The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.134 W Hopkins Ave.0037.2006.AHPC134 W Hopkins Minor HPC 7735-124-19-001 Case 0037.2006.461'C ~Â·'--- 051 0 <-Ce f i 19 0 (91 4 1 6 - S ce-\AA.J 311 6 fle 01/1/3 -3 /97 iDA oÂ·Â·U,/04/0 Of 24- f/â‚¬.Â¥- 0 1 r, 90/0 fli - 1p - City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0037.2006.AHPC PARCEL ID NUMBER 2735-124-19-001 PROJECT ADDRESS 134 W. Hopkins Ave. PLANNER Sara Adams CASE DESCRIPTION Minor HPC REPRESENTATIVE George Winne DATE OF FINAL ACTION 8/10/07 CLOSED BY Amy DeVault .. 5 J'.nulh DIe Idit Becord Gavigate Fgm Reports Format Iab Melp , y h < 0 41 / 4 -3 Â¥ D 2 * 14 ' I. WN' p'.3% 40'1 10 91 0 -4 $ Main Routing Statut :Fee Summavt feeN Cii:tom Fields Parcels Achon: Jubte,rfi#s Attachment. Rc! 1,goistofv 0 Pefrnit Type * .4.perÂ·,Ht:tcÂ« Land Use 2004 Permit it 0037,2006,AHPC Addfess Â· -Â·Â· 922'u -9- 1-1 | Apt/Suite 11 % rÂ·' LACcru State !00 ~13 Zip 01611 Permit Informatjan 0 .~.â€ž~~~2~~2<~~ LL Â«<Â«kÂ«.~â‚¬~~a.~Â«CCâ‚¬CCC~<<.â‚¬(.Â«Â«Â«4~<Â«~ ~ r,m g. i Master Pennit m 31 Routingeueue ianpowe Applied 07/31/2006 9 1 Statii; pendeig Approved 3 ~ DesÂ¢,iption i ROPOSAQ ADDITION OF 1 STOKE~SUNRROM AND MUDROOM 1194 st] AND issued 1 i JARIANCE FOR SIDE SETBACK = 5.0' TO 2670 FU , $ Subtrotted GEORGE R WiNNE 618Â·4346 Clock Rwinng Day4 Emies 107/26/2007 1 Ownet Last Name Jif:,-DER : Filst Name :MICHELLE PU U . 01 50 SPOTOMAC MD 20859 Pliorie 1301) 8735656 9 Owner ! s Applicant ? Appkcant Last Name 3NYDER Ast Name IMICHELLE PO BOX 6150 iPOTOMAC MD 20859 Phone 1301) 873-5656 Cust # 127112 -21 Lender 1, Fust Name ~ Last Name i 5 Phone 2- ,11Â·p-f the man line of the r < ir.Â·': -3:1,1/e; 1 Recoid 2 ot 2 / - //~/lag Ridenour At. Sterling Insurance, Inc. FaxID: Glenwood Insurance A To: City of Aspen Date. 7/26/2006 01:33 PM Page: 1 of 1 ... .. ... .. .. :~:~CORDâ„¢ CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/Yrn') OP ID MR' .. WELLH-1 07/26/06 PRODUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE Sterling Insurance, Inc. HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR 300 AABC Suite G ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. Aspen CO 81611 Phone:970-925-3737 Fax:970-925-8744 INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSURED INSURER A Seneca Insurance Company INSURER B INSURER C Well Huna Cabinetry PO Box 8832 INSURER D Aspen CO 81612 INSURER E COVERAGES INE POLICIES OP INSURANCE LISIED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED JO IHE INSURED NAMED ABOVE 1-OR IHE POLICY PERIOD INDICAIED NOIWIIHS IANDING ANY REQUIREMENT TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, I HE INSURANCE APPORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCNIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECI 10 ALL THE IERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDI T IONS OP SUCH POLICIES AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS INSK AUU L POLICY EN-ELIIVE POLICY EXPIRAIION LTRINSRD TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER DATE (MM/DD/YY) DATE (MM/DD/YY) LIMITS GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE [500,000 A X COMMERCIAL GENE[2AL LIABILITY CTP0500605 UAIVIAGE I U I<EN I LU 06/20/06 06/20/07 PREMISES (Ea occurence) $50,000 ~ CLAIMS MADEE ~~~ OCCUR MED EXP (Any one pei son) $5,000 PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $500,000 GFNFRAI AGGREGATE $500,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $500,000 E--- PRO- POLICY JECT LOC AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT (Ea accident) Al~1 f AUTO ALL OWNED AUTOS BODILY INJljRY - (Por person) SCI IEDL JI ED ALTOS HIRED AUTOS BODILY INJURY NON OWNED AUIDS per accident) PROPERTY DAMAGE $ (Per accident) GARAGE LIABILITY All I O ONLY - EAACCIDEN I $ ANY At }TO FA ACC $ OTHER THAN 7 At JTO ON[ Y AGG $ EXCESS/UMBRELLA LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ -~| DCAR ~ 01 AIMS MAE)F AGGRF(DATE $ $ ~ DEL)UC I IBLE -~ RFTENTION $ 2 VVE LIAIU 1 10'H $ WORKERS COMPENSATION AND TORY LIMITS 1 ER EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY E.L.EACH ACCIDENT $ ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? E L DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ H yes, describe under SPECIAL PROVISIONS below E L DISEASE POLICY LIME $ OTHER DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES / EXCLUSIONS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENT / SPECIAL PROVISIONS CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION CITYASP SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 10 DAYS WRITTEN City of Aspen & Pitkin County NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL fax 920-5439 IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE INSURER, ITS AGENTS OR 130 South Galena Aspen CO 81611 REPRESENTATIVES. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Sterling Insurance, Inc. ACORD 25 (2001/08) Â© ACORD CORPORATION 1988 69 64 + ASPEN OFFICE AVON OFFICE 601 East Hyman Avenue GARFIELD & HECHT, RC. 0070 Benchmark Road Aspen, Colorado 81611 Post Office Box 5450 Telephone (970) 925-1936 ATTORNEYS AT LAW Avon, Colorado 81620 Facsimile (970) 925-3008 Telephone (970) 949-0707 Since 1975 GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE Facsimile (970) 949-1810 The Denver Centre www.garfieldhecht.com BASALT OFFICE 420 Seventh Street, Suite 100 River View Plaza Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 RECEIVED 100 Elk Run Drive, Suite 220 Telephone (970) 947-1936 Basalt, Colorado 81621 Facsimile (970) 947-1937 ~1 9 0 2007 J U A Telephone (970) 927-1936 Facsimile (970) 927-1939 tgetri BUILDING DEPARTMENT June 20,2007 VIA EMAIL AND HAND DELIVERY Christopher J. LaCroix Mr. Chris Bendon Aspen office City of Aspen Community Development Director Email: clacrobÂ¢*garfieldhecht.com 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Extension of Deadline for Recording the Amendment to the Historic Landmark Lot Split Plat and Agreement for 134 West Hopkins Avenue Dear Chris: We represent Michele Snyder and West Hopkins, LLC, the owner of the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue known as Lot 1 of 134 and 134 !4 West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite ofAspen (the "Property"). The Aspen Historic Preservation Commission ("HPC") approved an application for Minor Development, Demolition and Variances for the Property pursuant to Resolution No. 36, Series of 2006 ("Resolution 36"). Resolution 36 was recorded on January 12,2007 at Reception No. 533287. The Community Development Department issued a Development Order for the Property on December 24,2006 Paragraph 3 of Resolution 36 provides that "the owner will record an amendment to the Historic Landmark Lot Split plat and agreement for 134 West Hopkins to read that Lot 1 = 1,760 square feet and Lot 2 = 1,704 square feet." Paragraph 9 of Resolution 36 provides, in part, that "Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void Permits)." Therefore, unless this deadline is extended, the amendment to the Historic Landmark Lot Split plat and agreement for 134 West Hopkins must be recorded by June 22,2007 (which is 180 days after the effective date of the development order). Because the amendment to the plat and agreement are not yet ready to record, the owner is hereby requesting an extension to the deadline. This requested for extension is being made within the 180 day period and it is in the community's best interest to allow the extension. Significant time and resources were devoted to the Â® Printed on recycled paper y. /.., jARFIELD &HECHT, RC. 4 Mr. Chris Bendon City of Aspen Community Development Director June 20,2007 Page 2 approval process for the Property evidenced by Resolution 36 and it would be a significant waste of the City's time, money and resources to render the approval invalid and require the owner to complete the approval process once again. The owner and the architect have worked consciously and diligently with HPC and the Community Development Department to comply with all of the requirements o f Resolution 36, including finalizing the amendment to the plat and agreement, and will continue to do so if the requested extension is granted. The owner hereby requests a 180-day extension of the deadline for the recordation of the amendment to the plat and agreement for 134 West Hopkins. If approved, the new deadline would be December 17,2007. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, GAR+IR]10 & HECHT, P.C. By: C P1.p Chris hkroix Copy to: Michele Snyder Amy Gutherie 90 0% Â©de,n4w 4 4Â»16â€ž* 59/ 217- 16/07Â»2 APPROVED 21 656 JUN W 2007 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CITY OF ASPEN uu v u lea IO the .. FLOOR AREA ALLOCATION AGREEMENT THIS FLOOR AREA ALLOCATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made th this 10 day of August 2007 by and among WEST HOPKINS, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ("WH"); PHYLLIS J. BRONSON ("Bronson") and THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO a municipal corporation (the "Citv"). RECITALS A. WH is the owner of certain properly in Pitkin County, Colorado legally described as Lot 1,134 and 134 !4 W. Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split Plat, according to the Plat thereof recorded May 4,2004 iii Plat Book 64 at Page 6 as Reception No. 497137("Lot 1"). B. Bronson is the owner of certain property in Pitkin County, Colorado legally described as Lot 2,134 and 134 !4 W. Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split Plat, according to the Plat thereof recorded May 4,2004 in Plat Book 64 at Page 6 as Reception No. 497137 ("Lot 2"). C. Pursuaiit to Ordinance 64, Series of 2003 recorded March 1,2004 at Reception No. 494988 ("Ordinance 64"), and that certain Subdivision Exemption Agreement for the 134 and 134 1/2 W. Hopkins Historic Laiidniark Lot Split recorded May 4,2004 at Reception No. 497136 (the "Subdivision Exemption Agreement") the City and the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission ("HPC") approved a 500 square foot floor area bonus (the "FAR Bonus") and certain setback variances to accommodate the then existing development on Lot 1 and Lot 2. D. In the absence of the FAR Bonus, the maximum aggregate floor area for Lot 1 and Lot 2 could not exceed 3,240 square feet (the "Maximum Zoning Floor Area"). With the FAR Bonus, the total maximum allowable aggregate floor area is 3,740 square feet. E. Lot 1 and Lot 2 were legally created pursuant to the 134 and 1341/2 W. Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split Plat recorded May 4,2004 in Plat Book 64 at Page 6 (the "Plat"). F. The Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement state that the floor area on the two lots shall be allocated as follows: "Lot 1 shall receive 1,872 square feet and Lot 2 shall receive 1,704 square feet." As a result, the total aggregate floor area for Lot 1 and Lot 2 as indicated on the Plat is 3,576 square feet, which exceeds the Maximum Zoning Floor area by 336 square feet (i.e., 336 square feet + 3,240 square feet = 3.576 square feet). Therefore, 336 square feet of the 500 square foot FAR Bonus had to be applied to accommodate the then-existing development on Lot 1 and Lot 2, which left 164 square feet of the 500 square foot FAR Bonus still available (i.e., 500 square feet minus 336 square feet = 164 square feet). RECEPTION#: 541727,09/06/2007 at 09:14:45 AM, 1 OF 5, R $26.00 Doc Code AGREEMENT Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO .. G. The Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement do not allocate the additional 164 square feet between Lot 1 and Lot 2; however, the City' s position is that the additional 164 square feet is shared equally between Lot 1 and Lot 2, so that Lot 1 had an additional 82 square feet of floor area available and Lot 2 had an additional 82 square feet of floor area available. H. Therefore, pursuant to the Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement and according to the City, assuming the full amount of the FAR Bonus is applied, the maximum floor area for Lot 1 would have been 1,954 square feet (i.e., 1,872 square feet existing per the Plat plus an additional 82 square feet) and the maximum floor area for Lot 2 would have been 1,786 square feet (i.e., 1,704 square feet existing per the Plat plus an additional 82 square feet). I. The actual floor area for Lot 1 when the Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement were recorded was 1,803.2 square feet, and not 1,872 square feet as indicated on the Plat and in the Subdivision Exemption Agreement. As a result, the total floor area of the then-existing development for Lot 1 and Lot 2 was actually 3,507.2 square feet (and not 3,576 square feet), which exceeds the Maximum Zoning Floor Area by 267.2 square feet. Therefore, when the Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement were recorded, in order to approve the 3,507.2 square feet of then-existing development on Lot 1 and Lot 2 only 267.2 square feet (and not 336 square feet) of the 500 square foot FAR Bonus needed to be applied (i.e., 267.2 square feet plus 3,240 square feet = 3,507.2 square feet). J. If only 267.2 square feet of the 500 square foot FAR Bonus must be applied to approve the development that existed when the Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement were recorded, the portion of the FAR Bonus that remains unallocated is 232.8 square feet (i.e., 500 square feet minus 267.2 square feet = 232.8 square feet). K. If 232.8 square feet of the 500 square foot FAR Bonus is still available, and it is divided equally between Lot 1 and Lot 2, each Lot has 116.4 square feet of additional floor area available. L. As a result, according to the City, assuming the full amount ofthe FAR Bonus is applied, the maximum floor area for Lot 1 is 1,919.6 square feet (i.e., 1,803.2 square feet existing as of the Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement plus 116.4 square feet = 1,916 square feet) and the maximum floor area available for Lot 2 is 1,820.4 square feet (i.e., 1,704 square feet existing as of the Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement plus 116.4 square feet = 1,820.4 square feet). M. WH, Bronson and the City desire to enter into this Agreement to correct the mistaken floor area for Lot 1 appearing on the Plat and in the Subdivision Exemption Agreement and to set out their mutual understanding concerning allocation of the FAR Bonus between Lot 1 and Lot 2. 2 .. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals and the mutual covenants contained herein, it is agreed as follows: 1. Recitals True and Correct. The Recitals above are true and correct and form a part of this Agreement. 2. Floor Area Allocation. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained on the Plat or in the Subdivision Exemption Agreement, WH, Bronson and the City agree that: (a) The floor area for Lot 1 that existed when the Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement were recorded is 1,803.2 square feet. (b) In order to accommodate the development on Lot 1 and Lot 2 that existed when the Plat and Subdivision Exemption Agreement were recorded, 267.2 square feet of the 500 square foot FAR Bonus must be applied, and therefore 232.8 square feet of the 500 square foot FAR Bonus remains available. (c) With respect to the 232.8 square feet of the 500 square foot FAR Bonus that remains available, one-half (i.e., 116.4 square feet) is available for Lot 1 and one- half (i.e., 116.4 square feet) is available for Lot 2. (d) As a result, assuming the full amount of the FAR Bonus is applied, the maximum allowable floor area for Lot 1 is 1,919.6 square feet (i.e., 1,803.2 square feet plus 116.4 square feet = 1,916 square leet721 the maximum allowable floor area available for Lot 2 is 1,820.4 square feet (i.e., 1,704 square feet plus 116.4 square feet = 1,820.4 square feet). 3. Miscellaneous. (a) Benefits and Burdens. All provisions contained herein, including the benefits and burdens, run with the land and are binding upon all persons who now or hereafter acquire any interest in Lot 1 or Lot 2, whether as an owner, renter, deed of trust or mortgage beneficiary or otherwise. Each provision contained herein shall be deemed incorporated in each deed or other instrument by which any right, title or interest in any of Lot 1 or Lot 2 is granted, devised or conveyed, whether or not set forth or referred to in such deed or other instrument. (b) Attorney's Fees. In the event any action or proceeding is brought by any party for the enforcement or the attempted enforcement of any of the provisions contained herein, the prevailing party, as determined by the court, in such action or proceeding shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees, in addition to any other relief to which it may be entitled. (c) Applicable Law. The law applicable hereto and its interpretation shall be that of the State of Colorado (regardless of its choice of law provisions), and any 3 .. litigation arising out of or concerning this Agreement shall be commenced and maintained in Pitkin County, Colorado, and the parties hereby submit to the personal jurisdiction of Colorado in connection therewith. (d) Severability. Any determination by any court of competent jurisdiction that any provision hereof is invalid or unenforceable shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any of the other provisions hereof. Where any provision hereof is alleged to be or declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be unconscionable, this document shall automatically be amended by the insertion of a new provision as similar thereto as practicable, but which would not be unconscionable, invalid or unenforceable. (e) Correction Documents. The City and the current and future owners of Lot 1 and Lot 2 shall fully and promptly cooperate to correct any scrivener, clerical or other errors found in any legal descriptions or in any other provisions of this document or any exhibits hereto. (f) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and, as executed shall constitute one Agreement binding on all of the parties hereto notwithstanding that all said parties are not signatory to the original or same counterpart. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first written above. WH. BRONSON: Wes~ns~LC< By: \-0/ m, AA j. 6207(4 Michele\@nyder, Sole Member phJL-J. liponson THE CITY: ATTEST: THE CITY OF ASPEN, CO] 1DO, a municipal corporation ~ MAIUUuÂ«D >4 14Â«t_ . 1/lA 4444( P n ... Kathryn S. I*th, City Clerk Mick Ireland, M~ APPROVED AS TO FORM: JZG*orcert dr, City Attorney [Acknowledgements on Following Pagel 4 0 . STATE OF ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) 6 49- The foregoing Agreement was acknowledged before me this I~ ~ day of Jdy, 2007 by Michele Snyder, sole member of West Hopkins, LLC. WITNESS my hand and official seal. <0 My commission expires: Â£0.7- (O .40%,1,11111 lim,/* /$3â‚¬v..99???3"R, 2 I g E NOTAR k.% Notar*Public - tâ‚¬'Â·.PUB L IC.'O* 1ty>... ...Of STATE OF ) ) SS. '9*HAFB".im-. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing Agreement was acknowledged before me this M'E, Of ~p 7- 2007 by Phyllis J. Bronson. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: //~~ . U NOTARY PUBLIC |~ ~STATEOPCOLORADQ_ll My Commission Exples~.//// 5 ,#i,"1111"U#, .. Sara Adams From: Chris LaCroix [clacroix@garfieldhecht.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 11:20 AM To: John Worcester CC: Sara Adams; Michele Snyder; jcavaleri@hansenconst.com; rhempel@hansenconst.corn Subject: 134 W. Hopkins Attachments: removed.txt removed.txt (387 B) Hi John: I represent Michele Snyder and West Hopkins, LLC, the owner of Lot 1 of the 134 and 1341/2 W. Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split Plat. My client has been working with Sara Adams to make renovations to the property and use an HPC floor area bonus. I just finished meeting with Sara and I understand that a revised plat is needed. Sara suggested I contact you to let you know how I propose to handle this and to get your comments or approval. Here's my understanding. 1. The 134 and 1341/2 W. Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split Plat (the "Original Plat") creates Lots 1 and 2. In the absence of an HPC bonus, maximum floor area of the entire property could not exceed 3,240 sf. With the HPC bonus of 500 sf, the total maximum is 3,740. 2. The Original Plat states that Lot 1 has 1,872 sf of floor area and Lot 2 has 1,704. The total floor area is 3,576. 3. In order to approve the 3,576 sf of floor area that existed at the time, the Original Plat allocated 336 sf of the 500 sf HPC bonus (i.e, 336 + 3,240 = 3,576). This left 164 sf of the 500 sf HPC bonus still available to be used at a later time. The Original Plat does not say how this additional 164 sf would be allocated, but Sara tells me that staff's position is that any remaining bonus would be shared equally between Lot 1 and Lot 2 - in other words, each Lot had 82 sf of additional floor area available. 4. Pursuant to the Original Plat, the maximum floor area for Lot 1 would have been 1,954 (i.e., 1,872 existing as of the Original Plat + 82) and the maximum available for Lot 2 would have been 1,786 (i.e., 1,704 existing as of the Original Plat + 82). 5. There was a mistake in the floor area calculations on the Original Plat because Lot 1 really only had 1803.2 sf of floor area (not 1872), so the total floor area for Lot 1 and Lot 2 was really only 3,507.2 (not 3,576). Therefore, as a result of this mistake, in order to approve the 3,507.2 sf of improvements that existed at the time of the Original Plat, only 267.2 sf of the 500 sf HPC bonus needed to be allocated (i.e., 267.2 + 3,240 = 3,507.2). 6. If only 267.2 sf of the 500 sf HPC bonus was needed at the time of the Original Plat, the unallocated bonus that remains is 232.8 sf (i.e., 267.2 + 232.8 = 500). 7. If 232.8 sf of the 500 sf HPC bonus is still available, and the surplus is divided equally between Lot 1 and Lot 2, each Lot has 116.4 sf of additional floor area available. 8. As a result, using all of the HPC bonus is used, the maximum floor area for Lot 1 is 1,919.6 (i.e., 1,803.2 existing as of the Original Plat + 116.4) and the maximum available for Lot 2 is 1,820.4 (i.e., 1,704 existing as of the Original Plat + 116.4). 9. I initially went to meet with Sara because I did not understand why you and Sara were requiring the owner of Lot 2 to sign the new plat, since I thought the new plat covered 1 .. only Lot 1 and the owner of Lot 2 has not been participating in any of the discussions that have taken place for Lot 1 between my client and staff. However, I now understand from Sara that one of the purposes for the new plat is to try to clarify the situation and state the correct amount of floor area that remains for each Lot and since the maximum allowable floor area for Lot 2 is increasing, you want the owner of Lot 2 to sign. Please let me know if you agree with this email. If you do, I will prepare notes to be included on the new plat that attempt to explain what is described in this email. I will, of course, send the plat (and my draft of the plat notes) to you for review. Thanks, Chris LaCroix Garfield & Hecht, P.C. 601 E. Hyman Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Phone: (970) 925-1936 Fax: (970) 925-3008 email: clacroix@garfieldhecht.com NOTICE: This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information intended solely for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone (970-925-1936) and delete this message and all copies and backups thereof. Thank you. Tax Advice Disclosure: Any U.S. Federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used or relied upon, for the purpose of avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or promoting, marketing or recommending any entity, investment plan or other transaction. 2 Blank Page 1 of 1 Sara Adams From: Todd Grange Sent: Tuesday, May 08,2007 3:30 PM To: Sara Adams Subject: 134 HOPKINS Sara I have reviewed the FAR on permit 0039.2007.ARBK and the new calc of 1803.2 is accurate. Todd Grange Aspen Comdev x 2767 5/9/2007 % THE CITY OF ASPEN ..# , h'Wt ~444 10b ~ or <1 4 hE j#Â£4,â€ž24,- (*11%?za: 6 4 Â° r**, 4 0 Atwal. 