Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.hpc.20160113 AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING January 13, 2016 5:00 PM City Council Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISITS A. Please visit 980 Gibson Avenue on your own II. INTRODUCTION (15 MIN.) A. Roll call B. Approval of minutes December 2, 2015 December 9, 2015 C. Public Comments D. Commissioner member comments E. Disclosure of conflict of interest (actual and apparent) F. Project Monitoring G. Staff comments H. Certificate of No Negative Effect issued I. Submit public notice for agenda items J. Call-up reports K. HPC typical proceedings III. OLD BUSINESS A. None IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Resolution endorsing Council adoption of new historic preservation design guidelines (5:10) B. 211 E. Hallam- Final Major Development, PUBLIC HEARING (5:25) C. 980 Gibson Avenue- Conceptual Major Development, Demolition, Relocation and Variations, PUBLIC HEARING (6:10) D. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair (7:20) V. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: TYPICAL PROCEEDING- 1 HOUR, 10 MINUTES FOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEM, NEW BUSINESS Provide proof of legal notice (affidavit of notice for PH) Staff presentation (5 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Applicant presentation (20 minutes) Board questions and clarifications (5 minutes) Public comments (close public comment portion of hearing) (5 minutes) Applicant Rebuttal Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed (5 minutes) HPC discussion (15 minutes) Motion (5 minutes) *Make sure the motion includes what criteria are met or not met. No meeting of the HPC shall be called to order without a quorum consisting of at least four (4) members being present. No meeting at which less than a quorum shall be present shall conduct any business other than to continue the agenda items to a date certain. All actions shall require the concurring vote of a simple majority, but in no event less than three (3) concurring votes of the members of the commission then present and voting. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 2, 2015 1 Chairperson, Willis Pember called the meeting to order at 12:00 Noon. Commissioners in attendance were Patrick Sagal, Nora Berko, Jim DeFrancia, Bob Blaich and Michael Brown. Absent were Sallie Golden, John Whipple and Gretchen Greenwood. Staff present: Jim True, City Attorney Amy Simon, Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk MOTION: Bob moved to approve the minutes of Nov. 11, 2015; secon d by Jim. All in favor, motion carried. Public: Brent Gardner-Smith introduced himself as a reporter. Nora said the work session with City Council was great. The Aspen Modern Ordinance #28 section 6 specified that there are five properties owned by th e city that should be designated. In 2016 we should get those five properties protected; Red Brick, Yellow Brick, Mountain Rescue, mall and Hildur Anderson Park. We need to lead by example. Amy said there would be a hearing before HPC and City Council. MOTION: Nora made the motion that HPC recommends that staff take steps to designate the 5 properties in 2016, motion second by Bob. All in favor, motion carried. Guidelines Amy summarized the memo in the guidelines. We have tried to improve the guidelines with better clarity. This is basically a re-write of the entire document. We have dropped the glossary. In the introduction we have trimmed out anything that refers to the code because the code could change tomorrow. We tried to be more general. We want passion behind the design and a good explanation of what the proposal is. Bob suggested that there be a link to the National Register on page 20. P1 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 2, 2015 2 Amy said there are about 25 properties on the register from Aspen. Patrick suggested that the purpose and intent of preservation from the land use code be added to the guidelines so that there is a natural transition. Patrick discussed adding when the guidelines should be revised. Jim said you could say that the guidelines can be reviewed every so many years. They are an advisory document. Nora said the guidelines give us the ability to say no. We need to know how the next generation gets protected. Historic Overview Amy said we replaced the images to show different aspects of the town’s history. Bob said he particularly liked the incorporation of the International Design Conference in the guidelines. Architectural styles Willis suggested that applicant write a description or narrative of how their project contributes to the sense and place of Aspen. Amy said this could be added to page 25. Chapter I is more of a perspective as to how the project fits into the town and neighborhood looking at maps, diagrams and site planning. 1.1 talks about setback to setback with nothing left. 1.2 Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas. Amy said we will add a corner diagram including the front diagram. 1.25 discusses art work 1.8 is the addition of storm water Chapters 2-8 are chapters on rehabilitation P2 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 2, 2015 3 9.4 avoid making design decisions that require code related alternations which could have been avoided. Amy said the dormer statement should be moved to 7.6 guideline Chapter 9 is the relocation chapter 9.1 was added to address where people are underpinning and excavating . Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged. Chapter 10 building additions Amy said this addresses that the addition can’t be doubled in size. We also talk about corner lots and heights of the addition on a corner. Chapter 11 Amy said the only change is design a structure to be a product of its own time. Chapter 12 Amy said this chapter is the catch all chapter. MOTION: Bob moved to adjourn; second by Nora. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk P3 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 1 Chairperson, Willis Pember called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. Commissioners in attendance were Nora Berko, John Whipple, Gretchen Greenwood, Patrick Sagal, Sallie Golden, Michael Brown and Bob Blaich. Absent was Jim DeFrancia. Staff present: Jim True, City Attorney Amy Simon, Preservation Planner Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk Public Comment: Jim Curtis represented the Aspen Institute and asked if there was any way HPC could push the application to early March or have an extra meeting. Willis said he discussed this with staff and HPC is willing to start one meeting a month at 4:00 to accommodate applicants and expedite the meetings. Amy said the guidelines will be presented to HPC in January and then council will adopt them. Disclosure: Michael said he assigned a contract to purchase a TDR, a transferable development right to Bill Guth for no consideration. Jim said the disclosure is appropriate but not substantive for a recusal. 124 W. Hallam – Conceptual Major Development Review Demolition, Relocation and Variations, Public Hearing Public Notice – Exhibit I Amy said the property at one time was 12, 000 square feet, 4 city lots. A subdivision took place about ten years ago. It is a Victorian era building that has additions and alterations and the 6,000 square foot lot is designated. The corner property will be developed with a new house and it will not appear in front of HPC. The architect team crawled under the building to try and locate the exact perimeter of the original foundation to determine what was old and what was new. The proposal is to tear off everything that isn’t P4 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 2 original. It is a large cross gable Victorian house which will face Hallam Street. They are requesting to demolish the non-historic construction and the second request is to relocate the house eastward so that they provide the proper side yard setback. They are also asking to move the house forward four feet to the minimum front yard setback line. Also by moving it forward it allows for the proper ten foot connector piece and an addition at the back of the property that doesn’t require setback variances above grade. There will also be a basement. Part of the basement is within five feet of the property line and that will need a variance request. It has no above ground implications. The footprint of the addition is similar in size to the Victorian and we feel that it is not an imposing relationship between the new and old. Staff has concerns with the design of the addition. It has a flat roof, a 25 foot tall cube. There is a roof deck on the addition and instead of having the railing pulled in from the edges it is all in the same plane. We feel there are ways to break down the height or reduce the perceived height of the addition by altering the way they are protecting the roof deck. We are also concerned with the cut in decks and other features that are not visually related to the Victorian. We are looking for a balance of fenestration and materials and compatibility. We also have concerns with the material choices. They are also requesting a 500 FAR bonus and we feel not enough of the requirements for a bonus are met. The restoration work involved will be a benefit to the neighborhood. Staff is recommending continuation to February 10th. Michael asked if just the southern façade needs addressed with the cut in deck. Amy said she feels all of the facades need addressed. Additions should be sympathetic in relationship to the historic house. Bill Guth, owner Zack Rorockett, architect Andrew Alexander Green, Rorockett Architects Zack thanked staff for their great process and good analysis. The parcel has a great relationship to the primary view corridors. We are orienting what was a front door on 1st St. to its historic location on Hallam St. We do have an alley to the north on the rear lot line which gives us prime access to a garage. In addition there are a handful of houses on the alley which we will respect. The parcel to the east has a wonderful buffer of Aspen trees and is P5 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 3 set back a considerably distance from this lot. The historic house was built in 1880. The southern exposure is along Hallam and the sun will be tracking around the front of the building and shadows to the rear. We will leave a five yard setback to the west and a ten yard setback to the east complying with the ten foot setback to the front and the rear yard setbacks deal with the addition and the garage. There is an existing large window and a cross gable that will be brought back. We took the Sanborn map and lot survey and overlaid the two to find out the historic footprint. The historic piece has been swallowed by additions. The porch will be restored and the central dormer will be brought back. The rear of the house will have a single gable. Zack said the new addition is to the rear. We have brought in the subordinating link element and we created a landscape buffer for a private court. The addition is a simple form that acts as a drop back for the Victorian. We initially thought of a gable form but with the gable the new addition gets quite large and would project 8 feet above the ridge line of the Victorian. That height would also impede on the neighbors. The 25 foot height limit tracks through lower than the ridge of the Victorian. The addition would be 3 feet lower than the historic ridge. We would also like to add a green roof and to the east side a deck. We are also proposing that the parapet operate as the guard rail. The base would be a wood siding similar to what is used on a Victorian and the top would be a milky glass surface that has some wood tracking through it and would be broken down into panels. It is effectively used to de-materialize the top of the building. The milky glass material also breaks down the mass. Each set of materials would be around 12 feet tall on the addition. Zack said the ground floor of the Victorian would be the public space with the kitchen, living room and dining room. The linking element will hold the powder room and the rear addition would have a small two c ar garage and a stair to go up and down and a single bedroom suite. Upstairs on the Victorian would be a suite and across to the addition two bedroom suites. Generally speaking the language is a soft wood siding and a soft milky glass. This addition clearly delineates old from new. Bill said we are trying to accomplish focusing on the Victorian. We are trying to subtly articulate the façade of the new addition. We are breaking down the mass of a 25 foot tall addition into the base and top. P6 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 4 Zack said there is a simple entry path from Hallam Street, with a low wood picket fence, restored porch, restored dormer, restored front façade at the gable. The addition is a few feet lower than the Victorian. There is a landscape zone in between the two houses. There will also be aspen groves along the lot line that further softens the continuity of old and new. Bill said the house on the corner lot will be contemporary with a flat roof. Zack said where we have doors and windows the glass will shift in its transparency. We are imagining single panels that are between three and four feet in width of a certain height that corresponds between the two floors. The technique is to soften the top of the building. Willis said the milky glass is technically cladding with window openings. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment portion of the agend a item was closed. Zack summarized that their approach is to celebrate this historic asset for the city. It is exciting to restore this house to what it once was. For the addition it is not replicating things on the Victorian. We are through the language of modern architecture trying articulate the volume in such a way that it provides for a kind of human scale and it doesn’t appear imposing and it recedes and allows the Victorian to be on the front which is Hallam Street and it is a quiet addition in the back yard that is not confused as an historic piece. Bill thanked HPC for their time and effort that they put forth on HPC and it is greatly appreciated. Willis commented that the presentation was well thought out. Willis identified the issues: Demolition; relocation southward toward the street; sub-grade eastward variation; FAR bonus 500 square feet; restoration; mass and scale of the addition and the materiality. It becomes important because of the dialogue between the addition and resource. P7 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 5 Willis said the diagram is elegant and the concept is great. The blue sky approach in terms of how the materials interact is close. The milky glass will create a ghosted fenestration at night and during the day it will app ear more of a cladded material. Willis said he can support this if one considers the cladding as another texture. It is also important to know that the neighboring house will have a flat roof with a contemporary structure. Willis said he hopes the board understands the clear glass and what it will look like at night. Patrick commented that it appears they have a very large 25 foot high box and it is a glass box. The guidelines talk about having windows of similar shape. The guidelines say for residential that the roof should be gabled or shed. They should re-design this to have more of a Victorian character. Gretchen said she appreciates the thoughts and concepts as to how the addition was approached. You deserve the bonus for reconstructing the Victorian. The problem with this is the 45 feet long by 25 feet high glass box off the alley. The scale is not compatible with the scale of a Victorian residence in a residential area. The addition doesn’t reflect a residential neighborhood. This building confuses me and doesn’t say I’m a modern building and a product of its own time in Aspen. It is the mass and there is no breakdown in scale of the building. I’m concerned that the materials will be a problem for the neighbors at night. We don’t know how the windows will work in the evening. I am in favor of the setbacks and the bonus. The building needs a significant design transformation to break down the scale to be similar to a Victorian building. John said he is OK with the demolition and relocation to the east and south. The subgrade variance is fully adequate. I’m also OK with the FAR bonus. The porch etc. should be restored to its authenticity as best possible. This is absolutely a product of its time. It is very clear the old from the new. A lot of thought has been put into this design to create a good product and it is appreciated. It is creative and there is so much good change happening to reinstate the historic resource that there should be some allowance for creativity within the perimeters that are very confined. Bob said he is OK with all the boiler plate items. When the image of the pitched roof was shown and the effect on the neighbors behind I think this is a very creative approach. The visual interpretation will be good in that area. It is an interesting modern box and only needs a little tweaking. I am P8 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 6 positive about the project. It is a benefit to the entire neighborhood bringing back the original house. Nora said she is glad to see the house come back to its original form. Clearly the demolition and the movement to avoid setbacks and the subgrade are all fine. The bonus hinges on the three guidelines and we are not quite there yet. A modern box can also have articulation. We are almost there. I am a little concerned about the 25 foot wall of glass. Maybe having a lighter guard-rail might lighten it up as it feels a little top heavy. Willis said there is more articulation than we realize but it just wasn’t conveyed. Sallie said to bring the house back to what it was is a beautiful project. I am for all the boiler plate items including the FAR bonus because of what you are doing. I am torn with the back addition. It is a beautiful piece of architecture but the guidelines say similar mass and scale to the original Victorian with modern materials. A box could work but the design isn’t there yet. All the glass is a concern and I am torn with the glass at night and what might happen. I haven’t seen a lot of opaque glass used. Willis said most of the milky glass is a wall of insulation. It is really a cladding. The project is challenging because of the form and fenestration. Michael said we will see the fenestration at final. Gretchen said no matter what materials it is a large box. Willis said the materials soften the box. Michael said he thought the presentation was excellent and it helped us understand the project very well. The demolition, relocation, the subgrade variation toward the rear and all OK. I like the design of the connection and design of the addition. It is a product of its own time. Bob suggested having a model for the next meeting to see how the different shapes etc. interact. John said he doesn’t see this as a box. There is a lot of undulation taking place here that breaks up the box. The bottom of the addition is wood. P9 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 7 Willis pointed out that the spectrum of variables in glass is enormous. Michael said at final they can bring in a sample of the glass. Willis said from the alley it shows its true mass and scale. Nora said a little “breakup” might enhance the project. Patrick said guideline 10.9 and 10.14 are not met. There should be a subtle difference not a major one. The window shape is also not similar. Gretchen said she doesn’t have a problem with flat roofs but this is not compatible in the breakdown of scale to the residential character of a Victorian residence. Sallie asked who on the board is ok with a flat roof and the 25 foot height. John, Bob, Michael and Sallie are OK with the flat roof and 25 foot height. Bill said we will go above and beyond on the fenestration and glass samples at final. John said at night the only thing being illuminated are the punched out dotted lines which is the glass for the windows. The applicant has shown what materials they like and this is a full complete packet. Bob pointed out that a lot of the fenestration changes are on the alley. Bill said you barely see the addition from the street and it is a small visual impact. Gretchen reiterated that her concern is the abrupt flat roof for 45 feet and she has stated this on other projects consistently. You need the breakdown of Victorian scale. It looks like a commercial building. Nora said she senses that there is enough discussion about not being totally comfortable with the project and it should be continued. P10 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 8 MOTION: Patrick moved to continue 124 W. Hallam conceptual development to February 10; second by Gretchen. Michael suggested giving the applicant clear direction. Sallie also said if we required a model our discussions would go a lot easier. Bob said you don’t see the new addition on the back from the streetscape or very little of it. A lot of it is on the alley. A pitched roof would not work and I am very positive about this project. There will also be something on the west side of the lot. John said we owe the applicant some direction as to what needs changed. Willis said a block elevation of the alley would is advised and photo sides of the alley. Patrick suggested the applicant listen to staff’s recommendation. Roll call vote: Gretchen, yes; Patrick, yes; Willis, yes; Bob, yes; Nora, yes Sallie, no; John, no. Motion carried 5-2. 517 E. Hopkins Ave. – Conceptual Design Review and Demolition Proof of publication – Exhibit I Justin Barker, Senior Planner Justin said the proposed project is to demolish the existing building and replace it with a two story commercial building with a basement. This building is not a designated building but is located within the commercial core historic district. HPC is being asked to review conceptual design, conceptual commercial design review as well as the demolition for the existing building. All other reviews will be combined with the final review. Staff is in support of the demolition. There is currently no parking provided onsite and the applicant has the right to maintain this deficit and will only have to provide for the increase of net leasable which they are going to do through cash-in-lieu. The project is also required to provide a minimum of 10% of public amenity space of the lot which equates to about 900 square feet and it is a 9,000 square foot lot. There is currently 500 square feet of space that qualified as public amenity which is essentially the walkway that P11 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 9 leads between the street and the alley. The proposed building has a setback area in the northeast corner which is about 285 square feet which the applicant has represented as public amenity space and they are also proposing the use of the upper level decks as public amenity space. Staff is in support of the northeast corner but not for the second story portions. Staff recommends that the remaining be cash-in-lieu payment. There are two design options. Both options have 4 modules to the desig n on the street level. There are three commercial areas and one is the entrance area for the circulation of the building. The entrance area is set back about 14 feet from the property line. Option A which has the center space set back from the property line includes a bridge cat walk between the other two commercial spaces to connect to the roof deck areas. Option B is what is presented after the applicant met with staff which pulls the center commercial area forward so that the three commercials are located at the property line. Option B is in line with the guidelines which bring the building fronts as close to the property line and sidewalk as possible. It helps create a stronger street façade which is what the guidelines request. It also displays a strong height variation which is requested by the guidelines for properties that are over 6,000 square feet. Both designs conform to the zone district. The maximum height is 28 feet and they are at 28 feet. The only portion that extends over that is the elevator overrun which is permitted by right in the code. The proposed development is below what the view plane is and is not subject to view plane review. Staff recommends approval of option B. Mark Hunt, owner Mitch Haas, Haas Planning Mark said the City came to us and asked us to explore putting in some office space and that is why the aspen leaf is on the building. The City decided to go elsewhere. The leaf is a signage place holder. The space to the east is designed to be a shared office environment where there would be short and long term offices with a social environment to that. There is also a health and fitness area as part of the project. We will be using steel and glass partitions to keep it light and airy. The ground floor has a lobby with a large corridor where local artists can hang their work. There are exterior decks above the retail. There will also be benches and landscaping outside. It is one building but we are delineating with the different heights and different facades. There is 285 square feet on the ground that is calculated for public amenity. There will probably be another 750 to 900 square feet provided in the right-of-way. We are only counting the 285 sq.ft. and will pay the cash- P12 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 10 in-lieu for the balance. On exhibit A the ins and outs of the façade are consistent with the block and the color is softer. Adding the wood makes a difference and it works well with the brick and stone as proposed and it engages the street. Mitch said the building itself is set back off the street. The public amenity today is essentially the walkway that leads to a transformer and then to the alley. The walkway is on the northeast side of the property. We can do the balance of the public amenity 903 square feet with cash-in-lieu even though the code says it can be taken in the form of physical or operational improvements to public rights-of-ways or private property in commercial areas. Why we shouldn’t get credit for improving the street scape putting in benches, trees and a detached sidewalk I don’t understand. The view plane height ranges between 30.6 feet at the front of the property and 34.4 at the front and at the back of the property between 36 and 41 feet high. We fall below the view plan and the elevator run is also below the view plane. The existing building is 10 to 12 feet taller than the proposed. The second floor space on the north east will be broken up into pods or cubicles. There are also three broken retail frontages that face the street. Option B would be all brick punched openings on the second floor. Staff is recommending approval of option B. The existing building fails to meet the guidelines with the sunken courtyard. Dwayne Romero, represented the applicant The proposed structure is stepping back out of a pre-existing encroachment into the view plane that runs to the benefit of the court house. The mass and scale of the proposal is completely in line with the concept of small downtown character. The proposal has an active lifestyle health and fitness thread and a community social gathering space tied to it. It is a great program for our community needs and the shared office model is also included that rounds out the program. Mark said the four studio units on the third floor will be replaced 100 percent off site. The second floor is not laid out for retail use. Mitch said the zoning has changed and we cannot have a third floor. Justin said the housing credits will be addressed with the growth management review in the future. They will either build units or buy credits. P13 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 11 John asked staff why they do not like the connecting deck etc. Justin said the design holds the property line and establishes the street wall that is in the guidelines. Mark said option A looks like individual buildings and B is more of the same material. Bob said plan A provides more space on the second floor and has more glass which makes the space lighter and airy. Bob commended the applicant for putting that kind of space in our community and it is needed and successful. Chairperson, Willis Pember opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment portion of the agenda item was closed. Mitch summarized and said in terms of height, scale and mass we have kept things to the 28 foot height limit. We have broken up the façade into modules to give a rhythm to the property. We have heard in other reviews that breaking up the frontage so that it looks like separate development is recommended. Willis identified the issues: Public amenity Demolition Cash-in-lieu View plane Mass and scale Community character Willis said this is an excellent presentation and the applicant gave a convincing case for demolition. What was lacking in the presentation was the street elevation showing the former Gap building and the Kenichi building. Option A has a better connection and fits with the mix on the street and the context. As Bob said the glass is a functionally good thing for an open office plan. Willis said he tends to supports staff’s recommendation for approval. P14 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 12 Michael said he supports the demolition and option B. Exhibit A presents messy facades going in and out and the punched windows are appropriate. Regarding the public amenity and because of the location on the south side of the street and the fact that there isn’t a real way of providing it I can grant it for the small opening in the entry and paying cash-in-lieu for the balance. The second level doesn’t meet the criteria for public amenity. Patrick said they have done a good job with no variances requested. Having the breakup in option A is preferred. On Hopkins everything historically is pulled back. Regarding public amenity cash -in-lieu has not been beneficial to the community as much as putting physical space on the site. If the public amenity is on the ground floor it works. In general the project works and the concept is great and hopefully it will go through. Willis said the outdoor amenity space represented on the second module is not open to the sky so it doesn’t count for public amenity. Gretchen said she is totally in favor of tearing this building down. Option A is appropriate. The fact that the decks above are connected is a good feature and it feels very community friendly. The breakdown of the building is totally successful. The only concern is the streetscape and the walkway which will be missed. There will be a narrow very small walkway to the very large façade. There should have been more discussion about the corner and the integration of the building. Mark said the building is 14 ½ feet back from the street. Gretchen commented that the board should know what is going on next to the proposed building and see it in plan. The corner is harsh. When applications come before us we need to see a streetscape. Regard ing affordable housing it is a mistake to take any affordable housing away when it could be kept there. Continually moving employee housing out of the core is a huge mistake. The different materials and the way it steps in and out and the details are all great. John said he is in complete agreement with Option A and it is messy vitality and the look of the proposal. When it comes to the public amenity you are reinstating a nice detached sidewalk with benches and in the past portions of what applicants have done were calculated in the public amenity. You should get credit for doing the detached sidewalk and benches because it P15 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 13 improves the streetscape. The pedestrian sidewalk experience by the old Gap building is one of the best in town. By doing the detached sidewalk you are doing a service to the community. The undulation proposed will do good for the Saturday market. Nora said she also agrees that street scape diagrams should be provided on all applications. Even when you know the street well it is different when you see a new building on it. Philosophically public amenity space should be on the street. Nora said she prefers option B. Option B is much quieter and unified. There are too many materials. Sallie said she is OK with the conditions. Sallie said she would prefer A to look a little more like B, (A ½.) The Theory building next door is one material and not chaotic. I would stand behind that building any day. B feels like a side street. Option A brings in a lot of glass and it doesn’t feel cold. Bob said functionally with the glass A is better. A has a little too many variables. Maybe there can be a middle ground between A & B. The relief of A is good. The fenestration can be dealt with at final. Michael pointed out that the second floor fenestration of all glass will probably not meet the design guidelines for final. A shows a better distinction between the two story element and the one story element of the façade. B looks like it is ready to go to final. Option A might not be what you end up with. Motion: John moved to approve resolution #31, 2015 as written with a minor amendment that option A is conceptually approved and everything else will be addressed at final. Motion second by Willis. Roll call vote: Patrick, yes; Gretchen, yes; John, yes; Bob, yes; Nora, no, Sallie, yes, Willis, yes; Motion carried 6-1. MOTION: Willis moved to adjourn; second by Bob. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Cler P16 II.B. ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 2015 14 P17 II.B. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Update to Historic Preservation Design Guidelines DATE: January 13, 2016 SUMMARY: HPC’s current design guidelines were adopted in 2000. Amendments were initiated in 2004 and in 2010, but not completed due to budget constraints and intervening projects which sidetracked the work. Staff has revisited the progress made previously and incorporated it into a new proposed update. We have presented edited chapters to the HPC on September 23rd, October 14th, October 28th and December 2nd. In mid-October, we also visited with several design firms in Aspen to take their input, and held a lunchtime meeting for the public. Feedback has been incorporated in the final draft presented to HPC at this meeting. Since the last meeting, staff: • Added the historic preservation purpose statements from the Municipal Code (page 10.) • Added a website address to find information about properties in Aspen that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places (page 10.) • Included the idea that HPC requests an applicant to state how their project contributes to Aspen’s sense of place (page 14.) • Changed the reference to HPC from a board to a commission (page 14.) • Fixed typos in historic overview. • Fixed the diagrams of zones where certain landscape improvements are allowed (pages 43 and 44.) • Requested needed images from the Aspen Historical Society (to be inserted before Council review.) • Dropped the proposed illustrations of the spectrum of solutions to distinguish new from old. This proved to be confusing the issue and staff decided to drop it from the guidelines. HPC is asked to pass a motion endorsing the final draft. Staff will provide a resolution at the HPC meeting. The guidelines will be presented to City Council for adoption on January 27th. P18 IV.A. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Update to Historic Preservation Design Guidelines DATE: January 13, 2016 SUMMARY: HPC’s current design guidelines were adopted in 2000. Amendments were initiated in 2004 and in 2010, but not completed due to budget constraints and intervening projects which sidetracked the work. Staff has revisited the progress made previously and incorporated it into a new proposed update. We have presented edited chapters to the HPC on September 23rd, October 14th, October 28th and December 2nd. In mid-October, we also visited with several design firms in Aspen to take their input, and held a lunchtime meeting for the public. Feedback has been incorporated in the final draft presented to HPC at this meeting. Since the last meeting, staff: • Added the historic preservation purpose statements from the Municipal Code (page 10.) • Added a website address to find information about properties in Aspen that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places (page 10.) • Included the idea that HPC requests an applicant to state how their project contributes to Aspen’s sense of place (page 14.) • Changed the reference to HPC from a board to a commission (page 14.) • Fixed typos in historic overview. • Fixed the diagrams of zones where certain landscape improvements are allowed (pages 43 and 44.) • Requested needed images from the Aspen Historical Society (to be inserted before Council review.) • Dropped the proposed illustrations of the spectrum of solutions to distinguish new from old. This proved to be confusing the issue and staff decided to drop it from the guidelines. HPC is asked to pass a motion endorsing the final draft. Staff will provide a resolution at the HPC meeting. The guidelines will be presented to City Council for adoption on January 27th. P19 IV.A. City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines P20 IV.A. P21 IV.A. Historic Preservation Design Guidelines P22 IV.A. P23 IV.A. table of contents introduction historic overview design guidelines: rehabilitation appendix Why Preserve Historic Resources 8 Purpose of the Design Guidelines 10 How to Use the Guidelines 10 Design Review Process 13 Aspen Historic Overview 16 Architectural Styles in Aspen 21 Chapter 2: Building Materials 52 Chapter 3: Windows 55 Chapter 4: Doors 59 Chapter 5: Porches & Balconies 63 Chapter 6: Architectural Details 66 Chapter 7: Roofs 68 Chapter 8: Secondary Structures 73 design guidelines: new construction Chapter 9: Excavation, Building Relocation, & Foundations 76 Chapter 10: Building Additions 79 Chapter 11: New Buildings on Landmarked Properties 85 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Preservation 94 design guidelines: general Chapter 12: Accessibility, Architectural Lighting, Mechanical Equipment, Services Areas, & Signage 90 design guidelines: context Chapter 1: Site Planning & Landscape Design 36 P24 IV.A. P25 IV.A. I ntroduction P26 IV.A. 8 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Aspen is a unique community, rich with history, dramatic landscapes, a vibrant economy, and vital cultural scene. Each of these elements contributes to the appeal of the City and enhances its livability. Within this context, the preservation of historic resources is a high priority. This policy is articulated in the Aspen Area Community Plan and in ordinances that address protection of landmarked properties and historic districts. This document provides background on the City’s preservation program and local history and then presents design guidelines that articulate policies for the treatment of locally-designated historic properties and districts. Why Preserve Historic Resources Across the nation, thousands of communities promote historic preservation because doing so contributes to neighborhood livability, variety, and quality of life, minimizes negative impacts on the environment and yields economic rewards. These same reasons apply in Aspen. Preservation of the built environment in Aspen provides a fundamental link to the past. Many of the buildings tell the story of Aspen’s unique historical development. Preserving these resources creates a sense of place for those who live here and provides visitors a connection with this unique heritage. Construction Quality Many of the historic structures in the City are of high quality construction. Other buildings are more modest, but even so may have used lumber from mature trees that were properly seasoned and typically milled to full dimension, which often yields stronger framing. Historic masonry walls were carefully laid, resulting in buildings with considerable stability. Many older structures were thoughtfully detailed and the finishes of materials, including fixtures, wood floors and trim, were of high quality and exemplify hand craftsmanship that is more unusual today. Some AspenModern structures represent early use of building technologies that continue to be favored. Adaptability Owners frequently find that the floor plans of historic buildings easily accommodate modern lifestyles and support a diversity of populations. Many rooms are large, permitting a variety of uses while retaining the overall historic character of the structure. Even historic buildings that are smaller in scale often have lots that can accommodate additions, if needed. Livability and Quality of Life When groups of older buildings occur as a historic district, such as along Main Street or the Commercial Core in Aspen, they create a street scene that is pedestrian friendly, and encourages walking and neighborly interaction. Mature trees and decorative architectural features also contribute to a sense of identity that is unique for each historic neighborhood— an attribute that is rare and difficult to achieve in newer areas of a city. These therefore are desirable places to live and work. Environmental Benefits Preserving a historic structure is sound environmental conservation policy because “recycling” saves energy and reduces the need for producing new construction materials. Three types of energy savings occur: IntroductIon i ntroduction Note: Not every guidelines will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) must determine that a sufficient number of the relevant guidelines have been adequately met in order to approve a project proposal. It must be emphasized that these are only guidelines and they are not applicable in all cases, and need to be weighed with the practicality of the measure. P27 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 9 • First, energy is not consumed to demolish the existing building and dispose of the resulting debris. • Second, energy is not used to create new building materials, transport them and assemble them on site. • Finally, the embodied energy which was used to create the original building and its components, is preserved. By reusing older buildings, pressure is reduced to harvest new lumber and other materials that may have negative effects on the environment of other locales where these materials are produced. Economic Benefits Historic resources are finite and cannot be replaced, making them precious commodities that many buyers seek. Preservation adds value to private property. Many studies across the nation document that, where local historic districts are established, property values typically rise, or at least are stabilized. In this sense, designation of a historic district appears to protect investment. Property owners within the district know that the time and money they spend on improving their properties will be matched with similar efforts on surrounding lots. Arguably, this applies to Aspen as well. Nationwide studies prove that preservation projects also contribute more to the local economy than do new building programs because each dollar spent on a preservation project has a higher percentage devoted to labor and to the purchase of materials available locally. By contrast, new construction typically has a higher percentage of each dollar spent devoted to materials that are produced outside of the local economy and to special construction skills that may be imported. When money is spent on rehabilitating a building, it has a higher “multiplier effect,” keeping more money circulating in the community. Rehabilitation therefore, provides more jobs for Aspen area residents. Heritage Tourism Preservation minded communities are among the leading tourist destinations. Aspen has an authenticity that visitors appreciate. There are many opportunities to connect with the history of Aspen as a tourist and this contributes to longer stays and repeat visits. Incentives for Preservation While the economic benefits are substantial, special incentives also exist to help offset potential added costs of appropriate rehabilitation procedures. Income tax credits are offered at the state and federal levels for appropriate rehabilitation. Eligible projects also can qualify for the Colorado Historical Society’s State Historical Fund, a substantial opportunity for owners of commercial and significant residential properties. The City also offers financial bonuses which are available for historic landmarks. The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) has the ability to award zoning bonuses to historic landmarks. Responsibility of Ownership Ownership of a historic property carries both the benefits described above and a responsibility to respect the historic character of the resource and its setting. While this responsibility does exist, it does not automatically translate into higher construction or maintenance costs. Ultimately, residents and property owners should recognize that historic preservation is a long-range community policy that promotes economic wellbeing and overall viability of the City at large and that they play a vital role in helping to implement that policy through careful stewardship of the area’s historic resources. Levels of Historic Designation in Aspen Local Landmark The City has identified approximately 300 historic resources, including buildings, structures, parks, cemeteries, and bridges as historic landmarks. Because there was a long period of economic depression at the turn of the 20th century, historic development in Aspen generally occurred either in the silver mining era (these resources are termed Aspen Victorian) or around World War II (these resources are termed AspenModern). The local register designation process is established through the police powers of Aspen’s zoning ordinance. Criteria for designation are set forth in city codes and designated properties are subject to protections outlined in the ordinance, including demolition and design review. In general, any exterior alteration to an inventoried property must be reviewed and approved before work can begin. District Designation Currently, the City of Aspen has two locally designated historic districts, the Main Street Historic District, and the Commercial Core Historic District. The districts were created to preserve the character of entire IntroductIon P28 IV.A. 10 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines IntroductIon neighborhoods. In general, any demolition, exterior alteration, or construction on a property within a historic district must be reviewed and approved before work can begin. National Register Listing The National Register of Historic Places is a list of sites and properties of historic significance that is maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. Properties so listed may have national significance, but they may also be listed if they are determined to have significance at a state or local level. The National Register is administered by the National Park Service and nominations are submitted through the State Historic Preservation Officer in Denver, using criteria adopted by the Secretary of the Interior. Properties listed in the National Register may be eligible for federal income tax credit incentives. Designated properties are also protected from federally-funded projects which might harm or alter the historic character. Such federal projects must be reviewed for their potential negative impact. In these cases, alterations are reviewed by the National Park Service. Otherwise, only the standard process for all Aspen landmarks applies. The History Colorado website lists National Register properties by county: historycolorado.org/ oahp/pitkin-county. Purpose of the Design Guidelines These design guidelines are specifically for properties listed on the “Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures,” inside and outside of the historic districts. Additional guidelines for the Main Street and Commercial Core Historic Districts are found in the “Commercial, Lodging, and Historic District Design Objective and Guidelines”, a separate document available on aspenpitkin.com. The design guidelines serve to reinforce the purpose of the Historic Preservation Chapter in the Aspen Land Use Code: • Recognize, protect, and promote the retention and continued utility of the historic buildings and districts in the City. • Promote awareness and appreciation of Aspen’s unique heritage. • Ensure the preservation of Aspen’s character as an historic mining town, early ski resort and cultural center. • Retain the historic, architectural and cultural resource attractions that support tourism and the economic welfare of the community. • Encourage sustainable reuse of historic structures. • Encourage voluntary efforts to increase public information, interaction or access to historic building interiors. The design guidelines provide a basis for making decisions about the appropriate treatment of historic resources and compatible new construction. They also serve as an educational and planning tool for property owners and their design professionals who seek to make improvements that may affect historic resources. How to Use the Guidelines While the design guidelines are written such that they can be used by the layman to plan improvements, property owners are strongly encouraged to enlist the assistance of qualified design and planning professionals, including architects, landscape architects, structural engineers, preservation contractors, and preservation consultants to assure that the work contemplated will help preserve the historic character of the City. Any affected property owner who plans to make changes to the exterior of a building must obtain a Certificate of No Negative Effect or a Certificate of Appropriateness. In order to review each project in a consistent manner, City Preservation Staff and the HPC will use these guidelines as a basis for determining the appropriateness of the work proposed. How Many Guidelines Must Be Met? Note that not every guideline will apply to each project, and that some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. City Staff or the HPC will determine that a sufficient number of the relevant guidelines have been adequately met in order to approve a project proposal. What is the Format of a Guideline? The chapters containing design guidelines are organized in a format that provides background information as well as specific regulatory language. Each of these chapters contains the following components: Policy Statement A broad statement explaining the City’s basic approach for the treatment of the design feature being discussed. This statement provides the basis for the P29 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 11 more detailed background information and design guidelines that follow. In a case in which special conditions in a specific project are such that the detailed design guidelines do not appear to address the situation, then this broad policy statement serves as the basis for determining the appropriateness of the proposed work. Background Information A discussion of the issues typically associated with the specific design topic is presented next. This may include technical information, such as factors associated with the preservation of a historic building material, as well as general preservation theory that is relevant to the topic at hand. Pertinent Sub-Topics The sections that follow the background information are divided into sub-topics. For example, in the chapter addressing Building Materials, the sub-topics include: treatment, repair and replacement. This organization allows the user to quickly select the specific design topics within a section that are relevant. Design Guidelines The specific design guidelines are presented as bold face statements under each sub-topic. These are also numbered to indicate their relative position within the chapter and to aid in specific reference in the review process. Also provided with the design guidelines are supplementary requirements, which are bulleted (•) statements. These supplementary statements clarify the primary design guideline statement and may suggest specific methods for complying with it. How Were the Design Guidelines Developed? The City’s first preservation guidelines were adopted in 1972. The guidelines have been revised and improved multiple times taking community input and the experience of the Historic Preservation Commission into account. The design guidelines incorporate concepts set forth in The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (listed in the Appendix)—a nationally accepted set of basic preservation design principles. This document is compatible with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, while expanding on how these basic preservation principles apply in Aspen. The Concept of Historic Significance What makes a property historically significant? It is generally recognized that a certain amount of time must pass before the historical significance of a property can be evaluated. The National Register, for example, requires that a property be at least 50 years old or have extraordinary importance before it may be considered. Aspen does not have a minimum age for designation. A property may be significant for one or more of the following reasons: • Antiquity • Association with events patterns, trends, or people that have contributed to local, state, regional, or national history. • Physical design associated with distinctive characteristics of a building type, period, or construction method. • An example of an architect or master craftsman or an expression of particularly high artistic values. • Singular significance to the City. • Integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. Period of Significance Every historic building or district has a period of significance—or the time span during which it gained architectural, historical or geographical importance. In most cases, a property is significant because it represents or is associated with a particular period in history. Frequently, this begins with its construction date and continues through the peak of early occupation. Building fabric and features that date from the period of significance typically contribute to the character of the structure or district. Concept of “Integrity” In addition to being historically significant, a property also must have integrity—a sufficient percentage of the structure must date from the period of significance. The majority of the building’s structural system and its materials should date from that time and its key character defining features also should remain intact. These may include architectural details as well as the overall mass and form of the building. It is these elements that allow a building or district to be recognized as a product of its time. Preservation Principles While the guidelines in this document provide direction for specific design issues, some basic principles form the foundation for them. The following preservation principles apply to all historic properties in Aspen. IntroductIon P30 IV.A. 12 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines IntroductIon Respect the historic design character of the building. Don’t try to change a building’s style or make it look older than it really is. Confusing the character by mixing elements of different styles is not appropriate. Seek uses that are compatible with the historic character of the building. Uses that closely relate to the building’s original use are preferred. Every reasonable effort should be made to provide a compatible use for the building that will require minimal alteration to the building and its site. Protect and maintain significant features and stylistic elements. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship should be treated with sensitivity. The best preservation procedure is to maintain historic features from the outset so that intervention is not required. Repair deteriorated historic features, and replace only those elements that cannot be repaired. Maintain the existing material, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. If disassembly is necessary for repair or restoration, use methods that minimize damage to original materials and re-install in the existing configuration. Selecting a Preservation Approach Each preservation project is unique. A project may include a variety of treatment techniques, including the repair and replacement of features and maintenance of those already in good condition. Some of the basic preservation treatments are described in the section that follows. In each case, it is important to develop an overall strategy for treatment that is based on an analysis of the building and its setting. Analysis should begin with an investigation of the history of the property. This may identify design alterations that have occurred and may help in developing an understanding of the significance of the building as a whole, as well as its individual components. Sources for historic information include the City of Aspen Community Development Department, the Aspen Historical Society, and two City websites; aspenvictorian.com and aspenmod. com. Denver Public Library Western History Collection (digital.denverlibrary.org) and on-line fire insurance maps from the turn of the century, Sanborn Maps, (cudl.colorado.edu) are also helpful. Historical research should be combined with an on-site assessment of existing conditions. In this inspection, identify those elements that are original and those that have been altered. Also determine the condition of individual building components. Finally, list the requirements for continued use of the property. Is additional space needed? Or should the work focus on preserving and maintaining the existing configuration? In addition to the historical background, research should also be done which identifies the preservation incentives offered by the HPC. The preservation incentives are a way for the property owner to improve a project and make it more sympathetic to the historic resource. By combining an understanding of the history of the building, its present condition, and the need for action, one can then develop a preservation approach. When doing so, consider the following terms: Maintenance Work that often focuses on keeping the property in good condition by repairing features as deterioration becomes apparent, using procedures that retain the original character and finish of the features. In some cases, preventive maintenance is executed prior to noticeable deterioration. No alteration or reconstruction is involved. Property owners are strongly encouraged to maintain their property in good condition so that more aggressive measures of rehabilitation, restoration or reconstruction are not needed. Preservation Preservation is keeping an existing building in good condition by a careful program of maintenance and repair. It will often include repair and stabilization of materials and features in addition to regularly scheduled maintenance. Restoration To restore, one reproduces the appearance of a building exactly as it looked at a particular moment in time; to reproduce a pure style—either interior or exterior. This process may include the removal of later work or the replacement of missing historic features. A restoration approach is used on missing details or features of a historic building when the features are determined to be particularly significant to the character of the structure and when the original P31 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 13 IntroductIon configuration is accurately documented. Rehabilitation Rehabilitation is the process of returning a property to a state which makes a contemporary use possible while still preserving those portions or features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural and cultural values. Rehabilitation may include the adaptive reuse of the building and constructing additions. Most good preservation projects in Aspen may be considered rehabilitation projects. Adaptive Use Converting a building to a new use that is different from its original purpose is considered to be adaptive use. For example, converting a residential structure to offices is adaptive use. A good adaptive use project retains the historic character of the building while accommodating new functions. While adaptive use allows the building owner to convert the building to a purpose other than that for which it was designed, it should be done with respect to the original building form. For example, it would be inappropriate to turn the living room of a historic building into a bathroom. The reason for this is that when the programmatic uses of a building are drastically altered, this often results in a major change to the original floor plan as well as to the exterior appearance of the building. When adaptive use is the preferred preservation alternative, the proposed design should honor the original building function as closely as possible. Combining Preservation Strategies Many successful projects that involve historic structures in Aspen may include a combination of preservation, restoration, and other appropriate treatments. For example, a house may be adapted to use as a restaurant, and in the process, missing porch brackets may be replicated in order to restore the original appearance, while existing original dormers may be preserved. Planning a Preservation Project Once the basic approach to a project has been defined, it is important to assess the property and to identify any significant character-defining features and materials. Retaining these elements, and then using the guidelines to select an appropriate treatment mechanism will greatly enhance the overall quality of the preservation project. In making the selection follow this sequence: 1. If a feature is intact and in good condition, maintain it as such. 2. If the feature is deteriorated or damaged, repair it to its original condition. 3. If it is not feasible to repair the feature, then replace it with one that is the same or similar in character (materials, detail, finish) to the original one. Replace only that portion which is beyond repair. 4. If the feature is missing entirely, reconstruct it from appropriate evidence. 5. If a new feature or addition is necessary, design it in such a way as to minimize the impact on original features. Design Review Process The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission The City Council appoints volunteers to the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). The HPC is comprised of members who are city residents, have an expressed interest and expertise in historic preservation, and are knowledgeable about the heritage of the City. Some work is exempt from historic preservation review and other work may qualify for an Administrative Review by the Community Development Department. Approval is generally not required for a change in paint color or interior alterations. A Community Development Department review includes work such as signs, fences, roofs and repairs. More substantial projects are reviewed by HPC. Applicants are encouraged to participate in a pre- application conference with the Historic Preservation Officer (HPO), available in the Community Development Department. At this conference, the HPO will identify any necessary review process, discuss approvals that may be needed from other city boards, provide application forms, and suggest any modifications which may make the application more consistent with the standards and guidelines. Importance of Acquiring a Permit Once approvals are granted, a property owner may Any contractor, superintendent, or owner/builder wishing to receive a building permit to work on a historic structure will be required to complete the “Aspen/Pitkin County Preservation Awareness Program” and receive a specialty license in historic preservation. P32 IV.A. 14 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines IntroductIon apply for a building permit. Obtaining a building permit is a crucial step in any construction process. If a city building or zoning inspector finds that work is occurring without a permit, the work is stopped, or “red tagged.” In the simplest situation, construction is delayed; in more contentious cases, the work has to be reversed or rebuilt, resulting in long delays, additional fees and fines, and occasionally court appearances. Undertaking an act of demolition on a landmarked structure without HPC approval may result in a long term suspension of building permits for the property. Building permits are not only a way for the City to keep track of applications, but they also serve as protection for the owner. Obtaining a building permit means that the work will be inspected to determine that it has been executed correctly. The HPC is deeply committed to its responsibilty in protecting the visual memory of the community and ensuring that historic resources are respected within the evolution of the City. There are many possible directions to take when approaching a preservation project. The Commission appreciates a clear explanation of context, how the proposal contributes to a sense of place in the community, and site analysis. An applicant should explain their intent and approach and provide models, story poles, material samples and other information to assist the review process. P33 IV.A. H istoric o verview P34 IV.A. 16 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Aspen has experienced several cycles of development in its history, beginning with the mining industry of the 1880s, the creation of the skiing industry in the 1930s and the City’s transformation into a center for arts and culture in the 1940s, all of which have led to the contemporary attraction it holds for intellectuals, outdoor enthusiasts and life-style connoisseurs. The Early Years - Mining Aspen is located in the Upper Roaring Fork Valley, where people have lived for at least 5,000 years. The Ute Indians arrived in the area around 1400 A.D. and controlled the region until the 1870s, preventing access to most of the valley under the 1868 Ute Reservation Settlement Act. However, they did allow the Hayden Survey to be completed in 1873, which was ultimately responsible for determining the evidence of gold and silver in the surrounding mountains. Following the reports from the Hayden Survey, in the summer of 1879, four prospectors from Leadville arrived in the valley to explore the mining potential. Quickly, they sank shafts to indicate they had mined the land and filed claims upon their return to Leadville. By the end of 1879 at least 35 prospectors camped at the base of Aspen Mountain, enduring the winter so as not to lose potential fortunes. The resulting pressure to mine and allow settlement of the area led to the removal of the Ute people to Utah. Henry B. Gillespie and B. Clark Wheeler, two ambitious men who would come to direct the growth of the region, arrived in the mining camp in the spring of 1880. Although it was Gillespie who initiated the efforts to create a town (which was to be called Ute City), Wheeler was first to complete a survey, and he gave Aspen its name. In March of 1880, B. Clark Wheeler incorporated the Aspen Town and Land Company with the financing of eastern capitalists. Initially, Aspen was a typical mining camp, with tents and crude log structures for businesses and homes. Transportation into the area was only by way of Taylor Pass, through Ashcroft until 1881, when the Independence Pass Toll Road was completed. Between 1883 and 1885, the population increased from 500 to 3,500 people, and the town had municipal water service, a telegraph, telephones and electricity, thanks to what was reportedly the first commercially operated hydroelectric plant in the United States. HIstorIc overvIew A spen H istoric o verview View of Aspen in 1900. P35 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 17 Aspen was in the thrust of a building boom, including construction of over twenty business buildings, and in 1884, well over one hundred homes to meet a housing shortage. Civic improvements were made and the City Council added street signs and house numbers. The town was platted into 30’x100’ lots and the city was divided east-west by Center Street (now Garmisch Street,) and north-south by Main Street. These two thoroughfares were both 100-feet-wide, while other streets were 75-feet. The residential districts were generally within proximity to the trails leading to the mines. The commercial district, originally four blocks in size, was located at the base of Aspen Mountain. The industry associated with the mining process such as the mills were located on the perimeter of the town. According to the Time’s editor, reflecting on the character of the town, “the pretty cottages, the palatial stores and the neat churches and public buildings, attest to their energy, prosperity and cultivation.” Many of Aspen’s achievements in the mid-1880s can be attributed to an eastern capitalist, Jerome B. Wheeler, no relationship to B. Clark Wheeler. Among other investments, Wheeler facilitated the development of two major sources of mining infrastructure—a smelter to process the ore locally for greater economic return and a railroad to connect the town to outlying regions. By 1886, two railroad companies were in competition to reach Aspen first; the Denver & Rio Grande Railroad and the Colorado Midland Railroad, which was partially bankrolled by Jerome Wheeler. The first train on the Rio Grande line pulled into Aspen in November of 1887. The Colorado Midland was hindered by bridge construction over Maroon and Castle Creeks, but ultimately arrived in town in December 1887. The railroad cars carried three to four thousand tons of ore each week to be processed; the returning cars brought valuable merchandise, including commodities and luxury items. As Aspen prospered, around 1888, more substantial, brick and stone, high style buildings began to be built. It was the custom of the day for successful businessmen to build a city block in a unified architectural style, using the best location for his own business and renting out to others. The business blocks (for example the Aspen Block, on the southwest corner of Hyman and Galena) were symbols of the prosperity of the town, and the individuals for whom they were named, as well as a growing civic pride. Two of the most important structures built during this period were financed by Jerome B. Wheeler— the Wheeler Opera House and the Hotel Jerome. Most of the houses built during this time were from designs found in pattern books, volumes of building plans that were widely available. The majority of the homes were wood frame, although some larger and more elaborate houses were constructed of brick. The miner’s cottages generally measured twenty- eight feet by thirty feet and were divided into five main spaces: a parlor (with bay window), sitting room, kitchen, sleeping area and a porch. An outhouse and sheds for livestock also would have been located on the lot. Exterior detailing on the cottages was relatively minimal, mostly focusing on the porch and the most prominent window. Produced at a rate of four per day, this family house, painted, plastered and ready for occupancy, cost $1,000.00 to build. The 300 block of HIstorIc overvIew A view of Cooper Avenue in 1900. A view of houses on Lake Avenue in 1910. P36 IV.A. 18 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines HIstorIc overvIew E. Main Street contains examples of the pattern-style, vernacular miner’s cottage. Residential landscapes at this time were often utilitarian in design, with small vegetable gardens and few ornamental plantings. Fences were low and transparent in nature to provide some definition between private yards and the public right-of-way. The planting of cottonwood rows was the dominant landscaping feature in the residential and commercial districts. Small irrigation ditches to promote growth linked the tree-plantings. In spite of fast-paced construction, by 1889 the housing shortage continued in Aspen, especially for miners’ families. In response, in September of 1889, the city council chartered a company to create a horse-drawn streetcar line. The completed system stretched two miles, crisscrossing the town and changing the face of Aspen by expanding its limits beyond the walking capacity of pedestrians. The Silver Crash - Aspen’s Quiet Years By 1892 Aspen was the third largest city in Colorado with 12,000 residents—only surpassed by Denver and Leadville. Aspen did outpace Leadville as Colorado’s leading silver producer, and housed the largest opera house in the state and finest luxury hotel on the Western Slope. In the spring of 1893, the financial success of Aspen crashed when Congress repealed the Sherman Silver Purchase Act. The “Silver Queen” of the Rockies came to a grinding halt, as did almost all of Colorado’s silver mines. By the end of 1893, the mining workforce had dropped from 2,250 to 150 men. By 1900, Aspen’s total population had dropped to 3,300 people and by 1930 had reached a low of 700 people. The events of 1893 initiated a period commonly referred to as the ‘’Quiet Years’, which lasted until the 1930s. Homes were vacant, stores empty and the grand architecture of the commercial and residential blocks entered a long stage of deterioration and neglect. Entire blocks were barren without a single occupied house and buildings stood as bare skeletons, the victims of salvaging for materials, fire and vandalism. During the “Quiet Years,” most people survived on modest resources. Residents raised much of their own food, merchants extended credit when possible and neighbors shared with neighbors. Throughout this extended depression numerous records indicate an enduring pulse of optimism amongst Aspenites. The theme of unfailing pride dominated during the “Quiet Years.” The major transportation services, the Midland Railroad and the Rio Grande Railroad were also affected by the financial crisis. The Midland line was purchased by the Santa Fe Railroad, but the route was abandoned by 1900 and the track was removed by 1921. The Rio Grande was more fortunate and endured the silver crash by hauling cattle and sheep rather than silver. By the 1930s and 1940s it once again met market demands by hauling the building materials and eventually passengers for the development of Aspen as a ski resort. Aspen’s Second Cycle-Ski Town Snow and spectacular mountains would provide the resources in the 1930s for Aspen to begin development as an international ski resort. While miners had previously used old barrel staves to slide down the mountain after work, they never guessed that this transportation method would be the next boom for their remote mining town. It was the chance meeting of a miner’s son, Tom Flynn, with Olympic bobsled champion, Billy Fiske in California that initiated speculation for the ski- industry in Aspen. Fiske soon hired Andre Roch, a celebrated mountaineer, avalanche expert and engineer, to survey the area. Roch spent the next six months identifying the recreational advantages of the region. Following the survey, Fiske and capitalist Theodore Ryan personally cleared brush off the hillside, creating the first alpine slope near Aspen.The Marolt Ranch in 1920, with the defunct Holden Lixiviation Plant (a silver processor) in the background. P37 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 19 HIstorIc overvIew Roch developed a downhill race course. Originally called “Roch Run Trail” or “the Roch”, only a section of the original course remains today. Roch believed that by creating a race course, Aspen would receive more publicity, thereby development of the mountain would be accomplished more quickly. It was a great success, attracting not only top skiers, but visionary capitalists. In 1938, Roch’s served as the site for the Rocky Mountain Ski Association Championship and by 1941, the Aspen Ski Club hosted the U.S. World Alpine Championships. World War II interrupted the development of Aspen skiing; but troops in training at the 87th Mountain Infantry and later the 10th Mountain Division would come to test their skills on the weekends. After the war, many of these same people came back to settle in Aspen and continue the momentum of developing its skiing potential. By 1950 Aspen was internationally famous for its terrain, World Cup Ski events and pioneering ski- industry technology. Lift capacity continued to expand at Aspen and new ski areas were developed. In 1957, Aspen Highlands opened, to be followed by Buttermilk a year later. The significant addition of the Snowmass ski area in 1967 firmly established Aspen as an international skiing destination. By 1986, Aspen installed the world’s longest, single-stage vertical rise gondola—the Silver Queen. Aspen continues to maintain its position as an international ski resort, attracting the world’s top skiing competitors and most celebrated ski events. Skiing also changed the architectural character of Aspen. Lodges were built in the chalet style familiar to their European owners. To enhance the alpine experience for tourists, landscaping trends attempted to bring the mountain environment into town. Spruce trees and other conifers were planted along streetscapes and throughout the commercial and residential districts. Aspen’s Cultural Renaissance - The Aspen Idea Investment capital began to flow into Aspen as influential people such as Elizabeth and Walter Paepcke promoted the town. The Paepckes were Chicago industrialists with grand visions. Walter Paepcke dreamed of a community “of peace with opportunities for a man’s complete life...where he can earn a living, profit by healthy, physical recreation, with facilities at hand for his enjoyment of art, music and education.” He created the Goethe Bicentennial Convocation in 1949, which attracted the world’s foremost artists, writers, musicians and celebrated humanitarians. The success of this event led to the creation of the Aspen Institute, Aspen Center for Physics, Aspen Music Festival and School, and numerous other world class conferences and events enjoyed in Aspen today. The International Design Conference, founded in 1950 left an indelible impression upon the architectural characteristics Lift One, 1950. Aspen Institute, 1965. P38 IV.A. 20 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines HIstorIc overvIew of Aspen and how the Aspen community promotes innovative design. Examples of private residences and civic structures influenced by the Modernist movement can be found throughout the city. Present Day Aspen - International Resort for the Mind and Body Aspen lures people today with world-class accommodations, outdoor recreation opportunities, artistic venues and educational forums. Its setting, unique architecture and sense of history provide a backdrop whereby the Aspen community can provide the best of both worlds— charm and natural beauty with cosmopolitan entertainment and flare. The Elks Building, 2015. P39 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 21 HIstorIc overvIew Note: Dates indicated describe the approximate period covered by a particular building style within Aspen. Architectural Styles in Aspen The City of Aspen contains a wide variety of building types and architectural styles that reflect its evolution, many of which have historic significance. This rich architectural heritage enhances the City and contributes to its strong “sense of place.” The following is a brief overview of the most frequently recognized styles found in Aspen. This survey of building types and styles reflects changing building technologies, tastes of the times, and the distinct Aspen context. Pioneer Circa 1879-1893, Residential These buildings were generally constructed of round logs, hewn logs, or log slabs considered to be mill- waste, and built as basic shelter for early Aspen settlers. Later examples copied this style. The log members were laid on alternating tiers, implementing a variety of notching techniques for joinery. The details of the log connections and the character of the log cuts themselves are important features. The spaces between the logs were filled with “chinking” consisting of a mixture of animal hair, clay, straw and other natural materials. The roofs were constructed of readily available material, including canvas, wooden shingles, and sheet metal. In Aspen, some of these log structures were later updated and covered with milled wooden siding and details. Characteristics: • Log construction. • Hip or gable roof. • Rough-sawn wood trim. A Pioneer house at 205 S. Third, constructed in 1885, or earlier P40 IV.A. 22 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines HIstorIc overvIew False-Front Store Front Circa 1880-1893, Commercial Relatively few examples of false-front buildings survive. These structures are from the early settlement phase when wood was the primary construction material. The front created a facade that made a building appear larger and taller than it actually was, masking a gabled roofline. Cornice details and kickplate elements below the storefront windows also were created from wood. Characteristics: • Gable roof concealed behind false front. • Recessed entry. • Large glass display windows. • Simple bracketed cornices. • Painted wood lap siding. • Kickplate below display window. • Transom above display window. • Wood doors and windows. Carpenter Gothic Circa 1880-1893, Residential This style is characterized by wooden interpretations of Gothic masonry structures, with an emphasis upon verticality and picturesque composition. Jig-saw cut trim elements were popular but straight lines and simple geometric forms provided the framework for more ornamental attachments. These ornamental details and the overall vertical form of this style are important features that should be preserved. All- white color schemes were popular, with accent colors only appearing on shutters. Characteristics: • Steeply pitched roof. • Cross gable roof plan or side gable roof plan with central cross gable over the door. • Clapboard siding. • Decorative barge board along eaves of main gables and dormers. • Two-over-two, double-hung sash windows. • Bay windows and lancet windows. • Elaborate porch railings, square posts, cut-out boards. False front structure at 310 E. Main, constructed in the 1890s. A Carpenter Gothic house at 302 East Hopkins, constructed in 1883. P41 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 23 HIstorIc overvIew Vernacular L-Type or “Miner’s Cottage” Circa 1880-1893, Residential The term “vernacular” refers to building traditions that reflect local taste, customs and materials. The vernacular houses of Aspen are similar to those throughout other Colorado mining towns—these houses were designed for utilitarian purposes with minimal attempts to copy a prescribed style. Typically, decorative elements were applied to cottages with steep roofs, wooden siding, vertical sash windows and front porches. Some homes received more ornament than others, often influenced by Queen Anne or Gothic Revival designs, usually around windows and doors and at porches and gable ends. In plan, these cottages were L-type, gable end, or side gable. Often shed additions were added. The L-type houses have two wings with intersecting gable roofs that form a letter “L” in plan. Very often an attached porch runs along the street-facing facade. Most of these houses are 1- story, but 1-1/2 and 2-story versions also exist. This is the most common historic resource type remaining in Aspen. Characteristics: • Overall, simple building forms. • 1-story, covered porch, usually at the intersection of the two wings. • Projecting bay windows. • Wood clapboard siding. • Shingle roof. • Two front doors, a social custom. Side Gable Circa 1880-1893, Residential This house style has a ridgeline that runs parallel to the street. Often a porch runs the width of the house. Details are similar to other gable cottage plans. Characteristics: • Full-width, one-story porch. • Decorative elements focused on the porch area. • Porch projects forward from the front wall plane. • Painted wood lap siding. • Wood trim around windows and doors. A Vernacular L-type house at 205 S. Spring, constructed in 1887. A side gable house at 117 N. Sixth, constructed in 1885. P42 IV.A. 24 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines HIstorIc overvIew Gable-End Circa 1880-1893, Residential This house type has a simple, rectangular shape with a gable roof with the ridge running perpendicular to the street. Most have a porch on the gable-end. Most are wood sided. Most are 1 - 1-1/2 story and a few are 2-story. Characteristics: • Bay-windows . • Full width or inset 1-story porch, with hip or gable roof. • Decorative shingles in gable-end. • Gable ornaments, including brackets and barge boards. • Overall, modest character. • Porch may project forward or be inset into the front wall plane. • Two front doors, a social custom. Italianate Circa 1880-1893, Residential and Commercial The Italianate style was introduced by Andrew Jackson Downing in his 1850 publication, The Architecture of Country Houses. He extolled the virtues of the Gothic Revival, but also offered the “villa,” a version based on Italian country houses that veered more toward classicism and did not have the religious overtones of the Gothic Revival. Cornices with large brackets appeared on porches and bay windows. Flat, ornamental arches capped most windows and doors. Characteristics: • Rectangular, square, with a side-passage plan, or cross-gable. • Brick, wood clapboard and stucco. • Double-hung, narrow windows, often with round arch heads. • Window panes are either one-over-one or two- over-two. • Protruding sills. • Ornate treatment of the eaves, including the use of brackets, modillions and dentil courses. • Low-pitched, hipped roof. • Bay windows, often rectangular. • Quoins, or decorative blocks, at corners. • Metal cresting along roof ridges. • Transom over entry, often curved. An gable end house at 612 W. Main, constructed in 1888. An Italianate house at 201 E. Hyman, constructed in 1883. The Wheeler Opera House at 320 E. Hyman is an example of an Italianate commercial structure, constructed in 1889. • Ornate treatment of porch with turned columns, posts and bargeboard ornament. P43 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 25 HIstorIc overvIew Dutch Colonial Revival Circa 1880-1893, Residential The most distinguishing feature of this style is the gambrel roof. The details, such as the window pattern, porches and materials are closely associated with the Shingle and Queen Anne styles. Characteristics: • Gambrel roof; both side-passage and front-facing variations can be found. • Single gable end. • One story. • Prominent front porch, with classically-detailed porch supports and plain balustrades. • Double-hung sash windows, with either single panes or multiple panes in the upper light. • Lunette windows in the upper gable. • Large, single pane windows with a fixed transom on the first story. Queen Anne Circa 1880-1893, Residential In the United States, Queen Anne developed from the desire to establish a national style. This style includes decorative wall surface patterns, framed in strap- work, polychrome color schemes, and steeply pitched rooflines. Typically, the buildings are 1 - 2-stories in height. Preserving the ornamental details and the original materials of this style are high priorities. Characteristics: • Irregular, asymmetrical massing. • Forward extension of wall planes; towers and triangular sections. • Decorative shingles. • Spindlework porch supports with lace-like brackets. • Windows with leaded or stained glass. • Patterned window panes. • Bay windows. • Corbelled brick chimneys. A Dutch Colonial Revival house at 611 West Main, constructed in 1886. A Queen Anne house at 128 E. Main, constructed circa 1893. P44 IV.A. 26 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines HIstorIc overvIew Second Empire Circa 1880-1893, Residential The Second Empire refers to the reign of Louis Napoleon, the grand-nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte, who ruled France from 1852 to 1870. In both France and America, the Second Empire style coincided with a period of prosperity and materialism, and was associated with urbanity and a cosmopolitan society. The style is characterized by its distinctive mansard roof, often containing windows on the steep lower slope. The complex massing and arrangement of towers is unified through decorative cornices similar to those of the Italianate style. Characteristics: • Steeply pitched, mansard roof. • Roof can be either straight or concave, and is interrupted by dormers. • Complex massing forms . • Brick, stucco or wood clapboard. • Wrought-iron ornament, such as cresting on roof or heavy, ornate fencing. • Wide eaves, often with modillions. • Corbelled chimney. • Heavily molded cornices and window trim. Industrial Circa 1880-1893, Commercial, Public The Industrial style represents an age when the production of goods was an overriding goal. This style was sometimes employed for utilitarian public buildings, and featured large, open interior spaces, made possible by a heavy wood truss system. Characteristics: • Large rectangular forms. • Masonry construction. • Large interior spaces. • Smaller, vertically proportioned windows. • Masonry cornice supported on corbels. A Second Empire house at 442 W. Bleeker, constructed in 1885. Aspen City Hall, originally an Armory, at 130 South Galena, constructed in 1891. P45 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 27 HIstorIc overvIew Victorian-Era Commercial Building Circa 1880-1893, Commercial The commercial storefront of the late 19th and early 20th centuries is the most common type of building found today in most historic commercial districts throughout the country. Usually one to four stories in height, these buildings are divided into two distinct bands. The first floor is more commonly transparent, so goods can be displayed, while the second story has smaller windows and is usually reserved for a residential or office space. The majority of these buildings in Aspen were constructed between 1888 and 1893. As this type evolved towards the turn-of-the century, so too did the amount of ornamentation and high- style influences. Cornice and midbelt moldings became more prominent, more elaborate window and door openings were used and much of the facade was covered with varying degrees of applied ornamentation. Italianate details were popular. With the introduction of cast-iron, the weight of second and third stories of these Victorian commercial structures was carried over larger expanses of glass on the first floor. Characteristics: • Cast-iron supported or wood post storefronts. • Large display windows on the first-floor usually framed in wood, but sometimes metal. • Transom lights above display windows. • Kickplate below display windows. • Recessed entry. • Wood double doors. • Tall second story windows with wood frames. • Decorative cornice at top. • Masonry walls. • Varying degrees of ornamentation. • Corner entry. A Victorian era commercial building at 419 E. Hyman, constructed in 1889. P46 IV.A. 28 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines HIstorIc overvIew The Collins Block, located at 204 South Mill Street, constructed in 1891-1893. Neo-Classical Circa 1880-1893, Commercial The Neoclassical movement is an American phenomenon that began with the 1893 Colombian Exposition in Chicago. Greek Revival precedents were most commonly used, but with more variety in composition and detail. In Aspen, popular neoclassical details were simple Doric columns, triangular pediments and large cornices with rows of dentil moldings. Other classical orders, including Corinthian and Ionic, sometimes are used as well. These appeared on both residential and commercial buildings. Characteristics: • Free-standing columns, usually Doric order. • Cornice with dentil moldings. • Triangular pediment, sometimes supported on classical columns. Romanesque Revival Circa 1880-1893, Commercial and Public Promoted by the prominent Boston architect, Henry Hobson Richardson, the Romanesque, or Richardsonian Romanesque style was commonly used for large public buildings during the 1880s— following suit with Richardson’s Trinity Church in Boston. Romanesque structures were always of masonry construction. Rounded stone arches were typical details, as were carved stone columns with Corinthian capitals, which feature an acanthus leaf pattern. Attached stone pilasters, or piers also were common. Characteristics: • Asymmetrical facades. • Masonry walls, usually with rough-faced, squared stonework. • Most have towers with conical roofs. • Round-topped arches over windows, porch supports, or entrance. • Deeply recessed openings. • Decorative colonnettes around windows. • Decorative floral patterns on column capitals and wall surfaces. • Wood frames for doors and windows. The Aspen Community Church, an example of the Romanesque Revival style, constructed at 200 E. Bleeker in 1890. P47 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 29 HIstorIc overvIew Rustic architecture at 300 W. Main, constructed in 1944. Rustic Architecture Circa 1900-present, Residential, Commercial, Public Popularized by the designs of the National Park Service for its institutional buildings, these structures were designed to blend with the environment and were constructed of native building materials. An emphasis upon simplicity, hand craftsmanship and the natural environment made this a popular style for vacation homes, hunting lodges, dude ranches and tourist facilities. In Aspen, these appear similar to Pioneer Houses, but usually include larger timber elements and emphasize more craftsmanship in details. Characteristics: • Hand built out of locally available materials, using limited tools. • Single story or 1 1/2 story. • Low pitched gable roof. • Simple rectangular footprint, with smaller addictive elements. • Small porch or entry feature. • True log construction with overlapping log ends, coped and stacked, with chinking to infill irregularities between the logs. • Rough sawn board and batten siding. • Stone at the base or in the fireplace and chimney. • Small window openings, spare and usually horizontally proportioned with wood trim. • Minimal detail and decoration. The Bell Tower, originally built as a WPA project in 1930 and later substantially reconstructed, is located at Paepke Park and is an example of Rustic architecture. P48 IV.A. 30 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines HIstorIc overvIew International style residence at 301 Lake, constructed in 1972. Bauhaus/International Style Circa 1928-1960, Residential, Commercial, Public The use of the words “international style” refers to the title of the exhibit promoted by the Museum of Modern Art in New York City in 1931 which presented the work of forty architects from fifteen countries. It has become synonymous with modern styles and post- World War II architecture that emphasized simple rectilinear forms that expressed internal functions. New materials and construction techniques also were used. In Aspen, some variations emphasized techniques and materials from elsewhere, while others adapted the International Style to local materials and building methods. Several of the International Style buildings in Aspen were designed by Herbert Bayer, a noted artist and designer from the Bauhaus school who had a significant influence on postwar architectural development in Aspen. Characteristics: • Simple geometric forms, both in plan and elevation. • Flat roofs, usually single story. • Proportions are long and low, horizontal lines are emphasized. • Asymmetrical arrangement of elements. • Windows are treated as slots in the wall surface, either vertically or horizontally, or glazing appears as a curtain wall. • Detailing is reduced to the composition of elements rather than decorative effects. • Materials are generally manufactured and standardized, surfaces are smooth, with minimal or no detail at window jambs, grade, and roof edge. • Entry is usually marked by a void in the wall, a cantilevered screen element, or other architectural clue that directs one into the composition. • Buildings are connected to nature through the use of courtyards, wall elements that extend into the landscape, and areas of glazing that allow a visual connection to the natural environment. • Schemes are monochromatic, using neutral colors. Primary colors are used for accents. P49 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 31 HIstorIc overvIew Chalet Circa 1945-1960s, Residential and Commercial This style is reminiscent of alpine architecture in Europe and was popular for early American ski resort towns, including Aspen. Large balconies and shallow roofs with wide eaves are identifying features. Wood trim often reflected a jig-saw cutout design, especially on balustrades and gable ornaments. Stucco was often combined with wood siding. Occasionally, mountain scenes were painted on the stucco. The style primarily used for hotels and residences. Characteristics: • Large, singular roof form, generally low in slope. • Deep overhangs with the structure of the roof expressed on the underside. • Eaves and rakes decorated with cutouts and fretwork bargeboards. • Continuous porch or balcony running the length of the primary side. • Decorative elements such as balustrades with cut out shapes (hearts, edelweiss, snowflakes, nature theme). • Rectangular footprint. • Stucco ground floor with minimal openings and wood lintels. • Slider and casement windows, horizontally proportioned and used sparingly. • Decorative shutters or flowerboxes. • Colors are restricted to white for the stucco base and dark brown wood walls, eaves, and balustrades. Bright colors are used sparingly for accents and decorative elements. Mountain Chalet Style at 312 W. Hyman, constructed in 1956. P50 IV.A. 32 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines HIstorIc overvIew A Modern Chalet Style home at 120 Red Mountain Road, constructed in 1962. A Pan Abode located at 630 W. Main, constructed 1965. Log Kit/Pan Abode Buildings Circa 1950s to 1970, Residential and Commercial Pan Abode is a brand name for log kit houses available beginning in 1952. These buildings were also manufactured by other companies as early as 1948. The logs were milled, tongue and groove and came pre-cut and notched for easy assembly. The system was popular in Aspen for ski lodges and modest homes. They were quick to build (a plus in Aspen’s limited construction season) and inexpensive. Characteristics: • Tongue and groove cedar log construction. • Overlapping notches at corners. • Wood framed, multi-light picture window. • Low-pitched roof, usually gabled but occasionally shed. • Deep overhanging eaves. • Recessed entrance with rounded or squared corners. • Natural, stained wood. • Simple, rectilinear footprint usually one story. Modern Chalet Circa 1950s-1960s, Residential A distinctive postwar housing type in Aspen is locally termed a Modern Chalet. With its moderately pitched gable roof oriented to the front, it recalls traditional chalets associated with ski country, but in its expansive glass and minimal decoration, it also seems classically modernist. For the most part, the sizable window walls on these buildings are oriented to Aspen Mountain. Characteristics: • Rectilinear footprint, classic chalet orientation with gable end to the street and/or mountain view. • Broad gabled facade organized in rectilinear solid or glass panels, generally in a tripartite organization. • Low to moderate pitched roof, often based on a 3:12 ratio. • Roof eave comes down to a low plate height at the upper level. • Deep eave overhang, may have exposed roof beams. • Glass in gable ends extending to the eaves. • Large central glazed areas is flanked by brick or stone piers. • Minimal decoration. • Balcony on front facade. • Entry door recessed or on side elevation. P51 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 33 HIstorIc overvIew This Wrightian style building is located at 720 E. Hyman, and was constructed in 1976. Wrightian/Organic Circa 1945-Early 1970s, Residential, Commercial, Public The Wrightian style was developed by the architect Frank Lloyd Wright. Several buildings in Aspen were designed by architects who studied under Frank Lloyd Wright. Characteristics: • Low horizontal proportions, flat or low pitched hip roofs. • Deep roof overhangs that create broad shadow lines across the facade, glazing is usually concentrated in these areas. • Materials are usually natural and hand-worked, such as rough-sawn wood timbers and brick, brick is generally used as a base material, wall infill, or in an anchoring fireplace element. • Wood structural systems tend more toward heavy timber or post-and-beam rather than typical stud framing. • Structural members and construction methods are usually expressed in the building. • Roof structure is often expressed below the roof sheathing. • Glass is used as an infill material which expresses a void or a structural system, or it is used to accentuate the surface of a wall through pattern or repetition. • No trim isolating the glazing from the wall plane, window openings are trimmed out to match adjacent structural members in a wood context, brick openings tend to be deeply set with no trim other than the brick return. • Structures are related to the environment through battered foundation walls, cantilevered floors and/or porches, clear areas of glazing that create visual connections between inside and outside, and the effect of the roof plane hovering over the ground. • Decoration stems from the detailing of the primary materials and the construction technique, no applied decorative elements are used. • Colors are usually related to the natural colors of materials (natural brick, dark stained wood, white stucco), accent colors are used minimally and mainly to accentuate horizontal lines of the structure. This Wrightian residence is located at 835 W. Main, and was constructed in 1947. P52 IV.A. P53 IV.A. D esign g uidelines :c ontext P54 IV.A. 36 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn c HA pter 1: s ite p l A nning & l A ndsc A pe d esign Background The character of a historic structure is greatly influenced by the surrounding framework of streets and public spaces, the physical characteristics of the specific site, and the way in which the historic resource is situated on the lot. It is important to analyze the context of a property before developing a strategy for treatment and/or alteration. Analysis should begin with a study of the overall development pattern of the neighborhood or district. The defining elements of the site need to be identified, and the placement of the historic resource reviewed for its consistency or deviation from the context of the neighborhood or district. How structures occupy their site, in terms of alignment, orientation, and spacing creates much of the context of a neighborhood. This context, along with right-of-way treatment, sidewalks, pedestrian and vehicular access, fences, natural features, alley relationship, landscaping and other site features all combine to define Aspen’s historic character. In the original Aspen townsite, the consistency of site development reflects a specific and identifiable time period. Some neighborhoods located outside of the formal townsite grid were planned much later and reflect a less formal pattern of development. HPC’s intent is that any project acknowledges the history of the surrounding area and uses the strongest and most common features as a framework for proposed development. In addition to architectural landmarks, Aspen has significant cultural and historic landscapes that represent early development patterns. Included in these private and public landscapes are: cemeteries, parks, campuses, public art, alleys, street right of ways, waterways, and similar public features. These landscapes are integral to the historic pattern of the community and should be preserved. How to Start When beginning a project, the applicant should follow these steps: • Document the existing site conditions, including existing plant material, natural features, historic artifacts, and configuration of the site. • Note neighborhood development patterns including existing and historic street and alley conditions, setbacks, and alley development. • Determine whether the existing context supports or detracts from the historic resource and incorporate findings into the design process. • Retain historic site features and incorporate important existing and historic development patterns into the site. Policy: Historic landscapes, landscape elements, and landscape patterns should be preserved. Additions and/or changes to the landscape should be compatible with the associated historic resource and the historic context of the neighborhood or district in which the project is located. Note: A permit is required for modifications within the publically owned right-of-way, including planting strips, sidewalks and irrigation ditches. This permit is issued by the Engineering Department in consultation with other City agencies. In general, the right-of-way within a given neighborhood should have a consistent design character. Right-of-ways should not be altered in a manner that makes them appear to be an extension of the adjacent private property. The Municipal Code includes detailed information about the City’s regulations affecting trees on public and private property. P55 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 37 cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn Neighborhood and District Patterns Maintaining significant development patterns in Aspen’s neighborhoods is important. Intentionally siting buildings to highlight historic development patterns reflects the evolution of Aspen’s development. Resources which are helpful in studying development patterns include Victorian era fire insurance maps (Sanborn Maps), the 1896 Willit’s Map, the 1893 Bird’s Eye View of town, subdivision maps, aerial photography, and GIS mapping. These are found in the Community Development Department or the Historical Society. GIS maps can be found online at aspenpitkin.com and Sanborn maps are online at www.cudl.colorado.edu. Within the historic townsite, the road layout is a grid. The neighborhoods and structures were organized in an orthogonal pattern, regardless of topography, with building façades parallel to the street. Main Street is the widest boulevard dividing Aspen north and south. Garmisch Street, formerly Center Street, divides the townsite east and west. In the west part of town, historic irrigation ditches are found alongside many streets. Within the original townsite, some Post-World War II buildings were set at an angle on the lot as a reflection of a different design philosophy – for example, many chalets are oriented to face Aspen Mountain. In later subdivisions, the grid is generally absent: streets are curvilinear and lots are irregular. It may require careful study to discern consistent or original development patterns remaining in these areas due to intense redevelopment. Consult with a landscape architect early in the conceptual process. 