Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20240327AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION March 27, 2024 4:30 PM, City Council Chambers - 3rd Floor 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 I.ROLL CALL II.MINUTES II.A Draft Minutes - 3/13/24 III.PUBLIC COMMENTS IV.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS V.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI.PROJECT MONITORING VI.A Project Monitoring VII.STAFF COMMENTS VIII.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED IX.CALL UP REPORTS X.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS XI.OLD BUSINESS XII.NEW BUSINESS XII.A 227 E Main Street – Informational Memo Regarding Alleged Violation of the Municipal Code, Section 26.415 – Historic Preservation, NOT A PUBLIC HEARING minutes.hpc.20240313_DRAFT.docx PROJECT MONITORING.pdf Project Monitoring And Certificate of No Negative Effect Report.20240327.pdf 227 E Main St.HPC Memo.20240327.pdf Exhibit A.HPC Resolution 9 Series of 2020.pdf 1 1 XII.B 227 E. Bleeker St. - Substantial Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING XIII.ADJOURN XIV.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER Exhibit B.HPC Resolution 13 Series of 2020.pdf Exhibit C.227 E Main Street Response, Updated.20240321.pdf Exhibit D.227 E Main Street Remediation Narrative.20240222.pdf Exhibit E.227 E Main Street Apology Letter, Drawings, and Photos.20240228.pdf Exhibit F.227 E Main Street Updated Drawings.20240312.pdf Exhibit G.227 E Main Street.Letter to Owner.20240319.pdf Staff Memo.227 E Bleeker St.LPA-24-027.pdf HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2024.pdf Exhibit A.Design Guidelines Analysis.227 W Bleeker St..pdf Exhibit B.Application.227 E Bleeker St.LPA-24-027.pdf TYPICAL PROCEEDING FORMAT FOR ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS (1 Hour, 15 Minutes for each Major Agenda Item) 1. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest (at beginning of agenda) 2. Presentation of proof of legal notice (at beginning of agenda) 3. Applicant presentation (10 minutes for minor development; 20 minutes for major development) 4. Board questions and clarifications of applicant (5 minutes) 5. Staff presentation (5 minutes for minor development; 10 minutes for major development) 6. Board questions and clarifications of staff (5 minutes) 7. Public comments (5 minutes total, or 3 minutes/ person or as determined by the Chair) 8. Close public comment portion of hearing 9. Applicant rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) 10. Staff rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) End of fact finding. Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed. 11. Deliberation by the commission and findings based on criteria commences. No further input from applicant or staff unless invited by the Chair. Staff may ask to be recognized if there is a factual error to be corrected. If the item is to be continued, the Chair may provide a summary of areas to be restudied at their discretion, but the applicant is not to re-start discussion of the case or the board’s direction. (20 minutes) 12. Motion. Prior to vote the chair will allow for call for clarification for the proposed resolution. Please note that staff and/or the applicant must vacate the dais during the opposite presentation and board question and clarification session. Both staff and applicant team will vacate the dais during HPC deliberation unless invited by the chair to return. 2 2 Updated: March 7, 2024 3 3 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 13TH, 2024 Chairperson Thompson opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission at 4:30pm. Commissioners in attendance: Roger Moyer, Peter Fornell, Jodi Surfas, Barb Pitchford, Riley Warwick, and Kara Thompson. Absent were Kim Raymond and Jeff Halferty. Staff present: Kirsten Armstrong, Principal Planner Historic Preservation Stuart Hayden, Planner - Historic Preservation Kate Johnson, AssistantCity Attorney Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk MINUTES: Mr. Fornell motioned to approve the draft minutes from 1/24/24. Mr. Moyer seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 4-0, motion passes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS: None DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: None STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Armstrong introduced Mr. Charlie Tarver who was recently appointed by City Council as HPC’s 2nd alternate. After a training meeting he will be joining the board. PROJECT MONITORING: Ms. Armstrong listed six project monitoring items that have either been approved or denied since the last meeting. She described some details and the outcomes of each as listed and described in the agenda packet. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None. CALL UP REPORTS: None. SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Ms. Johnson confirmed that public notice was completed in compliance with the Code for the agenda item. NEW BUSINESS: 808 Cemetery Lane (Red Butte Cemetery) – Minor PD Amendment to a Project Review Approval, Use Variation, GMQS Review Ms. Thompson moved to continue this item to April 24th, 2024, at the applicant’s request. Ms. Pitchford seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Mr. Warwick, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 6-0, motion passes. OLD BUSINESS: Discussion of Letter Regarding the Re-Naming of the Benedict Music Tent – NOT A PUBLIC HEARING 4 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MARCH 13TH, 2024 Ms. Thompson referred to the revised letter that was circulated to the members. She wanted to get the board members’ thoughts on it, whether they supported it or had any potential changes and how they wanted to proceed. Staff displayed the letter on the in room monitors. Ms. Pitchford said she thought it was very well written and to the point. She said she did realize that the letter was more of a gesture, as the renaming was a done deal. She said she still thought it was important to make the board’s voices heard. Ms. Surfas agreed that it was a nice letter and well written. Mr. Fornell thanked Ms. Thompson for putting the letter together and that he was satisfied with it. Mr. Moyer said that he would like the board to put the letter in the newspaper as a letter to the editor. Mr. Warwick said he liked that they were making the gesture with the letter but questioned the real purpose of it as he did not see how it would be effective in making any objective change. He referenced some language near the end of the letter that spoke to the desire for collaboration between the Music School and HPC on future permanent recognition display efforts. He said he wasn’t exactly sure about what the board was asking or offering to collaborate on. Ms. Fornell mentioned that the Music School representative that attended the last meeting said that they did want to put something up that would be in Mr. Benedicts’ memory and those other people who have contributed to the tent and school. Ms. Thompson confirmed that that is what she was referencing to in the letter about collaboration. She mentioned that if they all agreed on the letter, it would just say that it was from the HPC in general and would not include individual names. Ms. Johnson said that it would be good practice for someone to make a motion to approve of the letter itself and sending it to the Music School and a separate motion about the request of the publication of the letter. MOTION: Mr. Moyer motioned to approve the letter and to send it to the AMFS Board. Ms. Pitchford seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Mr. Warwick, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 6-0, motion passes. Mr. Moyer motioned to submit the letter to the local newspapers after the AMFS Board has received it. Ms. Pitchford seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Fornell, yes; Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Ms. Pitchford, yes; Mr. Warwick, yes; Ms. Thompson, yes. 6-0, motion passes. ADJOURN: Ms. Thompson motioned to adjourn the regular meeting. Ms. Pitchford seconded. All in favor; motion passes. ____________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 5 HPC PROJECT MONITORS - projects in bold are permitted or under construction 1/4/2024 Kara Thompson 300 E. Hyman 201 E. Main 333 W. Bleeker 234 W. Francis Skier’s Chalet Steakhouse 101 W. Main (Molly Gibson Lodge) 720 E. Hyman 304 E. Hopkins 312 W. Hyman 520 E. Cooper 931 Gibson 1020 E. Cooper Jeff Halferty 110 W. Main, Hotel Aspen 134 E. Bleeker 300 E. Hyman 434 E. Cooper, Bidwell 414-420 E. Cooper, Red Onion/JAS 517 E. Hopkins Lift 1 corridor ski lift support structure 227 E. Bleeker 211/213 W. Hopkins 211 W. Main 215 E. Hallam 500 E. Durant 413 E. Main Roger Moyer 227 E. Main 135 E. Cooper 110 Neale 517 E. Hopkins Skier’s Chalet Lodge 202 E. Main 320 E. Hyman (Wheeler Opera House, solar panels) 611 W. Main 132 W. Hopkins 500 E. Durant Jodi Surfas 202 E. Main 320 E. Hyman (Wheeler Opera House, solar panels) 611 W. Main 602 E. Hyman Peter Fornell 304 E. Hopkins 233 W. Bleeker 214 W. Bleeker Barb Pitchford 121 W. Bleeker 312 W. Hyman 132 W. Hopkins 214 W. Bleeker 630 W. Main 420 W. Francis 135 W. Francis Kim Raymond 630 W. Main 205 W. Main 216 W. Hyman 6 HPC PROJECT MONITORS - projects in bold are permitted or under construction 1/4/2024 Riley Warwick 420 E. Durant/Rubey Park 420 W. Francis 400 E. Cooper 7 Project Monitoring and Certificate of No Negative Effect ReportHistoric Preservation Commission March 27, 2024 8 Project Monitoring• Although several project monitoring requests are ongoing, none have been approved or denied since the last HPC meeting.Certificate of No Negative Effect• None issued since last HPC meeting.9 Page 1 of 2 427 Rio Grande Pl, Aspen, CO 81611 | P: 970.920.5090 | aspen.gov Memorandum TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Ben Anderson, Community Development Director FROM: Kirsten Armstrong, Principal Planner Historic Preservation MEETING DATE: March 27, 2024 RE: 227 E Main Street – Informational Memo Regarding Alleged Violation of the Municipal Code, Section 26.415 – Historic Preservation, NOT A PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT /OWNER: 227 East Main, LLC REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors LOCATION: Street Address: 227 E Main Street Legal Description: Lot F, Block 74, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2737-073-28-003 CURRENT ZONING & USE Mixed Use, Single Family Residential PROPOSED ZONING & USE: No change SUMMARY: On February 16th, 2024, the City of Aspen Chief Building Official issued a Stop Work Order at 227 E Main Street (Figure 1), an individually designated AspenVictorian resource. The City alleges violations of the land use approvals granted by HPC, the permit granted by the Building Department, and the requirement of a Historic Preservation Specialty Contractor’s Certification. This memo intends to inform the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) about the alleged violation and provide background on the steps taken by staff, the past approvals, and the current situation. Figure 1. Site Locator Map – 227 E. Main St. 10 Page 2 of 3 427 Rio Grande Pl, Aspen, CO 81611 | P: 970.920.5090 | aspen.gov BACKGROUND The City of Aspen’s Historic Preservation Program saw its beginnings in 1972, when a citizen’s “Save the Victorians” group encouraged City Council to adopt the city’s first historic preservation ordinance. The program has grown tremendously since then, acquiring two historic districts, approximately 300 individually designated AspenVictorian resources, and approximately 50 individually designated AspenModern resources. Though change has occurred to the program from its inception, the purpose is still to protect, enhance and preserve those properties, areas and sites, which represent the distinctive elements of Aspen's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history. 227 E Main Street is a circa 1886, one-story, wood frame Miner’s Cottage (Figure 2, Figure 3). Prior to the 2020 Major Development approvals, changes that occurred to the resource over time include the installation of asbestos siding over the original wood siding, removal of the original porch and windows details, and a small addition to the rear elevation which can be seen by 1974 aerial imagery. 227 E Main Street underwent Conceptual and Final Review for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations, and GMQS Change in Use in 2020. The project received HPC Conceptual and Final review approval, both with conditions, through HPC Resolution #9, Series of 2020 (Exhibit A) and HPC Resolution #13, Series of 2020 (Exhibit B). Approvals included the restoration of the historic resource, to be undertaken with evidence from historic construction, photographs, and additional research. Benefits awarded as part of the approval include the following setback variations: • A 5’10” front yard setback, where 10’ is required, to retain the historic house in its existing location. • A 0’ east and west side yard setback, where 5’ is required to retain the historic house in its existing location and to allow basement excavation. • A 3’ east and west side yard setback for the addition, above and below grade, where 5’ is required. Figure 2. 1886 Sanborn Map. 227 E Main Street parcel highlighted with a red border. Figure 3. 1969 Photograph including 227 E Main Street to the right side, Aspen Historical Society, https://archiveaspen.catalogaccess.com/photos/152775 11 Page 3 of 4 427 Rio Grande Pl, Aspen, CO 81611 | P: 970.920.5090 | aspen.gov SUMMARY OF ALLEGED VIOLATION Trek Builders LLC is serving as the general contractor for the 227 E Main Street project. On March 19, 2024, Trek Builders LLC provided a document in response to staff questions regarding unapproved removal of historic roof framing, see Exhibit C. This document provides detailed information. A summary of the unapproved work follows: • Westmost, north/south gable: Historic top plate removed, new top plate installed, with historic top plate installed on top of the new. LVL ledger placed too high. Historic rafters were removed and replaced next to new framing, resulting in a gable roof that is 4 ½ “ taller than it was originally. • Eastmost, north/south gable: Historic rafters removed and relocated 6” higher than original location. • East/west gable: Incorrect placement of LVL ledger resulting in a birds-mouth notch to the historic rafters, which was not an original condition. Although historic preservation projects typically do not include demolition calculations, which allows the program to incentivize removal of non-historic additions and alterations, in this instance staff requested demolition calculations be prepared to compare approved work and unapproved work. The demolition calculations provided indicate that approved work including the re-introduction of a historic door and the reconstruction of the front porch equals to approximately 11.45% demolition. Whereas the addition of unapproved historic rafter removal takes that total up to approximately 42.44% demolition. It should be noted that Project Superintendent Michael Monsauret does not currently have his Historic Preservation BEST Card/Certification. He has applied for and passed the test on March 13, 2024, but the certification has not been issued by the Chief Building Official as investigation and enforcement is ongoing. The representative team considered and addressed potential corrective action and appropriate penalties on page 4 of Exhibit C. Their writeup indicates their willingness to reframe the roof in accordance with the approved structural drawings, provides suggestion that they could assist with creating contractor training documents, and provides the offer to forgo the $30,000 financial assurance bond that was provided for the approved building relocation. NARRATIVE OF STAFF PROCESS UPON LEARNING OF ALLEGED VIOLATION On February 15th, 2024, staff received a voicemail from an HPC Board Member, stating concern that the framer may have removed the remaining historic roof framing on the west side of the resource. Staff went to the site to confirm, see Figure 4. Staff messaged the representative team to inform them of the alleged violation and coordinated with the Chief Building Official. Approved plans were reviewed to confirm that this approach was not to plan. A site visit was conducted February 15, 2024, with the Chief Building Official, Historic Preservation Officer, architect, Figure 4. State of construction at 227 E Main Street on February 15th, 2024. 12 Page 4 of 5 427 Rio Grande Pl, Aspen, CO 81611 | P: 970.920.5090 | aspen.gov project superintendent, and the framing subcontractor. By this time, new framing had been installed with the historic framing sistered on to new, see Figure 5. The Chief Building Official issued a Stop Work Order the morning of February 16th, 2024. An email to the representative team requested documentation including photos, narrative, and a timeline, regarding what happened and why. Staff received a letter from Trek Builders LLC on February 22, 2024, see Exhibit D. On February 28, 2024, staff received an apology letter, drawings, and before and after photos to illustrate what occurred, see Exhibit E. Updated drawings were received on March 12, 2024, see Exhibit F. When the updated drawings were sent, the representative team included the following narrative in their email: From my recent discussions with Trek Builders, the historic stud walls remained intact, with the only exception being the top plates on the west side gable. Those top plates were detached from the historic studs below, a new top plate was placed on top, and then the historic was put back on top of the new plate. That means that gable actually moved up 4 1/2” inches from its original location, not 3”. I’ve updated the drawings that you recently reviewed to reflect that and have also added an additional page showing some photos and explaining this alteration. I included a photo of the house being moved to remind everyone that there was no historic sill plate, and that the new double sill plates were always a part of the plan to place the historic studs back onto. On March 13, 2023, staff requested more detailed responses to the following topics/questions: • Please provide a written description of the historic condition, the current condition, and changes to the plan to accompany the drawings. Include specifics with measurements, etc. • Please list the names of all on-site supervisors on this project who hold/held a Historic Preservation Best Card/Certification, the dates of their involvement with the project, and the dates they held a valid HP Best Card. o If applicable, please explain why construction work that requires certain certification was performed without holding a valid certification for that work. • Please explain how often and in what ways the general contractor communicated with, checked in on, and supervised the subcontractor and their work. • What did the general contractor discuss with the framing subcontractor related to the historic resource, historic material, and the treatment thereof prior to and during the work, and after discovering deviations from the approved plans. • What happened to the existing historic materials once they were removed. o Include all disposal, storage, labelling, and reinstallation methods used. • Please explain who decided to remove, relocate and/or reinstall each material, as well as when they did and why. Figure 5. Condition at site visit on February 15th, 2024. 13 Page 5 of 6 427 Rio Grande Pl, Aspen, CO 81611 | P: 970.920.5090 | aspen.gov • Please provide the approved demolition calculations and updated demolition calculations according to the actual demolition. • Please explain how you would like to correct the violations, and which penalties you feel would be appropriate. Staff indicated that more detailed information will not only help HPC understand what occurred, and what corrective action may be appropriate, but will also inform the historic preservation program in a way that will help avoid similar circumstances in the future. Staff provided a rough estimate of schedule at this time, requesting information by March 20, 2024, in order to include an information only memo on the March 27, 2024 HPC agenda. A letter to the owner, providing notice and requesting a meeting to discuss the issue was mailed from City Hall on March 19, 2024, see Exhibit G. Additional information was provided to staff at the end of the business day on March 19, 2024, and updated on March 21, 2024, see Exhibit C. Additionally, a public hearing with the HPC has been noticed in the newspaper for April 10, 2024, in case HPC wants to provide recommendations concerning appropriate penalties in response to the alleged violations, and corrective actions to be undertaken. CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL LAND USE CODE, HISTORIC PRESERVATION PENALTIES PER SEC.26.415.140 Any person violating the provisions of Sections 26.415.070 through 26.415.100 will be subject to the general penalty provisions of this Title. (a) Additional penalties. Additional penalties for the violation of Sections 26.415.070 through 26.415.100 include: (1) Any person who constructs, alters, relocates, changes the appearance or demolishes a designated property in violation of any section may be required to restore the building, structure or setting to its appearance prior to the violation. (2) Following notice and public hearing, the HPC shall prohibit the owner, successor or assigns from obtaining a building permit for the subject property for a period of up to ten (10) years from the date of the violation. The City shall initiate proceedings to place a deed restriction on the property to ensure enforcement of this penalty. The property owner shall be required to maintain the property during that period of time in conformance with the Standards for reasonable care and upkeep set forth in Subsection 26.415.100(a). (3) Any variances or historic preservation benefits previously granted to the property may be subject to revocation. ( Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part ]; Ord. No. 28-2010, § 1 ) TIMELINE OF PAST APPROVALS What follows is a timeline of approvals as staff understands from the available record. Additional communication may have occurred that staff is unable to access at this time. 12 February 2020: Public hearing with HPC concerning the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, Conceptual Review, Relocation, and Setback Variations. Staff recommends continuation with direction, particularly asking for clarification on drainage, future maintenance, and a 14 Page 6 of 7 427 Rio Grande Pl, Aspen, CO 81611 | P: 970.920.5090 | aspen.gov restudy of the roof of the addition. HPC continues the hearing to April 8. 2020, citing concerns about the setback variation requests, and requesting restudy of the massing/roofline. 8 April 2020: Public hearing with HPC concerning the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, Conceptual Review, Relocation, and Setback Variations, continued from 12 February 2020. Staff recommends approval with conditions, particularly requesting continued investigation of the need for a transformer, review of the impact of trees on adjacent properties, and additional study of the historic resource during construction. HPC approves the Conceptual Review, Relocation, and Setback Variations through HPC Resolution #9, Series of 2020 with conditions (Exhibit A) 27 May 2020: Public hearing with HPC concerning the application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, Final Review and GMQS Change in Use. Staff recommends approval with conditions, particularly regarding staff and monitor review of additional details, including different landscaping items, reporting on condition of historic materials and preservation techniques to be employed, restoration of historic doors and windows, porch restoration, roofing materials, stormwater, sidewalk, tree, and utilities plans, and change in use. HPC approves the Final Review and GMQS Change in Use through HPC Resolution #13, Series of 2020, with conditions (Exhibit B). Benefits awarded as part of the approval include the following setback variations: • A 5’10” front yard setback, where 10’ is required, to retain the historic house in its existing location. • A 0’ east and west side yard setback, where 5’ is required to retain the historic house in its existing location and to allow basement excavation. • A 3’ east and west side yard setback for the addition, above and below grade, where 5’ is required. 