9 Â«Â«4*, aff .Wel# I 9 +40 4,4 k-o~l *ALL % ric<{16Â» Â¢'Of-*UXS. llÂ¢%4 4 #p Â«. 1/*bo -4 4- 14~1 - 130 SOUTH GALEN.A STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-1975 ... THE CITY OF_*PEN 31 44'. o &0 0 @Mt Fbok Oft 41'ft (KIShli,01 ' KNN Kjdwilt - ed ros Fqtt~F'*46 91" X 6 d 14 @6Â£)30" f %1*U- 4 ff 130 Soc rn GALE-\.A STREET Aâ‚¬PEN, COLORADO 81611-1975 91 bl . THE CITY OF ASPEN ~ MEMO FROM JOHN P. WORCESTER CITY ATTORNEY 2.4 n- t- :7 00 19 ZE 1'2 il' rlil * 0 1 90\ 91 J 4\% A . 4 2 3 1%15 130 SOUTH GALENA STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-1975 lie zoo 2432 *ZO- - 0,641 4 JWOU,54 3 Fri igilt. *vu___hut 6 04Â£N- Flk_'lb ytfuy ----~ %10/( ([tl/0 + CA~448 1 Â» '144_0 4 *Nit Wilf usd. 29412 FFA 9% 20% 0 + *DNut 8 4 4,4 94 40 bu~ 0Â¤pxi- 44 6 hed#64 (1/b k16 - Nest- fAL C 0 AmAid Â£ 01- 070 Nj- 4 0 Rf 6 14 nt#Â¥NU** --P 36. 40Â· 003, p Â»6Â·*Â»jÂ»hut * . .; L-7---- 4 â„¢- 0 - ---x lÂ¢8 2-- 74 - - D ~---9~1- 1 -140 -rl 41 1 3210, ~ - 2 3~ -LIV:61â€ž 14% 4 6 -4- h -29/223 - - I -12=Lbl--+ - ILd 4 f 2 GÂ¢Sflf ---- -1 I (0 ' I ./01 0+ Ct - 9 *AMS N- Â« \\ - 6#IM * * - F 2 1 041 tty -LIG . 4 .. DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Michele Snyder, West Hopkins LLC, P.O. Box 6150, Potomac, MD 20859. 301-873-5656. Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 M West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property HPC has approved plans to demolish a non-historic shed, construct a small rear addition, an 138 square foot FAR bonus for rehabilitation and design for the historic residence, and setback variances. Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Approved per Resolution #36, Series of 2006, passed on December 13, 2006. Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) December 24,2006 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) December 24,2009 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issuedfthis 24th day of December, 2006, by the City of Aspen Community Development Director. PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Chris Bendon, Community Development Director Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursu ant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, per taining to the following described property: 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 91 134 and 134 1/2 West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen Colorado through a Resolution of the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Numbered 36, Ser;es of 2006. The approval allows demolition of a.. existing non-his toric shed, construction of a srT 'I rear addition, a 138 square foot FAR bonus for rehabilitation and design, and setback variances, For further information contact Sara Adams, at the Aspen Community Development Dept., 130 S. Ga lena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 429-2778. ' City of Aspen Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on Decem ber 24,2006. (66623) U U -n-- -I'u, 'rucl. dill ally approval 'rulll IrFE-- Parks Department Director for offilte Â· 1 replacement or mitigation of any removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by a detailed landscape plan , indicating which trees are to be removed and , new plantings proposed on the site. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan and snow storage runoff plan, prepared by a Colorado [icerfied civil engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during system is required, a soil percolation report will and after construction. If a ground recharge be required to Crrectly size the facility A 5 year storm fre .uency should be used in designing any drAinage improvements. 4 A final construction management plan pursuant to the requirements described in Section 6 of thisordinance. ~ A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department .. revisal try 8 00. (#OJOOD 15\Â·folo F'*4614 Da?R.-3,FAHEst,?37Â°*669/. Gl,&99 -*404[- 9 QÂ»*46 90(AD WOOD E):7410(1 601~HC, t:)001* 01.10 94994 .--t.9 *14' powele o \90% FUU, RE,lek'r. Dpll,l 1 EFOM /n 449Â° WOOD Del. Hut46 Nlbl.DOW /6Â»9= 10.19,0 i \Ey r - ~~-N? ~D,wm~~0~:) 145* N j' EX!*TiNG, 0 2* *7 \4 000 0!b.. buR/- W 1 M.,0 4 GLAâ‚¬Â·9 = Las *.F \80817 Â«A,11- -tr k'*iMP.r,yE' 95\4 10'.td; Cotto. F - t' l e.. i i' '= 10 L 1 '9 FvÂ·-274 e r. i j CoaT o[ST EMe'[9 4"el**3 - Â·- 0 ed,ptl I. 6 91:J' 7 0 . C I. 146, , Â·Â· 1 1.*UNDOW NE.V.1 6616;ZaTE:* 1 46.---=111Â«U LARD) Iflae 4 9{Er / /KI -'. / 4-2 W TICE RHEW 1/77/ < 7 1 - n - 1 4 -1 48 - 1 1 1- 1/9 ..1 4 !1'.1 . I ./ -.1 K>* !, th 9 4 M- %*29 I . .:1 1-12 4...6/1 1 -1. :, _ 191- 12-1-4= p~i , PLUMBING NOTES 8:9 4 ZMO MA -*L .. ix 1.-br Ni ; 8 / d F i .-t- -- A -*5 i -&-4122- 1 244/ 780$ n.6~11 fl h 1 1, 121 EE ift " V i %'0 1 + 74 3 + I e I e.7-7 +4AAI * 4 t- mmâ€¢zir*- - --jl PLUMBINGEDCIURECHANGESEADDnIONS *12 - -7 2 327/eli 74-' -9 ' 1. NEW DOUBLE SINK. T. PLACE 1.-h . , 1 2-*lit#I i F . L --19- , / e EXImING KITCHEN SINK. p li B 18 rEMoop.ut?D 1 r S la -- 11 41 11 .4 j . Â· , i...1 12, JL 1 3. ADDmON OF TOILET & SINkÂ¢,#4 NEW , 1- â€¢-r, p.*i. DH 2. ADDmON OF BAR SINKINSUNNOOM T14* 04,lm. ~ 1--K__~ 7 ..1 1 Â» -A POWDERRM. I lA 0 9 4. RELOCATE EX]SIING WASHER/DRYER *0' I I /1 11 14,0121 4 - \ !46/1 - Â· TO EXIS11NG BASEMENT TF - 9 91, Y A 14% A - / 4 - 'Â§ d 0- ME 1 1 RADONÂ·MrnGATION NOTES .Rt letib i EARQM..MmQ81121.2.EQI,mbi201 1-.. iffwiÂ» 1. SUB-SURFACE PREPARATION FOR NEW L.-2171 1 I i BSEMENTaCRAWLSPACESHAILBEAS . I + 4& 1 1 -- 1 Amu 9103.3. 4 AF1033.2 AND -' DESCRIBED IN THE â€¢2003 IRC' SECI'IONS r I - 1 4 -r,0.04\Up*is-a 1- 499 E-33=/j T *lot,t,f' 4 4-4'~ 1 +127,0 ' SHOWN ON SHEET A-4 'BUILDING .Mn /1 i .,Â·Â·O*494Lâ€¢ Â«iL-+7Â«.tr-lt SECTIONS'. 08 .4. 9*BE, . - i 2. CRAWL. SPACE TO HAVE VENTILATION *t< 4 1, . AS DESCRIBED IN THE '2003 IRC' 6 0-1 -1 7 t * 0\\1>.Â»* --ji- 1 4,d, 79% '. 4,0 101\ f * 1--, : . SECT/N AF103.5.1 AND SHOWN ON 3. RADON VENT PIPING SHALL BE 1 , 4- INSTALLED AS PER THE â€¢2003 IRC SECMON AF 103.6, AF103.61 & AF103.61 FACE OF 1980'S ADDI'nON. 1/ U 8 -- 89%71'Ab 3. 6,0610, 11''d 1-- 1 #MiNE attertur, Del VENT PIPE TO BE LOCATED ON EAST -4â€ž2.:b'linrt i w i,F~OW 4 1-1-W. 99Â·0/1- 546EMENT 't,t.0,47 trp- 91''o# NEW WAU, MOUKE BE.94 ~ <EXISTINGÂ·'[2Â·EFLAOE W'TW El) Pti,HU.14& 4 6Â«11Â« (UNÂ»Â»50 Ue',tr'pl.XTup-**91 MMINDokÂ¢.CritÂ£ IN *44ll AS ped:03 tr,~00\'CHUG:kILAT" Ok.t':.14 ~ r I * o ' t N D AT 1 O N FL,AN 11 1 ;+1 .-Â· sew e -7 er,:rE-) P Lo of 9 LA 8 I i :41 9 0 r *- '' k -all. , 1 P.Elv,~OVE> 2.30:rt tÂ·Â·16, ecrepiOR F)~eNUH U.#1 * Â»M,96M k 1 r'2,445 WAU' a. HE,91 511Hpbe'l ADD,TION 1 FEMOVE EXert)46Â· ,-1 < NEW * , Ell:ir!&16 M]M, A~ 62**Aa â‚¬ \61\HDMA GNET, yllb !14 4 HEW ~ < DA].6:r\146 -,5$0'~ WOOD TllÂ·4164 W'644TY,1.EU. UD CO PEDIL -1019\9 :10Â¢SREF Â£3 4,i !4594 \N/*TA'=p !1432Â»846Â· 1 A.. . 2 ' 97 : 4441&~ 029--l~~ 't'.e" l t 11 1Â» - C,FE;htive V 7 19,420641Nt - ~CT'/Â«re 91/1:'?eu.26 f : 31 / 10 E-MT 1 , 1 ON out WAI.,4 1'. Al 2 M h. 1 1 + -1 -6 0./PI>J *06) -+ 7 -Â·-Del ovelÂ· O 11_ CONSTRUCTION NOTES @4#4 - CONTRACTOR TO FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING 4~z 1 - Â·f.Â·lk)Â°Pt.4' vif 5 121- r - 1.-7 - 3.1 513 fo V..\ n"-.. 73 23%%***01 r ..3 , i irj Â·1'+3--r-~~~~ele , CONSTRUCHON. ALL CONDmONS SHOWN ARE i CONDITIONS & DIMENSIONS PRIOR TO - -\ f pl 2, 5 V. ' h 4 + 4 Â£031 -41 Â· SEBING knACING AS REQUIRED. f B 1 1 ~ 701141i'*644 ' ASSUMED AND ARE TO BE FIELD VERIFIED. 2 2 e e< 9 i M ~ w CONâ„¢ACTOR TO PROVIDE ALL. TEMPOARY >t 4 1 , If ~'\X - 1 ANâ‚¬Â» 96 r THESE DRAWINGS BIDICATE WHE FINAL , i P i- -7Â« ----==1.-= CONDmON OF THE SIRUCTURE THE i 4 i . P CONTRACrOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR A 01*-r T ' 1 -T-1-7Jrr. 1 W 22*le> rT Â£ 6 1 11 3 2%1 1Â£1091,4,1 1 957 E 01'EMPORARY SHORING & BRACING DURING NOTES FOR ADDmONAL ENFORMATION. 45> S 3-0-+ -2 - 1\ I '11/ . = ...2 -,-râ„¢7~ cr=-- 2 0 0 V l , i.r' 1 - 4 1 Â·I -r Â©41 leÂ·Â· 1 1 i, 1 GABLE ROOFS ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED TO 1*1/1 p~15Â» *CD p. 'Â·*e*46 .X Y 0 -4 , 1 1 - MOVING AND CONSTRUCTION. SEE GENERAL ' I.' .0/ 1 2 P -6 U.3 . ./ I. NEW SHED ROOFS TO REPLACE THE EXISTING ..1 / !â‚¬.' 6 14.K- *râ‚¬f/- -clfr---70*. _ 4 C, 'e. .., : < 4j '1% 1 11 '1~ 11 1.2 REPLICATE THE ORIGINAL, HISTORIC DORMER 9 Â£ - ASSUMED TO Al,READY EXIST FOR DORMERS ' + T,A Rvv.!F (146,0 4 1 ' FRAMING & LOAD PATH. EXISIING FRAMWGIS sheet desc,iption â‚¬!Â¢F' f ..1-+,1% LEÂ·04â‚¬t~ 3 9, 1 1 Te, Fly O20~FC) 1 (342 11:atud - (29,110 11. . Vi#- 7-Â· t.'-+r --- 1-1 -1- -04 1 , 1 FOF BAF.-EÂ» 21 < i fil + 10:32'6" YIF 1 -Me'Â·0" AND SHALL BE Â· FIELD VERIFIED DURING 421 i- 1 4 ~-6~.NWD FERtÂ¢EA * j floop- + DEMOUTION. SOME REVISIONS MAY BE REQUIRED BASED ON DISCOVERED EXISTING FRAM1 Al& 1 09.d \ 4 1 CONDmONS. FIELD VERIFY & COORDINATE Wrni ARCHrrEC & ENGINEER PRIOR TO / 11 1 1 Â·>1442/ --~' 'AA, -9 L " 9/ ' L_ 4.9 ourp~e,9.5 4 WL 1 : 1 COEI-RUCnoN. FLANe 41* 0- te'*' 1.Â·Â·.P . F ... ' u . Â·Â·. 4 4%, -:..... Â·Â·Â· 1 -OSI dlawn Â· F f - \ Eli 0 . 1 1 t 9Wjj 1 ' - 0, hojoi 1 1 ~ 4. 4 0. 5061 4 jabl,9 job no An,1-7 11 ., 1 , sheet A.2 I 110 0 p F R A h''t { 1-~ 52 1~ C ''- + 1 I p La g [2- ~k it A H IN 6 Il l :0 + ~ 0252 Flarn yÂ·BANÂ·01. itÂ·.19 a Elie-46) 1 ' ' ' seal 1 STRUCTURAL ENGINEER KAUP ENGINEERING INC. 1129 Grand Avenue i Glenwood Springs. CO 81601 architecture - HHL 01. DNIE[HGOINERI 19 SNOI.I.ICICIV OaÂ¥HOUDOâ€¢ AINROO (IVH '100 â€¢ 1VSVE[ â€¢ a'ILAE[/N DISE[G C-HOLD#VHD NINdOH IS .. lili lilli- 111 lilli'11111 lilli 01/12/2007 10:0ll 533287 Page: 1 of 4 JANI_E K LOS 3 -DILL PITKI .Jur TY C- R 21.00 D 0.00 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT, DEMOLITION AND VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, LOT 1 OF 134 AND 134 M WEST HOPKINS HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, BLOCK 59, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 36, SERIES OF 2006 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-19-001. WHEREAS, the applicant, Michelle Snyder, represented by George Winne of George Winne Architects, has requested Minor Development, Demolition, and Variance for the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 M West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. 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, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, - approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC reviews the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, in order to authorize a demolition, according to Section 26.415.080, Demolition of designated historic properties, it must be 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 .. 111111111-1111111111111111111-lili-1 01/12/2007 10:0ll 533287 Page: 2 of 4 JAN.CE K VOS C.UD.LL PITKIi. COLN-Y CO R 21.00 0 0.00 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; and WHEREAS, for approval of an FAR Bonus, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code: that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; ang! b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained; and WHEREAS, for approval of variances, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110. B of the Municipal Code, that the setback variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b, Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report dated December 13th, 2006, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines have been met, and the criteria for a variance demonstrated; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on December 13, 2006, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application for Minor Development and a variance met the 'City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and variance review criteria, and approved the application by a vote of 4 to 0. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby recommends approval of the application for Minor Development, Demolition and Variances for the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 M West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. The option with all vertical siding on the addition is approved. fj 0- 0 1111111 lilli 11111111{ 1111111 lil i-1111111 lilli lill lili 533287 Page: 3 of 4 01/12/2007 10:011 JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 0 0.00 2. The following setback variances re approved: east side yard setback vaMance of 3 feet for the new addition, a west side yard setback variance of 1 foot for the existing house, and a combined side yard setback vaMance of 5 feet for the existing house. 3. The owner will record an amendment to the Historic Landmark Lot Split plat and agreement for 134 West Hopkins Avenue to read that Lot 1 = 1,760 square feet and Lot 2 = 1,704 square feet. 4. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor. 5. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board. 6. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 7. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 8. The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. 9. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested properly right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 134 West Hopkins Avenue. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required 0 0 under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 13th day of December 2006. Appr~pved--as.~ Form: DaVid Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Jeffrey Aelf*ty, Chair ATTEST: 1 1 ./. 4 3/ Rathy StriÂ¢kland, Chief Deputy Clerk ~~~~~~~~ ~~' 533287 JANICE K VOS CAUDILL PZTKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 0 0.00 ~ Page: 4 of 4 I 01/12/2007 10:011 .. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Sara Adams, Preservation Planner RE: 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Minor Review, Variances, Demolition, and FAR Bonus- Public Hearing DATE: December 13,2006 SUMMARY: The property, located on the corner of Hopkins Avenue and South First Street, is a one and a half story miner's cottage built in the 1880s that was subject to a Historic Landmark Lot Split in 2003 (Ordinance # 64). In the 1980s the historic home was rehabilitated and an addition was added to the rear. The applicant proposes to demolish and replace a 60 square foot attached rear storage shed and extend the rear addition 138 square feet. Setback variances and an FAR bonus are needed to build the 138 square foot addition. HPC continued the application on August 300 to confirm the existing FAR on the property with the Zoning Officer, and to redesign the addition in a more contemporary fashion. Because the project depends on receiving the FAR bonus and the house is in good condition, HPC suggested the applicant redo the 1980s rear addition to reflect the current Design Guidelines and fulfill the required rehabilitation component. HPC voted to continue the application a second time on October 11 th to allow time for a restudy of the form, scale, and fenestration of the proposed addition. HPC discussed restoring the dormer on the front fagade to the original shed roof as part of the rehabilitation criteria required to earn the FAR bonus. Todd Grange, the City Zoning Officer, confirmed that 1,760 square feet currently exist on the property including a portion of the 224 square foot FAR bonus awarded during the lot split to bring both properties into compliance. He supports the staff conclusion that 138 square feet of the FAR bonus is available on 134 West Hopkins. An FAR bonus must be granted for the proposed addition to be built. The 60 square foot storage shed is exempt from the FAR calculation and can be built without the Bonus. Recommendation:Staff recommends that HPC approve the application with conditions. APPLICANT: Michelle Snyder, represented by George Winne of George Winne Architecture. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-19-001. 1 .. ADDRESS: 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 M West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R6. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Staff Response: Addition: The applicant returned to the original proposal of a shed roof form off the rear of the 1989 addition. The height and width have been reduced and no longer interrupt reading the rear gable. Overall, staff finds that the shed form is an appropriate addition at the rear of the historic structure. The Design Guidelines recommend using materials and fenestration to differentiate between new and old construction, as stated in the Guidelines below. The applicant proposes two options to HPC: 1.) vertical siding and 2.) a wainscoting element to distinguish new from old. Staff is in favor of the first option, which utilizes vertical wood siding for the 1989 addition along the west elevation and the proposed rear construction. Staff is in favor of a shift from the horizontal siding on the historic portion of the residence, but finds that the material change should wrap around to encompass the entire non-historic addition including the east elevation as was previously mentioned by HPC. 2 .. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. u An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. u An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. u An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. Il An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. Il A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. Staff finds that the fenestration proposed for the west elevation of the addition is not in character with the historic building-the size and position of adjoining three windows together do not reference the historic resource. Staff recommends double hung windows and/or changing the size of the windows to create a more cohesive west fagade and be visually compatible, as stated in Guideline 10.4 above. The applicant proposes to remove half of a double easement window located on the west elevation of the 1980s addition. Staff is in support of this alteration, and recommends that the replacement window be double hung. The removal of an aspen tree is required for the new addition, which must receive approval by the Parks Department. Storage Shed: Staff finds that the storage shed, which does not rely on an FAR bonus, fulfills the criteria. The applicant lowered the roof height from about 14' to about 10.5' and changed the form from a shed to a flat roof. Staff finds that the flat roof creates a minimal visual impact and is appropriate. DEMOLITION The applicant proposes to demolish an existing detached structure located along the alley and South First Street. 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 3 .. 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. Staff Response: The applicant proposes to demolish a 60 square foot rear attached storage shed that was recently built. Staff is in support of demolition and finds that all of the criteria for approval to demolish, with the exception of a and b above regarding safety and structural soundness, and Guideline 10.2 are met. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. FAR BONUS The following standards apply to an FAR bonus, per Section 26.415.110.E: 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. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; and b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. 4 .. 3. The decision to grant a Floor Area Bonus for Major Development projects will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Section 26.415.070(D). No development application that includes a request for a Floor Area Bonus may be submitted until after the applicant has met with the HPC in a work session to discuss how the proposal might meet the bonus considerations. Staff Response: HPC grants an FAR bonus based on the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. The application demonstrates compliance with many of the Design Guidelines, but is struggling with a strong rehabilitation aspect. Rehabilitation: The historic home is in excellent condition and does not necessitate a high level of rehabilitation measures at this time. The applicant is proposing to restore the gable dormer on the front fagade to the original shed dormer, as recommended by HPC and Staff. An elevation of the residence prior to the 1 980s addition has been located and indicates that the dormer on the historic portion of the west elevation was shed roof (see Exhibit B). Staff finds that all of the dormers should be changed to a shed roof form to be visually consistent, which will also alleviate some of the mass and visual complexities of the non-historic addition. HPC suggested redesigning the 1980s rear addition to represent contemporary design, which would bring it into compliance with the Design Guidelines and could possibly fulfill the rehabilitation requirement and warrant granting an FAR bonus. The applicant proposes vertical siding for the 1 980s addition along the west elevation (facing South First Street). Staff finds that changing the material creates a distinction between new and old, but the design does not address the mass and scale of the 1980s addition, which would positively qualify as a rehabilitation measure to receive the Bonus. Staff finds the dormer restoration adequate for the FAR Bonus on the condition that the dormers are all changed to a shed roof, and the fenestration on the west elevation of the proposed new addition be altered to a style and size compatible with the historic resource. SETBACK VARIANCES The applicant is requesting the following setback variances: East side yard setback variance of 3 feet for the new addition, a west side yard setback variance of 1 foot for the existing house, and a combined side yard setback variance of 5 feet for the existing house. The criteria for granting setback variances, per Section 26.415.110.B of the Municipal Code are as follows: In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: 5 .. a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Response: The historic home requires setback variances that were not granted in the past: the west side yard and combined side yard setback variances will bring the existing conditions into compliance. Staff finds that the requested setback variances for the historic home and the new construction are appropriate to the site. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: â€¢ approve the application, â€¢ approve the application with conditions, â€¢ disapprove the application, or â€¢ continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC approve the request for Minor Development, Demolition and Variances for the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 M West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1. The option with all vertical siding on the addition is approved. 2. The windows on the west elevation must be revised and reviewed by staff and monitor. 3. The vertical siding will be added to the non-historic addition on the east elevation. 4. All dormers will be changed to a shed roof to match the photograph in Exhibit B. 5. The following setback variances re approved: east side yard setback variance of 3 feet for the new addition, a west side yard setback variance of 1 foot for the existing house, and a combined side yard setback variance of 5 feet for the existing house. 6. The owner will record an amendment to the Historic Landmark Lot Split plat and agreement for 134 West Hopkins Avenue to read that Lot 1 = 1,760 square feet and Lot 2 = 1,704 square feet. 7. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor. ' 8. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board. 9. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 6 .. 10. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 11.The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. 12. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 134 West Hopkins Avenue. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. Exhibits: A. Relevant Design Guidelines. 