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. • Building footprint and location should reinforce the traditional patterns of the neighborhood. • Allow for some porosity on a site. In a residential project, setback to setback development is typically uncharacteristic of the historic context. Do not design a project which leaves no useful open space visible from the street. Streets, Alleys, & Ditches Alleys are an important feature of the historic townsite and have traditionally been used for utilitarian functions. Today, this is an appropriate location for cars, storage, service areas, and in some cases, secondary residential units or small businesses. Historic photograph of Aspen’s west end neighborhood. This historic structure is easily viewed from the street and is surrounded by a large open yard. P56 IV.A. 38 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Though alterations to streets, alleys, and ditches are not generally within the HPC’s purview, development which removes a platted street or alley, or overplants a ditch, is discouraged. Ditches should be simple water channels planted with sod banks that do not include flower beds, hardscapes, or bridges that change the simplicity of the feature. 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. When HPC input is requested, the following bullet points may be applicable. • Retain and preserve the variety and character found in historic alleys, including retaining historic ancillary buildings or constructing new ones. • Retain and preserve the simple character of historic ditches. Do not plant flowers or add landscape. • Abandoning or re-routing a street in a historic area is generally discouraged. • Consider the value of unpaved alleys in residential areas. • Opening a platted right of way which was abandoned or never graded may be encouraged on a case by case basis. Driveways & Parking Typical transportation in the 19th Century included horses and wagons that were housed in the alleys or on side streets. As cars became more common after World War II, some development was automobile oriented and included driveways accessed from the primary street. Many Post-War residences incorporated this auto-centric trend with carports and these examples should be preserved. Generally though, in an effort to minimize the visual impact of vehicles, and meet current pedestrian safety goals, vehicular access should now be accommodated at the alley where possible. 1.3 Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the original development of the site. • Do not introduce new curb cuts on streets. • Non-historic driveways accessed from the street should be removed if they can be relocated to the alley. Where a historic driveway is accessed from a street, minimize the visual impacts by limiting paving. This Herbert Bayer designed residence, built in 1963, features a streetfacing carport. cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn A ditch in the West End neighborhood. P57 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 39 cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. • If an alley exists at the site, the new driveway must be located off it. • Tracks, gravel, light grey concrete with minimal seams, or similar materials are appropriate for driveways on Aspen Victorian properties. Yards, Walkways, and Patios Key landscape features include setbacks, public space and private space, the arrangement of trees, shrubbery and hedges, species of vegetation, natural features, walkways and patios, site furnishings, site lighting, fences, vehicular and pedestrian access, and walls. Aspen Victorian Properties Commercial zone districts allow lot line to lot line development with minimal setbacks if any. As such, most commercial properties do not contain on-site walkways and patios. This alignment of structures contributes to a sense of visual continuity and vitality for 19th Century resources in the Commercial Core Historic District. In 19th century residential settings, a “hierarchy” of open space exists along the street. Access from the public street to private residences was commonly achieved with a modest walkway. These walkways were typically narrow in width, made of simple, indigenous materials, and ran perpendicular from the street to the entry or porch. Typical residential neighborhoods located in the original townsite had a relatively consistent front yard setback. Open lawns were common. Side and rear yard setback patterns created distinctive patterns and contributed to the overall open space and rhythm of a neighborhood. Rear yard setbacks have traditionally been fairly minimal AspenModern Properties Post-war development oftentimes reflects a deliberate effort to bring the outside indoors or to contrast a natural, wild landscape with a minimalist, stark building. Many Post-War buildings incorporated patios, built in planters, deep overhanging eaves, wide steps, and other types of design elements to define the landscape as part of the architecture of the building. These features are integral to the design tenets of Post-War architecture and should be preserved. An elevated front pation was part of the original design for this AspenModern landmark in the Commercial Core Historic District. P58 IV.A. 40 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. • Reflect the established progression of public to private spaces from the public sidewalk to a semi- public walkway, to a semi private entry feature, to private spaces. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. • Meandering walkways are not allowed, except where it is needed to avoid a tree or is typical of the period of significance. • Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style and install them in the manner that they would have been used historically. For example on an Aspen Victorian landmark set flagstone pavers in sand, rather than in concrete. Light grey concrete, brick or red sandstone are appropriate private walkway materials for most landmarks. • The width of a new entry sidewalk should generally be three feet or less for residential properties. A wider sidewalk may be appropriate for an AspenModern property. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. • Ensure that open space on site is meaningful and consolidated into a few large spaces rather than many small unusable areas. • Open space should be designed to support and complement the historic building. 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. • When included in the initial planning for a project, stormwater quality facilities can be better integrated into the proposal. All landscape plans presented for HPC review must include at least a preliminary representation of the stormwater design. A more detailed design must be reviewed and approved by Planning and Engineering prior to building permit submittal. • Site designs and stormwater management should provide positive drainage away from the historic landmark, preserve the use of natural drainage and treatment systems of the site, reduce the generation of additional stormwater runoff, and increase infiltration into the ground. Stormwater facilities and conveyances located in front of a landmark should have minimal visual impact The historic hierarchy of spaces from public to semi-public to private. A flagstone walkway suits the character of this 1956 Pan Abode home. cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn P59 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 41 when viewed from the public right of way. • Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements. 1.9 Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis. 1.10 Built-in furnishings, such as water features, fire pits, grills, and hot tubs, that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. • Site furnishings that are added to the historic property should not be intrusive or degrade the integrity of the neighborhood patterns, site, or existing historic landscape. • Consolidating and screening these elements is preferred. Softscape Features & Plants While most historic plant materials on private property have been replaced over time, some specimens do survive, particularly in residential settings. 19th Century photographs indicate that front yards were typically mowed grass and a mix of cottonwood trees, lilacs, sweet peas, flowering vines, and yellow shrub- roses. Back yards were often dirt to accomodate animals and livestock. In later periods, yard designs evolved - a Rustic Style building may have a more natural, less manicured character with informal planting of native trees, shrubs and flowers and prominent placement of spruces near the entry. Always refer to historic photos of the site when available to guide landscape design. While HPC may not have the opportunity to review landscape alterations that do not occur as part of a development project, the following guidelines apply to all activity on historic sites and will be enforced when necessary. Permits are required for site disturbances great than 200 square feet. Refer to the Engineering page on the city website aspenpitkin.com for updated information. 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. • Retaining historic planting beds and landscape features is encouraged. • Protect historically significant vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Removal of A simple, albeit contemporary, walkway may be acceptable for a large, ornate Victorian. Historic cottonwood trees surround this corner lot. cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn P60 IV.A. 42 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines damaged, aged, or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. • If a significant tree must be removed, replace it with the same or similar species in coordination with the Parks Department. • The removal of non-historic planting schemes is encouraged. • Consider restoring the original landscape if information is available, including original plant materials. 1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram. • Simplicity and restraint are required. Do not overplant a site, or install a landscape which is overtextured or overly complex in relationship to the historic resource, particularly in Zone A. In Zone A, new planting shall be species that were used historically or species of similar attributes. • In areas immediately adjacent to the landmark, Zone A and Zone B, plants up 42” in height, sod, and low shrubs are often appropriate. • Contemporary planting, walls and other features are not appropriate in Zone A. A more contemporary landscape may surround new development or be located in the rear of the property, in Zone C. • Do not cover areas which were historically unpaved with hard surfaces, except for a limited patio where appropriate. • Where residential structures are being adapted to commercial use, proposals to alter the landscape will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The residential nature of the building must be honored. • In the case of a historic landmark lot split, careful consideration should be given so as not to over plant either property, or remove all evidence of the landscape characteristics from before the property was divided. • Contemporary landscapes that highlight an AspenModern architectural style are encouraged. 1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. • Low plantings and ground covers are preferred. • Do not place trees, shrubs, or hedgerows in locations that will obscure, damage, or block significant architectural features or views to the building. Hedgerows are not allowed as fences. A small conifer planted in front of a historic structure can grow beyond expectations and completely block the building. • Consider mature canopy size when planting new trees adjacent to historic resources. Planting trees too close to a landmark may result in building deteriorate or blocked views and is inappropriate. • Climbing vines can damage historic structures and are not allowed. cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn P61 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 43 cHapter1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn Zone A most signicant Zone B moderately signicant Zone C unrestricted Historic Resource Non-historic addition NOTE: Zones of signi - cance are approximate and deviations may be deemed appropriate by the HPC. Zone C may include secondary historic resourc- es such as a historic shed or outbuilding. When this occurs, the allowances in Zone B shall apply to the areas around the historic shed or outbuilding. FRONT REAR Historic Resource Non-historic Addition I N T E R I O R L O T P62 IV.A. 44 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 1: sIte plannIng and landscape desIgn Zone A most signicant Zone B moderately signicant Zone C unrestricted Historic Resource Non-historic addition NOTE: Zones of signi - cance are approximate and deviations may be deemed appropriate by the HPC. Zone C may include secondary historic resourc- es such as a historic shed or outbuilding. When this occurs, the allowances in Zone B shall apply to the areas around the historic shed or outbuilding. STREET ALLEY Historic Resource Non-historic Addition STREET P63 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 45 Site Lighting Traditionally, outdoor lighting on 19th century sites was minimal or non-existent. While electricity was available in Aspen in the late 1880s, based on available historic photographs, exterior lights, including porch lights, were not commonly found. To maintain historic character, all outdoor lighting must be minimized. Landscape lighting on AspenModern properties varies based on architectural style and time period of development. For additional information, see the City’s Lighting Standards. 1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting. • Landscape and pathway lighting is not permitted in Zone A (refer to diagram) on Aspen Victorian properties unless an exception is approved by HPC based on safety considerations. • Landscape, driveway, and pathway lighting on AspenModern properties is addressed on a case- by-case basis. • Landscape light fixtures should be carefully selected so that they are compatible with the building, yet recognizable as a product of their own time. • Driveway lighting is not permitted on Aspen Victorian properties. • Landscape uplighting is not allowed. Fences Originally, wood picket fences were commonly used to define front yards on Aspen Victorian properties. These fences provided a subtle delineation of private yard versus public right-of-way and were low in height, transparent in design, and did not create walled off private areas. The fence’s vertical slats were set apart with spaces between, and the overall height of the fence was approximately three feet. Many properties traditionally had open lawns with no fencing. Some Post-WWII properties may have original fences that provide less transparency than those used in the 19th century, or have other unique characteristics. Fencing on these properties will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. 1.15 Preserve original fences. • Fences which are considered part of the historic significance of a site should not be moved, Landscape lighting that suits this AspenModern home. A picket fence is an appropriate choice for a Victorian era home. cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn P64 IV.A. 46 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines removed, or inappropriately altered. • Replace only those portions of a historic fence that are deteriorated beyond repair. • Replacement elements must match the existing. 1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence. 1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution. • Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve the character of a property. 1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style. • The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of significance. • A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations. • Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen Victorian landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed on the site. • A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen Victorian properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including transparency, a low height, and a simple design. When this material is used, posts should be simply detailed and not oversized. 1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street. • A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature. • For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the picket. • For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate, proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. • Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. 1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. This is one of the last remaining original Victorian fences in Aspen. A historic wire fence ;located on Cooper Ave. A privacy fence that reflects a traditional picket fence style. cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn A historic photograph showing both a simple wire fence and a taller and more opaque privacy fence. P65 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 47 removed, or inappropriately altered. • Replace only those portions of a historic fence that are deteriorated beyond repair. • Replacement elements must match the existing. 1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence. 1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution. • Reserve fences for back yards and behind street facing façades, as the best way to preserve the character of a property. 1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style. • The new fence should use materials that were used on similar properties during the period of significance. • A wood fence is the appropriate solution in most locations. • Ornate fences, including wrought iron, may create a false history are not appropriate for Aspen Victorian landmarks unless there is evidence that a decorative fence historically existed on the site. • A modest wire fence was common locally in the early 1900s and is appropriate for Aspen Victorian properties. This fence type has many desirable characteristics including transparency, a low height, and a simple design. When this material is used, posts should be simply detailed and not oversized. 1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street. • A fence that defines a front yard must be low in height and transparent in nature. • For a picket fence, spacing between the pickets must be a minimum of 1/2 the width of the picket. • For Post-WWII properties where a more solid type of fence may be historically appropriate, proposals will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. • Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. 1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. This is one of the last remaining original Victorian fences in Aspen. A historic wire fence ;located on Cooper Ave. A privacy fence that reflects a traditional picket fence style. • A privacy fence should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing on the upper portions of the fence. • A privacy fence should allow the building corners and any important architectural features that are visible from the street to continue to be viewed. • All hedgerows (trees, shrub bushes, etc.) are prohibited in Zones A and B. Retaining Walls Historically stone retaining walls were sometimes used on steep slopes. Some of these walls survive and are important character-defining features. Whenever feasible they should be preserved. The addition of retaining walls on flat sites or in locations where they were not seen historically should be avoided. 1.21 Preserve original retaining walls • Replace only those portions that are deteriorated beyond repair. Any replacement materials should match the original in color, texture, size and finish. • Painting or covering a historic masonry retaining wall or covering is not allowed. • Increasing the height of a retaining wall is inappropriate. 1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized. • All wall materials, including veneer and mortar, will be reviewed on a case by case basis and should be compatible with the palette used on the historic structure. 1.23 Re-grading the site in a manner that changes historic grade is generally not allowed and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. A restored historic retaining wall located at 320 W. Main Street. cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn P66 IV.A. 48 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn Cultural and Designed Landscapes In addition to architectural landmarks, Aspen has historical landscapes. Historic landscapes are just as important to preservation goals as buildings. All alterations to cultural and designed landscapes are considered on a case-by-case basis. Some architectural landmarks include designed landscapes and hardscapes that blend the building into the surrounding environment. These features are integral to the preservation of the historic site. 1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. • An analysis of the historic landscape and an assessment of the current condition of the landscape should be done before the beginning of any project. • The key features of the historic landscape and its overall design intent must be preserved. 1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built features. • Do not add features that damage the integrity of the historic landscape. • Maintain the existing pattern of setbacks and siting of structures. • Maintain the historic relationship of the built landscape to natural features on the site. • All additions to these landscapes must be clearly identifiable as recent work. • New artwork must be subordinate to the designed landscape in terms of placement, height, material, and overall appearance. Place new art away from significant landscape features. • Avoid installing utility trenches in cultural landscapes if possible. 1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system. • Minimize the impact of new vehicular circulation. • Minimize the visual impact of new parking. • Maintain the separation of pedestrian and vehicle which occurred historically. Red Butte Cemetery, one of the three historic cemeteries in Aspen. Herbert Bayer’s 1955 Marble Garden at the Aspen Meadows. P67 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 49 cHapter 1: sIte plannIng & landscape desIgn 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. • Protect established vegetation during any construction. • If any tree or shrub needs to be removed replace it with the same or similar species. • New planting should be of a species used historically or a similar species. • Maintain and preserve any gardens and/or ornamental planting on the site. • Maintain and preserve any historic landscape elements. In 1976, several downtown streets were redesigned as pedestrians malls. P68 IV.A. P69 IV.A. D esign g uidelines :r e HA bilitAtion P70 IV.A. 52 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 2: BuIldIng MaterIals This chapter addresses the treatment of primary historic building materials—those that compose the dominant exterior surfaces of historic buildings. The treatment of materials used for architectural trim is addressed in a separate chapter. In Aspen, wood siding and masonry have been the typical primary building materials for both Aspen Victorian and AspenModern landmarks. For Aspen Victorian properties, horizontal clapboard is the most common material for residences. Most downtown buildings are brick or stone. AspenModern often used stucco, concrete block and brick. In each case, the distinct characteristics of the primary building material, including the scale of the material unit, its texture and finish, are key features that contribute to the historic character of a building. The best way to preserve historic building materials is through well-planned maintenance. It is important to inspect a historic building regularly. Horizontal building surfaces such as chimneys, caps, sills, railings, and parapet copings are likely to show the most wear because they are more exposed and may retain water for longer periods of time. When deterioration occurs, repairing the material rather than replacing it is preferred. It is important that the extent of replacement materials be minimized, because the original materials contribute to the authenticity of the property as a historic resource. Even when the replacement material exactly matches that of the original, the integrity of a historic building is to some degree compromised when extensive amounts are removed. This is because the original material exhibits a record of the labor and craftsmanship of an earlier time and this is lost when materials are replaced. It is also important to recognize that all materials weather over time and that an aged finish, or patina does not represent an inferior material, but simply reflects the longevity of the building. Preserving original materials that show signs of wear is therefore preferred to replacement. AspenModern properties which exhibit deterioration may require more substantial material replacement in order to preserve the original design intent. For example, CMU block that has been damaged over time may need to be entirely replaced in order to preserve the monochrome coloring or crisp edges indicative of the style. Approval of replacement materials on AspenModern properties is handled on a case by case basis. Treatment of Materials 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. c HApter 2: b uilding MAteriAls Policy: Historic building materials should be preserved in place whenever feasible. When the material is damaged, then limited replacement that matches the original in appearance should be considered. Primary historic building materials should never be covered or subjected to harsh cleaning treatments. P71 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 53 cHapter 2: BuIldIng MaterIals 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. Replacement of Materials 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. 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. Covering Materials 2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. • Regardless of their character, new materials obscure the original, historically significant material. • Any material that covers historic materials may also trap moisture between the two layers. This will cause accelerated deterioration to the historic material which may go unnoticed. 2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material. • Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material. Monitor the condition of horizontal surfaces that collect snow and water. Repair of historic siding in preparation for new paint. P72 IV.A. 54 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Before: Building prior to alteration.After: A cornice has been installed over the original brick. cHapter 2: BuIldIng MaterIals Before: A sign was installed overtop of the original decorative molding. After: The molding after restoration. After: The same house after non-historic siding materials were removed to expose original clapboard. Before: The original siding on this house was covered with asbestos shingles. P73 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 55 cHapter 3: wIndows Background Windows are some of the most important character- defining features of historic structures. They give scale to buildings and provide visual interest to the composition of individual façades. In fact, distinct window designs help define many historic building styles. For example, AspenModern properties in the Wrightian/Organic style typically have mitered windows that blur the line between the outside and the inside. The treatment of a historic window and the addition of a new opening to a historic structure requires careful consideration. Key Features of Windows The size, shape, location, and proportions of historic windows are among their essential features. Many Aspen Victorian windows were “double hung” with two sliding vertical sashes. These windows were usually sparsely placed around the structure. In contrast, a key defining feature of the Modern Chalet is large areas of glazing spanning from floor to roofline. The design of window casings, the depth and profile of window sash elements and the materials of which they were constructed are also important features. Window Types Window types typically found on Aspen landmarks include: • Casement - Hinged windows that swing open typically to the outside. • Double Hung - Two sash elements, one above the other; both upper and lower sashes slide within tracks on the window jambs. • Single Hung - Two sash elements, one above the other; only the lower sash moves. • Fixed - The sash does not move. • Mitered - Also called butt glazed windows, two windows joined together create a 90 degree corner. Casement windows. Double hung windows. Policy: The character-defining features of historic windows and their distinctive arrangement on a wall should be preserved. This is especially important on primary façades. New windows should be in character with the historic building. c HApter 3: windows P74 IV.A. 56 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 3: wIndows Deterioration of Historic Windows Properly maintained, original windows will provide excellent service for centuries. Most problems that occur result from a lack of proper maintenance. Water damage and the ultra-violet degradation caused by sunlight are major concerns, specifically for wood windows. If surfaces fail to drain properly, water may be introduced which quickly begins to cause material damage. In most cases, windows are protected if a good coat of paint or stain is maintained. Repair or Replacement of Historic Windows Whenever possible, repair a historic window, rather than replace it. In most cases it is in fact more economical to repair the existing frame and glass rather than to replace them. Even when replaced with an exact duplicate window, a portion of the historic building fabric is lost when new windows are installed, and therefore such treatment should be avoided. Inspect historic windows to determine their condition. Distinguish superficial signs of deterioration from actual failure of window components. Peeling paint, dried wood, or a rotted sill, for example, are serious problems, but often do not indicate that a window is beyond repair. Patching and splicing in new material for only those portions that are decayed is preferred. Complete window replacement will only be approved when unavoidable, on a case-by-case basis. While replacing an entire window assembly is discouraged, it may be necessary in some cases. When a window is to be replaced, the new one should match the appearance of the original to the greatest extent possible, including the material, size and proportion of window elements, glass and sash components, the original profile, and the original depth of the window opening. Energy Conservation In some cases, owners may be concerned that an older window is inefficient in terms of energy conservation. In winter, for example, heat loss associated with an older window may make a room uncomfortable and increase heating costs. In fact, most heat loss is associated with air leakage though gaps that are the result of a lack of maintenance, rather than loss of energy through the single pane of glass found in historic windows. The glazing compound may be cracked or missing, allowing air to move around the glass. Sash members also may have shifted, leaving a gap for heat loss. Adding a storm window, which Fixed windows. Mitered windows. P75 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 57 cHapter 3: wIndows Before: Window and door openings filled in with non-historic materials. was typical practice in the 19th century, or weather stripping successfully addresses air leakage while preserving the historic window. Treatment of Windows 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. • Features important to the character of a window include its frame, sash, muntins/mullions, sills, heads, jambs, moldings, operations, and groupings of windows. • Repair frames and sashes rather than replacing them. • Preserve the original glass. If original Victorian era glass is broken, consider using restoration glass for the repair. 3.2 Preserve the position, number, and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. • Enclosing a historic window is inappropriate. • Do not change the size of an original window opening. Replacement of Windows that are Beyond Repair, or Have Been Removed 3.3 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. • If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window must also be double-hung. If the sash have divided lights, match that characteristic as well. 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. 3.5 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. • Changing the window opening is not permitted. • Consider restoring an original window opening that was enclosed in the past. 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. • A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window’s casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several After: Restored storefront. P76 IV.A. 58 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 3: wIndows After: Restored windows. Before: Look for evidence of original openings and restore. increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. • The historic profile on AspenModern properties is typically minimal. Adding Windows 3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed. • Greater flexibility in installing new windows may be considered on rear or secondary walls. • New windows should be similar in scale to the historic openings on the building, but should in some way be distinguishable as new, through the use of somewhat different detailing, etc. • Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a façade. • Significantly increasing the amount of glass on a character defining façade will negatively affect the integrity of a structure. Energy Conservation 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic window. • Install a storm window on the interior, when feasible. This will allow the character of the original window to be seen from the public way. • If a storm window is to be installed on the exterior, match the sash design and material of the original window. It should fit tightly within the window opening without the need for sub-frames or panning around the perimeter. A storm window should not include muntins unless necessary for structure. Any muntin should be placed to match horizontal or vertical divisions of the historic window. Exterior mounted wood storm windows. P77 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 59 cHapter 4: doors Background Doors are important character-defining features of historic structures, which give scale to buildings and provide visual interest to the composition of individual façades. Many historic doors are noted for their materials, placement and finishes. Door Features Important features include the materials and details of the door itself, its frame, sill, head, jamb and any flanking windows or transoms. Door Types Door types found on historic structures in Aspen include: • Doorway with transom - Typically a wooden door topped with a rectangular transom with glass. • Half-lite door - This type of door has a wide sash of glass in the upper portion of the door. Many early Aspen houses have half-lite doors. • Full-lite door - This type of door is predominantly glass. • Paneled door - Wooden door with raised panels. • Slab door - A door without panels or glass. Full-lite door. Policy: The character-defining features of a historic door and its distinct materials and placement should be preserved. A new door should be in character with the historic building. c HApter 4: doors Doorway with transom. Half-lite door with double arched windows. Slab door. P78 IV.A. 60 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 4: doors Deterioration A typical Aspen Victorian door is sheltered by a porch, which extends the life of the door. However, deterioration can still occur due to water damage, weathering, and constant use. AspenModern properties typically have minimal roof overhangs or porches. As a result of deterioration, some historic doors do not properly fit their openings and allow moisture and air into the building. Repair of Historic Doors A problem door sometimes just needs to be re-hung in order to properly work. If is often easier and more economical to repair an existing door rather than to replace it. This is preferred because the original materials contribute to the historic character of the building. Even when replaced with an exact duplicate, a portion of the historic building fabric is lost and such treatment should be avoided. When rehabilitating a historic door it is important to maintain original doors, jambs, transoms, window panes and hardware. Surfaces may require cleaning and patching and some components may be deteriorated beyond repair. Patching and splicing in new material for only those portions that are decayed should be considered in such a case, rather than replacing the entire door. Replacement Doors Replacing an entire door assembly is discouraged. When a door must be replaced, the new one should match the original. A frequent concern is the material of the replacement door. Using the same material as the original is required. If the historic door was wood, then use a wood replacement. It is important to preserve the original jamb when feasible. Door Function The historic front door on a primary façade must be the main entrance into the building. Aspen Victorians with two front doors are permitted to fix one of the doors in place so that it does not operate. The procedure to fix the door must be reversible. Energy Conservation Owners may be concerned about the energy efficiency of old doors that seem to leak cold air during the winter. Most heat loss is associated with air leakage through the space below the door. The most cost-effective energy conservation measure for a typical historic door is to install weather stripping Door at 827 dean street. P79 IV.A. Caption Caption City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 61 cHapter 4: doors along the door, to fit the door to the jamb and threshold and to caulk any window panes. These measures will dramatically reduce heat loss while preserving historic features. If additional energy savings are a concern, consider installing a storm door. This may be applied to the exterior of the door. If a storm door is to be installed, it should match the design and materials of the original door. Treatment of Existing Doors These guidelines for the treatment of doors apply to all existing and proposed exterior doors, and screen doors. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. • Maintain features important to the character of a historic doorway. These include the door, door frame, screen door, threshold, glass panes, paneling, hardware, detailing, transoms and flanking sidelights. • Do not change the position and function of original front doors and primary entrances. • If a secondary entrance must be sealed shut, any work that is done must be reversible so that the door can be used at a later time, if necessary. Also, keep the door in place, in its historic position. • Previously enclosed original doors should be reopened when possible. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. • Altering its size and shape is inappropriate. It should not be widened or raised in height. 4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. Replacement Doors 4.4 When replacing a door or screen door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the building. • A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. • A historic door or screen door from a similar building also may be considered. • Simple paneled doors were typical for Aspen Victorian properties. Many Victorian era homes in Aspen had two front doors; one for receiving guests and one for family use. A new screen door. An original screen door must be preserved. P80 IV.A. 62 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 4: doors • Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. Adding Doors 4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed. • Place new doors in any proposed addition rather than altering the historic resource. • Greater flexibility in installing a door in a new location may be considered on rear or secondary walls. • A new door in a new location should be similar in scale and style to historic openings on the building and should be a product of its own time. • Preserve the historic ratio of openings to solid wall on a façade. Significantly increasing the openings on a character defining façade negatively affects the integrity of a structure. Energy Conservation 4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. • Match the material, frame design, character, and color of the primary door. • Simple features that do not detract from the historic entry door are appropriate for a new storm door. • New storm or screen doors should be in character with the primary door. Door Hardware 4.7 Preserve historic hardware. • When new hardware is needed, it must be in scale with the door and appropriate to the style of the building. • On Aspen Victorian properties, conceal any modern elements such as entry key pads. A decorative door knob. P81 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 63 cHapter 5: porcHes & BalconIes Background In the 19th century, front, side and rear porches were popular features in residential design. A porch protects an entrance from snow and provides shade in the summer. It also provides a sense of scale and aesthetic quality to the façade of a building. A porch often connects a house to its context by orienting the entrance to the street. Because of their importance as character-defining features, porches should receive sensitive treatment during exterior rehabilitation and restoration work. Some AspenModern styles employed recessed entries and roof overhangs as porches. Open balconies are common on Chalet and Modern Chalet buildings. Key Features Porches and balconies vary as much as architectural styles. They differ in height, scale, location, materials and articulation. A porch or balcony may be cut in, project or wrap around a corner and it may have elaborate details and finishes. Although they vary in character, most Aspen Victorian porches have these elements in common: • Balustrades or railings • Posts/columns • Architectural details • Hipped/shed/flat roofs These elements often correspond to the architectural style of the house and therefore, the building’s design character should be considered before any major rehabilitation or restoration work is done. AspenModern properties sometimes feature traditional porches, but may have balconies which run the full width or length of a structure and sit 1/2 story of a full story above the ground. The balustrade may be decorative or simple squared rails. Policy: An original porch or balcony should be preserved. In cases where the feature has been altered, it should be restored to its original appearance. c HApter 5: p orcHes & bAlconies An entry porch on a Pan Abode building. A Victorian porch. A balcony on a Chalet. P82 IV.A. 64 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 5: porcHes & BalconIes Deterioration Because of constant exposure to sun and rain and the fact that a porch or balcony is open to the elements, it decays faster than other portions of a building. Furthermore, if water is not channeled away from the foundation of a porch, its footings may be damaged. Peeling paint is a common symptom. In some cases a porch or balcony may experience sagging or detachment from the main structure due to settling. Repair of Porches After discovering structural or cosmetic problems, a porch or balcony should be repaired rather than replaced. Repair is preferred to replacement because the original materials contribute to the historic character of the porch. Even when replaced with an exact duplicate, a portion of the historic building fabric is lost; therefore, such treatment should be avoided when feasible. Reconstructing a porch or balcony that is beyond repair or has been removed When reconstruction is necessary, research the history of the building to determine the original design of the feature. Look for physical evidence including “ghost lines” on walls that indicate the outline of the features as it once existed. Reference similar buildings for guidance if needed. Treatment 5.1 Preserve an original porch or balcony. • Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions, material and spacing of balusters. • Expanding the size of a historic porch or balcony is inappropriate. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details. • Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate. 5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate. • Reopening an enclosed porch or balcony is appropriate. Before: A historic porch where the original posts and details were replaced with an inaccurate design. Handrails are susceptible to deterioration. After: A restored porch based on historic documentation. P83 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 65 cHapter 5: porcHes & BalconIes cHapter 5: porcHes & BalconIes Reconstruction 5.4 If reconstruction is necessary, match the original in form, character and detail. • Match original materials. • When reconstructing an original porch or balcony without historic photographs, use dimensions and characteristics found on comparable buildings. Keep style and form simple with minimal, if any, decorative elements. Steps, Handrails, and Guardrails 5.5 If new steps are to be added, construct them out of the same primary materials used on the original, and design them to be in scale with the porch or balcony • Steps should be located in the original location. • Step width should relate to the scale of entry doors, spacing between posts, depth of deck, etc. • Brick, red sandstone, grey concrete, or wood are appropriate materials for steps. 5.6 Avoid adding handrails or guardrails where they did not exist historically, particularly where visible from the street. • If handrails or guardrails are needed according to building code, keep their design simple in character and different from the historic detailing on the porch or balcony. Before: An enclosed porch significantly changes the character of the historic structure. After: The porch is restored, based on historic documentation. P84 IV.A. 66 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 6: arcHItectural detaIls Background Architectural details play several roles in defining the character of a historic structure. They add visual interest, distinguish certain building styles and types, and often showcase superior craftsmanship. While architectural details on many styles are ornamental in nature, some are very simple. In both cases, the character of the details contributes to the significance of historic properties. Features such as window hoods, brackets and posts exhibit materials and finishes often associated with particular styles. Treatment & Repair Preserving original architectural details is critical to the integrity of the building. Where replacement is required, one should remove only those portions that are deteriorated beyond repair. Even if an architectural detail is replaced with an exact copy of the original, the integrity of the building as a historic resource is diminished. Therefore, preservation of the original material is preferred. Replacement Using a material to match the historic material is always the best approach. In unique circumstances, a substitute material may be considered when it appears similar in composition, design, color, and texture to the original. Substitute materials may be considered when the original is not available, where the original is known to be susceptible to rapid decay, or where maintenance access may be difficult. Treatment of Architectural Features 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 Policy: Architectural details help establish a historic building’s distinct visual character and should be preserved. If architectural details are damaged beyond repair, replacements should match the original detailing. c HApter 6: Arc Hitectur A l detAils An ornate Queen Anne home. Simple miner’s cottage with ornate details. P85 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 67 cHapter 6: arcHItectural detaIls integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. 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. 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. 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. 6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts. • Where scars on the exterior suggest that architectural features existed, but there is no other physical or photographic evidence, then new features may be designed that are similar in character to related buildings. • Using ornate materials on a building or adding new conjectural detailing for which there is no documentation is inappropriate. Broken balusters within this railing were carefully replicated. The Health Club at the Aspen Meadows features a simple, but carefully detailed fascia. A portion of the metal crown on the Elks Building was missing and needed to be replicated. The restored dome on the Elks Building. P86 IV.A. 68 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 7: rooFs Background The character of the roof is a major feature for most historic structures. In each case, the roof pitch, materials, size and orientation are all distinct features that contribute to its character. Aspen Victorian properties have a range of gabled, hip, shed, and flat roof forms depending on building type. AspenModern properties typically have a range of gable, parabolic, butterfly or flat roof forms depending on the architectural style. Although the function of a roof is to protect a structure from the elements, it contributes to overall architectural character of the building. Characteristics Most Associated with Aspen Architectural Styles • Deep Overhangs - Chalet, Modern Chalet, Rustic, Wrightian • Flat roof, minimal eaves - Modern • Gables, shed - Victorian Deterioration The roof is the structure’s main defense against the elements. Over time all components of the roofing system are vulnerable to leaking and damage. When the roof begins to experience failure it can affect other parts of the structure by no longer acting as a barrier from water, wind, and exposure. Common sources of roof leaks include: • Cracks in chimney masonry • Loose flashing around chimneys and ridges • Loose or missing roof shingles • Cracks in roof membranes caused by settling rafters • Water backup from plugged gutters • Ice dams Policy: The character of a historical roof, including its form and materials, should be preserved. c HApter 7: roofs Deep overhangs on a Chalet. An A-Frame roof form on a Fritz Benedict designed home. P87 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 69 cHapter 7: rooFs Repairing a Historic Roof When repairing a historic roof it is important to preserve its historic character. It is not appropriate to alter the pitch of a historic roof, or to change the orientation of the roof to the street. Eave overhangs are extremely important to the style of the house and should be preserved. Gutters, Downspouts, Snowstops, and Snow Fences Gutters and downspouts are used to divert water away from a structure. Without this drainage system, water may splash off the roof onto exterior walls and run along the foundation of the building. Snowstops and snow fences are used to protect inhabitants and the building from the sudden snow avalanches that rip off architectural details and can cause serious injury. Gutters can be seen in some 19th century photos of historic buildings and are more common on AspenModern structures. Overall, the visual impact of these functional elements should be minimized. Dormers Historically, a dormer was sometimes added to create more head room and light in an attic. It typically had a vertical emphasis and was usually placed as a single element or in a pair on a roof. A dormer did not dominate a roof form. A new dormer should always read as a subordinate element to the primary roof plane. A new dormer should never be so large that the original roof line is obscured. It should also be set back from the roof edge and located below the roof ridge. In addition, the style of the new dormer should be in keeping with that of the building. Dormers are generally foreign to some architectural styles, such as Modernism. Roof Materials Exterior roof materials like shingles are usually not original on Aspen Victorian properties due to age and replacement over time. Periodic replacement of roofing is accepted. However, roof sheathing and structure is typically original on most of these buildings should be preserved. When repairing or altering a historic roof, do not remove significant materials that are in good condition. Always repair materials when feasible. For example, sister beams when roof rafters need more structural integrity rather than removing and replacing the element. Where replacement is necessary, use a material that is similar to the original in style and texture. Some AspenModern styles exposed roof rafters under deep overhangs as part of the architectural style. These character defining features must be preserved. Preserve original roof cresting, as found on the Sardy House. P88 IV.A. 70 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 7: rooFs Additions to Roofs Many Aspen residences have original chimneys. Wood burning appliances are no longer allowed in the City of Aspen, which means that historic chimneys are being retrofitted to accommodate other vents. New venting of any type added to a roof should be low profile, carefully located, and painted a matte black or dark color to not detract from the historic chimney. Treatment of Roofs 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. • Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Preserve the orientation and slope of the roof as seen from the street. • Retain and repair original and decorative roof detailing. • Where the original roof form has been altered, consider restoration. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. • Overhangs contribute to the scale and detailing of a historic resource. • AspenModern properties typically have very deep or extremely minimal overhangs that are key character defining features of the architectural style. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. • Skylights and solar panels are generally not allowed on a historic structure. These elements may be appropriate on an addition. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. • Direct vents for fireplaces are generally not permitted to be added on historic structures. • Locate vents on non-street facing facades. • Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. • Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists. 7.6 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. • A new dormer is not appropriate on a primary, These new chimney vents are consistent with the building type, located behind the ridgeline, and a dark color. This non-historic chimney is overscaled for the miner’s cottage. Before: Skylights are inappropriate on a miner’s cottage. After: The historic resource after the skylights were removed. P89 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 71 cHapter 7: rooFs character defining façade. • A new dormer should fit within the existing wall plane. It should be lower than the ridgeline and set in from the eave. It should also be in proportion with the building. • The mass and scale of a dormer addition must be subordinate to the scale of the historic building. • While dormers improve the livability of upper floor spaces where low plate heights exist, they also complicate the roof and may not be appropriate on very simple structures. • Dormers are not generally not permitted on AspenModern properties since they are not characteristic of these building styles. 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. 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. 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. Before: A historic resource before dormers were added. After: New dormers that are too large can change the massing of the original building. Preserve original roof material when possible. P90 IV.A. 72 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 7: rooFs 7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible. • Downspouts should be placed in locations that are not visible from the street if possible, or in locations that do not obscure architectural detailing on the building. • The material used for the gutters should be in character with the style of the building. These simple gutters are in character with a miner’s cottage. P91 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 73 cHapter 8: secondary structures This chapter addresses the treatment of secondary structures. These guidelines apply in addition to the guidelines for treatment of doors, windows, roofs, materials, additions and architectural details presented in the preceding chapters. Secondary structures include detached garages, carriage houses, and sheds. Traditionally, these structures were important elements of 19th century residential sites in particular. Secondary structures help interpret how an entire site was used historically. Most secondary structures are simple in form, materials, and detailing, reflecting their more utilitarian functions. Because secondary structures are subordinate to a primary building, greater flexibility in their treatment may be considered, but their preservation is a priority. Secondary Structures 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. • When treating a historic secondary building, respect its character-defining features. These include its materials, roof form, windows, doors, and architectural details. • If a secondary structure is not historically significant, then its preservation is optional. The determination of significance is based on documentation of the construction date of the outbuilding and/or physical inspection. A secondary structure that is related to the period of significance of the primary structure will likely require preservation. 8.2 Preserve a historic secondary building as a detached structure. • Any proposal to attach a secondary structure is reviewed on a case-by-case basis. • The position and orientation of the structure • should be maintained except when HPC finds that an alternative is the best preservation option. • Some AspenModern properties incorporated garages and carports into the architecture. This pattern should be maintained. This carriage house illustrates how Victorian secondary buildings were typically placed along alleys. Policy: When a secondary structure is determined to be historically significant, it must be preserved. This may include keeping the structure in its present condition or, rehabilitating it or adapting it to a new use so that the building continues to serve a useful function. Note: Outbuildings often encroach into the alleys or at least into setbacks. The owner should be aware of variances or encroachment licenses that may be required to renovate these buildings. Typically an outbuilding that is over a property line must be moved entirely onto one lot during a major redevelopment. c HApter 8: s econdAry structures P92 IV.A. Policy: An original porch should be preserved. In cases where the porch has been altered, it should be restored to its original appearance. 74 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 8: secondary structures 8.3 Do not add detailing or features to a secondary structure that are conjectural and not in keeping with its original character as a utilitarian structure. • Most secondary structures are basic rectangular solids, with simple finishes and no ornamentation. 8.4 When adding on to a secondary structure, distinguish the addition as new construction and minimize removal of historic fabric. • Additions to a secondary structure must be smaller in footprint than the original building and lower in height. Maintaining the overall mass and scale is particularly important. • Do not alter the original roof form. • An addition must be inset from the corners of the wall to which it attaches. 8.5 Preserve the original building materials, or match in kind when necessary. 8.6 Preserve original door and window openings and minimize new openings. • If an original carriage door exists, and can be made to function for automobile use, this is preferred. 8.7 If a new garage door is added, it must be compatible with the character of the historic structure. • The materials and detailing should be simple. 8.8 Adaptation of an obsolete secondary structure to a functional use is encouraged. • The reuse of any secondary structure should be sensitive so that its character is not lost. After: The same outbuilding, after restoration, contributes to the collection of small structures along the alley. Before: Outbuildings can fall into disuse and disrepair. When converting an outbuilding for vehicular use, install a simple garage door. This former barn has been adapted for residential use, with character defining features preserved. P93 IV.A. d esign g uidelines : n ew c onstruction P94 IV.A. 76 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 9: excavatIon, BuIldIng relocatIon, & FoundatIons This chapter presents guidelines for constructing basements, relocating historic structures and installing new foundations. The guidelines apply to primary and secondary structures. The original placement of a building on its site is an important aspect of history, contributes to integrity and authenticity, and should be preserved. Historic records indicate that structures have been occasionally moved within the City reaching back into the Victorian era, therefore, some precedent exists. Today, however, such relocation must be considered carefully. Installing a foundation that meets modern standards can be very beneficial to the long term condition of the building. Ideally the structure will not be permanently repositioned as part of this process. It may be acceptable to reposition a structure on its original site if doing so will accommodate other compatible improvements that will assure preservation. For example, if a house straddles two parcels, shifting it to one side may accommodate construction of a new, detached structure. Doing so may better protect the scale of the original structure, as opposed to erecting a large addition in close proximity to the landmark. Preserving Building Locations and Foundations 9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric. • This activity will require the same level of documentation, structural assessment, and posting of financial assurances as a building relocation. 9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis • In general, on-site relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. • In a district, where numerous adjacent historic structures may exist, the way that buildings were placed on the site historically, and the open yards visible from the street are characteristics that should be respected in new development. • Provide a figure ground study of the surrounding parcels to demonstrate the effects of a building relocation. • In some cases, the historic significance of the structure, the context of the site, the construction technique, and the architectural style may make on-site relocation too impactful to be appropriate. It must be demonstrated that on-site relocation is the best preservation alternative in order for approval to be granted. • If relocation would result in the need to reconstruct a substantial area of the original exterior surface of the building above grade, it is not an appropriate preservation option. 9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. • It must face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. In general, a forward movement, rather than a lateral movement is preferred. HPC will consider setback variations Policy: Moving a historic structure is discouraged; however, in some instances it may be the most appropriate option. Generally, buildings must be relocated within the boundaries of their original site. Permanent off-site relocation is detrimental and will only be allowed when no other preservation alternative is available. c HApter 9: e xcAvAtion , b uilding r eloc Ation & foundAtions P95 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 77 cHapter 9: excavatIon, BuIldIng relocatIon, & FoundatIons where appropriate. • A primary structure may not be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. • Be aware of potential restrictions against locating buildings too close to mature trees. Consult with the City Forester early in the design process. Do not relocate a building so that it becomes obscured by trees. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. • Raising the finished floor of the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable if needed to address drainage issues. A substantial change in position relative to grade is inappropriate. • Avoid making design decisions that require code related alterations which could have been avoided. In particular, consider how the relationship to grade could result in non-historic guardrails, etc. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. • On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a miner’s cottage where there is no evidence that one existed historically is out of character and is not allowed. • Exposed concrete or painted metal flashing are generally appropriate. • Where a stone or brick foundation existed historically, it must be replicated, ideally using stone salvaged from the original foundation as a veneer. The replacement must be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. • New AspenModern foundations shall be handled on a case by case basis to ensure preservation of the design intent. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. • The size of any lightwell that faces a street should be minimized. • Lightwells must be placed so that they are not immediately adjacent to character defining features, such as front porches. • Lightwells must be protected with a flat grate, rather than a railing or may not be visible from a street. • Lightwells that face a street must abut the building foundation and generally may not “float” The original sandstone was used as a veneer on this foundation after a new basement was built. Storing the historic resource on site during construction of the new foundation is strongly preferred. P96 IV.A. 78 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 9: excavatIon, BuIldIng relocatIon, & FoundatIons in the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site. 9.7 All relocations of designated structures shall be performed by contractors who specialize in moving historic buildings, or can document adequate experience in successfully relocating such buildings. • The specific methodology to be used in relocating the structure must be approved by the HPC. • During the relocation process, panels must be mounted on the exterior of the building to protect existing openings and historic glass. Special care shall be taken to keep from damaging door and window frames and sashes in the process of covering the openings. Significant architectural details may need to be removed and securely stored until restoration. • The structure is expected to be stored on its original site during the construction process. Proposals for temporary storage on a different parcel will be considered on a case by case basis and may require special conditions of approval. • A historic resource may not be relocated outside of the City of Aspen. 9.8 Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged. • Permanently relocating a structure from where it was built to a new site is only allowed for special circumstances, where it is demonstrated to be the only preservation alternative. Temporary off-site storage of a structure requires special efforts to protect historic features. P97 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 79 cHapter 10: BuIldIng addItIons Background This chapter presents guidelines for the construction of additions to historic structures. They apply to primary and secondary structures. Some special references are made to additions planned in historic districts. Many historic buildings in Aspen, including secondary structures, were expanded over time as the need for more space occurred. Typically the addition was subordinate in scale and character to the main building. The height of the addition was usually lower than that of the main structure and was often located to the side or rear, such that the original building retained its prominence. The addition was often constructed of materials that were similar to those used on the original structure. This tradition of adding onto buildings is appropriate to continue. It is important, however, that a new addition be designed in such a manner that it preserves the historic character of the original structure. Existing Additions An existing addition may have taken on historic significance itself. It may have been constructed to be compatible with the original building and it may be associated with the period of historic significance, thereby meriting preservation in its own right. Such an addition should be carefully evaluated before developing plans that may involve its alteration. In some cases, an early alteration that has taken on significance actually contrasts with the original building, for example, a Modernist addition that was constructed on a Chalet style structure. The change reflects the evolution of the property. This type of addition could be significant and worthy of preservation. The majority of more recent additions usually have no historic significance. Some later additions in fact detract from the character of the building, and may obscure significant features. Removing such noncontributing additions is encouraged. Basic Principles for New Additions When planning an addition to a historic building, minimize negative effects to the historic building fabric. Alterations and additions should reflect their own time while being subordinate and supportive of the historic resource. The addition shall not affect the architectural character of the building. In most cases, loss of character can be avoided by locating the addition to the rear. The overall design of the addition must be in keeping with the historic structure and be distinguishable from the historic portion. This philosophy balances new and old construction and allows the evolution of the building to be understood. Keeping the size of the addition small and subordinate, in relation to the main structure, helps minimize its visual impacts. An addition must be set apart from the historic building, and connected with a one story linking element. This creates a break between new and old construction and will help maintain the perceived scale and proportion of the historic resource. In historic districts, consider the effect the addition may have on the character of the area, as seen from the public right-of-way. For example, a side addition may change the sense of rhythm established by side yards in the block. Locating the addition to the rear c HApter 10: building A dditions Policy: A new addition to a historic building must be designed such that the character of the original structure is maintained. It shall also be subordinate in appearance to the main building. Previous additions that have taken on significance must be preserved. P98 IV.A. 80 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 10: BuIldIng addItIons would be a better solution in such a case. When designing an addition to a building, it is also important to remember that the maximum potential floor area in the Land Use Code is not guaranteed if it cannot be appropriately accommodated on the site. In some cases, smaller additions may be necessary. Approval for Transferrable Development Rights may be sought if unbuilt floor area cannot be accommodated on the site. Existing Additions 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. • For Aspen Victorian properties, HPC generally relies on the 1904 Sanborn Fire Insurance maps to determine which portions of a building are historically significant and must be preserved. • HPC may insist on the removal of non-historic construction that is considered to be detrimental to the historic resource in any case when preservation benefits or variations are being approved. Before: An addition extended the length of the cross gable and porch on this house, significantly altering its character. After: The same house after the non-historic addition was removed and the building was restored using historic photos. After: The same building after restoration. Before: Additions on the front of this structure, and an application of stucco masked the architectural significance of the building. P99 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 81 The rear addition varies from the form of the resource, but addresses the materiality and fenestration. New Additions 10.3 Design a new addition such that one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. • A new addition must be compatible with the historic character of the primary building. • An addition must be subordinate, deferential, modest, and secondary in comparison to the architectural character of the primary building. • An addition that imitates the primary building’s historic style is not allowed. For example, a new faux Victorian detailed addition is inappropriate on an Aspen Victorian home. • An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. • Proposals on corner lots require particular attention to creating compatibility. 10.4 The historic resource is to be the focus of the property, the entry point, and the predominant structure as viewed from the street. • The historic resource must be visually dominant on the site and must be distinguishable against the addition. • The total above grade floor area of an addition may be no more than 100% of the above grade floor area of the original historic resource. All other above grade development must be completely detached. HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: • The proposed addition is all one story. • The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource. • The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource. • The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically. • The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the street. • There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed. cHapter 10: BuIldIng addItIons An addition that does not provide a transition between old and new, and imitates the original building is no longer allowed. A side and rear addition that uses materials to differentiate between new and old construction. P100 IV.A. 82 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or • The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. 10.5 On a corner lot, no portion of an addition to a one story historic resource may be more than one story tall, directly behind that resource, unless completely detached above grade by a distance of at least 10 feet HPC may consider exceptions to this policy if two or more of the following are met: • The connector element that links the new and old construction is a breezeway or transparent corridor, well recessed from the streetfacing side(s) of the historic resource and the area of two story construction that appears directly behind the one story historic resource is minimal • The footprint of the new addition is closely related to the footprint of the historic resource and the proposed design is particularly sensitive to the scale and proportions of the historic resource • The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource • The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically • There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed • The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or • The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. 10.6 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. • An addition shall be distinguishable from the historic building and still be visually compatible with historic features. • A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material, or a modern interpretation of a historic style are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from historic construction to new cHapter 10: BuIldIng addItIons This addition to this Victorian is clad entirely in brick to distinguish itself from the original clapboard sided Victorian. This addition is taller than the resource, but setback on the lot and scaled in a sympathetic manner. P101 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 83 cHapter 10: BuIldIng addItIons construction. • Do not reference historic styles that have no basis in Aspen. • Consider these three aspects of an addition; form, materials, and fenestration. An addition must relate strongly to the historic resource in at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • Note that on a corner lot, departing from the form of the historic resource may not be allowed. • There is a spectrum of appropriate solutions to distinguishing new from old portions of a development. Some resources of particularly high significance or integrity may not be the right instance for a contrasting addition. 10.7 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street. • Some roof lines and porch eaves on historic buildings may align at approximately the same height. An addition can not be placed in a location where these relationships would be altered or obscured. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. • An addition that is lower than, or similar to the height of the primary building, is preferred. 10.9 If the addition is taller than a historic building, set it back from significant façades and use a “connector” to link it to the historic building. • Only a one-story connector is allowed. • Usable space, including decks, is not allowed on top of connectors unless the connector has limited visibility and the deck is shielded with a solid parapet wall. • In all cases, the connector must attach to the historic resource underneath the eave. • The connector shall be a minimum of 10 feet long between the addition and the primary building. • Minimize the width of the connector. Ideally, it is no more than a passage between the historic resource and addition. The connector must reveal the original building corners. The connector may not be as wide as the historic resource. The side addition and connecting element on a lot with no alley use simple forms and contemproary materials. A low profile flat roof rear addition hides the new construction behind the landmark. An addition that uses traditional forms with contemproary architectural details and materials. P102 IV.A. 84 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 10: BuIldIng addItIons 10.10 Place an addition at the rear of a primary building or set it back substantially from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. • Locating an addition at the front of a primary building is inappropriate. • Additions to the side of a primary building are handled on a case-by-case basis and are approved based on site specific constraints that restrict rear additions. • Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. 10.11 Roof forms shall be compatible with the historic building. • A simple roof form that does not compete with the historic building is appropriate. • On Aspen Victorian properties, a flat roof may only be used on an addition to a gable roofed structure if the addition is entirely one story in height, or if the flat roofed areas are limited, but the addition is primarily a pitched roof. 10.12 Design an addition to a historic structure that does not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. • Loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices, and eavelines must be avoided. Rooftop Additions on Flat Roofed Buildings 10.13 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of the historic building. 10.14 Set a rooftop addition back from the street facing façades to preserve the original profile of the historic resource. • Set the addition back from street facing façades a distance approximately equal to its height. 10.15 The roof form of a rooftop addition must be in character with the historic building. This rooftop addition is subordinate to the architecture of the original historic resource. This lot could not accomodate a rear addition. This side addition is successful because of simplicity, scale & separation. P103 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 85 cHapter 11: new BuIldIngs on landMarked propertIes The City provides several incentives for residential property owners to divide the square footage that could be built on a landmark parcel into two or more separate structures, to reduce the size of an addition made to a historic house and to reinforce the original character of many of Aspen’s neighborhoods, which had small buildings on 3,000 square foot lots. To determine if a property is eligible for a historic lot split to subdivide ownership of such structures, refer to the Aspen Municipal Code. Designing a new building to fit within the historic character of a landmarked property requires careful thought. Preserving a historic property does not mean it must be “frozen” in time, but it does mean that a new building should be designed in a manner that reinforces the basic visual characteristics of the site. The new building should not look old: imitating historic styles is inappropriate. It is appropriate to convey the evolution of the property and neighborhood, discerning the apparent age of each building by its style, materials, and method of construction. A new design must relate to the fundamental characteristics of the historic resource (site, location, mass, form, materials, details) and be “of it’s own time.” For instance, a traditional form may have contemporary materials and windows to balance new and old construction. On the other hand, a contemporary form may have traditional materials that relate to the resource to maintain a strong dialogue between new and old construction. Simplicity and modesty in design are encouraged. Building Orientation Aspen Victorian buildings are usually oriented with the primary entrance facing the street. This helps establish a pedestrian-friendly quality. AspenModern buildings have a range of orientations depending on the design philosophy of the architect. For example, a Chalet style building is often sited at an angle to face mountain views. Building Alignment A front yard serves as a transitional space between the public sidewalk and the private building entry. In many blocks, front yards are similar in depth, resulting in a relatively uniform alignment of building fronts which contributes to the sense of visual continuity. Maintaining the established range of setbacks is therefore preferred. Mass and Scale A new building must be compatible in mass and scale with its historic neighbor and not overwhelm it. At the same time, minimizing any addition to the historic resource and shifting square footage to the new structure is generally desired. Building Form Most historic buildings in Aspen are composed of simple forms - a simple rectangular solid is typical. In some cases, a building consists of a combination of simple forms. A new building should respect these traditions. c HA pter 11: n ew b uildings on l A nd MA rked p roperties Policy: New detached buildings may be constructed on a parcel that includes a landmarked structure. It is important that the new building be compatible and not dominate the historic structure. Note: The Residential Design Standards described in the Aspen Municipal Code apply in addition to these guidelines. P104 IV.A. 86 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 11: new BuIldIngs on landMarked propertIes This new home is strongly related to the scale and forms of the adjacent Victorian. This new structure uses Victorian inspired forms and materials, but a contemporary approach to fenestration. Building Placement 11.1 Orient the new building to the street. • Aspen Victorian buildings should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern. • AspenModern alignments shall be handled case by case. • Generally, do not set the new structure forward of the historic resource. Alignment of their front setbacks is preferred. An exception may be made on a corner lot or where a recessed siting for the new structure is a better preservation outcome. Mass and Scale 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. • The front porch shall be functional, and used as the means of access to the front door. • A new porch must be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale and proportion with the historic buildings on a parcel. • Subdivide larger masses into smaller “modules” that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. • Reflect the heights and proportions that characterize the historic resource. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. • The primary plane of the front shall not appear taller than the historic structure. 11.5 The intent of the historic landmark lot split is to remove most of the development potential from the historic resource and place it in the new structure(s). • This should be kept in mind when determining how floor area will be allocated between structures proposed as part of a lot split. 11.6 Design a new structure to be recognized as a product of its time. • Consider these three aspects of a new building; form, materials, and fenestration. A project must relate strongly to the historic resource in P105 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 87 at least two of these elements. Departing from the historic resource in one of these categories allows for creativity and a contemporary design response. • When choosing to relate to building form, use forms that are similar to the historic resource. • When choosing to relate to materials, use materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site and use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. • When choosing to relate to fenestration, use windows and doors that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic resource. 11.7 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. • This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. • Overall, details shall be modest in character. This new home reinterprets the roof form and balcony found on the Chalet home next door. The adjacent Chalet. cHapter 11: new BuIldIngs on landMarked propertIes P106 IV.A. P107 IV.A. d esign g uidelines : g ener A l P108 IV.A. 90 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines cHapter 12: accessIBIlIty, arcHItectural lIgHtIng, MecHanIcal equIpMent, servIces areas, & sIgnage Accessibility In 1990, the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) mandated that all places of public accommodation be made accessible to everyone. This includes historic structures that are used for commercial and multifamily purposes. While all buildings must comply, alternative measures may be considered to ensure the integrity of a historic resource. Lighting The character and intensity of outdoor lighting is a concern in the community. Exterior lighting should be shielded in keeping with “Dark Skies” inspired policies. The City of Aspen has lighting standards which must be met in addition to HPC guidelines. Mechanical Equipment & Service Areas New technologies in heating, ventilating and telecommunications have introduced mechanical equipment into historic areas where they were not seen traditionally. The visual impacts of such systems should be minimized such that one’s ability to perceive the historic character of the context is maintained. Locating equipment such that it is screened from public view is the best approach. Awnings Large fabric awnings were common on commercial buildings in the 19th century, helping to cool the interior and providing shelter for storefronts. They are not typical of AspenModern buildings, where a brise soleil or similar cantilevered element served the purpose of an awning. Signs Signs should not detract from character defining elements of a historic structure. Where possible, free standing signs, rather than signs mounted on buildings are preferred. Sign lighting should be minimized or concealed. The City of Aspen has a sign code that must be met in addition to HPC guidelines. Accessibility 12.1 Address accessibility compliance requirements while preserving character defining features of historic buildings and districts. • All new construction must comply completely with the International Building Code (IBC) for accessibility. Special provisions for historic buildings exist in the law that allow some flexibility when designing solutions which meet accessibility standards. c HA pter 12: A ccessibility , A rc H itectur A l l ig H ting , M ec HA nic A l e quip M ent , s ervice A re A s , & s ign Age A subtle ramp eliminates the need for a step onto this historic porch and therefore meets accessibility requirements. P109 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 91 A reconstruction of the original light fixture that once existed on an AspenModern building. cHapter 12: accessIBIlIty, arcHItectural lIgHtIng, MecHanIcal equIpMent, servIces areas, & sIgnage Lighting 12.2 Original light fixtures must be maintained. When there is evidence as to the appearance of original fixtures that are no longer present, a replication is appropriate. 12.3 Exterior light fixtures should be simple in character. • The design of a new fixture should be appropriate in form, finish, and scale with the structure. • New fixtures should not reflect a different period of history than that of the affected building, or be associated with a different architectural style. • Lighting should be placed in a manner that is consistent with the period of the building, and should not provide a level of illumination that is out of character. • One light adjacent to each entry is appropriate on an Aspen Victorian residential structure. A recessed fixture, surface mounted light, pendant or sconce will be considered if suited to the building type or style. • On commercial structures and AspenModern properties, recessed lights and concealed lights are often most appropriate. Mechanical Equipment & Service Areas 12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage. • Place mechanical equipment on the ground where it can be screened. • Mechanical equipment may only be mounted on a building on an alley façade. • Rooftop mechanical equipment or vents must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, it may be appropriate to provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. Use the smallest, low profile units available for the purpose. • Window air conditioning units are not allowed. • Minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Group them in a discrete location. Use pedestals when possible, rather than mounting on a historic building. • Paint mechanical equipment in a neutral color to minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds • In general, mechanical equipment should be A simple sconce is appropriate for the front door of this Victorian. Concealed lighting is appropriate for this AspenModern landmark. Wrightian influenced flush mounted fixtures suit the Hearthstone Lodge. P110 IV.A. 92 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines vented through the roof, rather than a wall, in a manner that has the least visual impact possible. • Avoid surface mounted conduit on historic structures. Awnings 12.5 Awnings must be functional. • An awning must project at least 3 feet, and not more than 5 feet from the building façade. • An awning may only be installed at a door or window and must fit within the limits of the door or window opening. • Awnings are inappropriate on AspenModern properties unless historic evidence shows otherwise. Signs 12.6 Signs should not obscure or damage historic building fabric. • Where possible, install a free standing sign that is appropriate in height and width. Consolidate signage for multiple businesses. • Mount signs so that the attachment point can be easily repaired when the sign is replaced. Do not mount signage directly into historic masonry. • Blade signs or hanging signs are generally preferred to wall mounted signs because the number of attachment points may be less. • Signs should be constructed of wood or metal. • Pictographic signs are encouraged because they add visual interest to the street. 