7 October 2020: Building Permit application received for 0128-2020-BRES. 20 November 2020: Building Permit application deemed complete. Reviews are routed. 25 May 2022: Building Permit 0128-2020-BRES is issued. Approved architectural plans include the note, “All historic framing & windows at perimeter walls & roof to be preserved in place with new structure sistered as needed” on sheets A.1.04, A.2.01, and A.3.01. Approved structural plans include the note, “All historic framing in perimeter walls and roof of historic structure will be preserved in place. At existing historic house framing all existing structure is to be exposed. Any members found to be insufficient for today’s code loading will remain in place and have new members sistered on to meet today’s code requirements. Sizes shown on plans may change depending on existing conditions,” on sheet S103. 25 July 2022: Staff conducts a site visit to discuss the porch. 06 September 2022: Staff signs a letter written by the representative team that outlines their discussion from 25 July 2022, to serve as a written approval for the removal and preservation of the porch while the building is relocated for basement excavation. 06 October 2022: Change Order (0087-2022-BCHO) application submitted for Master Building Permit 0128-2020-BRES. Changes include new site 100’-1” (building lifted 6" out of ground), entry walkway and stair riser alterations, removal of window on east façade after deemed non-historic, siding updates after walkthrough with staff, update to window/door package to match field conditions, and updates to dimensions of the historic resource to match in field measurements after the house was placed in its final location. 15 Page 7 of 7 427 Rio Grande Pl, Aspen, CO 81611 | P: 970.920.5090 | aspen.gov 1 December 2022: Michael Monsauret becomes the Project Superintendent. At this time, it appears that no one associated with the project holds a City of Aspen Historic Preservation Best Card/Contractor Certification. 22 May 2023: In response to being copied on an email discussion about historic rafters and sheathing, staff asks if input is being requested from the Community Development Department and elaborates that: “if the reference to “old slats” is about the historic sheathing that sits on top of the historic rafters, you are expected to retain that in place. If that causes an issue, please explain and we can discuss a solution.” The conversation continues, and it is asked if a second top plate can be introduced by “cutting all the studs.” A representative from Colorado Structural, Inc, provides the following response to which staff agrees and asks for coordination with the Building Department: “I don’t think you can add a top plate to the historic framing. You will just add a ledger inside attached with (3)-Timber screws @ 16”o.c. The ledger can bear on the tops of the new 2x6 that are sistered onto the 2x4’s.” 23 June 2023: Update to Change Order 0087-2022-BCHO to include additional historic entry door based on historic framing evidence. 2 November 2023: Staff and HPC monitor approve an updated wall assembly detail which includes the removal of historic siding, given existing conditions and lack of existing sheathing. See detail in Exhibit X. 2 February 2024: Staff and HPC monitor approve the consolidation of historic siding material on the street facing elevations. 13 February 2024: Staff and HPC monitor approve replacement siding sample for instances where original siding cannot be reused. 15 February 2024: HPC member leaves voicemail for staff outlining concern that the roof framing has been removed from the west side of the historic resource. Historic Preservation Officer and Chief Building Official conduct site visit. Representative team is asked for additional information about what happened and are informed that a Stop Work Order will be issued next day. 16 February 2024: Chief Building Official issues Stop Work Order. RECOMMENDATION: This memo serves as an informational memo only, to inform HPC about the alleged violation at 227 E Main Street. A recommendation will be made at the public hearing scheduled for April 10, 2024. If HPC would like additional information presented at the public hearing, please inform staff. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – HPC Resolution #9, Series of 2020 Exhibit B – HPC Resolution #13, Series of 2020 Exhibit C – 227 E Main Street Response, Updated, March 21, 2024 Exhibit D – 227 E Main Street Remediation Narrative, February 22, 2024 Exhibit E – 227 E Main Street Apology Letter, Drawings, and Photos, February 28, 2024 Exhibit F – 227 E Main Street Updated Drawings, March 12, 2024 Exhibit G – 227 E Main Street, Letter to Owner, March 19, 2024 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 TREK BUILDERS LLC Date: 03/18/24 Trek Builders LLC Response to: HPC Narrative for 227 Main Stop Work Order Dear Kirsten, Please see the below responses to your questions regarding what deviated from the approved 227 Main HPC plans and why. We would like to take this moment to once again explain that none of these framing errors were done maliciously or intentionally. I believe there were many factors that contributed to the errors getting made. Trek Builders had to switch to a different framer mid- December in the thick of the project which left a larger than normal margin for error in the transfer of information from one to the next. In addition to this change, the project superintendent was involved in a ski accident that took focus away from the project. There was also a change to the steel beam inside the historic home that opened the door to plan inconsistencies. Finally, there was a gross misunderstanding between the new framer and Trek about what they were allowed and not allowed to do with the historic materials. We are deeply sorry for the mishandling of this historic resource and are eager to make amends. • Please provide a written description of the historic condition, the current condition, and changes to the plan to accompany the drawings. Include specifics with measurements, etc. The following bullet points are intended to demonstrate the differences between what was approved by the HPC and the Building Department in our permit and what happened in the field. The errors by the framer have resulted in discrepancies that relate to the historic conditions compared to the current condition and are highlighted in corresponding drawing sheets “HPC 1” “HPC-3”. - Top Plate and Roof Rafter Framing o The originally submitted and approved plans of the historic resource depicted a method of structural reinforcement that would not require the removal of historic framing members. Details provided by Colorado Structural, Inc. showed how existing top plates were to remain in place and additional 2x6 wall studs and 7 ½” LVL ledgers were to be installed to support the new 2x12 roof rafters. These additional framing members were to be installed from within, as to not disturb historic framing of the walls or roof. o In two of the three gable roofs of the historic resource, these details deviated by: § The East-West gable roof (shown in Section 1) top plate was not altered and remains in its original location. However, with an incorrect placement of the LVL ledger, the historic roof rafters were altered at their connection to the top plate with incorrect birds-mouth detailing. § The construction of the smaller North-South gable roof (shown in Section 2) shows the top plate is in its correct and historic location, and the LVL ledger is also located correctly per the structural plans, but the new roof rafters and historic roof rafters are 6” higher than they should be. This shows the historic rafters were removed in and relocated to a non-historic location. The photo on sheet HPC-1 shows the historic rafters are floating 6” above the historic top plate. § The North-South gables (Section 3) historic top plate was removed, a new top plate was added on top of historic wall studs, and the historic top plate 23 TREK BUILDERS LLC sits atop that plate. The LVL ledger is located incorrectly, being placed too high. As a result, historic roof rafters were removed from their original locations and then added back with the new 2x12 rafters. This gable roof is 4 ½” taller than the original condition. - Historic Wall Framing o Except for the southernmost wall that we received approval to remove to introduce the linking element, all other exterior historic walls are intact. The historic framing that was approved to be removed is saved in the garage. o When the house was picked up and moved, the historic studs were exposed and revealed a lot of superfluous framing (see photo below). Note, a lot of this framing was rotten from the lack of a proper historic floor system. The original historic resource was collapsing into the ground at the time of construction commencement. o Some of these framing members, which provided no structural support, were removed; the thought by the framer was that it would allow for new 2x6 studs to properly sister onto full height historic 2x4 studs. § Many random horizontal framing members were removed in order to achieve proper structural integrity when the new 2x6 studs were sistered onto the existing historic studs. • Please list the names of all on-site supervisors on this project who hold/held a Historic Preservation Best Card/Certification, the dates of their involvement with the project, and the dates they held a valid HP Best Card. o If applicable, please explain why construction work that requires certain certification was performed without holding a valid certification for that work. Michael Monsauret is the Superintendent for Trek on the project. Michael has his Unlimited Certification Best Card and thought this was the highest level of certification required. Michael has since tested/passed and is pending approval of his HP Best Card should he be allowed to continue as project superintendent. Michael Monsauret took over for the previous Project Superintendent Forest Jacober Dec 1, 2022. 24 TREK BUILDERS LLC • Please explain how often and in what ways the general contractor communicated with, checked in on, and supervised the subcontractor and their work. Michael has daily check-ins with the subs onsite, including the framer at the beginning of the shift. They would review the tasks of the day and review plans together. Michael uploads daily logs with photos and a list of site activities which is shared in Procore with the project team. We also have documentation on when the architect and structural engineer were onsite to witness work in place. Michael was in a ski accident late December. In January, he was back onsite but with limited mobility in the trailer, and was in and out of physical therapy for Jan and part of Feb. This is certainly not an acceptable reason for the lack of oversight but I believe contributed to the mis- communication between the new framer and Michael. • What did the general contractor discuss with the framing subcontractor related to the historic resource, historic material, and the treatment thereof prior to and during the work, and after discovering deviations from the approved plans. Michael and the framing contractor discussed that anything historic was not to be touched, the plans are highlighted, and also marked in red as-to the historic pieces that needed to stay. There was a language barrier and misunderstanding in terms of not understanding that when you cut something, despite keeping it and using, that this is viewed as the same as removing it in the eyes of HPC. When the kitchen ridge was cut and put back in place Michael then realized we had a problem with the framer not adhering to the plans. Michael said the framer did this because he was trying to work around the steel which increased in size per the architectural drawings but then didn’t fit with the as- built historic framing. The framer should have stopped work, Trek should have sent the architect an RFI about the inconsistency and asked how to proceed. The structural plans say that the framers are not allowed to notch or cut any structural member, but this was not followed. The framed did not follow this because he couldn’t make the plans work without cutting/altering. The architect sent a photo of the roof in the living room being opened up and that’s when Michael flagged the issue to everyone involved. Michael instructed the framer to get the roof closed up to protect everything. At the same time, Milo, Kirsten, and Bonnie came out to see the error and then Trek was informed that we would receive a stop work notice the next day. Trek stopped work and waited for instructions. • What happened to the existing historic materials once they were removed. Please explain who decided to remove, relocate and/or reinstall each material, as well as when they did and why. o Include all disposal, storage, labelling, and reinstallation methods used. When the framer removed the living room roof rafters, he took off the historic members and re- applied them to the new framing. Nothing was thrown away but altered from the HPC plan. The top plates are in place, and these are shown on the new drawings from KRAI. Walls are plumb and level with the historic framing attached to it and are completed. There are a handful of historic studs that we kept and are storing in the garage. They came from the living, dining, and corner of the house that was replaced with steel per the approved drawings as explained above. The historic siding was labeled, categorized, bundled, and is stored in the home to go back on when appropriate. The historic doors, hardware, and window are in Chris Thompson’s storage to be refurbished and put back when appropriate. • Please provide the approved demolition calculations and updated demolition calculations according to the actual demolition. As is typical with most historic preservation projects, permitted demolition of the original resource is supervised and approved by the HPC at a very early stage. For this project, it was deemed that 25 TREK BUILDERS LLC only the section of wall to allow for the linking element along with a non-historic shed and the addition of a new door in the living room were to be removed. The entry porch roof was also approved to be removed and reconstructed because of the deteriorated condition of the existing roof by Amy Simon. No additional demolition was expected to be done. Therefore, for COA Master Permit procurement, no additional demolition calculations were submitted or approved. (This has been the typical procedure for HPC projects for decades). However, in light of the events that have occurred, “original” demolition calcs and “current” demolition calcs have been provided per Kirsten’s request. Please see sheets HPC-4 and HPC-5 for calculations. o Original demolition totals 11.45%, o Current demolition totals 42.44% of materials touched after top plate and roof removal. o The historic materials that comprise the additional demo were put back into the structural system of the historic home. The siding that has been removed, as was approved by Amy Simon; was numbered and is being stored safely on site for re- installation. • Please explain how you would like to correct the violations, and which penalties you feel would be appropriate. To correct our mistake, we would be willing to remove the newly inserted framing that is not in line with the structural details and reframe the roof in accordance with the approved structural drawings. That said, we believe it will cause more damage to the historic fabric that remains. Any wall studs that were removed that were not long enough to reach the floor due to being rotten will be “sistered” back onto the new studs, as to show the effects of water damage to the historic structure and how it can be properly dealt with. We realize that this is not perfect, but it would go a long way in restoring the historic structure. We would also be willing to create a document with narrative and photos for the HPC to use as training for contractors in what TO DO and what NOT TO DO. The owner of this home has restored dozens of historic homes in the past 20 years and is completely dismayed that this has happened. Our team can use this narrative, photos from the site, and photos from other past projects to create this guide. In addition to the above we will forgo the $30,000 financial assurance bond provided to ensure safe relocation of the house if HPC allows the project corrections to commence immediately. We would like to have HPC walk the site daily/weekly during the corrections so that everything is done according to HPC directive. Thank you, Tiffany Phipps Trek Builders & 227 Main LLC 26 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET HPC SET UPDATES HPC SET ADD. INFO227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC - 1 3/18/24 HPC SECTIONS & PHOTOS DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22523/12/2024 3/18/2024 NOTE: 5:12 ROOF TO BE RECONSTRUCTED NORTH HPC SOUTH HPC HPC2 HPC2 HPC1 HPC1 HPC 3 HPC3 SLOPE 5" : 12" (V.I.F)SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE 8" : 12" SLOPE 8" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 6" INCHES NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT HISTORIC ROOF RAFTERHISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF DID NOT MOVE UP OR DOWN NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 4 1/2" NEW TOP PLATE HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER NEW TOP PLATE NEW SILL PLATES NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT, SET ONTO NEW SILL PLATES SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 HISTORIC RESOURCE - ROOF PLAN HPC - 1 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 SECTION 2 HPC - 1SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 1 SECTION 1 HPC - 1 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 3 SECTION 3 HPC - 1 N SOUTH GABLE REFRAMED 6" ABOVE HISTORIC TOP PLATE. NEW LEDGER LOCATED IN CORRECT SPOT PER APPROVED STRUCTURAL DETAILS. ORIGINALLY APPROVED HISTORIC AND PROPOSED RAFTER INTERFACE DETAIL. NEW LVL LEDGER SUPPOSED TO BE SLIFH WITH TOP OF PLATE. WEST SIDE ROOF RAISED 3". HISTORIC TOP PLATE HIDDEN BEHIND INCORRECTLY LOCATED LVL LEDGER. NORTH SIDE HISTORIC TOP PLATE AT CORRECT ELEVATION. NEW LVL LEDGER INCORRECTLY LOCATED, HISTORIC RAFTERS CUT TO FIT 27 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET HPC SET UPDATES HPC SET ADD. INFO227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC - 2 3/18/24 HPC ELEVATIONS & PHOTOS DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22523/12/2024 3/18/2024 ROOF MOVED UP 4 1/2" INCHES DASHED FILL INDICATES HISTORIC LOCATIONEAST-WEST GABLE DID NOT MOVE ROOF MOVED UP 6" INCHES DASHED FILL INDICATES HISTORIC LOCATION ROOF MOVED UP 4 1/2" INCHES EAST-WEST GABLE DID NOT MOVE NOTE: 5:12 ROOF TO BE RECONSTRUCTED NORTH HPC SOUTH HPC HPC2 HPC2 HPC1 HPC1 HPC 3 HPC3 SLOPE 5" : 12" (V.I.F)SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE 8" : 12" SLOPE 8" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 1 CURRENT NORTH ELEVATION HPC - 2 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 CURRENT SOUTH ELEVATION HPC - 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 HISTORIC RESOURCE - ROOF PLAN HPC - 2 N SOUTH GABLE REFRAMED 6" ABOVE HISTORIC TOP PLATE. NEW LEDGER LOCATED IN CORRECT SPOT PER APPROVED STRUCTURAL DETAILS. SOUTH GABLE RIDGE WITH SPLICED HISTORIC RAFTERS, PRESUMABLY TO GET STEEL RIDGE BEAM INTO PLACE. WEST SIDE ROOF RAISED 3". HISTORIC TOP PLATE HIDDEN BEHIND INCORRECTLY LOCATED LVL LEDGER. HIPS AND VALLEYS REFRAMED WITH HISTORIC RAFTERS RE-ATTACHED 28 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET HPC SET UPDATES HPC SET ADD. INFO227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC - 3 3/18/24 HPC SECTIONS & PHOTOS 2 DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22523/12/2024 3/18/2024W21D20 W23 W22D21W37D26HPC2 HPC2 HPC1 HPC1 HPC 3 HPC3 HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 6" INCHES NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT HISTORIC ROOF RAFTERHISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF DID NOT MOVE UP OR DOWN NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 4 1/2" NEW TOP PLATE HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER NEW TOP PLATE NEW SILL PLATES NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT, SET ONTO NEW SILL PLATES SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 HISTORIC RESOURCE - ROOF PLAN HPC - 3 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 SECTION 2 HPC - 3SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 1 SECTION 1 HPC - 3 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 3 SECTION 3 HPC - 3 N PHOTO OF HISTORIC TOP PLATE ON TOP OF NEW 1 1/2" TOP PLATE. STUDS WERE NOT CUT, BUT TOP PLATE WAS REMOVED AND PLACED HISTORIC RESOURCE BEING MOVED. NOTE, EXISTING DETACHED FROM EXISTING FLOOR SYSTEM (PER PLAN). PHOTO LOOKING WEST UNDER EAST-WEST GABLE ROOF: INTERIOR FRAMING OF HISTORIC RESOURCE PRIOR TO MOVING. PHOTO LOOKING WEST UNDER EAST-WEST GABLE ROOF: INTERIOR FRAMING OF HISTORIC RESOURCE IN CURRENT CONDITION. HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW TOP PLATE 29 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET HPC SET UPDATES HPC SET ADD. INFO227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC - 4 3/18/24 ORIGINAL WALL & ROOF DEMO CALCS DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22523/12/2024 3/18/2024 320 sq ft 24 sq ftDEMO 40 sq ft DEMO16 sq ft 5 sq ft 4 sq ft 6 sq ft 299 sq ft 36 sq ftDEMO 30 sq ft24 sq ft19 sq ft 301 sq ft 312 sq ft EXISTING WINDOW DEEMED NON-HISTORIC, TO BE INFILLED NEW HISTORIC DOOR REQUESTED BY HPC12 3 4 110 sq ft 108 sq ft 95 sq ft 111 sq ft 140 sq ft 151 sq ft 182 sq ft 2 sq ft 2 sq ft 140 sq ftTO BE REMOVED & RE-BUILT REMOVAL & RECONSTRUCTION APPROVED BY HPC 1 2 43 5 6 7 1 WALL DEMOLITION ELEVATIONS 1/4" = 1'-0" 4 ROOF DEMOLITION ELEVATIONS 1/4" = 1'-0" TOTAL DEMO = 11.45% 30 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET HPC SET UPDATES HPC SET ADD. INFO227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT THE SITE. ANY DIMENSIONAL DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC - 5 3/18/24 CURRENT WALL & ROOF DEMO CALCS DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22523/12/2024 3/18/2024 320 sq ft 40 sq ft DEMO 5 sq ft 4 sq ft 6 sq ft 299 sq ft 3 sq ft (TOP PLATE REMOVED & RELOCATED) 1 sq ft (TOP PLATE REMOVED & RELOCATED) 24 sq ftDEMO 16 sq ft 36 sq ftDEMO 30 sq ft24 sq ft19 sq ft 301 sq ft 312 sq ft EXISTING WINDOW DEEMED NON-HISTORIC, TO BE INFILLED NEW HISTORIC DOOR REQUESTED BY HPC12 3 4 110 sq ft 108 sq ft 110 sq ft RE-FRAMED 108 sq ft RE-FRAMED 95 sq ft 111 sq ft 140 sq ft 151 sq ft 182 sq ft 2 sq ft 2 sq ft 140 sq ftTO BE REMOVED & RE-BUILT 182 sq ft RE-FRAMED 151 sq ft RE-FRAMED REMOVAL & RECONSTRUCTION APPROVED BY HPC 1 2 43 5 6 7 1 WALL DEMOLITION ELEVATIONS 1/4" = 1'-0" 4 ROOF DEMOLITION ELEVATIONS 1/4" = 1'-0" TOTAL DEMO = 42.44% 31 February 22, 2024 Kirsten Armstrong (HPC Principal Planner), Stuart Hayden (HPC Planner II) City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 S Galena Street, 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 RE: 227 E Main Street: Trek Builders’ Summary of Work Performed on the Historical House (Week of 2.12.24-2.15.24) Site Project Manager: Michael Monsauret, Trek Builders LLC Framing Contractor: Eduardo Lopez, LC Construc�on LLC Trek Builders LLC and LC Construc�on LLC was tasked with the framing of the historical resource, which involved the removal of the exis�ng non-historic metal roof, and addi�onal and supplementary wall/roof framing be sistered on to exis�ng framing per the approved plans. The addi�onal framing at the eastern walls and gable roofs were framed and installed according to the plans, as is preserved in place (see image below of approved structural plans’ note). When it came �me for work on the west side of the house, however, the approved framing prac�ces were lost in haste, and done so incorrectly. Although the inten�on was to sister roof ra�ers onto the exis�ng historical framing without removing any historical members, all historical framing on the west side was inadvertently removed. This was not inten�onal, as there was a misunderstanding regarding the importance of historical restora�on and preserva�on, as well as the specific requirements outlined in the approved plans. 