7 .. B. Drawings from the 1980s showing shed dormer on the historic resource. C. Minutes from August 300 and October 11th HPC Meeting. D. Application. Exhibit A- Relevant Design Guidelines 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. o A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. u An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. u An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. u An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. u An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. u A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. u An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. u Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. o Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. zi Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similarto those of the historic building. Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. u For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. u The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. 8 0 0 .. o If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. u Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or structure. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. u Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. u Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. 3 Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 9 000 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Sara Adams, Preservation Planner RE: 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Minor Review, Variances, Demolition, and FAR Bonus- Public Hearing DATE: October 11, 2006 SUMMARY: The property, located on the corner of Hopkins Avenue and South First Street, is a one and a half story miner's cottage built in the 1880s that was subject to a Historic Landmark Lot Split in 2003 (Ordinance # 64). In the 1980s the historic home was rehabilitated and an addition was added to the rear. The applicant proposes to demolish and replace a 60 square foot attached rear storage shed and extend the rear addition 138 square feet. Setback variances and an FAR bonus are needed to build the 138 square foot addition. HPC continued the application on August 30th to confirm the existing FAR on the property with the Zoning Officer, and to redesign the addition in a more contemporary fashion. Because the project depends on receiving the FAR bonus and the house is in good condition, HPC suggested the applicant redo the 1 980s rear addition to reflect the current Design Guidelines and fulfill the required rehabilitation component. Todd Grange, the City Zoning Officer, confirmed that 1,760 square feet currently exist on the property. He supports the staff recommendation that 138 square feet of the FAR bonus is available on 134 West Hopkins. There is no available FAR, as dictated bv zoning, existing on the property at this time. In other words, an FAR bonus must be granted for the proposed addition to be built. The 60 square foot storage shed is exempt from the FAR calculation and can be built without the Bonus. Recommendation Staff finds that the project does not sufficiently meet the criteria for an FAR bonus based on a lack of rehabilitation measures. Without the FAR bonus, the property does not have enough FAR to build the proposed addition; therefore Staff recommends denial. We do support setback variances that have been identified as necessary for the existing construction, and recommend approval of the storage shed, which does not count toward FAR. APPLICANT: Michelle Snyder, represented by George Winne of George Winne Architecture. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-19-001 ADDRESS: 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 14 West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R6. 1 .. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Staff Response: Addition: The proposed addition is located at the rear of the building attached to a non-historic addition. The height and scale of the addition are subordinate to the historic residence; however, the roof form needs to be restudied. Staff finds that the gablet (small ornamental gable) on the rear elevation of the proposed sunroom is inconsistent with the historic resource and does not comply with Design Guideline 10.9 below: 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. â€¢ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. â€¢ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. â€¢ If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. â€¢ Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or structure. During the August 30th meeting, HPC suggested a restudy of the addition to comply with Guideline 10.4. Staff finds that the proposed fenestration distinguishes the addition from the historic residence and is in compliance. The vertical board and batten proposed for the new construction complies with 10.11. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. â€¢ An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. â€¢ A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. â€¢ The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 2 .. Staff is in support of the metal roof material proposed for the rear addition as long as it is a matte or has a patina finish, as per Guideline 7.10 7.10 New or replacement roof materials should convey a scale, color and texture similar to those used traditionally. â€¢ Replacement materials should be similar to those used historically on comparably styled buildings. â€¢ If a substitute is used, such as composition shingle, the roof material should be earth tone and have a matte, non-reflective finish. â€¢ Flashing should be in scale with the roof material. â€¢ If copper flashing is to be used, it should be treated to establish a matte, non-reflective finish. The applicant proposes to remove half of a double window located on the west elevation of the non-historic addition. Staff is in support of this alteration. The removal of an aspen tree is required for the new addition, which must receive approval by the Parks Department. Storage Shed: Staff finds that the storage shed, which does not rely on an FAR bonus, fulfills the criteria. The shed roof and proposed vertical board and batten are consistent with the Guidelines. The proposed height of the storage shed is about 14', which could be lowered to minimize the non- historic mass at the rear of the historic home, as viewed from South First Street. DEMOLITION The applicant proposes to demolish an existing detached structure located along the alley and South First Street. 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. Staff Response: The applicant proposes to demolish a 60 square foot rear attached storage shed that was built in the 1980s. Staff is in support of demolition and finds that all of the criteria for approval to demolish, with the exception of a and b above regarding safety and structural soundness, and Guideline 10.2 is met. UJ .. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. FAR BONUS The following standards apply to an FAR bonus, per Section 26.415.110. E: 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. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; and b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. 3. The decision to grant a Floor Area Bonus for Major Development projects will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Section 26.415.070(D). No development application that includes a request for a Floor Area Bonus may be submitted until after the applicant has met with the HPC in a work session to discuss how the proposal might meet the bonus considerations. Staff Response: HPC grants an FAR bonus based on the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. The proposed addition does not comply with all of the Design Guidelines (criteria a), but it does maintain the historic building as the key element of the property (criteria b). Staff finds that, with alterations to the roof form, the project could comply with some of the design criteria listed above. Rehabilitation: The historic home is in excellent condition and does not necessitate a high level of rehabilitation measures at this time. One element that could be restored is the dormer on the primary fagade that, according to a historic photograph, had a shed roof rather than a gable; however, this is not proposed with the application. HPC suggested redesigning the 1980s rear addition to represent contemporary design, which would bring it into compliance with the Design Guidelines and could possibly fulfill the rehabilitation requirement and warrant granting an FAR bonus. The applicant proposes vertical board and batten for the 1980s addition along the west elevation (facing South First Street). Staff finds that changing the material creates a distinction between new and old, but the design 4 .. does not address the mass and scale of the 1980s addition, which would positively qualify as a rehabilitation measure to receive the Bonus. Staff recognizes that this case is difficult regarding a rehabilitation component, but in terms of the criteria, the proposal does not exhibit full compliance with the Guidelines and lacks a strong rehabilitation aspect. Therefore, staff recommends that HPC not grant the FAR bonus. SETBACK VARIANCES The applicant is requesting the following setback variances: East side yard setback variance of 3 feet for the new addition, a west side yard setback variance of 1 foot for the existing house, and a combined side yard setback variance of 5 feet for the existing house. The criteria for granting setback variances, per Section 26.415.110.B of the Municipal Code are as follows: In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Response: The historic home requires setback variances that were not granted in the past: the west side yard and combined side yard setback variances will bring the existing conditions into compliance. Staff finds that the requested setback variances for the historic home are acceptable, and should the addition and FAR bonus be approved, staff finds that the variance requested for the new construction is appropriate to the site. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: â€¢ approve the application, â€¢ approve the application with conditions, â€¢ disapprove the application, or â€¢ continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC deny the request for an FAR bonus for the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 M West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado because it does not sufficiently meet the criteria; therefore, the proposed addition lacks the FAR to be built. Staff recommends that HPC approve the storage shed and grant the required setback variances to bring the historic home into compliance. Exhibits: A. Relevant Design Guidelines B. Minutes from August 30,2006 HPC Meeting 5 .. C. C. Application Exhibit A- Relevant Design Guidelines 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. a A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. u An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. a An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. u An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. 1 An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. u A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. u An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. 1 Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. a Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. u Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similarto those of the historic building. Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. u For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. u The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. u If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. u Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or structure. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. u They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. 2 Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. u Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. 6 UC .. u On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. 1 Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged. These include geodesic domes and A-frames. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. a Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged. 3 Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 7 . e . il E /44- I .61%12,-â€ž I - //011Â» 1 - HE>+1 14*to ~ ~411*400\N - iN E*j#76 64;45Â· END - I 'r F. 80 1 1 // 44:.~2 Li 1 - 5 -P-NON-9 -Ir - -7 1 0- HEW 98*noAL #*b r. Â· 11 - clot'*Le, 1,0 F=EfLADE - *P -Ld-i--!9!5---' ~ r *kieriblÂ·9 HOR,1~2., 9 1Â¤61.6 11 1 r , p.: 11 .. 6 1 . NEW stÂ»AD1%6 *EAM '2Wt, 1 - .8-UAL *F Ar ADÂ®n ON -1 idaÂ¢__ i- 011 2217.14*1 - VERIC I 1 L .. - -INEWL.-Â»ilbt2ON -U/Actio-f- C - - . 1. 11 1-- 64-Â¥2-4io WÂ» 4 - - -14-03) 1,/elt 0/0 B I TOLD -Ar--AP@-m-OM --WooD FRAME .0.---*-- -41 POOR UNIT ser IM - i ~ 1 -1 7 - ~ 14EW -VER:OCAL j33--re-~ eroa*E~ 0 ~1 4 2-1-.--1.-,9Â«-0 Â»41217 4 ' **AfTENL-. -1- eiviwe- Ar P<-opiT-1014 1( 4- - 1. - .. *00 (T,014 ] -NOCIN-- --ELEVAT1--0-N -- 1-- ~ - e 1% 0- 6 524 - i O%0 .. 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT PHOTOGRAPHS 3 PAGES EXTERIOR FINISHES ROOF: Asphalt shingles to match existing- Charcoal gray FASCIA: layered wood to match existing - White SOFFIT: Plywood to match existing - Canary Yellow WALLS: bevel wood siding to match existing - Canary Yellow WINDOW/DOOR TRIM: 1" flat trim to match existing - White DOORS & WINDOWS: Clad wood units to match existing - Green + 2 i 6. - /4.1 4 & )yF- 4 lk 0* I - .-. ' uar,< .A . I -1. =2. 47336Â« I - 114 . 444 ,:Â· . 1, , + ~ 'j 14 7.- -1 ' V.4 -- - L ~< -. 2, ../. ms 0. stia!; Q .., 4%3 5/4/2005~ ,. r b 7 T' I p - .4.. 4 2. f Â»A. - W: ...I . 3..'f ~ 2 Â· UÂ· - - .5 4- 5.-* Â¥ ' â€¢'4 . 7.:RE.Ilk./.: --f. 2. -7 --9~-2. -Il . 2, i - 4 7. 7 3-8~9 -4-1~Â·-Â·f--7,-*,4,- 1,0/ â€¢I -- -: I 2 4.--4 Â¥:. Li~*...jir< -- i Z-, \ . ...1- *.:. I ./ .- 1.- 1.6- -4-S Â¢ imililizillimflmit i . 1 ij. 94:..9 fÂ¢ '47 - *,4 414?JO :~~92 4 J~~ 2111 f . 49 0 O.El?*7, : .2, 7,4 'A i 1 ./ p:,,t~kille./~.Al-"2 lY A 1 B 41 f 6.20 .53 2- I --, , '. 1 *12 8 K',2..44,7,46 <.i.,34~ 40 .- 0 1 231 - / Pt V. 2,3 ...,1~92)< 4 2"Â£44<EÂ·E,Gl' d'~ w ' , i .. Fill ' 1 ' 110.41'aÂ¢ 4.94...3,437,7 .Â» 0 7 4 77: /4.. 1 :.9 1 R, 4 .,1 ~411'e E. , .... ... '4~L 9. - I L , :. r v q A ' .. . 1 - ./re.- 1. I Â·Â· :al .7.4 r .aft,kÂ· 1'.1,4 '404â‚¬02 .... Vm///4.9."~.1779.-I.* 48 0 - : -'/. ~00~~/4 :..7...... ..... 1. 44'...lu; rpx:A 19. . .dismb, -I - 4* <4 44â€¢i- 4 k 4 1 i /7 9 . .It Â¢'ll#. . I. -I. t .4 y - 1, *1 .. :111; 7 - . ... :bk. '4Â¥ . 4. 0 I 1 t , -<--1 ./ 1 --fli i 3 A. I y .444: 4 - , le . I ./ t. I ./: , \X :;5.9 - 1- N 4 4 4 . -32. - A .1 2 , -1 0-11 -t-3-9 7 W 9 'h . ....1 A\\\\\I , Elli 1 I li\\ill .. 111 MEMORANDUM ' TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Sara Adams, Preservation Planner RE: 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Minor Review, Variances, Demolition, and FAR Bonus- Public Hearing DATE: August 24,2006 SUMMARY: The property, located on the corner of Hopkins Avenue and South First Street, is a one and a half story miner's cottage built in the 1880s that was subject to a Historic Landmark Lot Split in 2003 (Ordinance # 64). In the 1980s the historic home was rehabilitated and an addition was added to the rear, The applicant proposes to demolish and replace a 60 square foot attached rear storage shed and extend the addition. Setback variances and an FAR bonus are needed to build the proiect. There is no available FAR, as dictated by zoning, existing on the property at this time. In other words, an FAR bonus must be granted for the proposed addition to be built. HPC held a worksession with the applicant on June 28,2006 to discuss the project and the request for an FAR bonus. The applicant responded to HPC comments and reduced the height of the addition and changed the roof form from a gable to a shed. Recommendation Staff finds that the project meets the design guidelines, but does not sufficiently meet the criteria for an FAR bonus based on a lack of rehabilitation measures. Without the FAR bonus, the property does not have enough FAR to build the proposed design; therefore Staff recommends denial. We do support setback variances that have been identified as necessary for the existing construction. APPLICANT: Michelle Snyder, represented by George Winne of George Winne Architecture. PARCEL ID: 2735-124-19-001. ADDRESS: 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 1/2 West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. ZONING: R6. MINOR DEVELOPMENT The procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with 1 .. conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a Certificate of Appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a Development Order. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Staff Response: The proposed addition is located at the rear of the building attached to a non-historic addition. Staff finds that the scale, mass and proportion of the proposed addition are sensitive to the historic home and are in compliance with the following Design Guidelines: 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. â€¢ An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. â€¢ Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. â€¢ Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. â€¢ Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. Staff finds that the proposed shed roof and skylights are appropriate elements for the rear addition and fulfill the following Design Guidelines: 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. â€¢ Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. â€¢ Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs, 7.3 Minimize the visual impact of skylights and other rooftop devices â€¢ Flat skylights that are flush with the roof place may be considered only in an obscure location on a historic resource. Located a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is not allowed. â€¢ A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be positioned below the ridgeline. The proposed materials and fenestration are consistent with the historic resource and non-historic addition, as recommended in Guideline 10.11 below. Guideline 10.4 recommends a distinction between old and new through materials. Staff finds that the glass doors on the rear elevation fulfill the Guidelines; however the fenestration on the east elevation facing the street replicate the size of the windows on the historic resource. Staff is in support of the material choice and finds that it will create coherence with extant construction, and recommends a restudy of the windows on the west elevation to visually represent contemporary design. 2 .. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. ci An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. o A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. u The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials. The applicant proposes to remove half of a double window located on the west elevation of the non-historic addition. Staff is in support of this alteration. The removal of an aspen tree is required for the new addition, which must receive approval by the Parks Department. DEMOLITION The applicant proposes to demolish an existing detached structure located along the alley and South First Street. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a. The properly 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, Staff Response: The applicant proposes to demolish a 60 square foot rear attached storage shed that was built in the 1980s. Staff is in support of demolition and finds that all of the criteria for approval to demolish, with the exception of a and b above regarding safety and structural soundness, and the Design Guidelines are met. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 3 .. FAR BONUS The following standards apply to an FAR bonus, per Section 26.415.110.E: 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. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets All applicable design guidelines; and b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained. 2. Granting of additional allowable floor area is not a matter of right but is contingent upon the sole discretion of the HPC and the Commission's assessments of the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Projects that demonstrate multiple elements described above will have a greater likelihood of being awarded additional floor area. 3. The decision to grant a Floor Area Bonus for Major Development projects will occur as part of the approval of a Conceptual Development Plan, pursuant to Section 26.415.070(D). No development application that includes a request for a Floor Area Bonus may be submitted until after the applicant has met with the HPC in a work session to discuss how the proposal might meet the bonus considerations. Staff Response: In 2003, HPC granted 336 square feet of the 500 square foot FAR bonus to the fathering parcel as part the Historic Landmark Lot Split to bring the two existing properties into compliance, leaving a remainder of 164 square feet. The existing built FAR on Lot 1, the subject lot 134 West Hopkins, was inaccurately recorded, which resulted in the allocation of approximately 112 square feet of extra FAR. Staff sent a letter, attached as Exhibit B, to the applicant outlining two options regarding how much of the FAR bonus is available to Lot 1. The applicant will confirm the selected option by the HPC meeting on August 24'h In either option, an FAR bonus is required to build the proposed design. HPC grants an FAR bonus based on the merits of the proposed project and its ability to demonstrate exemplary historic preservation practices. Staff finds that criteria for the FAR bonus regarding new design (a, b, and d) are met; however, there is no rehabilitation aspect to the proposed project. The historic home is in excellent condition and does not necessitate rehabilitation measures at this time. The only aspect that could be restored at this point is the dormer on the primary fagade that according to a historic photograph, had a shed roof rather than a gable. Even if this alteration was proposed, staff finds that it does not warrant granting an FAR bonus. 4 .. SETBACK VARIANCES The applicant is requesting the following setback variances: East side yard setback variance of 3 feet for the new addition, a west side yard setback variance of 1 foot for the existing house, and a combined side yard setback variance of 5 feet for the existing house. The criteria for granting setback variances, per Section 26.415.110.B of the Municipal Code are as follows In granting a variance, the HPC must make a finding that such a variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. Staff Response: The historic home requires setback variances that were not granted in the past: the west side yard and combined side yard setback variances will bring the existing conditions into compliance. Staff finds that the requested setback variances for the historic home are acceptable, and should the addition and FAR bonus be approved, staff finds that the variance requested for the new construction is appropriate to the site. DECISION MAKING OPTIONS: The HPC may: â€¢ approve the application, â€¢ approve the application with conditions, â€¢ disapprove the application, or â€¢ continue the application to a date certain to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC deny the request for an FAR bonus for the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 7 West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado because it does not sufficiently meet the criteria; therefore, the proposed addition lacks the FAR to be built. Staff recommends that HPC grant the required setback variances to bring the historic home into compliance. Exhibits: A. Relevant Design Guidelines B. Letter to Applicant C, Application 5 .. Exhibit A- Relevant Design Guidelines 7.3 Minimize the visual impact of skylights and other rooftop devices m Flat skylights that are flush with the roof place may be considered only in an obscure location on a historic resource. Located a skylight or a solar panel on a front roof plane is not allowed. 0 A skylight or solar panel should not interrupt the plane of a historic roof. It should be positioned below the ridgeline. 10.2 A more recent addition that is not historically significant may be removed. 