12.7 Sign lighting must be subtle and concealed. • Pin mounted letters with halo lighting will not be approved on Aspen Victorian buildings. • The size of a fixture used to light a sign must be minimized. The light must be directed towards the sign. If possible, integrate the lights into the sign bracket. 12.8 Locate signs to be subordinate to the building design. • Signs should be located on the first floor of buildings, primarily. • Signs should not obscure historic building details. 12.9 Preserve historic signs. cHapter 12: accessIBIlIty, arcHItectural lIgHtIng, MecHanIcal equIpMent, servIces areas, & sIgnage Historic awnings on Cooper Avenue. Awnings at the Wheeler Opera House Historic blade signs. P111 IV.A. A ppendix P112 IV.A. 94 • City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines appendIx The Secretary of the Interiors’ Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings are general rehabilitation guidelines established by the National Park Service. Rehabilitation is defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. These standards are policies that serve as a basis for the design principles presented in this document. The Secretary’s Standards state that: 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. 8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. P113 IV.A. City of Aspen • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines • 95P114 IV.A. 1 FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 211 E. Hallam- Final Major Development, PUBLIC HEARING DATE: January 13, 2016 ________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: 211 E. Hallam is a 6,000 square foot property that contains the studio of celebrated Aspen photographer Ferenc Berko. In 2015, the property owner applied for voluntary landmark designation and received HPC Conceptual design approval for a proposed redevelopment of the site, preserving the studio as one unit of a new duplex home. Following the HPC hearings, City Council approved an ordinance which provides a number of preservation incentives for this project. The designation ordinance is expected to go into effect five days after HPC review is concluded. The applicant’s final design, and numerous documents summarizing the process to date, are attached. Staff recommends approval with conditions. APPLICANT: ELM 223, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, Harry Teague Architects and Connect 1 Design. PARCEL ID: #2737-073-16-007. ADDRESS: 211 E. Hallam, Lot 1, 223 E. Hallam Street Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R-6. Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: HPC granted Conceptual approval for this project in April 2015. The property is to be redeveloped as a duplex, with the relocated historic resource in front, an P115 IV.B. 2 addition running along the west property line, an interior courtyard, three parking spaces within garages along the alley and one parking space stacked behind garage doors. HPC recommended a number of variations be approved, including a 500 square foot floor area bonus, reductions of the front, east and rear setbacks, and waiver of two Residential Design Standards. These variations were incorporated into the Council ordinance. The only design related condition of HPC’s review was that, if the applicant was granted Council approval to remove a large tree at the rear of the site, HPC asked that installation of a rooftop solar energy system to be required since the system was represented as one of the beneficial outcomes of the tree removal. The tree will be taken down and Council did include HPC’s condition in their Ordinance. HPC’s Final design review does not involve any new variation requests. The proposal is very consistent with the information previously presented to the board. At this time, the Commission’s task is review of the landscape plan, lighting, fenestration, and selection of new materials. A list of the relevant design guidelines for this Final review is attached as “Exhibit A.” The area of the existing studio building that is being preserved in this project is the wood frame structure. All CMU components are to be reconstructed and painted to match the existing conditions. The studio is unaltered, has been in the same ownership since construction, and some of the architect’s original drawings are available to guide the project. All existing windows are proposed to be replaced to match the original design. These windows do not have any distinctive value or craftsmanship that requires preservation. Staff supports the proposed replacement. Doors leading to the front and rear decks are also to be replaced in kind. The application includes some alterations to the studio. First, one new basement level window is proposed on the east side of the structure. Other similar windows are part of the original design. The applicant proposes a walk out basement on the rear of the studio, and a small extension of the below grade living space. A side by side comparison of the original facade, and the proposed work is provided on the next page. Please note that all the openings in the wood frame portion of the studio are original, even though they don’t appear in the c. 1964 drawing on the left. Staff supports the development of an interior courtyard as proposed. This has no impact on the street and is a modification that has been permitted in other recent projects, to improve the livability of a small historic structure. Attached to this memo is an amended east elevation of the project, showing the rear extension more clearly than the original packet submittal. P116 IV.B. Below is a photograph of a project model presented at HPC Conceptual review. This model shows two small skylights on the eastern slope of the studio. Since Conceptual, the applicant has determined that the skylights present energy loss challenges. The proposal is to replace the features with light tubes, indicated with a red arrow in the roof plan at right. The applicant also proposes Solar PV panels on the roof of the studio. Below is a photograph of a project model presented at HPC Conceptual review. This model shows two small skylights on the eastern slope of the studio. Since Conceptual, determined that the skylights present energy loss challenges. The proposal is to replace the features with light tubes, indicated with a red arrow in the roof plan at right. The applicant also proposes Solar PV panels on the roof of the studio. 3 Below is a photograph of a project model presented at HPC Conceptual review. P117 IV.B. 4 Regarding replacement of the existing skylights, staff recommends against this action. They are historic features of the roof and should be maintained. Additional weatherproofing measures should be investigated. The applicant wishes to remove the existing skylights but would also forgo the new light tubes if preferable to HPC. Staff does not support installation of the PV panels on the historic resource. Although this is not prohibited by the design guidelines, HPC has repeatedly not allowed this alteration on other historic structures. There are opportunities to place these features on non-historic areas of the project. Construction is likely to include improvements to the substandard structure and insulation provided by the existing roof. The applicant is struggling with how to accomplish this work. There is limited ability to bring new materials into the roof below the existing interior ceiling because some of the original windows are placed high on the wall and the applicant does not want to destroy exposed beams inside the home. The proposal represented in the packet is to split the height of the new material between the interior, and a raised roof plane. The result is a thicker roof profile, as seen below. The new fascia at the red arrow is to be pulled back from the roof edge, and painted black. Staff prefers to preserve the existing roof plane from the exterior, but accepts the applicant’s proposal as an effective compromise. HPC has been provided with a P118 IV.B. 5 proposed landscape plan and a lighting plan. Staff has discussed a few concerns with the applicant. First, the landscape plan shows ground cover, rather than sod in the public right-of-way. Planning Staff and the Parks Department object to this, along with some proposed low walls. Private landscape should not be extended into this area, and the overall treatment should be consistent throughout the neighborhood. The applicant has agreed to remove these requests. The landscape plan indicates some areas of fencing, but no design is provided. The design must be provided to staff by noon on Tuesday, January 12th, for distribution to HPC. The applicant has a requirement to provide some new trees on the property as replacement to those being removed. A commitment was made some months ago to install 5 aspen trees on the site. These are not shown in the landscape plan. The landscape architect must coordinate a new approval with the City Forester, and this plan will also be reviewed by staff and monitor. The application shows four path lights, possibly in the public right of way, along the front sidewalk. HPC has generally wished to minimize site lighting for Victorian properties, but reviews AspenModern sites on a case by case basis. Staff recommends that the lighting be reduced to two units in the right of way because of the policy issues mentioned above. During staff review, two additional issues have arisen. First, since Conceptual approval the applicant has made a modification to the design of the roof that spans the two garages. The deck on top of the garage is now more continuous with the adjacent green roof, which will be an issue at zoning review. There is a limit to how much living deck is allowed on the property. Zoning requires a meaningful (30”) change in plane between the living deck and green roof to deter a property owner from expanding their seating area in a way that exceeds limitations. The applicant was not aware of this. A revision will be needed. This is not specifically a preservation issue. Staff recommends that staff and monitor review a proposal that will satisfy the zoning concern. Finally, the applicant is required to revise the design of their two car garage door to create the appearance of two smaller doors, rather than one large one. This is a P119 IV.B. 6 requirement of the Residential Design Standards. Attached to this packet is an amended rear elevation of the project, showing the garage doors divided as required. =============================================================== STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant Final approval with the following conditions: 1. All approvals and conditions contained in HPC Resolution #12, Series of 2015 and Council Ordinance #14, Series of 2015 remain valid. 2. Continue to study options to retain the existing skylights on the studio. Any alterations will require review and approval by staff and monitor. 3. Installation of PV panels on the roof of the studio is not approved. 4. Revise the landscape plan to install sod in the public right of way and remove proposed site walls in this area. Reduce the pathway light fixtures to two. Provide the number and type of on-site trees required for mitigation by the City Forester. Amendments to the landscape plan will be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 5. Provide a proposed fence design to staff by noon on January 12th for distribution to the HPC. 6. Revise the green roof over the garages to meet zoning requirements. The revised design will be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. EXHIBITS: Resolution #__, Series of 2016 Exhibit A: Design Guidelines Exhibit B: Amended graphics Exhibit C: Pending designation ordinance Exhibit D: HPC Conceptual resolution Exhibit E: Application text Exhibit F: Application drawings Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines for 211 E. Hallam, Final review 1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original. Any fence which is visible from a public right-of-way must be built of wood or wrought iron. Wire fences also may be considered. A wood picket fence is an appropriate replacement in most locations. A simple wire or metal fence, similar to traditional "wrought iron," also may be considered. Chain link is prohibited and solid "stockade" fences are only allowed in side and rear yards. P120 IV.B. 7 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a “transparent” quality allowing views into the yard from the street. A fence that defines a front yard is usually low to the ground and "transparent" in nature. On residential properties, a fence which is located forward of the front building facade may not be taller than 42" from natural grade. (For additional information, see the City of Aspen's "Residential Design Standards".) A privacy fence may be used in back yards and along alleys, but not forward of the front facade of a building. Note that using no fencing at all is often the best approach. Contemporary interpretations of traditional fences should be compatible with the historic context. 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally. Fence columns or piers should be proportional to the fence segment. 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street-facing facade. This setback should be significant enough to provide a sense of open space between homes. 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible with the historic context. A side yard fence is usually taller than its front yard counterpart. It also is less transparent. A side yard fence may reach heights taller than front yard fences (up to six feet), but should incorporate transparent elements to minimize the possible visual impacts. Consider staggering the fence boards on either side of the fence rail. This will give the appearance of a solid plank fence when seen head on. Also consider using lattice, or other transparent detailing, on the upper portions of the fence. 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. The front yard should be maintained in a traditional manner, with planting material and sod, and not covered with paving, for example. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. Select plant and tree material according to its mature size, to allow for the long-term impact of mature growth. Reserve the use of exotic plants to small areas for accent. Do not cover grassy areas with gravel, rock or paving materials. P121 IV.B. 8 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. 2.1 Preserve original building materials. Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. Only remove siding which is deteriorated and must be replaced. Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. 2.2 Protect wood features from deterioration. Provide proper drainage and ventilation to minimize rot. Maintain protective coatings to retard drying and ultraviolet damage. 2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. Avoid the removal of damaged materials that can be repaired. Isolated areas of damage may be stabilized or fixed, using consolidants. Epoxies and resins may be considered for wood repair and special masonry repair components also may be used. 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. If the original material is wood clapboard, for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, the amount of exposed lap and finish. Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. If the original is double-hung, then the replacement window should also be double- hung, or at a minimum, appear to be so. Match the replacement also in the number and position of glass panes. Matching the original design is particularly important on key character-defining facades. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. Using the same material as the original is preferred, especially on character-defining facades. However, a substitute material may be considered if the appearance of the window components will match those of the original in dimension, profile and finish. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. Reducing an original opening to accommodate a smaller window or increasing it to receive a larger window is inappropriate. Consider reopening and restoring an original window opening where altered. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. A historic window often has a complex profile. Within the window's casing, the sash steps back to the plane of the glazing (glass) in several increments. These increments, which individually only measure in eighths or quarters of inches, are important details. They distinguish the actual window from the surrounding plane of the wall. P122 IV.B. 9 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. A replica of the original, if evidence exists, is the preferred replacement. A historic door from a similar building also may be considered. Simple paneled doors were typical. Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. Do not alter the angle of a historic roof. Instead, maintain the perceived line and orientation of the roof as seen from the street. Retain and repair roof detailing. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. The shadows created by traditional overhangs contribute to one's perception of the building's historic scale and therefore, these overhangs should be preserved. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. Flat skylights that are flush with the roof plane may be considered only in an obscure location on a historic structure. Locating a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is not allowed. A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be positioned below the ridgeline. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non- reflective finish. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 14.6 Exterior lights should be simple in character and similar in color and intensity to that used traditionally. The design of a fixture should be simple in form and detail. Exterior lighting must be approved by the HPC. All exterior light sources should have a low level of luminescence. 14.7 Minimize the visual impacts of site and architectural lighting. Unshielded, high intensity light sources and those which direct light upward will not be permitted. Shield lighting associated with service areas, parking lots and parking structures. Timers or activity switches may be required to prevent unnecessary sources of light by controlling the length of time that exterior lights are in use late at night. Do not wash an entire building facade in light. Avoid placing exposed light fixtures in highly visible locations, such as on the upper walls of buildings. P123 IV.B. 10 Avoid duplicating fixtures. For example, do not use two fixtures that light the same area. 14.15 Minimize the visual impacts of mechanical equipment as seen from the public way. Mechanical equipment may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. Mechanical equipment or vents on a roof must be grouped together to minimize their visual impact. Where rooftop units are visible, provide screening with materials that are compatible with those of the building itself. Screen ground-mounted units with fences, stone walls or hedges. A window air conditioning unit may only be installed on an alley facade, and only if it does not create a negative visual impact. Use low-profile mechanical units on rooftops so they will not be visible from the street or alley. Also minimize the visual impacts of utility connections and service boxes. Use smaller satellite dishes and mount them low to the ground and away from front yards, significant building facades or highly visible roof planes. Paint telecommunications and mechanical equipment in muted colors that will minimize their appearance by blending with their backgrounds. 14.16 Locate standpipes, meters and other service equipment such that they will not damage historic facade materials. Cutting channels into historic facade materials damages the historic building fabric and is inappropriate. Do not locate equipment on the front facade. If a channel must be cut, either locate it on a secondary facade, or place it low on the wall. P124 IV.B. A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING FINAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 211 E. HALLAM, LOT 1, 223 E. HALLAM STREET LOT SPLIT, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2016 PARCEL ID: 2737-073-16-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, ELM 223, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates, Harry Teague Architects, and Connect 1 Design, has requested Final Major Development approval for the property located at 211 E. Hallam, Lot 1, 223 E. Hallam Street Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for Final Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.4 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, HPC reviewed the project on January 13, 2016. HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of __ to __. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC grants Final Major Development approval with the following conditions: 1. All approvals and conditions contained in HPC Resolution #12, Series of 2015 and Council Ordinance #14, Series of 2015 remain valid. 2. Continue to study options to retain the existing skylights on the studio. Any alterations will require review and approval by staff and monitor. 3. Installation of PV panels on the roof of the studio is not approved. 4. Revise the landscape plan to install sod in the public right of way and remove proposed site walls in this area. Reduce the pathway light fixtures to two. Provide the number and type of on-site trees required for mitigation by the City Forester. Amendments to the landscape plan will be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. 5. Provide a proposed fence design to staff by noon on January 12th for distribution to the HPC. P125 IV.B. 6. Revise the green roof over the garages to meet zoning requirements. The revised design will be reviewed and approved by staff and monitor. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 13th day of January, 2016. ________________________________ Willis Pember, Chair Approved as to Form: ___________________________________ Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney ATTEST: ___________________________ Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk P126 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects. B e r k o S t u d i o D u p l e x 129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue PR I N T D A T E : 1/ 7 / 1 6 8: 5 8 A M HPC FINAL10/01/2015 2 1 1 E a s t H a l l a m S t r e e t NOT F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N As p e n , C O 81 6 1 1 JOB NO.: 1403 Z201 elevations 14 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 , BI M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS 6 5 4 3 2 1 100' 1 main level 110' 2 upper level 120'-8" 3 roof 8 Z201 9 Z201 72 73 74 new window in new foundation, nearly invisible from street s06 s01bs02b w18c w16a w25b w15a w18b w13a w08b w08b w08b w17 w16b w13b s01as02a w15bw14 w10a w09 w11a w10b p08 w25a 01 04 01 05 06 new skylights in location of existing skylights 04 02 A B C D 100' 1 main level 110' 2 upper level 120'-8" 3 roof 8 Z201 9 Z201 all existing studio windows and exterior doors to be the same size as original, replaced with new insulated units e02 e01 s01cs02c p01 w01a 02 01 04 05 06 06 07 C B A +100' 1 main level +110' 2 upper level +120'-8" 3 roof 5 Z201 5 Z201 6 Z201 6 Z201 all existing studio windows and exterior doors to be the same size as original, replaced with new insulated units PV solar panels flat on roof behind CMU chimney e03 w23 w21a w22 w24a w20 w24b w21b w21c 05 06 new window with glazing set in same distance from exterior wall as original new blown in insulation in existing framing existing wood siding and sheathing wood sill and jamb to match size of existing new window with glazing set in same distance from exterior wall as original new blown in insulation in existing framing existing wood siding and sheathing flashing and sealant wood sill and jamb to match size of existing new window set directly on CMU with foam seal CMU foundation wall flashing and sealant wood sill and jamb to match size and profile of existing; sloped sill framing and insulation 1/8" minimumnon-compressibleshim new window with glazing set in same distance from exterior wall as original sealant and backer rod, typ foam seal around window trim width and thickness to match original 1/8" minimum non-compre s s i b l eshim SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 East Elevation SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 North Elevation SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 South Courtyard Elevation SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0"6 jamb detail @ wood condition SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0"5 sill detail @ wood condition SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0"8 sill detail @ masonry condition SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0"9 jamb detail @ masonry condition SCALE: 1:6.677existing window @ masonry SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"4 existing window @ wood 01. white painted corrugated metal 02. 03. 04. MATERIAL LEGEND 3-coat natural stucco with sgraffito detailing vertical smooth dark stained native wood polygal translucent panel repaired and refinished existing diagonal wood05. 06.painted concrete masonry units 07.recessed facia P 1 2 7 I V . B . © 2015 Harry Teague Architects. B e r k o S t u d i o D u p l e x 129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue PR I N T D A T E : 1/ 7 / 1 6 8: 5 8 A M HPC FINAL10/01/2015 2 1 1 E a s t H a l l a m S t r e e t NOT F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N As p e n , C O 81 6 1 1 JOB NO.: 1403 Z202 elevations 14 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 , BI M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS D C B A 100' 1 main level 110' 2 upper level 120'-8" 3 roof s06 w08a s05b w07b p04 w06b w07b w07b p07p06 02 01 03 02 1 2 3 4 5 6 100' 1 main level 110' 2 upper level 120'-8" 3 roof s05a w07aw05w05w04 p03 s04 w05 p02 w02 w02 w03b w03c w01b w02 w06a p05 w03a 02 02 01 01 03 05 06 A B C 03 03 02 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 South Elevation SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 West Elevation SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 North Courtyard Elevation 01. white painted corrugated metal 02. 03. 04. MATERIAL LEGEND 3-coat natural stucco with sgraffito detailing vertical smooth dark stained native wood polygal translucent panel repaired and refinished existing diagonal wood05. 06.painted concrete masonry units P 1 2 8 I V . B . Ordinance #14, Series of 2015 211 E. Hallam, AspenModern Negotiation Page 1 of 5 ORDINANCE #14 (Series of 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO APPROVING ASPENMODERN HISTORIC LANDMARK NEGOTIATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 211 E. HALLAM, LOT 1, 223 E. HALLAM STREET LOT SPLIT, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2737-073-16-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, ELM 223, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates and Harry Teague Architects, has requested that the property located at 211 E. Hallam receive benefits for historic designation through the AspenModern process described at Section 26.415.025 and Section 26.415.030 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the application initiated a 90 day period of negotiation that may be extended if no agreement has been reached. Since the review process could not be completed within 90 days, City Council, through Resolution #44, Series of 2015, granted a 30 day extension of the negotiation period, from May 10th to June 9th, 2015; and WHEREAS, Municipal Code Section 26.415.025.C(1)(b) states that, during the negotiation period, “the Community Development Director shall confer with the Historic Preservation Commission, during a public meeting, regarding the proposed building permit and the nature of the property. The property owner shall be provided notice of this meeting;” and WHEREAS, the property owner and representatives met with the Historic Preservation Commission on April 8, 2015; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on April 8, 2015, the HPC considered the designation and proposed development, and found that 211 E. Hallam is a “best” example of AspenModern era architecture. HPC recommended City Council approval of preservation benefits; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025.C(1)(d), states that, during the negotiation period, “council may negotiate directly with the property owner or may choose to direct the Community Development Director, or other City staff as necessary, to negotiate with the property owner to reach a mutually acceptable agreement for the designation of the property”; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.025.C(1)d establishes that “as part of the mutually acceptable agreement, the City Council may, at its sole discretion, approve any land use entitlement or fee waiver permitted by the Municipal Code and may award any approval that is assigned to another Board or Commission, including variations;” and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department performed an analysis of the application for Landmark Designation and found that the review standards are met; and P129 IV.B. Ordinance #14, Series of 2015 211 E. Hallam, AspenModern Negotiation Page 2 of 5 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Historic Landmark Designation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby directs that 211 E. Hallam, Lot 1, 223 E. Hallam Street Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado, while already listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, be hereby identified as containing a contributing historic resource which is historically designated, subject to the conditions described herein. The property owner shall have five (5) days from the date of adoption of the HPC Final Major Development approval Resolution to provide the City with a written agreement accepting the terms of this Ordinance. Otherwise, the Ordinance shall be considered null and void in its entirety. Upon the effective date of this ordinance, the City Clerk shall record with the real estate records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County, a certified copy of this ordinance. The location of the historic landmark property designated by this ordinance shall be indicated on the official maps of the City that are maintained by the Community Development Department. Section 2: Aspen Modern Negotiation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the City Council hereby approves the following incentives. 1. Waiver of impact fees. Parks, TDM and Affordable Housing fees for the remodel approved by HPC Resolution #12, Series of 2015 shall be waived. 2. Water tap fee credit. Water tap fees shall be reduced by a credit for the value represented by the existing home. 3. Waiver of tree mitigation fees. Mitigation fees for removal of all trees on this property except for the southeast tree that is the subject of appeal, shall be waived, less $7,959 of the fee which the applicant must mitigate with on-site tree plantings to be reviewed and approved by Parks and HPC. 4. Tree removal. Council hereby directs the Parks Department to issue a tree removal permit for the spruce tree in the southeast corner of the site. The removal has been determined to meet Aspen Municipal Code Section 13.20.d.3.ix.E, in that the protection of the tree conflicts with the redevelopment of a historically designated property in a P130 IV.B. Ordinance #14, Series of 2015 211 E. Hallam, AspenModern Negotiation Page 3 of 5 manner that is consistent with the “City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.” As a condition of allowing the southeast tree to be removed from the property, the property owner shall substantially implement the rooftop mechanical system concept represented in the application approved by HPC Resolution #12, Series of 2015. The mitigation fee for removal of this tree shall be paid. 5. Dimensional variances. Dimensional variances are approved, as addressed in HPC Resolution #12, Series of 2015, specifically allowing: • a 500 square foot floor area bonus. • a 5’ rear setback, a 3’ east setback (plus the necessary projection to accommodate the eave and a fire rated east wall), an 8’ combined sideyard and a 4’ front yard. • a waiver of the Residential Design Standards related to Secondary Mass and Street Oriented Entrance and Principal Window. 6. Transferable Development Rights. Council directs the Community Development Department to issue the applicant two (2) Transferable Development Rights certificates. 7. Expedited review. Council directs all building permit review departments to provide first round permit comments within three weeks of the applicant’s submittal of complete information and second round comments within two weeks of the applicant’s submittal of complete information. 8. 5 Year Return of Incentives. For a period of five (5) years, starting on the date that a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the redevelopment of the property, if either unit is sold to any person or entity other than the members of ELM 223, LLC as the LLC existed on June 1, 2015, the total fee waivers provided by the City of Aspen and the recorded sale price, or a fair market valuation of both of the two (2) Transferable Development Rights issued to the LLC, shall be repaid to the City of Aspen on the following schedule. Repayment shall be provided within 30 days of the sale of the units. This agreement shall be recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Within the first year, 100% repayment Within the second year, 80% repayment Within the third year, 60% repayment Within the fourth year, 40% repayment Within the fifth year, 20% repayment Section 3: Vested Rights The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan and a vested property right attaching to and running with the Subject Property and shall confer upon the Applicant the right to undertake and complete the site specific development plan and use of said property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan including any approved amendments thereto. The vesting period of these vested property rights shall be for three (3) years which shall not begin to run until the date of the publications required to be made as set forth below. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this P131 IV.B. Ordinance #14, Series of 2015 211 E. Hallam, AspenModern Negotiation Page 4 of 5 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 § 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 by the Historic Preservation Commission, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to Chapter 26.308, Vested Property Rights. Pursuant to § 26.304.070(A), Development Orders, 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: 211 E. Hallam, Lot 1, 223 E. Hallam Street Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the Development Order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this Ordinance of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this Ordinance. The vested rights granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review. The period of time permitted by law to exercise the right of referendum to refer to the electorate this Section of this Ordinance granting vested rights; or, to seek judicial review of the grant of vested rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as set forth above. The rights of referendum described herein shall be no greater than those set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Section 4: 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 Historic Preservation Commission or 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 an authorized entity. Section 5: Litigation This ordinance 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. P132 IV.B. Ordinance #14, Series of 2015 211 E. Hallam, AspenModern Negotiation Page 5 of 5 Section 6: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 7: Public Hearing A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 1st day of June, 2015 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of April, 2015. _______________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this ___ day of ____, 2015. _______________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ James R. True, City Attorney P133 IV.B. A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPROVING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, ON-SITE RELOCATION AND VARIANCES, AND RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF ASPENMODERN HISTORIC LANDMARK NEGOTIATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 211 E. HALLAM, LOT 1,223 E. HALLAM STREET LOT SPLIT, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #12 SERIES OF 2015 PARCEL ID: 2737-073-16-007 WHEREAS, the applicant, ELM 223, LLC, represented by Stan Clauson Associates and Harry Teague Architects, has requested that the property located at 211 E. Hallam receive benefits for historic designation through the AspenModern process described at Section 26.415.025 and Section 26.415.030 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the applicant also requested approval for Conceptual Major Development, On-site Relocation and Variances; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;" and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. For review of benefits, such as a floor area bonus and setback variances, HPC must determine conformance with Section 26.415.110 of the Municipal Code. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, in order to receive approval for Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, the HPC may approve variances to the Residential Design Standards according to Section 26.410.020.D; and WHEREAS, Amy Simon, in her staff report to HPC dated April 8, 2015, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards. The staff recommendation was that the property qualifies as a "best" example of AspenModern historic resources. Staff recommended in favor of the Conceptual Major Development, On-site Relocation and Variances; and RECEPTION#: 619259, 04/23/2015 at 11:09:12 AM, 1 OF 3, R $21.00 Doc Code RESOLUTION Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO I P134 IV.B. WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on April 8, 2015, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application during a duly noticed public hearing, including the staff recommendation and public comments, and found the project to be consistent with the review criteria, with conditions, by a vote of 5 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC asks City Council to work diligently with the applicant to achieve a mutually acceptable package of incentives to be awarded for this "best" example of an AspenModern resource. HPC grants Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation and Variance approval with the following conditions: 1. In the event that the applicant decides to preserve the southeast tree by deleting the single stall garage, the Conceptual design approval remains valid. The two displaced parking spaces would need to be reconfigured for Final review, or the applicant may request a variance. 2. HPC hereby grants a 500 square foot floor area bonus. 3. HPC hereby allows a 5' rear setback, a 3' east setback (plus the necessary projection to accommodate the eave and a fire rated east wall), an 8' combined sideyard and a 4' front yard. 4. HPC hereby grants a waiver of the Residential Design Standards related to Secondary Mass and Street Oriented Entrance and Principal Window. 5. For the temporary relocation of the studio during basement excavation, the owner must provide a $30,000 letter of credit, cashier's check, or other form acceptable to the City Attorneyto insure the safe relocation of the house. A relocation plan detailing how and where the building will be stored and protected during construction must be submitted with the building permit application, and the applicant shall include documentation of the existing elevation of the home and the relationship of the foundation to grade in the building permit application. 6. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of April 8, 2015, the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. 7. As part of the Council AspenModern negotiation, HPC asks that, if Council allows the southeast tree to be removed from the property, Council should require the rooftop mechanical system concept represented in the application to be substantially implemented. P135 IV.B. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 8th day of April, 2015. Willis Pember, Chair Approved as to Form: PT City Attorney ATTEST: Kathy Stri land, Chief Deputy Clerk P136 IV.B. P 1 3 7 I V . B . P 1 3 8 I V . B . P 1 3 9 I V . B . P 1 4 0 I V . B . P 1 4 1 I V . B . P 1 4 2 I V . B . P 1 4 3 I V . B . P 1 4 4 I V . B . P 1 4 5 I V . B . P 1 4 6 I V . B . P 1 4 7 I V . B . P 1 4 8 I V . B . P 1 4 9 I V . B . P 1 5 0 I V . B . P 1 5 1 I V . B . P 1 5 2 I V . B . P 1 5 3 I V . B . P 1 5 4 I V . B . P 1 5 5 I V . B . P 1 5 6 I V . B . P 1 5 7 I V . B . P 1 5 8 I V . B . P 1 5 9 I V . B . P 1 6 0 I V . B . P 1 6 1 I V . B . P 1 6 2 I V . B . P 1 6 3 I V . B . P 1 6 4 I V . B . P 1 6 5 I V . B . P 1 6 6 I V . B . P 1 6 7 I V . B . P 1 6 8 I V . B . P 1 6 9 I V . B . P170 I V . B . P 1 7 1 I V . B . © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 2 1 / 1 5 2 : 5 2 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 ZCVRcover 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 , B I M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS DR A W I N G S ZC V R Z0 0 1 Z0 0 2 Z0 0 3 Z0 0 4 Z0 0 5 Z0 0 6 Z1 0 0 Z1 0 1 Z1 0 2 Z1 0 3 Z1 0 4 Z2 0 1 Z2 0 2 Z2 0 3 Z2 0 4 Z3 0 2 L1 . 0 L2 . 0 L1 . 0 cover zoning summary RDS compliance site coverage FAR calculations FAR calculations roof height above grade site plan basement plan main level floor plan upper level floor plan roof plan elevations elevations materials streetscape exterior lighting landscape site plan planting plan color landscape site plan SC A L E : 1 " = 5 0 ' 2 sit e l o c u s pr o j e c t l o c a t i o n drawing index SC O P E O F W O R K Th e r e m o d e l o f F e r e n c B e r k o ' s m i d - c e n t u r y p h o t o g r a p h y s t u d i o a s a p a r t of t h e A s p e n M o d e r n p r o g r a m , c r e a t i n g a d u p l e x o n t h e e x i s t i n g s i t e . T h e du p l e x w i l l i n c l u d e a n a d d i t i o n t o t h e s t u d i o b u i l d i n g a n d a c o n n e c t e d 2 st o r y u n i t a t t h e S o u t h s i d e o f t h e l o t . T h e o r i g i n a l s t u d i o w i l l b e r e l o c a t e d to h a v e t h e p r i m a r y p u b l i c f a c a d e f a c i n g E a s t H a l l a m S t r e e t . P172 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 1 8 / 1 5 3 : 5 5 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z001zoning summary 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n , / V o l u m e s / P r o j e c t F i l e / * A C T I V E F I L E S / 1 4 0 3 B E R K O S t u d i o / 4 . D r a w i n g s + D o c s / 1 . A C T I V E C A D / W o r k i n g A r c h i v e / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS Zo n i n g A l l o w a n c e a n d P r o j e c t S u m m a r y 22 1 E H a l l a m S t r e e t Pr o p o s e d D e v e l o p m e n t D u p l e x Pa r c e l N u m b e r 2 7 3 7 - 0 7 3 - 1 6 - 0 0 3 Zo n e D i s t r i c t R - 6 Se t b a c k s E x i s t i n g A l l o w e d ( P r i n c i p a l ) A l l o w e d ( A c c e s s o r y ) P r o p o s e d ( P r i n c i p a l ) P r o p o s e d ( A c c e s s o r y ) R e f e r e n c e Fr o n t 1 0 ' 1 0 ' 1 5 ' 8 ' 1 5 ' 2 6 . 7 1 0 . 0 4 0 . 2 Re a r 1 0 ' 1 0 ' 5 ' 1 0 ' 5 ' 2 6 . 7 1 0 . 0 4 0 . 3 We s t S i d e 5 ' 5 ' 5 ' 3 ' 5 ' 2 6 . 7 1 0 . 0 4 0 . 4 Ea s t S i d e 5 ' 5 ' 5 ' 5 ' 5 ' 2 6 . 7 1 0 . 0 4 0 . 4 Co m b i n e d S i d e 1 0 ' 1 5 ' 1 5 ' 8 ' 1 5 ' 2 6 . 7 1 0 . 0 4 0 . 4 Di s t a n c e b e t w e e n b u i l d i n g s N / A Co r n e r L o t N o Su p p l e m e n t a l B r e a d o w n I n f o E x i s t i n g Pr o p o s e d Op e n S p a c e % N / A Si t e C o v e r a g e 1 1 . 3 5 % 5 0 % 4 6 . 2 0 % 2 6 . 7 1 0 . 0 4 0 . 7 On - S i t e P a r k i n g 0 4 4 Ne t L o t A r e a 22 1 E H a l l a m S t r e e t Zo n e D i s t r i c t R e q u i r e m e n t s Reference Mi n G r o s s L o t A r e a ( p e r R - 6 ) 6 0 0 0 S F , 3 0 0 0 S F f o r h i s t o r i c P r o p e r t i e s 26.710.040.1 Mi n N e t L o t A r e a ( p e r R - 6 ) 4 5 0 0 S F , 3 0 0 0 S F f o r h i s t o r i c P r o p e r t i e s 26.710.040.2 Lo t S i z e P e r S u r v e y 6 0 0 0 S F Al l o w a b l e F l o o r A r e a 22 1 E H a l l a m S t r e e t Al l o w a b l e F l o o r A r e a Reference Al l o w a b l e F l o o r A r e a 3 6 0 0 S F F o r D u p l e x i n R - 6 26.710.040.11 Un i q u e A p p r o v a l s As p e n M o d e r n C o m p l i a n c e 5 0 0 S F + 2 5 0 S F p e r u n i t B o n u s f o r C o m p l i a n c e w i t h A s p e n M o d e r n P r o g r a m 2 6 . 7 1 0 . 0 4 0 . 1 1 To t a l A l l o w a b l e F A R 4 1 0 0 S F Ex e m p t i o n s Ga r a g e E x e m p t i o n O v e r 5 0 0 S F c o u n t e d a t 5 0 % U p t o 2 5 0 S F a l l o w e d p e r u n i t 26.575.020.7 De c k E x e m p t i o n 5 4 0 S F e x e m p t A l l o w a b l e f l o o r a r e a 4 1 0 0 x 1 5 % 26.575.020.4 Fl o o r A r e a S u m m a r y P r o p o s e d G r o s s F A R Ba s e m e n t L e v e l 5 2 7 Ma i n L e v e l 2 1 4 2 Up p e r L e v e l 1 4 1 5 De c k A r e a 1 6 To t a l 4 1 0 0 P173 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 0 / 1 4 / 1 5 2 : 0 7 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z002RDS compliance 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E 2 , B I M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E 2 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS Re s i d e n t i a l D e s i g n S t a n d a r d s C o m p l i a n c e 21 1 E H a l l a m S t r e e t RD S S e c t i o n C o d e D e s c r i p t i o n Co m p l i a n c e D e s c r i p t i o n ( N o t e A p p r o v e d V a r i a n c e s ) R e f e r e n c e A. S i t e D e s i g n 1 . B u i l d i n g o r i e n t a t i o n T h e f r o n t f a c a d e s o f a l l p r i n c i p a l s t r u c t u r e s s h a l l b e p a r a l l e l t o t h e s t r e e t . On c o r n e r l o t s , b o t h s t r e e t - f a c i n g f a c a d e s m u s t b e p a r a l l e l t o t h e in t e r s e c t i n g s t r e e t s . O n c u r v i l i n e a r s t r e e t s , t h e f r o n t f a c a d e o f a l l st r u c t u r e s s h a l l b e p a r a l l e l t o t h e t a n g e n t o f t h e m i d p o i n t o f t h e a r c o f th e s t r e e t . P a r c e l s a s o u t l i n e d i n S u b s e c t i o n 2 6 . 4 1 0 . 0 1 0 . B . 4 s h a l l b e ex e m p t f r o m t h i s r e q u i r e m e n t . O n e ( 1 ) e l e m e n t , s u c h a s a b a y w i n d o w or d o r m e r , p l a c e d a t a f r o n t c o r n e r o f t h e b u i l d i n g m a y b e o n a d i a g o n a l fr o m t h e s t r e e t i f d e s i r e d . Th e f r o n t f a c a d e s o f t h e p r i n c i p a l s t r u c t u r e a r e p a r a l l e l t o th e s t r e e t . T h i s i s n o t a c o r n e r l o t Z100 2. B u i l d - t o l i n e s O n p a r c e l s o r l o t s o f l e s s t h a n f i f t e e n t h o u s a n d ( 1 5 , 0 0 0 ) s q u a r e f e e t , a t le a s t s i x t y p e r c e n t ( 6 0 % ) o f t h e f r o n t f a ç a d e s h a l l b e w i t h i n f i v e ( 5 ) f e e t of t h e m i n i m u m f r o n t y a r d s e t b a c k l i n e . O n c o r n e r s i t e s , t h i s s t a n d a r d sh a l l b e m e t o n t h e f r o n t a g e w i t h t h e l o n g e s t b l o c k l e n g t h . P o r c h e s m a y be u s e d t o m e e t t h e s i x t y p e r c e n t ( 6 0 % ) s t a n d a r d . 69 % o f t h e f r o n t f a ç a d e i s w i t h i n 5 f e e t o f t h e m i n i m u m fr o n t y a r d s e t b a c k l i n e Z100 3. F e n c e s F e n c e s , h e d g e r o w s a n d p l a n t e r b o x e s s h a l l n o t b e m o r e t h a n f o r t y - t w o (4 2 ) i n c h e s h i g h , m e a s u r e d f r o m n a t u r a l g r a d e , i n a l l a r e a s f o r w a r d o f th e f r o n t f a c a d e o f t h e h o u s e . M a n - m a d e b e r m s a r e p r o h i b i t e d i n t h e fr o n t y a r d s e t b a c k . Al l f e n c e s a n d p l a n t e r b o x e s a r e b e l o w 4 2 " h i g h B. B u i l d i n g F o r m 1 . S e c o n d a r y M a s s A l l n e w s i n g l e - f a m i l y a n d d u p l e x s t r u c t u r e s s h a l l l o c a t e a t l e a s t t e n pe r c e n t ( 1 0 % ) o f t h e i r t o t a l s q u a r e f o o t a g e a b o v e g r a d e i n a m a s s w h i c h is c o m p l e t e l y d e t a c h e d f r o m t h e p r i n c i p a l b u i l d i n g o r l i n k e d t o i t b y a su b o r d i n a t e l i n k i n g e l e m e n t . T h i s s t a n d a r d s h a l l o n l y a p p l y t o p a r c e l s wit h i n t h e A s p e n i n f i l l a r e a p u r s u a n t t o S u b s e c t i o n 2 6 . 4 1 0 . 0 1 0 . B . 