The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.hpc.20250910AGENDA ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION September 10, 2025 4:30 PM, City Council Chambers - 3rd Floor 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 I.ROLL CALL II.MINUTES II.A Draft Minutes - 7/9/25 III.PUBLIC COMMENTS IV.COMMISSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS V.DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI.PROJECT MONITORING VII.STAFF COMMENTS VIII.CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT ISSUED IX.CALL UP REPORTS X.SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS XI.SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT XII.OLD BUSINESS XII.A 504 W. Hallam St. - Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development - Conceptual Development Plan Review, Relocation, Setback Variation, and Recommendation for the Creation of Two Transferable Development Rights Certificates minutes.hpc.20250709_DRAFT.docx Staff Memo for 504 W Hallam Major Conceptual HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2025.pdf Exhibit A. HPDG Staff Findings (updated).pdf Exhibit B. Relocation Criteria Staff Findings.pdf 1 1 XIII.NEW BUSINESS XIV.ADJOURN XV.NEXT RESOLUTION NUMBER Exhibit C. TDR Criteria Staff Findings.pdf Exhibit D. Variation Criteria Staff Findings.pdf Exhibit E. Combined Referral Comments (updated).pdf Exhibit F. Updated Application.pdf Exhibit G. Original Application.pdf TYPICAL PROCEEDING FORMAT FOR ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS (1 Hour, 15 Minutes for each Major Agenda Item) 1. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest (at beginning of agenda) 2. Presentation of proof of legal notice (at beginning of agenda) 3. Applicant presentation (10 minutes for minor development; 20 minutes for major development) 4. Board questions and clarifications of applicant (5 minutes) 5. Staff presentation (5 minutes for minor development; 10 minutes for major development) 6. Board questions and clarifications of staff (5 minutes) 7. Public comments (5 minutes total, or 3 minutes/ person or as determined by the Chair) 8. Close public comment portion of hearing 9. Applicant rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) 10. Staff rebuttal/clarification (5 minutes) End of fact finding. Chairperson identifies the issues to be discussed. 11. Deliberation by the commission and findings based on criteria commences. No further input from applicant or staff unless invited by the Chair. Staff may ask to be recognized if there is a factual error to be corrected. If the item is to be continued, the Chair may provide a summary of areas to be restudied at their discretion, but the applicant is not to re-start discussion of the case or the board’s direction. (20 minutes) 12. Motion. Prior to vote the chair will allow for call for clarification for the proposed resolution. Please note that staff and/or the applicant must vacate the dais during the opposite presentation and board question and clarification session. Both staff and applicant team will vacate the dais during HPC deliberation unless invited by the chair to return. Updated: March 7, 2024 2 2 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 9TH, 2025 Vice - Chairperson Raymond opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission at 4:35pm. Commissioners in attendance: Roger Moyer, Jodi Surfas, Duncan Clauss and Kim Raymond. Absent were Dakota Severe, Barb Pitchford and Kara Thompson. Staff present: Gillian White – Principal Preservation Planner Daniel Folke – Planning Director Ben Anderson – Community Development Director Luisa Berne - Assistant City Attorney Mike Sear – Deputy City Clerk MINUTES: Mr. Moyer motioned to approve the draft minutes from 5/14/25 and 5/28/25. Mr. Clauss seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Mr. Clauss, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes; 4-0, motion passes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None COMMISSSIONER MEMBER COMMENTS: Mr. Moyer noted that one of the HPC members was not present as she was directly affected by the flooding events in Texas. The board took a moment of silence for all the people affected by these floods. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: None PROJECT MONITORING: None STAFF COMMENTS: Mr. Folke noted that Mr. Stuart Hayden had permanently relocated to Denver though he would be working remotely potentially through the end of the year. He noted that staff was conducting interviews for his eventual replacement. He then reminded the commissioners that the Armory project would be going in front of City Council for first reading on July 22. There was a brief discussion about employee retention and recruitment and how housing issues can affect them. Ms. White updated the HPC about the mural project at 435 E Main St. Ms. Berne reminded the members to keep the discussion polite and conduct themselves with proper decorum. CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT: None CALL UP REPORTS: None SUBMIT PUBLIC NOTICE FOR AGENDA ITEMS: Ms. Berne confirmed that public notice was completed in compliance with the Code as needed for both agenda items. 3 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 9TH, 2025 NEW BUSINESS: 305 South Mill St. – Commercial Design Review – Conceptual Design, Historic Preservation Major Development – Conceptual Development Plan Review, Mountain View Plane Review, Growth Management Quota System, and Transportation and Parking Management Review - Special Review - Public Hearing Applicant Presentation: Garrett Larimer – Kraemer Land Planning Mr. Larimer introduced Mr. Craig Pearce, the owner of the Wild Fig restaurant, and the applicant in this application and Mr. Ryan Doremus of Thunderbowl Architects. Mr. Larimer went on to describe the request before HPC and the various associated reviews. He described the property and went over some of its history. He then summarized the main components of their proposal. The first being to enclose the existing courtyard area between The Wild Fig and the neighboring building, converting it to about 460 square feet of new net leasable space. The other will be to enclose an open-air walkway between the existing building and pergola as well as about a third of the existing space under the pergola. He noted that this second aspect would create about another 330 square feet of net leasable space. He mentioned that they were also proposing to add a roof overhang above the area where the Popcorn wagon sits. He also noted that they are proposing a louvered awning system to be installed on top of the existing pergola as well as accordion style windows to be installed in the openings of the pergola. He added that with all the proposed additional square footage, the building would still only total about half the allowable square footage for the lot size. Mr. Doremus went over the architecture and design intent of the project noting that the main purpose of the additional internal square footage was to increase the amount of usable year-round seats in the restaurant while still keeping the prominent front arch feature. He continued by going over some of the design elements and material choices which he noted were similar to the characteristics of the neighboring buildings. Mr. Larimer then described the louvered awning system and noted that the system would increase the height of the pergola by about eight inches. He showed a few images of what it would look like. He moved on to the Land Use review items and noted that they were in agreement with City staff on several of them but pointed out the mountain view plane review as a point of further discussion. He showed an image of the Wheeler Opera House’s view plane and pointed out some of its details, including the point of origin and the extent of the foreground. He noted that this site and proposal would not be able to avoid infringing into this view plane. He pointed out where the development would cross the view plane. He noted that the HPC is given certain discretionary review to grant height variations if the development meets the definition of minimal impact and it is shown that the proposed height is required for reasonable use. He then went over the criteria for “minimal impact” and “reasonable use”, and he detailed the applicant’s reasoning for why the proposal meets them. He also went over the design intent for the height of the new additions. He mentioned that they are trying to take a light touch to an existing structure and if they were to have to reduce the height of the pergola it may have to be altered to a point that it is no longer maintainable or viable. He stated that over the past many years several temporary use enclosure requests for the pergola space have been proposed and the consistent feedback from City Council and staff is to come back with a high quality, permanent design solution. He believed that they are responding to that feedback with this proposal. Mr. Larimer then went over the design review related to the proposed materials and lighting. He noted that they are looking forward to continuing to work with staff and incorporating feedback from HPC when refining these elements. He also detailed their request of HPC to approve the proposed roof over 4 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 9TH, 2025 the Popcorn Wagon space. He mentioned that the rest of the public amenity space requirement would be satisfied by a cash in lieu payment. He then went over the growth management, parking and transportation reviews and detailed how they would satisfy these. Mr. Larimer concluded by stating that if the HPC agreed with their approach related to the mountain view plane review, they would like for the first two conditions in the resolution to be eliminated and for the proposal to be approved as presented. Mr. Pearce noted that he and his wife Samantha are locals and are not going anywhere. He described his history in Aspen and his connection with the town. He said that the process of a project like this can be very daunting. He was excited to be back in this space and was looking forward to creating something great for the town. He did not think what they were asking for was very exorbitant. Mr. Moyer asked when the original building was built. Mr. Larimer said sometime around 1960, and Mr. Pierce described the history of the space and its various tenants and remodels over the years. He noted that there is currently not enough seating space inside the existing restaurant layout to make enough revenue to service the rent. This was the reason for enclosing the proposed spaces and making the changes to the existing pergola. Staff Presentation: Daniel Folke – Planning Director Mr. Folke began his presentation by summarizing the various requests. He went into some details about the mountain view plane request. He noted that while the staff memo stated that the proposal did not meet the definition of “minimal impact”, after the site visit, staff had some internal discussion and agreed that the proposal had a minimal impact as it did not materially alter the observers view of Aspen Mountain. Regarding whether the proposed development is required for reasonable use of the property, Mr. Folke acknowledged that this can be a bit more subjective but felt that the applicant team had been very thoughtful in their design in order to minimize the height. He noted that the advantage of the applicant’s proposal was that the existing pergola would remain and he felt the question was whether the allowance of the additional eight inches for the louvered roof was an acceptable tradeoff for being able to keep the existing structure. He said that it was up to HPC whether that was “reasonable” and noted that one could find it unreasonable to require them to remove the entire pergola and lower it eight inches. He noted that the same reasoning could be used for the proposed construction of the entryway. He noted that the proposal is for it to be 12-feet tall, while staff is recommending it to be 11-feet 9 inches. He noted that staff recommended this height as it would be new construction and could be built to that height and not break the view plane. Mr. Folke moved on to the proposed materials and noted that one of the proposed materials does not meet Design Standard 1.23. He went on to explain staff’s position on this as noted in the staff memo and highlighted that the proposed metal cladding was not commonly seen in the downtown area. He also noted that one of the recommended conditions of approval was that the applicant’s lighting plan would need to comply with the City’s lighting code. He concluded by reviewing the recommended conditions of approval as listed in the staff memo. Ms. Raymond noted that in Mr. Folke’s presentation he said that after the site visit, staff had a different stance on conditions #1 related to the height of the existing pergola and louvered roof system. Mr. Folke said that staff felt the proposal would be minimally intrusive into the view plane and would not impact someone’s ability to see the mountain, but they were still unclear whether it met the second criteria of whether it was needed for reasonable use. 5 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 9TH, 2025 Ms. Raymond asked if the purple areas on the east elevation were where the metal material was proposed. Mr. Pearce noted that it would not be all metal and that the only metal would be the window frames. He said that everything around the windows would either be old brick or a painted stucco finish. Mr. Moyer asked staff if the material issue could be easily handled by staff and monitor. Ms. White noted that the materials would be reviewed and discussed at the Final review and if at that review the HPC still had concerns or were not happy with the design a condition of approval could be added to that effect. Ms. Raymond asked how the view plane was determined. Mr. Anderson went over some history of view planes in Aspen and explained how they were created and determined. Public Comment: Mr. Jay Maytin noted that he was a resident of the valley and a former Chair of the HPC. He felt this building could be the most restricted building in town due to the view plane from the Wheeler, while being a very visible property. He felt the building was needed for the vitality of the core. He felt that variances were a tool used by HPC to promote redevelopment and preservation simultaneously. He felt variances were a compromise to allow owners to preserve their property and that this specific height variance would be almost nonexistent to the public. He asked the HPC to approve this project. Board Discussion: Mr. Moyer commented that the building was built three feet taller than the east entry and the existing pergola. He noted the applicant was proposing to add eight inches to the height of the pergola and he felt that the main building height negates anything built below it in terms of the view plane. He felt the view plane issue should be dropped. He also did not have a problem with the proposed roof over the popcorn wagon area and felt the proposed materials could be reviewed more at the final review. Mr. Clauss was in agreement and felt the site visit was helpful. Ms. Surfas also agreed with Mr. Moyer. Ms. Raymond added that she felt the building proposal would end up being a great amenity for the community. She felt that this was a successful solution to the temporary plastic walls that had been used in years past and was a good response to City Council’s request for a permanent solution. She also agreed with the proposed cash-in-lieu payments where allowed as well as Mr. Moyer comments for the proposed materials to be reviewed at the final review. There was a discussion about amending the resolution conditions. The HPC agreed to amend conditions #1 and #2 to match the heights as presented by the applicant and conditions #3 and #4 regarding the materials and lighting to be reviewed at the final review. MOTION: Mr. Moyer moved to approve the next resolution in the series with the amendments discussed. There was some further discussion to clarify the amendments. Mr. Moyer amended his original motion to include these. Ms. Raymond seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Mr. Clauss, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes. 4-0, motion passes. NEW BUSINESS: 504 West Hallam St. – Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development and Relocation - PUBLIC HEARING 6 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 9TH, 2025 Before the presentations, Mr. Moyer made a motion to reject the application and continue the hearing to allow the applicant to come back with something that would be acceptable and not take up hours of the commission’s time. The motion was not seconded. Applicant Presentation: Sara Adams – Bendon Adams Ms. Adams began her presentation by introducing Mr. Scott Hoffman, the owner of the property, and Mr. Jack Snow, the architect on the project. She noted they had worked for over a year on this project and appreciate the ability to present to the entire HPC and hopefully receive some valuable feedback. Ms. Adams then listed the requests, including major conceptual development, demolition of non- historic additions, relocation on site, complete restoration of the historic resource, a small FAR bonus and a recommendation to City Council for the establishment of two Transferable Development Rights (TDRs). She noted that they were not asking for any variances and that the project was under the allowable floor area and height. She then went over some details of the property and its location. She also noted that the lot is zoned for two detached homes and a total of around 3,600 square feet and they are coming in around 2,800 square feet. She reviewed some of the history of the historic resource, the research that they had done to determine what is historic and what is not and described some of the alterations that had been made over the years. Ms. Adams noted that while there were some unknowns about the history of the home, in consulting with Mr. Hayden, they thought the best approach was to restore the historic footprint. She said the last thing they wanted to do was to start making up what they thought the building was. She noted that in modeling for a 10-foot connector, they realized that there was not enough space, as the lot was only 100 feet deep. She said the plan was to restore the historic footprint and use that as the connector as it would read as more modern and is longer than a 10-foot connector. She showed this process on the site plans. She also showed a side elevation and floor plan and further detailed the historic footprint of the rear portion of the building, noting that the connecting element would be about 14 feet long which was longer than the required 10 feet. She noted that the proposal included lifting the historic resource and square it to the lot line. She also went over the setbacks for the property. She mentioned that the second story of the addition above the garage was set about 63 feet back from Hallam St. which is over halfway to the rear of the lot. She then went over the proposed floor plans and noted that because the historic resource was so close to the property line, underpinning would not be an option. She showed several renderings of the proposal and noted that since the new two-story addition was set so far back that it was not visible from Hallam St. Ms. Adams moved on to the Preservation Guidelines and noted that while many of them were met, they were hoping to get some good feedback on the ones that staff noted were not. She detailed these guidelines and the reasoning behind why the applicant felt they were met. She referenced the requested FAR bonus of 71 square feet and noted that with the significant proposed restoration that amount was very minimal but it would allow the owner to request the establishment of two TDRs instead of just one. She went over the criteria for the bonus. Ms. Adams concluded by acknowledging that this was a lot to digest and that staff was recommending a continuation. She was hoping to receive some direct feedback on some of the key points including the relocation of the resource, the restoration of the historic footprint and using it as the connecting element, the height and width of the addition and the requested floor area bonus. Staff Presentation: Gillian White - Principal Preservation Planner 7 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 9TH, 2025 Ms. White began her presentation by going over the site details and context and reviewing the applicant’s requests. She then highlighted the guidelines that staff felt were not met and went over the reasoning for this as detailed in the “Staff Comments” section of the staff memo. These guidelines included 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, 10.8 and 10.9 that all deal with the proposed addition. She noted that staff is recommending continuance to allow the applicant to revise the application to better meet these guidelines. Ms. White moved on to the request for relocation and noted that in staff’s opinion the proposed temporary relocation is not an acceptable preservation method as it would not maintain the resources historic alignment. She mentioned that staff could not recommend approval of the relocation as it does not meet at least one of the relocation standards and recommended underpinning as an alternative to relocation. Ms. White then addressed the Floor Area Bonus request and went over the applicable criteria that need to be met as detailed in the staff memo. She also addressed the TDR request and went over staff’s analysis of this, also as detailed in the staff memo. She noted that staff could only recommend the establishment of one TDR. Ms. White concluded by stating that staff is recommending continuation and the next available date for was September 10th. She also responded to earlier commissioner comments, by stating the importance of respecting both staff’s and the applicant’s time spent on projects and that it would be unfair not to allow an applicant to come before HPC to gather needed feedback to ultimately end up with a better project. Public Comment: Ms. Laura Magis noted that she lived in the neighboring property on the other side of the alley. She said that since she does not face Franics St. on the other side of her property, the proposed new addition would be a large block to her view. Board Discussion: Mr. Moyer began his comments by reiterating that HPC’s job is to protect the historic integrity of the resource and in that job, it is ok to say no. He believed that by saying no, a better project usually is the result. He was supportive of the removal of the non-historic additions and the restoration of the historic resource, as well as lifting the resource in order to construct a new foundation. He was not in favor of the relocation and felt it should be placed back in its original location. Moving on to the proposed new addition, Mr. Moyer concurred with staff that it was overwhelming and that being on a corner lot, the new addition was supposed to blend with the historic and not dominate it. He felt the application violated many of the guidelines. He suggested that the mass and scale of the addition be reduced, and a true connecting element be created. He also noted that for HPC to grant a floor area bonus the project must be exemplary. Mr. Moyer motioned to extend the meeting to 7:30pm. Mr. Clauss seconded. All in favor, motion passes. Mr. Clauss felt that if the proposed connector acted as just a connector it would be smaller and would make the new addition more compliant with the guidelines, but may necessitate the historic resource be moved forward, which would be another issue. Mr. Moyer noted that staff made a good point that sometime an applicant cannot build as big as they may want. Ms. Surfas commented that the biggest issue in her mind was that this was a corner lot and that it felt like a very large mass on a corner. She felt the proposed connector element being part of the historic 8 REGULAR MEETING HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION JULY 9TH, 2025 resource was problematic, as it was not being used as just a connector and was proposed to be habitable space. Ms. Raymond did not see the new addition being overpowering as it was set 63 feet back from the front of the lot. Ms. Surfas clarified that it was overpowering when looked at from the side, because it was on a corner lot. Mr. Moyer brought up the public comment from the neighbor and felt it was important to consider. Ms. Raymond pointed out that this project was for Mr. Hoffman to live in and he is trying to create something he wants. Ms. Surfas felt that Ms. Raymond’s comment was somewhat irrelevant as they had heard that story before and then a short while later the house is for sale. Mr. Moyer reiterated that HPC’s job was protecting the historic resource, not helping the applicant. Ms. Surfas again noted that the connecting element was her biggest issue because it was not acting as a link and that from the side street rendering, the addition was overwhelming. Ms. Raymond noted the three criteria of completability between the historic resource and new addition were form, materials and fenestration. She said her feedback would be for the applicant to make a stronger relationship between two of those elements. While she appreciated the approach of trying to use the historic footprint for the connecting element but was somewhat conflicted as it was still not a true connector. She knew it was a wide connector and referenced a few other examples of wider connectors in town and felt that the applicant could bring it in a little bit so as to reveal more of the corner of the actual historic resource. She noted that from experience, underpinning a property with a lot of space is very hard and in this case trying to do it with only a foot and a half was nearly impossible. She did not have a problem with them picking up the resource and squaring it up to the property line and creating the 5-foot setback. She agreed with staff that a slate roof on the historic resource was not appropriate. She also reiterated that the connector was still the biggest issue for her and encouraged the applicant to investigate that further, as far as its materials and size. She agreed with Mr. Moyer that their job was protecting the historic resource, but she did appreciate the applicant’s efforts and felt that they would need to revisit this at a future meeting. The other members agreed with Ms. Raymond that it was ok to lift the historic resource and square it to the lot line. Ms. Adams asked the board for some more clarity regarding the feedback received. There was discussion regarding different options for the historic footprint and connecting element as well as reducing the mass and scale of the addition. MOTION: Mr. Moyer moved to continue the item to the September 10th meeting. Ms. Surfas seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Moyer, yes; Ms. Surfas, yes; Mr. Clauss, yes; Ms. Raymond, yes. 4-0, motion passes. ADJOURN: Mr. Moyer moved to adjourn the regular meeting. Ms. Raymond seconded. All in favor, motion passes. ____________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk 9 Page 1 of 7 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5000 | aspen.gov Memorandum TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission FROM: Gillian White, Principal Planner, Historic Preservation Officer THROUGH: Dan Folke, Planning Director MEETING DATE: September 10, 2025 RE: 504 W. Hallam St. - Conceptual Major Development, Relocation, Partial Demolition of Non-Historic Additions, Request for a Setback Variation, and Recommendation for Establishing Two Transferable Development Right (TDR) Certificates – PUBLIC HEARING Applicant/Owner: Scott Hoffman 504 W. Hallam St. Aspen, CO 81611 Representative: Sara Adams BendonAdams, LLC Address: 504 W. Hallam St. Legal Description: Lots R and S, Block 28, City and Townsite of Aspen Parcel ID Number: 2735-124-25-006 Current Zoning & Use: R-6 – Residential Proposed Use: Residential Summary: The applicant requests a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, Relocation, Partial Demolition of Non-Historic Additions, Setback Variation, and Recommendation for Establishing Two TDR Certificates at 504 W. Hallam St. for the purposes of restoring the historic resource. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommend approval with conditions of the conceptual major development review of 504 W. Hallam St. Figure 1: 504 W. Hallam St. – Site Location Aerial Image 10 Page 2 of 7 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5000 | aspen.gov BACKGROUND: 504 W. Hallam St. is an individually designated historic property of 6,000 square feet in the Medium-Density Residential Zone District (R-6). Constructed pre-1890, the subject resource is a single-story, wood-frame Miner’s Cottage with a street-facing gable roof, and L-shaped front porch, located in the southwest quadrant of the property. In the 1980s, the front porch was rebuilt and partially enclosed. REQUESTS OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) • Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development (Section 26.415.070(d)) for the • restoration of the historic footprint of the miner’s cabin, restoration of the front façade, construction of a compliant rear addition and garage with alley access, and demolition of non-historic additions and the detached garage. • Relocation (Section 26.415.090) to place the landmark at the 5’ side setback, repair/replace the foundation, and to square the house to the property lines. • Variations (Section 26.415.110) to allow for a lightwell to be placed in the rear yard setback. • Transferable Development Rights (Section 26.415.110.K/Section 26.535) for the establishment of two transferable development right certificates to sever 500 square feet from the property. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is the final review authority for the first three requests; issuance of TDRs requires City Council approval. Any HPC approval of demolition and/or relocation may be subject to call up by City Council. Figure 2: 1890 Sanborn Map with Property Boundary Figure 3: 1893 Sanborn Map with Property Boundary 11 Page 3 of 7 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5000 | aspen.gov SUMMARY OF FIRST HPC HEARING: This request came before the HPC on July 9, 2025. At this time, the HPC voiced concerns to the applicant regarding the proposed massing and scale of the addition. Although there was some discussion on the relocation request, the HPC ultimately agreed that they would be in support of the minor relocation of the resource to better allow for repairs to the existing foundation. After further discussion, the HPC voted unanimously to continue the request to a date certain of September 10, 2025, to allow the applicant time to revise the design in a way that responds to the concerns about the overall massing and scale. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant submitted an updated application on August 14, 2025, with additional supplemental updates submitted September 3, 2025. The updated application proposes demolishing non- historic additions and the detached garage to construct a new, single-story rear addition, restore the historic footprint of the structure and the front façade, and relocate the historic resource to make it parallel with the west property line. The applicant is also requesting a rear yard setback variance and a recommendation to Council regarding the creation of two Transferable Development Right Certificates. STAFF COMMENTS: After the first meeting before the HPC, the applicant met with staff several times to ensure they were working towards a design that better aligned with applicable Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Staff would like to note that throughout these meetings, the applicant was very open to feedback and made drastic changes to their proposal, ultimately resulting in a design that staff is supportive of. Changes to the request from the first meeting include reducing the addition from two-stories to one-story, reducing the garage from two cars to one car, changing garage access from the alley to 4th St., changes to roofing material, and withdrawing the FAR bonus request. Given these changes to the proposal, staff feel comfortable recommending approval of the conceptual review. Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, Conceptual Review (Section 26.415.070(d)): Staff have updated the following analysis of select Historic Preservation Design Guidelines based on the updated proposal. Staff analysis of all applicable Guidelines in response to the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development is attached as Exhibit A. The proposal to remove more recent additions that are not historically significant meets Guideline 10.2. While it appears that these recent additions are not significant, in order to “preserve original building materials” as called for by Guideline 2.1, additional physical investigation and documentation of these areas is necessary to ensure none exist. If “original, underlying material” does exist, Guideline 2.6 will also be applicable. Staff have recommended a condition of approval that would allow for selective demolition to be reviewed by HP staff and HPC monitor to determine whether historic material resides within the additions that are proposed to be removed. 12 Page 4 of 7 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5000 | aspen.gov For the new addition “to be recognized as a product of its own time” (Guideline 10.6), the historic resource must at least be “distinguishable against the addition” (Guideline 10.4). This is achieved by using different materials on the addition, including brick and a metal roof. Guideline 10.4 also states that “the historic resource must be visually dominant on the site”. The updated design allows for the resource to be the focal point of the property when viewed from Hallam St., as shown in the provided renderings. Guideline 10.4 also states that the above grade floor area of an addition may be no more than 100% of the above grade floor area of the historic resource. The design has been updated, and the new addition is 15sqft smaller than the resource. Guideline 10.5 states that on a corner lot, no portion of an addition to a one-story resource may be more than one story tall unless completely detached above grade by a distance of at least 10’. The design has been updated, and the new addition is one story tall. Guideline 10.8 calls for an addition to be compatible in scale and size with the historic resource, specifically stating that an addition that is lower than or similar in height to the resource is preferred. Following the redesign, the proposed addition is 3’6” taller than the resource. Given that the initial design proposed a two-story addition that was 7’ taller than the resource, staff find Figure 4: Rendering of proposed south elevation, provided by the applicant. 13 Page 5 of 7 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5000 | aspen.gov that the design of the new addition better aligns with this Guideline as the addition is similar in height to the resource. Guideline 10.9 speaks to the use of a connector element if the proposed addition is taller than the resource. Although the addition is slightly taller than the resource by 3’6”, staff are supportive of the proposed design and are supportive of treating this proposal as though the addition is not taller than the resource, regarding this particular guideline. This is due to the complexities involved in creating a connector while also maintaining the smaller addition that has been proposed. Staff believe that this is a good example of finding balance within our Guidelines to allow for appropriate additions. Relocation of Designated Historic Properties (Section 26.415.090): Lacking a “written report from a licensed engineer or architect regarding the soundness of the building, structure or object, its ability to withstand the physical move and its rehabilitation needs, once relocated”, as required per Section 26.415.090(a)(4), it is yet to be determined that the resources can withstand the physical impacts of this proposed relocation. Staff have notified the applicant that this report will be required prior to building permit submittal. After further review of the existing site conditions and the need for foundation improvements, it is staff opinion that the temporary relocation of the historic resource is an acceptable preservation method in this instance, as underpinning is not possible when the resource is located this close to the property line. It is appropriate to note that, as with any relocation, unanticipated issues can Figure 5: Rendering showing proposed kitchen/connector element, provided by the applicant. 14 Page 6 of 7 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5000 | aspen.gov arise during the relocation process and has potential to adversely affect the historic integrity of the resource. Staff analysis of relocation criterion is attached to this memo as Exhibit B. Variations (Section 26.415.110(c)): Designated properties are eligible for specific benefits as described in Section 26.415.110 of Aspen’s Land Use Code. Per the code, “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.” While granting a variation to allow for development, and in this case a lightwell, in a rear setback is allowed, the HPC must first find that the proposed development within the setback is “similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or 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”. Staff find that the placement of the lightwell in the rear setback prevents an adverse impact on the historic resource, as not allowing it in the setback would likely impact the overall design and may result in a less desirable addition that is not consistent with Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Staff analysis of variation criteria is attached as Exhibit D. Transferable Development Rights (Section 26.415.110.K/Section 26.535): The applicant requests a recommendation to Council from the HPC regarding the creation of two TDRs. Per the survey provided in the application, the subject property consists of a 6,000 sf lot. The maximum floor area for constructing a single-family dwelling on this lot is 3,240 sf. The applicant provided the following floor area calculations: • Allowable Floor Area = 3,240 sf • Existing Total Floor Area = 1,978.5 sf • Proposed Total Floor Area = 2,458 sf • Total Floor Area remaining = 782 sf The applicant requests approval to establish two TDRs at 250 sf each and equaling 500 sf total, which would leave 282 sf of allowable floor area should the TDR’s be severed. Staff find that the property demonstrates the existence of unused development rights, and the severing of development rights will not create or increase any non-conformities on the site. Should the creation of TDR(s) be approved by Council, the applicant plans to comply with the required steps of executing and delivering a deed restriction. A draft deed restriction was submitted with the application. In addition, the applicant agrees to disclose information related to the sale, assignment, conveyance or other transfer/change of ownership of the TDRs to the City of Aspen Community Development Department within five days. 15 Page 7 of 7 427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen, CO 81611-1975 | P: 970.920.5000 | aspen.gov Staff analysis of Transferable Development Rights criteria is attached as Exhibit C. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Staff referred the updated application to other City Departments for comment. One comment of note from the Zoning and Building Departments is in response to the proposed mechanical location. The applicant has stated that “Any mechanical equipment that requires open air venting will be located off the alley in the northwest corner hidden from street view.” This location would be within the 10’ rear setback. Recently, staff have found that proposed cooling mechanical equipment cannot meet allowed projections into the setback given clearance requirements and the size of equipment. Therefore, staff urge the applicant to look into alternative locations. Staff have recommended a condition that mechanical placement be noted on provided plans at final review to limit the potential adverse effect on the resource should the intended location not be viable. The combined referral comments are included in Exhibit E. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommend approval with conditions in regard to the request for a Major Certificate of Appropriateness Conceptual Review, Relocation and Variation. Additionally, staff are in support of a positive recommendation from the HPC to Council in regard to the requested creation of two Transferable Development Right certificates. The following conditions are recommended should the HPC choose to approve the conceptual review: 1. Mechanical equipment location to be specified on provided plans at Final Review. 2. Following Final Review and approval, applicant shall proceed with selective demolition of the additions to allow Historic Preservation staff and Historic Preservation Commission monitor to evaluate the resource and confirm that the additions slated for removal do not retain historic material. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution #10 of Series 2025 Exhibit A. Historic Preservation Design Guidelines – Staff Findings (updated) Exhibit B. Relocation Criteria – Staff Findings (updated) Exhibit C. Transferrable Development Rights Criteria – Staff Findings (updated) Exhibit D. Variation Criteria – Staff Findings Exhibit E. Combined Referral Comments (updated) Exhibit F. Application – Updated September 3, 2025 Exhibit G. Original Application 16 HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2025 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION #10 (SERIES OF 2025) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW, RELOCATION, A VARIATION BENEFIT, AND RECOMMENDATION OF TWO TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 504 WEST HALLAM STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 28, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL ID: 2735-124-25-006 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application on May 9, 2025, from Scott Hoffman (applicant/owner), represented by Sara Adams of BendonAdams, for demolition of non-historic additions, relocation of the resource, construction of a new single-story addition with subgrade space, a rear yard setback variation, and the creation of two Transferable Development Rights, which requires the following land use review approvals: • Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development – Conceptual Development Plan Review, pursuant to City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.415.070(d)(3); • Relocation, pursuant to City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.415.090; • Benefits – Variations, pursuant to City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.415.110; • Benefits – Transferable Development Right (TDR), pursuant to City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.415.110 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 a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development – Conceptual Development Plan 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. 