (e) 1 ----- te) a 1 6 i r----3 o T A: \ 1 1 *11 6 0 O 151 \ 1 // Fl EXISTING ROUND OPENING ~ 1 j ,.. TO BE INFILLED WITH | I JAL Â«i-Â» nRE f.1-T OPERABLE ROUND .0.1------ 32 0 ~ 1-8- 4 EXISTING OPEN BOILE FLUES ~ ATRIUM TO BE ' ' 2 " - ., WINDOW - Ego | ~OVE.~ED WITH A | i Ill- & 058 GLASS SKYLIGHT *5* n - -11====-7 -=1 - 74 / U ~ BOOK SHELVES| ~56*)- r 1 D ' 5 dll 1 1\ T O CONC. UNIT K~ 1 ~ FLAT THIN COAT CONCRETE 1 . . *\ RILI -116:9 11 1 'KY LIGHT 1 \419 1 1 ~ WITH CONTROL JOINTS RE:ATRUCT. AND OVER EXISTING SLAB ,/TTE'-- . T. 0. CONC - LE X -1 Â£ AS' 7 \ r / GLASS ' ,| STAR I i ~ I 1~KNUFACTURE | 1 L_13 \ZE ' i VK'77 7Â·-91/4 012 i _6__ I 11 MLS O _.1---__~1~-kovf- ---------.. <- 5 1' ---431 1 ~LIC E-â‚¬7-12.- ~ -==.-==11===- 2-Jd - ~ |n| GUAq[ RAIL IBC SECTION 10 2 &1601Â·7 17 (e) , I 0 // I v 9 I l'i} ~ 1/A9.13 3 - UNIT 1 â‚¬*D Z /A9.15 ~ATRIUM 1/A9.-4 BUILDING m LE.I THE CRANDALL / M ,Â»47 1 1.- 0 1 - - - -MEMÂ« 3 v iE-El 11 12.-til= ~ f f. 7 462 11 7 - 4 ./ ./-------1-1-= -r -- -- -- W. -- r - 4, j BATH I / 2 -3 7/31 ~ >/1 IiI [1 Lâ‚¬:11 ' - 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE 1 * 1 1 k 1 \\ >//10// 1 1 T ASPEN, CO 81611 UNI , @. 6 1 RE Z- . Le I. . , te) 1 1 1 08 1 1 8-0 C.J | \ /"â‚¬9 1 -r 1 1 :E 82 W4 I %9 1 CEI] 74 1 - 1Â· -EXISTING WINDOW 1 1 I Â£ - EXIST]NG WINDOW iii EXISTING WINDOV'4 TO BE REPLACED TO BE REPLACED 11 ~ TO BE REPLACED 1 1 / AND REPLICATED | j AND REPLICATED -- - UQ&--q 817 AND REPLICATED ||1 b>Â£ --- '1 --- - - ILAN NOTES (e) 2~22 (31 - El;W (e) 101 7 (e) PROJECT NO: - HEAT PUMP 2920 â€¢ GRID LINES ARE TO CENTER LINE OF EXISTING COLUMNS AND â€¢ ALL EXTERIOR STAIRS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH ILLUMINATION. 1 I 1 1 1 SUPPLY LINES I | DWG FILE: BEAMS AND FACE OF CONCRETE AT FOUNDATION. RE: MECH. VAS.lj 2920_A2.2.dwg â€¢ SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE ALARMS TO BE INSTALLED IN â€¢ DIMENSIONS ARE TO CENTER LINE OF COLUMNS AND FACE OF ALL SLEEPING AREAS. OUTSIDE EACH SEPARATE SLEEPING AREA - - -~~~ ~"' ~ ~~~ ~ STUD OR CONCRETE V,(ALLS. AND ON EACH ADDITIONAL STORY. ALL ALARMS TO BE SHEET TITLE INTERCONNECTED. â€¢ PLAN DIMENSIONS SHALL ALWAYS TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER ( 1 j SECOND LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED PROPOSED SCALED DIMENSIONS. NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY OF ANY â€¢ CONTRACTOR TO INSTALL PRESSURE TREATED WOOD AT ALL SPRING STREET Â£ A2.2 ) SCALE: 1/4..1-0 DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCIES. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS APPLICABLE LOCATIONS. SECOND LEVEL (BELOW) â€¢ ~ DESIGNATED AT DOORS AND WINDOWS DENOTES MEANS OF â€¢ HEAT TAPE TOBI PROVIDED ATALL ROOF DRAINS AND SCUPPER PLAN EGRESS PER I.R.C. R310 LOCATIONS. SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" â€¢ BUILDING ELEVATION 100'-0Â· = SITE ELEVATION 7924.16' â€¢ ALL ROOF AND DECKS TO SLOPE AMI. t/FT TO DRAINS. inilÂ· ' 5.0 8'-0. 10'J , 20-0 â€¢ FIRE SPRINKLERS ARE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT BUILDING. . TEMPERED GLASS IS REQUIRED WITHIN 12Â·Â· OF ALL DOORS, 15- 943 A2.2 A. F.F. AND IN ALL STAIRM'AYS AND BATHROOM SHOWER --+ â€¢ ALL BATHROOM AND LAUNDRY AREAS WITHOUT OPERABLE ENCLOSURES. INDOWS TO BE EQUIPPED WITH MECHANICAL VENTILATION. â€¢ REFER TO BASE BUILDING CODE PLANS FOR ALL FIRE ~ ~ ~ '6 8 8 0 8 ..4â€¢ ./â€¢......~cÂ»*I......SEDâ€¢,Inâ€¢c-inâ‚¬P,u:. â€¢ PROVIDE FLOOR DRAINS AT ALL NEW AND EXISTING BATHROOMS SEPARATIONS. :=.=C=Z~ h~ '/4~â„¢JN ... CEW, 14.. I.-1*) Â¤4 1.6 Â©IC,WSN~ I i. -C=.T I -d>-ell##CÂ»~Il=.OTECT,mLâ€ž~~A,/ LOCATED ON THE MAIN AND SECOND LEVELS. 3,=.../IS'Ill:â€¢E. ~~Â©~/au (]20Â¥-133U ~IBS~IlB 10Â·-3 000 0 MOONIM SN P.*IC-**:m.m. -- ... Â£-6 l . 9/9 .. -4 44- ...U NEK ~ .#56% 4 4 *413 ,Â§9<075-Â¥Revip- EW' "2Â·Â·Â·'Â·Â·> *2'~Af , 3-10 + -3-.*u Â·.1 M .- _~ : ~~ ~Â·Se'.4 4-. 0.. P - rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117/.monarch. 3377 blake st 108 39 aspen, co 81611 denver. co 80205 970.544 9008 v 303.308.1373 v 970 544.3473 f 303.308.1375 f :4* 49 U. Consultanb 9 9 D :'41 0 i 9-5. 15-9' 10 3- 8'-0. 10'-3' us/l iJO CJJ -.-7 Issue: ROOF TOP MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT-T.B.D. 05.19.2010 1 1 i 1 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT Crl-JNDRICAL METAL CLAD ELEVATOR TO HOUSE F.P. AND BBQ METAL- CHIMNEY ENCLOSURE OVER RUN BEYOND FLUES 36' HEIGHT LIMIT _ " -- - - HVAC DUCT OVEf:FRA~-1 - - - --- -- -- - -- if I MErAL GRAVEL STOP Wl DRIP CONCRETE PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL 7=1 EDGE JOINTSORREVEALS , _-_ ~OF ~ - METAL- PANELS WITH VERTICAL CONTROL ' ALUMINUM CLAD WINDOWS JOINTS OR REVEALS , 0 AND DOORS 0 /\ i / ~ ~ METAL- PANELS WITH / 1 VERTICAL- CONTROL Â® POCKET , JOINTS OR REVEALS i SLIDER FIXED f SUDER SLIDER : SLIDER DECK 6) - -72/5- 8BQ 42~GLASS 1 GUARDRAIL 0 . j\\ vi , 1 1-2- I 11I 1,1 I - 1 1 1.-67 T..PARAPEr / - - .....~. -4 ~~--~--i~~ - twÂ¥-â€¢r EXISTING STAINED ' REFINISHED SIDING TO BE I i EXISTING C.M.U. / TAMARAMOOD , TO BE REFINISHED CONCRETE COLUMN o BUILDING , 1 THE CRANDALL BUILDING I - -'- NEWWO66Â·STO-FRONT-~ --Â· --- ---- 1 2 - A WINDOW AND DOORS TO Â· 1--71 / 1-7-11-7-1 ~ CIJILI] , E---i-~p-71 j 1 MATCH EXISTING . 7 1 .6 i / ' /1 \ , ~ 0 '1 , ; , , /1 \ j . - SPRING 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE IL . 't# .'~ ~| ~ , . - STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 / /t\ 1 = /x EXISTINGWOOD~ ~- -2 / \ / 1 \ 1/ 1 1\ 1 0 1 /~ \ NEW EGRESS EXITDOOR TO BE REFINISHED 2 / 1 WINDOWS & DOORS \ 1\ 1 / 1\ 1/ \*1 1 1 [\1\ 1 1\ 1// 1---1 1 \ 1 / EXISTING SIDING , NEW WOOD'STORE FRON / TO SE REFINISHE WINDOW AND DOORS TO - \\ 1 // /1 / MATCH EXISTING Â·- ~- \1 / Â«$ 0 7 , ,~1 9 ' e O TO CONCRETE ~ 10Cr-0- , - Wl[JTH OF RECESSED | ENTRY -EISTINGS'TEWALL TO REMAIN PROJECT NO: 2920 DWG FILE: ! 2920_A+1 - 11 1 SHEET TITLE r--Ir - 4-~- -4-1 ---_k.'*It I /7 ' PROPOSED Lf Lf J f .-1-J L -1- L SOUTH ELEVATION - PROPOSED L_1_1_SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4' = 1'-0' I 9*27-SEE--174'=1.0' HOOD 1-9 , - -- --- --i~- p q li lili 1 .1 r---7 A4.1 942 -~r,â„¢/1-0/ m.--Zo.,1 *â„¢3},mc.* 00â€žt- I. Et tf~ 42.7 11> 94 , .Â·? **FÂ¢*di"41}:*h.,2-J 34, 2 A h#4468 /41 iwit,l :,ti=b*Â¥Â©;iÂ·d &6*. ;p Â·j Â·4 v V .'Â·â€¢l..i-â€¢C' ' ' -1 "" '' . '~ â€¢W; 91 E I Vilic. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director 01. FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer- RE: Second Reading of Ordinance #26, Series of 2010, an Amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, 630 E. Hyman Avenue Historic Landmark Negotiation (Continued from November 22,2010) DATE: December 6, 2010 SUMMARY: 630 E. Hyman Avenue, the Crandall Building, is a modern commercial building Aspen Mountain view window 1 constructed beginning in 1969. It was ~. identified on Ordinance #48, Series of ~ 2-2 2007 as a "potential historic 6 1=1 132 ==E-ta,2 &-==*I .- Â· resource. The property owners, Greg 'TE. I and Jane Hills, volunteered for 21. t. Â¥ 6 - -- 97: ..* . 7.43 ~ Â·.. câ€¢ I.~N landmark designation in 2009 and ' Gur negotiated specific incentives with _ HPC and City Council. -2.... .r The Hills plan a refurbishment of the --la building, including repair and r refinishing of exterior woodwork, replacing all windows, and reconfiguring the primary staircase. A third floor residential unit has been approved, which will result in the interior courtyard becoming an enclosed area. Public access will remain and will be enhanced with the addition of artwork and seating. In addition, the commercial units are to be condominiumized so that several long-term tenants may purchase their spaces. As the project has moved into building permit, the owners have found that one aspect of the plan needs to be revisited. It has become important for them to assign a portion of the public seating area/gallery space that was to be created on the second floor of the building to commercial tenant space instead. The area is identified in the application as Unit 207. The reason this specific public area was initially included in the project had to do with the historic layout of the building, and a significant south facing view window that awaits those who climb the front stair to the .. second floor. This window seems to have been very intentionally placed by architect Tom Benton to offer a view of Aspen Mountain. Normally Council would not review a revision to the floor plans of this approved proj ect, however eliminating the public seating area and converting to tenant space causes the project to exceed the allowable commercial FAR by 342 square feet. A Council variance would be needed. Council previously granted a 60 square foot variance for this same issue. Changing the area at Unit 207 into net leasable space is important to the owners because the costs of the project, as they have become more finalized, have made it challenging to keep purchase prices low for the tenants who wish to stay in the building. Since First Reading, the Hills have informed staff that they intend to sell the commercial spaces to the long term tenants at the originally intended price, whether this amendment is approved or not. They feel strongly about honoring that commitment to the City and businesses. However, they request the assistance that would be provided through more leasable space. Aside from the economic considerations, the Hills feel that the public area in question is arguably excessive in light of the amount of gathering space being created throughout the building. While this particular location in the building has had a lot of appeal due to the view towards Aspen Mountain, that view will be affected by the more recently approved Art Museum. th HPC discussed the amendment on October 13 . The change in use of the interior is not within HPC' s purview, however the board played a role in the landmark negotiation process and the approval of the alterations to the Crandall building. HPC was split in their opinion of this revision by a vote of 2-2. Some felt that the public seating area that is to be eliminated is an amenity that should not be sacrificed. Others felt that the conversion to tenant space won't detract from the historic significance of the building. At First Reading, City Council requested the following information, which has been added to this packet. â€¢ Council minutes from the original negotiation for landmark designation, in late 2009. â€¢ Floor plans and calculations showing all the public space in the building, before and after this proposed amendment. â€¢ Information about the purchase price being offered to the long-time tenants who plan to stay at the Crandall building. â€¢ Information about which current tenants are staying, where they will be located, and the size of their unit space. â€¢ A graphic study showing how the Art Museum will affect the view from the public area that is proposed to be converted to net leasable space, and an assessment as to whether any development that would have been allowed by code across the street would have impacted the view in the same way. â€¢ A response to whether or not there are any other places in the building to increase commercial space, other than the area by the round window. .. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the interior plan change and commercial floor area variance as requested, with the condition that the property owner provide evidence that the current tenants are offered a contract to purchase their spaces at the rates attached as Exhibit A to the ordinance. This will ensure the community benefit that has been represented in the project is honored. APPLICANT: 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects. PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007. ADDRESS: 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: C-1, Commercial. ORDINANCE #48 NEGOTIATION The application proposes an amendment to the benefits awarded to incentivize voluntary designation of the property. Council Ordinance #26, Series of 2009 is attached and lists all of the agreements made between the City and property owner. The existing building is less than the maximum allowable FAR, but exceeds the amount of space that can be dedicated to commercial use by 3,306 square feet. (9,000 square feet is allowed and 12,306 exists.) The fact that the courtyard is becoming enclosed will reduce the FAR calculation significantly. Even so, the approved project exceeded the commercial cap and Council granted a 60 square foot variance in 2009 to allow the commercial FAR to be 9,060 square feet. This proposed revision will increase the commercial space on site to 9,402 square feet, requiring a new variance of 342 square feet. The revision cannot go forward unless the applicant finds a way to reduce FAR to the approved limit, or Council grants a variance. The variance is slightly less than expressed at First Reading as the architects have revisited their calculations for the building. If the request is approved, the project will remain below the maximum FAR that could be allowed for commercial and residential space combined on this site. The project also amounts to less net leasable tenant space than currently exists because reconfigured entries, installation of an elevator, and other changes will eliminate some existing commercial area. This is important because, even with the new office area that is proposed, the variance does not generate space that has never existed before which would require affordable housing mitigation. With regard to HPC's recommendation, HPC felt that the community should continue to enjoy access to the "round window" feature. The applicant has argued that the view will be blocked by the new art museum. Staff believes that the perspective towards the museum may be just as interesting and is not in and of itself a reason to abandon the intent of the approved plan. Graphics illustrating the impact on the view are attached. .. We support the requested amendment because it does not increase net leasable commercial space or commercial FAR beyond what has historically existed in the building. The public view window is potentially a lost amenity, but approval has been granted to enclose the interior courtyard and reconfigure the main staircase, and these actions will fundamentally change the nature of the central space. The applicant plans a significant gallery and common area that will be comfortable year round and willlikely be used more than the existing courtyard. This building was constructed before the City began requiring open space, now known as public amenity. If public amenity were required on this site, 25% of the 6,000 square foot lot, or 1,500 square feet would have to be dedicated to the creation of a "pleasant downtown Public environment." While the interior common area proposed at the Crandall building does not meet the definition of public amenity, the property owner is, even in the revised plan, providing over 2,500 square feet of gallery, seating and meeting space to be used in common by tenants of the building and the public that chooses to visit. In reviewing the floor plans, there appears to be little opportunity to create additional net leasable space other than what is proposed. The existing building footprint, building code requirements for corridors and exiting, and other factors define the gross area that can be leased. The applicant does have a Community Development Director GMQS exemption that allows them to use Unit 204 as either commercial space (currently proposed) or a voluntary R.O. unit. If the R.O. unit was constructed, enough commercial FAR would be freed up to create the desired commercial tenant space at the round window without a variance. Council and the applicant should discuss the pro's and con's ofthis option. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approve the interior plan change as requested by allowing the commercial FAR for the Crandall project to be 1.57:1, or 9,402 square feet. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance #26, Series of 2010, which amends Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, on Second Reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Exhibits: Ordinance #26, Series of 2010 A. Ordinance #26, Series of 2009 B. Previous Council minutes C. Application .. ORDINANCE #26 (Series of 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AMENDING ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 2009, A NEGOTIATION FOR THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested an amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, which approved a package of incentives for the landmark designation of the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado under the provisions of Section 26.415.025 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 13, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the proposed amendment and made a motion to recommend approval to City Council which resulted in a tie vote of 2-2; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer, in her staff report to City Council dated November 22, 2010, performed an analysis of the proposed amendment and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby grants the following Land Use entitlement, an amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, which resulted in the voluntary landmark designation of 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. All provisions of Ordinance #26, Series of 2009 shall remain in full force and effect, except: 1. Council hereby grants a variance to the allowable FAR for Commercial Uses, from 1.5: 1 to 1.57:1 with the condition that the property owner provide evidence that the current 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 1 of 2 .. tenants are offered a contract to purchase their spaces at the rates attached as Exhibit A to the ordinance. This will ensure the community benefit that has been represented in the project is honored. Section 2: Severabilitv If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 3: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 6th day of December, 2010, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council ofthe City of Aspen on the 25th day of October, 2010. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2010. Michael C. Ireland, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John Worcester, City Attorney 630 E. Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 2 of 2 . .6 & c #1(,L1~ #f 2Â£Â£71 gwla (9 '2010 CRANDALL BUILDING 83#Al 6/4 Â» Price per Sq.Ft. Price Sq.Ft. Finish Barber 226 $ 105,000 $465/s.L total build out Sandy's 2342 $ 1,278,000 $546/s.it partial build out AVP 1100 $ 630,000 $575/s.ti total build out 0- 0- Elcul lo l 4-- )4 ORDINANCE #26 (Series of 2009) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING LANDMARK DESIGNATION AND ORDINANCE #48, SERIEN OF 2007 NEGOTIATIONS FOR POTENTIAL HISTORIC RESOURCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, 630 E. Hyman I.I.C, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested negotiation for landmark designation pursuant to Ordinance No. 48, Series of 2007 for the proposed alterations to the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99. City and rownsite of Aspen, Colorado: and WHEREAS, the property is included on Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 48, Series of 2007, as a potential historic resource; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025(E) of the Municipal Code states that. during the negotiation period set forth in the Code, "the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the Potential Historic Resource. 1 he properly owner shall be provided notice of this meeting with the Ilistoric Preservation Commission;" and WHEREAS, the property owners were notified of the Historic Preservation Commission meeting; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to HI'C dated October 28.2009, performed an analysis of the building and the impact of the proposed alterations to the potential historic significance of the building and found that the criteria for landmark designation are met; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 28,2009, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application and approved a recommendation to City Council by a vote of 5-0; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan: and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. RECEPTION#: 565306,12/15/2009 at 09:40:53 AM, 630 E. Hyman Avenue 1 OF 4, R $21.00 Doc Code ORDINANCE Ordinance #48 Negotiation Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO Page 1 of4 .. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Historic Designation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby approves Historic Designation for 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and lownsite of Aspen, Colorado. Section 2: Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby grants the following Land Use entitlements, conditioned upon the voluntary landmark designation of 630 E. 1 lyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and lownsite of Aspen, Colorado and the issuance of a Development Order to be granted by the Ilistoric Preservation Commission, following Final Major Development and Commercial Design Review: 1. Council hereby grants a variance to the allowable FAR for Commercial Uses, from 1.5:1 tol,51:1. 2. Council hereby approves an increase in the maximum residential unit size for the free market unit represented for 630 E. Hyman from 2,000 net livable square feet to 2,500 net livable square feet, with the extinguishment of an historic TI)R to be issued by the City. Council hereby authorizes the issuance of an historic 7 1)R with the restriction that it only be used tor this purpose. At the time ot building permit application, City staff shall deposit the 77)R with the building department and the developer shall deposit the sum of $250.000, representing the estimated value of the 'II)R, into an interest bearing escrow account with the City as the beneficiary of the account. In the event that there is a default in terms and conditions of the building permit and the construction is not completed, the City shall have recourse to the sums on deposit to complete the work and cure any default in the terms and conditions of the building permit, with any remaining sums returned to the developer, The 'I DR shall be extinguished and the deposit shall be returned to the developer upon issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Final Inspection, whichever first occurs. the terms of such escrow shall be set forth in the development agreement applicable to this project. 3. Council hereby approves an increase in the allowable Free-Market Multi-Family Housing FAR from 0.5:1 to 0.59.1. without provision of affordable housing. 4. Council hereby permits the City's execution of an Encroachment License for the existing encroachments into City right-of-way. 5. The applicant has represented that the remaining two uncommilled commercial spaces will be offered for sale to local businesses. 630 E, Hyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 2 of 4 6. Council hereby grants five years vested rights from the date of issuance of a development order, Section 3: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause. phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5: Vested Rights The Land Use entitlements granted herein shall be vested for a period of live (5) years from the date of issuance of a development order, 1'01]owing Final Major Development and Commercial Design Reviews by the Historic Preservation Commission. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded. as specified herein. within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set fbrth in this Ordinance. including Final Major Development and Commercial Design Reviews by the HPC, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of five (5) years, pursuant to the I.and Use Code of the City of Aspen and litle 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 630 E. liyman Avenue. Lots R and S. Block 99. City and lownsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. I he approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by ]aw for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date 630 E. ilyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 3 of 4 .. of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 6: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 7th day of December, 2009. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City I iall, Aspen, Colorado. fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council o f the City of Aspen on the23 day of h~ll, 2009. , ./-1 /1/1 A Va h - C le /Act Â»L fo r Michael C. I~eland, Mayor ATTHS'r: -9 04(21 /4.Plito.-3 1\-ey, - Kathryn Koc~plity Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this ~ day ofi~<3.2009 P % 6-2 lo, FC,u Michael C. 1~eland, Makuf'' Afy,AT: **0-0/,t~- ' Kathryn Kocl~j)(ty Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 2141 i,Lict;EL_ Ljohn-Woreester, City Attorney 630 E. 1 lyman Avenue Ordinance #48 Negotiation Page 4 of 4 . -- * -E -i- -T - 1 E 1-/hblll) i r Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 23,2009 adjustment. John Worcester, city attorney, stated that language will be added before the agreement is signed, Mayor Ireland moved to approve the consent calendar indicating that in Resolution #98, to specify 5% is an annual limitation; seconded by Councilman Romero. The consent calendar is: â€¢ Appointment to Kids' First Board - Richard Nedlin â€¢ Resolution #98,2009 - Gymnastics Agreement â€¢ Resolution #99,2009 - Amendments to Burlingame Covenants â€¢ Minutes - November 9,2009 All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Torre asked about the board openings listed in a memorandum. City Clerk Kathryn Koch told Council these openings have been advertised for and the deadline is th closed, Council scheduled interviews with these applicants November 30 . Mayor Ireland asked if any boards have only one application. Ms. Koch said P&Z has only one applicant, Jasmine Tygre, Mayor Ireland asked if Council wanted to interview Ms. Tygre. Councilman Skadron moved to appoint Jasmine Tygre to P&Z; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. Councilman Johnson left the room due to conflict of interest. Councilman Romero moved to reconsider Resolution #96, Series of 2009, extension of vested rights; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried. Mayor Ireland moved to continue Resolution #96, Series o f 2009, to December 71% seconded by Councilman Romero. All in fuvor, motion carried. -~Â¢" ORDINANCE #26, Series of 2009 - 630 E. Hyman Landmark Ordinance 48 Negotiation Amy Guthrie, community development department, told Council this is a commercial building built in 1969 by Jack Crandall. The building was designed by Tom Benton, a local artist. The new owners are interested in refurbishing the building. The new owners have plans to sell units to existing tenants and to add a residential unit. The owners are offering an Ordinance #48 negotiation on the size ofa residential unit and some city fees. Councilman Skadron asked if this is being brought forward as a historic designation in order to secure benefits. Ms. Guthrie said there are standard benefits for historic designation for which the applicants will be eligible. They are also aware of benefits that 4 .. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council November 23,2009 may be negotiated through Ordinance #48. Greg Hills, applicant, told Council he does not like to tear buildings down but to rehabilitate them and bring life to the buildings. Hills said this is an important structure for the community. Councilman Skadron asked to what degree the rooftop addition diminishes the building s historic integrity, Ms. Guthrie said there will be an architectural presentation at second reading. There were 3 meetings with HPC, who discussed the rooftop addition and how to design it in a way that is appropriate to the building. Ms. Guthrie told Council there is a scoring system to evaluate the integrity of the building and this building has scored 99 out of 100 because it is unaltered. Staffhas thought about the impact of an addition because they do not want to destroy the integrity o f a building. Ms. Guthrie said the building does need to be rehabilitated. Hills said they have worked to minimize the addition to the building but it will have an impact. Councilman Skadron asked how the building might be altered if historic designation is not received. Hills said there will have to be significant alternation in order to continue this is a commercial and office building. Councilman Romero moved to read Ordinance #26, Series of 2009; seconded by Councilman Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #26 (Series of 2009) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING LANDMARK. DESIGNATION AND A 500 SQUARE FOOT INCREASE IN THE CAP FOR RESIDENTIAL UNIT SIZE FOR THE SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Councilman Romero moved to adopt Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Skadron. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Torre, yes; Romero, yes; Skadron, yes; Johnson, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. ELECTION COMMISSION Mayor Ireland said he would like Council to add to the agenda consideration to solicit members for the election commission whose terms expired under the Charter. Councilman Skadron moved to add election commission members to the agenda; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried. Mayor Ireland moved to put out advertisement for persons interested in serving on the election commission through July 2011; seconded by Councilman Torre. Mayor Ireland said this is necessary because according to the Charter the terms of the Election Commission expired in July 2009. 5 .. Sbulj Bia l Vll / 2/10) 7 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 7,2009 -~ units. Ms. Adams said two affordable housing units are proposed at 600 square feet and category 2. A free market studio is proposed at 600 square feet. Ms. Adams said she will go over the design at second reading as well as present comparisons to the last project. Councilman Skadron said his primary concerns will revolve with the Aspen Area Community plan and the threshold question if this application goes far enough to satisfy the first standard of subdivision review, that a proposed subdivision be consistent with the AACP. Councilman Skadron said he would like to know more about the architecture evolution of the project as it relates to the concept of western vernacular, including covered wooden walkways, Councilman Johnson said the construction management plan and community outreach will be important and there needs to be a lot of detail. Councilman Johnson requested for information on the park development fee. Councilman Romero requested information on operations and operational considerations these improvements have on immediate neighbors including the alley and alley access. Mayor Ireland said he would like information on restoring the site and protecting the city from consequences of an economic failure. Mayor Ireland said the CMP needs to address the impact of construction on this corner and the tourist season. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Torre, yes; Johnson, yes; Romero, yes; Ska(iron, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. Councilman Torre moved to adopt Ordinance #29, Series of 2009, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Johnson. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Romero, yes; Johnson; yes; Torre, yes; Skadron, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. ~~- ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 2009 - 630 E. Hyman Landmark Ordinance 48 negotiation Mitch Haas, representing the applicant, pointed out that under Ordinance 48. Council's direction is to negotiate and reach a "mutually acceptable agreement for the preservation of the resource" and as part of the agreement, Council will require the property be historically designated. Haas said Ordinance 48 explains that preserving and protecting historic resources promotes the public welfare by making Aspen a more attractive and desirable place in which to live and visit. Haas stated the city has determined there is a positive benefit gained by designating historic resources as historic landmarks. Haas noted that historic designation also forwards the goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan, Haas said in order to achieve the benefit of historic designation, the code allows the city to offer variations from the dimensional requirements in the land use code; make recommendations to grant exemptions from the International Building Code; and authorize economic or development benefits to designated properties. Haas pointed out the code in Section 26.415.025(b) establishes the procedures for the 90 day negotiation period. Haas told Council staff reviewed this proposal and requested incentives and found the property satisfies all 3 standards to meet historic designation; only 1 standard needs to be met, HPC has several discussions about the appropriateness of a 3rd floor on 7 .. Retrular Meeting Aspen City Council December 7,2009 this building; its impact on the original design and on the historic significance of the building. HPC agreed all 3 standards were satisfied and also found that the proposed remodel and addition is consistent with the historic preservation design guidelines and the city's commercial/lodging and historic district design guidelines, Haas requested Council find significant public benefit is achieved with this proposal and agree on the incentives that will allow the Crandall building to be voluntarily added to the list of historic structures. John Rowland, architect, told Council this has been a commercial building since it was built in the 1970's, Rowland said any addition should be sympathetic and contextual. Rowland showed a vicinity map, the existing building, an overlay of the C-1 zone district. Rowland said the net leasable is currently 9,961 square feet, Rowland noted the existing internal courtyard has walkways that are icy and make circulation difficult. There is no handicap accessibility in this building. There is loss o f energy due to the courtyard configuration. The existing windows do not function properly for natural ventilation. Rowland noted in modern architecture there is an emphasis on horizontal lines; this building has horizontal siding and the flat roof with vertical columns. Rowland pointed out this building has a simple mass without a lot of details or windows. Rowland told Council the proposed building will retain the historic character with an addition of a unit on top. The net livable on the roof is around 2500 square feet. Rowland said the proposed building will be energy efficient; it is a mixed use building with the addition of the residential unit. The new residential unit will compliment the existing building. Rowland showed a key plan denoting 1, 2, 3 and 4 story buildings in the surrounding area. Rowland brought up community goals, adherence to the AACK which the proposed building does. The proposal is to sell the spaces back to the existing tenants at affordable prices. The Benton art gallery is proposed to be in the enclosed reconditioned courtyard, which will be an asset to the community. The plan is to retain the round windows. The concrete masonry columns and redwood siding will be expressed throughout. Rowland said the existing staircases are not to code and there is no elevator so the proposed building will increase accessibility. The insulation values and mechanical equipment will be updated; solar energy will be added to the roof Rowland said the number one green thing is that this building will not be demolished. Rowland showed the site plan; the roof plan, which was lowered by 2' as a result of the HPC meeting. Rowland showed the basement floor plan and relocation of the existing staircase and adding another egress in order to be compliant with the code, The loading dock will be re-arranged in order to add a parking space. New windows will be added on the alley side. The skylights on the roof will be removed in order to build the residential unit. The residential level is setback 25' from the sidewalk. Rowland showed renderings of the pedestrian perspective from different sides o f the building, showed the changed loading dock and addition o f windows 8 .. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 7,2009 Rowland told Council the applicants held a public meeting in October attending by 21 interested persons. Rowland said the design has worked with the rhythm of the building and the vertical clements of the building. Haas told Council the applicants had two separate work sessions with HPC, several meetings with staff and the public open house and a public hearing before HPC. Haas noted little opposition has been voiced against this proposal. There has been support from staff, neighbors and the HPC. Haas said the applicants have requested modest incentives. The first incentive has to do with FAR limits. Haas reminded Council in the C-1 district, there is an overall FAR limit and uses are broken down to limits within that. The remodel will reduce the commercial FAR by 3,000 square feet because of a technical requirement that exposed space be counted as FAR. By putting a roo f over the courtyard, that space is no longer counted. The commercial net leasable is not being reduced but even with the reduction, the commercial FAR is over the code allowance at 9,000 square. The building has 12,300 square feet. Haas said 340 square feet will be lost in net leasable. Haas noted the applicants are asking this be approved to allow the final commercial FAR and not be non-conforming. The intention is to allow the existing tenants to purchase their space and non-conformity can make financing difficult. Haas said the next incentive deals with the free market residential FAR on the project. The allowed FAR in C-1 is .5:1, which would be 3000 square feet. This proposal has 3524 square feet of residential floor area. Of that 3524,832 square feet are non-unit square feet, a pro rated share of the hallways, stairs, circulation in the building. This proposal is exceeding the free market FAR limit by 524 square feet and 832 square feet is non-unit space. Haas said rather than asking for a 500 square foot bonus from the HPC for an exemplary preservation project, they have requested this as an ordinance 48 negotiation. Haas noted the entire proj ect is 2700 square feet less than the square area allow for the property cumulatively Haas requested the maximum residential unit size be increased. The code allows 2000 square feet o f net livable space, which can be increased to 2500 square feet by buying a TDR and landing it on the property. Haas said they would like to achieve that without purchasing a TDR. This is not a variance request as a 2500 square foot unit is allowed. The 3rd request has to do with the right-of-way. Haas noted the columns on Spring street and the stair exiting the loading dook on the alley encroach into the city's right-of-way. There are revocable encroachment agreements. Haas said once the building is designated historic, nothing will be removed. 1-Iaas said the columns have been deemed to contribute to the historic character of the building. Haas noted the applicants have worked out details for a 39+ year encroachment license, which agreement has been reviewed by the city attorney. Haas pointed out the part of the loading dock furthest in on the alley will be converted into a garage and the loading dock for the commercial space will remain. Haas requested 5 year vesting rather then the standard 3 years vesting. Haas noted this project is subject to school land dedication fee requirement. Haas said this property will not dedicate land when the historic resource takes up all 6,000 square feet of the property. 9 .. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 7,2009 Haas said as the regulations are written, a property with a higher property value will have a higher fee than a property located on the edge of the city. The school fee-in-lieu is based on the value o f the property, not on the impact to the school. Mayor Ireland pointed out that is not a fee created by the city. Haas agreed the city is not authorized to waive those fees and they propose to pay the school fee and ask the city to waive other fees to offset that amount. Haas said the city will make up those fees when the units are sold and the real estate transfer taxes are paid. Haas said granting these incentives should be balanced against the community benefit of landmark designation but also the applicants have agreed to give up valuable space to have a publicly accessible art gallery. The applicants have agreed to maintain the historic integrity of the building by not installing more windows on the south side of the building. Ihe applicant has agreed to maintain the courtyard spaces and to forego the remodel and redevelopment flexibility by not designating the building. Haas pointed out there is no requested height variance for this building to keep it in character with the neighborhood. Haas said this is a low two-story building and a minimal 3rd floor is being added. The 3rd story perception is reduced by setbacks and a flat roof and pushing the structure to the back o f the building. Haas noted the heights o f adjacent buildings and this proposed height is not out of scale. Haas noted the C-1 zone is a transition district which has slight reduction in floor area compared to the commercial core. The C-1 zone has a separate chapter in the commercial design guidelines. Haas pointed out the number one design guideline for this is to strengthen the sense of relatedness with the commercial core historic district, not with the adjacent residential district. Variety of design is encouraged, as is greater street vitality and an enriched definition of the street frontage. Haas said the applicants did hear some concerns about precedent if the Council allows a 3rd iloor on this building. Haas said each and every ordinance 48 negotiation is discretionary and case specific so there is no precedence. Haas said if this would create a precedent, it would be that a 3rd floor can be built within 33', below the established height limit of 36' in the C-1 zone. The Wienerstube building across the street proposed a height limit of 48'. This building is 10' shorter than the Hannah Dustin building across the street. Haas pointed out all these plans except the 524 square feet can be achieved under existing land use code without any ordinance 48 incentives. Haas reiterated this is a modest proposal that will preserve a significant building. Haas told Council there are two Benton buildings in town and this one is totally in tact. Thc applicants feel this addition maintains the historic integrity of this building and it will read almost exactly the same. Amy Guthrie, community development department, told Council there are 3 criteria for historic designation and one has to be met; staff and HPC recommend all 3 criteria are met. Ms. Guthrie pointed out this building scored 99 out of 100. HPC and staff feel it could lose up to 15 points with this proposed remodel; however, it will still be above the threshold. This is a prominent location. Staff and HPC support these negotiations and do not object to any of the negotiations requested by the applicant. 