2 . Ac c e s s o r y b u i l d i n g s s u c h a s g a r a g e s , s h e d s a n d a c c e s s o r y d w e l l i n g u n i t s ar e e x a m p l e s o f a p p r o p r i a t e u s e s f o r t h e s e c o n d a r y m a s s . A s u b o r d i n a t e li n k i n g e l e m e n t f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f l i n k i n g a p r i m a r y a n d s e c o n d a r y ma s s s h a l l b e a t l e a s t t e n ( 1 0 ) f e e t i n l e n g t h , n o t m o r e t h a n t e n ( 1 0 ) fe e t i n w i d t h , a n d w i t h a p l a t e h e i g h t o f n o t m o r e t h a n n i n e ( 9 ) f e e t . Ac c e s s i b l e o u t d o o r s p a c e o v e r t h e l i n k i n g e l e m e n t ( e . g . a d e c k ) i s pe r m i t t e d b u t m a y n o t b e c o v e r e d o r e n c l o s e d . A n y r a i l i n g f o r a n ac c e s s i b l e o u t d o o r s p a c e o v e r a l i n k i n g e l e m e n t m u s t b e t h e m i n i m u m re a s o n a b l y n e c e s s a r y t o p r o v i d e a d e q u a t e s a f e t y a n d b u i l d i n g c o d e co m p l i a n c e a n d t h e r a i l i n g m u s t b e 5 0 % o r m o r e t r a n s p a r e n t . Th e S t u d i o g a r a g e i s a s u b o r d i n a t e s t r u c t u r e , b u t v a r i e s fr o m t h e g u i d e l i n e s . T h e d e s i g n c o n n e c t s t h e g a r a g e w i t h a d e c k a r e a . T h i s v a r i a t i o n w a s a c c e p t e d a s p r o p o s e d a t HP C c o n c e p t u a l r e v i e w Z100 a) P a r k i n g , g a r a g e s a n d c a r p o r t s s h a l l b e a c c e s s e d f r o m a n a l l e y o r pr i v a t e r o a d . Th e p a r k i n g g a r a g e s a r e a c c e s s e d f r o m t h e a l l e y Z 1 0 2 b) I f t h e g a r a g e d o o r s a r e v i s i b l e f r o m a s t r e e t o r a l l e y , t h e n t h e y s h a l l be s i n g l e - s t a l l d o o r s o r d o u b l e - s t a l l d o o r s d e s i g n e d t o a p p e a r l i k e s i n g l e - st a l l d o o r s . Th e g a r a g e d o o r s a r e a s i n g l e d o o r , a n d a d o u b l e d o o r wh i c h i s d e t a i l e d t o a p p e a r l i k e t w o s i n g l e d o o r s Z201, Z202 c) I f t h e g a r a g e d o o r s a r e n o t v i s i b l e f r o m a s t r e e t o r a l l e y , t h e g a r a g e do o r s m a y b e e i t h e r s i n g l e - s t a l l o r n o r m a l d o u b l e - s t a l l g a r a g e d o o r s . Th e g a r a g e d o o r s a r e v i s i b l e f r o m t h e a l l e y Z 2 0 1 , Z 2 0 2 a) O n t h e s t r e e t f a c i n g f a c a d e ( s ) , t h e w i d t h o f t h e l i v i n g a r e a o n t h e f i r s t fl o o r s h a l l b e a t l e a s t f i v e ( 5 ) f e e t g r e a t e r t h a n t h e w i d t h o f t h e g a r a g e or c a r p o r t . th e g a r a g e d o o r s a r e n o t f a c i n g t h e p u b l i c s t r e e t Z 2 0 1 , Z 2 0 2 b) T h e f r o n t f a c a d e o f t h e g a r a g e o r t h e f r o n t - m o s t s u p p o r t i n g c o l u m n o f a c a r p o r t s h a l l b e s e t b a c k a t l e a s t t e n ( 1 0 ) f e e t f u r t h e r f r o m t h e s t r e e t th a n t h e f r o n t - m o s t w a l l o f t h e h o u s e . th e g a r a g e d o o r s a r e n o t f a c i n g t h e p u b l i c s t r e e t Z 2 0 1 , Z 2 0 2 c) O n l o t s o f a t l e a s t f i f t e e n t h o u s a n d ( 1 5 , 0 0 0 ) s q u a r e f e e t i n s i z e , t h e ga r a g e o r c a r p o r t m a y b e f o r w a r d o f t h e f r o n t f a c a d e o f t h e h o u s e o n l y i f th e g a r a g e d o o r s o r c a r p o r t e n t r y a r e p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o t h e s t r e e t ( s i d e - lo a d e d ) . Th e l o t i s l e s s t h a n 1 5 , 0 0 0 S F Z 1 0 0 d) W h e n t h e f l o o r o f a g a r a g e o r c a r p o r t i s a b o v e o r b e l o w t h e s t r e e t le v e l , t h e d r i v e w a y c u t w i t h i n t h e f r o n t y a r d s e t b a c k s h a l l n o t e x c e e d t w o (2 ) f e e t i n d e p t h , m e a s u r e d f r o m n a t u r a l g r a d e . Th e f l o o r o f t h e g a r a g e i s a t g r a d e w i t h t h e a l l e y Z 2 0 1 , Z 2 0 2 e) T h e v e h i c u l a r e n t r a n c e w i d t h o f a g a r a g e o r c a r p o r t s h a l l n o t b e gr e a t e r t h a n t w e n t y - f o u r ( 2 4 ) f e e t . th e g a r a g e d o o r s a r e n o t v i s i b l e f r o m t h e p u b l i c s t r e e t Z 2 0 1 , Z 2 0 2 f) I f t h e g a r a g e d o o r s a r e v i s i b l e f r o m a p u b l i c s t r e e t o r a l l e y , t h e n t h e y sh a l l b e s i n g l e - s t a l l d o o r s o r d o u b l e - s t a l l d o o r s d e s i g n e d t o a p p e a r l i k e si n g l e - s t a l l d o o r s . th e g a r a g e d o o r s a r e n o t v i s i b l e f r o m t h e p u b l i c s t r e e t Z 2 0 1 , Z 2 0 2 1. S t r e e t o r i e n t e d e n t r a n c e a n d p r i n c i p a l w i n d o w . A l l s i n g l e - f a m i l y h o m e s an d d u p l e x e s , e x c e p t a s o u t l i n e d i n S u b s e c t i o n 2 6 . 4 1 0 . 0 1 0 . B . 4 s h a l l ha v e a s t r e e t - o r i e n t e d e n t r a n c e a n d a s t r e e t f a c i n g p r i n c i p a l w i n d o w . Mu l t i - f a m i l y u n i t s s h a l l h a v e a t l e a s t o n e ( 1 ) s t r e e t - o r i e n t e d e n t r a n c e f o r ev e r y f o u r ( 4 ) u n i t s a n d f r o n t u n i t s m u s t h a v e a s t r e e t f a c i n g a p r i n c i p a l win d o w . O n c o r n e r l o t s , e n t r i e s a n d p r i n c i p a l w i n d o w s s h o u l d f a c e wh i c h e v e r s t r e e t h a s a g r e a t e r b l o c k l e n g t h . T h i s s t a n d a r d s h a l l b e sa t i s f i e d i f a l l o f t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s a r e m e t : Th e e n t r a n c e s t o b o t h u n i t s f a c e t h e p u b l i c s t r e e t , a n d pr i n c i p a l w i n d o w s f r o m t h e s t u d i o u n i t f a c e t h e s t r e e t Z201, Z202 a) T h e e n t r y d o o r s h a l l f a c e t h e s t r e e t a n d b e n o m o r e t h a n t e n ( 1 0 ) f e e t ba c k f r o m t h e f r o n t - m o s t w a l l o f t h e b u i l d i n g . E n t r y d o o r s s h a l l n o t b e ta l l e r t h a n e i g h t ( 8 ) f e e t . Th e e n t r y d o o r s f a c e t h e s t r e e t , t h e e n t r y d o o r f o r t h e st u d i o u n i t i s s e t b a c k f r o m t h e f r o n t - m o s t f a ç a d e b y 1 4 ' , ho w e v e r t h e m a j o r f a ç a d e e l e m e n t t h a t o v e r h a n g s t h e st u d i o u n i t e n t r y i s l o c a t e d a t 1 0 ' f r o m t h e f r o n t - m o s t wa l l o f t h e b u i l d i n g . T h i s w a s a p p r o v e d a t t h e H P C co n c e p t u a l r e v i e w Z201, Z202 b) A c o v e r e d e n t r y p o r c h o f f i f t y ( 5 0 ) o r m o r e s q u a r e f e e t , w i t h a min i m u m d e p t h o f s i x ( 6 ' ) f e e t , s h a l l b e p a r t o f t h e f r o n t f a c a d e . E n t r y po r c h e s a n d c a n o p i e s s h a l l n o t b e m o r e t h a n o n e ( 1 ) s t o r y i n h e i g h t . Th e f a ç a d e o f t h e a d d i t i o n p r o v i d e s a n o v e r h a n g a t t h e st u d i o u n i t e n t r a n c e , a n d w a s a p p r o v e d a t t h e H P C co n c p e t u a l r e v i e w Z201, Z202 c) A s t r e e t - f a c i n g p r i n c i p a l w i n d o w r e q u i r e s t h a t a s i g n i f i c a n t w i n d o w o r gr o u p o f w i n d o w s f a c e s t r e e t . Tw o s i g n f i c a n t w i n d o w s f a c e t h e s t r e e t Z 2 0 1 , Z 2 0 2 2. F i r s t s t o r y e l e m e n t A l l r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g s s h a l l h a v e a f i r s t s t o r y s t r e e t - f a c i n g e l e m e n t t h e wi d t h o f w h i c h c o m p r i s e s a t l e a s t t w e n t y p e r c e n t ( 2 0 % ) o f t h e b u i l d i n g ' s ov e r a l l w i d t h a n d t h e d e p t h o f w h i c h i s a t l e a s t s i x ( 6 ) f e e t f r o m t h e w a l l th e f i r s t s t o r y e l e m e n t i s p r o j e c t i n g f r o m . A s s u m i n g t h a t t h e f i r s t s t o r y el e m e n t i n c l u d e s i n t e r i o r l i v i n g s p a c e , t h e h e i g h t o f t h e f i r s t s t o r y el e m e n t s h a l l n o t e x c e e d t e n ( 1 0 ) f e e t , a s m e a s u r e d t o t h e p l a t e h e i g h t . A f i r s t s t o r y e l e m e n t m a y b e a p o r c h o r l i v i n g s p a c e . A c c e s s i b l e s p a c e (w h e t h e r i t i s a d e c k , p o r c h o r e n c l o s e d a r e a ) s h a l l n o t b e a l l o w e d o v e r th e f i r s t s t o r y e l e m e n t ; h o w e v e r , a c c e s s i b l e s p a c e o v e r t h e r e m a i n i n g fi r s t s t o r y e l e m e n t s o n t h e f r o n t f a ç a d e s h a l l n o t b e p r e c l u d e d . Th e o r i g i n a l h i s t o r i c s t r u c t u r e h a s a b a l c o n y t h a t p r o j e c t s 4' f r o m t h e p r i n c i p a l f a ç a d e , a n d i s 7 ' w i d e . T h i s v a r i e s fr o m t h e r e q u i r e m e n t , a n d w a s a c c e p t e d a t H P C co n e p t u a l Z201, Z202 a) S t r e e t - f a c i n g w i n d o w s s h a l l n o t s p a n t h r o u g h t h e a r e a w h e r e a se c o n d f l o o r l e v e l w o u l d t y p i c a l l y e x i s t , w h i c h i s b e t w e e n n i n e ( 9 ) a n d tw e l v e f e e t ( 1 2 ) a b o v e t h e f i n i s h e d f i r s t f l o o r . F o r i n t e r i o r s t a i r c a s e s , t h i s me a s u r e m e n t w i l l b e m a d e f r o m t h e f i r s t l a n d i n g i f o n e e x i s t s . A t r a n s o m wi n d o w a b o v e t h e m a i n e n t r y i s e x e m p t f r o m t h i s s t a n d a r d . No s t r e e t f a c i n g w i n d o w s s p a n t h r o u g h t h e a r e a w h e r e a se c o n d f l o o r l e v e l w o u l d t y p i c a l l y e x i s t . Z201, Z202 b) N o m o r e t h a n o n e ( 1 ) n o n o r t h o g o n a l w i n d o w s h a l l b e a l l o w e d o n e a c h fa c a d e o f t h e b u i l d i n g . A s i n g l e n o n o r t h o g o n a l w i n d o w i n a g a b l e e n d ma y b e d i v i d e d w i t h m u l l i o n s a n d s t i l l b e c o n s i d e r e d o n e ( 1 ) no n o r t h o g o n a l w i n d o w . T h e r e q u i r e m e n t s h a l l o n l y a p p l y t o S u b s e c t i o n 26 . 4 1 0 . 0 1 0 . B . 2 . Al l w i n d o w s o n t h e b u i l d i n g a r e o r t h a g o n a l Z 2 0 1 , Z 2 0 2 4. L i g h t w e l l s A l l a r e a w a y s , l i g h t w e l l s a n d / o r s t a i r w e l l s o n t h e s t r e e t - f a c i n g f a c a d e ( s ) of a b u i l d i n g s h a l l b e e n t i r e l y r e c e s s e d b e h i n d t h e f r o n t - m o s t w a l l o f t h e bu i l d i n g . Th e r e a r e n o a r e a w a y s , l i g h t w e l l s o r s t a i r w e l l s o n t h e st r e e t - f a c i n g f a ç a d e Z201, Z202 a) T h e q u a l i t y o f t h e e x t e r i o r m a t e r i a l s a n d d e t a i l s a n d t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n sh a l l b e c o n s i s t e n t o n a l l s i d e s o f t h e b u i l d i n g . Th e q u a l i t y o f e x t e r i o r m a t e r i a l s a n d d e t a i l s a r e co n s i s t e n t o n a l l s i d e s o f t h e b u i l d i n g Z201, Z202 b) M a t e r i a l s s h a l l b e u s e d i n w a y s t h a t a r e t r u e t o t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Fo r i n s t a n c e s t u c c o , w h i c h i s a l i g h t o r n o n b e a r i n g m a t e r i a l , s h a l l n o t b e us e d b e l o w a h e a v y m a t e r i a l , s u c h a s s t o n e . Th e m a t e r i a l s a r e u s e d i n w a y s t h a t a r e t r u e t o t h e i r ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s Z201, Z202, Z204 c) H i g h l y r e f l e c t i v e s u r f a c e s s h a l l n o t b e u s e d a s e x t e r i o r m a t e r i a l s . T h e r e a r e n o h i g h l y r e f l e c t i v e m a t e r i a l s o n t h e b u i l d i n g Z 201, Z202, Z204 2. I n f l e c t i o n a ) I f a o n e - s t o r y b u i l d i n g e x i s t s d i r e c t l y a d j a c e n t t o t h e s u b j e c t s i t e , t h e n th e n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n m u s t s t e p d o w n t o o n e - s t o r y i n h e i g h t a l o n g t h e i r co m m o n l o t l i n e . I f t h e r e a r e o n e - s t o r y b u i l d i n g s o n b o t h s i d e s o f t h e su b j e c t s i t e , t h e a p p l i c a n t m a y c h o o s e t h e s i d e t o w a r d w h i c h t o i n f l e c t . A on e - s t o r y b u i l d i n g s h a l l b e d e f i n e d a s f o l l o w s : A o n e - s t o r y b u i l d i n g s h a l l me a n a s t r u c t u r e o r p o r t i o n o f a s t r u c t u r e , w h e r e t h e r e i s o n l y o n e ( 1 ) fl o o r o f f u l l y u s a b l e l i v i n g s p a c e , a t l e a s t t w e l v e ( 1 2 ) f e e t w i d e a c r o s s t h e st r e e t f r o n t a g e . T h i s s t a n d a r d s h a l l b e m e t b y p r o v i d i n g a o n e - s t o r y el e m e n t w h i c h i s a l s o a t l e a s t t w e l v e ( 1 2 ) f e e t w i d e a c r o s s t h e s t r e e t fr o n t a g e a n d o n e ( 1 ) s t o r y t a l l a s f a r b a c k a l o n g t h e c o m m o n l o t l i n e a s th e a d j a c e n t b u i l d i n g i s o n e ( 1 ) s t o r y . Th e b u i l d i n g s o n b o t h s i d e s a r e t w o s t o r i e s , t h e o r i g i n a l st u d i o b u i l d i n g i s 1 . 5 s t o r i e s a n d t h e n e w 2 s t o r y e l e m e n t is r e c e s s e d f r o m t h e s t r e e t f a ç a d e a n d l o c a t e d o n t h e Ea s t s i d e o f t h e l o t 1. F o r a l l r e s i d e n t i a l us e s t h a t h a v e a c c e s s fr o m a n a l l e y o r pr i v a t e r o a d , t h e fo l l o w i n g s t a n d a r d s sh a l l a p p l y 2. F o r a l l r e s i d e n t i a l us e s t h a t h a v e a c c e s s on l y f r o m a p u b l i c st r e e t , t h e f o l l o w i n g st a n d a r d s s h a l l a p p l y C. P a r k i n g , G a r a g e s a n d C a r p o r t s 1. M a t e r i a l s E. C o n t e x t 1. S t r e e t o r i e n t e d en t r a n c e a n d p r i n c i p a l wi n d o w D. B u i l d i n g E l e m e n t s 3. W i n d o w s P174 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 2 1 / 1 5 8 : 1 5 A M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z003site coverage 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 , B I M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS 681 sq ft EX I S T I N G S I T E C O V E R A G E 11 . 3 5 % 2, 5 1 2 s q f t 266 sq ft PR O P O S E D B U I L D I N G PR O P O S E D B U I L D I N G PR O P O S E D S I T E C O V E R A G E 46 . 3 % SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 existing site coverageSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 proposed site coverage AL L O W A B L E S I T E C O V E R A G E = 5 0 % P175 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 1 8 / 1 5 3 : 5 5 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z004FAR calculations 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n , / V o l u m e s / P r o j e c t F i l e / * A C T I V E F I L E S / 1 4 0 3 B E R K O S t u d i o / 4 . D r a w i n g s + D o c s / 1 . A C T I V E C A D / W o r k i n g A r c h i v e / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS U P UP UP 10 4 s q f t 17 0 s q f t 29 s q f t 45 s q f t 38 s q f t 41 s q f t 84 s q f t 38 s q f t 67 s q f t 97 s q f t 67 s q f t 43 s q f t 17 s q f t 88 s q f t 29 s q f t 24 s q f t 13 5 s q f t 11 7 s q f t 16 s q f t 3 2 1 1 3 2 12 U P U P 4 ' - 7 " 1 2 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 4 " 5'- 6 " 5'- 6 " 12 ' - 1 0 " 1 1 ' 14 ' - 8 " 6'- 8 " 1 6 ' - 1 1 " 7 4 6 8 5 9 4 7 6 8 5 9 10 11 1 0 11 1 2 st u d i o u n i t b a s e m e n t A: 8 0 2 s q f t re a r u n i t b a s e m e n t A: 1 , 0 7 0 s q f t st u d i o u n i t b a s e m t A: 2 6 0 s q f t st u d i o g a r a g e b a s e m t A: 2 5 3 s q f t U P UP UP 34 ' - 2 " 31 s q f t 24 5 s q f t 73 s q f t 26 5 s q f t 37 s q f t 227 sq ft 39 s q f t 39 s q f t 83 s q f t 52 s q f t 135 sq ft197 sq ft U P 13 ' - 5 " 4'- 8 " 33'-1"24'-8"16'-11" 9 ' - 1 " 4 ' - 1 0 " 4 ' - 1 1 " 1 5 ' - 7 " 19 17 1 8 2 0 1 4 1615 16 17 20 18 21 19 2 2 21 13 13 14 15 22 st u d i o u n i t b a s e m e n t A: 8 0 2 s q f t re a r u n i t b a s e m e n t A: 1 , 0 7 0 s q f t st u d i o u n i t b a s e m t A: 2 6 0 s q f t studio garage basemt A: 253 sq ft U P UP UP 1 3 ' - 1 " 6' 10 5 s q f t 16 1 s q f t 33 s q f t 72 s q f t 30 s q f t 82 s q f t 48 s q f t 20 ' 4 ' - 1 " 8 ' - 1 1 " 14 ' 2 6 2 8 23 2 4 25 27 27 23 26 28 24 25 st u d i o u n i t b a s e m e n t A: 8 0 2 s q f t re a r u n i t b a s e m e n t A: 1 , 0 7 0 s q f t st u d i o u n i t b a s e m t A: 2 6 0 s q f t st u d i o g a r a g e b a s e m t A: 2 5 3 s q f t Ba s e m e n t L e v e l Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t L e v e l W a l l A r e a C a l c u l a t i o n s St u d i o U n i t B a s e m e n t Wa l l N u m b e r T o t a l W a l l A r e a E x p o s e d W a l l A r e a 1 1 0 5 3 8 2 2 6 7 9 7 3 1 7 1 6 7 485 4 3 545 2 9 6 1 0 0 8 4 745 4 5 838 3 8 953 2 9 10 1 3 5 11 1 1 7 12 8 8 Ov e r a l l t o t a l w a l l a r e a 1 2 4 9 Ex p o s e d w a l l a r e a 47 0 % o f E x p o s e d w a l l ( E x p o s e d W a l l / T o t a l ) 37 . 6 3 % Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C a l c u l a t i o n s Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t G r o s s F l o o r A r e a 1 0 6 2 Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t C o u n t a b l e F l o o r A r e a 40 0 Re a r U n i t B a s e m e n t Wa l l N u m b e r T o t a l W a l l A r e a E x p o s e d W a l l A r e a 13 2 4 5 3 1 14 7 3 15 1 3 5 8 3 16 1 9 7 17 2 5 6 18 3 9 19 3 7 20 3 9 21 2 2 7 22 1 3 5 Ov e r a l l t o t a l w a l l a r e a 1 3 8 3 Ex p o s e d w a l l a r e a 11 4 % o f E x p o s e d w a l l ( E x p o s e d W a l l / T o t a l ) 8. 2 4 % Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C a l c u l a t i o n s Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t G r o s s F l o o r A r e a 1 0 7 0 Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t C o u n t a b l e F l o o r A r e a 88 St u d i o G a r a g e B a s e m e n t Wa l l N u m b e r T o t a l W a l l A r e a E x p o s e d W a l l A r e a 23 1 6 1 24 1 0 5 25 4 8 26 3 3 27 1 1 2 8 2 28 7 2 Ov e r a l l t o t a l w a l l a r e a 5 3 1 Ex p o s e d w a l l a r e a 82 % o f E x p o s e d w a l l ( E x p o s e d W a l l / T o t a l ) 15 . 4 4 % Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C a l c u l a t i o n s Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t G r o s s F l o o r A r e a 2 5 3 Pr o p o s e d B a s e m e n t C o u n t a b l e F l o o r A r e a 39 To t a l B a s e m e n t F l o o r A r e a C o u n t e d 5 2 7 To t a l P r o j e c t F A R C a l c u l a t i o n s Ba s e m e n t L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C o u n t e d 5 2 7 Ma i n L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C o u n t e d 2 1 4 2 Up p e r L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C o u n t e d 1 4 1 5 De c k A r e a C o u n t e d 1 6 To t a l F A R C o u n t e d 4 1 0 0 SC A L E : 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 st u d i o u n i t b a s e m e n t a r e a s SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 rear unit basement areas SC A L E : 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 3 st u d i o g a r a g e b a s e m e n t a r e a s P176 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 2 1 / 1 5 8 : 1 6 A M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z005FAR calculations 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l U p d a t e s 1 2 1 8 1 5 . p l n , / V o l u m e s / P r o j e c t F i l e / * A C T I V E F I L E S / 1 4 0 3 B E R K O S t u d i o / 4 . D r a w i n g s + D o c s / 1 . A C T I V E C A D / W o r k i n g A r c h i v e / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l U p d a t e s 1 2 1 8 1 5 . p l n HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS DN D N D N F R G D N D N D N D D N F R G R R G G R R R G G G st u d i o u n i t u p p e r l e v e l A: 2 8 5 s q f t re a r u n i t u p p e r l e v e l A: 1 , 1 3 0 s q f t de c k A: 3 0 0 s q f t D N de c k A: 9 1 s q f t U P DN DN UP D N U P F R G DN U P U P D N U P U U F R G G G R R U P de c k A: 4 5 s q f t re a r u n i t g a r a g e A: 4 8 8 s q f t re a r u n i t m a i n l e v e l A: 9 0 4 s q f t st u d i o u n i t e n t r y l e v e l A: 2 8 9 s q f t st u d i o u n i t g a r a g e A: 2 6 6 s q f t st u d i o u n i t m a i n l e v e l A: 8 2 2 s q f t de c k A: 1 2 0 s q f t To t a l P r o j e c t F A R C a l c u l a t i o n s Ba s e m e n t L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C o u n t e d 5 2 7 Ma i n L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C o u n t e d 2 1 4 2 Up p e r L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C o u n t e d 1 4 1 5 De c k A r e a C o u n t e d 1 6 To t a l F A R C o u n t e d 4 1 0 0 Ma i n L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C a l c u l a t i o n s Pr o p o s e d M a i n L e v e l A r e a C a l c u l a t i o n s St u d i o U n i t M a i n L e v e l St u d i o U n i t E n t r y L e v e l G r o s s A r e a 2 8 9 St u d i o U n i t M a i n L e v e l G r o s s A r e a 8 2 2 St u d i o U n i t M a i n L e v e l T o t a l 1111 Re a r U n i t M a i n L e v e l Re a r U n i t M a i n L e v e l G r o s s A r e a 9 0 4 Re a r U n i t M a i n L e v e l T o t a l 904 Ga r a g e A r e a s M a i n L e v e l Re a r U n i t G a r a g e G r o s s A r e a 4 8 8 St u d i o U n i t G a r a g e G r o s s A r e a 2 6 6 Ga r a g e T o t a l s 7 5 4 All o w a b l e G a r a g e A r e a s 5 0 0 2 5 0 S F / U n i t Ga r a g e A r e a C o u n t e d ( A r e a a b o v e 5 0 0 S F a t 5 0 % ) 127 Ma i n L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C o u n t e d 2 1 4 2 Up p e r L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C a l c u l a t i o n s Pr o p o s e d M a i n L e v e l A r e a C a l c u l a t i o n s St u d i o U n i t U p p e r L e v e l St u d i o U n i t U p p e r L e v e l G r o s s A r e a 2 8 5 St u d i o U n i t U p p e r L e v e l T o t a l 285 Re a r U n i t M a i n L e v e l Re a r U n i t U p p e r L e v e l G r o s s A r e a 1 1 3 0 Re a r U n i t U p p e r L e v e l T o t a l 1130 Ma i n L e v e l F l o o r A r e a C o u n t e d 1 4 1 5 De c k A r e a C a l c u l a t i o n s De c k s M a i n L e v e l St u d i o U n i t N o r t h D e c k G r o s s A r e a 4 5 St u d i o U n i t S o u t h D e c k G r o s s A r e a 1 2 0 St u d i o U n i t D e c k T o t a l 165 De c k s U p p e r L e v e l Re a r U n i t U p p e r L e v e l D e c k G r o s A r e a 3 0 0 St u d i o U n i t D e c k T o t a l 300 De c k s R o o f L e v e l Ro o f D e c k G r o s s A r e a 9 1 St u d i o U n i t D e c k T o t a l 91 All o w a b l e D e c k A r e a 5 4 0 3 6 0 0 S F x 1 5 % Gr o s s D e c k A r e a T o t a l 5 5 6 De c k A r e a C o u n t e d 1 6 SC A L E : 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 1 up p e r l e v e l a r e a s SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 roof areas SC A L E : 1 / 8 " = 1 ' - 0 " 3 ma i n l e v e l a r e a s P177 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 1 8 / 1 5 3 : 5 5 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z006roof height above grade 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n , / V o l u m e s / P r o j e c t F i l e / * A C T I V E F I L E S / 1 4 0 3 B E R K O S t u d i o / 4 . D r a w i n g s + D o c s / 1 . A C T I V E C A D / W o r k i n g A r c h i v e / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS B C DAC 2 1 3 4 6 5 slo p e slo p e slo p e s l o p e slop e slop e s l o p e 7890 7890 7890 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 4 . 6 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 fi n i s h g r a d e = 7890 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 4 . 6 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 8 9 . 7 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 1 . 1 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 8 9 . 8 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 1 . 1 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 8 9 . 6 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 1 . 1 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 8 9 . 7 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 0 3 . 3 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 8 9 . 7 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 . 5 fi r s t f l o o r a r c h i t e c t u r a l = 1 0 0 . 0 ' ar c h i t e c t u r a l 1 0 0 . 0 ' = 7 8 9 0 . 5 ' t. o . d e c k w a l l = 7 8 9 7 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 . 5 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 0 6 . 4 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 8 9 . 9 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 . 5 t. o . d e c k w a l l = 7 8 9 7 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 . 5 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 0 4 . 8 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 8 9 . 9 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 . 5 hi g h e s t p o i n t a b o v e g r a d e = 2 4 . 9 ' s l o p e ga r a g e r o o f be l o w slo p e s l o p e slope s l o p e de c k b e l o w de c k be l o w de c k be l o w slope t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 4 . 6 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 . 6 fi n i s h g r a d e = 7890 t.o. roof = 7904.2 existing grade = 7890.2 finish grade = 7889.8t.o. roof = 7904.2 existing grade = 7890.9 finish grade = 7889.8 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 0 4 . 2 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 . 2 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 0 6 . 4 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 8 9 . 8 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 8 7 . 1 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 0 4 . 8 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 . 5 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 . 5 t. o . d e c k = 7 8 9 4 . 3 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 8 5 . 3 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 1 . 1 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 8 7 . 5 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 1 . 1 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 . 1 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 1 . 1 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 . 7 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 t. o . r o o f = 7 9 1 4 . 6 ex i s t i n g g r a d e = 7 8 9 0 . 5 fi n i s h g r a d e = 78 9 0 de c k A: 9 1 s q f t SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 roof heights P178 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 0 / 1 4 / 1 5 2 : 0 7 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z100site plan 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E 2 , B I M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E 2 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS ALLEY E . H A L L A M S T R E E T D N PR O P O S E D N E W C O N S T R U C T I O N RE N O V A T E D HI S T O R I C ST R U C T U R E 5' 10 ' 5'5' 5 ' 5 ' EX I S T I N G B U I L D I N G (B E R K O S T U D I O ) ALLEY E . H A L L A M S T R E E T D B L D G S = 5 ' 7890 7890 7890 7889 pr o p e r t y l i n e se t b a c k l i n e s SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 proposed site plan SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 existing site plan P179 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 2 1 / 1 5 8 : 1 6 A M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z101basement plan 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l U p d a t e s 1 2 1 8 1 5 . p l n , / V o l u m e s / P r o j e c t F i l e / * A C T I V E F I L E S / 1 4 0 3 B E R K O S t u d i o / 4 . D r a w i n g s + D o c s / 1 . A C T I V E C A D / W o r k i n g A r c h i v e / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l U p d a t e s 1 2 1 8 1 5 . p l n HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS B C DAC 2 1 3 4 6 5 U P UP UP CR A W L S P A C E / S L A B O N G R A D E SL A B O N G R A D E SL A B O N G R A D E SL A B O N G R A D E SLAB ON GRADE ME C H ME C H ST O R A G E CL BE R K O A R C H I V E BA T H R O O M BE D R O O M LA U N D R Y FA M I L Y R O O M ST O R A G E ST O R A G E ME C H ST O R A G E NE G A T I V E ST O R A G E ST O R A G E 3 Z2 0 1 3 Z2 0 2 EL E V st u d i o u n i t b a s e m e n t A: 8 0 2 s q f t re a r u n i t b a s e m e n t A: 1 , 0 7 0 s q f t st u d i o u n i t b a s e m t A: 2 6 0 s q f t st u d i o g a r a g e b a s e m t A: 2 5 3 s q f t 2 Z2 0 1 2 Z202 1 Z2 0 1 1 Z2 0 2 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 basement plan P180 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 1 8 / 1 5 3 : 5 5 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z102main level fl oor plan 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n , / V o l u m e s / P r o j e c t F i l e / * A C T I V E F I L E S / 1 4 0 3 B E R K O S t u d i o / 4 . D r a w i n g s + D o c s / 1 . A C T I V E C A D / W o r k i n g A r c h i v e / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS B C DAC 2 1 3 4 6 5 U P DN DN UP D N U P F R G 3 Z2 0 1 3 Z2 0 2 PROPERTY LINE A C C E S S O R Y B U I L D I N G S E T B A C K PRINCIPAL BUILDING SETBACK ACCESSORY BUILDING SETBACK P R I N C I P A L B U I L D I N G S E T B A C K W O R K B E N C H CL CL BE R K O G A L L E R Y BE D R O O M MU D R O O M OF F I C E BA T H R O O M LA U N D R Y F A M I L Y R O O M W O R K B E N C H MU D R O O M W/C EN T R Y EN T R Y CL su n k e n co u r t y a r d EL E V LI V I N G DI N I N G KI T C H E N U P 2 Z2 0 1 2 Z202 1 Z2 0 1 1 Z2 0 2 de c k A: 4 5 s q f t re a r u n i t g a r a g e A: 4 8 8 s q f t re a r u n i t m a i n l e v e l A: 9 0 4 s q f t st u d i o u n i t e n t r y l e v e l A: 2 8 9 s q f t st u d i o u n i t g a r a g e A: 2 6 6 s q f t st u d i o u n i t m a i n l e v e l A: 8 2 2 s q f t de c k A: 1 2 0 s q f t SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 main level plan P181 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 1 8 / 1 5 3 : 5 5 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z103upper level fl oor plan 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n , / V o l u m e s / P r o j e c t F i l e / * A C T I V E F I L E S / 1 4 0 3 B E R K O S t u d i o / 4 . D r a w i n g s + D o c s / 1 . A C T I V E C A D / W o r k i n g A r c h i v e / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l 1 0 0 9 1 5 . p l n HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS B C DAC 2 1 3 4 6 5 DN D N D N F R G 3 Z2 0 1 3 Z2 0 2 U P EL E V op e n t o g a l l e r y BA T H R O O M KI T C H E N BE D R O O M CL O S E T CL O S E T BE D R O O M BA T H R O O M OF F I C E LI V I N G DI N I N G D N 2 Z2 0 1 2 Z202 1 Z2 0 1 1 Z2 0 2 st u d i o u n i t u p p e r l e v e l A: 2 8 5 s q f t re a r u n i t u p p e r l e v e l A: 1 , 1 3 0 s q f t de c k A: 3 0 0 s q f t SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 upper level plan P182 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 2 1 / 1 5 8 : 1 6 A M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z104roof plan 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l U p d a t e s 1 2 1 8 1 5 . p l n , / V o l u m e s / P r o j e c t F i l e / * A C T I V E F I L E S / 1 4 0 3 B E R K O S t u d i o / 4 . D r a w i n g s + D o c s / 1 . A C T I V E C A D / W o r k i n g A r c h i v e / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E H P C F i n a l U p d a t e s 1 2 1 8 1 5 . p l n HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS B C DAC 2 1 3 4 6 5 3 Z2 0 1 3 Z2 0 2 slo p e slo p e slo p e s l o p e slop e slop e s l o p e ALLEY s l o p e ga r a g e r o o f be l o w slo p e s l o p e slope D N 2 Z2 0 1 2 Z202 1 Z2 0 1 1 Z2 0 2 s l o p e SO L A R HO T WA T E R de c k b e l o w de c k be l o w de c k be l o w slope SO L A R P V (p r e v i o u s l y s i t e d o n r e a r u n i t ) SO L A R HO T WA T E R SO L A R HO T WA T E R SO L A R HO T WA T E R de c k A: 9 1 s q f t SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 roof plan P183 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 2 1 / 1 5 2 : 4 4 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z201elevations 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 , B I M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS 6 5 4 3 2 1 100'1 main level110'2 upper level120'-8"3 roof 8 Z2 0 1 9 Z2 0 1 new window in new foundation, nearly invisible from street s0 6 s0 1 b s0 2 b w1 8 b w1 6 a w2 5 b w1 5 a w1 8 a w1 3 a w0 8 b w0 8 b w0 8 b w1 9 a w1 7 w1 9 b w1 6 b w1 3 b s0 1 a s0 2 a w1 5 b w1 4 w1 0 a w0 9 w1 1 a w1 0 b p0 8 w2 5 a 0 2 0 1 0 4 0 1 0 5 0 6 new skylights in location of existing skylights A B C D 100'1 main level110'2 upper level120'-8"3 roof 8 Z2 0 1 9 Z2 0 1 a l l e x i s t i n g s t u d i o w i n d o w s an d e x t e r i o r d o o r s t o b e t h e sa m e s i z e a s o r i g i n a l , re p l a c e d w i t h n e w i n s u l a t e d un i t s e0 2 e0 1 s0 1 c s0 2 c p01w01a 02 01 04 0 5 0 6 0 6 0 7 C B A +1 0 0 ' 1 m a i n l e v e l +1 1 0 ' 2 u p p e r l e v e l +1 2 0 ' - 8 " 3 r o o f 5 Z2 0 1 5 Z2 0 1 6 Z2 0 1 6 Z2 0 1 a l l e x i s t i n g s t u d i o w i n d o w s an d e x t e r i o r d o o r s t o b e t h e sa m e s i z e a s o r i g i n a l , re p l a c e d w i t h n e w i n s u l a t e d un i t s PV s o l a r p a n e l s f l a t o n r o o f be h i n d C M U c h i m n e y e0 3 w2 3 w2 1 a w2 2 w2 4 a w2 0 w2 4 b w2 1 b w2 1 c 0 5 0 6 ne w w i n d o w w i t h g l a z i n g s e t in s a m e d i s t a n c e f r o m ex t e r i o r w a l l a s o r i g i n a l ne w b l o w n i n in s u l a t i o n i n e x i s t i n g fr a m i n g ex i s t i n g w o o d s i d i n g an d s h e a t h i n g wo o d s i l l a n d j a m b t o ma t c h s i z e o f e x i s t i n g ne w w i n d o w w i t h g l a z i n g s e t in s a m e d i s t a n c e f r o m ex t e r i o r w a l l a s o r i g i n a l ne w b l o w n i n in s u l a t i o n i n e x i s t i n g fr a m i n g ex i s t i n g w o o d s i d i n g an d s h e a t h i n g fl a s h i n g a n d s e a l a n t wo o d s i l l a n d j a m b t o ma t c h s i z e o f e x i s t i n g ne w w i n d o w s e t d i r e c t l y o n CM U w i t h f o a m s e a l CM U f o u n d a t i o n w a l l fl a s h i n g a n d s e a l a n t wo o d s i l l a n d j a m b t o ma t c h s i z e a n d p r o f i l e o f ex i s t i n g ; s l o p e d s i l l fr a m i n g a n d in s u l a t i o n 1/8" minimumnon-compressib l eshim new window with glazing set in same distance from exterior wall as original sealant and backer rod, typfoam seal around window trim width and thickness to match original1/8" minimumnon-compressibleshimSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 East Elevation SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 North Elevation SC A L E : 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 2 So u t h C o u r t y a r d E l e v a t i o n SC A L E : 1 1 / 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 6 ja m b d e t a i l @ w o o d c o n d i t i o n SC A L E : 1 1 / 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 5 si l l d e t a i l @ w o o d c o n d i t i o n SC A L E : 1 1 / 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 8 si l l d e t a i l @ m a s o n r y c o n d i t i o n SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0" 9 jamb detail @ masonry condition SC A L E : 1 : 6 . 6 7 7 ex i s t i n g w i n d o w @ m a s o n r y SC A L E : 1 ' = 1 ' - 0 " 4 ex i s t i n g w i n d o w @ w o o d 01.white painted corrugated metal02.03.04.MATERIAL LEGEND 3-coat natural stucco with sgraffito detailing vertical smooth dark stained native wood polygal translucent panel repaired and refinished existing diagonal wood 05.06.painted concrete masonry units 07.recessed facia P184 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 1 8 / 1 5 4 : 0 8 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z202elevations 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 , B I M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS D C B A 100'1 first level110'2 second level120'-8"3 roof plan s0 6 w0 8 a s0 5 b w0 7 b p0 4 w0 6 b w0 7 b w0 7 b p0 7 p0 6 0 2 0 1 0 3 0 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 100'1 first level110'2 second level120'-8"3 roof plan s0 5 a w0 7 a w0 5 w0 5 w0 4 p0 3 s0 4 w0 5 p0 2 w0 2 w0 2 w0 3 b w0 3 c w0 1 b w0 2 w0 6 a p0 5 w0 3 a 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 5 0 6 A B C 0 3 0 2 0 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 South ElevationSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 West Elevation SC A L E : 1 / 4 " = 1 ' - 0 " 3 No r t h C o u r t y a r d E l e v a t i o n 01.white painted corrugated metal02.03.04.MATERIAL LEGEND 3-coat natural stucco with sgraffito detailing vertical smooth dark stained native wood polygal translucent panel repaired and refinished existing diagonal wood 05.06.painted concrete masonry units P185 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 2 1 / 1 5 8 : 1 5 A M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z203materials 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 , B I M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS 11 da r k s t a i n e d v e r t i c a l w o o d 12 3- c o a t n a t u r a l s t u c c o 10 wh i t e c o r r u g a t e d m e t a l 9 po l y g a l t r a n s l u c e n t p a n e l s SC A L E : 1 : 5 . 8 3 1 ex i s t i n g s t u d i o 5 di a g o n a l w o o d s i d i n g t o b e r e s t o r e d 6 wh i t e p a i n t e d c o n c r e t e m a s o n r y b a s e a n d c h i m n e y t o m a t c h e x i s t i n g 4 me m b r a n e r o o fi ng t o r e p l a c e e x i s t i n g 8 me m b r a n e r o o f t o m a t c h e x i s t i n g 7 gr e e n r o o f t r a y s y s t e m SC A L E : 3 / 3 2 " = 1 ' - 0 " 3 vi e w f r o m E H a l l a m SC A L E : 1 : 2 1 5 . 4 2 2 vi e w f r o m s o u t h 13 sc o r e d s t u c c o w a i n s c o t i n g pr o p o s e d m a t e r i a l s : h i s t o r i c r e s o u r c e p r o p o s e d m a t e r i a l s : a d d i t i o n P186 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 0 / 1 4 / 1 5 2 : 0 7 P M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z204streetscape 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E 2 , B I M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O A C T I V E 2 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS SCALE: 1:0.98 14 232 E Hallam SC A L E : 1 : 1 . 2 1 13 23 2 E H a l l a m SCALE: 1:6.80 18 site from alleyway SC A L E : 1 : 6 . 8 0 17 vie w t o w a r d s s i t e f r o m c h u r c h c o u r t SC A L E : 1 : 6 . 6 3 2 vi e w o f s i t e - 2 1 1 E H a l l a m SC A L E : 1 : 6 . 8 0 1 22 3 E H a l l a m SCALE: 1:4.44 8 214 E Bleaker SC A L E : 1 : 2 . 8 4 10 re d b r i c k SC A L E : 1 : 2 . 1 3 11 21 6 E H a l l a m SC A L E : 1 : 2 . 8 4 12 23 2 E H a l l a m SC A L E : 1 : 2 . 1 3 15 22 3 E B l e a k e r SC A L E : 1 : 2 . 1 3 7 21 4 E B l e a k e r SC A L E : 1 : 2 . 1 3 5 co m m u n i t y m e t h o d i s t c h u r c h SC A L E : 1 : 2 . 1 3 4 14 3 E B l e a k e r SCALE: 1:2.13 3 143 E Bleaker SC A L E : 1 : 2 . 1 3 9 re d b r i c k SC A L E : 1 : 6 . 8 0 6 co m m u n i t y m e t h o d i s t c h u r c h SC A L E : 1 : 6 . 8 0 16 21 9 N M o n a r c h P187 IV.B. © 2015 Harry Teague Architects.Berko Studio Duplex129 Emma Rd. Suite A Basalt, CO 81621 970 927 4862 info@teaguearch.com www.harryteaguearchitects.com consultant information date wet stamp issue P R I N T D A T E : 1 2 / 2 1 / 1 5 8 : 1 5 A M HPC FINAL 10/01/2015211 East Hallam Street NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONAspen, CO 81611 JOB NO.: 1403 Z302exterior lighting 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 , B I M S e r v e r : h t a b i m s e r v e r - B I M S e r v e r 1 8 / 1 4 0 3 _ B E R K O _ A C T I V E _ 3 HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS B C DA U P DN DN D N W W D F RG S1 S2 S 2 S2 S 2 S2S2 ER1 ER 1 ER 1 ER 1 ER 1 S3 S3 S 3 ER1 ER1ER1 ER 1 ER 1 ER1S1 U P ER 1 ER 2 ER 2 ER 2 ER 2 (b e l o w de c k ) ER 2 (b e l o w de c k ) B C DA F EL1 DW D N S2S2S2S2ER2 E R 2 ER2 E R 2 ER2 ER2ER2 B C DA EL 1 D N  3 K R Q H                ǯ   ) D [                ǯ  Z Z Z  K H V V D P H U L F D  F R P 3  2   % R [     ǯ  * D I I Q H \   6 &             H e s s A m e r i c a CE N T O C E N T O . W a l l / C e i l i n g M o u n t e d L u m i n a i r e $V L P S O H  E H D F R Q  LV  W K H  E DV L V  R I  & ( 1 7 2Ǩ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o d e l M o u n t i n g L a m p &1     : D O O   & H L O L Q J     & )       & )    / ( ' ø 6 . 3 " 7. 1 " ' H V L J Q   . O D X V  % H J D V V H &1    ZZ Z  K H V V D P H U L F D  F R P      22 2 7 / %       0 . $ 3 # 2  0 . * % # 2  . + 2 ! ' %  . + . 0  / 2 ) . - 1  . $ ) & ) % $                  *     % $  " '  %                               ) ) )      ( &   # !      8# . / 7 0 ) ' ( 2                  / $ ! 2 % $         & &    )   ( !  "   %                                      ! , / 1                 Ű Ű         - %  / ) % # %  $ ) %  # ! 1 2  ! + 3 , ) - 3 ,  ( . 3 1 ) - '  5 ) 2 (  ) - 2 % ' 0 ! +   5)0 ) - '  # . , / ! 0 2 , % - 2    ) %  # ! 1 2 ) - ' 1  ! 0 %  , ! 0 ) - %  ' 0 ! $ %   # . / / % 0  & 0 % %   ƀ       F R S S H U  F R Q W H Q W  $       D O X P L Q X P  D O O R \         2 Q H  S L H F H  G L H  F D V W  D O X P L Q X P  I D F H S O D W H    Ű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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main level exterior lightingSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 upper level exterior lightingSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 roof plan exterior lighting ER 1 wa l l w a s h e r s c o n c e S1 S2 ex t e r i o r f i x t u r e s c h e d u l e re c e s s e d f i x t u r e sm a l l p r o f i l e r e c e s s e d f i x t u r e pa t h / f l o o r l i g h t f i x t u r e - w a l l r e c e s s e d pa t h w a y l u m i n a i r e S3 de s c r i p t i o n # m a k e / m o d e l Be g a / 3 2 4 5 L E D Be g a / 2 0 0 9 L E D S1 S2 S3 li n e a r L E D f i x t u r e c o n c e a l e d i n h a n d r a i l EL 1 Be g a / 7 7 2 3 3 ER 2 P188 IV.B. L1.0 PR O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E ISSUE & REVISION DATES Plot Date: 12/21/15 P r o j e c t # : 0224Drawn By: KT Checked By: GT HPC APPROVALS 0 1 / 1 3 / 1 6 /$1'6&$3($5&+,7(&785(ā/$1'3/$11,1*123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621 WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 CONCRETE WITH SAWCUT JOINTS 18"- 48" TALL CONCRETE ACCENT WALL GUARDRAIL SI T E P L A N L E G E N D PRECAST CONCRETE PAVERS 6' TALL MAX NEW FENCE 18"- 44" TALL BUILT-IN METAL PLANTERS SU N K E N B A S E M E N T WA L K O U T W I T H BU I L T - I N P L A N T E R S LA N D I N G F R O M UP P E R L E V E L D E C K BU I L T - I N B E N C H A N D S U R R O U N D I N G BU I L T - I N P L A N T E R S A T 3 0 " I N H E I G H T & 3 6 " I N D E P T H PR O P E R T Y F E N C E A T 6 ' I N HE I G H T M A X LA W N DR I V E W A Y PR O P E R T Y F E N C E A T 6 ' I N H E I G H T MA X MA I N T E N A N C E W A L K W A Y ST U D I O E N T R Y CO N C R E T E S E A T I N G W A L L A T 1 8 " IN H E I G H T ; W I T H T Y P E S 2 LI G H T I N G ( S E E S H E E T A 3 0 2 ) CO N C R E T E S C R E E N W A L L AT 4 2 " I N H E I G H T SH A R E D EN T R Y W A Y DECORATIVE PEBBLE BANDING UP SCALE: 3/16"=1'-00" A L L E Y E A S T H A L L A M S T R E E T BE A R P R O O F T R A S H EN C L O S U R E CO N C R E T E A C C E N T WA L L A T 2 4 " I N H E I G H T ; WI T H T Y P E S 2 L I G H T I N G (S E E S H E E T A 3 0 2 ) CO N C R E T E A C C E N T W A L L A T 18 " I N H E I G H T ; W I T H T Y P E S 2 LI G H T I N G ( S E E S H E E T A 3 0 2 ) 48 " H I G H R E T A I N I N G W A L L SE N I O R C E N T E R E N T R Y WOOD 5' - 0 " 3' - 0 " 1 0 ' S E T B A C K 1 5 ' S E T B A C K 5 ' S E T B A C K 1 0 ' S E T B A C K CO N C R E T E S E A T I N G WA L L 1 8 " I N H E I G H T CRUSHER FINE WITH STABILIZER DR I V E W A Y BI K E P A R K I N G T Y P E S 3 L I G H T I N G ( S E E SH E E T A 3 0 2 ) P189 IV.B. L2.0ISSUE & REVISION DATES Plot Date: 12/21/15 P r o j e c t # : 0224Drawn By: KT Checked By: GT HPC APPROVALS 0 1 / 1 3 / 1 6 /$1'6&$3($5&+,7(&785(ā/$1'3/$11,1*123 EMMA ROAD | SUITE 200 | BASALT | CO | 81621 WWW.CONNECTONEDESIGN.COM | 970.379.1030 BRONZE BEAUTY AJUGA - AJUGA REPTANS 'BRONZE BEAUTY'HARD FESCUE -FESTUCA OVINA DURIUSCULA COMMON LILAC -SYRINGA VULGARIS PL A N T I N G P L A N L E G E N D MOUNTAIN LOVER - PAXISTIMA CANBYI MOONGLOW JUNIPER - JUNIPERUS SCOPULORUM 'MOONGLOW'6"-24" PERENNIALS UP NARROWLEAF COTTONWOOD - POPULUS ANGUSTIFOLIA SCALE: 3/16"=1'-00" A L L E Y E A S T H A L L A M S T R E E T SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE - MALUS x 'SPRING SNOW' PR O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E PR O P E R T Y L I N E P R O P E R T Y L I N E LA W N SH A R E D EN T R Y W A Y SEASONAL BULBS 1 0 ' S E T B A C K 1 5 ' S E T B A C K 5 ' S E T B A C K 1 0 ' S E T B A C K DR I V E W A Y DR I V E W A Y P190 IV.B. P191 IV.B. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 1 of 16 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Amy Simon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 980 Gibson Avenue- Conceptual Major Development, Demolition, Relocation, and Variations review, PUBLIC HEARING DATE: January 13, 2016 ________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: 980 Gibson Avenue is in the Smuggler Mountain neighborhood and part of Alpine Acres Subdivision. In the 1960s, a number of Victorian era homes were moved to this subdivision from unknown locations in Aspen. These properties are all landmark designated. The miner’s cottage at 980 Gibson was significantly altered over the years. It is linked to another Victorian (990 Gibson) by a garage. The property has been sold and the new owner wishes to demolish all non-historic construction on the site, reposition and restore the Victorian, dedicate it as a deed restricted Carriage House (a form of Accessory Dwelling Unit) and build a new detached free market home on the south side of the lot. HPC is asked to consider Conceptual design (scale, massing and site plan), Relocation, Demolition, and Variation requests. Following Conceptual, staff will inform City Council of the HPC decision, allowing them the opportunity to “Call-Up” any aspects of the approval that they find require additional review. This is a standard practice for all significant projects. The last review step before applying for building permit is Final design (landscape, lighting and materials.) APPLICANT: Gibson Matchless LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning and Zone 4 Architects. PARCEL ID: 2737-074-10-001. ADDRESS: 980 Gibson Avenue, Unit 1, Alpine Acres Subdivision, City of Aspen, CO. ZONING: R-6 P192 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 2 of 16 CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT Major Development is a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a Conceptual Development Plan, and then a Final Development Plan. Approval of a Conceptual Development Plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the Conceptual Plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the Final Development Plan unless agreed to by the applicant. Staff Response: Conceptual review focuses on the height, scale, massing and proportions of a proposal. A list of the relevant HPC design guidelines is attached as “Exhibit A.” Currently, it is difficult to distinguish the original Victorian house. In preparation for this hearing, staff has searched all of the standard sources for documentation. There are no photos showing the house before alteration, and the original location of the building has not been identified so there are no Sanborn maps to reference. The only information that can guide the historic preservation aspect of this project is inspection of the existing framing and materials, and assessment of original vs. changed conditions. The project architects have done an initial study of the building, removing drywall in a few key locations. Evidence of historic framing, sheathing and siding has been found. There are indications that, when the historic resource was moved to 980 Gibson a few decades ago, it was placed so the historic rear façade is facing the street and the historic front façade faces the back yard. This photograph, taken in 1980, shows the Gibson façade of the house. P193 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 3 of 16 The image below, left, shows the house as seen today, from the back yard. The image below, right, shows how 980 Gibson might have looked originally. The first topic for HPC to discuss is demolition of the non-historic additions. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. The applicant proposes to demolish the addition identified in the photos above, and the garage that lies on the south side of the Victorian. These areas are not part of the original structure. They detract from the original resource and confuse the history of the property. P194 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 4 of 16 The applicant will also remove the materials that are enclosing what appears to be the original front porch. Any historic elements that are uncovered must be retained. Staff supports the demolition as proposed. The remaining historic resource is to be repositioned on a new basement, in the northwest corner of the site. Relocation of a historic building will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. The house is not in a historic district and it is not original to the site. Its current orientation appears to be inappropriate and detrimental to the historic character of the building. Staff supports placing the structure in a prominent location at the intersection of Gibson Avenue and Matchless Drive. The miner’s cottage will be freestanding; at least 17’ away from the proposed new house. A small addition is proposed on the back of the resource, addressed in more detail below. As part of a building permit review, the applicant will be required to submit the standard assurances that relocation will proceed with care, including a $30,000 deposit with the City during the construction process. P195 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 5 of 16 Setbacks The applicant requests three setback variances related to the relocation of the miner’s cottage. In order to grant a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. The project includes a north (Matchless Drive) side-yard reduction of 9’6” for the miner’s cottage, so that 5’6” is provided. There is no neighboring parcel that will be impacted by this variation. Staff finds that this variation maximizes the distance between the old and new structures and therefore mitigates a potential adverse impact to the resource. A south side-yard reduction of 7’ is requested, so that 8’ is provided. This variation relates to an upper floor deck that runs along the front (Gibson) and side of the new house. The deck meets the setback requirement along Gibson, but sits in the required south sideyard, which abuts 990 Gibson. 990 Gibson is also a landmark designated miner’s cottage that was moved to this neighborhood and has been heavily altered. Unfortunately, the front of the house is too obscured by trees to see from the street. 