The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.500 W Hopkins Ave.0024.2010.AHPC0024.2010.AHPC 500 W. HOPKINS AVE 2735122 4 49 002 7 AMEND HISTORIC DESIGNATION XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX -1 9 r SE & 4 ud '40 ~ .. THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0024.2010.AHPC PARCEL ID NUMBER 2735 12 4 49 002 PROJECTS ADDRESS 500 W. HOPKINS AVE PLANNER AMY GUTHRIE CASE DESCRIPTION AMEND HISTORIC DESIGNATION REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HOFFMAN DATE OF FINAL ACTION 11.10.10 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 01.26.11 .. lageÂ·Q * 2 1 35-12 - + - 49 -Do 22- Oo.24Â·2010Â·Ar.Hfc Elle Blit Record Navigate Fgm Repor; Format Iab Belp J al@>X, '2-J ~ike 32*li N .' >13 j AN@111#4,010" i9 * 4 j Ckar NI i 3 0 6 1 3 6 4,11 .2 . 9Â¢ 1,9 2, ~ Rogting Status |Fee- |Fee 5ummar ~Â¥001* ~ Attdinents Routhg 80tory I Yalabon I Arch/Eng |Clstorn Fields Subtermits |P.ceb I C) Pernt type 11Â¥c Aspen IN*land lise * 1 Permt # if,MO.Aljk : '...,9.' 1~ i. . ' . 1 .6 .... ~ ~ Ackiress 4 iii tiLE*.kt= Â·Â·Â· ~ Aptge ~ Cly ASPEN aate F-71 4 81611 - Permit Informdion . , Master perot ... Routhg pue ~07 | Applied |11EO1O,~ Projed Â·Â·Â· Status A* . *roved[ I DesoiÂ®m AMEND HBTORIC DESIGNATION - IT SHOULD BILL TO 0051.2010.ASLU- PLEASE Issued F '.,- REFER TO THIS LAND USE CASE FOR BILLING. Rnal L_LI . Submitted MICHEAL HOFFMAN 544 3442 1 Clock ~41 Days E-1 Expires 10/312011 v Sublritted via . Ap '-- 1 Omer ~ Lastnair- ~ASPENFSP-ABRLLC ... Fkstname ~SIMNSIINDA 1.1 '02NFORTHST '1~ . 90* AgEN CO 81611 'i* r.1 ~: Phone |*)93-7819 ' 1 Address L n 1 1 ~ AppDCant @ Owner is ap@icant? Il Contractor is applicant? E Last name |ASPEN FSP-AER UC ... First name 10 STEVEN STUCA 6/ ~UNFORTHST "1~~~~~~~ ASPEN (081611 'FMIII t Phone ~~ 26621 Â·Â·Â· Address ~: . 1 ~'F|~ 4 Lender 6 1 1 ~ Last name Â·Â·Â· Frst name ~, Phone ( 1 - Addre55 idlll~ll/ll Enterhnwinlheolthep=iÂ«kkess .~â€ž~~â€ž04*4~-' . Inbox -Mkrosoft Outlook ~, - AsperGolÂ¢51=) mgelas Edi -= #: 1 oil -=~ rUC~g-- *r ~ l-ouv\A- w_ Cay- -4- COS 1 -20 10 - AS L u *02.- 954 Lli n..r ~ - Uw *.*1--=- 1 -,49 40"011 "oqpoll 0 . A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF 500 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, BOOMERANG LODGE PUD, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #13, SERIES OF 2010 PARCEL 11): 2735-124-49-002 WHEREAS, the applicant, Aspen FSP-AHR, I.I.C, represented by Steve Stunda and Michael Hoffman has requested an amendment to 1 listoric Landmark Designation for The Boomerang Lodge, 500 W, Hopkins Avenue, Boomerang Lodge PUD, City and Townsite of Aspen. Colorado, 1 he property was designated historic through Ordinance #26, Series of 2006: and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for Designation and states that an application for listing on the Aspen Inventory of i listoric Landmark Sites and Structures shall be approved if City Council, after a recommendation from 1-11'C, determines sufficie,ht evidence exists that the property meets the criteria. Section 26.415.()50 states that the process of rescinding. or amending designation shall be approved if City Council, after a recommendation from HPC, determines sufficient evidence exists that the property does not meet the criteria : and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report to 1 1PC dated November 10, 2010, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the review standards for rescinding or amending the designation were not met, and recommended denial and WHEREAS, at their regular nteeting on November 10. 2010, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, found that the review standards for rescinding or amending the designation were not met, and recommended denial to City Council by a vote of 4 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby recommends Council deny the request to amend the designation for The Boomerang Lodge, 500 W Hopkins Avenue, Boomerang hodge PUD. City and Townsite of Aspen. Colorado. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on,'tfi/*041 day 1 Nove~~ber, 2()10. C LU fay 'paytin, f~ Chair App,ved as to Form: ,Â·/lim True, Special Counsel \ KiT"Trv c / 53<nÂ· L Z 4/ -34,1 . t ~/449-u.t..â‚¬ - Kathy Striâ‚¬k(and, Chief Deputy Clerk .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 10, 2010 Jamie suggested applicants do a site mockup which would be very helpful for the monitors and staff. Ann suggested the board start discussing interior reviews. Jay said if the commission preserves only one building a year it is worth it. Disclosure: Jason disclosed that he has done work with Michael Hoffman in the past but feels he has no conflict. Michael said he has no problem with Jason reviewing the Boomerang. 500 W. Hopkins, Boomerang Lodge - Amendment to Historic Landmark Designation, Public Hearing Steve Stunda, owner and managing local partner Michael Hoffman, attorney representing the applicant Exhibit I - drawing of the pool Exhibit II - proof of publication Exhibit III - Public comments Steve said he has been in Aspen since the 60's. He bought the project in 2005 and it took a year to go through the entitlement process. I voluntarily offered to preserve the east wing of the building and dedicate it to the historic preservation commission. [ here were no negotiations. I wanted it to be kept because I thought it important that a piece o f old Aspen be kept and I still fill that way. At the time of designation we included the swimming pool in the outlying area. When we were going to do a lodge it was an integral part of the project and it added a great element. Unfortunately because of the economy I have been trying to get a loan for 2 !4 years to develop it as approved. I have a building permit that is good until June of 2011. The least desirable for lenders is the condominium lodge. The team and in conjunction with the City we proposed converting the already approved building into an affordable housing project. We will retain the integrity of the east wing and nothing will change. Since we are about to make a change the old pool is no longer an attractive use within the context of the new project. Housing said the pool is just too expensive to maintain and too small to o f a benefit. We are suggesting that the site plan be 3 .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 10, 2010 amended that the building be under your purview but the pool be eliminated and it becomes a picnic area for the people living in the building. Site plan - Exhibit I. It is our intent to preserve the structure that was approved in 2005. The lower level ofthe existing building will be all storage. We can outline the pool indicating what it used to be and the rest would be a grassy area. Michael said staff requested we submit an HPC minor development approval. This application is going to city council to request the change in use from a condominium zed lodge to affordable housing. APCHA, which is the housing authority, has said the pool and spa are detriments to the project and they are too costly. They have asked us to have the area removed from designation. 1n a minor development approval HPC makes a decision and the only way we can bring that decision to City Council is to appeal your decision no matter what the decision is. That was inappropriate so what we did instead is ask you to make a recommendation as to whether you agree that this particular area of the historically designated area should be removed from your authority so that it can be converted to a picnic area. Your recommendation will be taken to city council and decided with the rest ofour application. Amy said APCHA has requested the area be removed due to potential problems and burdens on the home owners. I don't believe APCHA suggested it should be delisted from the inventory, they simply agreed that the pool should not be part ofthe development. Staff feels HPC should be discussing the site plan, such as the historic significance of the pool and how can it be preserved in some way that works for everyone. There may be a solution where just the concrete form work is preserved or perhaps the pool turns into a reflecting pool that doesn't have the same safety concerns as the existing pool. Charlie Patterson was educated in the Wrightian design and the relationship of the inside to the outside was a fundamental thing. Even at the pool level you could interact the outside to the inside. Staff recommends HPC deny the proposal to change the boundaries of the historic designation. Michael said in an appeal council can only decide if there was an abuse of discretion or abuse of due process. It is the weighing ofthe affordable housing concerns vs. the historic values of the designation. Amy said she feels there is a solution and an appeal won't be necessary. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 10, 2010 Steve said when the building changes use from its original intent the pool becomes nothing but a nuisance. Comments and clarifications: Jason said this will be a great affordable housing project and we can come up with a cool solution. As a suggestion you could cover it and put a platform over it to protect the pools. You could add a heat pump and heat the pool or have a reflecting pond. You can reuse the pools as is and it won't stop your project. Steve Stunda said the pool is too small. Jamie said it isn't the discussion ofthe pool it is the discussion of HPC being able to review this area or not. We need to make that really clear. Does HPC want to relinquish control of that area? Ann said the question is whether or not this is an important part of the building and landscaping of the site. We don't need to decide whether a pool is appropriate for affordable housing or not. The question is, is this an important part ofthe building and landscaping ofthe site. Amy pointed out that this is an unusual circumstance in that only a portion of the property (1/3) is under designation. This was a willingness on Steve to designate the property. HI'C will not review anything other than the historic portion ofthe property. Jay opened the public hearing. loni Kronberg asked about the pool and how deep it would be. Jay said only ideas have been thrown out and we have no design. Toni said the use is changing and I don't ever remembering a pool being preserved before. As a member of the public it is hard to know what HPC has purview over. Paul Taddune, representing the Christiania Lodge adjacent to the project. Paul encouraged the HPC to retain jurisdiction so HPC can determine what the final result is and probably something could be worked out. It is a safeguard to get input from other adjacent property owners. It may be that there would be no jurisdiction in the future based on the rest of the project 5 .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 10, 2010 but we don't know that in the abstract. It is obvious you should retain jurisdiction. Jay closed the public hearing. Ann reiterated that the board isn't talking about the use of the building or the appropriateness of the pool; we are talking about whether to give us review opportunity of this area. Something could be done. lt is a beautiful integrated site and we shouldn't give up designation. Jamie said HPC should retain review of the area no matter what it turns out to be and the landscaping ofthe area will reflect what is happening in the historic area. Jason said the pool area is a big percentage of the site and something can happen that will work for everyone. The project will be dynamite when it is done. Michael said we have already submitted the application for the change in use and that includes the change in the PUD as a whole. The representation is a lawn area and a picnic area. There will be public involvement in the PUD. Jay said he is siding with the other commissioner comments. The area is a big percentage ofthe designated area. We don't have purview over any part of the property anymore. This would ensure some kind of safeguard. Steve said he doesn't mind having this conditioned upon council approval. I voluntarily gave up this building. Michael pointed out that the context of the pool is being destroyed by the change in use from a lodge to affordable multi-family housing. The use of the sub-grade space will be storage so the context of historic resource and spa is destroyed. Ann said if we give up this portion of review what happens if your project goes away and it goes back to being a lodge. Steve said it could be conditioned upon the use changed. 6 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 10, 2010 Ann said we feel we can work with you and come up with something that enhances the building. lf your project doesn't go through then we haven't lost the pool. Jay said he would guess that employee housing residents would probably enjoy a pool. We shouldn't rely on APCHA's letter unless there is a code amendment that says no pools are allowed in employee housing units. Amy said 11PC's issue to address is; does this landscape have historic significance to the building or not and i f future alterations occur is this something that this board has input on. Ann said the assumption is that we will do a good job working with the applicant. Ann said she would not vote to remove the pool designation without knowing what the future of this project is. It would be better to deal with the difficulties down the road. MOTION: Ann moved to approve resolution #13 that HPC recommends to deny an amendment to the historic landmark designation for the Boomerang Lodge, 500 W. Hopkins Avenue: second by Jamie. All in favor, motion carried.4-0. Lift 1, South Aspen Street - Final Major Development, Public Hearing Stephen Holly, Poss Architects Bob Daniel, applicant Proof of public notice - Exhibit I Power point - Exhibit II Sara said Stephen and Bob will go over the background, There are four properties in your purview. Two parks, Lift I and Willoughby Park. The Chalet Steak house and the Chalet Lodge and pool house which will be moved onto Willoughby Park which is a designated parcel. The applicant is reverting back to their 2006 approvals when Ordinance #48 was not in place. Bob Daniels said they are providing an overview for a plan that renews the historic assets around the base of Lift I. The building exteriors are going to be the same. Regarding the site they will be in their historical context as it relates to coming to grade. We will be retaining assets and designating assets. The goal is to remind you what was previously approved and clarify 7 .. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 500 W. Hopkins Avenue- The Boomerang Lodge, Amendment to Historic Landmark Designation, Public Hearing DATE: November 10,2010 SUMMARY: A portion of The Boomerang Lodge property was designated a historic landmark in 2007. The undesignated area of the building and site improvements were demolished shortly afterwards for lodge redevelopment, but construction went no further. The property owner is now proposing to build affordable housing instead and wishes to remove the existing swimming pool from the property, and from HPC's area o f purview. Rescinding or amending a landmark designation requires a recommendation by HPC and a final determination by City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not support the requested amendment to the historic designation, finding that the review criteria are not met. Staff recommends the property owner consider other options to address alterations to the designated landscape in cooperation with HPC. APPLICANT: Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC, represented by Steve Stunda and Michael Hoffman. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-49-002. ADDRESS: 500 W. Hopkins Avenue, Boomerang Lodge PUD. ZONING: R-6, LP/PUD. HISTORIC DESIGNATION The Boomerang Lodge was first identified as historically significant through the City's comprehensive historic resources survey conducted in 1999-2000, however Council did not take action to designate it a landmark. The property was subsequently sold by the original lodge owners/designer, Charlie and Fonda Paterson, and in 2006 a redevelopment application was submitted. Through the review process, the City and applicant came to an agreement for the preservation of approximately 1/3 of the existing building and site. The rest was demolished. Although almost all historic landmark designations include the entire parcel in HPC's authority, in the case of The Boomerang Lodge, a map depicting the limited designated area was approved by Council. The boundaries that were agreed upon were, in staff's opinion, a compromise aimed at preserving the most iconic and public view of the lodge, including the historic entry and public areas of the building. This area of the property was thought to best represent Charlie Paterson's Wrightian design training. HPC was not given purview over the western end of the property, namely the new construction. 1 .. The lodge redevelopment project approved in 2006 has been undermined by the national economic condition. The-property owner has determined that, as an alternative, construction of a 100% affordable housing development is feasible because of the opportunities created by the City' s recently adopted affordable housing credits. Within this program, the property owner can voluntarily construct affordable housing, then sell credits to used by other developers owing mitigation for their own projects. Purchasers of the credits will pay market value, thereby absorbing the affordable housing subsidy themselves. The owner of The Boomerang Lodge proposes to build the same addition that was approved for lodge use, with minor modifications to meet minimum unit sizes for affordable housing, building code requirements, etc. A total of 54 affordable housing units would result. In preparation for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, the applicant sought the support and input of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA). An outcome of the APCHA discussion was the decision to eliminate the outdoor pool, because it involves liability and maintenance costs that could be a burden to the affordable housing residents. alley The property owner was LANCMARK AREA , informed that removing or - - -Fl.Â·frizn_,-~r~. ~-4,1 -fe-(ni--rfil Â¢-,4*122 k.ff.,j i altering the pool area required HPC Minor Development review, but has , EL-*11-ttkt;*tt;:23&~~itfte-*j~-- 3PiftitÂ·i;#t~-c 3 -=1 1 - - i '10 elected instead to request to delete the pool and m.-v=ED-=k, 42'77#239{19 'Ii-1-194 ,!i 1--1:3:4:24*41 1'{St~r<?-2- surrounding landscape from MZ-_.,nt{..,~'.*:9.2-41.--, HPC's purview. #tÂ« Â·zâ‚¬ Mtrl:;ME,[111119=il:4=213 E-:t J ~ +1 :- >,44Â·14-;44'% 6 48 Street 6-se.Yff-F -r= -=_ ___:_ .4.-5,$2:'tÂ·t~*Â·rÂ·. -Br-brÂ·ijAN ... - , HPC is asked to approve an ._ . ----.â€ž.--7 .:0.Â·.~,4=h#Â®92,47-4Â©IA[ML. 7-, - u 33.-fil#512.6-224*:3'46% 6:}:9 6.1- :-E-F-R-~yf#Arritit 1.1.2 amendment to the boundary of the landmarked area as .- 4-1--~==,ic=*A .:443 --A ..;:4 1 u.,2:4%4rA~-1441 . Â·4 depicted in the map to the 3.ur~ 94. d' IN, 3 P #411.1-4:i kh':111 , 5 4 li*MCA>&4Â¢91'18-4,Fil:~al/ZE:.14 tti imal;*fl#:4:. --- t J right. The gray shading r 4.14**-=-Z:kbi*-*; il-Re~k==t 9.,tNÂ·4:(,ghle.Eli=-t:?,I AA-N indicates the portion of the -,C:#31*tlwfIA-:Ne.=ry,iff,3-31F*TE3~M#tr#*t=-0-inimel -PU O site (the entirety of which ..,0$*eT,8?:tktli#iiÂ·~9#NfN:30**s~,-9*i.~b.~f,tef fAi **#*iN,2 1 encompasses an entire half a R~;41:114+141-2024 il j 2. - :f<#:4rit#till-#~th [- - City block) that is currently 3Â¥34lt*jÂ¢@.J lit.rnjti?ff= â€ž:r----ptâ€¢%*ff*%4~i f ~J L ''xÂ·:9: pi;.C~-~4'K,14 ~11Â°ht %* liff'_: ti-,FT* L.ilti: designated historic, and the J~- 1.4.~Â¥ [1*i ~ frA--44,-+4-re* 7-1. I- 1~In, - -11=-00 - ---.0 / .1\ green line shows what is LANDMARK AREA\ 1 proposed to be eliminated Hopkins Avenue \ from designation. t.u Â·:i 1 LAf -3.22 2.- rE z t' 'L--r- . Proposed to be removed from designation 69=7-] "Ec.Â·. e.jÂ·.-z.IN:. 2 .. The attached application summarizes the 2007 discussion that resulted in the boundary determination for the designated area. The application supports, and in no way disputes, the historic significance of the remaining portion of the lodge structure. However, the application states, on page 4, that there is nothing about the pool and spa area which contributes materially to the historic significance of the East Wing. Staff disagrees with this statement and believes that the staff memo and City Council minutes (included in the application), along with the HPC and minutes (attached as Exhibit A) from 2007 clarify why the landscape was landmarked. Amending the designated area requires HPC find that the standards are not met for the area where designation is to be rescinded, but would continue to be met by the area that remains designated. The applicable criteria are: 26.415.030.B. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The significance of 20th century properties like The Boomerang Lodge is evaluated according to the following criteria: A property or district is deemed significant as a representation of Aspen's 20th Century history, was constructed in whole or in part more than thirty (30) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made, possesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association and is related to one (1) or more of the following: a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history, b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national history is deemed important and the specific contribution is identified and documented, or c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. Staff finding: The recently authored paper, "Aspen's Twentieth-Century Architecture: Modernism 1945-1975," has this to say about Charlie Paterson and The Boomerang Lodge: Charles Paterson Charles Paterson represents another aspect of Aspen modern architecture. In 1949, Paterson (b. 1929), born Karl Schnazer in Austria, arrived in Aspen after a dramatic escape from the Nazis with his sister through Czechoslovakia, France, and Portugal. They -were.finally adopted in Australia. He had finished high school and started engineering studies in New York City. Disappointed with eastern skiing, he moved, first to Denver, then to Aspen, where he landed a job as a bellhop at the Hotel Jerome and became, in his words, "a ski bum." Within a month of his arrival, he purchased three lots on W. Hopkins Avenue, shortly follo-wed by another three that comprised a half block between Fifth and Sixth Streets. There, he built a one-room cabin from left-over lumber. 3 .. Paterson followed a circuitous path from that initial construction project that eventually led to Taliesin and his Wrightian lodge in downtown Aspen. He returned to New York for two years to resume his studies at City College, then moved back to Aspen, became a ski instructor, and began expanding his cabin. After a stint in the mid-1950s with the 10'h Mountain Division (Camp Hale's "Second Generation"), he added more units to his cabin and, in 1936, opened the Boomerang Lodge (recalling the Australian "boomerang," he hoped guests would return). Fritz Benedict encouraged him to study architecture, and Paterson spent three summers, from 1958- 1960, at Taliesin East, the GI Bill paying his tuition. He started out gardening, like the other apprentices, but discovered he -was good at plastering and became the "official plasterer." Surprised at the quality of the plasterwork, Wright thought the Fellowship had hired a professional plasterer. Although Wright died on April 9, 1959, before Paterson returned for his second summer, he went back that summer and the next. Through the years, he maintained strong ties to his Taliesin colleagues. In addition to Aspen locals Benedict and Molny, he encouraged other apprentices to stay at the Boomerang Lodge on their twice yearly trips between the two Taliesins. At Taliesin the fellows were encouraged to work on their own plans, after hours, in the evenings, and during breaks, and Paterson drew the plans for the Boomerang Lodge as it exists today. It continued to evolve organically. Twelve rooms, a lounge, and a pool were added in 1960. The novel underwater window, featured in a 1960s Life magazine, allows guests in the lounge to look into the pool. Other expansions took place in 1965 and 1970. Paterson described its Wrightian features-walls andfireplace of "concrete battered blocks, windows with 'corners of glass'... sort of a Frank Lloyd Wright signature. " Though Paterson designed other structures, he never listed himself as an architect in the Aspen directory. The Boomerang Lodge is his life's work. It distinctive fagade with windows organized into a horizontal band just under the extended eaves provides a direct connection to Taliesin that inspired much Aspen design. As mentioned above, designation of just a portion of a property as 1.- historic is not the norm. k.-13* . f~t ~,7- While the designation of the Boomerang was ~ voluntary, it was done in r, :Alr iÂ¥*, /. the context of a redevelopment proposal. * addressed one of the F -I E--t- fundamental issues on the ~ 1 table at the time, and presumably was perceived by Council as adding to the appropriateness of the overall project. The designation boundary was drawn to purposefully maintain the connection between the lodge and setting; the inside and the outside. This relationship is inextricable in Wrightian design. Charlie Paterson even went so far as to, famously, incorporate an underwater view of the pool area in the hotel lounge. The pool at the Boomerang has importance as the 4 .. social hub of the small lodge and also as a historic landscape design. It was featured at least twice in Life Magazine in the 1960's (see above) as a symbol of the atmosphere and design of the lodge. In 2007, staff, HPC and Council found that designation criteria A and C were met on this property. Staff still makes that finding, and in fact have more background today to demonstrate how the students of Frank Lloyd Wright, perhaps the most influential architect in history, were carried directly to Aspen; satisfying Criterion A. An argument could also be made that Charlie Paterson' s role as a pioneer lodge owner in postwar Aspen, and the lifetime contributions that he and Fonda have made to the Aspen community are historically significant under Criterion B. Reducing the designated area for the purpose of demolishing the pool greatly threatens the property's ability to meet Criterion C. While Criteria A and B, which have to do with cultural history are important, Criterion C addresses whether or not the building that remains part of the community conveys history accurately. This is the aspect of historic significance that the community gets to appreciate on a daily basis. Staff has not prepared an integrity assessment for The Boomerang Lodge because the form was not created to anticipate designation of only 1 /3 of a structure and cannot be sensibly applied. lt was concluded in 2007 that the preserved area met the integrity threshold. Since then there has been some deterioration, which can be repaired, but no other significant alterations. 