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 Relocation, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.090(c), Relocation of a Designated Property; and WHEREAS, for approval of Setback Variations, the application shall meet the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.415.110(c), Setback Variations; and 17 HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2025 Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, to recommend approval of Transferrable Development Rights, HPC must find the application meets the requirements of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.535.070, Transferable Development Rights; and WHEREAS, Community Development Department staff reviewed the application for compliance with the applicable code sections, standards, and guidelines, and, finding it in general conformance therewith, recommended approval of the application with conditions; and, WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public meeting on July 9th 2025, the HPC reviewed the project, including the application, staff memo, and public comments, and voted four to zero (4-0) in support of a motion to continue the application to a date certain of September 10, 2025; and, WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public meeting on September 10, 2025, the HPC reviewed the project, including the application, staff memo, and public comments, and voted X to X (X – X) in support of a motion to approve the request with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION THAT: Section 1: Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual Review and Relocation Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Historic Preservation Commission hereby approves the request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development Conceptual Review, Relocation, based on representations described in Exhibit A with conditions as described in Section 4 of this Resolution. Section 2: Variations Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Historic Preservation Commission hereby approves the request for a variation to the rear yard setback requirements. The approval allows for a 3’-10” x 8’-9 ¾” lightwell to be built 3’-10” into the rear yard setback at the northwest portion of the property, as represented in Exhibit A. Section 3: Transferable Development Rights The HPC recommends that Aspen City Council approve the request for the creation of two Transferable Development Rights Certificates that upon issuance, would sever 500 square feet of development right from the property. A separate Ordinance with City Council is necessary to approve the issuance of TDR(s). Final floor area calculations may be adjusted prior to final review and at permit but shall not exceed the maximum allowed square footage minus the approved TDRs. Allowable Floor Area 3,240 sf Existing Floor Area 1,978.5 sf Proposed Floor Area 2,458 sf Unbuilt Floor Area (following approval of proposal) 782 sf Unbuilt Floor Area After Removal of Two TDRs 282 sf 18 HPC Resolution #10, Series of 2025 Page 3 of 3 Section 4: Conditions of Approval 1. Mechanical equipment location to be specified on provided plans at Final Review. 2. Following Final Review and approval, applicant shall proceed with selective demolition of the additions to allow Historic Preservation staff and Historic Preservation Commission monitor to evaluate the resource and confirm that the additions slated for removal do not retain historic material. Section 5: Material Representations All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Community Development Department, the Historic Preservation Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 6: Existing Litigation This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: Severability If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of September 2025. Approved as to Form: Approved as to Content: ______________________________ ____________________________________ Luisa Berne, Assistant City Attorney Kara Thompson, HPC Chair ATTEST: _________________________________ Mike Sear, Deputy City Clerk Attachments: Exhibit A. Floor Plans, Elevations, Site Plan 19 OSW CO CT GM 504 West Hallam 0.138 Acres ± 6' - 6" 6' - 9 1 9 / 3 2 " 6' - 9 1 9 / 3 2 " 4T H S T R E E T ( P A V E D ) HALLA M S T R E E T ( P A V E D ) Graphic Scale In Feet: 1" = 10' 0 5 10 20 Re v i s i o n # Dwg No. Job No. Drawn by: Print Date: File: PE:QC: 2023-428.001 GJF 3.13.2025 CL WH-Site Plan CL 11 8 W e s t S i x t h S t r e e t , S u i t e 2 0 0 Gl e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 97 0 . 9 4 5 . 1 0 0 4 ww w . s g m - i n c . c o m Da t e By : C-7 Of : Pr o j e c t M i l e s t o n e : 10 PR E L I M I N A R Y N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 50 4 W e s t H a l l a m S t r e e t Site Plan -- - - Title: 20 2 A9 2 A9 1 2 3 4 A B C E F Mechanical and Utility Man Cave Guest Bath Workout Slab on Grade above 1 A9 1 A9 window well Slab on Grade Above PL W 6 8' - 0 " window well Auto Storage 6 A3 ____ 4 A3 ____ 3 A3 ____ 5 A3 ____ 22' - 1 1/2"5 1/2"13' - 10 1/4"5 1/2"5' - 1 1/4" 14 ' - 5 3 / 4 " 5 1 / 2 " 8' - 5 1 / 4 " 6' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 8' - 0 1 / 4 " 14 ' - 5 3 / 4 " 5 1 / 2 " 9' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 22 ' - 2 " 24' - 3 1/4" UP 5' - 0" red lines indicate setbacks typ 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 BASEMENT PLAN A5 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 21 6' - 6"0 4 04 0 5 05 05 4 79 0 6 1 A7 ____ 2 A9 2 A9 1 A8 ____ 2 A8 ____ 3 A7 ____ Kitchen library Dine Living entry 22 ' - 9 1 / 1 6 " 11' - 2 3/8"19' - 7 3/8" 9' - 0 " 6' - 3 5 / 8 " 12 ' - 0 " Patio brk 6' - 9 19/32" 1 1 2 3 4 A B C E F F 27 ' - 1 1 1 / 4 " 12 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 23 ' - 4 3 / 4 " 13 ' - 0 1 / 2 " 5' - 0 " 4' - 6 1 / 2 " 5 1 / 2 " 14 ' - 9 3 / 4 " 5 1 / 2 " 9' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 6' - 9 19/32" 10' - 0"2' - 0" 1' - 2" 7' - 5 1/2"5 1/2" 2' - 0"6' - 0 3/4"9' - 11 1/4" 5 1/2" 3' - 6"5 1/2"5' - 4 1/2" 5 1/2" 4' - 6" prep 7909.8 landscape grass pavers14' - 0"5 1/2"13' - 9"5 1/2"8 1/2" 8' - 9 3/4" 5' - 5 1/4" 29' - 7 1/2" 5' - 0" Window well Down Fence 1 A9 1 A9 PROPERTY LINE glass rail 12' - 2 1/2"2' - 1 3/4"17' - 6 3/4"6 1/4"11' - 3 1/2"7 1/4"5' - 4" PL W PL W PL N PL N PL E PL E magic pt fin/fin 60' - 0" 5' - 0 " 5' - 4" 11 ' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 14 ' - 9 3 / 4 " 2' - 0" 6 10 ' - 4 " 3' - 8" 5' - 0" 6' - 0" 2' - 0 " 4' - 0 " 8' - 8 3 / 4 " 5 5 55 4 4 4 4 22' - 5 1/2"5 1/2"5' - 0"5 1/2"14' - 3 1/2" bicycles motorcycles skis etc PL to Grid A PL to Fin PL to Grid A PL to Fin 5' - 2 3/4" PL t o F i n PL to Fin 4 4 4 6 GARAGE STAIR DOOR m bed office m bath 11x11 6' - 2 " 3' - 1 0 " 8 1 / 2 " 5 1 / 2 " 12 ' - 6 " 5 1 / 2 " 7' - 6 " 3 1 / 2 " 3' - 6 1 / 4 " 10' - 4" 5' - 6"3 1/2"8' - 6" Meters 2' - 9 1/4"5' - 9 1/2"2' - 10"1' - 6" 2' - 9 3 / 4 " 11 ' - 0 " 1' - 0 " 2' - 0 " 8 1 / 2 " 5 1 / 2 " 5' - 6 " 6 A3 ____ 4 A3 ____ 3 A3 ____ 5 A3 ____ Drive- Match Existing 2' - 0 " 16' - 0" 5 1/2" 9' - 5 1/2" 13' - 11 1/4" 3' - 1"1' - 0"5' - 0" 9' - 4 " 10' - 0" 5' - 0" 5' - 0 " Setback Setback Se t b a c k 10 ' - 0" s e t b a c k to f r o n t PL 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 MAIN FLOOR PLAN A6 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 22 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 15' -1 7/32" A B C E F Garage 5' -0 11/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32" 18 ' - 8 " 1/3 Brick Wood SidingAsphalt Restored Siding Typ Legacy Structure Porch roof to match historic raise grade to historic level BRICK 1 1 :1 21 1:1 2 1/3 15 ' - 5 3 / 4 " 5' - 7 1 / 2 " 21 ' - 1 1 / 4 " Legacy Proposed Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive PL W PL E 3' - 6 " 2 A9 2 A9 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" 1 2 3 4 Garage 5' -0 11/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32"1 A9 1 A9 1/3 18 ' - 1 1 " LOW FENCE 3' Max Wood Plank BRICK Wood Siding WINDOW TO BE RESTORED TO HISTORIC DIMENSIONS CONFIRM IN CONSTRUCTION PORCH ROOF TO BE RESTORED TO HISTORIC ASPHALT METAL ROOF Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive PL N 6 ASPHALT Wooden Garage Door 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 9/03/2025 23080 ELEVATIONS A7 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 1/4" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EAST Garage Door ASPHALT ROOF WOOD SIDING METAL ROOF BRICK 23 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 15' -1 7/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32" most resrictive grade under ridge BRICK most resrictive grade 18 ' - 9 " 1/3 of roof pitch Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive neighbor's fence 18 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 1/3 of roof pitch 2 A9 2 A9 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32"Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32" 1 A9 1 A9 1 1 :1 21/2 of roof pitch 19 ' - 9 " ASPHALT ROOF METAL ROOF Siding BRICK SIDING Glass Rail Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive 6' Max Wood Fence 3' - 6 " ASPHALT ROOF METAL ROOF METAL ROOF 23 ' - 8 3 / 4 " 3" 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 9/03/2025 23080 ELEVATIONS A8 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 1/4" = 1'-0"2 NORTH 1/4" = 1'-0"1 WEST ASPHALT ROOF WOOD SIDING METAL ROOF BRICK 24 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Basement -5' -5 5/16" Basement -5' -5 5/16" BASEMENT WINDOW WELL KITCHEN PANTRY METAL ROOF 1 1 :1 2 13 ' - 2 1 / 4 " 1/3 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Basement -5' -5 5/16" Basement -5' -5 5/16" WINDOW WELL BASEMENT PANTRY KITCHENBRICK BRICK 3' - 5"vif 1 1:1 2 12 ' - 3 " 1 1 :1 23:1 2 3:12 Glass Rail 1' - 6 " 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 HIDDEN ELEVATIONS A9 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 1/4" = 1'-0"1 Through Connecting North 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Through Connecting South 25 Page 1 of 16 Exhibit A Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.070(d) – Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development, Conceptual Review Relevant Historic Preservation Design Guidelines & Findings The applicant requests a Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development at 504 W. Hallam St. for the purposes of Relocation, Partial Demolition of Non-Historic Additions, and construction of a new addition. Chapter 1: Site Planning and Landscape Finding 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. Met 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. Met 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. Met 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. Met 26 Page 2 of 16 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. Met 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. Met 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. Met 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 when viewed from the public right of way. • Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements. Met 27 Page 3 of 16 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 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. Met 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. Met 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. • 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. Met 28 Page 4 of 16 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. Met 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. Met 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. Met 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. Met Chapter 2: Building Materials Finding 2.1 Preserve original building materials. • Do not remove siding that is in good condition or that can be repaired in place. • Masonry features that define the overall historic character, such as walls, cornices, pediments, steps and foundations, should be preserved. • Avoid rebuilding a major portion of an exterior wall that could be repaired in place. Reconstruction may result in a building which no longer retains its historic integrity. • Original AspenModern materials may be replaced in kind if it has been determined that the weathering detracts from the original design intent or philosophy. TBD 29 Page 5 of 16 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. • Masonry naturally has a water-protective layer to protect it from the elements. Brick or stone that was not historically painted shall not be painted. • If masonry that was not painted historically was given a coat of paint at some more recent time, consider removing it, using appropriate methods. • Wood should be painted, stained or natural, as appropriate to the style and history of the building. Met 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. • If the original material is wood clapboard for example, then the replacement material must be wood as well. It should match the original in size, and the amount of exposed lap and finish. • Replace only the amount required. If a few boards are damaged beyond repair, then only those should be replaced, not the entire wall. For AspenModern buildings, sometimes the replacement of a larger area is required to preserve the integrity of the design intent. Met 2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. • Original building materials such as wood siding and brick should not be replaced with synthetic materials. Met 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. Met 2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material. • Once the non-historic siding is removed, repair the original, underlying material TBD Chapter 3: Windows Finding 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. Met 30 Page 6 of 16 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. Met 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 sashes have divided lights, match that characteristic as well. Met 3.4 When replacing an original window, use materials that are the same as the original. Met 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. Met 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 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. Met 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. Met Chapter 4: Doors Finding 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. Met 31 Page 7 of 16 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. Met 4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. Met 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. • Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. Met 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. Met 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 keypads. Met Chapter 5: Porches and Balconies Finding 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 Met 5.2 Avoid removing or covering historic materials and details. • Removing an original balustrade, for example, is inappropriate. Met 5.3 Enclosing a porch or balcony is not appropriate. • Reopening an enclosed porch or balcony is appropriate. Met Chapter 6: Architectural Details Finding 32 Page 8 of 16 6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. • Repair only those features that are deteriorated. • Patch, piece-in, splice, or consolidate to repair the existing materials, using recognized preservation methods whenever possible. • On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. Met 6.2 When disassembly of a historic element is necessary for its restoration, use methods that minimize damage to the original material. • Document its location so it may be repositioned accurately. Always devise methods of replacing the disassembled material in its original configuration. Met 6.3 Remove only the portion of the detail that is deteriorated and must be replaced. • Match the original in composition, scale, and finish when replacing materials or features. • If the original detail was made of wood, for example, then the replacement material should be wood, when feasible. It should match the original in size and finish. Met 6.4 Repair or replacement of missing or deteriorated features are required to be based on original designs. • The design should be substantiated by physical or pictorial evidence to avoid creating a misrepresentation of the building’s heritage. • When reconstruction of an element is impossible because there is no historical evidence, develop a compatible new design that is a simplified interpretation of the original, and maintains similar scale, proportion and material. Met 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. Met Chapter 7: Roofs Finding 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. Met 33 Page 9 of 16 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. Met 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 façades. • Use historic chimneys as chases for new flues when possible. Met 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. • Reconstruct a missing chimney when documentation exists. Met 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. • Avoid removing historic roofing material. • Using recognized preservation methods, repair deteriorated historic material when possible. • When replacement is necessary, replace the roofing in kind, and/or use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities. Met 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should maintain or restore the character of the historic roof. • If a substitute is used, the roof material should be of a design, scale, color, texture, and composition akin to the original, or a simplified, neutral, modest, and deferential alternative that is visually compatible with building’s historic features. • 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 material should have a matte, non-reflective finish and match the original seaming. Met 7.9 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. • Adding ornament or detail where there is no evidence that they existed, creates a false impression of the building’s original appearance, and is inappropriate. • Roofing materials should reflect the architectural style of the affected building or be substantiated by documentary or physical evidence. Met Chapter 9: Excavation, Building Relocation, and Foundations Finding 34 Page 10 of 16 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. Not Met 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. Met 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 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 Met 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 Met 35 Page 11 of 16 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. Met 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” in the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site. Met 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. Met Chapter 10: Building Additions Finding 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. Met 36 Page 12 of 16 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. Met 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. Met 37 Page 13 of 16 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: o The proposed addition is all one story o 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 o The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource o The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically o The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the street o There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed o The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or o The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. Met 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 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. Met 38 Page 14 of 16 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. Met 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. • Any street-facing doors installed in the connector must be minimized in height and width and accessed by a secondary pathway. See guideline 4.1 for further information. Met/Not Met 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. Met 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. Met 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. Met 39 Page 15 of 16 Chapter 12: Accessibility, Architectural lighting, Mechanical Equipment, Service Areas, and Signage Finding 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. TBD 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. TBD 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. TBD 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 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. Met 40 Page 16 of 16 41 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit B Relocation Criteria Staff Findings 26.415.090(c) – Standards for the relocation of designated properties. 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 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. 42 Page 2 of 3 Relocation Review Criteria for 504 W. Hallam Ave. The applicant requests a relocation review to temporarily relocate the resource, and thus, must meet the standards for the relocation of designated properties. Relocation for a building, structure or object will be approved if it is determined that it meets any one of the following standards: Finding 1. It is considered a noncontributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district. N/A 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 N/A 3. The owner has obtained a certificate of economic hardship. N/A 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. Met Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met Finding 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation. TBD 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified. Met 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. TBD 43 Page 3 of 3 Staff Findings: Lacking a “written report from a licensed engineer or architect regarding the soundness of the building, structure or object, its ability to withstand the physical move and its rehabilitation needs, once relocated”, as required per Section 26.415.090(a)(4), it is yet to be determined that the resources can withstand the physical impacts of this proposed relocation. Staff have notified the applicant that this report will be required prior to building permit submittal. It is staff opinion that the temporary relocation of the historic resource is not an acceptable preservation method in this instance, as the request to disturb the resource in order to make the resource parallel to the property line – which means not maintaining its historic alignment – is not necessary for the longevity, preservation, or continued use of the resource. While the proposed repair to the foundation is a potential reason for this proposal, this would be better done through underpinning. Additionally, as unanticipated issues can arise during the relocation process, the proposed scope has potential to adversely affect the historic integrity of the resource. As none of the other relocation standards are applicable, staff is unable to recommend approval of this relocation proposal as it does not meet at least one of the relocation standards. The applicant should consider underpinning the foundation as an alternative to relocation. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends a continuance. 44 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit C Transferable Development Rights Criteria Staff Findings Section 26.535.070 A historic TDR certificate may be established by the Mayor if the City Council, pursuant to adoption of an ordinance, finds all the following standards met: A. The sending site is a historic landmark on which the development of a single-family or duplex residence is a permitted use, pursuant to Chapter 26.710, Zone Districts. Properties on which such development is a conditional use shall not be eligible. a. Staff Findings: 504 W. Hallam St. is a designated historic landmark that is an eligible sending site that can establish and sever Transferable Development Rights (TDRs). B. It is demonstrated that the sending site has permitted unbuilt development rights, for either a single-family or duplex home, equaling or exceeding two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates requested. a. Staff Findings: Staff find that the property demonstrates the existence of unused development rights that exceeds 500 sf. C. It is demonstrated that the establishment of TDR certificates will not create a nonconformity. In cases where a nonconformity already exists, the action shall not increase the specific nonconformity. a. Staff Findings: The creation of a TDR will not create or increase a nonconformity. D. The analysis of unbuilt development right shall only include the actual built development, any approved development order, the allowable development right prescribed by zoning for a single-family or duplex residence, and shall not include the potential of the sending site to gain floor area bonuses, exemptions or similar potential development incentives. Properties in the MU Zone District which do not currently contain a single-family home or duplex established prior to the adoption of Ordinance #7, Series of 2005, shall be permitted to base the calculation of TDRs on 100% of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. This is only for the purpose of creating TDRs and does not permit the on-site development of 100% of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. If the additional 20% of allowable floor area exceeds 500 square feet, the applicant may not request a floor area bonus from HPC at any time in the future. Any development order to develop floor area, beyond that remaining legally connected to the property after establishment of TDR Certificates, shall be considered null and void. a. Staff Findings: The allowable floor area for a detached single-family residence on a 6,000 sf lot in the R-6 zone district is 3,240 sf. Unbuilt floor area is available to convert to TDRs. 45 Page 2 of 3 E. The proposed deed restriction permanently restricts the maximum development of the property (the sending site) to an allowable floor area not exceeding the allowance for a single-family or duplex residence minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates established. For properties with multiple or unlimited floor areas for certain types of allowed uses, the maximum development of the property, independent of the established property use, shall be the floor area of a single-family or duplex residence (whichever is permitted) minus two hundred fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplies by the number of historic TDR certificates established. The deed restriction shall not stipulate an absolute floor area, but shall stipulate a square footage reduction from the allowable floor area for a single-family or duplex residence, as may be amended from time to time. The sending site shall remain eligible for certain floor area incentives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Land Use Code, as may be amended from time to time. The form of the deed restriction shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. a. Staff Findings: At the point of issuing a TDR certificate, the applicant will be required to file a deed restriction that will permanently reduce the allowable floor area by 250 sf. per TDR requested. All documents shall be reviewed by the City Attorney prior to execution. F. A real estate closing has been scheduled at which, upon satisfaction of all relevant requirements, the City shall execute and deliver the applicable number of historic TDR certificates to the sending site property owner and that property owner shall execute and deliver a deed restriction lessening the available development right of the subject property together with the appropriate fee for recording the deed restriction with the County Clerk and Recorder's office. a. Staff Findings: This is a mandatory process that the applicant must pursue. G. It shall be the responsibility of the sending site property owner to provide building plans and a zoning analysis of the sending site to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Certain review fees may be required for the confirmation of built floor area. a. Staff Findings: The applicant has provided detailed floor area calculations as part of the proposal. Final calculations shall be reviewed by The City prior to the issuance of the TDR certificate. H. The sale, assignment, conveyance or other transfer or change in ownership of transferable development rights certificates shall be recorded in the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and must be reported by the grantor to the City of Aspen Community Development Department within five (5) days of such transfer. The report of 46 Page 3 of 3 such transfer shall disclose the certificate number, the grantor, the grantee and the total value of the consideration paid for the certificate. Failure to timely or accurately report such transfer shall not render the transferable development right certificate void. a. Staff Findings: This is a mandatory process that the applicant must pursue. I. TDR certificates may be issued at the pace preferred by the property owner. J. City Council may find that the creation of TDRs is not the best preservation solution for the affected historic resource and deny the application to create TDRs. HPC shall provide Council with a recommendation. a. Staff Findings: The applicant is requesting HPC recommend in favor of establishing two (2) TDRs with this application. HPC is a recommending body and City Council is the final authority for granting the TDR request. 47 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit D Variations Criteria - Staff Findings 26.415.110 - Benefits: (c) Variations. 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 variations 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 public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. (2) In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or 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. 48 Page 2 of 2 Variation Review Criteria for 504 W. Hallam St. The applicant requests a rear setback variation for a lightwell. In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation either: Finding Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; or Not Met 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. Met 49 MEMORANDUM TO: Gillian White, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Sophie Varga, Zoning Administrator DATE: 08/25/2025 RE: Zoning Referral Comments – LPA-25-056, 504 West Hallam Avenue To be resolved prior to hearing: 1. The chimney on the addition does not comply with height regulations. The footprint needs to be the minimum necessary to use height exception 26.575.020.f.4.a. Either reduce the height of the chimney or remove decorative aspects of the venting above the maximum height line. To be resolved prior to final hearing: • Where will mechanical equipment be placed on the site? Ensure that site planning includes adequate room for exterior mechanical equipment outside of the setbacks. It appears that open areas are either in front of fenestration or do not comply with 26.575.020.e.5. To be resolved at permit: • Additional information is needed to confirm that the height of the addition complies with underlying zoning regulations. This includes elevation vignettes at the edge of the building showing natural and proposed grade. A variety of other requirements may be necessary for building permit submittal and zoning review. 50 Outlook LPA 25-056 // 504 W Hallam From Denis Murray <denis.murray@aspen.gov> Date Thu 9/4/2025 1:37 PM To Gillian White <gillian.white@aspen.gov> DRC comments for the applicant. 1. Here is a link to the current codes adopted and amended by the City of Aspen. https://www.aspen.gov/197/Energy-Building-Codes. 2. This project will require a HP license https://www.aspen.gov/202/Contractor-Licensing and https://www.aspen.gov/193/Historic-Preservation 3. A stabilization/ relocation plan for the cottage wet stamped and signed by a professional engineer. 4. Exterior mechanical equipment will need to comply as new for location, height, and sound. 5. Ignition resistant exterior on the addition and Fire sprinklers are required throughout. Denis Murray (He/Him/His) Plan Examination Manager | Community Development Department OFFICE 970.429-2761 CELL 970-309-6283 FAX 970-920-5440 www.cityofaspen.com Please note that my email address has changed. The City of Aspen is moving to a more secure and identifiable .GOV address for public communications. Please update your email contacts. Our Values: Stewardship | Partnership | Service | Innovation Notice and Disclaimer: This message is intended only for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential and exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error and then delete it. Further, the information or opinions contained in this email are advisory in nature only and are not binding on the City of Aspen. If applicable, the information and opinions contained in the email are based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The opinions and information contained herein do not create a legal or vested right or any claim of detrimental reliance. 51 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Commission August 28, 2025 Re: 504 West Hallam Street – Continued hearing Dear Gillian and HPC, Please accept this application for Major Development Conceptual Review, Relocation, Demolition of Non- historic Additions, TDRs, and a Setback Variation for the property located at 504 West Hallam Street (parcel ID 2735-124-25-006). The property is within the R-6 zone district and comprises Lots R and S of Block 28, on the corner of North Fourth and Hallam Streets in Aspen’s West End neighborhood. The 6,000 sf lot was designated historic in 1995 and has been under the same ownership since 1983. The current tenant, Scott Hoffman, has authorization to submit this application as does BendonAdams. HPC considered this project on July 9th with direction to restudy the addition to reduce mass and scale. Scott has considered HPC’s feedback and decided to forgo much of his development right by reducing the addition from two stories to one story, and the garage from a two-car garage to a one- car garage with access from Fourth Street instead of the alley. The FAR Bonus is no longer requested; however, the ability to apply for a bonus in the future that considers the restoration work in this project is requested. The project is 783 sf under the maximum floor area and requests a recommendation to establish two transferable development rights (TDRs) equal to 500 sf of floor area. Following is a summary of the revised project request. The background and existing conditions provided in the original application are found at the end of this memo. Exhibit A and B have been updated to reflect the revised project. • Restore the historic footprint of the miner’s cabin • Restore the front façade • Demolish non-historic additions and the detached garage 504 West Hallam Street. 52 Page 2 of 9 • Revised new construction: o One story brick addition o One car garage with access from Fourth Street (maintain existing curb cut) • Onsite relocation to place the landmark at the 5’ side setback for fire protection, repair/replace the foundation, and to square the house to the property lines. • Setback variation for lightwell in rear yard setback due to reduction to one story addition. • Establish two TDRs to remove 500 sf from the property • No FAR bonus requested. Request HPC consider the restoration work in this project for any future projects on the property Proposal After the July HPC hearing Scott and team went back to the drawing board to address concerns about mass and scale for a project that was already under height and under allowable floor area. The team concluded the key to a one story addition that contains a reasonable program for Scott (2-bedroom home) is to maintain the curb cut on Fourth Street and propose a one car garage 1. A 2024 engineering variance 2 allows Scott to maintain the curb cut from Fourth Street. The footprint of the addition is similar to the July presentation, but the massing, height, form and access are different. Floor area is significantly reduced: proposed floor area is 2,458 3 sf where 3,240 sf is allowable by zoning. As a corner lot there are two primary street facing facades that are equally important. Reduction of the mass to one story complies with HPDG 10.5 which recommends a one story addition for corner lots, and HPDG 10.8 which recommends new construction be compatible in size and scale with the landmark. In compliance with HPDG 10.6 and HPDG 10.11 the gable form and 11:12 pitch of the historic landmark is replicated in the proposed primary form of the addition, and traditional shed roofs extend off the primary gable to maintain a strong relationship to the landmark. 1 The one car garage has a lift to a subgrade parking space to meet onsite parking requirements. 2 The variance was granted by the Hearing Officer based on site specific constraints mainly alley width, alley impediments, and the original location of the historic landmark. 3 2,458 sf includes the garage floor area. The 375 sf garage exemption only applies to garages with alley access. Proposed one story addition as viewed from Hallam and Fourth Streets. 53 Page 3 of 9 Fenestration is vertically oriented to relate to the traditional double hung windows in the landmark. Brick siding and a standing seam metal roof are proposed for the new addition to differentiate between historic and new construction. The existing non-historic additions at the rear landmark are proposed to be removed and replaced with minor changes after the landmark is relocated. Painted wood siding is proposed for the elevations within the historic footprint, and a sliding glass door is proposed between the landmark and the new addition to create transparency and “separation” between historic and new. Exhibit A.1 addresses all design guidelines in detail. Hallam Street view: July proposal (left) and revised one story September proposal (right). The one story height of the addition is not visible behind the landmark as viewed from Hallam Street. Fourth Street view: July proposal (left) and revised one story September proposal (right). Note the painted yellow siding delineates the historic footprint. Large windows between historic and new addition add transparency and feeling of separation between forms. West elevation: July proposal (left) and revised one story September proposal (right). 54 Page 4 of 9 Relocation: The historic home is in the original location and sits askew on the property. The proposal is to pick up the home and place it on the 5’ west side setback to meet underlying zoning, square the house and addition parallel to the west property line, and place the historic home on a concrete slab. The rubble foundation is failing and requires attention. As discussed during the July 9th hearing, underpinning is not an option for this property due to proximity of the landmark to the property line. Increasing the west side setback from 1.6’ to 5’ mitigates adverse impacts to the landmark required to meet Fire Codes and provides adequate space to properly construct a new foundation under the landmark. The majority of the Board indicated support of the proposed relocation at the July 9th hearing. The front yard setback of ~12’ 11” is maintained to preserve the large front yard and the relationship of the house with Hallam Street. Setback Variation: The original application did not include any zoning variances; however, removing the entire second floor from the addition results in a request for a basement lightwell within the rear yard setback. The lightwell is larger than the minimum 3’ x 3’ size and is 6’2” where 10’ is required for living space (5’ rear yard setback only applies to garage). The lightwell provides egress from a subgrade bedroom and mitigates an adverse impact on the one story landmark by supporting subgrade development as opposed to a second story addition. The lightwell is not visible from the street and does not adversely impact the landmark. Restoration: Restoration of the front porch, opening the enclosed section of the porch, restoring the roof form and architectural details of the porch, removal of non-historic additions, removal of a non-compliant garage, and restoration of openings based on historic framing discovered during deconstruction are proposed. The original application requested an FAR Bonus of 71 sf out of a possible 375 sf for this size lot to recognize the restoration of the landmark. The Bonus is no longer requested as it is not needed for the revised project. The Code encourages historic property owners to build out their properties in order to be eligible to request a FAR bonus to offset extensive and costly restoration and additional regulations for historic projects. Scott wants to complete an accurate restoration of his home as part of this project but does not want to disqualify any ability to request a Bonus in the future. Alley elevation: July proposal (left) and revised one story September proposal (right). Access is proposed from Fourth Street per Engineering Variance. 55 Page 5 of 9 The Bonus has been withdrawn from the proposal; however the following condition (or something similar) is requested be added to the HPC resolution to allow a future project that may request the Bonus to apply the restoration proposed in this project: “HPC recognizes the extensive restoration of the 504 West Hallam property approved by this Resolution, and will consider this restoration when evaluating any future FAR Bonus request for the property.” TDRs: A recommendation to City Council is requested to establish 2 Transferrable Development Rights for this property equal to 500 sf of floor area. After completion of this project, 782 sf of floor area will remain unused. Removal of 500 sf of floor area through TDRs leaves 282 sf of unused floor area on the property. Sale of the TDRs will be applied directly to the restoration of the landmark which is intended to be the owner/builder’s forever home. Background – provided in original application The house was built pre-1890 when the property was owned by Daniel McLeod. The street facing gable end was added between 1890 and 1893 according to the Sanborn Fire Insurance maps. The McLeod family owned the house until 1917 when it was sold to Herbert Parsons, a miner who worked in the Smuggler Mine. The Parson family allegedly died in the flu epidemic. The landmark is in its original location and the street facing gable end and L-shaped front porch were added during the period of significance and are therefore considered historic additions important to the history of the property. Site inspections of very thick interior walls lead to a hypothesis that the original home was a simple log cabin that was expanded pre-1890 per the Sanborn Maps (see photo on following page). 1890 Sanborn Map showing original footprint. Note the green colored accessory building labeled “carpenter.” The green color indicates that the building material was “special”. Yellow indicates frame construction. 1893 Sanborn Map showing gable end and open front porch (dotted line). 1893 Bird’s Eye View of Aspen. 56 Page 6 of 9 The front porch was rebuilt and partially enclosed between 1980 and 1986, likely during the 1984 interior remodel which also replaced the front window in the gable end. The screened side porch shown in the 1964 photograph, but not on the Sanborn Maps, was possibly rebuilt or incorporated into interior space during the 1980s interior remodel. The garage was likely constructed in the 1950s based on the CMU block construction, an historic photograph dated 1964 showing the garage, and the absence of a building permit. 2025 photograph of garage. Similar log cabin in Aspen. Denver Public Library Special Collections, X-6139. 1964 Photograph from Aspen Historical Society showing original front porch (note porch roof, street facing gable end window). 57 Page 7 of 9 Existing conditions – provided in original application A lot of historic research, physical inspection and consideration of historic preservation guidelines and values went into this proposal. The historic building has been altered over time and interior walls suggest the original building (pre-Sanborn mapping) may have been a simple log cabin. This project proposes to restore the 1893 footprint using the Sanborn Maps and the existing sandstone foundation. A full restoration of the front porch is also proposed. The roof form, siding, and windows at the rear of the landmark were heavily altered; however, the original building corner, as evidenced by the sandstone foundation, is apparent. Historic photographs of the rear of the building were unfortunately not discovered – the only evidence of the west elevation is a 1970 photograph from the Aspen Historical Society which does not accurately show the 19th century appearance. An accurate restoration of the rear of the property would be guesswork which does not align with the design guidelines or the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. The best approach to this project is to restore the landmark footprint using physical evidence, historic photographs and maps, and clearly distinguishing historic from new construction. 