32 Upon realizing the mistake during the removal of the Historical Framing Members, immediate ac�on was taken. LC Construc�on completed the installa�on of the new 2x12 framing with the sistered historical roof members atached and in their original posi�on. Addi�onally, the historic 1x8 roof slats were reinstalled atop the framing, also in their exact historic loca�ons. Photos of the work completed were also forwarded to Colorado Structural Engineering Services (Mike Arbaney) to review and comment. His comment was: from what I see in the photos it looks good structurally as it is now. A site mee�ng was convened to address the viola�on of the approved plans and a STOP Work Order was issued un�l the mistake and discrepancies could be iden�fied and rec�fied with the Historical Preserva�on Commission and City of Aspen Community Development, by Trek Builders and Kim Raymond Architects. This mistake occurred on the a�ernoon of Thursday, 2/15/24, and all correc�ve work was completed on the same day by 5:00 pm. We sincerely apologize for the oversight and understand the gravity of the situa�on. We are commited to rec�fying our mistake and ensuring compliance with all relevant regula�ons and standards. Sincerely, Michael Monsauret Site Project Manager, Trek Builders LLC Eduardo Lopez LC Construc�on Framing 33 TREK BUILDERS LLC From; Tiffany Phipps, Owner, Trek Builders LLC and development consultant for 227 Main LLC Date; 02-28-2024 To; Kirsten Armstrong and Stuart Hayden Dear Kirsten and Stuart, I would like to sincerely apologize for the gross error that Trek Builders and our sub-contactor LC Construction has made in relation to the historic roof and rafters at the 227 Main project in Aspen. As the owner of Trek Builders LLC I am deeply troubled by the lack of oversight from our on-site team which created this situation. Our site superintendent, Michael Monsauret, has years of experience in building historic homes in Aspen’s west end with great success. He never wanted to deviate purposefully from the HPC directive, nor did our framing sub-contractor LC Construction. LC Construction has also completed historic homes in Aspen and assured us when we hired them that they would adhere to the HPC directive. I believe there was a breakdown in communication, what was allowed and not per HPC standards, language barrier issues, and an understanding of how to address inconsistencies in the plans to the HPC directive. Mark Friedland and I have partnered on many successful HPC projects over the last 8 years. I will venture to say we’ve restored more historic homes in Aspen than any other person to date. Our HPC projects have won awards and there is no one more committed to preserving historic homes in Aspen than us. I am personally responsible for the following HPC projects over the last 8 years. This list is long and I hope goes to show how committed we are, over anyone else in this valley, to historic preservation as it’s proven by the sheer number of projects. 110 Bleeker 208 Main 227 Bleeker 233 Bleeker 100 Main 105 Hallam 131 Bleeker 209 Bleeker 34 TREK BUILDERS LLC 223 Hallam 227 Main 417 Hallam 442 W Bleeker (future) 526 W Hallam 530 W Hallam 602 E Hyman 625 E Hopkins This was a mistake and error on the part of our whole team, myself as the business owner and developer most importantly, but nothing was intentional or malicious. Our architect Kim Raymond is not only the leading architect in historic preservation in Aspen but also sits on your HPC board. Her associate Milo Stark, who is the project lead architect, has also done many historic projects and walks the project site frequently. I highlight this point because with literally decades of HPC experience, 15 completed historic projects, and maybe the most qualified team in Aspen and we still made a mis-step. It was a mistake and one that I am so sorry happened. We hope that you please consider all of the presented facts when you make a determination as to the disciplinary action. I think everyone involved, including HPC does not want to see this home sit on Main Street boarded up for another year from our mistake. We would invite HPC to come by our site weekly, should we be allowed to proceed with some kind of corrective action, so that no further mis-steps happen on this beautiful historic cabin. I look forward to hearing back from you all and appreciate your understanding. Thank you, Tiffany Phipps Tiffany Phipps, Owner Aspen Dev Co & Trek Builders 970.901.7613 www.aspendevco.com 501 E Hyman Ave. Ste 201 Aspen, CO 81611 35 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC 2/27/24 HPC SECTIONS & PHOTOS DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252NOTE: 5:12 ROOF TO BE RECONSTRUCTED NORTH HPC SOUTH HPC HPC 2 HPC 2 HPC 1 HPC 1 HPC 3 HPC 3 SLOPE 5" : 12" (V.I.F)SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE 8" : 12" SLOPE 8" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 6" INCHES HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF DID NOT MOVEUP OR DOWN HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 3" SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 HISTORIC RESOURCE - ROOF PLAN HPC SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 SECTION 2 HPCSCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 1 SECTION 1 HPC SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 3 SECTION 3 HPC N SOUTH GABLE REFRAMED 6" ABOVE HISTORIC TOP PLATE. NEW LEDGER LOCATED IN CORRECT SPOT PER APPROVED STRUCTURAL DETAILS. ORIGINALLY APPROVED HISTORIC AND PROPOSED RAFTER INTERFACE DETAIL. NEW LVL LEDGER SUPPOSED TO BE SLIFH WITH TOP OF PLATE. WEST SIDE ROOF RAISED 3". HISTORIC TOP PLATE HIDDEN BEHIND INCORRECTLY LOCATED LVL LEDGER. NORTH SIDE HISTORIC TOP PLATE AT CORRECT ELEVATION. NEW LVL LEDGER INCORRECTLY LOCATED, HISTORIC RAFTERS CUT TO FIT 36 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC 2/27/24 HPC ELEVATIONS & PHOTOS DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-2252ROOF MOVED UP 3" INCHES DASHED FILL INDICATES HISTORIC LOCATION ROOF MOVED UP 6" INCHES DASHED FILL INDICATES HISTORIC LOCATION NOTE: 5:12 ROOF TO BE RECONSTRUCTED NORTH HPC SOUTH HPC HPC 2 HPC 2 HPC 1 HPC 1 HPC 3 HPC 3 SLOPE 5" : 12" (V.I.F)SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE 8" : 12" SLOPE 8" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 1 CURRENT NORTH ELEVATION HPC SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 CURRENT SOUTH ELEVATION HPC SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 HISTORIC RESOURCE - ROOF PLAN HPC N SOUTH GABLE REFRAMED 6" ABOVE HISTORIC TOP PLATE. NEW LEDGER LOCATED IN CORRECT SPOT PER APPROVED STRUCTURAL DETAILS. SOUTH GABLE RIDGE WITH SPLICED HISTORIC RAFTERS, PRESUMABLY TO GET STEEL RIDGE BEAM INTO PLACE. WEST SIDE ROOF RAISED 3". HISTORIC TOP PLATE HIDDEN BEHIND INCORRECTLY LOCATED LVL LEDGER. HIPS AND VALLEYS REFRAMED WITH HISTORIC RAFTERS RE-ATTACHED 37 TREK BUILDERS LLC 1 227 East Main Street Photos – PRIOR TO ROOF/FRAMING 38 TREK BUILDERS LLC 2 39 TREK BUILDERS LLC 3 40 TREK BUILDERS LLC 4 41 TREK BUILDERS LLC 5 42 TREK BUILDERS LLC 6 43 TREK BUILDERS LLC 7 227 East Main Street Photos – POST ROOF/FRAMING 44 TREK BUILDERS LLC 8 45 TREK BUILDERS LLC 9 46 TREK BUILDERS LLC 10 47 TREK BUILDERS LLC 11 48 TREK BUILDERS LLC 12 49 TREK BUILDERS LLC 13 50 TREK BUILDERS LLC 14 51 TREK BUILDERS LLC 15 52 TREK BUILDERS LLC 16 53 TREK BUILDERS LLC 17 54 TREK BUILDERS LLC 18 55 TREK BUILDERS LLC 19 56 TREK BUILDERS LLC 20 57 TREK BUILDERS LLC 21 58 TREK BUILDERS LLC 22 59 TREK BUILDERS LLC 23 60 TREK BUILDERS LLC 24 61 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET HPC SET UPDATES227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC 1 3/12/24 HPC SECTIONS & PHOTOS DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22523/12/2024 NOTE: 5:12 ROOF TO BE RECONSTRUCTED NORTH HPC SOUTH HPC HPC 2 HPC 2 HPC 1 HPC 1 HPC 3 HPC 3 SLOPE 5" : 12" (V.I.F)SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE 8" : 12" SLOPE 8" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 6" INCHES NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF DID NOT MOVE UP OR DOWN NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 4 1/2" NEW TOP PLATE HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER NEW TOP PLATE NEW SILL PLATES NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT, SET ONTO NEW SILL PLATES SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 HISTORIC RESOURCE - ROOF PLAN HPC 1 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 SECTION 2 HPC 1SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 1 SECTION 1 HPC 1 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 3 SECTION 3 HPC 1 N SOUTH GABLE REFRAMED 6" ABOVE HISTORIC TOP PLATE. NEW LEDGER LOCATED IN CORRECT SPOT PER APPROVED STRUCTURAL DETAILS. ORIGINALLY APPROVED HISTORIC AND PROPOSED RAFTER INTERFACE DETAIL. NEW LVL LEDGER SUPPOSED TO BE SLIFH WITH TOP OF PLATE. WEST SIDE ROOF RAISED 3". HISTORIC TOP PLATE HIDDEN BEHIND INCORRECTLY LOCATED LVL LEDGER. NORTH SIDE HISTORIC TOP PLATE AT CORRECT ELEVATION. NEW LVL LEDGER INCORRECTLY LOCATED, HISTORIC RAFTERS CUT TO FIT 62 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET HPC SET UPDATES227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC 2 3/12/24 HPC ELEVATIONS & PHOTOS DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22523/12/2024ROOF MOVED UP 4 1/2" INCHES DASHED FILL INDICATES HISTORIC LOCATIONEAST-WEST GABLE DID NOT MOVE ROOF MOVED UP 6" INCHES DASHED FILL INDICATES HISTORIC LOCATION ROOF MOVED UP 4 1/2" INCHES EAST-WEST GABLE DID NOT MOVE NOTE: 5:12 ROOF TO BE RECONSTRUCTED NORTH HPC SOUTH HPC HPC 2 HPC 2 HPC 1 HPC 1 HPC 3 HPC 3 SLOPE 5" : 12" (V.I.F)SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE8" : 12"SLOPE 8" : 12" SLOPE 8" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"SLOPE9" : 12"SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 1 CURRENT NORTH ELEVATION HPC 2 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 CURRENT SOUTH ELEVATION HPC 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 HISTORIC RESOURCE - ROOF PLAN HPC 2 N SOUTH GABLE REFRAMED 6" ABOVE HISTORIC TOP PLATE. NEW LEDGER LOCATED IN CORRECT SPOT PER APPROVED STRUCTURAL DETAILS. SOUTH GABLE RIDGE WITH SPLICED HISTORIC RAFTERS, PRESUMABLY TO GET STEEL RIDGE BEAM INTO PLACE. WEST SIDE ROOF RAISED 3". HISTORIC TOP PLATE HIDDEN BEHIND INCORRECTLY LOCATED LVL LEDGER. HIPS AND VALLEYS REFRAMED WITH HISTORIC RAFTERS RE-ATTACHED 63 Scale: AS NOTED ISSUE HPC SET HPC SET UPDATES227 E. MAINHISTORIC RENOVATION227 EAST MAIN STREETASPEN, COLORADO 816111" ACTUAL IF THE ABOVE DIMENSION DOES NOT MEASURE ONE INCH (1") EXACTLY, THIS DRAWING WILL HAVE BEEN ENLARGED OR REDUCED, AFFECTING ALL LABELED SCALES. ALL DESIGNS, IDEAS ARRANGEMENTS AND PLANS INDICATED BY THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE THE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT OF KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTS, INC. AND SHALL NEITHER BE USED ON ANY OTHER WORK NOR BE USED BY ANY OTHER PERSON FOR ANY USE WHATSOEVER WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS SHALL TAKE P R E C E D E N C E O V E R S C A L E D DIMENSIONS AND SHALL BE VERIFIED AT T H E S I T E . A N Y D I M E N S I O N A L DISCREPANCY SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. HPC 3 3/12/24 HPC SECTIONS & PHOTOS 2 DATE 2/27/2024 www.kimraymondarchitects.com 970-925-22523/12/2024W21D20 W23 W22D21W37D26HPC 2 HPC 2 HPC 1 HPC 1 HPC 3 HPC 3 HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 6" INCHES NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF DID NOT MOVE UP OR DOWN NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER ROOF MOVED UP 4 1/2" NEW TOP PLATE HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW LEDGER NEW TOP PLATE NEW SILL PLATES NEW SILL PLATES HISTORIC STUDS REMAINED INTACT, SET ONTO NEW SILL PLATES SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 HISTORIC RESOURCE - ROOF PLAN HPC 3 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 2 SECTION 2 HPC 3SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 1 SECTION 1 HPC 3 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0" 3 SECTION 3 HPC 3 N PHOTO OF HISTORIC TOP PLATE ON TOP OF NEW 1 1/2" TOP PLATE. STUDS WERE NOT CUT, BUT TOP PLATE WAS REMOVED AND PLACED HISTORIC RESOURCE BEING MOVED. NOTE, EXISTING DETACHED FROM EXISTING FLOOR SYSTEM (PER PLAN). PHOTO LOOKING WEST UNDER EAST-WEST GABLE ROOF: INTERIOR FRAMING OF HISTORIC RESOURCE PRIOR TO MOVING. PHOTO LOOKING WEST UNDER EAST-WEST GABLE ROOF: INTERIOR FRAMING OF HISTORIC RESOURCE IN CURRENT CONDITION. HISTORIC TOP PLATE NEW TOP PLATE 64 March 19, 2024 227 East Main, LLC c/o Mark Friedland 312 Aspen Airport Business Center, Suite D Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Stop Work Order for City of Aspen Building Permit #0128-2020-BRES at 227 E Main Street Dear Mr. Friedland, It has come to the attention of the City of Aspen that construction at 227 E Main Street, related to City of Aspen Building Permit #0128-2020-BRES, deviated from approved plans. Approved plans indicate that “All historic framing in perimeter walls and roof of historic structure will be preserved in place. At existing historic house framing all existing structure is to be exposed. Any member found to be insufficient for today’s code loading will remain in place and have new members sistered on to meet today’s code requirements.” On 15 February 2024, the City of Aspen was informed that historic roof and wall framing on the west side of the historic structure at 227 E Main was removed. After inspection on the 15th of February 2024 by the Chief Building Official and the Historic Preservation Officer, a Stop Work Order was issued by the Chief Building Official on the 16th of February 2024. This letter shall serve as additional written notice of the violation. The City of Aspen is currently working with the applicant team to understand the extent of damage to the historic resource, and what corrective actions there may be to the situation. Staff intends to provide the Historic Preservation Commission with an Information Only Memo on 27 March 2024; and will be noticing a public hearing for 10 April 2024 in case HPC wants to provide recommendations concerning appropriate penalties in response to the violations and corrective actions to be undertaken. Any corrective actions to the structure will likely require an application for Substantial Amendment to the existing project. Staff would like to meet with the owner of 227 E Main Street to discuss the violation and the enforcement process related to such. Please reach out to Kirsten Armstrong, Historic Preservation Officer, at Kirsten.Armstrong@Aspen.gov by 29 March 2024, 10 days after the date of this notice, to schedule a meeting. Community Development 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, Colorado 81611 CC: Luisa Berne, City of Aspen Assistant Attorney 65 Page 1 of 7 Memorandum LPA-24-027 TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THROUGH: Kirsten Armstrong, Principal Planner, Historic Preservation FROM: Stuart Hayden, Historic Preservation Planner MEETING DATE: March 27, 2024 RE: 227 E. Bleeker St. – Substantial Amendment; PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT /OWNER: French Road, LLC. REPRESENTATIVE: Kim Raymond Architecture & Interiors LOCATION: Street Address: 227 E. Bleeker St. Legal Description: Lot 2, East Bleeker Historic Lot Split, according to the Final Plat thereof filed on record in Plat Book 78 at Page 5 as Reception No. 521939 Parcel Identification Number: PID# 2737-073-20-014 CURRENT ZONING & USE R-6 (Moderate-Density Residential); Single-family home PROPOSED ZONING & USE: No change SUMMARY: The applicant requests a Substantial Amendment to plans approved pursuant to a development order and an associated certificate of appropriateness at 227 E. Bleeker St. for the purposes of disassembling historic wood siding; removing historic wall sheathing; installing composite sheathing; and installing synthetic roofing material. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Substantial Amendment with conditions. BACKGROUND: Figure 1. Site Location Map – 227 East Bleeker St. 66 Page 2 of 7 The wood-frame dwelling at 227 E. Bleeker St. was constructed circa 1883 as a one-story, front-facing-T-shaped miner’s cottage with a partial-width front porch and front bay windows. By 1980, several alterations had been made, including an enclosed front porch, new cladding, and a shed-roofed addition at the northeast corner. These alterations, however, did not annul the building’s overall historic integrity. In 2005, a historic lot split halved its original 9,000-square-feet parcel, but the historic resource remained relatively unchanged from 1980 until March 2021. HPC Resolution #06, Series of 2021 approved with conditions Final Major Development for restoration and relocation of the historic home on a new basement and foundation, the construction of a new addition, setback variations, and a floor area bonus at 227 E. Bleeker St. The monitoring committee for this project has since reviewed several proposed amendments and has approved the following: • April 2021: A Stormwater Plan. • September 2022: The relocation, resizing, or removal of approved fenestration on the approved connector and addition, a design for the front wood picket fence, and the enlargement of the approved surface parking space next to the approved addition. • December 2022: The replacement of an approved window with a door on the approved connector, the change of material and finish of the approved siding on the approved addition and connector, the addition of 13 solar panels to the roof of the approved addition, the change of size and operation of windows on the approved addition, the change of roofing material on the historic resource, and the addition of a retractable fabric roof over the balcony of the approved addition. • February 2023: The resizing or removal of approved windows on the approved addition, the relocation of non-historic windows on the historic resource, and the addition of three heat pumps outside the approved addition. • March 2023: The change of the railing on the balcony of the approved addition, and the change of the color of the roofing material. • May 2023: The addition of 21 solar panels to the roof of the historic building as supported by the majority of HPC members after a staff and monitor request for direction. • September 2023: The addition of a rooftop-terminating radon pipe and a wall-terminating gas-fireplace vent, the addition of a gas-fireplace vent through a historic chimney of the historic resource, and the replacement of non-historic windows on the historic resource. • December 2023: The removal of the approved fence and planter from the front yard, the retention of the existing eastern fence, the installation of a pathway with pavers from the west to the front yard, the substitution of approved pavers with concrete at the approved 67 Page 3 of 7 northern patio, the enlargement of the approved northern patio, the substitution of approved trees with vines or shrubs, and the substitution of the approved sculpture with a bench. • January 2024: The relocation and screening of approved and additional heat pumps, and an alteration to the wall assembly of the approved addition. • February 2024: The relocation of electric utility panels on the new addition. With guidance provided during the December 13, 2023 HPC meeting, the monitoring committee also remanded an amendment request to disassemble historic siding and remove historic sheathing to alter exterior wall assemblies as described below. As stated in Aspen Land Use Code Subsection 26.415.70(e)(2), “all changes to approved plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial amendment.” The monitoring committee has also disapproved of several insubstantial amendment requests, including the January 2024 proposal to install a synthetic roofing material described in the Project Summary below. The applicant is hereby appealing this decision pursuant to Subsection 26.415.070(e)(1)e. to be considered by the HPC in accordance with the procedures for substantial amendments. Figure 2. Photograph of front façade at 227 E. Bleeker St., 1980 Figure 3. Current property line on 1904 Sanborn Map 68 Page 4 of 7 REQUEST OF HPC: The Applicant is requesting the following approval: • Substantial Amendment (Sec. 26.415.070(e)(2)) to approved plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as originally depicted. The HPC is the final review authority for Substantial Amendments. PROJECT SUMMARY: • Exterior Wall. The applicant proposes to deconstruct all historic clapboard siding; remove roughly 700 square feet of historic one-inch-thick wood wall sheathing; install 7/16-inch- thick, fiberglass-reinforced-magnesium-oxide-treated oriented strand board (OSB), a waterproof membrane, and 1/2-inch-thick furring strips to the exterior of all existing wall studs; and reinstall the historic clapboard siding. • Synthetic Roofing Material. Instead of the architectural asphalt shingle (Malarkey Sienna Blend Legacy) approved in December 2022, or the natural cedar wood shingle approved in March 2021, the applicant proposes to install EcoStar-brand Empire Shake atop the historic resource. This plastic tile is molded into the shape of 3/8-inch-thick hand-split wood shakes of six-, nine-, and twelve-inch widths. At 20-inches long, the Empire Shake can be installed to have a seven-, eight-, or nine-inch exposure depending on roof slope. Figure 4. Locations of historic wood sheathing. Figure 5. Historic clapboard and wood sheathing. 