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 understands the intent of the application is to ensure that the pool may be removed from the property. We find that the historic significance and integrity of the remaining area of the lodge would be diminished if sensitive preservation and/or alterations to the adj acent landscape are not addressed. We believe that HPC review of pool demolition could be challenging because staff and the board would likely prefer preservation as is. However, the importance of preserving this feature of the property would certainly have to be balanced with discussion of other possible alternatives that could result in some degree of preservation while still providing the property with attractive, safe and usable grounds for the numerous people who will live here. Some alternatives worth discussing cooperatively are 1) convert the pool to a reflecting pool, fountain, or other water feature that still nods at the history of the landscape, or 2) retain the walls, steps and other concrete work that defines the existing pool area, but eliminate the pool and hot tub and replace with at grade paving. While the perception that the pool is a "nuisance" or an amenity is not HPC's call to make, this could perhaps be revisited, and adequate safety improvements made. 5 .. Exhibits: Resolution # , Series of 2010 A. HPC Minutes, April 25,2007 B. Application 6 .. A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) DENYING AN AMENDMENT TO THE HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF 500 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, BOOMERANG LODGE PUD, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #13, SERIES OF 2010 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-49-002 WHEREAS, the applicant, Aspen FSP-ABR, I.I.C. represented by Steve Stunda and Michael Hoffman has requested an amendment to Historic Landmark Designation for The Boomerang Lodge, 500 W. 1-lopkins Avenue, Boomerang Lodge PUD, City and lownsite of Aspen, Colorado. The property was designated historic through Ordinance #26. Series of 2006; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code establishes the process for Designation and states that an application for listing on the Aspen Inventory of- 1 listoric Landmark Sites and Structures shall be approved if City Council. after a recommendation from 1 IPC, determines sufficient evidence exists that the property meets the criteria. Section 26.415,050 states that the process of rescinding. or amending designation shall be approved if City Council. after a recommendation from liPC, determines sufficient evidence exists that the property does not meet the criteria ; and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie. in her staff report to I IPC dated November 10,2010. performed an analysis o f the application based on the standards. found that the review standards for rescinding or amending the designation were not met, and recommended denial; and WliEREAS, at their regular meeting on November 10. 2010. the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application. the staff memo and public comments. found that the review standards for rescinding or amending the designation were not met. and recommended denial to City Council by a vote of4 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby recommends Council deny the request to amend the designation fur The Boomerang Lodge, 500 W. Hopkins Avenue. Boomerang Lodge PUD, City and Townsite of Aspen. Colorado. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of November, 2010. Jay Maytin, Vice Chair Approved as to Form: Jim True, Special Counsel ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk .. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 25,2007 Chairperson Jeffrey Halferty called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance: Alison Agley, Brian MeNellis, Sarah Broughton and Michael Hoffman. Staffpresent: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk Jim '1 rue, Special Counsel th MOTION: Brian moved to approve the minutes of April 4 , joint meeting with P&Z; second by Jeffrey. All infavor, motion carried. Disclosure: Michael will recuse himselfon the Boomerang, 500 W. Hopkins. MOTION: Brian moved to approve the minutes of April 4,2007; second by Jeffrey. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Michael moved to continue the show cause hearing on 300 W. Main until May 9th; second by Sarah. All in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Michael moved to continue the minor development for 300 W. th Main until June 13 ; second by Sarah. Atl in favor, motion carried. MOTION: Alison moved to continue the public hearing and minor development for 408 E. Cooper, Aspen Sports until May 23rd, second by Sarah. All in favor, motion carried. 500 W. Hopkins - Boomerang - Landmark Designation Michael recused himself. Affidavit of posting - Exhibit I Map presented at the meeting by staff - Exhibit Il Amy stated that the Boomerang property takes up an entire half block between Fourth and Fifth Street facing Hopkins Street. In the staff memo it discusses how the lodge was developed in 1949 by Charles Patterson. Originally a long cabin was constructed in the center of the site and then lodge rooms were added. Patterson left Aspen and studied at Taliesen in the 1 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 25,2007 late 50's. Frank Lloyd Wright passed away at the end of Charlie' s tenure at Taliesen. When Charlie returned he built the east end of the property. It was determined at the council review process that only the east wing will be brought forward for designation. In terms of the historic designation criteria only one needs to be met and staff feels two are met. The first one is related to patterns or trends that are important in Aspen's history. There is a pattern of the Wrightian style architecture and the other is that the Boomerang is part of a group of small lodges that are significant to Aspen's early ski history. The building clearly exhibits a lot of Wrightian features, poured concrete walls and the overhanging mitered roof. In terms of the second half of landmark designation which is the integrity assessment this is difficult because we are not retaining the entire building but little to nothing has been altered to the east wing. Staff finds that landmark designation is appropriate. The map which staff drew up indicates that it is the entire end of the property and the landscape surrounding it that would be protected. Sunny Vann, presented. This designation was voluntarily offered by the owner of the property. It is not essential to the project and we do not benefit it from it in terms of FAR etc. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing section of the meeting was closed. Commissioner member comments: Sarah said HPC is pleased to have this as part of our landmark inventory in town. Jeffrey commended Charlie and Fonda Patterson for the many hard years o f work that they put into this project. We need to retain the small lodges. MOTION: Sarah moved to approve Resolution #16 for 500 W. Hopkins Avenue, landmark designation. Criterion A & C have been met. Motion second by Alison. Roll call: Brian, yes: Alison, yes; Sarah, yes: .Jeffrey, yes. Motion carried 4-0. Alison said the monitor will review landscape changes, and hot tub on the deck. The monitor will also approve the selection of materials and detailing of the design of the railing etc. 2 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 25,2007 Charlie Patterson said he appreciates the designation. His concern is that the historic lines not be destroyed when the deck and hot tub are added. Amy pointed out that HPC did not see the proposal because it was not designated. Facing the pool area one wall is shifting and a deck /hot mb is being added. Sunny said we did not agree that the current proposal would go back to HPC. The only obligation was designation and that in the future once this building is built HPC would have a role in the area that was included in the building. Augie Reno, architect for the project said he is willing to work with the monitor and discuss any concerns they may have on the design. He can't commit but he is willing to discuss them. 308 E. Hopkins - Major Development - Final Review - Public Hearing Michael was seated Jim Guffie and Mark Brestin from Cunniffe Architects Affidavit of posting - Exhibit I Com Dev. publication Exhibit II Sara relayed that the guidelines in general have been met regarding this project. HPC granted major development, conceptual, commercial design standards review, demolition and view plan exemption for a little over 3 feet. There are a few issues that were brought up in the staffmemo. In terms of lighting there was some linear lighting proposed beneath some of the railings and staff finds that it doesn't meet our lighting ordinance and we are recommending that be removed. In terms of materiality the horizontal wood balcony, we are not sure that is entirely appropriate for a contemporary fagade. It seems a little out of place and maybe the material needs changed. Staff is also concerned about the glass block that is proposed for the west elevation. We need clarification from the Building Dept. on the type of fire barrier that is needed on the west elevation. Staff is not sure the block glass will comply with the regulations. The final issue is the proposed metal door. Staff is concerned about the solid to void ratio of the metal door and maybe a little more glass could be added as it seems a little "cold" for this fagade. 3 .. ORDINANCE NO. 21 (SERIES OF 2007) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING HISTORIC - ..3 IGNATION FOR A PORTION OF THE BOOMERANG LODGE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 500 W. HOPKINS AVENUE, LOTS K-S, BLOC'K 31, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Parcel ll) #:2735-124-49-002 WHEREAS, the applicant. Aspen FSP-ABR, I.I.C. owner, represented by Michael Hoffman, Sunny Vann, and Reno- Smith LLC. has initiated I listoric Designation review for a portion of the properly located at 500 W. Hopkins Avenue, Lots K-S, Block 31. 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 }{PC, determines sufficient evidence exists that the properly meets the criteria: and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her i IPC staff report dated April 25.2007, performed an analysis of' the application based on the standards, found that the review standards had been met. and recommended approval: and WliEREAS, at their regular meeting on April 25. 2007, the Historie Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the review standards and recommended approval of the application by a vote of 4 to 0. and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the application meets or exceeds all applicable standards and that the addition of a portion of the Boomerang Lodge as a historic landmark to the Aspen Inventory of Ilistoric Landmark Sites and Structures is consistent with the goals and elenients of the Aspen Area Community Plan: and. WHEREAS, the City Council tinds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health. safety. and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE (711'Â¥ COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, (11()LORADO THAT: Section 1 The City Council finds that the application is complete and sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approval; and .. Section 2 The City Council does hereby approve designation of a portion of the property located at 500 W. Hopkins Avenue, Lots K-S. Block 31. City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. as defined in Exhibit A, to the Aspen Inventor> of I listoric Landmark Sites and Structures. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation und shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: 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 5: A public hearing on the ordinance will be held on the 1 1* day of'.lune. 2007. in the City Council Chambers. Aspen C'ity 1 lail. Aspen. Colorado. Section 6: Ihis ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLINHED as prop<19Â¢~1~~aw. by the City th Council ofthe City of Aspen on the 14 day c,i'May. 2007. 42Â¢7(~/~ /* .// M- Â» A Â«dke#30'1,- trbleA 14&,4Â©KI~iderud, Mayor A~st: f ' Kathryn S. Koch,C ity Clerk 8 // FINALLY, adopted. passed and approved this 11 day of.lune..29(3~.:-4,t# Hilen Katin Klanderud, MaÂ¥or 4 Â£ I , . fk 1*/' 1 iLTrd< Kathryn S. K~~L City Clerk Approved Â·As 1,1 form: L L 2 - John P. (Voreester, City Attorney Exhibit A- Map of Lots K-S. Block 31. City and Townsite of Aspen, showing portion of property designated as a iiistoric Landmark. .. LANDMARK AREA .' - - - . 2.K -Ti--31 ZÂ· 'Â·-: -23.1 .r''I[.-... Tri -.7.*.1~..fr='2.:0*p;4â‚¬J.:#Â·-,Â· i:Â· i.Â· --Â·- I J !1 â€¢ M.:26:if, w.1 i ,.- Â·Â· Â·12 . 2 4.-i--1=.:1:,.A.Â£.,~-2-~ibtli-:.1.14 -,Â·- - -Â·--&E --2*Â£-tili-W-ff-}43Â©IP:tib(3455-~*2-*456{=,7.-~ I - -- / r~*r:13;224:jif.:3-z.*.t:jr~.2 3' 4 1 61 :.1 tw:'%~lity-31% 09,1.1 i :-_ L . a--Â· E--Â· 1 '';132Â·.411'-T/77'2-r'74Â·Â·y: E T:.:LL/Imfy - T.1 &42'WUFG:A+-1*41- 1 ~ _.UL-4 =1:;2~13-1*13.Â·;iÂ·*%4%-E-il j.:F ~.ar..it /53:t ~di~ bl.â‚¬Â·1-31- ' t 'Â·-1..2~. , =E~ :rt ' ,:21~i ]- j~iae*-~1[-7 Lit.i-jifi?{ittfÂ»i*~34-:i,=. E-- - MA RdSÂ·Jt'f' In"S,11. i k -4.- ' 2â€ž4:-31.-t ,-2-1.Â·au. 6..it.-:Â·r. til:ENAT - - L .~ -91 1%Â· 4 4-45:1 2 2-1 r -r U E> 1 07 :- - 1-,-2_z.. d =.4,1 ~Â·Wr44-~ir-1 --...1. .....t /1 4 2-E.bÂ·b '.1.1.:1Â·' 34.Elll, Ll-=F-ir.i .5, -uÂ· .4.-r 6 :14 ' Â·i.:48 8.-%.5Â·4.-Â· i~ tÂ·.0.-t - 1 : b 3.03*:ii-*t.lkÂ·Â¢i>--12Â·Â·7~ __~___~_-- 3= b?:/Ear:Vinâ‚¬ 1.:IÂ·-t:F:'/i/9-tgES-t - 1.L-t--2- - . *'*-r--. L iÂ·-4--rb& ' Â· Â·Â·- -Â· 3 6- dÂ· scargy,-74*41.--,1. .1 -Â·Â·- . .-r N-zfjÂ¢EE[+23[~ji litif ' m-~ W.--' t t. - :J~,9;:kr-:0Â·if:rtr:MÂ·g.! 5:1:.5 3'l'.swi'.ia6f.tlt~ 4-44'Ki.f '4'2+*WEA-,Â·.+-4.r...1 intÂ·Â·- - I LÂ·Â·t.2.-_ I...trA,. -----+4#Yku*Â·,Â·we#Â·t'%2Â·23 .*414--.1.- en--4 8--44 :Â·r.-1 ----7- . A..1 â‚¬. + ~Â· - 1 12*?24=44 111 1-1.9 3, " . ~11:23:Â·155 Â·r n ... . 1 -Â· . Â·' '.~.i. 7.:~>,N':it:i li-ri:pi i.~4~11:hit-+* .1 ..-5Â¢i-:~. Â· i-""- Â·f:Eff<~1-j.f@klEÂ· R~yÂ£~43*71:Ii/?trf-trifF.* ~,f-....LE.;1@ . [K - --- 1--i-:~-.-,-r.91-qi Flet.r&& .r'.- '~~~migi.Â·,~01.3.;Tr:,r ~, .-7.:771-N Â·-' 6 1 - 21 6- ys-Al:-224-H : f I 31+~, 1 /7.-3 - irÂ·:;:. ziu I.dfi<e~ A fill- 444-th..t~i:~:2. 0,-.Â·.,1 QL~i~1. A :-1.JI-:f .i : i 2 1.- , ..f. r th " -"~ .glittf<Jlif'4231~g , ~-A~Jl:Nil.:-bAâ‚¬:ii ~ Â·.6 f: ~ *1, &2~ f -:Â·14:i ~ 7- ~ 211 , ff~ZY:5*lizen*3,31208-Wid j . 13476-7.~ .Â· ; Â·~~'' f xtenve "-AN* : 1 1 : 7 ; ' t.dy-*0 91-+8~6. *-<F=Z.4:4 Â·4 .-i~ j.,Â·--t i ~ ~,7-3-*Ff#-i'25*51.v~@?Â·13=9-49:I~-: :11 .Â·2.-21.3 ... 4...Â«--: :, -'"4 - 4-Â·' - I ---I*~ ~I --<3-*%31*:ifMT#Â£~b.L~*:3. if:~5 :Li;-kt?f -*3.36<-~ ~1.~.5~i - ig-4.--4 ANÂ·*bi .., .S .1, 1. 9 -9-*07819@9;113931 119 Â·' Mitudgmatf rl, 4-41.. 0-44-4.?74.-p.1 2,1 ; F:UÂ»U{&1t.J4:3.E.-EL:?Fali C.it ~Â¥.44-f--... . *. .--.,--..,.:-.-ti:.4*?:44.3-g.7..-4+X D- 7 TR U .ili it. 99,Â·C Â·Â· Â» 2' 5-7'4 9 ri- :Â·"-ckm} 7:7Â·Â·7Â·TA t.:tÂ·- .1. â€¢Â· Â·k: 6; .I .Â·.1 kB; 1/~Â·1.1..! I 4. 