58 Page 8 of 9 Parks The applicant worked closely with the Forester regarding removal of some trees along Fourth Street. A tree removal permit was submitted for the cottonwood trees in the Fourth Street right of way with direction from Parks to plant ornamental replacement trees (permit #0155-2024 TREE) but put on pause to coordinate with the land use application. Three trees in the alley right of way are proposed to be removed to access the garage. The large spruce tree located in front of the landmark facing Hallam Street is proposed to be removed to mitigate adverse impacts to the landmark as it is located close to the gable end and blocks views of the landmark from Hallam Street. Engineering A conceptual storm water management plan and conceptual landscape plan are included in the design set for initial review with the understanding that final plans will be provided in the Final Review application. As recommended in the Engineering Design Standards, bio-retention or rain 1970s photograph courtesy Aspen Historical Society, Chamberlain Collection. 2017.064.0267. Note – the west elevation addition has a non- historic window and asphalt roof. Existing west elevation. Blue are non-historic additions within the historic footprint. Orange is non-historic outside the historic footprint. Red is altered historic material. 59 Page 9 of 9 gardens in the northwest and northeast corners of the property, green roofs, and pervious pavers are proposed to meet URMP requirements. Dry wells are not proposed at this time. We look forward to discussing this project with you. Please reach out with any questions or additional information helpful for your review. Kind Regards, Sara Adams, AICP BendonAdams, LLC Exhibits – bold indicates new or revised exhibits A Review Criteria A.1 Historic Preservation Design Guidelines A.2 Demolition of non-historic additions A.3 Onsite relocation and housing letter A.4 FAR Bonus – withdrawn A.5 TDRs, acknowledgement, draft deed restriction recommendation to City Council A.6 Setback Variance for rear yard lightwell B. Land Use Application C. Pre-application summary D. Authorization to represent E. Proof of ownership F. Agreement to Pay G. HOA form H. Vicinity Map I. Mailing list J. Survey K. As-built drawings and identification of historic materials L. Engineering Report and preliminary civil drawings M. Referral comment response 6 20 25 N. Referral comment response 8 28 25 O. Drawing set revised 8 13 2025 60 Exhibit A.1 HP Review Sec. 26.415.060.A Approvals Required Any development involving properties designated on the aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual property or located within the boundaries of a Historic District, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights of way located within the boundaries of a Historic District. Response: Applicable Design Guidelines are addressed below: Streetscape 1.1 All projects shall respect the historic development pattern or context of the block, neighborhood or district. Response – The building location reinforces the patterns of the neighborhood by preserving the large ~12’ 11” front yard facing Hallam Street. The large east side yard facing Fourth Street is preserved around the landmark with new construction consolidated toward the alley. A non-historic garage that sits within the rear and east setbacks is proposed to be removed. 1.2 Preserve the system and character of historic streets, alleys, and ditches. Response – The existing curb cut off Fourth Street is proposed to remain. A surface parking space with grass pavers is proposed adjacent to the new one car garage for guest parking which alleviates street parking issues in the neighborhood. A car lift is proposed within the one car garage to meet onsite parking requirements. Grass pavers would appear similar to those at 202 N. Monarch. 1.3 Remove driveways or parking areas accessed directly from the street if they were not part of the original development of the site. Response –504 West Hallam is a complicated corner lot with a very skinny alleyway and a one story landmark in its original location. A garage with alley access requires a large rear yard setback to accommodate any reasonable turn radius from the skinny alley with unmovable impediments. This pushes mass toward the landmark and is contrary to the HPDGs. The revised project maintains the Fourth Street access per an Engineering variance that recognizes these site constraints. Allowing access from Fourth Street pushes new construction away from the landmark and a one car garage reduces mass. 1.4 Design a new driveway or improve an existing driveway in a manner that minimizes its visual impact. Response – The driveway is proposed to match the existing gravel drive at this time; however, driveway material and a developed landscape plan will be presented at Final Review. Grass pavers for additional parking space. 61 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 1.5 Maintain the historic hierarchy of spaces. Response – A simple walkway to the restored historic porch is the primary entry into the property. 1.6 Provide a simple walkway running perpendicular from the street to the front entry on residential projects. Response – A simple light concrete walkway with 3’ width is proposed similar to the existing condition. 1.7 Provide positive open space within a project site. Response – The existing front yard and east side yards around the historic home are large and open. Existing site coverage is 32% and proposed site coverage is 46% - a slight increase to the current condition. A complete landscape plan will be including the Final Design application. 1.8 Consider stormwater quality needs early in the design process. Response – A conceptual drainage plan is included in the application. Bio-retention areas, rain gardens, and green roofs are proposed to meet URMP requirements and will be presented in the Final Design application. 1.9 Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis. Response – n/a. 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. Response – Built in outdoor elements are not proposed at this time. Any future permanent site furnishings will be located behind the historic landmark in the west side yard. 1.11 Preserve and maintain historically significant landscaping on site, particularly landmark trees and shrubs. Response – The applicant worked closely with the Forester regarding removal of some trees along Fourth Street. A tree removal permit is in process for the cottonwood trees in the Fourth Street right of way with direction from Parks to plant ornamental replacement trees (permit #0155-2024 TREE). Three trees in the alley right of way are proposed to be removed and have preliminary approval from the City Forester. The large spruce tree located in front of the landmark facing Hallam Street is proposed to be removed to mitigate adverse impacts to the landmark as it is located close to the gable end and blocks views of the landmark from Hallam Street. Existing front walkway. 62 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 1.12 Provide an appropriate context for historic structures. See diagram. Response – A simple landscape is proposed around the historic resource as illustrated on L1. The landmark is not blocked by the proposed plantings. Sod and perennial beds are proposed around the landmark, and a gravel border will be included in the Final Design application as part of a detailed landscape plan. 1.13 Additions of plant material to the landscape that could interfere with or block views of historic structures are inappropriate. Response – Please refer to the response to Guideline 1.12. Planting is not proposed to block views of the landmark. The large spruce tree in front of the landmark is proposed to be removed to unblock views. 1.14 Minimize the visual impacts of landscape lighting. Response – Landscape lighting is not proposed at this time. Any landscape lighting will be included in the Final Design application. 1.15 Preserve original fences. Response – n/a. The existing fence is not original as evidenced in historic photographs that do not contain a fence. 1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence. Response – n/a. 1.17 No fence in the front yard is often the most appropriate solution. Response – Fencing will be finalized in the Final Design application. 1.18 When building an entirely new fence, use materials that are appropriate to the building type and style. Response – The existing privacy fence along the shared west property line is on the adjacent property and is not owned by 504 West Hallam. As noted above, fence design will be included in the Final Design application for review and approval by HPC. 1.19 A new fence should have a transparent quality, allowing views into the yard from the street. Response – n/a. 1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. Response – No fence proposed at this time. Please refer to Guideline 1.17. 1.21 Preserve original retaining walls Response – n/a. 63 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 1.22 When a new retaining wall is necessary, its height and visibility should be minimized. Response – A short retaining wall (24” max) is proposed by the driveway with steps to accommodate the restoration of historic grade. The material and specific details for the wall will be refined in the Final Design application. 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. Response – Based on historic photographs, grade around the landmark appears to have been altered. Slight grade changes are proposed to create positive drainage and to restore the front porch elevation which originally had a single step and now has two steps. 1.24 Preserve historically significant landscapes with few or no alterations. Response – n/a. 1.25 New development on these sites should respect the historic design of the landscape and its built features. Response – A simple landscape with traditional plant species is proposed and will be detailed in the Final Design application. 1.26 Preserve the historic circulation system. Response – Parking is located in a one car garage or a surface parking space located between the garage and the alley. 1.27 Preserve and maintain significant landscaping on site. Response – All new plantings are simple, and reference historically used native species. Site plan (left) and East elevation (right) with yellow circles indicating location of retaining wall. 64 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 Restoration Materials 2.1 Preserve original building materials. 2.2 The finish of materials should be as it would have existed historically. 2.3 Match the original material in composition, scale and finish when replacing materials on primary surfaces. 2.4 Do not use synthetic materials as replacements for original building materials. 2.5 Covering original building materials with new materials is inappropriate. 2.6 Remove layers that cover the original material. Response – Exhibit K outlines original vs. replacement materials based on visual inspection. All exterior historic material will be repaired or if necessary replaced in-kind. Windows 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 Match a replacement window to the original in its design. 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. 3.6 Match, as closely as possible, the profile of the sash and its components to that of the original window. 3.7 Adding new openings on a historic structure is generally not allowed. 3.8 Use a storm window to enhance energy conservation rather than replace a historic window. Response – Original windows will remain in place and non-historic windows, as indicated in Exhibit K, will be replaced with wood windows to match historic photographs or based on historic framing (if possible – to be revealed during demolition). No new openings are proposed in the landmark. Doors 4.1 Preserve historically significant doors. 4.2 Maintain the original size of a door and its opening. 4.3 When a historic door or screen door is damaged, repair it and maintain its general historic appearance. 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. 4.5 Adding new doors on a historic building is generally not allowed. 4.6 If energy conservation and heat loss are concerns, use a storm door instead of replacing a historic entry door. 4.7 Preserve historic hardware. 65 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 Response – The existing doors and transoms will remain on the historic landmark. Any historic hardware will be preserved if possible or replacements will closely match existing. New doors are not proposed in the landmark. The existing wood screen door is not historic but may be reused on the secondary entry door (the door facing east). Architectural Details 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 are required to be based on original designs. 6.5 Do not guess at “historic” designs for replacement parts. Response – Architectural details on the front bay window, window trim and the front porch are proposed to be restored. All restoration is based on historic photographs purchased from the Aspen Historical Society. Existing doors on front porch. Door at left will be primary entry in restoration project. Door at right will be secondary entry in restoration project. The screen door at left is not original but may be reused on the secondary entry door. Transoms will be preserved. Example of missing architectural details – top photos is 1970s detail of brackets under bay window, and bottom photo of existing bay window shows missing and altered brackets. 66 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 Roof 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. 7.4 New vents should be minimized, carefully, placed and painted a dark color. 7.5 Preserve original chimneys, even if they are made non-functional. 7.6 A new dormer should remain subordinate to the historic roof in scale and character. 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. 7.9 Avoid using conjectural features on a roof. 7.10 Design gutters so that their visibility on the structure is minimized to the extent possible. Response – The roof at the rear of the landmark has been heavily altered and is proposed to be removed and replaced. The roof plan at right shows altered roof forms within the historic footprint in blue, new additions in orange, and historic roof in red. The existing roof is a dark grey/black colored asphalt shingle which is proposed to be replaced in kind. The restored front porch roof will be either membrane or sheet metal to be determined at final design review. The roof form and eave depth are not proposed to change, and all venting is proposed through the brick chimney located in the new addition rather than a bunch of different vents. The simple chimney is proposed to consolidate and shield roof penetrations. The size of the chimney is the minimum size needed for the required venting – 3’7” x 4’ 3” to outside brick. Roof material comparison of historic photograph from Aspen Historic Society, 2020.034.0028 circa 1964 (left) compared to existing condition (right). Roof plan. 67 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 Relocation 9.1 Developing a basement by underpinning and excavating while the historic structure remains in place may help to preserve the historic fabric. Response – Underpinning is not proposed – a description of the approach to relocate the house is included in Exhibit A.3 of this application. The location of the historic home to the west property line does not allow underpinning to occur as more space is required for this technique as discussed at the HPC meeting on July 9, 2025. According to Dan Doherty, PE at KL&A Engineers & Builders, any potential underpinning (if equipment can even fit within the less than 2’ wide setback which is unlikely) would have to occur in 4’ segments which results in a substandard final product that would not perform or be long lasting. 9.2 Proposals to relocate a building will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Response – The house is proposed to be lifted and shifted slightly on the property to be parallel to property lines and to align with the 5’ side setback. This is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. Shifting the historic home to the 5’ west setback and maintaining the large front setback is an appropriate preservation solution as it allows a perpendicular connection for new construction behind the landmark and it meet Fire Codes for property line separation. The rubble foundation is failing and shifting, and requires replacement at this time. A figure ground study of the surrounding parcels demonstrates the minimal impact of increasing the west side yard setback on the context of the neighborhood. Figure ground study of buildings within the neighborhood. Most important to neighborhood context are the front and east setbacks. Existing conditions showing the house in relation to the property line (red dotted line). 68 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 9.3 Site a relocated structure in a position similar to its historic orientation. Response – The building is proposed to maintain the front yard setback of ~12’11” and to increase the west side setback from ~1’ 7” to 5’. 9.4 Position a relocated structure at its historic elevation above grade. Response – The building will be relocated at historic grade based on historic photographs. Positive drainage away from the landmark is proposed. 9.5 A new foundation shall appear similar in design and materials to the historic foundation. Response - The existing red sandstone foundation is historic and will be reused after the house is placed back on its new foundation. Red sandstone is preliminarily proposed for the new addition to be consistent with the landmark. 9.6 Minimize the visual impact of lightwells. Response – Two lightwells are proposed: one for a subgrade bedroom along the alley and the second along the west elevation for a subgrade living space. Glass railings are proposed as lightwell grates are no longer allowed per Building Code. Both lightwells are behind the structure and are not visible from the street. 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. Response – The project will comply with this requirement. A letter from KL&A is included as Exhibit A.3. 9.8 Proposals to relocate a building to a new site are highly discouraged. Response – n/a. 69 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 New Addition 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. Response – There are two historic “additions” to the original log cabin structure we assumed to be within the walls of the existing home. Based on wall thicknesses and the simple rectangular plan on the southeast corner of the building, we expect to find remnants of a log cabin that was added onto pre-1890 to create the footprint shown on the Sanborn Map. Comparison of the 1890 and 1893 Sanborne Maps illustrate the addition of the Hallam Street facing gable end in the southwest corner of the building, and the addition of the L- shaped front porch. The additions within the period of significance are preserved and the footprint is restored. 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. Response – The existing non-historic addition is proposed to be remodeled to better comply with the Design Guidelines. The areas in orange on the roof plan are not shown on the Sanborn Maps and are proposed to be removed. The areas in blue are within the historic footprint but have been altered overtime. These blue areas are proposed to be removed and replaced as described below. 1890 Sanborn Map (top) and 1893 Sanborn Map (bottom) showing gable end and open front porch (dotted line) Existing conditions roof plan. 70 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 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. Response – The new addition is a product of its own time while remaining subordinate to the landmark. The historic character of the landmark is clearly expressed through materials, restored historic detailing, and the cross gable form while the one story addition references the landmark but is clearly a product of its own time. The primary entrance is through the restored front porch. Hallam Street view: July proposal (left) and revised one story September proposal (right). The one story height of the addition is not visible behind the landmark from this view. Fourth Street view: July proposal (left) and revised one story September proposal (right). Note the painted yellow siding delineates the historic footprint. Large windows between historic and new addition add transparency and feeling of separation between forms. 71 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 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: Response – The landmark is visually dominant on the property as it is the main entrance and is more intricately detailed than the proposed addition. The above grade historic floor area is 1,180 sf compared to the new addition which is 1,165 sf which meets the 1:1 requirement. 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. Response – The proposed addition has been revised to be one story tall to meet this requirement. 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 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. 72 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 Response – Inspiration for the proposed addition came from the form, scale and materials of the landmark at 504 , and from the brick addition to 202 North Monarch (behind the Hotel Jerome) which supports but does not distract from the landmark. Form: The primary form of the addition is a 11:12 gable to match the historic roof pitch. The shed roofs are 3:12 to match the existing non-historic roof on the northwest side of the landmark, and the rectangular footprint of the landmark is similar to the rectangular footprint of the addition. The form of the addition strongly relates to the landmark. Fenestration: Proposed windows in the new addition are vertically oriented double hung style windows to relate to the landmark. Sliding glass doors are proposed in the new addition facing Hallam Street to express the addition as new construction and to balance the large bay window in the historic gable end. Fenestration strongly relates to the landmark. Materials: Brick is the primary material for the addition. Brick was used in the historic chimney at 504 Hallam and is a traditional material appropriate for a new addition as evidenced by the 202 N. Monarch project. Using brick is a creative way to introduce a traditional material to the property that is harmonious with an AspenVictorian. Painted wood siding is proposed for the areas within the historic footprint to match the historic landmark (see following page). Materials appropriately divert from the landmark. 202 North Monarch - brick addition to AspenVictorian property (aka Blu Vic). Historic footprint in green, addition footprint in diagonal hatch. View from corner of Hallam Street. 73 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 10.7 When planning an addition to a building in a historic district, preserve historic alignments on the street. Response – n/a. 10.8 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. Response – In elevation, the proposed addition is 3’6” taller than the historic landmark as shown below. When viewed from Hallam Street in actual real life perspective, the one story addition is not visible directly behind the landmark. Matching the historic 11:12 pitch in the proposed addition to be compatible with the scale of the historic building pushed the height of the addition slightly taller than the landmark. The importance of replicating the scale of the historic roof pitch outweighed matching the overall height of the landmark. In addition, a slight difference of height between the landmark and the new addition separates the massing as viewed from Fourth Street (please see elevations and renderings on preceding and following pages). Fourth Street elevation. Note the sliding glass door at center and the painted wood siding. West elevation. Note the painted wood siding within the historic footprint. . 74 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 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. Response – Some flexibility with Guidelines 10.9 is requested considering the proposed one story addition. The addition is slightly taller than the landmark and a connecting element is not proposed; however the intent of the connector is met through the proposed glass doors within the restored historic footprint which adds transparency between historic and new construction. The team explored a traditional one story flat roof connector link and it overcomplicated the massing, resulted in above grade setback variations and an unfunctional garage, and appeared forced. 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. South elevation (right) and West elevation (bottom) 75 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 • 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. Response – The addition is proposed at the rear of the building to minimize visual impact on the historic structure. The project is well under the allowable floor area and is a modest 2 bedroom, 2 bathroom home. The one story addition is about 10’2” to the east of the landmark - this portion of the addition is about 50’ back from the front façade of the historic home. 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. Response – Gable roof and shed roof forms are proposed to relate to the landmark. The proposed 11:12 pitch of landmark and the 3:12 pitch of existing non-historic additions are proposed in the new addition. 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 eave lines must be avoided. Response –The addition does not obscure historically important features. The original rear of the historic landmark is unknown – the only evidence is the footprint shown on the historic Sanborn maps and the historic sandstone foundation. Rather than guess at the appearance, the project proposes to preserve the footprint and only slightly alter the existing roof forms as shown below. Proposed section looking south (left), existing elevation looking south (right). 76 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria- 8.13.2025 12.3 Exterior light fixtures should be simple in character. Response – Exterior lighting will be developed for Final Design. 12.4 Minimize the visual impacts of utilitarian areas, such as mechanical equipment and trash storage. Response – The mechanical equipment will be located in the subgrade mechanical room. All venting is routed through the proposed chimney in the new addition. Any mechanical equipment that requires open air venting will be located off the alley in the northwest corner hidden from street view. Mechanical will be fully developed for Final Review. Lighting and Mechanical Photograph of existing northeast corner. 77 Exhibit A.2 Demolition of non-historic additions Exhibit A.2 Demolition – 8.13.25 Sec. 26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently, no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the 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. Response – Demolition of the non-historic additions identified in Exhibit K is proposed. Visual inspection and analysis of historic maps and photographs supports the removal of the east side addition and the rear (north elevation) addition. Portions of the front porch (roof, base of columns, enclosure, etc.) are not historic and are proposed to be removed and restored per historic photographs. Areas in blue and orange are proposed to be removed per the roof plan at right. Removal of these non- historic additions do not adversely impact the historic landmark and are inconsequential to the preservation needs of the area. Photograph of rear (left) roof plan (right) showing historic in red, altered within the historic footprint in blue, and additions outside the historic footprint in orange. 78 Exhibit A.2 Demolition of non-historic additions Exhibit A.2 Demolition – 8.13.25 Exploratory demolition was not conducted as the owner lives in the home. Historic wall studs discovered in the west wall of the rear historic footprint will be preserved. The wall area proposed to have sliding glass doors facing Fourth Street has already been completely removed, and the north wall is an interior wall that is outside the purview of HPC. This interior wall is proposed to be removed to function as the kitchen in the connecting element. As an interior wall, it does not require demolition approval from HPC; however we want to be fully transparent in the proposed project to avoid any issues at building permit review. Exterior west wall - historic studs to be preserved if discovered Interior north wall – to be removed for proposed kitchen Interior east “wall” - to be replaced with sliding glass doors Front porch enclosure to be removed. Proposed main level plan with green indicating historic footprint (left) and existing conditions (right). 79 Page 1 of 1 KL&A, Inc. 215 N. 12th Street, Unit E Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Telephone: (970) 927-5174 July 11, 2024 Scott Hoffman Crestone Building Company 504 W Hallam Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 504 W Hallam Residence Dear Scott, The purpose of this letter is to formally document that KL&A’s services have been retained for a remodel and addition to a home at the above referenced address. The existing house is on the City of Aspen historic registry. The historic portion of the house will be moved and stored temporarily on the lot while a new foundation is constructed, and then moved back onto the new foundation. Once it is put back in place, it will undergo significant structural retrofit to meet all current structural codes, while retaining the required exterior historic features. KL&A has observed the existing residence and has met with the contractor and the subcontractor that will perform the house moving. KL&A has concluded that the house can be moved safely and will coordinate the required stabilization measures necessary to maintain the structural integrity during the moving process. Please feel free to contact me if there are any questions. Sincerely, Dan Doherty, P.E. Principal 07/11/2024 80 Exhibit A.3 Relocation Exhibit A.3 Relocation – 8.13.25 26.415.090. Relocation of designated historic properties. The intent of this Chapter 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. C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. 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 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. Response – The landmark is proposed to be shifted to the east about 3’5” to meet the 5’ setback. This shift does not impact the ~12’ 11” front setback and allows a parallel connection of the new construction, proper Fire protection, and spacing from the adjacent property. Slight shifting of the landmark to be parallel to property lines and meet setback requirements does not impact the character of the neighborhood and has positive impacts on the landmark because it avoids fireproofing the west wall of the landmark and facilitates a new foundation to replace the failing rubble foundation. The original sandstone foundation material will be stored and reused as a veneer once the landmark is relocated. The landmark will be placed on a slab on grade – there will be no crawl space to avoid venting requirements and no basement to avoid lightwells near the landmark. The owner/builder has 31 years of construction experience and finds that slab on grade is the best construction method. The attached letter from professional engineer Dan Doherty of KL&A has met with Bill Bailey house moving and inspected the house and property. Doherty determined the house is capable of withstanding the impacts of relocation. As discussed previously, underpinning is not an option for this property - the proximity of the landmark to the west property line would result in a segmented foundation wall that does not perform properly (if equipment can even fit in the small 1’7” side yard to accommodate underpinning). Page A1 of the drawing set includes a preliminary housing moving plan for temporary storage of the landmark onsite 81 Exhibit A.3 Relocation while the foundation is prepared. Financial security will be provided at building permit application. The owner/builder is aware of the requirement for a letter of credit or similar security, and agrees to provide said documentation. Existing location of landmark (left), temporary relocation plan (middle), proposed location of landmark (right). 82 83 1 DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF A HISTORIC TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT PURSUANT TO ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE #___ , SERIES OF 20__ THIS DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT is made and entered into this _____ day of ______________, 20__, by Scott Hoffman, (hereinafter referred to as “Owner”), whose address is 504 West Hallam Street, Lots R and S, Block 28, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, Parcel ID 2735-124-25-006, and The City of Aspen, a body politic and corporate pursuant to its Home-Rule Charter and the Constitution of the State of Colorado, acting through its City Council, (hereinafter the “City”); WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Owner owns real property more specifically described as; Lots R and S, Block 28, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, Parcel ID 2735-124-25-006 (hereinafter referred to as “Real Property”), which Real Property is designated as a Historic Site, as such are defined in the City of Aspen Land Use Code (“City Code”); and WHEREAS, Owner has submitted an affidavit, duly notarized, in compliance with Section 26.535.090.A.2 of the City Code, and supplied the necessary application materials identified in Section 26.535.090 showing compliance with the criteria set forth in Section 26.535.070 of the City Code; and WHEREAS, The Community Development Department has reviewed Owner’s application according to the review standards identified in 26.535.070 of the City Code, and has recommended approval of the application and the establishment of up to two (2) approved Historic TDR Certificates as set forth herein; and WHEREAS, City Council Ordinance #____, Series of 20___ (the “Ordinance”) was approved on ___(date)__________, establishing the above referenced Historic TDR Certificates, and requiring that a Deed Restriction be recorded in real property records of Pitkin County, designating the Real Property as a Sending Site and permanently restricting the development of the Real Property (the Sending Site) to an allowable Floor Area not exceeding the allowance for a single-family residence or duplex if allowed, minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of Floor Area multiplied by the number of Historic TDR Certificates established; and WHEREAS, in consideration of the establishment of one (1) or two (2) Historic TDR Certificates pursuant to the Ordinance and City Code, Owner agrees to restrict the Real Property as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations contained herein, Owner and the City hereby covenant and agree as follows: 84 2 1. Development of the Real Property (the Sending Site) is hereby permanently restricted to an allowable Floor Area not exceeding the allowance for a single- family residence or duplex as otherwise permitted by the City Code on the Real Property, minus any deductions resulting from previous issuance of TDR certificate(s) and minus 250 square feet, that being two hundred fifty (250) square feet of Floor Area multiplied by the one (1) Historic TDR Certificate hereby established. 2. The property owner may elect to sever up to two (2) TDR certificates from the property and is not required by Ordinance # ___, Series of 2025 to sever both TDR certificates. The property owner, at their sole discretion, may elect to sever no TDRs, one (1) TDR or two (2) TDRs fom the property. 3. In consideration of the foregoing, and pursuant to the City Code and the Ordinance, the City shall cause the issuance of one (1) Historic TDR Certificate, executed by the Mayor, allowing the transfer of development rights to a Receiver Site to be determined pursuant to the City Code. This Historic TDR Certificate may be sold, assigned, transferred, or conveyed. Transfer of title shall be evidenced by an assignment of ownership on the actual certificate document. Upon transfer, the new owner may request the City re-issue the certificate acknowledging the new owner. Reissuance shall not require adoption of a new ordinance. The market for such Historic TDR Certificates shall remain unrestricted and the City shall not prescribe or guarantee the monetary value of any Historic TDR Certificates. 4. This deed restriction shall not be construed to stipulate an absolute Floor Area on the Real Property, but only a square footage reduction from the allowable Floor Area, as that allowable Floor Area may be amended from time to time. 5. The Real Property (Sending Site) shall remain eligible for Floor Area incentives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Code, as it may be amended from time to time. 6. This restriction may be modified only in a writing signed by both the Owner and the City. 7. Unless modified as stated above, this Agreement shall constitute a covenant running with the Real Property as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the City Council of the City of Aspen by any appropriate legal action including, but not limited to, injunction or abatement. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGES] 85 3 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on the date and year above first written. OWNER: By:___________________________ Scott Hoffman STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of ______________, 20___, by ___________ Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:___________________ _____________________________ Notary Public 86 4 APPROVAL OF CITY ATTORNEY By:___________________________ Kate Johnson, City Attorney THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO a body politic and corporate pursuant to its Home-Rule Charter and the Constitution of the State of Colorado By:____________________________ Date:______________ Rachel Richards, Mayor STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _________________, 20__, by_____________, as Mayor of the City of Aspen, Colorado. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:___________________ _____________________________ Notary Public 87 Exhibit A5 TDR Review Criteria Exhibit A.5 TDRs – 8.13.25 Sec. 26.535.070. - Review criteria for establishment of a historic transferable development right. A historic TDR certificate may be established by the Mayor of the City Council, pursuant to adoption of an ordinance, finds all the following standards met. (a) The sending site is a historic landmark on which the development of a single-family or duplex residence is a permitted use, pursuant to Chapter 26.710, Zone Districts. Properties on which such development is a conditional use shall not be eligible. Response – 504 West Hallam is a historic landmark site and single family or duplex are permitted uses in the R-6 zone district. (b) It is demonstrated that the sending site has permitted unbuilt development rights, for either a single-family or duplex home, equaling or exceeding two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates requested. Response – The allowable floor area is included as an exhibit and summarized below. The current property has 1,978.5f of allowable floor area. Table 1: Floor Area analysis – existing conditions Single Family Home Allowable Floor Area 3,240 sf Existing Floor Area 1,978.5 sf Unbuilt Floor Area 1,261.5 sf Unbuilt Floor Area After removal of 2 TDRS (500 sf) 761.5 sf (c) It is demonstrated that the establishment of TDR certificates will not create a nonconformity. In cases where a nonconformity already exists, the action shall not increase the specific nonconformity. Response – A nonconformity is not created or increased as part of this request. (d) The analysis of unbuilt development right shall only include the actual built development, any approved development order, the allowable development right prescribed by zoning for a single- family or duplex residence, and shall not include the potential of the sending site to gain floor area bonuses, exemptions or similar potential development incentives. Properties in the MU Zone District which do not currently contain a single-family home or duplex established prior to the adoption of Ordinance #7, Series of 2005, shall be permitted to base the calculation of TDRs on one hundred percent (100%) of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. This is only for the purpose of creating TDRs and does not permit the on-site development of one hundred percent (100%) of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. If the additional twenty percent (20%) of allowable floor area exceeds five hundred (500) square feet, the applicant may not request a floor area bonus from HPC at any time in the 88 Exhibit A5 TDR Review Criteria Exhibit A.5 TDRs – 8.13.25 future. Any development order to develop floor area, beyond that remaining legally connected to the property after establishment of TDR Certificates, shall be considered null and void. Response - The property currently has adequate unused floor area to create 2 TDRs (Table 1). A pending Major Development application proposes 2,458 sf of floor area, which leaves 782 sf of unused floor area on the property. Table 2: Floor Area analysis – pending project Single Family Home Allowable Floor Area 3,240 sf Proposed Floor Area 2,458 sf Unbuilt Floor Area 782 sf Unbuilt Floor Area After removal of 2 TDRS (500 sf) 282 sf (e) The proposed deed restriction permanently restricts the maximum development of the property (the sending site) to an allowable floor area not exceeding the allowance for a single-family or duplex residence minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates established. For properties with multiple or unlimited floor areas for certain types of allowed uses, the maximum development of the property, independent of the established property use, shall be the floor area of a single-family or duplex residence (whichever is permitted) minus two hundred fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplies by the number of historic TDR certificates established. The deed restriction shall not stipulate an absolute floor area, but shall stipulate a square footage reduction from the allowable floor area for a single-family or duplex residence, as may be amended from time to time. The sending site shall remain eligible for certain floor area incentives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Land Use Code, as may be amended from time to time. The form of the deed restriction shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. Response – A draft deed restriction is included in the application for review. It is understood that the property owner may elect to sever up to two TDR certificates and is not obligated to sever both TDRs. It is also understood that floor area equal to the number of TDRs issued is permanently severed from the property upon the recordation of the deed restriction, and not upon approval of an ordinance. (f) A real estate closing has been scheduled at which, upon satisfaction of all relevant requirements, the City shall execute and deliver the applicable number of historic TDR certificates to the sending site property owner and that property owner shall execute and deliver a deed restriction lessening the available development right of the subject property together with the appropriate fee for recording the deed restriction with the County Clerk and Recorder's office. 