990 Gibson sits in the required sideyard setback for its own lot. The house may or may not be relocated on the site in a future redevelopment. Staff does have a concern with the placement of a contemporary elevated deck at 980 Gibson so close (about 12’) from the side of the Victorian at 990 Gibson. Staff has concerns with the relatively large size of the deck as a feature of the front of the new house and finds it to be in conflict with the design guidelines. We find that the standards for a setback variation are not met. We recommend that the deck be located only on the Gibson façade of the house and not wrap into the side setback. Even if this is accomplished, the side of the house intrudes into the setback by 3.” (14’9” is provided where 15’ is required.) Staff recommends the proposed new house be shifted 3” towards the north The front of 990 Gibson Avenue P196 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 6 of 16 (closer to the 980 Gibson Victorian.) Full compliance with the required side setback is reasonable and the impact on the Victorian is not significant enough to justify a variation. The third requested variation is a full waiver of the required distance between two detached buildings, as measured below grade only. To be considered detached, structures are to be completely separated by a distance of 5,’ above and below grade. This measurement is more than met by separation between the structures above grade, but the basements of the two units will touch. The applicant requests this relief because it is easier and more cost effective to construct the adjacent basements if the foundations touch. Planning staff reviewed this request and supports the waiver only if there is a dirt or gravel filled chamber that separates the living spaces between the two units. This chamber must be 5’ wide, for the full length that the basements abut. It is important to provide a deterrent to any future effort to combine the free market house and the carriage house into one larger home. This would be a zoning violation and staff does not support enabling that possibility. HPC should be aware that the property owner significantly redesigned this project after receiving initial feedback from staff. The original site plan and a rendering are shown below. Staff had concerns about the width of the new house as viewed from Gibson Avenue. The revised proposal, currently under consideration by HPC, is at the bottom of the page. P197 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 7 of 16 Staff finds that this project has a number of benefits not only to the historic resource, but also the neighborhood. The miner’s cottage is being extracted from its current condition and will be a highlight of the street, adjacent to a number of other Victorian homes. The miner’s cottage will have only a small addition, joining a handful of others in Aspen that have been preserved in their original size, as an authentic representation of 19th century life. The miner’s cottage may be made available for occupancy as an affordable housing unit. The project eliminates a driveway along a busy street. The property owner is not requesting a floor area bonus for this project. Because of square footage limitations that affect this subdivision, the new house cannot be more than 2,486 square feet in size, which helps prevent it from overwhelming the smaller historic structure. Regarding the HPC design guidelines, staff finds that the proposal for the miner’s cottage is appropriate at the Conceptual level. The applicant is making a good effort to restore the form of the building. Many details will need closer study at Final review, and others will need to be resolved during construction, when more original fabric can be inspected. Most of the original exterior materials, doors and windows have been replaced. Full documentation of remaining original elements is needed. A small addition is proposed on the rear of the house to accommodate a stair to the basement. The addition is appropriate, however the architect must confirm that it does not cover the historic fascia on the rear facing gable end (see illustration above). Staff also recommends a slight reduction in the size of the lightwell that is proposed next to the front porch of the miner’s cottage, to be no larger than the building code requirement (See guideline 9.7). At this point, staff assumes that the historic porch is still in place, but enclosed. The dimensions and roof pitch that exist in that area now must be reflected in the proposed design. Regarding the new house, staff finds that the design guidelines are met, with the exception of the front deck. Staff has recommended that HPC not approve a requested variance to allow the deck to extend to the side of the house. We recommend that it be no wider than the Gibson Avenue facing gable end in order to be more sympathetic to the width of the Victorian. The deck also creates second floor oriented outdoor living space that is not characteristic of the miner’s cottage. For that additional reason staff recommends a reduction in the size of this feature. The guidelines state: P198 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 8 of 16 Residential Design Standards In addition to the HPC guidelines, the project must meet the Residential Design Standards. Two standards are not met: 1. Building orientation. The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street-facing facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. Parcels as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall be exempt from this requirement. One (1) element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front corner of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. 2. Build-to lines. On parcels or lots of less than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet, at least sixty percent (60%) of the front façade shall be within five (5) feet of the minimum front yard setback line. On corner sites, this standard shall be met on the frontage with the longest block length. Porches may be used to meet the sixty percent (60%) standard. In order to grant variations, HPC must find that the proposal will: a) Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the context in which the development is proposed and purpose of the particular standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures, the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or, b) Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific constraints. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry. A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. P199 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 9 of 16 CARRIAGE HOUSE REQUIREMENTS Staff finds that these variations are appropriate. The two buildings are parallel to Gibson Avenue. They cannot be parallel to Matchless Drive because it has an irregular shape. Regarding build to lines, the miner’s cottage cannot be moved any closer to the front lot line because of existing trees. The new house is purposely set back on the lot to give the historic building prominence. The applicant proposes to voluntarily deed restrict the historic resource as a Carriage House, a form of Accessory Dwelling Unit. A Carriage House is not considered a second dwelling unit. It is not required to be rented, but if it is rented it must be to a qualified working resident as determined by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines. Approval of a Carriage House would normally be conducted by the Community Development Director, however this unit does not meet all of the required design standards (deviations highlighted in gray below), therefore HPC approval is needed. 26.520.050 Design standards All ADUs and carriage houses shall conform to the following design standards unless otherwise approved, pursuant to Subsection 26.520.080.D, Special Review: 1. An ADU must contain between three hundred (300) and eight hundred (800) net livable square feet, ten percent (10%) of which must be a closet or storage area. A carriage house must contain between eight hundred (800) and one thousand two hundred (1,200) net livable square feet, ten percent (10%) of which must be closet or storage area. 2. An ADU or carriage house must be able to function as a separate dwelling unit. This includes the following: a. An ADU or carriage house must be separately accessible from the exterior. An interior entrance to the primary residence may be approved, pursuant to Special Review; b. An ADU or carriage house must have separately accessible utility systems, controls and disconnect panels. This does not preclude shared services; c. An ADU or carriage house shall contain a full-size kitchen containing at a minimum: i. Minimum 30-inch wide oven, 4-burner stovetop. ii. A sink, dishwasher, and a minimum 20 cubic foot refrigerator with freezer. P200 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 10 of 16 iii. Minimum 24 square feet of counter space and a minimum of 15 cubic feet of cabinet space. iv. Kitchens may not be located in a closet. d. An ADU or carriage house shall contain a ¾ or larger bathroom containing, at a minimum, a sink, a toilet and a shower. e. An ADU or carriage house shall contain washer/dryer hookups, with a dryer vent rough-in, to accommodate minimum 27-inch wide washer/dryer units. 3. One (1) parking space for the ADU or carriage house shall be provided on-site and shall remain available for the benefit of the ADU or carriage house resident. The parking space shall not be located in tandem, or “stacked,” with a space for the primary residence. 4. The finished floor level of fifty percent (50%) or more of the unit’s net livable area is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher. 5. The ADU or carriage house shall be detached from the primary residence. An ADU or carriage house located above a detached garage or storage area or connected to the primary residence by an exterior breezeway or trellis shall still qualify as detached. No interior connections to the primary residence, or portions thereof, shall qualify the ADU or carriage house as detached. 6. An ADU or carriage house shall be located within the dimensional requirements of the Zone District in which the property is located. 7. The roof design shall prevent snow and ice from shedding upon an entrance to an ADU or carriage house. If the entrance is accessed via stairs, sufficient means of preventing snow and ice from accumulating on the stairs shall be provided. 8. ADUs and carriage houses shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of this Title which apply to residential development in general. These include, but are not limited to, building code requirements related to adequate natural light, ventilation, fire egress, fire suppression and sound attenuation between living units. This standard may not be varied. 9. All ADUs and carriage houses shall be registered with the Housing Authority and the property shall be deed restricted in accordance with Section 26.520.070, Deed restrictions and enforcement. This standard may not be varied. An application requesting a variation of the ADU and carriage house design standards shall be processed as a Special Review. A Special Review for an ADU or Carriage House may be approved, approved with conditions or denied based on conformance with the following criteria: 1. The proposed ADU or carriage house is designed in a manner which promotes the purpose of the ADU and carriage house program, promotes the purpose of the Zone District in which it is proposed and promotes the unit's general livability. P201 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 11 of 16 2. The proposed ADU or carriage house is designed to be compatible with and subordinate in character to, the primary residence considering all dimensions, site configuration, landscaping, privacy and historical significance of the property. Staff recommends that approval be granted to allow the net livable area below grade to be more than 50% of the overall unit. It is undesirable to make a larger above grade addition to the historic resource. The unit as designed is very livable and, if rented will be a benefit to the City’s affordable housing inventory. The standards above require the Carriage House to be detached from the primary residence. The zone district requires 5’ of separation between structures in order to be considered detached. Staff addressed this issue under HPC’s criteria for setback variances. We support the foundation between the two buildings being continuous, but require the 5’ separation to be achieved below grade by creating a physical barrier between the living spaces. Regarding the requirement that the Carriage House be located within the dimensional requirements of the zone district, HPC has the authority to approve the requested sideyard and basement level variations based on the landmark status of the property. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends HPC grant Conceptual Major Development, Demolition, Relocation, and Variations review with the following conditions: 1. By noon on Tuesday, January 12th, provide revisions to the project to staff, by email, addressing recommended areas for redesign which are to remove the requested south sideyard variation by making the deck no wider than the Gibson Avenue facing gable end of the new house and by moving the new house northward, design a dirt or gravel filled chamber that separates the below grade living spaces between the two structures (this chamber must be 5’ wide, for the full length that the basements abut), confirm that the addition on the back of the miner’s cottage does not cover the historic fascia on the rear facing gable end, reduce the size of the lightwell that is proposed next to the front porch of the miner’s cottage to be no larger than the minimum building code requirement and ensure that the dimensions and roof pitch shown for the porch on the miner’s cottage reflect the enclosed front porch that appears to be in place now. 2. As part of a building permit review, the applicant will be required to submit a report from a licensed engineer, architect or housemover demonstrating that the structure can be moved, and the method for moving and protecting the structure, must be submitted with the building permit application. In addition the applicant must provide a bond, letter of credit or cashier’s check in the amount of $30,000 to be held by the City during the duration of the relocation process. P202 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 12 of 16 3. HPC hereby grants a north (Matchless Drive) side-yard reduction of 9’6” for the miner’s cottage, so that 5’6” is provided. 4. HPC hereby waives compliance with the Building Orientation and Build-to-lines requirements of the Residential Design Standards. 5. HPC hereby waives compliance with the Carriage House design standards stated at Municipal Code Section 26.520.050.2, numbered 4, 5 and 6. 6. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of January 13, 2016, the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. EXHIBITS: HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2016 Exhibit A: Design Guidelines Exhibit B: Application Exhibit A: Relevant HPC Design Guidelines for 980 Gibson Avenue, Conceptual review 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. This includes a sequence of experiences, beginning with the "public" sidewalk, proceeding along a "semi-public" walkway, to a "semi-private" porch or entry feature and ending in the "private" spaces beyond. Provide a walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry. Meandering walkways are discouraged, except where it is needed to avoid a tree. Use paving materials that are similar to those used historically for the building style. Concrete, wood or sandstone may be appropriate for certain building styles. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. Protect established vegetation during construction to avoid damage. Replacement of damaged, aged or diseased trees must be approved by the Parks Department. If a tree must be removed as part of the addition or alteration, replace it with species of a large enough scale to have a visual impact in the early years of the project. 5.1 Preserve an original porch. P203 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 13 of 16 Replace missing posts and railings when necessary. Match the original proportions and spacing of balusters when replacing missing ones. Unless used historically on the property, wrought iron, especially the "licorice stick" style that emerged in the 1950s and 1960s, is inappropriate. Expanding the size of a historic porch is inappropriate. 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. Use materials that appear similar to the original. While matching original materials is preferred, when detailed correctly and painted appropriately, alternative materials may be considered. Where no evidence of the appearance of the historic porch exists, a new porch may be considered that is similar in character to those found on comparable buildings. Keep the style and form simple. Also, avoid applying decorative elements that are not known to have been used on the house or others like it. When constructing a new porch, its depth should be in scale with the building. The scale of porch columns also should be similar to that of the trimwork. The height of the railing and the spacing of balusters should appear similar to those used historically as well. 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. In general, relocation has less of an impact on individual landmark structures than those in a historic district. It must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative. Rehabilitation of a historic building must occur as a first phase of any improvements. A relocated building must be carefully rehabilitated to retain original architectural details and materials. Before a building is moved, a plan must be in place to secure the structure and provide a new foundation, utilities, and to restore the house. The design of a new structure on the site should be in accordance with the guidelines for new construction. In general, moving a building to an entirely different site or neighborhood is not approved. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. If a historic building straddles two lots, then it may be shifted to sit entirely on one of the lots. Both lots shall remain landmarked properties. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. It should face the same direction and have a relatively similar setback. It may not, for example, be moved to the rear of the parcel to accommodate a new building in front of it. 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. On modest structures, a simple foundation is appropriate. Constructing a stone foundation on a modest miner's cottage is discouraged because it would be out of character. Where a stone foundation was used historically, and is to be replaced, the replacement should be similar in the cut of the stone and design of the mortar joints. P204 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 14 of 16 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. Raising the building slightly above its original elevation is acceptable. However, lifting it substantially above the ground level is inappropriate. Changing the historic elevation is discouraged, unless it can be demonstrated that it enhances the resource. 9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space. In general, a lightwell is prohibited on a wall that faces a street (per the Residential Design Standards). The size of a lightwell should be minimized. A lightwell that is used as a walkout space may be used only in limited situations and will be considered on a case-by-case basis. If a walkout space is feasible, it should be surrounded by a simple fence or rail. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. P205 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 15 of 16 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or structure. 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. The building should be arranged parallel to the lot lines, maintaining the traditional grid pattern of the site. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. The front porch should be "functional," in that it is used as a means of access to the entry. A new porch should be similar in size and shape to those seen traditionally. In some cases, the front door itself may be positioned perpendicular to the street; nonetheless, the entry should still be clearly defined with a walkway and porch that orients to the street. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. Subdivide larger masses into smaller "modules" that are similar in size to the historic buildings on the original site. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. The primary plane of the front should not appear taller than the historic structure. The front should include a one-story element, such as a porch. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not a part of Aspen's history are especially discouraged on historic sites. 14.17 Design a new driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. Plan parking areas and driveways in a manner that utilizes existing curb cuts. New curb cuts are not permitted. If an alley exists, a new driveway must be located off of it. 14.18 Garages should not dominate the street scene. P206 IV.C. HPC Review 1.13.16 980 Gibson Avenue Page 16 of 16 P207 IV.C. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2016 Page 1 of 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) GRANTING CONCEPTUAL MAJOR DEVELOPMENT, DEMOLITION, RELOCATION, AND VARIATIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 980 GIBSON AVENUE, UNIT 1, ALPINE ACRES SUBDIVISION, CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION #__, SERIES OF 2016 PARCEL ID: 2737-074-10-001 WHEREAS, the applicant, Gibson Matchless LLC, represented by Haas Land Planning and Zone 4 Architects, has requested HPC approval for Conceptual Major Development, Demolition, Relocation, and Variations review for the property located at 980 Gibson Avenue; and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that “no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review;” and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project’s conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, for approval of Demolition, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.080.A, Demolition of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, for approval of Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090.C, Relocation of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, the HPC may approve setback variations according to Section 26.415.110.C.1.a, Variances; and WHEREAS, the HPC may approve variations to the Residential Design Standards according to Section 26.410.020.D; and WHEREAS, the HPC may approve variations to the Carriage House Design Standards according to Section 26.520.080.D; and WHEREAS, HPC reviewed the project on January 13, 2016. HPC considered the application, the staff memo and public comments, and found the proposal consistent with the review standards and granted approval with conditions by a vote of __ to __. P208 IV.C. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2016 Page 2 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC grants Conceptual Major Development, Demolition, Relocation, and Variations review with the following conditions: 1. By noon on Tuesday, January 12th, provide revisions to the project to staff, by email, addressing recommended areas for redesign which are to remove the requested south sideyard variation by making the deck no wider than the Gibson Avenue facing gable end of the new house and by moving the new house northward, design a dirt or gravel filled chamber that separates the below grade living spaces between the two structures (this chamber must be 5’ wide, for the full length that the basements abut), confirm that the addition on the back of the miner’s cottage does not cover the historic fascia on the rear facing gable end, reduce the size of the lightwell that is proposed next to the front porch of the miner’s cottage to be no larger than the minimum building code requirement and ensure that the dimensions and roof pitch shown for the porch on the miner’s cottage reflect the enclosed front porch that appears to be in place now. 2. As part of a building permit review, the applicant will be required to submit a report from a licensed engineer, architect or housemover demonstrating that the structure can be moved, and the method for moving and protecting the structure, must be submitted with the building permit application. In addition the applicant must provide a bond, letter of credit or cashier’s check in the amount of $30,000 to be held by the City during the duration of the relocation process. 3. HPC hereby grants a north (Matchless Drive) side-yard reduction of 9’6” for the miner’s cottage, so that 5’6” is provided. 4. HPC hereby waives compliance with the Building Orientation and Build-to-lines requirements of the Residential Design Standards. 5. HPC hereby waives compliance with the Carriage House design standards stated at Municipal Code Section 26.520.050.2, numbered 4, 5 and 6. 6. A development application for a Final Development Plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of January 13, 2016, the date of approval of a Conceptual Development Plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the Conceptual Development Plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a Conceptual Development Plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 13th day of January, 2016. P209 IV.C. HPC Resolution #__, Series of 2016 Page 3 of 3 Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: ___________________________________ _____________________________ Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Willis Pember, Chair ATTEST: ___________________________ Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk P210 IV.C. APPLICATION UPDATE/ADDENDUM: December 31, 2015 Ms. Amy Simon City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: HPC Conceptual Design Review Application for 980 Gibson Avenue, Aspen (Parcel Identification Number 2737-074-10-001) Dear Amy: Please consider this letter and the accompanying plans set prepared by Zone 4 Architecture to constitute an updated addendum to the previously submitted formal request for Conceptual Approval of a Major Development to allow for the restoration and relocation of the existing historic home located at 980 Gibson Avenue, Aspen. This historic resource will become a voluntary Carriage House. The proposal also involves the development of a new single-family residence on the property. Since the time of the original submittal and in response to comments and direction received from Historic Preservation Planner Amy Simon, the new residence has been reoriented, repositioned, and redesigned altogether to ensure appropriate site planning, heights, scale, massing and proportions, as well as compatibility with the relocated and restored historic resource in terms of materials, form and fenestration. While this conceptual review is to focus only on the height, scale, mass, site plan and proportions of the proposal, the final review considerations of materials, form and fenestration have been taken into account with the redesign efforts as well. In association with the conceptual major development, the applicant is also requesting approvals for partial demolition and on-site relocation of the existing home in order to restore it to its historical appearance and deliver it to prominence while enabling development of a new foundation with a basement. The request also includes modest dimensional variances from the requirements of the underlying R-6 Zone District so as to better support the preservation effort. Background and Existing Conditions The subject property remains legally described as Lot 1 of the Alpine Acres Subdivision, which subdivision was approved by the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners HAAS LAND PLANNING, HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLCLLC • 420 E . MAIN STREET, SUITE 10-B • ASPEN, COLORADO • 81611 • • PHONE: (970) 925-7819 • EMAIL: MITCH@HLPASPEN.COM • P211 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 2 (BOCC) in 1964. The Alpine Acres Subdivision was annexed into the City of Aspen in 1976. All of the duplexes in the subdivision were condominiumized in 1977. Earlier this year (2015), the owners of 980 and 990 Gibson Avenue applied for and were granted approval for subdivision of their lot. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 21 (Series of 2015), the property was subdivided, creating two fee simple lots. Once the Subdivision Plat is recorded, the subject property will be legally described as Lot 1, Gibson and Matchless Subdivision. Staff is currently reviewing a draft of the Subdivision Plat is and its finalization for recording is expected in the coming months. Per the approved Ordinance (21-2015), each of the two resultant lots contains 7,808 square feet of Net Lot Area for the purpose of allowable development rights (i.e., allowable density and floor area). Each lot was restricted to one single-family home, subject to the floor area limitation of 2,486 square foot per dwelling unit as well as one ADU or Carriage House. The ADU or Carriage House does not count as a unit of density and may utilize floor area in excess of the 2,486 square foot limit, up to the total allowable floor area for the lot, which in the case of the subject lot is 3,493 square feet. The driveway access for this lot is required by the Ordinance to be relocated from Gibson Avenue to Matchless (Herron) Drive. While the applicant is permitted to request up to 500 square feet of bonus floor area from the HPC, no such request is being made. The Proposal The development proposed by this application includes restoration and relocation of the historic resource. The non-historic portions of the home will be removed and the remaining structure will become a voluntary Carriage House (CH). The CH will be turned around 180-degrees to face Gibson Avenue and moved to the northwest corner of the lot where it will stand alone as a detached structure and its prominence will be maximized from both streets (Gibson Avenue and Matchless Drive). As currently proposed, the relocated and restored historic resource will be fully detached from the new single-family home by a distance of 20’-6” (was previously proposed at 16’-10”) to the new home’s closest wall. This generous separation, combined with the reorientation to be generally perpendicular to Gibson Avenue, minimizes the new home’s visual impact from the street and on the resource. Although this separation distance is provided above grade, the two structures’ foundation walls will abut one another below grade so as to simplify construction. The restoration of the existing historic home (which will become a deed-restricted, voluntary Carriage House), combined with its relocation and the construction of a new single-family home requires the following variances, which the applicant is hereby requesting: • A north side-yard setback variance for the Carriage House of 9’-6” feet where 15 feet is required, to allow a proposed setback distance of 5’-6”; P212 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 3 • A south side-yard setback variance of 7’ for the deck on the new home where 15 feet is required, to allow a proposed setback distance of 8’ (the actual house footprint is setback 14’-9” from the south side property line but the deck lies within the minimum required setback area); and • A variance from the requirement that the two detached structures maintain a separation distance of at least 10 feet in order to avoid the combined side yard setback requirement of 39 feet. It is noted that the two residences will be more than twenty feet apart above ground at the closest dimension, but less than one foot apart below grade in order to simplify construction in terms of technical difficulty and cost. Furthermore, since the new structure will be located largely behind the restored resource (relative to Gibson Avenue), in effect, the carriage house will have approximately 70 feet of combined side yard setbacks. The new structure will have more than 40 feet of combined side yards along with nearly 75 feet of combined front and rear yard setbacks. Access to the property will now come from Matchless (Herron) Drive, as required in the 2015 Ordinance, and the existing access from and garage fronting on Gibson Avenue will be abandoned. The new single-family home will contain a two-car garage, while there will be one off-street parking space dedicated to the Carriage House, all as shown in the provided plans updates. This development requires substantial efforts to restore historic integrity and return the resource to its historic appearance. There are no photographs depicting the home in its original form, however, it has been determined by Zone 4 Architects which portions of the home are actually historic. While some older materials appear to have been reused in the construction of the north wing addition (i.e., an older door at the north end/side, and some old studs mixed in with new 2x4 framing), this addition is clearly of modern times. All of its windows, all of its roofing, its exposed interior ceiling joists, the majority of the framing, and most of the building openings are clearly of modern times. The restoration efforts to be undertaken include: • Removal of the non-historic additions and the non-historic garage. • 180-degree rotation of the home so that the true front façade faces Gibson Avenue. The home will be relocated to a more appropriate spot on the lot. • Development of a properly engineered foundation and basement below. • The red metal roofing will be replaced after the non-historic portions of the home are removed. • The front porch will be unenclosed and rebuilt (it no longer exists). • The historic side of the home will be restored after the garage addition is removed therefrom. • All inappropriate windows will be replaced with proper double-hung units, and others will simply be in-filled and sided over. • All siding will be repaired/replaced in-kind as necessary. P213 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 4 • It is anticipated that exact details will be worked out through Final Review and then during the construction process with the HPC staff and monitor. Review Requirements Given the above-described proposal and accompanying updated plans set, approvals are needed for Conceptual Major Development, On-Site Relocation and (Partial) Demolition. As part of the approvals, the development must be consistent with the Residential Design Standards and the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, as well as the Dimensional Requirements of the R-6 Zone District. Appropriate variances from some of these requirements are requested, as described and addressed below. Conceptual Development Plan, Section 26.415.070(D)(3) & The HPC Conceptual Design Standards Conceptual Review focuses on the height, scale, massing, site plan and proportions of a proposal. Conceptual Development Plan approval is required for the development proposed by this application. As part of this approval, there must be a determination of consistency with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (hereinafter “the Guidelines”), as such were in effect on the date of the initial Conceptual Review submission. The applicant is not requesting any Floor Area bonuses. Accordingly, the following portion of this application demonstrates adequate consistency with a sufficient number of relevant guidelines, as called for in the italicized print on the very first page of the Guidelines, which specifically state that, …not every guideline will apply to each project, and some balancing of the guidelines must occur on a case-by-case basis. The HPC must determine that a significant number of relevant guidelines have been adequately met in order to approve a project proposal. Chapters 1 through 10 of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (the HP Guidelines) are applicable to the proposed development as they refer to the renovation of Historic Structures. Chapter 11 provides guidelines for new buildings on Landmark Properties and is likewise relevant to this application. Since Chapter 12 is concerned with design in the Main Street Historic District and Chapter 13 concerns designs in the Commercial Core Historic District, these Chapters do not apply. The project has been designed to be generally consistent with the guidelines of Chapter 14, but specific consistency with these requirements will be demonstrated as part of the HPC’s Final review. P214 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 5 The relevant guidelines from Chapters 1 through 11 are outlined below in bold italicized text and each is followed by a response demonstrating compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. Fences 1.1 Preserve Original Fences. 1.2 A new replacement fence should use materials that appear similar to that of the original. 1.3 A new replacement fence should have a “transparent” quality allowing views into the yard from the street. 1.4 New fence components should be similar in scale with those seen traditionally. 1.5 A side yard fence which extends between two homes should be set back from the street facing façade. 1.6 Replacement or new fencing between side yards and along the alley should be compatible with the historic content. There are no original fences worthy of preservation and there are no new fences currently proposed. Similarly, Guidelines 1.7 and 1.8 are not applicable as there are no original retaining walls to preserve. Walkways 1.9 Maintain the established progression of public-to-private spaces when considering a rehabilitation project. The walkways to the front doors of both homes will be simple walks connecting the front porches with Gibson Avenue, consistent with Guideline 1.9. A small curve is necessary in each walkway so as to accommodate the preservation of cottonwood trees that the Parks Department wants maintained, and a few stairs are needed along each walkway as well so as to work with the natural changes in grade between the street and the front doors. Private Yard 1.10 Preserve historic elements of the yard to provide an appropriate context for historic structures. 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. 1.12 Preserve and maintain historically significant planting designs. 1.13 Revisions or additions to the landscape should be consistent with the historic context of the site. 1.14 Additions to the landscape that could interfere with historic structures are inappropriate. P215 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 6 The property does not have any historically significant, landmark landscape elements, but landscape elements residing along the boundaries of the property will be preserved to a great extent. The envisioned design is intentionally and fully compatible with the historic context of the property while accentuating the distinction between the “new and old” of the property. Representatives of the applicant have been working closely with the Aspen Parks Department to coordinate tree preservation and removals. Site Lighting 1.15 Minimize the visual impacts of site lighting. • Site lighting should be shielded to avoid glare onto adjacent properties. Focus lighting on walks and entries, rather than up into trees and onto facade planes. This standard is understood by the applicant and will be addressed at Final HPC Review. Streetscape 1.16 Preserve historically significant landscape and design features. 1.17 Maintain historic irrigation ditches as an integral component of the streetscape. There are no irrigation ditches on or immediately adjacent to the subject property. The property does not have any historically significant landscape or design features either. The historic resource was moved to the site in the late 1960s. 2.1 Preserve original building materials. 2.2 Protect wood features from deterioration. 2.3 Plan repainting carefully. 2.4 Brick or stone that was not painted historically should not be painted. 2.5 Repair deteriorated primary building materials by patching, piecing-in, consolidating or otherwise reinforcing the material. 2.6 Maintain masonry walls in good condition. 2.7 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. 2.8 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for primary building materials. Original building materials will be preserved to the extent practicable. As appropriate, this standard will be more fully addressed at Final HPC Review and then further so during construction with the HPC staff and monitor. 2.9 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. 2.10 Consider removing later covering materials that have not achieved historic significance. P216 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 7 The proposal does not include/involve the covering of original building materials. Later covering materials, such as the metal roofing and inappropriate windows, will be replaced with materials that better match the historic context of the structure. 3.1 Preserve the functional and decorative features of a historic window. 3.2 Preserve the position, number and arrangement of historic windows in a building wall. 3.3 Preserve the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall on a facade. 3.4 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. 3.5 In a replacement window, use materials that appear similar to the original. 3.6 Preserve the size and proportion of a historic window opening. 3.7 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than to replace a historic window. Although this standard will be more specifically addressed at the time of Final HPC Review, the distinctive arrangement of character-defining windows will be preserved in place but enhanced by replacing the casement windows with appropriately scaled double-hung units. Fenestration patterns will be enhanced through proper restoration and maintained. Any windows with character-defining detailing or trim elements will be restored and/or preserved, as appropriate. The position, number and placement of historic windows in building walls will be restored and preserved as well. Similarly, even with replacement windows, the historic ratio of window openings to solid wall will be preserved on historic facades. 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. 4.3 When a historic door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 4.4 If a new screen door is used, it should be in character with the primary door. 4.5 When replacing a door, use a design that has an appearance similar to the original door or a door associated with the style of the house. 4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, consider using a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. Although this standard will be more specifically addressed at the time of Final HPC Review, all historically significant doors will be restored and preserved. Treatment of Porches 5.1 Preserve an original porch. 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details on a porch. 5.3 Avoid enclosing a historic front porch. P217 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 8 5.4 The use of a porch on a residential building in a single-family context is strongly encouraged. Porch Replacement 5.5 If porch replacement is necessary, reconstruct it to match the original in form and detail. The historic front porch has long since been demolished and the original front of the structure currently faces the rear of the lot, where it has been enclosed. The applicant will lift and rotate the entire cottage to have the original front of the building face Gibson Avenue. The applicant will also remove the shed bathroom addition that now sits where an original front porch was; once this is accomplished, the front porch will be rebuilt/restored to match the typical size, orientation, form and design details of an original. Treatment of Architectural Features 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features should be based on original designs. 6.5 Do not guess at "historic" designs for replacement parts. 6.6 Replacement of missing elements may be included in repair activities. All significant architectural features will be restored and/or preserved, as applicable. Treatment of Roofs 7.1 Preserve the original form of a roof. 7.2 Preserve the original eave depth. 7.3 Minimize the visual impacts of skylights and other rooftop devices. The original roof form and the original eave depth will be preserved. No skylights are proposed for this development. Roofing will be replaced with more traditional materials. 7.4 A new chimney should be the same scale as those used historically. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. 7.6 When planning a rooftop addition, preserve the overall appearance of the original roof. The existing building does not have a chimney and no chimney is proposed in the renovation. No rooftop addition is planned. P218 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 9 7.7 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. There are no new dormers proposed for the historic building. 7.8 Preserve original roof materials. Original subsurface roof materials will be preserved to the extent practicable, although once the non-historic portions are removed, the roof may need to be replaced in part or fully. 7.9 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. 7.10 If it is to be used, a metal roof should be applied and detailed in a manner that is compatible and does not detract from the historic appearance of the building. 7.11 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. As the provided plans demonstrate, replacement roof materials will convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. There will be no conjectural features on or added to the roof. Secondary Structures 8.1 If an existing secondary structure is historically significant, then it must be preserved. 8.2 If an existing secondary structure is beyond repair, then replacing it is encouraged There are no existing secondary structures on the property. 8.3 Avoid attaching a garage or carport to the primary structure. 8.4 A garage door should be compatible with the character of the historic structure. No garage or carport is proposed for attachment the restored historic Carriage House. A garage is proposed on the Matchless/Herron side of the new single-family home, as appropriate. 8.5 Avoid moving a historic secondary structure from its original location. As mentioned above, there are no secondary structures located on the property. The existing primary structure, which is to become a detached carriage house, was moved to the subject property in the late 1960s. Preserving Building Locations and Foundations 9.1 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. P219 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 10 9.2 Moving an existing building that contributes to the character of a historic district should be avoided. 9.3 If relocation is deemed appropriate by the HPC, a structure must remain within the boundaries of its historic parcel. 9.4 Site the structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. 9.5 A new foundation should appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. 9.6 When rebuilding a foundation, locate the structure at its approximate historic elevation above grade. 9.7 A lightwell may be used to permit light into below-grade living space. The proposed relocation of the historic residence is depicted on the Site Plan. There is no original, historic location or orientation for the resource on the subject lot as it was moved to the property in the late 1960s, where it was turned 180-degrees to have its rear become the new front before several additions and alterations were completed. The property is not within a historic district. The on-site relocation of the historic residence will allow for development of a proper, engineered foundation with a usable basement. Once the foundation is completed, the structure will be turned around such that its true front façade will face Gibson Avenue and it will be moved to the front of the lot. By moving the historic home in the manner proposed, this resource will better align with the other historic homes on the street. Light wells will be installed at the rear side of the Carriage House so as to permit light into below-grade living space. The relocated resource will be set at-grade, as customary. 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. All non-historically significant additions will be removed. There are no older additions that have achieved historic significance. The existing north wing addition has been determined to be non-historically significant. While some older materials appear to have been reused in its construction (i.e., an older door at the north end/side, and some old studs mixed in with new 2x4 framing), this addition is clearly of modern times. All of its windows, all of its roofing, its exposed interior ceiling joists, the majority of the framing, and most of the building openings are clearly of modern times. This north wing addition as well as the shed roofed bathroom addition where an original front porch would have been located will be removed, as will the entire garage addition. The result will be the original small miner’s cottage form. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. 10.5 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments that may exist on the street. P220 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 11 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. 10.7 If it is necessary to design an addition that is taller than a historic building, set it back substantially from significant facades and use a "connector" to link it to the historic building. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. 10.12 When constructing a rooftop addition, keep the mass and scale subordinate to that of a historic building. 10.13 Set a rooftop addition back from the front of the building. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. The only “additions” to the historic structure involves the new foundation and basement, neither of which will be visible, as well as a modest, subservient and subordinate shed roof addition at the rear. The shed roof addition at the rear is inset from the building corners and allows space for stairs to access a lower level of living area. A front porch addition will be necessary so as to restore the historic character of the resource. As such, the above-cited criteria from Chapter 10 of the Guidelines are not applicable to the proposed development, other than to say that the restored front porch will be appropriate with regard to size, scale, design and detailing. As proposed, the porch will have metal roofing so as to be recognizable as a product of its own time. Chapter 11 provides the guidelines for new buildings on landmarked properties. Said chapter states that when new building occurs on a historic property, it should reinforce the basic visual characteristics of the site. Imitating historic styles is generally discouraged. The Guidelines explain that, “rather than imitating older buildings, a new design should relate to the fundamental characteristics of the historic resources while also conveying the stylistic trends of today.” Relating to such fundamental characteristics has lately been understood and administered to involve compatibility in at least two of the following three areas of design: form, materials and fenestration. While theses are generally understood to be consideration for “final HPC” review, the applicant has made an earnest attempt at achieving a fundamental compatibility in all three areas. The specific guidelines of Chapter 11 are addressed below. P221 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 12 11.1 Orient the primary entrance of a new building to the street. The primary entrance of the new building is oriented toward the street, but it is set an ample distance behind the front façade of the historic structure. The front yard setback of the miner’s cottage will be 15-feet while the front yard setback of the new residence will be some 33.5 feet to its front most wall. Note that, as a result of the subdivision review process and approvals, there is a jog in the front property line and associated setback; consequently, the two detached structures cannot be located within five feet of a common setback line. 11.2 In a residential context, clearly define the primary entrance to a new building by using a front porch. The new building’s primary entrance is clearly defined by the front porch element and a simple walkway from the street to the front door. The walkways curve only to avoid groupings of cottonwood trees that the Parks Department want preserved. 11.3 Construct a new building to appear similar in scale with the historic buildings on the parcel. Although taller and larger than the historic structure on the lot, the new building is set a significant, generous distance from the historic structure and from the street. The one- story element of the front porch on the new structure aids in stepping down the building mass and scale closest to the historic resource. In addition, the front façade of the new structure is extremely similar in footprint to that of the resource, albeit flipped over to provide a near mirror image that allows the new construction to better step down in mass/inflect toward the asset. 11.4 Design a front elevation to be similar in scale to the historic building. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. 11.7 Roof materials should appear similar in scale and texture to those used traditionally. Given the extremely small size of the original miner’s cottage and the development rights afforded under the zoning of the parcel (R-6), it would not be reasonable to expect that the design of the front elevation of the new building would match the scale or exact form to that of the historic building. However, as mentioned above, the front façade of the new structure is extremely similar in footprint to that of the resource, albeit flipped over to provide a near mirror image that allows the new construction to better step down in mass/inflect toward the asset. Furthermore, the new building is in scale and of similar form to most other single-family homes in the neighborhood. The pitched roof, cross-gable form of the new building is similar to that of the resource as P222 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 13 well as that of other, non-historic buildings in the area. Siting of (i.e., with its long axis perpendicular to Gibson Avenue) and generous separation distances between the structures, coupled with the one-story porch element of the new residence, work to appropriately mitigate the differences in size and scale. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. 11.9 Use building components that are similar in size and shape to those of the historic property. The new building will employ similar wood siding as that found on the restored resource but at a greater width. A stone base/wainscot will also be employed to clearly but compatibly differentiate the old and new. The proposed development on the property breaks down the massing of the new building to a traditional human scale by using the front porch element, varied building materials, and historically compatible fenestration patterns. 11.10 The imitation of older historic styles is discouraged. • This blurs the distinction between old and new buildings. • Highly complex and ornately detailed revival styles that were not part of Aspen’s history are especially discouraged on historic sites. The new building is clearly distinguishable from the historic building. The new building’s one-story front porch element is set back further from the street than is that of the historic building. Furthermore, the actual building corners (walls) are more than 20 feet apart. The new building uses different but compatible materials, fenestration patterns and forms, and its contemporary design will complement the historic building while clearly being a product of its own time. As mentioned above, the Guidelines of Chapter 14 are more directly applicable to Final Review than they are to Conceptual Review. Nevertheless, the project is and will be found consistent with Chapter 14’s general guidelines addressing such topics as accessibility, color, lighting, on-going maintenance, and treatment of mechanical equipment, service areas, driveways and parking; the elements of the proposal relative to many of these features are depicted on the accompanying plan sets. In summary, the foregoing has amply demonstrated an exceedingly high level of consistency with more than a “sufficient number of relevant guidelines.” The proposal does not include a floor area bonus request. As such, consistency with every guideline is not required. To the degree that any inconsistency with the Guidelines exists at all, such inconsistency is primarily the result of conflicting guidelines and the required balancing of goals. The proposed development maximizes the potential for consistency with the Guidelines. P223 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 14 Residential Design Standards The proposed development must comply with the City of Aspen’s Residential Design Standards, as enumerated in Section 26.410.040 of the Code. Each of the applicable standards is provided below in italicized text and followed by a response demonstrating compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. A. Site design. The intent of these design standards is to encourage residential buildings that address the street in a manner which creates a consistent "façade line" and defines the public and semi-public realms. In addition, where fences or dense landscaping exist or are proposed, it is intended that they be used to define the boundaries of private property without eliminating the visibility of the house and front yard from the street. 1. Building orientation. The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street-facing facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. Parcels as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall be exempt from this requirement. One (1) element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front corner of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. Both the historic Carriage House and the new single-family home are oriented parallel to the street. See the provided Site Plan. 2. Build-to lines. On parcels or lots of less than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet, at least sixty percent (60%) of the front façade shall be within five (5) feet of the minimum front yard setback line. On corner sites, this standard shall be met on the frontage with the longest block length. Porches may be used to meet the sixty percent (60%) standard. The entire front façade of the restored historic asset complies with this standard (the minimum front setback for this accessory structure is 15-feet). With regard to the new structure, this standard cannot be complied with because of the HPC desire for it to be set back farther from the street than is the historic Carriage House. That said, the second floor deck element on the new structure consumes more than 60% of the front façade and is resides within inches of 10-feet front setback line. In addition, the increased setback of the new structure enhances the preservation effort by allowing the restored cottage to be completely detached and achieve full prominence without being overshadowed or overwhelmed. Since the deck is subject to setback requirements, its location within 5 feet of the front setback line complies with this standard. Note that, as a result of the subdivision review process and approvals, there is a jog in the front property line and associated setback; consequently, the two detached structures cannot be located within five feet of a common/identical setback line. P224 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 15 Standard A.3, Fences, is not applicable since there are no fences or berms currently proposed. Standard B.1, Building Form – Secondary Mass, also does not apply since the subject property is not located within the Aspen Infill Area. C. Parking, garages and carports. The intent of the following parking, garages and carport standards is to minimize the potential for conflicts between pedestrian and automobile traffic by placing parking, garages and carports on alleys or to minimize the presence of garages and carports as a lifeless part of the streetscape where alleys do not exist. 1. For all residential uses that have access from an alley or private road, the following standards shall apply: a. Parking, garages and carports shall be accessed from an alley or private road. b. If the garage doors are visible from a street or alley, then they shall be single-stall doors or double-stall doors designed to appear like single-stall doors. c. If the garage doors are not visible from a street or alley, the garage doors may be either single-stall or normal double-stall garage doors. This property does not have access from an alley or a private road. 2. For all residential uses that have access only from a public street, the following standards shall be apply: a. On the street facing facade(s), the width of the living area on the first floor shall be at least five (5) feet greater than the width of the garage or carport. b. The front facade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house. c. On lots of at least fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in size, the garage or carport may be forward of the front facade of the house only if the garage doors or carport entry are perpendicular to the street (side-loaded). d. When the floor of a garage or carport is above or below the street level, the driveway cut within the front yard setback shall not exceed two (2) feet in depth, measured from natural grade. e. The vehicular entrance width of a garage or carport shall not be greater than twenty-four (24) feet. f. If the garage doors are visible from a public street or alley, then they shall be single- stall doors or double-stall doors designed to appear like single-stall doors. The front most façade on Matchless Drive is that of the Carriage House. With regard to the new home only, the width of both street-facing facades on the first floor is far greater than the garage width plus five feet. There are no garage doors facing Gibson Avenue. There is a condition in the subdivision approval requiring that the curb-cut on Gibson Avenue be removed and that access be taken from the Matchless (Herron) side of the property. Today the garage is right off of and directly faces Gibson Avenue. The proposed garage will be hidden from Gibson Avenue. The garage now complies with P225 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 16 the letter and the intent of the standard and greatly approves upon the existing condition. The front façade of the garage is far more than 10 feet farther from the street (Matchless/Herron) than is the front-most wall of the carriage house and it is 10-plus feet farther from the street than is the front-most wall of the new home. The lot is not 15,000 square feet in gross area, and the driveway will not be within the front yard area. The vehicular entrance width of the garage is not more than 24-feet and the garage doors have been designed to appear like single-stall doors. D. Building elements. The intent of the following building element standards is to ensure that each residential building has street-facing architectural details and elements, which provide human scale to the facade, enhance the walking experience and reinforce local building traditions. 1. Street oriented entrance and principal window. All single-family homes and duplexes, except as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall have a street-oriented entrance and a street facing principal window. Multi-family units shall have at least one (1) street-oriented entrance for every four (4) units and front units must have a street facing a principal window. On corner lots, entries and principal windows should face whichever street has a greater block length. This standard shall be satisfied if all of the following conditions are met: a. The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight (8) feet. The carriage house and the single-family home each have a street-oriented entrance, as well as street-facing principal windows. Furthermore, both front entry doors face the street that they are oriented to (Gibson Avenue), are well within ten feet of the building’s front-most wall, and are not taller than eight feet in height. b. A covered entry porch of fifty (50) or more square feet, with a minimum depth of six (6') feet, shall be part of the front facade. Entry porches and canopies shall not be more than one (1) story in height. The new home and the Carriage House both comply with this standard. c. A street-facing principal window requires that a significant window or group of windows face street. Both the Carriage House and the single-family home include significant windows and/or groups of windows facing the street. 2. First story element. All residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior P226 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 17 living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element; however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front façade shall not be precluded. The historic resource complies with this standard, as it is entirely one-story. The new home also complies with this standard as the one-story portions of the front porch comprise 56% of the building’s overall width, and the depth is more than 6 feet from the wall it is projecting from. 3. Windows. a. Street-facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve feet (12) above the finished first floor. For interior staircases, this measurement will be made from the first landing if one exists. A transom window above the main entry is exempt from this standard. No windows on either residence span through the 9-12 feet area above the finished first floor, where a second floor would typically exist. Since this property is not located within the Aspen Infill Area, standard 3.b. (nonorthogonal windows) is not applicable. 4. Lightwells. All areaways, lightwells and/or stairwells on the street-facing facade(s) of a building shall be entirely recessed behind the front-most wall of the building. All lightwells proposed are entirely recessed behind the front-most walls of the street- facing façade on each building. E. Context. The intent of the following standards is to reinforce the unique character of Aspen and the region by drawing upon Aspen's vernacular architecture and neighborhood characteristics in designing new structures. 1. Materials. The following standards must be met: a. The quality of the exterior materials and details and their application shall be consistent on all sides of the building. All building materials are of the highest quality and their application will be consistent on all sides of the building, as demonstrated on the accompanying plan sets and renderings. b. Materials shall be used in ways that are true to their characteristics. For instance stucco, which is a light or nonbearing material, shall not be used below a heavy material, such as stone. P227 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 18 The building materials for the new home are primarily wood siding and stone. All materials are being used in ways that are true to their characteristics. c. Highly reflective surfaces shall not be used as exterior materials. None of the proposed exterior materials have highly reflective surfaces. Since this property is not located within the Aspen Infill Area, the Inflection standard is not applicable. ADU/Carriage House Design Standards, Section 26.520.050 Section 26.520.050 enumerates the design standards that are specific to ADUs and Carriage Houses. Each of these standards is provided below in italicized text and followed by a response demonstrating compliance and/or consistency therewith, as applicable. All ADUs and carriage houses shall conform to the following design standards unless otherwise approved, pursuant to Subsection 26.520.080.D, Special review: 1. An ADU must contain between three hundred (300) and eight hundred (800) net livable square feet, ten percent (10%) of which must be a closet or storage area. A carriage house must contain between eight hundred (800) and one thousand two hundred (1,200) net livable square feet, ten percent (10%) of which must be closet or storage area. The proposed Carriage House will have 1,200 square feet of net livable area, at least 10% of which will be in closet or storage spaces. 2. An ADU or carriage house must be able to function as a separate dwelling unit. This includes the following: a. An ADU or carriage house must be separately accessible from the exterior. An interior entrance to the primary residence may be approved, pursuant to special review; b. An ADU or carriage house must have separately accessible utilities. This does not preclude shared services; c. An ADU or carriage house shall contain a kitchen containing, at a minimum, an oven, a stove with two (2) burners, a sink and a refrigerator with a minimum of six (6) cubic feet of capacity and a freezer; and d. An ADU or carriage house shall contain a bathroom containing, at a minimum, a sink, a toilet and a shower. P228 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 19 The Carriage House will be separately accessible from the new home and will have separately accessible utilities. The Carriage House will contain a compliant kitchen and bathroom. 3. One (1) parking space for the ADU or carriage house shall be provided on-site and shall remain available for the benefit of the ADU or carriage house resident. The parking space shall not be stacked with a space for the primary residence. There is one parking space dedicated to the Carriage House, as shown on the Site Plan. 4. The finished floor heights of the ADU or carriage house shall be entirely above the natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, on all sides of the structure. The finished first floor height of the Carriage House is above grade, but additional living space is also proposed below grade. Special review approval is requested to allow the basement level as the net livable area of the miner’s cottage alone is quite confined. Adding space above ground (and without the basement level) would run counter to historic preservation goals and design guidelines. 5. The ADU or carriage house shall be detached from the primary residence. An ADU or carriage house located above a detached garage or storage area shall qualify as a detached ADU or carriage house. No other connections to the primary residence or portions thereof, shall qualify the ADU or carriage house as detached. The Carriage House is entirely detached from the primary residence, although the foundations walls of the Carriage House and the primary residence will abut. 6. An ADU or carriage house shall be located within the dimensional requirements of the Zone District in which the property is located. As discussed below in the Dimensional Requirements section of this application, the applicant is seeking an appropriate side yard setback variance for the Carriage House. 7. The roof design shall prevent snow and ice from shedding upon an entrance to an ADU or carriage house. If the entrance is accessed via stairs, sufficient means of preventing snow and ice from accumulating on the stairs shall be provided. The Carriage House is a historic resource. The roof design will not change from what currently exists, except that a new front porch will have to be added as reconstruction of the historic condition. As such, the restored front porch will have shed roof that drains toward the front but which will protect the actual doorway/entrance from snow and ice shedding. To the extent this condition requires special review approval relative to this design standard, such approval is hereby requested. P229 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 20 8. ADUs and carriage houses shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of this Title which apply to residential development in general. These include, but are not limited to, the International Building Code requirements related to adequate natural light, ventilation, fire egress, fire suppression and sound attenuation between living units. This standard may not be varied. This standard is understood by the applicant and will be followed. 9. All ADUs and carriage houses shall be registered with the Housing Authority and the property shall be deed restricted in accordance with Section 26.520.070, Deed restrictions and enforcement. This standard may not be varied. This voluntary Carriage House, although not at all required for mitigation purposes, will be registered with the Housing Authority and deed-restricted in accordance with Section 26.520.070. Demolition, Section 26.415.080(A)(4) Section 26.415.080(A)(4) of the Code provides that the HPC shall review the application, staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a. The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or historic district in which it is located, and b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. P230 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 21 With regard to the existing structure, the applicant proposes demolition of only the non-historic portions. There is no documentation to support or demonstrate that the building portions to be demolished have historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance, and thereby satisfying standard “d” in the first portion of the requirements. This development requires substantial efforts to restore historic integrity and return the resource to its historic appearance. There are no photographs depicting the home in its original form, however, it has been determined by Zone 4 Architects which portions of the home are actually historic. While some older materials appear to have been reused in the construction of the north wing addition (i.e., an older door at the north end/side, and some old studs mixed in with new 2x4 framing), this addition is clearly of modern times. All of its windows, all of its roofing, its exposed interior ceiling joists, the majority of the framing, and most of the building openings are clearly of modern times. The shed roofed bathroom addition located where the original front porch was does not have any historic significance and is detracting from the ability to successfully restore the resource. The non-historic elements of the historic home do not contribute to the significance of the parcel, and the loss of these structures (or portions thereof) will not adversely affect the integrity of either the resource or its relationship to adjacent designated properties. The proposed demolition plans are inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. The overall historic integrity and resource value of the property will be greatly enhanced by development of the proposed plans. On-Site Relocation, Section 26.415.090(C) The intent of Chapter 26.415 is to preserve designated historic properties in their original locations as much of their significance is embodied in their setting and physical relationship to their surroundings as well as their association with events and people with ties to particular site. However, it is recognized that occasionally the relocation of a property may be appropriate as it provides an alternative to demolition or because it only has a limited impact on the attributes that make it significant. Section 26.415.090(C) of the code provides the standards for the relocation of designated properties and states that, Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or P231 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 22 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the Historic District or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security. The resource proposed for on-site relocation is not original to the property much less the actual location on the property. It was moved from an unknown location in the Aspen area to the subject property in the late 1960s. Please refer to the Site Plan for a depiction of the proposed on-site relocation. The applicant proposes on-site relocation of the Carriage House to better situate it on the lot, to allow development of a proper, engineered foundation with a basement, and to separate the historic Carriage House from the proposed new single-family home. Once the foundation is completed, the historic structure will be turned around and moved toward the front of the lot, near the northwest corner, so that it’s historic front façade will now face Gibson Avenue. By moving the historic home in the manner prescribed above, it will better align with the street and the nearby resources. Given the foregoing, it is fair to say that the relocation activity provides an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building. The move will not diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of/with adjacent designated structures. More to the point, restoring the resource and having its front face the street actually requires that it be relocated since the original front façade currently faces the rear of the lot. The structure will be properly supported prior to any relocation activity. A letter from a building relocation expert will be provided with the Final HPC application to substantiate that the structure is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the proposed relocation. Finally, a plan for safe relocation, repair and preservation of the P232 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 23 building, along with provision of the necessary financial security will be provided with the Final HPC application and/or building permit application, as required. Dimensional Requirements of the Medium-Density Residential (R-6) Zone District, Section 26.710.040; and Variances, Section 26.415.110(B) The existing and proposed conditions and dimensional requirements of/for the subject property, as compared with the R-6 Zone District requirements are as follows: • Minimum Gross Lot Area: - R-6 Zoning: 6,000 square feet; 3,000 square feet for lots created by Historic Landmark Lot Split. - Existing Condition: 11,587 square feet. - Proposed: No change. • Minimum Net Lot Area per Dwelling Unit: - R-6 Zoning: 4,500 square feet; 3,000 square feet for Historic Landmark Properties. - Existing Condition: 7,808 square feet per Ordinance 21-2015 with one single-family dwelling. - Proposed: One single-family dwelling and a carriage house (carriage houses are not counted as units of density). • Minimum Lot Width: - R-6 Zoning: 60 feet. - Existing Condition: >60 feet. - Proposed: No change. • Minimum Front Yard: - R-6 Zoning: 10 feet for principal buildings, and 15 feet for accessory buildings. - Existing Condition: >10 feet - Proposed: 10 feet for the principal building, and 15 feet for the accessory building. • Minimum Rear Yard: - R-6 Zoning: 10 feet for principal buildings, but only 5 feet for that portion of a principal building used solely as a garage (if applicable), and 5 feet for accessory buildings. - Existing Condition: > 10 feet. - Proposed: Both structures will have much more than 10 feet of rear yard setback. • Minimum Side Yard: - R-6 Zoning: For detached residential dwellings: 15 feet, and the two side yards must combine to provide a sum of at least 39 feet for this 11,587 square foot property. However, two detached residential dwellings located on one lot shall not be subject to the combined side yard setback P233 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 24 requirements, provided the minimum setback between the two detached dwellings on the lot shall be ten (10) feet. - Existing Condition: 0’ on south side; >15’on the north side - Proposed: 5’-6” north side yard and >15 feet south side yard for the CH. 36’ north side yard setback and 8’ on the south side yard for the deck on the new home (the actual house footprint is setback 14’-9” from the south side property line). The CH and new home will be separate structures and will have more than 10 feet between them at and above-grade. However, their foundation walls will abut below grade and will need a variance from the minimum distance between detached structures standard. Once said variance is approved, the combined side-yard setback requirement of 39 feet will not be applicable/necessary. • Maximum Site Coverage: - R-6 Zoning: Approximately 31% for this lot. - Existing Condition: Not calculated. - Proposed: approximately 20%. • Maximum Height: - R-6 Zoning: 25 feet. - Existing Condition: 13’-8” - Proposed: 24’-4” • Minimum Distance between Detached Buildings on the Lot: - R-6 Zoning: 5 feet. - Existing Condition: N/A - Proposed: 14’ (from roof overhang to roof overhang/deck) at and above grade, but <1 foot below grade. • External Floor Area Ratio (FAR): - R-6 Zoning: For two detached residential dwellings 4,080sf. However, this property has a restriction that limits each dwelling to not more than 2,486sf of Floor Area. The total FAR allowed on this lot is 3,493sf. - Existing Condition: Not calculated. - Proposed: One single-family home of 2,486 and one Carriage House with up to 1,007 square feet of FAR. As mentioned earlier, in the Proposal section, the restoration of the existing historic home (which will become a deed-restricted, voluntary Carriage House), combined with its relocation and the construction of a new single-family home requires the following variances, which the applicant is hereby requesting: • A north side-yard setback variance for the Carriage House of 9’-6” feet where 15 feet is required, to allow a proposed setback distance of 5’-6”; • A south side-yard setback variance of 7’ for the deck on the new home where 15 feet is required, to allow a proposed setback distance of 8’ (the actual house footprint is setback 14’-9” from the south side property line but the deck lies within the minimum required setback area); and P234 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 25 • A variance from the requirement that the two detached structures maintain a separation distance of at least 10 feet in order to avoid the combined side yard setback requirement of 39 feet. It is noted that the two residences will be more than twenty feet apart above ground at the closest dimension, but less than one foot apart below grade in order to simplify construction in terms of technical difficulty and cost. Furthermore, since the new structure will be located largely behind the restored resource (relative to Gibson Avenue), in effect, the carriage house will have approximately 70 feet of combined side yard setbacks. The new structure will have more than 40 feet of combined side yards along with nearly 75 feet of combined front and rear yard setbacks. Section 26.415.110 of the Code enumerates the benefits that historic properties can receive. Subsection B thereof states the following regarding variances: Dimensional variations are allowed for projects involving designated properties to create development that is more consistent with the character of the historic property or district than what would be required by the underlying zoning’s dimensional standards 1. The HPC may grant variances of the Land Use Code for designated properties to allow: a. Development in the side, rear and front setbacks; b. Development that does not meet the minimum distance requirements between buildings; c. Up to five percent (5%) additional site coverage; d. Less open space than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. 2. In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. The side yard setback variances requested will allow for further separation of the new home from the historic Carriage House, and will create a better visual aesthetic. The resulting pattern and character will be similar to that of many historically designated properties throughout Aspen and, particularly, within the Alpine Acres Subdivision. The historic development patterns will be maintained by the at- and above-grade separation of the historic resource from the other unit on the property. As mentioned above, although the two units will be separated by significantly more than ten feet above-grade, they abut only below grade in order to simplify construction. Excavation for foundation walls in close proximity to one another is a difficult process, especially P235 IV.C. 980 Gibson Avenue HPC Conceptual Application Page 26 with regard to stabilizing of the cuts and backfilling between the walls. So as to avoid such difficulty, the two foundation walls will directly abut one another and allow for a simple excavation and stabilization process. The proposal fully meets the intent and spirit of the Code provision allowing for a waiver of combined side yard setbacks when detached structures maintain at least a 10-feet separation. Parking The on-site parking requirement for the property is two (2) spaces for the new home and one (1) for the carriage house. As shown on the proposed site plan, there will be one surface parking space dedicated to the carriage house and two garage spaces for the new single-family home. It is hoped that the provided information and responses prove helpful in the review of this application. Should there be any questions or should any additional information be desired, please do not hesitate to contact me. Truly yours, Haas Land Planning, LLC Mitch Haas Owner/Manager Exhibits Exhibit 1: Pre-Application Conference Summary Exhibit 2: Proof of Ownership Exhibit 3: Authorization for Haas Land Planning, LLC to Represent the Applicant Exhibit 4: Vicinity Map Exhibit 5: Land Use Application, Dimensional Requirements, and HOA Compliance Forms Exhibit 6: Ordinance No. 35 (Series of 1987) and Ordinance No. 21 (Series of 2015) Exhibit 7: Executed City of Aspen Fee Agreement Exhibit 8: Mailing addresses of record for all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the subject property P236 IV.C. 9 8 0 G I B S O N A V E N U E R E V I S E D H P C C O N C E P T U A L D E S I G N R E V I E W | 1 2 . 2 1 . 2 0 1 5 P 2 3 7 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW SURVEY REVISED P 2 3 8 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW SITE PLAN REVISED 24'-1 3/8" 5'-6" 6 ' 1 5 ' 4' 33 ' - 6 " 14'-9" 43'-7" 36'-9" 42 ' 7945 7940 7950 7955 7940 7945 7950 7955 PROPERTY LINE 3 8 . 0 0 ' S 82 °59 '52 " E 10 6 .85 ' S 23°44'00" E 24.22' N 23°44'00" W 75.78' N 5 5 ° 2 9 ' 5 1 " E S 48 °50 '17 " E 58 .19 ' N 66 °20 '39 " E 14 2 .85 ' M A T C H L E S S D R I V E H E R R O N R O A D FRONT SETBACK S I D E S E T B A C K SID E SE T B A C K REAR SETBA C K R. O. W. S I D E SE T B A C K GIBSON AVENUE 990 GIBSON DO W N UP CH PARKING SPOT OUTLINE OF ROOF ABOVE DECK ABOVE DOWN CARRIAGE HOUSE 980 GIBSON N SCALE : 1" = 10' 0 5 10 20 40 P 2 3 9 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW LOWER LEVEL PLAN REVISED UP FRONT SETBACK S I D E S E T B A C K SID E SE T B A C K S I D E S E T B A C K UP N SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 1'5'10'2' P 2 4 0 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW MAIN LEVEL PLAN REVISED 24'-2 3/16" 3 8 . 0 0 ' S 23°44'00" E 24.22' N 5 5 ° 2 9 ' 5 1 " E M A T C H L E S S D R I V E FRONT SETBACK S I D E S E T B A C K SI D E SE T B A C K R. O. W. S I D E S E T B A C K D O W N UP OUTLINE OF ROOF ABOVE DECK ABOVE DOWN N SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 1'5'10'2' P 2 4 1 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW UPPER LEVEL PLAN REVISED 22'-9 3/4" 24'-3 1/2" DECK FRONT SETBACK S I D E S E T B A C K SID E SE T B A C K S I D E S E T B A C K 3 8 . 0 0 ' S 23°44'00" E 24.22' N 5 5 ° 2 9 ' 5 1 " E D O W N 12 : 1 2 S L O P E 1 2 : 12 S L O P E 2 : 1 2 S L O P E 12 : 12 SLOPE 12 : 12 SLOPE 2 : 12 S L O P E N SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 1'5'10'2' P 2 4 2 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW ROOF PLAN REVISED 12 : 12 SL O P E 12 : 12 S L O P E 12 : 12 SLOPE 3 : 12 SLOPE 12 : 12 SLOPE 12 : 12 S L O P E 12 : 12 S L O P E SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 1'5'10'2' N P 2 4 3 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW HISTORIC CARRIAGE HOUSE ELEVATIONS REVISED SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATIONNORTH ELEVATION GRADE T.O. RIDGE GRADE T.O. RIDGE 1/3 POINT OF ROOF 12 '-9 " 5 '-0 " GRADE T.O. RIDGE 1/3 POINT OF ROOF GRADE T.O. RIDGE 1/3 POINT OF ROOF 13 '-0 " 5 '-0 " 13 '-9 " 5 '-0 " 1/3 POINT OF ROOF 12 '-9 " 5 '-0 " SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" HISTORIC MINER'S COTTAGE IMAGERYHISTORIC MINER'S COTTAGE IMAGERY 0 1'5'10'2' P 2 4 4 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW NEW HOUSE ELEVATIONS REVISED SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION GRADE T.O. RIDGE SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 1'5'10'2' T.O. RIDGE 1/3 POINT OF ROOF 11 '-4 " 13 '-0 " SECOND FLOOR 5 '-8 " GRADE 1/3 POINT OF ROOF 11 '-4 " 13 '-0 " SECOND FLOOR 5 '-8 " P 2 4 5 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW NEW HOUSE ELEVATIONS REVISED WEST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION GRADE SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" GRADE T.O. RIDGE 1/3 POINT OF ROOF 11 '-4 " 13 '-0 " SECOND FLOOR 5 '-8 " 0 1'5'10'2' T.O. RIDGE 1/3 POINT OF ROOF 11 '-4 " 13 '-0 " SECOND FLOOR 5 '-8 " P 2 4 6 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS REVISED Residential Design Standards Compliance RDS Section Code Description Compliance Description (Note Approved Variances Reference 1. Building orientation The front facades of all principal structures shall be parallel to the street. On corner lots, both street facing facades must be parallel to the intersecting streets. On curvilinear streets, the front facade of all structures shall be parallel to the tangent of the midpoint of the arc of the street. Parcels as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall be exempt from this requirement. One (1) element, such as a bay window or dormer, placed at a front corner of the building may be on a diagonal from the street if desired. Both historic CH and new house are oriented parallel to the property line Site Plan 2. Build-to lines On parcels or lots of less than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet, at least sixty percent (60%) of the front façade shall be within five (5) feet of the minimum front yard setback line. On corner sites, this standard shall be met on the frontage with the longest block length. Porches may be used to meet the sixty percent (60%) standard. Can't comply with this standard per HPC requirements to have new house set back to help historic CH stand out Site Plan 3. Fences Fences, hedgerows and planter boxes shall not be more than forty-two (42) inches high, measured from natural grade, in all areas forward of the front facade of the house. Man-made berms are prohibited in the front yard setback. N/A B. Building Form 1. Secondary mass All new single-family and duplex structures shall locate at least ten percent (10%) of their total square footage above grade in a mass which is completely detached from the principal building or linked to it by a subordinate linking element. This standard shall only apply to parcels within the Aspen infill area pursuant to Subsection 26.410.010.B.2. Accessory buildings such as garages, sheds and accessory dwelling units are examples of appropriate uses for the secondary mass. A subordinate linking element for the purposes of linking a primary and secondary mass shall be at least ten (10) feet in length, not more than ten (10) feet in width, and with a plate height of not more than nine (9) feet. Accessible outdoor space over the linking element (e.g. a deck) is permitted but may not be covered or enclosed. Any railing for an accessible outdoor space over a linking element must be the minimum reasonably necessary to provide adequate safety and building code compliance and the railing must be 50% or more transparent. Parcel not located in the Aspen infill area - not required to comply with this standard a) Parking, garages and carports shall be accessed from an alley or private road.N/A b) If the garage doors are visible from a street or alley, then they shall be single-stall doors or double-stall doors designed to appear like single-stall doors. N/A c) If the garage doors are not visible from a street or alley, the garage doors may be either single stall or normal double-stall garage doors. N/A a) On the street facing facade(s), the width of the living area on the first floor shall be at least five (5) feet greater than the width of the garage or carport. Comply with the total width of the new house being 38' which is 15' larger than 23' wide garage Main Level Plan b) The front facade of the garage or the front-most supporting column of a carport shall be set back at least ten (10) feet further from the street than the front-most wall of the house. Comply as the front most elevation is 10'-3" in front of the garage elevation Main Level Plan c) On lots of at least fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet in size, the garage or carport may be forward of the front facade of the house only if the garage doors or carport entry are perpendicular to the street (side-loaded). N/A d) When the floor of a garage or carport is above or below the street level, the driveway cut within the front yard setback shall not exceed two (2) feet in depth, measured from natural grade. Comply Site Plan e) The vehicular entrance width of a garage or carport shall not be greater than twenty-four (24) feet.Comply Main Level Plan f) If the garage doors are visible from a public street or alley, then they shall be single-stall doors or double-stall doors designed to appear like single-stall doors. Comply Elevations All single-family homes and duplexes, except as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.4 shall have a street-oriented entrance and a street facing principal window. Multi-family units shall have at least one (1) street-oriented entrance for every four (4) units and front units must have a street facing a principal window. On corner lots, entries and principal windows should face whichever street has a greater block length. This standard shall be satisfied if all of the following conditions are met: a) The entry door shall face the street and be no more than ten (10) feet back from the front-most wall of the building. Entry doors shall not be taller than eight (8) feet. Comply on the historic CH and the new house Elevations b) A covered entry porch of fifty (50) or more square feet, with a minimum depth of six (6') feet, shall be part of the front facade. Entry porches and canopies shall not be more than one (1) story in height. Comply on the historic CH and the new house Elevations c) A street-facing principal window requires that a significant window or group of windows face street.Comply on the historic CH and the new house Elevations 2. First story element.All residential buildings shall have a first story street-facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty percent (20%) of the building's overall width and the depth of which is at least six (6) feet from the wall the first story element is projecting from. Assuming that the first story element includes interior living space, the height of the first story element shall not exceed ten (10) feet, as measured to the plate height. A first story element may be a porch or living space. Accessible space (whether it is a deck, porch or enclosed area) shall not be allowed over the first story element; however, accessible space over the remaining first story elements on the front façade shall not be precluded. Comply on the historic CHand the new house Elevations a) Street-facing windows shall not span through the area where a second floor level would typically exist, which is between nine (9) and twelve feet (12) above the finished first floor. For interior staircases, this measurement will be made from the first landing if one exists. A transom window above the main entry is exempt from this standard. Comply on the historic CH and the new house Elevations b) No more than one (1) non-orthogonal window shall be allowed on each facade of the building. A single non-orthogonal window in a gable end may be divided with mullions and still be considered one (1) non-orthogonal window. The requirement shall only apply to Subsection 26.410.010.B.2. Parcel not located in the Aspen infill area - not required to comply with this standard 4. Lightwells.All areaways, lightwells and/or stairwells on the street-facing facade(s) of a building shall be entirely recessed behind the front-most wall of the building. Comply on the historic CH and the new house Main Level Plan a) The quality of the exterior materials and details and their application shall be consistent on all sides of the building.Comply on the historic CH and the new house Elevations b) Materials shall be used in ways that are true to their characteristics. For instance stucco, which is a light or non-bearing material, shall not be used below a heavy material, such as stone. Comply on the historic CH and the new house Elevations c) Highly reflective surfaces shall not be used as exterior materials.Comply on the historic CH and the new house Elevations The following standard must be met for parcels which are six thousand (6,000) square feet or over and as outlined in Subsection 26.410.010.B.2: Parcel not located in the Aspen infill area - not required to comply with this standard a) If a one-story building exists directly adjacent to the subject site, then the new construction must step down to one-story in height along their common lot line. If there are one-story buildings on both sides of the subject site, the applicant may choose the side toward which to Inflect. Parcel not located in the Aspen infill area - not required to comply with this standard A one-story building shall be defined as follows: A one story building shall mean a structure or portion of a structure, where there is only one (1) floor of fully usable living space, at least twelve (12) feet wide across the street frontage. This standard shall be met by providing a one story element which is also at least twelve (12) feet wide across the street frontage and one (1) story tall as far back along the common lot line as the adjacent building is one (1) story. Parcel not located in the Aspen infill area - not required to comply with this standard 1. Materials.E. Context 2. Inflection A. Site Design 1. For all residential uses that have access from an alley or private road, the following standards shall apply: C. Parking, Garages and Carports 2. For all residential uses that have access only from a public street, the following standards shall be apply: D. Building Elements 1. Street oriented entrance and principal window. 3. Windows. P 2 4 7 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW CONCEPTUAL IMAGES REVISED VIEW FROM GIBSON AVE P 2 4 8 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW CONCEPTUAL IMAGES REVISED VIEW FROM GIBSON AVE P 2 4 9 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW CONCEPTUAL IMAGES REVISED VIEW FROM CORNER OF GIBSON AVE AND MATCHLESS DRIVE P 2 5 0 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW CONCEPTUAL IMAGES REVISED VIEW FROM CORNER OF GIBSON AVE AND MATCHLESS DRIVE P 2 5 1 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW CONCEPTUAL IMAGES REVISED VIEW FROM MATCHLESS DRIVE P 2 5 2 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW CONCEPTUAL IMAGES REVISED VIEW FROM MATCHLESS DRIVE P 2 5 3 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW CONCEPTUAL IMAGES REVISED VIEW FROM MATCHLESS DRIVE P 2 5 4 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW SITE ELEVATIONS REVISED WEST ELEVATION FROM GIBSON AVE 0 1'5'10'2' SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" P 2 5 5 I V . C . 980 GIBSON 1 2 . 3 1 . 2 0 1 5 HPC CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW SITE ELEVATIONS REVISED NORTH ELEVATION FROM MATCHLESS 0 1'5'10'2' SCALE : 1/4" = 1'-0" P 2 5 6 I V . C .