1 N. .... -14 -1 f ..1.1 -7. 1. : ./r t.. 1.:: Â·1Â©1-:n,U 4 - Â· 1 1.4..)*-I:;1 ,42NG.L.A.; ...~id-it- 2-r-Â· ..4- 1 -- e...3 Â· - 9.-1 I T... --* I =set Â·92:24-Â·.*--t::31 1.14-1.8Â·X.1.*'.Â»7.- -2. -9 i- r./.14. :aft.: ;. p. 4 ,~Â·Â·Â· r -4 + . 44.Â»,1 â‚¬ Â·+--1.1Â· 7,6: T-~M-'3'Airlt+5Â·Â¥ â‚¬'4.P --17 +7 Â«+ 3 - }*;Ptâ‚¬~1 Uttic f '; m,-T) F. <. '.fl NE A AA'ER LANDMARK AREA i i FA..Ls f 153t.1..,1 '3 15-ECT -D -00 --.R , 'EA F-Ti W NE R EJ'-5 INDÂ· MtÂ¥.~~ 1'~tlt< i-u,4 +4~; ~- ~- --' ' RECEIVED ACT 21 2010 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ASPEN OFFICE E. Michael Hoffman GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C. 601 East Hyman Avenue E-Mail: mhoffman@garfieldlieclit.com Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: (970) 544-3442 Telephone (970) 925-1936 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Facsimile (970) 925-3008 Since 1975 www.garfieldhecht.com October 20,2010 Ms. Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Application of Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC to Remove a Portion of the Boomerang Lodge from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Dear Amy: On September 17, 2010, Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC ("AFA") submitted its application (the "Mid- September Application") for an amendment of the Final Planned Unit Development for the Boomerang Lodge previously approved by City Council on August 28, 2006. The Mid- September Application seeks to modify the existing approvals for the Lodge property to allow the project to be used as affordable housing. In 2006 AFA received approval from the City to demolish the middle and western portions o f the pre-existing Boomerang Lodge and to redevelop the site, including the preserved "East Wing," as a condominiumized lodge. 1. How the East Wing Was Added to the Historic Inventory. During the City's review of the 2006 application, Steve Stunda of AFA offered to preserve the East Wing by causing it to be listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures (the "Historic Inventory"). City Council accepted Mr. Stunda's offer and made historic designation of the East Wing a condition of approval for the overall project. That requirement was memorialized in the City's Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2006 ("Ordinance 26"), as follows: Section 17: Historic Landmark Designation of the "East Wing" Prior to filing of the final plat the owner shall initiate the designation of the "East Wing" of the Boomerang Lodge for listing on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. The area to be designated shall be finalized in conjunction with the Historic Preservation Commission but shall include that area of the structural east wing along the alley, Fourth Street and Hopkins Avenue, also including the outdoor pool and spa area. The designation shall not subject the remainder of the building to HPC review. r .. Ms. Amy Guthrie October 20,2010 Page 2 (Emphasis supplied.) As required by Ordinance 26, AFA filed and prosecuted an application to the Historic Preservation Commission ("HPC") for designation of the East Wing, including "that area of the structural east wing along the alley, Fourth Street and Hopkins Avenue, also including the outdoor pool and spa area." The HPC voted to recommend historic designation of the East Wing, including the pool and spa area, at a meeting held on April 25,2007. City Council accepted HPC's recommendation on June 11, 2007, and listed the East Wing, including the pool and spa area, on the Historic Inventory in City Council Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2007. 2. Why AFA Is Requesting a Change in the Area Designated Historic. As explained at length in our Mid-September application, AFA has attempted to finance the construction of a condominiumized lodge at the Boomerang Lodge site since before it received final land use approval from the City in 2006. A construction loan was secured in 2006, but the commitment lapsed while the developer waited for a final building permit to be issued by the City. At about the same time global financial markets collapsed and took with them AFA's opportunity to build the permitted project. In addition, the market for condominiumized hotel units has been decimated by the economic meltdown. Current underwriting standards imposed on conventional lenders make it nearly impossible for potential purchasers to utilize a condominiumized hotel unit as collateral. For all of these reasons, redevelopment of the Boomerang Lodge has not progressed as contemplated in the 2006 approvals. In fact, the western and middle sections of the pre-existing Lodge were demolished in 2007. At that time the East Wing, swimming pool and spa area were isolated behind chain link fencing. Many of the dernising walls within the interior of the East Wing were removed in anticipation of construction of the approved project. No substantive changes have been made to the site since the summer of 2007. AFA now seeks approval from the City to convert the project to affordable housing use. As affordable housing, the project will be controlled by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (the "APCHA") through a Master Deed Restriction which will be recorded against the project and each of the units. The APCHA has informed AFA that the pool and spa area should be removed because maintenance of those amenities will unnecessarily increase the assessments to be paid by residents of the project and because they represent "attractive nuisances" which are likely to attract children and pets with potentially disastrous results. The project's homeowners association cannot accept these obligations, says the APCHA. For that reason, it has asked AFA to process this application to have the pool and spa area removed from the Historic Inventory. AFA does not intend, and does not request, to "de-list" the structure of the East Wing from the Historic Inventory. .. Ms. Amy Guthrie October 20,2010 Page 3 3. Applicable Land Use Code Provisions. Section 26.415.050 of the Aspen Land Use Code (the "Code") provides that An application for the removal of a property from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation described in this Chapter except that with respect to Subsection 26.415.030.C.4 an explanation shall be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation. Section 26.415.030 C. establishes the required elements of the application. The information required by Code Sections 26.304.030.B. 1., 2., 3. and 4. is enclosed herewith in Exhibits A through E. A site map is found in Exhibit E. A copy of the 2007 application letter is enclosed as Exhibit F and a copy of the staff memorandum to City Council at its second reading of the proposed Ordinance naming the East Wing to the Historic Inventory is enclosed as Exhibit G. AFA, and not the City, was the first to propose that the pool and spa area of the Boomerang Lodge be included in the historically-designated area. AFA never believed, however, that the pool and spa area had independent historic significance. As stated in the 2007 application, "AFA believes the East Wing is . . . worthy of historic designation because the integrity of the structure is largely being preserved and because the architecturally-significant portion of the East Wing, which is the eastern fagade, will be retained without modification." The only references made in the 2007 application to the pool and spa area of the Lodge came in connection to a statement made in the City of Aspen context paper entitled Aspen' s 20th Century Architecture: Modernism, which reported that "the [Boomerang L]odge's lounge, 12 more rooms, and a pool were added in 1960. The noted underwater window, which allows guests in the lounge to look into the pool, was featured in Life Magazine in the 1960's." The only substantive statement made in the 2007 staff memorandum concerning the pool area related to the architecture surrounding the pool and the not to pool itself. "The East wing of the building features board formed concrete walls, a flat roof, strong horizontal balconies, mitred windows, large overhangs with exposed roof structure, typical Wrightian color scheme, etc. Similar concepts are carried through the pool area." As relevant to this application, the criteria for historic designation are as follows: 2. A property or district is deemed significant as a representation of Aspen's 20th century history, was constructed in whole or in part more than thirty (30) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made, possesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association and is related to one (1) or more of the following: .. Ms. Amy Guthrie October 20,2010 Page 4 a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history, or b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national history is deemed important and the specific contribution is identified and documented, or c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. 1 The 2007 staff memorandum found that the East Wing as a whole met Criteria a. and c. City Council apparently concurred, as it unanimously approved the application. A copy of the minutes of the City Council meeting at which Ordinance 21 was adopted is enclosed as Exhibit H. There is no evidence that the pool and spa area o f the Lodge was separately discussed at the City Council meeting. There is nothing about the pool and spa area that has independent historical significance or which contributes materially to the historic significance of the East Wing. 4. The AACP Provides Guidance on How to Apply the Historic Preservation Criteria. The 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan ("AACP") provides guidance concerning how to apply the historic preservation criteria. "While the overall goal ofprotecting individual historic sites or the historic character of a larger area are foremost, the preservation process must be one of reason and balance, predictability, and economic fairness."2 Residents of Aspen have been working with City staff for the past 18 months to update the AACP to bring it in line with current community thinking. Notwithstanding the passage of 10 years, the proposed language of the Historic Preservation section of the 2010 update to the AACP is remarkably similar to the provision quoted above. "While the overall goal of preservation is foremost, the process should be one of balance, predictability, fairness, consistency and integrity."3 AFA's current request is to change the use of the East Wing from condominiumized lodge to affordable housing under the control of the APCHA. The Housing Authority has informed AFA that the homeowners association for the project should not be required to maintain the pool and 1 code,Â§ 26.415.030.B. 2 AACP, p. 39. 3 Preliminary Draft of 2010 Update to AACP, p. 68. .. Ms. Amy Guthrie October 20,2010 Page 5 spa area because of the high cost of those activities. Additionally, the APCHA believes the pool and spa represent a potential threat to children, pets and other occupants of the project. The entire project could be at risk if someone were hurt or killed in the pool or spa. The question of whether the pool and spa should be removed from the Historic Inventory requires a balancing of competing interests -- the historic significance of the amenities against the need of the community for affordable housing. In this case the needs for employee housing and to create a project which is truly affordable and safe outweigh the desire to keep the pool and spa area for historic preservation reasons. 5. Integrity of Pool and Spa Area. As quoted above, Code Section 26.415.030.B.2. states that "an individual building, site, structure or object" is eligible for historic designation if it possesses, among other things, "sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association." In the current application, the integrity of the setting and association related to the pool and spa area has been "471"gl.-I AP'. so severely disrupted that the continued inclusion of the amenities on the Historic Inventory is unwarranted. l.=4Â£&*Al,L-- - The pool and spa area of the Boomerang Lodge was constructed when the entire property was used as a modest hotel. . That hotel was demolished in 2007 when \ b''1.~ .3.-, AFA anticipated redeveloping the .. property as a modern lodge. As shown in \â„¢1~,r~ipi~ ~. this photograph, the pool and spa area is ->IN&\4711..'.11,7ijÂ¥***~ 5* now "marooned" between the East Wing and the open field where the balance of the lodge was formerly located. In addition, a pool and spa are not central to the use of an affordable housing project as they are to a hotel. The East Wing will be used, along with the rest of the project, as long-term housing for local employees. It is unlikely that users will often partake of a swim in this small pool. The hot tub/spa may get more frequent use, but probably not enough to make the pool and spa area a hub of activity. The historic character of the pool and spa as a center of social interaction, as was the case when the property was used as a lodge, will be lost. In an affordable housing project, the pool and spa are likely to become lifeless monuments which pose a threat to the health and safety of residents. 