89 Exhibit A5 TDR Review Criteria Exhibit A.5 TDRs – 8.13.25 Response – n/a. (g) It shall be the responsibility of the sending site property owner to provide building plans and a zoning analysis of the sending site to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Certain review fees may be required for the confirmation of built floor area. Response – Please refer to attached drawings and application narrative for a zoning analysis and floor area calculations. (h) The sale, assignment, conveyance or other transfer or change in ownership of transferable development rights certificates shall be recorded in the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and must be reported by the grantor to the City of Aspen Community Development Department within five (5) days of such transfer. The report of such transfer shall disclose the certificate number, the grantor, the grantee and the total value of the consideration paid for the certificate. Failure to timely or accurately report such transfer shall not render the transferable development right certificate void. Response – n/a. (i) TDR certificates may be issued at the pace preferred by the property owner. Response – It is understood that the property owner may elect to sever up to two TDR certificates and is not obligated to sever both TDRs. It is also understood that floor area equal to the number of TDRs issued is permanently severed from the property upon the recordation of the deed restriction, and not upon approval of an ordinance. (j) City Council may find that the creation of TDRs is not the best preservation solution for the affected historic resource and deny the application to create TDRs. HPC shall provide Council with a recommendation. Response – n/a. 90 Exhibit A6 Setback Variance Exhibit A.6 Setback Variance – 8.13.25 Sec. 26.415.110.c - Variations 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 variations 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 public amenity than required for the on-site relocation of commercial historic properties. (2) In granting a variation, the HPC must make a finding that such a variation: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or 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. Response: The revised project removed the second floor of the addition and shifted the interior program to the main level and basement. A lightwell is proposed in the rear yard setback that provides egress from a subgrade bedroom but is larger than the 3 x 3 minimum size per the Building Code. The R-6 zone district specifies a 10’ rear yard setback for living space and a 5’ rear yard setback for garage use only. The proposed lightwell is 6’2” from the rear property line and is 3’10” x 8’9.75” in size (measured to outside wall). R-6 requirement Proposed Variation Request Rear Yard Setback 5’ garage 10’ living 5’ garage 6’2” lightwell 3’ 10” The requested variation for a light well mitigates the impact of a two story addition to a one story landmark by pushing development subgrade. A variation for the larger lightwell than the minimum requirement balances the historic preservation design guidelines regarding mass and scale on a corner lot and is consistent with the intent of the historic preservation program “to draw a reasonable balance between private property rights and the public interest.” The lightwell will not be visible from either street and will be concealed behind a property fence along the alley. 91 LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET Name: __________________________________________________________________________________ Location: ________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID #: ______________________________________________________________________________ PROJECT: Name: __________________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________ Phone # : _______________________ E-mail: __________________________________________________ APPLICANT: Name: __________________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________ Phone # : _______________________ E-mail: __________________________________________________ REPRESENTATIVE: EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM Exhibit B 92 City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET Project: __________________________________________________________________________________________ Applicant: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Project Location: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Zone District: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Lot Size: _________________________________________________________________________________________ Gross Lot Area:________________________________ Net Lot Area:_________________________________________ For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high-water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code. Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: Variations requested (identify the exact variations being requested): 93 City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET Commercial net leaseable: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Lodge Pillows: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Lodge Units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Free-Market residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Affordable residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Proposed % of demolition: ________________ % DIMENSIONS: Write N/A where no requirements exists in the zone district. Floor Area: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Height Principal Building: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Accessory Building: Existing:_____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ On-Site Parking: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ % Site Coverage: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ % Open Space: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Front Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Rear Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Combined Front/Rear: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Indicate N, S, E, W Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Combined Front/Rear: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Distance between Buildings: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ 94 LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET TYPE OF APPLICATION ESA Review (Stream Margin, 8040 Greenline, View Plane, or Hallam Lake Bluff) Non Conformities Pre-Development Topography Temporary Use Accessory Dwelling Unit/Carriage House Dimensional Variance Growth Management Review Outdoor Vending Planned Development Review Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit Establishment of Zoning or Rezoning Subdivision Review Condominiumization Approval Documents Special Review Wireless Facilities Residential Design Standard Review Conditional Use Review Historic Designation Certificate of Appropriateness Minor Historic Development Major Historic Development (select one below) Conceptual Development Final Development Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) Demolition (total demolition) Substantial Historic Preservation Amendment Historic Landmark Lot Split Establishment of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs) Other City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEWS 95 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PRE-24-052 DATE: April 23, 2025 PLANNER: Stuart Hayden, stuart.hayden@aspen.gov REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams, Sara@BendonAdams.com PROJECT LOCATION: 504 W Hallam Street PARCEL ID: 2735-124-25-006 REQUEST: HP Major Development, HP Relocation, HP Benefits DESCRIPTION: 504 W. Hallam Street is a circa 1885 AspenVictorian structure set on a 6,000 square foot corner lot, located in the R-6 residential zone district. The property was designated per Ordinance #4, Series of 1995. The applicant is proposing the following work items: • Removing existing non-historic additions on the historic resource. • Restoring the front porch. • Lifting and slightly rotating the historic building to be parallel to the property line. • Demolishing a ca. 1950s detached garage. • Constructing a 750- to 1,000-square-foot addition with attached garage and basement. • Maintaining curb cut on N. 4th Street. The applicant is also asking for the following Historic Preservation benefits: • Establishment of two Transferable Development Rights (TDRs). • Floor area bonus of ~163 square feet. Given these requests, HP Major Development, HP Relocation, and HP Benefits reviews are anticipated. Major Development is a two-step process requiring the approval of a conceptual development plan and a final development plan. During its review of the conceptual development plan the HPC will consider mass, scale and site plan and evaluate the relocation and floor area bonus requested by the applicant, making a determination to approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Following the conceptual development plan review, staff will inform City Council of the HPC decision, allowing them the opportunity to uphold or to “Call Up” aspects of the major development and relocation approval for further discussion. This is a standard practice for all significant projects. Following the Notice of Call Up, and submittal of a final design application, the HPC will conduct final design review to consider landscape, lighting and materials. The Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the Land Use Code Sections that are applicable to this project will be used to evaluate the proposal. This property is exempt from Residential Design Standard Review (RDS). The project is subject to Administrative Growth Management mitigation for affordable housing. Exhibit C 96 Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Establishing TDRs requires the review and determination of the City Council. With a recommendation from the Community Development Department and public testimony provided during a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council shall approve or disapprove the establishment of a historic TDR certificate by adoption of an ordinance according to the review standards identified in Section 26.535.070 of the Aspen Land Use Code. RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: Section Number Section Title 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.070(d) Historic Preservation – Major Development 26.415.090 Historic Preservation – Relocation 26.415.110 Historic Preservation – Benefits 26.470.090 Administrative Growth Management 26.535 Transferable Development Rights 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential (R-6) HELPFUL LINKS: • Land Use Application (PDF) • Land Use Code (PDF) • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (PDF) REVIEW BY: • Staff for completeness and recommendations; • HPC for final decision of Major Development, Relocation and Floor Area Bonus; • City Council for final decision of TDRs and Notice of Call Up for Major Development and Relocation REQUIRED LAND USE REVIEW(S): • HP – Major Development • HP – Relocation • HP – Benefits • Establishing a Transferable Development Right Certificate PUBLIC HEARING: Yes, at HPC and Council PLANNING FEES: $1,950 for 6 billable hours of staff time. Additional/fewer hours will be billed/refunded at a rate of $325 per hour. REFERRAL FEES: Engineering Review: $1,605.00 (Flat Fee) Parks Review: $975.00 (Flat Fee) TOTAL DEPOSIT: $4,530 97 Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. APPLICATION CHECKLIST: Below is a list of submittal requirements for this review. Please email the entire application as one pdf to cdehadmins@aspen.gov. Include “PRE-24-052” in the subject line. If more than 18 months has lapsed since this letter was issued, please reach out to hp@aspen.gov.  Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.  Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).  Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.  Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.  HOA Compliance form (Attached).  List of adjacent property owners for both properties within 300’ for public hearing.  An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.  Site improvement survey depicting existing natural and man-made site features, including topography and vegetation, and all legal easements and restrictions, certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. Must be no older than a year from date of submittal.  A written description of the proposal (scope of work) and written explanation of how the proposed development and any requests for variations or benefits complies with the relevant review standards and design guidelines to the application.  An existing and proposed site plan showing property boundaries, setbacks and parking.  Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing, scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations.  Existing and proposed floor area calculations.  Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the designated historic property including photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location and extent of proposed work. 98 Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right.  A written explanation of the type of relocation requested (temporary, on-site or off-site).  A written report from a licensed engineer or architect regarding the soundness of the building, structure or object, its ability to withstand the basement excavation, and any rehabilitation needs related to the work.  Evidence of the financial ability to undertake the excavation safely, preservation and repair of the building, structure or object; site preparation and construction of necessary infrastructure through the posting of bonds or other financial measures deemed appropriate. For Conceptual, the following will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above:  A preliminary stormwater design.  Preliminary selection of primary building materials to be used in construction represented by samples and/or photographs.  A notarized affidavit from the property owner signifying understanding of the following concepts: o For each historic TDR certificate issued by the City for a particular site, that property shall be allowed two hundred and fifty (250) square feet less of floor area than permitted according to the property's zoning, as amended; o A deed restriction will permanently encumber the site and restrict that property's development rights to below that allowed by right by zoning according to the number of historic TDR certificates established from that site; o The property owner shall have no authority over the manner in which the historic TDR certificate is used by subsequent owners of the certificate.  A proposed deed restriction for the sending site. For Final Review, the following items will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above:  Drawings of the street facing facades must be provided at ¼” scale.  Final selection of all exterior materials, and samples or clearly illustrated photographs. Samples are preferred for the presentation to HPC.  A lighting plan and landscape plan, including any visible stormwater mitigation features. 99 Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 100 10 1 10 2 Customer Distribution Prevent fraud - Please call a member of our closing team for wire transfer instructions or to initiate a wire transfer. Note that our wiring instructions will never change. Order Number: Q62017542-3 Date: 03/19/2025 Property Address: 504 W HALLAM ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 For Closing Assistance For Title Assistance Land Title Roaring Fork Valley Title Team 533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE, SUITE 102 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 927-0405 (Work) (970) 925-0610 (Work Fax) valleyresponse@ltgc.com Seller/Owner SALLY RAE GLENN Delivered via: No Commitment Delivery 103 Estimate of Title Fees Order Number: Q62017542-3 Date: 03/19/2025 Property Address: 504 W HALLAM ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 Seller(s): SALLY RAE GLENN Buyer(s): None Thank you for putting your trust in Land Title. Below is the estimate of title fees for the transaction. The final fees will be collected at closing. Visit ltgc.com to learn more about Land Title. Estimate of Title Insurance Fees "TBD" Commitment $279.00 TBD - TBD Income $-279.00 TOTAL $0.00 Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These documents, such as covenants conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and use of the property. You may wish to engage legal assistance in order to fully understand and be aware of the implications of the documents on your property. Chain of Title Documents: Pitkin county recorded 07/21/1983 at book 449 page 45 104 Copyright 2006-2025 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Property Address: 504 W HALLAM ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 1.Effective Date: 03/07/2025 at 5:00 P.M. 2.Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured: "TBD" Commitment Proposed Insured: $0.00 3.The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: FEE SIMPLE 4.Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: SALLY RAE GLENN 5.The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 28, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:Q62017542-3 105 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: Q62017542-3 All of the following Requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POLICY WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT HERETO. 106 This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 5.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8.RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS CONTAINED IN DEED FROM THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN RECORDED JANUARY 31, 1888 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 328 AS FOLLOWS: PROVIDED THAT NO TITLE SHALL BE HEREBY ACQUIRED TO ANY MINE OF GOLD, SILVER, CINNABAR, OR COPPER OR TO ANY VALID MINING CLAIM OR POSSESSION HELD UNDER EXISTING LAWS. 9.TERMS, CONDITIONS, OBLIGATIONS AND PROVISIONS OF STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION AS SET FORTH IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED JUNE 6, 1977 IN BOOK 329 AT PAGE 925. 10.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE NO. 47, SERIES OF 1977 OF THE ASPEN HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE RECORDED OCTOBER 27, 1977 IN BOOK 337 AT PAGE 352. 11.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN NOTICE OF APPROVAL RECORDED DECEMBER 31, 2024 AS RECEPTION NO. 707016. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: Q62017542-3 107 Land Title Guarantee Company Disclosure Statements Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A) A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property). (B) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. (C) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. (A) No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. (B) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. (C) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. (E) 108 This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. Note: Pursuant to CRS 24-21-514.5, Colorado notaries may remotely notarize real estate deeds and other documents using real-time audio-video communication technology. You may choose not to use remote notarization for any document. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and (A) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. (B) 109 Joint Notice of Privacy Policy of Land Title Guarantee Company Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurancy Company This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based transaction management system; your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others; a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non-affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction. We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration 110 Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 111 Commitment For Title Insurance Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. . COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: 4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT “Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(a) “Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (b) “Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law.(c) “Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (d) “Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(e) “Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) “Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (g) “Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A.(h) the Notice;(a) the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b) the Commitment Conditions;(c) Schedule A;(d) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g) The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: (a) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (b) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. (c) The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (d) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e) In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (f) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy.(g) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment.(b) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (c) 112 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory. Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Craig B. Rants, Senior Vice President This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II —Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (d) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f) 113 11 4 1605 975 11 5 116 11 7 430 411 404 318 309 432 425 500 434 401 407 426 420 204 504 501 540 511 615 601 609 602 520 526 529 319 533 504 323 506 523 530 533 317 525 403 421 417 431 407 Si Johnson - 5th St Si Johnson - 5th St N 5th St W Francis St Si Johnson - 5th St N 4th St N 5th St N 5th St W Francis St W Hallam St W Hallam St Si Johnson - 4th St N 4th St Hil ly ard P ar k Si Johnson - 4th St Si Johnson- 3rd St N 3rd St N 4th St W Francis St W Francis St Si Johnson- 3rd St W Hallam St N 3rd St 0 0.01 0.030.01 mi FMaxar, Microsoft, Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Aspen GIS, Pitkin County, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS Legend Aspen Address Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) Emissions Inventory Boundary (EIB) City of Aspen Parcels Source: City of Aspen GIS 504 West Hallam Vicinity Map 118 Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. The information maintained by the County may not be complete as to mineral estate ownership and that information should be determined by separate legal and property analysis. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273512425006 on 03/19/2025 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com Exhibit I 119 318 FOURTH STREET LTD HOUSTON, TX 77027 3433 WESTHEIMER RD #906 323 NORTH 5TH ST LLC HOUSTON, TX 77019 2219 BRENTWOOD DR 430 WEST HALLAM LLC BAL HARBOUR, FL 33154 256 BAL BAY DR 529 W FRANCIS LLC WILMINGTON, DE 19809 200 BELLEVUE PKWY #525 533 W FRANCIS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 533 W FRANCIS ST AGGER DAVID ALDEN REV TRUST SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94126 PO BOX 2129 ALPENGLUHEN LLC CHICAGO, IL 60613 4113 N HERMITAGE ASPEN RETINA SURGEONS LLC MINNETONKA, MN 55345 5014 WOODHURST LN BLAICH JANET S TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 319 N FOURTH ST #A BLAICH ROBERT I FAM TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 319 N FOURTH ST #A BLUE MAGPIE LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 1268 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 427 RIO GRANDE PL CLARKS ADDITION CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 317 N FOURTH ST COHEN FAMILY REV TRUST SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85251 6002 E EXETER BLVD COLLETT JOHN & VIRGINIA C CHARLOTTE, NC 28204 1111 METROPOLITAN AVE #700 CONNERY FAMILY TRUST LARKSPUR, CA 949391345 135 WARD ST DEXTER WEST LLC WASHINGTON, DC 20007 4725 DEXTER ST NW DUNCAN SKIHAUS LLC HOUSTON, TX 77002 600 TRAVIS # 3550 EGGLESTON ROBERT H JR & TRACY H ASPEN, CO 81611 434 W HALLAM FUNMOM LLC BIRMINGHAM, AL 35213 24 RIDGE DR HALLAM WEST END LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 625 E MAIN ST # 102B-141 HENRY KRISTEN ASPEN, CO 816111246 525 W HALLAM ST HILLMAN ROBERTA WESLEY REV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 504 W BLEEKER ST HILLMAN TATNALL L REV TRUST CHILMARK, MA 02535 PO BOX 332 KEEFE FAMILY TRUST DENVER, CO 80209 3435 BELCARO DR LARNER GLEN & TRACY L HOUSTON, TX 77027 3737 ELLA LEE LN LAST RUN HOLDINGS LLC NEW YORK, NY 10023 115 CENTRAL PARK WEST # 12G MAGGOS LAURA P ASPEN, CO 81611 317 N 4TH ST MARSHALL TRACEY CAUSEY LIV TRUST AUSTIN, TX 78703 3603 MURILLO CIR MD ASPEN HOLDINGS LLC BETHESDA, MD 20814 4960 FAIRMONT AVE PH3 120 NATIONWIDE THEATRES CORP LOS ANGELES , CA 90048 120 N ROBERTSON BLVD 3RD FL NEISSER KATHERINE M DISCRETIONARY TRUST CHICAGO, IL 60614 359 W BELDEN AVE OXLEY DEBBY M TULSA, OK 74119 1437 S BOULDER AVE #1475 OXLEY JOHN C LIVING TRUST TULSA, OK 74119 1437 S BOULDER AVE #770 PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC HEALDSBRUG, CA 95448 PO BOX 1804 QUARK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA REYNOLDS LORA AUSTIN, TX 78746 913 CALITHEA RD SACK KEN & SHERI ASPEN, CO 81611 407 N 3RD ST SHC-ASPEN LLC TULSA, OK 74103 15 E 5TH ST #3200 SHELBY LLC DENVER, CO 80202 1615 CALIFORNIA ST #707 SHIELDS JOHN H II & PATRICIA P PONTE VEDRA BEACH, FL 32082 1077 PONTE VEDRA BLVD SIRKIN ALICIA CORAL GABLES , FL 331336985 60 EDGEWATER DR APT 505 SUGAR MOUNTAIN TRUST NEW YORK, NY 10165 60 E 42ND ST TISCHLER SALLY L HEALDSBRUG, CA 95448 PO BOX 1804 TISCHLER SALLY MGMT TRUST HEALDSBURG, CA 95448 PO BOX 1804 VALENTINE ELLEN ASPEN, CO 81611 500 W FRANCIS WEST END RESIDENCE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 312 AABC #312D 121 12 2 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE CVR COVER SHEET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 PROJECT SITE AS - BUILT/HPC 4/15/2025 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St, Aspen, CO PROJECT DIRECTORY Red Room Design (ARCHITECT) 1001 Grand Ave, Suite 103 CONTACT: Steven May Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 413-3144 stevenm@redroom-design.com Glenn Rae (OWNER) 76 Little Elk Crk AVE. CONTACT: Glenn Rae Snowmass, CO 81654 PROJECT INFO JURISDICTION: City Of Aspen PARCEL ID : 273-512-425-006 LEGAL DESC: Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Block: 28 Lot: R AND:- Lot: S CODE EDITIONS: 2021 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE (IRC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE (IECC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE (IMC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL PLUMBING CODE (IPC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL FUEL GAS CODE (IFGC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE (IFC) 2014 NATIONAL ELECRICAL CODE (NEC) FIRE SPRINKLER: No Climate Zone: 7B Building Zone: R-6 Height Limit: 25'-0" 123 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE GENERAL INFORMATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 COVER & INTRO CVR COVER SHEET GENERAL INFORMATION ARCHITECTURAL ZONING SITE PLANS ELEVATIONS SCHEDULES AFAR A0.01 A1.01 A1.02 A1.03 A2.01 A2.02 A2.03 A2.04 A6.01 A6.02 A6.03 FAR CALCS . SITE PLAN CELLAR LEVEL PLAN MAIN LEVEL PLAN ROOF PLAN ELEVATION ELEVATION ELEVATION ELEVATION WINDOW SCHEDULE DOOR SCHEDULE - EXTERIOR HISTORIC PHOTOS DRAWING INDEXMATERIAL LEGEND CONCRETE SIDING EARTH SHEATHING GLASS STEEL CMU BLOCK GWB INSULATION SANDSTONE WOOD NADimensionDIM Not Applicable Floor Drain Fireproof Dishwasher Face Of Concrete Expansion Joint Face Of Stud Downspout Fire Extinguisher Cabinet EXT Exterior FEC FTG FD FL GA FP FIN FOC FOS Guage Footing Floor Finish EQ EL EA EJ EXIST DRWG DR DN DW DS Equal Elevation Each Existing Drawing Drain Down Radius or Riser Perforated (d) Penny (nails, etc.) Outside Diameter Round Head Sheet Metal Screw Prefinished Sheet Metal PlywoodPLY RHSM REQ'D REINF REFR PROP PROJ PROD REF Refrigerator Required Reinforce (d) Property Project Product Refer PFSM PERF PL OD OPH OPP OPG OC NTS Plate Opposite Opening On Center Not to Scale Opposite Hand Damproofing Bottom Of Centerline Continuous Concrete Masonry Unit Architectural Construction Joint Both Sides CER Ceramic DIA DP DET CONT CJ CLOS CONC COL CLR CMU Detail Diameter Clear Concrete Column Closet BS BO CL CAB BLDG ARCH BD BET BRG BM Cabinet Building Board Between Bearing Beam Attic Access Door Aggregate Alternate Above Finished Floor Area of Refuge ADD ADJ AGG ALT AFF AOR AAD Addendum Adjacent Gypsum Wallboard Not In Contract Masonry Opening Inside Diameter and Air Conditioning Heating, Ventilating, Medicine Cabinet LAM Laminate MISC MECH NIC MIN MC LAV MAX MO MFG MTL Miscellaneous Minimum Mechanical Maximum Material Lavatory Manufacturer HWY JT INT ID HOR HDW HVAC HD HT Highway Interior Horizontal Joint Hardware Head Height Laminated Wood Beam General Contractor ABBREVIATIONS GC GWB GLB GR GYP GL GALV Gypsum Grade Glass Galvanized TreadT United States Gage Uniform Building Code With (comb. form) Vinyl Asbestos Tile Unless Noted Otherwise VerticalVERT WD W/O W/ WIN WT WP WC V VAT Weight Without Wood Window Waterproof Water Closet Voltage VENT VIF VAR USG UBC U.N.O. UNFIN TYP TS UG Variable Verify In Field Ventilate Unfinished Underground Tube Steel Typical Tounge and Groove Top and Bottom Toilet Paper Holder Sound- Transmission Class Supplement (al)SUPPL TO T&B T&G TPH THK TEMP SUSP IE TV TEL Top Of Thick Television Telephone Suspend (ed) That Is Tempered SQ STRUCT. SUB STL STD SPEC SM SIM STC SL Square Substitute Structure (al) Standard Steel Sheet Metal Specification Sliding Similar RO SHLV SECT SHT SEW SAN RW Rough Opening Section Sanitary Shelves Sheet Sewer Roof Window GENERAL NOTES CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND COORDINATE ALL OPENINGS STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS. COORDINATION AND RESOLUTION DURING THE BIDDING PROCESS. CONTRACTOR WILL ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY OF ITEMS REQUIRING THROUGH FLOORS, CEILINGS, AND WALLS WITH ALL ARCHITECTURAL , DRAWINGS NOT TO BE SCALED, NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY CONFLICTS ALL DIMENSIONS NOTED TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED. BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH WORK WHICH CONFORMS AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL SUBMIT CARE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING CONSTRUCTION , FOR COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE O.S.H.A. REGULATIONS, AND FOR THE PROTECTION OF ALL WORK UNTIL IT IS DELIVERED REQUESTS AND SAMPLES FOR REVIEW THROUGH THE GENERAL REQUIRED VERIFICATIONS AND SUBMITTALS TO BE MADE IN WORK IS BEGUN, AND WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE REVIEWED SHOP DRAWINGS, SUBJECT TO REPLACEMENT AS REQUIRED IN WHEN THERE IS NEED OF INSPECTION AS REQUIRED BY THE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SHALL BE NOTIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY AND SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ARCHITECT FOR HIS OR HER REVIEW WHERE CALLED FOR ANYWHERE IN THESE DOCUMENTS. REVIEW SHALL BE MADE BY THE ARCHITECT BEFORE OTHERWISE REGULATED OR SPECIFIED BY ARCHITECT THESE DOCUMENTS ARE INTENDED TO INCLUDE ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES REQUIRED TO COMPLETE ALL WORK DESCRIBED HEREIN. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT ANY CONDITIONS WHICH WILL NOT PERMIT CONSTRUCTION ACCORDING TO THE INTENTIONS OF THESE DOCUMENTS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ARCHITECT TO PROVIDE DETAILS AND/OR DIRECTIONS REGARDING DESIGN INTENT WHERE IT IS ALTERED BY EXISTING CONDITIONS OR WHERE NEGLECTED IN THE DOCUMENTS. REVIEWED SAMPLES. ANY WORK WHICH DOES NOT CONFORM SHALL BEFORE THE WORK IS PERFORMED. WORK MUST CONFORM TO THE AND ALL SUCH SAMPLES SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE ARCHITECT SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLES WHEN REQUIRED BY THE ARCHITECT. PRESENTED TO THE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. THE CONTRACTOR OR CALLED OUT BY TRADE NAME IN THESE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE ANY MATERIALS PROPOSED FOR SUBSTITUTION OF THOSE SPECIFIEDE. OR GOVERNING BODIES D. OR OMISSIONS COMPLETED TO THE OWNER. DIMENSIONS NOTED WITH "N.T.S." DENOTES NOT TO SCALE. J. K. I. H. IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS, UNLESS APPROPRIATE TRADES. GENERALLY, ALL MATERIALS TO BE INSTALLED ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES, AND SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE HIGHEST REPORTED TO THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY. AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT THE OFFICES OF THE ARCHITECT . THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS CONSIST OF THE AGREEMENT, THE GENERAL NOTES , THE SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE COOPERATIVE AND CONTINUOUS . WORK INDICATED OR REASONABLY IMPLIED IN ANY ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE SUPPLIED AS THOUGH FULLY COVERED IN ALL. ANY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT PARTS SHOULD BE STANDARDS OF CRAFTSMANSHIP BY JOURNEYMEN OF THE OF THESE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. COPIES ARE ON FILE AND ARE THE AIA DOCUMENT 201, "GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION", 2017, ARE HEREBY MADE A PART C. B. A. CONTRACTOR WHEN WORK IS LET THROUGH HIM OR HER. ADEQUATE TIME AS NOT TO DELAY WORK IN PROGRESS . UNIFORM BUILDING CODE OR ANY LOCAL CODE OR PARAGRAPH E, ABOVE. ORDINANCE. F. G. SYMBOL LEGEND ROOFING D101 A R1 I301 1 3 24 A301 101 1 A201 1 A501 1 ENTRY 101 ZONE MATCH LINEMATCH GRID ELEVATION SECTION DETAIL SECTION INTERIOR ELEVATION SPOT DOOR WINDOW W1 ASSEMBLY DETAIL CALLOUTA701 1 DRAWING REVISION 124 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE AFAR FAR CALCS . NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 DN UP EXEMPT PORCH 80.1 sq ft MAIN LEVEL 1,404.6 sq ft STAIR TO CELLAR BELOW GARAGE - 573.9 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DN UP CELLAR LEVEL EXEMPT CRAWL 272.7 sq ft EXISTING FLOOR AREA NET LOT AREA REFERENCE FLOOR AREA EXEMPT COUNTS TOTAL FLOOR AREA SITE SQFT 6,000.00 MAX SQFT 3,240.00 Sec. 26.710.040. d. (11) GARAGE 0 573.9 Sec. 26.575.020. (8) CELLAR LEVEL (EXEMPT)272.7 0 Sec. 26.575.020. (4) a. MAIN LEVEL 0 1,404.60 FRONT PORCH 80.1 0 Sec. 26.575.020. (6) UN-ACCESSABLE ATTIC N/A 0 Sec. 26.575.020. (4) a. 5. a. 352.8 1978.5 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1Main Level 0 2'4'8' SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2Main Level Garage 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3Cellar Level 0 2'4'8' FAR FLOOR AREA EXEMPT AREA Sec. 26.575.020. - Calculations and Measurements.(a)Purpose. This Section sets forth methods for measuringfloor area, height, setbacks, and other dimensional aspectsof development and describes certain allowances,requirements and other prescriptions for a range ofstructural components, such as porches, balconies,garages, chimneys, mechanical equipment, projections intosetbacks, etc. The definitions of the terms are set forth atSection 26.104.100—Definitions. (4)Attic Space and Crawl Space. Unfinished and uninhabitable space between the ceilingjoists and roof rafters of a structure or between the groundand floor framing which is accessible only as a matter ofnecessity is exempt from the calculation of Floor Area asdescribed below. Drop ceilings are not included in theheight measurement for crawl spaces.a.Crawl spaces thatmeet the following are exempt from Floor Area calculations:i.Six (6) feet or less in height measured between the hardfloor structure and floor framing; andii.Accessible only through an interior floor hatch, exterioraccess panel, or similar feature; andiii.Are the minimum height and size reasonably necessaryfor the mechanical equipment. (5)Decks, Balconies, Loggias, Gazebos, Trellis,Exterior Stairways, and non-Street-facing porches.a.The calculation of the Floor Area of a building or a portionthereof shall not include decks, balconies, trellis, exteriorstairways, non-Street facing porches, gazebos and similarfeatures, unless the area of these features is greater thanfifteen (15) percent of the allowable floor area for theproperty and the use and density proposed, or as otherwiseexempted by this Section. (6)Front Porches.Porches on Street-facing façade(s) of a structuredeveloped within thirty (30) inches of the finished groundlevel shall not be counted towards allowable Floor Area.Otherwise, these elements shall be attributed to Floor Areaas a Deck. (8)Garages and carports.For all multi-family buildings, parcels containing more thantwo (2) residential units, and residential units located withina mixed-use building, two hundred fifty (250) square feet ofthe garage or carport area shall be excluded from thecalculation of floor area per residence on the parcel. Allgarage and carport area in excess of two hundred fifty(250) square feet per residence shall be attributed towardsFloor Area and Floor Area Ratio with no exclusion. Garageand carport areas for properties containing no residentialunits shall be attributed towards Floor Area and Floor AreaRatio with no exclusion.In the R-15B Zone District, garage and carport areas shallbe excluded from the calculation of Floor Area up to amaximum exemption of five-hundred-square-foot total forthe parcel. 125 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A0.01 SITE PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 EXISTING FLUEEXISTING FLUEEXISTING FLUE PR O P E R T Y LI N E BEARING BASIS LINE W HALLAM ST. N 4TH ST . SITE NOTES GREY BACKGROUND DENOTES EXISTING SURVEY. FLOOR ELEVATIONS MAIN LEVEL - T.O.PLY. = 100'-0" (SITE = 7909'-10 3/8") CELLAR LEVEL - T.O.EARTH = 92'-10" (SITE = 7902'-8 3/8") N SCALE: 1" = 10'1Site Plan 0 5'10'20' SITE LEGEND EASEMENT PROPERTY LINE EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE SETBACK LINE 126 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A1.01 CELLAR LEVEL PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DN UP 1 A A B B C C D D E E F F 245673 T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") 1 A2.03 1 A2.02 1 A2.04 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1Cellar Level Plan 0 2'4'8' 127 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A1.02 MAIN LEVEL PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND N DN UP 1 A A EN T R Y B B C C D D E E F F 245673 DW RE F 14'-71/4" 11 '-11/8" 12 '-81/4" 6'-7" 4' - 5 " 3'-51/2" 6'-91/4" 7'-33/4" 11'-43/4" 1'-75/8" 14'-8"1'-11" 10 ' 11 '-31/2" 8'-7" 3' - 1 0 " 13'-2" 3' - 1 0 " 5'-4"3'-01/4" 19 '-57/8" 15'-21/2" 27 '-35/8" 11'-23/8"4'-101/2" 12 '-31/2" 13 '-11/2" 26 ' - 5 " 6'-73/8" 5'-13/4" 1'-51/2" 8'-53/4" 7'-2" 4'-93/4" 6'-73/8" 52 '-51/4" 28 '-37/8" 24 '-13/8" 35'-11" 12'-25/8"5'-45/8"14'-23/4"4'-1" 3'5'-2" 13 '-01/4" 22 '-10 1/2" 11 '-01/4" 5'-61/4" T.O.F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") 1 A2.03 1 A2.02 1 A2.04 5' SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE 10' SETBACK LINE LINE OF ROOF ABOVE STAIR TO CELLAR BELOW HISTORIC DETAILS TO REMAIN (REF: A6.03) ADDITION (REF: 4/A6.03) OLD WINDOW SIZE PREVIOUSLY CHANGED (REF: A6.03) LOWER RAILING TBD IF HISTORIC (REF: A6.03) SINGLE STORY GABLE ROOF FRAMED HISTORIC ADDITION (REF: A6.03) HISTORIC SINGLE STORY SHED ROOF (REF: A6.03) DECKFOYERDINING LIVING GUEST BED GUEST BATH BREAKFAST NOOK KITCHEN CL CL CL CL CL MASTER BED MASTER BATHHALL CL LAUNDRYSTORAGE D106 W12 1 D10 7 D10 8 101 12 ' - 2 " 9'-51/4" 16'-6"5'-101/4" 22 ' 22'-9" T.O.SLAB - MAIN LEVEL 107'-97/8" (SITE - 7907'-8 1/4") PROPERTY LINE 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE LINE OF ROOF ABOVE GARAGE STORAGE STAIR TO CELLAR BELOW SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1Main Level Plan 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2Garage Plan 0 2'4'8' 128 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A1.03 ROOF PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND N 1 A A B B C C D D E E F F 2456731 A2.03 1 A2.02 1 A2.04 5:12 EX I S T I N G FACE OF FRAMING BELOW EXISTING FLUES LOCATIONS VIF EXISTING FLUES LOCATIONS VIF EXISTING FLUES LOCATIONS VIF ROOF REBUILT (REF: 6/A6.03) DECK BELOW 6:12 11:12 11:12 11:12 11 :12 11 :12 5:12 FACE OF FRAMING BELOW STAIR TO CELLAR BELOW SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1Roof Plan 0 2'4'8' SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2Garage Plan 0 2'4'8' 129 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A2.01 ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 GENERAL NOTES 1) INDICATES WINDOW, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE ON A701 2) INDICATES DOOR, SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON A702 3) SIDING INDICATED AS WHITE IS MOSTLY NON-HISTORIC V.I.F. D103 W CMU BLOCKING HORIZONTAL BARNWOOD SIDING WOOD TIMBERS & TRIM ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND SANDSTONE FOUNDATION WALLS HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") T.O. F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") T.O.RIDGE 115'-3" (SITE - 7925'-13/8") T.O.RIDGE 117'-67/8" (SITE - 7927'-51/4") T.O.RIDGE 118'-87/8" (SITE - 7928'-71/4") HISTORIC DETAILS TO REMAIN (REF: 3/A6.03) W114 W113 W112 W116 W115 D105 D104 EXISTING FLUE HISTORIC ONE STORY ADDITION RE: ROOF PLANRE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"1North Elevation 0 2'4'6' 130 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A2.02 ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 GENERAL NOTES 1) INDICATES WINDOW, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE ON A701 2) INDICATES DOOR, SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON A702 3) SIDING INDICATED AS WHITE IS MOSTLY NON-HISTORIC V.I.F. D103 W CMU BLOCKING HORIZONTAL BARNWOOD SIDING WOOD TIMBERS & TRIM ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND SANDSTONE FOUNDATION WALLS HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND A B C D E F T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") T.O. F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") T.O.RIDGE 116'-93/8" (SITE - 7926'-73/4") T.O.RIDGE 118'-87/8" (SITE - 7928'-71/4") HISTORIC DETAILS (REF: 1/A6.03) ADDITION (REF: 4/A6.03) HISTORIC WINDOW SIZE PREVIOUSLY CHANGED (REF: 2/A6.03) HISTORIC ROOF REBUILT (REF: 5/A6.03) W117 W119W120 W103 D102 HISTORIC DETIAL PREVIOUSLY REPLACED EXCEPT FAR LEFT BRACKET BASE OF ALL COLUMNS ARE NON-HISTORIC REPLACED PREVIOUSLY(REF: 2/A603) STEP PREVIOUSLY REPLACED (NON-HISTORIC) RE: ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"1East Elevation 0 2'4'6' 131 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A2.03 ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 GENERAL NOTES 1) INDICATES WINDOW, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE ON A701 2) INDICATES DOOR, SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON A702 3) SIDING INDICATED AS WHITE IS MOSTLY NON-HISTORIC V.I.F. D103 W CMU BLOCKING HORIZONTAL BARNWOOD SIDING WOOD TIMBERS & TRIM ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND SANDSTONE FOUNDATION WALLS HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND 1765432 T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") T.O. F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") T.O.RIDGE 116'-93/8" (SITE - 7926'-73/4") T.O.RIDGE 117'-67/8" (SITE - 7927'-51/4") T.O.RIDGE 118'-95/8" (SITE - 7928'-8") HISTORIC DETAILS (REF: 1/A6.03) ADDITIONAL DETAILS (REF: 5/A6.03) HISTORIC ROOF REBUILT (REF: 5/A6.03) D101 W106 W104 W101 W118 W107 HISTORIC DETIAL PREVIOUSLY REPLACED EXCEPT FAR LEFT BRACKET BASE OF ALL COLUMNS ARE NON- HISTORIC REPLACED PREVIOUSLY (REF: 2/A603) STEP PREVIOUSLY REPLACED (NON-HISTORIC) RE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLANRE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"1South Elevation 0 2'4'6' 132 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A2.04 ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 GENERAL NOTES 1) INDICATES WINDOW, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE ON A701 2) INDICATES DOOR, SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON A702 3) SIDING INDICATED AS WHITE IS MOSTLY NON-HISTORIC V.I.F. D103 W CMU BLOCKING HORIZONTAL BARNWOOD SIDING WOOD TIMBERS & TRIM ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND SANDSTONE FOUNDATION WALLS HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND AFEDCB T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") T.O. F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") T.O.PLATE 114'-73/8" (SITE - 7924'-53/4") T.O.PLATE 117'-67/8" (SITE - 7927'-51/4") T.O.PLATE 118'-87/8" (SITE - 7928'-71/4") HISTORIC DETAILS (REF: 1/A6.03) ADDITION CHANGES (REF: 3/A6.03 AND EXISTING PLANS) HISTORIC WINDOW SIZE PREVIOUSLY CHANGED (REF: 3/A6.03) W111 W110 W109 W108 SIDING NOT HISTORIC RE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"1West Elevation 0 2'4'6' 133 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A6.01 WINDOW SCHEDULE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 ID W101 W102 W103 W104 W105 W106 W107 W108 ELEV 2'-4" 5'-6" 2'-4" 5'-6" 5' 5'-2" 4' 5'-2" 2'-4" 5'-6" 4' 6'-4" 2'-8" 1'-6" 2'-4" 5'-6" W x H 2'-4"×5'-6"2'-4"×5'-6"5'×5'-2"4'×5'-2"2'-4"×5'-6"4'×6'-4"2'-8"×1'-6"2'-4"×5'-6" NOTES HISTORIC HISTORIC HISTORIC HISTORIC ID W109 W110 W111 W112 W113 W114 W115 W116 ELEV 4' 6'-2" 3' 4' 2'-2" 3'-2" 2'-4" 2' 2'-4" 2' 2' 5' 2' 5' 1'-10" 4' W x H 4'×6'-2"3'×4'2'-2"×3'-2"2'-4"×2'2'-4"×2'2'×5'2'×5'1'-10"×4' NOTES ID W117 W118 W119 W120 W121 ELEV 8'-3" 4' 1'-10" 4' 2'-8" 4' 2'-4" 5'-2" 2'-4" 4' W x H 8'-3"×4'1'-10"×4'2'-8"×4'2'-4"×5'-2"2'-4"×4' NOTES HISTORIC SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"1Window Schedule (Graphic) 0 1/2''1''2'' 134 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A6.02 DOOR SCHEDULE - EXTERIOR NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 ID D101 D101.5 D102 D103 D104 ELEV 3'-11/2" 7'-11 " 3'-2" 6'-91/2" 3'-11/2" 7'-23/4" 3'-11/2" 7'-11 " 3'-11/2" 7'-03/4" W x H 3'×6'-9"3'×6'-81/2"3'×7'-2"3'×6'-9"3'×7' Material --------------- Door Type --------------- Notes HISTORIC HISTORIC ID D105 D106 D107 D108 ELEV 2'-111/2" 9'-51/2" 3'-11/2" 6'-83/4" 9' 8' 9' 8' W x H 2'-10"×7'-101/2"3'×6'-8"9'×8'9'×8' Material ------------ Door Type ------------ Notes SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"1Door Schedule | Exterior (Graphic) 0 1/2''1''2'' 135 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A6.03 HISTORIC PHOTOS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"11963 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front 0 1/2''1''2''SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"21964 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front And Side 0 1/2''1''2''SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"31970 W Hallam Exterior Photo Side 0 1/2''1''2'' SCALE: 1:1.69 41985 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front SCALE: 1:1.69 51989 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front Full SCALE: 1:1.69 61995 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front Full SCALE: 1:1.67 71995 W Hallam Exterior Photo HISTORIC CHIMNEY REMOVED EXHAUST FLUE ADDED RAILING ADDED HISTORIC ROOF REBUILT HISTORIC WINDOW RESIZED HISTORIC COLUMN PROFILE HISTORIC DETAILS LOWER PORTION OF HISTORIC COLUMN REPLACED HISTORIC DETAIL PREVIOUSLY REPLACED EXCEPT FAR LEFT BRACKET HISTORIC STEP REPLACED LATER 136 OSW 46" 12" 12" 30" 14" 10" 15" 16" 14" 24" 4" 10' CO 15' 13"11" 9"CT GM 15' MBMB 18" 26" - 2 Hour Parking Sign - STOP Sign - NO PARKING Sign - NO PARKING Sign Found 5/8" Rebar and Unreadable 1.25" Yellow Plastic Cap Found Mag Nail in Concrete with a 1.5" Washer stamped PLS 25947 Site Benchmark Found 5/8" Rebar and 1.25" Yellow Plastic Cap Witness Corner PLS 25947 EL:7908.5' (Bears N11°49'E 1.39') Found 5/8" Rebar and 1.25" Orange Plastic Cap stamped PLS 37972 Lot S Lot R Lot Q Lot P Lot O Lot G Lot H Lot I Lot H Lot G Hallam Street 74.38' Public Right-Of-Way Block 28 21.07' Alley 504 West Hallam 0.138 Acres ± 0.4' 1.6' 12.9' 22.6' JOHNSON, BRYCE Parcel No. 273512425007 CLARKS ADDITION Book 391, Page 944 Parcel No. 273512425800 EG G L E S T O N R O B E R T H J R & T R A C Y H Pa r c e l N o . 