69 Page 5 of 7 STAFF REVIEW: As detailed in Exhibit A, staff find the application for substantial amendment at 227 E. Bleeker St. inconsistent with the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. While proposed alterations to the exterior wall assembly may conditionally satisfy the guidelines, and thereby warrants more nuanced consideration, the proposed installation of the EcoStar Empire Shake roofing material unconditionally contradicts the guidelines and is inappropriate. Exterior Wall: Removing and disposing of roughly 700 square feet of historic one-inch-thick wood plank sheathing contradicts Guideline 2.1. Rather than “preserve original building materials” this aspect of the proposed amendment contributes to the subtle degradation of the building’s historic integrity and depletes the historic record of an irreplaceable primary resource. Trading the historic sheathing for fiberglass-reinforced-magnesium-oxide-treated oriented strand board (OSB) and waterproof membrane only adds to this incongruity. Guideline 2.4. states that “original building materials…should not be replaced with synthetic materials.” Jeopardizing the historic clapboard cladding to perform work that does not satisfy the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines is particularly inappropriate. Disassembling, then reinstalling the wood siding will increase the number of necessary repairs and replacements of yet more historic material. In fact, Guideline 2.1 explicitly cautions against removing “siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place.” On a modest miner’s cottage, such as 227 E. Bleeker St., historic wood siding is a significant architectural feature to which Chapter 6 of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines particularly applies. Herein, repairs, disassembly, and removal are treatments predicated on necessity. Insofar as the disassembly and reinstallation of the historic clapboard siding is not “necessary for its restoration,” will not repair “only those features that are deteriorated,” and will not remove “only the portion…that is deteriorated and must be replaced,” the proposed treatment does not meet Guidelines 6.1-6.3. Avoiding disassembly of a historic elements in the first place is the best way to “minimize damage to the original material,” and the easiest way to ensure it is “repositioned accurately.” Staff recommend approval of installing new sheathing only where historic sheathing is not extant, and disassembling the historic wood siding only where necessary for its restoration or the installation of new sheathing. Roofing Material: Installing a plastic replica of wood shake where natural wood shingle was the original roofing material does not meet Guidelines 7.7-7.9. The proposed roofing material is dissimilar to the original in both style and physical qualities. The EcoStar product’s exaggerated wood-grain texture is unlike the relatively smooth-sawn finish of wood shingle. It replicates a more rustic style of roofing material for which there is no historic precedent on AspenVictorian structures. Empire Shakes also appear larger than the original roofing material. Installed, Empire Shakes also appear larger than the original roofing material. Whereas natural wood shingles may have an exposure 70 Page 6 of 7 of 3.5 to 7.5 inches, that of the proposed substitute is 7 to 9 inches given the predominant roof slope at 227 E. Bleeker St. The divergent physical qualities of wood and plastic need little explanation. The EcoStar product has a slightly reflective surface, a sheen unseen on the matte surface of natural wood shingles. The coloration of the proposed material is also dissimilar to that of natural wood shingles. Each tile has an unnaturally solid color unlike the organic inconsistency in the hue and saturation of each wood shingle. With little to no natural color variation between tiles, an Empire Shake roof appears unusually monochromatic. Although weathering will likely affect this characteristic, the long-term aesthetic of the product is unknown given its relatively recent development. Installing wood shake, or a plastic simulacrum thereof, equates to adding ornamental cresting where there is no evidence that it existed. It creates a false impression of the building’s original appearance and perpetuates a broader historic fallacy regarding the rusticity and remoteness of early Aspen. By the time 227 E. Bleeker St. was constructed, milled wood shingles were ubiquitous in the city. Staff recommend disapproval of the proposed installation of EcoStar Empire Shake roofing material atop the historic resource. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The application was not referred out to other City departments. Their requirements may, nevertheless, affect the permit review if warranted. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the HPC approve the proposed Substantial Amendment with the following conditions: 1. Preceded and succeeded by staff approval and verification, and using methods that minimize damage and displacement, disassemble historic wood siding only where it cannot Figure 7. EcoStar Empire Shake mockup Figure 6: Example of installed wood shingles and wood shakes 71 Page 7 of 7 be repaired in place or is necessary for the installation of sheathing where none is extant. 2. Preceded and succeeded by staff approval and verification, install new wall sheathing only where none currently exists. 3. For monitoring committee review, propose an alternative roofing material that is more akin to the original in style, physical qualities, size, and color; or install one of the previously approved roofing materials. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution # __, Series of 2024 Exhibit A – Historic Preservation Design Guidelines / Staff Findings Exhibit B – Application 72 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2024 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION #__, (SERIES OF 2024) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT REVIEW FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 227 EAST BLEEKER STREET, LOT 2, EAST BLEEKER HISTORIC LOT SPLIT, ACCORDING TO THE FINAL PLAT THEREOF FILE ON RECORD IN PLAT BOOK 78 AT PAGE 5 AS RECEPTION NO. 521939, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2735-124-20-014 WHEREAS, the applicant, French Road, LLC, represented by Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors, has requested HPC approval for Substantial Amendment for the property located at 227 East Bleeker Street, Lot 2, East Bleeker Historic Lot Split, according to the Final Plat thereof filed on record in Plat Book 78 at Page 5 as Reception No. 521939, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for approval of Substantial Amendment, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070(e)(2) of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, as a historic landmark, the site is exempt from Residential Design Standards review; and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable review standards and recommended approval of Substantial Amendment with conditions; and WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on March 27, 2024, the HPC reviewed and considered the application, staff memo, and public comments, and found the application consistent with the applicable review standards and guidelines, and approved the application with conditions by a vote of __ to __. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby approves Substantial Amendment for the property located at 227 East Bleeker Street, Lot 2, East Bleeker Historic Lot Split, according to the Final Plat thereof filed on record in 73 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2024 Page 2 of 3 Plat Book 78 at Page 5 as Reception No. 521939, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado as follows: Section 1: Substantial Amendment. HPC hereby approves Substantial Amendment as proposed with the following conditions: 1. Preceded and succeeded by staff approval and verification, and using methods that minimize damage and displacement, disassemble historic wood siding only where it cannot be repaired in place or is necessary for the installation of sheathing where none is extant. 2. Preceded and succeeded by staff approval and verification, install new wall sheathing only where none currently exists. 3. For monitoring committee review, propose an alternative roofing material that is more akin to the original in style, physical qualities, size, and color; or install one of the previously approved roofing materials. Section 2: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 3: Existing Litigation This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and 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 conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution 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: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a 74 HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2024 Page 3 of 3 notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site-specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 227 East Bleeker Street Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 27th day of March, 2024. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: __________________________________ ____________________________________ Katharine Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Kara Thompson, Chair ATTEST: _________________________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 75 Page 1 of 6 Exhibit A Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.070(e) – Substantial Amendment to a Certificate of Appropriateness (2) Substantial amendments. a. All changes to approved plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial amendment. b. An application for a substantial amendment shall include the following materials, as determined appropriate by the Community Development Director: 1. A revised site plan. 2. Revised scaled elevations and drawings. 3. Representations of building materials and finishes. 4. Photographs and other exhibits to illustrate the proposed changes. c. The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for approval of a substantial amendment and waive any submittals not considered necessary for consideration. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. d. Notice for the review of an application for a substantial amendment will include publication, posting and mailing pursuant to Section 26.304.060(e)(3) Paragraphs a, b and c. e. Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the extent of the changes relative to the approved plans and how the proposed revisions affect the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Codes. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed revisions and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove, or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. f. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. 76 Page 2 of 6 Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines & Findings The applicant requests a Substantial Amendment to the Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development at 227 E. Bleeker St. for the purposes of temporarily removing historic wood siding; replacing historic wall sheathing; and installing synthetic roofing material. The proposed design must meet applicable Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Chapter 2: Building Materials Finding 2.1 Preserve original building materials. • Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. • Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. • Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. • Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. Not Met 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. • Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that was not historically painted shall not be painted. • If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods. • Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building. Met 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. • If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. • Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. Met 2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. • Original building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic materials. Met/Not Met 77 Page 3 of 6 Chapter 6: Architectural Details Finding 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. • Repair only those features that are deteriorated. • Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. • On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. Not Met 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. • Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration. Not Met 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. • Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. • If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish. Not Met 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. • The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building’s heritage. • When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. Met/Not Met Chapter 7: Roofs Finding 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. • Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities and use a color that is similar to that seen historically. Not Met 78 Page 4 of 6 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. • If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. • Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. • Flashing should be tin, lead coated copper, galvanized or painted metal and have a matte, non-reflective finish. • Design flashing, such as drip edges, so that architectural details are not obscured. • A metal roof is inappropriate for an Aspen Victorian primary home but may be appropriate for a secondary structure from that time period. • A metal roof material should have a matte, non-reflective finish and match the original seaming. Not Met 7.9 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. • Adding ornamental cresting, for example, where there is no evidence that it existed, creates a false impression of the building’s original appearance, and is inappropriate. Not Met Staff Findings: Chapters 2, 6, and 7 of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines are particularly relevant to this application for Substantial Amendment to the Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development at 227 E. Bleeker St. Whereas the guidelines in Chapters 2 and 6 apply to the HPC’s consideration of the proposed removal and reinstallation of the historic clapboard cladding and the proposed removal and disposal of the historic wood sheathing, Chapter 7 pertains to the proposed installation of plastic roofing tiles. Removing and Reinstalling Historic Clapboard Cladding The proposed disassembly and reinstallation of all the historic wood siding does not change the approved plan to repair or replace deteriorated clapboards, and match new material to the original composition, scale, and finish as substantiated by physical evidence. Accordingly, this aspect of the proposed amendment continues to satisfy Guidelines 2.2-2.4 and 6.4. Indiscriminately disassembling and reinstalling the historic wood siding, however, increases the likelihood of additional damage for which repairs and replacements are necessary. To “preserve original building materials,” Guideline 2.1 explicitly cautions against disassembling “siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place.” The proposed amendment neither meets this guideline, nor heeds its warning that “rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity.” 79 Page 5 of 6 The proposed disassembly and reinstallation of all historic clapboard cladding similarly falls short of satisfying Guidelines 6.1-6.3. Rather than preserve significant architectural features by repairing “only those features that are deteriorated,” disassembling a historic element only when “necessary for its restoration,” and removing “only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced,” the proposed work adds otherwise necessary repairs to, and loss of, historic material. Avoiding the disassembly of a historic element is the easiest way to “minimize damage to the original material,” and to ensure it is “repositioned accurately.” Staff recommends approval of disassembling the historic wood siding only where necessary for its restoration, or to access parts of the wall assembly where no sheathing exists. Removing and Disposing of Historic Sheathing The proposal to remove historic wall sheathing similarly contradicts the call to “preserve original building materials” in Guideline 2.1. Rather than “avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place,” the proposed amendment risks reconstruction that “may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity.” Covered by the reinstalled clapboard siding as the primary surface and finish material, the composition, scale and finish of the proposed sheathing and waterproof membrane need not necessarily “be as it would have existed historically,” nor “match the original material.” Effectively, Guidelines 2.2 and 2.3 have limited relevance to the removal of the historic sheathing. Guideline 2.4, however, is not similarly restricted to visible or exposed materials, and overtly discourages the “use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials.” Insofar as the proposed fiberglass-reinforced-magnesium-oxide-treated oriented strand board (OSB) and waterproof membrane qualify as synthetic materials, their proposed application as replacements for the historic wood sheathing does not satisfy this guideline. Staff recommends approval of the installation of new sheathing only where no historic sheathing is extant. Installing Plastic Roofing Tiles Installing a plastic replica of wood shake where natural wood shingle was the original roofing material does not meet Guidelines 7.7-7.9. The proposed roofing material is dissimilar to the original in both style and physical qualities. The EcoStar product’s exaggerated wood-grain texture is unlike the relatively smooth-sawn finish of wood shingles and replicates a more rustic style of roofing material for which there is no historic precedent on AspenVictorian structures. Installed, Empire Shakes also appear larger than the original roofing material. Whereas natural wood shingles may have an exposure of 3-7.5 inches, that of the proposed substitute is 7-9 inches. 80 Page 6 of 6 The divergent physical qualities of wood and plastic need little explanation. The proposed roofing material has a slightly reflective surface, a sheen unseen on the matte surface of wood shingles. The color of the proposed material is also unlike that of natural wood shingles. Each individual Empire Shake tile and batch of tiles has an unnaturally consistent, monochromatic coloration. There is little to no color variation or patterning on each tile, or across tiles. Over time, uneven weathering will likely produce some variation. The long-term appearance of this product, however, has yet to be seen given its relatively recent development. Installing wood shake, or a plastic simulacrum thereof, equates to adding ornamental cresting where there is no evidence that it existed. It creates a false impression of the building’s original appearance and perpetuates a broader historic fallacy regarding the rusticity and remoteness of early Aspen. By the time 227 E. Bleeker St. was constructed, milled wood shingles were ubiquitous in the city. Staff recommend disapproval of the proposed installation of EcoStar Empire Shake roofing material atop the historic resource. Staff Recommendation: Approval with the following conditions: 1. Preceded and succeeded by staff approval and verification, and using methods that minimize damage and displacement, disassemble historic wood siding only where it cannot be repaired in place or is necessary for the installation of sheathing where none is extant. 2. Preceded and succeeded by staff approval and verification, install new wall sheathing only where none currently exists. 3. For monitoring committee review, propose an alternative roofing material that is more akin to the original in style, physical qualities, size, and color; or install one of the previously approved roofing materials. 81 PRE-APPLICATION SUMMARY PRE-23-148 DATE: January 2, 2024 PLANNER: Stuart Hayden, Historic Preservation Planner, stuart.hayden@aspen.gov REPRESENTATIVE: Milo Stark, Kim Raymond Architecture & Interiors, milo@krai.us PROJECT LOCATION: 227 E. Bleeker Avenue PARCEL ID: 2737-073-20-014 REQUEST: Substantial Amendment to a Major Development Approval, Relocation, Setback Variations and Floor Area Bonus DESCRIPTION: HPC Resolution #26, Series of 2020 approved with conditions Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Setback Variations and a Floor Area Bonus for 227 East Bleeker Street in December 2020. HPC Resolution #06, Series of 2021 approved with conditions Final Major Development for 227 East Bleeker Street in March 2021. The property was sold to its current owner in October 2021. Since then, HPC staff, the Project Monitor (Jeff Halferty) and HPC have reviewed and approved several elements, including the following: • September 2022: The relocation, resizing, or removal of approved fenestration on the approved connector and addition, a design for the front wood picket fence, and the enlargement of the approved surface parking space next to the approved addition; • December 2022: The replacement of an approved window with a door on the approved connector, the change of material and finish of the approved siding on the approved addition and connector, the addition of 13 solar panels to the roof of the approved addition, the change of size and operation of windows on the approved addition, the change of roofing material on the historic resource, and the addition of a retractable fabric roof over the balcony of the approved addition. • February 2023: The resizing or removal of approved windows on the approved addition, the relocation of non-historic windows on the historic resource, and the addition of three heat pumps outside the approved addition. • March 2023: The change to the railing on the balcony of the approved addition, and the change to the color of the roofing material. • May 2023: The addition of 21 solar panels to the roof of the historic building as supported by the majority of HPC members after a staff and monitor request for direction. • September 2023: the addition of a rooftop-terminating radon pipe and a wall-terminating gas-fireplace vent, the addition of a gas-fireplace vent through a historic chimney of the historic resource, and the replacement of non-historic windows on the historic resource. 82 The HPC Project Monitor and staff are currently reviewing requests for insubstantial amendments for the resizing and reorientation of heat pumps and construction of a screening wall next to the approved addition, and the addition of a layer of sheathing to the approved addition wall assembly. Pursuant to Aspen Land Use Code Subsection 26.415.070(e), disapproval of a request for an insubstantial amendment may be appealed to the HPC to be considered in accordance with the procedures for substantial amendments. As expressed by members of the HPC during its meeting on December 13, 2023, such an appeal would be appropriate for the applicant’s request to remove the historic siding, replace historic sheathing with new sheathing, and reinstall the historic wood siding around the entire historic resource. As stated in Aspen Land Use Code Subsection 26.415.70(e)(2), “all changes to approved plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial amendment.” In this instance, an application for a substantial amendment shall be in writing accompanied by scaled drawings of the historic resource as previously approved and as proposed application, representations of building materials and finishes, and photographs or other exhibits to illustrate the proposed changes. If the application is determined to be complete, staff will notify the applicant in writing, and schedule a public hearing before the HPC. Notice for the review of an application for a substantial amendment will include publication, posting and mailing pursuant to Section 26.304.060(e)(3)a-c. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and all other applicable Land Use Code sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. As with all HPC decisions, a substantial amendment may be appealed by any person with a right to appeal as defined in Land Use Code Chapter 26.314. RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: Section Number Section Title 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.070(e) Historic Preservation – Amendments, Insubstantial and Substantial 26.415.120 Appeals, Notice to City Council and Call-Up 26.490.050 Development Agreements 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 83 For your convenience – links to the Land Use Application and Land Use Code are below: Land Use Application Land Use Code Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review by: Staff for completeness and recommendation, and HPC for final decision Public Hearing: Yes, at HPC Review Planning Fees: $1,950 for 6 billable hours of staff time. (Additional/fewer hours will be billed/refunded at a rate of $325 per hour.) Referral Agencies Fee: $0. Total Deposit: $1,950. APPLICATION CHECKLIST: Below is a list of submittal requirements for HPC substantial amendment review. Please email the entire application as one pdf to CDEHadmins@aspen.gov. The fee will be requested after the application is determined to be complete.  Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.  Pre-application Summary (this document).  Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.  Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.  List of adjacent property owners for both properties within 300’ for public hearing.  A written description of the proposal (scope of work) and written explanation of how the proposed development complies with the review standards and design guidelines relevant to the application.  An accurate representation of all relevant building materials and finishes approved and proposed for the development.  Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the designated historic property including photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location and extent of proposed work. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 84 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 February 7, 2024 Kirsten Armstrong Stuart Hayden Historic Preservation Officers Dear Kirsten, Stuart and Members of the Commission, As you know, our client, Ken Hubbard, is very concerned about the safety of his family that will be living in the home he is currently building at 227 E Bleeker. Along with the concerns for his family’s safety and wellbeing, he is working hard to make this project a model of energy efficiency and sustainability. His goal is to obtain LEED Platinum or Gold even with the extra effort needed to do this on the remodel of a historic cabin. At this point we are just a few points from achieving the platinum level. At this time, Ken is especially concerned about fire hazard. The fire in HI struck a deep chord in him and he is determined to find the best fireproof or fire resistive materials available on the market to harden the exterior of his home. Knowing that the City of Aspen passed an ordinance regarding the hardening of the exterior of homes in April of last year, he is very encouraged that he may be able to use materials that will make his new home more fire resistant. As the architects for this home, we are also very concerned about the building means and methods. The building sciences have progressed tremendously in the past 5-10 years, creating better buildings and indoor living spaces. And these methods and materials can be applied to the historic structures. The two main areas of our concern with the historic home are the structural sheathing that is mostly missing from the building; and what sheathing is there, is vertical boards, which add no shear strength to the structure, thus the need for the contractor to straighten and square the building with bracing before putting it back down on it’s new foundation. This layer of vertical boards is not a solid surface either, making it nearly impossible to add an appropriate waterproofing layer. 85 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 Vertical boards that are on part of the building, which do not provide shear, or a surface to which a good waterproof membrane can be attached. It is this water proofing layer that will help protect the actual structure of the historic home for the next century. The following section of this letter outlines the importance and benefits of the current building science. By incorporating these practices, we will be designing systems and assemblies that will truly protect not only the family inside, but the actual historic structure. We are completely committed to the preservation of the historic buildings that we are hired to renovate and bring up to current living standards, so these homes can have a new life in modern Aspen. As architects, we are also keenly interested in the progressive building sciences that are being developed to create a better built environment for the inhabitants while creating a building that is energy efficient, fire resistant, sustainable and that will last for the 86 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 next 100 years with the addition of all the new technology and demands that are placed on buildings. Our intention is not to undermine the historic preservation efforts that are currently in place but rather, to educate or at the very least bring to your attention to the critical role that responsible and progressive building science practices play in the planning and execution of all development and re-development projects; in this case the renovation of historic resources. Please remember that when these little cabins, Victorian homes and mountain chalets were constructed in the late 1800s through the early 1900s, that the methods and materials executed then were the best that were available at that time. As in every other arena, the progress of technology continues to change and improve. So too, the materials, means and methods of construction have been changing to meet the current demands of our society. At this point, beyond the comfort of the inhabitants, the protection of the actual historic structure and the insurability of the building, we are also concerned with the larger issues of sustainability and persevering the environment. The effects of climate change are already having huge impacts and consequences on the built and natural environment. For example, the wildfires that destroy entire communities, the more extreme temperatures that require more cooling and heating that taxes our electrical grids, the lack of snow that affects our livelihoods in ski towns and continues the cycle of less moisture = more fires. We have opportunities every day to do small things that can help alter the course of climate change. It is our intention to do our part, as architects, to do as much as possible in the design and construction arena to protect our environment. It is our strong belief that we can create buildings that are structurally sound and protected from moisture damage by designing better details of building envelopes. These details will in turn, be more energy efficient and fire resistant. In the following information, please think about how these principles can be applied to new construction and to the preservation of historic homes, while maintaining the look and appeal of the historic resources. Building Science encompasses a multidisciplinary approach that integrates various scientific principles to optimize the performance of buildings in terms of energy efficiency, durability, comfort, and overall environmental impact. Our community continues to strive for excellence in these arenas as illustrated with the City’s ambitious goal of being Net Zero by 2050 and the building department’s adoption of more strict energy and fire hardening codes every year. It is now up to those of us in the design and construction industry to do everything in our power to support these goals. This includes every building in the valley, including the historic resources. The following section of this letter outlines the importance and benefits of the current building sciences. By incorporating these practices, we will be designing systems and assemblies that will truly protect not only the family inside, but the actual historic structure: 1. Energy Efficiency: Building science helps design structures that are energy-efficient, reducing the overall energy consumption of the community. This not only contributes to 87 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 environmental conservation but also results in cost savings for both developers and residents. 2. Durability and Resilience: Implementing building science principles ensures that structures are resilient to natural disasters and extreme weather conditions. This, in turn, minimizes repair and reconstruction costs and enhances the safety of our community. This also insures that homes can be insured. Many insurance companies will not insure homes that have not hardened the exterior of their homes against fire. This hardening also protects the actual historic structure, even if the exterior gets some fire damage. 3. Indoor Environmental Quality: Building science emphasizes the importance of creating indoor spaces that promote the health and well-being of occupants. Proper ventilation, lighting, and thermal comfort are integral components of a building's design that impact the quality of life for its inhabitants. 4. Building Envelope: the design of a home’s wall and roof assemblies that are airtight, properly insulated and protected contribute to energy efficiency, indoor air quality and the preservation of the structure by keeping moisture from accumulating inside these components. This keeps the structure from rotting and prevents mold. Please note additional information on this point in the conversation below regarding waterproofing. 5. Sustainable Development: Incorporating sustainable practices in construction aligns with the global commitment to reducing the carbon footprint. Building science encourages the use of eco-friendly materials, energy-efficient systems, and waste reduction strategies. 6. Long-Term Cost Savings: Although implementing building science principles may involve initial investments, the long-term benefits far outweigh the costs. Reduced energy bills, lower maintenance expenses, and increased property values are among the financial advantages of prioritizing building science. 7. Re-Use and Re-Cycle: By redeveloping buildings, remodeling and keeping many building materials out of the landfill is another aspect of construction that the building sciences have been studying. How does one make an old building meet new energy codes, the demands of today’s society and preserve our important history. There are many new building materials on the market that can be used to simulate historic materials or that can be used in conjunction with existing historic fabric. These are the areas in historic preservation that we need to address locally. These materials will allow these historic homes to meet today’s huge cultural demands, energy and fire codes and contribute to the goal of reaching Net Zero by 2050. Waterproofing membranes play a crucial role in preserving and protecting historic homes. These membranes are essential components in maintaining the structural integrity and longevity of the building. Here are several reasons why incorporating waterproofing membranes into historic homes is of paramount importance: 1. Preservation of Historical Materials: Historic homes often feature unique and irreplaceable materials that may be vulnerable to water damage, such as wood, plaster, and ornate architectural details. Waterproofing 88 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 membranes help safeguard these materials, preventing deterioration, rot, and decay caused by water infiltration. 2. Prevention of Structural Damage: Water damage can compromise the structural integrity of a building. Waterproofing membranes act as a barrier against moisture, preventing it from penetrating walls, foundations, and other structural elements. This helps avoid issues like foundation settling, sagging floors, and structural instability. 3. Mold and Mildew Prevention: Excessive moisture in historic homes can create an environment conducive to mold and mildew growth. These fungi not only pose health risks but can also cause irreversible damage to historical materials. Waterproofing membranes inhibit moisture intrusion, thus reducing the risk of mold and mildew formation. 4. Protection of Historical Interiors: Many historic homes boast intricate interior designs, including ornate plasterwork, decorative moldings, and vintage finishes. Water damage can ruin these features, leading to expensive restoration efforts. Waterproofing membranes help maintain the integrity of historical interiors by preventing water-related deterioration. 5. Mitigation of Efflorescence and Staining: Water infiltration can lead to the migration of salts within building materials , resulting in efflorescence – the formation of white, powdery deposits on surfaces. Additionally, water can cause staining on historic facades and interiors. Waterproofing membranes provide a protective barrier, minimizing the occurrence of efflorescence and unsightly stains. 6. Energy Efficiency: Waterproofing membranes contribute to the overall energy efficiency of a historic home by preventing air and water leaks. This helps maintain a consistent indoor climate, reducing the workload on heating and cooling systems. Improved energy efficiency not only enhances comfort but also supports the sustainable use of historic structures. 7. Preservation of Landscaping and Surroundings: Proper waterproofing prevents water from infiltrating the building envelope and seeping into the surrounding landscape. This is particularly important in preserving historic gardens, pathways, and other outdoor features that contribute to the overall historical character of the property. Incorporating waterproofing membranes into historic homes is a proactive measure that ensures the continued viability and cultural significance of these structures. By protecting against water-related issues, these membranes contribute to the long-term preservation of our architectural heritage for future generations. As we all know, our climate is very dry, so many ask why we need to be so concerned about moisture. Many of the historic homes that have been redeveloped seem to be ‘just fine’ and show little signs of damage from the moisture that has infiltrated the building over the years. 89 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 But as new building methods, materials, heating/cooling and ventilation systems are incorporated into these old structures, we need to be more concerned with condensation inside the walls and roofs and the infiltration of moisture from the outside elements. We need to include all the new methods that create energy efficiency, without causing unintentional damage to the structure by trapping moisture within the wall cavities. On another note, we also need to be concerned with the structural stability of these homes. These older buildings didn’t have the structural codes or “know how” that we have now. As all of you have seen, all these buildings are out of square, the walls are not plumb or straight and the roofs, though still intact are sagging. To preserve and restore these buildings to their historic look, we need to incorporate more shear and structure into them. This will ensure that they continue to look as they did when first constructed for the next hundred plus years. It is with these intentions and desires that we come before the Historic Preservation Commission. We want this home at 227 E Bleeker to become a model of the marriage of historic preservation and the latest building sciences. We are very grateful to have a client that is so committed to the principles of good building, energy efficiency and fire resistance that he has hired many consultants and continues to push us, his architects and builders to find better solutions, all at extra cost to himself; which will benefit the entire community. Please think seriously about our future in this beautiful valley as you evaluate this information. It will be information that you can use in all the homes that come before you as a Commission in the coming years. We invite the HPC to join us in demanding better construction that will result in better preservation. Attached below as Exhibits, you will find a presentation of what was originally approved by the HPC for this home. This was before Ken had purchased the property; before he had any say in the decisions being made by the developer. We as a team, realize that we have been before you for other changes as initiated by the Interior Designer and appreciate your time and experience to now look at the actual building envelope. Roof Material As we all know, asphalt shingles have been the “go to” material for historic homes for decades now. We also all know that they do not look anything like a cedar shingle; but have been approved and used for years because there was nothing better on the market. We are proposing the EcoStar Empire series shingles. These shingles are a synthetic material that is reminiscent of cedar shingles to maintain the look of the historic home; but that have the sustainability factor of a material that is warrantied for 50 yrs or a lifetime AND that has the fire resistive quality to harden this home against fire hazard. The proposed shingles are also UL rated Class A without an additional underlayment. These EcoStar shingles come custom colors, which we are exploring to find a color that is the most like cedar shingles. There is a mock-up of the proposed EcoStar shingles on the roof of the bay window of the historic structure. Many of you have seen it. If you would like to visit again, please feel free to go by and take a look any time. If you would like to call Scott Hershey to set up a time, he is the site superintendent and he would be happy to show them to you. 508-277-0872. 90 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 We realize that no material will looks just like cedar shingles, but it is our belief that these shingles look more like cedar than Asphalt and have better performance. Siding Material The wood siding that is existing on the old home is actually in pretty good shape as it was protected from the weather for decades by Transite shingles, which are an asbestos-cement composite. Ironically, these transite shingles beyond being durable they are fireproof; this house was way ahead of it’s time. That said, the existing wood siding material is old and in much need of repair to look as it did when the home was first built. We will also have to mill additional material to match where we cannot repair and where the material is just missing. See information below on steps we will take to accomplish this in the Historic Guidelines section. Please see the attached details of what was previously approved and what we are now proposing for a better wall assembly as Exhibits A-E at the end of this letter. Another serious concern for Ken and others of our clients, is the issue of getting insurance to cover their homes. Many insurance companies are now requiring homeowners to remove flammable materials on the exterior of their homes and replace it or underlay it with non- combustible material. We believe the entire industry has become more aware of the need for entire communities to share in the responsibility to make their homes more fire resistant, thus making entire neighborhoods and towns less susceptible to the devastation that was just suffered in Hawaii. Aspen, in particular, is in a similarly vulnerable situation as the islands of HI in that there is only one way out of the valley in the winter and two slow ways to evacuate in the summer. A truly tragic situation would be to have a fire blaze through town as many homes are completely covered in flammable materials, both the walls and the roofs. Those homes that have hardened the exterior materials will likely be the only ones standing. Thus the structure of the historic 91 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 cabin will be preserved and could be repaired. If the entire thing is burned down, it is just lost forever. For your consideration we have included one roofing option and a new wall assembly. The detail of the wall assembly has many benefits as listed here; 1. Shear strength is added to the structure with 7/16” Flameblock 2. This flat surface allows for a great waterproof substrate 3. The waterproofing will protect the historic wood studs 4. The shear layer provides a 1hour fire rated layer to the exterior = fire hardened 5. The existing wood siding will be maintained on the historic cabin 6. The home will be insurable with the fire hardened material underlayment Land Use Code Sections that are relevant to this project Section 26.415.070 (e)(2) Substantial amendments. a. All changes to approved plans that materially modify the location, size, shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial RESPONSE: The proposed method of adding a layer of fireproof sheathing to this building will not materially change the look of the historic home. By carefully removing the siding and trim, and installing a layer of 7/16” material under everything, and then placing the newly preserved materials back on the cabin, will not change the look, as the relationships between the siding and trim will remain the same. As noted, some of the building has a layer of 1” thick, vertical boards under the siding and the remainder of the home has no material under the siding. To maintain the look of the building as closely as possibly, we have developed two details, one for each area. The area that has the 1” vertical boards, we will install small runners under the FlameBlock to maintain the same dimension as is existing. The areas with no material under the siding will receive just the 7/16” layer, which is insubstantial in the overall look of the building; it will not be noticeable. We strongly believe that this small change, with all the benefits that have been discussed, far outweigh the imperceptible change in the width of the home. Historic Guidelines that are relevant to this project CHAPTER 2 BUILDING MATERIALS 2.1 Preserve original building materials. Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. RESPONSE: Much of exterior siding of this home was fairly well preserved under the asphalt shingles for the past 40-50 years; and some of it has been destroyed by the numerous additions and other work done by the various owners down through the decades. This siding will need to be removed and replaced with wood that is milled to match the original. 92 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 To preserve this home and the rest of the exterior materials, we are proposing to number and carefully remove the existing siding and trim to fully refurbish each piece. It will be sanded, repaired where necessary and given a layer of protective sealer on every side to protect it for the next 100 years. The newly protected wood siding and trim will be placed back in the exact same place from which it was taken. The new wood that is milled to match, to fill in where the old is either rotted through or broken beyond repair will receive the same protective layer of sealer. The structure of the home will be covered in 7/16” LP FlameBlock material before the siding in returned; this will protect the structure in the event of a fire. The exterior material may be lost, but the structure will be saved. The other great benefit of this material is that is also a structural shear panel. This home, as you may recall, has no shear panels on most of the historic structure, and not a good layer of waterproofing. Our interest in using this LP FlameBlock is three-fold; we can add much needed shear to the walls, give ourselves a solid and flat surface to waterproof the historic structure and create the desired fire rated assembly for the occupants. This is in keeping with current building science, and similar to the detail recently approved at 227 E Main. We will work closely with our monitor during the entire process; doing one wall or section at a time to be sure nothing is done out of sequence; and he can be sure we are following our protocol with each board going back to its original place. Please see the attached details showing the previously approved materials and wall assemblies in comparison to what we are proposing now. As the currently approved wall assembly cannot be warrantied and will not protect the structure from moisture, we strongly encourage you to allow this new assembly. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically RESPONSE: The wood siding and trim will be painted; as it was originally. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. RESPONSE: We are determined to save as much of the historic material as feasible. Our intent is to be meticulous in removing the siding so as to put it ALL back. Since it has been protected from the elements for such a long time, we feel it is in good enough shape to be removed, preserved and replaced with very little loss of historic material. We have all of the means and methods available to us to make this cabin a model of preservation. Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. RESPONSE: For the siding and trim, we agree that putting synthetic siding on the cabin will change the look and not maintain the historic integrity of the resource. We have searched for alternative material that would be suitable but have come up empty handed. This is why we are proposing keeping the existing siding, fully preserved, and installed over fireproof material. The 7/16” of material, will not noticeably change the look of the building materials; and we feel that this small difference, weighed against the potential upside of saving the structure is worth the effort, time and expense. 93 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 As mentioned, the owner is willing to take on the huge expense of this sort of preservation for the safety of his family and the preservation of the home in the event of a wildfire. CHAPTER 7 BUILDING MATERIALS 7.7 Preserve original roof materials - Avoid removing historic roofing material that is in good condition. When replacement is necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities and use a color that is similar to that seen historically. RESPONSE: As has been the practice of the HPC and Historic Preservation officer for the past many years wood shingles have been replaced with asphalt shingles in the desire to follow city fire code and protect homes. We too will be replacing the old wood shingles as this home has already received approval to use asphalt shingles on the historic roof. At this juncture, we feel that there are other better materials to put on the roof than asphalt shingles to protect the home from the elements and fire. Since the City code has ban the use of wood shingles on all roofs, except for those on historic homes; and since the precedent of synthetic materials have replaced them we would like to propose a different material. For the reasons noted above, we feel the EcoStar shingles are a better alternative for this historic cabin than the asphalt shingles. Both the asphalt shingles and the EcoStar shingles have issues with looking exactly like cedar shingles, as nothing can replace natural materials perfectly, “nature” is always the best looking. 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. RESPONSE: The synthetic shingle we are proposing is low profile like a cedar shingle, has little texture and comes in widths that are consistent with cedar shingles. Compared to the asphalt shingles that are much thinner and have a very different texture than wood shingles. Of course, all synthetic materials look “funny” when holding one piece in your hand, but when they are applied to a roof and the perspective is seeing them as one would see cedar shingles, they are much more comparable aesthetically. We will have a very low -profile metal flashing at the roof and windows, the minimal to provide adequate water proofing, but it will not detract from the look of the historic cabin. The flashing will blend in color with the roofing so as not to draw attention to it. Summary 1. New Ecostar shingles are proposed to replace the previously approved asphalt. 2. The new wall assembly that allows us to remove, preserve and return the existing siding over a new layer of 7/16” Flameblock for shear and waterproofing needs. We believe that these proposed changes are completely in alignment with the goals of preserving the history of Aspen; as the mass, scale, character and look of the cabin will be maintained. These proposed changes are also contributing to the goals of the City to make neighborhoods more fire resistant and energy efficient. Additionally, we invite you to review the attached letters from not only Jan Legersky, the Aspen Fire Marshall, but also other experts in the industry that are committed to safety and historic preservation. We have also included articles that give more detail than we can give in this 94 501 E. Hyman Ave, Suite 201 | Aspen, Colorado | 81611 | 970.925.2252 letter or presentation. These letters are Exhibit G. And Exhibit H has a couple of Building science articles for your reference. We understand and will comply with Sections 26.304; 26.415.070(e); 26.425.120; 26.490.050; and 26.575.020. The calculations and measurements are not changing with these proposed changes. Thank you all for your thoughtful consideration of this information. We hope that after learning more about the current science of building homes, you will be as enthusiastic as we are to see how all the historic resources can be protected from the environment and fires, while maintaining their historic relevance and appearance. The owners of this home are very grateful for the opportunity to come before you to discuss these alternatives. They are eager to preserve the historic cabin while also making it fire resistant and energy efficient. We believe we have come up with solutions that can be married successfully to achieve the goals of both the HPC and the owners. Thank you all for your thoughtful consideration of this information. Mr. Hubbard and his family are excited to finish the construction and move into this preserved home. Respectfully, Kim Kim Raymond KIM RAYMOND ARCHITECTURE + INTERIORS www.kimraymondarchitects.com Exhibit A Approved assembly with sheathing Exhibit B Approved assembly with sheathing 3D section Exhibit C Approved assembly without sheathing Exhibit D Existing “sheathing” locations per Koru Exhibit E Proposed Assembly Exhibit F Proposed Assembly 3D section Exhibit G Letters from experts and other concerned parties Exhibit H Building Science articles Exhibit I Flameblock and EcoStar spec sheets 95 227 E BLEEKER VICINITY MAP 96 Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. Mineral estate ownership is not included in this mailing list. Pitkin County does not maintain a database of mineral estate owners. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273707320014 on 10/26/2020 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com 97 MONARCH BUILDING LLC WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 PO BOX 126 HODGSON PATRICIA H FAMILY TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 212 N MONARCH ST CRMX-236 LLC DILLON, MT 59725 PO BOX 1031 JBC PREFERRED PROPERTIES LLC DELRAY BEACH, FL 33483 1005 BROOKS LN 232 EAST MAIN STREET LLC CHICAGO, IL 60614 2001 N HALSTED #304 KRIBS KAREN REV LIV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 9994 EAST BLEEKER DUPLEX CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 232 E BLEEKER ST ROCKING LAZY J PROPS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 202 E MAIN ST ASPEN MILL HOLDINGS II LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 730 E DURANT AVE #200 223 HALLAM LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 1315 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR 203 E HALLAM LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 101 S MILL ST # 200 BERKO STUDIO LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 215 E HALLAM ST #1 208 MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 623 E HOPKINS AVE BERKO STUDIO DUPLEX CONDO OWNER ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 E HALLAM 227 EAST MAIN LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 312 AABC #D WHITMAN RANDALL A MIAMI BEACH, FL 331404230 2817 LAKE AVE MTK TRUST AUSTIN, TX 78703 1 NILES RD 201 N MILL ASSOCIATES LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 730 E DURANT AVE #200 WOLKE LAUREN B TARZANA, CA 91356 4109 GREENBRIAR LN LE VOTAUX II CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 117 N MONARCH ST PEARCE BERNARD D ASPEN, CO 81611 216 E MAIN ST CHAFFEY DUAN ASPEN, CO 81611 201 N MILL ST # 1A SOUTHWEST JLK CORP FORT WORTH, TX 761024116 301 COMMERCE ST #1600 JBC PREFERRED PROPERTIES LLC DELRAY BEACH, FL 33483 1005 BROOKS LN BLEEKER MILL DEVELOPMENT LLC NEW YORK, NY 10154 345 PARK AVE 33RD FL MC2 PARTNERS LLC CHICAGO, IL 60610 30 W OAK ST #7B WHITMAN RANDALL A MIAMI BEACH, FL 331404230 2817 LAKE AVE 201 EAST MAIN STREET LLC CHICAGO, IL 60614 2001 N HALSTED ST #304 ASPEN COMM UNITED METHODIST CHURCH ASPEN, CO 81611 200 E BLEEKER ST 303 EAST MAIN LLLP ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 8016 98 HODES ALAN & DEBORAH AVENTURA , FLA 33180 19951 NE 39TH PLACE ICONIC PROPERTIES JEROME LLC HOUSTON, TX 77077 1375 ENCLAVE PKWY HODGSON PHILIP R ASPEN, CO 81611 212 N MONARCH ST BERKO NORA ASPEN, CO 81611 211 E HALLAM ST #2 ASPEN MILL HOLDINGS II LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 730 E DURANT AVE #200 MALLORY I HOWELL ASPEN, CO 81611 211 E HALLAM ST #2 OTIS REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 602 W HALLAM WOLKE LAUREN B TARZANA, CA 91356 4109 GREENBRIAR LN CARLS REAL ESTATE LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 1365 BLU VIC CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 202 N MONARCH ST MILL BUILDING CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 201 N MILL ST BLEEKER MILL DEVELOPMENT LLC NEW YORK, NY 10154 345 PARK AVE 33RD FL BLEEKER MILL DEVELOPMENT LLC NEW YORK, NY 10154 345 PARK AVE 33RD FL PEARCE RICHARD B ASPEN, CO 81611 216 E MAIN ST ICONIC PROPERTIES JEROME LLC HOUSTON, TX 77077 1375 ENCLAVE PKWY MILL BUILDING ASSOCIATION INC ASPEN, CO 81611 730 E DURANT AVE #200 RODNEY JOHN W BASALT , CO 81621 20 RIVER OAKS LANE CJB REALTY INVESTORS LLC MISSION HILLS, KS 66208 6544 WENONGA CIR MONARCH HOUSE LLC MIAMI, FL 33130 120 SW 8TH ST WOLKE LAUREN B TRUST #1 TARZANA, CA 91356 4109 GREENBRIAR LN WOLKE LAUREN B TRUST #1 TARZANA, CA 91356 4109 GREENBRIAR LN PEGOLOTTI DELLA ASPEN, CO 81611 202 E MAIN ST BROWN KIM ASPEN, CO 816111557 201 N MILL ST #102 SHORT DIANA & CAMERON ASPEN, CO 81611 201 N MILL ST #2C SCHIRATO JASON P ASPEN, CO 816111557 201 N MILL ST #102 MINERS REAL ESTATE LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 1365 1543 LLC DENVER, CO 80202 1543 WAZEE ST #400 ASPEN MILL HOLDINGS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 400 E MAIN ST #2 AJAX/COMET LLC NEW YORK, NY 10128 170 E END AVE PH2A ASPEN CORNER OFFICE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 200 E MAIN ST 99 LAYNE MATTHEW & KRISTIN ASPEN, CO 81611 201 NORTH MILL ST #2A HANEY DEVELOPMENT CO LLC DENVER, CO 802061327 PO BOX 6680 209 EAST BLEEKER LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 625 E HYMAN AVE #201 MADDEN WALTER ROSS ASPEN, CO 81611 218 N MONARCH ST HANEY DEVELOPMENT CO LLC DENVER, CO 802061327 PO BOX 6680 BTRSARDY LLC PALO ALTO , CA 94306 PO BOX 61239 MYRIN CUTHBERT L JR ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 12365 225 NORTH MILL ST LLC NEW YORK, NY 10036 1530 BROADWAY 4TH FL 100 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GENERAL LAND USE PACKET Attached is an Application for review of Development that requires Land Use Review pursuant to The City of Aspen Land Use Code: Included in this package are the following attachments: 1.Development Application Fee Policy, Fee Schedule and Agreement to Pay Application Fees Form 2.Land Use Application Form 3.Dimensional Requirements Form (if required) 4.HOA Compliance Form 5.Development Review Procedure All applications are reviewed based on the criteria established in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code. Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code is available at the City Clerk’s Office on the second floor of City Hall and on the internet at https://library.municode.com/co/aspen/codes/municipal_code. We require all applicants to hold a Pre-Application Conference with a Planner in the Community Development Department so that the requirements for submitting a complete application can be fully described. This meeting can happen in person or by phone or email. Also, depending upon the complexity of the development proposed, submitting one copy of the development application to the Case Planner to determine accuracy, inefficiencies, or redundancies can reduce the overall cost of materials and staff time. Please recognize that review of these materials does not substitute for a complete review of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. While this application package attempts to summarize the key provisions of the Code as they apply to your type of development, it cannot possibly replicate the detail or the scope of the Code. If you have questions that are not answered by the materials in this package, we suggest that you contact the staff member assigned to your case, contact Planner of the Day (970-429-2764/planneroftheday@gmail.com), or consult the applicable sections of the Aspen Land Use Code. 101 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 Land Use Review Fee Policy The City of Aspen has established a review fee policy for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for applications that normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. Review fees for other City Departments reviewing the application (referral departments) also will be collected when necessary. Flat fees are cumulative, i.e., an application with multiple flat fees must pay the sum of those flat fees. Flat fees are not refundable. A review fee deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff time is required. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Various City staff also may charge their time spent on the case in addition to the Case Planner. The deposit amount may be reduced if, in the opinion of the Community Development Department Director, the project is expected to take significantly less time to process than the deposit indicates. A determination on the deposit amount shall be made during the pre-application conference by the Case Planner. Hourly billing shall still apply. All applications must include an Agreement to Pay Application Fees. One payment including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the City of Aspen. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required fee(s). The Community Development Department shall keep an accurate record of the actual time required to process a land use application requiring a deposit. The City can provide a summary report of fees due at the applicant’s request. The applicant will be billed for the additional costs incurred by the City when the processing of an application by the Community Development Department takes more time or expense than is covered by the deposit. Any direct costs attributable to a project review shall be billed to the applicant with no additional administrative charge. In the event the processing of an application takes less time than provided for by the deposit, the Department shall refund the unused portion of the deposited fee to the applicant. Fees shall be due regardless of whether an applicant receives approval. Unless otherwise combined by the Director for simplicity of billing, all applications for conceptual, final, and recordation of approval documents shall be handled as individual cases for the purpose of billing. Upon conceptual approval, all billing shall be reconciled, and past due invoices shall be paid prior to the Director accepting an application for final review. Final review shall require a new deposit at the rate in effect at the time of final submission. Upon final approval, all billing shall again be reconciled prior to the Director accepting an application for review of technical documents for recordation. The Community Development Director may cease processing of a land use application for which an unpaid invoice is 30 or more days past due. Unpaid invoices of 90 days or more past due may be assessed a late fee of 1.75% per month. An unpaid invoice of 120 days or more may be subject to additional actions as may be assigned by the Municipal Court judge. All payment information is public domain. All invoices shall be paid prior to issuance of a Development Order or recordation of development agreements and plats. The City will not accept a building permit for a property until all invoices are paid in full. For permits already accepted, any unpaid invoice of 90 or more days may result in cessation of building permit processing or issuance of a stop work order until full payment is made. The property owner of record is the party responsible for payment of all costs associated with a land use application for the property. Any secondary agreement between a property owner and an applicant representing the owner (e.g. a contract purchaser) regarding payment of fees is solely between those private parties. 102 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 Agreement to Pay Application Fees An agreement between the City of Aspen (“City”) and Address of Property: Please type or print in all caps Property Owner Name: Representative Name (if different from Property Owner): Billing Name and Address - Send Bills to: Contact info for billing: e-mail: Phone: I understand that the City has adopted, via Ordinance No. 20, Series of 2020, review fees for Land Use applications, and payment of these fees is a condition precedent to determining application completeness. I understand that as the property owner, I am responsible for paying all fees for this development application. For flat fees and referral fees: I agree to pay the following fees for the services indicated. I understand that these flat fees are non-refundable. $. flat fee for . $. flat fee for $. flat fee for . $. flat fee for For deposit cases only: The City and I understand that because of the size, nature, or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to know the full extent or total costs involved in processing the application. I understand that additional costs over and above the deposit may accrue. I understand and agree that it is impracticable for City staff to complete processing, review, and presentation of sufficient information to enable legally required findings to be made for project consideration unless invoices are paid in full. The City and I understand and agree that invoices sent by the City to the above listed billing address and not returned to the City shall be considered by the City as being received by me. I agree to remit payment within 30 days of presentation of an invoice by the City for such services. I have read, understood, and agree to the Land Use Review Fee Policy, including consequences for non-payment. I agree to pay the following initial deposit amounts for the specified hours of staff time. I understand that payment of a deposit does not render an application complete or compliant with approval criteria. If actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, I agree to pay additional monthly billings to the City to reimburse the City for processing my application at the hourly rates hereinafter stated. $ deposit for hours of Community Development Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. $ deposit for hours of Engineering Department staff time. Additional time above the deposit amount will be billed at $325.00 per hour. City of Aspen: Phillip Supino, AICP Community Development Director City Use: Fees Due: $ Received $ Case # Signature: PRINT Name: Title: 103 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: REPRESENTIVATIVE: Description: Existing and Proposed Conditions Review: Administrative or Board Review Required Land Use Review(s): Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) required fields: Net Leasable square footage Lodge Pillows Free Market dwelling units Affordable Housing dwelling units Essential Public Facility square footage Have you included the following? FEES DUE: $ Pre-Application Conference Summary Signed Fee Agreement HOA Compliance form All items listed in checklist on PreApplication Conference Summary Name: Address: Phone#: email: Address: Phone #: email: Name: Project Name and Address: Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 104 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 April 2020 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Complete only if required by the PreApplication checklist Project and Location Applicant: Zone District: Gross Lot Area: Net Lot Area: **Please refer to section 26.575.020 for information on how to calculate Net Lot Area Please fill out all relevant dimensions Single Family and Duplex Residential 1) Floor Area (square feet) 2) Maximum Height 3) Front Setback 4) Rear Setback 5) Side Setbacks 6) Combined Side Setbacks 7) % Site Coverage Existing Allowed Proposed Multi-family Residential 1)Number of Units 2)Parcel Density (see 26.710.090.C.10) 3)FAR (Floor Area Ratio) 4)Floor Area (square feet) Existing Allowed Proposed 8) Minimum distance between buildings Proposed % of demolition 5) Maximum Height 6) Front Setback 7) Rear Setback 8) Side Setbacks Proposed % of demolition Commercial Proposed Use(s) Existing Allowed Proposed 1) FAR (Floor Area Ratio) 2) Floor Area (square feet) 3) Maximum Height 4) Off-Street Parking Spaces 5) Second Tier (square feet) 6) Pedestrian Amenity (square feet) Proposed % of demolition Existing non-conformities or encroachments: Variations requested: Lodge Additional Use(s) 1)FAR (Floor Area Ratio) 2)Floor Area (square feet) 3)Maximum Height 4)Free Market Residential(square feet) 4)Front setback 5)Rear setback 6)Side setbacks 7)Off-Street Parking Spaces 8)Pedestrian Amenity (square feet) Proposed % of demolition Existing Allowed Proposed 105 April 2020 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Homeowner Association Compliance Policy All land use applications within the City of Aspen are required to include a Homeowner Association Compliance Form (this form) certifying that the scope of work included in the land use application complies with all applicable covenants and homeowner association policies. The certification must be signed by the property owner or Attorney representing the property owner. Property Owner (“I”): Name: Email: Phone No.: Address of Property: (subject of application) I certify as follows: (pick one) □This property is not subject to a homeowner association or other form of private c ovenant. □This property is subject to a homeowner association or private covenant, and the improvements proposed in this land use application do not require approval by the homeowners association or covenant beneficiary. □This property is subject to a homeowners association or private covenant and the improvements proposed in this land use application have been approved by the homeowners a ssociation or covenant beneficiary. I understand this policy and I understand the City of Aspen does not interpret, enforce, or manage the applicability, meaning or effect of private covenants or homeowner association rules or bylaws. I understand that this document is a public document. Owner signature: Date: Owner printed name: or, Attorney signature: Date: Attorney printed name: 106 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT April 2020 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURE 1.Attend pre-application conference. During this one-on-one meeting, staff will determine the review process applies to your development proposal and will identify the materials necessary to review your application. 2.Submit Development Application. Based on your pre-application meeting, you should complete to the application package and submit the requested number of copies of the complete application and the appropriate processing fee to the Community Development Department. 3.Determination of Completeness. Within five (5) working days of the date of your submission, staff will review the application and notify you in writing whether the application is complete or if additional materials are required. Please be aware that the purpose of the completeness review is to determine whether or not the information you have submitted is adequate to review the request, and not whether the information is sufficient to obtain approval. 