10 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 7,2009 Councilman Torre asked about the growth management 90 day requirement. Haas told Council the community development director does the growth management review and i f this landmark designation is approved, the director is authorized to approve growth management. Haas said there is a code interpretation about subdivision review and when one is adding only 1 unit, subdivision review is not required. Both those requests have been dealt with. Councilman Johnson asked how many spaces will be offered to tenants, Greg Hills, applicant, told Council there are 11 tenants in the buildings all of whom have been offered the ability to buy their space. Hills said the majority have expressed an interest in doing that; two tenants will not be buying their space and there is a list of locals who would be interested in buying a space. Hills said he has sat down with all the tenants to explain the cost of the space, the cost of the mortgage, the financing program. Councilman Skadron asked what the threshold number of points for historic designation is. Ms. Guthrie said for post WW11 buildings, the threshold is 75; this building with the addition would score 84. Councilman Skadron asked why subdivision is not required if the tenants are going to buy their spaces. Bendon said subdivision review is required for multi-family development and not required for the addition of one residential unit, Councilman Skadron asked about the issue o f approving non-conformities. Bendon said the policy on non-conformities in uses and in non-conformities is that they may continue for the life of the building. There is a review to get a variance on non-conformities when there is little flexibility on the lot. Bendon said there is concern from lenders about non- conformities. Herb Klein, representing the applicant, pointed out under city codes, this non-conformity would be allowed to continue. Klein requested Council declare this is conforming so that when the businesses are sold, that will not be an issue with lenders. Haas said conforming FAR for this parcel would be 1.5:1; the request for this project is 1.505:1, a small amount more than is allowed. Councilman Skadron said the applicants have said this is a modest development proposal and that the addition should be sympathetic. Councilman Skadron asked why a 2500 square foot addition is being requested when only 2000 square foot unit is allowed and at what point is the square footage no longer sympathetic. Haas pointed out the code does allow 2500 square feet by purchasing a TDR and landing on the propeMy. Haas reiterated other than the request for 524 square feet, all other requests are allowed for in the code. l'he applicants are not requesting additional net leasable area and are requesting only one free market residence. Councilman Romero asked about plans for tenant relocation during reconstruction. Hills said the plans include relocating the tenants within the building during construction. Hills told Council every business owner indicating interest in buying their space will be able to stay during reconstruction. Councilman Romero asked about performance and completion financial sureties and restoration surcties. Councilman Romero said Council has tried to include those type of sureties to protect the community as well as the site, Hills told Council when he does a project, he includes completion guarantees which in this case will be his personal guarantee. 11 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 7,2009 Mayor Ireland suggested a way to allow 2500 square feet is to issue a TDR to the applicant and then allow the TDR to be landed on the site. The city can hold the TDR as security against completion of the structure. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. Junee Kirk said any trades given to the applicant have included that the spaces be affordable to the present tenants and that any unsold space should go to local businesses. Ms. Kirk questioned when they are resold, is the price going to be controlled and how can that be en forced. Ms. Kirk said with the addition o f a third story, the city will not be preserving a historic structure; the addition changes the relationship o f the whole block. Bill Mitchell, tenant for 24 years, told Council he has been trying to buy his space for the past 20 years. The roof has leaked for the past 24 years. Mitchell said this building is a community asset and he hopes the project goes forward. Graeme Means told Council he has been a business person in Aspen and it is sometimes a struggle to meet rent. People have had to give up their business practices during economic downturns. Means asked Council not to underestimate the value o f small businesses to the community. These developers are locals with a track record in Aspen. David Elston stated he support this project because he likes keeping local people in Aspen. Businesses have been moving downvalley. Elston said he would like to see tenants be able to buy their spaces. Elston said he likes this architecture and it seems like it willlook like the same building. Bob Langely said the original owners will appreciate this proposal keeping the operation and composition of the building. Scott Lumby said he supports this development; it is a great opportunity to preserve a unique building while allowing locally serving business to own their own spaces. Mike Yates said restoring the building, making it historic and part of the town will be an asset to Aspen. Wiley Manering said it is difficult to purchase a property from long time owners. Manering said these owners got the property because they have the same vision as the previous owners. Toni Kronberg said this is discussing a landmark historic resource and how can this be a landmark historic resource with all the proposed changes. Ms. Kronberg noted the Aspen Area community Plan states any new development has to be in the scale of the existing neighborhood. Ms. Kronberg questioned why this has not gone through subdivision review because of the proposed separate ownership. This proposal puts a top hat on the building and changes the roofline, Ms. Kronberg said for landmark designation, there are 5 criteria to be looked at, not 3. The 2 criteria left out are the neighborhood and community character. Much of this neighborhood is two stories and this is an inappropriate application for landmark designation. Macky Morris, business owner in Aspen, said keeping businesses like office supply and pediatricians is one way to keep community. Eric Kolberg told Council he worked with the applicants on the Connor project. The applicants have energy toward preserving projects in Aspen. This project is a good mix of old and new. Kevin McClure said told Council he shops at businesses in this building and sees no downside and every upside. 12 . Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 7,2009 Tom Hineline said he supports the Crandall proposal; demolishing this building will take assets away from Aspen. Zack Feas stated one of the major reasons to support the proposal is to keep the pediatrician in Aspen. Feas said the applicant should be commended for trying to keep local commercial tenants in Aspen. Barbara Husalak, Sandy's owner, said the office supply store has been in the building for 28 years. Businesses are moving out of Aspen because of affordability. These applicants understand that and are giving businesses the opportunity to buy their spaces at reasonable prices. Ms. Husalak said the addition of a penthouse will help offset some of the restoration costs. Karen Mitchell told Council she had has a jewelry studio in this building for the past 9 years and has been able to keep her business in Aspen because of the affordable rents there, Ms, Mitchell said she feels the applicants will do a great job on the building. This building is in desperate need of care. Ms. Mitchell supports this renovation as it will revitalize the building. Kayla Ruchella said she has had an accounting service in this building for the past 20 years. Ms. Ruchella supports this project and hopes to be able to purchase her space if it is approved. Ross Thompson, owner of Barber Shop, said there is no elevator in this building and access like that would be a wonderful addition. Thompson said the plans for an enhanced courtyard would be great. Thompson said the only way a lot of these businesses can continue is with approval o f this project. John Olson said this is not about subdivision or historic designation; the real issue is retaining commercial spaces in town. Olson said this business model is in the best interests of this community. Olson said this proposal is the result o f many hours of meetings and a lot of good input. The applicants care about doing historic preservation right. Ward Page said this vision will give commercial spaces a way to maintain their business and keep the historic value of the building. Robert Croenenberg said this is a project whose time has come. It is difficult to afford real estate in Aspen. Croenenberg said the applicants should be applauded for giving businesses an opportunity to stay in Aspen.; Croenenberg said this building will always be unique. The penthouse is set back for enough so that one will not see very much of it. John Miller, contractor, said this proposal gives the Crandall building a face lift as well as maintaining the historic value. Miller said it also makes spaces affordable to local businesses with which he does business. Terry Murray told Council she has owned two small businesses and would have jumped at the chance to buy a space in Aspen from the landlord. This building is decrepit. Ms. Murray said she feels the trades offs are worth it to get this project. Mayor Ireland closed the public hearing. Amy Guthrie entered correspondence into the record on this project; in support ; a letter from Justine, Jack and Kristina Crandall the original owners of the building; Elena 13 .. Regular Meeting Aspen Citv Council December 7,2009 Eckhart a tenant in support, Scan Gooding building owner in the vicinity in support; Colder Hawk-Smith in support, Robert Turner in support; Jean Trousdale is opposed to the height variance, which is a misunderstanding. Mayor Ireland moved to adopt Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, on second reading; seconded by Councilman Romero. Mayor Ireland stated his only qualm about the project is the 2 units not spoken for and he hopes that the applicant offers to sell those to local businesses as a condition. Hills said this is his plan. Mayor Ireland said he generally does not favor additional luxury residences in Aspen as that does not create vitality in the community in general. To some extent luxury development has driven out affordable tourists accommodations. Mayor Ireland said the trade o ff being offered is attractive because it does preserve local businesses and it does preserve this building. Mayor Ireland said he does not feel the addition will intrude on most view planes. The requested addition is under the height allowance with no height variance requested. Mayor Ireland noted the alternative of demolition and reconstruction may entail more luxury space and less locally serving buildings. Mayor Ireland stated reusing buildings is preferable to demolition and hauling things to the landfill. Mayor Ireland said Ordinance 48 should be revised to create more specific criteria for evaluation of how many benefits should be granted. This is a special Aspen building, and this proposal could preserve that structure and empower the tenants to purchase their spaces. Mayor Ireland said this is the direction the community prefers, local serving infill versus giant luxury buildings. Councilman Tone said this is a project that is within the spirit of Ordinance #48, which the community has not seen a lot of. Councilman Torre said he feels this building is worthy of historic designation. Councilman Torre said he has an issue with the residential floor area and the TDR allocation. Ms. Guthrie pointed out in the commercial zones, one TDR allows an additional 500 square feet rather than 250. Councilman Torre said he would like to see greater setbacks on the east and north sides. Councilman Torre said the treatment of the south side of the building is exceptional and he would like to see that on the east and north sides. Councilman Torre stated he has no problems with continued maintenance of the encroachment into the right-of-way. Councilman Torre stated he would like to stay with 3 years vested rights rather than 5 years. Councilman Torre stated he does not support subsidizing the $31,000 fees. Councilman Torre asked about the appropriateness of materials for the 3~d floor. Ms. Guthrie said the materials will be addressed at final review by HPC. Councilman Torre said he would like the 3rd floor set off from the remainder of the building. Hills stated he is dropping the fee waiver request. Councilman Johnson said the community preservation, accessibility and sustainability and adaptive reuse are commendable. Councilman Johnson stated this is an appropriate Ordinance 48 negotiation. Councilman Johnson asked ifthere is a way to handle rosales !4 Regular Meetine Aspen City Council December 7,2009 to insure these spaces are preserved for locally serving business. Councilman Johnson said he is comfortable with the TDR concept for the additional square feet of 524 and the encroachments as well as the 5 years vested rights. Councilman Romero said preserving the building is important and also important is providing a pathway for locally serving businesses. Councilman Romero noted the Obermeyer project had the same aim to allow local businesses to purchase their space. Councilman Romero noted owning one's own space aligns one with the community and character of Aspen. Councilman Romero noted there was erosion in that goal at Obermeyer and even though the purchase price was low, they were not able to retain as many business as they wanted. Councilman Romero said there are trade offs to get to this objective; effective compromise means giving up something to get benefits. Councilman Romero stated the net net is worth those trade offs. Councilman Romero stated he can support the increase in square footage. Councilman Romero said he likes the mechanism of using the TDR to get to 2500 square feet and to hold that TDR in surety for the project. Councilman