10.3 Design a new addition such that one's ability to interpret the historic character of the primary building is maintained. A new addition that creates an appearance inconsistent with the historic character of the primary building is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an earlier period than that of the primary building also is inappropriate. An addition that seeks to imply an inaccurate variation of the primary building's historic style should be avoided. u An addition that covers historically significant features is inappropriate. 10.4 Design a new addition to be recognized as a product of its own time. u An addition should be made distinguishable from the historic building, while also remaining visually compatible with these earlier features. u A change in setbacks of the addition from the historic building, a subtle change in material or a differentiation between historic, and more current styles are all techniques that may be considered to help define a change from old to new construction. 10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main building. u An addition that is lower than or similar to the height of the primary building is preferred. 10.8 Place an addition at the rear of a building or set it back from the front to minimize the visual impact on the historic structure and to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. u Locating an addition at the front of a structure is inappropriate. u Additional floor area may also be located under the building in a basement which will not alter the exterior mass of a building. o Set back an addition from primary facades in order to allow the original proportions and character to remain prominent. A minimum setback of 10 feet on primary structures is recommended. 10.9 Roof forms should be similar to those of the historic building. Typically, gable, hip and shed roofs are appropriate. Flat roofs are generally inappropriate for additions on residential structures with sloped roofs. 10.10 Design an addition to a historic structure such that it will not destroy or obscure historically important architectural features. u For example, loss or alteration of architectural details, cornices and eavelines should be avoided. 10.11 On a new addition, use exterior materials that are compatible with the historic materials of the primary building. u The new materials should be either similar or subordinate to the original materials, 10.14 The roof form and slope of a new addition should be in character with the historic building. 21 If the roof of the historic building is symmetrically proportioned, the roof of the addition should be similar. u Eave lines on the addition should be similar to those of the historic building or structure. 11.5 Use building forms that are similar to those of the historic property. 6 C C 00 C .. u They should not overwhelm the original in scale. 11.6 Use roof forms that are similar to those seen traditionally in the block. o Sloping roofs such as gable and hip roofs are appropriate for primary roof forms. u Flat roofs should be used only in areas where it is appropriate to the context. u On a residential structure, eave depths should be similar to those seen traditionally in the context. u Exotic building and roof forms that would detract from the visual continuity of the street are discouraged, These include geodesic domes and A-frames. 11.8 Use building materials that contribute to a traditional sense of human scale. u Materials that appear similar in scale and finish to those used historically on the site are encouraged, u Use of highly reflective materials is discouraged. 7 .. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT, DEMOLITION, FAIt BONUS, AND SETBACK VARIANCES FOR A NEW ADDITION, AND APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR SETBACK VARIANCES FOR THE HISTORIC HOME FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, LOT 1 OF 134 AND 134 % WEST HOPKINS HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, BLOCK 59, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. , SERIES OF 2006 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-19-001. WHEREAS, the applicant, Michelle Snyder, represented by George Winne of George Winne Architecture. has requested Minor development, FAR bonus. demolition, and variances, and FAR bonus for the property located at 134 West I lopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 /2 West Hopkins I listoric Landmark Lot Split, Block 59. City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and WIIEREAS, Section 26.415.070 01 the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected. constructed, enlarged, altered. repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic properly 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 WIIEREAS, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The LIPC reviews the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Idistoric Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WIIEREAS, in order to authorize a demolition according to Section 26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties, it must be 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 nianner, 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 iii 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: and WHEREAS, for approval of setback variances. the HPC must review the application. a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine. per Section 26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code, that the setback variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district: and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district; and WHEREAS, for approval of an FAR bonus. the 11PC must review the application. a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine. per Section 26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code. that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines: and b. The historic building is the key element o f the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form. materials or openings: and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building: and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding: and/or li. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained: and WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report dated August 24th. 2006. performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found that the "City of Aspen Ilistoric Preservation Design Guidelines have been met, however review criteria for an FAR bonus have not been met, and recommends denial of Minor Development, Demolition. FAR Bonus. and variances for the new addition: and found that, concerning variances for the historic home. the review standards and the "City of Aspen 1 listoric Preservation Design Guidelines have been met. and recommends approval of setback variances for the historic home: and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on August 24,2006, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application for Minor Development. Demolition, FAR bonus, and variances for the new addition met the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design .. Guidelines" and review standards, but was inconsistent with the review standards to grant an FAR bonus and denied the application by a vote of ; and found the application for setback variances for the historic home was consistent with the review standards and "City of Aspen Preservation Design Guidelines" and approved the application by a vote of NOW, THEREFORE, BE ]T RESOLVED: That }IPC hereby recommends denial of the application for Minor Development, Demolition. Variances, and an FAR bonus; and HPC hereby recommends approval of the application for setback variances for the existing historic home for the properly located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 14 West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and lownsite of Aspen, Colorado, with the following conditions: 1. The following setback variances are granted for the historic home to bring the existing conditions into compliance: west side yard setback of 1 foot and a combined side yard setback of 5 feet. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 24th day of August 2006. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESE.RVATION COMMISSION Jeffrey Ilalferty, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk .. August 15 2006 EXHIBIT B George Winne GRW Architecture LLC P.O. Box 95 Carbondale, CO 81623 Re: FAR Bonus for 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Minor Development Review, Historic Preservation Application Dear George, The property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue was subject to a lot split adopted by City Council with Ordinance #64 of 2003. The historic structures on each new 3,000 square foot lot were non-conforming (i.e. represented to exceed the allowable FAR for the lot), which prompted the Historic Preservation Commission to grant the necessary 336 square foot FAR bonus to bring . each property into conformance. FAR was granted to the fathering parcel and was allocated to each newly created lot as needed for existing conditions, which resulted in Lot 1 receiving 1,872 i square feet and Lot 2 receiving 1,704 square feet. It turns out that the existing FAR on Lot 1 is 1,760 square feet, which is significantly less than that recorded. The proposed addition to 134 West Hopkins Avenue includes an expectation to use the extra FAR that was incorrectly calculated and requests half of the remaining 164 square feet of FAR bonus eligible for both properties. Two options are available to proceed with the application: Option 1: Community Development Staff finds that the miscalculation of FAR for the lot split should be corrected to remain consistent with HPC's original intent in granting the FAR Bonus. It would be unfair to the property owner of 134 1/2 West Hopkins if the allocated 1,872 square feet remained available to Lot 1 plus half of the remaining FAR bonus. To remedy this situation, staff proposes an amendment to the FAR allocated on the Lot Split Plat to read Lot 1 = 1,760 square feet and Lot 2 = 1,704 square feet. The available FAR Bonus for each property is 138 square feet (half of the Â· remaining 276). This means that the total FAR possible (including the FAR bonus, if granted) on Lot 1 is 1,898 square feet. Please refer to the enclosed chart for clarification. Option 2: A letter from the property owner of 134 M West Hopkins Avenue affirming the use of 82 square feet of the FAR bonus to be added to the 1,872 square feet that was awarded based on a miscalculation. The application submitted to the HPC proposes 1,954 square feet of FAR on Lot 1, which would need to be reduced by approximately 56 square feet (which factors in the bonus) if Option 1 was selected. Please contact me with any questions or to set up a meeting to discuss the application, 970.429.2778 or saraa@ci.aspen.co.us. Sincerely, Sara Preservation Planner .. 134 West Hopkins (lot 1) 1341/2 West Hopkins (lot 2) Available FAR for 6,000 square foot parcel in R-6 zone 3,240 square feet Allocated FAR + 336 Bonus to bring existing construction 1,872 square feet 1,704 square feet ' into compliance as per Lot Split Ordinance #64,2003 Proposed changes to Lot Split Ordinance to remedy miscalculation of existing FAR on Lot 1: Allocated FAR + 224 Bonus Correct FAR needed for 1,760 square feet 1704 square feet compliance Remaining balance of 500 square foot FAR bonus eligible for each 138 square feet 138 square feet property Total FAR allowed + possible FAR bonus 1,898 square feet 1,842 square feet .. August 15 2006 g r wk,th&#nalt. het George Winne jtor*2 + EdÂ£.hlf. GRW Architecture LLC P.0. Box 95 Carbondale, CO 81623 Re: FAR Bonus for 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Minor Development Review, Historic Preservation Application Dear George, The property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue was subject to a lot split adopted by City Council with Ordinance #64 of 2003. The historic structures on each new 3,000 square foot lot were non-conforming (Le. represented to exceed the allowable FAR for the lot), which prompted the Historic Preservation Commission to grant the necessary 336 square foot FAR bonus to bring each property into conformance. FAR was granted to the fathering parcel and was allocated to each newly created lot as needed for existing conditions, which resulted in Lot 1 receiving 1,872 square feet and Lot 2 receiving 1,704 square feet. It turns out that the existing FAR on Lot 1 is 1,760 square feet, which is significantly less than that recorded. The proposed addition to 134 West Hopkins Avenue includes an expectation to use the extra FAR that was incorrectly calculated and requests half of the remaining 164 square feet of FAR bonus eligible for both properties, Two options are available to proceed with the application: Option 1: Community Development Staff finds that the miscalculation of FAR for the lot split should be corrected to remain consistent with HPC's original intent in granting the FAR Bonus. It would be unfair to the property owner of 134 1/2 West Hopkins if the allocated 1,872 square feet remained available to Lot 1 plus half of the remaining FAR bonus. To remedy this situation, staff proposes an amendment to the FAR allocated on the Lot Split Plat to read Lot 1 = 1,760 square feet and Lot 2 = 1,704 square feet. The available FAR Bonus for each property is 138 square feet (half of the remaining 276). This means that the total FAR possible (including the FAR bonus, if granted) on Lot 1 is 1,898 square feet. Please refer to the enclosed chart for clarification. ~Option 2: A letter from the property owner of 134 M West Hopkins Avenue affirming the use of 82 square feet of the FAR bonus to be added to the 1,872 square feet that was awarded based on a miscalculation. The application submitted to the HPC proposes 1,954 square feet of FAR on Lot 1, which would need to be reduced by approximately 56 square feet (which factors in the bonus) if Option 1 was selected. Please contact me with any questions or to set up a meeting to discuss the application, 970,429.2778 or saraa@ci,aspen.co.us. Sincerely, Sara Preservation Planner .. 134 West Hopkins (lot 1) 1341/2 West Hopkins (lot 2) Available FAR for 6,000 square foot parcel in R-6 zone 3,240 square feet Allocated FAR + 336 Bonus to bring existing construction 1,872 square feet 1,704 square feet into compliance as per Lot Split Ordinance #64,2003 Proposed changes to Lot Split Ordinance to remedy miscalculation of existing FAR on Lot 1: Allocated FAR + 224 Bonus Correct FAR needed for 1,760 square feet 1,704 square feet compliance Remaining balance of 500 square foot FAR bonus eligible for each 138 square feet 138 square feet property Total FAR allowed + possible FAR bonus 1,898 square feet 1,842 square feet .. 1- m architecture W APRIL 28,2006 AREA CALCULATIONS FOR 134 WEST HOPKINS AVE. FIRST FLOOR: (includes interior wall thickness) LIVING: 11.25' x 13.16' = 148.0 sf DEN: 11.58' x 13.33' = 154.4 sf DINING: 13.33 x 11.0 = 146.6 sf KITCHEN: 13.33' x 13.16' = 175.4 sf LAUNDRY: 13.67' x 7.83' = 107.0 sf BEDROOM: 13.0' x 10.16' = 132.1 sf BATH: 7.33' x 6.25' = 45.8 sf STAIRWAY: 3.0' x 9.0' = 27.0 sf TOTAL INTERIOR AREA = 936.3 SF EXTERIOR WALL THICKNESS = 145 LF x 0.41" = 60.0 sf TOTAL AREA: FIRST FLOOR = 936.3+60 = 996.3 SF SECOND FLOOR: (includes interior wall thickness) BEDROOM 1 (front): (21.67' x 9.41') + (7.67' x 9.67') = 278.1 sf BEDROOM 2 (middle): 7.0' x 15.75' = 110.3 sf BEDROOM 3 (rear): 11.58' x 11.0' = 127.4 sf BDRM 1 CLOSET: 5.58 x 8.41 = 46.9 sf BDRM 2 CLOSET: 2.25' x 5.33' = 12.0 sf BATH: 8.58' x 8.25' = 70.8 sf HALL: 3.0' x 20.25 = 60.7 sf TOTAL INTERIOR AREA = 706.2 SF EXTERIOR WALL THICKNESS = 140.0 LF x 0.41" = 57.3 sf TOTAL AREA: SECOND FLOOR = 706.2 + 57.3 = 763.5 SF TOTAL FLOOR AREA (combined) = 996.3 + 763.5 = 1759.8 SF p.o. box 95 Â· carbondale - colorado Â· 81623 phone 970.618.4346 fax 775.719.2682 grwarch@comcast. net ...... .. lood . I O .. .. . 0 . 11 \\\\ . * 94Â«14444Â» T Â· , 1\\ 1 I :' a U 1 \ 1 9%, \\\ 1 \ 4 0 4 M . I \ I . I . 10+ h / . 9 4 4Â£ D - 4 CL 1 1 -- 4 . , I_.1 ., L.L ~~~ i . 4 4<t . A g =mil Ir ' r .$-'ll - i.34334 222-#ten,U, -- - 1 lk?$~=~ 4%/:#:p Â·-Mie DA.& 1 I L i imm:ImamIER:m:Mt ..bil. 0 / *- b Â·41=r *41al h I % --U0. t,aÂ·2~â€¢a'kl-%Â¢~ . 1.ill Fli ]0 - . ~ 2.1,0 e -V 44.01 t'%~ -Mi- h*lage_Reive*,0Â·-11[ 1111 -3~Â¥*1*LK#Â»9-. --- 1~ ~ -- 1- ~.~ i -1 24 i i 1 5 A- f - ~6 -- 4 . V .Â» 0 u 1. 100.0 1 1 1 . j L FREN/ous \--- 012(ANAL C,i 111 - PIEW Â£308?Â·0014. tioy,29 ADvt-rioN 14!BIDENCE ...1.. 1 itho er _ Dwill 14 - t*EW Â«OpÂ»* #OOM, 94 9 1-i -90.-0-- Â·4Â¥ --(3**MÂ¥T ) SNYDER RESIDENCE 1 .1 1 i . ..-.-*. *.8~61244. p.--p... p-v-.vr. - . - . " ' ASPEN â€¢ COLORADO 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE i ~-~ --0+~"-0-- ----~- ~-~~- ~~~~- ~-~ ~*ou-rM-â€ž-p,=~*T~ ~-~~~ -*Ty+38;-t~ Â· ~~ ~ :i GRW ARCHITECTURE LLC 1609 DEFIANCE DRIVE CORBONDALE.COLORADO ...... . 1. 1 RECONSTRUCT PORME,8-9 - 12*0089(101- D ell.ME,pb TO ~(MNAL SUED Boate- , -ID Pin(MNAb SUbD pliere -- . I '*-â€¢-1,-10â€¢r .-./.....*-I.....aRRue-Il-Il.ry -.*â€¢'P-......... . .A.,0 . '.â€ž.1............111-1- f'- Â»Â¢W,PAâ€¢*-2*+~18%.a - U /- lit* 44-4 .. 4%9-1 Â·Â· e+,94â‚¬.N. , 2 6 . . A-:=b-c '.1 4-'.4,1-:3:. leÂ»-eÂ¥Â· we:. I â‚¬ 6, .-'Â·A Â»---,h.M-le,Â·.-&Â·wryâ€¢2*~8~â€¢Â·Iâ€¢~~*49~e~Â®Â«xm'll........4*Â»*5.-g~~*nÂ¥*Â»$Â»4 . f ~ 1 , ~ i 9 :1Â·*u~ - '.. 1 1- . , I--I-/. ,-ce:~~~-Â»Na,~*â€¢â„¢*52â€¢*6-hâ€¢Â¥,ae~=~f~*a~4---9-*m~ime,â„¢,040:,r Â·. Â·. /4.t-- -*...,2 )-+*-2-j/ *d-*-*--***N/.**=*.$*.=*..&*4~~Mve<Â¢*r- 11/84(#..44474)~,ami i j i 1 i . ~~RtÂ¢Rk'i>ifil i pt,ni -4 .,. ",5':_C=-.i-~-' 0 ' I.|'1 'Sfilin ' WMÂ«Nia.,44.1 iÂ«*-2 LE<i,~12.3 . ~i..,,ST i . P '1, ~1 'CL,â‚¬0 "= i 1 11. 6 . .1 E-~Â»Â· 1:Â·flb#,9, 'Â·il,i, 0 9,/' LIL-4 --5-~-44Â»<m I U/JOI|' 111Â»1*411 1 033 -42 lix,i (-5: I In,- 1~N:5- *1~211 514:*1 71, ||| # -5 * $ =t --, 1~496* .--4=Ii-'-t' i If i,FL I / 2. t'i .%~23-% 1-41:-37% 1111'f,~p'~fi Â· 12' 4.-Â·Â»< -- ELL,1,2 1 T. -# - . -*. I *I , t. 0 1...EF~70~EEZRTTE** (D11T&~PU--~-EEFY~*ITI31 â€¢HO CHANGE ID PttiltH MATE[24Al-9 - -i 14Â£*I YntlsUES E BEV4 ADDI-TiON 4 rgEV10(19 SNYDER RESIDENCE ADWTBM (\039) TO *E- 1*-Bi -re G VETROAL 134 VMEST HOPKINS AVENUE SIt)ING - p.EM OVE E-*\Sm NG, HOM-LORTN- ASPEN â€¢ COLORADO 5!DING 08 14*69 ADDITWN GRW ARCHITECTURE LLC - t 1 1609 DEFIANCE DRIVE CORBONDALE = COLORADO - . 0 . . i. . . : i 9.MON*TF-1-boT EllerÂ» --- -- - BFLM6TyÂ®T DOWKET PgR~.6 To %\NEU Wore 10 0?Â·16#,Ab *WED Foof 1 1 . 1 1 0 . ' I.-I......../.*'I. I 0 . =4e*â€ž . f - , . ....#....'I i : j InÂ«. . ***& *1 2~64tgAte~..4 3-Ir . . 29 - . 4 6 , ./ - - A-, . - '. -~' -1 -1 ' # t. 1 1 11. I - 11141 - - 11 , r 1 -- ~6 1- , 11 1 3 -ri-Jift t' 2 1,4 -1 -,G =-4 11 L Ki-- Â· I .7 4- 7 ..>~ E-~ - - 41 - , ,- -14-11 -411-1 b~' ~ 3.y- -P - 1- *C 1 1 - - 4 11-1 - 4,1 -1- - -el 1-Nyun ,%44<51 3 1 .'4!eli 111# - Â· -- - - - 1 -- .4+ 1- C . . - 1 - 4 6 7- ---Ii' T k -1-114 . I p&-7- . I - - &-'1~J: ->~1-- ~Sit,4- --~ - -! A -- - =r - e - | i 5 -- 4 z j 115 -1 - 4 -1=- -=4 - _-0- *41'Xi - NEW -1 &*Â¥3[wj j ! ---41<- 19-EFT--TE[EY,471-O-td~: SNÂ¥DER RESIDENCE 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE W .HEW T INSHES & BEW APPITWN * f'KE.Nt OUS ~ : ASPEN â€¢ COLORADO ADPITZON 000Â© TO IDE. 1%5 14 6 SWING(Â¥EFT\GAL) i Â· pet.teVE E.*lerrl N,6, HOILIZ-(71â‚¬rAL- 5117LHx3 1 GRWARCHI'rECTURE LLC r OB Hee ADP\TWN 1609 DEFIANCE DRIVE CORI*ONDALEâ€¢COLORADO ..... f-860Mty[F-UOT Vvf-ME.F.e 117 *HED 'F-058' 1 - - . - . - 0,41* floof- Whu, To R'-tz=-1 . *ALOWN\1 . a. Ir. . , -0. - "3 1".761:Fr---f >i; 9%~i-: .Fl 21 , , 1 1 . . . . . ~~ . . .. 4 ': }9 4 i i #fbil.i.,3 1211 - r. 22 01 . â€¢ Â· b.4401 *41/4 .tÂ·' ~, Â· Â·Â·Â· Â· Â· Â· ~Â·Â·Â· Â·Â·Â·Â· .-fi.96->j::f+L-705 1 , .1 - I 1 - +Ii IME# 1 /Â·f, ....11" 1]~ Ilill'I';. 7 4. . t. , _-_n.- _ ..'lialliwil///-~~ill'ENM . I. , - ....1-1...7 ./. -I 1....1.0.11,4.,1 . 1 -11 , 1- - '1, 1.- 1-2,Â»r=JZ:@* 526&4434,&gm-4:23*:4~.44.L:.*SCGE#-904:~ CZI- Â·q-zr.,Â£:C .*41Â·Â·Â·Â·'Â· -- = 22=b r~.1-72 9:r:ir-r- -4..4- â€ž - 1.Â»e . m.9 4. ~1- , Â· /41*5*Â·-,- , . ' t 4.0 1 . - 1. 1 .1 . #11 Â· - til_ _ - Ht<i - 1 Iii i_ j i 1 , Z RAGT BLEVATTON I: 4- 69 NEW 1,0 VENUU SIONG e 1909 ADD lan ON - MeN Â¥1+USWES e NEW ADDLT&08- le * SNYDER RESIDENCE 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE i 113 TA G 'S\DLAG ASPEN â€¢ COLORADO , - **1NDE~ of EAST Â»* 10 '~AAN AD 19 GRW ARCHITECTURE LLC 1609 DEFIANCE DRIVE CORBONDALEâ€¢COLORADO i F I 0 . 0 0 1 i , PECohermer --DOBVIEF.$3 . Rco*TR-ll or PoPMEM, ---- -10 OFGFAL -29%0 foofâ€¢:b . 30 5\ABD Foor> 1. 1 , ----- / - -0,0~..HI Â»e...:~~h*4;/&,a.*=* **m,eq,r :. ....W. i L : I. m. i AV.~*Irâ€¢-,1.. 41 . 1-241-1 3 939 - i -1 r , 1.-/41:1.1 L '~ _ -Al I~ Â·I -=.3.10*-8'4.Â»,-1.*-,â‚¬-9-90-'MM,Â»5Â·*Mel#â‚¬A,e20W0*e-,4.92'4'N<INFI"BA.'p- i f 2, 04.Z -tâ€¢--Â·-Â·â€¢Â·------- 4 ' : t : 1 :-0,1-1-,0..e.,-'.... --'..........1.--,1- 4Â·3~ - Â· . i i .~*0â€ž,~:Â¥~,R,8//2...*8Â».--'llq'll-N" ~ t le-2-.<m**IÂ«-: i ir==77, r lili "Â«.1 I +21 1 Â· I : 1 .,9.:. & 1,0 I 114.-Arl */1 i' ,Â«NU -e â€¢' *B ~~~4Â·9 t.tii.%~-14 ca-141,3% ... ----1 1 ~11 -1 1 17~776'L 1. lilli :71110>44~ :f ... 1 fi'*4 #49 4Â£;tra i â€ž51,~*, J â€¢'~ ' 0~4"' . .. 5/,I,7. 1 "-4#'-221'_ 1< 9 4. -1* 1'%., , I - A -, Iii '- i ~ ,~f~â€ž04.,'RIP~ 9. ':.,~44: .' 41"E', 'Â·','.'4#. ,4 Lis:&* 40' +1 7 *F i - i i ,-4 tuh i'''1 &16~.- 9Â·~ ':* *~ :,J@ ,=11,1 2 47 . ~. 1 i Â® _f*EEI--BLEVATTEÂ¥4 Â® 1_NOFER- ELEVATION 1114_ SNYDER RESIDENCE ' 140 61*86,8 -To f lt\\*U tvlhrE;- *l,9 -- Â· NEW 14*191485 e NEW *00,1'l ON - 4 fREY(ous n 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE AUDITION (1744) 1.0prt. = LA* *NEL, 9101Â» (4 Ele) ASPEN = COLORADO VEFF. + Ille 14 6 910!NG p - -4- IZE~ULE E-~ilâ‚¬rlh16 Wefl204144â‚¬4PiNG wm-1 GRW ARCHITECTURE LLC f \(EyrICAL s,DING, 8 190-9 APPIT,0 M 1609 DEFIANCE DRIVE CORBONDALE, COLORADO . . . . 0 1 â€¢KIÂ¥ w i ttooNeT'FloT D opME,pe %*621491*BUG#-De?:ME?* ~ TO +G,1-MAL 14-l,Ea-Feri--_ 1/ 1 ' i â‚¬ 4 L I .Â· t i , 1 . . f , 2 - $. 4 1 ----*.I-li- *:'LO US:72 tt:L,..2;t~EENE-+ . 1 :L 'f.7 T %6-T-T r - C ;" 4,#tr-/4 5-:*-:'tky39 5-47 1,11â€¢115 7 1.-4.+ ..093 Â· .... 0 ~ , == -1=9-,-1 1 - 144-<lk'a'N . . .Pt I - . 4 i j'47 4%41% d - ! lit--4 ?41' 5 -ly-1-4:- I , 3-75.12,12;~i'i,"-14 I 06- V'., I . c-4- 14--5 ' , 'k.%2%,IX 11 -- - 1...1.1 977.-11- 1 3& 36,195-,111't . 3%6136 "LÂ·z TI- -3, Nk! -31 27 j_ -~4'22 Â· rfÂ·-Il, . 5%'.............0 ... ... -/ - Sivf='FR9 - 1 995.0- .64 . Â· EL.ji'Â¥E 6._ -9 44'Li~*W fâ‚¬AyÂ·9Â¥4 -- t-â‚¬ - 1 ----1- /*In .. 1 . 1 ' 1 Hew | EWANG i i We-9TELEVATEÂ«rE+1- Â© : SNYDER RESIDENCE -148,1 94*HES & NEW WpITLON $ f?ENCOUS 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE ApornoM 89 04), HeRLZ. = 1 %6 13ENEL S\Pth\6(Â»5*r) 1 ASPEN â€¢ COLORADO VEÂ¥.:C = IND TR 6 9101146 * ?-EMel E EARfrthlÂ¢:, HopitolATAL- 919*46 -Â¥*M ~ ; ' GRW ARCHITECTURE LLC P) 30 ADP IT LON 1609 DEFI-ANCE DRIVE CORBONDALE â€¢ COLORADO .... - .1 pUNGYRUOT Ovwlibe-* : To SUED poofe 2 f ; - BEA AB NEÂ¢11*,(SIDNG e 9* Â¥LOOF- WAU--8 -. - . ---I-*./.<I.-*.I-/--......./.*./.*Il#*%.-......I'..v-/.....'Ill/"I'll..'/=..-...../*.I~.-.Il-/,IV-*#.../...../.-../.-'-Il-'.....I-..--i...-I.-f9.:#Il.-I.+:*---I/-......Il-li-/.I- . 1 -Il-'-----./.--.-Il.----.I----.I-----I.- 44-L-.4*.*46"w--; --- ' ' Â·---4 Â· e<Â· 4 . -490*' t-' - # I. I . ' 9 '.A: 4.1 - 41Â£ 1'43 l'I, , 05*AM f. IÂ·4 -, j .,. 1.-I ' % I. - I -t,le-r61 14EY+ SNYDER RESIDENCE ME*l fltl,6 142% B HEW-ADD 1-n,ON # 1139 ADorrloN 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HO?YL. = \11(p IDENEL S\DING et" E.