4.Staff Review of Development Application. Once your application is determined to be complete, it will be reviewed by the staff for compliance with the applicable standards of the Code. During the staff review stage, the application will be referred to other agencies for comments. The Planner assigned to your case or the agency may contact you if additional information is needed or if problems are identified. Staff will draft a memo for signature by the Community Development Director that explains whether your application complies with the Code, and will list any conditions that should apply if the application is to be approved. Final approval of any Development Application that amends a recorded document, such as a plat, agreement, or deed restriction, will require the applicant to prepare an amended version of that document for review and approval by staff. Staff will provide the applicant with the applicable contents for the revised plat. The City Attorney is normally in charge of the form for recorded agreements and deed restrictions. We suggest that you not go to the trouble or expense of preparing these documents until the staff has determined that your application is eligible for the requested amendment or exemption. 5. Board Review of Application. If a public hearing is required for the land use action that you are requesting, the Planning staff will schedule a hearing date for the application upon determination that the application is complete. The hearing(s) will be scheduled before the appropriate reviewing board(s). The applicant will be required to mail notice (one copy provided by the Community Development Department) to property owners within 30 feet of the subject property and post notice (sign available at the Community Development Department) of the public hearing on the site at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing date. (Please see Attachment 6 for instructions.) The Planning staff will publish notice of the hearing in the paper for land use requests that require publication. The Planning staff will then formulate a recommendation on the land use request and draft a memo to the reviewing board(s). Staff will supply the applicant with a copy of the Planning staff’s memo, approximately five (5) days prior to the hearing. The public hearing(s) will take place before the appropriate review boards. Public hearings include a presentation by the Planning staff, a presentation by the applicant (optional), consideration of public comment, and the reviewing board’s questions and decision. (Continued on next page) 107 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT April 2020 City of Aspen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5090 6.Issuance of Development Order. If the land use review is approved, then the Planning staff will issue a Development Order, which allows the applicant to submit a building permit application. 7.Receipt of Building Permit. Once you have received a copy of the signed staff approval, you may apply for a building permit. During this time, your project will be examined for its compliance with the Uniform Building Code. It also will be checked for compliance with applicable provisions of the Land Use Regulations that were not reviewed in detail during the land use case review. (This might include a check of floor area ratios, setbacks, parking, open space and the like). Impact fees for water, sewer, parks, and employee housing will be collected as part of the permitting process. Any document required to be recorded, such as a plat, deed restriction, or agreement, will be reviewed and recorded before a building permit application is submitted. 108 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030000 (1-31-17)Page 1 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Commitment COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued By FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions,First American Title Insurance Company, a Colorado Corporation (the "Company"), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within six months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. First American Title Insurance Company If this jacket was created electronically, it constitutes an original document. 109 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030000 (1-31-17)Page 2 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1.DEFINITIONS (a) "Knowledge" or "Known": Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records. (b) "Land": The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term "Land" does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (c) "Mortgage": A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. (d) "Policy": Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (e) "Proposed Insured": Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) "Proposed Policy Amount": Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (g) "Public Records": Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (h) "Title": The estate or interest described in Schedule A. 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: (a) the Notice; (b) the Commitment to Issue Policy; (c) the Commitment Conditions; (d) Schedule A; (e) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; (f) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and (g) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. 4.COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5.LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY (a) The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: (i) comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; (ii) eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or (iii) acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. (b) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (c) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. 110 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030000 (1-31-17)Page 3 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) (d) The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (e) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any. (f) In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (g) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy. 6.LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT (a) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment. (b) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. (c) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (d) The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (e) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company. (f) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy. 7.IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8.PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9.ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. 111 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5033708-A (4-9-18)Page 4 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule A ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule A Transaction Identification Data for reference only: Issuing Agent:Winter VanAlstine Issuing Office:Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC Issuing Office's ALTA® Registry ID: 1019587 Loan ID No.: Commitment No.:20004528 Issuing Office File No.:20004528 Property Address:227 East Bleeker Street, Aspen, CO 81611 SCHEDULE A 1. Commitment Date: September 1, 2020 at 07:45 AM 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: Amount Premium A.ALTA Owners Policy (06/17/06)$3,600,000.00 $6,650.00 Proposed Insured:227 East Bleeker LLC, a Colorado limited liability company Certificate of Taxes Due $25.00 Endorsements: CO-110.1 (Delete 1, 2, 3, 4)$75.00 Additional Charges:$0 Total $6,750.00 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is Fee simple. 4. The Title is, at the Commitment Date, vested in: Rosa H. Gettman Family Trust, dated November 19, 2007 5. The land referred to in the Commitment is described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT A ATTACHED HERETO For informational purposes only, the property address is: 227 East Bleeker Street, Aspen, CO 81611. 112 SCHEDULE A (Continued) This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5033708-A (4-9-18)Page 5 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule A Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC By: Winter VanAlstine Authorized Officer or Agent FOR INFORMATION PURPOSED OR SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THIS COMMITMENT, CONTACT: Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC,715 West Main Street, Suite 202, Aspen, CO 81611, Phone: 970 925-7328, Fax: 970 925-7348. 113 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030008-BI&BII (5-18-17)Page 6 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule BI & BII ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII Commitment No: 20004528 SCHEDULE B, PART I Requirements All of the following Requirements must be met: 1.The Proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. 2.Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. 3.Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. 4.Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. 5.Payment of all taxes and assessments now due and payable as shown on a certificate of taxes due from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent. 6.Evidence that all assessments for common expenses, if any, have been paid. 7.Final Affidavit and Agreement executed by Owners and/or Purchasers must be provided to the Company 8.Special Warranty Deed must be sufficient to convey the fee simple estate or interest in the land described or referred to herein, from the Rosa H. Gettman Family Trust, dated November 19, 2007 to 227 East Bleeker LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, the proposed insured, Schedule A, item 2A. NOTE: C.R.S. Section 38-35-109(2) requires that a notation of the purchaser's legal address, (not necessarily the same as the property address) be included on the face of the Deed to be recorded. 9.Full disclosure from Seller, of any monetary liens and open Deeds of Trust of record. If you have any knowledge of an outstanding obligation secured by the subject property, you must contact us immediately for further review prior to closing. 10.A true and correct copy of the Trust Agreement which creates the Rosa H. Gettman Family Trust, dated November 19, 2007 providing, among other things, the designation of the trustee(s) and specification of the trustee(s) powers under that trust. 114 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII (Cont.) Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 7 of 16 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado 11.Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of the Rosa H. Gettman Family Trust, dated November 19, 2007, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172 and C.R.S. Section 38-30-108.5. 12.Certificate of Good Standing from the Colorado Secretary of State for 227 East Bleeker LLC, a Colorado limited liability company. 13.Record a Statement of Authority to provide prima facie evidence of existence of 227 East Bleeker LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, an entity capable of holding property, and the name of the person authorized to execute instruments affecting title to real property as authorized by C.R.S. Section 38-30-172. 14.A copy of the properly signed and executed Operating Agreement if written, for 227 East Bleeker LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, to be submitted to the Company for review. 15.Evidence furnished by the Office of the Director of Finance, City of Aspen, that the following real estate taxes have been paid, or that conveyance is exempt from said taxes: (1) The "Wheeler Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and; (2) The "Housing Real Estate Transfer Tax" pursuant to Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990); pursuant to the Warranty Deed dated November 19, 2007, and recorded November 21, 2007, as Reception No. 544296. 16.Improvement Survey Plat sufficient in form, content and certification acceptable to the Company. Exception will be taken to adverse matters disclosed thereby. 17.Receipt by the Company of the appropriate Lease Affidavit indemnifying the Company against any existing leases or tenancies, and any and all parties claiming by, through or under said lessees. 18.This Title Commitment is subject to underwriter approval. 115 This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by First American Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5030008-BI&BII (5-18-17)Page 8 of 16 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance (8-1-16) Colorado - Schedule BI & BII ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII (Cont.) Commitment No.: 20004528 SCHEDULE B, PART II Exceptions THIS COMMITMENT DOES NOT REPUBLISH ANY COVENANT, CONDITION, RESTRICTION, OR LIMITATION CONTAINED IN ANY DOCUMENT REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SPECIFIC COVENANT, CONDITION, RESTRICTION, OR LIMITATION VIOLATES STATE OR FEDERAL LAW BASED ON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, HANDICAP, FAMILIAL STATUS, OR NATIONAL ORIGIN. The Policy will not insure against loss or damage resulting from the terms and provisions of any lease or easement identified in Schedule A, and will include the following Exceptions unless cleared to the satisfaction of the Company: 1.Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the Public Records, but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 2.Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the Public Records. 3.Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct land survey and inspection of the Land would disclose, and which are not shown by the Public Records. 4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown in the Public Records. 5.Any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter that appears for the first time in the Public Records or is created, attaches, or is disclosed between the Commitment Date and the date on which all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements are met. Note: Exception number 5. will be removed from the policy provided the Company conducts the closing and settlement service for the transaction identified in the commitment 6.Any and all unpaid taxes, assessments and unredeemed tax sales. 7.Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof. 8.Any water rights, claims of title to water, in, on or under the Land. 9.Taxes and assessments for the year 2020, and subsequent years, a lien not yet due or payable. 116 ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI & BII (Cont.) Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 9 of 16 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado 10.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Act authorizing the issuance of the Patent for the City and Townsite of Aspen, recorded March 1, 1897, in Book 139 at Page 216 as Reception No. 060156. 11.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under Ordinance No. 6 (series of 1959, An Ordinance Accepting a Map Entitled "Official Map of the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, State of Colorado," as the Official Map of the City of Aspen: Providing for Dedication of all Streets and Alleys, Except Such Streets and Alleys Heretofore Vacated; And Providing for the Filing of Said Map, Field Notes, and Supplemental Plats with the Clerk and Recorder for Pitkin County, dated November 2, 1959, and recorded December 18, 1959, in Book 189 at Page 354 as Reception No. 109043; and any and all notes, easements and recitals as disclosed on the Willets Map recorded November 12, 1969 in Plat Book 4 at Page 27 as Reception No. 137902. 12.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Easement Agerement with the City of Aspen dated August 14, 1986, and recorded December 11, 1986, in Book 524 at Page 835 as Reception No. 283966. 13.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under Resolution No. 26, Series of 2005, a Resolution of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Reommending Approval of an Application for a Historic Landmark Lot Split, Including Subdivision Exemption and GMQS Exemption, and Granting an Approval for Setback Variances at 227 East Bleeker Street, Lots E, F and G, Block 73, City and Townsite of Aspen, dated July 13, 2005, and recorded August 11, 2005, as Recepiton No. 513429. 14.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Revocable Encroachment License dated November 11, 2005, and recorded December 2, 2005, as Reception No. 518031. 15.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under Ordinance No. 34 (Series of 2005), an Ordinance of the Aspen City Council Approving a Subdivision Exemption for a Historic Landmark Lot Split at 227 E. Bleeker Street, Lots E, F and G, Block 73, City and Twonsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, dated August 22, 2005, and recorded January 17, 2006, as Reception No. 519805. 16.Terms, conditions, provisions, agreements and obligations specified under the Subdivision Exemption Agreement for the Historic Landmark Lot Split at 227 East Bleeker Street, dated February 15, 2006, and recorded March 17, 2006, as Reception No. 521938. 17.Any and all notes, easements and recitals as disclosed on the Final Plat of East Bleeker Historic Landmark Lot Split, Lots E, F & G, Block 73, City & Townsite of Aspen, recorded on March 17, 2006, in Plat Book 78 at Page 5 as Reception No. 521939. 18.Any loss or damage due to the fence lines not corresponding to the lot lines, as disclosed on the Improvement Survey Plat provided by Aspen Survey, dated August 28, 2020, as File No. 2008193. 19.Any existing leases or tenancies, and any and all parties claiming by, through or under said lessees. NOTE: Upon receipt of a Lease Affidavit from Seller, this exception will not appear on the final title policy. 117 Form 5000000-EX (7-1-14)Page 10 of 16 Exhibit A ALTA Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Exhibit A File No.: 20004528 The Land referred to herein below is situated in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and is described as follows: Lot 2, EAST BLEEKER HISTORIC LOT SPLIT, according to the Final Plat thereof filed on record in Plat Book 78 at Page 5 as Reception No. 521939, Pitkin County, Colorado. 118 Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 11 of 16 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Pursuant to C.R.S. 30-10-406(3)(a) all documents received for recording or filing in the Clerk and Recorder’s office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one-half of an inch. The Clerk and Recorder will refuse to record or file any document that does not conform to the requirements of this section. NOTE: If this transaction includes a sale of the property and the price exceeds $100,000.00, the seller must comply with the disclosure/withholding provisions of C.R.S. 39-22-604.5 (Nonresident withholding). NOTE: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that “Every title insurance company shall be responsible to the proposed insured(s) subject to the terms and conditions of the title commitment, other than the effective date of the title commitment, for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title insurance company, or its agent, conducts the closing and settlement service that is in conjunction with its issuance of an owner’s policy of title insurance and is responsible for the recording and filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed. Pursuant to C.R.S. 10-11-122, the company will not issue its owner’s policy or owner’s policies of title insurance contemplated by this commitment until it has been provided a Certificate of Taxes due or other equivalent documentation from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer’s authorized agent; or until the Proposed Insured has notified or instructed the company in writing to the contrary. The subject property may be located in a special taxing district. A Certificate of Taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction shall be obtained from the County Treasurer or the County Treasurer’s authorized agent. Information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: This notice applies to owner’s policy commitments containing a mineral severance instrument exception, or exceptions, in Schedule B, Section 2. A. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and B. That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner’s permission. NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2, Affirmative mechanic’s lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner’s Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: A. The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. B. No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. C. The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic’s and material-men’s liens. D. The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium. E. If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium, fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. 119 Form 50-CO-Disclosure (4-1-16)Page 12 of 16 Disclosure Statement (5-1-15) Colorado NOTE: Pursuant to C.R.S. 38-35-125(2) no person or entity that provides closing and settlement services for a real estate transaction shall disburse funds as a part of such services until those funds have been received and are available for immediate withdrawal as a matter of right. NOTE: C.R.S. 39-14-102 requires that a real property transfer declaration accompany any conveyance document presented for recordation in the State of Colorado. Said declaration shall be completed and signed by either the grantor or grantee. NOTE: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado division of insurance within the department of regulatory agencies. NOTE: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of an ALTA Closing Protection Letter which may, upon request, be provided to certain parties to the transaction identified in the commitment. Nothing herein contained will be deemed to obligate the company to provide any of the coverages referred to herein unless the above conditions are fully satisfied. 120 TELEPHONE 970 925-7328 FACSIMILE 970 925-7348 ATTORNEYS TITLE INSURANCE AGENCY OF ASPEN, LLC 715 West Main Street, Suite 202 Aspen, CO 81611 Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC Privacy Policy Notice PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE Title V. of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) generally prohibits any financial institution, directly or through it affiliates, from sharing non-public personal information about you with a nonaffiliated third party unless the institution provides you with a notice of its privacy policies and practices, such as the type of information that it collects about you and the categories of persons or entities to whom it may be disclosed. In compliance with the GLBA, we are providing you with this document, which notifies you of the privacy policies and practices of Attorneys Title Insurance Agency of Aspen, LLC. We may collect nonpublic personal information about you from the following sources: Information we receive from you, such as on application or other forms. Information about your transactions we secure from out files, or from our affiliates or others. Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Information that we receive from others involved in your transaction, such as the real estate agent or lender. Unless it is specifically stated otherwise in an amended Privacy Policy Notice, no additional nonpublic personal information will be collected about you. We may disclose any of the above information that we collect about our customers or former customer to our affiliates or to nonaffiliated third parties as permitted by law. We also may disclose this information about our customers or former customers to the following types of nonaffiliated companies that perform marketing services on our behalf or with whom we have joint marketing agreements: Financial service providers such as companies engaged in banking, consumer finance, securities and insurance. Non-financial companies such as envelope stuffers and other fulfillment service providers. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED BY LAW. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products or services to you. We maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. 121 122 123 124 125 French Road, LLC 227 E Bleeker Street Aspen, CO 81611 February 8, 2024 To Whom It May Concern: This letter authorizes Kim Raymond and her team of architects at Kim Raymond Architecture + Interiors to represent French Road, LLC through the HPC review and permitting process. Kim can be found at 501 E Hyman Street, Suite 205, Aspen, CO 81611. The office number is 970-925-2252. kim@krai.us. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Respectfully, French Road, LLC by Ken Hubbard, manager 126 NEW TYVEK STUCCO-WRAP (BETWEEN FRAMING AND INSULATION) EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO REMAIN, TO BE RE-PAINTED FINISHED GRADE TO BE 6" BELOW BOTTOM OF WOOD FRAMED WALL PER IRC R317 EXISTING 1" VERTICAL WOOD "SHEATHING", ONLY IN SELECT LOCATIONS (SEE PLAN & ALT. DETAIL WITHOUT SHEATHING) EXISTING 2x4 STUDS TO REMAIN WALL ASSEMBLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO WATER DAMAGE & POOLING @ HISTORIC FRAMING AS WELL AS NEW ON SILL PLATE NEW TYVEK STUCCO-WRAP (BETWEEN HISTORIC FRAMING & INSULATION EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO REMAIN, TO BE RE-PAINTED EXISTING 2x4 STUDS TO REMAIN NEW 2x4 STAGGERED STUDS SISTERED ONTO EXISTING 2x4 STUDS FOR STRUCTURAL SUPPORT EXISTING 1" VERTICAL WOOD "SHEATHING", ONLY IN SELECT LOCATIONS (SEE PLAN & ALT. DETAIL WITHOUT SHEATHING) NEW 2x4 STAGGERED STUDS SISTERED ONTO EXISTING 2x4 STUDS FOR STRUCTURAL SUPPORT 2 6 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2"3 1/2"1 3/4" 5 1/2" 5 1/2" 2"1 3/4"3 1/2" NEW SKIRT BOARD METAL FLASHING W/ DRIP EDGE CONTINUOUS AIR SEALER NEW BASEBOARD WALL SILL PLATE, TYP. SILL GASKET SEALER, TYP. TREATED SILL PLATE NEW 5 1/4" BASE TRIM PIECE NEW PLYWOOD SUBFLOORING NEW FINISHED FLOOR NEW 1 1/2" TOPPING SLAB W/ RADIANT HEAT 5/8" GYPSUM WALL BOARD 5 1/2" SPRAY-IN INSULATION NEW 5 1/2" SPRAY-IN INSULATION NEW 5/8" GYPSUM WALL BOARD CURRENTLY APPROVED EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY AT HISTORIC RESOURCE (WITH 1" "SHEATHING") INTERIOR EXTERIOR INTERIOR EXTERIOR DETAIL SECTION VIEW DETAIL PLAN VIEW 127 NEW TYVEK STUCCO-WRAP (BETWEEN FRAMING AND INSULATION) EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO REMAIN, TO BE RE-PAINTED WALL ASSEMBLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO WATER DAMAGE & POOLING @ HISTORIC FRAMING AS WELL AS NEW ON SILL PLATE EXISTING 1" VERTICAL WOOD "SHEATHING", ONLY IN SELECT LOCATIONS (SEE PLAN & ALT. DETAIL WITHOUT SHEATHING) NEW 2x4 STAGGERED STUDS SISTERED ONTO EXISTING 2x4 STUDS FOR STRUCTURAL SUPPORT EXISTING 2x4 STUDS TO REMAIN PROPOSED EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY AT HISTORIC RESOURCE 3D SECTION VIEW CURRENTLY APPROVED EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY AT HISTORIC RESOURCE (WITH 1" "SHEATHING") 128 NEW TYVEK STUCCO-WRAP (BETWEEN FRAMING AND INSULATION) EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO REMAIN, TO BE RE-PAINTED FINISHED GRADE TO BE 6" BELOW BOTTOM OF WOOD FRAMED WALL PER IRC R317 EXISTING 2x4 STUDS TO REMAIN WALL ASSEMBLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO WATER DAMAGE & POOLING @ HISTORIC FRAMING AS WELL AS NEW ON SILL PLATE NEW TYVEK STUCCO-WRAP (BETWEEN FRAMING AND INSULATION) EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO REMAIN, TO BE RE-PAINTED EXISTING 2x4 STUDS TO REMAIN NEW 2x4 STAGGERED STUDS SISTERED ONTO EXISTING 2x4 STUDS FOR STRUCTURAL SUPPORT NEW 2x4 STAGGERED STUDS SISTERED ONTO EXISTING 2x4 STUDS FOR STRUCTURAL SUPPORT 2 6 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 3/4" 3 1/2"2" 5 1/2" 5 1/2" 2" 3/4" 3 1/2" NEW SKIRT BOARD METAL FLASHING W/ DRIP EDGE CONTINUOUS AIR SEALER NEW BASEBOARD WALL SILL PLATE, TYP. SILL GASKET SEALER, TYP. TREATED SILL PLATE NEW 5 1/4" BASE TRIM PIECE NEW PLYWOOD SUBFLOORING NEW FINISHED FLOOR NEW 1 1/2" TOPPING SLAB W/ RADIANT HEAT 5/8" GYPSUM WALL BOARD 5 1/2" SPRAY-IN INSULATION NEW 5 1/2" SPRAY-IN INSULATION NEW 5/8" GYPSUM WALL BOARD CURRENTLY APPROVED EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY AT HISTORIC RESOURCE (WITHOUT "SHEATHING") INTERIOR EXTERIOR INTERIOR EXTERIOR DETAIL SECTION VIEW DETAIL PLAN VIEW 129 WEST & SOUTH WALLS HAVE 1" VERTICAL WOOD "SHEATHING" EAST PATIO WALL HAS 1" VERTICAL WOOD "SHEATHING" EAST WALL HAS 1" VERTICAL WOOD "SHEATHING" NORTH-EAST WALL HAS 1" VERTICAL WOOD "SHEATHING" HISTORIC RESOURCE SHED PATIO FRONT PORCH LINK 1/4" = 1'-0" 130 EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO BE RE- APPLIED IN SAME LOCATION, TO BE RE-PAINTED FINISHED GRADE TO BE 6" BELOW BOTTOM OF WOOD FRAMED WALL PER IRC R317 NEW FURRING STRIPS EXISTING 2x4 STUDS TO REMAIN NEW WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE HISTORIC FRAMING & SILL PLATE BELOW PROTECTED BY WATER- PROOFING MEMBRANE NEW 7/16" FLAME-BLOCK SHEATHING EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO BE RE- APPLIED IN SAME LOCATION, TO BE RE-PAINTED NEW WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE NEW 7/16" FLAME-BLOCK SHEATHING NEW FURRING STRIPS NEW TYVEK STUCCO-WRAP (BETWEEN FRAMING AND INSULATION) EXISTING 2x4 STUDS TO REMAIN NEW TYVEK STUCCO-WRAP (BETWEEN FRAMING AND INSULATION) NEW 2x4 STAGGERED STUDS SISTERED ONTO EXISTING 2x4 STUDS FOR STRUCTURAL SUPPORT NEW 2x4 STAGGERED STUDS SISTERED ONTO EXISTING 2x4 STUDS FOR STRUCTURAL SUPPORT 2 6 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2"3 1/2"1 3/4" 5 1/2" 5 1/2" 2"1 3/4"3 1/2" NEW SKIRT BOARD CONTINUOUS AIR SEALER WALL SILL PLATE, TYP. SILL GASKET SEALER, TYP. TREATED SILL PLATE NEW 5 1/4" BASE TRIM PIECE NEW PLYWOOD SUBFLOORING SAME DIMENSION AS EXISTING SAME DIMENSION AS EXISTING METAL DRIP EDGE OVER SKIRT BOARD NEW BASEBOARD NEW FINISHED FLOOR NEW 1 1/2" TOPPING SLAB W/ RADIANT HEAT 5/8" GYPSUM WALL BOARD 5 1/2" SPRAY-IN INSULATION NEW 5 1/2" SPRAY-IN INSULATION NEW 5/8" GYPSUM WALL BOARD INTERIOR EXTERIOR INTERIOR EXTERIOR PROPOSED EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY AT HISTORIC RESOURCE DETAIL SECTION VIEW DETAIL PLAN VIEW 131 NEW 7/16" FLAME-BLOCK SHEATHING NEW WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE NEW FURRING STRIPS EXISTING WOOD SIDING TO BE RE- APPLIED IN SAME LOCATION, TO BE RE-PAINTED HISTORIC FRAMING & SILL PLATE BELOW PROTECTED BY WATER- PROOFING MEMBRANE NEW 2x4 STAGGERED STUDS SISTERED ONTO EXISTING 2x4 STUDS FOR STRUCTURAL SUPPORT EXISTING 2x4 STUDS TO REMAIN PROPOSED EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY AT HISTORIC RESOURCE 3D SECTION VIEW 132 Pioneers in Sustainable Roofing Since 1993 Highly Sustainable | Highest Testing Performance | Proven Longevity | Uncompromised Beauty Empire Shake Aspen Blend in Fresh Cut Cedar Empire Shake Aspen Blend in Feathered Driftwood Empire Shake Aspen Blend in Driftwood Wide Range Empire Shake in Bedford Black Empire Shake & Empire Shake Plus 133 An affordable and environmentally friendly alternative to natural shake, Empire Shake (3/8” thick) and Empire Shake Plus (3/4” thick) are natural-looking synthetic shake roofing tiles that come in an even blend of 6”, 9” and 12” widths. Aspen Blend replicates the look of thick, hand-split wood by using a combination of 2/3 Empire Shake and 1/3 Empire Shake Plus tiles. These synthetic shake tiles are Class A fire-rated and manufactured from 25% post-industrial recycled materials. They provide superior protection from the most extreme elements such as rain, wind, hail, snow, fire, extreme temperature change and the sun’s UV rays. Little-to-no maintenance combined with a 50-year warranty means a trouble-free roofing solution with lasting performance. Available in 14 standard colors, 10 factory blends, 8 marbled blends and an array of custom color options, Empire Shake and Empire Shake Plus provide the opportunity to showcase the beauty of natural shake at a fraction of the cost. Advantages • The look of traditional cedar shake without extensive maintenance • Easy application keeps installation costs down • Factory pre-blended for color & width • Significant property insurance discounts may be available when upgrading or building a roof to protect against the elements Architectural Flexibility • Available in 14 standard colors, 10 factory blends, 8 marbled blends and unlimited custom colors • Empire Shake and Empire Shake Plus can be blended together for unique architectural depth • Packaged in a blend of 6”, 9” and 12” widths • The 3/8” thick Empire Shake and 3/4” thick Empire Shake Plus create the natural appearance of traditional cedar shake Strength & Durability • Provides superior durability and protection from extreme weather conditions that include fire, wind, hail and driving rain • 19” length provides up to 7” of headlap protection against wind-driven rain and ponding snow melt (at 6” reveal) • Significant life cycle savings Environmental Sustainability • Manufactured with post-industrial recycled materials • Enjoy additional energy savings from our line of Cool Colors, available in 11 Empire colors Technical Information • UL listed Class A or C fire resistance (UL 790) • Category highest Wind Speed resistance • UL Class 4 impact resistance (UL 2218) • Prolonged UV Exposure (ASTM G155) • UL Evaluation Report, AC07-UL ER 18920-01 • Fungus resistant (ASTM G21-09) • Miami-Dade County, Florida NOA No. 17-1227.10 11/07/23 • Texas Dept. of Insurance Evaluation (RC-135) • May contribute to LEED® points • Manufactured in strict adherence to ISO 9001:2015 Quality Management Warranty Options • 50-Year Limited Material Warranty available • 50-Year Gold Star Labor & Material Warranty available Empire Shake Standard Colors Empire Shake & Empire Shake Plus Bedford Black Manhattan Midnight*Freeport Federal*Saranac Smoke*Sea Salt*Geneva Grove*Fairport Fern* Monticello Merlot*Tioga Terra CottaDrifting Dunes*Hampton Harbour*Auburn Acorn* Saratoga Sunset* Plymouth Patina Featured tiles: Empire Shake in Hampton Harbour 42 Edgewood Drive | Holland, NY 14080 | 800.211.7170 | www.ecostarllc.com © 2023 by EcoStar, LLC. EcoStar is a trademark of EcoStar, LLC. P/N 606004. Color samples may not accurately represent the true color level or variations of color blends that will appear on the roof. Colors and specifications are subject to change without notice. EcoStar is not liable for color variations or shading. * Available as Cool Color 134 135 136 Ants Cullwick 2551 Dolores Way Carbondale, CO 81623 Ants@korultd.com (970) 963-0577 Aspen Historic Preservation Commission 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 Subject: Support for Modernizing Historic Homes to Increase Resilience to Wildfire and Wind I am writing to express my support for modernizing historic homes to achieve sustainability, energy efficiency and enhanced wildfire resistance. By integrating these practices into preservation efforts, we can balance the preservation of our cultural heritage with safeguarding our community’s and our planet's future. Historic homes hold immense historical, architectural, and cultural significance. By upgrading building material selections, we can improve sustainability and wildfire resistance. We feel it is incumbent on the City of Aspen, and the Historic Preservation Commission, to look for solutions that both celebrate our storied past and protect our future. As an integral stakeholder in community, we firmly believe that a commitment to building high-efficiency houses and comprehensive management of wildfire and wind mitigation is paramount to protecting our Aspen community. In our changing environment, demonstrated through warmer and dried climates, increased droughts, and longer wildfire seasons, these topics are foremost in our and your interest to address. We look to you to see the benefits of making the right decision that positively responds to the changing needs of modern-day homebuilding. I urge the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission to support initiatives that promote the modernization of historic homes to incorporate sustainable, fire resistant materials. By engaging with homeowners, architects, and preservationists, we can collaborate, provide guidance, and share best practices. Thank you for your commitment to preserving our historical heritage. I look forward to witnessing the positive impact of merging historic preservation and modern building technologies in our communities. Ants Cullwick Koru, Ltd 137 9 December 2023 Mrs. Amy SimonPlanning DirectorCity of AspenAspen City Hall427 Rio Grande PlaceAspen, CO 81611 RE: Historic District Best Practices Mrs. Simon: Good evening. I hope this email finds you safe and well. My name is Josh Martin and I am a certified urban planner (AICP, CNU-A) with over twenty (20) years of professional experience in working in the many of the nation’s oldest historic districts in the country including but not limited to Charleston, South Carolina (founded in 1670), Beaufort, South Carolina (founded in 1711), and Savannah, Georgia (founded in 1733). During my tenure at the City of Charleston, I worked directly for Mayor Joseph P. Riley (served for Mayor of the City of Charleston for 40 years) as the Director of Planning, Preservation, and Economic Innovation in which role I oversaw the design review (Board of Architectural Review) and the City’s Zoning and Building Codes of the nation’s oldest historic district--the first historic district established in the United States. Recently, I was asked to share my observations of changes in the government oversight of historic districts that face extreme weather conditions of wind, flooding, fire etc. The responsible opportunity from a planning and design perspective involves preserving the basic design of the street scape, massing, roof shapes, window fenestration etc. It is not practical to pretend to protect old siding, wood roofing, window frames, and similar materials that are not resilient to natural disasters such as hurricanes, flooding, and wildfires. New sustainable materials have been developed and continue to evolve that replicate wood but are energy efficient and fire retardant. Aspen can and should be at the head of the list of cities that are leading the way to encourage and mandate the best sustainable practices. If you have any questions or would like to discuss in more detail, please feel free to contact me at jlangem@yahoo.com Respectfully Submitted, Joshua Lange Martin, AICP, CNU-A 424 Chilean AvenuePalm Beach, FL 33480 Joshua Martin, AICP, CNU-A 138 To whom it may concern: My long-time professional partner and friend Ken Hubbard has asked me to comment on environmentally sustainable and resilient design practices that are being advanced across the US in historic neighborhoods and on historic properties. My firm, Robert A.M. Stern Architects (RAMSA) has worked on a variety of significant planning and architectural design projects in historic districts, both preservation and new construction. We are also committed advocates for energy efficient, sustainable and resilient best practices. We continue to learn about and use many building materials that are aesthetically appropriate to historic preservation and that replicate wood. Many of these also achieve energy efficiency, environmental sustainability, and fire retardance. Aspen should be an ideal venue for advancing these goals, setting a national standard for practices that further historic preservation, while also addressing environmental sustainability and resilience. I would be pleased to discuss specifics. Best wishes, Graham Graham S. Wyatt, FAIA Partner Robert A.M. Stern Architects, LLP One Park Avenue, New York, New York 10016 Phone: 212 967 5100 g.wyatt@RAMSA.COM www.ramsa.com 139 To all, I would like to add a few comments to the points made in Mr. Moore's letter regarding historic structures and sustainability. I have been with the Aspen Fire Department now for nearly 30 years. During that time I have had opportunity to see many changes within the fire service, sadly including wildfire, the changes in wildfire fire behavior, and its impact on communities. In the interests of keeping this response short, my concern is with historic structures and the importance of life safety. My hope is that a dialogue will be opened up to reassess requirements for historical structures within the City of Aspen, and allow owners to use fire resistance materials to protect their homes. A few of my reasons for this are as follows: • Marshall Fire, Boulder County & Superior • Paradise, CA • Maui, HI • Coal Seam Fire, 2012, 29 homes lost • Lake Christine Fire, 2022, three homes lost; fortunately a mobile home park was saved • Insurance Over the last few months, I have been learning of more and more home owners and building owners faced with a choice by insurance companies to either protect their property by upgrading to class A roofing & siding materials, or face exorbitant insurance rate increases, or lose their insurance altogether. This isn't hyperbole, nor infrequent. It is fact. For the first time this year, Aspen Fire has been asked by homeowners who are in the planning phase of building to have a wildfire assessment done on their as yet empty lot. Again, this is a requirement coming from their insurance company. As of 2023, the City of Aspen began requiring that fire sprinklers be installed in all new residential construction. I do commend the City for this proactive decision. However, I would emphasize that interior fire sprinklers do not protect a home from wildfire. Any firefighter can and will tell you that. The best way to protect a home from the fire next door, or wildfire, is by using roofing and siding materials that are fire resistant in addition to creating a fire zone around their home. We are at a nexus point, and I would hope everyone would be willing to look closely and objectively at how best to protect the homes in this community. As has been pointed out, there are new and sustainable building materials that still have the historical look but provide much better protection for homes verses 100+ year old wood siding, and wood shake or asphalt shingles. As someone whose world is life safety, to me the choice is clear. Life safety. Respectfully, Jan Legersky Fire Marshal, Aspen Fire 140 Joeb Moore, FAIA Principal Joeb Moore & Partners, Architects, L.L.C. 20 Bruce Park Avenue Greenwich, CT 06830 jmoore@joebmoore.com www.joebmoore.com December 8, 2023 Re: Sustainable & Regenerative Bio-Regional Design Best Practices in Coastal & Mountain Communities To Whom it May Concern: My long-time client and friend Ken Hubbard has asked me to comment on environmentally sustainable and resilient design practices that are being advanced across the United States in historic communities and landscapes. The task of negotiating and finding a dynamic balance between ecological and cultural thinking requires extraordinarily integrative and complex bicircular analysis of overlapping and competing (even contradictory) concerns, controversies, and dilemmas with respect to current and emerging local historic preservation and regional environmental bio-circular conservation practices. I have been a Professor of Architecture at Columbia University & Senior Design Critic and Lecturer at Yale University for over 30 years. My focus of research and teaching is on the relationship between landscape, architecture, and art thru the lens of ecological, biological, historical, and cultural systems and thinking. In my teaching my students are studying and asked challenging questions about climate, climate dynamics/change and controversies as well as more detailed questions about carbon cycle flow analysis and strategies for the adaptive reuse/regenerative thinking of existing architectures and the embedded material and labor systems at play in them. Within the studio framework students are asked to identify and carefully consider social and environmental designs that will address this larger “circularity” of ecological systems at both the micro-biological and macro-ecological time scales. What I hope emerges is a series of visionary design proposals that can make visible a more profound “awareness” of the complex and interactive play between both cultural and environmental conditions and relations. These range across time and space effecting every physical, chemical, biological system on earth…from human labor to photosynthesis & plant and animal diversity...to invasive species and global material transport. I also serve on the board of trustees of The Cultural Landscape Foundation (TCLF.org), A Washington DC non-profit organization that helps bring together diverse, local communities & voices and larger, international research and academic communities to help steward significant cultural landscapes in various cities around North America that are in danger of being lost either to environmental challenges, climate change or our political and economic systems that have left these landscapes largely depleted or invisible and in danger of collapse. In my 30 years of private practice my design approach and philosophy is shaped out of the environmental and cultural ecologies of a place. I believe design excellence requires ecological and relational thinking and such a framework provides for how to build and live responsibly. Our firm, Joeb Moore & Partners, Architects (JM&P), has worked on a significant and growing series of adaptive reuse of historic structures and landscapes around the US. We are committed advocates for carbon flow analysis and energy efficient, sustainable, and resilient practices centered on broad environmental and social issues and justice. We continue to research and use many alternative bio-sensitive building materials and systems that are sensitive to historic conservation & preservation but also environmental sustainability, energy efficiency, and fire retardance and protection. I believe we must prioritize sustainability, resilience, and innovation in built environment, while also considering the awareness and desires of our communal historic past from concept to built-work. This means constantly expanding our knowledge and skills and collaborating with other experts in the field and being responsive and engaged in that dialogue. The City of Aspen is an extraordinary, if not ideal, site and opportunity for advancing these environmental and cultural goals and advocating for national standards of practice that further both historic preservation while advancing environmental sensitivity, sustainability, and resilience. Thank you for your time, consideration and concern about this important topic. 141 Sincerely, Joeb Moore Joeb Moore, FAIA Member, Joeb Moore & Partners, Architects, LLC Adjunct Professor of Architecture Columbia and Barnard Undergraduate Architecture Department Columbia University Senior Studio Critic Yale School of Architecture Yale University Colorado Architect License: ARC.00402878 142 March 2 I , 20z4 Ta: Historic Preservation Commission From: Karen Kribs 217 East Sleeker St. Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Application from French Road, Li_C far amendment to plans for new construction Eat 227 East Sleeker, St., Aspen, CO i am the neighbor on the west side of 227 East Sleeker St. l have received., notice That there will be a public hearing regarding an application for substantial amendment to their building plans. The homeowners have informed me that they have made a request to the Historic Preservation Commission to allow them to remove the siding from the old miner's cabin, install a fireproof membrane around the Outside of the structure and then reattach the existing wood siding. Their plan sounds very sensible and safety minded to me, Since there are a number of antique buildings on our block and those surrounding us, we need to be aware of the fire danger to these buildings. I feel that anything which can be done to mitigate the danger is forward4hinking and commendable. sincerely, Nubbard.HPC.03212