6. Summary and Conclusion. AFA suggested that the pool and spa area of the Boomerang Lodge be historically preserved along with the East Wing because those amenities would be appreciated in the new hotel. Preservation made sense under those circumstances. The applicant now seeks to convert use of the project to affordable housing. .. Ms. Amy Guthrie October 20,2010 Page 6 In an affordable housing project, the pool and spa represent liabilities to future unit owners. The cost of maintenance, repair and upkeep of a pool and spa is considerable. As "attractive nuisances," these amenities also pose a potential threat to children, pets and other users of the property. The pool and spa areas of the Boomerang were never the focus of HPC's or City Council's attention during their consideration of historic designation in 2007. The architecture and materials used in the East Wing and Charles Paterson's long-time stewardship of the Lodge were the key elements in the City's decision to preserve the East Wing. The pool and spa were only ancillary concerns in the decision-making process. The architecture of the pool and spa area is not independently significant. It is unlikely that the pool and spa area will receive much use when the property is utilized as affordable housing. Long-term employees will not use a pool or a spa in the same way hotel guests could be expected to. The integrity of setting and association with the rest of the property has been destroyed by the demolition of the balance of the hotel and the anticipated use of the project as affordable housing. Finally, the AACP (including the update now under consideration) counsels decision-makers to balance the need to preserve historic property with other community objectives. The establishment of safe, affordable employee housing is one of Aspen's most valued objectives. Affordable housing for local employees is critical if the City is to maintain a "sense of place" for people who live here in the present and come from a wide range of socio-economic backgrounds. While it is important that we remember the past, it is also important that the people who work in Aspen now have an opportunity to live in our community. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, E. Michael Hoffman Table of Exhibits Exhibit A - Letter of Authorization Exhibit B - City Land Use Application Form Exhibit C - Property Report from Land Title Guaranty Company Exhibit D - Vicinity Map .. Ms. Amy Guthrie October 20,2010 Page 7 Exhibit E - Site Plan Exhibit F - 2007 Application for Historic Designation Exhibit G - Staff Memorandum to City Council Exhibit H - Minutes of City Council Meeting .. Exhibit A Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC c/o Steven R. Stunda 602 North Fourth Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 September 17,2010 Mr. Ben Gagnon Senior Projects Planner, Community Development City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Mr. Gagnon, On behalf of Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC (the "Applicant"), please accept the enclosed application for approvals related to Growth Management, PUD Amendment, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review for Parking and Housing Credits. Please note that the legal address for the Applicant is in care ofme, 602 North Fourth Street, Aspen, CO 81611, United States. You may contact me, as the local representative of the Applicant, with questions at: (970) 925-7604. The Applicant's representative in this matter is our attorney, Michael Hoffman, Esq., Garfield & Hecht, P.C., 601 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611. You may reach him at (970) 544-3442. Sincerely, ASPE@FSP-ABR, LLC a Dl'ware limited liability 0mpany â‚¬44 A-/00~ ~feven R. Stunda l' .. Exhibit B REr.IVED ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION OCT 9 1 ,7010 PROJECT: c/Ty Name: Boomerang Affordable Housing Project COMMUNIA 06 +. /V 500 West Hopkins Avenue - Lots K, L, M, N, 0, P, Q, R and 5, Block 31, ofthe Aspen Townsite . ClÂ¥ j Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 273512449002 APPLICANT: Name: Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC Address: c/o Steven R. Stunda, 602 North Fourth Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 925-7604 Phone #: REPRESENTATIVE: Name: E. Michael Hoffman Address: 601 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 544-3442 Phone #: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): GMQS Exemption [3 Conceptual PUD U Temporary Use GMQS Allotment Â® Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) C Text/Map Amendment Special Review for parking O Subdivision U Conceptual SPA ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream E Subdivision Exemption (includes [3 Final SPA (& SPA Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Amendment) Mountain View Plane U Commercial Design Review El Lot Split U Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion U Residential Design Variance U Lot Line Adjustment El Other: U Conditional Use EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) See Ordinance No. 26. Series of2006. and Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 18, Series of 2006 and the attached letter of application. PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings, uses, modifications. etc.) Conversion of the project to affordable housing and ancillary approvals, as described on the attached letter of application. Have you attached the following? FEES DITE: $ 4.170.00 Â® Pre-Application Conference Summary 11] Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement 61 Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form [il 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. u 1 El 21 Exhibit C LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY PROPERTY REPORT Our Order No. QPR62003618 Cust. Ref: This report is based on a search made of documents affecting the record title to the property described hereinafter, searched by legal description and by the names of the record owners. The information as to record owner is taken from the most recent recorded Vesting Deed. No information is furnished relative to easements, covenants, conditions and restrictions. Liability of Land Title Guarantee Company under this Properly Report is limited to the fee received. Prepared For: Tlii s Report is dated: September 13, 2010 at 5:00 P.M. Address: 500 W HOPKINS ASPEN, CO 8161 1 Legal Description: BOOMERANG LODGE SUBDIVISION/PUD, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED MARCH 21, 2007 IN PLAT BOOK 83 AT PAGE 3. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Record Owner: ASPEN FSP-ABR, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY We find the following documents of record affecting subject property: 1. DEED OF TRUST DATED JUNE 28,2005, FROM ASPEN FSP-ABR, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF PITKIN COUNTY FOR THE USE OF BANK MIDWEST TO SECURE THE SUM OF $9,000,000.00 RECORDED JUNE 29, 2005, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 511779. SAID DEED OF TRUST WAS FURTHER SECURED BY ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS RECORDED JUNE 29,2005, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 511779. 2. ASSIGNMENT OF ENTITLEMENT DOCUMENTS AND CONTRACTS RECORDED JUNE 29, 2005 .. PROPERTY REPORT Our Order No. QPR62003618 Documents of Record: AS RECEPTION NO. 511780. 3. FINANCING STATEMENT WITH, BANK MIDWEST THE SECURED PARTY, RECORDED JULY 12, 2005 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 512253. MODIFICATION AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH SAID DEED OF TRUST WAS RECORDED JULY 11, 2006, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 526300, SECOND MODIFICATION RECORDED AUGUST 6,2008 AS RECEPTION NO. 551722 AND THIRD MODIFICATION RECORDED AUGUST 3,2009 AS RECEPTION NO. 561598. , 1 4 A ..4=1 '%14 v I â€¢ - - 1 -1, t./0 I-. .... : 'I# W;GifiespTe,St '' ' 4 , f.~ 'Pearlâ€¢â‚¬11 $9 - 1 1.... 4 . 4 -, 4.54 . 6 gte f . ... jl /,1. t. '.,9. . ...6 t. -- I ... 0, f./ . I . 1 IL; 94 1; , I Â»4 9 , W, I El*,P . . I '%. ' I 07' .4 ~ ,1 ~Â· .. ., 3,0. . 1 - . 21.1. 4 . 49 , I -I ./ 0 .... * I ... ... V- 4.1 , 1 1 1> 9 14 '14,-, k , . ..& 4 . a4. . + 2 9& 4 .2 . 1 4 1. 4 A. 1*4 .0/49 , 4 C 10 . .. , 1 k.1 - Â·stÂ· r.. ' ,Â»fl 1 . . , 2.* . r d -- '% t r.6 i a'*4 + M . 4, 4.. $ ./. ho.6 ' 4 7/" 1 , . -JVÂ£ '-' 1 4 27 .NU . 1 ~ 16.474 =ki tioo,w 441.43' Aisp~Al 206846.11 <5 911 *~ ASÂ£4\ 6Â£2. . 1$. Â£ 3-- + 1 - A rl , 4 . '*,1 Â£ ' *. an -1 -,/ 4-- Â¥~ '4 14 4 4,32- . m*". 14 t , 02 141 . 9 -.....- , 44'< e k "t .~4 40=.,0-. 1 .. p I r , -~ A â€¢- - ,Â· i ,,iEst-9'~,25*94)r@ins.Ave, ~ , ... , i} 9.8 -*i/3 iwiniset, 'Le 42,6, .f 1,043: 7 ::. 7Â»kie a.. i :,tÂ¢~f.4... Lt A. Â¢P:*.'.4 9,?P'apt*LJ 1.,I'.4 - '. 1, 2 ill):h Â· N **J - 4 . Liwittnt A e. : I ..1 9~49<42 .49,4 . S , â€¢ I :-0/9 WzLE - 0. P .3,Â·i 4,/4 4. \41/ Â© 2007 Europa,TeoliAibiD&77043, 0 - 4 . 94 I ' F r . . /. r I.:32 '272 1 <5 0 28by~ 4, * 9 ~r . a . 'P ImageÂ©20-0,7+DigAaIGroleff . p, r 1......0.: 8/InIMAT. DUICM Exhibit E 893 e6 L.1.T-/.VAIL m-1 -0.IRCTNO: DR~WN # CNIC"Z' .: AR ./.DATI: 3/1*no,07 1,16PM ---- - ..1. ---- ..1-- r===- - Pr-t- W.).- TO.*-I-2/ c~r ~--9 , 1 , ALLEÂ¥~1.aCKS' ., . ~ ~1 ...~~ - . I ...........i J/4 'i=- Â·p l .â‚¬41.1...1; I . / 1 11-Â©7'ij.~i....r -3-4- 1 /9@Â·â€¢E I Li --42Â·22.131~UpRii. L ": Â¢i%*- ; , rl 1 -1-%%%-4(ip.i)%748% I.ittif~:1...:il{D.4132-:.-#P.L..4,kL 7 -4,*--, : li 1 li VE -p.,yÂ·~*.4#':Â·-mk~~2.~fiÂ·j;r--ieÂ·Â·Â·~~0Â·Â·Â·iÂ·Â£~4:i~U'9~JA- :.'.Â·.~2~E=g#:,4 i 4'~ r . 14..8 ift 1%-Ediii, 4/1-Â·.:4 *:1;.:.ZA#40;:*1*-/ - Â·- 1 '~Â·Â·.., i ,. *t~-1-@%11Â·.i?~i~fa~Â·~4[ti.*f~=Â·Â·lf:FfkkE~#eep-:c~ / 3 1 ~..i-Â·- ~â€ž:. w-*peiti,1-~go>-:.ic*~t: --..c--I,-~~-~I4~..:~i,,~; ~~F ~ 2 L . 01, I=*= /,9, RENO Â· SMIT1 1 3464 1- -1 Â·AACUITECTSÂ· 111 N. i 'Â»29- / 1-1--C-/..1 LLC .....I- 1 ..' 1 ---r.: 1 .~ 0 ---Paois,deckandspa, areas to be removed 1 'Â· Â· , '' and replaced by lawn. ..- FAIX W )71 10/TH-1 * 0 0.- .â€ž1 535629 .â€ž11 'llil[Iliblill'lli ..U,-7 .':. (..1.7..'. 'AX ~ FINAL PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN .==- GENERAL 111*ET NO: 2 . Wi<1<0 5[DaO7 DNVHDUkWOOH I.â„¢ ./.15/ I'.... OGYMO1O0'%349Â¥ 1~2~16 H..Â·Ol limlimllt[ 1 p d ~ iiilr#Tf' .''I r._' ' 1-1-1-11. ----- -----1 IL !1 1111 4,111.1121 1 1 11. li T /Tre~1~ il w 0 1 11â€¢ i.'i , IL I'bill'111@1 1[ 9.4â„¢.. _ '[ - fl._~1 I ..ilt 1 EXISTINe BUILDINS \, \ , A ) i, 4,#<56 . Ii r 4 I_ 1, Bil'i'11 idl !~.'ill'.2.- -.-- t . *HOMM~Ll- 2 i -1 *,- 1'1' f '1'~1111~,i~1'1'11111),il d,r''il il''illti"i ,.AM 'Illi' /1 0" 'i' 14' 1 . 1 -111 -11 1,11 91111 111 11 1 11 11 -I L 1 i I F i![D,i'_'%, 414''il,1 ill' El~'l ii!|i 1~Â·1'|IJI't 8 RP- 'i'-'"-'' 4Iil'=" ilil ... ~, ~ ~ h'/71 21 11 - 1~ 1 lilli' 111011 lili ~ 111 ~11111 1111111~11'111 Ill 1111111~1 lili 1~ 1~11~1~1 lilli 111 11 ='lili. )19*. 1 1 11 1 lilli 1 - ...AÂ· , i .i)# 1-'- -T~i,ij~I~, 0"ti'V 1--1, Ii'Ili, il "'I''OFF'01 2% r. 1 111- 1 15Â©Gr' 1 1 -4 1111111- 1 11 U 4 4<I , 4<~4-1<L)diA&144*e,~uid -Â· - 3 1 3. : f 1 -Ar - ~ ' 6 |1 Ii'i -' 4 '1 |1~| Li'|: I.~!-~-111 lili 111111~ 11111111.11~11111111111 41, [L -li lli L .91 - DOL . 1, ~,- :. 6-41[.- 111'Ir -1| '~ i r--1 < 'h , 11 : 0 1: /n ' , .lili 11.-1. , tal' V $ , .,0.0.11......211.6 f 1 1 .4.-; i \ 1 ..., ; 3 1, 1 i ' Â· 4-7 / / IN-74 1 1 fALIGNMI/T MATOW) : MEMCW.R.~J N . r~--r â€¢ ~NEM HANPICAr .Ah. 1 , ' IE*T HOPKINe AVENLIN 'â€¢-RAM . ~~~~T~~~$*wEO ~ ' ~ 1 1 , *TATI ......ADO Pools, deck and spa \~~ Â· Â· areas to be removed and replaced by lawn. 133hll HANDICA~ RAMP .. Exhibit F LAW OFFICE OF E. MICHAEL HOFFMAN, p.c. 106 SOUTH MILL STREET SUITE 202 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 FACSIMILE E-MAIL TELEPHONE (970) 920-1019 Mhoffman@emhlaw-aspen.com (970) 544-3442 February 9,2007 Mrs. Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S. Galena Street, Third Floor Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Application for Historic Designation of Boomerang Lodge Dear Amy: This correspondence represents the application of Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC ("AFA"), the current owner of the Boomerang Lodge, for landmark designation of the "East Wing" of the hotel pursuant to Section 26.415.030 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code ("the Code"). AFA promised to seek designation for the East Wing at the time it received approvals from the City for redevelopment of the Lodge and rezoning, subdivision exemption and growth management approvals for the property across the street from the existing hotel. AFA received the last of those approvals in October of 2006. Section 17 of Ordinance No. 26, Series of 2006 (the "Approval Ordinance"), which memorialized the approval of AFA's redevelopment proposal for the Lodge, required the owner to initiate historic designation of the East Wing prior to filing of the final plat. This application is meant to satisfy the requirements of Section 17 of the Approval Ordinance and fulfill the promise made by AFA during the review process. 1. Technical Elements of Application. The following additional information is included with this application pursuant to Section 26.303.030 of the Code: 1. A letter of authorization from AFA is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2. The street address, legal description and parcel identification number of the property are as follows: 500 West Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, Colorado 81611 Lots K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, AND S , Block 31, City and Townsite of Aspen, County o f Pitkin, State of Colorado Parcel ID No. 2735.124.49.002 3. A copy of a current title insurance commitment, reflecting the information required by Section 26.303.030(B)(3) ofthe Code, is attached hereto as Exhibit B. .. Aspen Community Development Department February 9,2007 Page 2 4. A vicinity map, showing the location of the Property, is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5. A site plan in the form required by Section 26.303.030(B)(5) of the Code, is attached hereto as Exhibit D. 6. A certified site improvement survey is attached hereto as Exhibit E. 7. A written description of the proposal and an explanation of the historic significance of the East Wing is found below, in the main body ofthis correspondence. Please keep in mind while reviewing this application that the request is for the East Wing only, and not the balance of the property. The balance of the property will not be subject to HPC authority. Section 17 of the Approval Resolution provides that "[t]he designation shall not subject the remainder fo the building to HPC review." 