2 7 3 5 1 2 4 2 4 0 0 5 FUNMOM LLC Parcel No. 273512432004 Lot K Lot L Lot M 0.7' 4th Street Public Right-Of-Way (Width Varies) 10.0' Front Setback 5.0' Side Setback 10.0' Rear Setback 5.0' Side Setback 18"18" 8" 8" 14" 10" 7" 7" 15" 19" 14" 11" 12 . 0 0 ' AL L E Y CABLE TV PEDESTAL CABLE PHONE PEDESTAL EXISTING MAILBOX EXISTING GAS METER EXISTING SEWER CLEANOUT EXISTING WATER SHUTOFF 12 . 9 7 ' 22.5 2 ' 5.21' 10 . 0 0 ' 11.0 7 ' 5. 0 0 ' EXISTING GARAGE TO BE DEMOLISHED, NEW GARAGE LOCATION EXISTING HOUSE TO BE MOVED AND ROTATED UTILITY CONNECTION BOXES PROPOSED ADDITION STORMWATER (WQ) POTENTIAL AREA EXISTING WATER TAP TO BE ABANDONED. STREET RESTORED IF REQUIRED EXISTING SEWER SERVICE TO BE ABANDONED STORMWATER (WQ) POTENTIAL AREA EXISTING SEWER TAP ABANDONED AND ALLEY RESTORED PROPOSED NEW SEWER TAP NEW ELECTRICAL SERVICE FOLLOWING SAME GENERAL ROUTE STORMWATER (WQ) POTENTIAL AREA PROPOSED WATER TAP. TO BE RESTORED STREET RESTORED PROPOSED WATER SERVICE Graphic Scale In Feet: 1" = 10' 0 5 10 20 i: \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 4 2 8 - 5 0 4 W e s t H a l l a m \ 0 0 1 - I m p S u r v e y \ H - D w g s \ C i v i l \ P S - S h e e t S e t \ W H - S i t e P l a n . d w g P l o t t e d : 3/ 1 9 / 2 0 2 5 9 : 3 0 A M B y : Go r d o n F i e d l e r Re v i s i o n # Dwg No. Job No. Drawn by: Print Date: File: PE:QC: 2023-428.001 GJF 3.13.2025 CL WH-Site Plan CL 11 8 W e s t S i x t h S t r e e t , S u i t e 2 0 0 Gl e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 97 0 . 9 4 5 . 1 0 0 4 ww w . s g m - i n c . c o m Da t e By : C-7 Of : Pr o j e c t M i l e s t o n e : 1 2 3 10 PR E L I M I N A R Y N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 50 4 W e s t H a l l a m S t r e e t Site Plan -- - - Title: 13 7 www.sgm-inc.com GLENWOOD SPRINGS 118 West Sixth St, Suite 200 | Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 | 970.945.1004 Page | 1 March 20, 2025 Sara Adams, AICP Bendon-Adams www.bendonadams.com (o) 970.925.2855 x2 (m) 610.246.3236 RE: 504 Hallam HPC Civil Site anticipated scope and site work Dear Sara: This report addresses a general overview of Civil Engineering aspects of the proposed site. This site is an occupied parcel, historically designated, in the old residential area of Aspen. The home is to remain but the garage is being relocated, altering slightly the site layout. The anticipated work warrants general civil and site planning per COA. The parcel is at the northwest corner of Hallam and 4th Street, is relatively flat with a mild southwest to northeast slope. Streets are paved and current garage access is from 4th Street. There are no known drainage issues and the site is served by typical, albeit aged utility services. Addressing all these to update appropriately per COA (storm, water, sewer, utilities) are part of the potential scope of this application. Driveway & Access The garage is being relocated from the corner of the parcel to attached to the existing home. This relocation will afford that northeast corner of the parcel for potential stormwater controls although two other potential locations are shown on the civil site plan. Pending calculations and architectural affirmations, one or more of those locations shall be utilized for COA URMP water quality measures such as rain gardens, bio swales, or similar, pre-approved design element. Utilities The general site work opens up to replacing some aged services. The existing sewer to the northeast shall be abandoned and a new sewer tap proposed along the alleyway. The dry utilities (electric, gas, communications) shall also be re-run from the alley to the house, but without significant change in route or connection locations. The COA water department has indicated if a new water service is needed, it should come from Hallam, thereby abandoning the tap along 4th Street, following COA abandonment procedures and appropriate restoration. Conclusion We trust this report is sufficient for the HPC review of feasibility on the parcel. It would appear the site amendments, utility updates and stormwater quality improvements can be incorporated. Please feel free to contact us if we may provide further information or clarification. Very Truly Yours, Rick L Barth, P.E., Senior Engineer Civil Services Sector SGM Exhibit L 138 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM June 20, 2025 Referral Response Zoning To be resolved prior to hearing: 1. The Homeowner Association Compliance Policy must be signed by the owner or owner’s attorney, not a representative. As contract purchaser, Scott Hoffman is authorized to sign the HOA policy. In the interest of time, we have attached another HOA form with Sallie Rae’s signature. 2. Show setbacks on floor plans. Setbacks are measured to the exterior of the veneer for new construction (26.575.020.e.1.a). It appears that the exterior walls extend into the setback in both side yards and the rear. Either adjust the location of the addition’s walls or request setback variances in these areas. Additional information regarding the use of area in the garage space next to the vehicles is needed to determine if it is used solely as a garage, per 26.710.040.d.5. All setbacks are specified and walls do not encroach into setbacks. The garage space next to the car parking provides motorcycle parking which qualifies for the garage exemption. 3. The chimney on the addition does not comply with height regulations. The footprint needs to be the minimum necessary to use height exception 26.575.020.f.4.a. Either reduce the height of the chimney or remove decorative aspects of the venting above the maximum height line. The chimney corbels which were proposed to relate to the historic resource have been removed. The attached letter from the General Contractor explains that the chimney is the minimum size necessary to accommodate the proposed venting as allowed by Code. 4. Provide additional information regarding why the mechanical space is exempt. The southern subgrade wall should be included in the exposure calculations. The mechanical space is counted toward floor area and the south subgrade wall is included in the basement calculation. To be resolved at permit or prior to hearing: • Additional information is needed to confirm that the height of the addition complies with underlying zoning regulations. This includes elevation vignettes at the edge of the building showing natural and proposed grade. A condition will be placed on the resolution stating that the addition will comply with the 25’ height limit. Applicant agrees to this condition as height will comply with the 25’ height limit. Engineering These comments are not intended to be exhaustive, but an initial response to the project conceptual packet submitted for the purpose of the Historical Preservation Committee meeting. Other requirements may be requested at time of permit. 1. The survey must be tied to two City of Aspen Monuments. Exhibit M 139 2. Only one water service line is permitted per parcel. Page C-7 appears to show a second water service line coming in from the west. 3. The water service line meter and backflow must be located at the point of entry to the house. The mechanical room does not appear to be close. The equipment will need to be accommodated at the point of entry. 4. New utilities should not be trenched within the critical root zone of any remaining trees. 5. Any proposed fences should be within the property boundaries. 6. Roadside conveyance for right of way runoff must be provided for along the 4th street side. Response to all engineering comments is attached. Parks 1. A tree removal permit has not yet been granted for the cottonwood trees in Fourth Street right-of-way. Permit 0155-2024-TREE was cancelled and refunded pending land use and building permit approvals. 2. Owner/Landscape Architect shall coordinate the proposed tree planting number, size, species, and location along W Hallam Street and N 4th Street rights-of-way with City Forester prior to building permit submittal. Proposed landscape plans shall also include shade tree plantings in addition to ornamental tree plantings per City Forester. 3. As the large spruce tree located in the City right-of-way in front of the landmark facing Hallam Street is proposed to be removed to mitigate adverse impacts to the landmark due to proximity and visibility, please review the following codified language of Sec. 13.20.020(d)(3)(i)(1) and Sec 13.20.020(d)(3)(i)(3). No response required. Owner will meet these conditions and include shade trees in the final landscape plan per condition #2. 140 141 142 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM August 28, 2025 Referral Response Zoning To be resolved prior to hearing: 1. The chimney on the addition does not comply with height regulations. The footprint needs to be the minimum necessary to use height exception 26.575.020.f.4.a. Either reduce the height of the chimney or remove decorative aspects of the venting above the maximum height line. The chimney is less than the maximum height limit of 25’ and therefore does not need a height exception. The attached letter from the General Contractor explains that the chimney is the minimum size necessary to accommodate the proposed venting as allowed by Code. To be resolved prior to final hearing: • Where will mechanical equipment be placed on the site? Ensure that site planning includes adequate room for exterior mechanical equipment outside of the setbacks. It appears that open areas are either in front of fenestration or do not comply with 26.575.020.e.5. To be resolved at permit or prior to hearing: • Additional information is needed to confirm that the height of the addition complies with underlying zoning regulations. This includes elevation vignettes at the edge of the building showing natural and proposed grade. A condition will be placed on the resolution stating that the addition will comply with the 25’ height limit. Applicant agrees to this condition as height will comply with the 25’ height limit. Engineering A revised civil set and narrative are included to correspond to the revised project. Exhibit N 143 September 2, 2025 Response to Sophie Varga September 2 email: “RE: 504 hallam chimney revision” I thought we found an appropriate solution to this issue when we reduced the chimney height to be below the maximum height limit of 25ft whereby eliminating any inferred request for a chimney height exception. I hear loud and clear the assertion suggesting the proposed chimney is decorative to conceal venting, however I am also mindful that the IRC defines a chimney as a vertical vent for fuel-burning appliances to safely release combustion products to the outdoors (aligning precisely with 504 boiler exhaust venting objective). Rather than work with existing furnace and plumbing vents (4 existing roof penetrations found on the historic home), my intention has been to remove the 4 historic roof vents and reroute those plus new addition vents through the new chimney. I understood this action was supported by HPC Design Guidelines requesting minimizing venting in a manner that has the least visual impact to the historic resource. Certainly minimizing roof penetrations is consistent with generally accepted best construction practices. Regarding specific information about each vent, see proposed equipment noted below and further specifications attached: • Boiler: 3in exhaust - Lochinvar WHN 286 natural gas fired condensing boiler • ERV: 6in exhaust - RenewAir EV200 energy recovery ventilator • Plumbing Vent: 3in stack per International Plumbing Code 906.1 estimating 18 fixtures • Radon: 3in vent per ANSI AARST protocols Allowing for Code specified vent separations, I concluded the revised chimney dimension (3ft 4in X 1f 10-1/4in inside frame footprint per August 28 Application) is the minimum reasonably necessary for its function. Scott Hoffman 144 145 RENEWAIRE.COM 1.800.627.4499 10 SPECIFICATIONS & DIMENSIONS Specifications may be subject to change without notice. INDOOR UNIT EV 200 SPECIFICATIONS Ventilation Type: Static plate, heat and humidity transfer Typical Airflow Range: 100-200 CFM Standard Features: Painted cabinet Line-cord power supply Low-voltage circuit for controls Unit may be mounted in any orientation Controls: On board 24 VAC transformer/relay package with switched dry contacts Filters: Total qty. 2, MERV 8, spun-polyester media: 10 1/2" x 21 3/4" x 1" Unit Dimensions & Weight: 33 1/2" L x 24" W x 20" H 68 lbs. Max. Shipping Dimensions & Weight (on pallet): 34" L x 44" W x 34" H 110 lbs. Motor(s): Qty. 1, Double-shaft standard motor Accessories: Backdraft damper 8" Wall cap 8" - taupe plastic, galvanized, paintable galvanneal Louver with 8" round duct connection - 12" (W) x 8" (H) Percentage timer control (PTL) Push-button point-of-use controls (PBL), PTL req'd. Percentage timer control with furnace interlock (FM) Electric duct heater - EK series (1–60 kW) ELECTRICAL DATA HP Volts HZ Phase Input Watts FLA 0.1 120 60 Single 157 @ 181 CFM 1.5 UNIT PERFORMANCE CORE PERFORMANCE Airflow CFM ESP in H20 Temp EFF%Total EFF% Winter/Summer* 122 0.70 81 77/64 149 0.60 79 75/61 168 0.50 78 73/59 176 0.40 78 72/59 186 0.30 77 72/58 192 0.20 77 71/57 207 0.10 76 70/56 6" Ty p . 8 1 / 8 " 9 " 5 1 / 2 " Ty p . OA EA RA FA 34" Line Cord 24 " O v e r a l l (w i t h H a n g i n g Br a c k e t ) 11 7 / 8 " Ty p . 28 3/4" Case 33 1/4" Overall 2 1/4" Typ. 6" Nominal Typ. 8" Nominal Typ. 18 1 / 8 " Ca s e 2 5 / 8 " 7 / 8 " T y p . 21 3 / 4 " O v e r a l l (w i t h H a n g i n g B r a c k e t ) 2 0 " O v e r a l l 22 1/4" Minimum Service Area (Door can be Removed from Hinges.) 18 1 / 2 " Mi n i m u m Se r c i v e A r e a 23 7/8" Case Door Swing 24V AC Control Terminal LEFT VIEW FRONT VIEW RIGHT VIEW TOP VIEW Model: EV200Drawing Type: Unit DimensionVersion: APR16 ABBREVIATIONSEA: Exhaust Air to outsideOA: Outside Air intakeRA: Room Air to be exhaustedFA: Fresh Air to inside INSTALLATION ORIENTATIONUnit may be installed in any orientation. NOTE1.UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED,DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THENEAREST EIGHTH OF AN INCH. 2.SPECIFICATIONS MAY BE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE. UNIT DIMENSIONS AIRFLOW CONFIGURATION Available as shown in dimension drawing. UNIT MOUNTING & APPLICATION Can be mounted in any orientation. RA/EA airstream can be switched with OA/FA airstream. STANDARD * See HVI certification ratings on page 135 of RenewAire’s Full Line Volume XVI Catalog. 146 August 26, 2025 Response to Sophie Varga email: “RE: 504 Zoning referral comments” and Sophie Varga Memorandum dated 08/25/2025: “RE: Zoning Referral Comments -LPA-25-056, 504 West Hallam Avenue”. Regarding chimney construction, I will certainly comply with height and footprint regulations. Although the submitted design is conceptual in nature, the chimney was thoughtfully located with intentional dimensions. As noted in the June 18 letter previously offered, the expressed chimney was designed to be consistent with HPC Design Guidelines requesting minimizing mechanical venting in a manner that has the least visual impact and following generally accepted best construction practices to minimize roof penetrations. Regarding location, the image and text below taken from page 70 of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines informed placement of the chimney allowing venting behind the ridgeline. As for height, I relied upon R1003.9 of the 2021 IRC: “Chimneys shall extend not less than 2 feet (610mm) higher than any portion of a building within 10 feet (3048mm), but shall be not less than 3 feet (914mm) above the highest point where the chimney passes through the roof”. While not certain by the angle of the photo attached to Sophie’s email, I imagine the same code provision was applied when determining the height of the chimney shown. As for footprint, mechanical design work has not started. So while I can’t offer a precise list of items to be routed through the chimney, past history suggests the following are likely: radon vent, plumbing vent(s), erv exhaust, and boiler exhaust. At the June 18 letter, I offered pipe dimensions which informed the footprint size. I remain committed to construct the minimum necessary footprint to accommodate vent/exhaust components. As mechanical design advances, items will become more precisely defined and terminations specified. Installed terminations will be no higher than required by code and/or manufacturer specification. Under no circumstance is there any intention to extend anything decorative past the ridgeline of the structure. Scott Hoffman 147 www.sgm-inc.com GLENWOOD SPRINGS 118 West Sixth St, Suite 200 | Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 | 970.945.1004 Page | 1 March 20, 2025 (updated 8/26/25) Sara Adams, AICP Bendon-Adams www.bendonadams.com (o) 970.925.2855 x2 (m) 610.246.3236 RE: 504 Hallam HPC Civil Site anticipated scope and site work Dear Sara: This report addresses a general overview of Civil Engineering aspects of the proposed site. This site is an occupied parcel, historically designated, in the old residential area of Aspen. The home is to remain but the garage is being relocated, altering slightly the site layout. The anticipated work warrants general civil and site planning per COA. The parcel is at the northwest corner of Hallam and 4th Street, is relatively flat with a mild southwest to northeast slope. Streets are paved and current garage access is from 4th Street. There are no known drainage issues and the site is served by typical, albeit aged utility services. Addressing all these to update appropriately per COA (storm, water, sewer, utilities) are part of the potential scope of this application. Driveway & Access The garage is being relocated from the corner of the parcel to attached to the existing home. Potential stormwater controls are targeted in the northwest and southeast corners of the site, with a third potential alternate near the driveway, if needed. Pending calculations and architectural affirmations, one or more of those locations shall be utilized for COA URMP water quality measures such as rain gardens, bio swales, or similar, pre-approved design element. Utilities The general site work opens up to replacing some aged services. The existing sewer to the northeast shall be abandoned and a new sewer tap proposed along the alleyway. The dry utilities (electric, gas, communications) shall also be re-run from the alley to the house, but without significant change in route or connection locations. The COA water department has indicated if a new water service is needed, it should come from Hallam, thereby abandoning the tap along 4th Street, following COA abandonment procedures and appropriate restoration. Conclusion We trust this report is sufficient for the HPC review of feasibility on the parcel. It would appear the site amendments, utility updates and stormwater quality improvements can be incorporated. Please feel free to contact us if we may provide further information or clarification. Very Truly Yours, Rick L Barth, P.E., Senior Engineer Civil Services Sector SGM 148 OSW CO CT GM 504 West Hallam 0.138 Acres ± 6' - 6" 6' - 9 1 9 / 3 2 " 6' - 9 1 9 / 3 2 " 4T H S T R E E T ( P A V E D ) HALLA M S T R E E T ( P A V E D ) Graphic Scale In Feet: 1" = 10' 0 5 10 20 Re v i s i o n # Dwg No. Job No. Drawn by: Print Date: File: PE:QC: 2023-428.001 GJF 3.13.2025 CL WH-Site Plan CL 11 8 W e s t S i x t h S t r e e t , S u i t e 2 0 0 Gl e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 97 0 . 9 4 5 . 1 0 0 4 ww w . s g m - i n c . c o m Da t e By : C-7 Of : Pr o j e c t M i l e s t o n e : 10 PR E L I M I N A R Y N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 50 4 W e s t H a l l a m S t r e e t Site Plan -- - - Title: 14 9 REVISION CLOUD AND TAG GRID LINES DOOR TAG WINDOW TAG ELEVATION REFERENCE SECTION REFERENCE DETAIL REFERENCE HEIGHT REFERENCE INTERIOR ELEVATION REFERENCE ROOM TAG WALL TYPE KEYNOTE PROPERTY LINE DIMENSION NEW OR FINISHED CONTOURS EXISTING CONTOURS 1 6' - 0" NEW WALLS EXISTING WALLS DEMOLISH WALLS 101 1t 0 Room name 101 A101 1 Ref 1 Re f 1 Ref 1 Re f 1 A101 SIM 1i ? A101 1 SIM A101 1 Ref 1 Re f 1 Ref 1 Re f Name Elevation &AND @ AT ABV ABOVE AFF ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR AP ACCESS PANEL ADD ADDENDUM ADJ ADJUSTABLE ALT ALTERNATE ALUM ALUMINUM APPROX APPROXIMATE ARCH ARCHITECT (URAL) BASMT BASEMENT BRG BEARING BOT BOTTOM BLDG BUILDING BLKG BLOCKING BM BEAM CAB CABINET CPT CARPET (ED) CSMT CASEMENT C CAULK (ING) CLG CEILING CT CERAMIC TILE CLG CLEAR CLO CLOSET COL COLUMN CW COLD WATER CT COLLAR TIE CONC CONCRETE CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CONST CONSTRUCTION CONT CONTINUOUS CJT CONTROL JOINT CPR COPPER CUST CUSTOM DBL DOUBLE DEPT DEPARTMENT DT DRAPERY TROUGH DTL DETAIL DIA DIAMETER DIM DIMENSION DR DOOR DWG DRAWING DF DOUGLAS FIR or DRINKING FOUNTAIN DS DOWNSPOUT EA EACH ELEC ELECTRIC (AL) EL ELEVATION (S) ELEV ELEVATOR EQUIP EQUIPMENT EQ EQUAL EXH EXHAUST EXG or (E)EXISTING EJ EXPANSION JOINT EXT EXTERIOR FOC FACE OF CONCRETE FOF FACE OF FINISH FF FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FE FIRE EXTINGUISHER FDC FIRE DEPT CONNECTION FHC FIRE HOSE CONNECTION FEC FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET FPL FIREPLACE FP FIREPROOFING SPRAYED FLG FLASHING FLR FLOOR (ING) FD FLOOR DRAIN FND FOUNDATION FBO FURNISHED BY OTHERS FUR FURRED (ING) GA GAUGE GV GALVANIZED ABBREVIATIONS & SYMBOLS GC GENERAL CONTRACTOR GL GLASS, GLAZING GYP GYPSUM GYP BD GYPSUM BOARD HB HOSE BIB HDW HARDWARE HDWD HARDWOOD HDR HEADER HTG HEATER (ING) HVAC HEATING VENTILATION AC HT HEIGHT HC HOLLOW CORE HM HOLLOW METAL HOR HORIZONTAL HW HOT WATER HWH HOT WATER HEATER IN or (")INCH (ES) INCL INCLUDE (D), (ING) ID INSIDE DIAMETER / DIMENSION IBC INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR IBO INSTALLED BY OWNER INS INSULATE (D), (ION) INT INTERIOR JC JANITOR'S CLOSET KIT KITCHEN LAM LAMINATE (D) LAV LAVATORY LH LEFT HAND L LENGTH LDT LIGHT & DRAPERY TROUGH LT LIGHT TROUGH LTL LINTEL LVR LOUVER MH MANHOLE MFR MANUFACTURE (ER) MO MASONRY OPENING MTL MATERIAL MAX MAXIMUM MECH MECHANIC (AL) MC MEDICINE CABINET MMB MEMBRANE MTL or MET METAL M METER (S) MEZZ MEZZANINE MM MILLIMETER (S) MIN MINIMUM MIR MIRROR MISC MISCELLANEOUS MULL MULLION NAT NATURAL (N)NEW NR NOISE REDUCTION NOM NOMINAL N NORTH NIC NOT IN CONTRACT NTS NOT TO SCALE NO. or #NUMBER OC ON CENTER OPG OPENING OPP OPPOSITE OPH OPPOSITE HAND OD OUTSIDE DIAMETER OH OVERHEAD PR PAIR PK PARKING PVMT PAVEMENT PERF PERFORATED PL PLASTIC LAMINATE PLYWD PLYWOOD PEN PLYWOOD EDGE NAILING PT POINT PSI POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT PSI POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH PREFAB PREFABRICATED PT PRESSURE TREATED PL PROPERTY LINE QT QUARRY TILE RAD RADIUS REF REFERENCE REFR REFRIGERATOR REINF REINFORCE (D), (ING) REQD REQUIRED RES RESILIENT REV REVISION (D), (ING) REVS REVERSE RH RIGHT HAND R RISER R&S ROD AND SHELF RD ROOF DRAIN RDT RECESSED DRAPERY TRACK RFG ROOFING RM ROOM RO ROUGH OPENING R/S ROUGH SAWN S SEALANT SEL SELECT SHTG SHEATHING SHT SHEET SM SHEET METAL SIM SIMILAR SD SMOKE DETECTOR SC SOLID CORE SPEC SPECIFICATION (S) SQ SQUARE STD STANDARD ST STAIN STL STEEL STOR STORAGE SD STORM DRAIN STRUCT STRUCTURAL S4S SURFACED FOUR SIDES SUSP SUSPEND SYM SYMBOL or SYMMETRICAL TEL TELEPHONE TV TELEVISION THR THRESHOLD THRU THROUGH T&G TONGUE AND GROOVE T&B TOP AND BOTTOM TOC TOP OF CURB TS TOP OF SLAB TSL TOP OF STEEL TW TOP OF WALL TOP TOP OF PAVEMENT TB TOWEL BAR TR TRANSOM T TREAD TYP TYPICAL UNO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE VB VAPOR BARRIER VIF VERIFY IN FIELD VERT VERTICAL VG VERTICAL GRAIN VCT VINYL COMPOSITION TILE WC WATER CLOSET WP WATERPROOFING WWF WELDED WIRE FABRIC W WIDTH, WIDE WUI WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE WDW WINDOW WO WITHOUT WD WOOD 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 COVER A0 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 RevisionsCONTENTS Sheet Name A0 COVER A1 DIAGRAM A2 DEMOLITION A3 FLOOR AREA A4 SITE ROOF A5 BASEMENT PLAN A6 MAIN FLOOR PLAN A7 ELEVATIONS A8 ELEVATIONS A9 HIDDEN ELEVATIONS A10 IMAGES A11 NEIGHBORHOOD PHOTOS L1 LANDSCAPE PLAN OWNER SCOTT HOFFMAN 504 WEST HALLAM RD ASPEN, C0 SCOTT@CRESTONEBUILDING.COM ARCHITECT RKD Architects Contact: Jack Snow snow@RKDArch.com 970.390.3231 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BENDONADAMS Contact: SARA ADAMS SARA@BENDONADAMS.COM HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION RED Contact: XXXX 1001 GRAND AVE #103 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 XXXXX 504 WEST HALLAM 150 existing structure existing garage 2' - 11 3/4" 2.74° 1' - 7 1/4" 1' - 7 1/4" Demo and remove non-historic structures legacy structure 10 0 ' - 0 " 60' - 0" new porch roof to match historic comply with setback and parallel temporaily relocate legacy structure footprint of proposed final home Construction fencing approx location Additional Fence around relocated Landmark 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 DIAGRAM A1 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 1/16" = 1'-0"1 Project Diagram EXISTING 1/16" = 1'-0"2 Project Diagram DEMO 1/16" = 1'-0"3 Project Diagram FINAL 1/16" = 1'-0"4 Project Diagram RELOCATE 151 1:12 6:12 5:12 6:12 11:12 1 1 : 12 1 1 : 12 11:12 11:12 4:12 4:12 11:12 5:12 A B C E F G H I J K L M N OPQ 10:12 D 4.2 112.3 285.3 10.8 9.5 31.0 134.8 52.6 k l m n added to h 28.324.2 68.0 275.8 90.9 6.6 8.3 35.0 8.0 3.9 3.9 50.5 Note Deck removed this areaop q r 21.4 170.1 23.6 3.4 246.4 19.3 24.1 11.7 39.7 6.5 h i j 379.421.8 11.5 4.2 200.3 6.2 11.0 53.6 e f g added to h 71.4 63.5 63.5 191.4 c 160.8 9.8 21.0163.69.8 a 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 DEMOLITION A2 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Roof Demo 1/8" = 1'-0"2 Ex East 1/8" = 1'-0"3 Ex North 1/8" = 1'-0"4 Ex South 1/8" = 1'-0"5 Ex West 1/8" = 1'-0"6 Garage East 1/8" = 1'-0"7 Garage North 1/8" = 1'-0"8 Garage South 1/8" = 1'-0"9 Garage West b d 152 Workout Slab On Grade BASEMENT 1612.70 FACTOR .O7 FLOOR AREA 112.89 579.24 EXEMPT West b South a West a North East C South d East b South b South c East a Slab on Grade 61.09 Exempt 2345.10 existing structure 1358.7 existing garage 560 EXISTING 560+1358.7=1917.8 1917.8/6000=.32% 2553.51 PROPOSED 2553.51/6000=.46 1180.01 1165.09 East a East b 127.77 East c 159.7211 ' - 4 " 235.66 20' - 9 1/2"11' - 3 1/4"16' - 8" 1' - 9 " 48' - 8 3/4" North 381.24 68.97 6' - 9 3/4"7' - 9 3/4"29' - 8 1/2" 9' - 7 " 44' - 4" 8' - 1 0 " 11 ' - 4 " window well South a 46.59 South b 304.64 South C 137.12 South d 26.72 4' - 1"26' - 7 1/4"11' - 11 3/4"2' - 4" 45' - 0" West a 292.97 West b 197.51 Slab beyond Exclude 8' - 1 1 " 65.32 8' - 10 3/4"7' - 4"6' - 9 1/2"25' - 8 1/2" 23' - 0 1/4" 48' - 8 3/4" 11 ' - 4 " Window Well 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 FLOOR AREA A3 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Floor Area Basement 1/8" = 1'-0"2 Floor Area Main FLOOR AREA BASEMENT 112.89 MAIN 2345.10 TOTAL 2457.99 1/16" = 1'-0"8 Site Coverage EXISTING 1/16" = 1'-0"9 site coverage PROPOSED 1/8" = 1'-0"10 Floor Area Main HISTORIC V NEW HISTORIC v NEW FLOOR AREA HISTORIC 1180.01 NEW 1165.09 1/8" = 1'-0"3 Foundation East 1/8" = 1'-0"4 Foundation North 1/8" = 1'-0"5 Foundation South 1/8" = 1'-0"6 Foundation West 153 1 A7 ____ 2 A9 2 A9 1 A8 ____ 2 A8 ____ 3 A7 ____ 1 2 3 4 A B C E F 10 0 ' - 0 " 11:1211:12 11 : 1 2 11:12 13 ' - 0 " 1 A9 1 A9 Property Lines North and East REDO PORCH ROOF PER HISTORIC PHOTOS 4TH HALLAM 5' - 0 " setback se t b a c k PL to Grid/face of Found. Ma t c h e x i s t i n g PL W PL W PL N PL N PL E PL E PL SPL S 6 60' - 0" 5' - 4" Note setback to Grid A-5'-4"= outside face of concrete Note setback to Grid A-5'-4"= outside face of concrete 5' - 4" 10' - 4" 6 A3 ____ 4 A3 ____ 5 A3 ____ 11:123:12 11:12 11 : 1 2 3:1211:123:12 Propery lines South and West Propery lines North and West Propery lines South and West METAL ROOF Asphalt Roof Asphalt Roof Low Site wall w/ 3 risers approx 24" on North 6" on south METAL ROOF 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 SITE ROOF A4 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 154 2 A9 2 A9 1 2 3 4 A B C E F Mechanical and Utility Man Cave Guest Bath Workout Slab on Grade above 1 A9 1 A9 window well Slab on Grade Above PL W 6 8' - 0 " window well Auto Storage 6 A3 ____ 4 A3 ____ 3 A3 ____ 5 A3 ____ 22' - 1 1/2"5 1/2"13' - 10 1/4"5 1/2"5' - 1 1/4" 14 ' - 5 3 / 4 " 5 1 / 2 " 8' - 5 1 / 4 " 6' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 8' - 0 1 / 4 " 14 ' - 5 3 / 4 " 5 1 / 2 " 9' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 22 ' - 2 " 24' - 3 1/4" UP 5' - 0" red lines indicate setbacks typ 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 BASEMENT PLAN A5 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 155 6' - 6"0 4 04 0 5 05 05 4 79 0 6 1 A7 ____ 2 A9 2 A9 1 A8 ____ 2 A8 ____ 3 A7 ____ Kitchen library Dine Living entry 22 ' - 9 1 / 1 6 " 11' - 2 3/8"19' - 7 3/8" 9' - 0 " 6' - 3 5 / 8 " 12 ' - 0 " Patio brk 6' - 9 19/32" 1 1 2 3 4 A B C E F F 27 ' - 1 1 1 / 4 " 12 ' - 3 1 / 2 " 23 ' - 4 3 / 4 " 13 ' - 0 1 / 2 " 5' - 0 " 4' - 6 1 / 2 " 5 1 / 2 " 14 ' - 9 3 / 4 " 5 1 / 2 " 9' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 6' - 9 19/32" 10' - 0"2' - 0" 1' - 2" 7' - 5 1/2"5 1/2" 2' - 0"6' - 0 3/4"9' - 11 1/4" 5 1/2" 3' - 6"5 1/2"5' - 4 1/2" 5 1/2" 4' - 6" prep 7909.8 landscape grass pavers14' - 0"5 1/2"13' - 9"5 1/2"8 1/2" 8' - 9 3/4" 5' - 5 1/4" 29' - 7 1/2" 5' - 0" Window well Down Fence 1 A9 1 A9 PROPERTY LINE glass rail 12' - 2 1/2"2' - 1 3/4"17' - 6 3/4"6 1/4"11' - 3 1/2"7 1/4"5' - 4" PL W PL W PL N PL N PL E PL E magic pt fin/fin 60' - 0" 5' - 0 " 5' - 4" 11 ' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 14 ' - 9 3 / 4 " 2' - 0" 6 10 ' - 4 " 3' - 8" 5' - 0" 6' - 0" 2' - 0 " 4' - 0 " 8' - 8 3 / 4 " 5 5 55 4 4 4 4 22' - 5 1/2"5 1/2"5' - 0"5 1/2"14' - 3 1/2" bicycles motorcycles skis etc PL to Grid A PL to Fin PL to Grid A PL to Fin 5' - 2 3/4" PL t o F i n PL to Fin 4 4 4 6 GARAGE STAIR DOOR m bed office m bath 11x11 6' - 2 " 3' - 1 0 " 8 1 / 2 " 5 1 / 2 " 12 ' - 6 " 5 1 / 2 " 7' - 6 " 3 1 / 2 " 3' - 6 1 / 4 " 10' - 4" 5' - 6"3 1/2"8' - 6" Meters 2' - 9 1/4"5' - 9 1/2"2' - 10"1' - 6" 2' - 9 3 / 4 " 11 ' - 0 " 1' - 0 " 2' - 0 " 8 1 / 2 " 5 1 / 2 " 5' - 6 " 6 A3 ____ 4 A3 ____ 3 A3 ____ 5 A3 ____ Drive- Match Existing 2' - 0 " 16' - 0" 5 1/2" 9' - 5 1/2" 13' - 11 1/4" 3' - 1"1' - 0"5' - 0" 9' - 4 " 10' - 0" 5' - 0" 5' - 0 " Setback Setback Se t b a c k 10 ' - 0" s e t b a c k to f r o n t PL 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 MAIN FLOOR PLAN A6 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 156 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 15' -1 7/32" A B C E F Garage 5' -0 11/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32" 18 ' - 8 " 1/3 Brick Wood SidingAsphalt Restored Siding Typ Legacy Structure Porch roof to match historic raise grade to historic level BRICK 1 1 :1 21 1:1 2 1/3 15 ' - 5 3 / 4 " 5' - 7 1 / 2 " 21 ' - 1 1 / 4 " Legacy Proposed Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive PL W PL E 3' - 6 " 2 A9 2 A9 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" 1 2 3 4 Garage 5' -0 11/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32"1 A9 1 A9 1/3 18 ' - 1 1 " LOW FENCE 3' Max Wood Plank BRICK Wood Siding WINDOW TO BE RESTORED TO HISTORIC DIMENSIONS CONFIRM IN CONSTRUCTION PORCH ROOF TO BE RESTORED TO HISTORIC ASPHALT METAL ROOF Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive PL N 6 ASPHALT Wooden Garage Door 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 9/03/2025 23080 ELEVATIONS A7 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 1/4" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EAST Garage Door ASPHALT ROOF WOOD SIDING METAL ROOF BRICK 157 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 15' -1 7/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32" most resrictive grade under ridge BRICK most resrictive grade 18 ' - 9 " 1/3 of roof pitch Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive neighbor's fence 18 ' - 2 1 / 2 " 1/3 of roof pitch 2 A9 2 A9 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32"Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32" Garage 5' -0 11/32" 1 A9 1 A9 1 1 :1 21/2 of roof pitch 19 ' - 9 " ASPHALT ROOF METAL ROOF Siding BRICK SIDING Glass Rail Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive 6' Max Wood Fence 3' - 6 " ASPHALT ROOF METAL ROOF METAL ROOF 23 ' - 8 3 / 4 " 3" 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 9/03/2025 23080 ELEVATIONS A8 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 1/4" = 1'-0"2 NORTH 1/4" = 1'-0"1 WEST ASPHALT ROOF WOOD SIDING METAL ROOF BRICK 158 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Basement -5' -5 5/16" Basement -5' -5 5/16" BASEMENT WINDOW WELL KITCHEN PANTRY METAL ROOF 1 1 :1 2 13 ' - 2 1 / 4 " 1/3 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Basement -5' -5 5/16" Basement -5' -5 5/16" WINDOW WELL BASEMENT PANTRY KITCHENBRICK BRICK 3' - 5"vif 1 1:1 2 12 ' - 3 " 1 1 :1 23:1 2 3:12 Glass Rail 1' - 6 " 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 HIDDEN ELEVATIONS A9 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 1/4" = 1'-0"1 Through Connecting North 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Through Connecting South 159 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 9/03/2025 23080 IMAGES A10 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions IMAGES 4th & Hallam Hallam North West Alley 4th St West 160 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 NEIGHBORHOOD PHOTOS A11 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 EXISTING 1 PROPOSED 506 WEST HALLAM 520 WEST HALLAM 526 WEST HALLAM 530 WEST HALLAM 602 WEST HALLAM 601 WEST HALLAM 533 WEST HALLAM 525 WEST HALLAM 511 WEST HALLAM 501 WEST HALLAM 431 WEST HALLAM 434 WEST HALLAM 504 WEST HALLAM NEIGHBORHOOD MAP 161 PROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE TYP 5 EXISTING ASPEN COTTONWOODS TO BE REMOVED PER PERMIT #0155-2024 TREE ISSUED 09/11/2024 INDICATED BY CIRCLE AT TRUNK LOCATION WITH CROSS HATCH CONCRETE WALK PERENNIAL BED TYP PAVER PATIO gravel PLANTING BED GRASS PAVERS WEST HALLAM 4TH ST 6' FENCE LOWER FENCE REPLACE EXISTING SPRUCE WITH ONAMENTAL 2 steps Concrete Drive 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 8/28/2025 23080 LANDSCAPE PLAN L1 HPC Conceptual rev 2.1 Revisions ORNAMENTAL TREE PATIO PAVER PERENNIALS GRASS PAVER 162 300 SO SPRING ST | 202 | ASPEN, CO 81611 970.925.2855 | BENDONADAMS.COM Community Development Department Aspen Historic Preservation Commission April 22, 2025 Re: 504 West Hallam Street – HP Major Development Conceptual Review, Relocation, Partial Demolition of Non-historic Additions, partial Floor Area Bonus for Restoration, and recommendation to Establish 2 TDRs Dear Gillian, Stuart, and HPC, Please accept this application for Major Development Conceptual Review, Temporary Relocation to excavate a basement, and Demolition of Non- historic Additions for the property located at 504 West Hallam Street (parcel ID 2735-124-25-006). The property is within the R-6 zone district and comprises Lots R and S of Block 28, on the corner of North Fourth and Hallam Streets in Aspen’s West End neighborhood. The 6,000 sf lot was designated historic in 1995 and has been under the same ownership since 1983. The current tenant, Scott Hoffman, has authorization to submit this application as does BendonAdams. The property has been altered over time with non-historic additions that blur the line between historic and new construction. This application proposes to: • Restore the historic footprint of the miner’s cabin • Restore the front façade • Construct a compliant rear addition and garage with alley access • Demolish non-historic additions and demolish the detached garage • Onsite relocation is requested to place the landmark on the 5’ side setback for fire protection, repair/replace the foundation, and to square the house to the property lines. • Utilize 163 sf of the 375 sf FAR bonus for restoration of the front façade and remove non- historic additions. • Establish two transferable development right certificates to remove 500 sf from the property. 504 West Hallam Street. 163 Page 2 of 8 Background The house was built pre-1890 when the property was owned by Daniel McLeod. The street facing gable end was added between 1890 and 1893 according to the Sanborn Fire Insurance maps. The McLeod family owned the house until 1917 when it was sold to Herbert Parsons, a miner who worked in the Smuggler Mine. The Parson family allegedly died in the flu epidemic. The landmark is in its original location and the street facing gable end and L-shaped front porch were added during the period of significance and are therefore considered historic additions important to the history of the property. Site inspections of very thick walls lead to a hypothesis that the original home was a gable roof log cabin that was expanded pre- 1890 per the Sanborn Maps in Figure 1 and 2. The front porch was rebuilt and partially enclosed between 1980 and 1986, likely during the 1984 interior remodel which also replaced the front window in the gable end. The screened side porch shown in the 1964 photograph, but not on the Sanborn Maps, was possibly rebuilt or incorporated into interior space during the 1980s interior remodel. The garage was likely constructed in the 1950s based on the CMU block construction, historic photograph dated 1964 showing the garage, and the absence of a building permit. 1890 Sanborn Map showing original footprint. Note the green colored accessory building labeled “carpenter.” The green color indicates that the building material was “special”. Yellow indicates frame construction. 1893 Sanborn Map showing gable end and open front porch (dotted line). 2022 City of Aspen GIS aerial photograph. Similar log cabin in Aspen. Denver Public Library Special Collections, X-6139. 164 Page 3 of 8 2025 photograph of garage. 1964 Photograph from Aspen Historical Society showing original front porch (note porch roof, street facing gable end window). 1893 Bird’s Eye View of Aspen. 165 Page 4 of 8 Proposal A lot of historic research, physical inspection and consideration of historic preservation guidelines and values went into this proposal. The historic building has been altered over time and interior walls suggest the original building (pre-Sanborn mapping) may have been a simple log cabin. This project proposes to restore the 1893 footprint using the Sanborn Maps and the existing sandstone foundation. A full restoration of the front porch is also proposed. 1893 Sanborn Map (left) and proposed site plan (right) with yellow highlight showing restored historic footprint. Photograph of east elevation showing foundation materials (bottom). 166 Page 5 of 8 The roof form, siding, and windows at the rear of the landmark were heavily altered; however, the original building corner, as evidenced by the sandstone foundation, is apparent. Historic photographs of the rear of the building were unfortunately not discovered 1 – the only evidence of the west elevations is a 1970 photograph from the Aspen Historical Society which does not accurately show the 19th century appearance. The ability to accurately restore the rear of the property would be guesswork which does not align with the design guidelines. The best approach to this project was to restore the landmark footprint using both physical evidence and historic photographs and maps. During the initial design meeting, the team tried to fit a traditional 10 feet long, one story, flat roof connecting element between the restored footprint and proposed new construction but the site quickly ran out of depth when also trying to accommodate an alley access garage. SGM determined that a 10 feet setback is required to physically drive into the garage based on the alley width and immovable alley obstructions (trees, fences, etc.). A 10 feet, rather than the minimum 5 feet, rear setback for garage posed a major site plan challenge. The applicant went so far as to apply for an engineering variance to continue vehicular access from Fourth Street. The variance was denied by 1 We requested assistance from HP staff in locating a photograph of the rear of the property, but were told any research into the property would occur after we submit the land use application. 