Romero said to make the compromise work for both sides, he could agree to the 5 year vesting, Councilman Skadron asked about cap the resale price. Hill said he cannot do this. Hill said the people who buy their units should be able to enjoy whatever profits there are. Hills said that condition would be a deal breaker, Hill told Council he is pricing these spaces to be in line with the rents tenants are currently paying. Mayor Ireland said he does not feel the location of this building is conducive to high-end types of businesses. Mayor Ireland suggested there are other ways to restrict the speculative development. Mayor Ireland pointed out these spaces are small and are not right downtown. Councilman Johnson noted this is an open market lease situation today. This building does need improvements. Councilman Skadron asked if the size of the residential unit at 2500 square feet is financial gain. Hills said there are things he is trying to do with this project that he thinks are good, like trying to have affordable commercial; one is historic designation of the building. Hills said not adding windows to the south side o f the building will lower the value of those offices. Councilman Skadron stated he has difficulty with historic landmark with all the modifications. Councilman Skadron stated he does not believe Aspen is better served by scrape and replace with a modem building where a building with character once stood and that modern building replaces locally serving businesses with ones that do not. A project like that would return nothing to the type of businesses and people who have supported Aspen, Councilman Skadron said these fucts persuade him to favor this proj ect. Councilman Torre asked for a review of the square footage and any variance requests. Haas told Council there are two different measurements; net livable under city code is measured from interior wall to interior wall of the unit. Net livable area for this unit is 2500 square feet. Bendon noted net livable is capped at 2000 square feet in the C-1 zone; however, it can be increased to 2500 square feet with a TDR. Haas said the proposal for the entire building is about 2700 square feet below the total allowable FAR for the 15 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council December 7,2009 property. Haas said this would allow taking a 500 square foot TDR off the property and using it to secure the project and extinguishing it when construction is complete. Haas said taking the 2500 net livable, adding the wall thicknesses comes to 2692 square feet. Because this will then become a mixed use building, the circulation and non-unit space in the building like hallways, stairs, etc., needs to be prorated back to each specific use, like commercial and residential. The pro-rating is done on a percentage basis calculation and adding to 2692 added 832 square feet for a total of 3524 square feet, which is 524 more than the C-1 allowed. Bendon told Council staff looks at two numbers, the net livable at 2000 or 2500 square feet with a TDR and an FAR allocated to that use. On this property, one can have a.5 for residential which has to include the allocated space like stairs and hallways. Thisprojectis .59:1. Bendon said the existing building is inefficient, the courtyard, the hallways, the stairways. Mayor Ireland amended his motion that the applicant has offered to restrict sale of the unsold units to local business and agreed not to ask for a fee waiver; the TDR will be issued and held by the city and upon completion o f the project it will be extinguished; seconded by Councilman Romero. All in favor, motion carried. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Skadron, yes; Johnson, yes; Romero, yes; Ton-e, yes, Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. RESOLUTION #96, SERIS OF 2009 - Extension of Vested Right - South Aspen Street Councilman Johnson left the room due to a conilict of interest. Chris Bendon, community development department, reminded Council this was approved November 9th after which there was some confusion aboul the language. At the November 23rd meeting, reconsideration was requested by the applicant and approved by Council. Bendon noted the original language granted a two year extension of the subdivision approvals if the lodge application is not approved. If the lodge application is approved, vested rights for the townhomes would terminate with the lodge approval. The amended language provides a 2 year extension of the vested rights independent of what happens to the lodge. Bendon said staff is reluctant to see dual approvals for one property and have modified the land use code to make sure there are not two approvals on one properly. Bendon said when the Lodge at Aspen Mountain application comes forward, the ordinance should either prohibit two approvals for one property or to have a minimal overlap of two projects. Bendon said that discussion should occur with the ordinance approving the Lodge application. John Sarpa, applicant, told Council at the original hearing, he thought the discussion focused on 3 years versus 2 years. 11 was his understanding o f the agreement was that upon cessation of the lodge application, 2 years would be granted. Sarpa said his understanding was the cessation meant any end of the lodge process. This is critical because they cannot shorten the timeframe of the townhouse approvals. Sarpa said the 16 .. fivg k DaÂ·lt &41 0(2 ~41,QU u.47+4 Regular Meeting Aspen City Council October 25, Â®10 2,0 LO AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY I.COATED AT 220 AND 230 H. MAIN STREET, LOTS P AND Q BLOCK 73, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Councilman Torre moved to adopt Ordinance #25, Series of 2010, on first reading; seeonded by Councilman Romero. Roll call vote; Johnson, yes; Romero, yes; Skadron, yes; Torre, yes; Mayor ireland, yes. Motion carried. ~?k'ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 2010 - 630 E. Hyman Amendment to Ordinance #48 Negotiation Councilman Torre moved to read Ordinance #26, Series of'2010; seconded by Councilman Skadron. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #26 (Series of 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO AMENDING ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 2009. A NEOOTIATION FOR THE. LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 630 E. IlYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNS1TE OF ASPEN Councilman lorre moved to adopt Ordinance #26, Series o f 2019, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Romero. Mayor Ireland asked what is happening to the public space and why is it disappearing from the agreement. Greg Hills, applicant, told Council in the original negotiations, the reason to preserve the round window was for views of Aspen Mountain. With the Art Museum going across the street, the HPC agreed the view will be lost. Hills reminded Council another goal was to keep the commercial space as affordable as possible. Some of his tenants requested him to look al getting a better price. Hills said if he can sell this as an office space, he can give a better purchase price to the existing tenants. Mayor Ireland said in applications, Council makes agreements to get public benefits and then those disappear. Mayor Ireland said this may be reasonable and necessary. Mayor Ireland said he would like to see the impact on the view that is allegedly impaired by the Art Museum. Councilman Romero requested the Council minutes from the original approval. Councilman Romero said he would also like to see an architectural plan view o f the second tloor and what is being proposed. Councilman Johnson said he would like to see a matrix of the tenants, who is buying. Mayor Ireland stated he appreciates the efforts on behalf ofthe tenants. Mayor Ireland said he would like the views not just of the Art Museum but of the proposed Wienerstube development and what building could be built across the street. 5 .. Regular Meeting Aspen City Council October 25,2010 Councilman Skadron said he would like to know to what degree the original approval relied on the gallery space. Councilman rrorre asked if there are other ways to increase the rental space 427 square feet. Hills reiterated he is trying to honor his commitment to the tenants who need help purchasing their space. Roll call vote; Romero, yes; Torre, yes; Skadron, yes; Johnson, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #27, SERIES OF 2010 - Code Amendment Calculations & Measurements Councilman Johnson moved to read ordinance #27, Series of 2010; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in fuvor, motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 27 (SERIES OF 2010) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN I,AND USE CODE: 26.575.020 - CALCULATIONS AND MEASUREMENTS 26.104.100 - DEFINITIONS Councilman Johnson moved to adopt Ordinance #27, Series of 2010, on first reading; seconded by Councilman Romero. Councilman Torre said he would like to have P&Z comments for second reading. Councilman Johnson said he would like a synopsis of the public outreach on these code amendments. Roll call vote; Torre, yes; Skadron, yes; Johnson, yes; Romero, yes; Mayor Ireland, yes. Motion carried. ORDINANCE #22, SERIES OF 2010 - Rezoning Given institute Councilman Torre moved to continue Ordinance #22, Series of 2010, to November 8, 2010; seconded by Councilman Skadron. Mayor Ireland opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Ireland closed the public hearing. All in favor. motion carried. ORDINANCE #17, SERIES OF 2010 - Code Amendment - Signs 6 . 4/ Eas,hcult- (21, HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC October 6, 2010 Ms. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Amendment to Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 forthe Historic Crandall Building Dear Amy: Please consider this letter and the attached exhibits to represent a formal request for an. approval of an amendment to the Commercial FAR allowed in Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 for the Crandall Building, a designated Historic Landmark located at 630 E. Hyman Ave, Aspen. The subject property is legally described as Lot R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen. This 6,000 square foot lot on the northwest corner of E. Hyman Avenue and S. Spring Street is home to the Crandall Building, which was built in 1969 and designed by Tom Benton, a local architect/artist. The two-story plus basement structure is located in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District, one block east of the Commercial Core (CC). Pursuant to Resolution No. 19, Series of 2009, the HPC unanimously determined that the necessary criteria for listing this property on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures had been met and recommended City Council approval of Historic Landmark Designation and Ordinance #48 negotiation, and granted HPC Major Development (Conceptual) and Commercial Design Review (Conceptual). On December 7, 2009, the Aspen City Council unanimously passed Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 approving the Historic Designation of the property. One of the conditions of approval established a Commercial FAR limit of 1.51:1, or 9,060sf of Commercial Floor Area. Finally, on March 24, 2010, the HPC granted Major Development (Final) and Commercial Design Review (Final) for the property. During the HPC meetings, there were discussions concerning the circular opening on the second floor of the south fagade of the building. There had been a request for a removable window to be installed, which was shown to be, and accepted by the HPC as, impractical. In the end, an operable â€¢201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108â€¢ ASPEN, COLORADOâ€¢81611 â€¢ â€¢ PHONE: (970) 925-7819 â€¢ FAX: (970) 925-7395 â€¢ .. window was agreed to with a horizontal element to approximate what was depicted in Tom Benton's original elevation drawings. The space inside this window was to become a common area conference room. During the HPC review, the publicly accessible views of Aspen Mountain from this window were thought to be an important element to retain. However, since these approvals were granted, the City has approved the approximately 47' tall Aspen Art Museum directly across the street, which will completely eliminate any views of Aspen Mountain from this vantage point. Given that Aspen Mountain views will no longer be available (to the public or anyone else) through this window, the applicant is now seeking to convert this space on the second floor into a commercial unit. The conversion of this area into a commercial space will not change the overall FAR of the development, nor will it change the appearance of the building from the outside. However, conversion of this area to a commercial space is extremely important to the viability of this entire project. There are very few commercial spaces available with windows. Due to current economic conditions, the ability to sell this space is now crucial to the applicant. The conversion of this area into a commercial space will result in total commercial FAR of 9,472 square feet, thereby exceeding the 9,060 square feet of allowable commercial FAR by a total of 412 square feet. The applicant therefore requests an amendment to Condition #1 of Section 2 of Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2009 which limits the Commercial FAR to 1.51:1. Said condition would need to be revised to instead allow for a Commercial FAR of 1.58:1. In the HPC minutes from October 28, 2009, it was stated by Staff that the enclosure of the courtyard would eliminate HPC purview of the interior. Furthermore, it seems as though the main issue to the HPC members when considering Landmark Designation was the roof-top addition, and not the retention of this space for the public's benefit. Even if staff considers this to have been an important factor in the negotiations, the fact remains that there will no longer be any view of Aspen Mountain once the Aspen Art Museum is built, and that the proposed change involves only interior spaces. It is hoped that the provided information proves helpful in the review of this application. If you should have any questions or desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC 7 11 Mitch.Haas Owner/Manager Crandall Amendment Page 2 .. ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: 0 a,f-\44\ 84 (rl/>) a Location: 630 f. /44Â« Avef Asf~ 4,04 R and S Woot, 99) (Indicate street address, lot & blodk number, legal description where appdopriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 2-7 3,7 - 1 Fa.- /2-007 APPLICANT: Name: 6% 0 C Ru r,)0,4 LLO Address: 534 E. Â·1:bp k--tnt pe. AspeÂ« OD <MW I Phone #: (970) 920 f 495â‚¬ ,- 1 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Roof Land P lanninG LLC-, Address: 61(N N. P[,// cffreptul,1-4110% 12-9tn, CD ZIWI -3 Phone #: (99 0 9 9-9 2-79/7 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check ali that apply): GMQS Exemption U Conceptual PUD U Temporary Use GMQS Allotment U Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) U Text/Map Amendment Special Review U Subdivision U Conceptual SPA ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream E Subdivision Exemption (includes Â£ Final SPA (& sPA Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Amendment) Mountain View Plane C] Commercial Design Review U Lot Split ~ Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion ~1 Residential Design Variance 1 Lot Line Adjustment ~g Other: 41/F,670'17107-~ ~P U Conditional Use Ordl.44* 4% Naq oha-hon EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) Landmark_ \34'oraAE~ Alou-4481. buitcl-'AD 0 0 PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Re 0112-14 -Ar odd.4-le;al Bryl Nler-0-111 FAA ,0 Nave you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ U Pre-Application Conference Summary U Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement , E Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form D Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards U 3-D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5" X 11" must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-D model. Your pre-application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. mmmm .. CRANDALL BUILDING Price per Sq.Ft. Price Sq.Ft. Finish Barber 226 $ 105,000 $465/s.f. total build out Sandy's 2342 $ 1,278,000 $546/s.f. partial build out AVP 1100 $ 630,000 $575/s.f. total build out 2 5 3 2/= f.b ~ I PROPOSED 230 rowland+broughton FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS 3 - architecture and urban design Crandall - 2920 ~ x September 24,2010 2 ~ CITY COUNCIL 11-22-10 FLOOR AREA NON-UNIT SPACE FLOOR AREA FLOOR LEVEL COMMERCIAL 1~ RESIDENTIAL ~ AFFORDABLE ~ TOTAL COMM. 73% | RES. 27% ~ AFFORD. 0% ~ TOTAL 100% TOTALS DECK AREA BASEMENT 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF MAIN 3,084 SF 0 SF 0 SF 3,084 SF 1,100 SF 405 SF 0 SF 1,505 SF 4,589 SF 0 SF SECOND 4,179 SF 0 SF 0 SF 4,179 SF 848 SF 313 SF 0 SF 1,161 SF 5,340 SF 0 SF -Z THIRD 0 SF 2,677 SF 0 SF 2,677 SF 191 SF 71 SF 0 SF 262 SF 2,939 SF 1,913 SF U. W TOTAL 7,263 SF 2,677 SF 0 SF 9,940 SF 2,139 SF 789 SF 0 SF 2,928 SF 12,868 SF 1,913 SF g g COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA 00 W TOTAL FLOOR AREA 7,263 SF 2,139 SF 9,402 SF 1.57:1 823 3 ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA 9,060 SF 1.51 :1 DIFFERENCE - UNDERCOVER) (342) SF RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA TOTAL FLOOR AREA 2,677 SF 789 SF 3,466 SF DECK AREA COUNTING TOWARD FLOOR AREA 0 SF TOTAL FLOOR AREA 3,466 SF 0.58 :1 ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA 3,000 SF 0.5:1 DIFFERENCE - UNDEFU(OVER) _ (466) SF AFFORDABLE FLOOR AREA TOTAL FLOOR AREA 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA (UNLIMITED) N/A SF N/A :1 DIFFERENCE - UNDER/(OVER) N/A SF TOTAL BUILDING FLOOR AREA TOTAL BUILDING FLOOR AREA 9,940 SF 2,928 SF 12,868 SF 2.14 :1 ALLOWABLE TOTAL FLOOR AREA 15,000 SF 2.5:1 DIFFERENCE - UNDEW(OVER) 2,132 SF NET LEASABLE (COMMERCIAL) AREA NET LIVABLE (RESIDENTIAL) AREA BASEMENT 3,028 SF N/A 0 SF Notes: MAIN 2,863 SF N/A 0 SF Zone District = Cl SECOND 3.904 SF N/A 0 SF Property Size 6,000 SF THIRD 0 SF RESIDENTIAL #1 2,495 SF Allowable Deck 2,250 SF TOTAL 9,795 SF TOTAL 2,495 SF streetAZÂ·:enver co 8 # 303.308.1375 117 . monarch street, aspen co 81611 t 970.544.9006 1970.544 3473 br u m office rowlandbroughton ... 0 rE 1 UNit --Â·|U*yamel. d AIW iniwil-k--A-1 . uwri I, jj u===b\NIVI#1[7-,t~~~~~'~u**Mr ' 4-1 irr 1-_ -4 &?39~ M MECHANICAL ~1. *#*,4:, *Â¢. 1 11 UNIT 1 103 rowland + broughton ~_:MEBef~eS t=1**Â».6=*2,1 ROOM *' *- architecture and urban design M U U 1 : 117 s. monarch st. 3377 blake st 106 133$*ICOMMUNIr,2 X1~-i-73-Â¥ 104 1 E .. : ENNI SPACE 1 - - --- -7 :aspen , 81611 denver. co 80205 970.544.9006 Â¥ 303 3081373 v 11 nt 970.544.3473 f 303 308 13751 OPEN Â· n jA&42 7---73 - 6 *UNIT f || lal]Ill .2 TO - # 6 ir - p. ABOVE 1 : 16 207 b Ill 111*~!11 1111 - 1 ~~11111 0 U-= IHI. 111 k=, 11 'hill: . WATER -kIT-UNIT - ---0,6--- B 11 EGRESS ROOM 1 * c ..r .1 -1 UNIT 1 UNIT -..tINI:ft>,Rk'.MiER<M'f*QI 1 1.- ./. 007 e .: ~~*U~:~~~9~1~~ -1.........~ - UNIT L{ 101 1 102 201 202 203 Consultants '~ 006 1 1 5 -d 0 0 3 2 2 ' m 4 BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN MAIN LEVEL PLAN SECOND LEVEL PLAN FLOOR AREA: NET LEASABLE: FLOOR AREA: NET LEASABLE: FLOOR AREA: NET LEASABLE: 583 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 001 523 SF UNIT 001 826 SF UNIT 101 766 SF UNIT 101 462 SF UNIT 201 434 SF UNIT 201 226 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 002 207 SF UNIT 002 858 SF UNIT 102 811 SF UNIT 102 382 SF UNIT 202 354 SF UNIT 202 226 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 003 206 SF UNIT 003 483 SF UNIT 103 459 SF UNIT 103 1,110 SF UNIT 203 1,066 SF UNIT 203 442 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 004 401 SF UNIT 004 586 SF UNIT 104 548 SF UNIT 104 654 SF UNIT 204 609 SF UNIT 204 219 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 005 201 SF UNIT 005 25 SF UNIT 105 0 SF UNIT 105 543 SF UNIT 205 498 SF UNIT 205 Issue: 05,19,2010 190 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 006 163 SF UNIT 006 306 SF UNIT 106 279 SF UNIT 106 585 SF UNIT 206 520 SF UNIT 206 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT 114 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 007 0 SF UNIT 007 +423 SF UNIT 207 08.24.2010 313 SF OPEN TO BELOW 2,863 SF AREA 443 SF UNIT 207 - - CD H PERMIT REVISIONS 571 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 008 474 SF UNIT 008 +1,505 SF *NON-UNIT 313 SF SKYLIGHT 3,904 SF AREA - 11 22.2010 572 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 009 513 SF UNIT 009 4,902 SF FOOTPRINT +1,161 SF *NON-UNIT CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING 373 SF x 0% = 0 SF UNIT 010 +340 SF UNIT 010 5,653 SF FOOTPRINT +2,187 SF x 0% = +0 SF *NON-UNIT 3,028 SF AREA 5,703 SF x 0% = 0 SF FOOTPRINT 4,902 5,653 5,703 SF GROSS FLOOR AREA -313 -313 0 SF FLOOR AREA RATIO 4,589 SF FLOOR AREA 5,340 SF FLOOR AREA 1 ~UNPgudettN"""lf, DECK AREA ALLOWED: 5 LEGEND 6,000 SF LOT AREA 134 SF [L.,_3 | rFÂ·Â·i---1 " ~ ~ . '10,1, NET LEASABLE FLOOR AREA x25 - FAR ...T.-4 2,250 SF ALLOWABLE DECK AREA 15,000 SF FLOOR AREA ALLOWED x15 % PERCENT ALLOWED -=2 -NORTH NET LIVABLE FLOOR AREA THE CRANDALL r,ECK I- ' 1 144*$;d25' STAIR BUILDING r-mmER 103 SF 4:i. E- UNIT tru-:1116' ' , DECK AREA DECK AREA: 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE OPEN TO BELOW ASPEN, CO 81611 L I:-23* 1,913 SF DECK#1 STAIR EXEMPTION f913 SF TOTAL DECK AREA THIRD LEVEL PLAN Sec. 26.104.100. Definitions. FLOOR AREA: NET LIVABLE: Net /easab/e commercial and otice space. Those areas within a commercial or office building which are 2,677 SF UNIT 301 2,495 SF UNIT 301 or which are designed to be. leased to a tenant and occupied for commercial or office purposes, - - exclusive of any area including, but not necessarily limited to, areas dedicated to bathrooms, stainvays, 237 SF STAIR EXEMPTION 2,495 SF AREA circulation corddors, mechanical areas and storage areas provided, however, that these areas are used +262 SF *NON-UNIT solely by tenants on the site. 3,176 SF FOOTPRINT Net #vable wea. The area available within a building for habitation and human activity measured from PROJECT NO. interior wall to interior wall. including interior partitions and indusive of, but not limited to, habitable 2920 basements and interior storage areas, dosets and laundr'y areas; but exduding uninhabitable DWG FILE: 3,176 basements, mechanical areas. exterior storage, stairwells, garages (attached or unattached), patios, 2920~AO-2.chvg decks and porches. -237 SHEET TITLE 2,939 SF FLOOR AREA F/oor area. The sum total of the gross horizontal areas of each story of the building measured from the exterior walls or from the centerline of the party walls. (See, Supplementary Regulations - Section PROPOSED 26.575.020, Calculations and measurements). FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS Nonunit space. The floor area within a lodge, hotel or mixed-use building that is commonly shared, such as lobbies, hallways, stairways, recreational areas and dining rooms. SCALEÂ· 1/16"=1'-0" i AO.2 h : Â»~.1-T~~ .... rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 smonarchst 3377 blake st, 106 TAMARAWOOD 970 544 9006 v 303 308 1373 v aspen,00 81611 denver, co 80205 BUILDING 970 5443473f 303 308 1375 f (ABOVE) LILI UU UU UU UU UU L U~~LfLI fil 1 UU UU Ul LnI---1= Consultants L 11 4-1 1 l 4 4%0,3, rr I IST@ 1 1 .Up 11 11 11 STAIR | UNIT , Lgll-1 1 11 ELEVATOR ~* 4-1 UNIT - ~22,1 Issue MECH 05 EL : , 1 W lit-i _ _t 05.19.2010 Il 11 ILI _-__ CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS 4 PERMIT 0 1=9 ~0 RUSTED METAL (R>(*Â® CD / PERMIT REVISIONS 08.24.2010 --- PANELS IC= EXIT 11.22.2010 CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING PAIN-SCREEN WALL I . i BENCH 07/ 271-3 1 tpfw#1-=2*J n F L .000Cr 0 p 1-1 320 S.F. (44 1_1, __ u i , L %1 12 UCEDAR SIDIN 1111111 . h i. 504 (/1 ~~~~~~ < UNIT \(IN -11 STAIR \Er/ 7 // t{4 4/ 11 2%-1-w-" REd LK -C- EXIT-' mfilifi - 8 '6 BEEIERM-~-1 r -11- 1- - - - 1 -ELL * 23141 -- CL / BATH UNIT = WOOD STOREFRONT- THE CRANDALL r-=WINDOW AND DOORS BUILDING El u in I i:Ek--0--23--- P 'tij 8 8 uNIT i L / L lEi EXISTING i -~~~9 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE WATER ASPEN, CO 81611 ROOM 11 1 UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT 0Â£0 GE E " UNIT 41.--\- 1 I r 1--1 1. In 11 + (03 n ri,R-, FF- rul r.71 - ru-1 -+- rul n.rl__11.-1-1 r-1 FLI-1 n.rl PROJECT NO 2920 DWG FILE 2920_A2-OA dwg SHEET TITLE < 1 j BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED APPROVED SPRING STREET <A2.0 j SCALE 1/4 -1-0 TRUE BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN (ABOVE) NORTH NORTH PLAN ma SCALE 1/4- = 1-0 A2.Oa I I.-I.-I.I.-'-I.--I-I..... -*un-m.#.,0,TO 2, (ABOVE) *311Â¥ (3AOeV) --r%20~'.: 6*.Ill/-1, CON~/ ./All . . . 0 rE rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch st 3377 blake st. 106 BUILDING aspen. co 81611 denver. co 80205 TAMARAWOOD 970 544 9006 v 303 308 1373 v 970 544 3473 f 303 3081375 1 rroir L }Â·Â·| tÂ®<~*32* Lfu Ln....1 Ulr----LJU 1-lti-U U J L-J Ln_1 1-n_1 1-n-1 UU-~1_1 Consultants 70[FCATANICAI CHAFF GE - 11 fuâ€¢a i . 8 24 fE: {:f-}uP I FIEL---fFEF' --- I 1,4 4, ELEVATOR UNIT 0/0 1~ 4 iM. ~ ~DN.,2-#f//--~ 1 *- - Issue UNIT - UNIT 05.19.2010 ~ ~ 1 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT 08.24.2010 CD / PERMIT REVISIONS RUSTED STEEL PANEL 11.22.2010 CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING r-STEEL CABLE RAILING / 1 T STEEL NTERTOP- ~ ~~~ ~. ~ '' 1 11 ~ \ *m C~7 ~ ON 4Â¥24?k 11 1 \ EKISTING SITE ~ ALL TO REMAIN ~ OPEN TO BELOW I | ' *4 1 11 - ------~ 4, 1I | ~9 0 / |7.1~5' RECYCLING (SKYLIGHTABOVE) ~| 1 L.,1 GARBAGEf - EXISTING i ~ 4 - 1 1 1 141 1-1 40 0111 1 11 42% 74- i " Hopl Il s-U=11-L 1 11 PUBLIC SPACE 1,160 S.F. i li url i loT:Pt ~ ~1% -- 9 47~ Ph ' It p ...... ~~~1-1 BUILDING INFORMATION DISPLAY : 1 1 1 ~ 29---4c<-f ~~IMMJ|ULECTRICDISTRIBUTIONCENTER L* E-1 il 1 ~â€ž- GAS METERS L'Ill 1 11 1 1 It 11 111 1.L -).1 0 a. . 1. 4 11 0 : 1 ' THE CRANDALL - Ra-r: BENTON DISPLAY Nt--r ' BUILDING 1/ 1 , ..14- M --4. 1 P L - w 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE Â£ ASPEN, CO 81611 1/ um- UNIT EE - 1 f.91.-124 1661 - [~ig 1. 11 11 -Â·-L.2 - i . /691.V ON 2920 DWG FILE 2920_AllA.dwg SHEET TITLE -<4* 11 / r / 61 - i--. PROJECT-NO T ~jf!6__7:3 j MAIN LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSEDA. 71 APPROVED < ,-A.8.1 ) SCALE 1/C = 1-0 PLAN T,NU~Ir-~ MAIN LEVEL / NORTH PLAN r /,/ li =:%~ 1 m M# -~ ~~A SCALE- 1/4"=1'-0" ~ 1 A SPRING STREET SIDEWALK x~ A2.la 52-1 1,4113>/K,/ nE -1*#- .frâ„¢T co,rT'-D - â„¢ecoxx,~r. 9 /43\ 4 0' 2 =C--,;*,--m,&..1 77 3A31I1NVO SNUSIX) F6Path P~~20~~*0CrÂ¥~-Dr-OV.~~~10~2~ 8,~MI~nl~ -0 .1/ rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch st 3377 blake st, 106 BUILDING aspen, co 81611 denver. co 80205 TAMARAWOOD 970 544.9006 v 303 308 1373 v 970 544 3473 f 303 308 1375 f In--T--71 1--1-1-71 Ul-12 LI--U Ul] LrU LrU--LIU Llr--LILI 1ILI Ull Lr-1 Ul-1 Consultants r-1 9_1 11 11 r -S=- "AA - 88: a = ~ ij 1|yt~~.9 1Â¢ ~ ,up ~ 9W %810 uNIT 1 -- 2 07 p o 4 71 =IE 1 M'142~1~51 - * ELEVATOR - - 4-1--1 |,10 B@, it/let ' / - - Issue '11 -91 05.19.2010 44-; .....""4....'igfilli./.m:--'....EZZE....~~ . CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS /PERMIT r--- 08.24.2010 RUSTED STEEL (Â¥>Â®C CD / PERMIT REVISIONS 11.22.2010 PANEL UNIT 11 13 r ' CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING UNIT 0 204 -l z 1, .1 2 1.I-- 1 D - =UJ 1 Z : I- ' 21 - 11 11 IL 9 - Ati li Fuff-In 1 P PUBLIC SPACE ~ 915 S.F. FLAT INTERIOR 2 SKY UGHT 11 1 11 ri-Uuilk-If/ ~ 2 P 81@417 1| 1.14 | -1 11 1 . h|ihib /|1,0 IZZi 11 1 4 i : 14 - ~~ ~~ABLE RUIN~- 222222 ~~~_~~ LE - 11 r=ZER UNIT DE - THECRANDALL CZEÂ» ~ BUILDING 93-3 -7 32 -1 EL ICÂ¢f~ k/ U 242 , BATH - I' 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE DE 7 6 / = ASPEN, CO 81611 / 7 9 UNIT UNIT It ) 2%3 tf rl-- i lilli , 1 DED 060 L = REE 0- - 171 - -7 f:-7-rl il li - .-Lm- - Il ., _t Il In- 1._r - LI --' EXISTING WINDOW I---1 PROJECT NO EXISTING WINDOW =_.2 ...__ Â· __--= EXISTING WINDOW TO BE REPLACED TO BE REPLACED TO BE REPLACED 2920 AND REPLICATED AND REPLICATED AND REPLICATED DWG FILE 2920_A2-2Adwg SHEET TITLE < 1 ~ SECOND LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED APPROVED SPRING STREET < A2.2 7 SCALE W = 1-0 PLAN TRUE SECOND LEVEL (BELOW) NORTH NORTH PLAN mm SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" A2.2a *TÂ¥.1-.=fTâ„¢ANCH!/CmKWJ IV Ild3H ONV A377V 0910738) MOCNIM M3N .... rE rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch st 3377 blake st, 106 TAMARAWOOD 970 544 9006 v 303 3081373 v BUILDING asper, co 81611 denver, co 80205 970 544 3473 f 303 308 1375 1 (ABOVE) Lil] u u UU UU UU UU L Lr--LILI fil UU UU UU Ul Ul_J--L Consultants L ~ ELEVATOR : 10 AA EQUIPMENT ROOM ~ 1/.. "gi:64. ~ T uP I /7 ' 8Â¥@11 SANDY'S OFFICE 1,46 UNIT ~ 1 | STAR I SUPPLY 571 S.F. - UNIT 1 MECH Issue 1 CÂ® d-~:2_-1 - 9~ BENTONARTDISPLAY ~ 1 1 4.JEETEL 63 1.-----8 05.19.2010 F CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT t.4 b . 08.24.2010 CD / PERMIT REVISIONS - 52% I || - -1. i 11.22.2010 CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING COMMUNITY SPACE ~ INFORMATION WALL \-2 j i f E=z===---z= Â» 165 S.F. ~ *U 1 T-- liU In Â«.CK U fl *E--r- F-- 1-4.--'T?---~-'~-4 2 L IKieue----r----Â»- - 4 2 E SUPPLY 1 - %12 UNIT SANDY'S OFFICE >IR STAIR EXIT-Il~JS|RA/-1~6 1,528 S.F. <ls ' 1 .Ap'rÂ¥42-i'*-Ir 1 1 / 11,11 t====07-7==fl 343, n LL 22~11- t--9-~ l----Fr- G v# ~ â€žm Awn 7- WOOD FLOORS 1 1- 9833 013 Cut = UNIT UNIT GE THE CRANDALL 1-L---~ i BUILDING 23 - Â«-/ UNIT B / U DE 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE -2221 k==i WATER ~ ~ |~ Lf ASPEN, CO 81611 ROOM / UNIT UNIT UNIT GE DED BE DR. MITCHELL 1,077 S.F. ..=/Â·r f BARBER " â‚¬ )]1 11 -te=-46Â» 226 S.F. 11 U ' 1 UNIT I------ 1-1 \ rd)11 r.r. FIJI r~ 0 rul Â©ru~ nrL-_rlrl r-7 rul rul riM : PROJECT NO 2920 DWG FILE 2920_A2-OP dwR SHEET TITLE ( 1 ~ BASEMENT LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED PROPOSED SPRING STREET < A2.0 j SCALE 1/V = 1-0 PLAN TRUE BASEMENT LEVEL (ABOVE) NORTH NORTH PLAN mm SCALE: 1/4" = 1-0 A2.Op nE *,c~,~0*-se. .rl,w. crÂ»~ru,D - n.a ~*lci~,w~ i c:Es.g, ./.-r,rns'Ic,n~TI *.il,m....,-c* t./.cll-'Ir. n./.fo HYMAN AVENUE .... rif rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch s[ 3377 bike st 106 TAMARAWOOD 970 544 9006 v 303 308 1373 v 8UILDING aspen co 81611 denver co 80205 970 544 3473 1 303 308 1375 f UU--L.1 1- 1 *ki>Â®*Â® 1.-1-U LrU UlJIIIIILIZJ L-J UFCNANICAI CHASF Consultants Ul.1 Ul_1 Ull UNIT =il i U. C M ' 1 1~ i ,:521 U.1116' 5 L- tr -\ r----11 /7 -' i 81,1.1 1- I *UP 1 , 11/4 111111111J 1- 14* 44 '1 - - lb.1 * ELEVATOR 0 ~ UNIT f\3 1 79 1, / 1 1 05.19.2010 SANDY'S OFFICE 11'11'Ill 11 UNIT SUPPLY lili O/0 Issue 306 S.F. 1 - t ~~-Ir~: --- E-~ L CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT 1 I BENTON ART DISPLAY ~~Â·t -' 08.24.2010 2'2 1 CD / PERMIT REVISIONS UNIT 11.22.2010 === CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING ~STEEL CABLE RAILING 9 b.Â©~r-----.~â€žT STEEL F- EXISTIN ~*NTER TOP n ' 14 1% EKISTING SITE \\ : e - /-J r\\\ON.N#.5- 1 1 *ALL TO REMAIN 7, - 1 11 1. 1.............*41 11 IP--1=1:.- 1 9---1 1 GARBAGEf 1 1 .. 7 RECYCLING . 1 1 1-1 1 /4 Dll 11 1 1 + 1 11 PUBLIC SPACE OPEN TO BELOW LL~Â·Â·~ I.-. 3>11 1,160 S.F. (SKYLIGHT ABOVE) - r.-- :V~/11 11 4 "1 1 BUILDING INFORMATION DISPLAY !Â· %71 r EL=AJ ..lili........4 r 11 10 r-1 111 L.IL] 1 . ~ ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION CENTER L GAS METERS - : A 0 - 14 1 :. PUBLIC SEATING i 72 S.F BENTON ARTDISPLAY -1 6~ ~ THE CRANDALL O1 1 BUILDING '711 1Â¤11 919 JIL-i ip--- E 2 L Et f 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 UNE UNIT li 1~ 1 C-1 EE .1< 1 10 19 - 1: f~An*-En-. i ~i J~~~ i ~_~_ oildi [r== --1 1 j :-10 n 0 0 1' -t -94 -3 PROJECT NO DWG FILE DN 2920 2920_A2-1 P dw# 294 8 f. SHEET TITLE 6.41 \ 1. /P--- ~9 j MAIN LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED 1,9~2~ - PROPOSED SCALE 1/4 = 1-0 PLAN I&24. 1. MAIN LEVEL 979 EJEBR. PLAN NORTH Ult--ty Â«199-fft-F fÂ«-11 44-kjf SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SPRING STREET SIDEWALK A2.lp A SFU~ linwr ap,!A,e * 1â€ž80,]CLÂ»ENT 9 =,==1-=i=.%,#2::::= 6012~*2Â«WI"<,4441.-3 F n~ p.Â«,Â·~.~c-i,0,.-*i1en#- *cilÂ»*Grâ‚¬r~Â»e.n,~TÂ» HYMAN AVENUE SIDEWALK A311Â¥ AU PÂ¢,11 -* I--#I-~~F-.mâ„¢I .... rF rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch st 3377 blake /, 106 TAMARAWOOD 970 544 9006 v 303 308 1373 v BUILDING aspen,co 81611 denver. co 80205 9705443473f 303 308 1375 f L711 LrLI 1-1 1 1-1 Ln-1 Ul.1 UlJ--LrLI Llr~~Lrl-1 LILI U-LI LrJ LJ-U Ul_~==i__1 Consultants R 317 0 - gms 1 1 E--71--7 i-1- 1 1 A---'---4 *14 1 U~ 110'kial,69~16~ | I uNIT - 9:< -1 PPI 19,41,1.2 1 TUP i: UNIT 1/1 lilli 1 11 1 - 8/ L 'il 11 lilli iiI ! REF ~~ = 5: 2 4~ - 82 ELEVATOR U Issue 3 1 --71 05.19.2010 /5,11 . rl / o CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT BENTONARTWALL 'Â·Â· ,Â·Â·' L) Lâ€žJ 0 1 08.24.2010 PUBLIC SPACE ~ -3 _Ii CD / PERMIT REVISIONS UNIT ~ = 500 S.F. CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING 11.22.2010 - - - m % -r - -â„¢T 11 11 1 -2 11 11 1 - 1 1 -L 4 le 19 J; 1.11 11 11% 0, 0 1 1 ) DIll 11 118'dtill' i r @2%2* UNIT FLAT INTERIOR I CÂ»] SKY LIGHT 9.-- IEEE==2=11 E:d&* " a 1 -1 : I I --- d ---1 1 r U , '1 il - lu 0 t. 1 j ~-- STEEL CABLE 1-0 43 a - BUILDIN UNIT - THE CRANDALL E ~3*E 22 P -- -- 1 - r -1- E-2 ~ -- 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE +- 11 / 1 1 ~ BATH ~ U. 9 - 1 1 . ASPEN, CO 81611 UNIT UNIT 1 9- 8E8 GE 0@1 - R liD 2 85 2 7 1-- 11 3 15-. Il 12_I -1 Â· t 1 Â· f r 11 1-J Il 1 1 2.J EXISTING WINDOW 61-2 LJ L.1 2Â·_j EXISTING WINDOW L_J EXISTING WINDOW CL PROJECT NO TO BE REPLACED TO BE REPLACED TO BE REPLACED 2920 AND REPLICATED AND REPLICATED AND REPLICATED DWG FILE 2920_AMP dwg SHEET TITLE ( 1 ~ SECOND LEVEL PLAN - PROPOSED PROPOSED SPRING STREET ( A2.2 7 SCALE 1/40 =1Â·-0 PLAN TRUE SECOND LEVEL (BELOW) .-I NORTH NORTH PLAN 1 am SCALE: 1/4- = 1'-0 A2.2p ~Se, NOP#.%.-**i-*71Â«Z*Irr,EPRI) .!In'rrâ„¢~EÂ»ASS<Â»1 . 11[-,~.â€¢~,OUG,f-â€žRe/-Ki fi $3 1 ~Ildll ONV Ildaa ONV MJMÂ£ MOONIAA MEN .... rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 *monarch st. 3377 blake st. 106 denver, co 80205 303.308 1373 v 970 544.3473 f 303.308 1375 f 4 ....fl Â·. > 7 Consultants N- 4 <-1 -4 0 1 . -- 4 r..4 --â€ž'~c - -- --- I --* -- 4 --- 1.Fl - 1--- - -- ...; .~- 4 V Issue: - - -- - - ' 05.19.2010 , f - - i Â· CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS /PERMIT E-- - 08.24.2010 9 -11[ - - -I --= ' CD / PERMIT REV,SIONS -9---- #. - ..U - : i,"... 11.22.2010 m CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING . .ilid' 1. . 1,9. ' ,- I - a -,4 4.1 1 - Â¥ 111 - *r I li i â€¢ 1 L li . 4 4 . . 1 . 4-97 j , 1.41 23 -- I - ..... . 't. .72 t. 41 J $. ' I .2 ~ % -3-1 THE CRANDALL A-/~ -Â· Â·AP ----- ' 41 Â°~ - BUILDING '.- 1.â‚¬., , 21:ly k ZEEÂ» 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE -0 44::9 1 ~ - -- ASPEN, CO 81611 I " fi---- #:..1# '-: rk .r 4*. . 9 . 1 -L - - ...... %- , k i. PROJECT NO 2920 DWGFILE 2920_AO-4.dwg M SHEET TITLE PROPOSED I V ATRIUM RENDERING SCALE: N.T.S. LOWER LEVEL PEDESTRIAN PERSPECTIVE AO.4.5 nâ‚¬ -0-A=*M-==-- r-â„¢*xm' Mâ‚¬â€¢lry)~câ€žIL-.Â·-~1â€ž~Tt--*l,e,N 32*,1 ~~.ATC~n-.~,In~,T~~~,7--r.9â‚¬0,11,~ ,U 1 a .... rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch st 3377 blake st, 106 aspen. co 81611 denver, co 80205 I 970 544.9006 v 303 3081373 v 970544.34/f 303 308.13751 .mil. - 'tri 1 4 Consultants 1.'lizI -I"'"i',..---*:-mi#a=- A~ im ~ 4 ArÂ· M.. --- 1 -- - r .7..46.14 9- i =6 ... . ... - 2 Â«r . - ---J --I ... .= % itt V 4 4 ---i ... --- e ..r Â· I Â· Issue: ' ~ ~ CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT . . ' - 05.19.2010 4./. 1 . -1 08.24.2010 CITY COUNCIL- SECOND READING - - 9.4m~ , . CO / PERMIT REVISIONS 11.22.2010 10,111/F IC- 3. Â¢ :ff Â·i -t - " 7 r t/' ,--~1 ~ F' 52--- 1 "lit C - . 1~ - i I=y 1 +Illillillit- I - /./-= P.-- - 4. 2- . 841 J D t I - I ---- - 1 19* THE CRANDALL - 4 -e.Al=~ BUILDING -3Â»3Â¢4~.r-- It .Zi. 630 E HYMAN AVENUE 0 7 $ e,1 4. 1 - > 27 y ASPEN, CO 81611 f -- - Â·p *-2. . -9.47//m'"*7 YA-Fili 1.: U 0... 4.4.1. I o . d.il/N"Z f 1 ----2/ 1-/4 Â· i d -- PROJECT NO K. .----a- -\ \4 2920 DWG FILE: ..9 ----4.1 2920_AO-4.dwg PROPOSED I - Al: I - \ V SHEET TITLE \ ATRIUM L- - -, 4~ ' RENDERING SCALE: N.T.S. MAIN LEVEL PEDESTRIAN PERSPECTIVE *o,-â„¢Â»1â€¢,oD-ell.fre,IC~-rÂ£-1~8~,;-5.8 AO.4.6 ~1â‚¬ 0~~Â»er,Ve*~~,i~A~,â€¢-[U31.TUN-41Â©-. F1 :====7Kone-- U .2. .... rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch st 3377 blake .106 ==1 denver, co 80205 303 308 1373 v 970 544.3473 f 3033081375f . 1 . . Consultants e... B - <4~ -1 ISSueÂ· 05.19.2010 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT 0824.2010 . CD / PERMIT REVISIONS iâ€¢ 11 22 2010 CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING Lâ€ž00 7 4 .-A-- 0 1 .- A* 1 1 j/li# 1 - i ~ ~ it /\ 4 71 -1 ...t4 3:45 J 1 -4 1 **4 1 17 t m 1. - Tle. 1.El '. I LI - 11 1'11 /-17- -- 1~ ~.FF -- -- - - 4 - - /3 - - 9 - 267, 4 2 -t- 49 . --- - . . ./ /nv//i> ~* /.114 -. I I i. I ;h. - THE CRANDALL . L- BUILDING 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE . ./Illyp 'A W. 4. 't #"/b I C ASPEN, CO 81611 81 ' I 4) r 0. 1 PROJECT NO. Â· 2920 DWG FILE: 2920_AO-4.dwg SHEET TITLE PROPOSED 04 - ATRIUM Â£ RENDERING * SCALE: N.T.S. SECOND LEVEL PEDESTRIAN PERSPECTIVE AO.4.7 Dâ‚¬ -01~â€ž.~2>â€¢-.XKÂ»Inâ€ž~Câ€žT,CrlAEA,OL-4, ,ClK*-r~ ....... . 0. EXISTING VIEW 9~ . .... 0 1 I ..... 11 1- I 3.4' Â» 1 6Â» . 0'y/) Ff):.:)=~ ' 1 f ; 1?Jif' 4 ~24 6,61'Jt ".:diA& 93&5 43~- Ap,.,Â¥.1,11 1,4*(1 1 .'. Aj,4 +4 1 . & . 't ''4./',cÂ» ; 1 .YI' 014' 2,1,, t: , 14. tl,t. 1 - . ~ 1*14 l. ':9 41 'lliliii- - ' . 1 . 41 f '46 f r Â¥ 4.2. 1 #V $ .... 3,1 9-4 1 . â€ž 2.2,% 4\1. 8,25*T#24 j : AL ZiNWMI'liU.......liziem""I/6 1-21541"NE'Â£41 0 zÂ¥_~ 6 1,42';1.1.- . . 0 .. . .. .:. 2-h'.1-- ~TE-- . -3-2=Il . 0 - a.,2 _. N- -/5..Â» ~Ii. 2 .'~_ _-C - 7 I, - ' ~ 2:7.11 W*I Â· Â· . I k- _-i-tL - 2Â·64.-3'n_-- , '0:7fÂ· 2-/fk'.4.. - . ... - r.:92. -I/..+f.~i ./ -- e -- 1 '+253-2 -J~ i . . - V~'~~A~1 2 1 /Eh. -9 1 - -â‚¬EE#TTL -= .- .4. ..'. C : . . - *- 4 .2.-L, 2,2-ekliÂ» - W.=-6-1: u-Z--1 - luz.-- y '. te:12=Uk . Illk....j-i6 - . 1 --- - . 2 Â·, h /- .2,"71'I " 4â€¢U'. - . t J 0 .0 .... rowland + broughton architecture and urban design 117 s monarch sl 3377 blake st. 106 aspen co 81611 denver, co 80205 970 544 9006 v 303 308 1373 v 970 544 3473 1 303 308 1375 f A 0. ......... A Consultants tssue 05.19.2010 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT 08.24.2010 CD / PERMIT REVISIONS 11.22.2010 CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING ~hly.. i...m~ -eN.~ n -11.jil.i~ ~,rr. '4} V 4 4. , THE CRANDALL BUILDING 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 PROJECT NO 2920 DWG FILE: 2920_AO-4 dwg SHEET TITLE BENTON WINDOW VIEW - 45 FOOT PRIOR APPROVAL SCALE. N.T.S. BENTON02 NnU-**522~====7 r.7' ~p.'2:-0 0-*r-*~2-.u. .... rE rowland + broughton architecture and urban design Its monarch st 3377 blake st. 106 aspen.co 81611 denver, co 80205 970 544 9006 v 303 308 1373 v 970 5443473 f 3033081375f =,1.alle..1.0â€¢/Avâ€¢a:â€¢=0â€¢erocUM PROPOSAL,i,; 9 1= 05.19.2010 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS / PERMIT 08.24.2010 CD 1 PERMIT REVISIONS 11.22.2010 CITY COUNCIL - SECOND READING al. 1.ht, THE CRANDALL BUILDING 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN,CO 81611 PROJECT NO 2920 DWG FILE 2920_AN dwg SHEET TELE BENTON WINDOW VIEW - 47 FOOT ASPEN ART MUSEUM SCALE: NTS BENTON03 Z=:%;,&*------2*=0. ./.7F~P~~..S)'ll~~~.t~~Câ€¢-0UÂ£~4-1.Alâ€ž~Crâ„¢~-0- 0'.-G./-/0'fl */Ell .... Â£".C.n -I=:I,92.-*7*.61 =--PH~- . - ... f. 3 f . 1 *4 1 1. 1 -# 4 - .011 . 444*.: ;*1* . , 1 .4. 1 -' P , 1 T . 71 ... 4- t. f . ... 0 -4 .Â·, I ..'*IN, ./ A 4' r I ' ' I. 1. . L ' 4 Â· 3 Ill *.W/t~ IIII CRANDALL BUILDNG EAST ELEVATION ~ 1 4141: . 1 i - 6 f f.=f- :1, T 4, 07-#' I *.4Â¢.4 , 4.4 0 t'if*1 trÂ· 2 2 1, 179. 4 '.P .â€ž.7 4 4.24 -r ...2 . . -I-â„¢t - Ill --- , 1/ -9 -4 Â£ . 4 . F , 0 . , 444, rt: 0. 4 , 3 t. f Ot** , 0 .0 '1 BINBIIIA CRANDALL BUILDING 41*F/7./4/,>:-:-*tj....===&-- COM+.1'1 1 Al. EXTERIOIt LANI)%â‚¬ Al'F 1 -t.I -4-//// Il I v. 4 N/il /1 1 441,4 /14 41 4-â€¢eÂ· t 1 ELEVATIONX NOVEMBER 21)10 Pi ll r.1 rm -r 24% $ ..1,94.r...0 - 0 0 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: Awe_ 4:, 30 6 Â· Â·lajvwwvi , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 14(raboul Nov 2-2, e 5 :00 fm , 2002_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, ,41/\'1~A 56Â·04...e/ll (name, please print) being or reprbsenting an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of th Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ~ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in 1 height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph ofthe posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) 49....6.JtÂ© . a CD < 33- e a; 4 23 2 N 0 M LI ... 00 3 cd RU 4 4 18# 4 &3 . NE 8 6 %2.14,49 1 E e - - 2 9 O ..6 0-- t 0 >, Â¢ 38 U k 4, Uuu 4. C/~ * 2 O 7 0>00 -3 E M 9 a C &7 3 Cl, i & & 1 O-1 M a =M M U U U . 4 6.-23= 3 RE t â‚¬ E c,5 U E 92 u 5 3 1 7 O -2 -- O ~ . l,A < -3 . 2 E i (0 U ,-f - 2,2 0 5 0 H -0 5 0 4 O.= 91 1~ Li 00 4 CO 40% 00 1 E U w CA - 04-0 0 0 7 i~ A W fli U M- U 00 0 Â·iÂ·lit h f 28 C C t: 0 2 U O R 3 8 0 40 k 4& i i .R -Â° il i -lo~; 8 ~ PUBLIC NOTICE , 2 4 002 6 TO ORDINANCE #48 NEGOTIATION FOR ' r) ~ = 0 RE: 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE-AMENDMENT ~ ~ HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION - 01 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing . 4230 5 - will be held on Monday, November 22,2010, at a tz 4~ meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen r- '9 0 -0 0 = 3 0 City Council, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 4 ch 291:El. E-ZE--%4*eg=~ S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application *C submitted by Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, on behaM of 630 E. Hyman LLC, c/o Greg Hills, 532 2 2 -M = c - 2 4 1 i 5 tyt .% .9 5 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611. The public 4 44 hearing pertains to the property located at 630 E 8m- 60 - M -0 8- 0 AL; c li Hyman Avenue, Lots R, and S, Block 99. City and 0 *00 C O ..2 - Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The property owner 'E Â·M 12 2Â· <3 8 8 .5 %. A g.=.0 m -0 + 3 received approval in 2009 for voluntary landmark k 7: 4 -M U U u 2 5.E Â·- .2 got 4,) 6. designation and negotiation of preservation 42%3 2 0- 1 E 2 1 2 3 * 2 -2 60 6 -8 -E R. o 4 mEEREWEe 4044â‚¬Â£% 4 - =-00 0 d :a:; Cd O 2 6. 3 -3 F .E . 81. requests an amendment to the approval in the form 0%&24 <0 of a variance to increase the allowable commercial u square footage on the site by 472 square feet. The U 4 *4M 71 additional commercial space will be created by & -9 reducing some interior courtyard area. The overall U -C â€¢ further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City - bulk of the building will not be increased. For .... 