2. Substantive Aspects of Application. In a letter dated November 2,2005, AFA reiterated an oral offer it made in October of 2005 to give the HPC an opportunity to review and provide comments on the owner's development plans for the East Wing. A copy ofthe November letter is attached hereto as Exhibit F. Steve Stunda of AFA, Augie Reno of Reno Smith Architects and Craig Ward of Morris & Fyrwald Real Estate presented the owner's plans for the redevelopment of the East Wing to the Historic Preservation Commission at a work session held on February 22,2006. Those plans, dated November 30,2005, showed the intent of the owner to add five new lodge units to the third floor of the East Wing, to expand the multipurpose room located on the north end of the structure and to install a rooftop deck above the third floor units, among other things. A copy of the original site plan is attached hereto as Exhibit D. The staff memorandum (the "Staff Memorandum") which accompanied AFA's application when it was considered by City Council on June 26,2006, reported the following facts to the Council concerning the February 22,2006 work session: Generally, the HPC does not prefer the addition of a third floor on the east wing and would like to see this portion of the project remain more true to its original (current) form and receive only minor alterations. If the east wing did incorporate an addition, the HPC suggested it be recessed and of a clearly different architectural character (not mimicking the original wing) so that old and new components could be easily identified. [ ] The applicants have agreed to addressing the concerns of the HPC relating to a different type of material for the 3rd floor. Based largely on these comments, City Council elected to approve the project, but to deny the owner the right to build the third floor units over the existing East Wing. Council did, however, allow some modification of the East Wing, In particular, the plan approved by Council included an expansion of the multipurpose room. The expansion of the multipurpose room is shown on .. Aspen Community Development Department February 9,2007 Page 3 Exhibit G, which shows the new dimensional parameters of the East Wing. (Page 1 of Exhibit G depicts the new footprint of the East Wing. Pages 2 and 3 of the Exhibit show the programmatic use of the first and second floors of the East Wing, as approved by City Council.) The approved expansion of the multipurpose room will eliminate an open, landscaped area and a small portion of the patio located to the north of the pool. A hot tub is also being added to the west of the pool, in an area which is currently lawn. The question to be answered by the HPC is whether the East Wing, as reconfigured by the changes approved by Council, qualifies as a landmarked structure under Section 26.415.030 of the Code and the introductory section of the City's Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. AFA believes the East Wing is still worthy of historic designation because the integrity of the structure is largely being preserved and because the architecturally-significant portion o f the East Wing, which is the eastern fagade, will be retained without modification. Please see the photographs found in Exhibit H, which clearly indicate the iconic nature of the eastern favade. 3. Merits of Historic Designation ofthe East Wing. Under Section 26.415.030(B) of the Code, a property is eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures if it has "a demonstrated quality of significance." The significance of properties will be evaluated according to the following criteria: 2. A property constructed at least forty (40) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made that possesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, and association and is related to one or more of the following: a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history, b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national history is deemed important and be identified and documented, c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. The Boomerang's East Wing was constructed over 40 years ago, currently possesses and will possess the integrity required by the Code and is related to subsections a. and c. of Section 26.415.030(B)2. ofthe Code. .. Aspen Community Development Department February 9,2007 Page 4 A. The Creation of Small, Privately-Owned Lodges Was A Trend Which Helped Make the 1950s and 1960s A Unique Period of Aspen's History. As discussed at length in Aspen's 20th Century Architecture: Chalet Style Buildings, published on the Internet by the City's Community Development Department, the City experienced a period of rebirth between 1936 and the early 1980s centered on the development of the ski industry. Tom Flynn, Billy Fiske and Ted Ryan were the first to develop a privately-owned ski hotel when they opened the Highland Bavarian Lodge in 1936. The Prospector Lodge, located at 301 E. Hyman, was another small, privately-owned hotel built in 1947. Other hotels and guest accommodations of the same type included the Norway Lodge (built in 1954), the Skiers Chalet and Steak House (1955), the Holland House (1956), Mountain Chalet (1958) and the Edelwiess Inn. Charles Paterson arrived in Aspen in 1949. He bought the property which later become the Boomerang Lodge in the same year. In 1956 he built three simple lodge rooms on the property and opened the hotel. Mr. Paterson reported to the undersigned that he designed the East Wing while studying at Taliesen East in 1959. He presented the plans to the widow of Frank Lloyd Wright and his older apprentices at the institute's annual commemoration of the birth of the famed architect. The plans, which were clearly influenced by Mr. Wright's "organic architecture" style, were well received, according to Mr. Paterson. Mr. Paterson began construction of the East Wing in the fall of 1960 and completed the work in 1961. For five years, the East Wing, along with four original lodge rooms, made up the Boomerang Lodge. (During this period Mr. Paterson used the old cabin located in the center of the property as his personal residence during the winter and rented it to the Aspen Music Festival in the summer.) To his knowledge, Mr. Paterson was the first to finance a hotel project located in the Roaring Fork Valley using a loan guaranteed by the fledgling Small Business Administration. The SBA was hesitant to lend in the Valley because it viewed the resort economy as too volatile to meet conservative investment parameters. Mr. Paterson believes the staff of the agency was impressed in 1964 or 1965 when he paid off the loan before the stated due date. After Mr. Paterson's experience, the SBA guaranteed loans for the construction of projects located in Aspen and promoted by Ralph Melville and Whip Jones, among others. Mr. Paterson's participation in the trend which culminated in Aspen's vibrant tourist economy of the 1960s and 1970s is manifest. .. Aspen Community Development Department February 9,2007 Page 5 B. The Boomerang's East Wing Represents the Technical or Aesthetic Achievements of the Architecture of Charles Paterson And, by Implication, Fran-k Lloyd Wright. The significance of Mr. Paterson's architecture in Aspen is described in the following excerpt from Aspen's 208 Century Architecture: Modemism, which is also published on the Internet by the City's Community Development Department: The [Boomerang L]odge's lounge, 12 more rooms, and a pool were added in 1960. The noted underwater window, which allows guests in the lounge to look into the pool, was featured in Life Magazine in the 1960's. In 1965 and 1970 other expansions took place on the property. Although Paterson has designed relatively few buildings, among them his own business, structures at the Christiania Lodge, and a residence in Basalt, the Boomerang is his master work, exhibiting strong influences of Wrightian architecture. Paterson designed, helped to build, and financed the structure, and is still its host and manager today. [This is no longer true.] It has been described as "...timeless, ageless" and "...almost futuristic. â€ž1 Other contributions to local organizations made by Paterson include being a member of the Board of the Music Associates of Aspen for 20 years, Chairman of the Aspen Hall of Fame for 2 years and of the Aspen Board ofAdjustment for 20 years and counting. He has also served on the Aspen Chamber Resort Association Board of Directors. Paterson worked for the Aspen Skiing Company as an instructor from 1952 to 1969. 4. Conclusion. We look forward to discussing the merits of this application with the Historic Preservation Commission at a public hearing. Please feel free to contact me if you need any further information. 1 Scott Dial, "The Boomerang Lodge: The Lodge That Charlie Built, and Built, and Built," Destination Magazine. .. Aspen Community Development Department February 9,2007 Page 6 Sincerely, E. MICHAEL HOFFMAN, P.C. E. Michael Hoffman Table of Exhibits Exhibit A - Letter of Authorization Exhibit B - Title Commitment Exhibit C - Vicinity Map Exhibit D - Site Plan Exhibit E - Certified Survey Exhibit F - Letter to City dated November 2,2005 Exhibit G - Reprint of Page from Final Plat Exhibit H - Photographs of East Wing .. Exhibit G MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 500 W. Hopkins Avenue- Landmark Designation, Second Reading of Ordinance #21, Series of 2007, PUBLIC HEARING DATE: June 11, 2007 SUMMARY: The subject property is a 27,000 square foot lot. It is developed with the Boomerang Lodge, which began operation in the 1950's. 1... Id. . . 70 It . . I - 79 14 - -3 1 1 -I .... , -th , 77.1 _1Â»_ --ZZ~ - The Boomerang Lodge was considered for landmark designation during the 2000 inventory review. There was HPC support, however concerns raised by private property owners resulted in all designations being put aside while the City revamped the preservation ordinance. At Council's direction, staff began an on-going effort to work with the owners of post-war properties of historical interest to see if additional landmarks could be preserved cooperatively, however owner consent for designation was never required. Staff and HPC have advocated for the preservation of this property, and during City Council review of a redevelopment plan the following condition was required: 1 .. "Prior to filing of the final plat the owner shall initiate the designation of the East Wing of the Boomerang Lodge for listing on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. The area to be designated shall be finalized in conjunction with the Historic Preservation Commission but shall include that area of the structural east wing along the alley Fourth Street and Hopkins Avenue also including the outdoor pool and spa area. The designation shall not subject the remainder of the building to HPC review." Approximately 1 /3 0 f the resource is to be landmarked. Staff, the applicant, and HPC worked together to agree on a boundary for the designation in order to fully encompass the western part ofthe building and surrounding landscape. HPC recommended designation by a vote of4-0. Staff and HPC find that the application meets the criteria for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. APPLICANT: Aspen FSP-ABR, LLC, owner, represented by Michael Hoffman, Sunny Vann, and Reno- Smith LLC. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-49-002. ADDRESS: 500 W. Hopkins Avenue, Lots K-S, Block 31, City and Townsite ofAspen, Colorado. ZONING: R.-6, Medium Density Residential with LP/PUD Overlay. HISTORIC DESIGNATION 26.415.030B. Criteria. To be eligible for designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, an individual building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The significance of the portion of the Boomerang Lodge property under consideration for designation will be evaluated according to the following criteria: 1. The property was constructed at least forty (40) years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made and the property possesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, and association and is related to one or more of the following: a. An event, pattern, or trend that has made a significant contribution to local, state, regional or national history, b. People whose specific contributions to local, state, regional or national history is deemed important and can be identified and documented, c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. 2 .. Staff Response: As detailed in Community Development's research paper on Modernism in Aspen, Charles Paterson, architect of the Boomerang Lodge, was born Karl Schanzer in Austria in 1929. His mother died in his youth, and his father fled Austria, taking Charles and his sister when Hitler invaded in 1938. They traveled first to Czechoslovakia and then to France. Once there it was decided that the only way to get the two children out of Europe entirely was to allow them to be adopted by a family in Australia, whom Mr. Schanzer knew through business connections. Relocated to that country in 1940, the children took on the family's name; Paterson. Their father fought in the war and was eventually reunited with his children in New York City, after they immigrated. In New York City, Charles "Charlie" Paterson started engineering school, but he had an interest in skiing and was disappointed with the conditions in the area. He moved west in 1949, stopping in Denver. There, he worked for the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad and skied on weekends. On one ski trip, Paterson met someone who had been to Aspen, and decided to hitchhike there a week later. After finding a j ob as a bellhop at the Hotel Jerome, he decided to stay. Within a month of his arrival in Aspen, Charlie Paterson bought three lots on West Hopkins Avenue, shortly followed by another three that comprised a full half a block between Fifth and Sixth Streets. There he built a one-room cabin in 1949 out of leftover lumber. Paterson returned to New York fi-om 1950-1951 to continue his studies, then moved back to Aspen and began expanding the cabin. In 1952, he leased a Victorian house that had been operating under the name "Holiday House," and his father came to town to help out. This experience got Paterson interested in running his own lodge, and led to more construction on the Hopkins Avenue property. In 1956, he added three units and opened the Boomerang. Charlie Paterson left Aspen in the late 1950's to study at Taliesen East, under Frank Lloyd Wright. He returned and built the East wing and pool area, his "thesis project," from 1960-61. The development of the Boomerang Lodge represents a number of local and national trends. Architecturally the Boomerang Lodge exhibits a recognizable Wrightian style that swept throughout the country during the mid-twentieth century; and it actively contributes to the presence of Wrightian-inspired architecture in Aspen along with designs by locals Fritz Benedict and Robin Molny. The property is also a classic example of Aspen's original small lodges, accommodations of a scale and intimacy that is much harder to find today. Created by Europeans who fled World War II, like Paterson, these facilities personified European warmth and hospitality, and exemplify the social and architectural history of the community as it began developing into an international ski resort. Staff finds that Criterion A is met. Although compliance with just one criterion is enough to qualify the property for designation, the Boomerang Lodge also meets Criterion C, in that it represents a physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important. 