1970s photograph courtesy Aspen Historical Society, Chamberlain Collection. 2017.064.0267. Note – the west elevation addition has a non- historic window and asphalt roof. Existing west elevation. 167 Page 6 of 8 Engineering, appealed to a Hearing Officer, and ultimately granted approval but Engineering and the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (HPDGs) clearly prefer access from the alley. After months of back and forth with Engineering, Scott took this feedback to heart and designed a site plan that removes the curb cut from Fourth Street and provides vehicular access from the alley. Adamant Staff opposition to restoration of a rear addition at the 325 West Hopkins Avenue project motivated the design team to rethink the restoration of the rear portion of the landmark, especially considering the absence of any historic photographs. The proposal is to restore the footprint of the historic home (based on the sandstone foundation and historic maps) and utilize the restored rear portion of the landmark as the connecting element between historic and new construction. This approach restores the historic 1893 footprint and does not attempt to recreate the rear of the landmark without any evidence (HPDG 10.6) but uses the footprint to support a flat roof one story connecting element that is ~14’8” between the landmark and the new construction (HPDG 10.5). We reviewed our approach with Stuart Hayden in August 2024 to confirm our design approach. Rendering of proposed east elevation. The historic home is in the original location and sits askew on the property. The proposal is to pick up the home and place it on the 5’ west side setback to meet underlying zoning, square the house and addition parallel to the west property line, and place the historic home on a concrete slab. Increasing the west side setback from 1’6” to 5’ means less impact to the landmark to meet Fire Codes and provides more space to excavate the basement. The front yard setback of ~12’ 11” is maintained to preserve the large front yard and the relationship of the house with Hallam Street. 168 Page 7 of 8 South elevation facing Hallam Street No variances are requested. The project adds about 1,000 sf of floor area to the existing condition and is well under both the maximum floor area of 3,240 sf and is under the maximum height limit of 25’. The new construction contains a bedroom, bathroom, and office on the second level, and a kitchen, garage, bathroom and circulation on the main level. Additional floor area is located in the basement. A floor area bonus of 163 sf is requested for the restoration of the front porch, opening the enclosed section of the porch, restoring the roof form and architectural details of the porch, removal of non-historic additions, removal of a non-compliant garage, and restoration of openings based on historic framing discovered during deconstruction. A recommendation to City Council is requested to establish 2 Transferrable Development Rights for this property equal to 500 sf of floor area. The 2 TDRs will essentially sterilize any future development on the property.2 Sale of the TDRs will be applied directly to the restoration of the landmark which is intended to be the owner/builder’s forever home. Parks The applicant worked closely with the Forester regarding removal of some trees along Fourth Street. A tree removal permit has been granted for the cottonwood trees in the Fourth Street right of way with direction from Parks to plant ornamental replacement trees (permit #0155-2024 TREE). Three trees in the alley right of way are proposed to be removed to access the garage. The large spruce tree located in front of the landmark facing Hallam Street is proposed to be removed to mitigate adverse impacts to the landmark as it is located close to the gable end and blocks views of the landmark from Hallam Street. Engineering 2 Technically 212 sf of the FAR bonus would remain unused on the property if HPC grants 163 sf of the bonus out of the maximum 375 sf bonus available to the property. However, the bonus is based on restoration which would be completed as part of this application so the ability to request the bonus in the future would be limited. 169 Page 8 of 8 A conceptual storm water management plan and conceptual landscape plan are included in the design set for initial review with the understanding that final plans will be provided in the Final Review application. As recommended in the Engineering Design Standards, bio-retention or rain gardens in the northwest and northeast corners of the property, green roofs, and pervious pavers are proposed to meet URMP requirements. Dry wells are not proposed. We look forward to discussing this project with you. Please reach out with any questions or additional information helpful for your review. Kind Regards, Sara Adams, AICP BendonAdams, LLC Exhibits A Review Criteria A.1 Historic Preservation Design Guidelines A.2 Demolition of non-historic additions A.3 Onsite relocation and housing letter A.4 FAR Bonus A.5 TDRs, acknowledgement, draft deed restriction recommendation to City Council B. Land Use Application C. Pre-application summary D. Authorization to represent E. Proof of ownership F. Agreement to Pay G. HOA form H. Vicinity Map I. Mailing list J. Survey K. As-built drawings and identification of historic materials L. Engineering Report and preliminary civil drawings M. Drawing set 170 Exhibit A.1 HP Review Sec. 26.415.060.A Approvals Required Any development involving properties designated on the aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual property or located within the boundaries of a Historic District, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights of way located within the boundaries of a Historic District. Response: Applicable Design Guidelines are addressed below: Streetscape 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. Response – The building location reinforces the patterns of the neighborhood by preserving the large ~12’ 11” front yard facing Hallam Street. The large east side yard facing Fourth Street is preserved around the landmark with new construction consolidated toward the alley. A non-historic garage that sits within the rear and east setbacks with a large curbcut on Fourth Street is proposed to be removed. Demolition of this structure restores the historic pattern of development with vehicular access from alleyways. 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. Response – As noted above removal of the garage and curbcut on Fourth Street and restoration of access from the alley preserves alley and West End character. A surface parking space with grass pavers is proposed for guest or overflow parking. Grass pavers would appear similar to those at 202 N. Monarch. Grass pavers for additional parking space. 171 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. Response – Fourth Street access is removed rerouted to the alley. 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. Response – Access to the property is from the alley. 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 semiprivate entry feature, to private spaces. Response – A simple walkway to the restored historic porch is the primary entry into the property. 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. Response – A simple light concrete walkway with 3’ width is proposed similar to the existing condition. 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. Existing front walkway. 172 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria Response – The existing front yard and east side yards around the historic home are open. Existing site coverage is 32% and proposed site coverage is 39% demonstrates a minor change to the amount of open space on the property. 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 when viewed from the public right of way. • Refer to City Engineering for additional guidance and requirements. Response – A conceptual drainage plan is included in the application. Bio-retention areas, rain gardens, and green roofs are proposed to meet URMP requirements and will be presented in the Final Design application. 1.9 Landscape development on AspenModern landmarks shall be addressed on a case by case basis. Response – n/a. 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. Response – Built in outdoor elements are not proposed at this time. Any future permanent site furnishings will be located behind the historic landmark in the west side yard. 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 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. Response – The applicant worked closely with the Forester regarding removal of some trees along Fourth Street. A tree removal permit has been granted for the cottonwood trees in the Fourth Street right of way 173 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria with direction from Parks to plant ornamental replacement trees (permit #0155-2024 TREE). Three trees in the alley right of way are proposed to be removed to access the garage. The large spruce tree located in front of the landmark facing Hallam Street is proposed to be removed to mitigate adverse impacts to the landmark as it is located close to the gable end and blocks views of the landmark from Hallam Street. 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 over textured 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. Response – A simple landscape is proposed around the historic resource as illustrated on L1. The landmark is not blocked by the proposed plantings. Sod and perennial beds are proposed around the landmark, and a gravel border will be included in the Final Design application as part of a detailed landscape plan. 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. • 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. Response – Please refer to the response to Guideline 1.12. Planting is not proposed to block views of the landmark. The large spruce tree in front of the landmark is proposed to be removed to unblock views. 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. 174 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria • 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. Response – Landscape lighting is not proposed at this time. Any landscape lighting will be included in the Final Design application. 1.15 Preserve original fences. • Fences which are considered part of the historic significance of a site should not be moved, removed, or inappropriately altered. • Replace only those portions of a historic fence that are deteriorated beyond repair. • Replacement elements must match the existing. Response – n/a. The existing fence is not original as evidenced in historic photographs that do not contain a fence. 1.16 When possible, replicate a missing historic fence based on photographic evidence. Response – n/a. 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. Response – Fencing will be finalized in the Final Design application. 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. Response – The existing privacy fence along the shared west property line is on the adjacent property and is not owned by 504 West Hallam. As noted above, fence design will be included in the Final Design application for review and approval by HPC. 175 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. Response – n/a. 1.20 Any fence taller than 42” should be designed so that it avoids blocking public views of important features of a designated building. • 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. Response – No fence proposed at this time. Please refer to Guideline 1.17. 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. Response – n/a. 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. Response – n/a. 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. Response – Based on historic photographs, grade around the landmark appears to have settled or been altered. Slight grade changes are proposed to create positive drainage and to restore the front porch elevation which originally had a single step and now has two steps. 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. 176 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria • The key features of the historic landscape and its overall design intent must be preserved. Response – n/a. 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. Response – A simple landscape with traditional plant species is proposed. 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. Response – All parking is located off the alley. 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. Response – All new plantings are simple, and reference historically used native species. 177 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria Restoration 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. 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. 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. 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. Response – Exhibit K outlines original vs. replacement materials based on visual inspection. All exterior historic material will be repaired or if necessary replaced inkind. 178 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. 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 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. 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. 179 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. Response – Original windows will remain in place and non-historic windows, as indicated in Exhibit K, will be replaced with wood windows to match historic photographs or based on historic framing (if possible – to be revealed during demolition). No new openings are proposed in the landmark. 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. 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. • Very ornate doors, including stained or leaded glass, are discouraged, unless photographic evidence can support their use. 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. 180 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria • 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. 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 screen doors should be in character with the primary door. 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 keypads. Response – The existing doors and transoms will remain on the historic landmark. Any historic hardware will be preserved if possible or replacements will closely match existing. New doors are not proposed in the landmark. The existing wood screen door is not historic but may be reused on the secondary entry door (the door facing east). Architectural Details 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. Existing doors on front porch. Door at left will be primary entry in restoration project. Door at right will be secondary entry in restoration project. The screen door at left is not original but may be reused on the secondary entry door. Transoms will be preserved. 181 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria • On AspenModern properties, repair is preferred, however, it may be more important to preserve the integrity of the original design intent, such as crisp edges, rather than to retain heavily deteriorated material. 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. Response – Architectural details on the front bay window, window trim and the front porch are proposed to be restored. All restoration is based on historic photographs purchased from the Aspen Historical Society. Example of missing architectural details – top photos is 1970s detail of brackets under bay window, and bottom photo of existing bay window shows missing and altered brackets. 182 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria Roof 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, 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 permitted on AspenModern properties since they are not characteristics of these building styles. 7.7 Preserve original roof materials. • Avoid removing historic roofing material. • Using recognized preservation methods, repair deteriorated historic material when possible. • When replacement is necessary, replace the roofing inkind, and/or use a material that is similar to the original in both style as well as physical qualities. 183 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 7.8 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to the original. • If a substitute is used, the roof material should be of a design, scale, color, texture, and composition akin to the original, or a simplified neutral, modest, and deferential alternative that is visually compatible with the building’s historic features. • 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 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. 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. Response – The roof at the rear of the landmark has been heavily altered and is proposed to be removed. The roof plan at right shows altered roof forms within the historic footprint in blue, new additions in orange, and historic roof in red. The existing roof is a dark grey/black colored asphalt shingle. The applicant proposes a grey slate shingle roof for both the landmark and the new addition to meet Fire Codes and insurance requirements for fire rated roof material. The slate shingles are more akin to a wood shingle in dimension, and the color depicted in the historic photograph below, than the existing asphalt material. The restored front porch roof will be either membrane or sheet metal to be determined at final design review. Roof plan. 184 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria The roof form and eave depth are not proposed to change, and all venting is proposed through the brick chimney located in the new addition. The chimney design is based on historic photographs of the corbelled chimney that used to be on the landmark. Roof material comparison of historic photograph from Aspen Historic Society, 2020.034.0028 circa 1964 (top) compared to existing condition (bottom). 185 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria Relocation 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. Response – Underpinning is not proposed – a description of the approach to relocate the house is included in Exhibit A.3 of this application. 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. Response – The house is proposed to be lifted and shifted slightly on the property to be parallel to property lines and to align with the 5’ side setback. This is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. Shifting the historic home to the 5’ west setback and maintaining the large front setback is an appropriate preservation solution as it allows a perpendicular connection for new construction behind the landmark and it meet Fire Codes for property line separation. Existing conditions showing the house in relation to the property line (red dotted line). 186 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria A figure ground study of the surrounding parcels demonstrates the minimal impact of increasing the west side yard setback on the context of the neighborhood. Figure ground study of buildings within the neighborhood. Most important to neighborhood context are the front and east setbacks. 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 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. Response – The building is proposed to maintain the front yard setback of ~12’11” and to increase the west side setback from ~1’ 7” to 5’. 187 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. Response – The building will be relocated at historic grade based on historic photographs. Positive drainage away from the landmark is proposed. 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. Response - The existing red sandstone foundation is historic and will be reused after the house is placed back on its new foundation. Red sandstone is preliminarily proposed for the new addition to be consistent with the landmark. 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” in the landscape except where they are screened, or on an AspenModern site. Response – Two lightwells are proposed for the basement space and are both significantly setback from the historic landmark. Glass railings are proposed as lightwell grates are no longer allowed per Building Code. 188 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. Response – The project will comply with this requirement. A letter from KL&A is included as Exhibit A.3. 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. Response – n/a. New Addition 10.1 Preserve an older addition that has achieved historic significance in its own right. Response – There are two historic “additions” to the original log cabin structure we assumed to be within the walls of the existing home. Based on wall thicknesses and the simple rectangular plan on the southeast corner of the building, we expect to find remnants of a log cabin that was added onto pre-1890 to create the footprint shown on the Sanborn Map. Comparison of the 1890 and 1893 Sanborne Maps illustrate the addition of the Hallam Street facing gable end in the southwest corner of the building, and the addition of the L- shaped front porch. The additions within the period of significance are preserved and the footprint is restored. 1890 Sanborn Map (top) and 1893 Sanborn Map (bottom) showing gable end and open front porch (dotted line) 189 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. Response – The existing non-historic addition is proposed to be remodeled to better comply with the Design Guidelines. The areas in orange on the roof plan below are not shown on the Sanborn Maps are proposed to be removed. The areas in blue are within the historic footprint but have been replaced overtime. These areas are proposed to be removed and replaced as described below. 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. Response – The new addition is a product of its own time while remaining subordinate to the landmark. The historic character of the landmark is clearly expressed through materials, detailing, and massing while the addition is secondary with modest architectural details and forms. The primary entrance is through the restored front porch. Existing conditions roof plan. East elevation from Fourth Street. 190 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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: o The proposed addition is all one story o 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 o The project involves the demolition and replacement of an older addition that is considered to have been particularly detrimental to the historic resource o The interior of the resource is fully utilized, containing the same number of usable floors as existed historically o The project is on a large lot, allowing the addition to have a significant setback from the street o There are no variance requests in the application other than those related to historic conditions that aren’t being changed o The project is proposed as part of a voluntary AspenModern designation, or o The property is affected by non-preservation related site specific constraints such as trees that must be preserved, Environmentally Sensitive Areas review, etc. Response – The landmark is visually dominant on the property as it is the main entrance and is more intricately detailed than the proposed addition. The above grade historic floor area is 1,180 sf compared to the new addition which is 1,592.5 sf. The difference between historic and new above grade is 412.5 sf. The footprint of new construction is smaller than the historic landmark – the landmark is 1,180 sf and new construction footprint is 1,120 sf. The addition is sensitive to the scale and proportions of the landmark by using gable forms to break down the second story mass, limit height to below the maximum, and to leave roughly 345 sf of allowable floor area unused. Demolition of a non-historic addition and restoration of the historic footprint is proposed. The interior of the resource is fully utilized as a living area and the main entry into the home. No variances are requested in this application. 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 street facing 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 191 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria • 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. Response – Underlined criteria are met with the proposed addition. The landmark is 21’2” to top of ridge and the proposed addition is 27’4” to top of ridge (the addition is under the height limit per COA measurements). While the addition is taller than the landmark by about 6’ 2”; the one story connecting element is just about 14’8” long between the historic and two story addition – a perspective view from Fourth Street is below. The connecting element is mostly glass and functions as a kitchen because it is part of the historic footprint shown on the Sanborn Maps. A ~2’8” jog in the connecting element delineates the end of the historic footprint and the start of new construction, and increases the length of the one story massing before it steps up to two stories. The cross gable form of the new addition is similar to the landmark. Both height and floor area are below the maximum allowed in the zone district. Non historic additions are removed, and the historic footprint is restored. The interior of the resource is fully utilized and is the primary entrance to this home. The project does not request any variances. East elevation 192 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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 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. Response – Inspiration for the proposed addition came from the form, scale and materials of the landmark, and from the brick addition to 202 North Monarch (behind the Hotel Jerome) which supports but does not distract from the landmark. Form: The primary form of the addition is a cross gable – the street facing gable is 11:12 pitch to match the historic gable end. Fenestration: Proposed windows in the new addition are vertically oriented with a modern application. Double hung style windows appear grouped together in the street facing gable end to differentiate the addition as new construction. Materials: Horizontal wood siding and brick are the primary materials for the addition. Metal overhangs are proposed over the garage and the patio on the west elevation. Wood siding directly relates to the landmark, and brick was used in the historic chimney and is a traditional material appropriate for a new addition as evidenced by the 202 N. Monarch project. Using brick is a creative way to introduce a new traditional material to the property that is harmonious with an AspenVictorian. A slate roof is proposed for the entire project (except flat roofs and porch roof). Slate is a fire rated material that is similar in dimension and appearance to a wood shingle roof as discussed above. 202 North Monarch - brick addition to AspenVictorian property (aka Blu Vic). South elevation showing relationship between historic and new forms. 193 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. Response – n/a. 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. Response – The proposed two story addition is about 7’ taller than the historic landmark but only about 25’ wide and is located about 50’ back from the front façade of the landmark. In perspective, the height and massing of the two story addition will be almost invisible from Hallam Street. The view from Fourth Street clearly conveys a simple form that relates but does not overwhelm the landmark. Proposed south elevation. 194 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. • Any street-facing doors installed in the connector must be minimized in height and width and accessed by a secondary pathway. See guideline 4.1 for further information. Response – A one story connector is proposed that is ~14’8” long and connects just under the eave. Interior floor to ceiling height is 9’10” which mimics the existing historic ceiling height. The width of the connector matches the restored historic footprint of the home. Sliding glass doors face Fourth Street. 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. Response – The addition is proposed at the rear of the building to minimize visual impact on the historic structure. The project is well under the allowable floor area and is a modest 2 bedroom, 2.5 bathroom home with two car garage. The addition is about 11’ 3” to the east of the landmark to capture a view of Aspen Mountain, but this portion of the addition is about 50’ back from the front façade of the historic home. Section showing connecting element and proposed green roof planter (Sheet A10). 195 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. Response – Gable roofs are proposed for the addition to relate to the landmark. 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 eave lines must be avoided. Response –The addition does not obscure historically important features. The original appearance of rear of the historic landmark is unknown – the only evidence is the footprint shown on the historic Sanborn maps and the historic sandstone foundation. Rather than guess at the appearance, the project proposes to preserve the footprint and use the element as the connection between historic and new with a flat roof and modern sliding glass window system. Architectural details, eaves, etc. will be protected, restored, and replaced in kind (if necessary). As built north elevation (top) and photograph of existing northeast corner. 196 Exhibit A.1 Review Criteria 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. Response – Exterior lighting will be developed for Final Design. 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 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. Response – The mechanical equipment will be located in the subgrade mechanical room. All venting is routed through the proposed chimney in the new addition. Any mechanical equipment that requires open air venting will be located off the alley in the northwest corner hidden from street view. Mechanical will be fully developed for Final Review. Lighting and Mechanical 197 Exhibit A.2 Demolition of non-historic additions Exhibit A.2 Demolition Sec. 26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a historic district. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently, no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the 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. Response – Demolition of the non-historic additions identified in Exhibit K is proposed. Visual inspection and analysis of historic maps and photographs supports the removal of the east side addition and the rear (north elevation) addition. Portions of the front porch (roof, base of columns, enclosure, etc.) are not historic and are proposed to be removed and restored per historic photographs. Areas in blue and orange are proposed to be removed per the roof plan at right. Removal of these non- historic additions do not adversely impact the historic landmark and are inconsequential to the preservation needs of the area. Photograph of rear (left) roof plan (right) showing historic in red, altered within the historic footprint in blue, and additions outside the historic footprint in orange. 198 Exhibit A.2 Demolition of non-historic additions Exhibit A.2 Demolition Exploratory demolition was not conducted as the owner lives in the home. Historic wall studs discovered in the west wall of the rear historic footprint will be preserved. The wall area proposed to have sliding glass doors facing Fourth Street has already been completely removed, and the north wall is an interior wall that is outside the purview of HPC. This interior wall is proposed to be removed to function as the kitchen in the connecting element. As an interior wall, it does not require demolition approval from HPC; however we want to be fully transparent in the proposed project to avoid any issues at building permit review. Exterior west wall - historic studs to be preserved if discovered Interior north wall – to be removed for proposed kitchen Interior east “wall” - to be replaced with sliding glass doors Front porch enclosure to be removed. Proposed main level plan with red overlay showing historic footprint (left) and existing conditions (right). 199 Page 1 of 1 KL&A, Inc. 215 N. 12th Street, Unit E Carbondale, Colorado 81623 Telephone: (970) 927-5174 July 11, 2024 Scott Hoffman Crestone Building Company 504 W Hallam Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 504 W Hallam Residence Dear Scott, The purpose of this letter is to formally document that KL&A’s services have been retained for a remodel and addition to a home at the above referenced address. The existing house is on the City of Aspen historic registry. The historic portion of the house will be moved and stored temporarily on the lot while a new foundation is constructed, and then moved back onto the new foundation. Once it is put back in place, it will undergo significant structural retrofit to meet all current structural codes, while retaining the required exterior historic features. KL&A has observed the existing residence and has met with the contractor and the subcontractor that will perform the house moving. KL&A has concluded that the house can be moved safely and will coordinate the required stabilization measures necessary to maintain the structural integrity during the moving process. Please feel free to contact me if there are any questions. Sincerely, Dan Doherty, P.E. Principal 07/11/2024 200 Exhibit A.3 Relocation Exhibit A.3 Relocation 26.415.090. Relocation of designated historic properties. The intent of this Chapter 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. C. Standards for the relocation of designated properties. 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 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. Response – The landmark is proposed to be shifted to the east about 3’5” to meet the 5’ setback. This shift does not impact the ~12’ 11” front setback and allows a parallel connection of the new construction, proper Fire protection, and spacing from the adjacent property. Slight shifting of the landmark to be parallel to property lines and meet setback requirements does not impact the character of the neighborhood and has positive impacts on the landmark because it avoids fireproofing the west wall of the landmark. Relocation of the landmark to repair the foundation is an acceptable preservation method. The original sandstone foundation will be stored and reused once the landmark is relocated. The landmark will be placed on a slab on grade – there will be no crawl space to avoid venting requirements and no basement to avoid lightwells near the landmark. The owner/builder has 31 years of construction experience and finds that slab on grade is the best construction method. The attached letter from professional engineer Dan Doherty of KL&A has met with Bill Bailey house moving and inspected the house and property. Doherty determined the house is capable of withstanding the impacts of relocation. Page A1 of the drawing set includes a preliminary housing moving plan for temporary storage of the landmark onsite while the foundation is prepared. Financial security will be provided at building permit application. The owner/builder is aware of the requirement for a letter of credit or similar security, and agrees to provide said documentation. 201 Exhibit A.3 Relocation Existing location of landmark (left), temporary relocation plan (middle), proposed location of landmark (right). 202 Exhibit A.4 FAR Bonus Exhibit A.4 FAR Bonus 26.415.110 Benefits (f) Floor area bonus. (1) In selected circumstances, the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving designated historic properties. The potential bonus is determined by net lot area such that a three thousand (3,000)—five thousand nine hundred ninety- nine (5,999) square foot lot is eligible for a maximum of a two hundred fifty (250) square foot floor area bonus, a six thousand (6,000)—eight thousand nine hundred ninety-nine (8,999) square foot lot is eligible for a maximum of a three hundred seventy five (375) square foot floor area bonus and a nine thousand (9,000) square foot or larger lot is eligible for a maximum of a five hundred (500) square foot floor area bonus. Floor area bonuses are cumulative. More than one (1) bonus may be approved up to the maximum amount allowed for the lot. If a property is subdivided, the maximum bonus will be based on the original lot size, though the bonus may be allocated amongst the newly created parcels to the extent permitted. Response – A 163 sf bonus is requested out of the 375 sf bonus allowed for a 6,000 sf property. On any lot where a historic property is permitted a duplex density while a non-historic property is not, the increased allowable floor area that results from the density will be deducted from the maximum bonus that the property may receive. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that the project meets all of the following criteria: a. The historic building is the key element of the property, and the primary entry into the structure, and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building; and b. If applicable, historically significant site and landscape features from the period of significance of the historic building are preserved; and the applicant is undertaking multiple significant restoration actions, including but not limited to, re-opening an enclosed porch, re-installing doors and windows in original openings that have been enclosed, removing paint or other non- original finishes, or removing elements which are covering original materials or features; and c. The project retains a historic outbuilding, if one is present, as a free standing structure above grade; and d. The applicant is electing a preservation outcome that is a high priority for HPC, including but not limited to, creating at least two (2) detached structures on the site, limiting the amount of above grade square footage added directly to a historic resource to no more than twice the above grade square footage of the historic resource, limiting the height of an addition to a historic resource to the height of the resource or lower, or demolishing and replacing a significantly incompatible non-historic addition to a historic resource with an addition that meets current guidelines. Response – The historic building is the primary focal point of the property. The proposed rear addition is setback almost 5’ more than the required 10’ connecting element. The front and side yards are preserved and a non-historic garage is removed from the site. A significantly altered front porch is completely restored using historic photographs, and non-historic additions are removed to reveal the historic building footprint. 203 Exhibit A.4 FAR Bonus Openings are restored as evidenced by historic framing and historic photographs. No outbuildings are present on the property. There is no historically significant landscaping. The height of the addition is limited to only ~7’ above the ridge of the historic home (and is below the maximum height limit) and the amount of above grade square footage is less than the maximum allowed – the project is 337 sf under the maximum allowable floor area. Proposed new above grade floor area is only 412.5 sf more than the historic floor area (1,180 sf of historic vs. 1,592.5 sf of new). No variances are requested in the application. The new addition meets the design guidelines and replaces non-historic additions and alterations. 204 Exhibit A5 TDR Review Criteria Exhibit A.5 TDRs Sec. 26.535.070. - Review criteria for establishment of a historic transferable development right. A historic TDR certificate may be established by the Mayor of the City Council, pursuant to adoption of an ordinance, finds all the following standards met. (a) The sending site is a historic landmark on which the development of a single-family or duplex residence is a permitted use, pursuant to Chapter 26.710, Zone Districts. Properties on which such development is a conditional use shall not be eligible. Response – 504 West Hallam is a historic landmark site and single family or duplex are permitted uses in the R-6 zone district. (b) It is demonstrated that the sending site has permitted unbuilt development rights, for either a single-family or duplex home, equaling or exceeding two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates requested. Response – The allowable floor area is included as an exhibit and summarized below. The current property has 1,978.5f of allowable floor area. Table 1: Floor Area analysis Single Family Home Allowable Floor Area 3,240 sf Existing Floor Area 1,978.5 sf Unbuilt Floor Area 1,261.5 sf Unbuilt Floor Area After removal of 2 TDRS (500 sf) 761.5 sf (c) It is demonstrated that the establishment of TDR certificates will not create a nonconformity. In cases where a nonconformity already exists, the action shall not increase the specific nonconformity. Response – A nonconformity is not created or increased as part of this request. (d) The analysis of unbuilt development right shall only include the actual built development, any approved development order, the allowable development right prescribed by zoning for a single- family or duplex residence, and shall not include the potential of the sending site to gain floor area bonuses, exemptions or similar potential development incentives. Properties in the MU Zone District which do not currently contain a single-family home or duplex established prior to the adoption of Ordinance #7, Series of 2005, shall be permitted to base the calculation of TDRs on one hundred percent (100%) of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. This is only for the purpose of creating TDRs and does not permit the on-site development of one hundred percent (100%) of the allowable floor area on an equivalent-sized lot in the R-6 zone district. If the additional twenty percent (20%) of allowable floor area exceeds five hundred (500) square feet, the applicant may not request a floor area bonus from HPC at any time in the 205 Exhibit A5 TDR Review Criteria Exhibit A.5 TDRs future. Any development order to develop floor area, beyond that remaining legally connected to the property after establishment of TDR Certificates, shall be considered null and void. Response - The property currently has adequate unused floor area to create 2 TDRs (Table 1). A pending Major Development application proposes 2,903.5 sf of floor area. A 163 sf floor area bonus is requested for complete restoration of the altered front porch, removal of non-historic additions, restoration of historic openings, and restoration of the historic footprint. (e) The proposed deed restriction permanently restricts the maximum development of the property (the sending site) to an allowable floor area not exceeding the allowance for a single-family or duplex residence minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplied by the number of historic TDR certificates established. For properties with multiple or unlimited floor areas for certain types of allowed uses, the maximum development of the property, independent of the established property use, shall be the floor area of a single-family or duplex residence (whichever is permitted) minus two hundred fifty (250) square feet of floor area multiplies by the number of historic TDR certificates established. The deed restriction shall not stipulate an absolute floor area, but shall stipulate a square footage reduction from the allowable floor area for a single-family or duplex residence, as may be amended from time to time. The sending site shall remain eligible for certain floor area incentives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Land Use Code, as may be amended from time to time. The form of the deed restriction shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. Response – A draft deed restriction is included in the application for review. It is understood that the property owner may elect to sever up to two TDR certificates and is not obligated to sever both TDRs. It is also understood that floor area equal to the number of TDRs issued is permanently severed from the property upon the recordation of the deed restriction, and not upon approval of an ordinance. (f) A real estate closing has been scheduled at which, upon satisfaction of all relevant requirements, the City shall execute and deliver the applicable number of historic TDR certificates to the sending site property owner and that property owner shall execute and deliver a deed restriction lessening the available development right of the subject property together with the appropriate fee for recording the deed restriction with the County Clerk and Recorder's office. Response – n/a. (g) It shall be the responsibility of the sending site property owner to provide building plans and a zoning analysis of the sending site to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Certain review fees may be required for the confirmation of built floor area. Response – Please refer to attached drawings and application narrative for a zoning analysis and floor area calculations. (h) The sale, assignment, conveyance or other transfer or change in ownership of transferable development rights certificates shall be recorded in the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder and must be reported by the grantor to the City of Aspen Community Development Department within five (5) days of such transfer. The report of such transfer shall disclose the certificate number, the grantor, the grantee and the total value of the consideration 206 Exhibit A5 TDR Review Criteria Exhibit A.5 TDRs paid for the certificate. Failure to timely or accurately report such transfer shall not render the transferable development right certificate void. Response – n/a. (i) TDR certificates may be issued at the pace preferred by the property owner. Response – It is understood that the property owner may elect to sever up to two TDR certificates and is not obligated to sever both TDRs. It is also understood that floor area equal to the number of TDRs issued is permanently severed from the property upon the recordation of the deed restriction, and not upon approval of an ordinance. (j) City Council may find that the creation of TDRs is not the best preservation solution for the affected historic resource and deny the application to create TDRs. HPC shall provide Council with a recommendation. Response – n/a. 207 208 1 DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF A HISTORIC TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT PURSUANT TO ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE #___ , SERIES OF 20__ THIS DEED RESTRICTION AND AGREEMENT is made and entered into this _____ day of ______________, 20__, by Scott Hoffman, (hereinafter referred to as “Owner”), whose address is 504 West Hallam Street, Lots R and S, Block 28, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, Parcel ID 2735-124-25-006, and The City of Aspen, a body politic and corporate pursuant to its Home-Rule Charter and the Constitution of the State of Colorado, acting through its City Council, (hereinafter the “City”); WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Owner owns real property more specifically described as; Lots R and S, Block 28, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado, Parcel ID 2735-124-25-006 (hereinafter referred to as “Real Property”), which Real Property is designated as a Historic Site, as such are defined in the City of Aspen Land Use Code (“City Code”); and WHEREAS, Owner has submitted an affidavit, duly notarized, in compliance with Section 26.535.090.A.2 of the City Code, and supplied the necessary application materials identified in Section 26.535.090 showing compliance with the criteria set forth in Section 26.535.070 of the City Code; and WHEREAS, The Community Development Department has reviewed Owner’s application according to the review standards identified in 26.535.070 of the City Code, and has recommended approval of the application and the establishment of up to two (2) approved Historic TDR Certificates as set forth herein; and WHEREAS, City Council Ordinance #____, Series of 20___ (the “Ordinance”) was approved on ___(date)__________, establishing the above referenced Historic TDR Certificates, and requiring that a Deed Restriction be recorded in real property records of Pitkin County, designating the Real Property as a Sending Site and permanently restricting the development of the Real Property (the Sending Site) to an allowable Floor Area not exceeding the allowance for a single-family residence or duplex if allowed, minus two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of Floor Area multiplied by the number of Historic TDR Certificates established; and WHEREAS, in consideration of the establishment of one (1) or two (2) Historic TDR Certificates pursuant to the Ordinance and City Code, Owner agrees to restrict the Real Property as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and obligations contained herein, Owner and the City hereby covenant and agree as follows: 209 2 1. Development of the Real Property (the Sending Site) is hereby permanently restricted to an allowable Floor Area not exceeding the allowance for a single- family residence or duplex as otherwise permitted by the City Code on the Real Property, minus any deductions resulting from previous issuance of TDR certificate(s) and minus 250 square feet, that being two hundred fifty (250) square feet of Floor Area multiplied by the one (1) Historic TDR Certificate hereby established. 2. The property owner may elect to sever up to two (2) TDR certificates from the property and is not required by Ordinance # ___, Series of 2025 to sever both TDR certificates. The property owner, at their sole discretion, may elect to sever no TDRs, one (1) TDR or two (2) TDRs fom the property. 3. In consideration of the foregoing, and pursuant to the City Code and the Ordinance, the City shall cause the issuance of one (1) Historic TDR Certificate, executed by the Mayor, allowing the transfer of development rights to a Receiver Site to be determined pursuant to the City Code. This Historic TDR Certificate may be sold, assigned, transferred, or conveyed. Transfer of title shall be evidenced by an assignment of ownership on the actual certificate document. Upon transfer, the new owner may request the City re-issue the certificate acknowledging the new owner. Reissuance shall not require adoption of a new ordinance. The market for such Historic TDR Certificates shall remain unrestricted and the City shall not prescribe or guarantee the monetary value of any Historic TDR Certificates. 4. This deed restriction shall not be construed to stipulate an absolute Floor Area on the Real Property, but only a square footage reduction from the allowable Floor Area, as that allowable Floor Area may be amended from time to time. 5. The Real Property (Sending Site) shall remain eligible for Floor Area incentives and/or exemptions as may be authorized by the City Code, as it may be amended from time to time. 6. This restriction may be modified only in a writing signed by both the Owner and the City. 7. Unless modified as stated above, this Agreement shall constitute a covenant running with the Real Property as a burden thereon for the benefit of, and shall be specifically enforceable by, the City Council of the City of Aspen by any appropriate legal action including, but not limited to, injunction or abatement. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGES] 210 3 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument on the date and year above first written. OWNER: By:___________________________ Scott Hoffman STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of ______________, 20___, by ___________ Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:___________________ _____________________________ Notary Public 211 4 APPROVAL OF CITY ATTORNEY By:___________________________ Kate Johnson, City Attorney THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO a body politic and corporate pursuant to its Home-Rule Charter and the Constitution of the State of Colorado By:____________________________ Date:______________ Rachel Richards, Mayor STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _________________, 20__, by_____________, as Mayor of the City of Aspen, Colorado. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires:___________________ _____________________________ Notary Public 212 LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET Name: __________________________________________________________________________________ Location: ________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID #: ______________________________________________________________________________ PROJECT: Name: __________________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________ Phone # : _______________________ E-mail: __________________________________________________ APPLICANT: Name: __________________________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________________ Phone # : _______________________ E-mail: __________________________________________________ REPRESENTATIVE: EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM Exhibit B 213 City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET Project: __________________________________________________________________________________________ Applicant: ________________________________________________________________________________________ Project Location: ___________________________________________________________________________________ Zone District: _____________________________________________________________________________________ Lot Size: _________________________________________________________________________________________ Gross Lot Area:________________________________ Net Lot Area:_________________________________________ For the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high-water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code. Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note if encroachment licenses have been issued: Variations requested (identify the exact variations being requested): 214 City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET Commercial net leaseable: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Lodge Pillows: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Lodge Units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Free-Market residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Number of Affordable residential units: Existing: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Proposed % of demolition: ________________ % DIMENSIONS: Write N/A where no requirements exists in the zone district. Floor Area: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Height Principal Building: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Accessory Building: Existing:_____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ On-Site Parking: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ % Site Coverage: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ % Open Space: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Front Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Rear Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Combined Front/Rear: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Indicate N, S, E, W Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Side Setback: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Combined Front/Rear: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ Distance between Buildings: Existing: _____________ Allowable: _____________ Proposed: _____________ 215 LAND USE APPLICATION PACKET TYPE OF APPLICATION ESA Review (Stream Margin, 8040 Greenline, View Plane, or Hallam Lake Bluff) Non Conformities Pre-Development Topography Temporary Use Accessory Dwelling Unit/Carriage House Dimensional Variance Growth Management Review Outdoor Vending Planned Development Review Certificates of Affordable Housing Credit Establishment of Zoning or Rezoning Subdivision Review Condominiumization Approval Documents Special Review Wireless Facilities Residential Design Standard Review Conditional Use Review Historic Designation Certificate of Appropriateness Minor Historic Development Major Historic Development (select one below) Conceptual Development Final Development Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) Demolition (total demolition) Substantial Historic Preservation Amendment Historic Landmark Lot Split Establishment of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs) Other City of Aspen | City Hall, 427 Rio Grande Place Aspen, CO 81611 | (970) 920-5000 HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEWS 216 PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PRE-24-052 DATE: April 23, 2025 PLANNER: Stuart Hayden, stuart.hayden@aspen.gov REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams, Sara@BendonAdams.com PROJECT LOCATION: 504 W Hallam Street PARCEL ID: 2735-124-25-006 REQUEST: HP Major Development, HP Relocation, HP Benefits DESCRIPTION: 504 W. Hallam Street is a circa 1885 AspenVictorian structure set on a 6,000 square foot corner lot, located in the R-6 residential zone district. The property was designated per Ordinance #4, Series of 1995. The applicant is proposing the following work items: • Removing existing non-historic additions on the historic resource. • Restoring the front porch. • Lifting and slightly rotating the historic building to be parallel to the property line. • Demolishing a ca. 1950s detached garage. • Constructing a 750- to 1,000-square-foot addition with attached garage and basement. • Maintaining curb cut on N. 4th Street. The applicant is also asking for the following Historic Preservation benefits: • Establishment of two Transferable Development Rights (TDRs). • Floor area bonus of ~163 square feet. Given these requests, HP Major Development, HP Relocation, and HP Benefits reviews are anticipated. Major Development is a two-step process requiring the approval of a conceptual development plan and a final development plan. During its review of the conceptual development plan the HPC will consider mass, scale and site plan and evaluate the relocation and floor area bonus requested by the applicant, making a determination to approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Following the conceptual development plan review, staff will inform City Council of the HPC decision, allowing them the opportunity to uphold or to “Call Up” aspects of the major development and relocation approval for further discussion. This is a standard practice for all significant projects. Following the Notice of Call Up, and submittal of a final design application, the HPC will conduct final design review to consider landscape, lighting and materials. The Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the Land Use Code Sections that are applicable to this project will be used to evaluate the proposal. This property is exempt from Residential Design Standard Review (RDS). The project is subject to Administrative Growth Management mitigation for affordable housing. Exhibit C 217 Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Establishing TDRs requires the review and determination of the City Council. With a recommendation from the Community Development Department and public testimony provided during a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council shall approve or disapprove the establishment of a historic TDR certificate by adoption of an ordinance according to the review standards identified in Section 26.535.070 of the Aspen Land Use Code. RELEVANT LAND USE CODE SECTIONS: Section Number Section Title 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.415.070(d) Historic Preservation – Major Development 26.415.090 Historic Preservation – Relocation 26.415.110 Historic Preservation – Benefits 26.470.090 Administrative Growth Management 26.535 Transferable Development Rights 26.575.020 Calculations and Measurements 26.710.040 Medium-Density Residential (R-6) HELPFUL LINKS: • Land Use Application (PDF) • Land Use Code (PDF) • Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (PDF) REVIEW BY: • Staff for completeness and recommendations; • HPC for final decision of Major Development, Relocation and Floor Area Bonus; • City Council for final decision of TDRs and Notice of Call Up for Major Development and Relocation REQUIRED LAND USE REVIEW(S): • HP – Major Development • HP – Relocation • HP – Benefits • Establishing a Transferable Development Right Certificate PUBLIC HEARING: Yes, at HPC and Council PLANNING FEES: $1,950 for 6 billable hours of staff time. Additional/fewer hours will be billed/refunded at a rate of $325 per hour. REFERRAL FEES: Engineering Review: $1,605.00 (Flat Fee) Parks Review: $975.00 (Flat Fee) TOTAL DEPOSIT: $4,530 218 Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. APPLICATION CHECKLIST: Below is a list of submittal requirements for this review. Please email the entire application as one pdf to cdehadmins@aspen.gov. Include “PRE-24-052” in the subject line. If more than 18 months has lapsed since this letter was issued, please reach out to hp@aspen.gov.  Completed Land Use Application and signed Fee Agreement.  Pre-application Conference Summary (this document).  Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current (no older than 6 months) certificate from a title insurance company, an ownership and encumbrance report, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner’s right to apply for the Development Application.  Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.  HOA Compliance form (Attached).  List of adjacent property owners for both properties within 300’ for public hearing.  An 8 1/2” by 11” vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.  Site improvement survey depicting existing natural and man-made site features, including topography and vegetation, and all legal easements and restrictions, certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. Must be no older than a year from date of submittal.  A written description of the proposal (scope of work) and written explanation of how the proposed development and any requests for variations or benefits complies with the relevant review standards and design guidelines to the application.  An existing and proposed site plan showing property boundaries, setbacks and parking.  Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing, scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations.  Existing and proposed floor area calculations.  Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the designated historic property including photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location and extent of proposed work. 219 Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right.  A written explanation of the type of relocation requested (temporary, on-site or off-site).  A written report from a licensed engineer or architect regarding the soundness of the building, structure or object, its ability to withstand the basement excavation, and any rehabilitation needs related to the work.  Evidence of the financial ability to undertake the excavation safely, preservation and repair of the building, structure or object; site preparation and construction of necessary infrastructure through the posting of bonds or other financial measures deemed appropriate. For Conceptual, the following will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above:  A preliminary stormwater design.  Preliminary selection of primary building materials to be used in construction represented by samples and/or photographs.  A notarized affidavit from the property owner signifying understanding of the following concepts: o For each historic TDR certificate issued by the City for a particular site, that property shall be allowed two hundred and fifty (250) square feet less of floor area than permitted according to the property's zoning, as amended; o A deed restriction will permanently encumber the site and restrict that property's development rights to below that allowed by right by zoning according to the number of historic TDR certificates established from that site; o The property owner shall have no authority over the manner in which the historic TDR certificate is used by subsequent owners of the certificate.  A proposed deed restriction for the sending site. For Final Review, the following items will need to be submitted in addition to the items listed above:  Drawings of the street facing facades must be provided at ¼” scale.  Final selection of all exterior materials, and samples or clearly illustrated photographs. Samples are preferred for the presentation to HPC.  A lighting plan and landscape plan, including any visible stormwater mitigation features. 220 Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 221 22 2 22 3 Customer Distribution Prevent fraud - Please call a member of our closing team for wire transfer instructions or to initiate a wire transfer. Note that our wiring instructions will never change. Order Number: Q62017542-3 Date: 03/19/2025 Property Address: 504 W HALLAM ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 For Closing Assistance For Title Assistance Land Title Roaring Fork Valley Title Team 533 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE, SUITE 102 ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 927-0405 (Work) (970) 925-0610 (Work Fax) valleyresponse@ltgc.com Seller/Owner SALLY RAE GLENN Delivered via: No Commitment Delivery 224 Estimate of Title Fees Order Number: Q62017542-3 Date: 03/19/2025 Property Address: 504 W HALLAM ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 Seller(s): SALLY RAE GLENN Buyer(s): None Thank you for putting your trust in Land Title. Below is the estimate of title fees for the transaction. The final fees will be collected at closing. Visit ltgc.com to learn more about Land Title. Estimate of Title Insurance Fees "TBD" Commitment $279.00 TBD - TBD Income $-279.00 TOTAL $0.00 Note: The documents linked in this commitment should be reviewed carefully. These documents, such as covenants conditions and restrictions, may affect the title, ownership and use of the property. You may wish to engage legal assistance in order to fully understand and be aware of the implications of the documents on your property. Chain of Title Documents: Pitkin county recorded 07/21/1983 at book 449 page 45 225 Copyright 2006-2025 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Property Address: 504 W HALLAM ST, ASPEN, CO 81611 1.Effective Date: 03/07/2025 at 5:00 P.M. 2.Policy to be Issued and Proposed Insured: "TBD" Commitment Proposed Insured: $0.00 3.The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: FEE SIMPLE 4.Title to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in: SALLY RAE GLENN 5.The Land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: LOTS R AND S, BLOCK 28, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule A Order Number:Q62017542-3 226 ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part I (Requirements) Order Number: Q62017542-3 All of the following Requirements must be met: This proposed Insured must notify the Company in writing of the name of any party not referred to in this Commitment who will obtain an interest in the Land or who will make a loan on the Land. The Company may then make additional Requirements or Exceptions. Pay the agreed amount for the estate or interest to be insured. Pay the premiums, fees, and charges for the Policy to the Company. Documents satisfactory to the Company that convey the Title or create the Mortgage to be insured, or both, must be properly authorized, executed, delivered, and recorded in the Public Records. THIS COMMITMENT IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY, AND NO POLICY WILL BE ISSUED PURSUANT HERETO. 227 This commitment does not republish any covenants, condition, restriction, or limitation contained in any document referred to in this commitment to the extent that the specific covenant, conditions, restriction, or limitation violates state or federal law based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, handicap, familial status, or national origin. 1.Any facts, rights, interests, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 2.Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 3.Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. 4.Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 5.Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date of the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6.(a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 7.(a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 8.RESERVATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS AS CONTAINED IN DEED FROM THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN RECORDED JANUARY 31, 1888 IN BOOK 59 AT PAGE 328 AS FOLLOWS: PROVIDED THAT NO TITLE SHALL BE HEREBY ACQUIRED TO ANY MINE OF GOLD, SILVER, CINNABAR, OR COPPER OR TO ANY VALID MINING CLAIM OR POSSESSION HELD UNDER EXISTING LAWS. 9.TERMS, CONDITIONS, OBLIGATIONS AND PROVISIONS OF STATEMENT OF EXEMPTION FROM THE DEFINITION OF SUBDIVISION AS SET FORTH IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED JUNE 6, 1977 IN BOOK 329 AT PAGE 925. 10.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN ORDINANCE NO. 47, SERIES OF 1977 OF THE ASPEN HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE RECORDED OCTOBER 27, 1977 IN BOOK 337 AT PAGE 352. 11.TERMS, CONDITIONS, PROVISIONS AND OBLIGATIONS AS SET FORTH IN NOTICE OF APPROVAL RECORDED DECEMBER 31, 2024 AS RECEPTION NO. 707016. ALTA COMMITMENT Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Schedule B, Part II (Exceptions) Order Number: Q62017542-3 228 Land Title Guarantee Company Disclosure Statements Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that: Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document. Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-2 requires that "Every title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording whenever the title entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Title Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued. Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available (typically by deletion of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be issued) upon compliance with the following conditions: No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured has contracted for or agreed to pay. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given: The Subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.(A) A certificate of taxes due listing each taxing jurisdiction will be obtained from the county treasurer of the county in which the real property is located or that county treasurer's authorized agent unless the proposed insured provides written instructions to the contrary. (for an Owner's Policy of Title Insurance pertaining to a sale of residential real property). (B) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. (C) The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which includes a condominium or townhouse unit. (A) No labor or materials have been furnished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months. (B) The Company must receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed mechanic's and material-men's liens. (C) The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.(D) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased within six months prior to the Date of Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure of certain construction information; financial information as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fully executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company. (E) 229 This notice applies to owner's policy commitments disclosing that a mineral estate has been severed from the surface estate, in Schedule B-2. Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-1-128(6)(a), It is unlawful to knowingly provide false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to an insurance company for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the company. Penalties may include imprisonment, fines, denial of insurance, and civil damages. Any insurance company or agent of an insurance company who knowingly provides false, incomplete, or misleading facts or information to a policyholder or claimant for the purpose of defrauding or attempting to defraud the policyholder or claimant with regard to a settlement or award payable from insurance proceeds shall be reported to the Colorado Division of Insurance within the Department of Regulatory Agencies. Note: Pursuant to Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 8-1-3, notice is hereby given of the availability of a closing protection letter for the lender, purchaser, lessee or seller in connection with this transaction. Note: Pursuant to CRS 24-21-514.5, Colorado notaries may remotely notarize real estate deeds and other documents using real-time audio-video communication technology. You may choose not to use remote notarization for any document. That there is recorded evidence that a mineral estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise conveyed from the surface estate and that there is substantial likelihood that a third party holds some or all interest in oil, gas, other minerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and (A) That such mineral estate may include the right to enter and use the property without the surface owner's permission. (B) 230 Joint Notice of Privacy Policy of Land Title Guarantee Company Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurancy Company This Statement is provided to you as a customer of Land Title Guarantee Company as agent for Land Title Insurance Corporation and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. We want you to know that we recognize and respect your privacy expectations and the requirements of federal and state privacy laws. Information security is one of our highest priorities. We recognize that maintaining your trust and confidence is the bedrock of our business. We maintain and regularly review internal and external safeguards against unauthorized access to your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"). In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from: applications or other forms we receive from you, including communications sent through TMX, our web-based transaction management system; your transactions with, or from the services being performed by us, our affiliates, or others; a consumer reporting agency, if such information is provided to us in connection with your transaction; and The public records maintained by governmental entities that we obtain either directly from those entities, or from our affiliates and non-affiliates. Our policies regarding the protection of the confidentiality and security of your Personal Information are as follows: We restrict access to all Personal Information about you to those employees who need to know that information in order to provide products and services to you. We may share your Personal Information with affiliated contractors or service providers who provide services in the course of our business, but only to the extent necessary for these providers to perform their services and to provide these services to you as may be required by your transaction. We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards that comply with federal standards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. Employees who violate our strict policies and procedures regarding privacy are subject to disciplinary action. We regularly assess security standards and procedures to protect against unauthorized access to Personal Information. WE DO NOT DISCLOSE ANY PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU WITH ANYONE FOR ANY PURPOSE THAT IS NOT STATED ABOVE OR PERMITTED BY LAW. Consistent with applicable privacy laws, there are some situations in which Personal Information may be disclosed. We may disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission; when we are required by law to do so, for example, if we are served a subpoena; or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. Our policy regarding dispute resolution is as follows: Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to our privacy policy, or the breach thereof, shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration 231 Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 232 Commitment For Title Insurance Issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company NOTICE IMPORTANT—READ CAREFULLY: THIS COMMITMENT IS AN OFFER TO ISSUE ONE OR MORE TITLE INSURANCE POLICIES. ALL CLAIMS OR REMEDIES SOUGHT AGAINST THE COMPANY INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT OR THE POLICY MUST BE BASED SOLELY IN CONTRACT. THIS COMMITMENT IS NOT AN ABSTRACT OF TITLE, REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF TITLE, LEGAL OPINION, OPINION OF TITLE, OR OTHER REPRESENTATION OF THE STATUS OF TITLE. THE PROCEDURES USED BY THE COMPANY TO DETERMINE INSURABILITY OF THE TITLE, INCLUDING ANY SEARCH AND EXAMINATION, ARE PROPRIETARY TO THE COMPANY, WERE PERFORMED SOLELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMPANY, AND CREATE NO EXTRACONTRACTUAL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON, INCLUDING A PROPOSED INSURED. THE COMPANY’S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS COMMITMENT IS TO ISSUE A POLICY TO A PROPOSED INSURED IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS COMMITMENT. THE COMPANY HAS NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE CONTENT OF THIS COMMITMENT TO ANY OTHER PERSON. . COMMITMENT TO ISSUE POLICY Subject to the Notice; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and the Commitment Conditions, Old Republic National Title Insurance Company, a Minnesota corporation (the “Company”), commits to issue the Policy according to the terms and provisions of this Commitment. This Commitment is effective as of the Commitment Date shown in Schedule A for each Policy described in Schedule A, only when the Company has entered in Schedule A both the specified dollar amount as the Proposed Policy Amount and the name of the Proposed Insured. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within 6 months after the Commitment Date, this Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. COMMITMENT CONDITIONS 1. DEFINITIONS 2. If all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have not been met within the time period specified in the Commitment to Issue Policy, Commitment terminates and the Company’s liability and obligation end. 3. The Company’s liability and obligation is limited by and this Commitment is not valid without: 4. COMPANY’S RIGHT TO AMEND The Company may amend this Commitment at any time. If the Company amends this Commitment to add a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter recorded in the Public Records prior to the Commitment Date, any liability of the Company is limited by Commitment Condition 5. The Company shall not be liable for any other amendment to this Commitment. 5. LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY i. comply with the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; ii. eliminate, with the Company’s written consent, any Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; or iii. acquire the Title or create the Mortgage covered by this Commitment. 6. LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY MUST BE BASED ON THIS COMMITMENT “Knowledge” or “Known”: Actual or imputed knowledge, but not constructive notice imparted by the Public Records.(a) “Land”: The land described in Schedule A and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term “Land” does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is to be insured by the Policy. (b) “Mortgage”: A mortgage, deed of trust, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law.(c) “Policy”: Each contract of title insurance, in a form adopted by the American Land Title Association, issued or to be issued by the Company pursuant to this Commitment. (d) “Proposed Insured”: Each person identified in Schedule A as the Proposed Insured of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment.(e) “Proposed Policy Amount”: Each dollar amount specified in Schedule A as the Proposed Policy Amount of each Policy to be issued pursuant to this Commitment. (f) “Public Records”: Records established under state statutes at the Commitment Date for the purpose of imparting constructive notice of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. (g) “Title”: The estate or interest described in Schedule A.(h) the Notice;(a) the Commitment to Issue Policy;(b) the Commitment Conditions;(c) Schedule A;(d) Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and(e) Schedule B, Part II—Exceptions; and(f) a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form.(g) The Company’s liability under Commitment Condition 4 is limited to the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in the interval between the Company’s delivery to the Proposed Insured of the Commitment and the delivery of the amended Commitment, resulting from the Proposed Insured’s good faith reliance to: (a) The Company shall not be liable under Commitment Condition 5(a) if the Proposed Insured requested the amendment or had Knowledge of the matter and did not notify the Company about it in writing. (b) The Company will only have liability under Commitment Condition 4 if the Proposed Insured would not have incurred the expense had the Commitment included the added matter when the Commitment was first delivered to the Proposed Insured. (c) The Company’s liability shall not exceed the lesser of the Proposed Insured’s actual expense incurred in good faith and described in Commitment Conditions 5(a)(i) through 5(a)(iii) or the Proposed Policy Amount. (d) The Company shall not be liable for the content of the Transaction Identification Data, if any.(e) In no event shall the Company be obligated to issue the Policy referred to in this Commitment unless all of the Schedule B, Part I—Requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the Company. (f) In any event, the Company’s liability is limited by the terms and provisions of the Policy.(g) Only a Proposed Insured identified in Schedule A, and no other person, may make a claim under this Commitment.(a) Any claim must be based in contract and must be restricted solely to the terms and provisions of this Commitment.(b) Until the Policy is issued, this Commitment, as last revised, is the exclusive and entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Commitment and supersedes all prior commitment negotiations, representations, and proposals of any kind, whether written or oral, express or implied, relating to the subject matter of this Commitment. (c) 233 7. IF THIS COMMITMENT HAS BEEN ISSUED BY AN ISSUING AGENT The issuing agent is the Company’s agent only for the limited purpose of issuing title insurance commitments and policies. The issuing agent is not the Company’s agent for the purpose of providing closing or settlement services. 8. PRO-FORMA POLICY The Company may provide, at the request of a Proposed Insured, a pro-forma policy illustrating the coverage that the Company may provide. A pro-forma policy neither reflects the status of Title at the time that the pro-forma policy is delivered to a Proposed Insured, nor is it a commitment to insure. 9. ARBITRATION The Policy contains an arbitration clause. All arbitrable matters when the Proposed Policy Amount is $2,000,000 or less shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Proposed Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. A Proposed Insured may review a copy of the arbitration rules at http://www.alta.org/arbitration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Land Title Insurance Corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the date shown in Schedule A to be valid when countersigned by a validating officer or other authorized signatory. Issued by: Land Title Guarantee Company 3033 East First Avenue Suite 600 Denver, Colorado 80206 303-321-1880 Craig B. Rants, Senior Vice President This page is only a part of a 2016 ALTA® Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic National Title Insurance Company. This Commitment is not valid without the Notice; the Commitment to Issue Policy; the Commitment Conditions; Schedule A; Schedule B, Part I—Requirements; and Schedule B, Part II —Exceptions; and a counter-signature by the Company or its issuing agent that may be in electronic form. Copyright 2006-2016 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved. The use of this Form (or any derivative thereof) is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. All other uses are prohibited. Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. The deletion or modification of any Schedule B, Part II—Exception does not constitute an agreement or obligation to provide coverage beyond the terms and provisions of this Commitment or the Policy. (d) Any amendment or endorsement to this Commitment must be in writing and authenticated by a person authorized by the Company.(e) When the Policy is issued, all liability and obligation under this Commitment will end and the Company’s only liability will be under the Policy.(f) 234 23 5 1605 975 23 6 23 7 430 411 404 318 309 432 425 500 434 401 407 426 420 204 504 501 540 511 615 601 609 602 520 526 529 319 533 504 323 506 523 530 533 317 525 403 421 417 431 407 Si Johnson - 5th St Si Johnson - 5th St N 5th St W Francis St Si Johnson - 5th St N 4th St N 5th St N 5th St W Francis St W Hallam St W Hallam St Si Johnson - 4th St N 4th St Hil ly ard P ar k Si Johnson - 4th St Si Johnson- 3rd St N 3rd St N 4th St W Francis St W Francis St Si Johnson- 3rd St W Hallam St N 3rd St 0 0.01 0.030.01 mi FMaxar, Microsoft, Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Aspen GIS, Pitkin County, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS Legend Aspen Address Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) Emissions Inventory Boundary (EIB) City of Aspen Parcels Source: City of Aspen GIS 504 West Hallam Vicinity Map 238 Pitkin County Mailing List of 300 Feet Radius Pitkin County GIS presents the information and data on this web site as a service to the public. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information and data contained in this electronic system is accurate, but the accuracy may change. The information maintained by the County may not be complete as to mineral estate ownership and that information should be determined by separate legal and property analysis. Pitkin County GIS makes no warranty or guarantee concerning the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content at this site or at other sites to which we link. Assessing accuracy and reliability of information and data is the sole responsibility of the user. The user understands he or she is solely responsible and liable for use, modification, or distribution of any information or data obtained on this web site. This document contains a Mailing List formatted to be printed on Avery 5160 Labels. If printing, DO NOT "fit to page" or "shrink oversized pages." This will manipulate the margins such that they no longer line up on the labels sheet. Print actual size. From Parcel: 273512425006 on 03/19/2025 Instructions: Disclaimer: http://www.pitkinmapsandmore.com Exhibit I 239 318 FOURTH STREET LTD HOUSTON, TX 77027 3433 WESTHEIMER RD #906 323 NORTH 5TH ST LLC HOUSTON, TX 77019 2219 BRENTWOOD DR 430 WEST HALLAM LLC BAL HARBOUR, FL 33154 256 BAL BAY DR 529 W FRANCIS LLC WILMINGTON, DE 19809 200 BELLEVUE PKWY #525 533 W FRANCIS LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 533 W FRANCIS ST AGGER DAVID ALDEN REV TRUST SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94126 PO BOX 2129 ALPENGLUHEN LLC CHICAGO, IL 60613 4113 N HERMITAGE ASPEN RETINA SURGEONS LLC MINNETONKA, MN 55345 5014 WOODHURST LN BLAICH JANET S TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 319 N FOURTH ST #A BLAICH ROBERT I FAM TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 319 N FOURTH ST #A BLUE MAGPIE LLC ASPEN, CO 81612 PO BOX 1268 CITY OF ASPEN ASPEN, CO 81611 427 RIO GRANDE PL CLARKS ADDITION CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA 317 N FOURTH ST COHEN FAMILY REV TRUST SCOTTSDALE, AZ 85251 6002 E EXETER BLVD COLLETT JOHN & VIRGINIA C CHARLOTTE, NC 28204 1111 METROPOLITAN AVE #700 CONNERY FAMILY TRUST LARKSPUR, CA 949391345 135 WARD ST DEXTER WEST LLC WASHINGTON, DC 20007 4725 DEXTER ST NW DUNCAN SKIHAUS LLC HOUSTON, TX 77002 600 TRAVIS # 3550 EGGLESTON ROBERT H JR & TRACY H ASPEN, CO 81611 434 W HALLAM FUNMOM LLC BIRMINGHAM, AL 35213 24 RIDGE DR HALLAM WEST END LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 625 E MAIN ST # 102B-141 HENRY KRISTEN ASPEN, CO 816111246 525 W HALLAM ST HILLMAN ROBERTA WESLEY REV TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 504 W BLEEKER ST HILLMAN TATNALL L REV TRUST CHILMARK, MA 02535 PO BOX 332 KEEFE FAMILY TRUST DENVER, CO 80209 3435 BELCARO DR LARNER GLEN & TRACY L HOUSTON, TX 77027 3737 ELLA LEE LN LAST RUN HOLDINGS LLC NEW YORK, NY 10023 115 CENTRAL PARK WEST # 12G MAGGOS LAURA P ASPEN, CO 81611 317 N 4TH ST MARSHALL TRACEY CAUSEY LIV TRUST AUSTIN, TX 78703 3603 MURILLO CIR MD ASPEN HOLDINGS LLC BETHESDA, MD 20814 4960 FAIRMONT AVE PH3 240 NATIONWIDE THEATRES CORP LOS ANGELES , CA 90048 120 N ROBERTSON BLVD 3RD FL NEISSER KATHERINE M DISCRETIONARY TRUST CHICAGO, IL 60614 359 W BELDEN AVE OXLEY DEBBY M TULSA, OK 74119 1437 S BOULDER AVE #1475 OXLEY JOHN C LIVING TRUST TULSA, OK 74119 1437 S BOULDER AVE #770 PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT GROUP LLC HEALDSBRUG, CA 95448 PO BOX 1804 QUARK CONDO ASSOC ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA REYNOLDS LORA AUSTIN, TX 78746 913 CALITHEA RD SACK KEN & SHERI ASPEN, CO 81611 407 N 3RD ST SHC-ASPEN LLC TULSA, OK 74103 15 E 5TH ST #3200 SHELBY LLC DENVER, CO 80202 1615 CALIFORNIA ST #707 SHIELDS JOHN H II & PATRICIA P PONTE VEDRA BEACH, FL 32082 1077 PONTE VEDRA BLVD SIRKIN ALICIA CORAL GABLES , FL 331336985 60 EDGEWATER DR APT 505 SUGAR MOUNTAIN TRUST NEW YORK, NY 10165 60 E 42ND ST TISCHLER SALLY L HEALDSBRUG, CA 95448 PO BOX 1804 TISCHLER SALLY MGMT TRUST HEALDSBURG, CA 95448 PO BOX 1804 VALENTINE ELLEN ASPEN, CO 81611 500 W FRANCIS WEST END RESIDENCE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 312 AABC #312D 241 24 2 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE CVR COVER SHEET NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 PROJECT SITE AS - BUILT/HPC 4/15/2025 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St, Aspen, CO PROJECT DIRECTORY Red Room Design (ARCHITECT) 1001 Grand Ave, Suite 103 CONTACT: Steven May Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 413-3144 stevenm@redroom-design.com Glenn Rae (OWNER) 76 Little Elk Crk AVE. CONTACT: Glenn Rae Snowmass, CO 81654 PROJECT INFO JURISDICTION: City Of Aspen PARCEL ID : 273-512-425-006 LEGAL DESC: Subdivision: CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN Block: 28 Lot: R AND:- Lot: S CODE EDITIONS: 2021 INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE (IRC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE (IECC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL MECHANICAL CODE (IMC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL PLUMBING CODE (IPC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL FUEL GAS CODE (IFGC) 2021 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE (IFC) 2014 NATIONAL ELECRICAL CODE (NEC) FIRE SPRINKLER: No Climate Zone: 7B Building Zone: R-6 Height Limit: 25'-0" 243 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE GENERAL INFORMATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 COVER & INTRO CVR COVER SHEET GENERAL INFORMATION ARCHITECTURAL ZONING SITE PLANS ELEVATIONS SCHEDULES AFAR A0.01 A1.01 A1.02 A1.03 A2.01 A2.02 A2.03 A2.04 A6.01 A6.02 A6.03 FAR CALCS . SITE PLAN CELLAR LEVEL PLAN MAIN LEVEL PLAN ROOF PLAN ELEVATION ELEVATION ELEVATION ELEVATION WINDOW SCHEDULE DOOR SCHEDULE - EXTERIOR HISTORIC PHOTOS DRAWING INDEXMATERIAL LEGEND CONCRETE SIDING EARTH SHEATHING GLASS STEEL CMU BLOCK GWB INSULATION SANDSTONE WOOD NADimensionDIM Not Applicable Floor Drain Fireproof Dishwasher Face Of Concrete Expansion Joint Face Of Stud Downspout Fire Extinguisher Cabinet EXT Exterior FEC FTG FD FL GA FP FIN FOC FOS Guage Footing Floor Finish EQ EL EA EJ EXIST DRWG DR DN DW DS Equal Elevation Each Existing Drawing Drain Down Radius or Riser Perforated (d) Penny (nails, etc.) Outside Diameter Round Head Sheet Metal Screw Prefinished Sheet Metal PlywoodPLY RHSM REQ'D REINF REFR PROP PROJ PROD REF Refrigerator Required Reinforce (d) Property Project Product Refer PFSM PERF PL OD OPH OPP OPG OC NTS Plate Opposite Opening On Center Not to Scale Opposite Hand Damproofing Bottom Of Centerline Continuous Concrete Masonry Unit Architectural Construction Joint Both Sides CER Ceramic DIA DP DET CONT CJ CLOS CONC COL CLR CMU Detail Diameter Clear Concrete Column Closet BS BO CL CAB BLDG ARCH BD BET BRG BM Cabinet Building Board Between Bearing Beam Attic Access Door Aggregate Alternate Above Finished Floor Area of Refuge ADD ADJ AGG ALT AFF AOR AAD Addendum Adjacent Gypsum Wallboard Not In Contract Masonry Opening Inside Diameter and Air Conditioning Heating, Ventilating, Medicine Cabinet LAM Laminate MISC MECH NIC MIN MC LAV MAX MO MFG MTL Miscellaneous Minimum Mechanical Maximum Material Lavatory Manufacturer HWY JT INT ID HOR HDW HVAC HD HT Highway Interior Horizontal Joint Hardware Head Height Laminated Wood Beam General Contractor ABBREVIATIONS GC GWB GLB GR GYP GL GALV Gypsum Grade Glass Galvanized TreadT United States Gage Uniform Building Code With (comb. form) Vinyl Asbestos Tile Unless Noted Otherwise VerticalVERT WD W/O W/ WIN WT WP WC V VAT Weight Without Wood Window Waterproof Water Closet Voltage VENT VIF VAR USG UBC U.N.O. UNFIN TYP TS UG Variable Verify In Field Ventilate Unfinished Underground Tube Steel Typical Tounge and Groove Top and Bottom Toilet Paper Holder Sound- Transmission Class Supplement (al)SUPPL TO T&B T&G TPH THK TEMP SUSP IE TV TEL Top Of Thick Television Telephone Suspend (ed) That Is Tempered SQ STRUCT. SUB STL STD SPEC SM SIM STC SL Square Substitute Structure (al) Standard Steel Sheet Metal Specification Sliding Similar RO SHLV SECT SHT SEW SAN RW Rough Opening Section Sanitary Shelves Sheet Sewer Roof Window GENERAL NOTES CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY AND COORDINATE ALL OPENINGS STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS. COORDINATION AND RESOLUTION DURING THE BIDDING PROCESS. CONTRACTOR WILL ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY OF ITEMS REQUIRING THROUGH FLOORS, CEILINGS, AND WALLS WITH ALL ARCHITECTURAL , DRAWINGS NOT TO BE SCALED, NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY CONFLICTS ALL DIMENSIONS NOTED TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED. BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH WORK WHICH CONFORMS AT THE CONTRACTOR'S EXPENSE. SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL SUBMIT CARE OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING CONSTRUCTION , FOR COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL AND STATE O.S.H.A. REGULATIONS, AND FOR THE PROTECTION OF ALL WORK UNTIL IT IS DELIVERED REQUESTS AND SAMPLES FOR REVIEW THROUGH THE GENERAL REQUIRED VERIFICATIONS AND SUBMITTALS TO BE MADE IN WORK IS BEGUN, AND WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE REVIEWED SHOP DRAWINGS, SUBJECT TO REPLACEMENT AS REQUIRED IN WHEN THERE IS NEED OF INSPECTION AS REQUIRED BY THE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SHALL BE NOTIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFETY AND SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE ARCHITECT FOR HIS OR HER REVIEW WHERE CALLED FOR ANYWHERE IN THESE DOCUMENTS. REVIEW SHALL BE MADE BY THE ARCHITECT BEFORE OTHERWISE REGULATED OR SPECIFIED BY ARCHITECT THESE DOCUMENTS ARE INTENDED TO INCLUDE ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES REQUIRED TO COMPLETE ALL WORK DESCRIBED HEREIN. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT ANY CONDITIONS WHICH WILL NOT PERMIT CONSTRUCTION ACCORDING TO THE INTENTIONS OF THESE DOCUMENTS. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ARCHITECT TO PROVIDE DETAILS AND/OR DIRECTIONS REGARDING DESIGN INTENT WHERE IT IS ALTERED BY EXISTING CONDITIONS OR WHERE NEGLECTED IN THE DOCUMENTS. REVIEWED SAMPLES. ANY WORK WHICH DOES NOT CONFORM SHALL BEFORE THE WORK IS PERFORMED. WORK MUST CONFORM TO THE AND ALL SUCH SAMPLES SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE ARCHITECT SHALL SUBMIT SAMPLES WHEN REQUIRED BY THE ARCHITECT. PRESENTED TO THE ARCHITECT FOR REVIEW. THE CONTRACTOR OR CALLED OUT BY TRADE NAME IN THESE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE ANY MATERIALS PROPOSED FOR SUBSTITUTION OF THOSE SPECIFIEDE. OR GOVERNING BODIES D. OR OMISSIONS COMPLETED TO THE OWNER. DIMENSIONS NOTED WITH "N.T.S." DENOTES NOT TO SCALE. J. K. I. H. IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS, UNLESS APPROPRIATE TRADES. GENERALLY, ALL MATERIALS TO BE INSTALLED ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND LOCAL CODES AND ORDINANCES, AND SHALL BE PERFORMED TO THE HIGHEST REPORTED TO THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY. AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT THE OFFICES OF THE ARCHITECT . THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS CONSIST OF THE AGREEMENT, THE GENERAL NOTES , THE SPECIFICATIONS, AND THE DRAWINGS, WHICH ARE COOPERATIVE AND CONTINUOUS . WORK INDICATED OR REASONABLY IMPLIED IN ANY ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS SHALL BE SUPPLIED AS THOUGH FULLY COVERED IN ALL. ANY DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT PARTS SHOULD BE STANDARDS OF CRAFTSMANSHIP BY JOURNEYMEN OF THE OF THESE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. COPIES ARE ON FILE AND ARE THE AIA DOCUMENT 201, "GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION", 2017, ARE HEREBY MADE A PART C. B. A. CONTRACTOR WHEN WORK IS LET THROUGH HIM OR HER. ADEQUATE TIME AS NOT TO DELAY WORK IN PROGRESS . UNIFORM BUILDING CODE OR ANY LOCAL CODE OR PARAGRAPH E, ABOVE. ORDINANCE. F. G. SYMBOL LEGEND ROOFING D101 A R1 I301 1 3 24 A301 101 1 A201 1 A501 1 ENTRY 101 ZONE MATCH LINEMATCH GRID ELEVATION SECTION DETAIL SECTION INTERIOR ELEVATION SPOT DOOR WINDOW W1 ASSEMBLY DETAIL CALLOUTA701 1 DRAWING REVISION 244 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE AFAR FAR CALCS . NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 DN UP EXEMPT PORCH 80.1 sq ft MAIN LEVEL 1,404.6 sq ft STAIR TO CELLAR BELOW GARAGE - 573.9 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DN UP CELLAR LEVEL EXEMPT CRAWL 272.7 sq ft EXISTING FLOOR AREA NET LOT AREA REFERENCE FLOOR AREA EXEMPT COUNTS TOTAL FLOOR AREA SITE SQFT 6,000.00 MAX SQFT 3,240.00 Sec. 26.710.040. d. (11) GARAGE 0 573.9 Sec. 26.575.020. (8) CELLAR LEVEL (EXEMPT)272.7 0 Sec. 26.575.020. (4) a. MAIN LEVEL 0 1,404.60 FRONT PORCH 80.1 0 Sec. 26.575.020. (6) UN-ACCESSABLE ATTIC N/A 0 Sec. 26.575.020. (4) a. 5. a. 352.8 1978.5 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1Main Level 0 2'4'8' SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2Main Level Garage 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3Cellar Level 0 2'4'8' FAR FLOOR AREA EXEMPT AREA Sec. 26.575.020. - Calculations and Measurements.(a)Purpose. This Section sets forth methods for measuringfloor area, height, setbacks, and other dimensional aspectsof development and describes certain allowances,requirements and other prescriptions for a range ofstructural components, such as porches, balconies,garages, chimneys, mechanical equipment, projections intosetbacks, etc. The definitions of the terms are set forth atSection 26.104.100—Definitions. (4)Attic Space and Crawl Space. Unfinished and uninhabitable space between the ceilingjoists and roof rafters of a structure or between the groundand floor framing which is accessible only as a matter ofnecessity is exempt from the calculation of Floor Area asdescribed below. Drop ceilings are not included in theheight measurement for crawl spaces.a.Crawl spaces thatmeet the following are exempt from Floor Area calculations:i.Six (6) feet or less in height measured between the hardfloor structure and floor framing; andii.Accessible only through an interior floor hatch, exterioraccess panel, or similar feature; andiii.Are the minimum height and size reasonably necessaryfor the mechanical equipment. (5)Decks, Balconies, Loggias, Gazebos, Trellis,Exterior Stairways, and non-Street-facing porches.a.The calculation of the Floor Area of a building or a portionthereof shall not include decks, balconies, trellis, exteriorstairways, non-Street facing porches, gazebos and similarfeatures, unless the area of these features is greater thanfifteen (15) percent of the allowable floor area for theproperty and the use and density proposed, or as otherwiseexempted by this Section. (6)Front Porches.Porches on Street-facing façade(s) of a structuredeveloped within thirty (30) inches of the finished groundlevel shall not be counted towards allowable Floor Area.Otherwise, these elements shall be attributed to Floor Areaas a Deck. (8)Garages and carports.For all multi-family buildings, parcels containing more thantwo (2) residential units, and residential units located withina mixed-use building, two hundred fifty (250) square feet ofthe garage or carport area shall be excluded from thecalculation of floor area per residence on the parcel. Allgarage and carport area in excess of two hundred fifty(250) square feet per residence shall be attributed towardsFloor Area and Floor Area Ratio with no exclusion. Garageand carport areas for properties containing no residentialunits shall be attributed towards Floor Area and Floor AreaRatio with no exclusion.In the R-15B Zone District, garage and carport areas shallbe excluded from the calculation of Floor Area up to amaximum exemption of five-hundred-square-foot total forthe parcel. 245 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A0.01 SITE PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 EXISTING FLUEEXISTING FLUEEXISTING FLUE PR O P E R T Y LI N E BEARING BASIS LINE W HALLAM ST. N 4TH ST . SITE NOTES GREY BACKGROUND DENOTES EXISTING SURVEY. FLOOR ELEVATIONS MAIN LEVEL - T.O.PLY. = 100'-0" (SITE = 7909'-10 3/8") CELLAR LEVEL - T.O.EARTH = 92'-10" (SITE = 7902'-8 3/8") N SCALE: 1" = 10'1Site Plan 0 5'10'20' SITE LEGEND EASEMENT PROPERTY LINE EXISTING GRADE PROPOSED GRADE SETBACK LINE 246 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A1.01 CELLAR LEVEL PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND N 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 DN UP 1 A A B B C C D D E E F F 245673 T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") 1 A2.03 1 A2.02 1 A2.04 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1Cellar Level Plan 0 2'4'8' 247 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A1.02 MAIN LEVEL PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND N DN UP 1 A A EN T R Y B B C C D D E E F F 245673 DW RE F 14'-71/4" 11 '-11/8" 12 '-81/4" 6'-7" 4' - 5 " 3'-51/2" 6'-91/4" 7'-33/4" 11'-43/4" 1'-75/8" 14'-8"1'-11" 10 ' 11 '-31/2" 8'-7" 3' - 1 0 " 13'-2" 3' - 1 0 " 5'-4"3'-01/4" 19 '-57/8" 15'-21/2" 27 '-35/8" 11'-23/8"4'-101/2" 12 '-31/2" 13 '-11/2" 26 ' - 5 " 6'-73/8" 5'-13/4" 1'-51/2" 8'-53/4" 7'-2" 4'-93/4" 6'-73/8" 52 '-51/4" 28 '-37/8" 24 '-13/8" 35'-11" 12'-25/8"5'-45/8"14'-23/4"4'-1" 3'5'-2" 13 '-01/4" 22 '-10 1/2" 11 '-01/4" 5'-61/4" T.O.F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") 1 A2.03 1 A2.02 1 A2.04 5' SETBACK LINE PROPERTY LINE 10' SETBACK LINE LINE OF ROOF ABOVE STAIR TO CELLAR BELOW HISTORIC DETAILS TO REMAIN (REF: A6.03) ADDITION (REF: 4/A6.03) OLD WINDOW SIZE PREVIOUSLY CHANGED (REF: A6.03) LOWER RAILING TBD IF HISTORIC (REF: A6.03) SINGLE STORY GABLE ROOF FRAMED HISTORIC ADDITION (REF: A6.03) HISTORIC SINGLE STORY SHED ROOF (REF: A6.03) DECKFOYERDINING LIVING GUEST BED GUEST BATH BREAKFAST NOOK KITCHEN CL CL CL CL CL MASTER BED MASTER BATHHALL CL LAUNDRYSTORAGE D106 W12 1 D10 7 D10 8 101 12 ' - 2 " 9'-51/4" 16'-6"5'-101/4" 22 ' 22'-9" T.O.SLAB - MAIN LEVEL 107'-97/8" (SITE - 7907'-8 1/4") PROPERTY LINE 5' SETBACK LINE 10' SETBACK LINE LINE OF ROOF ABOVE GARAGE STORAGE STAIR TO CELLAR BELOW SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1Main Level Plan 0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2Garage Plan 0 2'4'8' 248 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A1.03 ROOF PLAN NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND N 1 A A B B C C D D E E F F 2456731 A2.03 1 A2.02 1 A2.04 5:12 EX I S T I N G FACE OF FRAMING BELOW EXISTING FLUES LOCATIONS VIF EXISTING FLUES LOCATIONS VIF EXISTING FLUES LOCATIONS VIF ROOF REBUILT (REF: 6/A6.03) DECK BELOW 6:12 11:12 11:12 11:12 11 :12 11 :12 5:12 FACE OF FRAMING BELOW STAIR TO CELLAR BELOW SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1Roof Plan 0 2'4'8' SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2Garage Plan 0 2'4'8' 249 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A2.01 ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 GENERAL NOTES 1) INDICATES WINDOW, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE ON A701 2) INDICATES DOOR, SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON A702 3) SIDING INDICATED AS WHITE IS MOSTLY NON-HISTORIC V.I.F. D103 W CMU BLOCKING HORIZONTAL BARNWOOD SIDING WOOD TIMBERS & TRIM ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND SANDSTONE FOUNDATION WALLS HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") T.O. F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") T.O.RIDGE 115'-3" (SITE - 7925'-13/8") T.O.RIDGE 117'-67/8" (SITE - 7927'-51/4") T.O.RIDGE 118'-87/8" (SITE - 7928'-71/4") HISTORIC DETAILS TO REMAIN (REF: 3/A6.03) W114 W113 W112 W116 W115 D105 D104 EXISTING FLUE HISTORIC ONE STORY ADDITION RE: ROOF PLANRE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"1North Elevation 0 2'4'6' 250 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A2.02 ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 GENERAL NOTES 1) INDICATES WINDOW, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE ON A701 2) INDICATES DOOR, SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON A702 3) SIDING INDICATED AS WHITE IS MOSTLY NON-HISTORIC V.I.F. D103 W CMU BLOCKING HORIZONTAL BARNWOOD SIDING WOOD TIMBERS & TRIM ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND SANDSTONE FOUNDATION WALLS HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND A B C D E F T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") T.O. F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") T.O.RIDGE 116'-93/8" (SITE - 7926'-73/4") T.O.RIDGE 118'-87/8" (SITE - 7928'-71/4") HISTORIC DETAILS (REF: 1/A6.03) ADDITION (REF: 4/A6.03) HISTORIC WINDOW SIZE PREVIOUSLY CHANGED (REF: 2/A6.03) HISTORIC ROOF REBUILT (REF: 5/A6.03) W117 W119W120 W103 D102 HISTORIC DETIAL PREVIOUSLY REPLACED EXCEPT FAR LEFT BRACKET BASE OF ALL COLUMNS ARE NON-HISTORIC REPLACED PREVIOUSLY(REF: 2/A603) STEP PREVIOUSLY REPLACED (NON-HISTORIC) RE: ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"1East Elevation 0 2'4'6' 251 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A2.03 ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 GENERAL NOTES 1) INDICATES WINDOW, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE ON A701 2) INDICATES DOOR, SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON A702 3) SIDING INDICATED AS WHITE IS MOSTLY NON-HISTORIC V.I.F. D103 W CMU BLOCKING HORIZONTAL BARNWOOD SIDING WOOD TIMBERS & TRIM ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND SANDSTONE FOUNDATION WALLS HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND 1765432 T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") T.O. F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") T.O.RIDGE 116'-93/8" (SITE - 7926'-73/4") T.O.RIDGE 117'-67/8" (SITE - 7927'-51/4") T.O.RIDGE 118'-95/8" (SITE - 7928'-8") HISTORIC DETAILS (REF: 1/A6.03) ADDITIONAL DETAILS (REF: 5/A6.03) HISTORIC ROOF REBUILT (REF: 5/A6.03) D101 W106 W104 W101 W118 W107 HISTORIC DETIAL PREVIOUSLY REPLACED EXCEPT FAR LEFT BRACKET BASE OF ALL COLUMNS ARE NON- HISTORIC REPLACED PREVIOUSLY (REF: 2/A603) STEP PREVIOUSLY REPLACED (NON-HISTORIC) RE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLANRE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"1South Elevation 0 2'4'6' 252 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A2.04 ELEVATION NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 GENERAL NOTES 1) INDICATES WINDOW, SEE WINDOW SCHEDULE ON A701 2) INDICATES DOOR, SEE DOOR SCHEDULE ON A702 3) SIDING INDICATED AS WHITE IS MOSTLY NON-HISTORIC V.I.F. D103 W CMU BLOCKING HORIZONTAL BARNWOOD SIDING WOOD TIMBERS & TRIM ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING ELEVATIONS MATERIAL LEGEND SANDSTONE FOUNDATION WALLS HISTORIC EXTERIOR ELEMENTS DOCUMENTED EXTERIOR ADDITIONS/CHANGES EXISTING EXTERIOR CHANGES HISTORIC ELEMENT LEGEND AFEDCB T.O.EARTH - CELLAR LEVEL 92'-10" (SITE - 7902'-83/8") T.O. F.F - MAIN LEVEL 100' (SITE - 7909'-103/8") T.O.PLATE 114'-73/8" (SITE - 7924'-53/4") T.O.PLATE 117'-67/8" (SITE - 7927'-51/4") T.O.PLATE 118'-87/8" (SITE - 7928'-71/4") HISTORIC DETAILS (REF: 1/A6.03) ADDITION CHANGES (REF: 3/A6.03 AND EXISTING PLANS) HISTORIC WINDOW SIZE PREVIOUSLY CHANGED (REF: 3/A6.03) W111 W110 W109 W108 SIDING NOT HISTORIC RE: ROOF PLAN RE: ROOF PLAN SCALE: 3/8" = 1'-0"1West Elevation 0 2'4'6' 253 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A6.01 WINDOW SCHEDULE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 ID W101 W102 W103 W104 W105 W106 W107 W108 ELEV 2'-4" 5'-6" 2'-4" 5'-6" 5' 5'-2" 4' 5'-2" 2'-4" 5'-6" 4' 6'-4" 2'-8" 1'-6" 2'-4" 5'-6" W x H 2'-4"×5'-6"2'-4"×5'-6"5'×5'-2"4'×5'-2"2'-4"×5'-6"4'×6'-4"2'-8"×1'-6"2'-4"×5'-6" NOTES HISTORIC HISTORIC HISTORIC HISTORIC ID W109 W110 W111 W112 W113 W114 W115 W116 ELEV 4' 6'-2" 3' 4' 2'-2" 3'-2" 2'-4" 2' 2'-4" 2' 2' 5' 2' 5' 1'-10" 4' W x H 4'×6'-2"3'×4'2'-2"×3'-2"2'-4"×2'2'-4"×2'2'×5'2'×5'1'-10"×4' NOTES ID W117 W118 W119 W120 W121 ELEV 8'-3" 4' 1'-10" 4' 2'-8" 4' 2'-4" 5'-2" 2'-4" 4' W x H 8'-3"×4'1'-10"×4'2'-8"×4'2'-4"×5'-2"2'-4"×4' NOTES HISTORIC SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"1Window Schedule (Graphic) 0 1/2''1''2'' 254 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A6.02 DOOR SCHEDULE - EXTERIOR NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 ID D101 D101.5 D102 D103 D104 ELEV 3'-11/2" 7'-11 " 3'-2" 6'-91/2" 3'-11/2" 7'-23/4" 3'-11/2" 7'-11 " 3'-11/2" 7'-03/4" W x H 3'×6'-9"3'×6'-81/2"3'×7'-2"3'×6'-9"3'×7' Material --------------- Door Type --------------- Notes HISTORIC HISTORIC ID D105 D106 D107 D108 ELEV 2'-111/2" 9'-51/2" 3'-11/2" 6'-83/4" 9' 8' 9' 8' W x H 2'-10"×7'-101/2"3'×6'-8"9'×8'9'×8' Material ------------ Door Type ------------ Notes SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"1Door Schedule | Exterior (Graphic) 0 1/2''1''2'' 255 SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE A6.03 HISTORIC PHOTOS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION AS - BUILT 1001 Grand Ave #103 Glenwood Springs CO 81601 © These documents have been specifically prepared for 504 W Hallam St. They are not suitable for use on other projects or in other locations without the approval and participation of the architect. Reproduction prohibited without approval of the architect. © 2024 504 W Hallam 504 W Hallam St Aspen CO 1611 3/25/2024 HPC 4/15/2025 SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"11963 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front 0 1/2''1''2''SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"21964 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front And Side 0 1/2''1''2''SCALE: 1' = 1'-0"31970 W Hallam Exterior Photo Side 0 1/2''1''2'' SCALE: 1:1.69 41985 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front SCALE: 1:1.69 51989 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front Full SCALE: 1:1.69 61995 W Hallam Exterior Photo Front Full SCALE: 1:1.67 71995 W Hallam Exterior Photo HISTORIC CHIMNEY REMOVED EXHAUST FLUE ADDED RAILING ADDED HISTORIC ROOF REBUILT HISTORIC WINDOW RESIZED HISTORIC COLUMN PROFILE HISTORIC DETAILS LOWER PORTION OF HISTORIC COLUMN REPLACED HISTORIC DETAIL PREVIOUSLY REPLACED EXCEPT FAR LEFT BRACKET HISTORIC STEP REPLACED LATER 256 www.sgm-inc.com GLENWOOD SPRINGS 118 West Sixth St, Suite 200 | Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 | 970.945.1004 Page | 1 March 20, 2025 Sara Adams, AICP Bendon-Adams www.bendonadams.com (o) 970.925.2855 x2 (m) 610.246.3236 RE: 504 Hallam HPC Civil Site anticipated scope and site work Dear Sara: This report addresses a general overview of Civil Engineering aspects of the proposed site. This site is an occupied parcel, historically designated, in the old residential area of Aspen. The home is to remain but the garage is being relocated, altering slightly the site layout. The anticipated work warrants general civil and site planning per COA. The parcel is at the northwest corner of Hallam and 4th Street, is relatively flat with a mild southwest to northeast slope. Streets are paved and current garage access is from 4th Street. There are no known drainage issues and the site is served by typical, albeit aged utility services. Addressing all these to update appropriately per COA (storm, water, sewer, utilities) are part of the potential scope of this application. Driveway & Access The garage is being relocated from the corner of the parcel to attached to the existing home. This relocation will afford that northeast corner of the parcel for potential stormwater controls although two other potential locations are shown on the civil site plan. Pending calculations and architectural affirmations, one or more of those locations shall be utilized for COA URMP water quality measures such as rain gardens, bio swales, or similar, pre-approved design element. Utilities The general site work opens up to replacing some aged services. The existing sewer to the northeast shall be abandoned and a new sewer tap proposed along the alleyway. The dry utilities (electric, gas, communications) shall also be re-run from the alley to the house, but without significant change in route or connection locations. The COA water department has indicated if a new water service is needed, it should come from Hallam, thereby abandoning the tap along 4th Street, following COA abandonment procedures and appropriate restoration. Conclusion We trust this report is sufficient for the HPC review of feasibility on the parcel. It would appear the site amendments, utility updates and stormwater quality improvements can be incorporated. Please feel free to contact us if we may provide further information or clarification. Very Truly Yours, Rick L Barth, P.E., Senior Engineer Civil Services Sector SGM Exhibit L 257 OSW 46" 12" 12" 30" 14" 10" 15" 16" 14" 24" 4" 10' CO 15' 13"11" 9"CT GM 15' MBMB 18" 26" - 2 Hour Parking Sign - STOP Sign - NO PARKING Sign - NO PARKING Sign Found 5/8" Rebar and Unreadable 1.25" Yellow Plastic Cap Found Mag Nail in Concrete with a 1.5" Washer stamped PLS 25947 Site Benchmark Found 5/8" Rebar and 1.25" Yellow Plastic Cap Witness Corner PLS 25947 EL:7908.5' (Bears N11°49'E 1.39') Found 5/8" Rebar and 1.25" Orange Plastic Cap stamped PLS 37972 Lot S Lot R Lot Q Lot P Lot O Lot G Lot H Lot I Lot H Lot G Hallam Street 74.38' Public Right-Of-Way Block 28 21.07' Alley 504 West Hallam 0.138 Acres ± 0.4' 1.6' 12.9' 22.6' JOHNSON, BRYCE Parcel No. 273512425007 CLARKS ADDITION Book 391, Page 944 Parcel No. 273512425800 EG G L E S T O N R O B E R T H J R & T R A C Y H Pa r c e l N o . 2 7 3 5 1 2 4 2 4 0 0 5 FUNMOM LLC Parcel No. 273512432004 Lot K Lot L Lot M 0.7' 4th Street Public Right-Of-Way (Width Varies) 10.0' Front Setback 5.0' Side Setback 10.0' Rear Setback 5.0' Side Setback 18"18" 8" 8" 14" 10" 7" 7" 15" 19" 14" 11" 12 . 0 0 ' AL L E Y CABLE TV PEDESTAL CABLE PHONE PEDESTAL EXISTING MAILBOX EXISTING GAS METER EXISTING SEWER CLEANOUT EXISTING WATER SHUTOFF 12 . 9 7 ' 22.5 2 ' 5.21' 10 . 0 0 ' 11.0 7 ' 5. 0 0 ' EXISTING GARAGE TO BE DEMOLISHED, NEW GARAGE LOCATION EXISTING HOUSE TO BE MOVED AND ROTATED UTILITY CONNECTION BOXES PROPOSED ADDITION STORMWATER (WQ) POTENTIAL AREA EXISTING WATER TAP TO BE ABANDONED. STREET RESTORED IF REQUIRED EXISTING SEWER SERVICE TO BE ABANDONED STORMWATER (WQ) POTENTIAL AREA EXISTING SEWER TAP ABANDONED AND ALLEY RESTORED PROPOSED NEW SEWER TAP NEW ELECTRICAL SERVICE FOLLOWING SAME GENERAL ROUTE STORMWATER (WQ) POTENTIAL AREA PROPOSED WATER TAP. TO BE RESTORED STREET RESTORED PROPOSED WATER SERVICE Graphic Scale In Feet: 1" = 10' 0 5 10 20 i: \ 2 0 2 3 \ 2 0 2 3 - 4 2 8 - 5 0 4 W e s t H a l l a m \ 0 0 1 - I m p S u r v e y \ H - D w g s \ C i v i l \ P S - S h e e t S e t \ W H - S i t e P l a n . d w g P l o t t e d : 3/ 1 9 / 2 0 2 5 9 : 3 0 A M B y : Go r d o n F i e d l e r Re v i s i o n # Dwg No. Job No. Drawn by: Print Date: File: PE:QC: 2023-428.001 GJF 3.13.2025 CL WH-Site Plan CL 11 8 W e s t S i x t h S t r e e t , S u i t e 2 0 0 Gl e n w o o d S p r i n g s , C O 8 1 6 0 1 97 0 . 9 4 5 . 1 0 0 4 ww w . s g m - i n c . c o m Da t e By : C-7 Of : Pr o j e c t M i l e s t o n e : 1 2 3 10 PR E L I M I N A R Y N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O N 50 4 W e s t H a l l a m S t r e e t Site Plan -- - - Title: 25 8 REVISION CLOUD AND TAG GRID LINES DOOR TAG WINDOW TAG ELEVATION REFERENCE SECTION REFERENCE DETAIL REFERENCE HEIGHT REFERENCE INTERIOR ELEVATION REFERENCE ROOM TAG WALL TYPE KEYNOTE PROPERTY LINE DIMENSION NEW OR FINISHED CONTOURS EXISTING CONTOURS 1 6' - 0" NEW WALLS EXISTING WALLS DEMOLISH WALLS 101 1t 0 Room name 101 A101 1 Ref 1 Re f 1 Ref 1 Re f 1 A101 SIM 1i ? A101 1 SIM A101 1 Ref 1 Re f 1 Ref 1 Re f Name Elevation &AND @ AT ABV ABOVE AFF ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR AP ACCESS PANEL ADD ADDENDUM ADJ ADJUSTABLE ALT ALTERNATE ALUM ALUMINUM APPROX APPROXIMATE ARCH ARCHITECT (URAL) BASMT BASEMENT BRG BEARING BOT BOTTOM BLDG BUILDING BLKG BLOCKING BM BEAM CAB CABINET CPT CARPET (ED) CSMT CASEMENT C CAULK (ING) CLG CEILING CT CERAMIC TILE CLG CLEAR CLO CLOSET COL COLUMN CW COLD WATER CT COLLAR TIE CONC CONCRETE CMU CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CONST CONSTRUCTION CONT CONTINUOUS CJT CONTROL JOINT CPR COPPER CUST CUSTOM DBL DOUBLE DEPT DEPARTMENT DT DRAPERY TROUGH DTL DETAIL DIA DIAMETER DIM DIMENSION DR DOOR DWG DRAWING DF DOUGLAS FIR or DRINKING FOUNTAIN DS DOWNSPOUT EA EACH ELEC ELECTRIC (AL) EL ELEVATION (S) ELEV ELEVATOR EQUIP EQUIPMENT EQ EQUAL EXH EXHAUST EXG or (E)EXISTING EJ EXPANSION JOINT EXT EXTERIOR FOC FACE OF CONCRETE FOF FACE OF FINISH FF FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FE FIRE EXTINGUISHER FDC FIRE DEPT CONNECTION FHC FIRE HOSE CONNECTION FEC FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET FPL FIREPLACE FP FIREPROOFING SPRAYED FLG FLASHING FLR FLOOR (ING) FD FLOOR DRAIN FND FOUNDATION FBO FURNISHED BY OTHERS FUR FURRED (ING) GA GAUGE GV GALVANIZED ABBREVIATIONS & SYMBOLS GC GENERAL CONTRACTOR GL GLASS, GLAZING GYP GYPSUM GYP BD GYPSUM BOARD HB HOSE BIB HDW HARDWARE HDWD HARDWOOD HDR HEADER HTG HEATER (ING) HVAC HEATING VENTILATION AC HT HEIGHT HC HOLLOW CORE HM HOLLOW METAL HOR HORIZONTAL HW HOT WATER HWH HOT WATER HEATER IN or (")INCH (ES) INCL INCLUDE (D), (ING) ID INSIDE DIAMETER / DIMENSION IBC INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR IBO INSTALLED BY OWNER INS INSULATE (D), (ION) INT INTERIOR JC JANITOR'S CLOSET KIT KITCHEN LAM LAMINATE (D) LAV LAVATORY LH LEFT HAND L LENGTH LDT LIGHT & DRAPERY TROUGH LT LIGHT TROUGH LTL LINTEL LVR LOUVER MH MANHOLE MFR MANUFACTURE (ER) MO MASONRY OPENING MTL MATERIAL MAX MAXIMUM MECH MECHANIC (AL) MC MEDICINE CABINET MMB MEMBRANE MTL or MET METAL M METER (S) MEZZ MEZZANINE MM MILLIMETER (S) MIN MINIMUM MIR MIRROR MISC MISCELLANEOUS MULL MULLION NAT NATURAL (N)NEW NR NOISE REDUCTION NOM NOMINAL N NORTH NIC NOT IN CONTRACT NTS NOT TO SCALE NO. or #NUMBER OC ON CENTER OPG OPENING OPP OPPOSITE OPH OPPOSITE HAND OD OUTSIDE DIAMETER OH OVERHEAD PR PAIR PK PARKING PVMT PAVEMENT PERF PERFORATED PL PLASTIC LAMINATE PLYWD PLYWOOD PEN PLYWOOD EDGE NAILING PT POINT PSI POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT PSI POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH PREFAB PREFABRICATED PT PRESSURE TREATED PL PROPERTY LINE QT QUARRY TILE RAD RADIUS REF REFERENCE REFR REFRIGERATOR REINF REINFORCE (D), (ING) REQD REQUIRED RES RESILIENT REV REVISION (D), (ING) REVS REVERSE RH RIGHT HAND R RISER R&S ROD AND SHELF RD ROOF DRAIN RDT RECESSED DRAPERY TRACK RFG ROOFING RM ROOM RO ROUGH OPENING R/S ROUGH SAWN S SEALANT SEL SELECT SHTG SHEATHING SHT SHEET SM SHEET METAL SIM SIMILAR SD SMOKE DETECTOR SC SOLID CORE SPEC SPECIFICATION (S) SQ SQUARE STD STANDARD ST STAIN STL STEEL STOR STORAGE SD STORM DRAIN STRUCT STRUCTURAL S4S SURFACED FOUR SIDES SUSP SUSPEND SYM SYMBOL or SYMMETRICAL TEL TELEPHONE TV TELEVISION THR THRESHOLD THRU THROUGH T&G TONGUE AND GROOVE T&B TOP AND BOTTOM TOC TOP OF CURB TS TOP OF SLAB TSL TOP OF STEEL TW TOP OF WALL TOP TOP OF PAVEMENT TB TOWEL BAR TR TRANSOM T TREAD TYP TYPICAL UNO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE VB VAPOR BARRIER VIF VERIFY IN FIELD VERT VERTICAL VG VERTICAL GRAIN VCT VINYL COMPOSITION TILE WC WATER CLOSET WP WATERPROOFING WWF WELDED WIRE FABRIC W WIDTH, WIDE WUI WILDLAND URBAN INTERFACE WDW WINDOW WO WITHOUT WD WOOD 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 COVER A0 HPC Conceptual RevisionsCONTENTS Sheet Name A0 COVER A1 DIAGRAM A2 DEMOLITION A3 FLOOR AREA A4 SITE ROOF A5 BASEMENT PLAN A6 MAIN FLOOR PLAN A7 MASTER FLOOR PLAN A8 ELEVATIONS A9 ELEVATIONS A10 HIDDEN ELEVATIONS A11 IMAGES A12 NEIGHBORHOOD PHOTOS L1 LANDSCAPE PLAN OWNER SCOTT HOFFMAN 504 WEST HALLAM RD ASPEN, C0 SCOTT@CRESTONEBUILDING.COM ARCHITECT RKD Architects Contact: Jack Snow snow@RKDArch.com 970.390.3231 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BENDONADAMS Contact: SARA ADAMS SARA@BENDONADAMS.COM HISTORIC DOCUMENTATION RED Contact: XXXX 1001 GRAND AVE #103 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO 81601 XXXXX 504 WEST HALLAM 259 existing structure existing garage 2' - 11 3/4" 2.74° 1' - 7 3/16" 1' - 7 3/16" Demo and remove non-historic structures legacy structure 10 ' - 0 " 10 0 ' - 0 " 60' - 0" 11:12 6: 1 2 flat roof 4:12 11:1211:12 11 : 1 2 11:12 new porch roof to match historic comply with setback and parallel temporaily relocate legacy structure footprint of proposed final home Construction fencing approx location Additional Fence around relocated Landmark 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 DIAGRAM A1 HPC Conceptual Revisions 1/16" = 1'-0"1 Project Diagram EXISTING 1/16" = 1'-0"2 Project Diagram DEMO 1/16" = 1'-0"3 Project Diagram FINAL 1/16" = 1'-0"4 Project Diagram RELOCATE 260 1:12 6:12 5:12 6:12 11:12 1 1 : 12 1 1 : 12 11:12 11:12 4:12 4:12 11:12 5:12 A B C E F G H I J K L M N OPQ 10:12 D 4.2 112.3 285.3 10.8 9.5 31.0 134.8 52.6 k l m n added to h 28.324.2 68.0 275.8 90.9 6.6 8.3 35.0 8.0 3.9 3.9 50.5 Note Deck removed this areaop q r 21.4 170.1 23.6 3.4 246.4 19.3 24.1 11.7 39.7 6.5 h i j 379.421.8 11.5 4.2 200.3 6.2 11.0 53.6 e f g added to h 71.4 63.5 63.5 191.4 c 160.8 9.8 21.0163.69.8 a 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 DEMOLITION A2 HPC Conceptual Revisions 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Roof Demo 1/8" = 1'-0"2 Ex East 1/8" = 1'-0"3 Ex North 1/8" = 1'-0"4 Ex South 1/8" = 1'-0"5 Ex West 1/8" = 1'-0"6 Garage East 1/8" = 1'-0"7 Garage North 1/8" = 1'-0"8 Garage South 1/8" = 1'-0"9 Garage West b d 261 UP UP Mechanical 81.72 Exempt Man Cave Guest Bath Workout up Slab On Grade BASEMENT 1190.08 FACTOR .O6 FLOOR AREA 71.04 792.83 EXEMPT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Slab on Grade 48.33 Exempt 1549.16 755.19 gross -375 credit 380.19 NET 847.29 1 2 3 4 10 ' - 4 " 15' - 2 3/16" 91.02 65.88 37.70 132.50 77.20 3' - 7 3/4"12' - 9 7/8"7' - 5 5/8" 8' - 0 " 8' - 2 13/16" 5 6 7 8 9' - 0 " 7' - 7 9/16"1' - 0"9' - 4 7/16"11' - 2 5/8" 68.67 9.0 84.33 100.97 9 10 11 9' - 0 " 5' - 0"24' - 5 1/2"24' - 9 7/8" 45.0 220.13 223.41 12 13 14 15 9' - 0 " 10 ' - 4 " 11' - 11 15/16" 2' - 3 15/16" 1' - 4 3/4" 12' - 10 1/4" 4' - 2 5/8" 4' - 0" 3' - 9 5/16" 6' - 7 " 81.64 26.33 24.07 14.44 132.83 existing structure 1358.7 existing garage 560 EXISTING 560+1358.7=1917.8 1917.8/6000=.319% 2331.2 PROPOSED 2331.2/6000=.388 1180.01 1120.21 -375.0 745.21 847.29 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 FLOOR AREA A3 HPC Conceptual Revisions 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Floor Area Basement 1/8" = 1'-0"2 Floor Area Main 1/8" = 1'-0"3 Floor Area Master 1/8" = 1'-0"4 FOUND WALL 1 1/8" = 1'-0"5 FOUND WALL 2 1/8" = 1'-0"6 FOUND WALL 3 1/8" = 1'-0"7 FOUND WALL 4 FLOOR AREA BASEMENT 71.04 MAIN 1596.16 MASTER 847.29 GARAGE 380.19 TOTAL 2894.68 1/16" = 1'-0"8 Site Coverage EXISTING 1/16" = 1'-0"9 site coverage PROPOSED 1/8" = 1'-0"10 Floor Area Main HISTORIC V NEW 1/8" = 1'-0"11 Floor Area Master HISTORIC V NEW HISTORIC v NEW FLOOR AREA HISTORIC 1180.01 NEW 1592.50 262 1 A8 ____ 2 A10 2 A10 1 A9 ____ 2 A9 ____ 3 A8 ____ 1 2 3 4 5 6 A B C E F 11' - 5 13/16" 10 0 ' - 0 " 60' - 0" 10' - 0" 11:12 6: 1 2 flat roof 4:12 11:1211:12 11 : 1 2 11:12 12 ' - 1 0 1 3 / 1 6 " 1 A10 1 A10 PROPERTY LINE MECHANICAL VENTING THRU CHIMNEY RE HISTORIC PHOTO PLANTER PLANTER 6:122:12 REDO PORCH ROOF PER HISTORIC PHOTOS 4TH HALLAM flat roof 5' - 0" 10 ' - 0 " 5' - 0 " setback se t b a c k se t b a c k setback Ma t c h e x i s t i n g 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 SITE ROOF A4 HPC Conceptual Revisions 263 2 A10 2 A10 1 A9 ____ 2 A9 ____ 1 2 3 4 5 6 A B C E F 7' - 0" 5 1/2" 19' - 3" 5 1/2" 6' - 1 1/8" 14 ' - 8 1 3 / 1 6 " 5 1 / 2 " 11 ' - 5 3 / 4 " 5 1 / 2 " 11 ' - 6 1 / 2 " 5 1/2" 5' - 0 1/2" 5 1/2" 2' - 0" 5 1/2" 11' - 10" Mechanical Man Cave Guest Bath Workout up Slab on Grade 1 A10 1 A10 window well window well Slab on Grade Above 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 BASEMENT PLAN A5 HPC Conceptual Revisions 264 UP 6' - 6"0 4 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 5 0 5 05 05 79 06 1 A8 ____ 2 A10 2 A10 1 A9 ____ 2 A9 ____ Kitchen library Dine Living entry 22 ' - 4 3 / 8 " 11' - 2 3/8"19' - 7 3/8" 9' - 0 " 6' - 3 5 / 8 " 12 ' - 0 " Patio brk FP 6' - 9 19/32" 5' - 4 25/32" 1 2 3 4 5 6 A B C E F F 2' - 7 1 3 / 1 6 " 12 ' - 0 " 23 ' - 4 3 / 4 " 13 ' - 1 9 / 1 6 " 24 ' - 9 1 5 / 1 6 " 60' - 0" 10 ' - 0 " 9' - 6 " 10 5 / 1 6 " 5' - 0 " 2' - 0" 24' - 9 3/4" 5 1 / 2 " 5' - 2 1 / 8 " 5 1 / 2 " 7' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 2' - 0 " 5 1 / 2 " 4' - 2 5 / 8 " 6' - 9 19/32" laund pow 5 1/2" 3' - 0" 3 1/2"3' - 9"3' - 3 1/4" prep floor 7908.3 -1'-6" from main 7909.8 DOOR meters grass pavers 5 1/2"11' - 2 15/16"5 1/2" 12' - 1 15/16" 11' - 7 7/16" CL Window well Window well Up Down Fence 1' - 10 9/16"20' - 0"2' - 0" 21 ' - 1 0 9 / 1 6 " 1 A10 1 A10 PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE glass rail glass rail 23 ' - 8 " 11' - 3 3/8" 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 MAIN FLOOR PLAN A6 HPC Conceptual Revisions 265 1 A8 ____ 2 A10 2 A10 1 A9 ____ 2 A9 ____ Primary closet primary bath 4 5 6 A C E F 10' from PL 7' - 3 3/16"7' - 4 15/16" 16 ' - 9 7 / 1 6 " 5 1 / 2 " 10 ' - 2 1 / 2 " Office 6' - 1 3/4"6' - 3 1/4" 1' - 3 3/16" 10' from PL PLANTERROOF 17' - 4 19/32" 2' - 0" 13 ' - 0 1 / 2 " 3' - 0 " 5' - 0 " 6' - 0 1 / 4 " King 72x84 w 12" side tables 4' - 0 " 3 1 / 2 " 4' - 6 1 / 8 " 5 1 / 2 " 5' - 5 5 / 8 " 9' - 9 1/16" 5 1/2" 3' - 3" 5 1/2"8' - 4"5 1/2"12' - 8 5/16" ROOF 1 A10 1 A10 open down Planter FLAT ROOF 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 MASTER FLOOR PLAN A7 HPC Conceptual Revisions 266 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" A B C E F Garage 5' -4 25/32" Garage 5' -4 25/32" 1 1:1 2 23 ' - 0 3 / 4 " 1/3 Brick Wood Siding Roof Slate Roof Slate Restored Siding Typ Legacy Structure Porch roof to match historic raise grade to historic level 1/2 of roof pitch 24 ' - 9 1 3 / 1 6 " SLATE ROOF WOOD SIDING BRICK 1 1 :1 21 1:1 2 1/3 15 ' - 5 5 / 8 " 5' - 7 9 / 1 6 " 21 ' - 1 3 / 1 6 " Legacy Proposed Glass Rail Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive 2 A10 2 A10 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" 2 3 4 5 6 Garage 5' -4 25/32" Garage 5' -4 25/32"1 A10 1 A10 1/3 23 ' - 5 3 / 1 6 " LOW FENCE 3' Max Wood Plank HIGH FENCE BEYOND 6' MaxWood Plank METAL FASCIA BRICK Wood Siding PLANTER BEYOND WINDOW TO BE RESTORED TO HISTORIC DIMENSIONS CONFIRM IN CONSTRUCTION PORCH ROOF TO BE RESTORED TO HISTORIC SLATE SLATE Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 ELEVATIONS A8 HPC Conceptual Revisions 1/4" = 1'-0"3 SOUTH 1/4" = 1'-0"1 EAST SLATE ROOF WOOD SIDING GREEN ROOF BRICK 267 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" Garage 5' -4 25/32" 24 ' - 1 1 / 4 " 1/2 of roof pitch 1 1 :1 2 4:12 most resrictive grade under ridge BRICK METAL SLATE METAL BRICK--SEE HISTORIC PHOTO FOR REFERENCE METAL FASCIA WOOD GARAGE DOOR most resrictive grade PLANTER 24 ' - 0 " 1/3 of roof pitch Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive neighbor's fence 3' max fence 2 A10 2 A10 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32"Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" Garage 5' -4 25/32" Garage 5' -4 25/32" 1 A10 1 A10 6:12 1 1 :1 2 24 ' - 2 " 1/2 of roof pitch 24 ' - 7 5 / 8 " SLATE ROOF SLATE ROOF SLATE ROOF SLATE ROOF SLATE ROOF METAL METAL Wood Siding BRICK SIDING METAL FASCIA 8' - 8 5 / 8 " Glass Rail Indicates Existing Grade Most Restrictive 6' Max Wood Fence 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 ELEVATIONS A9 HPC Conceptual Revisions 1/4" = 1'-0"2 NORTH 1/4" = 1'-0"1 WEST Garage Door SLATE ROOF WOOD SIDING GREEN ROOF BRICK 268 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" Basement -4' -7 7/32" Basement -4' -7 7/32" BASEMENT WINDOW WELL KITCHEN PANTRY SLATE ROOF PLANTER FLAT ROOF 2:12 6:12 1 1 :1 2 1 1 1 / 1 6 " 5' - 7 9 / 1 6 " 13 ' - 2 1 / 4 " 1/3 Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Existing FF 6' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" Master FF 16' -9 19/32" 8' - 0 " Garage 5' -4 25/32" Garage 5' -4 25/32" 10 ' - 0 " 1' - 4 1 3 / 1 6 " 1' - 0" 9' - 1 0 " Basement -4' -7 7/32" Basement -4' -7 7/32" WINDOW WELL BASEMENT PANTRY KITCHEN 1/3 22 ' - 2 " 5' - 2 " 1 1:1 2 BRICK WOOD SIDING PLANTER BRICK 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 HIDDEN ELEVATIONS A10 HPC Conceptual Revisions 1/4" = 1'-0"1 Through Connecting North 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Through Connecting South 269 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 IMAGES A11 HPC Conceptual RevisionsIMAGES 270 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 NEIGHBORHOOD PHOTOS A12 HPC Conceptual Revisions 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 EXISTING 1 PROPOSED 506 WEST HALLAM 520 WEST HALLAM 526 WEST HALLAM 530 WEST HALLAM 602 WEST HALLAM 601 WEST HALLAM 533 WEST HALLAM 525 WEST HALLAM 511 WEST HALLAM 501 WEST HALLAM 431 WEST HALLAM 434 WEST HALLAM 504 WEST HALLAM NEIGHBORHOOD MAP 271 PROPOSED ORNAMENTAL TREE TYP 5 EXISTING ASPEN COTTONWOODS TO BE REMOVED PER PERMIT #0155-2024 TREE ISSUED 09/11/2024 INDICATED BY CIRCLE AT TRUNK LOCATION WITH CROSS HATCH CONCRETE WALK PERENNIAL BED TYP PAVER PATIO GRASS PAVER PARKING PLANTING BED ROOF TOP PLANTER WEST HALLAM 4TH ST 6' FENCE LOWER FENCE REPLACE EXISTING SPRUCE WITH ONAMENTAL 2 steps 137 main street, suite G004 box 5055 edwards, colorado 81632 970.926.2622 rkd@rkdarch.com job number issue date sheet title sheet number 5 0 4 W E S T H A L L A M 4/22/2025 23080 LANDSCAPE PLAN L1 HPC Conceptual Revisions ORNAMENTAL TREE PATIO PAVER PERENNIALS GRASS PAVER ROOF TOP PLANTER 272