*E) 1 1 ASPENâ€¢ COLORADO \JE.F. = ti b 1-4 G sto\N 6 GRW ARCHITECTURE LLC â€¢ PMMUD EF 01:- par WMA, Te F.21*414 Mb \S 1609 DEFIANCE DRIVE CORBONDALE â€¢ COLORADO I. Land Use Application THE CrrY OF ASPEN PROJECn Name: 44\CUELLÂ© SHYDE_p- Res, 9040Â£, Location: (34- kiEST \18 fy-\ MS AUE_ Alt>EM,c-oloRADO 8\ 6Â£1 \31- 4 Â£31- '/2. IN . Rot\ANS , LMt-DMAÂ¥*S LOT Sf U.T . Lot 1 (Indicate street address, lot & block number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 21 36 -\14 -\ 9 -00\ APPLICANT: Name: MCCUELLE_ 6\[ AD+ Address: Â¥.0,%01 671 90 , 1)Â©TOMAO, MA'27 LAN,b 409>69 Phone#: 30\:Ell)-9656, Fax#: 410 '411,339 5 E-mail: MSMN DER E-* M sÂ»j DE-?.0 EM-TUBES , CÂ© M REPRESENTATIVE: Name: GEORBE- R , \14 \ W HE- Address: \ (00% DE-F\ABLE DRNE C.kÂ·EBO hbbAlt- , Co , Ele-2.3 Phone #: 470 -(01%Â·4-34* Faxit: 115 114t 1((SlE-mail: (4~WARC.14 c CSM, CAs-t-, RET- TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all tbat apply): El Historic Designation U Relocation (temporary, on or off:Â·site) [3 Certificate ofNo Negative Effect D Demolition (total demolition) 51 Certificate of Appropriateness ~ Historic undmark Lot Split -Minor Historic Development -Major Historic Development -Conceptual Historic Development -Final Historic Development -Substantial Amendment EXISTING CONDrnONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) 1 WE>' ABRf~* 4.INGLE- f-AMIL,1 1*LIDENCE 81-BHoot 1-lt c LoT- 9'f UT % Amzte,Au yort, SUEb SNX (TUILL PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) d) ADD\T\ON of ORE- STOP-Y SUMÂ¥0041 Mob 1100&\ t,14Â· st) Â©VA?\410& to?, 1 (DE_ SEBACic = bIO i -rt '1 47 ' (Â»ST Â© RETAIN FOR PERMANENT RECORD - Dimensional Requirements Form ([tem #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for all projecls.) Project: 13)12 \MEST 1-169\414-5 AUE- bef Ell Ci, Applicant: M C C \AELLE +f HDE-P- (W tq- MOP\1_ 41% llc) Project L,ocation: %1- Wt,9- \At pt\LE, AUL, Ab~EM , 01 . 84(\ Zone District: R- (b Lot Size: 30' * 1 Dry Lot Area: 7>000 Sf (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.) Commercial net leasable: Eacisting: Â§4 K P-ed: t\) h Number ofresidential units: Existing: OUP- Proposed: 65&5- Number of bedrooms: Existing: -22 proposed: 3 Proposed%of demolition: 1 . Â·73.1':' 9~ 142,;AL CÂ¥ St-tift,404 4'AE':3 1,0<39 . DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone district)~ 01 7 Floor Area: Existing.Â· 17 6 0 Allowable.- '1+06"44opose1- l9 El- Height Principal Bldg.: Existing.- 1-l. 3,3 Allowable: 19,0 Proposed- ll, 33 Accessory Bldg.: Existing: \\~1~ Allowable: ~4~ R Proposed: 111 k On-Site parking: Existing: 0 45_ Required: C KE Proposed.- OHE % Site coverage: Existing: 39,1 Required- WA proposed.- 40'5 % Open Space: Existing: 9 3.% Required: A ~ A Proposed: 51: 5 Front Setback: EratingÂ· ~9.0 Required: \,0 r 0 Proposed- ~,0 Rear Setback: Existing: 31-, 3 3 Required- \0 .0 Proposed- 'll .33 Combined Front/Rear: Indicate(~* E. W Existing: 51.16 Required- 19.0 Proposed- 39,33 Side Setback: iE.' Eratibg.- l ,0 Required: 6,0 Proposed.' i,0 Side Setback: ~~t Existing: 5,0 Required. 5,0 Proposed: 5,0 Combined Sides: Existing: 9.0 Required: \5 'O Proposed: & . C Distance between Existing: 14~k Requited.- 14~A Proposed: R tA buildings: Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note ifencroachment licenses have been issued: 140\AL Variations requested (identify theexactvariances needed): 1 38)0 CT\Ok) or M \1* 1 Allil S\De. SUBAC\L ot- 5,0~ TO 2,61. 'Ax- Utul kUD floOM l,tkq-) 41' 93" 1. â€¢A- 4-41 1---1 - 1-1 \ L z FAI '*Atill - - Aunruir?MÂ· + , t.,4.71 Â·.,/1 DEM ~1 91 w p i / ,- FEE di - "1 L- -'ll / 1 1 - 4-9 6- 51 12 - 1 i , e r / IUTOVER 1 --- -- A - t>0 - 1 i DN 11 k -T 1 Er,r.1 ~ ~ ; 1-1 ' LE.4 [f'IÂ· 1 81141 14(7 1-Dbl-1 , i = i CA . -7 ....4 1 1/MAIA At't '3.91*~ =' 1 .Â« .Al ..., 41~ .~/ 1 i; 1 1 1 ..4// /5>1 1 y .4-,1 1 + ----- I i. 1 i 0 i ,Â« 12.EF' ~ 1 55#th i. t ' 1 i ; - 1 -. 11 1 I i 1 1 -. 1 ----U } i . 1 21 1 k Â· 1 H 11 1 1~ i 14-1 - 0 4.9 1 4.0 It ?, p _ i l 1 11 1 1 + 1 K:...., 1 U 1 1109-T - d r. 5 12- I~ 1'. 2+ -17:zi, r lt'te .~r . :. ... ; .1, - 12 11 i k ./'Â·1 . /. Â© c~ 9-1.< : 41, 1 = lit -1,Flity.F--!-E2124Â·'. 4- 0 _ tv 1.1. , ,â€¢Vt '1 1.Kl .72 -lit 1.,3 41" 1% C O, A j 1 11'1 011 â‚¬,1, 1 I * 1 1 11(of> t){ (4 -- 1 f w. 0 1 0 11 '~ 1 EL~I 1 1-- fintEr * - 2 -91 0 i i 9.7 1 -uÂ·- -- ---4 It t, ---- ., -A--2244 ~==~__ i S E-~ p -â€ž-.-- brjOI'l.-CO,0,!l 4, 1- 42-71 \ 1 4 --h H !1 14 | +fl-- D!4 / 11: / . 1 3. /4,1 - ..1.-14 11- / 4 i, C---11 M a\\ 1 -I.- - 1 --Tr . .2.- r la- '47'r- 1 - 1 [ ---1 1 r : $ 4. 1 % 0 6,108 14', o" 19,4. 10,4 > - 7 - - -- 1 , il i I It.. 11--- 67/ f : Â· R . I -1-nr f f rj .., 1 .1 r , A Â· gy; iÂ·'Â· l'.Â·t-,t.'Â·Jt -7 3 12. DO *P " F.e-,0.-) 1.- thit /?r 1 :.Â· Â·'1 +,7 1 ' .... 0.,Ah .. 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT PHOTOGRAPHS 3 PAGES EXTERIOR FINISHES ROOF: Asphalt shingles to match existing- Charcoal gray FASCIA: layered wood to match existing - White SOFFIT: Plywood to match existing - Canary Yellow WALLS: bevel wood siding to match existing - Canary Yellow WINDOW/DOOR TRIM: 1" tlat trim to match existing - White DOORS & WINDOWS: Clad wood units to match existing - Green fâ€¢'c" = ikE- 6==St-A.7 .''i., 4 ..:.3/ .. , - A,-t . 4.2 el=. Al '02,2 - I . 6NL .1 0 -- --9-&-511---- L i:- --0 .lk - 1% :. -99-' - I V I If l. ' . 5. Â· . Â· irl 4 a i Â· Â·Â· 727 t%26Â· ae * 111*1&:c. . â‚¬6---'"* ...9. d.49 a 47 5/4/2005 ' . .0,1.- :.4 1 Â¥ 1 4â€¢ft 7 . ./. - - -42 '1. . 41 6. da . )= â€¢91/2979. t- Â· 4 4 fi~Â·t,~ i,q,ji. 2 .7 2 = c -Pi y'dIA , 1 2-4,#1~~~ i'.9'*-@rÂ·1*94 - . ..%8 %4 -, ...r 4!ME . . .V- ft? , '4-.... ~ 1 A.. . 2-A 247, 4 -, 3-*rl=:-~ - f 4,+75 f f .. ...:3,4* Sâ‚¬, 10-,0 43+A .16,Mid11/ â‚¬ " 4 Â·. 9..: . - 1 n ' 'Â·Â·C /3 -7 -1 52.Â« / 9- Â·'6..Â· t. 22 : f or / dric.e - -- + i N.' -b..: a f.ki" E~i , . . .76/ & - 41 . rl Ag:*ts .f . 4./. "#4 '., 1 262,/4Â·Â·Â· I t .'4 1 A , pfrt# Tas , 1â€ž ,Â¥ C -4 -. . . 1/:11//135/'. 4 1-1 4 4 ':rf: 4/ 9 - '5' '=. - ';â‚¬ 1 Ii-1 47,0 '96- . Â· 4 :- 4 4 1"Ir, -. *Ir. i. ' 1 L' y . IÂ» 4,= Â·~ .-1, 74. .2 sialli~:1(4/ 4 ry. 09- e . .144 .: , a . IF, , 41 - r_ 4 . a g. 1 .. ' '.1 5 6 ./ 0 '. X :..-2 '. '. '$ 1 23 - Ii.'L .. -, .Â·?'t A,146*1. f, â€ž 9. 1, 9,., -5' 43 /7/Mi<tac~t 4â€¢â€¢ *ic- 1 1 .1, #.0 i ip-/ -Â¥~, 1--. 10'dj'~ ~19 14-Re~ - . & 4Â¢29 i ~->r~!7 Â¥,6* 3-44=4 -p. # v 1 I i.. 0 . 6 Â»9,92 ,..:D:* 178 / 69 i I - : - 4 A - p 0 3 5 .-7 - . ' / 12) ': ral 0 SD . LN , â€¢, . JA 'Â·,2 T .--.- N --- r id _ . 1.- I I. 1 3 1. 7 11 1.1 1.b ..., Y.A. I 7 6 I ..2.- .1... 1 ..1 I . A -'Â£~ / AA' I I. -1 . r- U ' Kil f 4 Cyc - -- 1% C. , 94 Sk ...-Â·-1 I Â· A i 1:1Rth 11 0 2 2 --- - 19-6 - 2 - 2 - .. 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT LIGHT FIXTURES Wall mount fixtures by 'BEGA' Corporation Model #6320/538 - 60W A19 bulb Elevation above grade = 8' -0" Locations: one at front door Two at rear folding doors One at mudroom door .. 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT LIGHT FIXTURES Wall mount fixtures by 'TEKA' Corporation Model #BWM 2118 - (1) 75W PAR 30 bulb Elevation above grade = 8'-0" Locations: one at front door Two at rear folding doors One at mudroom door .. TE KA T ILLUM INATION BEACON WALL MOUNT | - I I A 1 / 1 2 5/8" F 1 C C D --- 5 E _ 7 1/2" 6 1/2" B .1 8 1/8" i PRODUCT# Lamp Rings Finish Option Description... Exterior wall mounted downlight luminaire for PAR 30 lamp BWM-2146/Natural 75W PAR30 Copper Brown Patina BWM-2118/Natural 75W PAR30 S.S. Brown Patina Materials / Construction... BWM-2166/Nickel 757/ PAP.30 SS None A. Cast bronze cap B. Heavy pure copper shade 'Nickel plate C. Stainless steel or copper on S.S. ring baffles U.L. listed, suitable for wet locations D. Solid brass spacers E. Cast aluminum wall plate w; pure copper cover E Heavy pure copper stem - 7/8" O.D. Mounting... Recessed 4' octagonal wiring box TEKA ILLUMINATION, [Ne. 86 GIBSON ROAD. SUITE 3 TEMPLETON, CALIFORNIA 93465 PHONE (805) 434-3511 FAX (805) 434-3512 Â©TEKA 3./98 .. .. BEGA Wall luminaires with partial uplight. Die cast aluminum arm. canopy and shade with upiight slots. Crystal glass with screw neck. Color: Black or white. . . A .C. 3/49\\. 49 Lamp Lurnen ABC 6320/538 Wall 1 60W A-19 890 7 36 8 98 8% 1 6321 Wall 1 75WA-19 1190 10 bl 10%, 12 1 - C. 6322P Wall 1 13W PLC 860 107â€¢ 10% 12 6420 Wall 1 100WA-19 1750 15% 18% 16 6421S Wall 1 50* E-17 HPS 4000 15 3/1 18% 16 6421MH Wall 1 100W ED-17 MH 8500 1534 18 96 16 538 Small opening wiring box included, see page 271 109 .. 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT LIGHT FIXTURES Wall mount fixtures by 'BEGA' Corporation Model #6590 - 60W A19 bulb Elevation above grade = 8'-0" Locations: one at front door Two at rear folding doors One at mudroom door .. .. BEGA 9Â«1 Wall luminaires with die cast aluminum radius bracket arm , and canopy. Three-ply opal 6 glass with screw neck. Color Black or white - lAÂ· Câ€¢ Lamp Lumen A B C ~ 6590 Wall 1 60* AÂ·19 890 101/â€¢ 141/2 12%6 6548P Wail 1 13W PLC 860 101/, 14% 12146 6393 Wall 1 100\N AÂ·19 1750 1594 27*ie 24'Â¥: 6394S Wai! 1 50W E-17 HPS 4000 1534 279,6 24-9-6 fÂ«h Wall luminaires with flared shade, ~1 die cast aluminum raalus bracket arm and canopy. Tnree-ply opal B glass with screw neck. - ColorÂ· Black or white. :111 \ 9/ . Aâ€¢ C . Lamp Lumen ABC 6491 Wai; 1 60W AÂ·19 890 12%e 1472 1314 6492P Wall 1 13W PLC 860 12%6 14 8 131,2 ~ 6493 Wai 1100W A 19 1750 1911~16 27% 27% 6494S Wall 1 508 EÂ·17 HPS 4000 191 y.6 27% 27% 105 .. 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT LIGHT FIXTURES Wall mount fixtures by 'TEKA' Corporation Model #PLW 1010 - (2) l OW G4 bulb Elevation above grade = 8'-0" Locations: one at front door Two at rear folding doors One at mudroom door .. TEKA T19 ILLUMINATION PATH LIGHT WALL 6 1/2" 2.-- 1 1 B -7=4 A 1 1 h 3 3/8" 1 1 1 1 1 2- 1,- D C H 111/2" E-! F H 01 D ---Er 1 Ir 0 - 7 1 H D- (<61 G 5 1/4" 1 1/4" Description... Wall mount luminaire for G4, PRODUCT # Lamp Finish Option 12V lamps PIW-1010/ Natural 2-10W G4 Brown Patina PLW-1016/ Nickel' 2-10W G4 None Materials / Construction... *Nickel plate A. Heavy pure copper shade B. Solid brass screw finial C. Etched glass enclosure Note... A. Longer stem lengths up to 18" available D. Solid brass fittings at additional cost - specify E. Cast aluminum wall plate w/ pure copper cover B. For tamper resistant finial - suffix TR E 120V supply, 11.67 output electronic transformer C. Available less transformer for remote 12V G Stainless steel fasteners H. Heavy pure copper stems - 7/8" O.D. suppl-7 U.L. listed, suitable for wet locations Mounting... Recessed 4" x 1 1/2" deep octagonal wiring box TEKA ILLUMINATION. INC. 86 GIBSON ROAD, SUITE 3 TEMPLETON, CALIFORNIA 93465 PHONE (805,434-3511 FAx (805) 434-3512 Â© TEKA 6/98 .. ' 1 architecture L 717 July 30,2006 City of Aspen Community Development Historic Preservation Committee 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Historic Preservation Application Minor Development Review Single Family Residence 134 West Hopkins Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Sirs This letter is being submitted as part of a Historic Preservation Application for the proposed addition to an existing residence located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, Colorado. This residence has been classified as a historical building and requires approval by the Historical Preservation Committee for any new development. The following are responses to items #1-10, 16, 17, 18, & 37, of the HPC application as required for Minor Development: 1. Applicant: Michelle Snyder Representative: George Winne West Hopkins LLC GRW Architecture LLC P.O. Box 6150 P.O. Box 95 Potomac, MD 20859 Carbondale, CO 81623 Tel: 301-873-5656 Tel: 970-618-4346 2. Propertv Information Address: 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description: 134 & 134 !4 W. Hopkins, Landmark Lot Split - Lot 1 Parcel ID: 2735-124-19-001 3. Disclosure of Ownership Attached with this letter 4. Vicinity Map Attached with this letter p.o. box 95 Â· carbondale Â· colorado Â· 81623 phone 970.618.4346 fax 775.719.2682 LI .. Page 2 134 West Hopkins Avenue HPC Application (Minor Development) 5. Site Plan (1/4" = 1'-0") Attached with this letter - 24x36 Drawing (Sheet A. 1) 6. Site Improvement Survev Survey to be prepared by "Tuttle Surveying Services", Glenwood Springs, CO. and submitted to the City of Aspen within 14 Days. 7. Written Description of Proposal A. Based on FAR calculations submitted to the city, we are proposing a 194.0 square foot one story addition to the north side of this residence. The addition includes a 156 SF Sunroom and a 38 SF Mudroom. The mudroom will replace an existing 60SF attached storage shed that will be removed. In addition, one half of a double easement window on the west wall will be removed for the redesign of the kitchen cabinets. The architectural design of this addition is based on the owners requirements & comments received at an HPC 'work session' held on June 28,2006. All elements of this addition including roof & wall materials, windows & doors, and colors of finishes are to match the existing residence. B. Request for side setback variance at east property line to be reduced from the minimum of 5.0' to 2.67' for location of new Mudroom. 8. Additional Materials No additional materials requested 9. Completed forms. Agreement, and Fees Attached with this letter 10. Dimensional Requirement Form Attached with this letter 16. Photograph, Samples, Drawings Architectural plan (Sheet A. 1) is included to describe the addition, its location on the property, and connection to the existing residence. Exterior lighting locations are shown on floor plan. 17. Building Materials and Finishes Architectural drawings (Sheet A.1 & A.2) indicate building materials. Photographs ofthe existing building are included to indicate finishes and colors that will be used on the addition. p.o. box 95 Â· carbondale Â· colorado 81623 phone 970.618.4346 fax 775.719.2682 Page 3 134 West Hopkins Avenue HPC Application (Minor Development ) 18. Scaled Elevations. Drawings Architectural drawings (Sheets A.1 & A.2) indicate elevations ofthe residence with the new addition. Site & Floor plan show the relationship of this residence to the residence at 134 M W. Hopkins Ave. 37. Lighting Plan, Cut Sheets New exterior lighting (4 locations) indicated on Sheet A.1 Cut sheets for lighting fixtures included with this letter. The existing residence is in excellent condition and has been well maintained over the years. The existing exterior features, finishes, and colors will remain as they are and will be used as a basis for the exterior of the new addition. We believe that this addition will add value to the residence and the neighborhood, and due to its location on the property (north face), will not interfere or disrupt the design, character, or historical significance of the existing residence. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this project to the Historic Preservation Committee, and we look forward to presenting our proposal for review & approval. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you need any further information. Sincerely, 1 :f 1 1*, If ' 1/0 / i li "iti + E- lit I: 1 ~ F' 1 ~ . 4 A ; â‚¬ 1. 1, , .- 1 Representative Owner George R. Winne A.I.A. Michelle Snyder GRW Architecture LLC West Hopkins LLC p.o. box 95 Â· carbondale Â· colorado Â· 81623 phone 970.618.4346 fax 775.719.2682 Matrix of The City of Aspen's Historic Preservation Land Use Application Requirements To review full procedures for all applications, reference 26.415 of The City of Aspen Building Code, Historic Preservation Ordinance. When submitting multiple step applications, do not replicate submission materials. Two copies ofthe application are required for a Certificate of No Elfect, 15 copies are required for each meetingall other review. Also note that an electronic version of all text documents is required in a .txt, .doc, .wpd, or .rtf format. Application Fees Type of Review Notice Requirements Requirements Deposit Fee Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Designation 1-9,11,12 $0 26,304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c.) at HPC and Council Consult with Historic Preservation None ~ Exempt Development $0 Officer to confirm exempt status Certificate of No Negative Effect 1-9,14,15,16 $225 None ~ 9-/r $675 4 Posting Pursuant to Sections 26.304.060 (E) (3) (b) : 2 Minor Development 1-10,16.17,18,37 ' Development under 1,000 s.f., $1,350 Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Maior Development / Conceptual 1-10,14,18,19,20,21 / Development over 1,000 s.f., $2,700 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Maior Development / Final 1-10,17,22,23,37 Paid at time of conceptual 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Substantial Amendment 1-10,17,24,25,26,37 $675 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Demolition 1-9,27 $2,700 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Relocation 1-9,28-35 $2,700 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Historic Landmark Lot Split 1-10 $1,350 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) at HPC and Council Publication, Posting and Mailing Pursuant to Sections Rescinding Designation 1-9,36 $1,350 26.304.060 (E) (3) (a) (b) (c) at HPC and Council .. .. 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP 9?06252951 SCHEDULE A-OWNER'S POLICY CASE NUMBER DATE OF POUCY AMOUNT OF INSURANCE PODCY NUMBER PCT19O01F2 August 23,2004 @ 240 PM $2,300,000.00 1312-236900 1. NAME OF INSURED: WEST HOPKINS. LLC 2. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND HEREIN AND WHICH IS COVERED BY THIS POLICY IS; IN FEE SIMPLE 3. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST REFERRED TO HEREIN IS AT DATE OF POLICY VESTED IN: WEST HOPKINS, LLC 4. THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS POLICY IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO AND iS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS. LOTY, 134 AND 1341/2 W. HOPKINS HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPUT. a,err~*..,9 11, #fe Piarthemc' resÂ©ted May 4.200â€¢ in PIM Book 09 at Page 6 as Reception No. 497137. FrrKIN COUNTY TITLB, INC 601 E HOFIJNS AVE. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970 925-1766/(970)-9254527 FAX .. 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP 9706252951 SCHEDULE B-OWNERS CASE NUMBER DATE OF POLICY POUCY NUMBER PCT19061F2 August 23,2004 @ 2.40 PM 1312-236900 THIS POLICY DOES NOT INSURE AGAINST LOSS OR DAMAGE BY REASON OF â„¢E FOLLOWING: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements. or claims of easements, not shown by the public records, 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, any lacts whlch a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4, Any Ben, or right m a lien, for services. labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records 5. Water rights, Glaims or title to water. 6. Taxes lor the year 2004 notyet due or payable. 7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 328 providing as follows: *That no title shall be hereby acquired to anymine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws'. 8. Terms. corldlfloits~ prctffeims emi cillefarts: ener' fcur- h S.1'-A:22. CU'* 2-1 GU~'~'- 1-717,Er,frtt.gypr---T recorded November 22, 1994 f= Beck 787 at Pt= 726. 9. Terms, condlrions, provisions. obligations and all matters as set forth in Resoluron of the Aspen Hetoric Preservabon Commission recorded December 16. 1999 as Reception No. 438633 as Resolution No. 19. Series 1999. 10. Tems, cerdÂ¥ors, p7nible EMi st>af.crs 09 sM foÂ¢Th in St,trfh.1.;05 3--=pecn Acrocr:e~ K . 2. Â· '1 2 4 2004 as Recepttn Ne. 497tSG 271 FIRCE-*i Met. 13,2 .: m /Â» q' I :9/-PWÂ·Â»i #~w- 1, 17 Elit~36>4107 4'.r,7 I-91 r-f t pulte'- as diC'~SeR rl Flit a t. 3'.* :37-3973 ]'=30â‚¬cd *ty 4, 2004 h Fla 4-W.h"t VJ 2 . j :4 .. O. *v- '*-z C--3Â«3:13~ reburri L ~.. -- - t- â€¢.e ~~~ --- -. It~, FE: 1';t E,t~{Â·1,Â·~~9~tki~ .22 1 Au,~i - 3. #.v~, .- 4*â€¢~:ke~ ~t. :..: "} , e .Â¥,1 M. .... 11 4/' . I 29., 203/ 27 ReÂ·c--9,Â£3n NO. Rnfzâ€ž:1 -- EXCEPTIONS NUMBERED 1,2,3 AND 4 ARE HEREBY OMITTED. & .. 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT VICINITY MAP Â¥ 7 6 4 5 A 444, 2 â‚¬ 4, N' Drwk 4** e 0. 1 44 to'. 47 Â· 9 , 4 4 9, 0 * ~ f / ~ Creek 4 0 One . 34 05> ide Rd saNa. 0% 160 + te 08- B O W : 2 C : Rub q y ; 7 aia Latto j. 3 G,Ilesp~t N a;%,nli ;51 As en i e L* 9%* ' er r - â€¢ 55 02.1% 4 4.- Â¥ If . 0 e Oe Vine i 04.14 Pu K - S 2 - 8 11 Ct '400 5~ 2.22.69 2 er AS 2 :P . 4mst Ric -- 0' Gibson C - Molly 2 e 5 'G'% a 4, : 0 8 *- G 0-y $ Park 0 9 28 440 m , 42> Â® 2 0 Co 08 0 *us . - r *C 4 6 2- 4 77~-1 3 4 01 0 4 U e Ln 0 4.Â¥er SUBJECT fou c ~ 0 - Rd 2 _ fOve rforefry 2 0 TS 2 8 09 2 ~ 4, Ave :b it m i As 6 D U rov I Rd Westview ~~* V ~~||~~ Get 1 - Dr C \ '==hee S C N 82 \ 4. E S Any changes, efrors, or omissions bought to our attention are greatly appreciated and updates wt# be in the next edition. Please email Maps Etc. Co., Denver, CO at changes@mapsetc.com Â© 2003 714 4 O.jek#'â‚¬*V M *~IS 0 ue SY 00+ Utel >Ul CITY OF A.*â‚¬I_OMMUNITY DEVELOPMET .-D LRTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and M ic: ic i- - C \ i :-,141.1,\! 'i,),0. 11 (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for \ jnc' 2,Npe ht:Â·, f t.c'-~kifi,h\T j ' (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because ofthe size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT' S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ . T G. C . which is for -' Â· 2 hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. 1 1- 1 i ;~ C f i' CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT fi/' Â· 1 By: By: Chris Bendon / 4 1 ilf 1 Community Development Director Date: Bill To Mailing Address and Telephone Number: g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doc 02/01/06 .. Land Use Application THE CrrY OF ASPEN PROJECn Name: (44\CUELLE) SHY DE_p- Rest omat. Location: (34 kIEDT- Moff) \46 AVE-- ASEE-Mic_olot*o EAGE L \34- 1 Il>4-- U . IÂ·*FUNS , LANDMA?*S LOT Sf UT . Lor 1 (Indicate street address, lot & block'number or metes and bounds description of property) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) 21 36- \14 -\9 - 00\ APPLICANT: Name: Rl\CUELLE- 6~ AtyE--* Address: 70,401 6\90 , POTOMAS, MA?71*+Ab 4-0 669 phone#: 30\Â· 81?9-96579 Fax#: 410*41-1, 33795 E-mail: MSWN DER- 6 M %>\47 DEA) EM-Tll~-15, COM REPRESENTATIVE: Name: G-BOK(spE_ R. w \ W KE_ Address: 1*0% Der\AN-CE- DRNE Ckf-Bo K\A) AVE ~ 00, SlaZE> phone#: 01.-!c -(r\% .4-34-9 Faxit: 7-15 ,-111:'t 9-(osiE-mail: G.~1Â¥J k\102 L COM, CAST-, HET~ TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): C] Historic Designation ~ Relocation (temporary, on or off-site) I Certificate of No Negative Effect D Demolition (total demolition) 154 Certificate of Appropriateness ~ Historic Landmark Lot Split -Minor Historic Development -Major Historic Development -Conceptual Historic Development -Final Historic Development -Substantial Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) 1 9[012>-1 4'*-bk SINGLE- FAMIL< 14-SIDENCE PrleY toot Up c LoT- SfUT X AFfirk.0*u yort, s\AU) STR\] CTUR_L PROPOSAL: Nescription of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) d) Abb\71014, of ORE STOP-\( SUMÂ¥00,Al Mub ROOAA (11+ st-3 Â© VAM MACE, ~op 1(-DE- Â«IBA-cle-= E).0 ' -1-c 1.61' LEAST- Â© 0O00m .. FEES DUE: $ &27 5, 00 General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application. This information will help us review your plans and, ifnecessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO * O Does the wod[ you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration? 0 *< Does the work youare planning include interior wodgi including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration? O Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time? EN.Wh WOOD Vit\VACM 9-KCE ALONG WEST FROVE,pr~ UNE- AN ADDI-tlOjUAL \4' d RETURN To +LULPIN-(6 0 )<' In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect andabuildingpermil., areyousee~neto medthe Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits? 0 0 If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not) 1/ O 0 If'yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use: o Rehabilitation Loan Fund O Conservation Easement Program <Dimensional variances O Increased Density 0 Historic I.andmark Lot Split 0 Waiver ofPark Dedication Fees 0 Conditional Uses 0 Exemption from Growth Management Quota System 0 Tax Credits .. Dimensional Requirements Form Btem #10 on the submittal requirements key. Not necessary for *11 projects.) Project: \3>4 \AEST- 1-16F\4145 kUE Abr' Ell ct . Applicant: 14 \ C\AELLE. 