3 .. The Lodge exhibits many Wrightian derived design concepts described below. There are specific physical features that a property must possess in order for it to reflect the significance of the historic context. Aspen's examples of modernist buildings should exhibit the following distinctive characteristics if influenced by Wrightian design principles: Low horizontal proportions, flat roofs or low pitched hip roofs. Deep roof overhangs create broad shadow lines across the faGade. Glazing is usually concentrated in these areas. Horizontal emphasis on the composition of the wall planes accentuates the floating effect of the roof form. Â· Materials are usually natural and hand worked; such as rough sawn wood timbers and brick. Brick is generally used as a base material, wall infill or in an anchoring fireplace element. Wood structural systems tend more toward heavy timber or post and beam than typical stud framing. Structural members and construction methods are usually expressed in the building. For example; load-bearing columns may be expressed inside and out, the wall plane is then created by an infill of glass or brick. â€¢ Roof structure is often expressed below the roof sheathing Â· Glass is used as an infill material which expresses a void or a structural system; or it is used to accentuate the surface of a wall through pattern or repetition. â€¢ There is typically no trim which isolates the glazing from the wall plane. Window openings are trimmed out to match adjacent structural members in a wood context. Brick openings tend to be deeply set with no trim other than the brick return. â€¢ Structures are related to the environment through battered foundation walls, cantilevered floors and/or porches, clear areas of glazing which create visual connections to the outside and the inside, and the effect of the roof plane hovering over the ground. Decoration comes out of the detailing of the primary materials and the construction techniques. No applied decorative elements are used. Color is usually related to the natural colors of materials for the majority of the structure; natural brick, dark stained wood, and white stucco. Accent colors are used minimally, and to accentuate the horizontal lines o f the structure. The East wing of the building features board formed concrete walls, a flat roof, strong horizontal balconies, mitred windows, large overhangs with exposed roof structure, typical Wrightian color scheme, etc. Similar concepts are carried through the pool area. Charlie Paterson studied at Taliesen East from 1957-1959. Frank Lloyd Wright died during the last few months of Paterson's tenure at the school. While he was part of Taliesen, projects "on the boards" in the studio included such famed buildings as the Marin County Civic Center and the Guggenheim Museum. Staff finds that the Boomerang Lodge is directly connected to an architectural movement of world wide importance and meets designation Criterion C. Although this style was at one time more common in Aspen, there are only approximately 50 properties that staff would categorize as eligible for designation within the context of Aspen's modemist architecture. This amounts to .02% of the parcels in town. Of the roughly 50 eligible sites, 12 have actually been designated, so clearly very little of this important aspect of our local history has been ensured to exist into the future. In staff' s opinion, the Boomerang Lodge is one of the best examples of the design philosophies and cultural history of the period. 4 .. The Boomerang Lodge meets two of the three designation criteria, which leaves the question of integrity to be evaluated. Integrity can be measured through the scoring system that HPC has developed, however this is an unusual circumstance in that only part of the building is being retained. Staff has spoken to Charlie Paterson and determined that the eastern area of the property is unaltered from the original design, other than the slight relocation of an exterior door in the pool area. There is a high degree of architectural integrity. Staff and HPC support landmark designation for this property finding that the review criteria are met. RECOMMENDATION: Staff and HPC recommend Council adopt Ordinance #21, Series of 2007, landmark designation of 500 W. Hopkins Avenue, Lots K-S, Block 31, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, as defined ill the exhibit to the Ordinance. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance #21, Series of 2007. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Exhibits: Ordinance #21, Series of 2007 A. Application B. Aspen's 208 Century Architecture: Modernism- a paper written by the Community Development Department. 5 .. Exhibit H ORDINANCE #21. SERIES OF 2007 - Boomerang Lodge Historic Designation Amy Guthrie, community development department, reminded Council as part of the review of the Boomerang Lodge redevelopment, the HPC and Council requested a condition of approval that the original part of this lodge is designated a historic landmark. Ms. Guthrie noted about 1/3 of the building, the oldest part of the building, will be landmarked. HPC and the applicant discussed and agreed on the boundaries ofpreserving the exteriors of the building and the landscaping including the swimming pool. Ms. Guthrie reminded Council the criteria for historic preservation are association with important historic events as well as a finding of architectural integrity. Ms. Guthrie noted this meets several criteria; the lodge is Wrightian in style, which building style was prominent in Aspen in the 1950's and 1960's, and is representative of Aspen's small lodges. This meets criteria (a) - an event or trend important to Aspen's history. Ms. Guthrie pointed out very little modern architecture has been preserved in Aspen and staff feels this is an important designation. Sunny Vann, representing the applicant, noted the applicant voluntarily agreed to designate this portion of the building. Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing. Councilman Torre asked about the new waterfall; how will this affect the historic designation. Ms. Guthrie said the applicant is still working with the HPC on the redevelopment details. Councilman Johnson moved to adopt Ordinance #21, Series of 2007, on second reading; seconded by Councilman DeVilbiss. Roll call vote; Councilmembers Johnson, yes; Torre, yes; Tygre, yes; DeVilbiss, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried. 0 0 0 1,(- 10- jo 1-1 , /71 0,$,p'AB 0~ . .,- Â©f 1% . I . ' 1 : \ :-Â· '9 'i . , 11 P ~ . .. ,#I\,2.--/Y:,_p I .. I I . Ggi*44 -.. I - -. t \4 - . 4 ' 14* â€¢Lifi r . 41*3 â€¢ â€¢ r â€¢ 4 . . . ~ . 1 , 7/533 Ifly, . i , 1, ,! F; 16 E / A G BAÂ·cy 4, , . 1 1/...6 14. h . , .0 -a + + rÂ·44 Ff-~ U. I - . I . . 0 'L. , ~, ~--- 0 _~402~ti=51914%01*18#VE#SAQF#1011 4.E# * A 0 rg. F 't 3 0 . 1 1 0 I../.4 7 . ty./IA. ". D Jl . Â· . T Czy=L===4 . .' IN I @. CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS - BOOMERANG LODGE 0 0 ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 500 W. Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 10,2010 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1, E. Michael Hoffman, being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that 1 have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) ofthe Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: E 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 25th day of October. 2010, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. m 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(IE)(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 (69) days prior to the date ofthe public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental aaÂ¢Acies so,dipd is attached hereto. 449 4- (E. 64(chael Hoffman L The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this ] 001 day ofNovember, 2010. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: ic,/1 6,/1 3 111 f r 1*fiary*blie List of Attachments PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) .,49%4.L LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL #et f LINDSAY i i LOGAN j %.........9 OF Â»Sy- My Commisslon Expires 10/18/2013 . 9- . PUBLIC NOTICE a DATE: November 10,2010 ''. 1 t hÂ·: E TIME: f s:Oop.m. --fr* '.I .4 '' I ' I, i PLACE: City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena Street. Aspen, CO 8 1 61 1 PURPOSE: To consideran application submitted byAspen FSP-ABR LLC, c/o Steve Stunda, 602 North Fourth Street. Aspen, CO 816 11, represented by Garfield and Hecht, P.C., affecting The Boomerang Lodge. located at 500 W. Hopkins i. - -~ Avenue. and legally described as Lots K, L, M, N, O, P. O. R and S, Blocl: 31 of the City and Townsite of Aspen. A portion 6 4 i: /- of the lodge was designated a historic landmark in 2007. The i Â·Â·r. applicant wishes to amend the boundaries of the designated F Â· 4 area to remove the pool and spa from the area historically N designated, as described in more particularity in the , 46%Â£ application. The IIistoric Preservation Commission is required N 4. r f to make a recommendation regarding landmark designation to t. 4 Â· 1 : : City Council. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie , 2 y*@.1 at the City of Aspen Conimunity Development Department, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2758, , amy.guthrie@ci.aspen.co.us. ' I . ;4. - . . $ -. ... : .. .... ;1~ 2 12 . , ....0 + 92*.r k .. Exhibit 16 Exhibit 16 List of Property Owners within 300 Feet of Boomerang Lodge 521-523 W HOPKINS AFFORDABLE 501 W HOPKINS LLC 501 WEST MAIN LLC HOUSING PO BOX 8769 532 E HOPKINS AVE CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611-1818 521 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 604 WEST LLC 612 WEST LLC ALEXANDER JOAN P 604 W MAIN ST 604 W MAIN ST PO BOX 4818 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81505 ALPINE BANK ALLEN DOUGLAS P ALPINE BANK ATTN ERIC GARDEY 403 LACET LN 600 E HOPKINS AV PO BOX 10000 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81602 AMAYA JOSE ANTONIO ASPEN MESA STORE LLC ANGELOV DIMTAR S & DANIEL D ARGUETA BLANCA EDITH C/O ASPEN BLUE SKY HOLDINGS LLC 605 W HOPKINS AVE #209 605 W HOPKINS AVE #103 PO BOX 8238 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN. CO 81612 ASPEN SQUARE CONDO ASSOC INC BARTON META PACKARD BERR LLC 617 E COOPER 4475 N OCEAN BLVD APT 43A 611 W MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 DELRAY BEACH, FL 33483 ASPEN. CO 81611 CARROLL MEREDITH COHEN BRIDGE WILLIAM BROOKS NORMAN A & LESLEE S CARROLL ARTHUR RICHARD 2075 SHERWOOD DR 16311 VENTURA BLVD #690 605 W HOPKINS AVE #210 CAMBRIA. CA 93428 ENCINO. CA 91436 ASPEN, CO 81611 CARTER RICHARD P CHAKERES JOHN B TRUST CHRISTIANA UNIT D101 LLC 400 E 3RD AVE #804 3801 KENNETT PIKE C200 795 LAKEVIEW DR DENVER, CO 80202 GREENVILLE, DE 19807 MIAMI BEACH, FL 33140 CITY OF ASPEN CLEANER EXPRESS CORONA VANESSA LOPEZ ATTN FINANCE DEPT 435 E MAIN ST PO BOX 3670 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN. CO 81611 CORTALE ITA CUMMINS RICHARD DESTINATION RESORT MGMT INC 205 SMILLST#112 1280 UTE AVE #10 610 S WEST END ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN. CO 81611 .. [Type text] DUNSDON S MICHAELE DILLON RAY IV EMERICK SHELLEY W BORKENHAGEN DAVID A PO BOX 10543 2449 5TH ST 617 W MAIN ST #D ASPEN, CO 81612 BOULDER, CO 80304 ASPEN, CO 81611-1619 .. [Type text] ERICKSON A RONALD FARR CHARLOTTE FAT CITY HOLDINGS LLC 605 W HOPKINS AVE #211 306 MCCORMICK AVE 402 MIDLAND PARK PL ASPEN, CO 81611 CAPITOLA. CA 95010 ASPEN, CO 81611 FINE FREDRIC N & SONDRA FRANSEN ERIN M & GREGORY H FRIAS PROPERTIES OF ASPEN LLC 412 MARINER DR PO BOX 5082 730 E DURANT JUPITER, FL 33477 GILLETTE, WY 82717-5082 ASPEN, CO 81611 GANT CONDO ASSC GARMISCH LODGING LLC GOLDENBERG STEPHEN R & CHERYL J 610 S WEST END ST 110 W MAIN ST 430 W HOPKINS AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 GORDON LETICIA GOLDMAN DIANNE L H & H PROPERTIES LLLP C/O JOE RACZAK GOLDEN HORN PO BOX 518 807 W MORSE BLVD STE 101 555 E DURANT AVE FAIRFIELD, CT 06824 WINTER PARK, FL 32789-3725 ASPEN. CO 81611 HAISFIELD MICHAEL DOUGLAS HAYMAN JULES ALAN HY-MOUNTAIN TRANSPORTATION INC HAISFIELD LISA YERKE 9238 POTOMAC SCHOOL DR 1110 AABC 616 W HOPKI N S POTOMAC, MD 20854 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN. CO 81611 JEWISH RESOURCE CENTERCHABAD IGLEHART JIM IGLEHART JIM OF ASPEN 610 W HALLAM ST 617 W MAI N ST 435 W MAI N ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN. CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 JOHNSON STANFORD H JOHNSTON FAMILY TRUST KELLY KIM PO BOX 32102 2018 PHALAROPE 605 W HOPKINS AVE #202 TUCSON, AZ 85751 COSTA MESA, CA 92626 ASPEN, CO 81611 KONIG DEBORAH KELSO DOUGLAS P KIRVIDA KATHY L REV TRUST HANSON KIM 627 W MAIN ST PO BOX 518 605 W HOPKINS AVE #203 ASPEN, CO 81611-1619 LINDSTROM, MN 55045 ASPEN, CO 81611 