4 % of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2758, amy.guthrie@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Michael C. Ireland. Mavor Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times Week/yon November 7, 2010. [5779778] 4&01/60Â£00~3 uols NOIiÂ¥)Ilind GIHI EIO ner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those ix records of 2412212~, a general revision change shall be de criptionhe ~~nu~.r~hmeenn~t~~d listi g ~ ~her text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in JO uo!1120!I uo Bulluoq orIqnd IE!1!u! 0111 Jo d mineral estate owners by at 1 (3 IJON SGIIDNE[DV 1VINVWNHE[AOE) a :37[E[VE)IlddV are subject to this notice requir nt. Notary Public (NDIS) IMION UELLSOd 3HI Signatur 1)I.LON SlEIN+10 3ULS) 1VHHNIIM-~0~NO~Il,VOI~iI~wffI~-fl and enactment GNV UNVH AMI SSHN.LILM ffidavit of Notice" was acl<.no .. AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: u30 6.4-IYM*i Ag . , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: fkf.â‚¬Na32- B , 201.0 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1, Mat-\ 14Â« (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) ofthe Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ~ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. 4~ Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the /9'fay of ~Ole#16â‚¬72- , 201 0 , to and includmgthedate andtimeof thepublicheartng. Aphotographoftheposted notice (sign) is attached hereto. < Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date ofthe public hearing. A copy ofthe owners and governmental agencies sonoticedis attached hereto. 11/19<to A ~A Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, th, proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen-451 davs prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Simiaki The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was actinowledged before me this 6; day - of 1/ef,Â£,el ger ,101.Q.,by x/Ctfcd(/41 F-, t.-li,Â·OrticÂ£.t . WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL / NATALLIA F. 01 My commip&*fe)(pir~4 10 ~ CD 2 ~ 20// \ KHARKHAL,i .AU:4 ' ' (&.... Notary' Pu*444/ / 1Â¥&;'66.~0~09 ATTACHMENTS: 7 COPY OF THE PUBLICATION 4 Commission Expire; 10/02/?011 PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL .. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE- AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE #48 NEGOTIATION FOR HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, December 6, 2010, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, on behalf of 630 E. Hyman LLC, c/o Greg Hills, 532 E. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611. The public hearing pertains to the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R, and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The property owner received approval in 2009 for voluntary landmark designation and negotiation of preservation incentives under Ordinance #48, Series of 2007, an ordinance which identified a group of potential historic resources in Aspen. The property owner requests an amendment to the approval in the form of a variance to increase the allowable commercial square footage on the site by 342 square feet. The additional commercial space will be created by reducing some interior courtyard area. The overall bulk of the building will not be increased. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429- 2758, amy.guthrie@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Michael C. Ireland. Mavor Aspen City Council ,~~ Ill, q -. 10 .r .-4 1 - . PUB C NOTICE ORTE 1*Â® , i, hr ~/ 9 fondy> TIME ' off te /upply MACE Â· -- Â· 4 - 61'd.,4, ./... 150:V -4-Â·423957 â€¢' 4Â· 0'31!â€¢t -157L *QU) *424 ' 111 liD .. 610 EAST HYMAN LLC 633 SPRING 11 LLC 308 HUNTER LLC C/O CHARLES CUNNIFFE C/O KATIE REED MGMT 490 WILLIAMS ST 610 E HYMAN AVE 418 E COOPER AVE #207 DENVER, CO 80218 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 635 E HOPKINS LLC 719 EAST HOPKINS AVE LLC ALEXANDER THOMAS L 532 E HOPKINS PO BOX 11600 715 E HYMAN AVE #27 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ALPINE BANK ASPEN ASPEN 719 HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN LEGACY HOLDINGS LLC ATTN ERIN WIENCEK PO BOX 11600 132 MIDLAND AVE #4 PO BOX 10000 ASPEN, CO 81612 BASALT, CO 81621 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 ASPEN PLAZA LLC BARTLETT KATY I BASS CAHN 601 LLC PO BOX 1709 715 E HYMAN AVE #18 PO BOX 4060 C/O STEVE MARCUS ASPEN, CO 81611-2066 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 BATTLE GERALD LIVING TRUST BELL MTN QUAL RES CONDO ASSOC BAUM ROBERT E ASPEN RES TRST HIXON BURT LIVING TRUST LLC PO BOX 1518 PO BOX 2847 320 S SPRING ST STOCKBRIDGE, MA 01262 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659 ASPEN, CO 81611 BISCHOFF JOHN C BORGIOTTI CLAUDIO BULKELEY RICHARD C & JULIE J 502 S VIA GOLONDRINA 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN 801 JOY ST TUCSON, AZ 85716-5843 VIENNA, VA 22192 RED OAK, IA 51566 CARVER RUTH A & MARTIN G CHATEAU ASPEN CONDO ASSOC CHATEAU ASPEN UNIT 21-A LLC 10 BYRON LN 630 E COOPER AVE BLDG 421-G AABC MUSCATINE, IA 52761 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 CM LLC CLARY EDGAR D IV COLBY WARD C/O ROGER MAROLT 715 E HYMAN AVE #9 715 E HYMAN #20 230 S MILL ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 COLOSI THOMAS W COOPER SPRINGS LLC DAILY CONNIE M 715 E HYMAN AVE APT 6 393 N COLUMBIA AVE 715 E HYMAN AVE #14 ASPEN, CO 81611-2099 COLUMBUS, OH 43209 ASPEN, CO 81611 DEVINE RALPH R DODEA NICHOLAS T DRESNER MILTON H REV LVG TRST 715 E HYMAN #13 715 E HYMAN AVE #19 28777 NORTHWESTERN HWY ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48034 .. EDGE OF AJAX INC EDGETTE JAMES J & PATRICIA ERGAS VENESSA BLAIR & CLAUDE C/O ANDRE ULRYCH 19900 BEACH RD STE 801 PO BOX 4316 201BESILVERST JUPITER ISLAND, FL 33469 ASPEN, CO 81612 MARBLE, CO 81623 ETTLIN ROSS L FAATH CARLOS M & MOLLY G FERRY JAMES H 111 715 E HYMAN AVE # 7 PO BOX 11435 BOX 167 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 GLENCOE, IL 60022-0167 FURNGULF LTD FIGHTLIN JONATHAN D GAUBA ALENA A COLO JOINT VENTURE 715 E HYMAN #46 715 E HYMAN AVE #21 616 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 GELD LLC GLAUSER STEVEN JERRY & BARBARA GOFEN ETHEL CARO TRUSTEE C/O LOWELL MEYER 460 ST PAUL ST 455 CITY FRONT PLAZA PO BOX 1247 DENVER, CO 80206 CHICAGO, IL 60611 ASPEN, CO 81612-1247 GOODING SEAN A 80% & RICHARD L GROSFELD ASPEN PROPERTIES GORGE MICHAEL D & WENDY S 20% PARTNERS LLC 25300 FRANKLIN PARK DR C/O PARAGON RANCH INC 10880 WILSHIRE BLVD #2222 FRANKLIN, MI 48025 620 E HYMAN AVE #1 E LOS ANGELES, CA 90024 ASPEN, CO 81611 HEXNER MICHAEL TTRUSTEE HAYLES THOMAS HEWINS SAMUEL JUSTIS KAREN L TRUSTEE 715 E HYMAN AVE #5 715 E HYMAN AVE #23 2555 UNION ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94123-3832 HORSEFINS LLC HUNT SARAH J HUNTER PLAZA ASSOCIATES LLP C/O PITKIN COUNTY TITLE 715 E HYMAN AVE #22 205 S MILL ST #301A 601 E HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 HURST FERN K HYMAN STREET BROWNSTONES 11 LLC IDS PARTNERS LLC 1060 5TH AVE PO BOX 381 PO BOX 642 NEW YORK CITY, NY 10128 WRIGHTVILLE BEACH, NC 28480 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 ISRAEL FAMILY PARTNERSHIP LTD JOYCE EDWARD KANTAS NICOLETTE 263 OCEAN BLVD 1310 RITCHIE CT 715 E HYMAN AVE #15 GOLDEN BEACH, FL 33160 CHICAGO, IL 60610 ASPEN, CO 81611 KASHINSKI MICHAEL R LANDIS JOSHUA B LANDRY ELIZABETH J 0343 GROVE CT 715 E HYMAN AVE #4 PO BOX 3036 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 .. MALLARD ENTERPRISES LP MARTELL BARBARA MAYLE KENNETH D 317 SIDNEY BAKER S #400 702 E HYMAN AVE 715 E HYMAN AVE #3 KERRVILLE, TX 78028 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 MCMURRAY WILLIAM & HELEN MONTANARO JOHN & SUSAN FAMILY MIAO SANDRA 29 MIDDLE HEAD RD TRUST 9610 SYMPHONY MEADOW LN MOSMAN NSW 2088 PO BOX 457 VIENNA, VA 22182 AUSTRAILIA, MALIBU, CA 90265 NATTERER HELEN MYSKO BOHDAN D NETHERY BRUCE 67 BAYPOINT CRES 615 E HOPKINS 715 E HYMAN AVE #25 OTTAWA ONTARIO ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 CANADA K2G6R1, NIELSON COL STEVE & CAROL D OLITSKY TAMAR & STEPHEN OLITSKY TAMAR G & STEPHEN L 501 S FAIRFAX PO BOX 514 2127 HAINES WY ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 GWYNEDD VALLEY, PA 19437 LANSDALE, PA 19446 PITKIN CENTER CONDO OWNERS P & L PROPERTIES LLC PACIFIC WEST INVESTMENTS LLC ASSOC 101 SOUTH 3RD ST #360 7115 ORCHARD LAKE RD STE 220 517 W NORTH ST GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 WEST BLOOMFIELD, MI 48322 ASPEN, CO 81611 PRICE GAIL QUARRY INTERESTS LTD REVOLUTION PARTNERS LLC C/O ASPEN POTTERS INC 9932 LAKEWAY CT PO BOX 1247 231 E MAI N ST DALLAS, TX 75230 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ROTHBLUM PHILIP & MARCIA RUDIN WEST LLC RUST TRUST 40 EAST 80 ST #26A 345 PARK AVE 33RD FLR 9401 WILSHIRE BLVD #760 NEW YORK, NY 10075 NEW YORK, NY 10154 BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212 RYERSON GEORGE W JR SAHN KAREN R SAHR KAREN M 715 E HYMAN AVE #17 715 E HYMAN AVE #11 715 E HYMAN AVE #8 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-2063 ASPEN, CO 81611 SALET PHILIP S REV TRUST SCHNITZER KENNETH L & LISA L SCI ASPEN LLC PO BOX 4897 2100 MCKINNEY AVE #1760 3200 OHIO WY ASPEN, CO 81612 DALLAS, TX 75201 DENVER, CO 80209 SHARP TERRI L SHUMATE MARK SILVER DIP EQUITY VENTURE LLC 715 E HYMAN AVE #12 1695 RIVERSIDE RD 2100 MCKINNEY STE 1760 ASPEN, CO 81611 ROSWELL, GA 30076 DALLAS, TX 75201 .. SMITH ALICIA M SNOWMASS CORPORATION STERLING TRUST COMP 715 E HYMAN AVE #16 PO BOX 620 110 STONE CANYON RD ASPEN, CO 81611 BASALT, CO 81621 LOS ANGELES, CA 90077 STEWART TITLE CO STRIBLING DOROTHY TAYLOR FAMILY INVESTMENTS CO C/O JENNIFER SCHUMACHER WACHOVIA BANK NA FL0135 602 E HYMAN #201 PO BOX 936 PO BOX 40062 ASPEN, CO 81611 TAYLORSVILLE, NC 28681 JACKSONVILLE, FL 32203-0062 VICTORIAN SQUARE LLC TREUER CHRISTIN L TROUSDALE JEAN VICK C/O KATIE REED MGT 981 E BRIARWOOD CIR N 611 E HOPKINS AVE 418 E COOPER AVE LITTLETON, CO 80122 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 WILLIAMS CRAIG & LEE FAMILY WEIDEL LAWRENCE W WISE JOSEPH PTNRSHP PO BOX 1007 1320 HODGES ST 8990 HEMPSTEAD HWY #200 MONROE, GA 30655 RALEIGH, NC 27604-1414 HOUSTON, TX 77008 WOODS FRANK J 111 WRIGHT CHRISTOPHER N YERAMIAN CHARLES 205 S MILL ST #301A 13 BRAMLEY RD PO BOX 12347 ASPEN, CO 81611 LONDONW106SP, UK ASPEN, CO 81612 meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the de'elop ment proposal is consistent with the goal's and elements of the Aspen Area Community PlanÂ· and. WHEREAS , the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health. safety, and welfam. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Ordinance #48, Series of 2007 Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Aspen City Council hereby grants the following Land Use entitlement, an amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, which resulted in the voluntary landmark designation of 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S. Block 99. City and Towns:te of Aspen, Colorado. All provisions of Ordinance #26, Series of 2009 shall remain in full force and effect, except: 1 Council hereby grants a variance to the allowable FAR for Commercial Uses, from 1.5: 1 to 1.58:1. Section 2: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clausel phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any rea- son held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent pro- vision and shall not affect the validity of the re- maining portions thereof Section 3: Existing Litigation This ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pend ing under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be con- strued and concluded under such prior ordinances, Section 4: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 22nd day of November, 2010, in the City Coun- cil Chambers, Aspen City Hall. Aspen. Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper 0 PUBLIC NOTICE of general circulation within the City of Aspen. ORDINANCE #26 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED : (Series of 2010) PUBL/SHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 25th. day of AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF October, 2010. THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO /1 Michael C. Ireland, Mayor AUIENDING ORDINANCE #26, SERIES OF 2009, ATTEST: A NEGOTIATION FOR THE LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED /9 Kathryn Koch, City Clerk AT 630 E. HYMAN AVENUE, LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 99, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on Novem- ber 7,2010. [5775722] PARCEL ID: 2737-182-12-007 WHEREAS , the applicant, 630 E. Hyman LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning, LLC and Rowland + Broughton Architects, has requested an amendment to Ordinance #26, Series of 2009, which approved a package of incentives for the landmark designation of the property located at 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Lots R and S, Block 99, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado under the provi- sions of Section 26.415.025 of the Municipal Code and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on October 13, 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the proposed amendment and made a motion to recommend approval to City Council which resulted in a tie vote of 2-2: and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer, in her staff report to City Council dated October 25, 2010, performed an analysis of the proposed amendment and recommended approval and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal 0 0 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.070 AND CHAPTER 26.306 ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: OfdtÂ«~1 (2_7%1& SeAto 1-810 9 Aspen, CO STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1, A-47Â·â‚¬14 S cc>Cel (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) or Section 26.306.010 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: 1~ Publication of notice: BY the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days after final approval of a site specific development plan. A copy of the publication is attached herejo. Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen no later than fifteen (15) days after an Interpretation has been rendered. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. ~*gnelture The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ~ day 4- 14(kle"(\V , 2005 by 04*1-44 Â·SAN-Jj WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Ji 'Alt.1,1 3.0 'L~ totary Public ATTACHMENTS: 0. i 2.INDAM. 1 i .-1.ANNING i COPY OF THE PUBLICATION ~2 OF Co3'~ My Commission Expires 03/2912014