97 HI)Â¤i- (W t-91- Uo~il-5 L.L. cl Project Location: %1- Wt* Utpl-\ LE Al)*>, Ab~EU , 0-t. 8,6lt Zone District: A- 03 Lot Size: 3>01 *.100 ' Lot Area: -5000 S~ (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.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: R~ K Proposed: t\) K Number ofresidential units: Existing: CAL Proposed: 6#'E- Number ofbedrooms: Existing.* 3 Proposed: 3 f. . 9 .f'.F'&' 6- crvA T t- Proposed % of demolition: :* ' ~ hi.-fp'"u- &. 4F.'41>Â«i:.It 28(* 1 {\4~ 2.72 ) DIMENSIONS: (write n/a where no requirement exists in the zone district) Floor Area: Existing: \1 0 0 Allowable: 93-0 0 Proposed- 19 51- Height Principal Bldg.: Existing.- 01_l. 31) Allowable.- '232.0 Proposed. 2 .33 Accessory Bldg.: Existing: \4~6 Allowabi '~ ~41 k Proposed: ~ k On-Site parking: Existing: CMU- Requ#ed: CKE Proposed.- 0 HE % Site coverage: Eriwing: 39,1 Requ#ed- M~ -Proposed: 40 <5 % Open Space: Existing: 9 3 1% Required: A ~ A Proposed: 51.5 Front Setback: Existing- ~ 9 . 0 Required.- 10 c O Proposed.- (i , 0 Rear Setback: Existing: 311 33 Required- 10.0 Proposed- 1-\.33 Combined Front/Rear: Indicate~@ E. W Â£~isting- 51. 13 Required- 16.0 Proposed. 35.33 Side Setback: 43 7 Existing: (tO Required. 5,0 Proposed: 1,0 rÂ»n Side Setback: tf Existing: 93 g> Required: 5,0 Proposed: to .U Combined Sides: Existing: 9,0 Required: \8 ' 0 Proposed: & . C Distance between Existing: tÂ¢k Required- N/A Proposed: N-1K buildings: Existing non-conformities or encroachments and note ifencroachment licenses have been issued: 140bw._ Variations requested (identify the exact variances needed): l REDUCT\Ok) Or M, 1 R i K Uk S\DE SU-5ACAL Ot 510< TO 2-trol ' Ar DEU) kl,UD floOM (*Aâ‚¬T) 1I , ~ ~Alugh#1/1 . FMS lu i d I unT 4 - +17 en-1, -- 1-071~ l~.44,~~ */r, CL 17/8 - 365 i (4 I 1 3 Po - 0Â£;8 6 6 c â‚¬/ f 0 9>D - 3144) (64 i 0. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT, DEMOLITION AND VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE, LOT 1 OF 134 AND 134 1/2 WEST HOPKINS HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT, BLOCK 59, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. _, SERIES OF 2006 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-19-001. WHEREAS, the applicant, Michelle Snyder, represented by George Winne of George Winne Architects, has requested Minor Development, Demolition, and Variance for the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 M West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. 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, the procedure for a Minor Development Review is as follows. Staff reviews the submittal materials and prepares a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code Sections. This report is transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC reviews the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions, or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and WHEREAS, in order to authorize a demolition, according to Section 26.415.080, Demolition of designated historic properties, it must be 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; and WHEREAS, for approval of an FAR Bonus, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code, that: a, The design of the project meets al! applicable design guidelines; and b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained; and WHEREAS, for approval of variances, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.B of the Municipal Code, that the setback variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district. WHEREAS, Sara Adams, in her staff report dated December 13th, 2006, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, found the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines have been met, and the criteria for a variance demonstrated: and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on December 13, 2006, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application for Minor Development and a variance met the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and variance review criteria, and approved the application by a vote of to NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC hereby recommends approval of the application for Minor Development, Demolition and Variances for the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of 134 and 134 M West Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the following conditions: 1 The option with all vertical siding on the addition is approved. 2. The windows on the west elevation must be revised and reviewed by staff and monitor. 3. The vertical siding will be added to the non-historic addition on the east elevation. - 4. All dormers will be changed to a shed roof to match the photograph in Exhibit B. 5. The following setback variances re approved: east side yard setback variance of 3 feet for the new addition, a west side yard setback variance of 1 foot for the existing house, and a combined side yard setback variance of 5 feet for the existing house. 6. The owner will record an amendment to the Historic Landmark Lot Split plat and agreement for 134 West Hopkins Avenue to read that Lot 1 = 1,760 square feet and Lot 2 = 1,704 square feet. 7. No elements are to be added to the historic house that did not previously exist. No existing exterior materials other than what has been specifically approved herein may be removed without the approval of staff and monitor. 8. There shall be no deviations from the exterior elevations as approved without first being reviewed and approved by HPC staff and monitor, or the full board. 9. The conditions of approval will be required to be printed on the cover sheet of the building permit plan set and all other prints made for the purpose of construction. 10. The applicant shall be required to provide the contractor with copies of the HPC resolution applicable to this project. The contractor must submit a letter addressed to HPC staff as part of the building permit application indicating that all conditions of approval are known and understood and must meet with the Historic Preservation Officer prior to applying for the building permit. 11.The General Contractor and/or Superintendent shall be required to obtain a specialty license in historic preservation prior to receiving a building permit. 12. The development approvals granted herein shall constitute a site-specific development plan vested for a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance of a development order. However, any failure to abide by any of the terms and conditions attendant to this approval shall result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights. Unless otherwise exempted or extended, failure to properly record all plats and agreements required to be recorded, as specified herein, within 180 days of the effective date of the development order shall also result in the forfeiture of said vested property rights and shall render the development order void within the meaning of Section 26.104.050 (Void permits). Zoning that is not part of the approved site-specific development plan shall not result in the creation of a vested property right. No later than fourteen (14) days following final approval of all requisite reviews necessary to obtain a development order as set forth in this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Aspen, a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan and creation of a vested property right pursuant to this Title. Such notice shall be substantially in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right, valid for a period of three (3) years, pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: 134 West Hopkins Avenue. Nothing in this approval shall exempt the development order from subsequent reviews and approvals required by this approval of the general rules, regulations and ordinances or the City of Aspen provided that such reviews and approvals are not inconsistent with this approval. The approval granted hereby shall be subject to all rights of referendum and judicial review; the period of time permitted by law for the exercise of such rights shall not begin - to run until the date of publication of the notice of final development approval as required under Section 26.304.070(A). The rights of referendum shall be limited as set forth in the Colorado Constitution and the Aspen Home Rule Charter. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 13th day of December 2006. Approved as to Form: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Jeffrey Halferty, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk . Â«*49*W"UrSP;U' , 4 1 0 m â‚¬ 11=entz e ..1 11 1 1 0. m * - - *14.r 11.4 C ' .A, lie+7414. 21 .. I 00 *it *i li ' < 1Â¥-- 9. Â· "R)* 'Wl<4~1 1~, i't'(~.,0,6Â¥, ,i:* , 11 1 1.-1.,0*li, '. 1 CU 114*** - . . LurÂ» , -I - . m 1rl Â£ 1 + 11,; .2 0. 3 -00 .71 ~.2Â¥7* 44, - 1- 1 4 + 't 1 1 1 ..+ 4 r. w 7-4 -1,92, "11 16,1- . 1 1 - 1#4* 4 -1 9,1.4 4 . ' *t"4 r r , 81~1 4%Â« ./ 1?jk ' 1 t . U 1- M. i<# R F.,1~ 0 r 4 + i -1 46 4 *,164 .,e'l - t# ' 0-27'M:. Â¢,9<. I.te 44 1 -fi = i. 11 1.111.1 l' I * - I / - la /1 '. 1, 1'' 1' ... ...I r,0 , 2<%69471 - 4 [I] + 1 . 1.. .11.: 0 . A.1 + /AT :111' 11 'j- - r-:24 .9%31;6.(. 1/ .,,,.6 - 1 '4 f V ... ...4.-6... 1 94 4- r02 1 + 14 1 : â€¢:2.91 â€¢ ' 4.-+111 6. 1 . 4 , 0-4 J. I fl , ,\Ift 14:- 4 1 O L \Â·+ l'i 4 , t ~'P - '*. Jt ~'f. C 2 '1 1 -'14 - A.1-1 . 4.- .1 -1-. -1. 1 :112 , It, %*,F , _ r 'lil ,/* #:Y :.2 1 141 + , 1 4 '7 1 h f .1,1 11 4 1 I .0 1 -07 1 4 -, 4 1 -Â£-k f - 4..th U 6 - * 1 1 1 at 4,1, :, .â€¢ 41 A ~6* ~ *Jig#1'C'~"*~~" 1. 1141 -- 1 4 + . -1 + 1;1, 1- 1 '-11 1 1,1 + I E- t 4,4 4 0 -- r :al 1 7~ - *4 1 41 1 1 1.L 11 '11 1.b ; 164~.41 W.f, 4 (8 4 * , e ~ - Irliwilloil/".il.ilillillilill'll.9/'ll/*./.'IMME.*4 2901'/74 - - -I' 1 --el I :It ,~~4,4 ~4~,tr':f Â»LIZ~ :'~'râ€¢~ *1â€¢'â€¢'y --** r -t- i - 1,0* L ./. - -a- - - ail --* - 1 61 --- $ 0 '1191 - u- 1 'U.4... .4/**p#- - -+ *7'Â·r'ki. 1*4*64*te~ ~4..'A....29Â·,44. -~'51.2-431*. Â· ' -1*1* 6.-L - I . I ......& ..' I. . -aur" 4 X ' u *Â» Ak *L;.2. .%'le- 4 77 4- - -~- -*$ * TI #1941 Â¥_ , , 44* 211 pacif aspen, 1E311 7,-:,4 K "41)111>X Â£401#Nope Â· rÂ·Â·1011Â»93-1,2 : 1,yanx t -1 ONO*571 1 , - 1.-~Â·-Â·..t,NUEÂ·cr.-UCE-*IT _,_ -. . ._. /4- i- t - /1 11! lip . ----1!! -- i -- 1 11 i. j. ~ % ---- iJ M P 1 -r-T: .-~ Â·+_ ~ Â»rht"g _I _ - . i i !7111111 i . ,,1 -4 <i .1 }--!!-'-Jif'J i.-;.~00~ ---- -Â·1 - - . -.-W. I : %* / ...' . MI-. -/$.- . -.* - 2 34361>12.-2.7 ~ --- - \ S.. j \\ 31*11.37 ti I / 4/*GMINIAL 6/N 8-0 110 ~00 ,1 4-3-145>N Irte ~ A t.uN,li;zy*j 79,9317 /Al lapÂ·029 6913+5' QLN| w" 14&4341 83 tie 01111Â¢9321 '*270~6 -334Url/Â»:a N lk' 1164 19*/1 rÂ·*Ptlxy/\913 11.LDâ‚¬29 Â£*11 0%61 * & M* UÂ» u-J--1- - - E-..1 R. I 1 f ~ C 41. . \40% ?1Â» # 14' Â£1 , -1------- *MUP MÂ·16Â¢> Pt:7Â¢4-IE29 0//---1 -- - ----- t, b knO *401-80 ADâ‚¬,~1~12-92 . ' â‚¬ LA,26,Â£Â£ A:>VIXC 1+UNA \Vth.10745 . --r ..... - - ...... , 1.-- ~ -- -.- il--it-- , kjau BIAX 0,4091147[ 04'KIALES - . - .../7... 161 IZE<FLACE FIXÂ£22 A-1716 14< IN{22Â»/ \V;/ 19 2 1 V -' i - '.* - f~ pi-4~?-449, f,- 1 -. , L.U,%06. 5,11140f O Â¢StÂ».60 14#140>ov SÂ¥ cd/NIEFL 1 I. . 1 I i-* 4 -, FAN Â« BUTr % i Wa Lee 10 -333_â€ž_; 1 2 .A.*.lt 1. : r. A 1 <t- ~ 2, . -- ~ rtitpi i, I._. . /-- '4448,[Â£ -~ -gâ‚¬44%9- i*-2--1-1-- 73(14<+ / ,- - LK 6 24.~662 Et,460 1-2 L.- n"-" .-,-7.-7-7.---- .Ft. -7464 .2.-1.1.1-f.Cl-0390(~f'Pot Â·1 rxrt. 1 4 , 1 .-- 0EkÂ·1(VE XÂ»P'WACT 5,64 1 AJILEÂ» 4 U.A.Ace Â»// 13,eÂ·/elÂ· 54Â£1NG. -Â·.Â· EEAAE# 1209 alÂ» *11161*62 */017 44'Le -- ~ 1 1 1 .-eferwet QuaÂ¢*CrivE e Â· -_'.., , 4 -fi - ---p . . 1 U NUEE 8609 ./1 A - - k.Â·fOft._f illuti - ----,--1 1 1 ( , -1 4 . 1 eâ‚¬%1- ell- 6. Page 1 of 1 - ASPEN HISTORIC tRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 30. 2006 Comments: Alison sid the replacement windows Im Hyman Ave. conform to our guidelines. ThÂ© windows should match as close as to what was there originally. The drawing presented today improves the lift. Jason said the new drawings will restore the faâ„¢le to its historic proportions, Derek, Jeffrey and Sarah are in full support of the revised drawings, MOTION: Jason moved to approve Resolution #23 for 501 E. Hyman, the Aspen,freade Building -Minor Review. The drawing submitted,4ugu-st 30 is also approved, Exhibit I, Sts#and monitor to review the windows. The goal is to match the window as close to the historic windows as possibk Lei historic photograph. Derek second the motion, motion carried 5 -0. Roll call vote: Jason, yes; Derek, yes: Alison, yes; Sarah, yes; Jeffrey, yes. 134 W. HOPKINS - MINOR REVIEW - DEMOLITION AND VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING Affidavit of notice - Exhibit I Sara sid this is a minor review for variances, demolition and a FAR bonus. The subjectproperty ig an 1880's miner'& cabin, The Iot split occurred in 2003. In the 1980' 5 the home was rehabbed and an addition was added to the rear. The applicant proposed to demolish and replace a 60 square foot attached storage shed and extend an addition, Staff finds that the project meets the design guidelines. Sara said the FAR bonus needs discussed. When the lot split was approved in 2003 the HPC granted a 336 square foot bonus to the fathering parcel to bring both of the existing structures into compliance. The subject lot was inaccurately recorded so they received more of the FAR bonus then they needed. Basically any construction done on this property needs to be granted an FAR bonus becau &e as the property exists now there is no FAR available to do any sort of building even though Chey are demolishing part of the structure. The main part ofthe appIicationis the FAR bonus, Staff finds that the new design does meet the criteria for the bonus; however, there are no rehabilitation aspects to this project go gtaffis not in Support of granting the FAR bonus, The house was rehabbed in I 980 and the only part ofthe house that staff fbund that could be restored at this point is a dormer on the primary fava,le that is a gabled roof which originally was a shed roof according to the historic photographs. Even if this alteration occurred it is not enough to grant an FAR bonus. Staff is in support of granting 2 s siback 4 http://205.170.56.4/weblin]<.7/ImageDisplay.aspx?cache=yes&sessionkey=WLImageDispl... 10/3/2006 Page 1 of 1 - ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 30, 2006 valiance for the existing home that was never granted previously, It is a west side-yard setback o f one foot George Winney, architect said he is here to request the bonus in order to do the addition. The existing house is in excellent condition except for the one dormer, We want to open the back of the house and add an addition, What is really thete is 1760 square feet on the property and when you add that up with the square footage of the adjacent house, 1704 you get 3464 square feet. The allowable is 3240 square feet. We are asking for halfof the square footage allowed. Alison Clarifidd that there are two historic houses on each lot The adjacent property owner added to the back of theE house. Sara gaid what was recorded was allowing the subject propetty too much FAR. The intent was to bring each property into compliance. George said he thought he could request the difference which is 112 square feet, Derek pointed that the calculations should have been ciarified with Todd Grange, Zordng officer, Amy pointed out that the applicant is requesting half the bonus that is allowed. --4 George said they are going to repair any bad si(ling and the house will be re- V painted. Chairperson, Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing portion of the meeting was closed, Sarah said when we add onto historic structures we want a link and keep the mass away from the historic structure. Jason said they are taking the shed offand replacing it with a different structure. The restoration of the dormer to its historic integrity would be preferred. Derek also recommended that the applicant look at restoring the dormer back. 5 http://205.170.56.4/weblin-k7/ImageDisplay.aspx?cache=yes&sessionkey=WLImageDispl... 10/3/2006 Page 1 of 1 - ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF.AUGUST 30, 2006 Amy pointed out that more than one of the bonus criteria needs to be met. Our concern is that HPC has made some people do a lot of rehabilitation and restoration in order to earn their 500 square foot bonus. Derek said hc would be willing to accept the sky lights. Derek reiterated that he wished the HPC had the correct figures. Sarah said the HPC tries to hold to our standards regarding bonuses. It would be easier to grant a bonus if the addition complied more with our guidelines such as a link. Right now you have a 12 foot wide sun room coming into the fasda boards ofthe sable and it is stailing to mar the historic resource. Similarly the shed room over the mud room is not allowing the back gable end to be realized in its overall form, Jason pointed out that bonuses am granted to exceptional preservation projects. With our current guidelineg the addition would nothave been approved that was put on in tile 1980's. If the proposal and the elimination of the addition and a link added that would be something that was worthy of the bonuB. Jason also pointed out that the skylights are a visual impact, Sarah said the addition was added on in the 80's and now wc are adding on again, Alison said basically the back half of the house is new. The suggestion that Sarah had changes the project Knowing the back of the house is not historic makes this confusing, Jeffrey said he is in agreement with staff, Bonuses are given to exemplary projects with a restoration effort. This is a challenging project. It is hard to support a variance with this level ofrestoraticm. Amy said under the circumstances that we have adding another addition that extends the building may not meet the bonus criteria and Sarah suggested that the applicant might have to undo Borne things to get back to a situation that is bonus woithy today. George said he can treat the center 80's part to read differently than the historic house and develop out from there. George asked for direction, 6 http://205.170.56.4/weblink7/ImageDisplay.aspx?cache=yes&sessionkey=WLImageDispl... 10/3/2006 Page 1 of 1 - ASPEN HISTO]RIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST 30. 2006 Derek said it may be berieficial for you to do one more design and look at everything in a broader scheme. HPC said they were open to suggestions, MOTION: Derek moved to continue ]34 W. Hopkins to October 1 Ith; second by Sarah. Roll cali vote: Jason, yes; Derek yea; Alison, yes: Sarah, yes; Jeffrey, yes, 408 E. COOPER AVE -MINOR REVIEW - COMMER L D IGN REVIEW - VIEW PLANE REIVEW - PUBLIC NG Affidavit fposting - Exhibit I Photo of m anical equipment approved by Chris Ben - Comnnmity Development 'rector - Exhibit II Amy relayed that A Sports has been in this lo tion for 50 years. The building was origina none-story building and ' 1968 Caudill and Assoc. redesigned the fafa<le ' added on and a few cars later they added the second story, The ground oor is a yellow 'ck with some arched facades and the upper floor is a stuce material. y stated that the application is to replace the existing exterior fa de of e building. They also intend to add new light fixtures, awl,ings, si e d windows, At the staff'review we aÂ©Imowledge that the proposal many ofthe design guidelines for what infill buildings downtown are ex ct to do but we also discussed guideline 13.]5 which is the one that trie to expla' how infill buildings should be clearly different than the old We also diskssed the development of Aspen and some new buildings thave been constqloted thataren'tof the period of some o f thesunoundi g structures and mat *p what set them outfrom others. In this particul case it was designed by~firm that has legacy in town. I guess we are xpressing regret of loosing th* fagade. The project is Filso subjectto the rcial design review but staf~beIs there is no conflict, There is me mechanical equipment for the rÂ®fand actually much of this bui 'ng already projects into the Wheeler 01'Pra House view plane. There i exemption available through the Conlmuhtly Development 'rector for mechanical equipment only and thÂ«Dave received exemption, (Exhibit II). Staff feels a number of thih*s can be approved - one form or another but we feel the fagade on the grouh~oor should t be removed. Pau odd, architect Jo Larkin, store manager 7 http://205.170.56.4/weblink7/ImageDisplay.aspx?cache=yes&sessionkey=WLImageDispl... 10/3/2006 *. .i:..Aw//4 #.-*.* ..' ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 2006 Sara sai~Qi the resolution she mentioned keeping the bushes at a heiiht of no higher 1~0 42 inches which would include the totem trees if HPC. is in agreement. .\ 244 -f rfiâ€¢ Sarah said she feelk<~is is a good compromise but there are still a lot of trees in front of the house. t 1-7, Jason said his concern is ~e the height is measured from, is it from the sidewalk height or down at t!16*rade. ,/ \ f. Jeffrey said this is a good compromit and in fairness to the applicant the tree should not be measured at the higli~evation and should be measured where the trees are at grade. Sara said measurement occurs at grade. 0 \ MOTION: Sarah inoved to approve Resolution #2 Tjqr 922 W. Hallam as stated in stafs menio with thefollowing addition: 4 l. The two totem trees are also kept to a height of4fh,<0es to match tile shrubs in the front yard. Motion second by Alison. Molfi carried 3-1. *Roll call vote: Jason, no: Alison, Yes; Sarah, yes; Je#re?~es. .- V. 134 W. Hopkins - Minor Development and Variances - Continued public hearing Exhibit 1 - New drawing Sara relayed that the property is on the corner of Hopkins Ave. and S. First St. It is al % story miner's cottage that was built in the 1 880's and was subject to a landmark lot split. IN 1 980's a big addition was added to the rear which does not comply with the design guidelines, There is no connector piece and things like that. At the last meeting HPC requested confirmation of the square footage. Currently there is 1760 square feet of FAR existing on the properly and 138 of the FAR bonus is available for this property. The proposal is an addition to the rear and a storage shed. Staff finds that the proposed roof form is inconsistent with some of the design guidelines 10.9 and 10.14. The main problem is with the gablette which is not consistent with the historic resource and we recommend its removal. The materials selected do comply with the guidelines. The height of the proposed shed is about 14 feet and staff feels it could be lowered a little in 2 â‚¬ ./4 yA#/4& EN 4 *1%~it y.*i~%91?%Â·Â»I{44#*4*2**~A@**%44*Â¢*84***<{%4* j ././..... dilillill ....Â»*t**>03?32%;44:4*49% ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11,2006 order to not compromise the historic structure. In terms of demolishing the storage shed that is currently there staff finds that it meets the criteria for demolition. FAR bonus: With alterations to the roof form staff feels the design could comply. Regarding the rehabilitation measure photographs indicate that the dormer on the primary faGade used to be a shed roof and now it is a gabled roof and staff suggested that would be a good rehabilitation measure that could help qualify for the bonus but that is not proposed with this application. HPC had an idea to redesign the 1 980's rear addition because it is difficult to distinguish between old and new. The applicant came back adding board and batten to create a differentiation between the materials. Staff finds that the proposal does not exhibit full compliance with the guidelines. A few setback variances were never granted for the existing house and staffis in favor of granting those variances. There is also a request for a 3 foot east side yard setback variance for the addition and staff supports that val-lance. Staff recommends HPC approve the storage shed but in terms of the addition staff feels there is not enough rehabilitation aspect to the proposal to warrant granting a bonus for the addition. George Winne, architect Michelle Snyder. owner George said the back section was added on in the early 1980's. It was finished with the same material as the house, horizontal siding. We came iii with a shed roofand incorporated it into the roof line and clianged the materials. Alison asked the owner if they were opposed to changing the front dornier back to a shed. George said that would be an option that we could do. Jason commented that the height of the east elevation seems foreign. Sarah asked if they are proposing doing the same vertical board and batten on the previous addition that you are proposing on the west elevation. Michelle said there is a fence there and you can't see it at all but if HPC desires that we could do it. Chairperson Jeffrey Halferty opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public comment section of the meeting was closed. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 2006 Sarah commented that this is a different kind of project in which we are being asked to giant a bonus above and beyond area that you have already used than what is allowable. Her concern is the height of the addition in the back. Architecturally how it is interacting with the gable volume seems problematic. Alison agreed with Sarah. The material change helps. In order to grant the FAR bonus the front dornier needs to be taken back to a shed roof. We were 1-nore Oil target when it was a simple shed roof on the back addition. The addition is modest and it seems that we should be able to work this out. Jason also said the project has moved in the wrong direction. The glazing vs. wall is too drastic. I-le suggested that the board and batten could be horizontal and the storage roof could be lowered. Jeffrey is currently in support of staff's recommendation. The new proposal is too much ofa contrast. Tile gablette causes disruption on the historic west elevation. The suggestion that the storage form have a different spring point oraflatroof would minimize the size ofthe north elevation. Guideline 10,9 and 10.14 are the guidelines that the applicant needs to be responding to. As Sarah stated this has to be an exemplary project for us to consider adding the square footage and the restoration at this point has not gone far enough. Returning the dormer to what it was originally is recommended. The addition is lower but is competing with the historic west elevation. Sarah said with the 8'6" doors they might be able to be lowered which would help a lot and there is area for improvement in the overall mass and scale of the addition. Michelle said they interpreted the last meeting to totally make the back addition different and that is why they went offin that direction. We misunderstood. We would eliminate the sky lights and lower the storage area and change the roof line to make it different from the addition. Michelle said she wasn't sure what can be done on the 1980's addition as it was there when she bought the house. Any ideas would be welcomed. We can definitely change the dormer in the front. Michelle said they want to do whatever it takes to get this done. She loves the Victorian and understands what HPC is charged to do and we certainly do not want to make a monstrosity. We are concerned more about the inside space. 4 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 2006 Jertrey said the material change is something we discussed and not mimicking the existing. Sarah said her concern is tile scale and mass. The scale before was niore in keeping with the historic resource. If you look at the front elevation and the gable volume of the window there is proportion and scale and we are loosing that in the back. As you think about the inside think about the outside also. George said he explored the shed roof on the center before. Sarah said it is the gable conflicting with the upper gable fascia. Look at the front of the house and use that as an example. Jason said there is an opportunity to make the storage lower. MOTION: Sarah moved to continue 134 W. Hopkins, minor development and publichearinguntil Dec. 13th ; second by Alison. Motion carried 4-0. Roll call vote: Jason, yes: Alison.,yes: Sarah. yes: Jeffrey, yes. , I. // r. A~,en IMeadows - Conference Bldg. referral ~pnments .james Curtis, 17~sented d Amy relayed that *PC reviewed the conference as eikeferral comment a couple of years agoÂ»d during the SPA and other approvals. It went under construction and durinkthe process they changed some aspects of their H VAC system in order to t}yand be more "green" ancl it changed the cliaracter of the mechanical>quipment that they needed and they made an adjustment to increase the parapht wall to hide it. They didn't realize they needed additional approvals that Were contradictory to their SPA which was very specific about all the height limikÂ· Sarah asked what the height limit was on the SPA. Jim said it varies depending on the building point. Amy pointed out that the parapet wall is going up an additionial 2'6". The end ofthe buil<ing where the height is increased is the closest area to the health club. F.~ X Jim said about 45 days ago the rooftop mechanical wakfut up. There are two large pieces of mechanical equipment behind the parb)Ret wall. Without even thinking about it they built the mechanical wall to hide'~ equipment. A Pitkin Green neighbor asked us to check the building heightg'~When we did we discovered that the parapet wall was 2'6" higher. The SPNdrawings A 5 - 1 architecture L.W July 30,2006 City of Aspen Community Development Historic Preservation Committee 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Historic Preservation Application Minor Development Review Single Family Residence 134 West Hopkins Avenue Aspen. Colorado 81611 Dear Sirs This letter is being submitted as part of a Historic Preservation Application for the proposed addition to an existing residence located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, Colorado. This residence has been classified as a historical building and requires approval by the Historical Preservation Committee for any new development. The following are responses to items #1-10, 16, 17, 18, & 37, of the HPC application as required for Minor Development: 1. Applicant: Michelle Snyder Representative: George Winne West Hopkins LLC GRW Architecture LLC P.O. Box 6150 P.O. Box 95 Potomac, MD 20859 Carbondale, CO 81623 Tel: 301-873-5656 Tel: 970-618-4346 2. Property Information Address: 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611 Legal Description: 134 & 134 4 W. Hopkins, Landmark Lot Split - Lot 1 Parcel ID: 2735-124-19-001 3. Disclosure of Ownership Attached with this letter 4. Vicinity Map Attached with this letter p.o. box 95 Â· carbondale Â· colorado Â· 81623 phone 970.618.4346 fax 775.719.2682 .. Page 2 134 West Hopkins Avenue HPC Application (Minor Development) 5. Site Plan (1/4" = 1'-0") Attached with this letter - 24x36 Drawing (Sheet A. 1) 6. Site Improvement Survev Survey to be prepared by "Tuttle Surveying Services", Glenwood Springs, CO. and submitted to the City of Aspen within 14 Days. 7. Written Description of Proposal A. Based on FAR calculations submitted to the city, we are proposing a 194.0 square foot one story addition to the north side of this residence. The addition includes a 156 SF Sunroom and a 38 SF Mudroom. The mudroom will replace an existing 60SF attached storage shed that will be removed. In addition, one half of a double easement window on the west wall will be removed for the redesign ofthe kitchen cabinets. The architectural design of this addition is based on the owners requirements & comments received at an HPC 'work session' held on June 28,2006. All elements of this addition including roof & wall materials, windows & doors, and colors of finishes are to match the existing residence. B. Request for side setback variance at east property line to be reduced from the minimum of 5.0' to 2.67' for location of new Mudroom. 8. Additional Materials No additional materials requested 9. Completed forms, Agreement, and Fees Attached with this letter 10. Dimensional Requirement Form Attached with this letter 16. Photograph. Samples, Drawings Architectural plan (Sheet A. 1) is included to describe the addition, its location on the property, and connection to the existing residence. Exterior lighting locations are shown on floor plan. 17. Building Materials and Finishes Architectural drawings (Sheet A.1 & A.2) indicate building materials. Photographs of the existing building are included to indicate finishes and colors that will be used on the addition. p.o. box 95 Â· carbondale colorado Â· 81623 phone 970.618.4346 fax 775.719.2682 b.j Page 3 134 West Hopkins Avenue HPC Application (Minor Development) 18. Scaled Elevations, Drawings Architectural drawings (Sheets A. 1 & A.2) indicate elevations of the residence with the new addition. Site & Floor plan show the relationship of this residence to the residence at 134 M W. Hopkins Ave. 37. Lighting Plan. Cut Sheets New exterior lighting (4 locations) indicated on Sheet A. 1 Cut sheets for lighting fixtures included with this letter. The existing residence is in excellent condition and has been well maintained over the years. The existing exterior features, finishes, and colors will remain as they are and will be used as a basis for the exterior of the new addition. We believe that this addition will add value to the residence and the neighborhood, and due to its location on the property (north face), will not interfere or disrupt the design, character, or historical significance of the existing residence. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this project to the Historic Preservation Committee, and we look forward to presenting our proposal for review & approval. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you need any further information. Sincerely, t.ri.- 11 1 1 .i 1 1,# '4 V A C f 'j ' 4 , kit . 1 l, L 1, X Â· Representative Owner r George R. Winne A.I.A. Michelle Snyder GRW Architecture LLC West Hopkins LLC p.o. box 95 Â· carbondale Â· colorado Â· 81623 phone 970.618.4346 fax 775.719.2682 - 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP 9?06252951 SCHEDULE A-OWNER'S POLICY CASE NUMBER DATE OF POUCY AMOUNT OF INSURANCE PODCY NUMBER PCT19001F2 August 23,2004 @ 240 PM $2,300,000.00 1312-236900 1. NAME OF INSURED: WEST HOPKINS. LLC 2. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND HEREIN AND WHICH IS COVERED BY THIS POLICY IS: IN FEE SIMPLE 3. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST REFERRED TO HEREIN IS AT DATE OF POLICY VESTED tN: WEST HOPKINS. LLC 3. THE LAND P.EFERRED TO IN THIS POLICY IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO AND iS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS. LOTY, 134 AND 13412 W. HOPKINS HISTORIC LANDMARK LCT SPLIT. ascurng le rte Pirthiem:' reÂ©orded May 4.200â€¢in Plat Book 09 at Page 6 as Reception No. 497137. FrrKIN COUNTY TITLB, INC 601 E HOFEUNS AVE. AS'EN, COLORADO 81611 (970 925-1766/(970*925#27 FAX - 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT DISCLOSURE OF OWNERSHIP 9706252951 SCHEDULE B-OWNERS CASE NUMBER DATE OF POLICY POUCY NUMBER PCT19061F2 Augus! 23,2004 @ 2.40 PM 1312-236900 THIS POLICY DOES NOT;NSURE AGAINST LOSS OR DAMAGE BY REASON OF THE FOLLOWING 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements. or claims of easements, not shown by the public records, 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments. any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the pubfic records. 4, Any Ben. or right to a lien, for sencoes, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records 5. Water rights, Glaims or title to water. 6. Taxes #cr the year 2004 not yet due or payable. 7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 328 providing as follows: 0That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, dnnabar or copper of to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws. 8. recorded No~Enter 22, 1974 h Bcok 787 C Pam 728. 9. Terms, condlrions, provisions. obigations and all matters as set forth in Resolution of the Aspen Hietoric Preservatton Commission recorded December 14 1999 as Recepeon No. 438633 as Resolution No. 19. Series 1999. 10. Temls, cord'fors, F uv~-2~ 279 cbf~yors 0-9 sat folt, A-, St.2-fs,35 2--rTTFOL- I.*'+ ./.Il . d ,-14. .LU:'f..C2:I #g r. Â·2s... ".1 . - .#0 a '% 2004 as Recepfun Ne. 497136 21 f 4:m.T.4.-i MEÂ·Â· 13, 2104 6 -:60Â©L.V. No- t. -1. 1 1 7-- 3-3 non, ir< 1 eT Â·r/ ror] r7 17'Ute- as Iz-"4'-'sel rn F!11 d '2393:rft pri o:.m, r-:oded '22.7 1. 2?04 tr, PIa: - 4 330% ED r Pr "OS *I T---- ---dw-"1 Trr'vaic'. 25:d .Pre-:.9--r:t: .t :-rf tt!'71 1[ Er:'1.3HWEItt' â€¢'.Â·n'*- f #'C.,r.' ' 6... /4, Â·04 &/ 23. GCN cl.7 R'-c'-F.:ton No. 500 32,3 . .Alj,~- .;...,I 1 --69.~Â· th ~,tut.- EXCEPTIONS NUMBERED 1,2,3 AND 4 ARE HEREBY OMITTED. - 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE HISTORIC PRESERVATION APPLICATION MINOR DEVELOPMENT VICINITY MAP Â¥ 76 4 5 A 1%> ,%6 4 40 404 2 '10:enon 4.44 . W wk R.. e,k <li 4 4 3 ' i '10 -* Creek .' 45. e*Me F 4% t 3%0 Ad 5 99 Saws ?.fy 0 1 6. ter e AS.> B O W 22 4, C Adb 9- uck Urd 7,1 . G St . ..1.,7. S As en rt e ahm; 6 j-- E 1 Lkke j. &% ncer r 3 .Mtâ‚¬Â» Â¥ 9 p Vme 0 9, 6 9 Â£ 3,-. -- 7 80 I 2. 0 G 41 6 2 ibsoo : / i *de % e A e co , E ' Molly 4 8 2 -= /am St Rio *c C < - Grande 2 Gibson - 4 0 4 0 - 2 -c 2 ~ark i agy ,. ' Park - e 0 60.2 00 0 0 -9 /6 D â„¢-mec 44*AS, t *er h 9 - ns 02 6 4 Ve - -4.4 5 4 2 E 0 040 ve 2 -*-'-2 0 0 k *efu gger SUBJELT 4 4 4,= rL e Ffortely % 0 0 1; P ~r4 im co 04 1 -spe , 0 M wate,7 -' *~5 D S, -Ve R rov / 42* Ule P, 6 Westviewd 04, or 0 4% U e â‚¬ Sta C N Â£: i- -9 E /4 S Any changes. errors, or omissions brought [o our anention are greatly appreciated and updates w,11 be m Ihe next edition. Please ema,1 Maps Etc. Co ., Denver, CO at changes@mapsetc.com Â© 2003 44,4, , '0 A no ue '41 09 C ..'' >Pul CITY OF AS OMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN JRTMENT .... Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and 14 10" E \, \ Â·\- ,--1,14\~Di E (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for 'V t. FL ...1.\ .1 1~ ir 1% 1 -- LÂ·'2 L Â£ 1~ t,4. t. 2. 2 1 rNFÂ· e, iN,v; ~,,rs'~T I r..rtte,MT J , I- (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment ofall processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent ofthe costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT' S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $'.: i ~,1.( 1- which is for > Â· 1 hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing ofthe application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $220.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. â€¢, 1 1 CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT 1/ f/!/l ~ f Â·A k By: By: f Chris Bendon Community Development Director Date: Bill To Mailing Address and Telephone Number: 4,7 1 g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doc 02/01/06 RET- FOR PERMANENT RECORD - FEES DUE: $ 61 9, CO General Information Please check the appropriate boxes below and submit this page along with your application This information will help us review your plans and, if necessary, coordinate with other agencies that may be involved. YES NO X O Does the work you are planning include exterior work; including additions, demolitions, new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation or restoration? 0 < Does the work you are planning include interior work; including remodeling, rehabilitation, or restoration? El 0 Do you plan other future changes or improvements that could be reviewed at this time? ENENt) WOOD Vit\VACH PV- KICE N-ORG *lEST FKO fE-pr~ UblE- A\4 ADDITio,UNL 14' it RETURN To tu\L,DihiC=, 0 *0 In addition to City of Aspen approval for a Certificate of Appropriateness or No Negative Effect and a building permit, are you seeking to meet the Secretoo of the Interior's Standards,tor Rehabilitation or restoration of a National Register of Historic Places property in order to qualify for state or federal tax credits? O If yes, are you seeking federal rehabilitation investment tax credits in conjunction with this project? (Only income producing properties listed on the National Register are eligible. Owner-occupied residential properties are not) L./ 0 0 If yes, are you seeking the Colorado State Income Tax Credit for Historical Preservation? Please check all City of Aspen Historic Preservation Benefits which you plan to use: 0 Rehabilitation Loan Fund O Conservation Easement Program MfDimensional Variances o Increased Density 0 Historic Landmark Lot Split 0 Waiver ofPark Dedication Fees 0 Conditional Uses 0 Exemption from Growth Management Quota System 0 Tax Credits - mwmmum~li'nuimiHImmiiiij. 09/09/2004 10:17A 501721 Page: 1 of 4 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) RECOMMENI)ING APPROVAL OF A HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT TO CITY COUNCIL AND APPROVING VARIANCES FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 134 AND 134 M W. HOPKINS AVENUE, UNITS K AND L, WYCKOFF CARLEY CONDOMINIUMS, BLOCK 59, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 23, SERIES OF 2003 PARCEL ID: 2735-124-19-002 WHEREAS, the applicants, James Marciano and Jesse Boyce, have requested a Historic Landmark Lot Split and Variances for the property located at 134 and 134 14 W. Hopkins Avenue, Units K and L, Wyckoff Carley Condominiums, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, in order to complete a Historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant shall meet the following requirements of Aspen Land Use Code: Section 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4). Section 26.470.070(C). and Section 26.415.010(D.) 26.480.030(A)(2), Subdivision Exemptions, Lot Split The split of' a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14,1 977, where all of the following conditions are met: a) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board cd cotinty Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969. This restriction shall not apply to properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures; und b) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section 26.100.040(A)(1)(c). c) The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(C)(1)(a); and dj A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100. 4 Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County cterk and recorder. Failure on the part of tile applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. l ili 1 1111111Â£1 ~,R lili fi . 111 fl'll ill lilli f Ir Illl 501721 Page: 2 of 4 09/09/2004 10:17A S-LV A DAVIS PI-KIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00 In the case where an existing single-famity dwelling occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to applicatio,1 for a lot split. g) Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split sliall not exceed three (3) units, whicli may be composed of a duplex and a single-family home; and 26.480.030(A)(4), Subdivision Exemptions, Historic Landmark Lot Split fhe split of a lot that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic I,andmark Sites and Structures for the development of one new single-family dwelling may receive a subdivision exemption if it meets the following standards: a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of six thousand (6,000) square feet in size and be located in the R-6, R-15, R-151 RMF, or O zone district. b. The total FAR for both residences shall be established by the size of the parcel and the zone district where the property is located. The total FAR for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat. [n the Office zone district, the following shall apply to the calculation of maximum floor area for lots created through the historic landmark lot split. Notc that the total FAR shall not be stated on the Subdivision Exemption Plat because the floor area will be affected by the use established on the property: If all buildings on what was the fathering parcel remain wholly residential in use, the maximum noor area will be as stated in the R-6 zone district. If any portion of a building on a lot created by the historic landmark lot split is in commercial/office use, then the allowed floor area for that lot shall be the floor area allowed for all uses other than residential in the zone district. If the adjacent parcel created by the lot split remains wholly in residential use, then the floor area on that parcel shall be limited to the maximum allowed on a lot of its size for residential use according to the R-6 standards. If there is commercial/office use on both newly created lots, the maximum floor area fur all uses other than residential in the zone district will be applied. c. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district. The variances provided in Section 26.415.120(B)(1)(a),(b), and (c) are only permitted on the parcels that will contains a historic structure. The FAR bonus will be applied to the maximum FAR allowed on the original parcel; and 26.470.070(C), GMOS Exemption, Historic Landmark Lot Split The construction of each new single-family dwelling on a lot created through review and approval of an Historic Landmark Lot Split shall be exempt from the scoring and competition procedures. The exemption is to be approved by the Community Development Director, but is not to be deducted from the respective annual development allotments or from the development ceilings; and 00 i tilill ilill lilli zill illi litllill filli ill lilli lifi illi 09/09/2004 10:17A 501721 Page: 3 of 4 SILVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0.00 26.415.010(D), Historic Landmark Lot Split A Historic Landmark Lot Split is a two step review, requiring a public hearing before HPC and before City Council; and WHEREAS, for approval of an FAR bonus, the I IPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code, that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; and b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site und landscape features are retained; and WIIEREAS, for approval of setback variances, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code, that the setback valiance a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district; and WHEREAS, for approval of parking reductions, HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine, per Section 26.415.110.C of the Municipal Code, that: 1. The parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property. an adjoining designated property or a historic district: and WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie. in her staff report dated December 10,2003, performed an analysis o f the application based on the standards, found that the review standards and the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation 1)esign Guidelines have been met, and recommended approval with conditions: and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on December 10, 2003, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application was consistent with the review standards and "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and approved the application by a vote of 4 to 0. . 11111'l lilli 111111 lili 111111111111 lilli lll lilli lili 1111 501721 Page: 4 of 4 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 21.00 D 0,00 09/09/2004 10:17A NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That HPC approves variances and recommends Council approve the I Iistoric Landmark Lot Split application for 134 and 134 72 W. Hopkins Avenue, Units K and L, Wyckoff Carley Condominiums, Block 59, City and Townsite of Aspen. Colorado with the conditions listed â€¢ below. 1. The HPC hereby approves a 336 square foot FAR bonus. 2. The HPC hereby approves the setback variances up to 5 feet along the new 134 W. I lopkins east sideyard setback. and up to 5 feet along the new 134 !4 W. Hopkins west side yard setback to accommodate the development that currently exists. 3. The HPC hereby waives one on-site parking space for each unit. 4. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall: a. Meet the requirements of Section 26.480 of the Aspen Municipal Code; b. Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be prohibited from further subdivision and any development of the lots will comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at the time of application; c, Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the lots will conform to the dimensional requirements of the R-6 zone district, except the variances approved by the HPC.. d. Contain a plat note stating that the FAR on thiuEUAS created hy this lot split shall be allocated as follows: Lot 1 shall receivi 1.872 dquare feet and Lot 2 1 704 square feet. 41.4,1, 411-7 APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 10th day of December, 2003. iljoi Approed5isto*'orm: 62.- 1-- _1 1 -.)/ David Iloefer, Assistant Nty Attorney Appcoved as to content: HIST~TC PRAERVATION COMMISSION Jeffre~f~lferty, Chair kathy st/ickland, Chief Deputy Clerk 41' 4, I ' . 1 i bKI R ---d I il -04/ 14 Up Â»7==f kEptdoM 4,1 -1- S I ; DEM I 1.- : - 1, 1 1 11 i -1 -4 i OWN I 1--1-9 1 Y .---t= / --2. IL.C.TOPÂ¥08 1 / . 1 - 2- ..Ut 1 3 4>. + 1 i i 124 1- DU E-k \ LE-1 1 T. 11 024 T -14' i 1 4-0%'l . D! 14, p. & 3/34 2- li\.1\K.1.6 64VUZE,?* -- - -:241 IL 1 1 1 UP i rn /.1 11 i i i 1- -I - I $ 10 Â· 21 lit- i \" 1 li 1 Â¢> 1 *.9 4,- i G~. Â· b -74.- -- - - . _47, fi .t-0 +3 P/:l,ii 1 1,'1,33. 163'.12 1 P. i ! 1.-'Â· ? , 1. i , (,7 ri ~ 1 '.4 1 1 i ; Â·' 1 , LIt.. t 1 1 ..r 2 4.' 9 ;/ . . \ 13>4 \,Â·Ii.'ir.Â·11- 1 :. 7,v'. 44.'' AT.> f ,Â«4,7}11 , l , r '. .i , - t/ 41'b (0,*3 1.-1 5 vp â‚¬h . - 1 1 11 L - 4-_i___.1 .1 1 1 1 -t 1 -7 1 11(rf_-14-YE --- -// ' , \ 4 , r.' 3 4,4 A ,--- L/#Af r r 3 1 Ft. A -2---4 4, ~MIL.0,76.1 .5â€¢ , /--i-*.6 11 ----i , 1 r , ..... I ru --1 --4-/211 ' ./* lia 1 r--- 44 144-1- DM +L --7. , 51 6 c '. M# --* il El 1 / 4- 1 -41 // 1 t--El 1. 14 a f 7* 4 4-, r.: 1- i 'Qt 4----- : Â£,l - 4 -- i . â‚¬1 .> 1 E---1- r ! 1 1 ft----- --- --- 9 --- 1/ SfoR 1 4,0" try, R t O '. 4 t . 41''D, (-9,Al 1-- li 1 : 4- 1 1-nr A ! t. - i 'Â· 3 ' j ir,J A i r':.,./ -Â· . i.4 3~ 0 f. 11 17 t \Â· Â· . ' / 0..li.i .A :C).7 44 , op 136.50 91= 9 No EllÂ·Â®kiG l.)173- 1. + 2.47 4 1 2 , / 1 % A.% A I .4 00 000 00 A ... 0 0 ./0 .0 0.0 0 . 4 44. 0 I . 0 00 . 0 0 .0 A.. 4 4.. . 0 000 4 :. . . . 0 0 .. â€¢ . - . .. : A . --- - 0 1.1 1 0 1 3 I . ,. . 19 ' a.-... I ' ,, 2.- 44,~ . . 4 I - . -'' '' , - '' I ''' '' ''. . 0 0 0 0 . 0 ---I ./ I , 0 ......' ' '' . I I ' ' ' , '00 4. r . lilli. .1 -' I 1,4/ %71 1 . . .4 , I '' .. - Â·.3, . I ' . . I 1 - , , . ... . I . .r Â· , I Â«1 4 . I ' . -I. ... D - .,4 1 7 - I . - ./. .......... .... 2 ' I.yll'M. 0 4. - .. .... /Â·idÂ· , fa<V ' '71 Â¢ Â¥ 7/ - .. ... ....... I. 3 li ./.r///2 . . I. . . I.C. D- 2 . - --I' 4% -Â¥ :i ... .-. I -f ' . ; 4.. . . . . 2 1 1 - I-- I ..... ....... C J I . I. . -''- . - 8 I. 29 - I .IS : .. .4 . ........... . --- 1 00 . 1. 3 0 2 .. I . - , ~ . .. . 1'' . . 4 t.9-3. 6 13, .4 4,6 4.12 "' 4 4 ...> ..- I .t' I . â€¢ - 0 .. I. .- ~ A .1/.09*ZAN# i -2 6 - , 0 :..11 - -- , , - I ' .. - .. .. ..... .. --I - I -im.' 4~A --"I" #flll'. Al'ill"'18--mi'"*93-2,"I= 1~~ -rg.# 4..' 4 ... .. 01 . 0 =':.' . . . 4 . . . . 0 . 0. .. ' 'lk #an .1...2=2,0.. 14 95 - I . - . 2 ... W .C .. 2 .' 1Â» 0 ..2 .. . '' , ' . 1 ' ... . C~ 2Â«42 I .... .1 ..... .. ,' I - . . 2 2 . . ... 1. . 0 ... ...... .. I .. 12.*////h-4/14'* f .12 5. , . . I -.I . . . ' I. I . 1 .0 - ~t- -~~1--*661*1~,mi # . I *~4 -0 0 . - .9 0 94;.1,269. _ .* 1 1,20 1 -4 .' . .. ; 1, , .. 2/ Â¢ I. I 74 3 1% , 7 4 0. 03 : ' 4 44/F-1 2 .1.301 . S: i 1 & 0 'CLI '5129, \astlc cap found at the ts tommitment. lewalk. Curb and Gutter Improvement F. t forth in Resolution of the Aspen Historic 9 No. 438633 as Resolution No. 19, ibdivision Exemption Agreement recorded '004 as Reception No. 497541. of subject property recorded May 4, 2004 in ointenance and Access Agreement Notice: TUTTLE SURVEYING SERVICES According to Colorado law, you must commence 134 West Hopkins Drawn by: S J any legal action based upon any defect in 226 Heather Lane this survey within three years after you first discover such defect. In no event may Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Date: 8/23/06 any legal action based upon any defect in Improvement Survey Plat Aspen, Colorado 81611 /OF 1 thug survey be commenced more than ten years (970) 928-9708 (FAX 947-9007) from the date of the certification shoum TUTTLE SURVEYING SERVICES hâ‚¬reon. Email- je#Otss-us.com ... jn $#1),4 4Â·,1 ...:9'>,DA\.ilt - -- 4.14? E 146 11/ i.L Cr'Â·7# } .4- 11 rit .2-1 '.4 -z .2- ..~QV ~~~,-~,+ . -~ t ,Â«Â«2Â«*Â»44049Â«~~.poa~<4143 1 04 5,.1 4.$ AxtÂ· R..'..22:'#. IA ,Â·..-4,4:bilf:Â·-1<5>04<3tttli1i~.~~b x,Ai:.Â«Â·... 4,4=1,131.-61426614ih,1~2~ 1 I *P*Â»UL-=9 1 \1 \4. UN NEW j#\614 FivER L 69 ,.0 . ~'C 31___L 1 66 \NAUL To KUP 121,1 ~ -~--~ 1-. ..21--- , 0 66?MMOR It 1, /1 / 1] UN I ,- 1 +11 .. ' 1 * GOMMON It J =9 1 - -~ -6 -41- 1 -24 1 "4 Â»---------------- ------J 2 i ---1 F ............. ......---91. ---- - - ,--Ir- --- 41 1 * 4 11 r -- ' T - . 0, 00 6 m 7- :'9 88 ' 1 ' ' I. I. I. . - I h )460 -:el~~rr, -14. m *i ~ - 2 000 0% 1- ---- 115 . , . . 0 v 3 I. V. 01 0 41 M *4 ' , .1 0 04 4 5 5 / 1 ! \1 7 * @le,lj / 471 1 1/ \ 1 - -71 03= /1 04 - A - w h N <~*i 4 #M R . 5M / 9 04 0# , -0.1 1 / ~ ~-1..~11- al--4+ 0 Zlid 1/--' 0 -4-- M U 4. - il 2 0 1 r,Â»71?37 +9-40:Â·1.t '4. I.: 1 /3 i (*(DIL %4.999 , 74... 'i ; --#-*-- . ...lt- - '' ----~-- 01 It **Y# I P ch -il M ". 1. 1 L__-_14- Â·-- --1{ lili 1 1,1 ,-, I. 1 r ,Â·z nk.4 +==44 9 1 r.2 0 9 /1 91 (01 *~' ~- ' ~~ ' --*-Tri 1 1 .88 /41{ % 11 ' .71. 'lf # I. 0 O... 4 ' i It_- U u :Â» ' 7 Â· : l Btw ) ,..t-- d 1. ...1 Â».. 1 , , { 0 7 1 1: 1 . 1. --~ ij '. 1 1 -- Â·ouvi f pi,<2 i. ~ Â·--~ 11 . 5 4, - 1 -Le't, 1 -711 (58 884*ue. Vt 1 441 â‚¬ 1Â¥ reÂ· .1,1,/ i,- q Hfi-Â¥4 76\*Fl)-94â‚¬0~ ti)* k .."I #.5. ~ /~ 1.140 it'4(9 4 607\84/ 4,0 icÂ·'!3~~ \4(.PE. ir , + Ull h., 0 0 Lk 9<. 70 *a M1 1 1 100 0 10'!YEup6, Of,9, 08 90UTW 4 41% DH 44,1 t b H 1 Â· tut VAT\014 -THREE PM BMEN --- -- RUE-NAÂ¢\014 6 -==-v :-=':..==r 411 , 3.2, 1 4> 1 1 .1 1~' ~â‚¬-I ~~f.-to f *,6,- ~15â‚¬7 6 f tÂ·'~~ ~:Â·0~6 t:?19't..lfi, f V i Ip)Â£#jr.13Â£'Xie'9,16Â·) A Â£ A.6 ..1& -4..... - ---I-*. ..... .......9.........--I---..-I-----r-*-I.--7......-9...--....--Vg*--.-i-I ---.-I,---.--I----$*i.t...k...I-A. , i u 41 50 Â£ E,*Fit*) - i' ~l -- - 1 .11 1! E 0 @44.4 I 11 i L...0- ...8 - [: C, .isp I r / ~-4: 1 f :4+ latlf W 41 OV {., A t>,(.6-1 : I. . -9* 4- 7-" ' 1 i L 1 8 047F ,dry I t..Â·[40Â·10>1 - 1 12-- ir c-4.â€ž Ldlt--1-'-%- -1--4- , <Â·,i .r-J.- 1#KT#~3. reve,t> t./..TE;'16a ~6------ 0 0 0 -f H , 1, M ~~ Mi 8 .1 ---- 4,3.k V I Â·' 9 'V k L q 1 01)4- Â¥4*99 W:1 MA:, Aik>. ' r:N .v... 0 4 ,1-2~Â¢. . < . +4 * F',#bliT Buor f-4 t 1,19,.1- 90{4 4.--4,?i~Â«.( Ij * 1 #032 ' Â· -5 1 -0 t- 1 -Â·,7 -4â€¢ r ?Â·:* 0 D pfillÂ·OVE' th. 90\APOW UNIT IN ILITGHwEÂ·N . 9 E '# f &. :.. : t, '. i.-.Â· - rd.Â· EL'~:' u =23 2 __MEMMi-fâ‚¬f-,~ / Orr:n..6 sIr - ..feÂ« /EX /, - 'rl. \ (4) 4â‚¬ f/(AU.Aft c , V' Â· 1/~01, 1' '.f/-13>\ /// l 1 :1 4~.1 Sv-.--~~\ â‚¬ V-\I r,Aa $-1.1-07 .Zi~22->~%14 / :'St 71\% -/ /2 :* Tr~ 1 1 ~\ Â·Â· 0 \49.\N toop I 91 14â‚¬0 *:/ --1 i; , it-'-~.*. 1.11.: ..... ~ Aevt\AuT' 4.4146,1,Â·09 70 -- 11.-_111 111.---4 .424 * i t..14.44, ri--:\ 1 --Il Ill _11 / .Ii / )11-. -.Ii. Ir -~ F+15 2, fl,WIC,171.Â·p:%' ,- ~ --* -r--n====- '. , iii.:11 . .10. . 1 F===-.1.04-*.'ll-/-1... ' ..+1_.....4 ' r ., \ -To Flftc,U Emer, Â· .. .-T N IN\ 14 - - p- 3 I r'On 1, .1 . 1 r,l' fli tÂ·, 5, 6- ----0.- g-..V.. .-*... . 4 -- .........$.----V - ---------................ .--- ... ;11 4 0..0 boil TO M,AraÂ·t -~-- ---: ...-*--=......#---Â£.- .r-,--I...#li.-.-*. 9 -- 4-- 1 . ~~~~ ~~~~ ~0~ "~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~"~~~~ ~~"~*~~ ~~ ~~ Sheet description. â€¢L'%, .,1 . 1 ;li --- 1 . 1 , 1 ,#V U -- - }54*114 1 1, 1 t ! 1 lf,v ' c.:11 Ch 6 - . -- 11 , Te' 0.9 . i . Mv --- -; 1 1 --~~---~IL .~u"ror--- j 1 1 ~] ~ i~i~ ~ - 1 4 ' ..1 4 F 1. 1 11 1=_ 111!1.1--2.0 1_-_Li,i~ 11 --1** - -=L t HEY, 4%71 9 0,. , . 1 U) 1,3''g 1.%11 MWOr' f ----~ . - #-- 1,--1 004 44 '4â‚¬-rt-\M *--i. i. - - I .....--------- --L.-1 ------,-.#.-I -B A----1----71 -1~-----9--- --'.....1-, .+---.. 1.......-.-- .--.-I 7, 11 913 MATGU EXICT(b, ....---*.-'Il<---i-------------i--#-I..---i--.- jW--IM..il*lill'--. 1 -------.-*.*.-I-i---I-.-.# --. --......-*.-1, ............,-,- .- .1--I- .%A- 1........ ...--.-...... ....-'..#- ....--..E.--Il.....-I--I----I----'.*.*Il.- .------ - ------- --- A' 1 i i i i~Â·0.3 - ---------- ~ ~ 17 11 I litit; ...~TIE.I--4 1 i 5 1 14, A.17 A hÂ¥: 1 drawn 052./ checked / f p .0 j date 1 46 1-40 f %6 ..1 WiTE> -I--- --#--------- ----*--------- ti:A #: , : e-9,1 1- - k 1 t.0, ..Â» i --3-4- job no. 00 07 62,0 27 70 GE.695 0---.-x.- 1/9 Am 02,\# \'4Â£8'0~Â¢4 1 --- x~------------- r - 1 1 0 '*. v. f ... re *b â‚¬#Mmit: t.7 ' 1~* r< 3 r .f :-"Â· PI 11 f r j.1 -r sheet 2 21 i I 't 11 1 seal .. PHONE/3, 11VSVS â€¢ a Â£[ / AIDISGIC (IHOiAiVHJ 01 NOILICIC[V GEISOdONd dOH IS NIN,LId â€¢ NE[dSV 1 .. .0 ---------------00.0/0/00/0 Rel 1. EÂ«r 1 twop /t \ / <'.2 5 41\ 1 1_.X ~ --r 1 ------- r 1 \ , d - ~ -31 -'--7 11 - ! 1 r----11 E--It f -- ' 1 - -- - (49 41. coN ott,yE' 0'pr,F#6 11.-11_4{31 ' ~ - . *tÂ»16111-9 { f .9~ 1, 0 1 1 Il \ 6** 49 4Â£Q@ 38 HEw FÂ©F i IME 94 203 45 kerlikur â‚¬Â·,1,96Â·LE* To 2% 10 aig m HATO.ll E X ter< 96 t'-'117 -7-=T , th==21- - / % 00 9/ -1 Trl MATC-1-* EX,Grb _____-_ sa co t.! -- 0 -- %29 -- --- i --Ill - i.- - * -m l i .,EVEÂ· D Alt)114,/- 0 *4 p .-%. I &/r *2 1- .._- 1/03 162&,F?(47|1 1| ~ |-----c .- 94001) M 1 1 214â‚¬,v 00 09 L. r--Â· -_ . cotop To Mgot,! Ey.â‚¬1-6, *PIC- m flifih JILIN 1 -~Ul -2- Orn-4 3 ---_ lilli 111.- MOD Â«'M - 1 ----*-.Ap' - Pi - HE.WI (01 9/0 X.3/07 N'rÂ·'Out, : 1 - 01-*99 006*9 8 1 .~_.{Lt-~Â·1.-1-'-~ ~ ~ I 1-4 1 - 8 1 -~--- ]51,19-El ble ~ 4- 148*i - 1,61\0! 4 6 4 â‚¬>Ter *TO 0--Fi~VE. tv.-#R# 8 fr; 1 f.bEY ON 4 1 1 1 1 0,6 -1,0 k S e .6, 1.-36 .Av 14~ . 5* 1 4'i. \ '' rt - "A t' 0 14 li 1 14- 1 . I . /XEZE-4 ' , d ----- 04) 61.4 961Alle, oftl)Â·AN,6 i 961 01 600 W W E - --- - ------ 03~ 1 - NEW Perp (3/11- oloply') 4.J~' - P I ---1 - 1930~1 EY--i ort ble 7,3 11 **FHAUT 01# i N.6Â£EÂ« 70 46/.=/./..===R 1 1 ,'i f Iii I U .111 1,17017 tic/.16 4 60(.Dia - 1 4 , 1 1 4 1111 ! i i E 01-37 i , i -9-L . 4,1 , 1 1.1 , 1. .->44. 1-~ 17) MATCH *,(91*'A, - 11 1 111---- --------Â·Â·Â·---'Â·-- ...Â·--Â·Â·Â·-I........ -Â·-4.-Â·-.. Â·.....Il--.---P... 149\.61 *1~9 (,1/irk â‚¬,Let)Â© OVER,) t ..1.* 12.0. : M ' 9 51 \ r 1 O tc F----#-21--kIT---11 1 Hi 11 1.-----Â·--4 tla#1~~~~~I--6- - ---------+- -- ----- Al COr) BF\/fi 91 01 U 0, 4 Colotl -re MATOL.t E.NeTE>, 1 i ' ' sheet description: -/ 15,1 CA ji. 11 :94. 16*7 - % 3 1 . *: 2,4.Â· k ' (~~ ' Â«Â¥y~ .,e 1 1*}Pi &<LAuff, LAI-4 Di Ke ftÂ· ent.:.F I - 4 tw . i-t 1 -% . 1 *W drawn 42-2., 1 1, PA 'â€¢ 4* 2 1. i '3 4 izer---*-............... ------.-- --1- . 70 OVA!. E- checked / 1 r 2 3 ./1 -i. =-Â¥'" pr,Â·. 2 4'-'*3 Â¥1 1 .r' A.:.4.Â· t..+.7 1 . 3 11-7 t / 1 date â€¢Ft 1 --- 6/to/09- , ~ job no. /) 210 Q>, 092 sheet seal .. 82195 Xy 10NlaI OGV-HOE[00 0 3ILL O.L NOILICIC[V GE[SOdONd Oan<0102) â€¢ 11VSVE[ â€¢ alIBH / AISIBIa (RIOjImVHO .. EXHIBIT /0- - E ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 191 W:471444 , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: Aull U.51- 1/9 , 200_~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 3,1, AVAM (name, please print) I, being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (IE) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ~ Publication ofnotice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the-public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto, Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproo f materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the ' ' day of , 200 , to and including the date and time ofthe public hear\ng. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing ofnotice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Sec#on 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners ofproperty within three hundred (300) feet of Ge property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property 9wners shall be thoge on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) .. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal o f this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other . sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners ofreal property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on huch amendments, /4 1---b ~gnature The foreooino "Affidavit of Notice" was a*nowledged before me this l_*~ of 6~xlcit- , 200* by Â·-34,11 /â‚¬*1 41 4 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 1.. My commission expires: 044 -7 /2/ tr,)1- F:: Vic,6 2.*L * O < JACK:E \ i LOTHIAN j ~tary Public 10 / / 6 OF COLO ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 9- THE CITY OF ASPEN~ PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE - MINOR HPC REVIEW DEMOLITION AND VARIANICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Thursday, August 24, 2006, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.In- before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Michelle Snyder, West Hopkins LLC, P.O. Box 6150, Potomac, MD 20859, affecting the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of the 134 and 134 1,2 W Hopkins Historic Landmark Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen Colorado. HPC is asked to grant Minor Development approval to demolish and replace an existing rear addition to a miner's cottage. The project requires an east sideyard setback variance of 3 feet for the new addition, a west sideyard setback variance of 1 foot for the existing house, a combined sideyard setback variance of 5 feet for the existing house and an FAR bonus of up to 500 square feet- For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2758, amyg@ci.aspen-co-us. s,Jeffrey Hal ferty, Chairman, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published inthe Aspen Times on August 9,2006. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 922 WEST HALLAM - MINOR HPC REVIEW AND VARIANCE FROM RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday, September 27, 2006, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Christine Markey, 922 West Hallam, affecting the property located at 922 West Hallam Avenue, Lot A, Aspen Historic Cottages, Block 4, City and Townsite of Aspen Colorado. HI>C is asked to grant Minor Development approval for landscaping and a variance from the ResidentiaI-Design Standards regarding the landscape. For further information, contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2778, saraa@ci.aspen.co. us. -s, Jeffrey Halferty, Chairman, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on August 9,2006. ~ - PUBLIC NOTICE RE 408 EAST COOPER AVENUE- MINOR HPC REVIEW, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AND MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE REVIEW NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Thursday, August 24, 2006, at a meeting to begin at 3: 00 p.m. before the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers, City H411,7130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Barnett-Fyrwald Holdings Inc., c/o Becker Business Services, 630 E. Hyman Avenue, Aspen, CO 81611, affecting the property located at 408 East Cooper Avenue, PI' of Lot L and M, Block 89, City and Townsite of Aspen Colorado. HPC is asked to grant Minor Development and Commercial Design Review approval to replace the windows, doors and materials on the front of the building. In addition the applicant proposes new mechanical equipment on the roof that may be visible within a designated View Plane. For further information, contact Amy -Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2758, amyg@ci.aspen.co. us. s/Jeffrey Halferty, Chairman, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on August 9,2006. 9Â· *-1 n. * â‚¬ :-2 + 9 1 9 10 g# -+ '* I *-/3. .Wdl . . rlmmn-~ AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 154 \NEST Uof\<\146 kIEUUE, Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 1-HORSDAI ) A\) 60%I- 14, 200_0 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) GEOSGE- 9, \61\ kible- (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. X posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph ofthe posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. X Mailing ofnotice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date o f the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) .. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision o f this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended. whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing ofnames and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all busigess hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendm~04. 1 1/7 h A 11 r - Â»344 The foggoing "Affidavit of Notice" was n#nowlddged before me this ill.day of 64.61~('<(Jit , 2000_,by Etlf {)d (6 9. il Lâ‚¬-11 t.) WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: 23/23/20 I 0 <l,it)atk_ 0,- 1-cu( Notary Public / ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL 1 111 11 - 1 1 1 . " 1 1-, 1 111 -11 1 1 '-/,7.- -4- M.''.....Iii .1 .. . ' 1.1 11 ....1 . LIU. 4, .4+ . 1 ..... 1 1--,â€ž.2 14.,1, 1 111 1.1 1,11, 1.1.4.-1#.Â£*11 1111 0 1 1 3 L.-_- 5.1 . 16;b 0.21 1 INIE.Â·fil..80: ' . . 2 --4/5 ~ ~ r im ~ ~7:,Â· ~;~,i~*33~/// 1 0 t.â€¢ _ :'90 : 1/faet#b.: "14 671 12 ': 2 ": .2.-04~ 244; Im~,.:Â·. 41,il *~ Â·3 r.-Â· Â· 7 0 ' 1 1 1% I 1 1 1 1 - 1 *.1-4.1 11 1 . ba ,. 'rÂ· i : . 111.145 '1 - P 5Â·4, 0 Â· Â·"Ak~ Â·- C.,4.. .'*,~r 1, 1.101 y k. ..9 '99'8 1'0?';:. 4 1 ; 11 1. i â€¢ r. 1-1 11 1 ./ 1 1 . 1 1 1 . 1 1 11. Rl'qi' 44*#, 'E ' ' ' 11 . 1 ...1.'-I z . 414 ...,- . 3 Sep 06 06 02:43p B,~d Crawford 9~0-927-0924 p.2 135 Hopkins LTD 1303 GRAND LLC 132 WEST MAIN ASSOCIATES INC c/o John Key C/O NEIL JOHN F PO BOX 7846 PO BOX 671243 BOX 1576 ASPEN, CO 81612 DALLAS, TX 75367 GLENWOOD SPGS, CO. 81602 ASPEN MAIN LP ASPEN GALENA LLC ASPEN SKIING COMPANY LLC C/O MR H SCHMIDT C/O MICHAEL BROWN PO BOX 1248 PO BOX 2768 400 WONTARIO #1103 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81612 CHICAGO IL 60610 BERNSTEIN ARNOLD A & POLLY A TRST BACON SHIRLEY R ASPEN MOLLY GIBSON LIODGE LLC ARNOLD AND POLLY BERNS rEIN 3 GROVE DR #1608 101 W MAIN STREET 1870 JACKSON ST #504 COCONUTGROVE FL 33133 ASPEN CO 8161 1 San FRANCISCO CA 94109 BOWMAN AL BOURKE D MICHAEL BEILINSKI JUDITH R 3580 NW lor" AVE 200 W HOPKINS AVE 2121 'rROWBRIDGE CT OAKLAND PARK FL 33309 ASPEN CO 81611 GLENVIEW, IL 60026 BRENNEN JAMES C BRENNER JAMES AND MARKA BREWSTER JAMIE L 417 ROYALE ST PO BOX 3732 PO BOX 11977 NEW ORLEANS LA 70130 VAIL CO 81658 ASPEN CO 91612 CI-IR]STENSEN ROHERT M& CANDICE I. COLES ELLIOT L CHRISHOLM KII &H M M INT 1240 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR 2929 E HARTFORD AVE 205 W MAIN ST ASPEN CO 81611 MILWUKEE, WI 5321 1 ASPEN CO 81611 CSAH LLC CYR BARRETT Dean family ltd ptshp Alp 00 BARBARA BALLANTE PO BOX 9064 590 DELLWOOD AVE 19950 W COUNTRY CLUB DR 10 FL ASPEN CO 81612 BOULDER CO 80301 AVENTURA, FL 33180 DIMITRIUS RALLI DHM INVESTMENTS LP 9056 DETURRIS EMILIO 200 S SIERRA MADRE BLVD 15 INMAN CIR NE 90 ESTATE DR PASADENA CA 91109 ATLANTA GA 30309 JERICI IO, NY 11753 FARLAND MARISA J ERB JANE DONATELLI ROBRET A & SUSAN J PO BOX 3542 PO BOX 3207 1234 WASHINGTON DR ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81612 CENTERPORT NY 11721 FCB LLC FUNHOUSE PROPERTIES LLC FRIEDLAND & SINGER LTD C/O KRISTA EDDY ATTN ANDREW CONWAY PO BOX 197 PO BOX 6622 38500 WOODWARD AVE #]00 3- 11 ST GEORGES ST SNOWMASS VILLAGE CO 8/615 BLOOMFIELD Mt 48034 DOUGLAS ISI,E OF MAN, IL 1 M991 SN Sep, 06 06 02:43p B,G.d Crawford 92.Q-927-0924 P.3 .. NEWKAM JAMES F & Patrick c MULLINS MARGARET ANN MORGAN DONALD H 10% 211 W MAIN ST 1935 HOLLY ST 15 1NMAN CIR NE ASPEN CO 81611 DENVER CO 80220 ATLANTA GA 30309 MELTON DAVID ACGINN JAMES F & JEAN C MCLEOD GLEN D 135 W MAIN STREET 08 S FRONTAGE RD W #100 PO BOX 11977 ASPEN, CO 81611 TAiL, CO 81657 ASPEN CO 816]2 Aspen co 81611 4AROON BELLS LLC Martin scott m Mauerhoff gert h '/O GREGORY S BAND ESQ. Sand Katherine m Gain h 630 FRUITVILLE RD Pobox 51 Po box 3207 ARASOTA, FL 34236 ASPEN CO 81612 .ubin Richard g MARK CAROL KRAUSS MARKLE JUDY 55% 217 s flangler dr PO BOX 9283 C/O JUDY POOL nd n flager plaza ASPEN CO 81612 10 MEADOWVIEW VILLAGE, CO VEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 80121 .ampton Patricia LEWIS BRETT 1 1 USS ARTHUR 29 GREY FOX RD 548 FRANKLIN STREET 250 MARTIN ST STE 100 .UGOFF SC 29078 DENVER CO 80218 BIRMINGHAM, MI 48009 KOENIG RAYMOND J VRK COURTLANDT KRAKOVITZ ROBERT WAYNE TRAGGIS ELIZABETH G 'OBOX 134 0094 ELK RANGE DR POBOX 284 kSPEN CO 81612 SNOWMASS CO 81654 NEW LONDON CT 06320 NTENTRIX LLC YO TOM WARD-MCDERMOTT WILL & JOHNSON ASPEN HOLDINGS LLC LOUISE KING LLC NERY 9227 HAPPY HOLLOW PO BOX 1467 27 MONROE SCOTSDALE AZ 85262 BASALT CO 81621 :HICAGO IL 60606 INNSBRUCK SUITES INVESTMENTS IOTELASPEN LTD HOTEL ASPEN LTD LLC 70 ASPEN HOTEL PARTNERS LP C/O VECTRA BANK-COMM LENDER 2950 E BROAD ST 2 ND FL 44 N WELLS STE 504 534 E HYMAN AVE COLUMBUS OH 43209 :HICAGO IL 60610 ASPEN CO 8]611 LARPER MARILYN HILL & HILL HARRIS LAURIE 8.4% HITE HENRY H & ANGELA R 'O BOX 7952 2255 ST JOHNS AVE PO BOX 155 J;PEN CO 816 l2 HIGIILAND PARK IL 60035 WOODY CREEK, CO 81656 HALCYON ENTERPRISES LLC }ROSVENOR DENIS GUERRA DONNA 78 LOVERS LN 'O BOX 3071 3622 SPRINGSBROOK ST PRINCETON, NJ 08540 iSPEN CO 81612 DALLAS TX 75205 Sep 06 06 02:43p Brad Crawford 970-927-0924 P.4 .. :AGORSKi JOSEPH & ROBIN WARSHAW MARTIN R 40.6% WALGREEN JOANNE 55 MARQUESA DR PO BOX 8976 2258 N FREMONT DRAL GABLES, FL 33156 ASPEN CO 81612 CHICAGO IL 60614 'IPTON JOHN K FAMILY TRUST M SUTTON J J SHADOW MTN 11OMEOWNER ASSOC. 477 E MANOR DR 220 W MAIN ST #106 232 W HYMAN AVE [NGLEWOOD CO 80111 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 RANCE CAROL :CHNEIDER SARAH A TRUST 26 ALDER LODGE RIVER GARDENS POPE JACQUELYNN C 8.4% 'O BOX 4490 STEVENAGE RD 540 MANHATTON AVE 1SPEN CO 81612 FULHAM, LONDON HERMOSA BEACH CA 90254 ENGLAND SW6 6NP VETRZAK ROBERT & SUSAN WILLIAMS DAVID & DANNIE JO WARSHAW LYNNA 19.8% 796 E SOPRIS CREEK RD 222 W HOPKINS AVE APT 5 236 ELVIN CT IASALT CO 81621 ASPEN CO 81611 LANSING MI48912 :TIRLING REBECCA R TACO 2 LLC TYROLEAN LODGE LLC 37 ALLISON LN 545 METRO PL S #400 200 W MAIN ST IASALT, CO 81621 DUBLIN OH 43017 ASPEN CO 81611 PRINCE DOUGLAS & VALERIE EGUIN JEFF & MADALYN B ROSS PAULINE PO BOX 8589 'O BOX 8852 PO BOX 9969 ASPEN CO 81612 *SPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81612 ;TRAUCH ELAINE B THOMAS GAIL HICKS REV TRUST WARSHAW MARK 11.4% 327 SO YOSEMITE CT 1242 HAPTON RDG 540 MANHATTAN AVE ;REENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111 BEDFORD VA 24523 HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 UNKELMAN WENDY L VAUGHAN l IEIDI 1996 TRUST POOL MARKELL L 22.5Â°/0 08 W HYMAN AVE #8 N2322 SYLVAN LN 10 MEADOWVIEW LN ~SPEN CO 81611 LAKE GENEVA, Wl 54 I 37 LITTLETON CO 80121 'OOL DAVID & Nikki Ferrari PRICE DOUGLAS S SCIIMIDT CHERYL L 'O BOX 10264 8611 MELWOOD RD PO BOX 2768 1SPEN CO 81612 BETHESDA, MD 20817 ASPEN CO 81612 ;EIDER DENNIS J & LEAH ELLENBERG 'RUSTEE 6642 LAT1GO SHORE DR dAL[BU CA 90265 .. PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 134 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE- MINOR HPC REVIEW, DEMOLITION AND VARIANCES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Thursday, August 24,2006, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen 1 listoric Preservation Commission, City Council Chambers. City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Michelle Snyder, West Hopkins LLC, P.O. Box 6150, Potomac, MD 20859, affecting the property located at 134 West Hopkins Avenue, Lot 1 of the 134 and 134 14 W. Hopkins 1-listoric Landmark Lot Split, City and Townsite of Aspen Colorado. HPC is asked to grant Minor Development approval to demolish and replace an existing rear addition to a miner's collage. The project requires an eas't 0ideyard setback variance of 3 feet for the newâ€¢addition. -Nest sideyard setback variance of 1 foot a * for the existing house, a combined sideyard setback variance of 5 teet for the existing house and an I FAR bonus of up to 500 square feet. For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429.2758, amyg@ci.aspen.co.us. s/Jeffrev Halferty Chairman, Aspen Historic Preservation Commission Published in the Aspen Times on August 9.2006 City of Aspen Account