KURKULIS PATSY & PAUL R LESTER JAMES LITTLE AJAX CONDOMINIUM ASSOC 605 W HOPKINS AVE #201 229 CHRYSTIE ST #1417 605 W HOPKINS #006 ASPEN, CO 81611 NEW YORK, NY 10002 ASPEN, CO 81611 .. [Type text] LOT 2 BOOMERANG LOT SPLIT MADSEN MARTHA W MARSHALL ALISON J & JOSHUA W PLANNED COM OWNERS ASSOC 608 W HOPKINS AVE APT 9 605 W HOPKINS AVE #212 533 E HOPKINS AVE 3RD FL ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 .. [Type textl MOLLER DIANE T NECHADEIM REALTY LLC NELSON TREVOR T & ROSE MARIE 1710 MIRA VISTA AVE PO BOX 4950 605 W HOPKINS #207 SANTA BARBARA, CA 93103 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 NIX ROBERT JR NORTH AND SOUTH ASPEN LLC NORTHWAY LLC PO BOX 3694 200 S ASPEN ST 106 S MILL ST #202 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN. CO 81611 OHARROW SIOBHAN P PERRY EMILY V RENO ASPEN PROPERTIES LLC 605 W HOPKINS AVE #208 PO BOX 11071 605 W MAIN ST #002 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 REVA LLC RODRIGUEZJOANN ROLAND DANIEL P & LEAH S PO BOX 1376 605 W MAIN ST #00A 605 W HOPKINS AVE #102 ASPEN. CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 SCHEFF JONATHAN & BUTTERWICK RUFUS CAMI CAMI LLC SCHALL FAMILY TRUST 8/31/1998 KIMBERLY 1280 UTE AVE #7 18518 ST MORITZ DR 6450 AVENIDA CRESTA ASPEN, CO 81611 TARZANA, CA 91356 SAN DIEGO. CA 92037 SCOTT MARY HUGH SHADOW MTN CORP SHERWIN ENTERPRISES LLC RUSSELL SCOTT 111 & CO LLC C/O FINGER CORP C/O JENNIFERSHERWIN 5420 S QUEBEC ST #200 7321 N.W. 75TH STREET 1714 VISTA ST GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 MEDLEY, FL 33166 DURHAM. NC 27701 STARFORD PROPERTIES NV SLTM LLC SMITH ANDREW C & DONNA G C/O KEON WILLIAM 106 S MILL ST #202 3622 SPRINGBROOK ST 7321 NW 75TH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 DALLAS, TX 75205 MEDLEY, FL 33166 STASPEN LLP STUART DAN SUBOTKY JULIE E KING & SPALDING PO BOX 183 55 WEST 14TH ST #15L 1180 PEACHTREE ST NE LOMA, CO 81524 NEW YORK, NY 10011 ATLANTA, GA 303093521 TOMS CONDO LLC THROM DOUGLAS H TODD SHANE C/O BRANDT FEIGENBAUM PC 617 W MAIN ST PO BOX 2654 132 MIDLAND AVE #4 ASPEN. CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 BASALT, CO 81621 .. [Type text] TUCKER LUCY LEA ULLR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION VERNER DANIEL A & MERYLE PO BOX 1480 600 E HOPKINS #304 2577 NW 59TH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 BOCA RATON. FL 33496 .. [Type text] VIEIRA LINDA 50% INTEREST WAGNER HOLDINGS CORP LLC VOSS NATALIE S HALL TERESA 50% INTEREST C/O BILL POSS 605 W HOPKINS AVE #204 0095 LIGHT HILL RD 605 E MAIN ST ASPEN. CO 81611 SNOWMASS, CO 81654 ASPEN. CO 81611 WASHBURN LYNN S WENDT ROBERT E 11 WERLIN LAURA B TRUST TERRELL SERENE-MARIE 350 MT HOLYOKE AVE 2279 PINE ST 605 W HOPKINS AVE #205 PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94115 ASPEN, CO 81611-1607 WEST ALFRED P JR & LORALEE S WHITNEY KURT A & JACQUELINE WINGSTONE TOY COMPANY LLC 58416475 METAVANTE WAY 6448 E CRABTREE PL 12 GREENBRIAR LN SIOUX FALLS. SD 57186 YUMA, AZ 85365 PAOLI, PA 19301 YLP WEST LLC YOUNG DONALD L YOUNG PAUL 111 FAMILY TRUST 7 SOUTH MAIN ST PO BOX 4444 8117 PRESTON RD SUITE 300 WEST YARDLEY. PA 19067 ASPEN, CO 81612 DALLAS, TX 75225 EXHIBIT NAMASTE ENTERPRISES, INCT Meta Packard Barton, CFPrM, President 1 - O\ P.O.B. 633 Riderwood, MD 21139 n Phone: 561-272-5664,,603-253-6008 n R e mll, b . 4ntl GLLFIv72 -**I t* 2.4 f 61~ f Ms Meta Barton 443 ~fhpal eylÂ»jvyioU Atelifi,MA P th,JI 61 4475 N Ocean Blvd Apt 43A fife C? f Delray Beach FL 33483 Prern: 4 4~ 13 Ectdbn 564 - 292- 5 06 4 8**E. f~ ob:784 O1142QA ' *Gtic'Eihdo + 52 11 9/84 0&;130 13 80â‚¬rAQU) ang locti D I.DIA 4 40 56 99 6*rq Â°fro-6 %0 -5 04P \149 99 per-Ach CL Fle (30 07424771 Led p 41-31 c ct- il,Â·6)06 are doo) i~> rift,J go hioku-)ic Mnele-raok 70 300 7 10 4 Â«.1-ta~cl i r> 43{j uk-u~ '72-e focd &73 Spa CNA2_Â« u/00 a slyake pu-hÂ» 4-)22 +Es-hoic 1Â©37 1,1 10Â£Â»44 <Eurn vy@n <743<J l.owdeÂ« enfet,SA J -ep> cidj>/ 4 'V ...1 1Â«0243 ukko Ac.le N & 1-0 i*Q-4 unlk ejcD cirN rtto 14 1 549 Â«ACU) d Re- p,9 a-W ep o cÂ·Â«) ck tra_lj fle y cLU j f 14/*0 41 eyis ker-to, 2 ah 2)12-1-02 0.9 4 u>1.1~ 1)e~ c~tt~ A.)atj e) ,Â«tyâ‚¬o a j.<nj tyÂ» crb:/ fy#193 <50 4 m~\011 Â¥23- CCACT J CAU pr=p A-J i al,GA (o ll)-6 >oÂ« Axacl madt- 4)40 1) pvix.Ac) crÂ·*~ A-Ocah doj Mh! aau* NO câ‚¬llho J A d *Ne A CAA_UT<u.k stl) i 8Â« cn 36 firdÂ«Lle A clcui)-?LA />a-lk/nce-Â° 1 Ma . El A l,VIA-Le Â°1 93(149 boae au_ uke n al Â«0-lcu>-0 d 91; a-likA -TU â‚¬ *4 Foo; 4 â‚¬497 ? af #nck 4 *49/JA Â©O LU f AUZ Lv_lan De 1 60) 4,1 U~M jÂ»7120[0/<0~ 166 Â« VrÂ© 01-2.Ar> Â°lf< co 60 j j cUr.9 . 39- oppeauo lie C~Ze>â‚¬~ 412-4 15 AA cdo nÂ¥ A 071 cy rkej> 8 A. ik- Atjth ki-4 9}an i caj f eh~jd)239 6/nmit ri cn 1 znd- 0,1- 0 32 9-c) c\>LoILew Fljft,Q,) 3-gÂ«j 763 9-0 w b /10 ccup ))e ApCO -Seo 2/30 1-1* 4 0#*A 60\~1-9 4- fle ke.3-#J 4 0-*n recnxr-~fc bulllÂ£2 , 0-vi J *OCU-Ofry 16% r * d ~41al/~ cod oppo_cLBL)*N on 712 ect-nogn) c dalv#MAR. -12â‚¬ 114*1410 Ccen#n frrjl_ 03 1 -lk G %3 2Â£*11 d;.)1/-Clk--2 dong Gr, V c.te3Â«1 Bn 0 -E cn,4 hAnd , CJ,r 4 0/1, Cali:f . Act tof CHUA~ 34-640>*Â·cl z All A+ 1) A .. Amy Guthrie From: Tom McCabe Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 8:17 AM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: Boomerang application Dear Amy. Please distribute this e mail to the 11PC u hen the> consider the new Boomerang development plan. Dear HPC members. the APCHA Board of- Directors has approved the content of this message. Keeping 11()A assessments to homeowners as low as possible is one of APCHA's objectives. Recent events at some HOAs only underscore that importance. I offer Burlingame as an example. I was involved in many ofthe discussions that tried to integrate all the various objectives and the inevitable tradeoffs that come into play. and I argued for keeping the elements that increased the monthly assessments to a minimum. I am sorry to say that the project did not optimize that set of considerations. and that resulted, inevitably, in some families being unable to afford the monthly HOA assessments. They could afford the mortgage, insurance and utilities. but as the HOA learned the totality of their obligations and apportioned those cost onto the homeowners. the burden eventually broke some families. Consequently some had to sell. and others experienced foreclosure. APCHA is always involved when these things happen and we know firsthand about the linancial and emotional calamities those working families experience. In that light 1 would like you to consider not requiring the Boomerang applicant to preserve the swimming pool and hot tub amenity for this workforce housing development. APCHA knows that the pool has esthetic design value, It is hard for us to quantify what that value amounts to for the larger community. in as much as the larger community will not have significant access to that private property. I don't know how to quantify the green house gas impacts of heated swimming pools and hot tubs. but they certainly run counter to long term energy goals of the community. Additionally. there are maintenance. chemical. safety. inspection. and insurance expenses that are perpetual. Repairs to a one of a kind. historic glass pool are likely to be expensive also. 1 .. Lastly, because this pool area is a unique one. and from an era when safety considerations were not as well developed, I suspect that any insurance provider would require modifications to bring the pool area into an insurable condition without regard to the sanctity of the original design. APCHA has never endorsed including a swimming pool in any new affordable housing development because the added expense to the homeowner could not be.justified. not even at North 1Â·'orty Ihank you for your time. Tom mcCobe Executive Difecto, Aspent Pilitin County Housing Authority S30 E. main n. A,pen. CO 81611 970-920-5068.970-319-2335 tomm@ci.o,pen.co.u, Tom mcCobe EMecutive Directo, A,pen/ Pilkin County Hou,ing Outhofity 530 E. main St. A,pen. CO 81611 970-920-5068.970-319-2335 tomm@ci.o,pen.co.u, 2 .. Amy Guthrie From: Cindy Christensen Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 10:01 AM To: Amy Guthrie Subject: FW Boomerang pool I wanted to forward this e-mail to you per Steve Stunda's request regarding the pool. From: sstunda@aol.com [mailto:sstunda@aol.com] Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 9:58 AM To: Cindy Christensen Cc: Michael Hoffman forward Subject: Re: Boomerang pool Cindy, Would you be so kind as to provide me with a copy of this email to Amy Guthrie. I meet with HPC on Wed. and would like to be able to refer to your recommendation. Thanks Steve -----Original Message----- From: Cindy Christensen <Cindy.Christensen@ci.aspen.co.us> To: sstunda@aol.com; Tom McCabe <Tom.McCabe@ci.aspen.co.us> Sent: Thu, Nov 4,2010 11:41 am Subject: RE: Boomerang pool Just to let you know, I did send Amy an e-mail that it was a request from the Housing Board to remove the pool due to the cost and liabilitythatthe homeowners would have. As to adding a three-bedroom, I don't think we have a problem selling a couple of three bedrooms, however, in a dense project like this where most of the units would not have children, I would think that it would be betterto not have any asthree bedrooms require the household to have a dependent. Of course, the project across the street is alrnost all three bedrooms. From: sstunda@aol.com [mailto:sstunda@aol.coml Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 10:33 AM To: Tom McCabe Cc: Cindy Christensen Subject: Boomerang pool Tom, First let me thank you again for attending the Pand Z meeting. Your support and comments were greatly helpful and appreciated . I have a couple of questions and a request to make of you and or Cindy. First , in order to minimize the number of units do you think it might be possible to combine a studio with a 2 bedroom unit creating a 3 bedroom unit? Is that marketable ? It still would be a cat 3 or 4. If you think that is feasible could we accommodate more than one ? Second, I have advanced word that Amy is not going to approve of the removal of the pool. I have a meeting w th the HPC next Wed the 10th to discuss this issue . Could you or Cindy write me a letter indicating that your department feels that 1 0 . the pool constitutes an attractive nuisance and that it would be too expensive to operate --also a word about its lack of size and functionality should be mentioned. I don't get their lack of cooperation but that is what Mike is telling me. Thanks Steve Email secured by Check Point Email secured by Check Point 2 0 0 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 600 1/36-[ tto plavd ABL , Aspen, CO -TI'- 3048#9 47â‚¬- SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Nov to Wal 42 5-,f,1 '100-a- STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1, jv*7 0Â£4 560-I- b- (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Xspen 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: ~,0,/ Publication of notice: By fhe 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 nolice: 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 ~ Â·and including the date and time.ofthe 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) 4 4 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 of this Title, or whenever the text o f this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. -2 3-2 Signature The foregoing "Affidavit o f Notice" was acknowledged before me this 2 lay of Gr,4120 , 2002, by 4414)Â·80(a Sce-Â·~ill , WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Alleill 14Â« fit* faa,1Â£54Â» Notary Public -. - I-I - 4- I , ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: â€¢ COPY OF THE PUBLICATION -1.- â€¢ PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) 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 A 1 l: A y Public, Notice 21 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 500 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE (aka The Boomerang Lodge) - AMENDING HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, November 10, 2010 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Aspen FSP- ABR LLC, c/o Steve Stunda, 602 North Fourth St. Aspen CO 81611, represented by Garfield and Hecht, PC, affecting The Boomerang Lodge, located at 500 W. Hopkins Avenue, and legally described as Lots K, L.MI N, O, P. Q. R and S. Block 31 of the City and Townsite of Aspen. A portion of the lodge was designated a historic landmark in 2007. The applicant wishes to amend the boundaries of the designated area to remove the pool and spa from the area historically lesignated, as described in more particularity in :he application. The Historic Preservation Commission is required to make a recommenda- lion regarding landmark designation to City Council. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Develop- nent Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, &970) 429-2758, amv.guthrie@c/.aspen.co.us. D/Sarah Brouqhton, Chair, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on October 14 2010 157917901 22 PublioNotice LLC, Co., P.O. Box 4560 Basalt CO 81621. For further information. contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Depart- ment, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2778 0, at sara.adams@cl.aspen.co.us s/Sarah Broughton, Chair Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times Week/y on October 24, 2010. [5721846] PUBLIC NOTICE RESTART COMBINED NOTICE OF SALE, RIGHT TO CURE, AND RIGHT TO REDEEM RESTART FORECLOSURE NO. 09-92 Republished to restart foreclosure stayed by bankruptcy and reset sale date. On November 25.2009, the undersigned Public Trustee caused the Notice of Election and Demand relating to the Deed of Trust described below to be recorded in the County of Pitkin records. To Whom It May Concern: This Notice iÂ¢ given with regard to the following described Deed of Trust: Original Grantor(s) CHRISTOPHER J MEZA Original Beneticiary(les) MORTGAGE ELECTRIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., AS NOMINEE FOR SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC. Current Holder of Evidence of Debt: